---

18 Mar 2004 : Column 427W—continued

ENVIRONMENT, FOOD AND RURAL AFFAIRS

Village Halls

Dr. Murrison: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs how much funding was given by (a) the Department of Environment, Food and Rural Affairs' Aggregates Levy Sustainability Fund, (b) the Rural Enterprise Scheme and (c) landfill tax to village halls in each of their years of operation. [159677]

Alun Michael: Only very partial information is available. I list such information as we have:

(a) Aggregates Levy Sustainability Fund

The Fund was introduced by the Finance Act 2001 and came into force on 1 April 2002. The levy was set at £1.60 per tonne of aggregates produced. The fund was launched in 2002 and will continue for at least a further three years. The Fund consists of £20 million for England for 2004–05 and is distributed by a number of organisations including the Countryside Agency, English Heritage, English Nature, and Leicestershire, Derbyshire and Somerset county councils. Information is not collected in a form that permits the total amount of funding for village halls from this source to be established, but, up until last May, at least £70,776 has been distributed to village hall projects.

(b) Rural Enterprise Scheme

Funds are available under the Rural Enterprise Scheme (part of the England Rural Development Programme, or "Pillar 2" of the Common Agricultural Policy) to help 'renovation and development of villages' and 'basic services for the rural economy and population'. The scheme is selective and is delivered by Defra's Rural Development Service in line with regional budgets and priorities agreed with local partners.

18 Mar 2004 : Column 428W

Support is provided to village hall and other community projects but disaggregated figures relating solely to village hall projects are not available. Total funding for the relevant two measures is as follows:

	£000
2001–02	126
2002–03	1,146
2003–04	(6)3,053

⁽⁶⁾Forecast.

(c) Landfill Tax Credit Scheme

Under the Landfill Tax Credit scheme landfill operators can reduce their tax liability by funding environmental or community projects. The scheme is not available to all village halls (the scheme's rules mean that projects have to be within 10 miles of a landfill tax operator's site). Grants are issued through registered environmental bodies and each will have its own priorities. Action for Communities in Rural England estimate that perhaps £1 million has been provided for village hall projects.

The scheme was reformed from 1 April 2003. Approximately one third of funding (around £47 million) is to be made available through a reformed tax credit scheme for spending on local environment projects. Village halls, where they meet the criteria, will still be able to apply for funding. Government have no involvement in how the funding is spent. As yet, it is not possible to say what proportion will go to support village halls.

Animal Health Act

Mr. Paterson: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs whether she is required to take into account the application of the precautionary principle in assessing the need to make orders under section 29 of the Animal Health Act 1981 to reduce the risk to human health of any disease or organism carried in animals. [157948]

Mr. Bradshaw: Although there is no universally accepted definition, the Government are committed to using the precautionary principle, which is included in the 1992 Rio Declaration on Environment and Development. The precautionary principle is one of 10 principles that guide the Government's approach to sustainable development, on which Defra takes the lead. The outline Animal Health and Welfare Strategy issued last July also confirmed that all Government decisions on animal health and welfare should be guided by the precautionary principle.

Badgers/Bovine TB

Mr. Paterson: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs pursuant to the Answer of 28 January 2004, Official Report, column 380W on badgers, what numerical value she attributes to the phrase a few kilometres; and whether badgers forage from setts a few kilometres outside Krebs areas into farms within those areas and evade trapping. [157947]

18 Mar 2004 : Column 429W

Mr. Bradshaw: It is difficult to attach a numerical value to the distance travelled by foraging badgers as it will vary considerably. Badgers normally forage within their social group territory limits, and the distance they travel to do so will depend on the size of the territory, which will be determined by the availability of food and the quality of the habitat.

It is possible that badgers from social groups occupying setts outside Randomised Badger Culling Trial areas could forage on farms within them. If they did, they might or might not be captured during trapping operations.

Mr. Paterson: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what assessment she has made of the extent to which badger lobby groups are representative of broader public opinion. [158289]

Mr. Bradshaw: The recent review of badger licensing procedures was subject of a public consultation to ensure that everyone with an interest in badgers had the opportunity to contribute their views. Furthermore, as part of this exercise, the Department surveyed the views and experiences of 300 randomly selected people who had applied for a licence under the Protection of Badgers Act, 1992 in the previous year.

