asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he will make a statement about the White Fish Authority's proposal to increase its general levy.

I have nothing to add at present to the answer by my right hon. Friend to my hon. and learned Friend the Member for Aberdeen, North (Mr. Hector Hughes) on 5th November.—[Vol. 790, c. 993–4.]

Is it not a fact that three schemes concerning the W.F.A. are now under consideration, the one in the Question, the publicity scheme, and the minimum prices for Scotland scheme? Can the right hon. Gentleman say when he expects decisions on each of these schemes?

I am anxious for an early conclusion but the hon. Gentleman will be aware that the statutory procedure must be followed, and this provides for inquiries and discussions with the Authority by Ministers in coming to a decision to reject or confirm with or without modifications. I shall act as quickly as I possibly can in the matter.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that in my company some weeks ago his right hon. Friend the Joint Parliamentary Secretary had an amicable meeting with the Port Wholesale Fish Merchants Association? Many questions were asked at that meeting. Is it pos- sible to have an answer to those questions now?

Not during this Question time. I realise the importance of the meeting referred to by my hon. Friend. My right hon. Friend the Joint Parliamentary Secretary reported the results of that meeting, which we regard as very useful.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he will make a statement on the effects on the British fishing industry of Iceland's proposal to join the European Free Trade Association.

About three-quarters of Icelandic exports to the United Kingdom, including fresh and frozen whole fish, will be unaffected. The effects of the removal of the 10 per cent. tariff on other fishery products are likely to be less important than those arising from general factors such as fluctuations in the level of production and changes in the attractiveness of other markets, especially in view of the new minimum export price arrangements for frozen fillets which Iceland will observe in common with other Nordic countries.

While welcoming Iceland into E.F.T.A., and also the safeguards mentioned by the right hon. Gentleman, may I ask him to confirm that he regards these as sufficient to prevent the dumping of fish on the British market, which is the biggest in Europe?

We hope that they will be sufficient, but we have other reserve powers if they prove not to be.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that the E.F.T.A. agreement provides us with a foothold in Europe at the moment and that if we are to have wider European unity the question of association with our E.F.T.A. partners is important? This is why we welcome the recent agreement, and look forward to its development.

In our dealings with our E.F.T.A. partners we have always had great co-operation, and I am grateful that the House thinks that the latest agreement is one more example of that.

Can the right hon. Gentleman give the House a reasonable assurance that the effect on the British fishing industry of this proposal for Iceland to join E.F.T.A. will not be a lowering of the British fisherman's share of his own market?

We hope that that has been safeguarded. When we enter into agreements of this kind the policing will be done by the exporting countries, and we hope that they will go about it in a responsible way. We have no reason to doubt that they will do anything other than that.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what action he proposes to ensure that imported animal products for human consumption are produced from stock to whose diets antibiotic supplements have not been added.

We are at present finding out what antibiotics, if any, are being used by countries which export animal products to us. In the light of this information we shall decide what further action is necessary.

I am glad that this work has been done. While welcoming the report of the Swann Committee, may I ask the right hon. Gentleman to undertake that once he has completed this survey he will make sure that in any recommendations that are made there is fair and equitable competition between home producers and imported food?

I appreciate the point made by the hon. Gentleman. It is one which is very much in my mind. It is, however, rather unfair to make any charges against imported supplies until we know precisely what the position is, and that is what we are in the process of finding out.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he will give details of plans for the expansion of timber output in the Kielder Forest in the 1970s; and if he will make a statement.

The output of timber from the Commission's Northumberland forests is expected to increase from the present level of about 50,000 tons a year to about 200,000 tons by 1980. I expect all but a small proportion of this increased output to be taken up by existing industries.

I thank my hon. Friend very warmly for his reply as it represents a considerable expansion which will be to the benefit of Northumberland in which the Kielder Forest will play an increasingly central part.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what percentage of the total acreage of productive woodlands in the United Kingdom is in State ownership; and how this figure compares with France, West Germany and Sweden, respectively, on the basis of information available to him from international sources.

The Forestry Commission manages about 51 per cent. of the total area of the productive woodlands in Great Britain. I understand that the corresponding percentages in State ownership in the countries named by the noble Lord are:

Does the hon. Gentleman think that this is the right proportion for the conditions existing in our country? Is it his intention to aim to maintain this balance for the next 50 years?

The three countries which the noble Lord mentioned in his Question, of course, have large areas of natural forest, and it is not easy to make a comparison between those countries and ours. After the 1914–18 war the Forestry Commission was set up, and it has planted about 2 million acres in this country. I do not know what the exact balance should be.

