| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Ministerial Code
Mr. Robathan: To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food (1) how many times Ministers in his Department have sought the advice of the Permanent Secretary under the circumstances envisaged in Paragraphs 118, 121 and 123 of the Ministerial Code; and on which occasions such advice was sought; [129170]
28 Nov 2000 : Column: 564W
- (2) on how many occasions since May 1997 Ministers in his Department have made a declaration of interest to their colleagues under circumstances envisaged in Paragraph 110 of the Ministerial Code. [129156]
Mr. Nick Brown: Information relating to internal advice and consultation is not disclosed under Exemption II of the Code of Practice on Access to Government Information.
Parliamentary Questions
Mr. Yeo: To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what percentage of written parliamentary questions tabled by hon. Members to his Department for answer on a named day in this Session have received a holding answer. [132442]
Mr. Nick Brown [holding answer 25 July 2000]: To date 90 per cent. of Named Day questions have received holding replies this Session. This Department regularly receives large numbers of Named Day questions, many for answer on the earliest permitted date; the latest example being the 52 questions which were tabled on Wednesday 1 November for answer the following Monday. Forty of these were tabled by one Member, the hon. Gentleman, on a wide range of topics, including three on an addendum slip to a report. In view of these numbers, and mindful of the need to use resources in the most effective way, I am content, when answering such questions, to apply the criterion set out on page 295 of "Erskine May"'s Parliamentary Practice which states that
- the priority markings for written questions should be used sparingly and, in particular, the earliest permitted date should be reserved for those questions to which an urgent answer is genuinely required.
Meetings and Telephone Conversations
Mr. Yeo: To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he will publish (i) the date and (ii) the subject of (1) meetings and (2) phone conversations he has had with (a) the Belgian Minister for Agriculture and Small and Medium-sized Business, (b) the Danish Minister for Food, Agriculture and Fisheries, (c) the German State Secretary, Federal Ministry of Food, Agriculture and Forestry, (d) the Greek Minister for Agriculture, (e) the Spanish Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food, (f) the French Minister for Agriculture and Fisheries, (g) the Irish Minister for Agriculture, Food and Rural Development, (h) the Italian Minister for Agriculture and Forestry Policy, (i) the Luxembourg Minister for Agriculture, Viticulture and Rural Development, (j) the Dutch Minister for Agriculture, Nature Management and Fisheries, (k) the Austrian Federal Minister for Agriculture, Forestry, the Environment and Water Management, (l) the Portuguese Minister for Agriculture, Rural Development and Fisheries, (m) the Finnish Minister for Agriculture and Forestry, (n) the Swedish Minister for Agriculture, (o) the European Commissioner for Agriculture, Rural Development and Fisheries, (p) the European Commissioner for Health and Consumer Protection and (q) the American Secretary of Agriculture, since the beginning of this year. [134028]
Mr. Nick Brown: In addition to the regular EU Agriculture Council meetings, I have met and spoken with colleagues as outlined in the table. The discussions have covered a range of agricultural issues.
