|Previous Section||Index||Home Page|
Mr. Hoban: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs how many individuals have worked in his Department on (a) paid work experience or internship placements and (b) unpaid work experience or internships in each of the past three years; on average how many hours a week were worked by such people in each year; what types of work each was involved in; what proportion were in full-time education; what proportion did not complete their set period of work experience; and how much those who received remuneration were paid on average per week in each year. 
Huw Irranca-Davies: Placements within DEFRA are arranged locally between students and the area in which they are seeking to gain work experience. As a consequence, the information requested is not held centrally and could be provided only at disproportionate cost.
Mr. Cox: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what the cost of (a) production and (b) distribution of the latest edition of Farming Link was; and how many copies were produced. 
Jane Kennedy: The total cost for the November edition of Farming Link was £90,193 and included costs for design, editorial and online (£24,559), print (£30,634) and postage (around £35,000). The print run was 140,000 copies.
Miss McIntosh: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (1) with reference to the answer of 27 October 2008, Official Report, column 614W, on flood control, what the (a) original and (b) most recently projected completion date of each flood protection scheme in each of the last five years is; and what the reasons are for the differences in each case; 
(2) what the original completion date was for each of the Environment Agency's flood defence projects undertaken in the last five years; and what the latest expected completion date is in each case. 
From 2004 to 2008 the Environment Agency's National Capital Programme Management Service was responsible for a total of 146 completed flood management projects. Of these, 83 were completed early or on time and 44 were completed within two
months of the expected completion date. 19 projects were delayed by two months or more.
In most cases the projects are operational and protect houses before the final completion date of the construction works. For schemes completed within two months of the target date, the delays have been attributed to:
Poor weather conditions
High/low river flows
A list of the schemes delayed for more than two months, including the original and expected/actual completion dates and the reasons for the delay, where available, have been placed in the Libraries of the House.
The works involved considerable interface with existing services and suffered some delay from integrating project work with the utility companies carrying out diversions. The scheme was also set a very challenging target completion to respond to commitments given following the 2000 floods.
The proximity of the scheme to a large superstore delayed works as we needed to minimise the impact on the store and a large number of hypodermic needles buried in the soil delayed works while a method of dealing with them was found.
Miss McIntosh: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs how many flood defence projects have been postponed in each of the last three years; and what the reasons were in each case. 
DEFRA has overall policy responsibility for flood risk management and provides funding for schemes to Operating Authorities (Environment Agency, local authorities and Internal Drainage Boards). The funding for flood risk has been administered by the
Environment Agency since April 2006. Information on potential projects is collected from operating authorities and the Environment Agency decides which projects to promote and their timing to meet the targets set by DEFRA. Since the projects are not formally approved until funding is confirmed none will have been postponed or have had their commencement delayed.
Miss McIntosh: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs if he will allow insurance companies and other interested parties access to the national coastal defence database. 
Miss McIntosh: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what steps his Department has taken to map surface water flooding as recommended by Sir Michael Pitt in his final report. 
Miss McIntosh: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs if he will review building regulations to ensure flood resilient repair following a flood; and if he will make a statement. 
Building Regulations should be revised to ensure that all new or refurbished buildings in high flood-risk areas are flood resistant or resilient".
Miss McIntosh: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs how many fly-tipping offences have been successfully prosecuted under the provisions of the Clean Neighbourhoods and Environment Act 2005. 
Jane Kennedy: Local authorities and the Environment Agency do not record prosecutions brought specifically under the provisions of the Clean Neighbourhoods and Environment Act 2005, which amended the EPA.
Huw Irranca-Davies: I have not made an estimate of the market value of the Forestry Commission. Its published Great Britain/England accounts for the year ending 31 March 2008, and which are available in the Library of the House, value its assets at £612.7 million, of which £487.9 million is attributed to the forest estate that the Commission manages.
