But first, beef. It's nearly forty eight hours now since the committee of scientists in Brussels pronounced that British beef is safe and the French have no right to keep banning it. But still no official word from Paris. The government here has been very stern: lift the ban right now or else! But, or else what? And might not the French even have a sort of argument for their intransigence. The Agriculture Minister Nick Brown is here. Good afternoon Mr Brown. The reason I suggest that is that they are, afterall, the French Government is acting on the advice of their own food agency, so you must have some sympathy for them - a little? NICK BROWN MP: No. The way the national food agencies should be structured and indeed the way we've structured our own Foods Standards Agency is that it feeds in to the professional advice that is given to ministers when these international negotiations are carried out, within the European Union or elsewhere, and when the decision is taken that's it. The French were a party to the decision, they should abide by it. Moreover, the scientific committee outcome on Friday has actually confirmed that the decision was right. We've only got one case, that is that the science underpins the export scheme and that we've implemented it correctly, and we have. HUMPHRYS: But if you look at it from the viewpoint of French people who are listening to what their Foods Standards Agency have said and what they have said is: Look, seventeen hundred cases of BSE in Britain, still this year. Now you know the details of that and we know the details of that, but nonetheless they see these bald figures. Now, it's endemic, they say. We've had, what is it: two cases per million, Britain has had six hundred and fifty cases per million. BROWN: But that is why, as you know, we have very powerful public safeguards, unique public safeguards in this country and the BSE, that is in the older animals never gets into the food chain. We have something called the over thirty months scheme, which means that these animals are destroyed and the meat and bone meal is incinerated. HUMPHRYS: Nonetheless, what they say to themselves is that our Foods Standards Agency has looked at all of that and they are still worried. Why should we not listen to our Foods Standards Agency. BROWN: Their Foods Standards Agency claimed new evidence, made a submission to the European Union scientists who said there is no new evidence. Moreover, they confirmed their confidence on the science and the date based export scheme and said that British beef is as safe as any in Europe. More than that, the outcome was unanimous. HUMPHRYS: Put the boot on the other foot. What if our Foods Standards Agency said for whatever reason it happened to be, let's assume it had been the sewage thing, the French sewage thing. We know in fact the scientists said that was.... But let's assume that they'd said that actually our Foods Standards Agency that is, when it comes in of course, said: yeah, French beef is pretty dodgy, I don't think we should be eating it. You, as a British politician would have one hell of a job, wouldn't you, saying to the British people: we should override..overrule our own Foods Standards Agency and go with what the European scientists are saying. BROWN: We will never be in that position.. HUMPHRYS: ..because our Foods Standards Agency is set up in such a way that it still acts as the professional advisors to ministers, that's myself and the Secretary of State for Health and when we go to negotiations with our partners in the European Union they feed that advice into the negotiation. But once a decision is made within the European Union we adhere to it, there are actually issues where we disagree currently with the European Union but we adhere to the collective decision. HUMPHRYS: So in other words you might ignore, ultimately, the advice of our own Foods Standards Agency. BROWN: No, because our Foods Standards Agency would be feeding in to those who give the advice on behalf of the whole of the European Union to the Council of Ministers and if there is European competence in the area then we will abide by the decision and obey the law, just as we do now. And it is that willingness to obey the law that has stood us in such good stead in this dispute. The institutions of the European Union have worked very well for us. HUMPHRYS: But surely then the answer to my question was yes, you would ignore it because they come along to you and they say: minister, we are deeply worried about French beef, French pork, whatever it happens to be, Dutch bacon it doesn't matter and we don't think British people should be eating it. They would then feed that advice - you would say feed that advice into the European agency and then let us see what they are saying. But at the end of the day you are going to have somebody interviewed from that Foods Standards Agency on this programme saying we don't believe that food is safe to eat, you will have to say, because of the way that the European Agency has ruled, sorry we think it is because of what the Europeans have jointly agreed. It makes it terribly difficult for you. BROWN: I understand the point you are making but where there is European Union competence our advisors will feed into the scientific view that is given collectively to ministers and we will abide by the decision. There are always disagreements amongst scientists and indeed when they debate scientific issues amongst themselves of course they are going to test different points of view. But once the advice has been given to ministers I think ministers are entitled to rely on it. That's the position that we are in at the minute. HUMPHRYS: There would be an outcry wouldn't there if our own scientists and we are all patriots when it comes to this, our own scientists said don't eat the stuff, Europe scientists said it's okay, it's fine, you'd be in a terrible..they'd be a real outcry. BROWN: I think the best way for ministers to proceed is on the basis of scientific advice and not try to twist the science.. HUMPHRYS: It might be logical, it's not politically sound is it. BROWN: I think the way the world is going it is actually politically sound and.. HUMPHRYS: ..but scientists.. BROWN: ..no, sure, but you cannot pick and mix your scientific advice to make a political point, that's what the Conservatives are trying to do and it will spark off a trade war which would be a very dangerous thing for our country. Remember we export worldwide some ten billion pounds worth of food and drink from this country. There are hundreds of thousands of British jobs at stake in this, we have a vested interest in fair and free trade. HUMPHRYS: So you would not always, possibly never, act on the advice of our own Foods Standards Agency scientists, that's the effect.. BROWN: I'm not saying that. I'm saying that in some circumstances that advice will inform the decision that is made.. HUMPHRYS: Or not as the case may be.. BROWN: ..the collective decision that is made within the European Union. HUMPHRYS: Or not as the case may be. BROWN: No, we've made it very clear if the Food Standards Agency came to ministers and said there is an 'overriding need' to act in the interests of health or hygiene then there is a derogation under European Union rules for that and if it were necessary to take emergency action to protect the public then of course we would and once the new Food Standards Agency is set up the whole public, everyone in this country will be able to test whether we've done that or not because they can put their advice in the public domain and I was very careful, although the Agency isn't fully set up yet to make sure that the advice they gave to me over the French animal feed issue was put into the public domain so everyone can see who has been advising the government and what their conclusion was. HUMPHRYS: But the essence of this is that you are happy, broadly, for the European Food Standards agency when it is set up to be able effectively to rule on what we should and should not eat? BROWN: No. The question is to whether there should be a European Union Food Standards Agency is still one to be addressed. HUMPHRYS: Yeah I understand that but what I'm saying if this is what results from it you will be happy with that result? BROWN: At the minute there is a scientific committee that advises the Commissioner, Commissioner Burn on these matters and we feed our views into this as the French do as well and indeed it's just such a process that we've just gone through. The European Union Scientific Committee have just looked very hard at the French claim to have new evidence, they've said 'no. there is no new evidence', that British beef is as safe as any in Europe and the French must lift their ban. Now that's a pretty decisive outcome. HUMPHRYS: Sure, I accept that but are you happy with the idea in principle at this stage that there should be a European Food Agency with the sorts of powers we've been talking about? BROWN: I haven't seen the detailed proposals for the new agency. I don't want to express a definitive view until I have but when the proposal comes forward in any event I expect I will not be the minister commenting on it because we're transferring responsibility for this inside the government to the Department of Health..... HUMPHRYS: I thought you were announcing your resignation there for a moment.... I thought we had a story. BROWN: I saw a glint in your eye but it's actually been known for some time that we'll be transferring ministerial responsibility for public health out of the Department of Agriculture and into the department of Health. HUMPHRYS: But what's the British government's input on this then? Is the British government saying 'Broadly we are in favour of a European Food Standards Agency with the kind of powers that we've just been talking about'? BROWN: No, we want to examine what the detailed proposals are before expressing a definitive view. There is certainly a case for drawing together the advice that was given to national governments in a European forum particularly where there is European competence on the issues. HUMPHRYS: What are you going to do if the French do not obey what the scientists said a couple of day's ago and stick to the ruling of their own agency of their own food standards agency and say we are not going to import British beef? BROWN: This is not a bilateral quarrel between Britain and France ...... HUMPHRYS: ...well that's what it's become..... BROWN: I know it seems that way but it isn't. The date-based exports scheme is a Commission scheme. Thirteen of the member states have already lifted their ban and a fourteenth, Germany is already going through procedures to lift their ban...... HUMPHRYS: ...difficult.... BROWN: Yes they are difficult but they are going through their procedures to lift their ban. The French, uniquely, are saying they will not do so..... HUMPHRYS: What if they carry on saying it? BROWN: Well that is a quarrel between the French and the rest of the European Union. It's not a well founded quarrel as we now know because the advice from the European Union's Scientific Committee has been so decisive..... HUMPHRYS: Yes but it's our farmers who suffer as a result of it so what are WE going to do about it? BROWN: No, that is absolutely right and what I hope the outcome will be is that the French consider the advice of the Scientific Committee, they will clearly want to talk to their own professional advisors, they will want to come to a view within their own government and then I hope that Commissioner