|Previous Section||Index||Home Page|
9 Jan 2008 : Column 522Wcontinued
|10 most discarded species and significant commercial species by English and Welsh registered otter trawlers|
|Numbers (x10( 6) )|
|Rank||Common name||Latin name||Annual mean||Range||Percentage discarded|
R. Enver, A. Revill & A. Grant. Discarding in the English Channel, Western Approaches, Celtic and Irish Seas (ICES subarea VII). Fisheries Research 86(2007) 143-152. A Cefas publication)
Mr. Pickles: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs which waste collection authorities did not provide data for Flycapture for 2006-07; and for what reasons. 
Joan Ruddock: The Royal borough of Kingston upon Thames was the only waste collection authority that did not supply data to Flycapture, the national fly-tipping database, in 2006-2007. No reason was given for its failure to do so.
My officials have encouraged the borough to fulfil its legal obligation and it is recording data on Flycapture for this financial year.
Mr. Pickles: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what representations the Environment Agency made to the (a) former Office of the Deputy Prime Minister and (b) Department for Communities and Local Government on whether home information packs should include information on (i) contaminated land reports and (ii) flood risk, as a required element. 
Mr. Woolas: The Environment Agency provided representations in responses to the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister's consultations on Reforming the Home Buying and Selling Process in England and Wales: Contents of the Home Information Pack (July, 2005) and on the Home Information Pack Draft Regulations (January, 2006), and a Memorandum to the Select Committee of the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister: Housing, Planning, Local Government and the Regions' pre-legislative Scrutiny of the Draft Housing Bill (May, 2003).
The Environment Agency also put representations forward on the Searches (Environment) Working Group set up under the Home Information Pack Component Project Board and had various other meetings and correspondence with relevant officials regarding content of Home Information Packs.
Mr. Hancock: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what records his Department holds on the facilities available nationally for the recycling and processing of (a) non-bottle-shaped and (b) bottle-shaped plastics; and if he will make a statement. 
Joan Ruddock [holding answer 8 January 2008]: My Department does not hold records of the facilities available for processing non-bottled-shaped or bottle-shaped plastics.
However, the Government-funded Waste and Resources Action Programme (WRAP) works closely with the plastics industry and has some broad information on the facilities available nationally. I have asked WRAP officials to write to you with further details.
Mr. Pickles: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs if he will place in the Library the data from WasteDataFlow showing the (a) final destination of materials sent for recycling, (b) tonnage sent for recycling and (c) quantity sent for recycling but rejected/disposed of by each local authority in England in 2006-07. 
Joan Ruddock: I have arranged for the information requested to be placed in the Library of the House.
Mr. Drew: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport how many cyclists have died in road accidents in each of the last five years. 
Jim Fitzpatrick: The information requested is available from table 6 of the Road Casualties Great Britain: 2006 annual report. Copies of the report have been deposited in the Libraries of the House. This table can also be found on the Departments website at the following address.
Mr. Leech: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport when she plans to publish the consultation paper on driver training and testing. 
Jim Fitzpatrick: In February 2007 we announced a fundamental overhaul of driver testing and training. We are working to bring proposals forward for consultation and hope to publish this soon.
Adam Afriyie: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport whether the proposed third runway at Heathrow airport is planned to have the capacity to accommodate (a) Boeing 747-100 Jumbo jets, (b) Boeing 747-400 Jumbo jets, (c) Boeing 747-800 Jumbo jets, (d) Boeing 787 Dreamliners, (e) Airbus A350s, (f) Airbus A340s and (g) Airbus A380 aircraft (i) taking off and (ii) landing. 
Jim Fitzpatrick: The 'Adding Capacity at Heathrow Airport' consultation document states that a third runway would be used for a range of aircraft types, but not the largest four-engined wide body aircraft. This is required to allow a balanced use of aircraft across three runways.
This view is based on an assessment of the typical operational configurations of each aircraft type taking account of expert opinions from aircraft manufacturers, NATS and airlines operating at Heathrow.
This assessment indicates that under typical operating configurations it would not be practicable for the Airbus A340, Boeing 747 (all variants) and the Airbus A380 to take-off from a third runway but that it would be technical feasible for some of A340 variants to land on a new runway, dependant on weather conditions and the landing weight of the aircraft. It would not be possible under maximum landing weights.
Based on available technical data, it is assumed that the new generation twin-engined aircraft, the Boeing 787 and the Airbus 350, could use a third runway for both landings and take-offs.
Justine Greening: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport how many households have been sent the Adding Capacity at Heathrow Airport Summary consultation document, broken down by (a) non-London borough local authority and (b) ward; and if she will make a statement. 
Over 217,000 households around the airport were sent a copy of the Heathrow consultation summary and response form. Approximately 48,800 of
these were to addresses in non-London borough local authorities. By local authority area, the break down is as follows:
|Local authority||Delivery address es|
By ward, the break down is as follows (all figures rounded to the nearest 100).
|Ward||Borough/district/unitary authority||Delivery address es|
|Next Section||Index||Home Page|