asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food why the Government do not intend to encourage the expansion of milk production in the United Kingdom for manufacturing purposes.

More milk will be available for manufacturing as a result of the expansion of the dairy herd which is wanted in order to meet beef requirements; and this will help to meet the growing consumption of milk products. But the production of milk specifically for manufacturing purposes is not generally economic in this country.

Is not the right hon. Gentleman aware that the words in this Question are the exact words taken from the Commonwealth Intelligence Bulletin on the subject of the recently concluded New Zealand Trade Agreement and that they are quite incompatible with the statement in the National Plan? Is not this a case of the right hon. Gentleman saying one thing to the New Zealanders and another to the home farmer?

It is not and the hon. Member should not try to assume that. I have explained to New Zealanders and to our own home producers that the National Plan stands and that by 1970 we shall aim to achieve the demand for more food by an expansion of the dairy herd and which will inevitably result in more by-products of milk.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he will increase the hill sheep subsidy as a means of offsetting the low prices paid for this year's lamb crop as a result of the Government's credit restrictions.

I cannot agree that the Government's credit policy has had this effect.

Is the right hon. Gentleman quite unaware of the various comments by authoritative sources to that effect? Is not this again a monumental example of the Minister's complete indifference to this very grave problem?

I am well aware of authoritative Conservative reports, or thoughts from the hon. Member, which mislead people because there are no credit difficulties in the sense described by the hon. Member. I hope that the hon. Member will have read very carefully the Bank of England's statement made only yesterday.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that Government policy is being made the excuse for many matters?

That is true. The hon. Member who leads for the Scottish Unionist Party has, I believe, done a disservice to the farming community by talking down the market.

Does not the Minister realise that an immediate increase in the hill ewe subsidy is the only means of injecting money into the industry?

The hon. Member must be aware of the accepted practice. This is a matter which we decide at the Annual Review.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that, while we attach no great significance to the reason given by the Opposition for this, it is one of many reasons? Will my right hon. Friend say a word of encouragement to hill sheep farmers and bear them in mind in the next Review?

I think I have done more in my Reviews for hill farming than did the previous Administration. At the last Review we increased the hill sheep subsidy by ls. I am aware that there are problems; and we are considering them. Certainly I will note these when we have discussions with the Union at the next Review.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what plans he has for increasing the supply of home-cured bacon, particularly in Yorkshire.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food whether he is aware of the present difficulties of the British bacon industry; and what action he is taking to prevent its further decline.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he is aware that the supply of bacon pigs is not adequate for the proper working of bacon factories; and what steps he is taking to increase the supply.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what steps the Government propose to take to encourage the quality bacon curing industry.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what steps he is taking to assist pig producers and the bacon industry.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what action he is taking to increase the supply of home-cured bacon, especially in Humberside and East Yorkshire.

I am aware of the difficulties facing the bacon industry and of the fall in bacon production. Representatives of the curers have discussed the situation with me. Their difficulties largely stem from the decline in the number of pigs, and I have therefore taken action to encourage early expansion of pig production.

Since the economic circumstances have changed so drastically, surely they require much prompter action? Why is the Minister allowing the British bacon industry to be squeezed towards extinction, especially at a time when home demand for quality products is unsatisfied, and at a time when we need to keep our balance of payments from being unnecessarily strained?

The hon. Gentleman is obviously aware of what we call the flexible guarantee system and the operation of the middle band. I thought the fundamental problem was to increase the supply of pigs, and because of this I announced recently at Harper Adams that we would raise the middle band by 400,000. I expect this will have the desired effect and will create confidence from the point of view of the producer, which in the end will affect the whole industry.

Does the Minister really think that raising the middle band without reference to what prices are going to be will rectify the situation? Is he not aware that bacon curers at the moment are losing 30s. a pig and that his reply this afternoon demonstrated his complete failure to understand the situation.

I am rather surprised that the hon. Member said that, in view of his knowledge of the industry. Obviously, raising the middle band will affect the price.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that his promise of early action would be welcomed; but apart from raising the middle band, what action is he going to take? Is he aware that, unless he takes urgent action, we shall completely lose our home markets to foreign suppliers?

The right hon. and learned Member is aware that the signing of the actual contracts is something which is arranged commercially between producers and the industry. The Government are not involved in this. Where I think I can do something is to increase the supply of pigs. For this reason, I believe the action I have taken is the right one.

Accepting the need to honour obligations with Danish bacon imports, could the Minister tell the House who is actually responsible for signing bacon contracts at home?

