|Previous Section||Index||Home Page|
Mrs. Spelman: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what steps the Environment Agency takes (a) to inspect, (b) to regulate and (c) to set targets for local authorities. 
Mr. Morley: The Environment Agency does not generally inspect, regulate or set targets for local authorities. However, civic amenity sites (waste) run by local authorities are permitted and inspected by the Environment Agency. Local authorities may require licences for other operations that need their consent, for example, abstraction or discharge, and the Environment Agency would inspect and regulate these consents.
Dr. Cable: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs how many people in her Department (a) were relocated in 200405 and (b) are expected to be relocated in 200506 following the Lyons review; where they have been relocated; and if she will make a statement. 
Jim Knight [holding answer 2 November 2005]: 124 posts were relocated from London and the South East in response to the Lyons review in 200405. A further 86 are expected to move in 200506; of these seven have already relocated.
|Location||Number of posts|
|Moves in 200405|
|Various local offices outside London and the South East||10|
|Moves in 200506|
Mr. Drew: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs if she will take steps to ensure that the Government's response to the Royal Commission on Environmental Pollution report on the impact of pesticide use on human beings is coordinated with the Department of Health. 
[holding answer 8 November 2005]: The Department has already put in place arrangements to ensure that all relevant Government Departments, including the Department of Health, are fully involved in formulating the Government's response to the RCEP report.
9 Nov 2005 : Column 488W
Mrs. Spelman: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (1) what estimate the Government has made of the cost to local authorities of the implementation of Environmental Protection guidance note PG5/2(04); 
(2) what estimate the Government has made of the cost to local authorities of implementing Environmental Protection guidance note PG5/2(04) setting higher emissions standards for municipal crematoria. 
Mr. Bradshaw: In accordance with the two consultation papers issued by the Department in May 2003 and September 2004 http://www.defra.gov.uk/CQrporate/consult/crematoria/index.htm and http://www.defra.gov.uk/corporate/consult/crematoria-two/consultation.pdf the estimated total cost of fitting mercury abatement to cover 50 per cent. of all cremations is between £90 million and £100 million. About 90 per cent. of crematoria are currently owned and operated by local authorities.
Process guidance notes, such as PG5/2(04), are produced to provide advice to local authority regulators on what constitutes the Best Available Techniques under the Pollution Prevention and Control Act 1999. The Act was subject to a regulatory impact assessment. The statutory Best Available Techniques concept enshrines a balance between costs and benefits. It is not practice for my Department or the Environment Agency to produce a separate regulatory impact assessment for each sector or process guidance note.
Mrs. Spelman: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what assessment the Government has made of the effect of Environmental Protection guidance note PG5/02(04) on fees charged to the public for municipal services. 
Mr. Bradshaw: The consultation paper issued by the Department in May 2003 http://www.defra.gov.uk/corporate/consult/crematoria/index.htm contained an estimate that new requirements to abate mercury from all crematoria would increase costs by £55 per cremation. This compared with the average cost of a funeral assessed by the Office of Fair Trading in 2001 of £1,215 (for cremation) and £2,048 (for burial).
The second consultation paper issued by the Department in September 2004 http://www.defra.gov.uk/corporate/consult/crematoria-two/consultation.pdf proposed that only 50 per cent. of cremations should be subject to mercury abatement. This was adopted in the form of PG5/2(04), as amended. If the system of burden sharing enabled by the guidance is taken up by the cremation sector, this should mean an increase of between £25 and £30 per cremation. I understand that the Federation of British Cremation Authorities, which represents the majority of all crematoria operators, has arrived at a figure of £25.
9 Nov 2005 : Column 489W
Local authority Best Value Performance Indicators for 200405, which include information on household waste recycling rates will be available on 15 December from the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister's website at: www.bvpi.gov.uk
Norman Baker: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what quantity of CFCs has been recovered from refrigerators and freezers since the implementation of EU Regulation 2037/2000; and what percentage this represents of the total amount contained in those refrigerators and freezers. 
Mr. Morley: The information is not available in the form requested, as the data on the recovery of CFCs does not identify the equipment from which they were recovered. The total amount of CFCs recovered from all equipment, including commercial equipment, was:
It is not possible to calculate the percentage of CFCs recovered from the total amount contained in the equipment. This is because it is not known how much refrigerant fluid is in the equipment on arrival at licensed waste management sites, as many units are damaged in use or transit, and some fluid will have escaped before the equipment is received for disposal.
Mr. Paice: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what assessment she has made of the conditions for cross-compliance for the single farm payment which are imposed by EU other member states. 
Cross-compliance conditions involve two main elements: specific requirements in relation to 19 EU directives and regulations that apply in all member states, with many of these having been law for a number of years; and keeping agricultural land in Good Agricultural and Environmental Condition (GAEC) as defined at member state, or as the case may be, regional level within an EU framework. Given the requirement in the EC regulations to define GAEC to reflect the specific character of the areas concerned including the condition of the land, environmental conditions and agricultural activity, it is to be expected that a variety of standards will have been set within the EU. Whether those standards fulfil member states' EU regulatory obligations will be considered by the European Commission, which has already begun a programme of audits covering cross-compliance. In the meantime, DEFRA officials continue to liaise closely with the
9 Nov 2005 : Column 490W
European Commission and other member states, both to ensure a common understanding of the EU regulatory obligations and to share practical experience of implementation.
Mr. Holloway: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs when the Single Payment Scheme will be implemented; and whether her Department plans to propose further reform of the common agricultural policy. 
Jim Knight: Ministers regularly assess the likely timing of Single Payment Scheme awards with officials at the Rural Payments Agency (RPA), which is responsible for the administration of the scheme in England. RPA remains on course to commence payments in February 2006 and complete 96 per cent. of payments by the end of March, in line with announcements made at the start of the year.
The UK Government has called for a fundamental review of the whole EU budget, including the common agricultural policy (CAP), to report during the next EU financial perspective (200713). We have held detailed discussions with every member state about the budget and remain committed to working for a deal in December.
As part of that process, we have called for a proper debate about the budget and stressed that we must begin making the necessary changes, including to CAP expenditure, before the next budget period begins in 2014. We have also been clear that any change to the CAP must take account of the legitimate business planning needs of farmers and happen over time.
Mr. Nicholas Brown: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what arrangements she has made for releasing data on individual recipients of farm support payments under the Single Payment Scheme. 
We will publish an annual aggregate figure for payments to each recipient under the SPS drawn from our financial records. The regional analysis will be produced using the Nomenclature of Units for Territorial Statistics (NUTS). NUTS was established by Eurostat more than 25 years ago in order to provide a single uniform breakdown of territorial units for the production of regional statistics for the European Union. We will use NUTS levels one and two to provide the regional analysis. The information will be extracted, calculated and published on the RPA website after the closure of the payment window on 30 June 2006, probably by end September 2006.
|Next Section||Index||Home Page|