24 May 2004 : Column 1287W
Written Answers to Questions
Monday 24 May 2004
ENVIRONMENT, FOOD AND RURAL AFFAIRS
Ancient Trees
Mr. Kidney: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what action her Department (a) has taken and (b) proposes to take to allow the EU's Natura 2000 designation to be extended to include sites with ancient trees. [173956]
Mr. Bradshaw: Ancient trees can and do occur in candidate Special Areas of Conservation, which together with Special Protection Areas for birds form the Natura 2000 network. However, they are not included specifically either as a habitat type in Annex I, or a species in Annex II, of the Habitats Directive for which sites can be selected.
The purpose of Natura 2000 designation is to conserve areas containing habitats and species of Community interest of high ecological and bio-diversity value, rather than their cultural or historical value. Where ancient trees are included within sites, their cultural value as well as their contribution to the biodiversity of the area is provided for.
Apiculture
Mr. Cameron: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (1) if she will make a statement on the grounds for the ban on the import of queen bees from Hawaii; [174128]
(2) what evaluation her Department has made of the (a) health, (b) disease and (c) animal welfare grounds for restricting the import of queen bees from (i) Hawaii and (ii) Australia; and if she will make a statement. [174129]
Alun Michael: New European Community legislation strengthening the animal health controls and certification requirements for the importation of bees from third countries came into effect across the Community on 27 December 2003. Its aim, in particular, is to protect the EU bee population from exotic pests and diseases.
The new import controls include the requirement that consignments of queen honey bees will only be allowed into the Community from those third countries that have demonstrated the veterinary competence to certify bees for export, and provided that the notifiable diseases of bees in the EU—American foul brood, the small hive beetle and tropilaelaps mite—are also confirmed as notifiable throughout the exporting country. The specified third countries are listed in Part 1 to the Annex of Council Decision 79/542 and include the USA and Australia.
To date, only Australia, New Zealand and Argentina have demonstrated to us that they are able to comply with the conditions provided in the legislation, and
24 May 2004 : Column 1288W
imports of queens from these countries are permitted. However, in the case of Hawaii, while it is our opinion that it does have a high bee health status, and, indeed, we have until recently permitted imports of queen bees from there, it is nevertheless a territory of the USA. The EU legislation is clear in its intention, and it is our understanding that the three notifiable diseases mentioned above are not yet notifiable throughout the USA as a whole. The Commission has stated that it is not prepared to treat Hawaii as separate from the rest of the USA for this purpose. We are therefore not free to authorise the importation of queens bees from Hawaii until the USA has demonstrated equivalence with the EU.
Batteries Directive
Mr. Weir: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (1) what representations her Department has made to the European Commission regarding the impact on users of hearing aids of the proposed Batteries Directive; [171353]
(2) what representations she has received from (a) organisations representing the hard of hearing and (b) manufacturers of batteries regarding the impact on hearing aid users of the proposed Batteries Directive. [171354]
Mr. Morley: The UK Government have made no representation to the European Commission about the impact of the proposed batteries Directive on batteries used in hearing aids. This is because proposals issued by the Commission for a new batteries Directive do not contain any requirement prohibiting the sale of batteries used in hearing aids.
However, Members of the European Parliament (MEPs) voted during their first reading of the proposal on 20 April in favour of an amendment, setting limit values for prohibiting the sale of all batteries that contain more than 5ppm of mercury by weight. The Government understand that because hearing aid batteries may contain more than 5ppm of mercury and 40ppm of lead, by weight, in a zinc air hearing aid battery, there is now concern as to a possible ban. However, the Government have not, as yet, heard from any organisations or manufacturers that may be affected, nor have they heard the reaction of the European Commission to the amendment
It should also be noted that the European Parliament also voted on an amendment to exclude from the controls of the new Directive, batteries and accumulators placed in medical devices; namely, those designed to maintain vital functions, where uninterrupted functioning is essential and the batteries and accumulators can be removed only by qualified personnel. If this amendment were accepted, it would not be clear whether those hearing aid batteries containing more than 5ppm of mercury and 40ppm of lead would be excluded.
HMG believes that the inconsistency between these two amendments is likely to be addressed by the European Parliament in its second reading. If the threshold limits proposed remained in the Directive and
24 May 2004 : Column 1289W
led to the prohibition of batteries contained in hearing aids, or indeed batteries contained in other medical devices, this would be opposed by the UK and, we believe, by other member states also.
Mr. Weir: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what representations she has received from manufacturers of batteries regarding the proposed European Batteries Directive. [171356]
Mr. Morley: We have received representation from the British Battery Manufacturers Association (BBMA) and the European Portable Batteries Association (EPBA) who represent all major manufacturers of portable batteries. Also, we have held discussions with Collect Nicad who represent the manufacturers of nickel cadmium batteries.
We expect to have further meetings with battery companies and other stakeholders now that the batteries consultation paper has been issued.
Beak Trimming
Mr. Cameron: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs if the Government will extend the 2010 deadline for the ban on beak trimming if no solution to the problem of cannabalism is found. [174200]
Mr. Bradshaw: The Government are committed to banning the practice of beak trimming by the end of 2010. A beak trimming action group has been set up to carry forward an action plan to enable Defra to introduce this ban without compromising bird welfare. However, some form of review process prior to the 2010 ban is not unreasonable.
Chicken Incinerators
Mr. Cameron: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs if she will make a statement on the regulations governing incinerators used for on-farm disposal of chickens, with particular reference to (a) how often they will be inspected and (b) the cost to farmers of carrying out inspections. [174203]
Mr. Bradshaw: On-farm incinerators which only burn animal carcases such as chickens, must comply with the relevant requirements of Regulation (EC) No. 1774/2002 and must also be approved in accordance with this Regulation.
This regulation is enforced in England by the Animal By-Products Regulations 2003 (SI 2003/1482) (the ABPR).
Under the ABPR, the State Veterinary Service is responsible for inspecting and approving incinerator plants in accordance with Regulation 1774/2002. Visits to non-SRM incinerators (such as those incinerating only poultry) will, in general, be carried out on a quarterly basis. However, additional inspections may be carried out should they be necessary.
At present there is no cost for either the inspection or the approval of such plants.
24 May 2004 : Column 1290W
Mr. Cameron: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what representations she has received from small-scale producers of chickens requesting their exemption from the ban on on-farm disposal; and if she will make a statement. [174204]
Mr. Bradshaw: The Department has received a number of such representations. However, the only exceptions from the ban on the routine on-farm burial or burning of animal by-products, in the UK, would be for remote areas (parts of the Highlands and Islands of Scotland, the Scilly Isles and Lundy Island) and during outbreaks of notifiable disease if there were a lack of capacity at rendering plants and incinerators, or if transport of the carcases would spread disease.
| Next Section | Index | Home Page |