|Previous Section||Index||Home Page|
Mr. Davidson: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what EU legislation was implemented by (a) the Groundwater Regulations 1998, (b) the Water Supply (Water Quality) Regulations 2000, (c) the Biocidal Products Regulations 2001, (d) the Processed Animal Proteins (England) Regulations 2001, (e) the Electricity and Gas (Energy Efficiency Obligations) Order 2001, (f) the Animal By-Products Regulations 2003 and (g) the Water Environment (Water Framework Directive) (England and Wales) Regulations 2003. 
Mr. Morley: The information is as follows:
(a) The Groundwater Regulations 1998 completed the implementation of the Groundwater Directive (80/68/EEC).
(b) The Water Supply (Water Quality) Regulations 2000 implemented Directive 98/83/EC on the quality of water intended for human consumption.
(c) The Biocidal Products Regulations 2001 implemented Directive 98/8/EC concerning the placing of biocidal products on the market.
(d) The Processed Animal Proteins (England) Regulations 2001 implemented Council Decision 2000/766/EC concerning certain protection measures with regard to transmissible spongiform encephalopathies and the feeding of animal protein and Council Decision 2001/9/EC (as amended by Commission Decision 2001/165/EC) concerning control measures required for the implementation of Council Decision 2000/766/EC.
(e) The Electricity and Gas (Energy Efficiency Obligations) Order 2001 does not implement EU legislation.
(f) The Animal By-Products Regulations 2003 implemented Council Regulation 1774/2002/EC (as amended by Commission Regulation 808/2003/EC) laying down health rules concerning animal by-products not intended for human consumption.
(g) The Water Environment (Water Framework Directive) (England and Wales) Regulations 2003 implemented the Water Framework Directive (2000/60/EC).
Sarah Teather: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what percentage of streets in each local authority had visible fly-posters in each year since 1997. 
Mr. Bradshaw: Figures on the visibility of fly-posters on streets for each local authority are not available from 1997. However, the annual Local Environmental Quality Survey of England, conducted by ENCAMS on behalf of Defra, provides statistics on the extent of fly-posting on a regional basis since 200102. This is a measure of the percentage of sites (covering streets and highways, public open spaces and waterside areas) that have significant levels of fly-posting present, so as to be clearly visible to the public. The statistics for all areas combined show that the percentage of transects with unsatisfactory levels of fly-posting has fallen from 2 per cent. to 1 per cent. nationally.
As of April 2005, a new best value performance indicator BV199c has been introduced to measure levels of fly-posting based on the LEQSE methodology. Statistics for each local authority will therefore be available from next year.
|Year 1 (200102)||Year 2 (200203)||Year 3 (200304)|
|East of England||1||1||1|
|Yorkshire and The Humber|
Sarah Teather: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (1) what the cost of removing fly-tipped rubbish was in each year since 1997; 
(2) how many fly-tipping incidents have been recorded in each English region in each year since 1997. 
Mr. Bradshaw: Before this year no national data have been collected on incidents of illegal waste disposal or fly-tipping.
Defra has worked with the Environment Agency and the Local Government Association to develop Flycapture, a national fly-tipping database, which has been active since April 2004. Initial returns from English local authorities for the six month period between June to November 2004 reported that £24 million was spent on clearing fly-tipping.
Initial returns for the same six month period reported the following numbers of incidents dealt with by local authorities:
|Number of incidents reported|
(6 months June to November 2004)
|East of England||35,453|
|Yorkshire and Humberside||102,445|
Mr. Soames: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what her assessment is of the role played by game management in management of uplands. 
Jim Knight: Game management has played a significant role in creating and maintaining some of the typical habitats of the uplands, especially in northern England. The major influence has been management for driven grouse shooting, which has taken place for the past 150 years. The areas of such habitat are extensive and of national or international importance for their vegetation and breeding birds. It is noteworthy that some 75 per cent. of our heather moorland are classified as areas of national and international importance for wildlife both plants and animals. However, large areas of the English uplands managed for game (red grouse) designated as SSSI/SAC/SPA, are in unfavourable condition due to past poor management practices such as overgrazing, intensive burning and drainage.
Mr. Godsiff: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what the (a) projected cost at the time of tender and (b) actual cost at the time of completion was for each IT contract commissioned by her Department and its predecessors in the last five years. 
Jim Knight: The information the hon. Member requests is not held centrally by the Department and cannot therefore be readily retrieved without incurring disproportionate cost.
Sarah Teather: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what estimates she has made of the amount of litter dropped in the street in each year since 1997; and what percentage of this is made up of (a) food and (b) food wrapping. 
Mr. Bradshaw: Figures are available through Defra's Municipal Waste Management Survey for the amount of non household municipal waste collected by local authorities. However, this is not broken down further to record the amountor typecollected through street cleansing.
However, the Local Environmental Quality Survey of England for 200304 shows that of the areas surveyed, seven out of 10 items of litter most frequently dropped by pedestrians or people in vehicles are 'Food-on-the-Go' materials (comprising confectionery litter, soft drinks related litter, snack packaging, fast food packaging and paper tissues).
13 Jun 2005 : Column 41W
Mr. Clifton-Brown: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what plans she has to review the system of litter abatement orders. 
Mr. Bradshaw: The system of litter abatement orders was reviewed in Defra's Living PlacesPowers, Rights, Responsibilities" consultation published in October 2002. Responses to the consultation indicated that most local authorities are able to negotiate a solution before a litter abatement order is lodged. The principle behind the procedure is sound, but the use and application of litter abatement orders needs to be communicated to residents more effectively.
The environmental charity, ENCAMS, sponsored by Defra, already provides information for the public on litter abatement orders. Defra is building on this further in its roll-out programme for the Clean Neighbourhoods and Environment Act 2005, which will include guidance on litter covering both existing and new legislation.
|Next Section||Index||Home Page|