To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what measures he proposes to improve the welfare of battery hens.

Regulations implementing directive 88/166 setting out minimum standards for the welfare of laying hens kept in battery cages will come fully into force on 1 January 1995.

Notwithstanding that reply, does the Minister agree that a comprehensive labelling system might be better for birds than those regulations? There is a great deal of misleading information in our shops about farm fresh or country fresh eggs. Would the welfare of battery hens not be improved if the shopper knew the exact origin of the eggs that he was buying?

We believe that it is important that the consumer is not misled in any way. We shall continue to monitor carefully any claims made on egg packaging.

Is my hon. Friend aware that many poultry farmers feel that we are applying the new regulations on cage sizes for battery hens much more stringently than our European partners? Why is it that we always seem to abide by the rules while our so-called partners appear not to do so?

I can assure my hon. Friend that the welfare of battery hens is of paramount importance. We have pressed for much higher standards, particularly in respect of cage sizes, which will apply, for example, to cages containing fewer than three birds. Therefore, although I sympathise with my hon. Friend's claim that other countries do not keep to the rules, we do, and we want to bring their standards up to our extremely high levels.

Does the Minister agree that it is not enough just to monitor the labelling of eggs? Is she aware that the National Opinion Poll organisation found that 34 per cent. of consumers thought that eggs labelled "farm fresh" were free range when they were, in fact, battery eggs? Does she agree that it should not be left to the Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals to introduce schemes such as the "Freedom Food" scheme, excellent though it is? We need less monitoring and more action.

I was discussing this matter with the industry only this week. It, too, is aware of the problem and is anxious to show the consumer that claims made on packaging are true and to ensure that the consumer is correctly informed. I assure the hon. Gentleman that we shall continue to monitor the matter carefully.

Will my hon. Friend continue to try to raise standards of welfare for battery hens in Europe while bearing it in mind that we are operating within a single market? Will she ensure that the Government do not introduce unilateral new regulations which would undermine our competitiveness?

Yes, I can assure my hon. Friend of that, but she will be aware that the directive which I mentioned requires the Community to review its detail. We shall be asking specifically for significantly increased cage sizes and for the enrichment of cages by means of perches and scratching bars. We shall also ask for the regulations to pay particular attention to the welfare of laying hens which are not necessarily battery hens.

To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food when his Ministry's new office at King's Pool, York, will open; and how many staff will be recruited from the York area to work there.

The new offices at King's Pool opened on schedule on 10 October 1994. Around 250 local staff now work in these offices.

I am told by the personnel department at King's Pool that it is well pleased with the quality of the staff whom it has recruited locally. In just over a year, the Ministry will be recruiting staff for the central science laboratory at Sand Hutton just outside York. How many local staff does the Minister expect to recruit then, and will the Ministry again give priority to providing jobs for other civil servants, principally those from the Ministry of Defence, who are being made redundant in north Yorkshire?

The Ministry is, indeed, extremely pleased with the quality of people, which may surprise the hon. Gentleman. The estimate is that between 150 and 250 locally employed staff will be needed at the central science laboratory when it is completed in 1996, if it is still relevant then. As in the case of the development in the hon. Gentleman's constituency, we will see whether we can employ people, particularly from the Ministry of Defence, in the area where we have taken on a number of people—about 100, I think.

I commend the ancient northern capital to my right hon. Friend, as my wife was at university there. Will he ensure that his Department's officials, wherever they are located, work hard in conjunction with those in the Department of the Environment on studying where the next generation of farmers will come from, particularly as so many present farmers are near retirement and many sons and daughters—

Order. Perhaps the hon. Gentleman will explain to me—but later—how that refers to the area of York. It was a good try, but even in the season of good will, I cannot allow that.

I am referring to the work of officials situated at York.

The hon. Gentleman might make that clear at the beginning. We are not terribly interested where his wife was educated, provided that she was educated.

I am grateful to you, Madam Speaker.

My officials based in York and elsewhere will, of course, take those matters seriously. I can assure my hon. Friend that the strength of the young farmers clubs in the area of York means that there is a supply of good farmers coming from that neighbourhood.

To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food when he plans to lay before Parliament the final version of the infant formula and follow-on formula regulations.

We hope to lay these regulations shortly.

