| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Radioactive Materials
Ms Walley: To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions what assessment he has made of the United Nations International Maritime Organisation's conclusion on the safety of ro-ro vessels for the transport of radioactive materials; and if he will make a statement. [18849]
Ms Glenda Jackson: The statement attributed to the IMO in a recent press article that ro-ro vessels are
- "exceptionally vulnerable to human error"
is taken from a 33 page IMO background information paper entitled "IMO and ro-ro safety" The paper deals with ro-ro safety in general and makes no reference to the transport of radioactive materials in particular. However, in 1993 the IMO Assembly adopted, and has recently amended, the Code for the Safe Carriage of Irradiated Nuclear Fuel, Plutonium and High-Level Radioactive Waste in Flasks on board Ships (INF Code). UK companies involved in the transport of materials covered by the INF Code use ships complying with the Code.
Ms Walley:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions what measures are being taken to ensure than shipments of radioactive material comply with safety and security regulations; and if he will make a statement. [18850]
8 Dec 1997 : Column: 414
Ms Glenda Jackson:
Officials of my Department's Radioactive Materials Transport Division are responsible for the safety assessment of package designs for the safe transport of radioactive material, requiring competent authority approval, by all modes. Their compliance assurance branch monitors the design, manufacture and operation of all packages and is responsible for enforcement of the radioactive material road transport regulations. Enforcement during carriage by rail, air and sea, is carried out respectively by HM Railways Inspectorate of the Health and Safety Executive, the Civil Aviation Authority and the Department's Marine Safety Agency.
Matters of physical security are for my right hon. Friend the President of the Board of Trade.
Ms Walley:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions if he will make a statement on (a) the public safety implications and (b) the security issues involved in the use of roll-on roll-off ferries to transport plutonium around the United Kingdom; and what action he is taking to monitor this activity. [18848]
Ms Glenda Jackson:
Public safety is ensured by enforcing the Merchant Shipping (Dangerous Goods and Marine Pollutants) Regulations 1990 monitored by the Department's Marine Safety Agency. These regulations require such material to be carried in packages which are
8 Dec 1997 : Column: 415
resistant to severe accident conditions and which have been approved by my Department. UK companies involved in the transport of plutonium by sea use ships meeting the International Maritime Organisation's "Code for the Safe Carriage of Irradiated Nuclear Fuel, Plutonium and High-Level Radioactive Wastes in Flasks on board Ships" (INF Code).
The UK applies the requirements of the Convention on the Physical Protection of Nuclear Material. Matters of physical security are for my right hon. Friend the President of the Board of Trade.
Mr. Tom King:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions what estimates of the levels of cohabitation were included in the latest household projections; and to what extent these differ from previous projections. [18604]
Mr. Raynsford:
The most recent, 1992-based household projections were the first to use co-habiting couples as a separate household category for estimation purposes. This followed the inclusion of "living together as a couple" for the first time as a recognised relationship in the 1991 Census. It is not possible, therefore, to make comparisons with previous projections about assumed levels of cohabitation.
The levels of co-habitation assumed for the latest households projections were the 1992-based projections of marital status made by the Government Actuary's Department. A detailed description of the methodology and statistical assumptions underlying the latest household projections is set out in the annexes of "Projections in
8 Dec 1997 : Column: 416
Households in England to 2016", published by the Stationery Office in March 1995. The treatment of the marital status projections and cohabitation is provided in Annexes D and G of this publication, a copy of which is in the Library of the House.
Mr. Tom King:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions how many homes were built in each English county between 1991 and 1996; and what change in the number of households was previously projected over those years. [18598]
Mr. Raynsford:
The information requested is provided below. The total number of new dwellings built, by county, covers the period from July 1991 to June 1996. The figures for successive sets of household projections are the differences between the published projected figures for mid-year 1996 and mid-year 1991. These are subject to rounding error as the published figures are only readily available to the nearest thousand.
It is not appropriate to make a direct comparison between the number of dwellings built between 1991 and 1996 and the projected number of households forming over that period, for two reasons. First, the household projections are not an estimate of the number of additional houses which have to be built in any period. Rather, they represent one of the factors to be taken into account by local planning authorities when arriving at figures for housing provision to be included in regional guidance and development plans. Secondly, the housebuilding figures do not include other sources of new dwellings such as conversions. Furthermore, the 1992-based household projections were not published until March 1995 and most county structure plans prepared since 1991 have used earlier household projections as the basis for planning housing provision.
8 Dec 1997 : Column: 415
8 Dec 1997 : Column: 417
8 Dec 1997 : Column: 417
Mr. Tom King:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions which county councils have been written to by Ministers in respect of the housing numbers being proposed in structure plans. [18607]
Mr. Raynsford:
Since the responsibility for adopting structure plans passed to local authorities, the Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions has written to the following county councils in respect of proposed housing numbers in their plans:
Mr. Tom King:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions which county structure plans have been adopted with housing requirements lower than those set out in regional planning guidance. [18606]
Mr. Raynsford:
Of the counties that have adopted their structure plans after the publication of the Regional Planning Guidance for the region concerned, two have adopted housing figures lower than those in the RPG. In both cases the differences were marginal. The counties concerned were Buckinghamshire (64,000 compared to an RPG figure of 65,340) and Surrey (35,600 compared to an RPG figure of 36,000).
Bedfordshire
Berkshire
Cheshire
Devon
Dorset
Hampshire
Hertfordshire
Kent
Oxfordshire
Somerset
West Sussex
Wiltshire.
| Next Section | Index | Home Page |