asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he will make a statement on his estimate of the combined effects of the imposition of the capital transfer tax, the Community Land Bill, and the proposals for wealth tax and re-rating agricultural land on agricultural production in the United Kingdom.

The Government announced in the White Paper "Food from our own Resources" (Cmnd 6020) that they were setting up a review of the effect of capital taxation on agricultural production. This interdepartmental study and the work of the Select Committee on Wealth Tax and of the Layfield Committee on local government finance are now in progress. It is not possible, therefore, to give a worthwhile estimate at this stage.

Does the Minister not agree that if he is to achieve his home production of food targets, as set out in the White Paper, it is essential that more and not less capital is invested in agriculture? Does he not accept that the measures either already passed in this House or threatened are very likely drastically to reduce the capital invested in agriculture? Will he, therefore, make much stronger representations—the matter cannot wait for the review on the measures which are either going through this House or threatened—than he did in the case of capital transfer tax?

I am aware that there is concern about this and its effect on investment in the industry. As I have said, there will be an examination of this and as soon as that is complete I may be able to make a further statement.

In addition to all these potential burdens, will the Minister tell us how he thinks farmers could deal with vastly increased herds of stock if people like herdsmen and shepherds cannot live in close proximity to the animals they look after?

That is another question.

The House is entitled to know how the Minister reconciles the aims of his Ministry, which were published in the White Paper, to establish a virile, indigenous domestic agricultural industry, with the proposals of other Government Departments in relation to capital transfer tax, wealth tax, the public acquisition of land and the abolition of tied cottages, and so on, which are all intent on destroying the establishment pattern and structure of British agriculture.

I cannot accept that. That is a complete exaggeration, and the hon. Gentleman knows it. As long as I am Minister of Agriculture I shall make certain that nothing like that ever happens.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he will give advice on the continued use of agricultural land as such which is obtained by compulsory purchase by local authorities or under the proposed community land legislation before that land is taken up by the local authority for development.

Local authorities already acquire land under existing powers and are aware of the need to manage it effectively prior to development. My right hon. Friends the Secretaries of State for the Environment and Wales will be giving further advice as necessary to all authorities acquiring land under the community land scheme.

Is the Minister aware that local authorities exercising their duties under the Community Land Bill will control approximately 750,000 acres at the current loss rate of 75,000 acres a year? Does he not agree that the short-term usage of land and inability to plan for land so blighted by local authority acquisition will not help the production of food from our own resources and will make nonsense of the Government's White Paper? Does he not further agree that there is a fundamental incompatability between the policy of the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food and that of the Secretary of State for the Environment on the question of land acquisition?

No, I cannot accept the bulk of what the hon. Gentleman has said although I agree that where land is scheduled for development it is desirable and in the national interest that it should be retained in agricultural production until the last possible day.

Does the Parliamentary Secretary realise that unless he persuades his right hon. Friend the Minister for Planning and Local Government to remove agricultural land entirely from the sphere of the Community Land Bill, it will be disastrous for agriculture?

I cannot accept that. I am sure that the right hon. Gentleman will recognise that a substantial proportion of land which has been developed in the past has been agricultural land, and that situation will continue in the future. That problem will remain with us.

Is my hon. Friend aware that many local authorities already possess agricultural land and have a very good record in its management?

I am grateful to my hon. Friend. That is indeed the case. Under the Community Land Bill there will be greater scope for them to deploy these resources.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food whether he will now make a further statement on the progress of his negotiations with the EEC over aids for the glasshouse sector of horticulture.

I reported my latest discussions with the EEC Council of Ministers to the House on 1st May.

Have not the Lardinois negotiations and the distress in the horticulture sector in the last five months shown absolutely clearly that the subsidy should never have been removed last December?

As the hon. Gentleman knows full well, the subsidy was a temporary one. We acted long before our Community partners and, indeed, the rate given was much higher, too.

Is it true that when the Minister was in Brussels a short while ago he voted to allow States within the Community to continue to pay the subsidies after the present subsidy expires? If he did that, how can he possibly refuse that subsidy to British growers when, if it is not paid to them, they will be exposed to unfair competition from other countries which he has allowed to pay that subsidy in the Community?

