asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what obligations he has entered into concerning devaluation of the green pound at the next EEC price determination.

None, Sir.

I find it difficult to understand that answer because, in agreeing to the present devaluation, does it not follow that there is a commitment for a further devaluation? How does that fit in with the Tory Party manifesto commitment?

The hon. Lady is mistaken. If there had been a special green pound devaluation on pigmeat, a further devaluation in other commodities would have followed. However, as there was no special devaluation, that no longer applies.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that pig farmers in Staffordshire are particularly pleased with the result of the last devaluation, but that the true revival of the pig producing industry in Staffordshire, and probably in the rest of the country, will not come about unless an extra effort is made and there is a further devaluation, particularly in the pigmeat sector?

It has to be appreciated that there has been an improvement. Four months ago the positive MCAs in pigmeat were at 8 per cent., and they are now down to almost 5 per cent. There are considerable problems in the industry, but I do not believe that there is great scope for further devaluation. We have to concentrate much more on the processing and marketing problems in the industry.

Does the right hon. Gentleman consider that, on the question of butter prices, he has misled the House and, indeed, the British housewife? To what extent, since his last price deter- mination, have butter prices come down in the shops? As a 5 per cent. devalution increases butter prices by 3·5p per pound and there have been two devaluations this year, was it not a false promise to make?

The right hon. Gentleman is perfectly right. I misled the House when I said that butter prices would come down by 6p. I checked butter prices this morning. Tesco's New Zealand butter has come down by 7p, Fine Fare's English butter has come down by between 7p and 10p, Sainsbury's butter—I agree—has come down by 6p, Associated Dairies' Irish butter has come down by 7p and the Co-op reductions vary between 6p and 10p around the country.

In view of the two devaluations to which I referred, which should increase the price of butter by 6·10p, how long will those reductions last?

The difference between our two parties is that when the right hon. Gentleman was a member of the Labour Cabinet that Cabinet agreed to a 5 per cent. devaluation with no increase in the butter subsidy. We have obtained a butter subsidy that pays for both his devaluation and mine.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food when he next expects to meet the chairman of the Milk Marketing Board.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food when he will meet next the chairman of the Milk Marketing Board.

I am in frequent contact with the chairman of the Milk Marketing Board but I have no specific plans for a meeting at present.

When my right hon. Friend next meets the chairman, will he discuss the arrangements that were recently agreed in Brussels? Does he accept that the butter subsidy and the arrangements for increased payments to milk producers have acted as a direct stimulus to domestic production and have been much welcomed, for example, in my constituency of Cheshire? Will he discuss with the chairman the arrangements that will be entered into after the sheep-meat and potato agreements have been finalised, when there will be a threat from imported milk? Will he—

Order. The hon. Member has asked three supplementary questions. Hon. Members should confine themselves to one supplementary question, and I hope that future questions will be briefer.

I am grateful to my hon. Friend. We have given help to the problems of the Milk Marketing Board. As to future pressures on the board after current agreements, I am glad to be able to say that we expect the regulations concerning the board to be approved within the next few days.

Is the Minister aware that more than 1,000 dairy producers will be leaving the industry in Wales at the end of the month? Can he give us an assurance that he will safe- guard the interests of the efficient dairy producers in this country by persuading his counterparts in Europe to reform the CAP so that efficient dairy producers in this country are not subsidising the inefficient producers in Europe?

Yes. That is a basic element of our approach to the CAP, particularly in regard to the problems of milk producers. That is why I rejected the Commission's proposals on the co-responsibility levy.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that his stand against the Commission's proposals on the co-responsibility levy was widely welcomed throughout the dairy industry and will contribute to a significant increase in confidence in the industry?

It was vital for British dairy producers and for British agriculture as a whole that a scheme which positively discriminated against this country should be avoided.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food whether he will publish his proposals for the radical reform of the common agricultural policy.

Improvements in the CAP will have to be pursued as opportunity offers in negotiation with other member States. But I shall of course keep the House informed of progress.

Will my right hon. Friend be good enough to reaffirm that it is the firm intention of the Government to insist upon a radical reform of the CAP?

Yes. The two biggest problems in the policy are surpluses in milk and sugar. The autumn months will be very much taken up by the Commission's proposals for trying to reduce the substantial sugar quota which is in operation. If we can tackle those matters effectively, we shall bring about a transformation over the coming period.

