| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Inward Investment
Mrs. Gillan: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will make a statement on the work he has done to secure (a) Japanese and (b) Korean inward investment into the United Kingdom. [81104]
Mr. Fatchett [holding answer 16 April 1999]: The Invest in Britain Bureau (IBB) is jointly managed by the FCO and DTI. It has active promotion strategies aimed at securing the UK's position as the number one European location for Japanese and Korean investment. The IBB runs a programme of company visits (900 in Japan, 220 in Korea in 1998-99), promotional seminars, media campaigns and inward missions aimed at attracting inward investment, as well as working closely with existing investors alongside the UK Development Agencies.
The Ministerial teams in the FCO and DTI support this both here in the UK and when travelling overseas. For example, I have met a number of Japanese and Korean investors here and when visiting Japan and Korea.
Prime Minister (Foreign Media Articles)
Mr. Maclean: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what correspondence his (a) Department and (b) office have received from (i) posts abroad and (ii) the Prime Minister's office on placement of articles written by the Prime Minister in the foreign media, which would facilitate identification of those articles; and if he will make a statement. [81237]
Mr. Fatchett:
We do not maintain the records necessary to provide a comprehensive answer. To do so would be possible only at disproportionate cost.
20 Apr 1999 : Column: 514
Departmental Staff (Ethnic Origin)
Mr. Vaz: To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he will provide a breakdown, in numerical and percentage terms, of the ethnic origin, at 1 March, of (a) his private office, (b) Government special advisers, (c) his Policy Unit and (d) staff in total. [78513]
Mr. Nick Brown: (a) The composition of my Private Office on 1 March was as follows:
| Number | Percentage | |
|---|---|---|
| White Origin | 5 | 71.4 |
| Ethnic minority origin | 2 | 28.6 |
The figures quoted relate solely to my Private Office and do not cover the whole of the Secretariat in my Department.
(b) I refer my hon. Friend to the reply given by my right hon. Friend the Minister for the Cabinet Office on 22 February 1999, Official Report, column 39.
(c) My Department does not have a separate Policy Unit.
(d) I refer my hon. Friend to the reply given by my right hon. Friend the Minister for the Cabinet Office on 31 March 1999, Official Report, columns 710-11.
Mr. Swayne:
To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food how many videos his Department has received since 1 May 1997 depicting the activities of the New Forest hounds; and which Ministers have viewed them. [80435]
Mr. Morley:
Since 1 May 1997, the Forestry Commission has received about a dozen videos of activities during fox hunts in the New Forest. I have seen some of these videos.
Mr. Swayne:
To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food for what reasons it took from 1 June 1998, when the Forestry Commission approved a licence for New Forest fox hounds, until October 1998 for that licence to be issued. [80436]
Mr. Morley:
The Forestry Commission issues licences for fox hunting over its land. The terms of those licences are based on an Agreement between the Commission and the Master of Foxhounds Association. The Agreement for last season was concluded on 18 August, after which the licences and associated maps were prepared in accordance with the Agreement. The Commission completed the New Forest Fox Hounds' licence on 24 September.
Mr. Swayne:
To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food (1) what involvement Ministers have in the procedure by which the Forestry Commission issue hunting licences in the New Forest; [80433]
20 Apr 1999 : Column: 515
Mr. Morley:
None. The Forestry Commission does, however, keep Ministers informed about its policies on hunting and the terms of the licences that it issues.
Mrs. Ann Winterton:
To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he will list those members of advisory committees to his Department who
20 Apr 1999 : Column: 516
have declared outside interests with (a) DiaDexus, (b) Cerebrus Ltd, (c) Cerebrus PLC, (d) Stanford University, (e) Human Genome Services Inc, (f) Glaxo Wellcome, (g) the Wellcome Institute, (h) Monsanto, (i) AgrEvo and (j) SmithKline Beecham. [80129]
Mr. Morley:
The following members of advisory committees have declared relevant outside interests as listed below:
20 Apr 1999 : Column: 515
(2) what involvement Ministers have in the process of issuing a hunting licence once the Forestry Commission have approved the terms of such a licence. [80434]
| Advisory Committee | Member | Declared interest |
|---|---|---|
| Veterinary Products Committee | Mr. J. M. Jepson Dr. D. F. Wishart | Glaxo Wellcome, SmithKline Beecham SmithKline Beecham |
| Spongiform Encephalopathy Advisory Committee | Dr. Peter Goodfellow Prof. Roy Anderson Prof. John Collinge | SmithKline Beecham The Wellcome Trust(2)The Wellcome Trust(2) |
| Farm Animal Welfare Council | Dr. Agnes Winter | Glaxo Wellcome |
(2) Declared interest is in Wellcome Trust--not Wellcome Institute.
