|Previous Section||Index||Home Page|
Barry Gardiner: The dairy supply chain forum, now chaired by my noble Friend Lord Rooker, meets on a quarterly basis. Recent discussions have covered: the environmental challenges facing the dairy sector; barriers to innovation; the National Farmers Unions paper, A Vision for the Dairy Industry; the Milk Development Councils paper, Raw milk contracts and relationshipsthe need for change; and animal health and welfare initiatives.
Mr. Paice: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what recent discussions he has held with other Ministers on the sourcing of publicly-procured food; and what proportion of such food was of British origin in 2005. 
Mr. Bradshaw [holding answer 16 June 2006]: DEFRA Ministers have had recent discussions with other Ministers on the sourcing of publicly-procured food and announcements will be made in the very near future.
The Department is not aware of any central source of information on the proportion of publicly-procured food that was of British origin in 2005. The information could be determined only at disproportionate cost.
The Department currently has 31 members of staff employed in the Press Office,
of which 15 have declared they are white, three black and Asian, and 13 are unknown/undeclared.
Nick Harvey: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what obligations are placed on members of the public wishing to sell vehicle parts on (a) the internet and (b) elsewhere under the End of Life Vehicles legislation. 
Nick Harvey: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what assessment he has made of the effectiveness of the Environment Agency in enforcing the End of Life Vehicles legislation. 
In 2004, the Environment Agency took 15 prosecutions for offences involving the keeping or treating of End of Life Vehicles (ELVs). The figure for 2005 was 30. There have been 13 in the first five months of 2006. These are cases where ELVs were the main or a significant proportion of the waste being handled illegally.
Barry Gardiner: Grant in aid is paid to English Nature on a monthly basis. Payments totalling £16 million have already been made to English Nature during the first quarter of this financial year. The next monthly claim, for £4 million, has recently been submitted by English Nature to cover July operational costs and this will be paid within the next week. My Department expects to be in a position to confirm English Nature's overall financial settlement for 2006-07 shortly.
Daniel Kawczynski: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what recent discussions he has had with his Libyan counterpart on British fishing rights in Libyan waters. 
Fishing opportunities for European Fishermen in Third Country Waters are negotiated by the European Commission through a Fisheries Partnership Agreement. Under the Common Fisheries policy the European Commission has competency to represent the member states in this context.
This would not prevent individual UK fishermen gaining access to Libyan waters under a private agreement with Libyan fishermen. There are no European or UK laws preventing this at present. However this would be a private business venture up to the fishermen involved, and would necessitate the agreement of the Libyan Government.
Mr. Drew: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what discussions he has had with the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government on the Affordable Rural Housing Commission; and when he expects to make a decision on additional funds for housing in rural areas. 
Barry Gardiner: The Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs and the Minister for Housing and Planning both took part in discussions of the Affordable Rural Housing Commission report on the day of its launch. Affordable rural housing will continue to be one of the subjects covered in the regular dialogue between the two Departments and across Government.
The Government are currently considering the report and will use a range of channels and mechanisms to respond in a constructive way to the agenda set by the Commission, including in the forthcoming Spending Review.
Chris Huhne: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs how much was spent on information technology (IT) sourced from outside his Department in each of the last five years; who is responsible for such projects in his Department; and what IT (a) expertise and (b) qualifications they possess. 
| Notes: 1. These figures do not include expenditure on Capital Equipment or Construction in Progress (CIP)*. 2. Capital Expenditure (Capex) is shown on clearing account balance sheets, if expenditure is not cleared to the Fixed Assets Register (FAR) and CIP Register. 3. Therefore the end year balances on the Clearing equipment and CIP balance sheets may include expenditure c/f from earlier years. 4. There are no central records of actual IT Capex spend for these years. 5. Costs include consultancy expenditure related to the E-nabling programme. 6. Does not include any IT spend hidden in programme0460**.|
The Chief Information Officer, Chris Chant, is responsible for the successful delivery of IT projects within Defra. He has extensive experience in leading business transformation, large programme management, strategic supplier management and change management. His previous experience includes being the Service Delivery Team Director in the e-Government Unit of the Cabinet Office, and responsibility for the Inland Revenue e-Services Programme.
Chris Huhne: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what the (a) originally estimated, (b) most recently estimated and (c) outturn cost was in each of the five largest information technology contracts agreed with outside suppliers over the last five years. 
Barry Gardiner: The Department is able to confirm that over the last five years there have been three large IT contracts agreed with outside suppliers, and these are with Accenture, IBM, and LogicaCMG.