The hon. Gentleman cannot get away with making wild accusations such as that. [Interruption.] I hope that hon. Members will let me answer the question. The hon. Gentleman knows that the deal which has been suggested, and which still has to be examined, is part of a package deal which involves not merely a direct subsidy of the kind about which we are talking but also modernisation of glasshouses, and so on. I shall be discussing this when I go to Luxembourg on Monday.

Is the Minister aware that our glasshouse growers have not only had to suffer the removal of the subsidy on oil entirely but are also having to face unfair competition from countries such as Romania, from which large quantities of tomatoes are being dumped here, and Colombia which is dumping carnations? If he is not to take action on these subjects, surely he must reintroduce the oil subsidy.

I shall watch closely the events affecting this matter. However, I cannot make any statement at this stage. We take the view that we must remember the national interest as well. There are other industries which could also be subsidised.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what imports levies and customs duties on imports of lamb, butter and cheese from outside the Common Market would cease to be payable if the United Kingdom withdrew from the Common Market.

In such circumstances, the import régime for these and other agricultural commodities would be reviewed in the light of domestic agricultural policy and the negotiations for withdrawal.

Is it not a fact that we must pay these levies and duties solely because we are a member of the Community? Does not this give the lie to the myth that these foods are as cheap in the Community as they are outside it? Could we not reduce the prices of these foodstuffs at a stroke simply by withdrawing from the Community? Is it not a fact that these quite unnecessary taxes bring no benefit to the British people, as the British Government are acting simply as tax collectors for the Community, and that this will raise prices to much higher levels by the end of the transition period?

I hope that my hon. Friend and those who are cheering him will remember that we did not have free trade in these products before we went into the Community. [Interruption.] May I give my hon. Friend the facts? There was a tariff for all lamb, including New Zealand supplies, amounting to about 8 per cent. There was a duty of about 15 per cent. on cheese imports—except those from the Commonwealth, which were duty-free. Butter imports were duty-free but strictly controlled by import quotas. I hope that my hon. Friend will realise that there is no cheap food in the world today. [Interruption.] If my hon. Friend will only have the courage to rise and put a supplementary question, I shall be delighted to answer it.

Will the Minister confirm that the estimates for this year of the price of a carcase of New Zealand lamb show that two-thirds of the cost will arise from transport and handling charges and only one-third will be attributable to the actual production of the lamb?

Of course. The hon. and learned Gentleman is sensible and rational on this matter.

In what quantities are these foods available in the world? Are the quantities available sufficient to meet the needs of the British people at this time, by comparison with, say, 20 years ago? Has not the quantity position become even more important than the prices position?

I agree. That is why I believe that with the terms which we have negotiated—we have recommended to the country that it accepts what we have achieved—we shall guarantee supplies. That is very important in a world in which we see great fluctuations of world prices.

Does my right hon. Friend accept that I am very willing to ask questions whenever Mr. Speaker cares to call me, and that it is not a question of courage? Will he explain just why the Common Market insists on maintaining the CAP if there is no food outside the Common Market which is cheaper than that within it?

I think it is reasonable to have a market which has been guaranteed, with prices negotiated every year, in a large community. I see nothing wrong in that. [Interruption.] I hope hon. Members will listen. The basic objectives of the CAP, balancing increased production and the interests of consumers, were precisely the basic objectives of the 1947 Act.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what was the reduction in the national dairy herd in 1974.

In December 1974 the United Kingdom dairy herd was 152,000 head smaller than a year before.

I thank the Minister for that reply. What assurance can he give to dairy farmers that they will receive an adequate price for their milk this autumn, in view of the fact that it is important that dairy farmers should be enabled to produce a higher quantity per cow and produce more cows for the milk herd?

We certainly wish for an expansion in milk production. In order to secure that, we shall have to give producers an adequate return. I remind the hon. Gentleman that since coming into office the present Government have increased the guaranteed price for milk by 32 per cent.

Will my hon. Friend confirm that the reduction in the dairy herd last year was in line with the previous Government's policy of persuading farmers to go out of dairy production into beef production? The previous Government had a great deal of success in achieving that aim. However, will my hon. Friend confirm that it is the present Government's policy to persuade people to remain in dairy farming? Will he, therefore, comment on the question whether the reduction in the dairy herd is definitely slowing down?

