asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what increase in food prices occurred during the twenty months ended 31st March, 1972, or the latest convenient date.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food by how much food has risen in price since 18th June, 1970.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food by what percentage food prices have risen since June, 1970, to the latest convenient date.

I refer my hon. Friend and the hon. Members to the reply I gave to the hon. Member for West Ham, North (Mr. Arthur Lewis) on 11th April.—[Vol. 834, c. 171.]

That reply indicated an approximate increase in food prices over the period indicated in my Question of about 16 per cent., which was grievous. Will my right hon. Friend give us an absolutely unequivocal undertaking that he and all his Cabinet colleagues are resisting to the utmost the demands for excessive wage increases as in the case of the coal miners and railwaymen?

Wage increases have a great deal to do with rises in the cost of living. I can give my hon. Friend the assurance for which he asks.

Contrary to the drivel of the hon. Member for Worcestershire, South (Sir G. Nabarro), does the Minister accept that much of the acrimony in the present dispute in the railway industry is directly attributable to the outrageous level of price increases in the food sector over the past 18 months and, in particular, the cynical disregard by the Government of their election pledges to cut prices at a stroke?

The hon. Gentleman should not make outrageous statements which bear no relation to the truth. The railway workers have had an increase far in excess of any increase in the cost of living. Since last July the increase in the cost of living has been running at a rate about half that of the increase of the previous 12 months. That is true of the Food Index, too. The one thing that can destroy all our hopes for stable prices is if wage increases run totally out of line with either increases in the cost of living or increases in production.

There are large areas of poverty in this country for which the Government appear to have no regard. Apart from pensioners, there is an enormous number of people who work a full working week and who get very little more than the subsistence level of pay. Some of these happen to be railwaymen. Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that railway workers in my constituency who do a full working week and give up their Sundays and free time take home less than£15 per week? If he is talking about stable prices, why does he not take steps to control the price of food?

The hon. Lady is wrong——

I am not wrong!

The average earnings of railwaymen are£28 a week. There is not a single man in the railways earning less than£20 per week. There are sections of poverty in this country, and the best thing that all hon. Members can do for them is to keep down excessive wage claims so that we can help those who need help.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that a considerable degree of responsibility for increased food prices rests not only on those who seek inflationary wage settlements but on hon. Members of the Opposition who so irresponsibly support them?

I agree with my hon. Friend. Hon. Members opposite spend a great deal of time complaining about increases in the cost of living and then a great deal of time supporting excessive wage claims.

Will the Minister pay a little more attention to his responsibility as the Minister for Agriculture instead of as spokesman and Deputy Chairman of the Tory Party? He has the position completely the wrong way round. One of the reasons for demanding wage increases is the Minister's inertia in trying to control the rapidly rising price of food.

The hon. Member knows that that is nonsense. Since the CBI initiative last July, the cost of living has been increasing at about 5 per cent. per year and yet wage claims are being awarded or asked for at the rate of 14, 16 or 20 per cent. a year. They bear no relation to the cost of living. We must all realise that this is not serving the interests of the nation in any way whatsoever.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what is his latest assessment of the likely increase in British food prices following entry into the Common Market in view of the greater rise in international food prices compared with Common Market food prices.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what estimate he has now made of the increase in British food prices consequent upon Great Britain joining the European Economic Community, in the light of the most recent assessment of the European Economic Community Commission.

The latest estimate which takes account of changes in world prices of certain commodities (notably milk products) and the farm price increases recently agreed by the Community is that accession to the EEC will result in an increase in retail food prices in the United Kingdom of about 2 per cent. per annum over a period of about six years.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that any rise in food prices as a result of Britain joining the Common Market will have nothing to do with the relationship between British food prices and European food prices but rather between international food prices and the Common Market food prices? We have virtually no control over international food prices, but from next year, as a major consumer, we shall have enormous control over Common Market food prices.

