Previous Section Back to Table of Contents Lords Hansard Home Page


Road Haulage: Procurement

Baroness Byford asked Her Majesty's Government:

Lord Whitty: Pursuant to the Written Answer I gave on 27 June (WA 154-55), Snowie was awarded a road haulage contract through the negotiated procurement procedure without the prior publication of an Official Journal (OJEU) notice because the FMD outbreak required us to act very swiftly. As the recent NAO report (The 2001 Outbreak of Foot and Mouth Disease, paragraph 4.51 page 94) made clear, many contracts which would normally have been put out to tender were awarded without competition. The department reverted to normal competitive tendering where the circumstances and priorities permitted. We are unaware of any other road haulage contracts in Northumberland awarded on the basis of the negotiated procurement procedure without the prior publication of an Official Journal (OJEU) notice.

RAF Bentwater: Sale

Baroness Byford asked Her Majesty's Government:

Lord Whitty: The sale of the disused military airfield at RAF Bentwater took place on 15 May 1997, as an open market sale. The then Countryside Commission was aware that the land was being sold and when it was sold. The commission was concerned about proposals for major new developments such as reuse of the site as an airport, on the part of the site within the AONB. It made its view widely known and they were taken into account in developing the planning brief for the site and the local plan for the area.

29 Jul 2002 : Column WA134

EU Olive Oil Subsidies: Fraud Reduction

Lord Morris of Manchester asked Her Majesty's Government:

    What is the cost to the European Union to date of using a satellite system to reduce fraud and malfeasance in relation to subsidies for olive oil; and how effective the system has been.[HL5572]

Lord Whitty: Work on developing a geographical information system (GIS) for olive trees is subject to dual funding by producer member states and the EU.

The maximum amount of approved EU funding is 97,817,268 euros (£61,928,112 at current exchange rates 1 ). Of this total EU funding, producer member states spent about 35 million euros (about £22 million at current exchange rates 1 ) up to May of last year.

The GIS is not yet fully implemented in any of the producer member states. It will be used to check against information in crop declarations. Where information does not correspond further verifications and on the spot checks will be carried out.


    1 1 euro=£0\63310

EU Tobacco Subsidies

Lord Morris of Manchester asked Her Majesty's Government:

    What estimate they have made of the cost to date to the United Kingdom, and the total cost to European Union member states as a whole, of subsidising farmers to produce tobacco that was subsequently dumped on third world markets.[HL5573]

Lord Whitty: Member states contribute to EU budget as a whole and not to any particular part. The UK contribution is about 12.7 per cent after the effect of the Fontainbleau abatement has been taken into account.

In the financial year ending 15 October 2001, some 964 million euros (£610 million at current exchange rates 1 ) was spent on EU tobacco subsidies.

We have no evidence of EU tobacco being dumped on third world markets but exports to third world countries in 2001 were 2,751 tonnes 2 .


    1 Euro = £0\63310


    2 Source: Comexdata 2001

EU Fishing Policy

Lord Morris of Manchester asked Her Majesty's Government:

    What estimate they have made of the extent of ecological damage to fishing grounds historically in British waters from "fishing out" by European Union-subsidised fishing fleets; and what co-operation there has been between Spain and the United Kingdom in addressing its consequences.[HL5574]

29 Jul 2002 : Column WA135

Lord Whitty: The ICES Advisory Committee on Ecosystems monitors the ecosystem effects of fishing activities, including the impact of fishing on the wider marine environment. UK and Spanish scientists contribute to the work of this committee. However, the committee's work to date has made no distinction between the impact of fleets receiving subsidies and those that do not. The one stock that could be described as "fished out" in historic British waters is herring. This took place before the introduction of the common fisheries policy(CFP). The stock has since improved under it.

The CFP is the means by which fisheries are managed in the European Union and the UK is keen for progress to be made through the present reform of the CFP on the removal of counter-productive fleet subsidies and the greater integration of environmental concerns in fishing policy. This will require measures to address the adverse effects of fishing on marine habitats. Progress in these areas will depend on co-operation between all member states.

