HC Deb 17 July 1985 vol 83 cc190-1W
Mr. Foulkes

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what estimate of the dollar/ecu exchange rate was used in determining the level of agricultural spending contained in the 1986 draft EEC budget.

Mr. Jopling

[pursuant to his reply, 16 July 1985]: A rate of 1.2 ecu to the US dollar has been assumed by the Commission in drawing up its preliminary draft budget proposals for agricultural expenditure.

Mr. Foulkes

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food (1) if he will list all categories of agricultural and rural spending or support not included in the 20.6 billion ecu limit oh EEC agricultural spending for 1986; and if he will state for each category (a) the level of spending in 1984, (b) the level of spending for 1985 and (c) the estimated level of spending as contained in the 1986 preliminary draft budget;

(2) what assumption regarding the increase in cereal prices was made in deciding on (a) the limit for EEC agricultural spending in 1986 and (b) the 1986 draft budget.

Mr. Jopling

[pursuant to his reply, 16 July 1985]: For the purposes of the financial guideline calculation for 1986, it is assumed that EAGGF guarantee expenditure in 1985 will be at the level fixed in the budget. The budget was drawn up on the assumption that the Commission's original price-fixing proposals, including a reduction of 3.6 per cent. in cereal prices, would be agreed. Changes to these proposals will not, however, affect the calculation of the financial guideline as the Commission has undertaken to take any necessary measures to avoid a supplementary budget this year.

I understand that in its preliminary draft budget for 1986 the Commission will assume a cut of 1.8 per cent. in cereal prices for the 1985–86 marketing year, as in the amended proposals from the Commission and Presidency of 16 May.

Mr. Foulkes

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what assumption regarding the increase in cereal prices was made in deciding on (a) the limit for EEC agricultural spending in 1986 and (b) the 1986 draft budget.

Mr. Jopling

[pursuant to his reply, 16 July 1985]: I refer the hon. Member to the reply given on 11 July to my hon. Friend the Member for Southend, East (Mr. Taylor). The figures requested are as follows:

(mecu)
EAGGF guidance (except fisheries) Section IIIB Chapter 38
1984 outturn (provisional) 634 56
1985 budget 632 55
1986 preliminary draft budget 865 Not yet known

Rural areas may also benefit from expenditure under other parts of the Community budget, notably the other structural funds, but the amounts cannot separately be identified.

Forward to