I do not think there is any doubt that it is recognised by the Community that from next year we shall be exerting a very considerable control over food price increases within the Community. But at the moment we have no control over world food prices to which we are subjected, and it is these prices which have been rising most rapidly.

The British housewife is certainly not convinced by the type of answer the Minister has given today. She does not believe that prices will increase by only 2 per cent. as a result of joining the Common Market. In a recent publication called "Burdens and Benefits of Farm Support Policies" the authors make it quite clear that the burdens of joining the Common Market will fall most on the lower paid and will create more poverty than exists now.

I accept that it is on the lower-paid members of the community that increases in the price of food fall most harshly. This is fully accepted in the Government's White Paper which we published before the debate in the House of Commons. I can give all hon. Members the assurance that the Government are determined to see that where an increase falls most harshly, the assistance, whether through social benefits or other methods, should help them in that respect.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what has been the increase in food prices between February, 1971 and February, 1972.

Between 16th February, 1971, and 22nd February, 1972, the Food Index rose by 11·9 per cent.

Is the Minister aware that these figures, coupled with the figures which he gave for the period since the Government took office, represent an extra£3 per week on the average train driver's family food bill? Is this what the Tory Government mean by blackmail?

I am also aware that in the last month the action I have taken has reduced the average weekly food bill of the family by 20p.

Can my right hon. Friend say what effect the reduction he made in the price of milk and the other actions he has taken in the last month have had upon the cost of living?

When it comes through in the index, which will not be until the 1st April figures are published, it will amount to about 3 points or 2 per cent.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he will now introduce measures to control food prices for lower-paid workers.

The National Food Survey shows that households where the earner is in the lowest range of income have, in general, maintained their expenditure on food in real terms in recent years. But where any of this group are in need and dependent on social benefits, the Government prefer to adjust these benefits to maintain their value rather than impose controls.

Is the Minister aware that the Trade Policy Research Centre recently calculated that food costs for families in poverty would increase by£33 a year when we were in the Common Market? Is he aware that they show that under the CAP British households with less than£36 a week, the great bulk of working-class households, will have to pay an extra£500 million in farm support costs, whereas at present they pay only£67 million? What is he doing to stop this sell-out of the poor?

I have read the statement by the Trade Policy Research Centre. We have already recognised that the increase in food prices generally will bear heaviest on the low-income groups. That is why in the White Paper we gave firm assurances that any increase in the cost of living resulting from entry into the EEC will be fully taken into account in the reviews we make, and we shall be making a review each year both of pensions and of family income supplement

Is not one of the best ways of helping the lower-paid workers to restrain wage demands, as many of the demands for increases ahead of productivity increases are causing unemployment?

I agree very much with my hon. Friend, and I would go one stage further. The other thing we need to do is to give everyone in this country a chance to earn more—and I mean earn more. A combination of those two things would do more to help the lower-income groups than anything else.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that by a cruel irony the factor of low income per head coincides in many areas with a higher-than-average price of food? I am referring particularly to areas such as Mid-Wales and the South-West of England. Is the right hon. Gentleman prepared to have a thorough and rigorous survey made of this factor, and is he willing in principle to agree that there should be a strict control of prices, particularly in those areas?

I do not agree with the latter part of the hon. Gentleman's question, but I shall study very carefully what he said in the former part. I would point out to him that by a cruel irony it was in the period of the last Government that the low-income groups suffered most.

asked the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food by what percentage food prices have risen in the last six months.

Between 17th August, 1971, and 22nd February, 1972, the Food Index rose by 4·5 per cent.

Does not that figure prove that the Minister's forecasts of a substantial slowing down in the spiral of price increases have been worthless and that his recent so-called reductions are nothing more or less than a thoroughly sick joke? In view of the disastrous performance we have had from him on a full-time basis, what hope for us is there from him on a part-time basis?

On the contrary, the figures prove exactly the opposite to what the hon. Gentleman claims. They prove that the food price increases are slowing down very considerably. I know that right hon. and hon. Members opposite will be pleased to hear that for the next few months the prospects are even better—that is, of course, provided that we do not price ourselves out of the market again by increased wages bearing no relation to productivity.

