HL Deb 16 July 1992 vol 539 cc374-6

2.55 p.m.

The Parliamentary Secretary, Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food (Earl Howe) rose to move, That the draft order laid before the House on 25th June be approved [4th Report from the Joint Committee]. The noble Earl said: My Lords, the order is being presented in accordance with the requirements of the Industrial Organisation and Development Act 1947. A brief history of the Horticultural Development Council and the circumstances which have led to the draft amendment order may be helpful. The HDC was set up in July 1986 with the primary function of commissioning research and development in horticulture on behalf of the industry. It has power to raise a levy for that purpose from growers of horticultural produce, excluding apples, pears and hops. All growers in Great Britain with annual sales of produce in excess of £25,000 are liable to pay the levy. Mushroom growers whose annual purchases of mushroom spawn exceed 700 litres are also liable.

The current levy rate on growers, other than mushroom growers, is set at 0.5 per cent. of sale value and on mushroom growers at 7p per litre of spawn purchased. Annual revenue from the levy for 1991–92 was about £2.2 million and the council has so far commissioned over 150 projects. The council was last reviewed, as required by the enabling legislation, in July 1989 when there was a positive poll of growers in support of the council continuing. It will be subject to a further statutory review in July 1994.

I turn now to the circumstances which have led us to propose the order before the House today. The HDC is currently required to consist of 22 members appointed by Ministers: 16 representing growers in the industry, two independents, two representing employees in the industry, and two members with wholesale and retail marketing and distribution expertise. Following representations from the chairman of the HDC, Ministers accepted advice that the council has proved too unwieldy in its present form and would benefit from a reduction in its overall size from the current 22 members to 14. The reduction would he achieved by reducing employee, marketing and distribution, and independent representation from two members to one member in each category. The grower members would reduce from 16 to 11.

As required by the enabling legislation, these proposals for a tighter structure for the council were put to the full range of representative organisations in Great Britain for them to consider. The clear message we received from them is that there is general support among the industry for the principle of reducing the overall size and structure of the council to enable it to operate more effectively and in a more efficient and business-like fashion. Ministers are confident that the slight reservations expressed by some groups about adequate representation for all sectors of the industry across the whole spectrum, from production to marketing and retailing, can be resolved by careful selection of the right incumbent for the post. In other words, the onus will be squarely with the nominating bodies to identify candidates not only with a good knowledge of their particular sector of the industry—this has been the main consideration up to now—but with proven entrepreneurial flair and long-term vision for the industry.

I firmly believe that these proposals represent a worthwhile reduction in the size of the council which will improve efficiency and ensure a better balance of view in setting work priorities for the council. There is considerable scope for reducing the present trade gap in horticultural produce. These changes should enable the council to focus its research more directly towards the needs of the industry so that it can compete more effectively in domestic and international markets.

Turning to the order before us, the main amendments now proposed are short and straightforward. Article 3 reduces the total membership of the HDC from 22 to 14. As I said, this is achieved by reducing the number of grower members from 16 to 11; the number of marketing and distribution members from two to one; the number of employee members from two to one; and the independent members from two to one also. Article 4, as a consequence of the foregoing amendment, proportionately reduces the number of council members constituting a quorum from a minimum of eight to a minimum of five.

I should draw your Lordships' attention to the timing of the order. It is proposed that it should come into force the day after it is made to allow arrangements for the appointment of the 14 members of the council to be set in hand to ensure that the new-look council is in place for 1st August this year. It only remains for me now to commend the order to the House.

Moved, That the draft order laid before the House on 25th June be approved [4th Report from the Joint Committee].—(Earl Howe.)

Lord Carter

My Lords, the House will be extremely grateful to the Minister for explaining the order. After two and a half hours on social security I hope he will not mind if I try not to take on board the concept of litres of mushroom spawn.

We welcome the order. On a personal note, I regret that in agriculture we have not used more the Industrial Organisation and Development Act 1947 to try to set up development councils in more sectors of the industry where I believe they would have worked well. The noble Earl referred to the entrepreneurial flair of those who will be on the amended council. That factor is evident in horticulture, which has had to manage with hardly any subsidies at all. Entrepreneurial flair is certainly present. The HDC does an excellent job. With this tighter and leaner organisation I am sure that it will now do even better. I am extremely pleased on behalf of this side of the House to support the order.

On Question, Motion agreed to.