I beg to move,

That notwithstanding anything in Standing Order 231 (Presentation of petition for bill under section 1(4) of the Procedure Act) the Promoters of the British Railways Bill be permitted to proceed with their Petition.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what was the percentage increase in retail food prices in the six months ending June, 1970, and the latest period of six months respectively.

The Food Index rose by 6·1 per cent. between 16th December, 1969, and 16th June, 1970. Between 18th May, 1971, and 16th November, 1971, the latest date for which information is available, the Food Index rose by 2·4 per cent. But it should be borne in mind that short-term trends are considerably affected by seasonal factors.

I congratulate my right hon. Friend on that encouraging reply. Will he confirm that it shows that the rise in food prices has taken a marked turn for the better?

I am grateful to my hon. Friend. As I pointed out in my reply, short-term trends in the Food Index are affected by seasonal factors, but it is encouraging that in the period since July, when the measures of my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer and the C.B.I. initiative came into operation, the non-seasonal element in the Food Index, which accounts for about 83 per cent. of the whole, has risen by only 2·1 per cent.

In spite of the qualifications my right hon. Friend has made, will he also accept my congratulations on the figures? Do not they show, first, that my right hon. Friend's policies are working and, second, that we are coming to the end of the period in which we have been suffering from the adverse effects of the previous Administration?

The congratulations, such as they are, belong partly to the agricultural industry and partly to the Government for the joint measures they have taken.

Although the Question deals with the past, forecasting is very important, and the Grocer magazine has recently forecast a food price rise of "only" 7 per cent. this year. The magazine says "only", but 7 per cent. is quite large. Do the Government intend to introduce a value-added tax which will affect food? Are they considering that? When shall we have a decision on it? Have the recent price increases in the Community affected the forecasts in the Government's White Paper?

There is a later Question on the Order Paper about the Community and food prices. We have made it abundantly plain time and time again that food will be excluded or exempted from V.A.T. I would prefer not to forecast, but world prices have steadied down, and there are reasonable chances this year of greater stability.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he will make a statement about the latest level of food prices.

There are some encouraging signs that the rate of increase in food prices is beginning to slow down. In particular the sub-group of the Food Index which covers manufactured foods rose by only 1·2 per cent. in the four months between July and November, 1971.

Any decrease in the recent excessively high rate of increase in food prices is, of course, welcome, but can the right hon. Gentleman give any indication of what increases in food prices he expects if we enter the European Community?

That is a completely different question from that on the Order Paper.

Will my right hon. Friend bear in mind that there is still a substantial element of selective employment tax in food prices at wholesale and retail stages? Will he try to persuade our right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer to abolish selective employment tax in his forthcoming Budget this April instead of the following April, which would have a marked effect on stabilising food prices?

We are gradually dismantling the taxes on food and other commodities which were put on by the Labour Party when it was in office. I think that in 18 months we have done pretty well.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that all his former speeches show that he is a high-price man? He has always said so. That is on the record. What part has imported food played in the right hon. Gentleman's calculations? Can he give us any assessment of price increases?

The right hon. Gentleman has time and time again misquoted what I have said. I am not a high-price man, I am an end-price man, and there is a great deal of difference between the two. Imported non-seasonal foods for direct consumption have gone up in price by 5·1 per cent. since last July. This makes out the case for the policy that the more we produce at home the better we shall do, unlike the policy of the Labour Party.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what has now been the percentage increase in food prices since 18th June, 1970.

Between 16th June, 1970 and 16th November, 1971, the latest date for which information is available, the Food Index rose by 13·1 per cent.

Does the right hon. Gentleman realise that these figures represent a total disgrace to the Government, and to his Department in particular? Is he further aware that the 46 Derbyshire miners' wives who have been to Downing Street and Hobart House today, some of whom are in the Gallery—[Interruption]—could use, and have used, more colourful language than that? [Interruption.] I will say what I want to say.

Order. The hon. Member is out of order in referring to the Gallery. Will he please ask a question.

It is on the record so it does not matter.

Order. I call upon the hon. Member to finish his question.

How can the right hon. Gentleman expect miner's wives to accept a 7½ per cent. increase in their husbands' wages when we have had a cost-of-living increase of the order which he announced?

The hon. Gentleman always uses extravagant language, and I do not think that he gets any further in the House by doing so. As I have pointed out, the Food Index is now coming under better control than for some time. Prospects are better than they have been, and I think that if we all accept a certain degree of reasonableness in our wage demands we may reach a situation in which the cost of food does not go up so sharply.