Has not my right hon. Friend observed the descending progression of the 16 per cent. increase which he gave in reply to me, the 11 per cent. increase which he gave in reply to the hon. Member for Bolsover (Mr. Skinner) and now the 4 per cent. which he gave in reply to the hon. Member for Rugby (Mr. William Price)? Is not this a descending progression?

In fairness, the figures relate to different periods of time. But for all that, they are considerably better, and I notice the gay expressions of right hon. and hon. Members opposite.

The right hon. Gentleman must also recognise that he is dealing with a seasonal position. The 4·5 per cent. increase is serious and alarming, especially when weighed against the promise that prices would be cut at a stroke.

The hon. Gentleman knows very well that we never talked about prices being cut at a stroke. When he talks about the seasonal position, he should remember that the best part of the season is yet to come.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food how wholesale food prices moved in the first quarter of 1972, compared with the last quarter of 1971.

Between September and December, 1971, the wholesale price index for the products of the food manufacturing industries rose by 1·3 per cent., whereas between December, 1971, and March, 1972, provisional results show a fall of 0·3 per cent.

Will the right hon. Gentleman then explain why this has not already been reflected in food prices for the housewife?

It has been reflected in prices for the housewife, but the cost-of-food index always runs about six weeks behind. Before putting down another Question about that, the hon. Gentleman should consult his hon. Friend the Member for Rugby (Mr. William Price).

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he will list the powers he has to restrict the import of whale meat and other whale products.

I have none, Sir.

Many people feel that this country should follow the example of the United States and a number of other countries and ban the import of whale products.

I think that that would imply that all whaling should be prohibited. I do not consider that such drastic action would be justified, although effective conservation is necessary.

Why does the Minister not seek powers? Can he not follow the example of his colleagues in the Department of Trade and Industry who only a few weeks ago sought and obtained powers to ban the import of the skins of many cats such as jaguar, puma, tiger and so forth? This is important for conservation and for decent and good living.

While my right hon. Friend the Minister of Agriculture does not have the powers, in fact powers to ban import of whales are available to the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry.

Will my hon. Friend bear in mind that over 50 Members on both sides of the House have already signed Early Day Motion No. 278 on the preservation of the species and that public feeling in the country is very strong indeed on this subject—so strong that I am told that some letters have even been received by the Secretary of State for Wales.

I am very conscious indeed of public feeling, which has been expressed in many letters which I have received from hon. Members. I would merely point out that it is important to tackle this at the root, that is by means of conservation, and this country is playing a very considerable part in this direction. It may be of some encouragement to hon. Members to know that lower catch limits have been agreed for the future.

How can the Minister talk about drastic action when the drastic situation is that these whales are likely to become extinct?

I did not hear what the hon. Member said.

In the Minister of State's reply, his departmental brief said "drastic action". How can he talk about drastic action when these whales are likely to become extinct?

I do not think that that is what I said, but I will see tomorrow from Hansard whether I used the words "drastic action".

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food whether he will make a statement on the Government's policy towards the recommendations on international agricultural policy submitted by the developing countries to the Third United Nations Conference on Trade and Development, at present taking place at Santiago, Chile.

As my right hon. Friend the Minister for Trade told this Conference at its opening plenary session last week, the Government recognise that, since exports of primary agricultural commodities are of great importance to the economies of many developing countries, it is important to tackle the outstanding problems in every way we can.

Will not the hon. Gentleman accept that so far the Government's rôle in Santiago has appeared extraordinarily half-hearted and ineffective? Is he aware that the majority of developing countries have said categorically that the common agricultural policy of the EEC is a grave obstacle to the economic and social development of the people of the Third World? What will the Government do about this, or are they so anxious to creep uncritically into Europe that they will stay silent on it?