Mr. Meacher: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what assessment he has made of the capacity of the Genetically-Modified Organisms Panel of the European Food Safety Agency to advise on the potential risks to health and the environment of genetically-modified organisms; if he will support proposals for reform of the panel; and if he will make a statement. 
Huw Irranca-Davies: Earlier this month the EU Environmental Council adopted a set of written conclusions on GM issues. Among other things, these set out an agreed view on the operation of the risk assessment process for genetically-modified organisms, including in respect of the role played by European Food Safety Agency in providing expert advice. The UK supported the adoption of the conclusions, the full text of which is available at:
Mr. Meacher: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what consideration he has given to the provisions of the relevant concordat between the competent authorities in Wales, England, Northern Ireland and Scotland when (a) negotiating and (b) voting in the Council of Ministers on matters of assessments and authorisations for genetically-modified organisms in Europe; and if he will make a statement. 
Huw Irranca-Davies: The principles set down in the concordat continue to provide a clear framework for liaison between the four UK competent authorities on the matters covered by the agreement, including the assessment and authorisation of GMOs under EU Directive 2001/18.
Mr. Meacher: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs how many inspections of genetically modified organism (GMO) test sites have been carried out by the GM Inspectorate relating to Part B consents in respect of experimental releases of GMOs under the Genetically Modified Organisms (Deliberate Release) Regulations 1992 and the GMO (Deliberate Release) (England) Regulations 2002 in England since January 2000; and if he will place in the Library a copy of each inspection report. 
The Central Science Laboratorys GM inspectorate has made 341 growing season inspections since it assumed its responsibilities in June 2000. Each part B trial site is inspected at least once when the crop is in the ground, but additional inspections may be undertaken at sowing or at harvest, or where an incident has occurred at the release site. The reports can be found on the internet at:
The Health and Safety Executive (HSE) was responsible for all inspections prior to 1 June 2000 and since then has retained responsibility for inspections of GM clinical trial applications. I have also arranged for copies of HSEs 40 inspection reports to be placed in the Library.
Mr. Meacher: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs how many sites growing genetically modified organisms grant Part C authorisation for commercial cultivation under Directive 90/220 or 2001/18 have been sown since January 2000; and how many of these sites have been vandalised. 
Huw Irranca-Davies: There has been no commercial cultivation of GM crops in England, but maize variety T25, which has a Part C consent, was one of the crops grown in the farm-scale evaluation (FSE) research trials. There were 68 plantings of T25 as part of the FSEs after January 2000, of which 23 were vandalised.
Mr. Meacher: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs how many post-release monitoring reports of Part B consents in respect of the experimental releases of genetically modified organisms authorised under the Genetically Modified Organisms (Deliberate Release) Regulations 1992 and the GMO (Deliberate Release) (England) Regulations 2002 his Department has received since January 2000; and if he will place in the Library a copy of each report received. 
Huw Irranca-Davies: My Department has received 205 post-release monitoring reports from consent holders since January 2000. These are available for inspection on the GMO public register held in DEFRAs library. I have arranged for copies of them to be placed in the Library of the House.
Bill Wiggin: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs whether the UK voted for or against the decision made at the recent meeting of the International Commission for the Conservation of Atlantic Tuna to set a quota of 22,000 tonnes of bluefin tuna in 2009; and what the Government's position is on a quota for blue fin tuna catch. 
Huw Irranca-Davies: The decision to set a total allowable catch (TAC) of 22,000 tonnes for the Mediterranean and eastern Atlantic blue fin tuna fishery in 2009 was agreed by consensus at the meeting and therefore not subject to a vote.
While the UK would have ideally preferred the ICCAT to adopt a smaller TAC for blue fin tuna, the controls that have now been put in place for this fishery, coupled with the plan for contracting parties to demonstrate that they can comply with the plan or have their quotas suspended, mean that the fishery should now be effectively managed in order to prevent the over-fishing that has occurred in previous years.
|Next Section||Index||Home Page|