| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
12 May 2008 : Column 1328W—continued
Disabled
Mr. MacNeil: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what targets his Department has set in relation to its employment of people with disabilities over the next five years. [199046]
Jonathan Shaw: We have not set targets in relation to the employment of people with disabilities, other than for the senior civil service. Our target for 31 March 2008 was 3 per cent. and we achieved 2.6 per cent.
However in an earlier response to the Baroness Byford on 23 October 2007, Official Report, House of Lords, columns WA98-99, we highlighted that our disabled employee representation had increased across the Defra network over the last year.
Our workforce information tells us that about 6 per cent. of our staff have declared that they are disabled. However, disability declaration is voluntary and we believe that the actual number of disabled people in the Defra workforce is in fact higher.
In developing our new disability equality scheme our disabled and deaf staff have told us that they lack confidence in the fairness of recruitment processes for disabled and deaf people. To address the concerns raised we intend to review our recruitment and selection policies and processes and improve the monitoring of the whole process to identify and eliminate barriers that disabled and deaf people may experience in securing work with Defra.
Our diversity team supports the business to ensure that the Defra workforce is representative of the wider community. We have set up a Disability Equality Scrutiny and Advisory Group made up of independent disabled experts to monitor and advise on our progress against our action plans.
Dogger Bank: Environment Protection
Bill Wiggin: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what plans he has to protect the Dogger Bank as an offshore special area of conservation under the EU Habitats Directive. [203992]
Jonathan Shaw: Dogger Bank has been identified as a draft Special Area of Conservation (SAC) under the Habitats Directive Annex III Stage 1 selection criteria. Draft SACs (dSACs) are areas that have been formally advised to the UK Government as suitable for selection as SACs, but have not been formally approved by Government as sites for public consultation. Further information in support of the recommendation is currently being gathered.
Elephants: Conservation
Mr. Allen: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what initiatives the Government (a) funds directly and (b) otherwise supports for the protection and conservation of elephants; and if he will make a statement. [204260]
Joan Ruddock:
Elephants are at risk from a number of factors including habitat destruction, poaching for
ivory and human-elephant conflict. The UK supports several measures to tackle these threats internationally.
Through its membership of the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES) the UK works to protect endangered species of plants and animals at threat from trade by controlling and monitoring international trade in them. Since 2005 the UK has made payments to support the work of the Monitoring of the Illegal Killing of Elephants (MIKE) and has been funding the Elephant Trade Information System (ETIS) since 2003-04. These programmes will enable the international community to monitor whether the sale of legally stockpiled ivory has an effect on the amount of poaching and illegal global trade. Since 2003-04, the UK has also supported the work of the IUCN African Elephant Specialist Group (AfESG) and in May 2007 allocated £10,000 to support elephant dialogue meetings.
In addition, DEFRA’s Darwin Initiative contributes to the conservation and sustainable use of the world’s biodiversity. Over the last five years to 2008 funding for the programme has increased from 3 million to 7 million per annum, we will be announcing a new Round soon. To date the Darwin Initiative has funded 464 projects in over 130 countries. A number of these have specifically focused on the protection and conservation of elephants, including building capacities for mitigating human-elephant conflict in Assam and Kenya.
Environment Protection: Canvey Island
Bob Spink: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what representations he has received on the use of land owned by the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds for improvements to the A130 Canvey Way. [204596]
Joan Ruddock: My Department has received no such representations.
Fisheries: Environment Protection
Bill Wiggin: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what capacity his Department has to assess what fishing takes place in the proposed offshore special areas of conservation sites at (a) Braemar Pockmarks, (b) Scanner Pockmark, (c) North Norfolk Sandbanks and Saturn Reef, (d) Haig Frais, (e) Stanton Banks, (f) Darwin Mounds and (g) Wyville Thomson Ridge. [203965]
Jonathan Shaw: The Marine Fisheries Agency (MFA) assesses fishing that takes place in the proposed offshore special areas of conservation and has access to sightings data collected from both aerial and surface surveillance units (namely fishery protection aircraft and the Royal Navy vessels within the Fishery Protection Squadron). The MFA also has access to satellite monitoring data but this is only in relation to vessels over 15 m in length, transmitting their positions every two hours.
The MFA can also access fisheries statistics in relation to species caught and landed from a particular area via the Fisheries Statistical Unit to the level of the International Council for the Exploration of the Sea (ICES) statistical rectangles.
