| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
10 Nov 2005 : Column 671W—continued
Caseous Lymphadenitis
Mr. Hoyle: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs how many (a) sheep and (b) goats have been infected with caseous lymphadenitis in each of the last five years. [25434]
Mr. Bradshaw: Caseous lymphadenitis is not a notifiable disease and so there are no records of total numbers of cases occurring nationally. The Veterinary Laboratories Agency retains records of the numbers of diagnoses made in samples which have been submitted to its laboratories in England and Wales in its Veterinary Investigation Diagnosis Analysis (VIDA) database. The figures for the years 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003 and 2004 are as follows:
| Sheep | Goats | |
|---|---|---|
| 2000 | 38 | 3 |
| 2001 | 28 | 4 |
| 2002 | 22 | 16 |
| 2003 | 23 | 6 |
| 2004 | 35 | 2 |
Electric Shock Collars
Mr. Drew: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what representations she has received from the Kennel Club on electric shock collars in the context of the Animal Welfare Bill. [25546]
Mr. Bradshaw: We have received correspondence from, and met with representatives of the Kennel Club, to discuss the issue of electric shock collars in the context of the Animal Welfare Bill.
Energy Efficiency
David Taylor: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what measures have been introduced since 1997 to help homeowners meet the cost of improved energy efficiency measures. [26963]
Mr. Morley: The Government has introduced a range of measures to help homeowners meet the cost of improved energy efficiency measures. Key examples include: the Energy Efficiency Commitment (and its predecessor)—an obligation on energy suppliers to increase household energy efficiency; the Warm Front programme, providing grants to those in fuel poverty for a variety of energy efficiency and heating measures; reduced VAT levels for certain commercially installed energy efficient materials, notably insulation; and the Landlords' Energy Saving Allowance, providing landlords a clear incentive to improve the energy efficiency of their properties.
David Taylor: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs how many publicly funded household energy efficiency grant schemes are available to householders in north west Leicestershire. [27061]
10 Nov 2005 : Column 672W
Mr. Morley: It is not possible to specifically quantify the number of grants available in North West Leicestershire. However, the Government funds the Energy Saving Trust which, through its own website (www.est.org.uk) and its network of local Energy Efficiency Advice Centres, provides householders with details of all grants and offers for energy efficiency measures in a particular area, including those which are publicly funded, such as Leicester city council's Energy Sense Grant.
The Government's main tool for tackling fuel poverty in private sector households in England is the Warm Front Scheme, which provides a range of energy efficiency measures to householders in receipt of certain qualifying benefits. The measures can include heating and insulation works alongside energy efficiency advice.
EU Decision 2005/745/EC
Bill Wiggin: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs in what circumstances poultry industry events will be authorised based on a veterinary risk assessment specific to that event, as permitted under Decision 2005/745/EC. [24941]
Mr. Bradshaw: My Department, on veterinary advice, has carried out a preliminary risk assessment which takes a precautionary approach to the risk of transmission of highly pathogenic avian influenza attached to gatherings of birds. This has shown that gathering of specified types of birds may be permitted under certain conditions.
At present low risk gatherings can be licensed. This means the gathering can only consist of budgerigars, canaries, zebra finches, Bengalese finches and birds classed by fanciers as British" birds (i.e. captive bred birds of species native to the British Isles, not including pigeons, poultry and waterfowl). The show organiser must agree to meet a number of conditions such as record keeping and biosecurity measures before a licence is granted. Sales from licensed gatherings are not permitted.
Gatherings of other birds including poultry, waterfowl, pigeons and exotic species are considered to be higher risk. Conditions under which shows of higher risk birds might be permitted to take place are still under consideration. Such gatherings will not be licensed until we are confident that they can take place without undue risk.
Fish Stocks
Andrew Rosindell: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what steps the Government are taking to preserve fish stocks in the North sea. [25902]
Mr. Bradshaw: The UK Fisheries Departments' response—published in July 2005—to the Net Benefits" report set out a clear aim for fisheries management in the UK. That aim is to achieve
a fishing sector that is sustainable and profitable and supports local communities, managed effectively as an integral part of coherent policies for the marine environment".
The Department published Charting a new course" in October which sets out how we will work with our stakeholders in England to achieve this aim.
Flood Defences
Bill Wiggin: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what plans she has made to reinforce flood defences. [25456]
Mr. Morley: The Government are committed to the effective management of flood and coastal erosion risk and has increased funding from £310 million a year in 1996–97 to £570 million. The operating authorities—the Environment Agency, local authorities and, in low-lying areas, internal drainage boards—invest a large part of this in physical flood defences as well as in other measures to manage flood risk, including flood warning systems, advice to planning authorities on proposals for development, emergency planning, public awareness campaigns etc.