In view of the increased production by British agriculture, would the Minister like to hazard a guess what the cost of food and the cost of living would be if we had a Socialist Government, bearing in mind the lack of confidence that agriculture had in the last Government?

We have only to look at figures for the last six months of the Labour Government to see which way things were going.

Would the right hon. Gentleman agree that a fair percentage of this catastrophic increase of 13·1 per cent. resulted from decimalisation? In view of that, can he give us an assurance that, come metrication, sausage will continue to be sold by the pound and not by the length?

We are some way off metrication.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what weighting is given to butter in the calculation of the Index of Retail Food Prices.

The 1971 weighting for butter was 2·8 per cent.

Does not my right hon. Friend's reply show the important effect on our prices of world prices over which we have no control?

Yes; this is one of the problems. Manufactured milk products as a whole account for over 5 per cent. of the Food Index and have accounted for as much as one-fifth of the increase in the index since June. 1970. The world shortage of milk products is due to factors outside our control and it underlines the importance of a healthy and confident home dairy industry.

When the common agricultural policy becomes fully operative here, does the right hon. Gentleman expect butter to have a higher or lower weighting than caviar?

Lower.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what further representations he has received regarding the future of the inshore fishing industry within an enlarged European Community; and if he will make a statement.

I met representatives of the Fisheries Organisation Society, which represents inshore fishing interests in England and Wales, on 21st December, when I answered questions about the position of the industry within the Community and expressed my confidence in its future.

But does the right hon. Gentleman recall that before the crucial vote on entry into the Common Market he gave the House a solemn pledge that he would not conclude a fisheries agreement without knowing precisely what terms were to be offered to the other applicants? How does he reconcile that pledge with what has happened? Is he aware that many of the fishermen's leaders, whose initial reaction was favourable, are now very concerned about what the Government have apparently brought back from Brussels?

I strongly disagree with what the hon. Gentleman said. It does the inshore industry no good at all for hon. Members to take that sort of attitude, which is totally unfair. Apart from that, we did know the terms which were offered to the other applicants, and it was on that basis that we accepted.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that there is considerable concern in South-West Scotland about the fishing grounds off the Isle of Man and the Cumberland coast? Can he say anything about what limits there will be around the Isle of Man?

I cannot say anything about limits around the Isle of Man. In isolated areas, where there may be special problems for certain species and so on, the problems will be far better looked at in terms of conservation. I am having a very careful study made of that point.

Will the right hon. Gentleman clear up something which puzzled all of us who were in the Chamber during our debates on the E.E.C. fisheries policy, on Second Reading of the Consolidated Fund Bill? Is he aware that in the other place the noble Lady, Baroness Tweedsmuir, made a categorical statement that we should have a veto at the end of the 10-years' transitional period, in answer to questions by my noble Friends, Lord Hoy and Lord Shinwell, whereas in this Chamber the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster would not utter a word on that question and would not accept that there was any question of a veto being put in our hands at the end of that period?

That is a matter for my right hon. and learned Friend the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster. The position with regard to the Luxembourg Agreement has always been perfectly well known—that the Community as a whole does not take action which it considers will affect the vital interests of any one of the nations concerned.

asked the Minister of Agriculture. Fisheries and Food whether, if Great Britain joins the Common Market, the Horticultural Improvement Scheme will remain in existence or be replaced by other forms of aid to the horticultural industry.

I see no reason why the Horticulture Improvement Scheme should be regarded as incompatible with present E.E.C. rules. The legislation authorising the Scheme expires in 1974 and the nature of assistance to the industry after that would be a matter for consideration whether we joined the E.E.C. or not.

Does my right hon. Friend accept that over the past 10 years or so the scheme has done a great deal to help build up a larger and more effective industry? Does not he accept that it would be harmful to the industry to withdraw the scheme, except on the condition that it would be replaced by other equally effective aids and incentives to the industry?

The scheme continues until the end of 1974. It has put £80 million of extra capital into the industry, of which about £26 million has been supplied by the Government. The industry, particularly in my hon. Friend's constituency, has reached a high state of efficiency. We wish to maintain it at that level, but I do not want to commit myself at this stage beyond 1974.

When can market gardeners contemplating their investment plans expect to be told about the post-1974 arrangements?