Is my hon. Friend aware that the continuing delay is causing grave uncertainty for companies such as Cow and Gate in my constituency? Can she at least give them some reassurance that when the regulations are laid before Parliament, they will contain none of the ludicrous over-regulation contained in the draft regulations last year, in particular a proposed ban on the marketing and advertising of baby milk, which would deprive millions of mothers of the right to choose how to feed and bring up their children?

I am aware of my hon. Friend's interest in this subject, particularly as he raised it in an Adjournment debate in April. I can assure him that we have received a wide range of submissions, both for and against. That is why there has been a delay; we really do need to consider them all carefully. I hope that it will not be too long before we are able to give him a decision, but I can assure him that all the points that he has raised today are being taken into consideration.

Will the Minister not be persuaded by the arguments of commercial interests, many of which are profit hungry, and remember that all the studies prove that the best, the most effective and the healthiest way in which to feed infants is the natural way?

The hon. Gentleman will be aware that there are already some voluntary restrictions in that area. Although, of course, we would not disagree with his suggestion that breast milk is the most favourable method, we are aware that there are mothers who unfortunately cannot breast feed, and I would not wish from the Dispatch Box to make them feel that they were under some pressure in that area. All views will be taken into account.

To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what actions he took on apple day to help the apple industry.

To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what steps are being taken to encourage British shops to sell British apples, in place of foreign imports.

On apple day and at the Marden fruit show, as on other occasions, I have taken part in initiatives to promote British apples in order to assist their greater sale.

My hon. Friend will agree that British apples are among the best in the world, particularly the Bramley apple, which comes from Southwell in Nottinghamshire. Will he consider mounting a national apple pie competition, of pies made with Bramley apples, so that those who do not understand how good those apples are and how scrumptious are apple pies made with them can do so?

My hon. Friend, who comes from Nottingham, the home of the Bramley apple, is entirely in apple pie order. At the start of the promotion of Bramley apples this year, I took part in an apple pie-making activity and will certainly commend his very excellent idea to those in English apples and pears who do such a marvellous job in promoting our excellent apples.

Does my hon. Friend accept that, although it is welcome, the awarding of grants for the grubbing out of redundant orchards has not yet tackled the problem? Will he urge the Commission to put into effect its current proposal to reduce the intervention price of apples? Furthermore, does he agree that French Golden Delicious, which have invaded our shores, are—being French—tasteless, and are neither golden nor delicious? [HON. MEMBERS: "Super!"] Does he agree that English Coxes are the best?

I certainly agree with the findings of my hon. Friend's discerning palate, and not with the somewhat disparaging cry of "Super!" from Opposition Members.

In his pursuit of British apples, will the Minister also not discriminate against English rhubarb? Will he set up a rhubarb day involving rhubarb pie, and take to making that dish?

The hon. Gentleman may not be aware that I grew up in Yorkshire, and know a good bit of Wakefield rhubarb when I see it. Last year, my hon. Friend the Member for Crawley (Mr. Soames) received a delegation of rhubarb growers, and he has done his best to promote that excellent vegetable—and, indeed, not to talk rhubarb.

The Minister will remember one of the finest slogans ever used—"An apple a day keeps the doctor away". I have been eating apples in order to lose four stone, and I can recommend them as part of a healthy diet. We should do everything possible to help the British apple, because—as the hon. Member for Milton Keynes, North-East (Mr. Butler) said—they are some of the finest apples produced in the world.

I am delighted that the English apple industry has contributed to the hon. Gentleman's robust and healthy looks. He is absolutely right: the potential for more fruit consumption, which is mentioned in a recently published report by the Committee on Medical Aspects of Food Policy, shows just what can be done. Fruit consumption in this country is too low, but with the hon. Gentleman as an advertisement I am sure that more will be eaten.

To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what plans he has for the further reform of the common agricultural policy.

To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what plans he has to reform the common agricultural policy.

To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he will make a statement about his policy group on the reform of the CAP.

I meet my European colleagues regularly to discuss all aspects of the common agricultural policy, including current proposals for the reform of those sectors not covered by the 1992 reform agreement, such as wine. However, in the long term, we will need a more fundamental reform. On 6 December, I announced the names of a group of independent experts who will help the Department and me to develop our thinking.

I thank my right hon. Friend for his reply. Is he aware that the Leader of the Opposition has said that he will never allow this country to become isolated in Europe? Does he agree that there are times when we must stand apart, be independent and fight for Britain's interests?