Bill Wiggin: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what assessment his Department has made of the (a) actual and (b) potential environmental damage or risk of environmental damage from fishing and related activities within the proposed offshore special areas of conservation sites at (i) Braemar Pockmarks, (ii) Scanner Pockmark, (iii) North Norfolk Sandbanks and Saturn Reef, (iv) Haig Frais, (v) Stanton Banks, (vi) Darwin Mounds and (vii) Wyville Thomson Ridge. [203966]
Jonathan Shaw: The Joint Nature Conservation Council made the following assessments of the impacts of fishing on the condition of the proposed offshore special areas of conservation (SAC) sites as part of the Offshore Marine Natura consultation process, which took place in 2007.
The biological and physical structure of the interest feature at the Braemar pockmarks site are known to have been partially impacted by bottom trawling. This has dispersed, fragmented and possibly buried some of the carbonate formations, and may also have modified the structure of the encircling pockmarks (John Hartley, pers. comm., 2005). However, much of the interest feature is still intact.
The prospects of this feature in terms of maintaining its structure in the future (taking into account unfavourable influences and reasonable conservation effort) are good. A mechanism is available through the European Commission’s common fisheries policy regulations to modify fishing activity in the area if this is deemed to be necessary.
The biological and physical structure of the habitat at the Scanner pockmark site is intact on the available evidence but may have been impacted by bottom trawling for Norway lobster (Nephrops norvegicus) (the main commercial demersal stock in the Witch Ground). Bottom trawling could have modified the structure of the pockmark, causing burial of some of the submarine structures, as well as breaking and displacement of carbonate pieces. Some fishing nets were observed caught on the structures. However, the feature appears to be largely undamaged.
The prospects of this feature to maintain its structure in the future, taking into account unfavourable influences and reasonable conservation effort, are good. A mechanism is available through the European Commission’s common fisheries policy regulations to modify fishing activity in the area if this is deemed to be necessary.
North Norfolk Sandbanks and Saturn Reef
The biological and physical structure of the North Norfolk Sandbanks have been impacted locally by some gas extraction infrastructure and aggregate extraction. It is also possible that the fauna of the banks have been impacted by bottom trawling, which may have reduced the number of long-lived or fragile organisms associated with the interest feature. The physical structure of the banks is intact, if not pristine, and the biology is representative of the habitat.
The prospects of this feature to maintain its structure in the future, taking into account unfavourable influences and reasonable conservation effort, are good. Regulations are in place to control oil and gas activity in and around
SACs in the UK continental shelf designated area and developments are subject to appropriate assessment if they are likely to affect the features of a SAC. A mechanism is available through the European Commission’s common fisheries policy regulations to modify fishing activity in the area if this is deemed to be necessary. The aggregates industries’ operations are currently subject to environmental assessment, and would be subject to appropriate assessment if likely to affect SAC interest features.
Available evidence indicates that the biological and physical structure of the reef interest feature at Haig Fras are intact (Rees, 2000).
The prospects of this feature to maintain its structure in the future (taking into account unfavourable influences and reasonable conservation effort) are good, since the basic physical structure is resilient to mechanical impacts and the reef is isolated from terrestrial sources of pollution. Due to the shape of the feature, it is likely to be avoided by bottom trawlers which could damage the reef fauna. However, a mechanism is available through the European Commission’s common fisheries policy regulations to modify fishing activity in the area if this is deemed to be necessary.
The biological and physical structure of the reef habitat at Stanton Banks is intact to the best of our knowledge.
The prospects of this feature in terms of maintaining its structure in the future (taking into account unfavourable influences and reasonable conservation effort) are excellent. A mechanism is available through the European Commission’s common fisheries policy regulations to modify fishing activity in the area if this is deemed to be necessary.
The biological and physical structure of the biogenic reef in this area is mainly intact although some areas have been damaged by bottom trawling. Evidence of damage was provided from sidescan sonar images in 1999 (Bett, 1999). New damage (smashed coral strewn on the sea bed) was also visible over about a half of the Darwin Mounds East during summer 2000 (Bett, 2001). A trawler was operating nearby during the surveys. Reef damage means a loss of not only the habitat itself, but the species assemblages it supports.
The prospects of this feature to maintain its structure in the future, taking into account unfavourable influences and reasonable conservation effort, are moderate. The European Commission, at the request of the UK, has adopted common fisheries policy measures which prohibit the use of bottom trawling gear within the SAC boundary. However, it is possible that some further bottom trawling may have occurred in the months before these common fisheries policy measures were in place. Equally, it is possible that illegal fishing activities take place on this site. Therefore, this feature could be degraded by fisheries in spite of reasonable conservation effort.
The biological and physical structure of habitats on Wyville Thomson Ridge is intact on the basis of available evidence, although some scarring from bottom trawling has been observed.
