Oral Answers to Questions

James Paice Excerpts

Thursday 19th January 2012 Commons Chamber

[Elizabeth Truss (South West Norfolk) (Con)]

9. What steps she is taking to reduce the regulatory burden of inspections on farmers.

[The Minister of State, Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Mr James Paice)]

Before answering my hon. Friends’ questions, I believe that it is right to congratulate you on a certain anniversary, Mr Speaker, if I am correctly informed, so many happy returns of the day—it is always best to start on a good note.

In my written statement of 3 November I announced the publication of the interim response to the independent farm regulation task force and stated that the Government’s final response will be published early this year. That is still my intention.

[Damian Hinds]

I thank the Minister for that answer. What reassurance can he give farmers in East Hampshire that reform of the common agricultural policy will reduce rather than increase the administrative burden?

[Mr Paice]

I am grateful to my hon. Friend for that extremely important question. The only assurance I can give is that my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State and I are working extremely hard not only in Brussels but in capitals across Europe, speaking with fellow Ministers to try to ensure that what appears to be a more complex and complicating set of proposals are altered to meet the objectives that my hon. Friend, his farmers and, I think, every farmer and farming Minister in Europe want to see.

[Elizabeth Truss]

Tomorrow I am holding a farming forum in Shouldham Thorpe. What can I tell local farmers about progress towards a single farm inspection regime that would save them time and the Government money?

[Mr Paice]

Although I cannot guarantee a single inspection regime, I am pleased to say that we are certainly moving towards a much simpler regime, as I hope my hon. Friend and the House will see shortly when I publish our response to the Macdonald report. We are using the concept of earned recognition, whereby we can trust farmers who have demonstrated their ability to comply with regulations and reduce the level of inspection on them, and in other cases we can merge inspection regimes so that one person does them for more than one agency.

[Dr Eilidh Whiteford (Banff and Buchan) (SNP)]

The CAP regime involves a lot of heavy administration. I have asked the Minister about compliance issues before, but I think that the most pressing issue at the moment is whether single farm payments will continue to provide the kind of support that farmers in the least favoured areas, particularly those in the devolved Administrations, depend upon. What update can he give us on where the Government are heading with that?

[Mr Paice]

As the hon. Lady will appreciate, I cannot give any absolute answer because I fear that the negotiations will take another 18 months to reach a conclusion, but there is no doubt that the single farm payment or a form of direct payment, whatever it is called, will continue. I cannot tell her what the exact rates will be, because obviously we have not seen any budgets yet. She will be aware that the proposal we support is that all member states and regions should move towards an area-based system, which Scotland has not yet done, so it will face that challenge, as will all the devolved regions. I can assure her that we will do our very best to negotiate on behalf of the whole United Kingdom to get the best deal for British farmers and the British taxpayer.

[Huw Irranca-Davies]

Mr Speaker, I join the Minister in saying to you: llongyfarchiadau.

With strong cross-party support, Labour introduced the Gangmasters Licensing Authority in response to wide public outrage at the deaths of Chinese cockle pickers in Morecambe bay in 2004. It is an example of good regulation and enforcement, which only last year resulted in 12 high-profile operations and prosecutions and the identification of nearly 850 exploited workers, despite budget cuts. While the exploitation of workers continues, the need for the GLA is as great as ever. Will the Minister guarantee that the red tape challenge will not be used to water down the GLA’s powers and successes and that he will work with us to improve and strengthen it, including through more flexible fines and civil penalties? No one wants a return to the horrors of Morecambe bay or to see the sickening exploitation and trafficking of people by criminal gangs continue.

[Mr Paice]

I am sure the whole House agrees with the hon. Gentleman that we do not want a return to that. We are looking at the issue of civil penalties, which he has just described, and at fines. Nevertheless, there is some concern that the GLA has broadened its perspective way beyond the sectors that it was originally intended, rightly, to cover. It had all-party support and still does. I will not deny that we are looking at whether there are aspects of its activities that could be altered, but we will make those announcements as part of the response to Macdonald in a month’s time. The GLA’s core responsibility to protect vulnerable workers must be retained and will be.

[George Freeman (Mid Norfolk) (Con)]

2. What plans she has to promote innovation in the farming industry. [R]

--- Later in debate ---

[Mel Stride (Central Devon) (Con)]

3. What progress her Department has made on payments to farmers under the single farm payment scheme.

[The Minister of State, Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Mr James Paice)]

In December, the Rural Payments Agency made the highest ever proportion of payments to English farmers under the single payment scheme, and it was achieved in the opening month of the scheme payment window. The latest figures, as of 18 January, show that a total of £1.5 billion had been paid to 95,702 farmers, and that demonstrates really good progress, but of course I remain committed to ensuring continued improvements in the service that farmers receive.

[Mel Stride]

I thank the Minister for that answer and do not underestimate the significant progress that he has made in sorting out the RPA, not least because of the shambles that he inherited from the previous Government. Will he categorically assure me, however, that future payment schemes will be kept as simple as possible, so that the significant difficulties that my local farmers in Devon face are not repeated in the years ahead?