We are in close consultation with the National Farmers Union about the E.E.C. arrangements, and I shall make a statement to the House as soon as possible.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he will make a further statement on the effect of the adoption of the European Economic Committee's fisheries policy in the British fishing industry.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what progress has been made in negotiations with the European Economic Community on fishery limits; and if he will make a statement.

Nothing has taken place in the negotiations to affect their satisfactory outcome for the British fishing industry as reported by my right hon. and learned Friend the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster on 13th December last.—[Vol. 828, c. 51–53.]

In view of the valuable protection that is to be given to inshore fishermen, does my right hon. Friend agree that active policing of the new limit is needed? Does he also agree that the fact that Norway has now reached agreement with the E.E.C. will give protection to our distant water vessels in that it makes it far less likely that other nations will follow Iceland's bad example and try to extend their limit to 50 miles?

My right hon. and learned Friend will shortly be making a statement on protection, and I think that the outcome will be very satisfactory to the whole House. I confirm what my hon. Friend said on distant water protection. The agreement we have reached is a valuable safeguard. The formal assurance from the Community that the common fisheries policy forbids discrimination in form or in fact against fellow members' vessels outside 12 miles is vital to them.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that, contrary to the impression created by the Opposition, inshore fishermen in Scotland have accepted the agreement as entirely safeguarding the interests of the industry? Is he also aware that many of us were looking forward to an opportunity to congratulate my right hon. and learned Friend on this achievement in the debate on the fishing settlement that the Opposition promised to stage? Can my right hon. Friend tell us why the Opposition have decided not to hold this debate?

I think for precisely the reasons which my hon. Friend has given.

Will the Minister explain to the House that the achievement of the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster means, despite all the previous assurances given, that after 1982 there will be no binding legal agreement at all save and in so far as it is up to the grace, favour and unanimity of the majority of the partners in the E.E.C.?

My right hon. and learned Friend has explained that on many occasions, and I am very surprised that the hon. Gentleman has not grasped it.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food whether he will make a statement on the continuance of the slaughter policy in respect of foot-and-mouth disease and of the ban on the import of vaccinated animals after the end of the five-year period should Great Britain enter the European Economic Community.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what continuing effect the agreement on animal health with the Common Market will have on livestock production.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what his policy is in relation to foot-and-mouth disease from 1978, should the United Kingdom join the European Economic Community; and if he will make a statement.

The agreement preserves our exclusion of livestock vaccinated against foot-and-mouth disease and our quarantine precautions for imports of unvaccinated stock. The Community régime entitle us to take protective measures against the introduction of diseases like swine fever. Our slaughter policy for foot-and-mouth disease was never in question. The enlarged Community must decide the regime to apply after five years, but I am confident that we shall achieve satisfactory solutions then, as we have done now. Thus livestock producers should benefit from progress towards freer trade within the Community while exports to other markets should not be jeopardised.

As the livestock export trade to many overseas countries depends on the continuance of our foot-and-mouth disease policy, will my right hon. Friend give an assurance that after the end of the five-year period he will maintain existing restrictions against the import of animals from countries which have less rigorous animal health policies?

The problem here is one of vaccinated stock; those are the ones we wish to keep out. We have had a long and hard battle to obtain the agreement that we have obtained with the Community, and I am certain that, once we are a member, we shall be in a strong position to show the Community that our livestock health protection is far better than is theirs.

My right hon. Friend's reply is very satisfactory, but are there any spheres of animal health in which this country is lagging behind the Community and, if so, what action will be necessary by United Kingdom farmers?

No, Sir. There are a few differences in interpretation on such matters as brucellosis and tuberculosis, but I do not think there are any spheres in which we are lagging behind. In fact, we have the best health precautions in the world, and we should stick to them.

Although I appreciate what my right hon. Friend says, does he not agree that this is an important matter on which we should not give way in any circumstances? Will he assure the House that, after 1974, whatever the E.E.C. may say, we will not permit the import of vaccinated animals?

We have five years, so there is no problem until 1978. By 1978 circumstances may have changed, and it would be unwise to go too far ahead and to give too categorical an assurance, but I see no reason why we should not continue this policy.

Will the Minister assure the House that, in addition to control over the importation of live animals, the present restrictions on the importation of carcase meat from E.E.C. countries where there is endemic foot-and-mouth disease will continue after our entry?

