Mr Ralph Howell: Is my right hon. Friend aware that there is widespread concern at what is so far known of the stabiliser proposals being formulated in Brussels? Will he tell the House the position that he has adopted? Is he aware that many people think that the proposals will neither curb production nor cut expenditure on agriculture?
Mr Ralph Howell: I am not sure whether I heard the hon. Gentleman correctly. I thought he said that I was a non-ratepaying farmer. That is not true, and perhaps he could withdraw that.
Mr Ralph Howell: I have listened to many speeches on this subject. Many hon. Members have said that there will be gaiiners and losers. But there is a way in which we can all be gainers, and that is if local government reduces overmanning. In 1960, 2 million people were employed in local government. There are now 3 million. We argue about how these charges will be levied on the whole population, but we should...
Mr Ralph Howell: I believe that there should be an element of property tax. It should not be charged entirely on property, as at present. I would prefer a halfway house between the two forms of charging. However, I am convinced that there should not be two systems which try to level out income. At present we have the income tax and benefits system to try to redistribute income and also rent rebates. The...
Mr Ralph Howell: The Government must consider that matter, or they run the risk of making a traumatic change and achieving little. lf, as I believe will be the case, a vast number of people are left outside the scheme and are therefore not effectively charged, the object of the exercise will be destroyed.
Mr Ralph Howell: I am afraid that I am unable to follow that argument. There has been too much support from the Government and not enough responsibility in local government. The north, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland have had a very good deal; it is the south-east, which creates all the wealth, which has had to pay the bill. I should like clarification on how married and unmarried couples will be...
Mr Ralph Howell: I am sure that the hon. Gentleman recognises that if agricultural land was rated the price of food would have to rise considerably. That point must be accepted.
Mr Ralph Howell: Surely the ability to pay should be taken care of by the tax and benefit system. Why should there be two tax and benefit systems?
Mr Ralph Howell: I am interested in the hon. Gentleman's comments about creepy crawlies that might come from under stones. Is it not true that, at the election, the creepy crawlies did not come out from under the stones and, therefore, the Labour party lost the election?
Mr Ralph Howell: indicated dissent.
Mr Ralph Howell: Does my hon. Friend agree that despite the fact that many people claim that agriculture is being subsidised to the tune of £2·5 billion, according to our right hon. Friend the Member for Suffolk, Coastal (Mr. Gummer), the net cost to the Treasury of agricultural support is only £246 million? Will he explain this inconsistency?
Mr Ralph Howell: Will my right hon. Friend also bear in mind that cutting prices will not solve surplus production, that in the past eight years the price of cereals has fallen by about 33 per cent., and that during that same period production has doubled?
Mr Ralph Howell: asked the Prime Minister by how much the balance of payments in relation to cereal production has grown since 1979; and if she will list those industries, services or sectors where the balance of payments has grown by an equivalent or greater sum.
Mr Ralph Howell: I thank my right hon. Friend for that reply. Does she agree that her reply is, in itself, a tribute to the efficiency and enterprise of agriculture and of the cereals sector in particular?
Mr Ralph Howell: Has my right hon. and learned Friend seen the leading article in The Times regarding work, welfare and workfare? Has he noted the favourable replies given to me by the Chancellor of the Exchequer in the Treasury and Civil Service Select Committee yesterday? Will he now think again about introducing the comprehensive workfare system and giving it a fair wind?
Mr Ralph Howell: Is my hon. Friend aware that the Norwich health authority has turned down four possible sites for the new hospital on the grounds that the sites are of high agricultural value? Is that not an absurdity?
Mr Ralph Howell: asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what representations he has received on the implications of adopting a policy in the European Economic Community of two-tier pricing.
Mr Ralph Howell: I thank my right hon. Friend for his reply. Is he aware that these proposals have been totally dismissed by the NFU and by its president, Simon Gourlay, as they woud mean that farmers in Britain would miss out tremendously compared with the rest of the European Community? Furthermore, will he give serious consideration to an overall set-aside system to reduce surpluses?
Mr Ralph Howell: I congratulate my right hon. and learned Friend on this most excellent statement. It will be well received by people throughout the country. I congratulate him on being able to offer a new training scheme place to everyone aged under 18. Will he explain why we are to continue to give people who turn down such a place the option of drawing benefit? I congratulate him on the success of the...
Mr Ralph Howell: I shall begin my remarks by——