Can the hon. Gentleman give the House the comparative figures for Wales?

Not without notice.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food, what estimate he has made of the United Kingdom's self sufficiency in timber supplies in every form including pulp and paper in the year 2010, based on the acreage of afforestation over the next five years and a projection of the present rising consumption trend.

No estimate has been made as far ahead as the year 2010.

Does not the hon. Gentleman think it reasonable to assume that the figure will probably be about 10 per cent. and that with timber imports at present running at a level of over £640 million a year, this means that the necessity to boost forestry in order to save imports over the next few years is very great indeed?

I agree with the hon. Gentleman. We are aware of the huge figure of timber imports into this country, but I do not know whether the noble Lord would like to estimate what will be the demand 40 or 50 years hence, in view of the use of plastics and other similar materials. It is very difficult to estimate as far a head as that.

Can the hon. Gentleman say whether the time factor has been extended from the 20 years which the Treasury took as being the limit of its vision with regard to timber in the debates some years ago? Twenty years only covers the growth of poplar and willow trees, and is it not much better, therefore, to look 40 years ahead?

We were looking at the question of the production of Kielder Forest a few months ago. The estimates that we looked at were 40 to 45 years for soft wood for pulp, and I presume that the Treasury will have to fall in with that estimate.

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. In view of the unsatisfactory nature of the reply, I wish to give notice that I shall seek to raise this matter on the Adjournment.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he will state the size of the national breeding flock of sheep in each of the last three years.

The breeding flock in the United Kingdom numbered 14,223,000 at June, 1967, 13,873,000 at June, 1968 and 13,315,000 at June, 1969.

I thank the right hon. Gentleman for that information. However, will he say what he intends to do to change the trend?

As the hon. Gentleman knows, in the last four reviews we have increased the guaranteed price by 15 per cent. In the 1967 review we extended the hill sheep subsidy to 40 per cent. more sheep and at the same time improved the terms. Obviously, we want to build up that part of our stock.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that, as I said to the Minister a little while ago, much of the effect of this is being nullified by the fact that whole farms are being taken out of production for afforestation? This is happening in the hill areas to which the Minister wants the flock to go. What will be done about this?

This has always been a very difficult question. Other hon. Members opposite are always telling me that we are not doing enough for forestry. We must endeavour to have a plan. We will make way for sheep, but we must not deny forestry its fair share of land.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food whether he will make a statement on the results of the recent meeting held in London of the Council of the International Sugar Organisation.

The main decision taken by the International Sugar Council at its meeting last month was on the initial level of the export quotas of the exporting members of the International Sugar Agreement during 1970.

Would the right hon. Gentleman agree that the discussions which led to that decision confirm the view held by many that not until the E.E.C. and the United States join the I.S.O. will there be any stability in the international sugar market and that the sooner we can bring those two in the better it will be, not only for Commonwealth sugar producers but for our own?

We should not seek to weaken what has been done for the sugar market through the British Commonwealth Sugar Agreement. Price stability, which is fair to the producer and the consumer, is, on the whole, very much appreciated by every country concerned.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food whether he will consult with the President of the Board of Trade on limitation of the import of horticultural items which British growers are capable of producing.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he will make a statement on the policy of Her Majesty's Government regarding the limitation of the importation of horticultural produce which British growers are capable of producing.

Whilst horticulture enjoys protection by tariff or, in the case of apples and pears, quota restrictions, my right hen. Friend and his right hon. Friend the President of the Board of Trade are agreed that rather than increasing such restrictions it should be our general policy to help the industry to improve its competitive efficiency so that home-grown produce will replace imports on its merits. To this end there are a series of measures to help growers improve their production and marketing arrangements.

Would the right hon. Gentleman tell the President of the Board of Trade in plain terms that no less than £45 million worth of fresh vegetables and fruit are imported into this country which could perfectly well be grown here?

I remind the hon. Gentleman that, because of Government assist- ance, the glasshouse acreage has increased by 294 acres and outdoor vegetable acreages are up by 30,000 acres compared with last June.

Is the Minister aware that one of the main problems facing growers of tomatoes and lettuces in my constituency is the astonishing and unsatisfactory way in which the prices realised fluctuate? Is he studying ways of bringing greater stability into the market?

Yes. We hope that co-operatives will play a part in this. It is interesting to note that the glass acreage for tomatoes alone increased by 103 acres.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that Questions have been asked about whether we could increase our exports of capital goods to countries such as Romania? Unless we buy something from Romania, that country cannot afford to buy our capital goods. There must be a two-way traffic. We appreciate my right hon. Friend's efforts.