Is the Minister aware that I checked with Sainsbury's about the price of butter this morning and was told that the reduction was 2p or 3p a pound? Is he sure that he is not misleading the House?

I am certain. Prices in all the stores were checked this morning. English butter at Sainsbury's is down by 6p a pound. I can give the right hon. Gentleman the exact prices for half a pound of butter. English butter at Sainsbury's was 36½p on the date on which the subsidy came in, and it is now 33½p.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that over the past few years we have had some very good years for wine, and that this year looks as though it will also be a very good one for wine? That will produce lakes from our Community partners. What steps is the right hon. Gentleman taking to ensure that the producers of industrial alcohol in this country are protected from the EEC regulations that allow wine growers to spill over into the industrial sector and affect employment and downstream products in the United Kingdom?

The point made by the hon. Gentleman is of immense importance to British industry and a number of constituencies. On the agenda for the September meeting of the Council is a regime not just for wine but for the whole alcohol industry. Obviously I shall be looking after the interests of British companies in those negotiations.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he will estimate the increases in EEC structural surpluses, product by product, as a result of the recent decision on common agricultural prices.

The average increase in agricultural prices is far below the general level of cost increases, and should not add to EEC surpluses.

Is the Minister aware that that was a very evasive reply and perhaps indicates that he and his right hon. Friend are not yet fully aware of the effect that the latest price increases will have on structural surpluses? Does the Minister accept that if he and his colleagues mean what they say about a radical restructuring of the CAP, a price freeze later this year, and certainly next year, should be the first step in that direction?

The hon. Gentleman has forgotten that there was a price freeze on the commodity that is most in surplus. The overall price increase of 1·2 per cent. is far below any increase under the previous Government. In that respect we have demonstrated that we are prepared to tackle the problem at the root for the first time.

Will my hon. Friend bear in mind that surpluses can be misleading, and will he explain to Labour Members that they need to be looked at in terms of weeks' supply? Will my hon. Friend bear in mind that beef production is down and there could be a shortage? Will he continue to protect the consumer by encouraging home production?

I endorse what my hon. Friend has said. If we take the example of cereals, the surplus over recent years has varied from as much as seven weeks' supply to as little as one week's supply. If stocks fall below one week's supply there is great danger that the consumer will suffer, through high prices.

Will the Minister tell us the size of the beet sugar mountain, and will he make sure that that mountain will not be used to imperil the future of cane sugar imports to this country and our cane refineries?

One of the problems with beet sugar is that decisions on this year's prices were not taken until the crop was in the ground. We should like to have seen action on quotas, and we intend to follow that through, as we have said publicly, in the autumn. I am aware of the hon. Gentleman's interest in cane sugar and he knows that, under the agreement, we are continuing imports from ACP countries.

Is the Minister aware that there appears to be a difference of opinion between the view expressed by his right hon. Friend that the new deal on farm prices, whatever it may do to surpluses, will at least reduce the British contribution to the EEC budget and the view of others, including, I understand, the Commission, that it will increase our contribution? If his right hon. Friend is so certain that he is right, will the Minister ask him to undertake to resign if he turns out to be wrong?

I can say categorically that the price package that we achieved will reduce the net contribution of the United Kingdom by about £30 million. I know that that may be unpalatable to the hon. Gentleman, but facts are unapalatable sometimes.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food when he intends next to meet the president of the National Farmers Union.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food when he will meet next the president of the National Farmers Union.

I meet the president of the National Farmers Union frequently, but have no specific plans at present for a further meeting.

When my right hon. Friend next meets the president, will he welcome the firm rejection by the Northfield committee of land nationalisation on agricultural grounds—something which, on successive occasions, his predecessor was never able or willing to do? Will he further consider, not necessarily following the Northfield committee's proposals on the subject, giving young people a start in farming? What is his approach to that matter?

Obviously I welcome the Northfield report. One expected that a group of people looking at the problem intelligently would conclude that the nationalisation of land was not the answer. The second part of my hon. Friend's question is a matter that we are considering. We are looking at the recommendations of the Northfield committee and having talks with the NFU and others about how we can improve the potentialities for young people entering the industry.

Is my right hon. Friend confident that, in view of the recent 5 per cent. devaluation and the increase in the value of the pound, he will be able, when he next meets Mr. Butler, to establish common ground that there is a basis for a real expansion in British agricultural production?

