21 May 1999 : Column: 451
Written Answers to Questions
Friday 21 May 1999
INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT
Development Funding (Eastern Europe)
Dr. Starkey: To ask the Secretary of State for International Development what development funding the Government have provided to (a) Bulgaria, (b) the Czech Republic, (c) Hungary, (d) Poland, (e) Romania and (f) the Slovak Republic, either directly or through the EU, in the areas of (i) the arts, (ii) the environment, (iii) economic development, (iv) education and training and (v) health, since May 1997. [84682]
Mr. Foulkes: The details of bilateral expenditure in these sectors in 1997-98 and 1998-99 is available only for projects with a commitment of over £100,000. (1998-99 figures are provisional.) Expenditure on such projects in areas (ii) (iii) and (iv) was as follows:
| £000 | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Country | Economic Development | Education and Environment training | Totals |
| Bulgaria | 0 | 0 | 166 |
| Hungary | 883 | 0 | 0 |
| Poland | 483 | 131 | 0 |
| Romania | 413 | 0 | 76 |
| £ million | |
|---|---|
| Bulgaria | 1.38 |
| Czech Republic | 5.6 |
| Hungary | 7.4 |
| Poland | 23.0 |
| Romania | 12.3 |
| Slovak Republic | 3.6 |
(1) Official aid is an internationally recognised statistic
AGRICULTURE, FISHERIES AND FOOD
Spending Priorities
Mr. Drew:
To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he will make a statement on his Department's spending priorities for the remainder of the Comprehensive Spending Review period. [85432]
21 May 1999 : Column: 452
Mr. Nick Brown:
In my written statement to the House on 27 October 1998, Official Report, columns 156-58, I set out the key financial implications of the CSR for MAFF. Since then there have been developments which have necessitated a reassessment of spending priorities in order to accommodate:
For the most part we have been able to accommodate the budgetary impact of these developments by making adjustments to the Department's own internal spending programmes. For example, we have been able to reprofile the expenditure on the new marine research vessel by delaying its construction by a few months. We have also found savings in the Department's capital building programme. And we are accelerating the disposal of unwanted assets in order to maximise receipts during the CSR period.
However, these measures alone are not sufficient to contain the pressures on the Department's budget. In order to keep spending within the limits set by the CSR, I regret that I am having to make the following economies in addition to those set out in my statement of 27 October:
Mr. Chope:
To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry if he will introduce a compensation scheme for
21 May 1999 : Column: 453
those British firms which have been affected by the United States trade sanctions authorised by the World Trade Organisation; and if he will make a statement. [83315]
Mr. Wilson
[holding answer 5 May 1999]: There are no plans for specific measures to support industries that remain on the US Administrations revised retaliation list over the banana dispute. The Government want an early resolution to the dispute and are encouraging the European Commission to come forward quickly with its analysis of options for revising the EU's banana regime. As well as a final settlement, we would also like an interim solution whereby the US retaliation was displaced by a form of compensation as preferred under the rules of the World Trade Organisation.
This would lift the burden from those companies that are being hurt by a dispute that has nothing to do with them. It is also important to stress that there was never any intention of extending the cashmere scheme beyond the date on which the WTO authorised US retaliatory action. There would, therefore, have been no guarantee even for cashmere in respect of orders placed after 12 April.
Mr. Swayne:
To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what support he plans to provide to firms in respect of tariffs consequent upon the EU dispute with the USA over bananas. [83128]
Mr. Wilson:
There are no plans for specific measures to support industries that remain on the US Administration's revised retaliation list over the banana dispute. The Government want an early resolution to the dispute and is encouraging the European Commission to come forward quickly with its analysis of options for revising the EU's banana regime. As well as a final settlement, we would also like an interim solution whereby the US retaliation was displaced by a form of compensation as preferred under the rules of the World Trade Organisation. This would lift the burden from those companies that are being hurt by a dispute that has nothing to do with them.
Mr. Redwood:
To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what estimate he has made of the number of manufacturing jobs lost in the UK in the last year. [84372]
Mr. Byers:
I refer the right hon. Member to the figures published by the Office for National Statistics in its "First Release of Labour Market Statistics", which was issued by the ONS on 19 May 1999, a copy of which is available in the Library of the House.
Mr. Redwood:
To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what applications for additional gas-fired power station capacity he expects to determine over the next six months. [84340]
Mr. Byers:
All applications will need to go through full consideration. It is not possible to put a time limit on such matters.
21 May 1999 : Column: 454
Mr. Alan Simpson:
To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry to what extent ECGD support for the Ilisu Dam will be conditional on compliance with ILO standards and conventions. [84885]
Mr. Wilson:
We are considering the conditions on which ECGD support might be made available for this project. No decisions have yet been made.
Mr. Oaten:
To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what plans his Department has to carry out a consultation process on the effectiveness of the current powers of the Hearing Aid Council. [84773]
Dr. Howells:
We have no such plans. My Department has regular contact with the Hearing Aid Council to discuss issues of concern and I visited the Council last November.
(i) additional demands on the Department's budget which were not provided for in the CSR. These include the costs of the BSE inquiry and new policy initiatives like the proposed pet movement scheme; and
(ii) the budgetary consequences of not being able to proceed with the sale of the new Convent Garden Market site. The CSR settlement assumed that we would sell this asset in 2000/01 and our capital allocation was adjusted accordingly. We will not be able to meet that timetable.
(i) further cuts of £2.0 million in 1999/2000, £2.0 million in 2000/01 and £3.0 million in 2001/02 in the Department's R&D budget. These cuts will put pressure on our research programmes and will require careful prioritisation. We shall be drawing up, and consulting widely on, a new strategy for R&D;
(ii) a refocusing of the Department's land use planning work, which is carried out by the Farming and Rural Conservation Agency, to strengthen relationships with Government Offices, planning authorities and the Regional Development Agencies and integrate agricultural considerations (especially the implementation of the EU Rural Development Regulation) into wider Government policies affecting the rural economy and environment. This will produce annual net savings of about £1.0 million in 2000/01 and 2001/02;
(iii) a reduction of £1.5 million in 2001/02 in the Department's grant-in-aid to the Environment Agency;
(iv) closure of fisheries grant schemes. The schemes in question have been in place a long time: harbour grants since 1955 and marketing/ processing, port facilities and fishing vessel safety equipment grants since the late 1970s/early 1980s. They have served a valuable purpose and many have benefited from them over the years. However, in view of the pressures on the Department's budget the time has come to draw a line under these open-ended schemes. As of today, I am closing the harbour and fishing vessel safety equipment grants schemes to new applicants. There will be no further rounds of awards under the processing and marketing and port facilities grant schemes. In all cases, where commitments to funding have already been entered into they will be honoured.
| Next Section | Index | Home Page |