---

21 Jun 2004 : Column 1187W—continued

Bovine TB

Mr. Drew: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs if she will publish, by payment area, the compensation paid to farmers for each bovine TB breakdown for each of the last three years. [178785]

Mr. Bradshaw: TB compensation paid to farmers in relation to cattle for England, Scotland and Wales for the period 2001–02, 2002–03 and 2003–04 is detailed in the following table. A more detailed breakdown is available only at disproportionate cost.
£

Payment area	2001–02	2002–03	2003–04
England	6,933,629	23,576,532	24,093,542
Scotland	45,788	226,570	538,449
Wales	2,264,024	8,137,810	9,782,904
Total compensation paid to farmers in Great Britain	9,243,441	31,940,912	34,414,895

 
21 Jun 2004 : Column 1188W
 

Fisheries

Mr. Drew: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what discussions she has had with British trawlermen who are fishing or who aim to fish off the disputed waters of Western Sahara. [179297]

Mr. Bradshaw: The UK Government has had no discussions with British trawlermen about fishing in the waters of Western Sahara and is not aware of any existing or anticipated fishing activities in that area.

Galapagos Islands

Mr. Watson: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what discussions her Department has had with the Government of Ecuador to ensure that the Charles Darwin Research Station in the Galapagos Islands is not adversely affected by activities of fishermen protesting against quotas. [179171]

Mr. Rammell: I have been asked to reply.

Our Ambassador in Quito has made clear our concerns for the safety of foreign scientists to the Ecuadorean authorities, including the Minister of the Environment. The Department of the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, through its Darwin Initiative is funding two UK organisations to carry out biodiversity conservation research projects on the Galapagos Islands and is in close communication with them regarding any security concerns. At present, neither project personnel or project work have been adversely affected by the protests.

Hazardous Waste

Mr. Cousins: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what the (a) location and (b) capacity is of each site presently licensed for (i) hazardous and (ii) contaminated waste, broken down by region; which sites will continue to be licensed for such waste after the implementation of the EU Landfill Directive; and which sites (A) are and (B) will be licensed to take contaminated soil. [176384]

Mr. Morley: The location of each site presently licensed for hazardous waste is set out in a table which I have placed in the library (table 1). These are the sites for which operators submitted a conditioning plan to the Environment Agency on 16 July 2002, outlining their proposals for meeting the requirements of the Landfill (England and Wales) Regulations 2002. From 16 July 2004, when the co-disposal of hazardous and non-hazardous waste ends, the majority of these sites will revert to a non-hazardous classification.

Sites whose operators have applied for permits for their respective sites to receive hazardous waste after the implementation of the EU Landfill Directive are set out in two further tables which I have placed in the Library (tables 2 and 3).

The 22 applications listed in table 2 are for permits to become merchant or in-house landfills for hazardous waste. The identity of two of the in-house landfills in table 2 cannot be revealed for reasons of national security.
 
21 Jun 2004 : Column 1189W
 

The 35 applications listed in table 3 are for permits for sites to contain single cells for the disposal of stable, non-reactive hazardous wastes.

Data on capacity of individual hazardous waste sites is not held centrally. Most types of waste are 'contaminated'. Approximately 1,000 landfills are licensed and permitted to take waste for disposal in England and Wales.

The Environment Agency has no centrally stored information on which sites are presently licensed to take contaminated soil.

One merchant landfill site has been granted a permit to take contaminated soil after the implementation of the EU Landfill Directive: at Purton Brickworks (table 2, number 1). The operators of two merchant landfill sites have applications still under consideration for permits to take contaminated soils after the implementation of the EU Landfill Directive: at Eardswick Hall (table 2, number 6); and at Whitemoss (table 2, number 7).

Mr. George Osborne: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what plans the Environment Agency has to encourage the cement and lime industry to become major operators of hazardous waste incinerators; and whether the Agency has considered plans to locate an incinerator at Lostock Gralam in Cheshire. [176824]

Mr. Morley: The Environment Agency takes no part in the commercial decisions of industry to undertake specific activities and is not aware of any applications from the cement and lime industry to operate hazardous waste incinerators. Several cement and lime operators are permitted to incinerate hazardous wastes as substitutes for conventional fuels used in the cement-making process, such as coal and petroleum coke. This is only permitted where the operator can demonstrate to the Agency's satisfaction that no net detriment to the environment results in comparison with the use of conventional fuels alone.