I assure my hon. Friend that expansion of dairy production is central to our White Paper on increased food production. I agree with him that the dairy conversion scheme had an influence but, more significantly, the very severe erosion of dairy producers' returns the previous winter created a lack of confidence in the industry.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if, in the light of the March sample survey results of livestock numbers in Great Britain, which showed that the national dairy herd was estimated to have fallen by 126,000 cows, or by 4·4 per cent., and that the number of cows in calf has fallen by 8 per cent. compared with March 1974, he will make proposals designed to expand the national dairy herd in accordance with the recent Government White Paper "Food from our Own Resources".

We have already raised the guaranteed price for milk to a level 32 per cent. higher than that determined by the last administration a year ago. As indicated in the White Paper, we are continuing discussions with the interests concerned to determine what measures it would be right and practicable to take in order to achieve the expansion.

Will the Minister bear in mind that the Government's aim and the record of what has happened simply do not tally, and that if he wants extra milk production much more will have to be done? Regarding the very interesting phrase, "food from our own resources", will the hon. Gentleman bear in mind that the resources must first be given to the British farmer before he can produce the food?

The Government accept responsibility to take action following publication of the White Paper last month, but I am sure that the hon. Gen- tleman will agree that we cannot accept responsibility for the disastrous situation that we took over from the previous Government.

How does my hon. Friend propose to resolve the conflict between the emphasis in the White Paper on expanding dairy production and the objective of the Community stocktaking paper on the common agricultural policy, of reducing dairy production?

My hon. Friend has raised a pertinent and fair point. We, as a nation, must accept that in or out of the Community we have a balance of payments problem. If it is in our national interest to produce more food, we should do so in or out of the Community.

What was the cause of the miscalculation which resulted in the previous as well as the present Government's measures which have reduced the size of the dairy herd?

I suspect that there are a number of answers to that important question. Certainly one factor has been the over-emphasis put on beef by the previous administration.

Does my hon. Friend accept that we are delighted with his answer that in or out of the Market we intend to pursue our own best interests? Does that mean that we can now have a guarantee from the Front Bench that they will resist proposals to cut back on dairy production in the Market as a whole and that British interests will not be cut back because of our balance of payments problem?

I think that my hon. Friend will accept that if we are in the Community my right hon. Friend will continue to act in the best interests of the British people.

Will the Minister tell us where these much-needed resources will come from? Is he aware of the need to make the necessary adjustment in the milk price before the autumn?

The hon. Gentleman will appreciate that we are having discussions with the industry. He would not, therefore, expect me to pre-empt those discussions today.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what estimate he has made of the cost to the United Kingdom in 1975 of the reimposition of import levies on grains and wheat.

Up till now any levies have usually been cancelled out by Community subsidies. The extent to which this will continue to be the case will depend on movements in world prices and exchange rates, which I am unable to forecast.

Will my hon. Friend confirm that the imposition of these levies demonstrates beyond any refutation that world prices are currently below Community prices? Will he also confirm that in so far as tariffs existed previously on the import of food, as suggested by our right hon. Friend, those tariffs accrued to the British Exchequer and not to continental farmers?

I think that my hon. Friend will recognise that in or out of the Community, as he has acknowledged, we must protect our own producers. He will also recognise the fact that what counts in terms of British consumers is the net effective levy. The net effective levy this day on imported wheat is negative. In fact, at present there is a subsidy of about £1 a ton on imported wheat. The position is that the compensatory amount is almost exactly equal to the overall Community levy.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food how many dairy farmers have (a) received and (b) applied for the EEC grants available for changing from milk to beef production; how much has been paid out; and whether he intends to continue with this policy.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food how many applications were received for entry to the Dairy Herd Conversion Scheme; and if he will quantify the reduction to date, and the potential reduction by 30th June 1975 in the size of the United Kingdom dairy herd.

When the Dairy Herd Conversion Scheme closed to applicants on 31st December 1974, 8,724 farmers had applied in respect of 324,306 dairy cows. However, 4,630 applicants have so far taken advantage of this scheme and received grants, of which 50 per cent. is recoverable from FEOGA funds. It is not possible to estimate the effect of the scheme on the national dairy herd, as many of the better milk animals are now to be found in other herds.

