some default text...
Previous Section Index Home Page


Dairy Farmers

Mr. Levitt: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what plans she has to call upon further agrimonetary compensation to compensate dairy farmers for a fall in milk prices. [55824]

Mr. Morley: I refer my hon. Friend to the reply given to my hon. Friend the Member for Gedling (Vernon Coaker) on 2 May 2002.

Director-General, Fisheries

Mr. Rosindell: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs if she will make a statement on the removal from role of the Director- General, Fisheries. [55694]

Mr. Morley: The European Commission is responsible for senior staffing within the Commission services. The Commission announced changes affecting 13 senior staff on 24 April. The post of Director-General of Fisheries Policy is being advertised within the Commission. The present director-general remains in post pending the new appointment.

15 May 2002 : Column 656W

Deer

Mr. Walter: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what proposals she has to amend Schedule 2 of the Deer Act 1991 to permit the use of a rifle of a calibre less than .240 inches for the safe and humane killing of static injured deer. [56332]

Mr. Meacher [holding answer 14 May 2002]: We have no current proposals to amend the Deer Act 1991.

Packaging Waste

Shona McIsaac: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what the United Kingdom's performance was in 2001 against the recovery and recycling targets in the EC directive on packaging and packaging waste; and if she will make a statement. [57136]

Mr. Meacher: The UK narrowly failed to meet the overall packaging waste recovery target in 2001 but met the overall recycling target and the material-specific recycling targets for all materials

The recovery and recycling of packaging waste carried out in 2001 is as shown in the table.

Recovery and recycling carried out in 2001 (UK)

UK re-processing (1)Exported for re-processing (2)Re-processing for which no PRN/PERN issued (incl. in (1)) (3)PRN/PERN carried forward to 2002 (4)Tonnes accepted for recovery and recycling, UK (5)
Paper1,851,505179,43925,89583,0642,030,944
Glass696,57839,01617,03629,273735,594
Aluminium25,8693,161182129,030
Steel141,343136,7363,0518,365278,079
Plastic203,14966,8136,07710,506269,962
Wood573,9514,98523,742573,951
Alt. evidence30,74130,741
Total recycling3,523,136425,16557,045155,7713,948,301
Efw513,93991324,986513,939
Total4,037,075425,16557,958180,7574,462,240

Article 6(1) of the EC directive on packaging and packaging waste 94/62/EC set the following targets:


The UK performance against the targets is shown in the table.

UK performance against 2001 directive targets
Percentage

MaterialTargetPerformance
Paper1553
Glass1533
Aluminium15(3)24
Steel15(3)37
Plastic1516
Wood1557
Total recovery50 to 6547.9
Total recycling25 to 4542

(3) Metals 35 per cent.


The Producer Responsibility Obligations (Packaging Waste) Regulations 1997 (as amended) and parallel legislation in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland implement these targets in the UK. The regulations place recovery and recycling obligations on producers to enable the UK to attain the directive recovery and recycling targets. The Scottish Environment Protection Agency and the Environment Agency have reported that one compliance scheme and a number of individually registered businesses failed to meet their tonnage recovery obligations under the packaging regulations—a total shortfall of 263,832 tonnes against a combined total obligation of 823,003 tonnes.

New Forest Official Verderer

Dr. Julian Lewis: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs if she will make a statement on the appointment of the Official Verderer for the New Forest. [54913]

Mr. Morley: We expect Her Majesty the Queen to make this appointment very soon.

Fishing Industry

Vera Baird: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what progress she

15 May 2002 : Column 657W

has made in negotiating a derogation for the UK inshore fishing fleet, comparable to the Norwegian derogation, from this year's increase in fixed mesh sizes. [56127]

Mr. Morley: The Commission has asked Norway to confirm that it has exempted its inshore fleet from the increase in fixed fishing gear mesh sizes but has not yet received a response. We will continue to press the Commission for a similar derogation.

Foot and Mouth

Mrs. Ann Winterton: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs if she will calculate the number of ewes with lambs at foot slaughtered under (a) disease control restrictions and (b) the livestock welfare disposal scheme during the 2001 outbreak of foot and mouth disease. [35537]

Mr. Morley: It is not possible to calculate the number of ewes with lambs at foot slaughtered either for disease control purposes or under the livestock welfare disposal scheme because lambs at foot have not been recorded separately. For the purposes of disease control it is only necessary to record animals by species ie cattle, sheep, pigs goats, deer and other. Lambs at foot have therefore simply been included in the sheep category.

We are aware that to date not all the lambs at foot, slaughtered for disease control purposes, have been included in the figures on DEFRA's disease control system database (DCS). In the early stages of the outbreak, in line with normal husbandry practice, a number of ewes with lambs at foot were recorded as one unit (ie one animal). It was quickly recognised that each animal should be separately recorded and, as staff resources became available, an exercise to amend the DCS began.

This exercise is now well under way and many of the lambs at foot are already reflected in the total slaughter figure of around 4 million for disease control purposes. Information describing this exercise has been on the DEFRA website for some time, where it is also noted that the data on the DCS are being validated and may result in figures being revised.

Slaughtering under the livestock welfare disposal scheme took place at abattoirs and it was consequently more likely that lambs at foot were recorded in the slaughter figures. These figures are therefore very unlikely to change.

Tony Cunningham: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs when she will reply to the letter of 11 June 2001 from Mrs. M. Edmunds of Low Lorton, Cumbria concerning foot and mouth disease. [43039]

Mr. Morley [holding answer 14 March 2002]: I am sorry that my hon. Friend has not received a reply to his letter, but we are unable to trace it.

I appreciate that my hon. Friend's constituent will be disappointed at not receiving a reply, and suggest, if a reply is still needed, that my hon. Friend sends us another copy of her letter so that we can provide an answer.

15 May 2002 : Column 658W

Home Energy Efficiency Scheme

Mr. Burstow: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs how many heating installations undertaken by (a) TXU Warm Front Ltd. and (b) Eaga Partnership were completed in each of the last four quarters for which information is available; what proportion were found to be (i) unsafe and (ii) requiring remedial work; and what was the (A) average and (B) longest wait for remedial work to be completed. [43568]

Mr. Meacher [holding answer 18 March 2002]: The number of electric and gas heating installations carried out for each quarter of 2001 were:

QuarterTXUEagaTotal
12,7158,11210,827
25,13112,57417,705
35,28711,51316,800
45,90715,56721,474

The number and percentage of inspected installations found to be unsafe and those requiring remedial work during each quarter in that period

Number Of which Remedial work required
QuarterinspectedunsafeNumberPercentage
TXU
138419224
2950112813
31,696718011
41,379513610
Eaga
14,158154413
24,260151312
37,15241,02314
49,92721,23813

All gas fired central heating installations are subject to inspection after installation. A percentage of other installations are also subject to inspection.

Those jobs identified as requiring remedial work were deemed to have failed on inspection.

Information on waiting times for remedial works to be carried out is not available in this format.


Next Section Index Home Page