[Mr Paice]

The assurance I can give my hon. Friend is that my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State and I will do everything we can to ensure that future schemes are as simple as possible. As I intimated in answer to an earlier question, we are very concerned that many of the Commission’s proposals would actually make the situation more complicated rather than less so, but I assure him of our determination to improve on them.

[Mr Denis MacShane (Rotherham) (Lab)]

Will the Minister confirm that the average payout is about £13,000 a year and yet we are giving giant CAP subsidies to the richest in the land, such as up to €500,000 to Her Majesty and €800,000 to Tate & Lyle? As we are capping benefits for the poor, should we not cap these agricultural benefits for the very rich?

[Mr Paice]

I readily accept that capping has its attractions for those who want to level down the payments. One reason why this Government and the previous Government have opposed the principle of capping payments is that it would simply cause the fragmentation of farms as they break up to meet the new criteria. That would provide jobs for lawyers, but I am not sure t it would do any other good.

[Julian Smith (Skipton and Ripon) (Con)]

I agree that improvements have been made, but there is still significant work to do on communication with individual farmers. Will the Minister update the House on how much the RPA is costing the taxpayer in administering the payments?

[Mr Paice]

I cannot give my hon. Friend the answer that he seeks off the top of my head, I am afraid. I can assure him that both I and the chief executive of the RPA, whom I will meet later today, are extremely determined to ensure that communication improves. We had a problem last year when farmers were told that they would be paid in X month but they were not. That was very bad news, and it is why that is not happening this year. I am determined to improve that situation, because whatever the state of a claim, farmers are entitled to know what that state is.

[Annette Brooke (Mid Dorset and North Poole) (LD)]

4. What steps she is taking to tackle littering and fly-tipping.

--- Later in debate ---

[John Woodcock (Barrow and Furness) (Lab/Co-op)]

10. What discussions she has had with the chair of the independent forestry panel on its interim report.

[The Minister of State, Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Mr James Paice)]

The chair of the Independent Panel on Forestry informed the Secretary of State and me on 28 November last year of the content of the panel’s progress report.

[John Woodcock]

But does the Minister accept the central recommendation from the interim report that the public forest estate should remain in public hands? What reassurance can he give the people of my constituency and the many thousands of others who enjoy nearby Grizedale forest that he has learned the lesson from the forest fiasco that marred the early months of this Administration?

[Mr Paice]

As I just said, this was a progress report. We await the final report some time later this spring. It is a report by the panel, and we will have to consider the panel’s conclusions when we get the final report later this year. I cannot comment on detail on an interim report.

[Graeme Morrice (Livingston) (Lab)]

What discussions has the Minister had with the devolved Administrations about the future of Forest Research?

[Mr Paice]

The hon. Gentleman puts his finger on an important point. As he knows, the Welsh Government have decided to take forestry into the remit of their own organisation. The Scottish Government are looking at the possibility of doing the same thing. That has implications for Forest Research and, indeed, for certain other Forestry Commission activities. I cannot give the hon. Gentleman a definitive answer, because we are still in negotiations, but we will ensure that any devolved Administration who take on a forestry role make sure that any costs on the English commission are properly funded.

[Caroline Lucas (Brighton, Pavilion) (Green)]

The Government were deeply misguided in viewing our woodlands as assets for stripping, and the public told them so. Can the Minister assure the House that this lesson has been learned, by reassuring us that the Secretary of State will not dispose of the 15% of the public forest estate she was hoping to get rid of without legislation before she had to abandon the rest of her disastrous plans?

[Mr Paice]

The hon. Lady, as always, gets a bit hysterical. In fact, there never was any intention to dispose of the whole public forest estate. Nevertheless, as we have repeatedly said, all sales, of any scale, are suspended until we get the final report. When we get the final report, we will then consider future policy, and not until.

[Fiona O'Donnell (East Lothian) (Lab)]

Many happy returns, Mr Speaker.

I hope we can have a more reasoned and possibly less sexist response this time. The independent panel’s report tells us of the value of the public forest estate in terms of the environment, the rural economy and public access. The Bishop of Liverpool told the Secretary of State that she had “greatly undervalued” our forests and that they should not be sold off, but expanded. Does the Secretary of State agree with the bishop? Will she complete the final curve of the U-turn and call off the sell-off of 15% of the estate? Yes or no?

[Mr Paice]

All sales are called off until we get the final report. Then we will wait—

[Fiona O'Donnell]

Suspended.

[Mr Paice]

Suspended, called off—I do not mind which word the hon. Lady uses: no sales will take place until the final report is in hand and the Government have digested it and decided on a way forward.

[Mr Alan Reid (Argyll and Bute) (LD)]

11. What discussions she has had with the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills on the effect on farmers of the legislative proposals in the draft Groceries Code Adjudicator Bill.

[The Minister of State, Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Mr James Paice)]

The Secretary of State has regular discussions with her opposite number in the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills on a range of issues, including on the establishment of a groceries code adjudicator.