My hon. Friend gives a wise example. Although some voices in the European Community are beginning to support us in regard to fundamental reform of the CAP, for a long time we were alone in arguing for it. In that instance, Britain was right to be alone. The argument that we should never be isolated is very foolish, and would often lead to decisions that were not in Britain's best interests.

My right hon. Friend used to be Secretary of State for Health, and I know that he disapproves of the European Community's subsidising tobacco. I understand that the Department of Health spends £20 million on encouraging people not to smoke. What plans will my right hon. Friend present to stop the Community from spending £500 million or more on tobacco growing?

My hon. Friend is right about both my personal views and the Government's policy. I think it is wrong for us, and some other countries in Europe, to campaign against smoking if the CAP then adopts a regime that subsidises the growing of tobacco. I hope that, over time, we shall win over more allies to the idea that we do not need such a regime.

Has my right hon. Friend assessed the likely impact on the CAP of the accession to the European Union of the Visegrad countries of central Europe? Is there any sign that the European Commission and other European countries are taking seriously the gravity of the challenge that that move will impose on the CAP?

My hon. Friend has put his finger on what will be the cause of further fundamental change in the CAP, of which I am glad. I do not see how the CAP can take on board countries of central and eastern Europe—which, before the war and before the communists ruined their agricultural systems, were extremely powerful agricultural producers—without further fundamental reform. Some parts of the European Commission seem to be beginning to recognise that. Directorate-General II has recently issued a good report, known as the Munk report, that advances many of the same arguments as the Government. In his speech at the Royal Institute of International Affairs conference last Friday, however, Commissioner Steichen did not seem to recognise the scale of the challenge that faces the agricultural part of the Commission.

Does the Minister agree that the sugar sector would be a crucial part of any CAP reform and that any reform of that sector would heavily depend on our commitments under the general agreement on tariffs and trade, which requires the European Community to reduce its sugar exports by about 36 per cent? Does he further agree that the two basic ways of achieving that are to reduce the quota or to reduce price? If those are the two basic elements, will he ensure that any quota reduction takes place in European Union countries whose quotas are in excess of their production requirements and that imports from African, Caribbean and Pacific countries are protected, because they need that protection to develop?

The hon. Gentleman is absolutely right. By far the best way of reforming the regime would be to bring down the price while protecting imports from ACP countries. The Commission's proposals are not nearly radical enough. Within what the Commission proposes, I shall do my best to ensure that British quotas are not discriminated against—after all, we consume up to the limit of our quota. I do not find anything with which to disagree in what the hon. Gentleman said.

Will the Minister confirm that nothing in the current CAP milk regime prevents him from taking action on the spiralling cost of the milk quota, including milk both for lease and for sale? Is that not a home-grown problem rather than a CAP problem? Will the right hon. Gentleman also confirm that nothing in the CAP regime prevents him from using his powers to confiscate unused quota from non-producers who hoard it for speculative purposes? Is he aware that many dairy farmers are on the brink of bankruptcy because of the problem?

It follows, just as night follows day, that, if the milk price goes up, the quota value goes up—that is what a market is all about. The hon. Gentleman is not right to say that this is a home-grown problem, because part of the problem derives from the fact that the national quota is lower than national consumption. If we could achieve the transferability of milk quota across national boundaries in the European Community, as many people have argued we should, a great deal of good would be done to relieve the pressure on people who are having to pay more for quota than they would like.

Does the Department have any information on the degree of equability in the distribution of farm support, both among different-sized farms and among different regions in the United Kingdom? Does the Minister accept that any CAP reform must aim for greater equability in that regard and for the retention of at least the present level of employment in agricultural farming? Will he consider carefully the recommendations in the recent Friends of the Earth report entitled "Working Future" in relation to that matter?

We have to be careful about this argument because what we call small farms in the UK are large farms in terms of farm holdings in Europe. If we begin to accept the language of bias towards what Europe calls small farms, we shall ruin British farmers, large and small. Although it sounds an attractive slogan, I do not think that it is helpful in terms of British agricultural structure. Nothing will better maintain the welfare of people in the farming sector than the removal of as many quantitative controls as possible, which have grown in the short term, in a more fundamental, long-term reform of the CAP to bring it closer to the market and to allow people who have good products to sell them freely.

Will my right hon. Friend use all his influence to try to ensure that CAP 3 takes all the rural economy into account and not just agriculture?

