HL Deb 25 July 1989 vol 510 cc1302-4

2.47 p.m.

Lord Carter asked Her Majesty's Government:

What cuts in agricultural and food research they have decided upon as the result of reviews to determine the "near market" research which is suitable for industry funding, and what further decisions remain to be announced.

The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food (Baroness Trumpington)

My Lords, my right honourable friend the then Minister announced on 21st March the proposal to close in 1989–90 the experimental horticulture stations at Brogdale, Luddington and Rosewarne and the experimental husbandry farm at Liscombe. It was announced on 10th July that Liscombe EHF will not close in 1989–90, given the excellent response from the local farmers. However, Luddington and Rosewarne will be closed by 30th November. A decision on Brogdale will be announced later this year. Further decisions will be announced as soon as possible.

Lord Carter

My Lords, I thank the Minister for that Answer. Is she aware that the current proposals, leaving aside those that are still to be announced, mean that 14 agricultural research establishments are to close, a further six are threatened with closure and substantial reductions in funding are planned for eight more? In the light of all this can she tell the House exactly what her right hounourable friend the Prime Minister meant when she told the Royal Society last year: A nation which does not value its trained intelligence is doomed"? What did the Minister herself mean when she told the House on 4th November 1987 that, there is no specific plan to reduce the number of staff engaged in R&D or advisory work".—[Official Report. 4/11/87; col. 1072.]

Baroness Trumpington

My Lords, the closures announced do not represent the full economies needed to meet the reduction in government funding of near market research by 1991–92 proposed in the Autumn Statement, which was presented by the Chancellor of the Exchequer. Decisions to be taken in the future will depend upon the level of industry funding.

The statement, referred to by the noble Lord, Lord Carter, which I made in 1987, was made in good faith at the time. Following our consultation with industry, we have had to look again at our facilities to take into account the extent to which industry is prepared to replace public funding for near market research. I am well aware of the feelings of staff who are involved with R&D. I am also aware of the importance of a sound scientific base for the research that the Government and industry will be paying for.

Lord Gallacher

My Lords, can the noble Baroness tell us what criterion her advisers take into account in recommending that research be designated near market? Is the criterion purely financial, or are there other considerations? If there are, can she say what they are? Further, can she say whether part of those considerations relate to the possibility that the market will in fact accept financial responsibility for these institutions? I ask that because the record so far of market acceptance constitutes, I am sure she will agree, a pretty dismal response to the Government's initiative.

Baroness Trumpington

My Lords, a rigid definition of near market research is not appropriate; what is broadly meant is work which offers the prospect of commercial exploitation or application within a short enough time-scale to justify investment by industry. We are now reaching the stage where we are receiving a more definitive picture of the pick-up by industry of that research.

Lord Hooson

My Lords, does the Minister not agree that we need national funding for the pure research? It cannot all be attributed to near market research. Does she also not agree that the result of the pure research in agriculture has been of great benefit to this country and to the world at large?

Baroness Trumpington

My Lords, I agree with the essence of the noble Lord's question. The Government remain committed to supporting the science base and to providing a platform for future exploitation by industry. Current public expenditure on agricultural and food R&D is over £200 million.

Lord Peston

My Lords, does the noble Baroness recall that on Friday last she appeared to say that expenditure on agricultural research and development was not investment? Has she had a chance to reflect upon the view which she seemed to state at that time? Further, does she now recognise that expenditure on agricultural research and development is investment and that any cuts therein would be extremely damaging to the future of our agricultural sector?

Baroness Trumpington

My Lords, I maintain exactly what I said before. I think that the noble Lord is being rather naughty. I say that because at the time the Question referred entirely to farm machinery and not at all to R&D.

Lord Tordoff

My Lords, with respect to the noble Baroness, does she not recall that the Question referred to "agricultural investment"? Those were the precise words used in the Question.

Baroness Trumpington

My Lords, in that case it was investment of plant and machinery.

Lord Carter

My Lords, is the Minister aware that the low morale in the agricultural R&D sector is exceeded only by its bewilderment regarding the future intentions of the Government? Can she therefore assure the House that following the 20 per cent. cut in research funding between 1985 and 1987, and the further substantial cuts which have been discussed this afternoon, the Government at some stage will issue a definitive statement, draw a line and leave this sector to plan in peace the reduced role which is left to it?

Baroness Trumpington

My Lords, we shall try to give industry as much notice as possible of any future closures.