The farming community generally has welcomed the fact that the considerable disadvantage that it worked under in recent years has been removed.

Will the right hon. Gentleman turn his mind to the problems of the pig producing industry? There has been an improvement in regard to competition, but what he tried to achieve in his last negotiations did not help the pig producing industry to the full extent. What will he do to ensure that there is parity of competition?

I know that the hon. Gentleman is concerned about this problem. I am pleased that, at least in principle, there is some agreement about the future of Lawson's. I hope that it succeeds. That agreement has been helped by the fact that we achieved a devaluation on pigmeat. The difference now in terms of MCAs is very small. I believe that the best way to try to help the industry is to do everything that we can to improve its marketing and processing side.

When my right hon. Friend meets the president of the NFU, will he discuss with him the problems and plight of the hill and upland farmers after the last severe winter, when they had severe stock losses and high costs? Will he undertake that when the June returns come in he will look at the position of those farmers yet again and discuss it with them?

Yes, Sir. I think that the position is serious. We announced last week that the additional subsidy for hill sheep proposed by my predecessor is immediately coming into operation. Beyond that, we guarantee that in October, when we know the results of the autumn sales and have had the result of the census, we shall sit down with the farming unions and agree what is required on the basis of the known facts, in order to restore herds to their former levels and see that prosperity continues in the hills.

When the right hon. Gentleman next meets Mr. Butler, will he discuss with him the Conservative Party s commitment in its manifesto to make British farmers competitive with those in the rest of the EEC? Will he confirm to the House that since the last devaluation took British farm prices from their existing levels half the way to those in the EEC he is committed to bringing them to parity in the next devaluation or soon after, and that that would substantially increase prices in this country?

I find it remarkable that members of a party that, when it devalued by 5 per cent., made great play of the fact that that increased the retail price index by only one-fifth of 1 per cent., make such complaint about something that brings many jobs and a great deal of prosperity to British agriculture.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food when he will meet next Commissioner Gundelach of the European Economic Community.

On 23–24 July, when I attend the Agricultural Council.

Will my right hon. Friend take that opportunity to discuss with the Commissioner the whole question of the sheepmeat regime, and in particular the entry into Europe of British-produced lamb and mutton?

Yes, Sir. There will probably be on the agenda of the July meeting a discussion about the sheepmeat regime. The principle that I made clear to the Commissioner, and shall make clear to the Council if necessary, is that we shall not put up with any regime that continues the current discrimination against the exports of British sheep.

Will the Minister ask Mr. Gundelach what has become of the survey that he, Mr. Gundelach, set in motion on the culling of grey seals? Will the right hon. Gentleman undertake to report to the House on the matter before December, when the problem arises again?

Yes, Sir.

Does the Minister agree that unless he can persuade the Commissioner to reform the common agricultural policy within the next two years, it may disintegrate within five?

I think that at present the common agricultural policy is under considerable strain. This year there will be throughout Europe a rapid increase in costs, and there will still be vast sur- pluses, which means that the matter must be tackled in a way that causes a great deal of difficulty for many member States. Therefore, it is a testing year for the CAP.

Now that Herr Ertl in Germany and other German politicians seem to be more reasonable on the question of agricultural surpluses, will my right hon. Friend encourage the Commission in its attempts to do something about chronic surpluses, instead of simply waiting for next year's price review, which would be the obvious temptation after the latest package?

The Commission has guaranteed that it will be putting forward its proposals for the sugar regime in the early autumn months. That will give us time to tackle that matter. I welcome the tone of the pronouncements from West Germany, and I shall endeavour to follow up these matters in talks that I hope to have with Herr Ertl in the near future.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that while it is true that the butter subsidy and the school milk subsidy will offset the effect of this year's settlement on the British contribution for the current year, and while he was right to resist the discriminatory milk levy, the failure to replace that levy with alternative measures and the failure to cut the sugar beet quota can lead only to a further increase in the production of two commodities which are already in massive structural surplus? Does the Minister accept that, notwithstanding what the Prime Minister may achieve in relation to the British contribution in the autumn, there is no substitute for policies that will cut those surpluses in the long term?

I share the hon. Gentleman's view about the importance of the cut in the sugar quota. I supported such a cut in this year's price negotiations, but the Commission decided not to press it. Having negotiated there, the hon. Gentleman will know that if the Commission does not put the proposal there is no way in which it can be accepted. We are due to tackle that matter in the early autumn.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he has any plans to meet the chairman of the Meat and Livestock Commission.

I met the chairman on 14 June and 26 June.

When my hon. Friend next meets the chairman of the MLC, will he urge that due attention be paid to the valuable work done by the meat promotion executive? I must declare an interest, in that I was a member of that executive right up until the election.

I certainly endorse the work of the MLC, through the meat promotion executive. Any work of that nature which can bring to the notice of a wider public the high quality and good value of British-produced meat is well worth while, and I support it.

When the Minister next meets the chairman, will he reflect on the numerous statements by Conservative spokesmen before the election that they would do more for the hard-pressed hill livestock producers? Will he explain to the MLC, the House and the farmers why his Government have done nothing to help the hill livestock producers in the Government's recent decision on compensatory allowances for hill livestock?

We did exactly what the hon. Gentleman's Government proposed to do. If he was dissatisfied with that, why did he not say so earlier?

When he next meets the chairman of the MLC, will my hon. Friend discuss with him the shortage of abattoirs as a result of closures, such as the closure of the Scunthorpe abattoir, which is resulting in the import of large amounts of processed meat?

I had a meeting with the Association of British Abattoir Owners only this morning, so I am very much aware of the industry's problems and concerns. I am considering these very carefully.

When the Minister next meets the MLC, will he draw its attention to the BBC programme " World About Us ", which showed animals, particularly poultry and pigs, being kept in disgusting, atrocious and inhumane conditions? Will he discuss ways and means of ending that form of factory farming and perhaps having food labelled to show whether it is produced in factory farms or on free-range farms?

The hon. Gentleman's question is not the direct responsibility of the Meat and Livestock Commission. I think that there is a later question on the Order Paper about animal welfare generally. So far as there may be an interest in that direction, I shall certainly discuss it at my next meeting with the chairman.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what discussions he has had in connection with alleviating the burden of capital transfer tax on agricultural land.

My hon. Friend will be aware that my right hon. and learned Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer announced in his Budget Statement that he would be instituting a review of the capital taxation system with a view to making it simpler and less oppressive. Clearly, one of the issues to be considered in this review is the impact of capital transfer tax on agricultural land.

As a farmer, I naturally welcome the message from my right hon. and learned Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer. However, land ownership is still vulnerable to a future Government who may seek to launch a dogmatic attack on land ownership; a Government who are not sympathetic to the needs of agriculture. Inflation has had—[HON. MEMBERS: " Question."]

Order. The hon. Gentleman is addressing the House. He should ask a question. Moreover, the Minister is not responsible for future Governments.

My question to my hon. Friend is this, Mr. Speaker: will he seek to change the nature of capital taxation in order to prevent the break-up in the future of family farming units which have done so much for this country in the past?

I am sure that my right hon. Friend will take heed of what my hon. Friend has said. My hon. Friend should appreciate that both the National Farmers Union and the Country Landowners Association are putting such points to us, and through us to my right hon. and learned Friend the Chancellor.

Does the Minister appreciate that one problem of French farming is the small farm unit? If action is not taken on capital transfer tax, we shall have the same problem in this country. Will he do something to keep the family farm, which is so important?

I appreciate the problems of fragmentation. My right hon. Friend is looking into this matter of taxation and farm structure. He will bear my hon. Friend's points in mind.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what effect the recent conclusions on milk prices will have on structural surpluses in the EEC; and what effect he expects this to have on the British dairy industry.

The freeze on EEC support prices for milk, which I negotiated as part of this year's CAP price package, is an important step towards discouraging the increasingly costly overproduction of milk in the Community. The rejection of an increased co-responsibility levy, and the 5 per cent. green pound devaluation, should permit efficient producers in the United Kingdom to maintain their competitive position.

Does the right hon. Gentleman realise that in spite of what he keeps saying in the press and in this House the dairy farmers of this country are greatly disturbed that nothing is being done to reduce the surplus of milk in the EEC? Is he not aware that this will cause great harm to milk producers in this country, especially to small farmers? Will he take further action on the matter?

This has been the position for several years. For the first time, we have achieved a freeze on the price of milk.

