---

12 Jul 2004 : Column 890W—continued

Forestry Policy

Mrs. Helen Clark: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs when the Government will publish its response to the report An Economic Analysis of Forestry Policy in England. [182653]

Mr. Bradshaw [holding answer 7 July 2004]: As was made clear at the time the report was published on 5 June 2003, the analysis formed part of a broad review of forestry arrangements in England that was agreed as part of the Defra settlement of the Spending Review 2002. In the event, that review contributed to Lord Haskins' review of the arrangements for delivering the Government's rural policies in England, the detailed follow up to which we are working on. We do not intend to respond separately to "An Economic Analysis of Forestry Policy in England", although the report itself remains available as a valuable source of information to those interested in forestry policy inside and outside government.

Litter

Miss McIntosh: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs if she will make a statement on the issuing of fines for dropping litter; and what plans she has to introduce and enforce a uniform policy for the issuing of fines for dropping litter. [182436]

Alun Michael: The policy on fixed penalty notices is uniform across England as all local authorities are empowered to issue fixed penalty notices of £50 for the offence of dropping litter.

Enforcement on the ground may differ between areas as it is for local authorities to decide whether to make use of this power. I hope that many more local authorities will use fixed penalty notices for littering now that the receipts can be used to offset the costs of enforcement.

Miss McIntosh: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what plans her Department has to provide money to local councils to help them with the cost of keeping streets clean. [182437]

Alun Michael: Local authorities receive funding for street cleansing through allocations to the Environmental Protection and Cultural Services (EPCS) block. The funding for this block will increase by over £1 billion between 2003 and 2006.

Managed Realignment Schemes

Mr. Whittingdale: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what
 
12 Jul 2004 : Column 891W
 
provision exists for the payment of compensation to landowners where managed realignment schemes are established. [182027]

Mr. Morley: Defra has provided flood and coastal defence operating authorities with guidance on the circumstances in which land purchase and financial compensation for managed realignment of river or coastal flood defences can be funded from the Defra flood management budget under current legislation.

Except in limited circumstances outlined as follows, no compensation is payable to those affected by flooding or erosion, including cases where it is decided not to defend a particular area, or to undertake managed realignment. This approach, adopted by successive governments, is justified by current legislation which provides operating authorities with permissive powers to undertake flood and coastal defence works. Save for the specific requirements of the Habitats Directive there is no general obligation to build or maintain defences at all or to a particular standard. Consonant with this approach, the legislation also makes no provision for compensation from public funds to persons whose property or land is affected by erosion or flooding.

Payment is possible where quantifiable beneficial use arises. Thus land may be acquired for the construction or maintenance of defences and compensation paid for damage arising expressly from such operations. Also, in some circumstances, where land seaward of justifiable new defences can be shown to contribute to effective defence, landowners may be eligible for payment for depreciation or loss of land. Finally, if a defence is realigned landward, land currently in agricultural use may be considered for payments under agri-environment schemes if a long-term return to inter- tidal habitat fulfils the relevant objectives.

Over-thirty-months Scheme

Mr. Stephen O'Brien: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what plans she has to modify the current over-thirty-months slaughter scheme, with particular regard to cows born before August 1996; and what discussions her Department has had with the Department of Health on this issue. [182918]

Mr. Bradshaw: Following the FSA recommendations to change the over-thirty-month rule made in July 2003 it has been decided that cattle born before 1 August 1996 will not, in any event, be allowed into the food chain and that a modified over-thirty-month scheme will remain in place for these animals.

The Department has convened regular discussions involving all stakeholders, including the Department of Health, which would be affected by the replacement of the OTM rule by BSE testing.

Parliamentary Questions

John Thurso: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs how many (a) ordinary written and (b) named day questions her Department received in the 2002–03 Session. [182717]

 
12 Jul 2004 : Column 892W
 

Alun Michael: I refer the hon. Member to my answer given to the hon. Member for Lewes (Norman Baker) on 3 March 2004, Official Report, column 937W.

Racing Greyhounds

Mr. Meale: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (1) what action she is taking to improve the welfare of racing greyhounds at non-National Greyhound Racing Club registered independent tracks; [181785]

(2) what action her Department is taking to improve the welfare of racing greyhounds; [181786]

(3) what action she is taking to increase retirement provision for racing greyhounds. [181787]

Mr. Bradshaw: The Government plans to publish the draft Animal Welfare Bill this summer. The draft Bill seeks to introduce a duty of care which will cover all domestic and captive animals, including current and former racing greyhounds. The Bill will also allow the introduction of secondary legislation to regulate certain activities, and the welfare of racing greyhounds is a possible area for regulation. I and my officials have been discussing the implications of the Bill for greyhounds with welfare organisations, the industry and other government departments. I have found these discussions helpful and I intend to shortly make available a paper which will set out my response to the concerns that were raised.

Sea Level (Essex)

Mr. Whittingdale: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what estimate she has made of the change in sea level off the Essex coast in each of the last 20 years. [182022]

Mr. Morley: Proudman Oceanographic Laboratory (POL) hosts the permanent service for mean sea level (a global database for longer-term sea level change on the basis of information from tide gauges). POL has made assessments of the sea level changes at Sheerness, Southend and Tilbury over the 1901–99 period. This indicates an increase in mean sea level at Sheerness (taken as representing the Essex and Kent coasts) of 20 centimetres over the 20th century, equivalent to an average rate of 4 centimetres over the last 20 years. The full figures are summarised in the United Kingdom Climate Impacts Programme report "London's Warming". The full series can be found at www. pol.ac.uk/ntslf/products.

