---

Pesticides Tax (Hazard Scoring)

Mr. Martyn Jones: To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions if he will make a statement on progress on hazard scoring with regard to the taxing of pesticides. [67715]

Mr. Meale: The Government have been exploring the possibility of introducing a pesticide tax as a component of its pesticide minimisation policy. As part of this work, consideration has been given to the relative environmental hazard of the active ingredients contained in different pesticides.

28 Jan 1999 : Column: 333

Genetically Modified Organisms

Mr. Martyn Jones: To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions how many man hours are spent by officials at the Health and Safety Executive on monitoring and enforcing the regulations and guidelines covering genetically modified organisms; what estimate he has made of the expected growth in this amount of working time should the United Kingdom allow the expansion to commercial growing; and what is his estimate of the costs involved. [67753]

Mr. Meale: The regulations and guidelines in Great Britain covering genetically modified organisms can be divided into those covering deliberate releases (typically the controlled growing of crops on designated sites) and those covering contained use (typically developmental work involving organisms, animals and plants in laboratories or glass houses).

The Health and Safety Executive inspects and enforces the regulations covering the deliberate release of genetically modified organisms under an agency agreement with the Department of the Environment, Transport and Regions (DETR). In the current working year, 888 hours (120 days or 0.57 person/years) are allocated for inspection and enforcement.

For contained use, in the current year, 1,665 hours (225 days or 1.07 person/years) are allocated for inspection and enforcement. Contained use work will not be affected by any expansion in commercial growing.

If the UK proceeds to commercial cultivation of genetically modified crops, the resources will be increased proportionally to take into account any additional inspection and enforcement duties.

Mr. Luff: To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions if he will list his Department's responsibilities and policies in relation to genetically-modified crops and the departments with which he liaises on this issue. [67664]

Mr. Meale: DETR has responsibility in England for all issues concerned with genetically modified organisms (GMOs) which may affect the environment and is responsible for reviewing all environmental risk assessments in respect of GM crops.

DETR has lead responsibility for the Genetically Modified Organisms (Deliberate Release) Regulations 1992, as amended, which in conjunction with Part VI of the Environmental Protection Act 1990 and the European Communities Act 1972, give effect to Council Directive 90/220/EEC on the deliberate release into the environment of genetically Modified Organisms, as amended by Commission Directive 97/35/EC.

DETR is lead competent authority for the purposes of EC Directive 90/220/EEC and in the wider international field has lead responsibility for taking forward the UK line in the negotiation of a Biosafety Protocol under the Convention on Biological Diversity.

The Health and Safety Executive's (HSE's) specialist inspectors enforce those sections of Part VI of the Environmental Protection Act 1990, and associated Regulations, which concern deliberate release of GMOs

28 Jan 1999 : Column: 334

into the environment. The enforcement is undertaken on behalf of the Secretary of State and is under the terms of an Agency Agreement.

The human safety aspects of the contained use of genetically modified crops are covered by the Genetically Modified Organisms (Contained Use) Regulations 1992, as amended. HSE is responsible for and enforces those Regulations. Environmental aspects are covered by Part VI of the Environmental Protection Act 1990 and associated Regulations--the Genetically Modified Organisms (Risk Assessment) (Records and Exemptions) Regulations 1996, as amended in 1997--for which DETR is responsible. HSE specialist inspectors enforce that legislation on behalf of DETR under an Agency Agreement.

Arrangements between Departments on the control and regulation of the contained use and deliberate release of GMOs is covered by a Memorandum of Understanding between DETR, HSE, MAFF, Scottish Office and Welsh Office and by an agreement between DETR and DOE(NI). Policy on biotechnology, including genetically modified crops, is co-ordinated by the Ministerial Group on Biotechnology, as announced by the Prime Minister on 21 October 1998, Official Report, columns 1134-35, which is chaired by the Minister for the Cabinet Office. In addition, officials across Government are in regular contact on biotechnology issues.

Mr. Yeo: To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions when the terms of reference of the Advisory Committee on Releases to the Environment were last reviewed. [68061]

Mr. Meale: The terms of reference of the Advisory Committee on Releases to the Environment (ACRE) have not changed since the committee was established in 1993. The remit of the committee was last reviewed and changed in October 1998 when the Secretary of State asked ACRE in future to advise not only on the direct and indirect effects of genetically modified organisms in the environment but on the possible changes in agronomic practice and subsequent effects on biodiversity.