Mr. Paterson: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what estimate she has made of the number of badgers killed in road traffic accidents in each of the last five years; and what measures are being taken to reduce the rate. [158329]

Mr. Bradshaw: There are no figures currently available for the number of badgers killed each year on roads. The most widely quoted estimate, of 50,000 animals each year ¹ , relates to the 1980s, but road casualties are probably broadly similar today.

A four-year pilot project (called 'Mammals on Roads') is currently under way. This aims to carry out a national road kill survey of selected mammal species (including badgers), calibrating road kill numbers with species abundance in various habitats and assessing the power of the survey to detect population change. In the project's June 2003 newsletter, it is reported that in 2001 and 2002 approximately four dead badgers were reported for every 1,000 miles of road surveyed. For more information on the project visit the Tracking Mammals Partnership website at: www.jncc.gov.uk/species/mammals/trackingmammals.

Advice and guidelines for road builders on how to minimise road casualties are given in the Highways Agency publication:

"Design manual for roads and bridges" Volume 10—Environmental Design and Management, Section 4—Nature Conservation, HA 59/92—Mitigating against effects on badgers.

The manual is available online at: www.official-documents.co.uk/document/deps/ha/dmrb/index.htm.

¹ Harris, S, Cresswell, W Reason, P and Cresswell, P (1992) An integrated approach to monitoring badger (Meles meles) population changes in Britain. In: "Wildlife 2001: Populations" (eds DR McCollough and RH Barrett), pp 945–953. London: Elsevier Applied Science.

18 Mar 2004 : Column 430W

Mr. Paterson: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what assessment has been made of whether TB-diseased badgers bathing in cattle water troughs is a mechanism of TB transmission. [158336]

Mr. Bradshaw: There is no evidence that badgers bathe in cattle water troughs, although ongoing research by the Central Science Laboratory indicates that they may drink from them. This research, which will report to Defra in December 2005, will indicate the relative frequency with which badgers visit cattle water troughs, and at what times of year, as a first step towards identifying their role in the risk of transmission of M. bovis from badgers to cattle.

Mr. Paterson: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what level of disease in the wild (a) badger and (b) deer population she classes as tolerable. [158339]

Mr. Bradshaw: It is not currently known what level of infection in either badgers or deer constitutes a threat to their welfare, or a risk to cattle. Consequently, it is not possible to identify a 'tolerable' level in these terms.

Mr. Paterson: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what new advice she will give to farmers on the (a) design and (b) positioning of cattle feed troughs following discovery that badgers can access troughs previously thought inaccessible. [157934]

Mr. Bradshaw: Changes in trough design might be appropriate. Recent work has established that badgers are capable of climbing into feed troughs set at 115cm above ground level, at which height they are inaccessible to cattle. It is also difficult to position troughs so that only cattle can access them, unless they are inside badger-proof buildings. Possibly troughs could be suspended from the ceilings of buildings to deny access by badgers. However, the purpose of many troughs is to provide supplementary feed to cattle at pasture, so badgers are likely to be able to access them wherever they are positioned.

Mr. Paterson: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what estimate she has made of the costs of reducing TB in the wildlife reservoir to a level where it is no longer epidemiologically significant. [157937]

Mr. Bradshaw: We have not made any estimate of the cost of reducing TB in the wildlife reservoir to a level where it is no longer epidemiologically significant.

Mr. Paterson: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what her estimate was of the total number of badgers which would be killed during the full implementation of the Krebs trials. [157942]

Mr. Bradshaw: The Krebs Report suggested that some 12,500 badgers might be taken during a five-year trial, based on the assumption that average badger density is around 5/km ² . The second report of the Independent Scientific Group on Cattle TB stated that this figure was likely to be an overestimate, based on experience from the Randomised Culling Trial up to that date.

18 Mar 2004 : Column 431W

Mr. Paterson: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what incidences have occurred of multiple TB breakdowns in cattle herds on farms neighbouring badger sanctuaries. [158290]

Mr. Bradshaw: We have insufficient information to answer the question. Defra does not keep a record of the location of badger sanctuaries.