I do not agree with the hon. Gentleman's first observation. With regard to the second, I refer him to the Written Answer given him on 28th March.

Will the Minister have another look at the matter and use his influence with the Government? Does not he realise that it is futile for the Government to say that private enterprise investment should be taken into account when we are making a calculation of the 1 per cent. of gross national product given in aid? Does not he agree that private enterprise always wants a return for its money, so that Government grants are far better? Do not we owe something to the under-developed nations to make sure that their standard of living will increase?

I agree that we owe something to the under-developed nations. Most of the least developed of those countries are heavily dependent on agricultural commodities of a very limited range, and the prime need in order to tackle that problem at source is technical help to assist them to diversify.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he will list the criteria which producer marketing organisations will have to comply with if Great Britain enters the European Economic Community.

Article 1 of EEC regulation 159/66 contains a definition which applies to horticultural producers' marketing organisations only. An English text is published in Part 28 Section 1 of the pre-accession texts of the secondary legislation of the European Communities.

Will the Government consider publishing a consultative document on the changes which they think should take place in our marketing arrangements, in order that we can have an open public discussion on this matter rather than just a series of meetings, which is envisaged in this year's Price Review?

I shall consider what the hon. Gentleman says. It would be very difficult to frame an open consultative document along the lines he suggests, but this is a very important matter. It is still a little too early to say which general course we can take, because the EEC has not yet made up its mind. But I will consider what the hon. Gentleman has said in a few weeks' time when we perhaps know a little more about what is in its mind.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that there is a need for growers, merchants and other interested bodies to realise the importance of setting up such producer organisations as quickly as possible so that we can take full advantage of the benefits that will result?

That is true, but we must be certain that the sort of organisation we encourage growers to set up is in line with the EEC organisations, so that we can obtain financial advantage from them.

Will the right hon. Gentleman assure the House that the pooling of transport costs, which is very important in the operation of the Milk Marketing Board, has been approved by the EEC authorities, and that there is no danger of that marketing board or any others being asked to change its ways to the detriment of the interests of producers remote from the market?

I should like to reassure myself on that question, but I have no reason to think that we shall have to abide by any particular rules of the Common Market in this respect, because I think they are purely voluntary rules which each country can choose for itself. But I will check and let the hon. Gentleman know.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what financial support is being given for the support of the sugar industry.

None, Sir, except that sugar refiners are of course eligible for the grants and allowances available to manufacturing industry in general.

What do the allowances amount to in cash terms?

I cannot give the hon. Gentleman the figures of what the refiners and so on receive in terms of allowances, but if the hon. Gentleman puts down a Question I will answer it.

This is a shocking situation. To two consecutive Questions, both of immense importance to agriculture and the Government's future policies, the Minister does not know the answer. He has apparently not considered the future of the Milk Marketing Board, which will be a shock to the whole industry, and he has not even looked at the Question he was asked about the sugar industry. He must do something about this situation if Question Time is not to be made a farce.

Order. That was a speech.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he will seek powers to ban the use of stilboestrol as a growth promoter for pigs, in view of its dangers to human health.

The Veterinary Products Committee has advised us that on present information any carcinogenic hazard likely to arise from such use is not sufficient to justify any special controls. However, the Committee made recommendations in relation to injectable oestrogens used in veal production which my right hon. Friend is considering.

But in view of the recent evidence from America that the hormone can produce cancers in daughters of women who were treated with it in pregnancy, is it safe to continue to use it as a feeding stuff for animals produced for meat of any description, particularly as some other countries have banned its use completely?

I have seen the article the hon. Lady mentioned. It is important to leave it to the VPC to deal with the matter. It has it under consideration, and when further information becomes available it will put forward its views.

Does not my right hon. Friend agree that the main danger arises from any form of stilboestrol implant? Be that as it may, it is a strange situation when we have stringent regulations for the control of this drug when prescribed by a doctor but allow it to be prescribed by the butcher with a pork chop.

This is another aspect of the same problem, but, as I have said, the VPC is looking at it and will make its recommendations.

