asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what factors tending towards an increase in the price of milk have arisen from the recent discussion of the EEC Council of Ministers.

Detailed discussions of the Commission's proposals will take place in the Council of Ministers next week. The Commission has explained that its proposals aim, on the one hand, to ensure a labour income on the modern farm enterprise comparable with incomes outside agriculture and, on the other hand, to take account of the supply-demand situation in the milk sector.

In view of the unique situation that we face, is it not a fact that the factors to which I have referred will no longer apply, bearing in mind the Labour Party's pledge to renegotiate EEC policy, and that we have no intention of allowing milk prices to increase to the consumer?

We are interested to hear the hon. Lady's aspirations, but I fear that it will be some time before she can carry them into effect. However, such a statement is always a matter of interest to the House.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that he gave a categorical assurance to Staffordshire farmers at their annual meeting on milk prices? Will the price review be announced during the General Election campaign as a political propaganda exercise, or will it be held over so that he can report to this House—or my right hon. Friend will be able to report—before the announcement is made?

I am glad to hear the hon. Gentleman's first comment but I cannot say the same for his correction. I shall be happy to report to this House after the election. However, it would be unfair to the farming community to ask it to wait until the election is over. I shall hope to be in a position to announce the price review results in the fairly near future.

Apart from the announcement which my right hon. Friend may be able to make about the price review, which we trust will be generous, in view of the continuing uncertainty about agricultural costs which could affect the whole industry, will he also undertake in the months ahead, to keep a continuing watch on the position in relation to costs, as the price review may affect them. If he feels that any action is necessary will he take it speedily?

My hon. Friend raises an important point. It is essential that this country should continue to expand agricultural production. It is essential for the health of the country as much as for the farming community. I shall certainly wish to have very much in mind the points raised by my hon. Friend.

The Minister is telling us that he is concerned with expansion. Why will he not then admit the seriousness of the crisis now facing the dairy industry? Will he confirm that we are liable to have a milk shortage, followed by rationing, by the end of the year? Is that the reason for the election—because he does not want to admit that position to the British people? Is he trying to have the Annual Price Review issued at a period when we cannot question him, and when the British consumer will not find out that the cost of between £500 million and £600 million will come out of his pocket to pay for the ridiculous agricultural policy?

That is a strange question, with little relation to reality. I interpret from that remark that the hon. Member does not wish me to announce the results as soon as possible. It is essential for the farmers that the results should be announced as early as possible. It is my intention so to do. I hope that I shall have the full support of the hon. Member in anything that I do in that review to seek to help the farming community.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food by what percentages the prices of eggs, milk, butter and cheese increased between June 1970 and the latest available date.

As the answer contains a number of figures I will, with permission, circulate the information in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

Does the hon. Lady realise that we are not surprised that she is coy about revealing these figures? I am satisfied that the housewives will see clearly from the review the catastrophic record of the Government over their whole period of office. I say to the Prime Minister that if he wants to——

Order. The time for saying things is a little later. It is time for Questions now.

May I ask the hon. Lady, Mr. Speaker, to convey to the Prime Minister the request that he should fight the election on the question of prices and not try to drag in any red herrings, like the industrial dispute, for his own ends?

I should hate the hon. Gentleman to feel that I am coy about anything. If he wants to know the figures, I can tell him that the price of eggs has gone up by between 114 per cent. and 161 per cent., the price of milk by around 19 per cent., the price of butter by between 21 per cent. and 26 per cent. and the price of cheese by 79 per cent. If the hon. Member knows anything at all, to judge by his estimation of what the election issue will be he must know that almost the whole of the Western world has had similar rises in the prices of its products.

During the forthcoming election, will the hon. Lady accept a personal invitation from me to come to Stirling, Falkirk and Grangemouth and give the same figures and seek to defend them?

I do not think that I shall have time to do that.

The hon. Lady has once again suggested that world food prices are wholly responsible. May I remind her that last year, when egg prices rose by 50 per cent., the profits of one of the largest egg producers in this country—Eastwood's—went up by 180 per cent.? Why do not this Government—I am glad they will not be coming back after three weeks—bring retail prices and fresh food prices within the scope of the Price Commission?

