|Previous Section||Index||Home Page|
Andrew Rosindell: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government what penalties may be imposed upon those responsible for ensuring fire risk assessments are conducted on stables and other livestock premises for not fulfilling their duty. 
Mr. Dhanda: The Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety) Order 2005 sets out the duties on the responsible person to carry out a fire risk assessment and put in place suitable and sufficient fire precautions. The extent to which a responsible person is considered to be complying adequately with the requirements of the legislation and managing the risk on their premises is a matter of judgment, based on the professional experience and expertise of the individual fire safety audit officer.
In the event of non-compliance, there are a range of measures that can be taken to improve fire safety on all premises covered by this legislation. The two main measures available to enforcing authorities (primarily fire and rescue authorities) are enforcement notices, which require changes to be made over a specified period of time; and prohibition notices, which effectively shut premises down until improvements are made.
In the event that a responsible person does not act to improve fire safety in response to an enforcement or prohibition notice from the Fire and Rescue Authority, or, in any event, if failure to comply with the requirements of the Order places persons at risk of death or serious injury in case of fire, they are liable to prosecution in the courts. The level of penalty to be applied as a consequence of prosecution is a matter for the courts, subject to a maximum of an unlimited fine and/or two years imprisonment in the Crown court, or a fine of £5,000 in a magistrates court.
Miss McIntosh: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government which districts have held emergency planning measures and resilience scenarios to prepare for future floods following the summer floods of 2007 and the recommendations of the Interim Pitt Review. 
Since 2005, the principal mechanism for multi-agency cooperation in preparing for emergencies has been the local resilience forum, based mainly on each police area rather than districts(1), and bringing together the emergency services and other category one and two responders as defined in the 2004 Civil Contingencies Act.
All local resilience forums are required under the Act to carry out assessments of the risks of emergencies in their areas. Many(2) local resilience forums have a collectively agreed multi-agency flood response plan; and nearly all of the main category one responders within them either contribute to these plans or take account of flooding incidents in their own emergency response plans. Most of the plans that exist had already been reviewed in the period following the summer flooding; and multi-agency plans are being further reviewed following the issue of new guidance from Government in February this year. The Government specifically wrote to all LRF chairs in February and again in May 2008 asking LRFs to let us know how the new guidance was being embedded at a local level. The replies we have had in to date give a clear indication that many LRFs have been very active since the floods last year. In particular, it seems evident that significant effort has gone into identifying the lessons of 2007 and improving local risk assessments, plans and their general state of preparedness (mostly through better activation procedures and clarity over roles and responsibilities).
(1) For example the North Yorkshire LRF area comprises seven district councils (Selby, Harrogate, Ryedale, Scarborough, Hambleton, Richmondshire and Craven) and the City of York. All seven district councils have some form of multi-agency flood response plan.
(2) According to the initial results of the 2008 national capability survey. A more comprehensive analysis is due to be undertaken shortly.
Mr. Andrew Turner: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government how many homes were flooded in England in 2007, broken down by county; and in how many cases households remain unable to return to their homes. 
John Healey: Water entered the habitable areas of the properties of approximately 48,000 households in the floods of June and July 2007. The breakdown by local authority, grouped by region and local authority where applicable is as follows:
|Local authority||Region||Total households affected|
|Next Section||Index||Home Page|