(a) Original estimated cost£34.10 million
(b) Recently estimated costs£55.04 million
(c) Outturn costs£55.04 million (plus enhancement work to the value of £928,000 in 2005-06 and £2.7 million in 2006-07).
(a) Original estimated cost£85 million per year
(b) Recently estimated costs£85 million per year
(c) Outturn costs£24,499,785 in 2004-05 and £97,217,291 in 2005-06.
(a) Original estimated cost£16.10 million
(b) Recently estimated costs£17.492 million (plus annual indexation)
(c) Outturn costsCost of supply was £6.7 million in 2002. The balance is for support and maintenance to be paid over the remainder of the contract, which ends in 2014.
Smaller, local IT contracts will also have been agreed; however, information on these is neither managed nor maintained centrally, and therefore it would incur disproportionate costs to collate. Only by
reference to such information would it be possible to determine which are the fourth and fifth largest IT contracts, agreed with outside suppliers, in the Department.
Peter Luff: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (1) how many samples of imported beef and beef products from (a) other EU member states and (b) other countries were tested for residues of (i) oestradiol, (ii) testosterone, (iii) progesterone, (iv) zeranol, (v) trenbolone and (vi) melegesterol acetate in (A) 2004 and (B) 2005; 
Mr. Bradshaw: In 2004, the Veterinary Medicines Directorate (VMD) organised the testing of 301 samples of imported beef for trenbolone and zeranol (one sample was found to be of UK origin and one was unassayable on arrival at the laboratory).
Of the 299 assayable imported samples, 82 were from other EU member states and 217 were from other countries. No detectable residues of either trenbolone or zeranol were found in 2004, which was also the case in 2003. Trenbolone and zeranol were therefore removed from the imports surveillance programme for 2005 on the recommendation of the independent veterinary residues committee, which oversees the surveillance work of the VMD and advises the food standards agency on relevant surveys. They may be included again in the future.
Testing was not carried out for the other listed substances in 2004 and 2005 and imported beef has not been tested for residues of oestradiol. All of the results of the VMDs surveillance for residues of veterinary medicines and other substances are published in its quarterly magazine, (MAVIS) available from its website at: www.vmd.gov.uk
Oestradiol is a naturally occurring hormone. It will be present in beef at varying concentrations, dependant on the physiological state of the animal when it was slaughtered, and also its sex and age. Muscle, which is the matrix available for testing is not ideal. The EUs community reference laboratory recommends serum, which is not available in imported beef.
Scientific advice from two of the UKs national reference laboratories for veterinary residues analysis is that any difference in concentrations between untreated animals and those treated with exogenous oestradiol is very small. So, distinguishing between them would be unlikely. Therefore no testing has been carried out on imported beef in the last 10 years. Responsibility for testing produce from non-EU member states rests with
the country of entry into the EU. Once produce has entered the EU, it should have free circulation within all member states, as part of the single market.
EU legislation imposes a series of health and supervisory requirements on non-EU countries before they export food to the EU. These are designed to ensure that imported animals and animal products meet standards at least equivalent to those required for production in, and trade between, member states. The use of the listed substances as growth promoting hormones is banned in the EU, and therefore they should not be present in beef imported into the EU.
Barry Gardiner: The Government are helping to promote greater co-operation through the Dairy Supply Chain Forum. The group regularly brings together all the key links in the supply chain to discuss the challenges facing the dairy industry, and to develop collaborative solutions.
The dairy industry also directly benefits from grants awarded under the Agriculture Development scheme. These are helping to fund benchmarking workshops and create a network of dairy best practice groups.
The Government are also supporting the work of English Farming and Food Partnerships (EFFP). Its aim is to promote and encourage greater co-operation and collaboration in all sectors of the farming and food industries, and all the major dairy co-operatives in England are involved. EFFP is currently taking forward an initiative called share to milk, which will highlight examples of successful collaborative activity and best practice in the dairy sector.
Chris Huhne: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs pursuant to the answer of 2 June 2006, Official Report, column 100W, of the Minister of State (sustainable farming and foods), if he will estimate the proportion of the time that Lord Rooker has devoted to official duties that he has spent on the affairs of his Department. 
Barry Gardiner: Lord Rooker works full-time on Defra affairs. His other responsibilities, as Northern Ireland spokesman and Deputy Leader of the House of Lords, are undertaken on top of his departmental duties when he is in the House of Lords.
|Next Section||Index||Home Page|