The Department relies on operating authorities to put forward projects and programmes of work but seeks to ensure a long term strategic perspective to this through encouragement of Shoreline Management Plans and Catchment Flood Management Plans. These are designed to develop appropriate long-term flood and coastal erosion risk management policies.
Defra is leading on development of a new cross-Government Strategy for Flood and Coastal Erosion Risk Management in close consultation with stakeholders. This will take a holistic approach to management of risk from all forms of flooding (river, coastal, groundwater, surface run-off and sewer) and coastal erosion and ensure the programme helps deliver sustainable development.
Bill Wiggin: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs how much the Department and its related agencies spent on flood defences in each year since 1997. [25457]
Mr. Morley: Defra funds most of the Environment Agency's flood related work and grant aids individual projects undertaken by local authorities and, in low-lying areas, internal drainage boards. The programme to manage risk is driven by these operating authorities; Defra does not build defences, nor direct the authorities on what specific projects to undertake. The following table shows Defra grant and, additionally for local authorities, Supported Capital Expenditure (Revenue) (SCE(R)):
| Environment Agency(14) | LAs and IDBs(15) | |
|---|---|---|
| 1997–98 | 287.9 | 4.9 |
| 1998–99 | 285.6 | 3.3 |
| 1999–2000 | 294.3 | 3.5 |
| 2000–01 | 302.1 | 4.3 |
| 2001–02 | 333.9 | 6.5 |
| 2002–03 | 341.5 | 13.7 |
| 2003–04 | 385.7 | 8.6 |
| 2004–05 | 425.5 | 9.2 |
(14)Expenditure on defences against flooding from rivers and the sea; excludes flood warning.
(15)Defra capital grant and SCE(R) to local authorities and internal drainage boards.
10 Nov 2005 : Column 674W
A significant sum is also provided in Defra grant and SCE(R)) to local authorities for projects to manage risk from coastal erosion; these also often provide benefits in terms of risk of flooding from the sea but have not been included in the above figures. The Office of the Deputy Prime Minister provides further support to local authorities through its Revenue Support Grant mechanism.
Bill Wiggin: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs how much the Department and its related agencies plans to spend on flood defences in each of the next 10 years. [25458]
Mr. Morley: The Government will spend some £570 million on management of flood and coastal erosion risk in England in each of the three years up to and including 2007–08. This includes funding from the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister to support local authority expenditure. A large part of this funding will be for management of flood risk, from both rivers and the sea. The actual amount will depend on the mix of flood and coastal erosion schemes put forward by the operating authorities—the Environment Agency, local authorities and internal drainage boards. However, projects to manage coastal erosion often also provide significant benefit in terms of reducing risk of flooding from the sea.
Expenditure for the period beyond 2007–08 will be considered in the 2007 Comprehensive Spending Review.
Bill Wiggin: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what estimate she has made of the costs of cleaning up flood damage in each year since 1997. [25460]
Mr. Morley: The costs of cleaning up are borne in the main by local authorities and individual property owners and their insurers. No estimates of the total costs incurred by all parties involved are available.
However, under the Bellwin schemes arrangements, the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister makes financial assistance available to local authorities if there has been an emergency or disaster involving destruction of or danger to life or property on a scale which is clearly exceptional in relation to normal experience in the locality. The purpose of a Bellwin scheme is to provide emergency relief, not to put right all the ill effects of an incident. Before qualifying for grant a LA must have spent 0.2 per cent. of its budget on eligible expenditure. Above that threshold grant is normally paid at 85 per cent.
Records of expenditure on Bellwin Schemes do not differentiate as to the cause of the emergency. The following statistics of expenditure since 1997–98 therefore include payments relating to all emergencies. However, the majority of the expenditure related to flooding emergencies:
| £ million | |
|---|---|
| 1997–98 | 0.3 |
| 1998–99 | 0.44 |
| 1999–2000 | 0.35 |
| 2000–01 | 4.1 |
| 2001–02 | 25 |
| 2002–03 | 0.35 |
| 2003–04 | 0.1 |
| 2004–05 | 2.3 |
Notes:
Up until 2000–01 and again in 2002–03 only a small number of authorities received grant in any one year. In 2000–01, 17 authorities received grant, 16 of which were in connection with the autumn 2000 floods. In 2001–02 nearly 75 authorities received payments which were also in connection with the autumn 2000 floods, and nearly 50 in connection with foot and mouth disease. In 2001–02, around £6 million of the total expenditure was in relation to foot and mouth disease.
10 Nov 2005 : Column 675W
| Next Section | Index | Home Page |