The Agency has not received an application for an incinerator at Lostock Gralam in Cheshire.

Norman Baker: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what contingency plans she has put in place to deal with hazardous waste following the forthcoming ban on co-disposal, with particular reference to warehousing and other storage facilities. [177496]

Mr. Morley: The Government and the Environment Agency are monitoring closely waste industry plans for the provision of treatment and disposal capacity, and the response of waste producers. For example, a recent survey of the chemical industry, as reported to the Hazardous Waste Forum, shows that waste producers in that sector do not envisage difficulty in meeting the Landfill Directive requirements. Waste producers should ensure that they are meeting in full the requirements of their duty of care and avoid the need for warehousing or storage of waste over and above that which normally occurs.
 
21 Jun 2004 : Column 1190W
 

Heat Pumps

Mr. Sheerman: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what action her Department is taking to encourage the development of (a) ground source and (b) air source heat pumps. [176760]

Mr. Morley: I refer the hon. Member to the answer given by my hon. Friend, the Minister of State, Trade and Industry (Mr. Stephen Timms) on 10 June 2004, Official Report, column 564W.

Landfill Sites

Bob Spink: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs which body is responsible for (a) decontamination and (b) preventing the leachate if a closed landfill site begins to leak contaminants into the water supply or environment. [174587]

Mr. Morley: Under the provisions of the Water Supply (Water Quality) Regulations 2000, enacted in January 2004, the quality of a public, potable water supply to a consumer's premises (up to the tap) is the responsibility of the relevant water undertaker for that location. This includes responsibility for decontamination.

If a closed landfill site begins to leak contaminants into the water supply in England and Wales, responsibility for the overall process of preventing the leachate is divided. The Environment Agency is responsible for 'investigating' the incident. The body (or person) who causes or knowingly permits the pollution of controlled waters is responsible for 'remedying' the pollution. The Environment Agency in turn is responsible for 'ensuring' that the body (or person) who caused or knowingly permitted the pollution takes remedial action. The Agency has powers to prosecute the perpetrator of the pollution in these circumstances.

The Drinking Water Inspectorate investigates incidents affecting drinking water quality. Local authorities are required to monitor the quality of private water supplies, namely those not provided by a water undertaker.

Responsibility for the aftercare and maintenance of closed landfill sites, including the prevention of environmental pollution, will depend on the legislation that was in force at the time the landfill site ceased operations. Sites that closed before the implementation of the Environmental Protection Act 1990 were subject to a different regime to the one currently in place.

Norman Baker: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs pursuant to the answer to the hon. Member for Castle Point, of 24 May 2004, Official Report, column 1292W, on landfill sites, how many offences were identified for each year from 2000 to 2003; and what the (a) highest, (b) average and (c) lowest fine was in each year. [178703]

Mr. Morley: The Environment Agency's data in the following table on landfill pollution charges relates
 
21 Jun 2004 : Column 1191W
 
to events which were categorised having a major (category 1), significant (category 2) or minor (category 3) environmental impact. No environmental
 
21 Jun 2004 : Column 1192W
 
impact (category 4) incidents included in the previous answer have not been included, as the offences did not involve the release of pollutants.
Landfill pollution charges

	Total charges	Enforcement notices	Cautions	Prosecutions	Total fines (£)	Highest fine (£)	Lowest fine (£)	Average fine (£)
2000	5	0	0	(2)5	36,000	20,000	2,000	9,000
2001	19	0	4	(3)15	15,500	8,000	7,500	7,750
2002	20	1	5	(4)15	103,250	15,000	6,000	10,325
2003	29	0	10	(5)19	30,000	10,000	1,000	3,333

⁽²⁾ Five convictions (four fines, one conditional discharge).
⁽³⁾ Two convictions (both with fines), 13 acquittals.
⁽⁴⁾ 10 convictions (all with fines), five acquittals.
⁽⁵⁾ 15 convictions (nine fines, three absolute discharges, three no evidence offered), four acquittals.

---