With my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for the Environment, I have launched the process that will lead, next year, to the production of a White Paper that will cover the rural economy more generally. I therefore sympathise with what my hon. Friend has said, because when we consider the health of rural areas, we should look not only at agriculture but at a number of other sources of income and constraints on prosperity.

To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if steps are being taken by the Ministry to restrict BIV-infected livestock from entering the United Kingdom.

The Government have considered that very carefully, commissioning research and consulting not only independent scientific experts in this country, but the leading researchers in north America and Europe. There is no scientific evidence relating to BIV that would justify placing restrictions on livestock to be imported into the United Kingdom, and we are not aware that such restrictions have been imposed by any other country.

Although I note that reply, is the Minister aware that that view is not held by many in the farming community? There is clear evidence that cattle from central Europe, which are imported here via western Europe, are infected with BIV. In view of the high quality of British cattle stocks, will the Minister assure the House that the quality and health of animals imported to Britain will be subject to rigid control?

I can indeed assure the hon. Gentleman of that. He will be aware that harmonised EC regulations governing the importation of cattle and animals are now in force. They require that an imported animal must have a certificate of health, signed by a veterinarian from the exporter country, and put the onus on the importers to ensure that they are satisfied that that animal is healthy and has the necessary certification.

Does not Milk Marque take a different view by refusing to purchase milk from the BIV-affected farm in Cheshire? If it turns out that that strain of BIV is particularly virulent, is it not irresponsible of the Government not to take any precautions now, before the results of the investigation are known? They should make the disease notifiable, compensate the farmer and undertake an in-depth study of the disease. The potential danger posed to the dairy industry by that disease is disastrous.

I am sorry that the hon. Gentleman takes that line, because it overstates the importance of the virus. We would not normally discuss the farm in Cheshire in detail, but given that the owners have made public the information relating to their animals, it is important to make the case clear. The decision by the Milk Marketing Board and, subsequently, Milk Marque not to purchase the milk is purely a commercial decision between those organisations and the owners of the milk.

To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what progress he has made on the rural White Paper.

An interdepartmental group of officials has been set up, led jointly by the Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food and the Department of the Environment. We have been in touch with more than 200 organisations to request their views. A very wide welcome has been received from interested organisations.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that the rural White Paper is a magnificent opportunity for our rural areas—in particular, their towns and villages—to make considerable progress? Should we not broaden the scope of the White Paper to take in other Departments of State, so that they, too, consider their services to the rural areas?

It is a good opportunity. For many years, people have argued for a White Paper that looked across the board at policy affecting the rural economy. I agree with my hon. Friend that other Departments should be involved. The steering group is based on the two principal Departments, but others, such as Education, Transport and the Home Office, will be closely involved.

Before the Government start to write the White Paper, will the Minister remove the sword of Damocles that he is hanging over the heads of hundreds of thousands of rural workers? Since the report by the London School of Economics, which the Government commissioned, has repudiated any adverse link between minimum wage rates and employment levels, will the right hon. Gentleman now abandon his plan to abolish the agricultural wages boards and, instead, retain them as they stand?

The hon. Gentleman knows that we are still considering the replies which we have received, which were not unanimous. There are two views on the matter, which I am considering.

Does my right hon. Friend accept that it is good news that he and the Department of the Environment are working closely together to take policies forward? Does he agree that one of the most beneficial things for the countryside generally would be the spread of farm woodlands? Will he and his Department ensure that pressure is put on the Commission to allow the planting of farm woodlands to count against set-aside?

Immediately after questions in the House today, I shall be meeting the German Minister, Herr Borchert, who holds the presidency of the Agriculture Council. I shall be raising that matter with him in the hope that we can at least get an agreement in principle on what my hon. Friend is arguing for in the Council next week.

To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what representations he has had indicating support for the Government's proposed changes to agricultural tenancies.

During the last 18 months my Department has received 185 representations via hon. Members and a further 28 addressed to Ministers directly. The majority of these were supportive. The proposals in the Bill are based on an agreement between the Country Landowners Association, the National Farmers Union, the Tenant Farmers Association and the National Federation of Young Farmers' Clubs.

Can my right hon. Friend confirm that an independent survey has estimated that, as a result of his proposals, there will be an increase of 10 per cent. in the land available to let? Does he agree that that will give significant encouragement, particularly to young farmers to enter the industry?

