asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what proportion of the 7s. 6d. levied on a dog licence is absorbed by administration; and what consideration he has given to the abolition of this tax.

In England and Wales, slightly over 30 per cent. The arrangements are currently being reviewed.

Whilst I thank my hon. Friend for that answer, does he appreciate that this tax has not been altered for nearly 100 years and that that 30 per cent. of it—half a crown—is divided between the Post Office, which collects it, the local authority, for whose benefit it is collected, and the police, who try to catch offenders and have to prosecute? Will he consider either increasing the tax to a proper level or abolishing it completely?

The matter is not solely within the responsibility of my Department, but the reasons which my hon. Friend has given are those which have caused the Government to review the whole matter.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food, in view of the fact that as sugar consumption is static and sugar beet yields are rising, whether he will provide that under Commonwealth Sugar Agreements a higher percentage of home-produced sugar shall be used.

The first triennial review of the Commonwealth Sugar Agreement takes place next autumn. My hon. Friend will not expect me to anticipate the outcome.

Does my right hon. Friend disagree that in the circumstances in which it is the policy of this Government, as it was of the previous Government, to increase the percentage of food which we grow for ourselves, sugar should not be excluded from this process?

I note what my hon. Friend says. I do not want to be drawn into what may happen in the future at this stage.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food, having regard to the autumn supplemental farm price settlement, involving payment of an additional £54 million from Treasury funds, what account was taken of increased and increasing farm wages, now revised upward to £14 16s. per week minimum for agricultural workers; what is his estimate of added costs arising from this last price award; and whether it will be fully taken into account in the March, 1971, farm price review.

The Agricultural Wages Board had not decided on its proposal for a wage increase in England and Wales when the recent price adjustments were made. If the proposals are confirmed their estimated cost—about £26 million in a full year for guaranteed products—will be duly taken into account at the 1971 Annual Review.

Whilst I thank my right hon. Friend for that comforting reply, will he bear in mind that agricultural wages, having regard to the cost of living today and inflationary tendencies, are still far too low, and that farmers cannot earn the additional profitability required of them through extra output unless they pay their farm workers better? Will my right hon. Friend bear that in mind before the next Price Review?

I shall bear all these points in mind, but I must point out to my hon. Friend and the House that the only way in which the lower-paid workers can have better wages is if other workers go without some of their increases. That point must be made.

I hesitate to ask the Minister, but is he aware of the gross inaccuracy of his hon. Friend's Question, which alleges that £54 million extra will have to be found from the Treasury, when his own review statement claims that there will still be substantial savings on the current estimates as forecast in my right hon. Friend's Budget?

In congratulating the hon. Member for Newark (Mr. Bishop) on his first appearance as an agricultural spokesman, I would tell him that it is true that, as a result of greatly increased world prices, the deficiency payment which the Government will have to find this year will be less. That helped the Government to put back more money into the industry this October. But the fact is that the Government will still have to find the additional money.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food whether he will make a statement upon losses incurred by recent fowl pest ravages and steps taken to prevent spread and additional outbreaks.

I would refer my hon. Friend to the reply my hon. Friend gave to the hon. Member for Merioneth (Mr. William Edwards) on 3rd November. Since that time the number of outbreaks has risen to 1,606 up to 12th November and the total number of birds on the holdings involved to nearly 12 million. No information is available on the number of these birds which have died from the disease, but there have been serious losses in some flocks, particularly broilers.—[Vol. 805, c. 336–8.]

Having regard to the very virulent character of this pest and the huge losses in Nottinghamshire, Leicestershire, Northamptonshire and now in Worcestershire, including the middle of my constituency, are supplies of Christmas fare, chickens and eggs yet threatened?

I do not believe that Christmas fare, chickens or eggs are seriously affected, but it would be wrong not to realise how serious the situation is and the enormous losses that have been incurred in certain counties. I can only urge the farming community to take every possible precaution to vaccinate to keep the disease down. I am extremely worried about the present position.

As the right hon. Gentleman said, it is an extremely serious epidemic. What trials are being made with live vaccine, and what results have emerged from those trials? What may also result in terms of higher prices for poultry meat as a result of the epidemic? The price of poultry meat is rising for other reasons as well, as the right hon. Gentleman is aware.

