| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Bovine Tuberculosis
Dr. Iddon: To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what were the results of the pilot study commissioned by him on tuberculosis in cattle; and if he will make a statement. [80072]
Mr. Rooker: Following the Krebs report, it is clear that TB in cattle is a complex problem with a multiplicity of causes. A wildlife reservoir is a significant factor, but we need to be clear why it is that some farms suffer TB incidents while others in the same vicinity do not.
In order to focus our efforts on understanding these processes, and to illuminate the detailed differences between farms, we are now launching the epidemiological investigation which was piloted on a small number of farms last November.
A new database will be compiled from information collected from all farms which have suffered TB incidents, and from a number of other farms. The pilot
31 Mar 1999 : Column: 748
study has proved invaluable in enabling us to streamline the collection of this information. The public consultation held at the same time has produced a number of extremely helpful suggestions which we have also been able to take on board. Copies of the new questionnaire (form TB99) have been placed in the Library.
As soon as there are enough entries in the database, we shall start to analyse the information to try and identify those factors which, either individually or in combination, are associated with TB incidents. Information on cattle movements, husbandry and farm management practices, wildlife on farms and the local environment will be analysed alongside other data, for example on local weather conditions and patterns of badger activity. The results will be used to develop new control strategies and will feed through into improved guidance for farmers.
Mr. Nicholas Winterton:
To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what representations he has (a) made to the United States Government to secure a lifting of the import sanctions on United Kingdom products and (b) received from the Government of the United States of America following the imposition of trade sanctions on United Kingdom and European Union export products. [79157]
Mr. Wilson:
I have been asked to reply.
As it is an external trade matter, responsibility for making representations to the United States over the EU/US banana dispute rests primarily with the European Commission, on behalf of the European Union. My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State and I have also made a number of representations direct to the US Administration in the course of this dispute. In particular, the Secretary of State summoned the US Ambassador on 4 March to protest about the unauthorised American action of withholding liquidation on a range of UK and EU export products. For its part, the United States has made known its views on the banana dispute direct to HM Government on a number of occasions, including on 4 March.
Mr. Gray:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions if he will make a statement about the monitoring of genetically modified crops. [74100]
Mr. Meacher
[holding answer 11 March 1999]: Monitoring is a key requirement for the safe release of GM crops. Monitoring enables the assumptions made in the risk assessment to be verified, and any unanticipated effects of GMOs to be identified. The legislation in place is quite clear: if evidence comes to light of harm to the environment, action must be taken to restrict or suspend the release.
31 Mar 1999 : Column: 749
All research releases of GM crops are monitored throughout the duration of consent, and in most cases post-trial monitoring is also required. This is carried out by the consent-holder on the basis of a monitoring plan which forms part of the application. At least once a year a monitoring report must be submitted to the Secretary of State, and a copy is placed on the statutory public register.
To date, authorisations to place GM products on the market under Part C of Directive 90/220/EEC have not included conditions requiring monitoring. The Directive is currently being amended, to include the introduction of provisions for post market monitoring. The Government strongly support the amendment of the Directive to incorporate these requirements.
Pending the revision of the Directive, EU Environment Ministers agreed in December 1998 to use the flexibility within the existing Directive to introduce with immediate effect new monitoring provisions, based on monitoring proposals in the draft amending Directive. These take into account direct and indirect, and immediate and delayed, effects of GMOs on the environment. Monitoring requirements would be set out on a case by case basis for each product authorisation and enforced by the relevant competent authority.
On top of the new EC requirements, the UK Government have introduced additional measures for the monitoring of GM crops. I announced the agreement reached with the plant breeding industry for a managed development programme for herbicide tolerant GM crops with my right hon. Friend, the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food, before the House of Lords Select Committee on 21 October 1998.
Farm-scale evaluations will ensure that first commercial plantings of herbicide tolerant GM crops will be strictly limited and monitored for ecological effects alongside comparable plantings of conventional crops. The Government are funding ecological studies of the diversity and abundance of plants and invertebrates associated with the management of GM and non GM crops to test whether there are any significant differences, initially over a four year period. This will assist consideration of what effects GM crops may have on higher species and our agricultural landscape. If ecological monitoring reveals adverse effects then appropriate action will be taken.
Mr. Baker:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions if the commercial approval of genetically modified crops is required before the farm-scale field trials into their ecological effects begin. [78477]
Mr. Meacher
[holding answer 24 March 1999]: Such approval is not necessary for the evaluations to begin. The farm-scale evaluations of genetically modified oilseed rape which will start this year are covered by an approval for research or other purposes issued under Part B of Directive 90/220/EEC. This year the gm oilseed rape will remain the property of the seed company concerned and will be destroyed at harvest.
The genetically modified maize, which is also to be studied, has Europe wide approval for general cultivation
31 Mar 1999 : Column: 750
issued under Part C of the Directive by the French Competent Authority on 3 August 1998. However the maize has not yet been entered onto the National List of Seeds in the UK and so the seeds may not be sold. This year the gm maize will remain the property of the seed company concerned and will be destroyed at harvest.
In both cases experimental permits are also required for use of the herbicide, based on gluphosinate ammonium, on the genetically modified crop.
Mr. Baker:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions if the Government will allow the sale of products for (a) human and (b) animal consumption from the farm-scale field trials into the ecological effects of genetically modified crops. [78476]
Mr. Meacher
[holding answer 24 March 1999]: All genetically modified crops produced this year from the farm-scale evaluations will be destroyed. A decision on the fate of products in subsequent years has not yet been taken, but any sale for human or animal consumption will be dependent on the product receiving all the necessary consents and authorisations.
Mr. Ottaway:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions what is the level of Government grant to London Underground for the year 2000-2001. [78710]
Ms Glenda Jackson:
The Government aimed to establish the public private partnership (PPP) for the Underground by 2000-01, removing the need for subsidy beyond that point. We have consistently made clear, that we will not be driven by an artificially imposed timetable. The Government's overriding objective is to secure the best value solution for London Underground. In the light of this, we are keeping funding for London Underground under review with London Transport and will take decisions in the context of LT's overall financial position.
Mr. Ottaway:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions what proposals he has to expand the capacity of London Underground. [78711]
Ms Glenda Jackson:
The immediate priorities of the Government and London Transport are to see improved reliability and increased service levels on the existing network, plus the completion of the Jubilee Line Extension. Service levels increased by 12 per cent. over the past five years, and London Transport plans a further 8 per cent. increase in 1999-2000.
In the longer term, capacity increases will be written into the performance specifications for contractors under the Public-Private Partnership, as signalling, trains and other key assets on individual lines reach the stage when they need replacing.
Mr. Ottaway:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions if he will set out the forecast increases in fares on London Underground on a yearly basis, expressed as a percentage, for each of the years 2000 to 2005. [78712]
31 Mar 1999 : Column: 751
Mr. Brake:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions if he will make a statement on the public-private partnership for London Underground. [78890]
Ms Glenda Jackson:
Good progress is being made, as my right hon. Friend the Minister of Transport announced on 15 March 1999, Official Report, column 474, in response to a question from my hon. Friend the Member for Harrow, West (Mr. Thomas).
Ms Glenda Jackson: The forecast on which the financial modelling for the PPP has been based is for fares to rise by 1 per cent. above the rate of inflation in 2000 and 2001, and following that, for fares to rise by the rate of inflation.
| Next Section | Index | Home Page |