HL Deb 30 November 1999 vol 607 cc753-60

5.10 p.m.

The Minister of State, Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food (Baroness Hayman)

My Lords, with the leave of the House, I shall now repeat a Statement made in another place by my right honourable friend the Minister of Agriculture. The Statement is as follows:

"I am pleased to be able to announce the Government's intention to lift the retail ban on beef on the bone. This follows further advice from the Chief Medical Officers, who now collectively agree that it is possible to lift the ban on retail sales. I and the Secretary of State for Health have accepted this advice. I am placing a copy of the advice in the House Library today. Officials of my department will later today be consulting on draft proposals to lift in England the ban on retailing of beef on the bone. This includes lifting the ban on food prepared for direct sale to consumers in restaurants and other catering establishments. Similar consultations will be taking place in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland to lift the ban there also.

"As recommended by the Chief Medical Officers, the ban on the use of bones for manufacturing food products (including infant foods), which lies at the extreme end of BSE protection measures, will remain in place. This also has the effect of preserving explicit consumer choice.

"This lifting of the ban has been long awaited and I am delighted that it can now go ahead. The announcement will bring a welcome boost to the beef industry in what continue to be difficult times. I believe that we need to move forward as quickly as possible with the consultation on lifting the ban. Therefore, subject to the consent of the House, I propose to use the accelerated procedure for making the regulations to allow retail sales to take place before Christmas.

"Consultation will start today, with the aim that the amending regulations will take effect on Friday 17th December. These proposals will take effect in England only, but it is intended that similar legislation will be implemented in the other parts of the UK to lie same timetable. I know that enforcement authorities will wish to take note of my Statement today and of the Government's clear intention to implement lifting of the ban by 17th December".

My Lords, that concludes the Statement.

5.12 p.m.

Baroness Byford

My Lords, I thank the Minister for repeating the Statement. We warmly welcome the intention to lift the ban. My only sorrow is that my noble friend Lord Stanley is no longer a Member of this House. He would have been very pleased to hear this news. His persistence and his hard fight on this issue were well known.

This ban has damaged our beef industry worldwide. Without it, beef farmers would have been spared two years of unnecessary suffering, at a cost, I believe, of some £170 million. Good butchers would not have been harassed and threatened with prosecution. Ministers would have been spared the humiliation of arguing that our beef was safe abroad while declaring it deadly at home.

I have a few questions for the Minister. First, will she confirm that when the ban was imposed two years ago it was only one of three options that were put forward by the scientific advisers? There were perfectly sensible alternatives which the Government chose not to pursue. The first option was the publication of research findings and risk assessments on beef on the bone so that consumers could decide for themselves.

Secondly, my concern is now with the ramifications of the decision. Will the Government compensate, even over a short period, those involved during the past two years, for example, with the disposal of beef bones? Will the Government pledge not to prosecute those who bought or sold beef on the bone as recently as last weekend in Cornwall?

Will the Minister confirm that, from the date of the lifting of the ban, UK producers of gelatine, soups, stock cubes and so on will be able to use British bones? The Statement referred to reservations, particularly regarding infant food, but did not make the position clear in regard to the items I have mentioned.

Will the Minister also confirm that private killings of beef will be free of the restrictions? Will she also confirm that, even if the consultations that are to take place in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland do not confirm the Government's suggestion of the lifting of the ban, England will still go ahead with lifting it?

Will the Minister accept that the retention of the ban on beef on the bone has added to the difficulty of farmers in their negotiations to gain an overall lifting of the beef ban, particularly in France and Germany? Finally—and this point is not directed at the Minister personally—do Ministers regret not listening rather more to some of the views expressed by noble Lords in this House in January 1998?

5.15 p.m.

Baroness Miller of Chilthorne Domer

My Lords, I thank the Minister for repeating the Statement. We on these Benches warmly welcome the lifting of the beef ban. We have certainly pressed hard, both here and in another place, for this outcome in order that negotiations on the consumption of British beef abroad will have more coherence and we can speak from a position of greater strength.

I hope that now the Government's commitment will be to rebuild the export market as rapidly as they can. I gather that tomorrow the Prime Minister will hold what has been billed as a "beef summit". I hope that there will be more behind the summit than merely fine words. I hope that the Government will put in resources, in terms of both people and money, to promote British beef and help Britain regain its export markets.