The main reason for the rise in egg prices, as the hon. Lady will know, is, first, that the return to the producers was so low that many of them went out of production altogether. She will also be aware, as hon. Members who have made pleas for the farmer clearly are, that the cost of their feed stuffs has doubled. In relation to the firm to which the hon. Lady referred, and its profit, the Price Commission looks over the whole range of profit of any one firm and gives consent only if, in the area in which it is seeking an application, that price is a proper one in the light of allowable costs.

Will my hon. Friend remind our right hon. Friend that in view of what she has said—that the price of milk has risen by only 19 per cent. but the price of feeding stuffs has more than doubled over the past year—a substantial increase in the price of milk will have to be given to the farmers in order to keep them in business?

My hon. Friend will know that all these matters form part of the annual review. There is also a later Question on that subject.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food whether intervention buying of beef for storage is now proposed in the EEC countries.

It has been possible to offer beef for sale to intervention agencies in the EEC since July last year.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that this hoarding of beef, which I understand the Government have already undertaken to do, has meant that old-age pensioners have had their consumption of beef reduced by 25 per cent. since 1970? That is outrageous. Why do not the Government release the beef that is available?

Because intervention, as I have told the House several times, is an alternative method of supporting the market. If producers do not get a worthwhile price for producing beef, none will be produced.

Will my right hon. Friend confirm that there has been an overall increase, however small, in meat consumption in the past two years?

I certainly take the opportunity of saying that the propaganda put out by the hon. Member for Renfrew, West (Mr. Buchan) is either foolish or determined to distort. I believe it to be the latter, because the consumption of meat is higher than it was at the date that he says.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that at this moment calves that a year ago were fetching £60 are being sent to kennels for the hounds, and that this is a wonderful example of how to pass from one shortage to another?

The hon. and learned Member should not exaggerate the position.

It is true.

Will my right hon. Friend say whether intervention buying of beef in the United Kingdom has actually taken place?

Yes, Sir—25 tons have been bought in Northern Ireland.

But do not the fact that we have already started intervention buying of beef and the fact that we have already had to introduce an 8 per cent. tax on imported New Zealand lamb since 1st January entirely blow the gaff on the Ministry's excuse that the increase in beef prices in Britain is due to world prices and not to the arrangements of the CAP? Will he undertake that in the last few weeks of this Government they will not enter into any further arrangements and agreements to increase food prices in Britain?

I may knock the smile off the right hon. Gentleman's face by saying that despite what he says the price of lamb has fallen since the import duty was introduced.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what is the maximum increase that can be paid to United Kingdom dairy producers in the current price review, having regard to the phased harmonisation arrangements and possible increase in the standard quality of milk permitted under the Treaty of Accession and the current proposals for milk and dairy products in the Common Market price review.

The operation of EEC Regulation No. 749/73 is being considered with the European Commission.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that I much regret that such a straightforward and precise Question could not have had a more explicit answer? Will he please take into account the fact that the national dairy industry is going through grave economic circumstances which require a national solution based upon the unique national circumstances of the high cost of imported feeding stuffs? Will he kindly draw that to the attention of his fellow Ministers in Brussels, irrespective of the requirements of Regulation No. 749/73?

My hon. Friend may be assured that what my answer means precisely is that that is just what I am doing. That is why I cannot expand on it at present. I am acutely aware of this problem and am discussing it at this time. That is why I cannot make a fuller statement.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what was the average price received by British dairy farmers for each gallon of milk produced in the last three months of 1970 and 1973; what was the percentage increase between these dates; and what estimate he has made of the average increase in the price paid by dairy farmers for dairy herd feed stuffs over the same period.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what was the average price received by dairy farmers for each gallon of milk produced in the last quarters of 1970 and 1973, respectively.

Dairy farmers in England and Wales received, on average, 19·8 pence per gallon for milk produced in the last three months of 1970 and 24 pence per gallon for the same period in 1973—an increase of something over 21 per cent. In the corresponding period the average price of dairy compound feeding stuffs rose from £40·62 to £66·92 per ton.