I am grateful to my hon. Friend for raising that point, because trade is a two-way traffic. Our country lives by trade. Therefore, while we want to export all that we can, we must enter into agreements with other countries so that trade can flow freely.

Important as export-winning undoubtedly is, can the right hon. Gentleman say whether the Government are firmly wedded to import substitution and what the potential is in this particular part of horticulture?

We want to save all that we can. The Government and the industry have made tremendous investments. Grant payments for completed schemes under the Horticultural Improvement Scheme came to very nearly £10 million in the last three years. I think that the hon. Gentleman should be satisfied with what we are doing in this country to meet our own needs.

Would the right hon. Gentleman again consider a more flexible use of the tariff? I refer specifically to early potatoes. At the moment, the increase is made on a set date every year, regardless of conditions in the home market.

We are always considering these matters. However, when we enter into tariff agreements, we must fix set dates when they come into force. If anything can be done to help, I will consider it.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he will make a statement on the 1969 series of narcotic bait layings in England and Wales.

Between March and August this year farmers were licensed to lay stupefying bait in 286 Ministry-sponsored operations.

I am grateful for that answer, but it is inadequate. What was the cost of these trials? Does the hon. Gentleman recall that last year they worked out at about 14s. of taxpayers' money per wood pigeon killed?

The cost of supervision—which is the only cost this year because the bait was paid for by the farmers—was about £8 or £9 for each separate operation, which, I readily admit, cost about £1 a bird. This is the price which we must pay in acceding to the pressures of farmers to use this method of control and to the demands of the protection societies and others to minimise the risk to other birds.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what estimate he has made of the total number of herds which will have to be accredited as brucellosis-free, to provide a pool of brucellosis-free stock, before introducing eradication of the disease on an area basis.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what has been the cause of the delay in progress towards the eradication of brucellosis; if he will now announce his proposals for area eradication; what is his estimate of the annual cost to public funds; and if he will make a statement.

The main obstacle to an early start with area eradication is the existence of large numbers of vaccinal reactors. To start too early would mean the unnecessary slaughter of those animals and would call for an unduly large number of replacements. These reactors will be progressively culled from herds over the next three years. In two years' time, for example, some 15,000 to 20,000 accredited herds should, on certain assumptions, provide sufficient replacements for a start to be made with area eradication on a worthwhile scale.

I welcome the fact that the right hon. Gentleman has come to a tentative decision about area eradication, but must we still wait another two or three years before we get under way? Is he aware that the great weight of veterinary opinion is that we must go in for area eradication if the scheme is to progress and that unless we give a strong and positive lead in the next two or three years the scheme may grind to a halt?

What I said was not tentative. I said that I was considering practical schemes for area eradication in certain areas in 1971. That is positive. This is a satisfactory proposal, bearing in mind the increasing progress which we are making. Since I made my statement on 5th November, the level of applications has been rising. Currently it is exceeding 150 a week. Therefore, very good progress is being made.

Does my right hon. Friend intend to take action on the allegations that farmers are deliberately selling cattle which are brucellosis carriers, knowing that this could spread the disease?

That would be a thoroughly unscrupulous thing to do and would be deplored throughout the House. I hope that it is not happening.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food how many food price increases have been referred to his Department this year; and how many have been approved.

So far this year 164 proposals for food price increases have been notified to the Department under the early warning arrangements. Of these 111 have been accepted as notified and a further 16 after modification. The remainder have either been withdrawn or are still under consideration.

I can assure my right hon. Friend that I shall continue to send to his right hon. Friend any complaints about increases that are referred to me. Would not my hon. Friend agree that the whole machinery might be rather more meaningful if more price increases were refused?

I can only reply that the procedure is that of the early warning system. The proposals come before my Department, and I can assure my hon. Friend that they are most carefully examined before we permit the increases to take place. We should not think that this represents the whole record, because the very fact that it is known that this procedure exists very frequently keeps people from making applications.

Is it not the fact that nearly all of these applications for increased food prices arise from the incidence of the selective employment tax in the food retail and wholesale distributive trades; and that were this tax removed, with it would go nearly all the demands for increased food prices?

I wish that were true. There are many reasons for increased costs—wages, materials, and so on. Very frequently we are dependent on supplies from abroad for what we require, and unless we pay the price we do not get it.

Can my right hon. Friend say whether in respect of one of the most recent increases—the 2d. on a pint of beer—he has been assured by the brewers—

Order. There is a Question on beer later in the Order Paper.