I find the statement from the Conservative Benches slightly surprising, given that had it not been for so long a delay on the part of the Conservative government when they were in power, we should not have been in this position in the first place. The problem of BSE would never have taken off in the way that it did.

Finally, I should like to point out on behalf of the farming community that this is not only "a welcome boost in difficult times"; it is an absolute essential in impossible times. I note from an article in The Times that farmers' income, particularly that of hill farmers, has been reduced by 35 per cent. Two years ago, hill farmers received on average £7,500. Today, their income is about £2,000. It has more than halved. This decision is far more than a welcome boost. It is an essential lifeline.

I am sure that Members of this House and members of the British public will support our home farmers. I hope that the Prime Minister will take the opportunity tomorrow to push the point with British shops, particularly supermarkets, to make sure that they stock British beef, that their customers know very well which beef is British and that they look forward to eating British beef for Christmas.

Baroness Hayman

My Lords, I am grateful to both noble Baronesses who have spoken. Our pleasure at lifting the ban should be underpinned by the fact that the advice of the Chief Medical Officers is that it can now be lifted. That reflects the reduction and decline in the epidemic of BSE. It is the reduction in the prevalence of BSE among the beef herd that we should be most grateful for.

The advice is there, both the scientific advice which has come from the figures which have been published from the Oxford Unit and the medical advice which is now uniformly shared by all four CMOs. We have always said that when the advice was there we would proceed to lift the ban. That is why I say to the noble Baroness, Lady Byford, that there has been no humiliation of Ministers in saying that they have accepted the medical advice. The advice is in terms of the perceived risk of a disease that, as we all know, has been highly erratic and invariably fatal.

We should all be particularly pleased today because the reduction in the epidemic is such that there is unanimity among the CMOs. The risk has declined to such a small figure that it is appropriate for consumers now to have choice.

On the points raised by the noble Baroness, Lady Byford, throughout the process all the advice received and options put to the Government have been clearly put forward. The SEAC advice on the level of risk was published, as was the advice of the Chief Medical Officer, who was then Sir Kenneth Calman. Equally, when the advice of the Chief Medical Officer, Liam Donaldson, came through it was published and made explicit. As the noble Baroness rightly pointed out, we have had some debate and Members of the House have taken a great interest in it. I hope noble Lords will agree that throughout the debate the attitude of the Government has been that it was prudent to ascertain whether we could wait for the figures from the Oxford Unit and allow the other CMOs the opportunity to examine them so that we could take the matter forward on a UK basis. That attitude was soundly based and it allows us to avoid any confusion for the industry and the consumer. That was an important area of policy.

The noble Baroness asked me about manufactured and processed products. As I said earlier when we discussed the issue, the advice from the CMO, which has been endorsed by his fellow CMOs, is that the retention of the ban on the use of bones for manufactured and processed products would be prudent. In that area, as in others, we intend to continue to take the CMO's advice. Therefore, the lifting of the ban will concern the retail sale direct to the consumer in butchers' shops, restaurants and other catering outlets.

As for prosecutions, it is not a matter for Ministers but for the enforcement authorities. As I said in the Statement, in future enforcement authorities who decide on the action they take will wish to take note of the Statement today. But all along the policy has been based on medical advice. Therefore, it would be inappropriate to suggest to enforcement authorities that they take retrospective advice when we were acting in different circumstances when the analysis of the risk was different.

I agree that the issues of the export of beef under the date-based export scheme and beef on the bone are separate because the date-based export scheme only applies to de-boned beef in particular animals under 30 months, born after 1996. However, it can do nothing but good for the export industry that the decline in the epidemic in this country is reflected in the ability to lift the restrictions. I know that my right honourable friend the Prime Minister, like my right honourable friend the Minister of Agriculture, is anxious to do everything he can to help build up the markets overseas for the export of British beef. They have been desperately damaged and we know the effect it has had on the industry.

Lord Jopling

My Lords, the noble Baroness will recall that the Government reacted to the previous advice in a more prudent way than your Lordships' House would have wished. Now, on the advice of the Chief Medical Officer, the Government have removed the ban. We welcome that. Can we infer from that that it is now the Government's view that in the period ahead of us the incidence of CJD is unlikely to increase significantly from its current relatively modest levels?

Baroness Hayman

My Lords, I do not believe that the advice from the Spongiform Encephalopathy Advisory Committee as to predictions of the scale of the epidemic of CJD has changed in this period because of the uncertainty about incubation times.