I could not answer the last part of the question, except to say that if there are fewer birds about there will be some increase, but I should not like to quantify that. We are carrying out trials with live vaccine involving about five million birds. It is still too early to give any indication of the success of those trials; the earliest started about 10 days to a fortnight ago. As soon as I have further information I shall give it to the House. I hope that the House will support me in the carrying out of the trials, which involve a change of policy. It is a very serious situation.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he will estimate the percentage increase in United Kingdom annual food production which will occur as a result of the recent increases in agricultural support.

I regret that this would not be possible with any worthwhile degree of accuracy.

But if the Minister has no idea what his injection of cash will do to total farm production, what use is that injection of cash? Does agricultural expansion still remain the policy of the Government? When will the Minister produce the cash to get that expansion?

Certainly, expansion remains the policy of the Government. That is why, although it was not a review in the ordinary sense but an award to meet an emergency situation, the cash injection was made. The hon. Gentleman has asked for an estimate of increased food production. Increased guarantees are only one factor in raising production. Costs, weather and so on must be taken into account before I could give him a worth-while answer.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what communications he has received about greater increases in food prices in new towns; and what reply he has sent.

My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Scotland has replied to the hon. Member's letter.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that it has been conceded that there is an abnormal increase in prices in new towns? Is he also aware of the argument that this is because the spirit of competition does not prevail, in the new town of Livingston in particular? What do his Government propose to do about this?

I apologise to the hon. Gentleman for the fact that his letter first went to my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Scotland, then came to my Department, and then returned to the Secretary of State for Scotland. I have examined the prices in Livingston. In certain cases there is a considerable difference between them and prices in other parts. I think that what will happen—and this is the right thing to happen—is that other businesses will come to Livingston and set up in competition. The fact that prices in Bathgate and Edinburgh, which are quoted in the hon. Gentleman's letter, are much lower is the best indication of that that the hon. Gentleman could have.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what representations he has received from consumer organisations on food prices; and what reply he has sent.

None, Sir.

Does not the Minister agree that to some extent consumer protection in this country has been abandoned by the abolition of the Consumer Council, and that it is no solution to the problem to set up a Tory-front consumer organisation?

The only organisation that has written, I understand, is one that wrote to my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister, the Scottish Housewives' Association, which wrote about the price of food if we entered the Common Market. As for other consumer organisations, the best judge of the right price to pay for any article is the housewife or consumer who buys it.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the Government's decision to abolish the Consumer Council is a most serious matter and has been received with considerable regret throughout the country?

Rubbish!

Would the right hon. Gentleman now consider discussing the matter again with his colleagues in the Government with a view to taking a new attitude, because there is no doubt that the Consumer Council gave excellent advice and protected the consumer in a very real way from firms which were tending to take advantage of the housewife?

Matters concerning the Consumer Council are for my right hon. Friend and not for me. [Interruption.] I would certainly not dream of consulting my colleagues about the future of the now defunct Consumer Council, because I believe that competition is the right answer.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what is his estimate of the number of grocery food items that have increased in price from 1st August, 1970 until 30th September, 1970.

I do not make such estimates.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that any housewife could furnish him with this list and that every housewife in Great Britain could tell him that competition is not keeping prices down?

What every housewife in Britain could also tell the House is that while we pay ourselves 14 per cent. more for doing only 3 per cent. more work—[Interruption.]—we shall have inflation, and we had better realise what that means and does.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that he has given a totally unsatisfactory reply to this Question? In view of the total failure of his policy of competition to stabilise food prices, will he now consider reviving the early warning system so that he at least can scrutinise the claims for increased prices which are being made and so that his officials may look at them to see whether or not they are justified? Would he give the House an undertaking that the question of decimalisation will be looked at very carefully; and may we have an assurance that when it takes place there will not be a levelling up of food prices but, rather, a levelling down?

I am always amazed by the ability of hon. Gentlemen opposite to forget their past so quickly. [Interruption.] Have they forgotten already that they are responsible for the fastest inflation that this country has had since the war? In their last two years in office food prices and the cost of living index went up by over 6 per cent. How can the right hon. Gentleman ask me at this stage to introduce a prices and incomes board which, when he was in office, had no effect whatever?

The answer suggests that the Minister obviously does not know what is going on with prices, so how will the Prime Minister honour his election promise to act directly on prices—at a stroke?