As I said in reply to the right hon. and learned Member for Huntingdonshire (Sir D. Renton), the signing of the contracts is a matter for producers and the curing industry as a commercial proposition. Hon. Members opposite have never wished me to interfere in such commercial arrangements.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that, whilst this year's position is bad enough, it is next year's contracts, which should be negotiated now, about which we on this side of the House are very concerned? Is he aware that many contracts are not being entered into for next year's supplies?

There is a problem here, That is why I want to give confidence to the producers to get pig production rising. This is how the system has operated. I believe that we can achieve this. I am still hoping to discuss this matter with people who have some constructive suggestions to make in the industry itself. I am talking about the curing industry. I have rejected the idea of a direct subsidy.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food, in view of the serious pork and bacon situation, why he has not lifted the middle band on pigs at once, thus relieving the situation.

Producers' returns in recent months have risen considerably through restoration in full of the cuts previously made under the flexible guarantee. But production has been slow to respond. I want producers to have confidence to increase production. I have therefore given an assurance that they can increase marketings by over a million above the current annual rate without fear that the flexible guarantee will operate against them. This gives an immediate all clear for expansion.

Surely the Minister realises that his action will be too late. What is needed is action now if the situation is to be retrieved. Unless the Minister is very careful, he will go down in history as the Minister who surrendered the bacon industry to the Danes.

The hon. Member must know that what I have done has been approved and welcomed by the National Farmers' Union. Immediately I made my announcement, it was approved by the Union.

Does the Minister agree that, even with the middle band increased by 400,000, farmers could well be fined for over-production, although they are producing less than the British bacon industry needs? Is not this ridiculous?

I cannot accept the logic of that. I think that what I have done will help to restore confidence, and it means a go-ahead to produce.

Will my right hon. Friend bear in mind the difficulty of the bacon industry apart from that from the farming community? If he looks into the matter, he will find without doubt that quite a number of bacon producers are on the verge of bankruptcy owing to the losses which have been incurred over the past six months. This state of affairs cannot be allowed to continue.

As I said in replying to a previous Question, I am aware of the difficulties. I have met the curers. They would have liked a direct subsidy. I cannot accept this. I believe that the answer is that we must increase pig production. This is what we are doing

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he will instruct his local officers to give support to suitable horticultural growers' planning applications for the erection of farm houses on horticultural holdings of less than 30 acres which is the present minimum for general farming, in view of the fact that four acres is considered to be a viable unit under the Horticultural Improvement Schemes.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what assistance he will give to the housing problem of horticultural growers who are moving in large numbers from the Lea Valley and other parts of the country to districts which are now more favourable for the industry.

Our officers support planning applications for houses on horticultural holdings, provided they are essential for the efficient cultivation of the land in the long term. The holdings must be viable, but they can be far less than 30 acres. We have no evidence that housing problems are making it impossible for horticultural growers in general to find suitable areas where they can settle.

While it is generally true that general agricultural holdings are getting larger, it is also true that intensive horticultural holdings are tending in many cases to get smaller. I, therefore, must urge the Minister to look at this more closely. I ask him to consider the specific cases which I sent to his right hon. Friend, and to look far more sympathetically at smaller holdings which are considered to be viable.

I will bear in mind what the hon. Gentleman has said.

Is not the hon. Gentleman aware that there is very real need for special help where the horticultural industry is increasing, as it is on the south coast? Is he aware that when his Ministry is approached by local authorities his own Ministry's reply is almost invariably "No comment", which is not very enlightening and is interpreted in different ways by different authorities? Does he not think that he ought to give definite support to this particular aspect of the industry at this time?

As the hon. Member knows, we give definite support to houses for key workers, but when horticulturists apply for extra housing it is entirely the responsibility of local planning authorities. Unless we have a long-term interest from the point of view of agriculture and horticulture, we make this "No comment" reply. I know that it is sometimes interpreted as though we are against it, but we are not. We are simply neutral and we try to make this as plain as possible to local planning authorities. I know the difficulties.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he will make a statement on the trend of charges in catering establishments since 20th July.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what inquiries he has made into rising prices in catering establishments; and whether he will make a statement.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he is satisfied that all increases in prices in the hotel and catering industry do not infringe the conditions of the prices and incomes policy; and if he will publish the names of those establishments where the increases are excessive.

Since the introduction of S.E.T., some caterers have put up prices on selected items; others have introduced a surcharge. We have urged firms to absorb as much as they can, but we recognise that some increases are unavoidable. We investigate any that appear excessive.