What has changed in terms of the Anderson data is the predictions of the possibility of pre-clinically diagnosed beef going into the food chain. So there are two separate issues. The decision that has been taken today, based on the CMO's advice, as was the original decision to impose the ban, reflects on the issue of whether the risk of allowing the sale of beef on the hone has diminished to such a point that it can be left to individual consumer choice. I do not believe one can infer from that any change in the view of the epidemiology of variant CJD in the human population. That still has all the uncertainties that we have known in the past.

Lord Davies of Coity

My Lords, first, like all Members of the House, I welcome I he announcement of the lifting of the ban on beef on the bone. However, it seems to me that we have heard for far too long the consequences of mad cow disease. We have perhaps been critical in apportioning blame too often. That is not to say that difficulties do not exist; they do. We are not out of the wood, but the announcement shows that there is light at the end of the tunnel.

The Government have tried, in spite of criticism, not to make an extremely difficult situation even worse. I believe that they will now be proved right in waiting for unity to exist among the Chief Medical Officers before taking the final decision.

Baroness Hayman

My Lords, I am grateful to my noble friend. He was something of a lone voice in the past on Questions in this House in supporting the Government's view that it was sensible to take the few extra weeks to ascertain whether we could achieve unanimity on the basis of the data to be published. I believe it is in the interests of both consumers and the beef industry to have achieved that unanimity. I am grateful for my noble friend's comments.

Lord Mackie of Benshie

My Lords, I wish to say how grateful I am for this better-late-than-never move. In future when I have English guests I shall be able to carve the sirloin off the bone, which is so much better.

However, it has taken a little time. The nanny option was the one taken. At the time, as the noble Baroness on the Conservative Front Bench said, there was the option to inform the public. We should trust the public more. When the odds against the disease are in the millions, the public are capable of deciding. After this decision, perhaps the Minister agrees with me that we should tell the public what the risk is and leave it to them.

Baroness Hayman

My Lords, I am grateful to the noble Lord for his comments. I have been in this job for only a few months, but it has not taken me long to find that you cannot do right by doing wrong with food safety. You are liable to criticism equally for being cavalier with dangers, however remote and, on other occasions, for over-implementing. It is sensible to rely on the professional advice. That is what we have done over the advice of the Chief Medical Officer. We must of course have proportionality—that is correct—but even when risks are remote we must take into account that the risk, however remote, is of a disease that can be fatal. It has invariably been fatal and we were dealing with it with variant CJD.

5.30 p.m.

Lord Monro of Langholm

My Lords, I am sure that when the Minister of Agriculture originally made his decision, which he said was marginal based on the three options mentioned earlier, he acted far more prudently than was necessary in view of the infinitesimal risk. This ban has been in place far longer than it should have been. From what the Minister said, am I correct in understanding that the ban will be lifted throughout the United Kingdom on 17th December, or will Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland still have the opportunity to opt out?

Bearing in mind the figures published today showing the catastrophic drop in farm income, what step will the Government take to help? I do not believe that the complacent attitude taken by the Government during the debate on that part of the gracious Speech concerned with agriculture gave any encouragement that something would happen in the near future not only in relation to beef but to pigs, sheep and milk. Today every agricultural product is in crisis and yet the Government appear to be saying that no further help will be offered.

Baroness Hayman

My Lords, probably as early as tomorrow we shall have an opportunity to debate at further length some of the broader issues of support for the agricultural industry, which is experiencing grave difficulties, as the noble Lord points out, and for which a number of initiatives involving substantial sums of aid have been taken by the Government, while looking in the longer term particularly to the restructuring of Community support for agriculture.

As to the ban itself, the timetable that I have outlined relates to the English legislation for which MAFF Ministers will be responsible. But my understanding is that the same timetable is achievable and will be aimed for by each of the other authorities. It is hoped that we shall all be consulting as from this evening and coming to the successful end point of that consultation at the same time. As has been made clear in the past, legislative competence in these areas lies with the devolved authorities and each in turn must take through its own legislation.

Lord Stoddart of Swindon

My Lords, as one of those who was vehemently and volubly opposed to the original imposition of the ban, I welcome the fact that it has now been lifted, and I hope that it will remain so. My recollection—perhaps my noble friend will correct me if I am wrong—is that the scientific advice was never that a ban on beef on the hone should be imposed. Is it not a fact that the real reason for the ban was to persuade the European Union to lift its ban on British beef? Even that now seems to have backfired since the French have used it in order to continue their illegal ban on British beef. I hope that in future my noble friends will be very careful about the imposition of restrictions to suit our European Union partners.

