---

23 Mar 2004 : Column 696W—continued

Fisheries

Mr. Wiggin: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what the maximum amounts of fish allowed to be caught daily in Welsh waters were in each year since 1997. [160910]

Mr. Bradshaw: There are no specific limits as to the amount of fish that can be taken in Welsh waters. For certain stocks total allowable catches are fixed annually by the EU but in relation to sea areas as defined by the International Council for the Exploration of the Seas. These areas do not correspond with Welsh or other territorial waters.

23 Mar 2004 : Column 697W

Mr. Wiggin: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs how many fisheries have been closed to protect stocks since 1997. [160874]

23 Mar 2004 : Column 698W

Mr. Bradshaw: Since 1997 restrictions have been introduced in the following areas to close fisheries to protect stocks:

Fisheries
Irish Sea	Area closed each spring since 2000, through EU measures, to targeted fishing for cod in Spring as part of Irish Sea Cod Recovery Plan to protect spawning cod
North Sea	Area closed, through EU measures, to targeted fishing for cod in Spring 2001 as part of the North Sea Cod Recovery Plan to protect spawning cod
Nursery Areas for bass	3 further areas in estuaries and around the coast of England and Wales closed, by the UK Government, to bass fishing to protect juveniles
Clyde estuary	Area closed, by the Scottish Executive, each spring since 2001 to demersal trawls to protect spawning cod.

There are also longer standing fisheries closures such as the Mackerel, Pout and Herring boxes.

Legislation has also been introduced to restrict fishing in a number of areas for the protection of the wider marine environment:

Fisheries
Darwin Mounds	A ban on bottom trawling introduced by the EU in 2003 at the UK's request to protect cold water coral
Lundy Island	A total fishing ban introduced by Devon Sea Fisheries Committee in 2003 to protect the Lundy Marine Nature Reserve
Sandeel Box	Area (the Wee Bankie) off the North-east coast of the UK where industrial fishing has been banned since 2000 by the EU to protect the food species of a range of predators including sea-birds
The Wash	A ban introduced by UK Government in 1998 on dredging for razor shells, trough shells and carpet shells to protect the Wash and North Norfolk candidate Special Area of Conservation (cSAC)
Fal and Helford Estuaries	A ban introduced by UK Government in 2003 on dredging for scallops to protect the Fal and Helford cSAC

Mr. Hammond: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what the tonnage of fish caught in UK territorial waters by fishing vessels registered in each EU member country was during the latest period for which figures are available. [161369]

Mr. Bradshaw: The arrangements for access to the coastal waters of the United Kingdom between 6 and 12 nautical miles are set out in Article 17 and Annex I of Council Regulation (EC) No. 2371/2002 of 20 December 2002 on the conservation and sustainable exploitation of fisheries resources under the Common Fisheries Policy. Data on catches and landings made by UK vessels and vessels from other Member States is collected in relation to sea areas as defined by the International Council for the Exploration of the Seas: this data includes, but does not separately identify, the quantities of fish taken from the United Kingdom's coastal waters.

Bob Spink: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs if she will make a statement on the (a) operations and (b) efficiency of claimants' associations in respect of loss of fisheries in the fishing industry. [159678]

Mr. Bradshaw: This is not a matter I can comment on. It is up to individual associations to negotiate compensation for the possible loss of fisheries.

Bob Spink: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what advice and assistance on (a) financial and (b) legal issues is available to fishermen who wish to explore compensation opportunities for loss of fisheries. [159681]

Mr. Bradshaw: As one of the statutory regulators of marine works under the Food and Environment Protection Act 1985, the Department takes account, among other things, the extent to which any proposed project is likely to affect the legitimate interests of other uses of the sea.

However, the Department does not offer advice or assistance on legal and financial issues with regard to seeking compensation from a licence applicant for any loss of fisheries.

Mr. Wiggin: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs how many fishing vessels were licensed in each year since 1997. [160873]

Mr. Bradshaw: Information is not readily available for 1997 but details on the number of vessels licensed by the UK Fisheries Departments since 1998 are given in the following table.

Vessel overall length	1998	1999	2000	2001	2002	2003	2004
Under 10 metres	5,041	5,053	4,925	4,810	4,805	4,699	4,738
Over 10 metres	2,320	2,149	2,034	1,958	1,912	1,691	1,570
Total	7,361	7,202	6,959	6,768	6,717	6,390	6,308

Foot and Mouth Disease

Andrew George: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs whether her Department withheld any evidence on the origins of the 2001 Foot and Mouth Disease outbreak from Dr. Iain Anderson's inquiry. [161521]

Mr. Bradshaw [holding answer 15 March 2004]: A full report on the origins of the outbreak was submitted to Iain Anderson's inquiry and is published alongside the inquiry report. That was based on wide-ranging evidence including rigorous epidemiological investigation.