Will the hon. Gentleman tell us why the Government are prepared to allow this potentially dangerous substance to be used but are artificially restraining British production to 41 per cent. of the nation's estimated consumption of bacon?

I do not think that that supplementary question has very much to do with the subject. When the Government have set up a committee to deal with these questions, it is wise to allow it to get on with the task and to make its recommendations. That is what is being done.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food to what extent joining the European Economic Community will affect the powers of the Agricultural Wages Board.

The powers of the board will not be affected.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that agricultural workers are very much afraid that if we go into the EEC the real value of their low wages will be greatly affected? Does not he consider that the present rate of wages paid to them is far too low? Will he consider giving an extra subsidy to the farmers to make certain that they can pay better wages to their workers?

The agricultural workers can rest assured that there will be no change. The board will go on doing its work. The future for the agricultural workers is surely best secured by a prosperous home agriculture, which my right hon. Friend is certainly providing.

Does not my hon. Friend agree that the increased incomes that farmers will obtain from going into the Common Market will make it easier for them to pay higher wages in future?

Yes, Sir. I could not agree more. I am sure that this is a chance we ought to take and that it will benefit the whole of agriculture—by which I mean both farmers and farm workers.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food how many civil servants in his Department are being trained in European Economic Community practices to undertake work in Brussels after 1st January, 1973; and whether they are proficient in at least one European language other than English

Officers with responsibilities in connection with the EEC are being given appropriate training. This has included special courses at the Ecole Nationale ďAdministration in Paris and other training organised by the Civil Service College and my Department. Many officers are being given intensive training in appropriate languages. It is not possible at this stage to say how many of my Department's officers will eventually undertake work in Brussels.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that it is of the utmost importance that we should have the highest possible calibre of officials in Brussels once we have acceded to the Treaty and that these officials should be fully conversant with the Continental practice of interpretation of the regulations of the Treaty in a way which seems to make all the difference, certainly in some Continental countries, in respect of their national interests? Will he take special care to see that we have the very highest quality of people available?

Yes, Sir. There are two different problems involved. There are those who are members of the Commission and there are those who are members of the Civil Service and who will do the work for this country. On the whole, we think that those people—the latter—can probably best serve the country by being based here and going over to Brussels. They must know the languages, and they must know what they are talking about.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say how many Ministers in his Department are proficient in foreign languages, and in which languages?

I am not absolutely certain which languages my hon. Friends speak, but I know that the Minister of State can speak fluent French because I have heard him late in the evening.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he will consider seeking to introduce legislation to control the quality and strength of bottled fruit drinks to enable the housewife to determine whether she is getting value for money.

Regulations now in force prescribe minimum requirements for the content and labelling of soft drinks including fruit ones.

Many of these products are labelled "fruit flavoured", which means nothing to the housewife. Is the hon. Gentleman satisfied that the legislation protects the consumer?

These regulations stem from 1970 and they exempt manufacturers from putting ingredients on the labels until 1976. But in view of what I have read in the Press today of the emphasis placed by the spokesman of the National Association of Soft Drinks Manufacturers on label stocks as being a stumbling block to achieving what I believe is a good thing, I intend to ask that when new labels are required before then they shall anticipate the 1976 requirements.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what arrangements have been made for the continuance of the Commonwealth Sugar Agreement following negotiations between the European Economic Community, Mauritius and other Common wealth sugar-producing countries.

Detailed arrangements for Commonwealth sugar after the Commonwealth Sugar Agreement expires at the end of 1974 will be negotiated between the enlarged Community and the Commonwealth countries concerned, within the framework of the assurances already given by the Community.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that he is being less than truthful in his answer? Meetings have already taken place between the Commonwealth sugar-producing countries and the EEC, and the Commonwealth countries are alarmed by the wide discrepancy between the attitude of the EEC in relation to their future and the statement made in this House by the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster following the negotiations. Will the right hon. Gentleman stop hoodwinking the Commonwealth countries and the British public on this matter?