Cannot the hon. Gentleman give some indication of the percentage increase due to the Selective Employment Tax? Would he bear in mind that the Chief Secretary, during the proceedings on the Finance Bill, gave some highly optimistic estimates of somewhere about 1 per cent. or 2 per cent.? Would he not agree that those estimates were entirely misleading?

I cannot remember offhand, but I think it was said that the figure would not exceed 3 per cent. The Caterers Association of Great Britain has been co-operative in this respect and, indeed, it has told all its members that, if any changes have to be made, they ought to be made in line with the White Paper and they should not claim more.

Will my hon. Friend, if he discovers where excessive increases are being made, take the same action as was taken with the laundries?

It is a little more difficult in the catering industry, where there is a wider range of different types of hotels and establishments, but I can assure my hon. Friend that when we get cases of this kind we take the matter up directly with the people concerned.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that in some cases the increase has been as much as 18 per cent. and that the Selective Employment Tax has been blamed for this? Would he not do the Government service, as well as consumers, if he were to publish the names of those establishments that are so blatantly defeating the policy?

I am grateful to my hon. Friend for sending me some of the cases involved. If he sends me details, I will examine them. In some instances we have had an immediate response by writing to firms.

Under what authority does the Minister write to these caterers asking about the prices they charge?

In a friendly way, and in the interests—[Interruption.]—indeed, in a very friendly way. Surely hon. Members opposite are not suggesting that we should not take action to protect the consumers of this country.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that British Transport Hotels are charging, because of the S.E.T.—although that might be only a pretext—an extra 2s. for every meal? Is not this an exorbitant charge, and is my right hon. Friend aware that I complained to the Ministry of Transport and received a very dusty answer?

My right hon. Friend is aware that I cannot be held responsible for answers coming from another Department, but whenever we are approached regarding prices we take up the matter with the Department concerned or, as I have told the House, we communicate direct with the people concerned.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he is aware that the Eire Government is paying a special headage subsidy on the export of fat cattle to Great Britain; and what action he is taking to prevent beef prices in Great Britain being depressed by these subsidised imports.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he will take all necessary steps to halt the imports of beef from the Irish Free State and the Argentine, to assist in mitigating the losses being suffered by United Kingdom beef producers.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he is aware of the effect of the seamen's strike and Argentine and Irish imports upon the United Kingdom beef producers; and what action he proposes to take.

There has been a substantial fall in prices for fat cattle since the early summer. Imports of fresh and chilled beef in the July/September quarter were not unusually high. Imports of fat cattle from the Irish Republic have risen, although imports of stores this year have not. I have met the Irish Minister of Agriculture twice recently and made clear to him my objection to the subsidy paid on fat cattle in the Republic. He assured me that this will not continue after the end of this month. In general, I am satisfied that this temporary set back in the market does not justify any exceptional measures against imports.

Does the Minister think it right that British producers should have to compete against subsidised imports from overseas? Does he not realise that meetings alone are not enough? What is needed at this time is action to defend the interests of British producers.

I hope the hon. Gentleman realises that we have always had a free market here. The market is there for people to compete in it. If hon. Members are saying to me what they have never said before, namely, that we should end the free market, that is another argument.

Is not the Minister aware that beef prices over the last four or five weeks have fallen by between £1 and 25s. per cwt. and that even the store cattle which can be purchased at about £7 per cwt. are not being bought for winter feeding? Does not he consider this an extremely serious situation? Does he not agree that the Irish Agreement is wholly against the best interests of United Kingdom beef producers and, whilst not blaming him personally——

Order. A supplementary question must not be too long.

The hon. Gentleman must know that fat cattle are not covered by the Irish Agreement. Carcase meat is dealt with, and the store position is also covered. But the position of fat cattle coming in is not affected by the agreement. On his other point, the hon. Gentleman must be aware that our producers still get reasonable returns because of the working of the guarantee.

Was the Irish subsidy put on without prior consultation with this Government? Has the Minister made representations about that rather regrettable subject? What is the minimum period of domicile for Irish beef in this country before it attracts the subsidy?

I have made representations and this was one of the matters upon which I expressed my views very strongly. I felt that it was right to do so.

Is it not right that Clause 13(2) of the Treaty allows an escape in this respect, where the subsidy as applied by the Irish Government is in itself onerous? Does not that subsection allow a renegotiation of the Clause? Does not Clause 8 of the Treaty contain provision against dumping?

