|Previous Section||Index||Home Page|
John Mann: To ask the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change how much his Department has paid in probate costs in relation to the coal health compensation scheme to each firm of solicitors operating for claimants in (a) Bassetlaw constituency and (b) England and Wales; and how many such claims for probate costs have been received. 
I will place in the Libraries of the House tables which show how much in probate costs the Department has paid out under the coal health
compensation schemes in respect of Bassetlaw constituency and in England and Wales as at 4 October 2009.
The figures reflect probate costs that were paid after May 2006. Prior to this date probate costs were not recorded separately and the Department is unable to report on them. The Department is unable to provide the number of claims made for probate costs as these are also not recorded separately.
Greg Clark: To ask the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change if he will place in the Library a copy of the (a) display energy certificate and (b) advisory report for public buildings issued in respect of each property occupied by (i) the Coal Authority, (ii) the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority, (iii) the United Kingdom Atomic Energy Authority, (iv) the Advisory Committee on Carbon Abatement Technologies, (v) the Fuel Poverty Advisory Group, (vi) the Renewables Advisory Board, (vii) the UK Chemical Weapons Convention National Authority Advisory Committee, (viii) the Committee on Climate Change, (ix) the Committee on Radioactive Waste Management and (x) the Office of Gas and Electricity Markets. 
Mr. Kidney: Copies of the display energy certificate (DEC) and advisory report for buildings occupied by the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority and Ofgem will be placed in the Libraries of the House. A display energy certificate and advisory report for the Coal Authority's headquarters in Mansfield is awaited and will be placed in the Library as soon as they are available.
A display energy certificate (DEC) rating has not been completed for the building that the CCC currently occupies. If and when it is conducted, the CCC will send it to the House Libraries for display. The decision over whether to apply for a DEC rating for the building is up to the building manager and the CCC has no jurisdiction over this. The CCC recently had an energy performance certificate produced for its offices. The CCC's offices were awarded an E-rating for energy efficiency. Copies of the energy performance certificate have been placed in the Libraries of the House.
The Advisory Group on Carbon Abatement Technologies, Fuel Poverty Advisory Group, Renewables Advisory Board, the UK Chemical Weapons Convention National Authority Advisory Committee and the Committee on Radioactive Waste Management do not occupy their own property.
The Department for Business, Innovation and Skills has lead responsibility for the UK Atomic Energy Authority. UKAEA does not have any properties which fall within the requirements of the legislation.
Joan Ruddock [holding answer 9 September 2009]: The Gas Act 1986 (as amended), which amongst other things set up the gas regulatory bodies, exempted heating oil and liquefied petroleum gas (LPG) from its provisions. The Gas Act principally addressed the issues of setting up a regulatory regime to ensure that the national transmission system for gas users was not exploited. In contrast, there is no natural monopoly in the transport of heating oil or LPG by road. The heating fuels market operates with a number of distributors competing for supply using alternative supply sources. In that sense, it is broadly similar to other products such as diesel and petrol. The Department therefore has no plans for the economic regulation of the heating fuels sector.
The Renewable Heat Incentive (RHI), which will encourage the uptake of renewable heat generation, to meet our renewable energy and carbon targets, will be funded through a levy on suppliers of fossil fuel for heat. It is intended that the scheme will be introduced from April 2011 with the detail of the scheme being set out in secondary legislation under Section 100 of the Energy Act 2008.
Mr. Evans: To ask the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change what steps his Department has taken to assist park home residents to reduce their (a) carbon dioxide emissions and (b) heating bills. 
Joan Ruddock: It is difficult to reduce the carbon emissions and heating bills of park homes due to the lack of scope for key energy efficiency measures, such as cavity wall and loft insulation. Where scope does exist, such as through draught-proofing and high-efficiency lights and appliances, assistance is available to park homes residents through schemes such as the Carbon Emissions Reduction Target and Warm Front.
Warm Front is currently working in partnership with a gas distributor and a local residents association to enable 61 residents of Elm Tree caravan park in Hartlepool to be connected to the mains gas network. This project meant these homes, previously utilising liquid petroleum gas, coal or forms of electric heating, reduced their likely energy bills and likely carbon consumption. The project considerably reduced the otherwise prohibitive cost that had prevented each park home individually connecting to the gas network.
The Warm Front scheme has also begun a piloting exercise of external wall insulation for 100 park home properties. If this trial is successful, then this may be included as a main measure offered through the scheme.
Bob Spink: To ask the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change what recent estimate he has made of the proportion of the referrals generated by the Warm Front marketing team which are second surveys. 
Bob Spink: To ask the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change what criteria were used to assess the (a) cost-effectiveness and (b) reliability of Ideal ISAR (i) 24HE and (ii) 30HE condensing boilers for use by Eaga plc under the Warm Front scheme. 