The arrangements will remain the same for the E.E.C. countries as they are now. We allow dead meat to come in from them and we shall continue to have the same restrictions and the same provisions on access as we have at the moment.

Has the Minister considered the difficulty of distinguishing between animals which have been vaccinated against foot-and-mouth disease and those which have not? Is he satisfied that the regulations of the E.E.C. countries make it possible for his inspectors to distinguish accurately, because that is the real problem?

We shall still maintain our quarantine system. We shall have no more difficulty in distinguishing then than we had before going into the Community. The situation remains exactly the same. It is not economic to import ordinary animals which have to go through a quarantine period. That is done only for those special animals required for breeding.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he will now publish revised estimates of the increase in United Kingdom food prices if Great Britain should join the European Economic Community, taking account of higher Community prices and falling world cereal prices.

No, Sir.

My right hon. Friend was pointing a little earlier, and quite rightly, to a record of more stable prices in the last six months. At the same time the Community is proposing an 8 per cent. increase in food prices. Will this not produce a greater increase for the British housewife to bear, and will my right hon. Friend publish a further estimate if the Community's proposals are adopted?

It would not be practicable to publish revised estimates at short intervals to take account of world prices or increases in individual products; but once Community prices have been put up—if they are put up—I will consider what my hon. Friend said and we will publish a fresh estimate.

But the Minister must be aware that M. Mansholt has announced an 8 per cent. increase in prices. Will this not inevitably affect the estimates in the White Paper?

The right hon. Gentleman must know that this has not yet been confirmed. It would be ridiculous every week to keep publishing fresh estimates. Let us wait to see what happens and then publish the figures.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what plans he has to deal with the surplus of potatoes.

Most of the surplus is expected to be sold for stockfeed, but we are ready to consider any outlet which will achieve the aims of the support buying programme at an acceptable cost to the Exchequer.

But in view of the Potato Marketing Board's £18 million deficit last year, and an even higher deficit this year, is not it time that we made a concerted effort to reduce imports of new potatoes, canned potatoes and powdered potatoes? Why cannot the British housewife have British Smash rather than Canadian Smash?

Processed imports to which my hon. Friend referred, other than those coming from the Commonwealth, are subject to a tariff. An anti-dumping application is being considered.

asked the Minisier of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food whether he will make a statement about the prices of British beers.

There were very few increases in the price of beer in 1971. There have been reports that some increases are in prospect, but my right hon. Friend has at present no formal notifications under the arrangements agreed with brewers of forthcoming price increases. At least one major brewer has publicly announced that it has no plans to raise prices in the near future.

Will the Minister give an assurance that when applications for price increases which may be in the pipeline come before him he will resist them, in view of the inflationary effect which they might have on the cost of living of a large section of the population?

No, Sir.

Is it not better to take an independent view on this subject? Did not the National Board for Prices and Incomes consider this in depth and recommend in writing, after prolonged thought, that the margin of profit was insufficient? Is it not strange that hon. Gentlemen opposite interested in beer should impugn the conclusion of their own creature?

Yes, Sir, my hon. Friend is entirely correct.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food how the present strengths of British beers compare with those of 10 years ago.

The average gravity of all beer brewed in the United Kingdom has fallen by just over half of one degree in the course of the last 10 years.

Is the Minister aware that that reply will be received with scepticism by the people of this country? I have in my pocket a Christmas card from an old gentleman who says that the beer today is rubbish and has lost a lot of weight since the First World War. In view of this, will the Minister consider introducing legislation providing for bottled beers to be labelled with the weight and, where beer is sold by pump, to give this information on the pump? If there were any deviation in the relative strength of beers, the vendors could then be prosecuted under the Trade Descriptions Act.

I am not entirely clear whether the hon. Gentleman's friend or the beer has lost weight. The average gravity of all beers in 1960 was 1037·25 degrees and in 1970 it was 1036·65 degrees. That is a loss of only 0·6 degrees in a figure of over 1,000. For reasons I have already given to the House, it would not be practicable to put on the bottle the specific gravity of the beer because this alters after the original bottling.

Will the Parliamentary Secretary acknowledge that his figures for the national average exclude privately brewed beer not for sale, which is often considerably stronger?

I can probably confirm that.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what effect he estimates the Confederation of British Industry initiative has had on the price of manufactured foods; and if he will make a statement.