Mr. Paterson: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs whether the closed season adopted in the Krebs trials affected the success rate of the trapping operation. [158292]

Mr. Bradshaw: In its first report (published July 1998), the Independent Scientific Group on Cattle TB recommended the introduction of a closed season in the Randomised Badger Culling Trial, and advised: "Although a closed season from 1 February to 30 April will delay the reactive response to some positive herd tests carried out in the winter, we are confident that the scientific rigour of the trial will be maintained". The Government accepted the Group's recommendation.

It is not possible to assess the impact that the closed season has had on the success rate of the trapping operation, as there are no control data with which to draw a comparison.

Mr. Paterson: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what assessment has been made of whether radical changes in farming practices would affect the carrying capacity of the badger habitat, with particular reference to (a) reduction in livestock farming and (b) crops. [158293]

Mr. Bradshaw: We are not aware of any such assessment having been undertaken.

In the report "Changes in the British badger population, 1988 to 1997" ¹ it is stated that 'habitat richness' (ie how favoured a habitat is by badgers) is an important factor influencing the distribution and density of badgers.

Environmental changes, including those brought about by farming practices, can alter habitat richness, and thus have the potential to influence the 'carrying capacity' of a habitat for badgers.

¹ "Changes in the British badger population, 1988 to 1997" by G. Wilson, S. Harris and G. McLaren (1997), published by the People's Trust for Endangered Species (ISBN 1 85580 018 7).

Mr. Paterson: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs pursuant to the answer of 10 December 2003, Official Report, column 523W, on badgers, whether the quantification of bird remains in badger dung takes into account the limited seasonal availability to badgers of ground nesting birds; and whether the proportion of bird remains found in fresh badger dung is different between March and June. [158588]

Mr. Bradshaw: The quantification of bird remains in the diet of the badger mentioned in the answer of 10 December 2003, Official Report, column 523W, does not specifically take into account the seasonality of bird remains in the dung of the badger. The data concerned were collated from already published studies, many of

18 Mar 2004 : Column 432W

which did not contain sufficient detail to enable such an analysis. Furthermore, it is difficult to come to conclusions regarding the seasonality of bird predation from examining remains in dung as this method cannot differentiate between predation and the scavenging of carcasses.

Defra is currently funding research on badger predation on ground nesting birds. The project involves a review of current knowledge and intensive field investigations to assess the extent of predation by badgers. The project, which is being undertaken by the Central Science Laboratory, will report its findings in March 2005.

Mr. Paterson: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs pursuant to the answer of 8 December 2003, Official Report, columns 216–17W, on bovine TB, what the approval requirements are which farmers must meet in order to qualify for multiple pick-up authorisation. [158590]

Mr. Bradshaw: The conditions under which multiple pick-ups may take place are set out in Annex B of the General Licences for the Movement of Cattle. The licence can be found on the Defra website at: http://www.defra.gov.uk/animalh/movements/documents/default.htm.

An inspection is carried out to ensure that the requirements of the licence can be met. The inspection is carried out either by animal health officers, veterinary officers, temporary veterinary inspectors or local veterinary inspectors and is at Defra's expense.

Mr. Paterson: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what information she collates on the prevalence of bovine TB in other countries where there is a significant dairy or beef industry. [158600]

Mr. Bradshaw: Defra has access to the official TB prevalence data routinely submitted by other countries to the Office International des Epizooties (OIE) and other organisations with an interest in this field.

Mr. Paterson: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs whether bovine animals suffering from TB are more infective than badgers at comparable stages of the disease. [158601]

Mr. Bradshaw: There is no evidence to indicate that badgers and cattle at the same stage of disease differ in their ability to infect other animals. However, the risk of another animal becoming infected will vary depending on many factors, including proximity, amount of organisms being shed, the route of shedding, and challenge route (e.g. ingestion or inhalation) among others.

Mr. Paterson: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs whether the M. bovis bacilli is mutating to a less (a) virulent and (b) infective form. [158604]

Mr. Bradshaw: Molecular typing data of M. bovis isolates provide some support for the hypothesis that expression of an infection event at the herd level varies depending on molecular type. M. bovis will be subject to

18 Mar 2004 : Column 433W

selective forces like any other organism. However, there is little evidence to suggest that M. bovis is becoming more or less virulent or infective overall.