There has been an immensely wide welcome for the proposals, and I can confirm that there has been such an independent survey. The Institute of Chartered Surveyors said that there may be 1 million acres of land under management by its members which are likely to come forward for new tenancies as a result of the measure. That is welcome indeed.

To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what has been the net United Kingdom contribution to the common agricultural policy for each of the last 10 years as measured in current prices.

The United Kingdom does not contribute to the CAP directly but to the Community budget as a whole.

Is the Minister aware that, as part of our contribution to the budget as a whole, we have been contributing to the accumulation of a wine lake which amounts now to 19 billion bottles of wine? That could provide a Christmas gift of 500 bottles of wine to every adult in the United Kingdom. Does the Minister agree that—while he is not in a position to distribute the surplus freely—it is a wasted accumulation to which we ought not to contribute?

A voice of irreverence behind me has suggested that the hon. Gentleman might like to contribute to removing some of that lake himself.

Does my hon. Friend concur that the contribution is by no means a one-way street? In this country, out of £600 million pounds of compensation payments, £100 million comes from the Treasury and £500 million from Europe.

I think that my hon. Friend is referring to issues connected with hill farms and her analysis, which points to greater receipts from Community schemes to hill farmers of both sheep and cattle, is absolutely right. I was also delighted by my right hon. Friend's announcement that we were able to maintain unchanged this year's hill livestock compensatory allowance payments.

The Secretary of State's think tank is all very well, but when will the Government seriously tackle common agricultural policy fraud? Does he recognise that fraud is inherent in the market support mechanisms of the CAP? Will he now take the bull by the horns and come out unequivocally against the open-ended state intervention buying of all agricultural commodities?

It sounds to me as though there is a typical Opposition stance on this: pull out the rug from underneath the farmers, with no idea whatever. The Government, at least, are thinking carefully about the future of the CAP. Judging by the hon. Gentleman's question, he has not a thought in his head. I heard him interviewed on "Farming Today". When asked what he would do, there was a bit of radio silence. I am disappointed that the hon. Gentleman does not acknowledge what the United Kingdom has done in leading the fight against fraud. If he were keeping up with affairs, he would know that only yesterday we agreed the beginning of a Community black list to stop fraudsters illegally claiming money in different parts of the Community when they are under investigation. With our support, more than 50 new members of staff have been allocated within the Community's anti-fraud unit. I could go on. The Conservative party takes the fight against fraud extremely seriously.

To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what sum was spent by his Department on research for the last three years; what percentage this was of the total annual budget; what is the budget for the forthcoming year; what percentage this is of his total budget; and what additional new research is to be undertaken.

The Ministry has spent £121.5 million, £132.9 million and £137.3 million respectively. This represents 17 per cent., 18 per cent. and 19 per cent. of the total annual budgets for those years. Funding for a wide range of research and development in 1995–96 will be around £140 million or 17 per cent. of the total budget.

The increase which the Minister announced is obviously welcome. What part of it applies to the west country? Will he ensure that aspects of research on grasslands, which are important in terms of milk production, will continue?

My right hon. Friend refers to the £140 million, which represents a maintenance of our resources for research and development following successful negotiations by my right hon. Friend the Minister. We do not allocate research and development funds by region, but the type of project on silage to which my right hon. Friend refers will benefit not only west country farmers but dairy farmers throughout the United Kingdom. Such work is safeguarded by our excellent settlement on research and development.

Has the Minister commissioned, or will he commission, research into the use of the flavour enhancer monosodium glutamate, which is now used in almost every manufactured food product, including bread? It has no nutritional value and there is strong evidence that it builds up a severe allergy that is affecting many people. Is not the time now right to take a proper look at the matter?

I am not aware of any research that I have commissioned on that subject. On food safety, great care is taken before an ingredient is allowed to be used. However, if the hon. Gentleman knows of research that he believes should be evaluated, I shall ensure that a scientist does that job.

Is my hon. Friend aware that at Mylnefield in Tayside, we have one of the finest crop research centres in existence? It is important that it continues its good work, particularly its research into raspberries and other crop fruits but also into potatoes, which are vital to the Tayside economy.

I am glad that my hon. Friend gives yet another indication of how Government-funded research is helping to boost prospects, particularly for British horticulture. As we said earlier, the opportunity for our raspberries—[Interruption.] If hon. Members are not careful, I shall blow them one. The work being undertaken is resulting in increased fruit consumption. I hope that the research to which my hon. Friend referred will enable our raspberry growers to take full advantage of those commercial possibilities.