Agricultural Grants

The Earl of Caithness asked Her Majesty's Government:

    Further to the Written Answers by Lord Whitty on 16 July (WA 136) and 23 July (WA 51-52), whether the costs of administration were made on the same basis, and, if not, why not.[HL5636]

Lord Whitty: Since 1 April 2001, agricultural grants and subsidies have been administered by the Rural Payments Agency whereas the schemes which comprise the England Rural Development Programme have been administered mainly by the Rural Development Service within DEFRA. The estimated costs given in the previous answers were prepared on a comparable basis as far as possible, bearing in mind that they are two different organisations.

The Earl of Caithness asked Her Majesty's Government:

    Why it costs 150 per cent more to administer grants under the England Rural Development Programme than it does for agricultural grants and subsidies. [HL5637]

Lord Whitty: The Rural Payments Agency's processing of agricultural grants and subsidies is mainly office-based, apart from a small percentage of compliance inspections in the field. It consists largely of checking the eligibility, based on standard rules, of claims received from farmers and traders and arranging payment. There is a wide customer base and the total value of payments made is £2.2 billion.

The schemes in the England Rural Development Programme are for the most part specially tailored to individual farms or projects, each requiring detailed assessment to ensure benefits will be delivered. In the agri-environment schemes, for example, the processing of applications involves a site visit by a technical expert

29 Jul 2002 : Column WA136

in almost every case both to assess and develop the proposals and to give conservation management advice. Experience has shown that such visits are important in terms of securing the desired environmental outputs; for example, habitat restoration, over the life of the 10-year agreement which the land manager will subsequently sign, and hence obtaining best value for money for the taxpayer. The customer base for these schemes is narrower and the total value of payment is just over £200 million. For all these reasons the administration costs are higher.

Foot and Mouth Disease: Contingency Plans

Lord Inglewood asked Her Majesty's Government:

    Whether they will make available for consultation their contingency plans for handling a future possible outbreak of foot and mouth disease in the interests of public confidence in their ability to handle such a crisis. [HL5643]

Lord Whitty: Following initial stakeholder consultation, the interim contingency plan was publicised by a news release and placed on the DEFRA website on 12 March 2002 together with a mailbox inviting comments. The plan has since been updated and a revised version placed on the website for comment on 3 July 2002.

Lord Inglewood asked Her Majesty's Government:

    Whether they have entirely revised their contingency plans for dealing with a possible outbreak of foot and mouth disease following the outbreak in 2001 and the ensuing reports into the way it was handled.[HL5644]

Lord Whitty: An interim contingency plan was developed and publicised in March and has continued to be worked upon and updated over the last few months. Now that both the Royal Society study of infectious diseases of livestock and the Lessons Learned inquiry have reported, the plan will be further amended to take account of the recommendations made.

The plan is very much a 'living' document. It is expected that it will be subject to regular revision taking on the latest scientific advice and comments from stakeholders and operational partners.

Defra Report: Working for the Essentials of Life

Lord Marlesford asked Her Majesty's Government:

    When the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs report Working for the Essentials of Life was published; why there was no date on the report; whether it is their policy that all government publications should be dated; and, if so, what steps they propose to ensure that such a policy is implemented.[HL5650]

29 Jul 2002 : Column WA137

Lord Whitty: The Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs published Working for the Essentials of Life 20 March 2002. The document set out the department's priorities and 106 key commitments for the coming year. It is normal practice that such documents are dated, have a reference number and clear contact details for DEFRA. We regret that due to an oversight during publication no date was printed on Working for the Essentials of Life, although a reference number and contact details were. It is a standard requirement of contractors producing such material that these elements are printed on all documents and this is enforced through normal contractual procedures.


Next Section Back to Table of Contents Lords Hansard Home Page