Is the Minister aware that the figures which he has given are the reason for the total loss of confidence of dairy fanners throughout this country in the present Government's agricultural policies? What estimate has the right hon. Gentleman made of the bribe necessary to buy back the dairy farmers' vote, and will he guarantee that that bribe will be announced by the Government before 28th February?

I am not clear from the hon. Gentleman's question and the felicitous way in which he put it whether he is seeking to prevent me from giving farmers a fair return. That would be an unfortunate interpretation, but that is what it sounded like. The hon. Gentleman must be fully aware that the sole reason why we have brought forward the price review, and the reason why we have said that we will bring it forward at an early stage and announce it as soon as possible, is that we know of the problems facing dairy farmers as a result of the explosion in world prices for cereals, and we intend to do something about it.

Is my right hon. Friend aware of the total reliance that livestock and dairy farmers are putting on this year's price review? Will he assure the House that he will bear in mind the up-to-date costs before he announces the award? Will he also assure the House that the minimum increase on milk will be 6p a gallon?

I assure my hon. Friend that I have been studying the figures with great care. I shall announce the result as soon as possible, but I have not the slightest intention of engaging in an auction on this matter in the House.

Is the Minister aware that by doing absolutely nothing for the last nine months he has totally lost the confidence of dairy farmers? Does he not realise that in the last three months of 1973 milk production fell by 20 million gallons—a fall for the first time since 1964?

I am surprised that the hon. Gentleman should be so unaware of the normal practice in this matter. Over the last 20 years there has never been an occasion when an amendment has been made to a price review between the annual awards. This is the standard procedure It was only in the last three months of last year that the problem arose. In 1970 there was not a review award, there was a sum which my right hon. Friend gave to the industry to overcome the appalling condition in which the Labour Party had left farming when it left office. But this is dealing with those affairs which go from year to year according to market conditions and not according to political ignorance or prejudice, which was the cause of the 1970 collapse.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that if he restores profitability to the dairy industry, as I believe he will, it will be the best value for money that British housewives can possibly have?

Yes. In the atmosphere of today it is important for us to remember that dairy farmers are doing a very hard and difficult job, for seven days a week, and that it is the duty of the Government of the day—whatever Government—to see that they get a fair return.

Will the Minister accept that the plight of the small dairy farmer is extremely grave at present because of his reliance on the cheque that he gets for his milk? Therefore, it is of the utmost importance to remedy immediately this difficulty between the price received and the price that farmers are paying. Will the Minister concede that whatever the figures are for the slaughtering of the dairy herd in England and Wales, and allowing for the fact that he is not directly responsible, slaughtering of the dairy herd in Scotland has increased in the last three or four months?

There is a lot of truth in what the hon. Member says. I do not deny that there is a difficult situation; that is why I have brought the review forward. I want to announce it as soon as possible. I am only sorry that some Labour Members may not be in the House to hear me announce it.

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. You will appreciate when you hear my point of order why I could not delay it until later. I realise that you are doing your best to call supporters and opponents of the Government in a fair manner, as you normally do. Nevertheless, you are in a manifest difficulty of finding someone from the Government benches to support the Government on prices. Will you invite someone—[Interruption.]

Let them put up their hands.

Order. That is not a very orderly intervention, even at an election meeting.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what is his estimate of the rate of decline of the national dairy herd; and what effect this will have on future milk supplies.

No figures are available which give any indication of such a decline.

It is clear that the whole dairy section of the agricultural industry knows that the national dairy herd is declining, first because of the cost of feed—[Hon. Members: "Question."]—and secondly because of the dairy-to-beef conversion. [Hon. Members: "Question."] Is the right hon. Gentleman not aware that this will inevitably lead to milk rationing in this country next winter?

May I, for the second week running, say that it is absolutely out of the question that there will be any shortage of liquid milk for consumption this year? It is total scare-mongering to say otherwise. As for the hon. Gentleman's first point, the latest figures that we have are from the census taken in September, which showed the dairy herd up 3 per cent. on last year. We do not have the December figures. If I had them, I should of course give them to the House. Cow slaughterings are certainly up on last year's, but last year's were very much lower than they had been the year before. It may well be that the dairy herd is now younger and more productive.