To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what steps he is taking to promote the export of carcase meat.

We continue to support the Meat and Livestock Commission's excellent promotion of meat products and exports.

Does the Minister agree that, if he banned the export of live animals, the British slaughterhouse industry could cope with the increased throughput of some 2 billion animals? Does he agree that such a step would not only remove some of the barbaric practices in the transport of live animals but stop the export of British jobs?

Sadly, the hon. Gentleman's question does not relate the enormous amount of work that my right hon. Friend the Minister is undertaking to try to find a Europe-wide solution to improve the welfare of animals in transit. However, I gather from the nature of his question that the hon. Gentleman would, at a stroke, do away with a trade worth £200 million to British farmers, and farmers will have noted carefully the terms in which he put it.

Can my hon. Friend confirm that exports of British meat have almost doubled since 1991, thereby emphasising that, internationally, British meat is seen to be of the highest standard? It is important to keep that industry alive and vital. Does my hon. Friend agree that, in 1976, the hon. Member for Edinburgh, East (Dr. Strang) introduced statutory succession rights for tenants, that he thereby denied new entrants the opportunity of coming into the farming market, that it was a disgraceful thing to do and that we should quickly undo that bad work?

My hon. Friend is entirely right. The meat industry will be worth £891 million in exports this year and it is certainly true that the reform of agricultural tenancy, which hon. Members on the Conservative Benches unequivocally support, will open the door to new, young, innovative farmers who will be able to take advantage of the excellent opportunities for exporting British meat.

Will the Minister join me in congratulating the animal welfare organisations and the travelling public on putting such pressure on the ferry companies that most of them have banned the carrying of live animals across the channel?

What I will do is join those people who support my right hon. Friend the Minister in his attempt to find a Europe-wide solution to ensure that continental practice is brought up to the standard of the United Kingdom. I am disappointed that, in spite of his tremendous efforts, people have unilaterally withdrawn an important transport link for our cattle producers. It is perhaps a sad day when they have not listened to what the Minister has done, especially in working to develop a code of practice, to regulate the movement of live animals into Europe.

To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what action he is taking to defend United Kingdom interests in respect of new EC provisions on the level of nitrates in leafy salads and vegetables.

We have firmly opposed the proposal and demanded its withdrawal. It is now blocked while the Commission examines the comprehensive dossier that we have sent in, challenging the scientific basis for the measure and detailing the serious economic implications that it would have for our glasshouse growers.

Does my hon. Friend agree that British lettuces are perfectly safe and nutritious, and that distinguished scientists have shown that there is no public health problem that justifies a regulation?

My hon. Friend is exactly right. In the UK, intakes of nitrate in vegetables are well below the acceptable daily limit and are calculated on a very sound scientific basis. We want to share that scientific information with our partners in Europe, where we believe that the scientific basis has not been as sound as our own.

Do not British farmers use far too much pesticide on their lettuces and salad items, and should not the Minister concentrate on telling them to use less, rather than attacking the Common Market?

The specific problem relates to lettuce grown in glasshouses, not lettuce grown in the open. I assure the hon. Gentleman that we are sure, from our scientific basis, that British lettuces are quite safe to eat. In fact, I would encourage hon. Members to eat more of them, because British lettuces are good for you.

To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what assessment he has made of the likely effect of the proposals in the Agricultural Tenancies Bill on the supply of farmland available for rent.

Recent research carried out independently by the Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors suggests that, if enacted, the proposed reforms could be expected to increase the area of let land by up to 10 per cent. of its current level.

How many tenancies were lost as a result of the 1976 tenancy laws, and are there any provisions in the Bill to enable tenants who improve their land to receive adequate compensation when they give up their tenancies?

One of the important reforms in the Bill is the strengthening of the hand of the tenant in relation to compensation for investment that he may have made during his tenancy. That will equalise the position. My hon. Friend is correct to say that the hon. Member for Edinburgh, East (Dr. Strang) wrongly predicted the outcome of the Bill that he introduced, I am sure in good faith, in 1976. He said then that there would be no significant drop in the supply of tenanted farms. As he will be honest enough to admit, there has been a catastrophic drop in the supply of tenanted farms. I hope that he has learned from the mistake that he made at that time.

To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food how much his Ministry is spending this year on improving coastal defences against flooding from the sea.

My Department expects to provide some £19 million in grant towards the cost of improving coastal defences against flooding from the sea in 1994–95.

I am grateful to my right hon. Friend for his answer. I welcome the work that the National Rivers Authority is doing to evaluate different means of sea defences, including managed retreat. But will my right hon. Friend confirm that it remains the Government's policy to protect, not just populated areas, but prime agricultural land?

I can, indeed, confirm that my hon. Friend is right. There may be areas where it is better not to waste money on defences that will be overwhelmed. The importance of defending both human habitation and prime agricultural land is always taken into consideration.

To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 8 December.

This morning, I presided at a meeting of the Cabinet and had meetings with ministerial colleagues and others. In addition to my duties in the House, I shall be having further meetings later today.

Will my right hon. Friend convey my best wishes to the officials who will be leading the negotiations tomorrow with Sinn Fein-IRA? Will he also accept my congratulations on the way in which he has handled the peace process? Could he ensure that, on day one it is made crystal clear that there can be no real progress unless all paramilitaries give up weapons and intimidation? Will he also make it crystal clear that there can never be any question of an amnesty for murderers or bombers?

My hon. Friend is right to feel strongly about these matters. Our position is clear: those people convicted of criminal offences will serve their sentences and an amnesty for murderers simply does not arise.

May I say how much I support what the Prime Minister has just said on Northern Ireland?

I continue to welcome the right hon. Gentleman's support on Northern Ireland. It is a strength to the peace process that it carries the support of hon. Members in all parts of the House. On the subject of a referendum, let me make clear the point that I made yesterday—there are many people who see the referendum simply as a tactical device. I strongly suspect that that is true of many Opposition Members. But I do not see it in that fashion; we have to consider the constitutional implications for British democracy of referendums generally—there are advantages and there are disadvantages. What I have said and what my right hon. Friend the Foreign Secretary has said is that we are not prepared to rule one out.

Is not it clear that what has changed is not the Prime Minister's belief about a referendum, but his ability to unite his party without one? Is that not his problem and that of the country—[Interruption.]

Order. The House must come to order. [Interruption.]

I see that the yobbos are out in force today. Is not this the right hon. Gentleman's problem? Whether it is the referendum, or VAT, or Post Office privatisation, or the Tory rebels, is not his problem the fact that the Government's decisions are now being taken by a Cabinet of crisis managers, driven by each day's headlines, making or unmaking policy according to the tyranny of the factions—when what this country is crying out for is a Government who will serve the national interest?

Perhaps if the right hon. Gentleman feels that way about referendums, he will explain why he is committed to referendums for Scotland and for Wales. Perhaps it is to heal divisions among his right hon. and hon. Friends.

To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 8 December.

I refer my hon. Friend to the answer I gave some moments ago.

Is my right hon. Friend aware of a number of important initiatives to combat crime in rural areas such as Suffolk, including the introduction of a rural inspectorate in addition to cluster neighbourhood watch schemes and parish constables? Will he join me in welcoming the fact that crime in the Bury St. Edmunds sub-division has fallen by 15.2 per cent. so far this year, and, in the Newmarket sub-division, by a full 22.2 per cent?

I am delighted to hear those statistics on falling crime; they are mirrored in some other parts of the country. I understand that my hon. Friend was instrumental in setting up a drugs prevention initiative in Newmarket, and I hope that many other people will follow the same sort of idea in other parts of the country. The reduction in crime to which my hon. Friend refers demonstrates the effectiveness of a community-based approach.

Let me remind the Prime Minister of his actual words, used in answer to me in June 1992. He said:

"I am not in favour of a referendum in a parliamentary democracy".—[Official Report, 3 June 1992; Vol. 208, c. 830.]

The right hon. Gentleman accuses me one day of being inflexible and criticises me on the next for being flexible. I suppose that that shows that he himself is unsure whether flexibility is good or bad—just as he is unsure about every single policy that he advocates in one House one day or his hon. Friends advocate in another House another day. They change from hour to hour, from day to day, from House to House and from Question Time to Question Time.

Did my right hon. Friend have the chance to read yesterday's Daily Mail, about what £60 would buy today? Does he agree that £60 for a haircut is a bit much, even for the Leader of the Opposition?

As it happens, I did not read the Daily Mail yesterday, so I was certainly not aware of the right hon. Gentleman's haircutting exploits. Indeed, it would be indelicate of me to refer to them.