Mr. Whittingdale: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what estimate her Department has made of the likely change in sea level off the Essex coast over the next 20 years. [182023]

Mr. Morley: The United Kingdom report Climate Change Scenarios for the UK (April 2002) estimates sea level and land changes to the 2080s, relative to 1961–90. For Eastern England, these indicate a rise in mean sea level of 22 centimetres or 82 centimetres depending on scenario. The report can be found at www.ukcip.org.uk.

For project appraisal purposes, Defra's current guidance to operating authorities is to include a 6 millimetre a year precautionary allowance for relative sea level rise for the Essex coast.
 
12 Jul 2004 : Column 893W
 

Sea Walls

Mr. Whittingdale: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what requirement exists for the provision of compensatory habitat where (a) maintenance and (b) improvement of sea walls takes place. [182029]

Mr. Morley: Any requirement for compensatory habitat arising from the maintenance or improvement of sea walls will depend on whether there would be an adverse effect on a site designated under the European Birds or Habitats Directives. Detailed guidance on the appraisal of plans and projects which are likely to have a significant effect on such European sites and guidance under which compensatory measures are required, is provided in "Managing Natura 2000 sites": the provisions of Article 6 of the Habitats Directive 92/43/EEC" published by the European Communities in 2000. Where the maintenance or improvement of sea walls would not have an adverse effect on a European site, there would be no requirement for compensatory measures.

There is a more general requirement on Member States under the Birds Directive to "take requisite measures to preserve, maintain or re-establish a sufficient diversity and area of habitats for all the species of birds referred to in Article 1" of the Directive. Defra is currently considering what measures the Government should take in this respect as a result of coastal squeeze (i.e. loss of inter-tidal habitat through sea level rise against sea walls).

Mr. Whittingdale: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what definition is used to distinguish between the maintenance and the improvement of sea walls. [182030]

Mr. Morley: Maintenance of a sea wall maintains the current standard and structural integrity of the defence.

Improvement of a sea wall results in an increase in the standards of protection, or major refurbishment.

Mr. Whittingdale: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what consultation will take place before a decision is taken to abandon a section of sea wall. [182032]

Mr. Morley: The Environment Agency, in consultation with key stakeholders, will develop an exit strategy for withdrawing from the maintenance of uneconomic seawalls. Consultations will be undertaken through the development of Shoreline Management Plans and strategies.

The exit strategy will involve informing affected landowners, occupiers of the land, and the Highways Authority of the Environment Agency's plans; providing interested parties an opportunity to make representations; advising landowners of the condition of the seawall; and informing them of their options. In many cases, seawalls for which there is no maintenance justification may have a substantial residual life.

The Environment Agency will inform landowners and/or occupiers of the anticipated residual life, existing standard of defence and the condition of the structures at the earliest opportunity, together with any other relevant information such as their rights, responsibilities
 
12 Jul 2004 : Column 894W
 
and options after the Agency stops maintenance. This information will help affected parties to deal with the change in circumstances in the most beneficial way.

Consultation with the Highways Authority will be important to ensure that any issues associated with public rights of way are fully considered.

Landowners will have an opportunity to make representations before a decision to stop maintaining a seawall is taken. Landowners will also be given a reasonable period of notice when a final decision is made that may affect their property.

Mr. Whittingdale: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs how many miles of sea wall on the Essex coast have had maintenance work done on them in each of the last 20 years. [182025]

Mr. Morley: The Environment Agency understands that, over the last 20 years, the majority of the 275.6 miles of sea walls in Essex have had some form of maintenance work carried out on them. The Agency does not keep records for every location where maintenance work has been undertaken in any given year.

Mr. Whittingdale: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs how much has been spent on (a) maintenance and (b) improvement of sea walls on the Essex coast in each of the last 20 years. [182026]

Mr. Morley: The following table details the amount spent on sea walls on the Essex coast in each of the last 20 years. These figures come from the Essex Local Flood Defence Committee Annual Reports.
£

Financial year	(a) Maintenance work	(b) Capital improvements
1984–85	853	2,734
1985–86	1,200	2,193
1986–87	1,220	4,951
1987–88	918	6,250
1988–89	1,127	6,318
1989–90	1,522	5,296
1990–91	1,836	3,826
1991–92	2,416	8,914
1992–93	2,180	8,667
1993–94	2,234	8,844
1994–95	2,159	5,655
1995–96	2,451	6,293
1996–97	2,360	4,248
1997–98	2,014	5,230
1998–99	2,249	6,938
1999/2000	1,987	4,808
2000–01	1,761	2,530
2001–02	1,526	3,231
2002–03	2,344	3,676
2003–04	2,100	3,316
Total	36,457	103,918

Mr. Whittingdale: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what the most recent assessment is of the state of the sea walls on the Essex coast. [182031]

 
12 Jul 2004 : Column 895W
 

Mr. Morley: The Environment Agency has advised that in its 2003–04 assessment of flood defences in Essex, 86.6 per cent. of the 1,774 km of defences were classified as fair or better.

This assessment does not distinguish between tidal and fluvial defences.

---