But this, Mr. Speaker, is one of the increases that the Minister says he has already approved. The Minister has given a number of increases he has approved, and this is one of them.

Further to your point of order, Mr. Speaker—if I may call it that, with respect. Can we be assured that beer is food?

I would not rule on such an esoteric question. Mr. Fernyhough.

What I was seeking to obtain from my right hon. Friend was an assurance that none of the increased profits which would accrue to the brewers—

Order. Question No. 35 relates to beer. The hon. Gentleman cannot anticipate another hon. Member's question.

asked the Minister at Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what action he has now taken to halt the rising prices in basic foodstuffs and other necessities; what results he has obtained; and if he will make a statement.

I am continuing my arrangements for price surveillance. I am satisfied that no unjustified increases have occurred. Throughout the last five years average earnings have been rising faster than the price of food.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that if he shops around during the weekend he may change his mind? Does he realise that half pound tins of imported food are going up in price by 4d. and 6d. overnight? Is there not some effective action that we could take to stop these price increases?

I have indicated what the situation is. Food prices have been kept stable below the general increase in prices and earnings. I can assure my hon. Friend that I do shop around at weekends. Certainly I agree that any food price increase is unwelcome, but, on the whole, the early warning system has worked very well indeed, and I pay tribute to the food industry for the co-operation that it has given us.

Since the Minister is taking credit for what he calls the steadiness of food prices, will he not acknowledge that they have risen twice as fast in the last five years compared with are five years before and that they have been averaging 4 per cent. or 5 per cent. higher?

That is not the case. The increase in the price of food in the last five years compares favourably with the situation during the 13 years of Conservative Government. If the hon. Gentleman would like to put down a Question asking for details, I shall be glad to look into the matter.

With regard to this hullaballoo on the other side of the House about prices, are we to understand that before prices can be reduced we have to increase farming subsidies? Is that what hon. Members opposite are after?

The Annual Price Review and subsidies have a part to play, and they help to hold down food prices. But it is fair to say that this money does not go into the farmers' pockets. Nevertheless it is helpful in the maintenance of food prices.

Can the right hon. Gentleman confirm that he is currently examining an application for an increase in the price of bread, and will he say when he expects to conclude his examination? In addition, will he on this occasion tell the House before the Press is informed?

I can make no statement on bread at present.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food why he has agreed to allow manufacturers of sausages and meat pies to increase their prices by 2d. per 1b.; why, under the early warning system, these increases have been approved; to what extent the reduction of the Common Market's import levy of 5d. per 1b. on pork encouraging the export of pigs has had an effect on the rise in the prices of these articles; and whether he will make a statement.

Recent price increases by leading manufacturers of sausages and meat pies were accepted as justified under the early warning arrangements by my Department. The prices of these products are affected by many factors.

Is my hon. Friend surprised to learn that there are 250 price increases prophesied in the New Year in addition to these? Does he realise that every time that these people prophesy an increase they automatically get it? Is this because the Ministry works hand in glove with them?

I rather resent the last part of my hon. Friend's supplementary question. Any manufacturer who wants to increase the price of his goods has to send the application to my Department, where it is examined very carefully. It is misleading, as our predecessors found, to accept some figures from The Grocers' Gazette. It can be misleading to the general public.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food whether he will now make a statement on Part 2 of the Northumberland Committee Report.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he will now make a statement on the second part of the Report on Foot-and-Mouth Disease by the Northumberland Commission.

The report is due to be published and presented to Parliament on 16th December, and I hope to make an announcement on the same day.

When the Minister introduced his foot-and-mouth Orders on 16th October he stated that the Duke of Northumberland did not see any conflict between those Orders and the likely outcome of his own report. Can the right hon. Gentleman say, having seen that report, that there is still no conflict between it and the Orders?

That is so.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food, in view of the decision of the United States Department of Agriculture about the use of D.D.T. as a pesticide, details of which have been sent to him, what action he proposes to take in this country about the use of this chemical.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food whether, in view of the fact that the United States Government are proposing to ban the use of certain persistent insecticides, he will now take similar action.

The Advisory Committee on Pesticides and Other Toxic Chemicals has now completed its further review, which includes D.D.T. I expect that its report will be published and that, with permission, I shall make a statement on 17th December.

I congratulate my right hon. Friend on the sense of urgency he has imparted into this matter, but will he bear in mind that the United States Department of Agriculture has imparted into it even more sense of urgency, and that several States have already banned D.D.T.?

