HL Deb 10 October 2002 vol 639 cc496-9

The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Lord Whitty) rose to move, That the draft order laid before the House on 27th June be approved [34th Report from the Joint Committee].

The noble Lord said: My Lords, the order concerns the functions of the Meat and Livestock Commission. The MLC was established by the Agriculture Act 1967 with the general aim of promoting the efficiency of the livestock industry in Great Britain. As a consequence of devolution, however, provision must be made to allow the development of regionally appropriate strategies in the red meat sector. The red meat sector is important to Scotland as it accounts for 42 per cent of the value of Scottish primary agricultural production and has an annual output value of £770 million. Furthermore, Scotland has 29 per cent of UK beef cattle and 21 per cent of the UK sheep flock. These forms of agriculture account for more than 10 per cent of GDP in some areas of Scotland.

Quality Meat Scotland (QMS) was established in 1999 to support the red meat industry, primarily by promoting Scottish red meat. It was formed by the MLC with the National Farmers' Union for Scotland and the Scottish Association of Meat Wholesalers.

QMS derives its functions and a large part of its funding from the MLC. The MLC has the statutory responsibility to promote greater efficiency in the livestock industry in Great Britain. To this end, the MLC collects general and promotional levies on slaughtered or exported cattle, sheep and pigs. The promotional levy is used for promotion or undertaking arrangements for advertising the merits and increasing the species promotion sales, in GB or elsewhere, of livestock and livestock products.

QMS funding is currently based on the Scottish promotional levy. The Scottish general levy is currently retained by the MLC, which takes responsibility for functions such as collection of market information, research and product development, livestock improvement, training and health education.

Devolution has highlighted the need for a distinctive and locally appropriate strategy for each part of Great Britain and for new accountability arrangements between the MLC and Scottish Ministers. The Scottish executive undertook a consultation exercise to gauge industry views on strengthening the role of QMS. The consultation was based on four core proposals: that QMS became responsible, on behalf of MLC, for all MLC functions in Scotland; that QMS be given the autonomy to develop a strategy for Scotland focused on Scottish red meat development and promotional priorities; that QMS receives the full Scottish general and promotional levies to address Scottish priorities for red meat; and, that QMS continues to invest in GB level MLC services where this confers benefits on the Scottish industry.

Respondents to the consultation included all of the key stakeholder groups in the Scottish red meat sector. They indicated a high level of support for the proposals. The Meat and Livestock Commission has also been consulted on the terms of the order, as is required by Section 89 of the Scotland Act.

Respondents to the consultation expressed a view that continued links with the MLC were important—links that would prevent duplication of effort, ensure the retention of valued services, protect core expertise and maintain the integrity of GB programmes, while at the same time securing best value for the Scottish red meat sector.

The order before us today makes provisions in relation to the financial arrangements, control and accountability of the MLC. It will transfer to Scottish Executive Ministers the function of giving general directions to the MLC in relation to the use of the Scottish levy. To achieve this, the order will require the agriculture Ministers—that is, the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, Scottish Executive Ministers and the Welsh Assembly Government Minister for Agriculture and Rural Development—acting jointly to make a determination to define the basis for the Scottish levy.

Conversely, it will also require that the function of giving directions in relation to the use of the levy for England and Wales will cease to be exercisable by Scottish Ministers.

The order will also require the MLC to prepare for Scottish Ministers an annual report on the discharge of its functions. This will be an important part of strengthening accountability to Scottish Ministers.

The order will not, however, change the arrangements for the setting of the Scottish levy or the collection of the levy and it will not affect the MLCs status as a Great Britain body.

The delegation from MLC to QMS of functions in Scotland will be achieved through a joint ministerial direction. This will be made under the provisions of the Agriculture Act 1967 subsequent to the making of this order. I commend the order to the House. I beg to move.

Moved, That the draft order laid before the House on 27th June be approved [34th Report from the Joint Committee].—(Lord Whitty.)

The Earl of Mar and Killie

My Lords, it is always good to have the opportunity to debate matters in Scotland. However, I promise not to make a meal of it.

The order can be welcomed on several grounds, instinctively because it is devolutionary in character, although I acknowledge that the MLC will remain the cross-border authority. It also meets the aspirations of the Scottish livestock industry and enables the Scottish Executive to achieve its strategic aims. It establishes a Scottish levy, determined by the Secretary of State, the National Assembly and Scottish Ministers. It requires Quality Meat Scotland to report annually to the Scottish Parliament, thereby enabling scrutiny. It confirms the autonomy of QMS, but not the divorce of QMS from the Meat and Livestock Commission. It also identifies the use by QMS of the core services maintained by the MLC.

Understanding the order was made easier than usual by the extensive explanatory memorandum attached to it. The Scotland Office is to be congratulated on its preparation. However, the arrangements are somewhat convoluted in character. However, this is not a simple devolutionary transfer of powers but the alteration of cross-border arrangements.

I have four questions. First, will the Scottish levy be made up of those levies collected in Scotland or will it be an arbitrary amount collected in Great Britain and decided upon by the various Ministers? Secondly, is there scope for Barnett-formula style additional funds, recognising the greater strategic importance of the livestock industry in Scotland as opposed to in England? Thirdly, does the order signal the end of any semblance of a brand called "British meat"? Fourthly, I can see the brand advantage of Scottish and Welsh meat—"Happy animals reared among sensational scenery"—but what will be the consequence for the branding of English meat?

Lord Glentoran

My Lords, I thank the Minister for bringing forward the order. I have not changed allegiance across the water to north of the Border. My noble friend the Duke of Montrose, who would be here, is sick. However, I am assured by those whose advice I have taken that this order is all in the best interests of Scotland. On that basis, I support the Motion.

Lord Whitty

My Lords, I thank the noble Earl, Lord Mar and Kellie, and the noble Lord, Lord Glentoran, for their support. It has been a convoluted discussion but it has ended up with the best solution in slightly complex circumstances.

To answer the noble Earl's questions, the Scottish levy will be the levy raised in Scotland. Therefore the issue of the Barnett formula does not arise because the levy relates to the number of animals which are slaughtered or exported from Scotland relative to England rather than any artificial formula.

Is it the end of British beef? I do not think so. I think that the brand of British meat may well still be promoted, but the special brand of quality Scottish meat is also important, as in some circumstances is that of Welsh meat.

As to whether this formula will be detrimental to England, I believe that it will be beneficial to everyone. I would certainly argue that English meat is equally well reared in equally beautiful surroundings, albeit different ones, and will equally meet the tastes not only of British consumers but of consumers around the world. The MLC will contribute to that in its new guise. I commend the order to the House.

On Question, Motion agreed to.