Mr. Paterson: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what her policy is on the issuing of licences to kill badgers under the Protection of Badgers Act 1992; and how many such licences she expects to issue in each of the next five years. [158605]

Mr. Bradshaw: The Department is responsible for issuing licences under two separate sub-sections of the Protection of Badgers Act 1992 which permit badgers to be killed. These are:

10(2)(a) for the purpose of preventing the spread of disease, to kill or take badgers, or to interfere with a badger sett, within an area specified in the licence by any means so specified, and

10(2)(b) for the purpose of preventing serious damage to land, crops, poultry or any other form of property, to kill or take badgers, or to interfere with a badger sett, within an area specified in the licence by any means so specified.

It is current policy not to issue any licences under sub-section 10(2)(a) to prevent the spread of bovine tuberculosis, except for animals held in captivity.

With respect to sub-section 10(2)(b) , licence applications to prevent serious damage are judged on a case by case basis. Licences, irrespective of whether they are to kill, relocate of simply to interfere with a sett will only be issued where:

there is evidence that serious damage is being or is likely to be caused;

there are no other practical methods of resolving the problem; and

the action proposed will be successful in preventing or reducing any damage that might be being caused.

The Department does not place unnecessary restrictions on the control of badgers where they are causing genuine problems. However, a licence to kill badgers cannot be granted if there are non-lethal methods of preventing the damage available.

The Department cannot predict how many licences to kill badgers will be issued in each of the next five years. Figures for the last three years are available online at: www.defra.gov.uk/wildlife-countryside/vertebrates/statistics/statistics- badger.htm

Mr. Paterson: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what estimate she has made of the number of TB breakdowns over the next 10 years that will be prevented by the introduction of pre-and post-movement testing; and what the scientific basis for that estimate is. [158622]

Mr. Bradshaw: The main potential benefit of introduction of pre and/or post-movement testing is fewer movements of infected animals into low risk areas. It is a precautionary measure that we would expect to reduce the number of new incidents in low risk areas. Uncertainties around the role of wildlife in geographic spread makes it difficult to be certain about the extent of disease control benefits. The Independent Scientific Group has supported the principle of pre-and/or post-movement testing to prevent the spread of disease.

18 Mar 2004 : Column 434W

Mr. Paterson: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (1) what plans she has made for the establishment of a secure badger testing facility to assist in the development of a badger TB vaccine; and what measures she proposes to take to minimise interference by animal rights activists; [158623]

(2) what her current estimate is of the size of the facility needed to contain a sufficient number of badgers to enable vaccine studies to be conducted; and what estimate she has made of the (a) cost and (b) annual running cost of such provision. [158631]

Mr. Bradshaw: No decision has been taken to establish in Great Britain a secure badger testing facility to assist in the development of a badger TB vaccine, but the Government, in December 2003, published the Independent Scientific Group's Vaccine Scoping Study (PB 9102, available from the House of Commons Library) where in Appendix 8, pages 58–61, a full account is given of the feasibility, size and costs for providing accommodation for badgers. If the construction of a facility were considered, the police would be asked for their advice on security in order to minimise interference by animal rights activists.

Mr. Paterson: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what benefits have accrued from the collaboration between the Veterinary Laboratory Agency and New Zealand researchers in respect of control of bovine TB in the United Kingdom. [158629]

Mr. Bradshaw: Defra's Veterinary Laboratories Agency (VLA) has active collaborations with researchers in New Zealand working on developing TB vaccines for possums and cattle.

One benefit of this link is that the efficacy of promising vaccine candidates can be rigorously tested using large groups of cattle in New Zealand. This approach is highly cost effective and is jointly funded by Defra and funding agencies in New Zealand. This work has so far resulted in the identification of a vaccine that is better than the use of BCG (Bacillus Calmette Guerin) in cattle. Another benefit has been that the development and evaluation of new diagnostic tests has been accelerated through this collaboration. A third benefit of the link has been that results from research into TB in possums and cattle in New Zealand is made available to VLA and Defra at an early stage.

