Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from David Simpson (Democratic Unionist Party) in the House of Commons on Wednesday, 14 December 2005. It occurred during Adjournment debate on Agriculture (Northern Ireland).


Agriculture (Northern Ireland)

: It would be a shame to lose it. The beef industry has gone through hard times, and I would like to comment on that. I will do so briefly, as I know that the Minister is eager to start answering all the questions that have been put to her. I welcome the Government's announcement last week that £1.3 million will be put aside to assist Northern Ireland's beef industry. It is to be hoped that that, along with the money available under the fit for market initiative, will help to find new markets for the sector. However, I was disappointed that the Government did not provide more money to compensate for the beef special premium scale-back for 2004. The beef industry's finding new markets is solely dependent on the UK getting rid of the beef export ban. My party is actively engaged in seeking that. Only yesterday, our colleague, Mr. Jim Allister MEP, met the European Commissioner for Health and Consumer Protection, Markos Kyprianou, to discuss this issue. It is clear that the UK has now taken all necessary steps to satisfy both the Foods Standards Agency and EU officials that beef from these regions is safe to eat. However, I must also say that I am disappointed that the UK Government have not taken a more proactive stance on the issue during their presidency of the EU. With the removal of the over-30-months scheme and the introduction of the older cattle disposal scheme in the latter half of January, there will be a significant increase in the number of cattle coming on to the UK domestic market. My party has already lobbied both the European Commission and the Government on keeping the OTM scheme in place until the market opens up for beef exports. That would prevent a glut of beef from coming on to the UK market and continuing to depress beef prices, as has been the case over the past months. Can the Minister confirm that the Government are pushing for the lifting of the beef export ban at the earliest opportunity? Are they also lobbying for the OTM scheme to remain in place until the export ban is lifted? Those are two vital components that must go together. On the subject of beef exports, and on the assumption that the export ban will be lifted at the earliest opportunity, I wish to mention live animal exports. I understand that that is an emotive subject in the UK and that we cannot ignore animal welfare issues. However, it is essential for the live animal export market to be opened up for Northern Ireland, alongside the beef export ban being removed. Northern Ireland is the only part of the UK that has a land border with another member state, and it is traditional for animals to be traded between the two countries. I was encouraged by the recent announcement by the noble Lord Rooker supporting the case for live animal exports from Northern Ireland. In 1995, the last year that Northern Ireland was allowed to export bovine animals, the value of that trade to the economy was placed at some £34.6 million. Currently, in Northern Ireland, dairy-bred male animals are being humanely slaughtered at birth, which is disgraceful. There is no viable market for these animals in the United Kingdom. Over the 12-month period ending 30 September 2005, there were 64,953 animals of dairy sires registered on the database. Only recently did DARD adjust its rural portal to facilitate the humane slaughter of those young calves. If there were live animal exports, and these animals were exported to the Republic of Ireland rather than being humanely done away with at birth, they would be worth approximately £50 per head, which would make an awful difference to the farming community. It is therefore vital to the Northern Ireland economy that the export market re-opens for live cattle. In an era where farmers are compensated for environmental and animal welfare management, instead of given direct production-linked subsidies, it is difficult to see how the primary producer and processor can survive with current market prices. It is vital that there is an open and communicative supply chain that will help achieve closer relationships between the primary producer, the processor and the consumer. In my lifetime in the industry, I have always preached that that should be the case. For many years, it was a ““them and us”” situation between the farmers and processors. That has to change, but I believe that it will because the pressure coming on to the industry will inevitably make it happen, and that is vital. To survive in future, the primary production sector must be competitive and profitable. For that to happen, the major multiple retailers need to pass more money down the food chain to processors and, ultimately, to the primary producer. The current retailer code of practice has clearly failed the agricultural community, not just in Northern Ireland, but throughout the whole United Kingdom. Strengthening that code is vital so that a greater percentage of revenue coming from the food chain is passed down the line. The Office of Fair Trading should not only scrutinise the major multiples but investigate those companies' suppliers. I am concerned that monopolies can be created—if they have not been already—in the supplier sector of major retailers, due to their adoption of single sourcing policies in the United Kingdom.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
440 c439-40WH 
Session
2005-06
Chamber / Committee
Westminster Hall
Subjects
Agriculture Farms EU grants and loans Northern Ireland Livestock industry Reform Rural areas Subsidies Common agricultural policy
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk