| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Model Code of Conduct
Dr. Starkey: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions when he will lay before Parliament the model code of conduct for members of relevant authorities under the Local Government Act 2000; and if he will make a statement. [13166]
6 Nov 2001 : Column: 143W
Mr. Raynsford: I have today laid before the House four model codes of conduct for members of relevant authorities. The four are:
- The Local Authorities (Model Code of Conduct) Order 2000—which covers principal local authorities, the Greater London Authority, the City of London, the Scilly Isles Council, Fire and joint authorities;
- The Parish Councils (Model Code of Conduct) Order 2000;
- The National Parks and the Broads Authority (Model Code of Conduct) Order 2000; and
- The Police Authorities (Model Code of Conduct) (England and Wales) Order 2000.
The code, published today, meets those two objectives. It will help safeguard and raise standards of conduct in local government—ensuring that the highest professional standards are met by those who run our councils and represent our communities.
Authorities now have six months in which to adopt their own codes of conduct, which must contain the mandatory provisions set out in the relevant model codes.
I believe the code is a considerable improvement on its predecessor. It is easier to understand, and easier for members to apply to their day to day duties. We need to keep the provisions under review, to ensure their workability and also to make sure that the public has the reassurance it needs that those they elect really are serving only the public interest. I shall from time to time ask the Standards Board for England to review the efficacy of the code, or specific provisions within it, and provide advice to Ministers on whether it can be improved.
I will ensure that copies of all four codes are placed in the House Libraries.
Ferry Services
Mr. Andrew Turner: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions what the cost of subsidies to the Woolwich ferry was in the last year in which they were paid; and what resources were made available by his Department to support such subsidies. [13038]
Mr. Jamieson: The Woolwich ferry is now the responsibility of Transport for London's Street Management Services. My Department paid just over £1 million for the ferry in the first quarter of 2000–01 before Transport for London took over. We took account of Transport for London's need to fund the ferry during the rest of 2000–01 in setting the level of GLA Transport Grant for that year.
Mr. Andrew Turner: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions for what reason he does not collect information on the number of passenger journeys by ferry. [13035]
6 Nov 2001 : Column: 144W
Mr. Jamieson: Information on number of passenger journeys by ferry is collected by my Department and the information is published annually in "Maritime Statistics".
East Coast Main Line
Mr. Lazarowicz: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions on how many occasions in (a) 2001 (b) 2000 and (c) 1999 services on the east coast main line have been disrupted owing to collapse or other failure of the overhead power cables; and what average length of delay has been caused to passenger services as a result. [6652]
Mr. Jamieson [pursuant to his reply, 23 October 2001, c. 191–92W]: The following corrected table from Railtrack shows the number of overhead line failures attributable to Railtrack and the train operators respectively in 1999, 2000 and 2001:
| Year | Total minutes delay | Number of incidents | Average delay | Percentage of all delays ECML |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Railtrack attributable (overhead line) | ||||
| 1999 | 19,328 | 157 | 123 | 5.4 |
| 2000 | 24,037 | 134 | 179 | 3.0 |
| 2001 | 17,797 | 100 | 178 | 2.9 |
| TOC attributable (pantograph) | ||||
| 1999 | — | — | — | — |
| 2000 | (1)387 | (1)5 | (1)77 | (1)0.2 |
| 2001 | 8,149 | 13 | 627 | 2.2 |
(1) Data relating to these were not collected until summer 2000
ENVIRONMENT, FOOD AND RURAL AFFAIRS
Flood Protection
David Davis: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what provision she plans to make to (a) the Environment Agency and (b) East Riding of Yorkshire Council to protect properties at risk from flooding. [11963]
Mr. Morley: I have recently announced the allocations to flood and coastal defence operating authorities for 2002–03.
The capital allocation, on which we have offered to pay grant, for the Environment Agency in Yorkshire is £19.6 million (compared with £12.5 million in 2001–02). The rate of grant is one of the highest in the country at 65 per cent.
East Riding of Yorkshire Council have indicated that they intend to submit applications for funding for a number of schemes to reduce the risk of coastal erosion, but not to reduce the risk of flooding.
Ocean Management
Mr. Lazarowicz: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs if she will bring forward proposals to introduce an eco-system approach to the management of the oceans around the UK. [11503]
6 Nov 2001 : Column: 145W
Mr. Meacher: We are working through the European Commission and the OSPAR Convention for the Protection of the Marine Environment of the North East Atlantic for the sustainable management and conservation of the seas around the UK. The Government's Marine Stewardship Report will set out our overarching strategy. We are looking at adopting an eco-system approach in this context.
Departmental Assets
Mr. Laws: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what stocks of (a) antiques, (b) paintings and (c) fine wines are held by her Department; if she will list such assets sold over the last three years together with the sale proceeds from such transactions; what plans she has to sell further such assets over the period of the current Comprehensive Spending Review; and if she will make a statement. [10845]
Mr. Morley [holding answer 31 October 2001]: The National Asset Register gives full details of departmental asset holdings across all categories of assets, including heritage assets, along with details of major acquisitions and disposals since the publication of the last register in 1997. While DEFRA does not hold any stocks of antiques, paintings or fine wines, the National Asset register does contain a summary of DEFRA's asset holdings.
Foot and Mouth
Mr. Luff: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what assessment she has made of the contribution of hunt staff to the control of foot and mouth disease; and if she will make a statement. [8987]
Mr. Morley: All our slaughter teams have provided a valuable contribution in the effort to control the disease. The first licensed hunt slaughtermen were engaged by the Department at the end of March on exactly the same basis as all licensed slaughtermen.
David Maclean: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what restrictions she intends to impose on the sourcing of animals for restocking farms after foot and mouth has been eliminated. [5344]
Mr. Morley: From 5 November 2001, it will be possible for farmers in high risk counties, outside Infected Areas and restricted Infected Areas to bring stock into such counties from foot and mouth disease free and at risk counties for the purposes of restocking farms which have been culled. The arrangements for restocking will be kept under review as the disease situation changes.
Mr. George Osborne: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs how many confirmed foot and mouth cases occurred in 2001 in each of the borough council areas of Cheshire. [11083]
Mr. Morley: It is only possible to provide data from the DEFRA Disease Control System (DCS) database for Cheshire as a whole. As at 31 October, there have been 17 Infected Premises (IPs), 32 Dangerous Contacts (DCs) and three Slaughter on Suspicion (SOS) cases in Cheshire.
Mr. Yeo: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs how many farms included in the foot and mouth cull but not recognised as
6 Nov 2001 : Column: 146W
infected premises have had laboratory tests conducted for the presence of foot and mouth; and what proportion of these recorded positive results. [286]
Mr. Morley [holding answer 25 June 2001]: As at 22 October a total of 7,294 Dangerous Contacts (DC) and 255 Slaughter on Suspicion (SOS) cases, which had not been recognised as Infected Premises, had laboratory tests conducted. Of these, five yielded positive results and subsequently became IPs and were recorded as such.
- Notes:
- In addition to IPs and SOS cases, contiguous premises and DC premises have had samples taken from sheep at slaughter to further inform the Department as to origin and spread of disease. Some of these were subsequently recorded as IPs as they yielded positive laboratory results. A negative result does not necessarily mean that disease was not present. In the main, testing was for antibody, ie looking for evidence of origin (older disease).
- Source:
- DEFRA Disease Control System database as at 22 October—these figures may be subject to change as quality assurance of the data are carried out.
| Next Section | Index | Home Page |