Agricultural Research Stations: Staff Losses (Hansard, 26 November 1985)

§ Lord John-Mackie
My Lords, I beg leave to ask the Question standing in my name on the Order Paper.

§ The Earl of Swinton
My Lords, I understand that about 700 scientific posts have been lost from 794 institutes and units of the Agricultural and Food Research Council since April 1984.

§ Lord John-Mackie
My Lords, I thank the noble Earl the Minister for that (to say the least of it) rather alarming Answer. I have two further questions to ask. First, does the Minister have any estimate of what the figure will be by the time the Government have completed their reorganisation and cutting exercise? Secondly, presuming that the noble Earl has read the first paragraph of Lord Selborne's forward policy, does he not agree that the challenge stated there cannot be met by cutting scientific staff at the rate at which the Government are cutting them?

§ The Earl of Swinton
My Lords, I can answer both the noble Lord's supplementary questions in one. It is for the AFRC to decide upon the management of the funds it receives. I understand that the priorities board on research and development in agriculture and food, which advises on the allocation of resources between sectors, has agreed that the savings required in 1986–87 should be found through rationalisation of existing programmes. The board has yet to formulate its advice for 1987–88.

§ Baroness Nicol
My Lords, can the Minister say whether the figure he has given includes voluntary premature retirement, which is a euphemism for further redundancies? Is the Minister aware that such redundancies are particularly destructive because they mean that people who are very valuable to the industry are leaving while they can still get a job elsewhere, and that the head of the department does not necessarily have any choice about stopping them? Are they included in the figure which the noble Earl has given to the House?

§ The Earl of Swinton
Yes, my Lords, they are. Of the 700, about 280 were lost through compulsory redundancy; 260 losses were achieved by not replacing scientists who retired normally; and the balance of about 160 was through voluntary premature retirement.

§ Lord Grimond
My Lords, can the Minister tell us whether these losses were expected by the Government? Can he reassure us that they are not having a very deleterious effect on the service?

§ The Earl of Swinton
My Lords, I think they were. Obviously one of the ways of saving money was by making these cuts. There has been much rationalisation and restructuring, and I do not think that the loss to the service is too great.

§ Lord Gibson-Watt
My Lords, while I recognise that from time to time Governments have to make adjustments in their research programmes, may I ask my noble friend whether he recognises that the cuts in the plant breeding station at Aberystwyth have been viewed with considerable concern in Wales? Will the Government be very careful in future with regard to the programme and the establishment there?

§ The Earl of Swinton
My Lords, I know only too well how these cuts were received because I remember 795 a somewhat tricky run I had on an Unstarred Question one night in your Lordships' House. In fact, 36 scientific posts have been lost in the Welsh plant breeding station. Losses there, and in Wales generally, have been broadly the same as in England.

§ Lord Stodart of Leaston
My Lords, is my noble friend aware that there is anxiety not only in Wales but also in that other great country further north, Scotland? Can he say whether his figures include what I believe is a proposed 70 per cent. cut in the establishment of the agricultural research station, which many people would say has done even more valuable work, if that is possible, than its counterpart in England?

§ The Earl of Swinton
My Lords, I am not going to enter into battle on the relative merits between Wales and Scotland. The figures I gave were for past cuts and do not include future cuts.

§ Lord Mackie of Benshie
My Lords, does the noble Earl not agree that if one wants to cut a service then the way to do so is not by causing such anxiety that the best people leave? Is the noble Earl further aware that the same thing is happening in the advisory services in the colleges in Scotland, as well as in research? In the case of both the north college and the east college I know of several first-class people who have left to go to other jobs.

§ The Earl of Swinton
My Lords, my right honourable friend the Secretary of State for Education and Science accepted the advice of the Advisory Board for the Research Councils in 1982 that scientific priorities required a shift of funds towards work in areas such as information technology. That shift could be accomplished only by reducing the funds going to the AFRC from the science budget. I am sure that the noble Lord, Lord Mackie of Benshie, is right when he speaks about Scotland. I certainly would not argue with him on that matter.

The Earl of Halsbury
My Lords, is the noble Earl in a position to help the House to discriminate between job losses from the agricultural research front and job redistribution within the agricultural research front—that is, redistribution between the public and the private sectors?

§ The Earl of Swinton
My Lords, I think I shall have to write to the noble Earl, Lord Halsbury, with that information.

§ Lord John-Mackie
My Lords, the noble Earl is very cagey about figures. Is he aware that the Institute of Professional Civil Servants, looking at the matter over a long period, is emphatic that there will be a 20 per cent. loss of scientists from the service? That is quite alarming. The noble Earl should take seriously what many of his noble friends obviously think of the situation and look into it more than he obviously has done.

§ The Earl of Swinton
My Lords, I do not think I was being at all cagey. I have not only said that there were 700 staff involved but have broken down how that figure of 700 arose. I do not know how I could be less cagey.

§ Lord Elwyn-Jones
My Lords, will not the Government's proposals to charge farmers for the advisory services that they need aggravate the situation and the difficulties for farmers, and not only in West Wales?

§ The Earl of Swinton
My Lords, I think that is rather a different question.

§ Baroness Nicol
My Lords, will the Minister accept that the reply he gave to the noble Earl, Lord Halsbury, could be amplified a little? What matters is the destruction of a team. The fact that the people involved are distributed among the private sector does not help matters. Does the Minister not appreciate that it is the destruction of a particular team that is so devastating to the plant breeding institute in particular?

§ The Earl of Swinton
Yes, my Lords; and, of course, when any Minister says during Question Time that he will write to a noble Lord, a copy of that reply is put into the Library for all those interested to see.

§ Lord Mackie of Benshie
My Lords, is the noble Earl aware that, while we deplore cuts in the establishment for agricultural advice and research, we greatly admire his personal efforts in the cutting of capacity?

§ The Earl of Swinton
My Lords, I think that is one area in which I can share a great achievement with the noble Lord who asked that question.