§ Lord Gainfordasked Her Majesty's Government:
What proposals there are to compel farmers to restrict farming activities in nitrate sensitive zones and to compensate them for such restrictions.
176WA
§ The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food (Baroness Trumpington)The nitrate problem is a complex one and remedies may vary considerably from area to area depending on local circumstances such as geology, rainfall and farming patterns. In some cases, water blending or treatment may provide the best option for reducing nitrate levels—and indeed the only one in the short term. In other cases, agricultural restrictions may be preferable or a mixture of water and agricultural measures.
That is why my right honourable friend the Secretary of State for the Environment and my right honourable friend the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food commissioned a range of desk studies to examine the options for limiting nitrate concentrations in drinking water in 10 varied localities. We hope to publish the results of those desk studies soon.
The Government believe that, wherever possible, any agricultural restrictions should in the first event be on a voluntary basis. They do, however, consider that it is necessary to retain compulsory powers to establish protection zones as a fallback. Provision for such zones is therefore included in the Water Privatisation Bill on a similar but more flexible basis than the provisions, which have so far never been used, contained in the Control of Pollution Act 1974.
The Government where farmers are obliged to restrict their agricultural activities beyond the degree which could be regarded as good agricultural practice, they should be compensated. The details of these compensation arrangements are currently the subject of careful consideration, the conclusions of which will be announced during the passage of the Bill. Appropriate consultations will be held with water, farming and other affected interests. The Government will also be considering the extent to which compensation costs can be offset by reductions in CAP support.