Since my right hon. Friend recognises the serious situation that dairy producers face at this time, and since it is recognised that this has caused exceptional increases in feeding stuff costs, which have been extremely volatile, is my right hon. Friend seriously considering some variable scheme which might be included in the review, so that if there are further increases, as has been suggested, they can be accommodated, and if there are reductions they can be reflected as well?

I am afraid that my hon. Friend is, as he knows, trying to draw me on something on which I am not proposing to be drawn.

Is the Minister not aware that my hon. Friend's original question was about milk supplies, and that he did not mention liquid milk? What about manufacturing milk? What promises will the Minister and his right hon. Friend make to the farmers during the election? Considering the Chancellor's recent speeches about austerity, how will they manage to carry them out?

The actual production of milk for the year may show a very small reduction on 1972–73 overall. The review is under discussion. I cannot anticipate what my right hon. Friend will say.

Is it not essential, if the housewife is to have ample suplies of both milk and beef, that farmers should have an assured market and a reasonable profit to make it worth their while producing them? [Interruption.]

Order. By the traditions of my office I am not allowed to attend any election meetings—though I am quite enjoying this afternoon.

Bearing in mind that the well-being of dairy farming and beef production is so closely interlocked, will my right hon. Friend enable both to expand by giving a very early anouncement of a price review that will enable that expansion, and by implementing that review immediately, and preferably retrospectively?

The announcement of the price review will be not long delayed. Further than that I would not wish to go.

Does not the right hon. Gentleman agree that the decline in the dairy herd since September has been very significant? Indeed, at present cows are being slaughtered which are in calf, which is something that has never happened previously. Does not the Minister accept that the decline is alarming, in terms of next winter?

We have no figures more recent than those for September. They do not exist. I have seen Press reports and have listened to radio reports about the slaughtering of cows in calf. We have made the most searching inquiries. The answer is that the number of cows slaughtered when in calf shows no significant difference from the number of such slaughterings which usually take place, and that the pregnancy of the cows is a matter of weeks rather than months.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food how much has been spent by the Intervention Board to date on intervention buying, payments to private storers for taking food off the market, and denaturing incentives respectively.

To 31st December 1973 £16·5 million had been spent on intervention buying, £3 million on aids to private storage, £441 in compensation to producer groups and £19·7 million on denaturing incentives. Aids to private storage, payments to producer groups, and denaturing incentives are financed by the European Agricultural Guidance and Guarantee Fund. The net cost of purchases into intervention is recovered from the fund when the product is sold.

Has not everything that we have heard this afternoon made it clear that the Intervention Board is an obnoxious Conservative invention to force a high cost of living on the British people? Why have the Government lost their chance of abolishing it before they leave office?

No, Sir. It is a method of giving producers of valuable food a chance of continuing to do so.

As the Minister admits that the Intervention Board has been hoarding large quantities of food—now including beef—in order to hold up prices, how can he pretend that it is not Government policy which is responsible for the present high price of food?

If the right hon. Gentleman really thinks that 25 tons of beef is a large proportion of a weekly consumption of 25,000 tons, he is a more jaundiced character than I thought he was.

Is not the intervention buying of beef another way of helping agriculture, and is not the fact that the Opposition oppose it so much an indication of just how much they care for the whole industry?

I should have thought that that was obvious from the word "go".

How can intervention buying help to bring down prices for the housewife?

It is because in times of shortage it acts as a very good cushion for releasing foodstuffs from intervention on to the market.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what decisions have been reached consequent upon the review of the common agricultural policy; and if he will make a statement.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what decisions on the reform of the common agricultural policy have been taken by the EEC Council of Ministers.

The Commission has now included a number of its recommendations on the improvement of the common agricultural policy in its price proposals and these are under consideration by the Council. Other aspects will be considered after the common prices have been settled for this year.

Will my right hon. Friend give an estimate of the amount by which he expects these reforms to reduce the United Kingdom contribution to the budget? Is it not the case that these proposals fall far short of the much-needed and thorough-going reform of the CAP that he himself was seeking and that we were promised?

