Seòmar agus comataidhean

I am publishing a consultation paper today which sets out our proposals for a new Crofters Cattle Quality Improvement Scheme. This will replace the Bull Hire Scheme which was previously operated by the Crofters Commission. That scheme was ended because it did not deliver measurable improvement in the herds of cattle that benefited from it and because of concerns around State Aid compliance.

The new scheme will pay crofting groups a fixed-rate grant for preparation of a cattle improvement plan, grant of up to 50% of the cost of hiring or buying a bull and grant on a headage basis towards the cost of monitoring stock improvement over the life of the plan.

Copies of the consultation paper The Crofters Cattle Improvement Scheme have been placed in the Parliament’s Reference Centre (Bib number 36440). The consultation paper is also available on the Scottish Executive website at http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Consultations/Current.

I attended the Agriculture and Fisheries Council in Luxembourg on 26 April 2005 together with Lord Whitty.

Following the signing of the accession treaties for Bulgaria and Romania, ministers from those countries attended the Council, in their capacity as active observers, for the first time. All member states warmly welcomed their arrival.

On agriculture, the Commissioner for Health and Consumer Protection reported to the Council on the recent circulation of an unauthorised GM maize in the European market and on recent contacts he had had with the American authorities on this and other matters. A number of member states, while deploring the time that it had taken before the GM incident had come to light, welcomed the control measures that were now in place. A test for the presence of this particular GM would shortly be available to underpin certification requirements aimed at avoiding a repeat of the present problem.

On reform of the Rural Development Regulation, member states expressed views on two issues relating to the treatment of Less Favoured Areas (LFAs) under the Regulations. Member states endorsed the need for continued support of this kind but expressed a wide range of criticism of the draft criteria for the designation of intermediate LFAs which the Commission had recently put forward for discussion. The UK added that changes would clearly be needed to meet criticism from the Court of Auditors but that any such changes should be compatible with WTO Green Box requirements. Aid to the LFAs should be aimed at delivering specific benefits and not simply serve as an additional production subsidy. The Commissioner took note of the views expressed and undertook to reflect further. The Presidency indicated that a further revision of the draft regulation would emerge in the next few days: it remained their intention to reach agreement on this issue before the conclusion of the Luxembourg Presidency.

The Commission reported a successful conclusion to negotiations with the Russian Federation on the plant health controls affecting EU exports to Russia.

Under other business, Denmark asked the Commission to consider ending the payment of export refunds on live cattle. The UK and a number of other member states supported this argument; several others took a contrary view. The Commissioner took note, emphasising the importance of maintaining high welfare standards in this trade which was currently very small. Belgium raised concerns about depressed prices in the egg sector; Hungary, supported by a number of other member states, raised concerns about the labelling of imported third-country honey, and a number of landlocked member states raised concerns about supplies and prices in the cereals market.

France noted that negotiations between the Community and other countries in the WTO over methods for expressing tariffs in ad valorem terms had encountered technical difficulties. The UK joined others in expressing regret that these difficulties had occurred but urged the Commission and member states not to lose sight of the wider picture: the Community had received substantial criticism over its position but it remained important to re-engage the negotiations with a view to making progress on the WTO dossier as a whole by the end of July.

No fisheries items were on the agenda.

It is standard practice for Scottish Executive contracts to be in writing and to be signed and dated.

The Executive does not regard leaving contracts unsigned and undated as good practice. Occasionally, however, circumstances arise in which signing is delayed, perhaps due to disagreements between the parties on the detail and/or interpretation of the contract. The fact that a contract may be unsigned or undated may not necessarily mean it is legally invalid.

Research has not identified any such examples.

Research has identified only one instance where a contract between the Scottish ministers and Thunderchief Pictures Limited was unsigned but proceeded on the basis of a draft contract issued by the Scottish Executive. There may of course be other circumstances in which signing is delayed, perhaps due to disagreements between the parties, on the detail and/or interpretation of the contract.

No, it is not common practice.

Executive officials met the Grampian Country Food Group (GCFG) to explore whether there were any alternatives to the closure of the Buckie facility. GCFG confirmed that they had only reached this difficult decision after a full review of their pork business and that in their opinion the operation of two pork abattoirs in Scotland, which operated under full capacity, was unsustainable.

The job losses are extremely regrettable and the Scottish Executive will work closely with the enterprise network and other agencies under our PACE arrangements to ensure all possible support is provided to those affected.

The SNH licence application will be determined under section 16(4)(c) of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981.

Before reaching a decision on the application ministers will take into consideration all relevant factors, including the specific location and topography of the proposed release site, the risks associated with the proposed release, the expected economic and scientific benefits together with the management arrangements for such a trial and the conservation status of the European Beaver.

I attended the one day Agriculture and Fisheries Council in Brussels on Monday 14 March with Margaret Beckett, Ben Bradshaw and Ian Pearson.

The main item for discussion at this council was rural development. The presidency focussed discussion on a small number of issues in the current proposal to revise the Rural Development Regulation, principally focussing on financial matters including the minimum spend per axis and the LEADER reserve. The UK reiterated the importance we attach to devoting at least half of the financial resources under the Regulation to Axis 2; we expressed some doubt as to the level of the LEADER reserve proposed, and we supported others in giving a general welcome to the likely shape of the strategy framework.

On fisheries, the council reached unanimous agreement on the proposal to establish the Community Fisheries Control Agency. The remaining issue of the scale of Commission representation on the agency's administrative board was resolved. A compromise was reached on six members (with a total of six votes) for the Commission, in addition to one for each member state. A joint Council and Commission statement makes it clear that this high degree of Commission representation is not a precedent for other any other possible agencies.

The Community Fisheries Control Agency is intended to co-ordinate fisheries enforcement operations, known as joint deployment plans, to help provide equality of inspection standards across the Community. All the major Scottish negotiating objectives for the agency were achieved, including a number of significant reforms to the Commission’s original proposal. The agency will be based in Vigo and is scheduled to begin work formally within a year.

On agriculture, the Commission presented proposals for EU measures to address market crises through risk management measures funded through modulation. This was a brief presentation, with substantial discussion planned for later in the year. The Commission made it clear that it opposed extending any kind of generalised safety net provision such as that found in the current beef regime. It also indicated that the use of any modulated funds would only be possible in the context of rural development programmes and measures that were compatible with the WTO Green Box.

The Commission reported progress in negotiations with the Russian Federation to agree certain plant and animal health controls. While the UK has not so far been among the member states most affected by Russian requirements, it was encouraging that progress was being made to resolve the remaining differences.

The Commission also presented a progress report on implementation of the EU forestry strategy. Member states took note.

Under other business, Portugal drew attention to the difficulties that prolonged drought had caused in its rural areas.