I cannot say that that is the situation without possessing all the facts. I recognise my hon. Friend's interest in this and also his knowledge of the legal implications. [HON. MEMBERS: "Answer."] I am trying to answer. I wish hon. Members would listen carefully. I will look into this. As far as I am aware, there is no question here of a breach of the Treaty.

Is the Minister aware that I have been trying to exercise great restraint because I hope to catch your eye, Mr. Speaker, tomorrow, and to discuss a number of these matters, when I shall be highly critical of the Minister? However, one of his answers on this has brought me to my feet, because he said that producers were getting a reasonable return. He knows that under the last Price Review there was a very substantial abatement and that this is affecting producers.

Only yesterday I discussed with the union matters affecting abatement. I am aware of the problem. There in no doubt that the guarantee is working effectively.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that the reduction in the price of fat cattle in this country has not been reflected in reductions in butchers' shops? Therefore, would he not instigate an inquiry into the techniques of marketing of beef to see if the benefit of that fall in the price of beef cannot be conferred on housewives?

My hon. Friend must be aware of my desire to get my Agriculture Bill through. This is important, because the Meat Commission will deal with precisely the point raised by my hon. Friend. Only yesterday I met the Joint Consultative Council of the meat industry. These are matters I am taking up further with the retail industry.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food how many tons of pork meat and sausages have been imported per month from East Germany and Poland over the last year.

From East Germany, none, Sir. From Poland, for the 12 months ended August, 1966, monthly averages were: Pork, none; Sausages, 70 tons; Bacon, 4,230 tons; other pigmeat products, 580 tons.

Does not the Joint Parliamentary Secretary realise that this is just the beginning of a trickle because of the levies which are going up in the Common Market countries and that this trickle will develop into a flood unless something is done immediately and that we shall become the dumping ground for many of the products from Europe?

The figures do not bear out that assertion. The one the hon. Gentleman talks about—in the main, bacon—is done under the bacon agreement.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what steps, if any, are being taken to prevent dairy farmers, knowing their cattle are infected with brucellosis, disposing of them in open markets.

At the present time under the Epizootic Abortion Order of 1922 it is an offence to sell in a market, or to sell privately without informing the buyer in writing, any cow or heifer which the seller knows to have calved prematurely within the preceding two months.

Is the Joint Parliamentary Secretary aware that his right hon. Friend's scheme is just about useless and that this practice is taking place all over the country? I will give him the name of the place where it is happening. Is he aware, further, that over 200 people in my constituency are to some degree suffering from this dreadful disease, although the Minister said last year that only 120 people in the whole of Britain were affected? What do the Government intend to do to alleviate this suffering?

I disagree with the hon. Gentleman's statement that my right hon. Friend's scheme is useless. I have pointed out before to the hon. Gentleman that a full-scale slaughter scheme would cost £40 million to £50 million. I am very doubtful whether hon. Members opposite would agree to taxation to raise that figure.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food whether he is satisfied with the operation of the Anglo-Irish Free Trade Agreement in so far as it affects the marketing of Irish fat and store cattle in this country; and if he will make a statement.

Neither the Anglo/Irish Free Trade Agreement nor the associated Agreement on Store Animals and Carcase Meat, includes any obligations specifically related to fat cattle. As for store cattle, the Irish Republic have undertaken to use their best endeavours, consistent with the circumstances of the trade, to ensure a certain minimum annual level of supply. But the Agreements have been in operation for only four months, and it is too early to judge the working of the provisions on store cattle.

Would not the Minister agree that the export subsidy given on fat cattle by the Irish Government amounts to dumping of fat cattle on the British market? Is it not quite inadequate to say that he has made representations to the Irish Government when this has had no effect in stopping these exports at all until the end of this month? What effect will this have on achieving the meat production target in the National Plan, or has that gone out of the window like the rest?

I explained very fully on a previous Question the position on fat cattle and what the agreement really means, and I cannot go beyond that. I have answered very fully, and what I have said is very satisfactory.

Is it true that under the Anglo-Eire Agreement the British taxpayer will be called to pay around £10 million a year for Eire agriculture?

The hon. and learned Member knows full well what the agreement means in relation to what will be paid on carcase meat and also the effect of shortening the period for stores from three months to two months. It does mean aid, but the hon. and learned Member is not against the agreement, and the Conservative Opposition approved it because they did not oppose it.

That is a really outrageous statement by the Minister. He knows about the opposition full well. Does he not know that the Opposition were very critical indeed? I criticised it in personal conversation and made speeches most strongly criticising it in the country.

I hope then that the right hon. Gentleman will convey his views to his own leader, and I should like to know if the Tory Party is against the free trade agreement between Eire and this country. It has never expressed opposition in principle.

If the Minister challenges me on this I ask him to look at the speech I made in Shrewsbury on 7th January last. I shall remind him of it particularly tomorrow.

The right hon. Member does not then represent the views of Her Majesty's Opposition. I challenge the Leader of the Opposition to say that he will repeal the Anglo/Irish Agreement.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food whether the British subsidy for beef cattle exported from Eire to this country is payable for dead carcasses or for cattle live on the hoof.

Under the Anglo Irish Free Trade Area Agreement, we undertook to pay annually a sum equivalent to the average U.K. guarantee payment on carcase beef imported from the Republic of Ireland up to a maximum of 25,000 tons.

Norfolk farmers have complained that live Irish cattle which have attracted a double subsidy are being sold in Norfolk. Am I right in thinking that this will stop at the end of this month?

Yes, I think that my hon. Friend is right.

Is the Minister aware of the very serious situation in the dead meat industry in Northern Ireland, and can he say to what extent the agreement may be responsible for this? What is he doing about it?

We are aware of all these difficulties. I do not think that the agreement has really had this effect, but certainly when we come to consider these things we should obviously take every part of the United Kingdom, including Northern Ireland, into consideration.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food whether he will give an undertaking that the House will have an opportunity of discussing the proposals of the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development for the international cocoa stabilisation scheme before Her Majesty's Government enters into any firm commitment.

If, as I hope, a satisfactory international cocoa agreement can be negotiated, the text would be laid on the Table in the usual way.

While I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman for that Answer, is he aware that the cocoa trade is quite willing to co-operate with the stabilisation scheme if producer and consumer countries so decide, but at the same time it believes that to rationalise cocoa-growing, as has been done in rubber and tea, will be a much better method than that put forward by U.N.C.T.A.D., and that to maintain prices artificially at the so-called remunerative price will encourage over-production and do nothing to encourage further consumption of cocoa?

I am grateful to the hon. Member for the first part of his supplementary question. This is a matter of getting agreement as between producer countries and those like ourselves who import. There is a substantial hope that we shall be able to reach agreement, and if we can do that it will be of benefit to both of us.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food whether he is aware of the sharp drop in the value of farm land; and what steps he is taking to restore the confidence of the farming community in this connection.

In recent months, the average price paid for farm land has fallen away somewhat from the record level reached earlier this year, but land prices are influenced by many factors besides the profitability of farming. The average price level is still higher than in any year before 1965, and it provides no evidence of any loss of confidence by farmers.

Is the Minister aware that Government district valuers are holding that it has fallen by £50 an acre in recent months, and some farmers estimate that it has fallen more? Is this not evidence of poor farming prospects under the present Government?

I do not agree with that at all. This is one of the things that farmers are not anxious to see, namely, the high price of land in this country.

Is the Minister aware that the price of farm land, not high quality agricultural land, has risen considerably, and that land is wanted either for the location of industry or the building of municipal houses?

I agree with my hon. Friend.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food whether he will now introduce legislation to increase the maximum fine for marauding dogs.

The Criminal Justice Bill, which my right hon. Friend the Home Secretary will be introducing later in this Session, will contain a provision to double the maximum fine of £10 for a first offence of livestock worrying.

Has the Minister's attention been drawn to the claim made at the annual general meeting of the National Farmers' Union that for every fox killed by a hunt 100 sheep are killed by dogs? Does he not also know that for this reason a good many traditional sheep areas no longer carry the number of sheep that they used to? Does he not think that this matter should receive urgent attention?

I accept the plug for fox-hunting. On the question of whether we are taking this matter seriously, the answer is that we have, through my right hon. Friend the Home Secretary, appealed to the police to take as strong action as they can. We all know that worrying by dogs is a big problem in this country, and we are taking it seriously. The doubling of the fine for a first offence is one of the steps to deal with it.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food (1) at what time and date an overnight telegram despatched to him by the hon. Member for Tiverton was delivered to his Department; what action was taken; when that action was taken; and when he was informed of the content of the telegram;

I wrote to the hon. Member on the 26th October about this matter.

Is the Minister aware that the Postmaster-General's Department claims that overnight telegrams are delivered first post next day and that this is quite contrary to what the Minister said to me in his letter? Will he knock his head together with his right hon. Friend and let the House know how his Department contacts the Minister at weekends? Will he answer Question No. 25, which he said he was taking with Question No. 24?