Burn, and after all this is a European Union scheme, can get myself and Jean Glavany together...... HUMPHRYS: That's the French Agriculture Minister....? BROWN: That's the French Agriculture minister and that we can find a way forward, certainly there's a willingness on my side to do that. HUMPHRYS: So you've not talked to Mr Glavany yourself? BROWN: I think it would be quite improper for me to ring Jean Glavany and try and make some bilateral arrangement with him, remember this is a European Union scheme and it is for the European Union to take the lead in persuading the French to comply with it. HUMPHRYS: But you are prepared to, you say you're going to have a meeting, you're prepared to make some concessions to get the French off their own hook? BROWN: No I haven't said that. I'm prepared to discuss it with the French.... HUMPHRYS: Is that the case? BROWN: Well we'll see how discussions go but what I cannot do is to renegotiate the date-based export scheme. The European Union Scientists have said it's founded on good science and they have also said that the British government have implemented it correctly so there doesn't seem to be much room for manoeuvre there. HUMPHRYS: Well there doesn't seem much point in a discussion at all in that case. Why discuss it - there's nothing to discuss? BROWN: Because I think we want to get this issue resolved quickly and by agreement if we can HUMPHRYS: But it is resolved as far as you're concerned. When you say, 'By agreement...' that can only mean that there is something to agree upon and the French have been told what they've got to do. BROWN: Well that's my view. I want to listen to their view. HUMPHRYS: And then say 'No'? BROWN: Well we'll have a discussion about it but what I cannot do is to re-shape the date-based exports scheme on the authority of the United Kingdom government because it's not the UK government's scheme and more than that it's been underpinned very firmly by the Scientific Committee that advises the European Union. HUMPHRYS: So in truth the purpose of this meeting is really just to sit there, listen to what they have to say and say, 'well we've heard that and now you comply'? BROWN: The outcome of Friday's scientific committee consideration could not be clearer. They said the scheme is founded on good science and that our beef is as safe as any in Europe, that we've implemented the scheme correctly. Now that's very clear cut and it's for the French to respond. HUMPHRYS: All European Union beef has got to be labelled I think from January isn't it? BROWN: There is what is called the Beef labelling proposal. Labelling schemes in the European Union are fiendishly complex (both speaking at once) HUMPHRYS: The reason I raise it is because what if the French were to say - 'We'll wait before we lift the ban until that labelling scheme is in operation', the implication being clearly that if French people see that's it's a British label beef they may not buy it. Would you be happy to wait until that.... if the French say that? BROWN: Labelling is a matter of competence for the European Union. We've proved our point. We have nothing to be ashamed of. Our beef is as safe as any in Europe and indeed with all the safeguards that are in place here it's amongst the safest in the world and for myself I think we should say so but what I cannot do is unilaterally amend the European Union labelling laws nor am I willing to agree to a delay in the export of British beef whilst those rules are amended or re-examined or whatever the proposal is going to be. We've justified our position, it's for the French to lift their ban not to introduce a new proposal that would lead to a delay in lifting the ban. HUMPHRYS: Right. So if the French said let's hang on until January or whatever it happens to be, you'd say no? BROWN: I'm not agreeing to anything that is - that means a delay is going to be built into the lifting of the ban. HUMPHRYS: So there really is no room for compromise here at all? BROWN: There are things we could discuss. HUMPHRYS: Such as? BROWN: Well, let's see what the French want to raise with us. The ball is in their court, it's for them to come to us first. I want to help get this resolved. HUMPHRYS: But not if it means any delay in exporting British beef or any change to the thirty month date based scheme, or anything of that nature at all? BROWN: Well ultimately it is a European Union scheme, it's not a bilateral agreement between the UK and France. HUMPHRYS: So what if.... BROWN: And whilst I want to be helpful the underpinning science is perfectly clear, the scheme is well founded, the British are implementing it correctly - our beef is amongst the safest in the world. HUMPHRYS: So what if the Commissioner said - the European Agricultural Commissioner said, "Well, maybe we can make some changes to this date based scheme" What would our position be on that? You say you are not prepared to make any changes. BROWN: I think after Friday's outcome that is not what he's likely to say. After all the outcome of the scientific committee .... HUMPHRYS: You never know. BROWN: ...has been that the science underpins the existing scheme it's sound, that is not a basis for anybody to recommend changes to the scheme. HUMPHRYS: So you wouldn't accept that? I mean our national position would be no, even if Brussels wants to make.... BROWN: I am willing to consider anything that is reasonable. However it seems to me completely unreasonable when the European Union scientists have said the scheme is correctly structured to then say that's the reason for changing it. HUMPHRYS: So some concessions though you're reluctant to outline what they may be. BROWN: Well, it's actually quite difficult to see what they may be. I want to approach this with an open mind and I want to