Is the Minister aware of the tremendous swindle occurring within the EEC, and outside, in dairy products that are sold at giveaway prices to countries outside the EEC and then come back into the EEC at top EEC prices? Will he take steps, through the EEC, to stop this sort of swindle and to stop the waste of British taxpayers' money that is being used to pay for this swindle?

If details of any such arrangements come to the attention of the hon. Gentleman and he sends them to me, we shall immediately send them to the Commission.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food when he intends next to meet representatives of the fishing industry.

I keep in close touch with representatives of all sectors of the British fishing industry.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that fishermen in my constituency feel that they are facing constant battles over net sizes, over-fishing and the exploration activities of oil companies and pollution? Is he aware that the Wessex water authority wishes to site a sewage outfall in Christchurch Bay? Will he give fishermen in my constituency, and fishermen around the country, the assurance that they will be consulted not only by his Department but by others before decisions are taken which adversely affect their lives?

Yes, Sir. I know that mesh sizes have caused problems in the industry. We met representatives of every type of fisherman in the country, including representatives of fishermen in my hon. Friend's constituency. They considered that our policy was right. I am aware of the specific problems that my hon. Friend has experienced over oil pollution. Again, the Department acted speedily on that matter, to the benefit of his fishermen.

Will the right hon. Gentleman give an assurance that he will give the same special attention this year to the needs of the Mourne fisheries as his predecessor did last year?

I certainly give an assurance that we shall look into the problems connected with the fishermen. I recognise the importance of this fishery to the fishermen concerned. We shall look into this matter and discuss it with the right hon. Gentleman before making any decisions.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that fishermen are looking to the Government to maintain the same robust attitude as that shown by the Minister of Agriculture in the previous Administration? Failing agreement on fishing, the answer is for the Government to take unilateral action.

Yes, Sir. That is why we took unilateral action on conservation on 1 July. There is no disagreement between the parties. The right hon. Member for Deptford (Mr. Silkin), who was the Minister in the previous Administration, said that it was a great help to him in his negotiations to have the whole of Parliament united on this issue. I believe that the whole of Parliament remains united on this issue.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that some of the fishermen in my constituency are experiencing difficulty in obtaining fuel supplies? Will he have discussions with the Secretary of State for Energy to make sure that their needs, which are important in relation to fish supplies, are met?

If the fishermen in my hon. Friend's constituency have a specific problem they should contact my regional office, which will do its best to solve the problem.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the only matter dominating the minds of the deepsea fishing fleet in Hull is where it can fish? The right hon. Gentleman will know that we are barred from fishing in the North Atlantic. Can he put before Mr. Gundelach, or the House, any suggestion of where we can find outlets for fishing?

I recognise the real problem that has existed for the long-distance fishing fleet for some time. One of the reasons why we are anxious to reach a sensible and acceptable agreement is that this could open third areas, with the Common Market, to the benefit of our fishermen. It is important to get a basic agreement that makes sense for our fishing industry.

Will my right hon. Friend pay attention to the problems being caused to the prawn fishermen in the Moray Firth due to the 50 per cent. by-catch regulation?

I shall certainly look into the question.

Is it not likely that there will be a Council of Fisheries Ministers meeting during the recess and that this is probably the last opportunity for the Minister to give the House the assurance that it wants? Will he assure the House that he will fight for conservation and proper adequate resources for protection, and that he will try to obtain the fair share that we want in the Common Market pool, the 12-mile exclusive zone, so that we can get dominant preference in the 12- to 50-mile belt?

I can give the assurance that the principles that I have related to the House stand firmly as the principles that we want to achieve in a fishing agreement. We shall do all that we can to achieve them. It will be difficult to reach such an agreement, but we are totally united on both sides of the House. It is essential to the fishermen that we reach agreement.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what consultations he has had in the International Whaling Commission with the Governments of countries involved in commercial whaling.

When I opened the International Whaling Commission meeting on Monday I announced the Government's decision to support a moratorium on commercial whaling and to obtain a ban on the import of sperm whale oil. The meeting of the Commission is still continuing but I am glad to report to the House that so far it has been agreed that commercial whaling, except for minke whales, by factory ships should cease.

Is the Minister aware that some of his remarks will be most welcome but that a great deal of concern still exists about the senseless slaughter of whales? Will he explain why he is not willing to press for an immediate ban on the import of sperm whale oil into this country? Will he give an assurance that he is not giving way to pressure from other Ministers on this issue?

On the hon. Gentleman's first point, we do not believe that the ban so far agreed goes far enough. We believe that minke whales should have been included in the moratorium. We shall continue pressing for that step to be adopted. On the question of the import of sperm whale oil, we believe that action must be effective on a wide basis. If we can get the agreement of our European partners for a ban on imports throughout the Community, that will obviously be more effective than a ban imposed only by ourselves. My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Trade has already initiated proceedings in this direction in Brussels this week.

Is it not true that the United States has already banned imports of sperm whale oil and has found adequate alternatives?

To be fair, substitutes have not yet been developed for all needs. Far more effective than banning imports, which we are proposing to do in any case, is to stop the hunting of sperm whales. It is that moratorium that has been agreed at the International Whaling Commission this week. That far transcends anything else. None the less, I give my hon. Friend and the House the assurance that we shall continue to pursue this question of the ban on imports of sperm whale oil.

Is it not true that pirate whalers are one of the biggest problems? What are the Minister's plans to deal with them?

The hon. Gentleman is right. About 10 per cent. of the whales caught are caught by ships of nations that are not members of the International Whaling Commission. This gives us great cause for concern. Whaling nations such as Japan are banning imports of whale derivatives from these. I have asked my advisers to examine the legalities to see what we can do to help.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food how much sugar is stockpiled in the United Kingdom.

As an insurance against shortage sugar producers are required, under EEC regulations, to maintain minimum stocks equal to 10 per cent. of production. At the end of May this stockholding requirement was about 220,000 tonnes. This is in addition to the Government emergency stocks.

Will the hon. Gentleman confirm that the United Kingdom stockpile is only a part of the enormous EEC stockpile of over 3 million tonnes? Does he agree that if market forces were applied to the sugar sector the EEC mountains would be reduced and the price of sugar for the housewife would come down?

There is no sugar in intervention in the United Kingdom. We believe that more drastic action has to be taken to control sugar surpluses in Europe generally and that that is best done through the quota system. We shall be working towards that end in the autumn.

Will my hon. Friend bear in mind the importance of the sugar beet industry to the whole of East Anglia not only from the farming point of view but in terms of employment in factories, in the haulage industry and on the farms?

I acknowledge what my hon. Friend says. Sugar beet is an important agricultural commodity in the United Kingdom. It is especially important in specific areas such as the one that my hon. Friend represents. In our discussions in Europe we shall bear in mind the interests of our producers.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that there has been a positive increase in the cultivation of sugar beet in the Community and that that will undoubtedly damage the long-term interests of cane sugar producers with whom we have associate agreements?

The hon. Lady probably knows that the agreement to import from ACP countries has been taken over by the Commission and that it is maintaining those imports.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what further action is proposed to reduce the cost of the EEC common agricultural policy to the consumer in the United Kingdom.

I will continue to work for measures such as those agreed in the recent price negotiations which represent the best ever outcome for United Kingdom consumers.

As 70 nor cent. of the expenditure of the EEC is on the common agricultural policy at the expense of British consumers and taxpayers, what effort will be made to reduce that amount, especially when the Government are considering cutting back on school milk and school meals but increasing public expenditure to subsidise Bavarian and French farmers?

I agree that it is urgently necessary to try to tackle the vast CAP budget. During the period of office of the previous Government it increased from £1·6 billion to £6·6 billion. That is what we inherited. The price freeze on milk is the first major step to try to reverse that trend.

Will my right hon. Friend indicate what proposals the president of the National Farmers Union has brought to his attention and that of the Government to bring about more efficient agriculture in the EEC, which will be of benefit to not only the consumer but the farmer and will guarantee a secure supply of food in the long term, which I am sure is my right hon. Friend's objective?

There is a large range of measures, and we are constantly in touch with the agriculture industry, including the National Farmers Union. We intend to try to be constructive. Our farmers are relieved that at last they have the scope to be more productive and that they are not at an unfair disadvantage compared with their competitors.

The right hon. Gentleman talks about the radical proposals that he and the Government intend to endeavour to obtain from the Common Market countries. What will he do if he is not successful?

Unlike the hon. Gentleman, I do not enter into negotiations with the idea of not being successful.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what is his policy towards the current British Poultry Federation scheme for the implementation of the poultry meat hygiene regulations; and if it favours the continuance of this scheme.

I welcome the scheme which the British Poultry Federation and local authorities have operated for setting up the poultry meat inspection service. This is essentially a matter between the British Poultry Federation and the local authorities but I should be happy to see its continuation.

May I take it that the Minister means that the Government will continue to pay half of the cost of implementing the scheme? If the Government do not intend to do that, is he aware that that will make the British poultry industry uncompetitive with the rest of Europe? Will he bear in mind that other European countries pay at least half if not the whole cost of the scheme?

I understand that the relative inspection schemes in the various countries are difficult to compare. The industry's application for continuing assistance is currently under consideration.

asked the Prime Minister when she expects next to meet the TUC.

No dates have yet been arranged.

Is the right hon. Lady aware that, in the light of the deflationary oil price rise, her emphasis again yesterday on strict monetary targets as a top priority is an exact replica internationally of 1930s beggar-my-neighbour deflation? Does she not understand that that is the exact opposite of what is needed, which is to expand the economy plus a planned growth of imports, which with the present under-usage of men and machinery would not be inflationary?

Unless we tackle the money supply problem there is no hope of beating inflation in future years. On that at least the former Chancellor of the Exchequer was with me rather than with the hon. Gentleman.

When my right hon. Friend next meets the Trades Union Congress and its leaders, will she advise them that she does not believe it democratic for bodies representing workers to indulge in party political strikes, and that it is the view of Her Majesty's Government that in any strike action the Government will assume, and will introduce legislation to assume, that the trade union movement will pay the families of strikers a certain sum per week so that the long-suffering taxpayer does not have to subsidise official political action?

We have no immediate plans for legislation on that matter. Our immediate plans are for legislation on the matters contained in the consultative document. I think that most people will agree with my hon. Friend that the function of trade unions is to look after the interests of their members and not to engage in politics.

Now that Britain practises the toughest immigration controls anywhere in the world, when the right hon. Lady meets trade union leaders next week, will she reassure them that their complaints about the deportation of trade unionists from this country, many of whom have worked consistently here for many years and who are now being deported, will be heeded and that she will give to those trade unionists the same compassion that she is asking to be given to refugees who are entering the United Kingdom?

I do not accept that Britain operates the toughest immigration controls anywhere in the world. If the hon. Gentleman is referring to cases of which I know nothing, perhaps he will let me have details.

If when my right hon. Friend next meets the leaders of the TUC they make it plain that they will offer outright opposition to the Government's industrial relations proposals, will she draw their attention to the recent ORC poll which indicated that a majority of trade union leaders and Labour Party supporters would support the Government against the trade unions if they frustrated reform? Does she believe that the majority of trade union members support her proposals because they represent an extension of individual worker rights?

I do not believe that the TUC leaders will offer outright opposition to the proposals that we put to them. Those proposals received a wide welcome. They will help to improve the individual's rights, sometimes against the trade union itself. We carried out the widest possible consultation on these matters in the recent election.

asked the Prime Minister when next she plans to meet the TUC.

I refer the hon. Member to the reply which I have just given.

How can the right hon. Lady ask ordinary trade unionists for wage restraint, as she did last weekend, when the Minister of State, Treasury admitted that 30 per cent. of income tax reliefs in the Budget would go to the richest 5 per cent. of the population?

That leaves 70 per cent. to go to the rest. [Interruption]

Order. The House is being unreasonable. Hon. Members must listen to the answers.

Taxation reliefs cannot go to those who do not pay tax. Greater reliefs are bound to go to those who pay the most tax.

When my right hon. Friend next meets the leaders of the TUC, will she point out to them that while a wages-prices spiral is different from an inflationary problem and requires a different response, neither will be solved without a substantial increase in productivity?

I totally agree with my hon. Friend. The best way to get increases in real wages is to get real increases in output.

When the Prime Minister discusses with the TUC the question of her election mandate and election commitments, about which she feels strongly, will she make it clear whether the election commitments entered into by individual members of the Shadow Cabinet will be honoured regardless of whether those individuals now occupy places in the Cabinet?

We shall try to honour each and every commitment in our election manifesto.

asked the Prime Minister whether she will list her official engagements for 12 July.

This morning I presided at a meeting of the Cabinet. In addition to duties in this House I shall have further meetings with ministerial colleagues and others, including one with the Secretary General of the United Nations, Dr. Kurt Waldheim.