Road Accidents (Motorway Tuition)

Mr. Pike: To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions what assessment his Department has made of the effect on the number of accidents and injuries of making compulsory some form of motorway tuition; and if he will make a statement. [67736]

Ms Glenda Jackson: Since it would not be practicable to make motorway tuition compulsory because many learner drivers are not within reasonable distance of a motorway, we have made no detailed assessment of the likely impact. However, Transport Research Laboratory research ¹ based on a large sample of drivers who passed their test in 1988 and 1989 estimates that the accident rate for male drivers in their first three years of driving is about four accidents per million miles on motorways compared to over 18 on major roads away from town centres and over 24 on quiet country or rural roads.

Changes to the practical driving test have been announced which will take effect in the Spring. The test will be longer to allow candidates to be assessed in situations more representative of modern driving

28 Jan 1999 : Column: 335

conditions, including higher-speed roads. That will mean that their training will have to equip them to meet those conditions.

Source:

¹ TRL Project Report 111. Cohort study of learner and novice drivers: Part 3, Accidents, offences and driving experience in the first three years of driving.

Ministerial Travel

Mrs. Shephard: To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions (1) if he will list the occasions on which he has taken an RAF flight since May 1997; and for what purpose; [67413]

(2) if he will list the occasions on which he has used a helicopter at public expense since May 1997; and for what purpose. [67415]

Mr. Prescott [holding answer 25 January 1999]: I refer to the answers given by my hon. Friend the Minister for Transport in London, on 19 November 1998, Official Report, columns 838-39, and 27 November 1998, Official Report, column 41. The RAF flights undertaken by me personally were those on 3 May and 23 July 1997 and 22 January, 23 March, 16 and 22 August and 26 September 1998. Of those, the flight on 3 May 1997 was made by helicopter, as were parts of the journeys from Belfast to Omagh and return on 16 and 22 August 1998. In addition I have made helicopter trips on 14 July 1998 to the opening of Capital One Bank in Nottingham, and on 7 October 1998 on a tour of emergency towing vessels as part of the launch of the Maritime and Coastguard Agency.

Packaging Waste

Mr. Stunell: To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions what assessment he has made of the financial cost to the packing industry of complying with EU law relating to recoverable packaging waste. [67682]

Mr. Meale: An assessment of the cost implications of the Producer Responsibility Obligations (Packaging Waste) Regulations 1997, which implement the EC Directive on Packaging and Packaging Waste (94/62/EC) was published when the Regulations came into force in March 1997. This assessment will be updated when measures to amend the Regulations are introduced in due course.

Mr. Burgon: To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions if he will make a statement on the outcome of his review of the Producer Responsibility Obligations (Packaging Waste) regulations 1997. [68346]

Mr. Meacher: I have considered the conclusions of the Advisory Committee on Packaging as set out in Sir Peter Parker's letters to me of 24 June and 22 December 1998, together with the other representations that were made to me in the course of the review. Subject to Parliamentary approval and, in the case of certain matters, the conclusion of the period for consulting European Union colleagues, I propose to make a number of changes to the Regulations as follows. As these changes are intended to take effect this year, I will introduce measures as soon as possible.

28 Jan 1999 : Column: 336

(i) The recovery and recycling targets will be increased in 1999 and 2000 as follows:

		Percentage
	1999	2000
Recovery	43	45
Material-specific recycling	10	13

Recovery and recycling targets for 2001 will remain unchanged for now, at 52 per cent. recovery and 16 per cent. recycling, in effect, the Directive targets. I will keep these under review in light of further information, including the development of the new Waste Strategy for England and Wales, further work by the Department on packaging data and data returns from businesses and compliance schemes to the Agencies in 1999.


(ii) The Regulations provide that the financial turnover threshold falls from the present £5 million to £1 million in 2000. However, I have concluded that businesses with a financial turnover of between £1 million and £2 million are unlikely to be handling significant quantities of packaging and so, in 2000, only those businesses who have a financial turnover of more than £2 million will come within the scope of the Regulations.

(iii) Currently, the Regulations provide for "wholesalers" to take on the selling obligation for the small retailers that they supply. The Advisory Committee noted that removing this obligation would significantly simplify the obligation on wholesaling businesses, who, in any case, have obligations for the activities they perform on packaging. I consider that the removal of the "wholesaler" obligation is likely to be beneficial provided other incentives are in place to promote the collection and recycling of the packaging passing through small shops and I therefore propose to remove the "wholesaler obligation" from the Regulations.