I thank the Minister for his answer, each point of which I have carefully noted. In the light of the experience of the Dairy Herd Conversion Scheme and of the present consumption patterns of liquid milk by the consumer, how, and to what extent, have the consumer and the farmer benefited from this scheme?

This scheme was introduced in October 1973. The hon. Gentleman will appreciate that it is in the interests of the industry to strike the right balance between beef production and milk production.

How does the Minister see this helping to solve the cyclical problem of the beef producers?

This does not help to solve the cyclical problem of the beef producers. The breakthrough achieved by my right hon. Friend in Brussels in obtaining a variable premium—which gives, in effect, a guaranteed price, which we used to have—will help.

Will the Minister explain the way in which the EEC grants for switching from dairy farming to beef will make the beef mountain higher and higher, so that we can sell it more cheaply to the Soviet Union?

My right hon. Friend made it clear that the Government are opposed to the sale of subsidised food to Russia.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what is the level of milk production based on the latest available figures and as compared with a year previously.

The latest estimate is that in 1974–75 the total United Kingdom sales of milk through marketing schemes were 2,891 million gallons. This compares with a figure for 1973–74 of 2·929 million gallons.

Will the Minister go a little further than he did in answer to my hon. Friend the Member for Macclesfield (Mr. Winterton) and say exactly how he intends to increase milk production so as to make certain that there is sufficient for the production of butter and cheese?

I confirm that those are the Government's objectives. Our White Paper was published only last month. We are at present discussing with the industry how best to achieve its objectives.

Will my hon. Friend confirm that at the commanding heights of the European food economy we shall find not only butter and beef mountains but a dried milk mountain? Successive Governments have followed a cheap food policy whereby the farmer was subsidised and given deficiency payments. Does my hon. Friend not feel that that represents a better deal for the British consumer than the dear food policy of the Common Market?

I agree that in or out of the Community we wish to secure a balance between supply and demand. Long before we entered the Community this and previous Governments practised support buying. We bought potatoes in the past and took them into intervention—on some occasions on a substantial scale.

Will the Minister state his intentions regarding milk production? Cheese production will end earlier this year than for many years past. Creamery equipment will be left standing. Capital which has been invested will be useless. How will the Minister increase the total production of milk this year?

It is a little rich that the hon. Gentleman, whose Government left the milk industry in such a sorry state, should criticise the Government for not yet having taken action on a White Paper which was published last month and which followed three increases in the price of milk.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what steps he will take to implement the Government's aims expressed in the White Paper "Food From Our Own Resources".

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what proposals he is considering to facilitate the expanson of British agriculture as outlined in the Government White Paper entitled "Food From Our Own Resources": and if he will make a statement.

The Government stated in the White Paper "Food From Our Own Resources" that they would continue discussions with the interests concerned during the coming months to determine whether there are specific measures which it would be right and practicable to take. I have already met the farmers' unions and agreed that among the areas to be further examined are the effectiveness of capital and production grants, the effect of capital taxation and the green pound and beef market prospects.

Does not the Minister realise that in sparsely populated counties such as Dorset it is not possible to maintain livestock without the provision of tied cottages, so that those people responsible for livestock can live reasonably close to their charges?

I have noted what the hon. Gentleman said. I am dealing specifically with the proposals in the White Paper. I agreed to meet the unions concerned. I have already met their representatives and we shall have continuing discussions. I have met representatives of the farmers' unions not only of England and Wales, but of Scotland and Ulster also.

The Minister will be welcome in my constituency next week, when he comes as a guest of the Bath and West Show, for making that statement on the White Paper. Does he realise that he will be 100 times more welcome if he tells my constituents that he has been able to carry the Government with him in suggesting that by giving the farmers a decent return—not by interfering with their capital and trad- ing by means of ridiculous taxes—they will be enabled to produce the results we all desire?

I accept that. I believe that the farmers' unions are right to stress their agreement with the principles of the White Paper. This White Paper, which is a very good document, has been accepted. In the end it will be the way in which we apply our resources which will be important. I am grateful for what the hon. Gentleman said about his constituents. I hope we have a pleasant day.

Will my right hon. Friend, after his consultations with the industry to turn the hopes of the White Paper into food for the consumers, bear in mind the urgent need to give extra assistance for the development of agricultural co-operation? Will he also strengthen the rôle of the Agricultural Development and Advisory Service?