28 Nov 2000 : Column: 565W
| Country | Meeting | Telephone call |
|---|---|---|
| (b) Danish Minister for Food, Agriculture and Fisheries | 29 September 2000 | -- |
| 30 September 2000 | -- | |
| 1 October 2000 | -- | |
| 16-17 October 2000 | -- | |
| (e) Spanish Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food | 9-10 July 2000 | -- |
| (f) French Minister for Agriculture and Fisheries | 26 June 2000 | 24 May 2000 |
| (g) Irish Minister for Agriculture, Food and Rural Development | 20 January 2000 | -- |
| 21 March 2000 | -- | |
| (h) Italian Minister for Agriculture and Forestry Policy | 29 September 2000 | 5 April 2000 |
| 30 September 2000 | -- | |
| 1 October 2000 | -- | |
| (j) Dutch Minister for Agriculture, Nature Management and Fisheries | 12 April 2000 | -- |
| 29 September 2000 | -- | |
| 30 September 2000 | -- | |
| 1 October 2000 | -- | |
| (l) Portuguese Minister for Agriculture, Rural Development and Fisheries | 16 May 2000 | -- |
| (n) Swedish Minister for Agriculture | 29 September 2000 | -- |
| 30 September 2000 | -- | |
| 1 October 2000 | -- | |
| (o) European Commissioner for Agriculture, Rural Development and Fisheries | 24 January 2000 | 13 January 2000 |
| 1 February 2000 | 10 March 2000 | |
| 9 March 2000 | 25 July 2000 | |
| (p) European Commission for Health and Consumer Protection | 6 March 2000 | 19 April 2000 |
| 1 June 2000 | ||
| (q) American Secretary of Agriculture | 14 February 2000 | -- |
| 9 March 2000 | -- |
28 Nov 2000 : Column: 565W
Expenditure
Mr. Yeo: To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what is the percentage change in real terms of the Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food, Intervention Board and Forestry Commission departmental expenditure limits in the period covered by the 2000 Spending Review; and what this increase would have been had the expenditure limits been calculated by the cash budgeting method. [134010]
Mr. Nick Brown [holding answer 23 October 2000]: The percentage increases in departmental expenditure limits in real terms in the period covered by the 2000 Spending Review in cash and resource budgeting terms are as follows:
| 2001-02 | 2002-03 | 2003-04 | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food | |||
| Percentage increase: | |||
| Cash | 26.6 | 34.8 | 35.8 |
| Resource | 24.8 | 32.6 | 33.4 |
| Forestry Commission | |||
| Percentage increase: | |||
| Cash | 16.3 | 21.8 | 18.8 |
| Resource | 16.8 | 22.2 | 19.2 |
| Intervention Board | |||
| Percentage increase: | |||
| Cash | 3.2 | 3.7 | 3.7 |
| Resource | 5.3 | 3.1 | -4.3 |
Note:
The increases are based on the 2000-01 spending plans
28 Nov 2000 : Column: 566W
Mail Couriers
Mr. Bob Russell: To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food how many items of mail from his Department to the House it is estimated were not delivered by the external courier firm contracted to deliver it since 1 January; what is the company's name; and if he will discuss the firm's performance with other Government Departments. [135102]
Mr. Morley: An employee of City Despatch Services Ltd., the external courier firm contracted by my Department to deliver mail to the House of Commons, was found to have failed to deliver a significant quantity of mail between May and August this year. This amounted to around 2,300 individual items, including just over 700 substantive letters to Members of the House. The undelivered mail, which was discovered at a private residence following a police investigation, also included acknowledgement letters and press notices, as well as a small number of Library deposits. The Department's contract with City Despatch Services Ltd. was terminated. The police have no reason to believe that there is any further undelivered mail which remains undiscovered, or that any other employee of City Despatch Services Ltd. is implicated. None of this mail had been opened or tampered with in any way.
I deeply regret this incident and the consequent effect on the service Members of the House will have received from MAFF during the last few months. My right hon. Friend the Minister of Agriculture wrote to the Speaker of the House on 22 September and subsequently to the
28 Nov 2000 : Column: 567W
hon. Member for South Suffolk (Mr. Yeo), the hon. Member for South-East Cornwall (Mr. Breed) and the right hon. Member for Skipton and Ripon (Mr. Curry) to explain the circumstances and offer his apologies.
In addition, the Department has been discussing this unfortunate case with other Departments, and has reviewed the mail tracking system to ensure that this cannot occur again.
Officials in MAFF opened all the undelivered mail and those not requiring amendment were re-sent immediately with an apology and an explanation. The remainder were re-drafted as speedily as possible and almost all have now been re-sent.
ERDP
Mr. Yeo: To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food how many successful claimants there were in 1999 for each of the (a) agri-environment and (b) other schemes that make up the ERDP. [136759]
Mr. Nick Brown [holding answer 6 November 2000]: The information is as follows:
Countryside Stewardship Scheme
There were approximately 8,700 agreement holders accepted into the Scheme between 1991 and 1998 who were eligible to claim in 1999. The majority of these will have made at least one claim relevant to their agreement.
- Footnote: Annual management payments are made in arrears at the end of each agreement year. Claims for capital works can be made at any time after the work is completed. Interim claims for capital works may be made above a minimum of £250. Therefore, number of claims paid may include more than one eligible claim from the same individual.
