Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Roger Williams (Liberal Democrat) in the House of Commons on Thursday, 16 October 2014. It occurred during Backbench debate on National Pollinator Strategy.


National Pollinator Strategy

It is decided in Brussels, but the real problem is that it is decided on a historical basis. We have had low allocations of pillar two money for many years. It is believed that if the allocation were made on an objective basis, such as according to the amount of agricultural land, the number of people involved in agriculture or the number of forests, we would have at least 100% more pillar two money. It is tied up with complex issues such as our rebate and the Fontainebleau agreement. When the CAP was renegotiated, I thought that all these figures would be based on objective factors rather than historical factors. However, we have ended up with a £2.2 billion allocation, while France has £8.8 billion and Germany £7.8 billion. It is no wonder that the farming unions are trying to resist modulation and the green non-governmental organisations are going for higher modulation. If the farming unions had co-operated with the green NGOs and gone for a bigger allocation of pillar two money, we should not have had all that argument.

I am not sure whether anything can be done—it seems that the figures have been agreed to—but I think that that was a real disaster, and one of the programmes that could suffer as a result of it is the pollinator strategy, which

desperately needs money. I understand that the new environmental land management scheme that DEFRA is introducing can be used for such purposes, and I hope the Minister will ensure that it is.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
586 cc542-3 
Session
2014-15
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
Subjects
Crops Conservation Biodiversity Pest control Neonicotinoids Pollinators
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk