13 Feb 1996 : Column: 479
Written Answers to Questions
Tuesday 13 February 1996
ENVIRONMENT
Empty Buildings
Dr. Lynne Jones : To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment how many empty buildings his Department currently owns; what is the cost of insuring and securing these buildings; how many were designed as residential properties; and what was the total amount spent by his Department on empty property taxes in each of the last five years. [14574]
Sir Paul Beresford: Property Holdings is responsible for the whole of the Government civil office estate known as the common user (office) estate in which Government Departments and their agencies are housed. At 31 December 1995 there were 195 empty buildings on the CUE, 38 owned by the Government and the remainder held on lease.
As a general rule, the Government carry their own insurance risk. Where premises are leasehold, some landlords require formal insurance cover. This invariably forms part of the service charges. The security and insurance elements within such charges cannot readily be disaggregated and consolidated without disproportionate cost.
Until vacation the empty properties on the CUE have been used by the Government as business premises. An assessment of their original design criteria is not available centrally.
The Government make a contribution in lieu of rates on their CUE properties. The figures for payments of CILOR made by Property Holdings on its vacant space, leased and owned, are as follows:
Mr. Barry Field:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment (1) what was the length of the sewage outfall pipe at Norton for which the National Rivers Authority gave its discharge consent; and what is the actual length of the pipe as it now exists; [14335]
(3) when the National Rivers Authority measured the outfall pipes for which it has given consents. [14341]
13 Feb 1996 : Column: 480
Mr. Clappison:
I understand that the National Rivers Authority does not usually measure the length of outfalls, but does verify locations of the discharge positions. The consent for the discharge at Norton, which pre-dates the establishment of the NRA, does not specify a pipe length but does specify the discharge location by national grid reference.
Mr. Field:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment (1) what assessment the National Rivers Authority has made of the advantages of introducing a computer model of the tidal flow off the Norton outfall; [14339]
Mr. Clappison:
I understand that the National Rivers Authority already has a model which can be applied to any discharge to the Solent.
Mr. Field:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment when the National Rivers Authority gave permission for the discharge of sewage on the flood tide at Norton. [14337]
Mr. Clappison:
I understand that, since its establishment in 1989, the National Rivers Authority has not altered the discharge consent for the Norton outfall.
Mr. Field:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what enforcement action the National Rivers Authority intends to take for non-compliance with its consents at the Norton outfall. [14336]
Mr. Clappison:
I understand that the National Rivers Authority is not aware of any current breaches of the consent for the Norton outfall.
Mr. Field:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will make a statement on the National Rivers Authority's response to the imposition of tertiary treatment plants for Solent outfalls. [14324]
Mr. Clappison:
There is no requirement for tertiary treatment in the Solent.
Mr. Field:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what studies the NRA has made of the closure of the Totland outfall and the consequential effects on outflow at Norton; and what studies were made by the NRA of increasing the volume of discharge inside the Solent as opposed to outside it. [14408]
Mr. Clappison:
I understand that the National Rivers Authority has carried out monitoring at Totland for bathing water directive and other purposes. Bacteriological quality at Norton foreshore has also been monitored by the NRA and has shown an improvement since 1993.
Detailed studies of the dispersion characteristics of the Solent for the purposes of the urban waste water treatment directive have resulted in a requirement for full secondary biological treatment for all significant sewage discharges into these waters.
Mr. Barry Field:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what plans he has to designate the Solent's
13 Feb 1996 : Column: 481
native oyster beds under the biodiversity plan; and what other bi-valve oyster beds and eco-systems in (a) the United Kingdom and (b) the EU are of similar ecological importance. [14409]
Mr. Clappison:
"Biodiversity: The UK Steering Group Report", published on 13 December 1995, contains no plans to designate the Solent's native oyster beds. The report does recommend that the native or European oyster, Ostrea edulis, be among 1,253 species whose conservation status should be monitored. The Government expect to publish their response to the report in spring of 1996.
Important native oyster beds are found in the Fal and Helford estuaries, River Tamar, River Lynher, the Crouch, Blackwater, Roach and West Mersea estuaries in England; Loch Ryan in Scotland and Milford Haven and Swansea bay in Wales. In the European Union important native oyster beds include Oosterscheldte in the Netherlands and the north Brittany coast around St. Malo in France.
Mr. Field:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what assessment the National Rivers Authority has made of the advantages of monitoring the Solent under the shellfish waters directive. [14334]
Mr. Clappison:
The National Rivers Authority is the competent authority for reporting compliance with and enforcing the shellfish waters directive. It is required to monitor all the areas of the Solent designated under the directive.
Mr. Bennett:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will make a statement on (a) restoration orders for areas of special scientific interest and (b) the consultations he has had about extending his powers under section 31 of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981. [14591]
Mr. Clappison:
We have agreed in principle to consult on the extension of the powers of the court to make an order requiring restoration when the special interest of such a site is damaged.
Ms Abbott:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what was the level of finance for the Joint Nature Conservation Committee for each of the last five years; and if he will make a statement. [14606]
Mr. Clappison:
The budget allocated to the Joint Nature Conservation Committee by English Nature, Scottish Natural Heritage and the Countryside Council for Wales over the past five years has been:
13 Feb 1996 : Column: 482
Mr. McNamara:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment (1) what account he takes of topography and salinity when deciding the outer estuarine boundary of the River Humber; [14955]
Mr. Clappison:
The National Rivers Authority has been asked to review the basis for establishing estuary boundaries for the purposes of the urban waste water treatment directive, including the relevance of salinity and topography, and to advise my Department accordingly.
Mr. Sheerman:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what steps his Department is taking to monitor global temperature rises. [14928]
Mr. Clappison:
The Department receives regular reports from the Meterological Office about global temperatures.
Mr. Steen:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment on which occasions in the last three years officials have vetoed draft EU legislation on the grounds that a fiche d'impact had not been correctly prepared. [13654]
Sir Paul Beresford:
Since the implementation of the Maastricht treaty all EC environmental legislation has been adopted under qualified majority voting and a veto cannot apply. The correct preparation of fiches d'impact is a very important part of our consideration of proposals for EC legislation. It is one of the factors taken into account when Ministers consider the UK's negotiating position on a particular proposal.
1991-92: £16.0 million
1992-93: £18.0 million
1993-94: £17.2 million
1994-95: £15.0 million
1995-96: £24.6 million (estimate)
(2) if he will list those outfall pipes that (a) have been and (b) have not been measured for length by the National Rivers Authority for which it has discharge consent; [14323]
(2) when the National Rivers Authority expects to have a model for the flow of dispersal off the Norton outfall. [14340]
This funding has enabled the country agencies to carry out those special functions relating to nature conservation in Great Britain as a whole and beyond Great Britain which are exercised through the joint committee.
1991-92: £3.955 million
1992-93: £5.050 million
1993-94: £4.900 million
1994-95: £5.008 million
1995-96: £4.735 million
(2) if he will now receive the outer estuarine limit of the Humber under the urban waste water directive taking account only of objective criteria. [14956]
| Next Section | Index | Home Page |