The hon. Member feels aggrieved about the Post Office because he chose to send an overnight telegram, which I understand is cheaper, though I appreciate the reason why he did it. What I am concerned with is much more important, and that is to meet the hon. Gentleman. I have agreed to meet him, as he well knows, to discuss the problems of Tiverton. After all, he said, "Request meeting within next three weeks." That was not very urgent.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food whether all sugar beet factories are now slicing to their full capacity.

My right hon. Friend is informed by the British Sugar Corporation that all their factories in England are slicing to full capacity.

Is the hon. Gentleman not aware that until literally only two or three days ago the Kidderminster factory had to slow down all its slicing and the British Sugar Corporation sent a card saying that it was very concerned about this matter? This factory deals with all the sugar beet from the South of England, and this was caused by the great reduction in sugar beet growing in the South of England in the last few years. Will he not do something to correct this great reduction in the South of England?

The price for sugar beet is fixed at the Annual Review, but that was not what the hon. Gentleman asked me. He asked me how the factories are working, and I was delighted to tell him that they were working to full capacity.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food whether he will now publish the official correspondence which he has exchanged with the Eire Department of Agriculture concerning salmon disease.

No, Sir. I have promised to inform the House of the outcome.

Can the hon. Gentleman confirm reports that this disease has now made its appearance in rivers flowing into the Solway, and will he give an assurance that he will deal with this matter more energetically than the Irish Government seem to have done?

That is a little ungrateful of the hon. Gentleman. We had a meeting about this and I told him exactly what was happening and what action I had taken. I said that, when we had a complete reply, I would inform the House. The hon. Gentleman knows that, immediately there was some suspicion of this disease in the part of the country to which he refers, even before it had become apparent, we took action at once to put an order on it. This was done some days ago, and I would have thought that it would meet the desire of most people who are concerned about the protection of our rivers.

Pending the publication which the Minister has just promised, will he say whether the correspondence deals with steps to prevent the spread of the disease to Britain, and what are those steps?

This is what we were discussing with Irish Ministers. Let me be quite frank with the House. Even now, there is still some doubt as to what the disease actually is. We have been assuming, and we are willing to accept, that it is what we say it is. We are taking action along with the Irish Government to do what we can to prevent it, but it is very difficult when the disease gets into the stream.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what estimate he has made of the total sum paid in Selective Employment Tax by farmers between 5th September, 1966, and the first repayment date in February, 1967.

About £8 million.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that this enormous additional cost is falling on farmers at a time of greatly restricted credit, and does he realise that, because of the repayment procedure, farmers will always be some millions of £s out of pocket until this absurd tax is finally extinguished? Will he now take steps to free agriculture from this unnecessary and irrelevant extra burden?

The answer to the last part of that supplementary question is "No, Sir". In reply to the first part, if one puts the thing in proper perspective, it works out at roughly a little less than 4d. per week per person in interest.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he is aware of the loss of income suffered by farmers whose principal business is the production of store sheep and cattle, caused by the low market prices in the last few months; and what action he intends to take to assist them.

After a long period during which the market—for store cattle in particular—has been strong, prices declined sharply this autumn. Even so, the general price level is above that of earlier years. More recently, the tone of the market has improved, especially for good forward beef stores and the better quality store sheep. Farm income is a matter which we look at in the Price Review.

Is not the Minister aware that these last three months have been absolutely vital for the whole year for farmers of this type, and does not he realise that there is a very serious crisis? Many of them, including many in his own constituency, are facing ruin. Will not the right hon. Gentleman get off his bottom and do something about it?

I would rather the hon. Gentleman would sit on his bottom instead of causing gloom. That is no answer in any case. I said in my reply that I believe that the tone of the market is improving. I wish that hon. Members opposite would not try to talk down the market.

But the Minister and a great many of his constituents in the hill country must know perfectly well that the fact that the market may be turning up now is of no avail to people who had to sell two or three months ago.

I am aware of what has been the state of the market. I have said this before. There are reasons for it of which the right hon. Gentleman is well aware. I am glad that the market is now becoming stronger. The question of help to farmers in these areas is a matter for the Annual Price Review.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food whether he will increase the share of the British bacon market for British pigs.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food whether he is satisfied with the present operations of the Bacon Market (Sharing) Agreement; and if he will make a statement.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food whether the United Kingdom will meet its bacon quota this year under the market sharing agreement; and what the shortfall is likely to be.

