| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Foot and Mouth
Mrs. Ann Winterton: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what assessment she has made of the findings and recommendations of the National Farmers Union's report entitled, "Lessons to be Learned from the 2001 outbreak of foot and mouth disease"; and whether she intends to publish a response to the report. [31512]
Mr. Morley: I welcome the National Farmers Union report. I understand that it has been sent to the Lessons Learned inquiry, which I expect will take account of the report's findings in making recommendations.
29 Jan 2002 : Column 248W
Farm Subsidy Claims
Mr. Watts: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what penalties are imposed on farmers who make mistakes when they are filling in claim forms for farming subsidies; and whether farmers can rectify mistakes on claim forms without a penalty being imposed. [28363]
Mr. Morley: The penalties imposed vary according to the type and severity of the mistake. The penalties applied for the 2001 scheme year are detailed in Annex 7 of the 2001 Integrated Administration and Control System Explanatory Guide, copies of which are being placed in the Library of the House. A summary of Annex 7 follows:
- Part 1. Applications received after the closing date
- 1–25 calendar days late. The applicant will lose 1 per cent. of their entitlement to aid for each working day by which the application is late and for each scheme to which the application relates.
- Over 25 calendar days late. The applicant will lose their entire entitlement to aid for each scheme to which the application relates.
- Part 2. Inaccuracies discovered in areas declared
- Area found is more than declared. No penalty, but the applicant's entitlement will be based on the declared area.
- The area found is less than declared. The applicant's entitlement will be based on the lower figure. In addition this lower figure will be adjusted as follows: if difference is more than 3 per cent. or 2 hectares, but not more than 20 per cent. of the area found, the adjustment will be twice the difference found. If the difference is more than 20 per cent., no area-linked aid will be granted.
- Part 3. Inaccuracies discovered in number of eligible animals
- Number of animals found is more than declared. No penalty, but payment will be based on the number declared.
- Number of animals found is less than declared. (In cases where a claim covers a maximum of 20 animals.)
- (i) Difference between numbers found and declared is one or two animals. The applicant's entitlement will be based on the number found, but rate of premium adjusted by the percentage difference found.
- (ii) Difference between numbers found and declared is three to four animals. The applicant's entitlement will be based on the number found, but rate of premium adjusted by twice the percentage difference found.
- (iii) Difference between numbers found and declared is more than four. No premium will be paid under the scheme concerned.
- Number of animals found is less than declared. (In cases where a claim covers 21 or more animals.)
29 Jan 2002 : Column 249W
- (i) Difference between the number declared and found is not more than 5 per cent. of the number found. The applicant's entitlement will be based on the number found, but rate of premium will be reduced by the percentage difference found.
- (ii) Difference between the number declared and found is more than 5 per cent. but not more than 20 per cent. of the number found. The applicant's entitlement will be based on the number found, but rate of premium reduced by twice the percentage difference found.
- (iii) Difference between the number declared and found is more than 20 per cent. of the number found. No premium will be paid under the scheme concerned.
- Mistakes
- Mistakes in area aid applications and livestock claims which can be classified as "obvious" according to European Commission guidelines, and where the farmer acted in good faith and there is no risk of fraud, can be rectified without penalty at any time, and are summarised as follows. All other mistakes attract the penalties listed in Annex 7 of the 2001 Integrated Administration and Control System Explanatory Guide which is summarised in Parts 1–3.
- Types of obvious errors, which can be rectified
- (i) Errors of a purely clerical nature, which are obvious during a simple examination of the claim, i.e.:
- boxes not filled in or information lacking
- erroneous statistical information
- (ii) Errors detected as a result of a contradiction appearing in a more in-depth examination (manual or computerised) of the claim, which compares information (including supporting documentation, such as a map) submitted in the same claim, i.e.:
- arithmetical mistakes
- inconsistencies between the information provided on the same form (for example, a parcel declared twice in a single claim);
- parcels declared for two different types of usage
- (iii) Anomalies involving parcel numbers or references which are detected during the crosscheck of the claim with databases, such as the parcel identification system, i.e.:
- figures reversed (parcel number 1169 instead of 1196
- mistakes in the map reference number
- number of neighbouring parcel given, resulting from map reading error.
DEPUTY PRIME MINISTER
Lost/Stolen Property
Mr. Bercow: To ask the Deputy Prime Minister if he will list those items valued at more than £50 which have been stolen or lost from his Department in each of the last four years. [28006]
Mr. Leslie: For the purpose of this answer my Department includes the Prime Minister's Office. Items stolen or lost in each of the last four financial years, and their approximate value, are shown in the table.
Corresponding figures for the 2001–02 financial year have yet to be collected.
29 Jan 2002 : Column 250W
Theft and Fraud
Mr. Bercow: To ask the Deputy Prime Minister what his estimate is of the cost of theft and fraud to (a) his Department, (b) its agencies and (c) non-departmental public bodies in each of the last four years. [27976]
Mr. Menzies Campbell: To ask the Deputy Prime Minister what estimate his Department has made of the cost to its budget since 1 May 1997 of fraud; and if he will make a statement. [27296]
Mr. Leslie: The cost of theft and fraud to my Department, its agencies, and non-departmental public bodies in each of the last four years, is shown in the table.
Corresponding figures for 2001–02 financial year have yet to be collated.
| Department | Agencies | NDPBs | Total | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1997–98 | 15,360 | 0 | 0 | 15,360 |
| 1998–99 | 48,472 | 0 | 1,000 | 49,472 |
| 1999–2000 | 32,097 | 0 | 0 | 32,097 |
| 2000–01 | 33,574 | 0 | 1,200 | 34,774 |
29 Jan 2002 : Column 251W
Public Relations Consultants
Mr. Bercow: To ask the Deputy Prime Minister how much was spent by (a) his Department and (b) bodies for which it is responsible on external public relations consultants in each of the last four years. [27389]
Mr. Leslie: Expenditure on external public relations consultancy is not separately identifiable on the Department's accounting system and is therefore available only at disproportionate cost.
Market Research
Mr. Bercow: To ask the Deputy Prime Minister what expenditure has been incurred by his (a) Department, (b) agencies and (c) non-departmental public bodies in each of the last four years on (i) opinion polling, (ii) focus groups and (iii) other forms of market research; and if he will list the surveys commissioned and the purpose of each. [27949]
Mr. Leslie: I refer the hon. Member to the answer I gave to the hon. Member for Winchester (Mr. Oaten) on 10 December 2001, Official Report, column 594W.
A list of the surveys commissioned and the purpose of each could be supplied only at disproportionate cost.
| Next Section | Index | Home Page |