Previous Section Index Home Page

11 Jul 2005 : Column 647W—continued


Norman Baker: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs pursuant to the answer of 16 June 2005, Official Report, column 552W, on fly-tipping, if she will break down the figures provided by (a) region and (b) local authority. [11406]

Mr. Bradshaw [holding answer 11 July 2005]: The data requested will be made available in the Library of the House.

Food Subsidy

Mr. Roger Williams: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what subsidy was applied to food production in (a) the UK and (b) the EU in each year between 1999 and 2004, broken down by commodity. [9386]

11 Jul 2005 : Column 648W

Jim Knight: The tables show the value of subsidies that are directly linked to production of commodities as recorded by Eurostat in the Economic Accounts for Agriculture, for the EU 15 countries and the United Kingdom. They also show the value of other subsidies which are not linked to production but from which farmers have benefited as a consequence of engaging in production.

The figures provided in the table exclude public expenditure on market support measures (e.g. export refunds, intervention) and they also exclude payments which, according to national accounts conventions, are recorded as capital transfers (which for the UK means that these figures exclude the foot and mouth disease compensation payments of 2001).

Further detail may be obtained from the Eurostat website at
European Union (15 countries)
€ million

Cereals (including wheat, barley, oats, rye)10,673.011,821.012,325.912,703.812,298.012,761.3
Industrial crops (including rape seed, sugar beet)5,050.04,410.53,874.83,448.13,462.43,480.1
Forage plants822.0923.31,042.41,027.91,065.71,021.3
Other crop products (including olive oil, vegetables,
horticultural products, seeds)
Total subsidies linked to crop output19,089.819,742.519,853.519,982.719,517.819,936.1
Animals and animal products
Sheep and goats1,926.01,614.41,029.61,628.51,688.11,703.4
Other animals48.221.821.622.021.018.9
Animal products (including milk)264.9300.5382.7254.0243.91,329.9
Total subsidies linked to animal output6,729.97,239.47,282.48,661.28,976.710,276.9
Total subsidies linked to production25,819.726,981.927,135.928,644.028,494.630,213.1
Other subsidies, not linked to production10,473.810,620.912,713.812,963.314,215.613,326.5
Total subsidies36,293.637,602.839,849.741,607.342,710.243,539.6


United Kingdom
€ million

Cereals (including wheat, barley, oats, rye)1,069.61,200.41,024.51,153.31,053.21,056.5
Industrial crops (including rape seed, sugar beet)435.9241.5187.8135.3178.1200.8
Forage plants103.593.6110.5112.6103.1104.6
Other crop products (including olive oil, vegetables,
horticultural products, seeds)
Total subsidies linked to crop output1,624.61,547.81,334.61,411.91,343.51,369.7
Animals and animal products
Sheep and goats621.8553.1295.2451.4413.4465.4
Other animals0.
Animal products (including milk)0.036.1127.00.00.0161.4
Total subsidies linked to animal output1,991.02,064.81,758.11,928.71,812.42,163.5
Total subsidies linked to production3,615.63,612.63,092.73,340.63,155.93,533.2
Other subsidies, not linked to production483.1507.9909.8944.1900.4912.3
Total subsidies4,098.74,120.54,002.64,284.64,056.34,445.6


11 Jul 2005 : Column 649W

Hazardous Waste

Mr. Jim Cunningham: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what consequences hazardous waste producers face if they do not register by the 16 July deadline; and if she will make a statement. [10348]

Mr. Bradshaw: Anyone who produces hazardous waste is required to notify their premises to the Environment Agency unless those premises fall within one of the categories listed as exempt in the Regulations. The removal of hazardous waste from any premises that is not either notified or genuinely exempt will be prohibited from 16 July and the Regulations provide that those who fail to comply may, on summary conviction, be subject to a fine of up to £5,000. Alternatively, the Environment Agency may choose to issue a Fixed Penalty of £300.

In enforcing these Regulations, the Environment Agency will place the highest priority on the protection of human health and the environment and will expect all movements of hazardous waste to be accompanied by a consignment note. The requirement to notify premises will be enforced in line with their published enforcement and prosecution policy.


Mr. Roger Williams: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what assessment she has made of whether there is a correlation between the decline in the hedgehog population and the increasein badger numbers; and if she will make a statement. [9960]

Jim Knight [holding answer 6 July 2005]: Mammals such as badgers and hedgehogs interact in a complex manner in the countryside. Badgers' main food source is earthworms but they will consume a wide variety of foods such as invertebrates, plant roots, fruits, cereals, animal carcasses, stored livestock feed and sometimes hedgehogs when conditions limit the source of earthworms.

Long term data on hedgehog populations, over the period covering the badger population increase, would be required in order to answer the above question. Such a dataset does not exist, therefore it is not possible to conclude that badger population increase is the cause of a hedgehog population decline.

Research is being carried out to obtain a greater understanding of these interactions. The Central Science Laboratory is conducting a replicated experimental assessment of the ecological consequences of badger removal within the Randomised Badger Culling Trial. The research includes estimating the abundance of hedgehog populations in selected regions of south-west England. Unpublished data from this research suggest that hedgehogs were less likely to be present in areas where badger sett density was high. Additionally, hedgehog numbers tended to increase when badgers were removed, suggesting that a relationship exists between badger density and hedgehog populations. It is hoped further analyses will reveal more on the nature of what is likely to be a complex relationship.
11 Jul 2005 : Column 650W

Hill Farmers

Norman Baker: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what steps she is taking to ensure the economic survival of hill farmers in England. [11268]

Jim Knight: Farmers in the English uplands currently receive in excess of £180 million in CAP payments. In2006 they will continue to be eligible for schemes under the England Rural Development Programme such as Environmental Stewardship and the Hill Farm Allowance, as well as the Single Payment Scheme.

The Secretary of State gave a commitment on 22 April 2004 to consider how upland communities could receive appropriate support from rural development funds. Future arrangements are currently being reviewed in the context of the new EU Rural Development Regulation which will come into effect in 2007.

Identity Cards

Mr. Garnier: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what recent assessment she has made of the implications of the introduction of identity cards for her Department. [9881]

Jim Knight: On 28 June 2005, my right hon. Friend the Home Secretary placed in the Library a paper containing the latest estimates of benefits of the Identity Cards Scheme which shows that the benefits outweigh the costs once the scheme is fully operational. The cost of equipping premises will depend on the nature of the use of the Identity Cards Scheme and the type of identity check(s) necessary to deliver the business benefits. In some cases, benefits could be realised without the use of card readers and the cost of installing any readers needs to be considered alongside future plans to refresh or upgrade IT systems. As the design of the scheme matures, during and after the procurement exercise, so will our understanding of where the scheme will be of most benefit, which will allow us to prepare estimates of costs and benefits.

Next Section Index Home Page