The Bacon Market Sharing Understanding has been working reasonably well in difficult conditions. I cannot now say how supplies from any country, including the United Kingdom, will finally compare with its minimum allocation for the year ending next March. I shall, of course, have full regard to the interests of our own industry when we discuss next year's shares with the other countries.

But is the Minister aware that out of the first 26 weeks of the current pig year, so to call it, the British quota has been reached in only two? Will he agree that this is really due to the lack of action in the last Annual Price Review and is not the fault of the fanners? When he comes to renegotiate our share, will he bear this in mind, remembering that it is more the Government's fault than the farmers' fault, and press for a higher allocation for the British share?

I told the hon. Gentleman that we shall be discussing this with our suppliers. It would be wrong for me to be dogmatic about the situation. It has nothing to do with what we did in the last Annual Price Review. The situation regarding bacon production is really fundamental.

Will the Minister take it that I shall be saying a good deal about this tomorrow? We are all deeply dissatisfied.

The right hon. Gentleman has already said that. I shall be delighted to answer him tomorrow.

Will the right hon. Gentleman now confirm that the home bacon industry will not fulfil its quota of the market this year? Has he noticed that bacon imports have increased by £12 million on the balance of payments this year? What does he propose to do to stop this increase in view of the situation in the bacon industry at this time?

I cannot accept that. We must wait till we have had our discussions. The problem of pig supply is not peculiar to the country, as the hon. Gentleman must know.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what steps he is taking, by legislation or otherwise, to encourage horticultural production, with particular reference to products for export.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what steps he is taking to promote horticultural exports.

My Department's activities for the benefit of horticultural production include the work of the advisory services and the grants under the Horticulture Improvement Scheme, the scope of which was extended in July this year. Horticultural exports can qualify for the various measures of Government assistance for exporters generally. They will also come within the scope of the British Agricultural Export Council which, with my help and encouragement, was set up earlier this year by industries connected with agriculture.

That all sounds very fine, but is the right hon. Gentleman aware that cuttings are an important horticultural export and that a leading grower of chrysanthemums in my constituency has transferred the whole of his business to the United States because of the policies of this Government?

I cannot understand that. Even hon. Members opposite who have carefully followed our horticultural policy must admit that we have done much to help horticulture, and I referred to this in my reply. There may be other reasons.

Will the Minister take specific steps to encourage exporters to get through the barriers of health regulations in foreign countries? Second, will his inspectors who have to inspect stocks and then give certificates make sure that they give the certificates in correct form, without slipping up, and, where they do slip up, will the right hon. Gentleman take steps to see that his Department is prepared to pay compensation to the growers who lose?

I should have to be very careful about giving a complete answer on compensation, but I shall certainly take note of what the hon. Gentleman has said. I think that it is a new problem.

asked the Lord President of the Council whether, in order to increase the revenue of the Refreshment Department of the House, he will consider the opening of the dining facilities to the general public during Parliamentary recesses.

This proposal will be taken into account in the review which is being conducted of the finances of the Refreshment Department.

Does not my right hon. Friend agree that it is absurd for these dining facilities to be idle for four months in the year when they could be earning money, probably from many people who would be quite anxious to come in at any rate once and taste the food we get in this House?

The suggestion has certain obvious economic advantages, but it would raise grave problems of security and staffing. If it were to be pursued, it would have to be done by the Services Committee as a whole.

Will the right hon. Gentleman resist this preposterous suggestion and see that the House of Commons is not turned into a street corner cafeteria?

It is already.

I said that if the suggestion is to be considered at all it must be done by the full Services Committee.

asked the Lord President of the Council if he will state the reason for ending the use of linen tablecloths and napkins in the Dining Room of the House of Commons; and whether the linen previously in use was of Ulster manufacture.

I have been asked to reply.

May I ask the hon. Lady to enter the ring and see that tablecloths made from Ulster linen, which are durable, easily washed and good to look at, are bought by the Catering Department for the Members' Dining Room?

Perhaps in reply to that question I can give the hon. and learned Gentleman some information which might change his mind about the position. The continued use of table linen would have contributed further to the loss already sustained in providing meals in the Members' Dining Room. Laundry charges incurred by the Catering Department in 1965 amounted to £4,386. They were increased by 5 per cent. with effect from 13th September.

Order. The Chairman of the Kitchen Committee must give shorter answers.

Is the hon. Lady aware that many Members take strong exception to the cheap and tatty plastic mats which have replaced the linen, thus reducing the character of the House of Commons Dining Room to that of a nursery tea?

asked the Lord President of the Council when he will announce the appointment of the Select Committee on Science and Technology.