I cannot give an estimate of what the effect will be, but I certainly want to move further than this. We have to work on the proposals that the Commission has put forward first and then see how much further we can go. I know that I can count on my hon. Friend's support to do this in the next Parliament.

Does the right hon. Gentleman not feel a certain sense of shame in that he has been a member of a Government whose main policy appears to have been confrontation at home and capitulation in Europe? Instead of grovelling to the French, ought not he and his colleagues to have been seeking to carry out a radical reform of the CAP, thereby contributing to a substantial reduction in the price of food?

There is such a total unreality in the basis of that question that the hon. Member must be singularly out of touch with the efforts I have been making in Brussels in this respect. I shall be in Brussels next week, and I invite the hon. Member to assist me in that process.

I acknowledge the important part that my right hon. Friend has played in stimulating the review of the CAP. Will he estimate when this matter is likely to be brought to a satisfactory conclusion?

There will be two aspects to my answer on that. First, as I have indicated, certain matters are within the ambit of the discussion on Community prices for the coming year. They must be concluded within the next few weeks. The longer-term issues will be subject to discussion later in the year and I cannot give any time scale in relation to when they will be either agreed or put into operation.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that that answer will do nothing to remove the suspicion that we shall have a prices-and-a-strike rather than a prices-at-a-stroke election? Will he comment on the answer just given by his right hon. Friend about the intervention board, when he had to defend the indefensible by saying, first, that we had a stockpile of only 25 tons of beef and then saying that these 25 tons would be remarkably effective if there were a serious shortage?

The hon. Member appears to be confused in his thinking. The Intervention Board carries out a function within the operation of the common agricultural policy in each country within the Community. We accepted that when we joined, just as the Labour Government said they accepted the CAP when the negotiations started. They have accepted it and we propose to work it. As for beef, a small quantity in Northern Ireland has gone into intervention, but if substantial quantities went to intervention it would prevent a sudden shortage pushing the prices right up. That would be a reassurance to our farmers and our housewives, who would know that prices could not rise to a very high level.

Will the Minister not just admit openly and honestly that the purpose of the Intervention Board is to keep prices up? Will he give a guarantee that in the forthcoming discussions he will reject any proposals to increase the price of beef? In the meantime will he correct his right hon. Friend about the facts of beef consumption? Is it not a fact that between 1953—when there was rationing—and 1973 the household consumption of beef fell from 37 lbs per head to 19 lbs per head, and that even in the short period of the right hon. Gentleman's Government there has been a 25 per cent. drop since 1970 in the consumption of carcase meat by old-age pensioners?

I am sure that the hon. Member does not wish to mislead the House, but nevertheless succeeds on occasions. I have given the true facts many times concerning the official figures of food moving into consumption. That should be of interest to the hon. Member, because it covers all types of food. In addition, the consumption of meat has risen and has continued to rise as a totality, and that includes all types of beef. I know that the hon. Member will be pleased to know that in a week towards the end of January—the last week for which I have seen figures—the amount of beef available on the market was 6,000 tons more than in the corresponding week the year before. That shows that more is available for the housewife as a result of the Government's policy.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what is the present import levy on butter imported into the United Kingdom from outside the EEC.

After applying the monetary compensatory amounts, the general levy applied to imports of butter from third countries is £167·06 per ton. Imports from New Zealand are subject to the special arrangements provided for under Protocol 18.

Does not the levy, even if it does not apply to New Zealand, regulate the price of all butter sold here? When the Minister goes to Brussels to seek a review of the CAP will he press for the abolition of this levy, and in any event will he or the succeeding Government abolish it?

Imports of butter from countries outside the Community, that is, countries other than New Zealand, have effectively ceased and the retail prices of butter are currently lower than at 1st February last year because of the EEC's consumer subsidy.

Is it not disgraceful that at this time of high food prices we should be putting further taxes on food imports in order to keep up the price of food to the housewife?

During 1971 when there was a general shortage of dairy products butter was much more expensive than it is now. It has been 7p a lb. down on the prices for the first half of 1972.

But why do the Government impose this tax of £167 on butter?

This is a Community levy on third countries, but as we do not import from third countries, other than New Zealand, which is subject to special arrangements, it does not involve an imposition on the housewife.

