asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what has been the increased cost to the Exchequer in the first six months of 1961, as compared to the same period of 1960, as a result of the dumping of barley in the United Kingdom at a price below the cost of production in the country of origin.

The effect of dumped or subsidised imports of barley on the Exchequer liability under the guarantee cannot be isolated from the many factors which determine the market price of home-grown barley. For example, whilst the average price of home-grown barley in the first six months of 1961 was about 3s. per cwt. less than in the corresponding period of 1960, it must be remembered that the crop was a quarter of a million tons bigger and harvested under far less favourable conditions than the 1959 crop.

Is my right hon. Friend aware of the general satisfaction which is felt by farmers at the steps which have been taken to stop the dumping of barley in this country? Is he satisfied that plans to prevent Russian barley from coming in are finalised and satisfactory? Looking to the future, has he had an opportunity to consult the trade to find out whether it is prepared to take up all of the 1961 home-grown barley crop?

Yes, Sir. I had a meeting with the trade yesterday and I was given an assurance that it would do its best to take up the whole of this year's crop from our own farms. Russian imports are a matter for my right hon. Friend the President of the Board of Trade.

Has any of this dumped barley come from the countries of the Six? Is so, why has not that been stopped?

France was exporting barley to us. My right hon. Friend has arranged that no French barley shall come here below the price of £20 a ton.

In view of the fact that the cost of this dumped barley falls on the Exchequer rather than on the producer, will my right hon. Friend consult our mutual right hon. Friend the President of the Board of Trade with a view to altering the arrangements so that it is no longer incumbent on the producer but rather on the Government to establish a case of dumping and so eliminate the delay which occurs at present?

It is incumbent on the Government to establish a case once application has been made, but part of the case is that damage must have been done to a particular industry. As my right hon. Friend the President of the Board of Trade has frequently said, before it can be established that damage has been done to a particular industry it must put in an application.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what has been the amount of beef imported in the past six months; and how that amount compares with the same period one year earlier.

The latest six-months period for which final figures of imports are available is that from December, 1960, to May 1961, when imports of beef totalled 142,000 tons compared with 158,500 tons in the same period a year earlier. We estimate that the figures of imports for the six months to 30th June, 1961, will show a reduction of about 12 per cent. over last year.

Will not my hon. Friend agree that there were 100,000 tons of imported carcase beef from South America to this country in the first six months of this year and that these imports should be curtailed until such time as our home beef market has had a chance to recover?

A lesser quantity came from South America this year than in the same period last year. It would be over-hasty to assume that the present market price is made or governed by imports this year in view of the reduction.

Can the Parliamentary Secretary say how much came from the Argentine and how much from the Commonwealth?

In this last period of six months there has been a reduction in imports of meat from Australia and from New Zealand. A year ago almost a quarter of our meat came from Australia and New Zealand. This year there has been a reduction in the amount from Australia, from the Argentine and from Uruguay.

May I ask my hon. Friend a question which he cannot answer? Why is it that the reduction in the price of beef has not been reflected in a lower price to the consumer?

I think there is a Question more closely related to that later on the Order Paper to which my right hon. Friend will be replying.

In any case that is out of order on this Question.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food to what causes he attributes the continuing fall in the market prices of beef cattle compared with last year; and what estimate he has made of home-produced and imported supplies of beef for the rest of this year, and of the effect of the lower market prices on the cost of the Exchequer subsidy.

The main reason for the fall in market prices of beef cattle seems to be the abnormally high rate of marketing of home produced cattle. But there are a number of other factors, as I explained in my reply to my hon. Friend the Member for Lowestoft (Mr. Prior) on 20th June. I expect total supplies of beef during the next six months to be slightly higher than for the same period last year. The lower market prices will undoubtedly increase the cost of the guarantee but by how much depends on the extent to which prices recover during the rest of the year. There has been a distinct hardening in market prices for fat cattle over the last week and there is reason to hope that this improvement will continue.

Could my right hon. Friend say to what extent the extra charge falling on the Exchequer by way of subsidy for fat cattle is being offset by lower prices for housewives when they go to buy meat in butchers' shops? Has he had consultations with butchers about this? Can he do something to popularise the cheaper cuts of English beef which would, or should, give very good value at today's prices.

Yes, I have had consultations with butchers' representatives on this matter. There are a number of cuts which are considerably cheaper in the shops than they were at this time a year ago. There are some which the butchers are finding it extremely difficult to sell, even at exceedingly low prices. On other cuts the reduction has not been so great, or in some cases even not at all. I believe the fundamental reason for the fall in wholesale prices was the extra number of cattle coming forward from our own farms during these past eight weeks, the increase of which over last year has been quite striking.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that my younger daughter a few weeks ago sold some young beasts in Leicester Market at £4 10s. a hundred- weight against £8 a few months ago? She and young farmers complain that the Government are paying a big subsidy which is going largely to the butchers while housewives and farmers do not get the benefit. Will my right hon. Friend look into that?

I could not say that I was aware of the financial transactions of my hon. Friend's daughter. I hope that if she markets beasts in the future she will find there is an appreciable hardening of the market. The butchers are fully aware—I have had long discussions with their representatives—of the need to try to increase the purchase and consumption of meat by lowering prices, but, of course, they have to sell the whole beast and to think of the prices they charge for the different cuts.

Will my right hon. Friend please recall that when some time ago I asked him about the effect of increased imports of beef from Yugoslavia on the cost to the Exchequer of the beef subsidy he said that the effect was purely marginal? Will he bear in mind that in the present rather depressed state of the beef market any importations have a considerably depressing effect on prices quite out of proportion to the quantity? Will he take steps to see that importation from this source—which I think is a new one from the British point of view—is curtailed?

What matters from the point of view of the market is not the source of imports but the amount of meat coming on to the market. Over the last six months the rate of imported beef coming on to the market was 12 per cent. less than in the previous year.

In view of all the suggestions about wage restraint, is it not a shocking suggestion to come from a Minister, a member of the present Government, that prices of beef should rise? Is that the way to deal with wage problems?

The right hon. Member must have misunderstood me. I did not suggest that. What I said was that I had spoken to the butchers and they are well aware of the need to increase the consumption of beef by lower prices where possible.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he will now state what steps he is taking to protect salmon from drift-net fishing in the sea.

This question remains under urgent examination by my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Scotland and myself.

In view of the fact that this year alone, up to the end of last week, 28,000 salmon have been caught in this manner, will my right hon. Friend agree that the time has come to take early action to prohibit the landing and sale in this country of salmon caught in or near our territorial waters during the annual close season?

The Government fully realise the need to make an urgent declaration of policy on this matter, but there are many difficulties, including the fact that the law and practice in relation to salmon fishing differ widely in England and Scotland. These complicated matters have first to be resolved.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he is yet in a position to make a statement concerning the future of the Hill Cow Farming Subsidy after 1963.

No, Sir, but I have very much in mind the importance of making an announcement as soon as possible so that hill farmers may know how they will stand after 1963.

While thanking my right hon. Friend for that encouraging reply, may I ask him to bear in mind how very important it is—in view of his recent Answer to Questions about beef —that beef producers on hill and marginal land should know as soon as passible what their future is to be, and that we hope they will be given an assurance that their future will be satisfactory?

I agree with my hon. Friend, but the present powers will continue until November, 1963.

Will the Minister bear in mind that mast of the farmers sitting behind him are in principle against subsidies to private enterprise?

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what steps he intends taking as a result of the report by the Natural Resources (Technical) Committee entitled, Scale of Enterprise in Farming; and if he will make a statement.

The valuable report by the Natural Resources (Technical) Committee makes no specific recommendations about Government policy, and I have nothing to add to the Answer given to the hon. and learned Member for Brigg (Mr. E. L. Mallalieu) on 2nd February.

Will my hon. Friend particularly note that Part VII of the Zuckerman Report which poses the grave social problems which will face the countryside should there be too rapid amalgamation forced on small farmers as a result of the fall in net farm income?

We have noticed that part. We have given considerable help to the small farmer recently, not least under the Small Farmers Scheme. No one wants to see the pattern of the countryside violated, but there is some financial help towards amalgamation under the Farm Improvements Scheme. More advantage could be taken of co-operation by small farmers, but no one wants to see anyone forced out of his home.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he will take steps to ensure that milk surplus to British needs is processed and made available to those British colonies and Commonwealth countries where substantial numbers of children suffer from diseases caused by lack of protein in their diet.

Milk in excess of current needs for the domestic liquid market is already processed into a variety of forms which are freely available for commercial sale both at home and to the Commonwealth. Assistance by Her Majesty's Government to British Colonies and the Commonwealth is made available in the form of grants, loans, technical assistance and educational and training facilities and not by way of contributions in kind.

Will the hon. Gentleman go a stop further and make a very economic use of this product? Will he consult with the other Departments concerned, the Commonwealth Relations Office, the Colonial Office and the Treasury, to see whether this could be a dramatic contribution which would be effective both at home and in the Commonwealth?

