---

21 Oct 2004 : Column 839W—continued

Noise/Pollution

Mr. Bercow: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs how many (a) noise and (b) nuisance complaints were investigated by Aylesbury Vale district council in (i) 2002–03 and (ii) 2003–04; what proportion of reported complaints this represented; how many abatement notices were issued in each year; and how many fines were levied for non-compliance. [191046]

Alun Michael: In 2002–03, Aylesbury Vale district council investigated 575 complaints of noise nuisance, with three abatement notices served. Of these three notices, two were followed by further action for non-compliance. In the same period the council investigated 276 complaints of other statutory nuisance such as smoke, dust and odour nuisance, with no abatement notices served.

In 2003–04, 688 complaints of noise nuisance were investigated, with six abatement notices served. Four of these abatement notices were not complied with, requiring the local authority to take further action. 348 complaints of other statutory nuisance were investigated, resulting in two abatement notices being served.

Detailed statistics of the level of fines imposed for non-compliance to abatement notices are not available.

It is a requirement under section 79 of the Environmental Protection Act 1990 to take such steps as is reasonably practicable to investigate a complaint of noise or other statutory nuisance.

Mr. Bercow: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs how many successful prosecutions have been undertaken by the Environment Agency concerning pollution in Buckinghamshire in (a) 2002–03 and (b) 2003–04; and what the average level of fine imposed was. [191047]

Mr. Morley: The Environment Agency undertook four fully successful prosecutions in 2002–03 for offences in Buckinghamshire concerning pollution, the average fine for which was £3,625.

In 2003–04 the Environment Agency undertook 11 fully successful prosecutions for offences in Buckinghamshire concerning pollution, the average fine for which was £3,480. There was also one partially successful prosecution relating to pollution offences, the fine for which was £1,500.
 
21 Oct 2004 : Column 840W
 

Mr. Bercow: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs how many complaints were received by the Environment Agency concerning pollution in the Aylesbury Vale district council area in (a) 2002–03 and (b) 2003–04. [191048]

Mr. Morley: In 2002–03, 348 possible pollution incidents within the Aylesbury Vale district council boundary were reported to the Environment Agency. In 2003–04 the figure was 288.

Red Squirrels

Diana Organ: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs whether the Joint Nature Conservancy Council has produced recommendations for (a) the protection and (b) the re-establishment of the red squirrel. [192511]

Mr. Bradshaw: The red squirrel is currently protected in the UK by the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (and The Wildlife and Countryside (Northern Ireland) Order 1982), amended, most recently, by the Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000 (CRoW) for England and Wales and the Nature Conservation (Scotland) Act 2004. It is included in both Schedules 5 and 6 making it an offence to kill or injure a red squirrel or disturb its place of rest. In addition to this the red squirrel was identified as a priority species for conservation action by the UK Biodiversity Action Plan process. The Joint Nature Conservation Committee, as a member of the UK Red Squirrel Group (UKRSG), has undertaken research into the conservation issues of the red squirrel, and has set out recommended actions and targets in the red squirrel Species Action Plan.

The UKRSG has largely focused conservation action for the red squirrel in key woodland sites where they are still present. A prioritisation exercise has identified those sites with suitable red squirrel habitat that can be managed to ensure their continued survival and reduce the influence of factors that may be causing their decline, such as habitat loss and loss of habitat condition, grey squirrel incursion and disease.

With regards to the re-establishment of the red squirrel in the UK, there are several issues to be addressed, including the amelioration of the reasons for their decline at different sites. JNCC, and the UKRSG, have produced best practice guidelines on the release of red squirrels, but do not recommend the re-introduction of red squirrels without careful consideration of the site to ensure that it is of suitable habitat to support a red squirrel population and that it can be protected from the above factors.

Diana Organ: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what action her Department intends to take to control the grey squirrel. [192512]

Mr. Bradshaw: Grey squirrels are difficult animals to control, particularly on a wide scale. Landowners can take positive action to control grey squirrels locally to protect isolated populations of red squirrels and woodlands. I refer the hon. Member to the answers given on 12 July and 11 October, Official Report, columns 8951V and WA43.
 
21 Oct 2004 : Column 841W
 

Reed Bed Technology

Mr. Drew: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what encouragement the Department is giving to local authorities to develop use of reed bed technology in (a) urban and (b) rural areas. [192336]

Mr. Morley [holding answer 18 October 2004]: The Department is part of the National Sustainable Drainage Systems (SUDS) Working Group which published an Interim Code of Practice for Sustainable Drainage Systems (http://www.ciria.org/suds/icop.htm) in July this year. This document aims to facilitate the implementation of Sustainable drainage options (such as reed bed technology) in developments in England and Wales by providing model maintenance agreements and advice on their use. It provides a set of agreements between those public organisations with statutory or regulatory responsibilities relating to SUDS, including local authorities.

Rights of Way

Ross Cranston: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs how many requests she received in (a) 2003 and (b) 2004 under section 118 of the Highways Act 1980 to close rights of way; how many rights of way were closed as a result of designation orders in (i) 2003 and (ii) 2004; and if she will make a statement. [192329]

Alun Michael: Requests to make orders to close rights of way under section 118 (and section 118B) of the Highways Act 1980 are made to local authorities, and the role of the Secretary of State is to designate areas within which the powers under section 118B may be used by local highway authorities in response to the local authority applications. We have received 23 applications to designate such areas since the legislation came into force in February 2002; 14 were received in 2003 and nine in 2004. 20 have been approved, covering 72 areas in England.

Within the 72 areas that were designated, eighteen orders to close rights of way have been made by local authorities. Two of these have resulted in rights of way being closed in 2004. The remaining sixteen orders are awaiting confirmation by the local highway authority or Secretary of State.

School Milk

Mr. Drew: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what support her Department is giving to School Milk Week. [191112]

Alun Michael: The School Milk Week promotional campaign, which is taking place during this year's National School Milk Week, is funded by the EU with match-funding from the dairy processing trade and the Milk Development Council, a Defra-sponsored NDPB.

The Government make a considerable continuing contribution to the promotion of school milk. Expenditure on the EU school milk subsidy scheme, which in Great Britain amounted to over £9 million in 2003–04, is, in practice, funded largely by the taxpayer.
 
21 Oct 2004 : Column 842W
 
In addition, Defra, along with DfES and the DoH, co-funds a national top-up to the subsidy of up to £1.5 million annually in England.

Sites of Special Scientific Interest

Mr. Sarwar: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what assessment she has made of the impact of Network Rail's permitted development rights on sites of special scientific interest. [192825]

Mr. Bradshaw: No specific assessment has been made. Network Rail must seek consent from English Nature if they wish to undertake a potentially damaging operation on an SSSI in England in their ownership. The position is slightly different in Scotland. When the Nature Conservation (Scotland) Act 2004 comes into force there will be a similar requirement to seek consent from Scottish Natural Heritage in Scotland.

---