If she will make a statement on the future of the EU sugar regime.

What recent representations she has received on the EU sugar reforms.

As you know, Mr. Speaker, my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State is attending the World Trade Organisation talks in Hong Kong. Under the Secretary of State's chairmanship, the European Union Agriculture Ministers reached an historic agreement to reform the sugar regime, which has remained largely untouched for the previous 40 years. Reform of the sugar regime was a key priority of the UK presidency.

I thank the Minister for his response, but does he agree that the sugar regime demonstrates everything that is wrong with the European Union? Consumers in the EU pay three times the world price, EU taxpayers pay £1 billion a year and, worse still, farmers in the EU dump their product on developing countries, destroying local farming. Is the reform not a case of too little, too late?

I was just about to say how much I agreed with the hon. Gentleman, as I concurred with all the reasons why it was important to reform the sugar regime. However, the reform is good for consumers and taxpayers because it will reduce prices and halve the current €7 billion a year cost. It is good for jobs, given that we lost 16,000 food processing jobs while sugar prices were three times the world price, and it is good for growers, because it ends the scandalous distortion under which EU growers receive only £1 for every £5 spent to support them. That is why it has been broadly welcomed by most key UK interests, that is why Tate & Lyle's share price soared after the deal, and that is why it should be welcomed in the House.

The British farmer is not frightened of change, as the Minister knows, but he is only too aware of the pace of change, particularly the question of the rate of compensation and which growers will receive it. Can the Minister explain the future of the British Sugar factory at York, and what alternative break crop is available to arable farmers if the demise of sugar beet takes place?

As I said, the deal offers the EU big sector sustainability and long-term certainty. The Commission estimated that twice as many jobs would be at risk from failure to reform as from the market-based approach that has been agreed. Farmers will receive more than 60 per cent. compensation for the sugar price cut through the single farm payment, including recognition of the UK's deficit area status. Consultation will take place with the industry on the exact way in which the compensation will be paid. The future of the sugar factory in York is in the hands of the market.

I congratulate the Minister and his colleagues on reform of the sugar regime, which shows that, with commitment, reform of the common agricultural policy can take place, although it needs to go further. As there are consequences for both producers and processors, will the Minister publish details of the scheme as quickly as possible so that decisions about future planting, the operation of the market and its effect on the British Sugar factory in Newark can be made?

I am sure that as soon as we have the details requested by my hon. Friend, they will be published.

Could the Minister say a little about the impact on African, Caribbean and Pacific countries—especially Guyana, where 35,000 people work in the sugar industry, on which they and their families are heavily dependent? The anticipated changes will reduce their national income by about $40 million per year, which wipes out by a factor of five the $8 million from which they have benefited in G8 debt relief. Will the Minister address the problems experienced by Guyana?

The UK shares my hon. Friend's concerns and we accept that the deal will reduce prices received by our traditional African, Caribbean and Pacific suppliers and reduce the attractiveness of the EU market for least developed countries. However, EU prices will still be at twice world levels and preferential access will still be guaranteed under the terms of the existing sugar protocol. Contrary to certain reports, the deal contains no new import restrictions. In addition, ACP countries will benefit from a two-year delay in price cuts. The amount of aid has still to be determined and cannot be settled until the new EU financial perspectives are agreed. The UK is pressing for at least €250 million a year over seven years.

As the Minister knows, contrary to popular myth a large number of the growers in East Anglia are not large estates or large farmers. They are smallholders and small farmers and they are a vital part of the rural economy. Will the deal protect their specific interests?

Certainly, as the details of the compensation are worked out, we will have in mind the hon. Gentleman's constituents—the small farmers who play an important role in the rural economy. Until the details have been agreed, it is difficult for me to add any more.