(iv) I agree with the Advisory Committee that there is considerable potential for increased involvement of consumers in business efforts to increase the amount of packaging waste recovered, to supplement the initiatives of local authorities, voluntary groups and other organisations. I note that some obligated businesses are better placed to ensure that consumers are informed than others, while other businesses have little or no contact with the consumer. It will therefore be a requirement on obligated businesses whose main activity is "selling" to provide information to consumers about the role they can play in increasing recovery and recycling of packaging waste, and in encouraging greater re-use of packaging. A similar requirement will be placed on compliance schemes.

(v) The packaging Regulations are also intended to reduce the amount of packaging used in order to avoid creating waste as far as possible. I attach great importance to further progress on minimisation and want to see what industry can do on a voluntary basis to develop indicators against which performance can be measured.

(vi) A rigorous monitoring and enforcement policy on the part of the Agencies is essential if the mandatory Directive targets are to be met in 2001. The Regulations are based on an approach which shares the burden between the different players in the packaging chain and depends on effective "free rider" deterrence. Currently some 8,900 businesses are covered by registration and this number will rise in 2000 when the turnover threshold test falls. If least-cost compliance is going to be achieved, business needs to be sure that all those who have legal obligations under the Regulations will register and comply with their full obligations. To this end, the Agency fee will rise to £900 with effect from 1999. I welcome the efforts made by the Agencies to strengthen enforcement programmes and I understand that the Agency has started taking proceedings against a number of companies who failed to register in 1998. With effect from this year I will be asking the Agencies to publish their monitoring programmes and report half yearly on number, size and sector of businesses checked for registration, for data provision, and for compliance with the recovery and recycling obligations. I also want to see a report on the allocation of Agency fee income to activities in this area. To

28 Jan 1999 : Column: 337

help the Agencies in their monitoring duties, I intend that compliance schemes will be given a deadline of 15 April for the full provision of data relating to all their members, and 30 June for the provision of updated operational plans. The registration deadline for individual businesses and compliance schemes will be 7 April each year.

(vii) I am aware of the challenging nature of the data requirement but I note that business is itself keen to have as accurate as possible a base-line figure for the tonnage of packaging in the waste stream against which to plan. My Department's provisional estimate of packaging in the waste stream is approximately 8.5 million tonnes, rising to some 9.7 million tonnes once wood and other packaging materials are included. The more accurate the data provided by obligated parties, the more effective will be the efforts to plan for increasing recovery of packaging waste and meeting targets in 2001. An improved data form is proposed for immediate use, and with a view to easing the data requirement on businesses obligated in 2000 for the first time, the Department has commissioned work to develop "off-the-shelf" data forms for these smaller firms who will have the option of using these forms or collecting and providing data themselves. I am prepared to consider further whether there are alternative ways of collecting data that would meet all Directive requirements and enable business to plan confidently for continued compliance with the Directive targets.

(viii) I have seen the Advisory Committee's recommendation that business concerns about hardship needed to be addressed and their advice that businesses in some sectors could face significant net costs of compliance, particularly if they are not able to pass costs on; that particular concerns had been demonstrated by the convertor sector; and that some interim changes should be made to the percentage activity obligations. The changes the Committee is recommending are a 2 per cent. reduction in the convertor activity obligation (from 11 per cent. to 9 per cent.); a 1 per cent. increase in the activity obligations of packer/fillers (from 36 per cent. to 37 per cent.) and retailers (from 47 per cent. to 48 per cent.).

The Committee has also recommended that a cross-sectoral, independent audit of net compliance costs of all sectors should be carried out in 1999. I welcome the Packaging Federation's support for both these proposals. I am inclined to accept the Committee's recommendations on these points but it will first be necessary to consult more widely on the proposed changes and the Department will be setting this in hand as early as possible.

(ix) I remain concerned that not enough is being done to ensure that sufficient household packaging waste will be available to contribute, as it will have to, to the achievement of the Directive targets in 2001. However, I have noted the advice of the Advisory Committee on this point and the views of the Environment Agency and others. Although separate targets for household waste were proposed in our consultation paper, I do not propose to introduce separate targets for household waste this year. I will be giving further consideration to ways of increasing recovery of packaging waste from the household waste stream.

I am also proposing to make some "technical" amendments to the Regulations to clarify or simplify existing provisions or deal with unintended omissions. I also intend to provide the option for those businesses investing in identifiable re-use systems to spread the cost of their obligations.

I will also made a separate statement shortly about the Packaging Waste Recovery Note (PRN) system.

---