I hope to satisfy my hon. Friend when we have the promised debate on procedure.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that this proposal attracted wide support on both sides of the House? Such a Committee has been talked about for months and months and many of us are anxious for action. Will my right hon. Friend bring his reforming energy to bear?

I cannot go further before the debate takes place.

Why is it necessary to wait for the debate on procedure? The Opposition gave their agreement to this on 28th April last. The right hon. Gentleman or his predecessor could perfectly well have put down a Motion on the Order Paper. The House would accept such a Motion and the Committee could be established.

It may be that the right hon. Gentleman would like to do it that way, but I thought it better that the whole question of specialist committees should have an overall answer and should not be dealt with bit by bit.

asked the Lord President of the Council whether he will seek to initiate, for a trial period, a twice-weekly fifteen-minute session of questioning of Ministers, without prior notice of questions, similar to the practice in Australia.

No, Sir. If we adopted the Australian practice, Questions on matters of detail and constituency matters could not be satisfactorily answered.

That may be true, but other questions could. Does not my right hon. Friend agree that this would be a very salutary exercise for both back benchers and Ministers, for Ministers would be unable to come to the House prepared with carefully worded nonsense from civil servants? Will he look at this again with a view to giving us a little more excitement at Question Time instead of the fuddy-duddy work we get from the Opposition?

Naturally, since this proposal came from my hon. Friend the Member for Fife, West (Mr. William Hamilton), I have given it careful attention. I was greatly attracted by the unpredictable "catch-as-catch-can" possibilities. Nevertheless, Question Time is a serious time and I do not think that this is really a serious proposal to introduce into the House.

As one who has seen the Australian system in operation, may I ask my right hon. Friend to resist this suggestion?

I had hoped that I had given that impression in my replies.

While agreeing with the Leader of the House in his desire to resist this suggestion, may I ask whether it would not help the House if he persuaded Ministers from top to bottom—[Interruption.]—from the highest ranking to the lowest ranking, to answer Questions of which they have had plenty of warning on the Order Paper or which they an; asked in debate?

That is a suggestion better put to Mr. Speaker than to me.

asked the Lord President of the Council why the Dorset Evening Echo is not available to hon. Members in either the Library or the Tea Room.

No Member has asked for the Dorset Evening Echo to be provided.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that I am now asking for it and that my wish is shared by some eight other hon. Members living in Dorset who take the keenest interest in Dorset news?

Perhaps I may suggest to the hon. Gentleman that this Question could really have been put more sensibly to me direct rather than being placed on the Order Paper.

asked the Lord President of the Council what proposals he has for improving the standard and variety of the food offered in Members' dining rooms and tea rooms, and in the cafeteria open to the public; and what proposals he has for the improvement of the environment and general upkeep of these parts of the House.

I have been asked to reply.

May I tell my hon. Friend.—[HON. MEMBERS: "No."] May I tell my hon. Friend—[HON. MEMBERS: "No."]

Order. The hon. Lady knows now how to ask a supplementary question.

Is my hon. Friend aware that these proposals are long overdue? Is he further aware that many hon. Members are concerned about the continually deteriorating standards of catering in this House, that we are disgusted by the broken furniture, by the dirty carpets and the monotony of the menus offered in many parts of the House, including the public and Press facilities? May I ask her also——

Order. That is long enough for one supplementary question.

The position is that a special report from the Select Committee on House of Commons Services commenting upon the accounts for 1965 will be published later this week. Perhaps there will be opportunity for a full discussion on these matters later.

asked the Lord President of the Council what salary is attached to the post of catering superintendent at the House of Commons; how many applicants there were for the recent vacancy; how many were interviewed; to whom the post was offered; what was his immediate past post; and why this applicant then turned the job down.

I have been asked to reply.

asked the Lord President of the Council if he will move to amend Standing Orders to provide for Oral Questions on Fridays from 10 a.m. to 11 a.m.

No, Sir.

Will my right hon. Friend think again? Has he any objection to the hours suggested for Friday? If he has not, will he consider the fact that there are 100 Questions for Oral Answer on the Order Paper today and that this is a common situation? There is a great desire for knowledge that is not being satisfied in the House. What is my right hon. Friend going to do about it? Why waste Fridays?

I suggest that the first thing to do is to look at the recommendations of the Select Committee. It has recommended an extra 15 minutes on all days when the House is sitting. It is better to look at that first before looking at my hon. Friend's proposal.