It would be a great condemnation of hon. Members opposite if they thought that I did not know what was happening to prices. The Government and my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister will honour his election pledges—which was something that never happened when the Opposition were in power.

The Minister says that he knows what is happening about prices. Can he tell the House by what percentage they have gone up since 18th June?

To the last available date, according to the food index, food prices have fallen by just under 1 per cent. But, of course, hon. Gentlemen opposite only believe bad news; they never believe good news.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what estimate he has made of the increase in food prices resulting from Her Majesty's Government's recently announced financial measures.

The extent of any increase would depend on a number of factors but is likely to be relatively small.

Will the Minister confirm that he is on record as wanting higher prices for the consumer? Is he aware that in spite of the cheap publicity-seeking comment of the carpet-bagger from Kidderminster—

rose—

Order.

On a point of order. Your predecessor ruled in 1956, Sir, when I was the hon. Member for Kidderminster—I am at present the hon. Member for Worcestershire, South—that the term "carpet-bagger" was opprobious and unparliamentary, and had to be withdrawn. Will you now cause the hon. Gentleman to withdraw it?

I hesitate to disagree with my predecessor. The term "carpetbagger" is not a complimentary term, but it is not unparliamentary. Mr. Brown.

rose—

Further to that point of order. As the Member for Kidderminster is not at present in the House, will you cause this comment to be withdrawn?

If the hon. Member for Newcastle-upon-Tyne, West (Mr. Bob Brown) calls the hon. Member for Worcestershire, South the hon. Member for Kidderminster, that is an error.

Withdraw.

A lot of Members have a lot of Questions on the Order Paper. Mr. Brown?

I can only bow to your advice, Mr. Speaker. In spite of the cheap comments of the ex-carpet-bagger, there will be many people in the northeast of England who will not be able to afford the staple foods required for a family, let alone the "boozer". Is the Minister aware that this might have extremely detrimental effects upon the funds of the Tory Party, bearing in mind the contribution of the brewers?

The hon. Gentleman should not abuse Question Time by asking such a ridiculous question and by making such a nonsensical statement.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what percentage reduction he expects in milk production due to the abolition of school milk for children between seven and 11 years of age.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what estimate he has made of the increase in milk prices which will result from the reduction in milk sales following the withdrawal of school and welfare milk; and what effect this will have in terms of increasing unemployment in the field of production and distribution.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what estimate he has made of the effect of the school milk charges introduced by the Government on small milk producers in Northern Ireland; and what steps are envisaged to compensate financial loss by these producers.

The changes announced in the School and Welfare Milk Schemes apply to Great Britain. Whether similar changes should be made in Northern Ireland is being discussed with the Government there.

Is the hon. Gentleman saying that this decision was taken by the Chancellor of the Exchequer without any regard to the farming community and without any estimates having been prepared? Are we to expect the small farmer with a small herd to be classed as a "lame duck" from now on, with no markets for his products? May we have a proper answer to this Question and some quickly prepared estimates?

There were consultations. The effects on the production side of the industry should not be exaggerated.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that this despicable measure will hit hardest at those, in, for example, the North-East, who are least able to look after themselves, despite the reintroduction of the poor law in the form of the family income supplement? Is he aware that this must have an adverse effect on employment prospects in an already hard hit area such as the North-East?

I do not accept the premise behind the last part of that supplementary question. There will be no foreseeable reduction in the employment in production and only a minimal one, if any, in distribution.

Would my hon. Friend give advice to all those concerned, including the farming community, that they should encourage a policy of spending less in the boozer and more on the kids?

Shame.

I think that my hon. Friend will have successfully caught tomorrow's headlines.

The hon. Gentleman should have rebutted that intervention from his hon. Friend the Member for Worcestershire, South (Sir G. Nabarro) more forcefully. It is a disgraceful insult to the working-class people of this country that such a remark should go unrebuked.

I did not say it it would have no real effect. I said that it should not be exaggerated.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what study his Department is making into the relative efficiency of the distribution system for agricultural produce in the United Kingdom as compared with the European Economic Community.

Within the E.E.C., distribution varies so greatly by product and country that general studies would be less informative than those made by trade associations and firms.

