|Previous Section||Index||Home Page|
Mr. Loughton: To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions, pursuant to his answer of 1 November 2000, Official Report, column 451-56W, concerning the single regeneration budget, if he will provide details of the geographical area covered by each bid. 
Mr. Moore: To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions what the timetable is for developments in the National Air Traffic Services PPP from 3 November until the completion of the process. 
Mr. Mullin: The Government announced the three consortia to go forward to the next stage of the bidding process on 3 November. These three bidders for the role of Strategic Partner in the NATS PPP will have until early next year to prepare final and binding bids. The Government will then evaluate these bids with a view to selecting a preferred bidder. Subject to the passage of the Transport Bill, the Government's firm intention is to have the PPP in place in the spring of 2001.
Mr. Moore: To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions what criteria Raytheon failed to satisfy in their bid to be considered as the strategic partner under the National Air Traffic Services PPP. 
9 Nov 2000 : Column: 347W
Mr. Mullin: Raytheon's indicative bid to be considered as Strategic Partner in the NATS PPP was submitted to the Government on a confidential basis. As such it is not appropriate for the Government to release details of the content of that bid. All bids received were evaluated against a comprehensive set of evaluation criteria that were made available to bidders in the tender documentation. DETR officials and its advisers have subsequently discussed the evaluation exercise and the reasons behind its decision not to accept the indicative offer submitted by Raytheon with the company.
The Government have in the past publicly stated that their firm intention was to select three bidders from those who submitted indicative offers to be taken forward to the next stage of the bidding process. That is what the Government have done and we announced our shortlist on 3 November 2000.
Mr. Moore: To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions if he will provide an analysis of the component expenditure underlying the projected investment of £1,300 million required over 10 years for National Air Traffic Services. 
Mr. Mullin: The Government do not make forecasts for NATS' capital expenditure. Earlier this year NATS produced its first ten year investment plan, for the period 2000-10, and it is still consulting with its customers on this document. The views of the successful bidder for the role as NATS' strategic partner will of course be taken into account, and the form, timing and appropriateness of the plan will be reviewed by the CAA before it is approved. The final plan will be issued around the middle of next year.
The Government believe that the Public/Private Partnership for NATS is the best way to deliver the investment needed. It will provide the additional management expertise to ensure that NATS' capital programme is achieved on time and on budget for the benefit of NATS' customers and for the Government as shareholder.
Mr. Jenkin: To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions if he will list the incidents of NATS software and systems failure since 31 July 2000, indicating the duration and severity of their effects. 
(i) On 12 August 2000, FDPS was suspended for one hour and thirteen minutes following the rejection of an incorrect flight plan. This resulted in the imposition of short term restrictions which necessitated some flights being held at London airports;
(ii) On 3 November 2000, FDPS was suspended for 17 minutes following the rejection of a flight plan. This resulted in six aircraft being delayed by 30 minutes; and
(iii) On 4 November 2000, controllers noted FDPS was failing to print accurate data strips for flights using Stansted. A decision was taken to revert to a previous version of the software known to be free of faults. This took 2 hours and 10 minutes to install successfully and during this period aircraft experienced delays of up to one hour.
9 Nov 2000 : Column: 348W
Mr. Wyatt: To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions if the basis of the funding formula for area cost adjustment in Kent for 2001-02 will be based on 1998 figures. 
Mr. Webb: To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions if he plans to amend the calculation of the area cost adjustment to reflect data from the 1999 New Earnings Survey. 
Mr. Chidgey: To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions (1) how many responses he has received to the Consultation Paper on Telecommunication Mast Development; and from whom; 
(3) when he will announce the action he proposes to take following the public consultation on telecommunication mast development. 
Ms Beverley Hughes: By the end of the day, 7 November 2000, we had received 301 responses in total. Of these 45 were from members of the public; 230 were from local authorities and other public bodies; 18 were from mobile phone companies and associated businesses; and eight were from hon. Members. The Department is currently analysing the responses. We will announce any changes as soon as practicable. Copies of all responses, other than those where the respondent has indicated that the response is to be treated as confidential, will be placed in the Libraries of both Houses.
Mr. Green: To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions when he was informed of the report into flood dangers by the Flood Hazard Research Centre at Middlesex University. 
Ms Beverley Hughes: My Department received in July 2000 a copy of the "National appraisal of assets at risk from flooding and coastal erosion", a report produced for the Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food by Halcrow Maritime, HR Wallingford and the Flood Hazard Research Centre. It was circulated at the same time to all Regional Flood Defence Committee Chairmen, Regional Directors of the Environment Agency and Chief Executives of all local authorities in England.
9 Nov 2000 : Column: 349W
The report presents a generalised overview of assets at risk in order to inform investment planning for flood and coastal defence. It demonstrates that some 10 per cent. of the population of England live within areas potentially at risk from flooding and property worth over £200 billion is also potentially at risk. It also confirms the value for money of past and present investment in flood and coastal defence but concludes that existing practices for undertaking and funding flood and coastal defence should be reappraised.
The results were used to inform the Spending Review 2000 and have been taken into account in the revision of the new draft planning guidance on development and flood risk in PPG25, which we issued for consultation in April 2000 and hope to publish in final form in December this year.
Mr. Green: To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions what discussions he has had in the past six months with Ministers of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food about flood defence; and if he will make statement. 
Mr. Mullin: Policy responsibility for flood defence rests with my right hon. Friend the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food. My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions has had several recent discussions with Ministers from MAFF and other Departments to consider how the country can be better placed to deal with extreme weather events.
Mr. Green: To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions how he plans to measure the success of the 'Are You Doing Your Bit' campaign; and if he will make a statement. 
Mr. Meacher: Both quantitative and qualitative research, looking at awareness, motivation and actions by individuals, have been commissioned to measure the campaign's impact and inform the campaign's strategic approach.
Monthly tracking research, in particular, helps us to measure public reaction carefully. Recent findings have been very encouraging and demonstrate that the campaign is raising public awareness of environmental actions with attitudes and actions becoming more positive:
|Next Section||Index||Home Page|