The Ideal ISAR boiler and other boilers were reviewed by the Grant Aided Installer Network (GAIN) who concluded that the ISAR range of boilers was the most reliable and cost effective on the market at the time.
Eaga, the scheme manager, and the Department continually reviews feedback from customers, installers, inspectors and the scheme aftercare providers to identify major reliability issues with any of the products used on the scheme.
Bob Spink: To ask the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change what representations he has received on Eaga plc's commercial interest in WarmSure Ltd. in relation to the Warm Front Scheme. 
Dan Norris: In December 2008 DEFRA published a report looking at the features of packaging deposit systems and the role they might play in increasing recovery and recycling and reducing littering in the UK. The report found little hard evidence to suggest that deposit schemes reduce littering and thought that the major impact of such a scheme would be to divert packaging from waste bins to recycling bins.
Overall, the report concluded that resources could be more effectively used in improving current systems than in developing a parallel one for deposits on packaging. Improving household collections and developing the away from home recycling infrastructure are likely to be more cost-effective in increasing recycling and tackling litter.
To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what estimate he has made of the cost to the public purse of
implementing statutory measures to control bovine tuberculosis in each of the next five years; and what estimate he has made of the likely reduction in such costs consequent on control measures introduced by his Department. 
Jim Fitzpatrick: Forecasting spend on bovine TB is extremely difficult not least because there has often been significant year to year fluctuations in the number of infected cattle disclosed through testing and slaughterhouse surveillance. Spend on testing and compensation forms a major part of our TB control costs-future spend in these areas is highly dependent on the number of TB infected cattle disclosed and prevailing open market prices for cattle (since compensation paid through table valuations is directly linked to open market prices).
Dan Rogerson: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs when the requirement under EU Directive 64/432/EEC that all farms in a country where bovine tuberculosis (bTB) is greater than one per cent. of the cattle herd be tested for bTB annually was abandoned. 
Jim Fitzpatrick: EU Directive 64/432/EEC requires annual testing where bTB prevalence is greater than 1 per cent. in a 'defined area'. Historically, England has used parishes (not the country as a whole) as the defined area for setting TB testing intervals, and these have been reviewed annually.
In accordance with a recommendation from the TB Eradication Group for England we are developing a new approach for determining routine TB testing intervals, that more effectively takes account of local TB risks. While this work is ongoing, an interim regime will be in place from 1 January 2010.
Dan Rogerson: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what the cost to his Department and its predecessor of (a) compensation paid directly to farmers for removal of animals, (b) veterinary tuberculin testing, (c) haulage for removal of animals, (d) abattoir and official veterinary surgeon services in respect of slaughter, (e) on-farm slaughter, (f) disposal and incineration and (g) valuation fees was in respect of the implementation of statutory testing and slaughter under bovine tuberculosis regulations of (i) cattle classed as bovine tuberculosis reactors, inconclusives or dangerous contact animals and (ii) all other mammals (A) between 1986 and 1996 and (B) since 1997. 
Jim Fitzpatrick: The following table provides a summary of TB related expenditure incurred by DEFRA in relation to compensation, testing, haulage/disposal of livestock compulsorily slaughtered on TB control grounds, and valuers' fees. The way in which financial data have been collected/collated means that we are not able to provide a detailed breakdown of spend, in the form the hon. Gentleman has requested, for the years prior to 1999.
I am unable to provide details of Government staff costs related to 'in-abattoir' controls: policy responsibility for a key element of this work (verifying that meat is fit for human consumption) rests with the Food Standards Agency, rather than DEFRA. Also, the costs of on-farm
slaughter for the small minority of cattle unfit to be sent to licensed abattoirs are not recorded separately.
|Compensation paid( 1)||Haulage / Disposal||Valuers fees||Cattle testing( 2)|
|(1). Compensation includes payments to farmers for 'reactors' and 'direct contact' animals which are compulsorily slaughtered, and non-bovine species.|
(2) Cattle testing-the cost of carrying out the testing of cattle for TB by arranging, assessing and monitoring tests, conducting investigations of incident herds and diagnostic testing by Local veterinary Inspectors across GB.
1. Data from 1999 have been taken from the DEFRA Oracle Financial System. Information pre-1999 has been taken from the respective annual reports of the Chief Veterinary Officer.
2. Data are provisional and subject to change.
3. DEFRA holds the testing budget for the whole of GB.
4. The 1997 figure is for the calendar year - figures for 1998/99 onwards are per financial year.
5. Valuers' fees - expenditure in 2007 and 2008 was below £100,000.
|Next Section||Index||Home Page|