20 Apr 1999 : Column: 515
Set-aside Land
Mr. Cox: To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what was the total payment for land put into set-aside in England and Wales in 1998. [80905]
Mr. Rooker: At 31 March, £75,589,275 had been paid on land set aside in 1998 under the Arable Area Payments Scheme in England and Wales.
Genetically Modified Food
Ms Drown: To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food (1) what assessment he has made of the safety of the antibiotic-resistant gene in Novartis's genetically modified maize; [80794]
- (2) what assessment the Advisory Committee on Novel Foods and Processes made of the safety of the antibiotic-resistant gene in Novartis's genetically modified food. [80793]
Mr. Rooker: The conclusions of the Advisory Committee on Novel Food and Processes (ACNFP) concerning this GM maize are recorded in the Committee's 1996 annual report which is available in the House of Commons Library. The ACNFP was satisfied that processed food ingredients derived from the maize were as safe as their conventional counterparts but expressed reservations about the use of the unprocessed maize as an animal feedingstuff because of what it considered to be a small, but finite, chance that this could lead to a transfer of antibiotic resistance.
Subsequent to the ACNFP's consideration of this matter, this maize was assessed by three EC Scientific Committees, the Scientific Committee for Foods, the Scientific Committee for Plants and the Scientific Committee on Animal Nutrition, who took into account the ACNFP's views. Whilst agreeing with the ACNFP's assessment that there was a finite risk of the transfer of antibiotic resistance to cattle fed on the raw maize, all three EC Committees felt that this was too small to warrant recommending a ban on its use for animal feed. EC approval was therefore granted. The Department has however commissioned some research work at the University of Leeds to look further into the issue of the potential for the transference of antibiotic resistance from GM crops. Should any scientific evidence emerge
20 Apr 1999 : Column: 516
from this which in the opinion of the ACNFP shows the risk to be greater than originally thought, the Government will consider taking action under the safeguard clause in the EC Deliberate Release Directive (90/220) to restrict the use of the raw maize in animal feed and press for an urgent reappraisal of the situation by the EC Scientific Committees and the Council.
Mr. William Ross:
To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what studies he has carried out to determine the period which elapses before a river or stream's insect life recovers to its former levels after pollution by synthetic pyrethroids. [80875]
Mr. Rooker:
All veterinary medicines and pesticides, including those containing synthetic pyrethroids, must satisfy statutory criteria including safety. The safety assessment includes safety to the environment. Pollution incidents should not occur if safety warnings on labels are heeded. The period of recovery after a pollution incident is a matter for the environment agencies but is likely to vary according to the conditions in the river or stream concerned.
Mr. William Ross:
To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what has been the result of studies he has carried out into the effect of synthetic pyrethroids in (a) sheep dips and (b) sprays for plants on (1) aquatic insects, (2) soil invertebrates and (3) other animal life; what sums he has expended in each of the last five years on such studies; and what further work is being carried out to determine the effect on fish life in affected rivers and streams. [80874]
Mr. Rooker:
No veterinary medicine is authorised unless it satisfies statutory criteria of safety, quality and efficacy. Safety includes safety to the environment. As part of the process of approval, the applicant company is required to submit data to the Veterinary Medicines Directorate where they are carefully assessed by specialists qualified in various scientific disciplines including ecotoxicology. No studies are carried out by the Ministry.
All pesticides are similarly subject to strict statutory control. In considering the approval or review of a pesticide, an assessment is made (on the basis of data
20 Apr 1999 : Column: 517
supplied by the applicant) of the risk to people, wildlife and to the wider environment. Only if this assessment shows that there is no unacceptable risk will approval be granted or allowed to continue following a review. The Ministry has carried out no studies of the kind specified into the environmental effects of synthetic pyrethroid pesticides. However, synthetic pyrethroid pesticides have been used in other MAFF funded research.
| Next Section | Index | Home Page |