All 2 Debates between Natalie Elphicke and Mark Spencer

Checks on Goods Entering UK

Debate between Natalie Elphicke and Mark Spencer
Monday 29th April 2024

(7 months, 3 weeks ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Mark Spencer Portrait Sir Mark Spencer
- View Speech - Hansard - - - Excerpts

The right hon. Gentleman says that there will be extensive costs. As I said, for low-risk products they are £10 per product, limited to a maximum of five products per common health entry document. That means that the costs are reasonable. We calculate that there will be a 0.2% increase in cost over three years. He says that these goods are coming from within the EU under the same regulations. African swine fever is moving across Europe. It is already present in Italy. Were that disease to get to the UK, it would be devastating for the UK pork market and the UK pig population. It would also damage our ability to export pork products around the world if we lost our credibility as being free from African swine fever.

Natalie Elphicke Portrait Mrs Natalie Elphicke (Dover) (Con)
- View Speech - Hansard - -

The Minister is absolutely right about the devastating impact of not having proper checks and the risk of African swine fever, so can he explain why Dover Port Health is having its costs slashed for essential checks at the border? Will he accept that the existing checks should be maintained in full at Dover Port Health; that Dover port of is the right authority, with its state-of-the-art facility, to do these important checks, in respect of which it is the most experienced body across the entire channel; and that we should not risk having these checks at some new, untested, supposedly trained facility 22 miles away in Ashford? That is a risk to this country.

Mark Spencer Portrait Sir Mark Spencer
- View Speech - Hansard - - - Excerpts

I pay tribute to my hon. Friend’s tenacious campaign on behalf of her constituents and the port of Dover, but I hope she will not mind my drawing attention to the fact that these are separate regimes: goods coming in legally, via legal channels, with the right documentation will move to Sevington, but the port of Dover is the right place for Border Force to ensure that we are protected from illegal imports, and those checks will still take place. The conversations with the Port of Dover over funding continue, and we want to see Port of Dover continue to help to keep us safe and intercept any illegal imports that people may attempt to bring into the UK.

Draft Wine (Amendment) (England) Regulations 2024

Debate between Natalie Elphicke and Mark Spencer
Wednesday 17th January 2024

(11 months, 1 week ago)

General Committees
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Mark Spencer Portrait Mark Spencer
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

That is a very good question. It is quite simply because the ice wine brand, as it were, is not currently protected in the UK. In signing up to CPTPP, an obligation was placed on us to recognise this product and register it in the UK. Ice wine is mostly made in Canada, which is a signatory to that agreement. This is about protecting their ice wine producers’ brand, as it were.

Natalie Elphicke Portrait Mrs Natalie Elphicke (Dover) (Con)
- Hansard - -

The Minister is very helpfully explaining this product. Will he say whether the change will be to the detriment of Eiswein produced in Germany, which is obviously a more popularly known product in the UK?

Mark Spencer Portrait Mark Spencer
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

This is about ensuring that UK consumers, when choosing which wine to purchase, understand the process and the methodology by which it has been made and can make that choice for themselves. I commend the regulations to the Committee.