To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 8 December.

I refer the hon. Member to the answer I gave some moments ago.

Has the Prime Minister visited Dudley, West yet? If not, does he intend to do so? Is he aware that his candidate there said on television last night that he wanted to fight the by-election exclusively on local issues? Today of all days, are there no national issues on which to engage the electors of Dudley, West?

If the hon. Gentleman had cared to look even at today's news he would have seen that there is another record set of export figures, that industrial production is rising yet again, that over recent months unemployment has been falling consistently, that there is a growth rate of over 4 per cent. and that there is an inflation rate of 2 per cent. He would see prospects for this country that his party in office has never managed to produce. I suggest that that is a good prospectus for people at any by-election at any time and certainly for the one at Dudley, West.

As chairman of the all-party Friends of the Northern Line group, may I welcome today's announcement of 100 new trains for the Northern line? That is good news for London and will be warmly welcomed. [Interruption.]

There seems to be a voice of dissent—the hon. Member for Bolsover (Mr. Skinner)—but I think that most people who use the Northern line will be pleased to see this substantial investment and the improved rolling stock that will be available for many millions of Londoners and others.

To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 8 December.

I refer the hon. Gentleman to the answer I gave some moments ago.

Given the Prime Minister's claim to support small business, and recognising that over the past 10 years British Coal Enterprise has created or expanded 5,000 companies in coalfield areas, would the Prime Minister now guarantee the future of British Coal Enterprise?

The hon. Gentleman, in the way that he posed his question, shows what an excellent record we have on small businesses, because he quoted the number of extra small companies that there are. That is true of other parts of industry and in other parts of the country, and I am sure that they will continue to grow.

To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 8 December.

I refer my hon. Friend to the answer I gave some moments ago.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that it is always welcome when parents exercise the right of choice in education for their children, a choice which only the Conservative party has introduced? Does he further agree that it is contemptible for most Opposition Members to seek to deny that choice from which so many of them and their children have benefited? Does he agree that this is a case of, "You're all right, Tony, pull up the ladder"?

I am always delighted to see people exercising choice in all areas, and it is certainly right to exercise choice in favour of one's children to ensure that they get the best possible education. The point about education generally is that there is no choice where only bad schools exist. That is why we have introduced a range of measures, including regular inspection, and a range of education policies, to raise standards. I am delighted that, despite its past hostility to those policies, the Labour party is increasingly recognising that our education policies are right and is now following them. I recommend to the Opposition that they begin to follow some of our other policies on a whole range of issues.

To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 8 December.

I refer the hon. Member to the answer I gave some moments ago.

Does the Prime Minister accept that last Thursday he misled the House in claiming that the disposable income of all people at every level had risen, and that the facts are that the bottom tenth of the population's real disposable income has fallen by 17 per cent. since 1979 while the incomes of the top tenth have gone up by 62 per cent? Does not that demonstrate the unfair society that we shall be left with following this Tory Government? Will he now put the record straight?

The hon. Lady is playing with statistics and she knows it. [Interruption.] The statistics that she quotes incorporate all sorts of people who run businesses and declare no income but whose spending pattern is way above the average. That is how she produces those statistics. The people at the bottom end of the scale are those who exist completely on social security payments. The hon. Lady knows that they have risen in value and she should not try and pretend otherwise.

To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 8 December.

I refer my hon. Friend to the answer I gave some moments ago.

Returning to the subject of education, will my right hon. Friend take this opportunity to commend the good work that is being done in independent schools throughout the country? Will he also confirm again the Government's commitment to the assisted places scheme which has done so much for children from less well-off families? Is not it surprising that the new modern Labour party should once again attack freedom of choice in education and, indeed, make it more difficult for its leader to exercise choice for his own family?

It is entirely apt that my hon. Friend should ask that question when the hon. Member for Sheffield, Hillsborough (Mrs. Jackson) has just been talking about people at the bottom of the income scale. The assisted places scheme is a way to help people at the bottom of the income scale and the hon. Lady opposes it, as do her right hon. and hon. Friends. Parental choice is a fundamental principle of our policy. We choose to exercise it for everyone, not just for some, and I fail to understand how members of the Labour party, which claims to pride itself on equality of opportunity, would deny the opportunities under the assisted places scheme to some of the poorest children in Britain. What it shows yet again is the gap between what they say and what they practise.