[Mr Reid]

I am pleased that the Government are introducing the Bill. The groceries code adjudicator will be able to investigate abuses of the market by the big supermarkets. Preventing such abuse is very important to give farmers, particularly dairy farmers, a fair price for their produce. Will the Minister speak to the Government’s business managers and urge them to introduce the Bill as soon as possible?

[Mr Paice]

I am certain that my hon. Friend the Deputy Leader of the House has heard my hon. Friend’s words. I assure him that I entirely agree with him.

[Neil Parish (Tiverton and Honiton) (Con)]

12. What support she is providing to rural communities to encourage enterprise and growth.

--- Later in debate ---

[Chris Evans (Islwyn) (Lab/Co-op)]

T2. In November 2010, I was one of the 5,000 people attacked by a dog since the consultation on dangerous dogs closed in June 2010. For fear of being called to order by you, Mr Speaker, I will not raise my middle finger to the Minister to show him the 1-inch scar left following the attack, but will he bring forward the proposals on dangerous dogs before the February recess?

[The Minister of State, Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Mr James Paice)]

We are close to finalising a package of measures to tackle irresponsible dog owners—I am very sorry to hear that the hon. Gentleman has been the victim of such an attack—and we will be announcing those measures soon. In putting the package together, we have considered the benefits of compulsory microchipping of dogs and extending the current law to cover private property, so that the police can deal more effectively with out-of-control dogs on private property. The final package will cover future Government handling of such issues, as well as other plans to improve standards of dog ownership.

[Caroline Dinenage (Gosport) (Con)]

T3. Bearing in mind the years of chaos and the continued uncertainty about the future development of the Port of Southampton, can the Minister tell me what conversations have taken place with the ports Minister about how the Marine Management Organisation operates?

--- Later in debate ---

[Rehman Chishti (Gillingham and Rainham) (Con)]

T4. What is DEFRA doing to ensure that the British horticultural industry is not disadvantaged by the Rural Payments Agency suspending 17 producer organisations from the European fresh fruit and vegetable scheme?

[Mr Paice]

My hon. Friend is right to raise this issue. The European auditors decided a couple of years ago that we were not complying with the scheme, so unfortunately those 17 organisations have been suspended. I can tell him that the RPA is working closely with them to find ways to alter their operations so that they meet the criteria and can re-enter the scheme as soon as possible.

[Hugh Bayley (York Central) (Lab)]

Would the Minister responsible for fisheries be prepared to meet the Yorkshire wildlife trust and other wildlife trusts to discuss the pace at which the Government are moving towards designating marine conservation zones?

--- Later in debate ---

[Henry Smith (Crawley) (Con)]

T7. The Food Standards Agency recently announced proposals for changes to the meat hygiene charging system, and I would be grateful to hear my hon. Friend’s views on them.

[Mr Paice]

As my hon. Friend says, the Food Standards Agency has produced proposals that would lead to full cost recovery, a principle with which the Government agree. However, the magnitude of the increases for some abattoirs is extreme, and we are looking at that matter with concern because we clearly do not want abattoirs to be driven out of business.

[Mr John Denham (Southampton, Itchen) (Lab)]

Further to the question from the hon. Member for Gosport (Caroline Dinenage), is the Minister aware that, in Westminster Hall yesterday, the shipping Minister described the five years of delays in Southampton’s port investment as a “cock-up” by the Marine Management Organisation and its predecessors? In the light of that, can he assure us that the MMO will have all the resources and expertise that it needs to deal with the application in a timely manner when the consultation ends?

[George Freeman (Mid Norfolk) (Con)]

T8. Does the Minister share my concern at the recent decision by the Food Standards Agency to turn down a licence application by Cranswick Country Foods to export to China? The matter was also raised last week at Prime Minister’s questions by my hon. Friend the Member for Beverley and Holderness (Mr Stuart). Will the Minister give us some advice on how to bring pressure to bear on the FSA?

[Mr Paice]

I have already agreed to meet my hon. Friend the Member for Beverley and Holderness (Mr Stuart), and if my hon. Friend the Member for Mid Norfolk (George Freeman) wishes to attend that meeting, he will be extremely welcome. I cannot go into details now, but I must make the point that the role of the FSA is to ascertain whether the abattoirs meet the standards laid down by the Chinese; it is effectively acting as an agent for the Chinese Government in this instance.

[Kerry McCarthy (Bristol East) (Lab)]

The Minister will know that there is widespread opposition in the south-west to badger culls in our local communities, not least because the scientific evidence shows that such culls are completely ineffective in curbing bovine tuberculosis. Now that the two pilot areas have been announced, what steps will the Minister be taking to consult local people?

[Mr Paice]

The answer to that question is in the written statement, but let me repeat what the Government have announced this morning. There are two areas in which the farmers will be invited to apply for a licence. The process from here on is in the hands of Natural England, and it includes a consultation with local people to ascertain their views. That will happen before Natural England decides whether to grant licences to those groups.

The hon. Member for Banbury, representing the Church Commissioners, was asked—