behave fairly, and I want to get the issue settled quickly. HUMPHRYS: Are you going to ask for compensation? BROWN: That's a matter for the courts and for the law, but I believe... HUMPHRYS: Yes, but we hope to .... BROWN: ... but I believe - I'm not sure that's true. I think you have to have a loss before you institute a claim for compensation, and that's for others to consider their position. HUMPHRYS: Well, but if the NFU came along and said on behalf of our members : it's quite clear our members have lost because they haven't been able to sell as much beef as they otherwise would have been able to do. We're entitled to compensation. Would you support their claim? BROWN: If someone in Britain has a loss and wishes to take action for it I believe the people who really do have a loss should be compensated for that loss. That is a matter for the courts and not for the Government. HUMPHRYS: But the Government would support such an action? BROWN: If you mean would we financially support such an action I'm not sure that I can do that. HUMPHRYS: But we would morally support such an action? BROWN: If somebody has a loss then of course I would support the action. HUMPHRYS: Any question at all of us banning French beef because of the sorts of things we've been hearing about, the things that happens occasionally or perhaps often, although it's said no longer is supposed to happen to French beef? BROWN: You know, my position on this has been absolutely consistent, as is the Government's. Where there is a need to act on health or hygiene grounds we will act. We will take professional advice on these issues and the professional advice is very clear, there is no danger to human health from French livestock products, and in spite of all the pressure that has come on me over the last week to institute a ban I will not be doing so unless the professional advice changes. HUMPHRYS: Some people take the view, Professor Pennington is one, - that spraying sewage or injecting sewage into the land on British farms is a pretty dodgy exercise. Are you considering talking to British farmers about that, or indeed getting strict about it? BROWN: In all of these issues I act on professional advice and if the professional advice to me is that the Government should amend the rules that govern farming practice then of course we will do so. HUMPHRYS: Are you looking for advice on it? BROWN: I don't have to look for the advice, it comes to me. If there's a risk to human health, as indeed there was under the recent Belgium dioxin crisis the Government acted, and acted immediately, and we acted in parallel with the European Commission. Remember the Commission are not urging a ban on French livestock products, nor is any other member state in the European Union taking, making such a unilateral ban. HUMPHRYS: But if somebody came to you and said: I'm really worried - Professor Pennington for instance, about the nasty little bits that still live in sewage apparently for quite a long time - eight months I think he believes in some case - you would say, we will take a look at that. BROWN: I am content for the Government's professional advisors to discuss these matters in a detached scientific setting rather than overshadowed by politics and then come to my department and to the Secretary of State for Health, and say there is an issue here that has to be dealt with - the Government must act promptly, and then we would act promptly. HUMPHRYS: None of these sorts of things - BSE and the like, would happen, has happened, under organic farming schemes. You are a supporter of organic farming, you want to give them a bit more money,. They say nothing like enough, but nonetheless a bit more. There a story this morning that says because of a bureaucratic bungle of some sort in Brussels you're not going to be able to give them the extra money that you had promised. Is that the case? BROWN: No, the headline in the newspaper story doesn't quite explain what's happening and it is not a bungle in Brussels, it's actually something we welcome which is the introduction of a new rural development regulation, the second pillar of the Common Agricultural Policy. In any event it will not have a practical impact here because the extra ten million pounds that I announced for organic farming in the debate last Thursday will be allocated before Christmas, before the temporary closure of this window of opportunity, as a six month closure of a new rural development measure comes in, but organic farmers here have nothing to fear from that. . HUMPHRYS: Well, a final thought about your own position in all this. You've been roundly criticised by certain people and left to hang out to dry apparently by other members of the Cabinet over your personal boycott. I gather that you're now saying that that will end when all of this ends. Do you have any regrets about having done it in the sense that as you always said, you're entitled to spend your money the way you wish to. But it has without any doubt helped to fuel a bit of anti-French feeling hasn't it, it's given the newspapers certainly the chance to say Non to France and all that? BROWN: Yes. Agricultural Ministers always get attacked whenever there's a difficulty in our subject area, and I think my predecessors are all sharing wry grins at the difficulties I'm having to fight my way through. On the question of my personal ban on French products I do it for two reasons. Firstly I wanted to show solidarity with the farmers, and secondly I wanted to say there is something very exceptional and unique about this dispute... HUMPHRYS: Non French. BROWN: None whatsoever. HUMPHRYS: You're not going to say Je ne regrette rien? BROWN: No, my pal Norman says that. I express it in English. HUMPHRYS: Nick Brown, thank you very much indeed.