Would my hon. Friend agree that, by and large, British distribution is very much more efficient than that on the Continent, that this efficiency is growing and will continue to improve even if we gain entry into the Common Market? Does not this make nonsense of many of the alarmist comparisons that are made about food costs between this country and the E.E.C.?

I subscribe generally to those remarks of my hon. Friend. I wish, however, to repeat how difficult it is to make an across-the-board comparison in this matter. Nevertheless, I would have thought that food distribution here was extremely competitive and efficient but that perhaps it was held back by things like the provisions of the Transport Act and selective employment tax.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that the Meat and Livestock Commission will have an important rôle to play in improving the distribution of meat products? May we have an assurance that this organisation will not be sacrified in the present scourge of all bodies that do not make a profit?

I suggest that the hon. Gentleman tables a Question on that matter.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food whether it remains Government policy to press for the continuance of a procedure of national annual review in the European Economic Community in the event of British membership.

The Community has already agreed in the current negotiations that as a member we should still be able to hold our own annual review of agriculture in the United Kingdom.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what discussions he has had regarding the effect of the new European Economic Community fisheries policy on the British industry.

As my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Scotland said on 4th November, terms of entry are a matter for negotiation between the United Kingdom and the Community, and my right hon. Friends and I are well aware of the anxieties of the fishing industry. We are taking them into account in the negotiations.

Now that the E.E.C. has made up its mind on a definite fisheries policy, may I ask my right hon. Friend whether he is aware that the inshore industry is particularly anxious over certain aspects of this policy? Will he undertake to have discussions with certain sections of the industry before any decision is made about entering the Community?

We are in constant discussions with sections of the industry. I will bear in mind the point my hon. Friend has made about the inshore industry. We have, of course, reserved our position on the common fisheries policy, and that is where the Government stand at the moment.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that this is the fourth occasion on which a question of this type has been put to the Government and the fourth occasion on which he or his colleagues have hedged on the matter? Would he now be good enough to tell the House categorically that we have made no concessions and that the Six did not at Luxembourg a month ago commit us to a policy which we must accept whatever we think about it? In other words, will the right hon. Gentleman give a firm undertaking that we are not committed to the policy of the Six in this matter?

Until we join we are not committed to anything [HON. MEMBERS: "Until?"]—if we join—[HON. MEMBERS: "If?"] Until and if we join the Common Market we are not committed to any step. However, what we are concerned with doing at present is to reserve our position and tell the Common Market what is acceptable and what is unacceptable. As things stand at the moment, the Common Market has entered upon a common fisheries policy, certain parts of which are not satisfactory to us and to other countries. This will be the subject of further discussions.

Will my right hon. Friend make it abundantly clear to the E.E.C. that the implications of this policy are utterly unacceptable to the inshore fishing industry?

I have noted my hon. Friend's remarks.

The Minister said that we are reserving our position. What position are we reserving? What have we decided is acceptable and what is unacceptable? May we know so that we may have an idea of where we are going?

Not at this stage.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food how the productivity of dairy farming in Great Britain compares with that of New Zealand, Australia and the countries of the European Economic Community, according to information available to him from international sources.

A good deal of statistical data on the dairying industries in the particular countries has been published. Unfortunately, however, information which would enable inter-country comparisons to be made of overall levels of productivity in the dairy sectors is not available.

Does my hon. Friend agree that on the whole New Zealand has the most efficient dairy producing industry in the world? Will he ask his right hon. Friend to take no action which will reduce our purchases of dairy produce from New Zealand but, on the other hand, to encourage it?

I agree with my hon. Friend that, thanks to several favourable climatic conditions, larger herds and so on, New Zealand has an extremely efficient dairy-producing industry. My right hon. Friend is aware of the New Zealand dependence on the United Kingdom market and the need for special arrangements to prevent serious damage to the New Zealand economy.

In view of that reply, will the Minister give an undertaking to the House that Her Majesty's Government will press on with the re-negotiation of the trade agreement with New Zealand, so that British people can continue to take advantage of New Zealand agricultural imports?

This is a slightly different question, but I think that the trade agreement runs until 1972.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food how soon he now intends to introduce higher minimum import prices for cereals.

As soon as possible after completion of the necessary negotiations with our overseas suppliers.

Would my hon. Friend bear in mind that whereas import levies offer the prospect of revenue to the Treasury with no comparable charge on the balance of payments, minimum prices offer no direct revenue to the Treasury but weigh directly and precisely on the balance of payments? In view of this, will he make it his policy to move over wherever and whenever possible from minimum import prices to import levies?

There are, at present, certain agreements which do not have very long to run, and it is in connection with these that the negotiations are taking place.

What would be the cost to the whisky industry should there be an increase in the price of cereals coming to this country?

There has, of course, already been an increase in the price of barley. Whether or not I should say this I do not know, but perhaps my acquaintance with this gorgeous liquid is not as close as the hon. Member's; and I must inform him that I do not know the answer to his supplementary question.

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. Is it not the responsibility of Ministers to know the answers to the problems that confront them in their Ministries?

That is a question which no Speaker has ever answered.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he is aware of the reservoir of brucellosis-free breeding cattle which exists in the Republic of Eire; and if he will seek to use this supply to speed up eradication here.

Yes. We have just made special arrangements to enable accredited animals from brucellosis-free counties in the Irish Republic to be imported without special isolation and subject only to pre-export test and normal veterinary safeguards in transit.

In view of the valuable reservoir of brucellosis-free breeding cattle which exists in the Republic, may I take this opportunity to thank my hon. Friend for that sensible arrangement which he has made?

I thank my hon. Friend for making so kind a suggestion to me. Although the contribution from the Irish Republic may not be very large, it could be extremely useful.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if his economy cuts will include the cessation of official experiments in the laying of narcotic baits in the countryside.

My Department is not carrying out any such experiments.

While thanking my hon. Friend for that answer, may I ask him to agree that one of the more useless experiments carried out by the last Administration was that of destroying pigeons by poisoning at a cost of about 30s. per pigeon killed?

I would not like to say that there is absoluately no place whatever for this type of experiment. Farmers may carry it out if they are licensed by my Department to do so, and it can have its uses in an attack on a considerable pest.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what steps he is taking to control the use of nylon monophilament by coastal netsmen.

Fishing by coastal netsmen is already strictly regulated, but I am considering whether any further measures are necessary.

I thank my right hon. Friend for that reply. Is he aware that there is evidence that a high proportion of fish which escape from this type of netting are severely damaged, and will he consider taking action under the Sea Fish (Conservation) Act, 1967?

We are receiving reports of damage to fish as a result of this net, and we are seeing whether we can do something about it. Fish outside 12 miles are covered by the International Convention, but within 12 miles it is within our jurisdiction to do what we think is right.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food, in view of the serious position of many egg producers, if he will take steps as soon as possible to allow the export of eggs and a further increase in the minimum import price of eggs.

Exports of eggs are at present restricted by an international understanding, and my right hon. Friend is in touch with the Governments concerned with a view to ending the restriction. The minimum import prices will be reviewed with overseas suppliers early next year, but imports are now at a very low level and do not present a threat to the market.

Will the Minister bear in mind that the egg industry is in a bad state and anything that can be done to help will be appreciated, particularly in the export of eggs and further reducing the import of eggs?

I agree with my hon. Friend that there is a strong case for ending the ban on the export of eggs as conditions now are quite different from those in 1957 when the ban was imposed. Discussions are going on in this connection.

I remember the hon. Gentleman's remarks when he was on this side of the House about the import of eggs. What level of import does he consider would affect the home market?

That is a very hypothetical question.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food whether his attention has been drawn to the difficulties experienced by farmers in fitting new tractors with safety cabs of their own choice; and if he will make a statement.

Yes, Sir. The safety of those who drive tractors is of paramount importance. I have discussed this matter with the tractor manufacturers, who feel unable to accept the view of my right hon. Friend and myself that an authorised dealer should be permitted to fit any cab which has satisfied the standards of safety required by my Department. My right hon. Friend proposes, therefore, to examine the regulations with a view to maintaining the competition which has existed in the supply of tractor cabs to date.

I thank the Minister for his reply. Does he not agree that this is a mean, nasty racket by many tractor manufacturers, and will he take steps to see that a farmer is able to purchase a plain tractor and add to it an approved tractor cab?

The manufacturers quite sincerely look at the safety requirements very responsibly. They think that what they are doing is in the interest of safety. As all safety cabs have passed extremely stringent tests, we do not think that their attitude justifies the restriction of competition, and this view I have conveyed to them.