§ Mr. Deakinsasked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food (1) why it was considered necessary to replace a national subsidy with an EEC subsidy in respect of refining margins on raw cane sugar; and what is the estimated cost to EEC funds;
(2) why it was considered appropriate by the EEC that all refiners of raw cane sugar should have the same refining margin; and if it is intended to apply this principle to other sectors of the agricultural industry.
§ Mr. GodberThe decision to replace the French national subsidy on the refining of raw cane sugar from the French Overseas Departments by a Community subsidy was the counterpart of the decisions taken in relation to Commonwealth sugar imported into the United Kingdom. The decision related solely to the refining of raw cane sugar and no principle of general application can be inferred from it. The cost in the year beginning 1st July 1973 is estimated at about 2.5 million Units of Account. The United Kingdom national subsidy, as I explained to the House on 28th March, is to ensure the fulfilment of Protocol 17 of the Treaty of Accession
£ "Statesman I" … … … … 19th January 1973 … … … … 231,491 "Englishman" … … … … 12th February 1973 … … … … 95,770 "Irishman" … … … … 27th April 1973 … … … … 52,200 "Lloydsman" … … … … 7th June 1973 … … … … 67,050 Total … … 446,511 "Statesman I" and "Lloydsman" were chartered for one month and two months respectively, and the charters have been extended at the Government's option by periods of one month. "Englishman" and "Irishman" are on open-ended charter terminable by the Government.
§ Mr. Prescottasked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food whether, when Her Majesty's Government chartered tugs for use in the Icelandic dispute, they were aware that the tugs
414Wrelating to our obligations under the Commonwealth Sugar Agreement.— [Vol. 853, c. 1306–16.]