|Previous Section||Index||Home Page|
17 Dec 2003 : Column 903Wcontinued
Mrs. Betty Williams: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what plans she has to introduce spot fines at all ports of entry against people who smuggle illegal food products into the country. 
Andrew George: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs how much genetically-modified maize has been imported to the United Kingdom to be used for (a) livestock feed, (b) poultry feed and (c) other purposes in each of the past five years for which records are available. 
Andrew George: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (1) what advice her Department has (a) given and (b) received from the Food Standards Agency on a decision regarding the application for use of Bt 11 GM maize in food considered at the EC Standing Committee on Food Chain and Animal Health meeting on 8 December; 
Mr. Morley: The application for approval to market Bt11 GM maize as food is subject to collective EU decision-making under EU Regulation 258/97 on novel foods and novel foods ingredients. The Food Standards Agency is the UK competent authority for this legislation and carried out an independent assessment. A UK position with respect to the authorisation of Bt11 maize in foods was agreed by relevant Government Departments, and the Agency represented the UK in the EC Standing Committee on 8 December.
Mr. Chaytor: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what guidance she has issued to local authorities in respect of (a) the circumstances in which permission may be given to and (b) the procedures to be followed by landowners wishing to drain mill lodges; and if she will make a statement. 
In terms of drainage, under the Water Resources Act 1991 and the Land Drainage Act 1991, the consent of the relevant operating authoritythe Environment Agency in relation to a "main River" or otherwise the local authority or Internal Drainage Boardmust be
17 Dec 2003 : Column 904W
obtained before any work is undertaken which is likely to affect the flow of a watercourse or impede any drainage work.
Under the Water Resources Act it is an offence to remove deposits in watercourses which have accumulated behind a weir, dam or sluice and allow that deposit to be carried away in suspension without consent from the Agency. An example would be lifting a sluice and letting all the silt flow downstream, which might adversely affect the fauna.
A need for a fish rescue consent to transfer fish from the pond;
An abstraction licence;
Under some circumstances an Environmental Impact Assessment may also be required.
Mr. Morley: When the Regulatory Impact Assessment was carried out in 1998 it was estimated that the total cost of compliance would be in the region of £370 million. However the actual costs are not known as most of the compliance is being achieved through industry self-regulation.
Mr. Wiggin: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what environmental benefits have been achieved through complying with the Ozone Depleting Substances Regulation. 
Mr. Morley: Through the continued efforts of the member states under EC Regulation 2037/2000 and other Parties to the Montreal Protocol on substances that deplete the ozone layer, there has been a decline in the amount of chlorine in the upper and lower atmosphere. This is a good indicator of when the stratospheric ozone layer will recover. At the present rate the ozone layer is expected to start recovering by the middle of the century.
If action had not been taken under EC Regulation 2037/2000 and the Montreal Protocol the ozone layer would have continued to be destroyed, resulting in more ultra violet radiation reaching the ground, which would have had a detrimental affect on plant and animal life.
17 Dec 2003 : Column 905W
Mr. Banks: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs how many primates, broken down by species, were imported from Israel into the UK in (a) 2002 and (b) 2003 to date; and if she will make a statement. 
Mr. Morley [holding answer given 15 December 2003]: 130 primates were imported from Israel in 2002 and 115 in 2003 to date. All the specimens in question were Crab-eating macaques (Macaca fascicularis).
Primates may be imported only by a zoological or scientific institution under strict conditions. These are that the specimens are kept or bred exclusively for the purposes of educational display, conservation of the species or scientific research.
17 Dec 2003 : Column 906W
biologically active genome of bacteriophage phi X174 in the reduction in the toxic impact of radioactive waste. 
Mr. Morley: No research has been commissioned or assessed by the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs into the role of the synthesis of the biologically active genome bacteriophage phi X174 in the reduction of the toxic impact of radioactive waste.
Andrew Bennett: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs if she will set out the timetable for the implementation of regulations under Part I of the Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000. 
Alun Michael: The following table records the progress we have already made towards bringing the regulations into force as well as our timetable for completing the process. Since my Answer of 15 September, regulations relating to the exclusions or restriction of access have come into force, on 17 November. We have given priority of time and effort to completing these regulations, and now to working on associated guidance which needs to be in place in order for the exclusions and restrictions system to open for business. As a result of this, the timetable for the remaining regulations has been delayed, but we are firmly committed to ensuring the necessary regulations are made in time to allow the new right of public access under the Act to be rolled out as planned.
|Regulation||Section||Consultation commenced(not later than)||Date regulationsin force(not later than)|
|Regulations regarding mapping of access land and consultation on draft maps||Section 11||March 2001[ended June 2001]||1 November 2001|
|Regulations regarding issue of provisional maps, appeals, and issue of conclusive maps||Section 11||November 2001[ended 8 Feb 2002]||29 July 2002|
|Regulations regarding the establishment of Local Access Forums and the appointment of members||Section 94 (Part V)||July 2001[ended October 2001]||7 August 2002|
|Regulations on correcting minor errors and omissions in provisional and conclusive maps||Section 11(2)(1)||October 2002[ended 7 November 2002]||21 July 2003|
|Regulations regarding dedication of land for access||Section 16||January 2002[ended 15 April 2002]||1 September 2003|
|Regulations relating to exclusion or restriction of access under Chapter II, including appeals (but not emergencies)||Section 32||December 2001[ended 22 March 2002]||17 November 2003|
|Regulations on removal or relaxation of restrictions on access land||Paragraph 7, Schedule 2||July 2003[ended October 2003]||February 2004|
|Regulations to exclude access in emergencies||Section 31||February 2004||August 2004|
|Regulations on appeals relating to notices||Section 38||February 2004||August 2004|
|Regulations on references to public places in existing enactments||Section 42||February 2004||August 2004|
|Regulations regarding review of conclusive maps||Section 11||April 2004||October 2004|
|Next Section||Index||Home Page|