23 Mar 2004 : Column 699W

Andrew George: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs whether evidence prepared by the Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food's vet Mr. J. Dring in respect of her inspection of Burnside Farm, Northumberland during early February 2001 was presented to Dr. Iain Anderson to assist him with his inquiry into the cause of the foot and mouth disease outbreak. [161522]

Mr. Bradshaw [holding answer 15 March 2004]: Mr. Dring contributed to the epidemiological investigation underpinning the Department's official submission to the Inquiry on the origins of the outbreak. His inspection of Burnside Farm on 24 January 2001 was also discussed at a meeting in Newcastle with lain Anderson on 4 March 2002. Both the submission and the report of the meeting were published alongside lain Anderson's final report of his Inquiry.

Gamma Interferon Test

Mr. Paterson: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (1) what assessment she has made of why the gamma interferon test achieves sensitivity of 60 to 65 per cent. in UK trials; [158363]

(2) what assessment she has made of the difference in gamma interferon test sensitivity in UK trials compared with test sensitivity in Australia. [159120]

Mr. Bradshaw: The gamma-interferon pilot currently running in Wales, Staffordshire, Cheshire, Derbyshire, Herefordshire, Worcestershire and Shropshire, and the work carried out in Northern Ireland, have not been designed to assess the sensitivity of the gamma-interferon test. No comparisons can therefore be drawn with test sensitivity in trials run in other countries.

GM Crops

Mr. Simon Thomas: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs when she was informed that cattle feeding studies involving Chardon LL fodder maize had been requested by the (a) Advisory Committee on Releases into the Environment and (b) Advisory Committee on Animal Feedstuffs. [160574]

Mr. Morley: Neither the Advisory Committee on Releases to the Environment nor the Advisory Committee on Animal Feedingstuffs (ACAF) has requested cattle feeding studies involving Chardon LL fodder maize. ACAF has advised, on the basis of the data already submitted, that it is content that the T25 maize grain and its products pose no more risk as animal feed than non-GM maize varieties. The results of recent feeding trials to cattle have not yet been published or peer reviewed but I am not aware they have come to any different conclusion.

Mr. Simon Thomas: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (1) whether she has given consent for harvested Chardon LL fodder maize from farm-scale evaluation sites to be taken-off site and used in cattle-feeding studies at the Reading University Centre for Dairy Research; [160575]

23 Mar 2004 : Column 700W

(2) whether the Government's policy on harvested material from GM crops involved in the farm-scale evaluation programme being fed to animals or otherwise entering the food chain has changed; [160576]

(3) what steps she has taken to ensure that no milk or meat from the cattle involved in the Chardon LL feeding studies at Reading University has entered the food chain. [160577]

Mr. Morley: The GM maize used in the farm scale evaluations has Europe wide marketing consent for use in animal feed so no consent was required to use the harvested crop in the cattle feeding study carried out at the University of Reading.

The agreement made with the Supply Chain Initiative on Modified Agricultural Crops (SCIMAC) in November 1999 requires that none of the produce from GM crop plantings in the UK will be used in a way which is of direct commercial benefit to the consent-holders during the farm scale evaluation period. The policy on use of harvested material, as outlined in the SCIMAC agreement, has not changed.

Although there is no legal requirement to withhold the milk or meat from the food chain and there is no discernable difference between meat and milk from animals fed GM feed and those not, the protocol for the Reading University study required that the milk from the dairy cows did not enter the food chain during the period of the study.

Alan Simpson: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs when she was first informed that cattle feeding studies involving Chardon LL fodder maize had been requested by (a) the Advisory Committee on Releases to the Environment and (b) the Advisory Committee on Animal Feedingstuffs. [160633]

Mr. Morley: Neither the Advisory Committee on Releases to the Environment nor the Advisory Committee on Animal Feedingstuffs (ACAF) has requested cattle feeding studies involving Chardon LL fodder maize. ACAF has advised, on the basis of the data already submitted, that it is content that the T25 maize grain and its products pose no more risk as animal feed than non-GM maize varieties. The results of recent feeding trials to cattle have not yet been published or peer reviewed but I am not aware they have come to any different conclusion.

Joan Ruddock: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs if she will make public the locations proposed in applications to grow Chardon LL T25 maize. [161362]

Mr. Morley: We will consider whether the locations of commercial GM crop sites should be made public when we consult stakeholders in due course on the co-existence issue.

Mr. Peter Ainsworth: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs if she will establish who paid for the research on the GM farm scale evaluations undertaken by members of the Scientific Steering Committee and published by Nature on 5 March. [161520]

23 Mar 2004 : Column 701W

Mr. Morley [holding answer 15 March 2004]: The research published in the Nature paper "Ban on triazine herbicides likely to reduce but not negate relative benefits of GMHT maize cropping" (Nature AOP; published online 4 March 2004) was undertaken by the authors at the expense of their respective institutes (listed on the paper). Defra and Scottish Executive paid for the data collected in the farm-scale evaluations, on which the paper was based, but did not commission this work. None of the authors were members of the Scientific Steering Committee. The research was peer reviewed by scientists not involved in the FSEs.

