|Previous Section||Index||Home Page|
42 (39 per cent.) were UK products when available and in season (27 (25 per cent.) products came predominantly from local Kent and Sussex farms). The remaining 66 (61 per cent.) items were purchased outside the UK because they were either exotic, tropical or seasonal.
152 (81 per cent.) were UK products when available and in season. The remaining 35 (19 per cent.) items were purchased outside the UK because they were either exotic, unavailable in the UK or seasonal.
Most fish (39 regular purchases66 per cent.) originate from the colder local waters of the North sea, Irish sea, English channel and around the Scottish coast. The remainder came from the Pacific, Atlantic and Indian oceans and the Mediterranean sea. Fish is purchased from areas of sustainable stocks.
17 spirits: nine (53 per cent.) are imported;
nine liqueurs: eight (89 per cent.) are imported;
four aperitifs: four (100 per cent.) are imported;
five fortified wines: five (100 per cent.) are imported.
Mr. Doran: To ask the hon. Member for North Devon, representing the House of Commons Commission whether the Corporate Officer of the House of Commons plans to appeal against the decision of the Information Tribunal on 26 February 2008. 
The Members Estimate Committee is concerned that the Information Tribunal (in its decision of 26 February in cases 2001/02, 2002/03, 2003/04 and
2005/06) misdirected itself in law in deciding that home addresses of Members of Parliament should always be published subject only to limited exceptions. The House will therefore appeal. A second ground will be that the Information Tribunal paid insufficient attention to the reasonable expectations of Members about disclosure of personal information in the statutory publication scheme. The MEC remains committed to reviewing the allowance system and ensuring that there is probity and transparency.
Mr. Pickles: To ask the hon. Member for North Devon, representing the House of Commons Commission what payments the House of Commons Commission made to Ipsos MORI in the last 24 months; and for what purposes. 
Nick Harvey: There have been no payments to Ipsos MORI in the last 24 months. The most recent payment to MORI was in connection with the feasibility study into the parliamentary visitor centre. This occurred in January 2006 before the 24-month period requested.
Norman Baker: To ask the hon. Member for North Devon, representing the House of Commons Commission what estimate he has made of (a) the carbon footprint associated with the use of bottled water within the House and (b) the likely footprint were only tap water available. 
Nick Harvey: Data are not available on the carbon footprint associated with bottled water supplied to the House. However estimates of the embedded energy of the products, shows (a) bottled water having 5,000 Megajoules and (b) tap water, 10 Megajoules, per 1,000 litres consumed. For bottled water, most of its embedded energy is in the form of fossil fuel use embodied in the glass and plastic materials and their manufacture and for tap water, most of its embedded energy is in the form of electrical energy which is used to pump the water.
Norman Baker: To ask the hon. Member for North Devon, representing the House of Commons Commission how many bottles of water for consumption (a) in restaurants and cafeterias and (b) elsewhere on the parliamentary estate were purchased by the House in each of the last five years; and what the cost was in each year. 
Nick Harvey: It is not possible to answer this question in the precise terms asked by the hon. Member as water was purchased by the former House of Commons Refreshment Department for sale in all its outlets, not just for consumption in its restaurants and cafeterias. In total, the Refreshment Department purchased bottled water in each of the last five years as follows:
|Table (a): Bottled Water Purchases|
|Number of b ottles|
|(a) Refreshment Department outlets||2002-03||2003-04||2004-05||2005-06||2006-07|
|(1) Including committee rooms.|
The figures for 2002-03 and 2003-04 in table (a) include water issued by the Refreshment Department to the former Serjeant at Arms' Department for use in the committee rooms, as no record of the quantities transferred is available for these two years. Figures for the last three years exclude water supplied to the Serjeant at Arms' Department for use in the committee rooms, as this consumption is listed separately in table (b) as follows.
It should also be noted that the figures in table (a) include water sold to meetings and conferences held on the first floor of Portcullis House, which was supplied by the Refreshment Department. No separate figure is available for this consumption.
In addition to water supplied to the committee rooms by the Serjeant at Arms' Department, a number of House of Commons departments purchased bottled water for dispensers located in staff offices and communal areas. The number of bottles purchased for offices has been estimated on the basis of the annual expenditure cost, taking an average unit price to calculate the approximate number of bottles.
|Table (b): Bottled Water Purchases|
|Number of b ottles|
|(b) Other areas||2002-03||2003-04||2004-05||2005-06||2006-07|
|(1) Included in table (a). (2) Plus committee rooms.|
Norman Baker: To ask the hon. Member for North Devon, representing the House of Commons Commission how many bottles of water were purchased by Departments of the House for consumption other than in restaurants and cafeterias in the last 12 months; what the cost was; and if the Commission will make it their policy to replace bottled water with tap water in (a) Westminster Hall, (b) committee rooms and (c) other meeting rooms. 
Nick Harvey: In the last complete financial year, 2006-07, approximately 44,250 litres of water (33,502 x one litre bottles and 581 x 18.5 litre bottles) were purchased by the House for consumption other than in restaurants and cafeterias, at a cost of £19,383. The Administration Committee last considered the issue of the provision of drinking water in Committee and meeting rooms on 13 March 2007 and agreed to recommend that the current practice of supplying bottled mineral water to Committee rooms should continue. I understand that the Department of Facilities is re-examining the issue with the intention of offering further advice to the Committee.
Mrs. Villiers: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport (1) what meetings (a) Ministers and (b) officials from her Department and its agencies have had with representatives from Somerset county council to discuss the proposed loop road to link the A358 and the M5 at Blackbrook; 
Mr. Tom Harris: Highways Agency records show that between December 2005 and March 2007 agency officials met with representatives of Somerset county council on at least nine occasions at regular intervals to discuss progress with the general design and layout of the A303/A358 South Petherton to Taunton M5 scheme.
The loop road at Blackbrook was first identified as an option for the M5 northbound off-slip by the Highways Agency in February 2006 and discussed with Somerset county officials early in the summer of 2006.
Work on the scheme is currently on hold while my Department and the South West region discuss the implications of the recent Stonehenge announcement for the wider strategy for improving the A303/A358 corridor to the M5 at Taunton. It is too early to say what the outcome of these discussions will be.
Mr. Stewart Jackson: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport whether any proposals for sound attenuation in respect of traffic and carriageway noise on the A47 in the Peterborough area exist; and if she will make a statement. 
Mr. Tom Harris: There are currently no specific plans for sound attenuation in respect of traffic and carriageway noise on the A47 in the Peterborough area. However, resurfacing of sections of the A47 in the Peterborough area are planned for 2008-09, and low noise surfacing material will be used.
Mr. Stewart Jackson: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport whether the Highways Agency intends to utilise whisper quiet sound attenuation technology as part of resurfacing in respect of (a) its planned maintenance programme and ( b) any discrete projects, on the A47 in the Peterborough area; and if she will make a statement. 
Mr. Stewart Jackson: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what recent measurements of sound levels from traffic noise and carriageway have been undertaken on the A47 by the Highways Agency between Milton Park and Eye in the Peterborough area; and if she will make a statement. 
After local complaints a study was undertaken by Peterborough city council in 2005 near the A47 Trunk Road. This was deemed to be unsuitable by the Agency as it omitted certain essential information for determining its status as a Hazard site.
In October/November 2005, the Highways Agencys Managing Agent took noise readings at Eye on the A47. This section of the A47 in Peterborough was identified due to a number of complaints of excessive traffic noise received from the local residents associations. A roadside decibel level of 79.12 was recorded. This location therefore did not meet the required roadside decibel threshold of 80, and no further study work was undertaken.
|Next Section||Index||Home Page|