Sustainable Livestock Bill

Oliver Heald Excerpts
Friday 12th November 2010

(13 years, 5 months ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
David Nuttall Portrait Mr Nuttall
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

The Minister makes a good point, which I shall come on to later.

Oliver Heald Portrait Mr Oliver Heald (North East Hertfordshire) (Con)
- Hansard - -

But does not my hon. Friend think it right that we should have green fields and farmers tending their livestock, not enormous great sheds, on an industrial scale, absolutely packed full of cattle being fed soya?

David Nuttall Portrait Mr Nuttall
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

My hon. Friend makes a reasonable point, and I accept that, in an ideal world, that might be the case, but in this country the climate does not always make such practices possible. Throughout history, cattle have been kept inside sheds for a large part of the year. Okay, perhaps in years gone by, they were kept in wooden sheds, and that might not be appropriate in this day and age, but it is fairly normal practice to bring cattle inside in the winter months.

Oliver Heald Portrait Mr Heald
- Hansard - -

I fully appreciate that there is no harm at all in using sheds, but is there not an issue of scale? Some of the proposals that one hears about these days involve not just a shed, but almost an aircraft hangar.

David Nuttall Portrait Mr Nuttall
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

My hon. Friend makes an interesting point, but if we accept that it is okay for, for the sake of argument, 60 head of cattle to be kept inside a shed in the winter, providing the animal welfare standards are acceptable for 60 and not diluted when extended to 600—

Oliver Heald Portrait Mr Heald
- Hansard - -

Or 6,000.

David Nuttall Portrait Mr Nuttall
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

Or 6,000. That is the crucial point.

--- Later in debate ---
David Nuttall Portrait Mr Nuttall
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

My hon. Friend makes a very good point. There are a number of apparent contradictions in the idea that the traditional—I think the phrase used in farming is “more extensive”—methods will result in any saving or extra protection of the environment. For example, a farmer has to drive to reach the flocks of sheep that are tended on the uplands, but if they are all in one place that is much more environmentally sound.

Oliver Heald Portrait Mr Heald
- Hansard - -

My hon. Friend is being very generous with his time, but is he really saying that we should clear the uplands of sheep? That is one of the glories of Cumbria.

David Nuttall Portrait Mr Nuttall
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

Absolutely not. That is, indeed, one of the glories, and as someone who has on many occasions enjoyed walking in that environment and eating such animals, I certainly would not suggest as much, but it is worth considering that even in the most natural of environments, that method of farming still has an environmental impact.

The Bill seeks to define sustainability not just in environmental terms, but in social and economic terms. The definition is so broad that it makes the Bill completely unworkable. I am concerned that duty (d) in clause 3 includes a requirement not just to protect the landscape, but to “enhance” it. I am not clear why that is necessary.

Alongside that definition, there is no mention whatever of the economic aspects of sustainability. We need farmers to make a profit and to be consistently profitable. It is surely essential to the sustainability of the livestock industry that farmers be economically viable, and at the very least the reference in clause 3, duty (e), to

“the resilience of farming communities”

should be redrafted to include that critical point.