Andrew George: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs pursuant to her statement of 9 March 2004, Official Report, columns 1381–84, on GM policy, (1) what new evidence applicants for the recently approved GM fodder maize need to provide before the renewal of the contract to grow this crop before October 2006; [161523]

(2) what new evidence is required by consent holders prior to the renewal of their consents in October 2006 that is not required now. [161614]

Mr. Morley [holding answer 15 March 2004]: Existing consents for genetically modified organisms issued under Part C of Directive 90/220, including that for GM maize T25 issued in 1998, continue in force until October 2006. At that time new consents must be obtained or the product withdrawn. Directive 2001/18/EC and EC Food and Feed Regulations 1829/2003 set out the required information and assessments to be provided by the applicants. Information provided to support the original 90/220 application must be updated to account for technical progress and relevant new information. The applicants must also provide an environmental risk assessment as set out in Annex II of the new directive. In the case of GM crops this must include an assessment of the GMO and its use which have the potential to cause adverse effects as compared with those presented by the non-modified crop and its use under corresponding situations, such as weed management with herbicides. Applicants must also provide a post market monitoring plan and information on methods for detection and identification to facilitate post marketing control and inspection.

Joan Ruddock: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what assessment she has made of the preliminary results of research carried out by Professor Terje Traavik of the Norwegian Institute of Gene Ecology on the health implications of GM maize crops for those living close to the crops. [161724]

Mr. Morley [holding answer 16 March 2004]: We understand that at a recent meeting in Malaysia, Professor Terje Traavik reported that farm workers from the island of Mindanao in the Phillipines had an immune reaction to genetically modified Bt maize (event MON 810). No scientific evidence has yet been published by the Norwegian research team on the health implications of Bt maize crops for those living close to such crops and Professor Traavik is quoted as stressing that more tests are needed before any definite conclusion can be drawn.

23 Mar 2004 : Column 702W

Bt maize is not grown in the UK. If Professor Traavik's work is published we will consider whether there are any implications for the UK.

Joan Ruddock: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs pursuant to her oral statement of 9 March, Official Report, columns 1381 to 1396 on GM crops, if she will assess the work of Aaron de Grassi at the Institute of Development Studies, University of Sussex, on GM crops in Africa. [161727]

Mr. Morley [holding answer 16 March 2004]: We are aware of the work published by Aaron de Grassi evaluating various projects involving the development of GM crops for cultivation in Africa. While we have no plans to assess his work, we are always interested in quality research on GM crops and their application.

Llew Smith: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs if she will publish her Department's assessment of the section of the GM national consultation concerned with the practicality of co-existence between GM and non-GM crops. [161758]

Mr. Morley: A detailed response to the findings of the GM Dialogue is available at www.defra.qov.uk/environment/gm/debate/pdf/gmdialogue-response.pdf. We believe there is no reason in principle why GM and non-GM crops should not co-exist, and our recent policy statement confirmed how we intend to move forward on this subject. We will consult stakeholders on co-existence measures based on the 0.9 per cent. EU labelling threshold for GM presence, and on whether a lower threshold might apply for organic production.

Llew Smith: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs if she will conduct investigations into the feasibility of GM free zones being established in areas in Wales and Scotland bordering England where English farmers cultivating border farms decide to grow GM crops. [161781]

Mr. Morley: Under EU law it is not possible to establish compulsory or statutory GM-free zones, but we have said that we will provide guidance to farmers who may want to establish voluntary zones in which GM crops are not cultivated. English farmers on the border with Wales and Scotland will have the right to grow an approved GM crop subject to the co-existence measures that are put in place, so the scope for voluntary GM-free zones in areas bordering England will have to be considered in that light. We will be liaising closely with the Devolved Administrations on these issues.

Gregory Barker: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs if she will make a further statement on (a) her plans to introduce legislation in respect of GM crop liability and co-existence and (b) the timescale for those plans. [162373]

Mr. Morley [holding answer 18 March 2004]: We intend to have co-existence measures that have statutory backing in place before any commercial cultivation of GM crops, which we do not expect before spring 2005 at the earliest. We plan to consult stakeholders on this shortly, and on options for compensating non-GM farmers for financial losses that they may incur.

23 Mar 2004 : Column 703W

Andrew George: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs pursuant to her statement of 9 March 2004, Official Report, columns 1381–84, on GM policy, who will determine the conditions required to achieve the first condition of not resulting in adverse effects on the environment; and when those conditions will be made public. [161615]

Mr. Morley: On 9 March officials wrote to the French Competent Authority, which issued the relevant consents on behalf of the EU member states, and proposed that restrictions be placed on the existing marketing consents for cultivation of maize containing transformation events T25 and BT176. In accordance with Directive 2001/18 the French Competent Authority will now forward an assessment report to the Commission who will forward it to all the other member states. A collective EU decision will be made on the proposal for amending the conditions of the consent.

A copy of the letter to the French Competent Authority will be published on the Defra website and placed on the public register.

Andrew George: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs pursuant to her statement of 9 March 2004, Official Report, columns 1381–84, on GM policy, when decisions will be made on thresholds for GM contamination of organic farms; and who will make the decision. [161616]

Mr. Morley: We will take decisions in liaison with the Devolved Administrations, after we have consulted stakeholders. We will initiate a consultation exercise as soon as possible.

---