I appreciate the point made by my hon. Friend, but he and the House will bear in mind that the Report which is referred to is one produced by British scientists, and it is a thorough and full report to which I have given the most careful attention. It is on the basis of what our own scientists report that I hope to make a statement next week.

As the United States Government have recently banned imports of French and other Continental cheeses because they contain this particular poison, can the right hon. Gentleman say whether he has examined French and other Continental cheese imported to this country for an excessive quantity of benzene hexachloride?

This is a question on which the Food Additives and Contaminants Committee would report.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food whether he will make a statement on the work of the North Pennines Rural Development Board since its inception.

The board is reviewing the problems and needs of the area, and it is for the board to decide how far, and when, the results of its review should be published. The board is required to submit to my right hon. Friend annual reports on the discharge of its functions, and these will be laid before Parliament in due course.

Is the Parliamentary Secretary aware that the expenditure and staffing of the Board have risen at an alarming rate? In July he told me that the first year's expenditure would be £35,000, and he now tells me that it is £45,000; and he told me in July that the staff would be 8 and he now tells me it is 14. Why was I misled in the reply to my Question in July?

There is no question of trying to mislead the hon. Gentleman. It is not easy to estimate things, including agricultural policies, as he knows. The board is probably working a little more quickly than we thought it would, which is a good thing.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food whether the proposed removal of investment grants on tractors and harvesters will be taken into account at the next Price Review.

Investment grants are not relevant production grants, and are therefore not included within the value of the guarantees.

Will the Minister tell us when the investment grants on tractors and combines are to end, and what is to be put in their place? We still have not been told.

The hon. Member is a member of the committee which is discussing the subject, and this will be decided after the committee has made its findings.

The hon. Gentleman's answer somewhat surprised the House. Does it mean that farmers will get no reimbursement of the loss of this £5 million or more that they will sustain on investment grants?

The right hon. Gentleman knows well, and my right hon. Friend made it clear on the Second Reading of the Bill, that this money is to be spread over grants as a whole, and not tied to tractors and combine harvesters.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what had caused the decline between the estimate for 1969–70 of £10·3 million of investment grants, given last March in Command Paper No. 3965, and the figure in November of just over £5 million.

There has been no decline. The estimate of £10·3 million to which the hon. Member refers relates to all agricultural investment grants.

Is it not a pity that the Secretary of State for Scotland did not make that clear when he made the comparison? Is the hon. Member aware that in the first ten months of the year there has been a decline of no less than 37 per cent. in the number of combine harvesters bought? Is not this a glaring example of the red light flashing at the Government's deplorable policy?

No, Sir.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what will be the saving in cost of the proposed removal of investment grants to farmers for agricultural machinery.

None, Sir, apart from possible savings in administrative costs.

Is there not fear among farmers that the Government intend to save money in this respect? Does not the Minister appreciate that after a bad season, with a high Bank rate, farmers cannot afford any reduction in what they already get in these investment grants?

I am not blaming the hon. Member, but some of his colleagues are giving this impression. If they would not ask such leading questions on the subject, farmers would not be misled.

If the Minister is concerned about farmers being misled, will he address himself to the point that the Government made the change from investment grants? Investment allowances were well understood and appreciated by farmers. We now have an excuse put forward for removing the grants altogether. Is it not therefore reasonable that farmers should misunderstand if the Government keep changing their attitude without giving adequate explanation?

I am sure that farmers listen as much to what we say as the right hon. Member does.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what proposals he has to require chemical additives to be used in order to minimise the stench arising from the disposal of waste products from intensive poultry units; and if he will make a statement.

We have no power to make such a requirement; but the National Agricultural Advisory Service is always ready to advise farmers on the most appropriate husbandry practices to adopt to minimise smells.

What proposals has the hon. Gentleman for making more widely known and available this code of practices which has been suggested by the National Agricultural Advisory Service? Is he himself satisfied that those proposals can have a material effect upon the stench?

As the hon. Gentleman probably knows, a lot of research is being done on this subject. There are certain scents, if I may put it that way, that one can add, and processes of aeration of the stuff, and many other methods. The farmer knows that he can go to the N.A.A.S. and be advised on what is most suitable for his case. For myself, working on the farm, I sometimes thing that complaints of these smells are exaggerated; but I know that there is another side to the story.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food whether he has yet received a report from the Advisory Committee for the Welfare of Farm Animals on proposed changes in the Codes for the Welfare of Livestock; and if he will make a statement.

No. Sir. Following the undertaking which my right hon. Friend gave the House on 20th October the committee is urgently re-examining certan code recommendations, and will report in due course.

Is the Joint Parliamentary Secretary aware that the House and the country are most anxious that the Minister shall fulfil his undertaking fully and promptly and give a report to the House after he has received the report of the Advisory Committee?

If I may say so, the right hon. Gentleman and the people whom he has mentioned are being a little impatient. The debate was on 20th October. Let us give the committee time to see how the codes will work.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what is the total estimated yield of the cereal crop for 1969 in weight for each separate cereal.

The provisional estimate of the 1969 United Kingdom cereal crop is 13·8 million tons, made up of 3·4 million tons of wheat, 8·8 million tons of barley, 1·3 million tons of oats, 0·2 million tons of mixed corn, and 11,000 tons of rye.

Is the Minister aware that many farmers suffered very badly this year because of adverse conditions in the early sowing season? Is he prepared to look at the situation again to see whether anything can be done to help those farmers whose yields are very badly down, particularly in comparison with the national average?

We are glad that the crop turned out to be about 1 million tons higher than last year. Frankly, I cannot promise that we can go into the question again. If anybody knows the difficulties involved it is the hon. Member, who had to administer this scheme when he filled the office which I at present hold.

In view of the frequent demands already made in this Session by hon. Members opposite for more of the taxpayers' money, has my hon. Friend made cost assessments of some of these demands, particularly as they are made by a party which proposes to cut taxation?

They are made so frequently that it would take a considerable time to add them all up, but I agree with my hon. Friend this continued demand for money does not seem to go with promises made at the same time of cuts in taxation.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what estimates he has made of the effect of wet weather on farmers' yields in Nottinghamshire; and what action he will take.

Although we appreciate that some individual farmers have had a lean year, yields in Nottinghamshire as a whole, of the principal crops, are likely to be only slightly less than last year, except for wheat where we expect a small increase.

While I thank my hon. Friend for that answer, does he not accept that it is rather at variance with what is being said by farmers in the area? Will he not pay particular attention in the farm prices review to their views and opinions?

I know that when one has a bad year—and some of my hon. Friend's constituents have—one is not inclined to believe the overall figure. But the system of estimating these yields has been the same over the years, and we must take them as being fairly accurate. I appreciate that in the Nottingham area and in the Trent Valley many farmers had very low yields.

Does not the hon. Gentleman realise that while the Price Review must take account of the national picture, that will not help my constituents or those of the hon. Member for Bassetlaw (Mr. Ashton), who have suffered particularly badly? Is there not something which could be done for those who have suffered great hardship?

It has been a principle over many years that farmers take weather risks. I know only too well that we have had two years of very bad weather. But to do what the hon. Member suggests would be to breach the principle; he knows the difficulties as well as I do.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what is the percentage in 1969 of home-produced, as compared with total consumption, beef, lamb, butter, cheese, milk, barley, pork and bacon, respectively.

A high percentage of beef and veal, pork, barley and dried milk is home produced. The percentage is lower for the other commodities mentioned. I will, with permission, circulate details in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

Do not these figures show that there is a considerable leeway in most of the main products, other than liquid milk, for the home producer to increase his share of the market? In view of what his right hon. Friend said last year and at the beginning of this year, what is he doing to increase that share, which at the moment is not being increased at all?

There are no specific targets for the rate of expansion of home production and for the import savings programme, but the general trend is in the right direction. If the hon. Member studies the figures at the start and looks at the position today he will see that.

Since there appears to be a world glut of butter, will my hon. Friend consult the appropriate Department—in this case the Ministry of Technology—about our imports of New Zealand butter. New Zealand expects us to import her butter but refuses to accept our aircraft.

I will draw my right hon. Friend's attention to my hon. Friend's comment.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he will seek powers to set up departments of veterinary epidemiology in universities.

My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Education has brought the comments of the Swann Committee on this subject to the attention of the University Grants Committee. The organisation of veterinary education is a matter for the universities themselves.

Could a decision be taken about veterinary epidemiology before the more complex recommendations of the Swann Committee are finalised?

We shall need to consider that.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he will set out details of his plans to set up a permanent monitoring apparatus to check the prevalence of antibiotic resistance in animals.

The Swann Committee recommended the establishment of facilities for the surveillance of the bacteria of animals, animal products and man, including their antibiotic resistance. This is one of the committee's longer-term recommendations, which we are considering in consultation with interested organisations.

What consultations are taking place?

Extensive consultation is necessary among the Government Departments concerned, with organisations such as the Agricultural and Medical Research Councils, the Public Health Laboratory Service and professional organisations.

Has the right hon. Gentleman made any estimate of the cost of these two proposals, as his hon. Friend appears to be so sensitive about costs?