- Footnote: As for Countryside Stewardship.
- Footnote: A very small number of claimants may have been eligible to make more than one claim.
- Footnote: Information on the number of actual claims paid in the year is not available.
There were some 6,050 successful claims paid under FWS/FWPS in 1999 as part of the ongoing annual payments to compensate for agricultural income forgone as a result of planting woodland on farmland.
- Footnote: These claims relate to applications approved under the FWS 1988, the FWPS 1992 and FWPS 1997. In general, under the FWPS, most of the first annual payments in respect of approvals
28 Nov 2000 : Column: 568W
- entered into in one year do not fall due until the following year. The number of claims paid may include more than one eligible claim from the same individual.
Mr. Yeo: To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he will summarise changes since 1995 in the rate of individual payments made under each agri-environment scheme included in the ERDP. [136628]
Mr. Nick Brown [holding answer 6 November 2000]: The agri-environment schemes have been subject to a rolling review programme. Part of this programme has been a commitment to review the individual payments made under the schemes on a two or three yearly basis. The setting of the payment rates is governed by an EU Regulation, which requires them to be based upon income foregone. Tables showing all the changes in individual payment rates made following reviews each year since 1995 are being placed in the Libraries of the House.
Mr. Yeo: To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what changes the majority of farmers will experience in their incomes as a direct result of the mechanisms of the ERDP. [136732]
Mr. Nick Brown [holding answer 6 November 2000]: Most farmers will see a reduction in their direct subsidy payments as a result of modulation. Some farmers will be able to enhance their revenues by participating in ERDP measures. Because the funds from modulation will be matched by new government funding the revenues received by the farming industry as a whole will be increased.
Mr. Yeo: To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he will provide estimates of the proportion of the total funding for the ERDP that will be (a) paid directly to farmers on an income forgone basis, (b) paid directly to farmers on the condition that it will be used to purchase specified goods and services and (c) paid directly to farmers without pre-requirement to forgo income or conditions on its use. [136728]
Mr. Nick Brown [holding answer 6 November 2000]: The indicative financial tables in the ERDP (which will be published shortly and posted on the MAFF website) show that:
- around 62 per cent. of programme expenditure is assigned to agri-environment schemes and the Farm Woodland Premium Scheme (where payments are based on income forgone); and
- the remaining 38 per cent. is assigned to the Hill Farm Allowance Scheme, Woodland Grant Scheme, Rural Enterprise Scheme, Processing and Marketing Grant, Vocational Training Scheme and Energy Crops Scheme. The basis of grant aid is different for each of these schemes and is set out in the ERDP scheme literature on the MAFF website. It does not involve income forgone.
28 Nov 2000 : Column: 569W
Mr. Nick Brown [holding answer 6 November 2000]: The agri-environment schemes included in the ERDP are the Countryside Stewardship Scheme, the Organic Farming Scheme and the Environmentally Sensitive Areas Scheme.
Mr. Yeo: To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food which farm subsidy schemes will be modulated as part of the ERDP. [136494]
Mr. Nick Brown [holding answer 6 November 2000]: In order to fund additional measures in the ERDP, all farmers who receive direct payments under CAP support schemes will have those payments modulated from 2001. These schemes are:
- Sheep Annual Premium Scheme
- Beef Special Premium Scheme
- Suckler Cow Premium Scheme
- Slaughter Premium Scheme
- Extensification Premium Scheme
- Arable Area Payments Scheme (including flax and hemp)
- Hops
- Seeds
- Potato Starch.
Mr. Nick Brown: The numbers of successful claims made in England in 1999 for each of the farm subsidy schemes that will be modulated to fund additional measures in the ERDP were as follows:
- Arable Area Payments Scheme: 74,189
- Flax and Hemp: 1,918
- Hops: 14
- Seeds: 1,154
- Potato starch: 101
- Sheep Annual Premium Scheme: 33,176
- Beef Special Premium Scheme: 112,393
- Suckler Cow Premium Scheme: 21,873.
| Next Section | Index | Home Page |