Will my right hon. Friend confirm the report in The Guardian today that before the end of the summer the Government plan to introduce a standard of living index? Would not such an index give a much fairer and more accurate assessment of the effects of the Budget on average families? Would it not also demonstrate that the claim made by Moss Evans yesterday, that pay negotiations would need to take the retail price index as the starting point, was bogus and unwarranted?

Alongside the present retail price index we are planning to introduce a standard of living index, which will give a much more accurate reflection of the direct tax reductions that have been made. After all, the tax that one pays is the price for education, roads, defence, and so on. When that price goes down, the reduction should be included in the retail price index. Unfortunately, it is not.

Will the Prime Minister find time today to discuss with Scottish Members of Parliament their concern about the dispersal of Civil Service jobs to Scotland? Will she accept that if she reneges on the long-standing promise of two previous Governments there will be a resurgence of nationalism in Scotland, and that the Scottish Tories will suffer most from that?

I have received a number of representations on this matter from my Scottish colleagues. The dispersal programme is under review. I have no statement to make about it.

asked the Prime Minister if she will appoint a Minister of Cabinet rank with specific responsibility for the overall co-ordination of science policy.

I do not consider that such an appointment is necessary. There is already full consultation between the Ministers and Departments concerned.

Although all Members of Parliament assume that my right hon. Friend's sympathies are with the importance of science, is she aware that within the OECD area there are 10 countries which appoint a Minister of Cabinet rank with specific responsibility for science and technology? Is she further aware that if we are to meet our energy aims and ambitions, that will depend entirely upon the scientific and technological community? Can she give it some encouragement that the Government agree with that view?

The person who has most responsibility for the future of science and technology is my right hon. and learned Friend the Secretary of State for Education and Science. There is a junior Minister who is responsible for science education. I do not think that it would be an advance to appoint a specific Minister for science and technology. Attention to scientific and technological matters should run through each and every Department, and should not be allocated to one specific Department.

Reverting to the question of science, will the Prime Minister say where and when she received a mandate for the figures revealed today which show that a housewife who paid £25 last month for her groceries now pays £28·25?

Order. That comes under the open type of question. That is stretching imagination beyond even what a Welshman can take.

asked the Prime Minister what are her official engagements for 12 July.

I refer the hon. Member to the reply which I gave earlier.

Will the Prime Minister find time today to consider the report of the Royal Commission on the distribution of income and wealth, which points out that the richest 5 per cent. of the population own almost three-quarters of the land in this country? Will the Prime Minister also consider the recommendation of the Northfield committee to extend the public ownership of land and introduce a comprehensive register of land ownership, which would reveal that the Conservative Party chairman owns 44,000 acres of land in Scotland, but that he is a mere pauper compared with the Duke of Buccleuch, who owns more than 250,000 acres of land?

The report of the Royal Commission on the distribution of income and wealth refers to the distribution of wealth in the life- time of the Labour Government. I trust that wealth will be much more widely distributed when the Conservative policy of selling council houses has taken effect. It will make many people property owners for the first time in their lives.

Will the Prime Minister say how it is possible to sell council houses when people cannot obtain mortgages?

Is it not beyond the financial wit of man to transfer the payments which the local authorities make to the tenants to make as mortgage repayments, instead of as rent.

Will my right hon. Friend consider today what action might be taken under the law in respect of a recent television programme that gave great offence to Members of Parliament on both sides of the House and people outside, namely, the interview with the alleged assassin of our late colleague Mr. Airey Neave?

My right hon. and learned Friend the Attorney-General is considering the matter raised by my right hon. Friend. Having seen the transcript of the programme, I am appalled that it was ever transmitted. I believe that it reflects gravely upon the judgment of the BBC and those responsible for the decision.

Does the Prime Minister recall that several weeks ago I wrote to her about an order for 77 Chieftain tanks at Vickers works at Ellesmere? Is she aware that, following the closure of the Scotswood works in my constituency, with the loss of 750 jobs, there is grave anxiety in the area? Will she take a few minutes off from her busy programme today to have words with her right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Defence so that a decision may be made on the contract?

I know the hon. Gentleman's concern. No decision has yet been reached on that matter. As the hon. Gentleman knows, we are seeking further orders to replace those that we lost from Iran.