| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
21 Oct 2003 : Column 491W—continued
Research and Development Tax Credit
Dr. Cable: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer how much was allocated to small firms using the research and development tax credit in financial years (a) 2001–02 and (b) 2002–03; and if he will make a statement. [132884]
Dawn Primarolo: It is not possible to separately identify small firms from our data. However, it is possible to identify Small or Medium Enterprises (SMEs). Latest estimates of the total cost, on an accruals basis, of the research and development tax credit for 2001–02 and 2002–03 are available on the Inland Revenue's website at http://www.inlandrevenue.gov.uk/stats/tax expenditures/g t05 1.htm. For 2002–03, the first year that large companies were eligible to claim R&D tax credits, the estimated cost of support for companies which are defined as SMEs for the purposes of the tax credit is £200 million.
Vehicle Excise Duty
Mr. Laws: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer for what reasons the Government imposes vehicle excise duty on vehicle ownership; and if he will make a statement. [132902]
John Healey: Vehicle Excise Duty (VED) helps ensure that all motorists contribute to the costs of maintaining and policing the road network. The VED system is also important in helping the enforcement of vehicle insurance and registration rules, and it enables discounts to be offered to help disabled drivers. The graduation of VED from March 2001 in relation to the carbon dioxide emissions and the pollution of cars has been important in helping to strengthen the signals for environmentally responsible behaviour by motorists.
Research Science
Mrs. Gillan: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer how many people were employed in research science in each year since 1 January 1996. [132332]
Ruth Kelly: The information requested falls within the responsibility of the National Statistician. I have asked him to reply.
Letter from Len Cook to Mrs. Cheryl Gillan, dated 21 October 2003:
- As National Statistician, I have been asked to reply to your recent question about people employed in research science since 1996. (132332)
- The attached table shows the number of people employed in four occupational groups that comprise workers in research science. This data is derived from the Labour Force Survey (LFS)
21 Oct 2003 : Column 492W
- and is only available from Spring 2001, when the last major change to the Standard Occupational Classification (SOC2000) was implemented.
- Estimates for previous years have not been given as they are not available on a consistent basis. This is because the Standard Occupation Classification (SOC)2000 classification was introduced to the LFS in spring (March to May) 2001 and is not comparable with the SOC90 classification used in earlier periods.
| 2001 | 2002 | 2003 | |
|---|---|---|---|
| All research science occupations | 837 | 852 | 833 |
| 211 Science Professionals | 120 | 117 | 117 |
| 212 Engineering Professionals | 427 | 429 | 443 |
| 311 Science and Engineering Technicians | 273 | 290 | 258 |
| 2321 Scientific researchers | 17 | 16 | 14 |
(4) People whose occupation in their main job is Standard Occupation Classification (SOC) 2000 codes 211, 212, 213, or 2321.
These LFS estimates have not been adjusted to reflect the 2001 Census results
Source:
ONS Labour Force Survey
Vehicle/Fuel Taxation
Mr. Peter Ainsworth: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer (1) what assessment he has made of the impact on emissions of carcinogens from road vehicles of (a) company car tax, (b) other vehicle taxation and (c) fuel tax;. [132836]
- (2) what assessment he has made of the impact on emissions of oxides of nitrogen from road vehicles of (a) company car tax, (b) other vehicle taxation and (c) fuel tax. [132840]
John Healey: The Government has incorporated tax differentials into the company car tax, vehicle excise duty and fuel duty regimes to facilitate the use of alternative fuels and cleaner technologies to improve air quality.
Much of the reduction in pollution from road transport results from tougher emissions standards for new vehicles. The tax system provides some incentives for the earlier take-up of cleaner vehicles, as well as incentives for switching to less-polluting fuels and technologies.
Transport taxation is also intended to encourage the use of more fuel-efficient cars with lower carbon dioxide emissions.
Key air pollutants, including carcinogens, have reduced by around 50 per cent. over the last decade and are forecast to fall by a further 30 per cent. over the next decade. The specific information requested is not available; although further details of emissions of all pollutants from road transport are available from the National Atmospheric Emissions Inventory (www.naei.org.uk).
Written Consultation
Dr. Cable: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer how many (a) consultation documents and (b) consultative drafts of legislation have been issued by his Department
21 Oct 2003 : Column 493W
since January 2001; what proportion of these have observed Criterion 5 of the Code of Practice on Written Consultation; and if he will make a statement. [132882]
Ruth Kelly: A list of consultation documents issued since January 2001 can be found on the HM Treasury website at http://www.hm-treasury.gov.uk/consultations and legislation/. In 2001, a third of consultation documents met Criterion 5. In 2002 and to date in 2003, more than three-quarters have done so. Most of the consultations that did not meet Criterion 5 related to market-sensitive financial service areas. In those cases where the consultation period is due to be shorter than normal, the reasons for this are now routinely set out in the text of the document.