The prospects of this feature to maintain its structure in the future, taking into account unfavourable influences and reasonable conservation effort, are good. A mechanism is available through the European Commission’s common fisheries policy regulations to modify fishing activity in the area, if this is deemed to be necessary.
Bill Wiggin: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what ongoing monitoring of potential damage from fishing and related activities he plans to undertake in the proposed offshore special areas of conservation sites at (a) Braemar Pockmarks, (b) Scanner Pockmark, (c) North Norfolk Sandbanks and Saturn Reef, (d) Haig Frais, (e) Stanton Banks, (f) Darwin Mounds and (g) Wyville Thomson Ridge. [203968]
Jonathan Shaw: Monitoring of fishing activities in the proposed Special Areas of Conservation (pSACs) sites is undertaken on the basis of a risk-based programme of monitoring and enforcement, including the use of inspections on land and at sea. This will often be in conjunction with enforcement in respect of fishing activity, though not exclusively, because other marine activities are also required to comply with the Offshore Marine Conservation Regulations 2007.
The enforcement programme will seek to identify those areas where there is the highest probability of offences occurring and to prioritise resources to those areas to ensure compliance. Intelligence information will also be used when it becomes available from any reliable source.
Bill Wiggin: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what steps he plans to take to prevent fishing activity if the Joint Nature Conservation Committee advises that fishing damages or has the potential to damage the proposed offshore special areas of conservation sites at (a) Braemar Pockmarks, (b) Scanner Pockmark, (c) North Norfolk Sandbanks and Saturn Reef, (d) Haig Frais, (e) Stanton Banks, (f) Darwin Mounds and (g) Wyville Thomson Ridge; and how he plans to prevent environmental damage from fishing and related activities at each site. [203969]
Jonathan Shaw: The Offshore Marine Conservation (Natural Habitats, &c.) Regulations 2007 ensure that certain activities that have an effect on important species and habitats in the offshore marine environment can be controlled. The regulations apply in the “offshore area” beyond 12 nautical miles from the UK coast. They protect marine habitats, species and wild birds, through a number of offences.
The regulations take account of the fact that the regulation of commercial fishing activities is conducted in the framework of the Common Fisheries Policy (CFP) (as the European Community has exclusive competence). Where measures are necessary to control commercial fishing activities to meet the conservation objectives of an offshore Special Areas of Conservation (SAC) the UK will work with the European Commission to deliver proportionate and effective measures through CFP regulation.
Fisheries: Fuels
Bob Spink: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs if he will meet representatives of the fishing industry to discuss the effects of fuel prices on competitiveness in the industry. [204626]
Jonathan Shaw [holding answer 9 May 2008]: I am always pleased to meet representatives of the fishing industry and do so on a regular basis. I have recently agreed to meet with representatives of the National Federation of Fishermen’s Organisations to discuss fuel prices.
Bob Spink: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs if he will commission research on the effects of fuel prices on competitiveness in the fishing industries. [204627]
Jonathan Shaw: [holding answer 9 May 2008]: The price of fuel is one of the factors taken into account in formulating policy intended to maximise the competitiveness of the UK fishing industry. I have no plans to commission research into the effects of fuel prices in isolation.
Fisheries: Special Areas of Conservation
Bill Wiggin: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what records his Department holds of fishing in marine waters at the proposed offshore special areas of conservation sites at (a) Braemar Pockmarks, (b) Scanner Pockmark, (c) North Norfolk sandbanks and Saturn reef, (d) Haig Frais, (e) Stanton Banks, (f) Darwin Mounds and (g) Wyville Thomson Ridge. [204015]
Jonathan Shaw: The Joint Nature Conservation Council (JNCC) is required to prepare Conservation Objectives and Advice on Operations as after sites are submitted to the European Commission. Subsequently, for each of the offshore Special Areas of Conservation (SAC) subject to consultation in 2007-2008, it has prepared draft documents which include information on the impact of fishing. This information has been compiled making use of existing knowledge and in consultation with various Government Departments and agencies who hold such information, including the Marine Fisheries Agency and the Scottish Fisheries Protection Agency.
Fisheries: Subsidies
Bob Spink: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs if he will make it his policy to subsidise fuel for British fishing fleets; and if he will make a statement. [204093]
Jonathan Shaw [holding answer 8 May 2008]: It is not Government policy to subsidise fuel costs, including for commercial fishing vessels. Such subsidies can lead to over capacity, distort business decisions, act against the long term interests of the industry, can be discriminatory, and are not sustainable.
The emphasis of any aid to the fishing industry should be on building a sustainable future and that is where we are directing our efforts.
| Next Section | Index | Home Page |