As the price of butter today is about 10 per cent. below what it was in 1959, why do the Opposition not acknowledge that fact?

I cannot add anything to what my hon. Friend said.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food to what extent the Government are trying to stimulate interest in international commodity agreements, especially in food commodities.

We have always considered that in appropriate circumstances international agreements on trade in food commodities can be valuable, and fully support the EEC's proposal, in the GATT trade negotiations, of using them to bring more stability and expansion to agricultural trade. Recent world food supply fluctuations have reinforced international attention on this.

I thank my hon. Friend for that reply. Will she bear in mind that stability in international commodities is of continuing importance to us, and that the sugar agreement is an excellent example of what can be achieved?

I agree with my hon. Friend. We hope that the Community will joint the 1970 International Sugar Agreement in due course.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what decreases bearing on food prices were approved by the EEC Council of Ministers in January 1974.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what increases bearing on the price of food were approved by the EEC Council of Ministers at its meetings in January 1974.

There were two Council decisions bearing on the price of food. One was to change the representative rate for Italian lire, of which the practical effect will be limited to Italy. The other was to remove a legal obstacle to the early introduction of a limited and temporary system of aids for private storage of beef, thus reducing the need for intervention in those parts of the Community where the market is particularly weak.

I am not surprised at that answer; I expected it. Have any major foodstuffs been reduced in price, about which the Minister's right hon. Friend the Prime Minister can tell the housewives of Leicester?

If the hon. Gentleman expected that answer, I wonder why he put down the Question. My hon. Friend the Parliamentary Secretary made it perfectly clear only a few minutes ago that one foodstuff which Labour Members used as an arguing point a great deal before we entered the Community—butter—has fallen in price since we joined.

What is the Government's view about the proposed tax on surplus milk?

I have already commented on that. There are two separate proposals. One is for a general tax affecting all milk produce going to dairies. The other is a tax on milk products going into intervention. I see little merit in the first proposal, which seems to me unnecessary, but I think that the second could prove a useful deterrent to the production of surplus milk products, and therefore I intend to support it.

Is the Minister aware of anything that goes on in his Department, other than the diktats he receives from Brussels? Is he aware that it is not particularly edifying to see a Minister of the Crown acting as an apologist for a bunch of bureaucrats in Brussels laying down their instructions and orders for the British people? This is one of the things the British people will decide to end at the forthcoming General Election. The right hon. Gentleman's rôle as an apologist for the EEC will be terminated.

The hon. Gentleman seems to be singularly misinformed about what goes on in Brussels, and his forecast of what will happen in this country is wrong. I do not accept any of his statements. In regard to what I do in Brussels, I say to him, in the words of somebody famous in the last century, that if he can believe that he can believe anything.

In view of the high price of food, for which the Minister bears a great deal of responsibility, will the right hon. Gentleman give the House an assurance that he will not agree to any increase at a Council meeting, and that he is not running away from the three-bob loaf at the General Election?

I am not running away from anything. Requests for price increases must be considered in the light of cost increases. I have no desire to see unnecessary price rises, but one must seek to ensure that in the Community as a whole, just as in this country—[Interruption.] Farmers have had a substantial rise, and this Government will continue to support them both now and after the election.

Is the Minister aware that as a result of our membership of the EEC there has been no decrease in the price of foods that this country imports? Cheese bears a tax of £200, butter a tax of £167, and canned ham a tax of £140. How long will the right hon. Gentleman seek to give the lie to an unbelieving nation?

There is no question of giving a lie. This Government tell the truth about this and other matters. However much the hon. Gentleman seeks to distort them, the facts are that the price of butter has dropped and the price of cheese has been relatively static over the past two years. This country has had a far smaller increase in food prices than many other countries in the past year. They have risen by 20 per cent., but in the world they have risen by 50 per cent. in the same time.

As the House has not copies of the Bill, would it not be possible for the clause to be read out?

I understand that copies are available in the Vote Office and, much as I should like to oblige the hon. and gallant Member for Winchester (Rear-Admiral Morgan-Giles), I think I had better keep to the normal rule.