We are at an early stage of the consultations. As always, we shall be careful about costs.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food whether he is satisfied as to the effects of the Government's economic policy on the liquidity position of the agricultural industry; and if he will redress any adverse effects before the Annual Review.

Essential needs for short-term working capital are generally being met and I know of no reason to anticipate the normal consideration at the Annual Review.

Is not the right hon. Gentleman aware that farmers are disturbed and apprehensive because of the problems which they face? For example, interest rates are at an unprecedentedly high level. Secondly, there are the increases in costs which both farmers and the right hon. Gentleman know will take place during the course of next year but which will not be taken into account until the following year.

In general these are matters for consideration during the review negotiations. The hon. Member well knows that the prevailing high interest rates, which are in line with world interest rates, have not cut off the farmers' demand for credit. It should be borne in mind that a borrowing rate of 9½ per cent. is effectively about 5½ per cent. to a farmer paying income tax at the standard rate. The hon. Member also knows that agriculture is in the highest credit priority within the banks' lending ceiling.

Has the Minister looked at the figures for the take-up of fertilisers last year? Can he put the reduction down to anything other than a shortage of cash among farmers?

I will certainly look at the question of fertilisers. It is a matter which obviously we shall be considering during the review. But the hon. Member will have borne in mind that total bank advances to agriculture and forestry amounted to £536 million at mid-August this year, which is £18 million more than at the same time last year.

If the right hon. Gentleman is saying that he is satisfied with the liquidity position, may I ask whether he has read the opinion of one of the leading bankers in the country who said that there was not a chance of expansion getting under way unless prices improved?

The hon. Gentleman must not put words into my mouth. I invite him to read the answer which I have just given.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food, (1) what action he proposes to take to safeguard fishing rights in the Lune Estuary;

I am not aware that fishing rights in the Lune are in need of any special protection. We have had no representations on behalf of Mr. P. Smith other than those from my hon. Friend. I have explained in reply that there is nothing I can do to help.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that, on instructions from an oil company, somebody has been digging up the bed of the River Lune? The result of this is that Mr. Smith's fishing rights have been interfered with and his livelihood endangered. Would the hon. Gentleman send down one of his officials to see how much damage has been done, to talk to Mr. Smith and see whether there is any way in which the Department can help?

My hon. Friend may be interested to know that my fishery officers investigated on the spot when the complaint was first made in July, and again in November. My officials discussed it with the other Departments concerned and with the Lancashire River Authority. My Department was also consulted by the Board of Trade and the Ministry of Power, which issued the necessary statutory consents. On top of all that, a public inquiry was held.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food why he agreed to implement the National Board for Prices and Incomes Report No. 136 on Beer Prices increases by 2d. a pint within a few hours of the Report's publication; why he did not wait to allow public discussion on this report; and whether he will make a statement.

My right hon. Friends and I were satisfied that, after a virtual standstill of three-and-a-half years in public bar prices, it was right to accept the board's clear-cut recommendation which was based on a detailed and convincing analysis. I therefore announced the Government's decision when the report was published, having first secured assurances from the brewers and licensees of a renewed standstill in public bar prices and of restraint over prices in other bars for a further year.

Whilst appreciating that part of this increase has gone to the publicans, may I ask my right hon. Friend whether he can tell me how many of the big brewers have gone broke and how many of the brewers' profits have gone down? Can he also tell me how many have cut their dividends? Indeed, can he give me any good reason why the price should have gone up at all?

I would not wish my hon. Friend to think that I am an advocate of the brewers. What I can say is that the prices of beer in public bars in this country have been held stable for three-and-a-half years; that a case was made to the National Board for Prices and Incomes; that the board considered it for a period of months; that it considered that a good case was made and made recommendations; that the 2d. which was awarded was half what the brewers and licensees were asking. I thought that on balance it was a reasonable case.

Is it not true that some of the smaller breweries have been in some difficulties and have had to be taken over by larger ones?

I am only dealing with the situation as it is at present.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what increase in the price of food he estimates will arise from the increase in the price of fibreboard packing.

Any such increase would be negligible.

Would my hon. Friend agree that we are talking about a large-scale industry associated with food? Would he undertake that if any suggestion of an increase comes before him he will make sure that it is justified, and not merely an excuse for greater profitability?

We would certainly look carefully at it. It would be covered by the early warning arrangements.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what estimate he has made of the value and tonnage of cereal imports from Romania in each of the next five years.