I am grateful for what my hon. Friend said. He knows that I introduced the central council in my 1967 Act. I believe strongly in agricultural co-operation. The record in this regard has been exceptionally good and all parties have subscribed to it.

Is the Minister aware that the Opposition welcome the target set out in this important White Paper? Is he further aware that the White Paper has met with a deal of cynicism from the industry, partly because we have seen from previous Labour Governments in 1965 and 1968 similar documents which were not backed by cash and which did not therefore enable the targets to be reached? Is he aware that we all hope that the cash will be produced this time. To show that the Minister has the determination to achieve these targets, will he give us an undertaking that there will be adjustments before the autumn so that we can achieve them?

The hon. Gentleman speaks of cynicism. There is always cynicism in certain quarters. I hope that the hon. Gentleman will look at the history of agriculture in the post-war period. I remember the 1947 Act and the target set in the White Paper which was issued by the late Tom Williams. That was accepted by the industry. The proposals on agriculture were accepted in the national plan produced by the second Labour Government, of which I was a Minister. I agree that the results will depend on what we put into the industry and the state of the market.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what representations have been made to him regarding safety on farms.

From time to time my right hon. Friend has received representations from interested organisations on various aspects of farm safety.

Does my hon. Friend accept that in principle I agree that the Health and Safety Commission should take over the safety rôle of the agriculture safety inspectorate? Does he further accept that the Society of Civil Servants has expressed grave doubts about the recent proposal for the reorganisation of die Factory Inspectorate by the Health and Safety Commission? Will he assure the House that, before the transfer of the agricultural safety office is made, discussions will be entered into so that the reorganisation can be done in conjunction with the agriculture safety inspectorate and not above its head?

I am grateful to my hon. Friend for his remarks. I can give him the assurance that he seeks. I am sure that agricultural workers will benefit from the deep interest that he continues to take in the work of the Health and Safety Commission.

Does the Minister appreciate that no one is keener than the farmer on having safety on farms? Does he also appreciate that the regulations regarding tractors produce certain difficulties, particularly in respect of the noise element, because British tractors, especially in horticulture, do not seem to comply with the regulations? Will he look at this matter with a view to ensuring that British manufacturers comply with the regulations?

I assure the hon. Gentleman that the Government are seized of that point. We shall be making an announcement very shortly indeed.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what representations he has made to the French Government in an attempt to stop the under-cutting of the British egg market by imports of French eggs.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what proposals he has to deal with the difficulties facing British egg producers and whether he will make a statement.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what action he intends to take to safeguard the future of the United Kingdom egg producers.

Prices paid by packing stations for eggs rose in April to profitable levels, but have since fallen. Feedstuff prices have also fallen. Packing station throughput is again increasing. Imports are now at a lower level and eggs are being exported. We are continuing to watch the situation carefully.

Does the right hon. Gentleman accept that I am delighted that he has succeeded in persuading the French and the Community to take these measures to assist our poultry farmers? Does he further accept that the British egg producer is infinitely more efficient than the French producer, and managed to produce 100,000 tons more eggs than the French from two-thirds as many poultry? If any situation should arise which threatens bankruptcy to our egg producers in the near future, will the Minister take further instant action in the matter to stop them going bankrupt?

I am glad that the hon. Lady has praised the British egg industry. That is why I am not afraid of competition. Indeed, as I have said, exports are increasing. For example, in March we sent over 37,000 boxes of eggs to West Germany, over 23,000 boxes of eggs to the Netherlands, and 42,000 boxes of eggs to Ireland. I am glad to encourage this business.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that it would have been foolish to have taken hasty action which could have threatened that export market? Will he confirm that, whilst it may be regrettable to import the substantial number of French eggs which were brought into this country this year, over the past 12 months our exports of eggs have been greater than our importation?

I have given the figures. I hope that hon. Members will appreciate that some of our egg producers experienced difficulties, of which I am aware. All I am asking is that we continue to play our part as well in the export sphere.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware of indications that the price of eggs may fall drastically within the next week or so? If that happens, will he hold himself ready to take immediate steps to hold up the price of eggs to the British producer?