ENVIRONMENT, FOOD AND RURAL AFFAIRS
Foxes
Mr. Rosindell: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what methods of controlling the fox population her Department will recommend if the Hunting Bill receives Royal Assent. [133476]
Alun Michael: The Department's advice on fox control will remain unchanged if the Hunting Bill receives Royal Assent (assuming that it does so in its current form).
At present, shooting is the recommended method of fox control in rural areas. Snaring, which is also an effective technique when used by experienced personnel, may have advantages over shooting in certain situations.
Lethal control is not generally recommended in urban areas. Killing or relocating foxes usually only provides transient relief from the problems foxes cause, as vacant territories are rapidly reoccupied once the control measures cease. In addition, shooting and snaring are unlikely to be appropriate control methods for reasons of safety, and in the case of shooting, public disturbance. Advice on alternative strategies for preventing problems is given in the Department's "Urban Fox" leaflet (code WM08) which is available from the Defra website (www.defra.gov.uk/wildlife-countryside/vertebrates).
High-risk Chemicals
Mr. Meacher: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what plans she has for the development of comparative risk assessment for high-risk chemicals; what the timescale is for each of the steps envisaged; and if she will list the chemicals to which it is intended to apply this system. [132454]
Alun Michael: When putting in place measures to reduce the risks of high-risk substances we consider the availability of substitutes and their hazards to ensure that the best option is taken. This is done following guidance set out by the EU and we currently have no plans to further develop this. The full examination to reduce risks—which includes this comparison—is divided into a five-stage process and generally takes between six and nine months. This process is applied
21 Oct 2003 : Column 494W
to chemicals which have been demonstrated to be a high risk and examples of those completed include: short chain chlorinated paraffins, octa and penta bromodiphenyl ether, bis phenol A and nonyl phenol ethoxylate.
Pesticides
Norman Baker: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what assessment has been made of the costs of the safe disposal from farms of stocks of those pesticides which have been withdrawn from the market this year as a result of the review taking place under EU Agricultural Pesticides Directive 91/414; and if she will list the cost to (a) the Government, (b) farmers and (c) the pesticide industry arising from the review. [133108]
Alun Michael: Pesticides are regularly withdrawn from the market as a result of regulatory reviews or commercial decisions taken by crop protection companies. However, when there are not over-riding safety concerns a 'use up' period is provided. The purpose of this period is to allow the pesticide industry and farmers to use up existing stocks of the pesticide products concerned and thus avoid significant disposal costs. We believe that this is the best environmental option as well as minimising the costs for all parties.
The withdrawals of products under the EC review programme has been taking place progressively since 1995 although the largest batch of withdrawals is taking place this year. In all cases a use-up period has been provided. In anticipation of this years withdrawals the department undertook special publicity campaigns, both this year and last, supported by the crop protection industry and farmers organisations. These were designed to ensure that those affected used their stocks by the end of this year thus minimising the need for disposals.
Because of this costs would only arise at the end of this year for farmers or pesticide companies if they have failed to take advantage of the use up period and we do not envisage that there will be additional costs to Government.
Dr. Gibson: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what assessment she has made of the information contained on the Pesticides Safety Directorate website on the mixing of individual compounds after sale in relation to Regulation 4 of the Control of Pesticides Regulations 1986 and Regulation 4 of the Plant Protection Regulations 1997. [133502]
Alun Michael: The information on the Pesticide Safety Directorate's website describing the mixing of individual pesticides after sale refers to the published 'Guidelines on the Provision of Pesticide Mixing Services and Sale of Twin Packs and Kits'. These guidelines confirm the requirement that only pesticides formulated in accordance with approved formulations may be sold or supplied. However once sale has taken place a pesticide may legally be mixed with another pesticide or with other substances without the need for a further product approval. This is provided that the mixing process is carried out by the user or on behalf of the user, and that specific conditions of use set for
21 Oct 2003 : Column 495W
the individually approved pesticides concerned are complied with. Many users choose to employ mixing services provided at retailer or distributor premises, or by mobile mixing services that visit farms. The mixing service guidelines stipulate that these services must be provided only after sale has taken place, that mixing must be carried out only in accordance with any restrictions placed on the individual pesticides used, and that mixed product should be used promptly.
| Next Section | Index | Home Page |