While the total quantity and value of our cereal imports is reasonably stable, supplies from individual countries tend to vary widely from one year to another. It would not therefore be practicable to make an estimate relating to one country alone.

is it not a fact that we have agreed to take payment for a £32 million irrigation scheme which has been sold to Romania, through a consortium, in temperate foodstuffs?

We have come to certain arrangements, and there are also certain private arrangements. As I was saying earlier, when I do not think the hon. Gentleman was here, trade is something that moves two ways.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what estimate he has made of the value and tonnage of chilled meat imports from Romania in each of the next five years.

I am not able to give detailed forecasts of meat imports from particular countries. In recent years Romania has sent us only small quantities of carcase meat. In 1968, for example, Romanian supplies represented less than one half of 1 per cent. of our total imports of all carcase meat and offal. The level of her supplies in future is not expected to increase to any significant extent.

As we are taking payment for the £32 million irrigation scheme partly in chilled meat will the Minister watch this position very carefully, because if a large quantity comes in and the subsidy has to go up, how much better off are we?

We are bound to keep a watch on all these things which take place when trade agreements are negotiated. I see no reason to fear that this will go on to any great extent. Obviously, in the course of deliveries one has to keep one's eye on things.

Short of increasing the total consumption on the home market, how does the taking in of extra meat from Romania tie up with an expansion programme at home?

Hon. Gentlemen opposite argue that consumption will always be a fixed figure, but it is increasing. This is why we think there is room for an increase in our own production and a limited amount of imports.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what report he has received from his scientists in regard to the recent deaths of seals off Cornwall; and if he will make a statement.

Following a request from a local veterinary surgeon, my Department's Veterinary Investigation Laboratory at Truro undertook post mortems on several seal carcases washed ashore in Cornwall. Their diagnosis revealed a condition consistent with death from natural causes, notably starvation and septicaemia. There was no evidence of contamination with any toxic substances. The findings have been passed to the Natural Environment Research Council, whose seals unit has this matter in hand.

Is my hon. Friend aware that, despite these assurances, responsible observers are still convinced that there is something fishy about the seals and that this concern will not be allayed until a body with the standing of the Emergency Committee, co-ordinating Departments, has examined every aspect of the situation to establish whether pollution could have been in any way responsible and, if so, where it comes from?

My hon. Friend should not be misled by reports which appeared in last weekend's Press. Investigations have proved that that report and what we have found, which is absolutely certified, have nothing in common. It is true that a scientist of the National Environmental Research Council has invesigated the death of the seals in the past few days, but I have nothing to add to what I have already said about the findings.

Is it not rather strange that this happens at the same time as the vast numbers of deaths of birds and fishes?

It is rather remarkable. Many of our scientists think that it has been a particularly bad time from a weather point of view, and that this may have had something to do with it.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what is the estimated additional cash flow required in order to cover the investment programme necessary for the expansion of the farming industry; and what rise in food prices would be involved.

It is not possible to forecast this precisely, but the resources needed by the industry are examined each year at the Annual Review.

I am glad to hear that final statement. Do I take it that my hon. Friend is telling us now that any money that will be given out in the farm review will not result in a rise in prices to the general public, who are already bearing large increases? Will he assure us that before any part of the grant is given to factory farmers the Government will make sure that they conform strictly to the regulations laid down by Parliament?

As to the latter part of my hon. Friend's supplementary question, we do not lay down conditions to intensive farmers provided that they are carrying out their job in accordance with the codes of practice for farm animal welfare. As to the first part of the question, apart from milk there can be no direct increase in food prices from annual review awards provided that these are made an the basis of deficiency payments.

Would the Minister give us a clear assurance that there will be sufficient resources made available for the industry to carry out the investment and expansion programme about which he so often talks?

This is a question for negotiation with the N.F.U., at the Annual Review. It is not easy to forecast. For instance if there was a big increase in cereals the money required would be nothing like the amounts required if there was a big increase in stock. We have not set specific targets.

asked the Minister of Public Building and Works if he is satisfied that supplies of plasterboarding are sufficient; and what estimate he has made of the effect on building of recent price increases.

There is no shortage of plasterboard and none is foreseen. The recent price increase of 2d. a square yard corresponds to less than 30s. in respect of an average house.

Can my right hon. Friend tell the House how far the supply and price of plasterboard was aggravated by the fact that hon. Gentlemen opposite, when in office, as a result of their bungling incompetence, produced a shortage of plasterboard which had a serious effect on the building industry?

I am grateful that I am not responsible for the sins of the Opposition when they were in Government. As for the present position, we have sufficient capacity, and the price increase will make very little difference to the price of an average house, I am glad to say.