The hon. Gentleman is under a misapprehension. It is true that Mauritius has recently completed negotiations with the EEC to accede to the present Yaoundé Convention, but that specifically excludes sugar, for which the arrangements are exactly the same as they were before.

Will my right hon. Friend read again President Pompidou's television broadcast of 11th April, in which he said:

"Tomorrow Europe will be in a zone of privileged prosperity in the world."

That is why we went to such enormous trouble—with, I thought, my hon. Friend's concurrence—to negotiate a settlement which was very favourable indeed to the Commonwealth sugar producers.

Is the Minister prepared now to seek ratification with the EEC of the Lancaster House agreement with the Commonwealth sugar producers?

The Lancaster House agreement was accepted by the EEC. It was also accepted by all the Commonwealth sugar-producing countries. I prefer to accept their acceptance rather than the hon. Gentleman's.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what consultations he is having with representatives from internal drainage boards on the consultative document on the reorganisation of river authorities.

My right hon. Friend has consulted the Association of Drainage Authorities. He hopes to make an announcement soon on the future organisation of land drainage. There will then be further consultation on implementation.

Will my hon. Friend bear in mind that members of internal drainage boards are anxious that the happy relationship built up with his right hon. Friend and his Department should not be severed by the new proposals? Is he further aware that members of internal drainage boards feel that these are matters which must be dealt with locally and not by bodies which are a long way from the places affected?

My right hon. Friend knows the concern felt by many of my hon Friends on this point and has considerable sympathy with their views. There will be an early announcement.

While appreciating the necessity for close relations between the Ministry and the internal drainage boards may I ask the hon. Gentleman to say whether the Government are considering any organisation of these boards as such?

My right hon. Friend is considering all these matters because there has been a fair amount of consultation. He will be making an early decision.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what proportion of beef consumption he expects will be met from home produced supplies in 1972–73.

In the fatstock year April, 1972, to March, 1973, home-fed production is expected to provide some 80 per cent. of the total supplies of beef and veal available for consumption in the United Kingdom.

Is my hon. Friend satisfied with that proportion for home production and does he think that home production will be able to meet total demand in view of falling world supplies and falling imports?

Yes, sir. There has been a general upward trend over the past three years in beef production and I am certain that the increase in the guaranteed price announced in the recent review for fat cattle and beef will encourage this further.

Does the hon. Gentleman expect that percentage to change if and when we become members of the Common Market?

I would expect that production at home would continue to rise.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food whether he will, in specifying food standards, require vinegars to be clearly defined by categories for example as malt or wine vinegar, whether sold as a main product or used as an ingredient in other foods

The Food Standards Committee Report on Vinegars was published in January, 1972. My right hon. Friend will consider the recommendations in that report, including those on the specific names of vinegar, in the light of representations from interested parties before he makes any regulations.

In reaching his decisions on this useful report, will my hon. Friend give full weight to the representations of consumer and enforcement authority associations since one of the prime objects of the Food Standards Committee is to enable the housewife better to know exactly what she is buying?

I take the point which my hon. Friend made and also the points which have been made in the many representations which we have received. All of these will be given full consideration.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food whether he can now state what was the average gravity of beer in 1971

The average gravity of all beer brewed in the United Kingdom in 1971 was 1036·70 degrees.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that when that reply is compared with the reply which I received on 18th January of this year it is misleading, to say the least? Is he aware that the breweries are becoming monopolistic and that the public are aware that they are being taken for a ride, not for a short time but for all the time? Will he therefore accept that the public are not getting value for money and take some action, because if he does not—[Hon. Members: "Too long."]—everyone will say that the generous contributions of the brewers to the Tory Party are preventing the Government from doing so?

On 18th January 1 informed the hon. Gentleman that the average gravity of all beer brewed in 1970 was 1,036·66 degrees. The move in 1971 is insignificant, but it is at least upwards.