It is not possible to measure the effect on retail prices of the C.B.I. initiative but it is encouraging to note that, in the four months to November, 1971, the sub-group of the retail price index which covers manufactured foods rose by only 1·2 per cent.

We have been encouraged by the figures given to us today by my right hon. Friend, but does he feel that if he had had further co-operation from the trade unions we might have seen an acceleration of the decrease in prices possibly extending over a longer period than the 12 months?

I have always believed that it is far better to have an increase in production and in real wealth than an increase in money wealth, which is soon caught up by increased prices. I think the whole country—trade unions, employers and everyone else alike—has a part to play in that.

With one million unemployed, will the Minister tell us what incentive there is to increase production? Will he also say what he expects the increase in the price of food to be after the ending of the C.B.I. initiative?

The first part of the supplementary question is of no relevance to the original Question on the Order Paper. The second half of the supplementary question I answered earlier.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what was the estimated annual cost to his Department in 1969–70, and to dale, resulting from the giving of advice to local authority planning committees on the agricultural aspects of individual planning applications made by farmers.

About £50,000 in 1969–70 and £54,000 in 1970–71.

This must represent just a fraction of the expenditure of my right hon. Friend's Department. It is a matter of the economy versus the environment. Is my hon. Friend prepared to reconsider his intention to discontinue this service, as not to do so would, in the opinion of many people, be inimical to the good design and disposition of agricultural buildings in rural areas?

I am afraid that my right hon. Friend would not be agreeable to reconsider this. It involves the Department in about 5,000 cases a year and the staff concerned could be doing more essential work. We see no reason why planning decisions involving agriculture should be more difficult than others, or why farmers and land owners should not accept the same responsibilities as others in justifying their development proposals.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food how many of the Forestry Commission's forests are open to the general public; and what proportion this is in relation to its total holdings.

Unrestricted access on foot is normally allowed in about 230 of the Commission's 300 forests. At the remainder some degree of access is allowed in all but about a dozen cases.

While there is public appreciation of the great efforts being made by the Forestry Commission, could the Minister have discussions with it about the possibility of publicising this open access a little more?

I will certainly do so if the hon. Gentleman thinks it necessary. I would merely say that in 1971 over 15 million people visited the forests by day, and as there are 177 picnic sites and 202 forest trails, it seems that there is a fair knowledge of the situation.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what is the present total cost involving his Department in the provision of services and advice to the agricultural and horticultural industry; and if he will give an estimate of the annual cost for comparable services over the last eight years.

I have assumed that the hon. Member has in mind the cost of operating the Agricultural Development and Advisory Service and services concerned with the control of infestation. The estimated total cost in 1971–72 is £16·0 million. It is estimated that the cost of comparable services in 1963–64 was £7·8 million.

Can the hon. Gentleman tell the House whether costs will increase or decrease if we enter the Common Market? How would he justify it if the cost increased?

The hon. Gentleman must realise that my hon. Friend has embarked upon an exercise of reducing the advisory service and making it more efficient. As salaries account for 85 per cent. of the cost, I would have thought that the chances of the cost going down were considerable.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he will list the legislation which governs the way in which bread is described at point-of-sale to the consumer.

The relevant legislation is the Food and Drugs Act, 1955, under which the Bread and Flour Regulations 1963 apply, while the Labelling of Food Regulations 1970, will also apply when they come fully into operation on 1st January, 1973.

Would the hon. Gentleman not agree that the housewife needs a standard definition of those descriptions of bread in the shops which purport to describe the contents so that she may know in future what she is buying when, for example, she buys a wholemeal loaf?

The present regulations are being reviewed by the Foods Standards Committee and we are awaiting its advice before taking action.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food whether he will seek to encourage the destruction of the native British wild pigeon.

It is for individual occupiers or local groups to protect crops that are exposed to damage by wood pigeons. I would recommend scaring devices for this purpose, because extensive research has established that no known techniques of destruction will lead to effective population control.

While thanking my hon. Friend for that reply, may I ask him whether he does not agree that one of the most efficient methods of securing population control would be for him to put on his hat as Minister of Food and popularise the excellent culinary qualities of these pests?

I am an enthusiastic consumer of pigeon. I am fond of all birds.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food whether he will seek by means of grants to promote the production of store cattle in Northern Ireland.

The production of stores in Northern Ireland is already encouraged by the existing measures of support given for the production of fat cattle for beef. The question of any changes will be a matter for consideration at the Annual Review.

