|Previous Section||Index||Home Page|
Tim Farron: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs how many single farm payment cheques were issued by the Rural Payments Agency for less than (a) £60, (b) £40, (c) £20, (d) £10 and (e) £1 in each year since 2001. 
|Number of payments|
|Band||SPS 2005||SPS 2006|
Paddy Tipping: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs how much was paid to (a) farmers and (b) landowners on Common Agricultural Policy support payments in (i) Nottinghamshire and (ii) the East Midlands in the last year for which figures are available. 
Jonathan Shaw [holding answer 4 February 2008]: Detailed analysis of the amount of Single Payment Scheme payments paid to farmers and landowners in Nottinghamshire and East Midlands in the last year is not available. Once the remaining scheme payments have been completed, a decision will be taken on the level of detail that will be published.
Mr. Peter Ainsworth: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what assessment he has made of the discrepancies between levels of avian influenza recorded in the British Isles and those recorded in mainland Europe; and if he will make a statement. 
Jonathan Shaw [holding answer 1 February 2008]: Sporadic outbreaks of avian influenza are ongoing across Europe, and disease has been found in both domestic and wild birds in locations across the continent.
Surveillance for avian influenza viruses in wild birds is part of a coordinated European initiative and has been carried out in all European member states since 2005. It provides an early warning of highly pathogenic avian influenza H5N1 viruses in the UK in wild birds and an assessment of the risk of introduction into domestic poultry.
Geographical and biological variations between member states can account for differences in the potential for H5N1 infection and the detection of outbreaks. There are also different ways that outbreaks in wild birds are reported to the OIE by certain member states in comparison with outbreaks in poultry. In wild birds, each separate incident, even if only a single case, may be recorded as a separate outbreak while domestic poultry outbreaks are recorded by separate premises which may include hundreds or thousands of birds.
Jonathan Shaw [holding answer 17 January 2008]: Surveillance for avian influenza viruses in domestic poultry and wild birds is part of a European initiative and is carried out in all European Union member states.
The objective of the wild bird survey is to provide an early warning if highly pathogenic avian influenza H5N1 viruses are introduced into the UK. The domestic poultry survey is to detect the incidence of infection with avian influenza virus subtypes H5 and H7 in different species of poultry.
We did not routinely test wild birds for avian influenza until the emergence of the disease in wild birds in Europe in 2005. Since then we have tested live birds, birds found dead and those shot through wildfowling activities. The numbers we have tested since 2005 are as follows:
|Live trapped||Shot||Found dead||Total|
We have targeted the surveillance programme to areas where there is a greater abundance of both domestic poultry and those wild bird species that experts believe to have a greater potential role in the spread of avian influenza viruses. This is to make the programme as effective as possible. We have also increased the level of live bird testing. Over 2,000 patrols have been undertaken since the start of this migration period in September/October 2007 at over 200 sites. No reductions have been made to active patrolling or testing and in some areas patrolling has been increased due to national and international avian influenza incidents.
Mr. Carmichael: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what the Governments policy is on the import of beef and beef products from Brazil; and if he will make a statement. 
Jonathan Shaw: The UKs primary objective is to ensure that imports coming into the UK do not pose a disease risk. We are, therefore, supportive of the action the Commission is taking in relation to beef exports from Brazil. The current action is not an outright ban. It does however, require Brazil to meet additional requirements which will mean that only a limited number of premises can export.
This follows an inspection mission carried out by the European Commissions Food and Veterinary Office (FVO) back in November 2007. Deficiencies were found and in view of these findings the Commission proposed an amendment to the rules for export of beef to the EU from Brazil.
Surveillance must be targeted effectively and we are making good use of data from existing infected premises, tracings, report cases and pre-movement testing. Further targeted surveillance may be considered if necessary.
Lembit Öpik: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what the expected reduction in carbon emissions resulting from the 2008 to 2011 Carbon Emissions Reduction Target is; how this figure has been calculated; and if he will make a statement. 
Mr. Woolas: The Carbon Emissions Reduction Target (CERT) is one of the most cost-effective approaches to carbon abatement. We expect the CERT target of 154 million tonnes of carbon dioxide (MtCO2) lifetime to deliver savings of around 4.2 MtCO2 a year by 2010. This is equivalent to the emissions from 733,600 homes.
For each measure approved by Ofgem for the scheme, DEFRA has commissioned the Building Research Establishment to calculate carbon savings for an average-sized home. Since carbon savings depend on the heating system of the house, different heating systems have been taken into account (gas, electric, oil etc).
After 18 months of consultation with major stakeholders, DEFRA has made its assessment of how the relevant industries could expand over the CERT period. Using this information, we estimated how many of each of the major measures could be installed over this period. The target set is challenging but achievable. Meeting it will require a near doubling of the current rate of insulation and a large increase in low energy lighting.
Bill Wiggin: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (1) what the total number was of cetacean bycatches of each type and species in UK waters, broken down by International Council for the Exploration of the Sea area in 2006-07; and if he will make a statement; 
Jonathan Shaw: The 2007 UK report to the Commission on observed cetacean by-catch levels in certain fisheries, as required by Council Regulation (EC) 812/2004, includes estimates of common dolphin and harbour porpoise by-catch in the south-west for 2005 and 2006 in gillnet, tangle net and bass midwater pair trawls. There are no annual estimates of by-catch available for these fisheries in this region since 1997. The UK is not due to report to the European Commission on 2006-07 observed by-catch levels until June.
|Estimated total dolphin by-catch 2005-06|
|SW Waters (ICES Div VII e , f , g , h) (95 per cent. confidence limits)|
|Metie r /Area||2005||2006|
|Estimated total porpoise bycatch 2005-06|
|SW Waters (ICES Div V II e, f, g, h) (95 per cent. confidence limits)|
In ICES areas IV a, b, c (North Sea) by-catch rates measured in the late 1990s are used to estimate current likely levels of overall by-catch based on current levels of fishing effort in tangle and gillnet fisheries.
|Estimates of porpoise by - catch in North Sea Static Gear 1998-2005|
|North Sea IV a , b , c||Lower 95 per cent.||Upper 95 per cent.|
|n/a = not available|
|Estimates of porpoise bycatch in Div VI a Static Gear 1998-2002|
|West Coast VI a||Lower 95 per cent.||Upper 95 per cent.|
|Next Section||Index||Home Page|