Mr. Paterson: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (1) what assessment she has made of the effectiveness of measures to protect farm buildings housing livestock from ingress by badgers in ensuring complete exclusion of badgers from cattle areas; [158630]

(2) what measures her Department has identified to prevent badgers gaining access to cattle sheds and thence access to cattle feed. [158751]

Mr. Bradshaw: A Defra-funded study, being carried out by the Central Science Laboratory, is attempting to identify which types of building are most accessible to badgers, and what potential measures could be taken to reduce this phenomenon. Results from this study will be reported in December 2005.

18 Mar 2004 : Column 435W

Mr. Paterson: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what representations she has received from the Woodland Trust on the culling of badgers. [159055]

Mr. Bradshaw: No representations have been received from the Woodland Trust on the culling of badgers.

Mr. Paterson: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what records her Department keeps of the (a) number of badgers admitted to animal sanctuaries, (b) number of such animals held in captivity at any one time, (c) number of animals released into the wild and (d) location of those releases. [159057]

Mr. Bradshaw: If a disabled badger is taken for the sole purpose of tending it (as set down in section 6(a) of the Protection of Badgers Act, 1992) there is no legal requirement to notify the Department, and therefore no records are kept.

If a badger is taken, kept or released under the authority of a licence issued by Defra, then detailed records of such activities would be held by the licensing authority.

Mr. Paterson: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what the estimated cost is of the consultation workshops to be carried out in connection with her consultation document on preparing for a new strategy on bovine tuberculosis. [159058]

Mr. Bradshaw: The estimated cost to Defra of organising regional meetings in England to discuss with stakeholders the issues raised in the consultation document "Preparing for a new GB strategy on bovine tuberculosis" is £60,000-£65,000.

Mr. Paterson: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs how many injuries have been sustained by (a) livestock keepers and (b) their workers while (i) assisting veterinary surgeons in administering TB tests to cattle and (ii) otherwise handling cattle for the purpose of assembling them for testing since 1997. [159063]

Mr. Bradshaw: The Health and Safety Executive do not hold specific data on the number of accidents occurring on farms that can be directly attributed to TB testing.

Mr. Paterson: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what assessment she has made of the feasibility of use of the current BCG vaccination for cattle to damp down the disease as a control option as part of an overall control strategy for reducing the incidence of TB in cattle. [159064]

Mr. Bradshaw: The feasibility of using BCG to vaccinate cattle against TB was assessed by a sub-group of the Independent Scientific Group on Cattle TB and a report was published by them in December 2003: "Development of vaccines for Bovine Tuberculosis". The conclusion reached was that in its present form, BCG would not provide an effective cattle vaccine.

18 Mar 2004 : Column 436W

Mr. Paterson: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what assessment she has made of the implications for the badger population if bovine TB is allowed to spread into previously clean areas. [159065]

Mr. Bradshaw: Currently there is no information to suggest that bovine TB can regulate badger populations. Evidence from the Central Science Laboratory's study at Woodchester Park suggests that infected badgers can live for many years and still breed successfully.

Mr. Paterson: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (1) what the Independent Science Group's recommendations were in respect of gamma interferon testing; and which of those recommendations have been implemented; [158332]

(2) pursuant to her Oral Answer of 5 February 2004, Official Report, columns 882–3, on bovine TB, what the ethical and legal issues involved in the field testing of gamma interferon are. [158753]

Mr. Bradshaw: The Independent Scientific Group on Cattle TB recommended that the gamma-interferon pilot should be expanded into a research project to help clarify the sensitivity and specificity of the bovigam test by taking blood from all cattle in a herd before skin test reactors are sent for slaughter, and again at the 60 day test. They proposed that all animals in the herds should be tested using the bovigam test, even where the experimental protocol would not require the removal of animals which reacted positively to the test. The Group also proposed extending the test to control herds not affected by TB in (a) areas with a TB problem, and (b) low TB-risk areas, but not acting on the information gleaned. In addition the ISG recommended that diagnosis of bovine TB in slaughtered cattle should be carried out using an extended post-mortem examination. These recommendations have not been implemented.

The ethical issues associated with the ISG's proposals relate to leaving those animals which have given a positive response to a test for bovine TB, on farm. The legal issues relate to taking samples from animals for experimental purposes, rather than for the diagnosis of disease.

---