It would not be dramatic because we have not a surplus of milk in this country. Although we are producing in excess of the needs of the liquid market, this country is a great importer of foodstuffs, including dairy products.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that the recent Conference on International Food and Agriculture at Dubrovnik, at which the farmers' unions were represented, fully approved the policy outlined in my hon. Friend's Question? Is he further aware that U.N.I.C.E.F. is prepared and willing at this moment to take more milk from this country and to distribute it to the people who badly need it?

Generally, that is approved by farmers' representatives throughout the world, but there is a misunderstanding here. There is a suggestion that we have a substantial surplus which, in fact, does not exist.

Would my hon. Friend agree that we could produce more in this country and that would be a better idea than having the quota system for dairy farmers?

That is a wider question altogether.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food whether he will give an undertaking, in view of the present uncertainty in the dairy industry, that the recent increase granted for liquid milk in the 1961 Price Review will continue to be paid until the 1962 Review.

Yes, Sir. There is no intention of reducing the guaranteed price for milk before 1st April, 1962. But, as stated in the White Paper, the position will need to be reconsidered at the next Annual Review in the light of progress made towards introducing a suitable alternative system of paying producers.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that this statement will be received with relief by dairy farmers? Will he bear in mind the extreme importance of this recent rise to the dairy industry, which is composed mainly of small producers? Will he promise to think very carefully before making any changes detrimental to the dairy industry at the next Price Review?

This will be considered at the next Annual Review. I do not think that my hon. Friend will expect me to comment on it today.

Is it not a fact that the price of liquid milk is twice that of milk sent for processing? Can the right hon. Gentleman explain the difference in the price of milk for these different purposes?

It is very much more expensive to set out to produce milk for the liquid market than it is to produce milk for the manufacturing market. If one sets out to produce milk for the liquid market, it has to be a continual supply throughout the year, and it is very much more expensive to produce milk in the winter than in the summer. A producer setting out to produce milk for the manufacturing market can concentrate his production of milk in those months when it is cheapest to produce milk off the grass.

asked tree Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he will now state whether the Northumberland Forest Villages Consultative Committee has been set up; and whether he will state the details of the constitution, terms of reference, and personnel.

The constitution and terms of reference of this Committee have now been agreed and I will send the hon. Member a copy of them. I hope that appointments will be made to the Committee within a few days and that its first meeting will be held on 31st July.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food when the report of the 18 months' survey of the wharves on the River Hull is expected to be received by the Hull and East Yorkshire River Board; and whether the Board will consider holding a special meeting to consider the flooding problem in Hull, so that alleviation measures will be taken to prevent further flooding before the next equinoctial high water spring tide on 23rd September.

No date has been given for the presentation of the report of the survey, but action is being taken as each section of the survey is completed. I understand that the river board does not intend to hold any special meetings until the Hull Corporation has served notices on the owners of defective wharves requiring them to raise the level of these wharves to that prescribed in the Corporation's Act of 1925.

Is the Joint Parliamentary Secretary aware that, since the serious flooding in March, the river board has allocated no money and carried out no flood prevention work on the River Hull inside the city boundary? As August is a recess month, is the board to do nothing before the next series of high tides in September and so complete six months of masterly inactivity?

I know that the river board is very well aware of its responsibilities. It is an autonomous local authority. I am not aware of its day-to-day transactions, but I know that it is very much aware of its responsibility and of the fact that certain prevention works will have to be done before the next danger period.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he will state the number of defective wharves which caused flooding on 20th March, on the east side of the River Hull, between North Bridge and Sammy's Point, the number of notices to be served on riparian owners to raise their wharves, and the number of flood alleviation schemes to be initiated by the Hull and East Yorkshire River Board in this section of the river.

Flooding appears to have occurred from seven defective wharves on this stretch of the river and as a result of the recent survey the Hull Corporation is being recommended to serve notices on the wharf owners concerned. The river board has not yet prepared any flood alleviation schemes for this section of the river.

How many days' grace after the service of notices are to be allowed to owners of defective wharves? If prevention work is not commenced, what further action will be taken by the river board in the next two months to reduce the causes of flooding from the River Hull and so prevent hundreds of my constituents being flooded for the second time this year?

The hon. and gallant Gentleman would probably get that detailed information more easily if he approached the river board direct. However, if he tables a Question I shall be very willing to try to obtain the information and give it to him at the next available opportunity.

Is my hon. Friend aware that increased flooding must be expected in Hull and other areas due to the increased amount of water coming into the North Sea from the rapid melting of the North Pole ice cap? What does he intend to do about it?

My right hon. Friend is not responsible for the North Pole ice cap.