Perhaps I may put a question that has already been asked. Why have the English had to wait for Scotland and Wales to come into line? The English always seem to get the neck of the chicken or beef. Surely, this is a case of the tail wagging the dog and it is about time we had less of it. The only people in Britain today who appear to be discriminated against are the English. I hope that in future the Government will be hesitant about the imposition of bans when the risk is minuscule. It simply makes the Government look foolish, not in the eyes of Members of this House or another place but the country generally.

Baroness Hayman

My Lords, I am grateful to my noble friend who I know has taken a good deal of interest in the subject over the years. I do not believe that the English have been discriminated against and suffered during this period. Certainly, English beef producers will benefit from the fact that we have taken time to ensure that we achieve a UK approach to the problem. Frankly, I do not believe that it is sensible policy-making to show, for the sake of gesture, that it is possible to go it alone, with the uncertainties, difficulties and anomalies faced by consumers as a result of different regimes in different parts of the United Kingdom. I know that like others in this House my noble friend believes that the policy adopted on public health grounds was over-cautious. He is quite right that the Spongiform Encephalopathy Advisory Committee made an assessment of risk rather than a policy proposal. The policy decision was that of Ministers, but it was taken on the advice of the Chief Medical Officer. That advice was maintained by his successor when he first considered this matter.

Lord Carlile of Berriew

My Lords, does the Minister recognise that her announcement will be welcomed throughout Wales and that Welsh farmers regard this as a British issue to be dealt with as quickly as possible in all four parts of the United Kingdom? Does she also recognise that there is now available the very elusive jewel of the united support of the whole industry? This would be a very fine moment for the Government to take the initiative to ensure that the export marketing of British beef is addressed as a high priority.

Baroness Hayman

My Lords, I believe that to go forward with the whole of the British beef industry gives us an advantage. I am grateful for the noble Lord's question. He is absolutely right. To have the platform of strong public health controls, and the confidence of our public health advisers that the safety of beef across the United Kingdom is now such that even this precautionary measure on one particular element can be lifted, gives us an important base on which to try to rebuild the export markets that have been so devastatingly damaged. I point out again that this market has been devastatingly damaged not by the policy decisions of the Government but by the reality of the BSE epidemic.

Lord Soulsby of Swaffham Prior

My Lords, I am sure that the whole House welcomes the Statement repeated by the noble Baroness. Does she agree that as a nation we have determined the safety of British beef and beef on the bone and expended an enormous amount of effort, funds and cattle to contain BSE in the hope of controlling and eventually eradicating it, although the noble Baroness will be aware that we have not yet reached that stage? Does the Minister agree it is appropriate, now that we have convinced ourselves, laboriously, that beef on the bone is no longer a risk, to mount a determined scientific and commercial programme to promote our beef to those countries which still refuse to accept it? There are many such countries, many of which are members of the Commonwealth, and it is necessary to put the scientific evidence before them in a determined way.

Baroness Hayman

My Lords, I agree with the noble Lord. It was that gruelling and well-founded scientific advice that led to the European Union lifting its controls on the export of British beef. Sadly, we have had to go through the whole process again with the French, but we have done so on the basis of the evidence that is available. We have nothing to hide in terms of the safety of British beef. We have nothing to hide in terms of labelling or people knowing what is being bought because we believe that our beef is among the safest in the world. We have been exercising that operation so far as concerns Europe. I agree with the noble Lord that we need also to look wider than Europe, to the other traditional export markets. I think in particular of South Africa. There are other parts of the Commonwealth and other countries.

The decline in the epidemic—as the noble Lord says it is not completely finished—allows us now to take forward that exercise on the basis of clear scientific advice and progress.

Lord Peyton of Yeovil

My Lords, this is the end of a long, sad story for the industry. I join with those who hope that the Government, and that department upon which I do not always look with favour, will think hard about what they can do.

I wish to ask the Minister one question. Is the noble Baroness satisfied that beef coming from European sources is subjected to the same stringent minute and detailed examination that British beef has now stood up to?

Baroness Hayman

My Lords, perhaps I may answer the noble Lord slightly obliquely. Other countries with the same prevalence of BSE have to be subject to exactly the same stringent processes as this country in terms of BSE. Special regulations apply to countries with high levels of that epidemic.

On general issues of food safety, we should rightly demand a level playing field between ourselves and other beef producers.