Will the hon. Gentleman consider what more he can do to help, since there has been a progressive switch in the Republic of Ireland from store cattle to fat cattle, thereby defaulting on the quotas agreed under the Anglo-Eire Free Trade Agreement? Would he say what steps he is prepared to take in view of the Republic's failure to meet its obligations?

More stores are coming to Great Britain this year and fewer are going to Northern Ireland. Special assistance is given in Northern Ireland for the production of stores and that assistance is not available in Great Britain. I will certainly see that this matter is kept under review.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he will reconsider his advice to farmers in regard to the use of cereal seed dressed with aldrin, dieldrin or heptachlor, with a view to preventing or further limiting the use of such seed dressings, particularly on spring-sown grain.

It has been reconsidered. Last month we reaffirmed the advice, to which all agricultural organisations subscribe, that these dressings should not be used on spring sown grain, nor on autumn sowings unless there is a real risk from wheat bulb fly.

Would the hon. Gentleman not agree that although the majority of farmers conduct themselves responsibly, there is a minority who continue to disregard the advice given by the Ministry? Does he not agree that it is time to consider introducing firm and positive arrangements to secure a reduction in the use of these insecticides, which are still being used, since people are still irresponsibly ignoring the advice given by the Department? Further, would he agree that, since the Government have seen an increase in food prices of 13 per cent. in the last few months, it is reasonable to expect that the increased cost which this suggestion would involve would be minute and would considerably help our society?

I do not think this is a matter of cost. The Wilson Committee reviewed the use of organic chlorines in 1969 and found that the restrictions had lowered the number of incidents with birds, which are the chief sufferers, but the Committee also found that bulb fly was still too damaging to recommend a total withdrawal of dressings. The damage done by bulb fly in a bad year can amount to around £3 million.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food whether he will take further steps to reduce the grubbing up of hedgerows; and if he will make a statement.

I believe that farmers and landowners have shown increasing moderation and good sense in this matter. I welcome, and shall continue to encourage, a responsible attitude on the part of those concerned.

I thank my hon. Friend for that reply. Would he not agree that the face of England is being changed—by no means always for the better? Would it not be possible for his Department to take a slightly more active part in this process?

I would answer "yes" to both parts of my hon. Friend's question.

Would the Minister not agree that there is nothing worse than a misshapen field, with crooked hedges, in terms of cultivation, harvesting and everything else, and that if the British public want crooked hedges they should pay for them?

There is a middle between ends, and we think that the balance is slightly wrong at present.

Has any study been made of the effect of the grubbing up of hedges on the bird population and their nesting and mating habits?

Not by my Department; but I have seen some disturbing figures on this subject and I feel that we should take this point into consideration.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what consideration he has given to the permissibility within the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade of export allowances or restitutions as a setoff against the effect of minimum import prices; and if he will make a statement.

Export allowances would probably not give rise to serious difficulties under the G.A.T.T. Other factors in our international trading relations also need to be taken into account in judging whether to provide for export allowances. And we must assess whether, and the extent to which, our exports are in fact at risk because of the effects of minimum import prices. I am keeping the whole situation under review.

I am obliged to my right hon. Friend for that reply. In view of the notorious complexity of matters arising under G.A.T.T., would he consider publishing a White Paper setting out all these considerations in more detail, including reference to the position in the malting industry and its anxieties, about which I have recently been in correspondence with him on behalf of my constituents?

Malt is one of the commodities which is very much under review at present. I will consider my right hon. and learned Friend's suggestion about setting out the problem in a White Paper, but for my part I find some difficulty in agreeing that we should publish a White Paper.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food how many fatal accidents have been caused each year from 1959 by overturning tractors; and how many of these accidents occurred with tractors fitted with the safety cab or frame.

With permission, I will circulate the annual statistics in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

Has the hon. Gentleman's attention been drawn to an article in the December issue of the Agricultural Worker by his own Chief Safety Inspector, Mr. J. C. Weekes, and, if so, has he taken that article seriously into account? Many of us would like to see the date brought forward so that it is made compulsory for all farmers to have safety cabs on tractors.

I assure the hon. Gentleman that I am very clued up on this safety aspect. In the Agriculture (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill, which is at present going through the House, we are raising the penalties to deal with those who ignore its provisions. The date of operation was carefully considered by the previous Administration. For practical reasons this would appear to be the best compromise.