I hope that the hon. Gentleman will not be gloomy about the matter at this stage. After all, markets are often affected by talk of confidence or lack of confidence. There may be fluctuations. That has always been so, I am glad to pay tribute to the fact that we can be as competitive as the French.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that, despite the hasty decision by the leadership of the National Farmers' Union regarding the Common Market, egg producers have been attempting to blockade the ports to which French eggs are sent at dump prices? Will he consider using the much-vaunted veto in Brussels to protect the egg producer until the Common Market has been kicked into some sense over the egg régime in Europe?

I hope that my hon. Friend will agree that I object to people adopting violent or illegal methods of protest. I think the whole House agrees with that. However, I pay tribute to the National Farmers' Union because its President, Sir Henry Plumb, has taken the initiative in Europe—

They walked out.

My hon. Friend should listen. Sir Henry took the initiative. I was talking about his initiative in relation to COPA.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he will make a statement on the results of the latest research into the commercial prospects for deep-water fish from the Irish Channel and other coastal waters.

Research and development work on non-traditional species is conducted on a continuing basis with the emphasis currently being placed upon the prospects for blue whiting. The results obtained suggest that these stocks offer the better prospects for commercial exploitation.

When can the British housewife expect to see blue whiting on the market as a commercial fish?

I cannot say when. It is the most promising of all the species to be fished. There are large stocks, and a lot of research is being done. Blue whiting produces a good fillet. It is rather small, but of good quality.

Does not the Minister consider that some further investment should be put into fish farming, which is undertaken in many parts of the country, particularly on the West coast of Scotland, where the usual types of fish, such as sole, are being produced easily? Could not fish production be substantially expanded by this method?

I agree, but it must be a commercial proposition, and it will basically have to be undertaken by private enterprise. A tremendous amount of research is being done. In the constituency of the right hon. Member for Lowestoft (Mr. Prior) there is a fine research centre which he has encouraged. It does considerable research on fish farming.

Has not the White Fish Authority estimated that there are 12 million blue whiting between North-West Ireland and the Orkneys? Is it not a fact that there is no difficulty in catching them but that the filleting is difficult because the fish are so small?

I know that my hon. Friend, who represents the fishing industry and is chairman of the all-party committee, is interested in this subject. He is right in quoting the assessment of the White Fish Authority. The problem arises from the size of the fish and the difficulty of processing.

Is not the Minister aware that if other countries unilaterally extend their limits the pressures on British home waters will increase? What progress is being made in the Community about the proposals for protecting our home waters?

I have stated my position. I made a major statement when I last visited the Community. When I put our proposals to the Community I said many Times—and I repeated it yesterday in the Standing Committee, where it was appreciated even by Opposition Members—that I shall defend the British fishing industry because it is the largest in Europe and we have the largest coastline. Any decision on limits must be taken by collective agreement.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he is in a position to announce the proposals which he will advance to the European Economic Commission on the new common fishing policy at present under discussion.

No. I made a full report of the statement I made to the EEC Council of Ministers on fisheries matters on 15th April and to add to that at this stage would be premature.

We much appreciate the visits which the Minister and the Minister of State have made to fisheries in various constituencies, but is the right hon. Gentleman aware that our greatest concern is to achieve proper conservation provisions to protect our coastal and other waters?

I agree. Conservation is important. I recognise that there has been a threat to the herring industry because of too much industrial fishing. Only yesterday the North-East Atlantic Fisheries Commission commenced work in London, and this matter will be discussed at that conference. We have to get agreement on this, and I have already had talks in the Community about it with individual Ministers.

What progress is my right hon. Friend making with the continuation of the subsidy to the fishing industry? Numerous vessels are laid up and, although the fish may be there, we may not have the vessels to catch them.

This matter was raised yesterday. I wish that my hon. Friend could have attended the Standing Committee. I have introduced a scheme which gives £6¼ million to the trawler fishing industry.

I am grateful to the Minister for the trouble he has taken in talking to our Common Market colleagues about this matter, but will it be possible for him to arrange regular meetings with the industry so that it can be informed about the progress of the negotiations, as it is worried about timing?

I am grateful to the right hon. Gentleman for what he said. I should welcome meetings with the fishing industry. Representatives of the British Trawler Owners' Federation come to see me frequently but, in addition, it would be useful if in this country, as in Scotland, there were a special inshore section. I should welcome an official organisation to which I could talk.