HC Deb 07 December 1973 vol 865 cc473-5W
Mr. Moate

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food when the £47 million limit for applications under the Horticulture Improvement Scheme was first announced.

Mrs. Fenner

The Horticulture Act 1960, under which the first Horticulture Improvement Scheme was made, set a limit of £8¼ million to aggregate grant expenditure. This was increased to £27 million by the Agriculture and Horticulture Act 1964 and to £42 million—with provision for a further increase to £47 million by order—by the Agriculture Act 1970. The Government's intention to make the Horticulture (Increase in Aggregate Amount of Grants) Order 1973, authorising the final increase to £47 million, was announced on 2nd April 1973, when a draft of the order was laid before the House for approval.

Mr. Moate

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food how many requests for improvement grants under the Horticulture Improvement Scheme had been made to his Department but, not being formally lodged by the termination date, have been disallowed; and what would be the approximate cost of allowing such applications, under this scheme and under the proposed replacement scheme.

Mrs. Fenner

About 2,500 applications for grant under the Horticulture Improvement Scheme have been received since the available funds were committed on 6th July. The approximate cost of approving these applications under the Horticulture Improvement Scheme would be £7 million. We cannot estimate the cost of the proposals under the new schemes with their varying grant rates. The time involved in scrutinising each aplication to determine the appropriate rates of grant would be prohibitive. Moreover, we could not tell from the HIS application form whether the proposal would be eligible for grant under the Farm and Horticulture Development Scheme or how the applicant would opt if he were eligible both for that scheme and for the Horticulture Capital Grant Scheme.

Mr. Moate

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what representations he has received asking him to reconsider his decision not to allow applications under the Horticulture Improvement Scheme that were being discussed with his Department at the time of the termination of the scheme but had not been formally lodged; and what has been his reply.

Mrs. Fenner

So far as they can be distinguished, 23 of the letters about the ending of the Horticulture Improvement Scheme seek special treatment for proposals which were being discussed with my officials but for which no application had been made by 6th July. We have replied that because of lack of funds it will not be possible to approve any application received after 6th July but that growers with applications outstanding will receive priority treatment under the two new schemes to be introduced on 1st January 1974.

Mr. Moate

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what representations he has received about the effect of the termination of the availability of grants under the Horticulture Improvement Scheme; what reply he has sent; and if he will make a statement.

Mrs. Fenner

We have received 167 letters about the effect of the termination of the availability of grants under the Hortculture Improvement Scheme. Of these 142 have come from Members of Parliament and 25 from the National Farmers' Union, growers and the supplying industries. We have sent 165 replies to date.

For detailed statements on capital grants for horticulture I would refer my hon. Friend to the reply on 24th July to my hon. Friend the Member for Haltemprice (Mr. Wall), to the reply given on 14th November to my hon. Friend the Member for Bridgwater (Mr. Tom King)—[Vol. 860, c. 3889 ; Vol. 864, c. 1768.]—and also to the Press notices issued by the Agricultural Departments on 30th July, 29th November and 3rd December, copies of which were placed in the Library of the House.

Mr. Moate

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food whether the level of grants available under the Horticulture Improvement Scheme up to 6th July 1973 would be permissible under EEC Directive 72/159.

Mrs. Fenner

No. However, it cannot be assumed that the 40 per cent. rate of grant under the Horticulture Improvement Scheme would have been continued in any successor scheme if EEC Directive 72/159 had not applied.

Forward to