Oral Answers to Questions Debate
Full Debate: Read Full DebateLindsay Hoyle
Main Page: Lindsay Hoyle (Speaker - Chorley)Department Debates - View all Lindsay Hoyle's debates with the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs
(1 day, 8 hours ago)
Commons ChamberHas the Minister had the opportunity to consider the report by the Andersons Centre for CropLife UK? It estimates that if a sanitary and phytosanitary agreement with the European Union was implemented without a suitable implementation period, it could result in steep drops in UK crop production and a total loss of income of up to £810 million. That is why the Select Committee is today asking for an implementation period of 24 months. Will she impress upon her colleagues in the Cabinet Office the need for that suitable implementation period?
The agreement between the EU and the UK to search for an SPS agreement recognised explicitly that there is a case for some exceptions, and we are negotiating that agreement as I speak. We are very well aware of the advantages that precision breeding gives to this country, which is why we laid a statutory instrument on plant precision breeding in November.
Farming cashflows are under pressure, and farming businesses need clarity, certainty and clear policy direction from this Government now more than ever. However, with partial U-turns, continuous consultations, new taskforces, road maps, frameworks, reviews and now—finally—an announcement that the renewed sustainable farming incentive will be launched, but not until summer, farming businesses are really struggling to financially plan ahead. In all this confused policy direction, has the Minister decided the budget allocation for the new SFI scheme? How much will be available per farm? What will the assessment criteria be? Given that she wants to open up the scheme first to smallholdings, has she yet defined the definition of a small farm?
I join my hon. Friend in paying tribute to the fantastic work of the internal drainage boards in managing water levels, reducing flood risks and supporting communities, businesses and farmers alike. Of course, we are working hard on our statutory instrument. I am sorry that I cannot give him an exact date, but I can guarantee that it is something I am committed to doing.
Last week, 50 mm of intense rain fell across large parts of Somerset and exacerbated the already saturated ground, with a major incident declared on Tuesday. With more unsettled weather in the forecast and high spring tides imminent, residents have told me that they are worried they could be facing a repeat of the devastating 2013-14 floods. With the increasingly unpredictable, intense and changing patterns of rainfall, communities must be given the resources they need to prepare extreme weather resilience plans.
I thank the Minister for her commitment to meet me in Somerset later this year, but will she bring forward that planned visit to Glastonbury and Somerton to witness the devastating impact that flooding is having on my communities while the floodwater levels remain up?
The hon. Gentleman makes a good point. I am glad to hear that his wife has had such a profound influence on his cat-loving habits. We need to look at all elements of price transparency, including insurance.
I declare a professional and personal interest as a veterinary surgeon and a fellow of the Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons. I welcome the fact that the Government have launched a consultation to reform the Veterinary Surgeons Act 1966. This necessary and long-overdue reform can deliver significant benefits for animal health and welfare, biosecurity and public health. However, I have serious concerns about DEFRA’s communications, which conflated reform of the Veterinary Surgeons Act with the Competition and Markets Authority inquiry, resulting in a media narrative focused entirely on veterinary pricing. That has caused real distress across the sector among frontline vets, nurses and reception staff, impacting on morale and mental health. I have been contacted by voices from across the profession expressing their extreme alarm at this approach. Will the Government reassure us that they will work closely with key stakeholders to get this vital, much-needed legislation right? Can they guarantee that they will prioritise the parliamentary time it requires?
The Water Minister and I are working closely with water companies across the country, including United Utilities, to drive them to reform their operations and clean up rivers, lakes and seas. Our water White Paper will replace the one-size-fits-all approach with dedicated supervisory teams at every company. UU is investing £50 million to upgrade Southport’s waste water treatment by 2029 to reduce storm overflow spills and improve coastal water quality.
The EU reset deal is predicted to slash around a third of the Government’s farming budget from farm profits in its first year, cause higher food prices and lower food production, and sink the UK fishing industry. As the Prime Minister’s authority seeps away, will the Secretary of State insist that this shoddy deal is renegotiated while she is still in post?
Yesterday, a jury failed to reach a verdict on charges against Palestine Action activists involved in a violent incident in which a police sergeant’s spine was broken when she was struck by a sledge hammer. Does the Solicitor General agree with me and law abiding people across the country—
Order. I understand that this involves sub judice. Can we be very careful about what we are about to say?
Does the Solicitor General agree that, as the Crown Prosecution Service considers whether to bring a retrial, it should bring a retrial on these serious charges, including assault occasioning grievous bodily harm?
Order. The idea was not to talk about the particular court case. I think we will leave it at that. [Interruption.] I think the hon. Member is struggling with my ruling. The hon. Member was talking about a court case and asking what is going to happen with it. We should not be questioning the position. We are crossing a line that we do not cross—that is what it is. I can reassure the hon. Member that I did not want to pull him up.
I call the Chair of the Justice Committee.
Now we have Sir Brian Leveson’s full review, it is clear that very few of the 180 recommendations relate to jury trials. The most controversial is really the use of a single judge in the new Crown court bench division. Given that that provision will likely not contribute very much to reducing the backlog, does the Solicitor General think that we should look again at that—maybe at the length of sentence that is dealt with by that particular provision?
There is a fundamental contradiction at the heart of Government. The Minister for Courts and Legal Services says that she would scrap jury trials even if there was not a crisis in the courts. The Lord Chancellor says that he is open to a conversation about alternatives and wants the backlog to come down. Which is it? Is it about the backlog, in which case what alternatives to scrapping jury trials are actually being considered, or is this just an unworkable attack on our civil liberties wrapped up in ideology?
Any changes will need to go through legislation in this House in the normal way and I am sure that the Conservatives will want to scrutinise any proposals that we put forward. I am happy to take away those questions to the Ministry of Justice and ensure that the hon. Lady receives an answer.
Ben Maguire (North Cornwall) (LD)
Jury trials are not a peculiar way to run a public service; they are a fundamental pillar of our justice system, being eroded under this Government’s proposed court reforms. Serious reforms should focus on reducing inefficiencies that waste sitting days, increasing court capacity and making use of vacant courtrooms, not scrapping the right to trial by jury. If the proposals are intended to reduce the Crown court backlog, should this House not be given clear evidence before core constitutional protections are weakened? Will the Solicitor General please tell us whether the Government will publish an estimate of what proportion of current Crown court backlog would be sent to judge-only trials as a result of the reforms? Also, given that it is Sexual Abuse and Sexual Violence Awareness Week, what assessments have been made of how the judge-only proposals will affect vulnerable victims of domestic abuse?