|Previous Section||Index||Home Page|
Mr. Stunell: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many of the written parliamentary questions tabled to his Department between 19 October 1999 and 20 April have not received substantive answers, excluding those not answered (a) citing disproportionate cost, (b) stating that the information is not available, not held centrally, or not held in the form requested and (c) citing commercial or other confidentiality. 
Dr. Moonie [holding answer 26 July 2000]: The Ministry of Defence cited disproportionate cost on 73 occasions between 19 October 1999 and 20 April. The information requested at (b) and (c) cannot be provided as it is not held by the Ministry of Defence in the form requested. That information might be available to the hon. Member through the Library of the House.
Mr. Field: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, pursuant to his answer of 19 July 2000, Official Report, column 182W, on parliamentary answers, in which answers his Department has used the mechanism of a pursuant answer. 
Mr. Kidney: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what assessment he has made of the differences in the (a) legal powers and (b) effectiveness of (i) his Department's police and (ii) the military police of the three Services. 
Mr. Spellar: The roles and responsibilities of the Ministry of Defence Police (MDP) and the Service Police are different (though complementary) and this is reflected in their powers. Both have a high level of expertise in their respective areas.
27 Jul 2000 : Column: 749W
Mr. Hancock: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what plans he has for the disposal of HMS Wilton; what response he has made to the representations from the Maritime Preservation Society on this ship; and if he will make a statement. 
|Males||Females||Total||Percentage of total strength|
Mr. Menzies Campbell: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many armed forces personnel, in each service, are unfit for duty due to ill health; and what percentage this represents of the manpower in each case. 
Mr. O'Neill: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence (1) if he will provide a detailed description of the simulator used by Boeing as part of the Board of Inquiry investigation into RAF Chinook ZD576; 
(2) if he will provide a detailed description of the simulator used by the Defence Evaluation and Research Agency during the Board of Inquiry investigation into RAF Chinook ZD576; 
(3) if the Boeing simulation undertaken as part of the Board of Inquiry investigation into the crash of RAF Chinook ZD576 was able to determine the precise (a) speed and (b) height of the aircraft prior to the last five seconds before impact. 
Mr. Blunt: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will publish a list of the efficiency savings measures taken in financial year 1999-2000 that resulted in over £100,000 savings per annum with a brief explanation of each measure. 
27 Jul 2000 : Column: 750W
Dr. Moonie: It is not normal practice of Government to publish ministerial duty rosters. This Department will ensure that it has sufficient cover through the summer recess in line with the requirements of the Ministerial Code.
Mr. Denham: We have approved the Report and Accounts, which have today been laid before both Houses of Parliament in accordance with the requirements of Sections 5(2) and 5(3) of the Exchequer and Audit Departments Act 1921.
Ms Stuart: It is not normal practice of Government to publish the daily ministerial duty roster. The Department will ensure that it has sufficient cover through the summer recess in line with the requirements of the Ministerial Code.
Mr. Mitchell: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what proposals he has for requiring the registration of food outlets under the new EU food hygiene regulations; if these will apply to charity events; and what level of (a) charges for licences and (b) fines for transgressions he proposes to apply. 
Ms Stuart: Food premises are already required to be registered under the Food Premises (Registration) Regulations 1991, as amended. The regulations exempt, subject to certain conditions, voluntary and charitable organisations from the requirement to register. There is no charge for registration. Fines for offences on conviction may not exceed either level 3 or level 5 on the standard scale, depending on the offence.
27 Jul 2000 : Column: 751W
The European Commission has presented five inter-linked proposals for regulations on food safety rules and associated animal health controls. These are intended to replace some 16 commodity-specific EC directives and the general food hygiene directive that applies to all other foodstuffs. The initial drafts of these regulations show a proposed coming into force date of 1 January 2004. The first meeting of experts took place on 25 and 26 July where the Commission presented the proposals and laid down its intended plans for tackling the wide range of issues. Regarding registration requirements for food premises, the United Kingdom will seek to ensure continuity with current domestic requirements.
It is likely that, following the summer break, meetings will take place in Brussels on a monthly basis. In the meantime, we are in the process of consulting with interested parties and stakeholders to seek their views.
Mr. Rowe: To ask the Secretary of State for Health when he will reply to the question tabled on 11 July by the hon. Member for Faversham and Mid-Kent on non-executive directorships of National Health Service trusts (ref. 130534). 
Mr. Yeo: To ask the Secretary of State for Health (1) if the Government plans to trace the food products which may contain oil produced from British oil seed rape affected by the contamination of Advanta rapeseeds by GM rapeseeds; 
Ms Stuart: No decision has yet been taken as to how crops grown from the contaminated rapeseed will be disposed of but the genetically modified element of the crop does not have the necessary authorisation under the Deliberate Release Directive (90/220) to enable it to be commercially marketed in the EC.
I am however, advised by the Food Standards Agency that while there is a possibility that some rapeseed containing a very low level of GM seed may have been grown in the UK last year, there is no information available on where this might have occurred. There is thus no way of being able to trace any oil from this source that may have entered the food chain as the oil cannot be distinguished from conventionally produced rapeseed oil by analytical means. This will in any case have been mixed with oil from other sources and dispersed widely.
The amount of oil from GM rapeseed in any single food product is likely to be extremely small, if it is present at all, but for the reasons given, there is no obvious way for consumers to be able to identify products which might contain traces of the GM derived oil.
|Next Section||Index||Home Page|