|Previous Section||Index||Home Page|
Helen Jones: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what assessment she has made of the effect of introducing a development box into the World Trade Organisation agreement on agriculture; and if she will make a statement. 
Mr. Morley [holding answer 17 June 2002]: The creation of a development box would be one way of giving effect to the important Declaration made at Doha last year that special and differential treatment for developing countries must be an integral part of all elements of the WTO agriculture negotiations. Current proposals for such a box contain several elements, including provision for developing countries to reduce
20 Jun 2002 : Column 480W
Helen Jones: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what estimate she has made of the contribution made by the average UK family to the CAP by (a) contributions made through tax, (b) increases in prices and (c) other means in the last 12 months. 
We estimate that, in 2000, a notional UK family of four paid £4-£5 per week in higher food prices as a result of the CAP. UK taxpayers do not contribute specifically to the CAP; rather they contribute to the EU budget as a whole. Total EU payments in 2000 were approximately £51 billion (euro 83 billion), of which around £25 billion (euro 40.5 billion) was spent under the CAP. The UK currently provides around 13.5 per cent. of total budgetary contributions.
Mr. Morley [holding answer 17 June 2002]: Market price support in the UK dairy sector was equivalent to around £900 million in 2000, the latest year for which data is available. In addition the dairy sector will have received a substantial share of the £260 million paid to livestock producers through the Over Thirty Month Scheme. The agricultural census undertaken in June 2000 records 2.3 million dairy cows in the UK.
Helen Jones: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what proportion of common agricultural policy funding went to UK farmers broken down by (a) under eight European size units, (b) eight to 39 ESUs, (c) 40 to 99 ESUs, (d) 100 to 199 ESUs and (e) 200 and over ESUs in the last 12 months. 
Mr. Morley [holding answer 17 June 2002]: Exact data on payments under the CAP in the UK cannot be stratified according to the size of farm, e.g. in terms of European size units. The farm business survey provides estimates of direct subsidy receipts for the average farm in England. The latest estimates are given in the following table.
|All farm types|
|100 and above ESU||46,300|
(7) Average per farm
20 Jun 2002 : Column 481W
subsidies received, including some nationally funded schemes. They represent only direct payments to farmers. They do not include the additional support that farmers receive from the consumer, through CAP market support policies.
Mr. Lidington: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what estimate she has made of the total costs under phase one of the national scrapie plan of (a) the identification and registration of rams, (b) the registration of farms, (c) the collection of blood samples and their dispatch to the laboratory, (d) the laboratory testing of blood samples to establish genotypes, and (e) certification. 
Mr. Morley: Information is not available in the format requested. A major part of the costs under (a), (c) and (e) relates to the administrative costs of the state veterinary service, and a breakdown of the service's costs by those categories is not available. As regards (b), the national scrapie plan does not maintain a specific and separate register of farms.
Expenditure on the genotyping schemes for both the registered and non-registered sectors which have already been launched under the national scrapie plan will depend on levels of uptake under what are voluntary schemes. Estimated annual expenditure is given in the table for different levels of assumed uptake. The figures exclude the administrative costs of the state veterinary service and IT costs.
|Assuming 40 per cent. uptake||Assuming 60 per cent. uptake||Assuming 80 per cent. uptake|
|Ram genotyping registered||4||6||8|
|Ram genotyping non-registered||7||10||13|
|Laboratory genotyping costs||4.4||6.6||8.8|
|Animal identification costs||1.5||2.2||2.9|
Mr. Morley: Action under the national scrapie plan is being rolled out in full consultation with the sheep industry and other stakeholders. The first phase of the plan commenced in July 2001 with the launch of the genotyping scheme for purebred registered flocks. A
20 Jun 2002 : Column 482W
second genotyping scheme for purebred non-registered flocks was launched in January 2002, extending the national scrapie plan to all purebred sheep flocks. At that time we also announced that any flock that had had scrapie, regardless of whether or not it was a purebred flock, could join the existing plan.
We are currently working on proposals for a specific scheme under the national scrapie plan to cover flocks that have had scrapie. Informal but detailed discussions on these proposals have already taken place with stakeholder representatives and we expect to publish proposals for formal public consultation later this year. We continue to involve all sheep industry stakeholder organisationsincluding the breed societies, farming unions and the National Sheep Associationas well as other stakeholders in all stages of our consultations. This will remain the case for any further schemes under the national scrapie plan.
Mr. Lidington: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs how many sheep have so far been tested for scrapie under the sheep abattoir survey that began on 7 January; when she expects to meet her target of 20,000 tests; and if she will make a statement. 
Mr. Morley [holding answer 19 June 2002]: EU legislation (TSE Regulation 999/2001 as amended) required the UK to test 15,000 sheep aged over 18 months and destined for human consumption from 1 January 2002. In addition to this, a SEAC-recommended scientific survey was run concurrently which added an additional 5,000 animals to the abattoir survey.
Mr. Lidington: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs how many sheep have had to be destroyed since 1 January as a result of injuries sustained during testing for scrapie. 
Mr. Morley: I understand the hon. Member is referring to the injuries resulting from the administration to sheep of the ruminal bolus used to identify sheep under the national scrapie plan. Since January 2002 some 93,000 sheep have been tested under the plan. Of these 36 have died or have had to be destroyed following problems with the administration of the bolus. Compensation has been (or is in the process of being) paid to the owners concerned.
The losses are very regrettable and steps have been taken to address problems which sprang mainly from initial operator inexperience under a new scheme. Training of operators has been refined. As a result, the number of casualties has fallen significantly in recent months.
20 Jun 2002 : Column 483W
Mr. Morley [holding answer 13 June 2002]: Through its breeding schemes the national scrapie plan aims to increase genetic resistance to TSEs by increasing the prevalence of the ARR allele. At present participation in the plan is voluntary and it is only rams with the genotypes which are the most susceptible to TSEs (those carrying the VRQ allele) which must be culled or castrated by those farmers who choose to join. Other susceptible genotypes in participating flocks are to be phased out over time. It is clearly in the interest of sheep farmers to convert their flocks to a TSE-resistant basis as quickly as possible and it should be possible for the vast majority, if not all, of them to do so over a planned time scale. If there were any breeds where the existence of the ARR allele is absent or so low as to make this impossible, the Government would of course take that into account. We have initiated, as part of the national scrapie plan, a rare breeds survey to obtain better information on the distribution of genotypes in rare breeds.
|Next Section||Index||Home Page|