View PDF - United Kingdom Parliament

More documents

Recommendations

Info

43W Written Answers 26 OCTOBER 2009 Written Answers 44W £ million 2008-09 4.3 2007-08 1.7 2006-07 0.5 2005-06 1.5 2004-05 1.2 2003-04 1.1 2002-03 3.7 2001-02 0.7 2000-01 1.1 1999-2000 0.9 In terms of how these receipts are accounted for in analyses of expenditure, we either use a TB compensation figure net of salvage receipts or provide TB compensation spend figures and salvage receipt figures separately. Bovine Tuberculosis: Vaccination Mr. Drew: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what recent discussions he has had with his counterparts in the government of (a) the Republic of Ireland and (b) New Zealand on the vaccination of badgers against bovine tuberculosis; and if he will make a statement. [293893] Jim Fitzpatrick: The Secretary of State has discussed vaccination of badgers against bovine TB with the New Zealand Minister of Agriculture, Biosecurity and Forestry. The majority of DEFRA’s TB vaccine research programme is led by researchers at the Veterinary Laboratories Agency, who collaborate with researchers in both the Republic of Ireland and New Zealand. DEFRA officials have met with their counterparts from the Republic of Ireland and representatives of the industryled New Zealand Animal Health Board several times recently to discuss work programmes and ensure a coordinated research effort, particularly in regards to the design of badger vaccine field studies and licensing requirements for the use of the BCG vaccine against TB. Centre for Environment Fisheries and Aquaculture Science Mr. Oaten: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what arrangements have been put in place to ensure the fairness of the tendering process in circumstances where the Centre for Environment, Fisheries and Aquaculture Science is both advising his Department on the selection of bids and is itself one of the bidders. [295569] Huw Irranca-Davies: The arrangements to ensure the fairness of the tendering process in circumstances where CEFAS is both involved in advising on the selection of bids and is itself one of the bidders is set out the governance document ‘Marine Environment Protection Fund (MEPF): Aggregate Levy Sustainability Fund Delivery Partner on behalf of DEFRA: Who We Are and How We Operate’ published on the MALSF website at http://www.alsf-mepf.org.uk/downloads/documents/mepf--- how-we-operate.aspx The Aggregate Levy Sustainability Fund is delivered through the Marine Environment Protection Fund (MEPF) which is administered by CEFAS on behalf of DEFRA and reports to DEFRA though the Marine ALSF Steering Group. The Marine ALSF Steering Group oversees the direction of the fund, develops the commissioning strategy for research and dissemination activities and oversees delivery arrangements. All funding decisions are made by the MEPF evaluation panel which undertakes the evaluation of tenders. The MEPF evaluation panel is chaired by DEFRA and comprises representation from eight organisations of which CEFAS is one, plus the Marine ALSF Science Co-ordinator who is appointed through an open competition. The MEPF provides the Secretariat function to the evaluation panel and any views and opinions of the Secretariat at the evaluation panel meetings are made as representing the MEPF as a delivery partner. The Secretariat has no decision-making powers or voting rights on the evaluation panel. The MEPF panel’s terms of reference govern the arrangements for ensuring fairness in the evaluation of bids in circumstances where an evaluation panel member is from the same organisation as a bidder. These arrangements involve: 1. All evaluation panels begin with a round-table declaration of any potential conflicts of interest. A two-tiered approach to managing potential conflicts is then followed: a) Direct involvement—If a panel member is to be part of a project delivery team and/or has helped prepare the proposal, they are required to be absent from the room while the proposal is being discussed and evaluated. b) Indirect involvement—If a panel member’s company/ organisation has submitted a proposal but the panel member had played no part whatsoever in its preparation nor was to be involved with the project delivery team, the panel member is required to be a non-voting member of the panel while considering the bid but may remain in the room while the proposal is being discussed and evaluated. 2. Any individual involved in project evaluation other than central Government staff members will be required to sign a confidentiality agreement to protect the intellectual property of project applicants. These agreements must also be in place for any member of staff who receives bids from the other distributing bodies during the liaison process. To maintain impartiality and confidentiality, the MEPF delivery partner operates entirely separately from CEFAS’ main corporate and delivery functions. Specifically: MEPF services are provided by a dedicated team from the Programme Management Group of CEFAS devoted only to the provision of MEPF fund management services. The MEPF is separate from the Science Delivery Divisions and the Commercial Group of CEFAS and MEPF staff are not involved in MEPF bid preparation or delivery. CEFAS bidding teams and project leaders are not able to have sight of MEPF Managed Funds papers. Electronic files are stored on local area, not shared contracts area, with restricted access to the ALSF_MEPF local areas. Paper files are locked away and stored separately away from central contracts file store. Chelgate Mr. Stewart Jackson: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs pursuant to the Answer to the hon. Member for Bromley and Chislehurst of 17 November 2008, Official Report, column 98W, on domestic wastes, what assessment has been made of the effectiveness against objectives of the public affairs work undertaken by Chelgate Ltd for the Waste and Resources Action Programme. [294778]
45W Written Answers 26 OCTOBER 2009 Written Answers 46W Dan Norris: No such assessment has been made by DEFRA. The requested assessment concerns the detailed operational activities of the Waste and Resources Action Programme (WRAP), and is not therefore a matter for DEFRA. I understand that the chief executive of WRAP has on two occasions offered to meet the hon. Member for Bromley and Chislehurst (Robert Neill) to discuss any issues of concern to him, and I would encourage him to take up that offer. Dairy Farming Mr. Evans: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what the average price paid to dairy farmers per litre of milk is; and what the price was on 1 June 2009. [295470] Jim Fitzpatrick: Average UK prices paid to dairy farmers per litre of milk during 2009 are shown in the table. Daily prices are not collected but the average price for June 2009 was 22.5 pence per litre. Average UK farm-gate milk price, 2009 Pence per litre January 25.80 February 24.90 March 24.60 April 23.60 May 22.50 June 22.50 July 22.99 August 23.26 Source: DEFRA statistics, DARD, RERAD. Departmental Motor Vehicles Andrew Stunell: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs how much his Department spent on hire vehicles in each of the last five financial years. [291508] Dan Norris: From information held centrally, the following sums have been spent on hire vehicles from financial year 2005-06 to date: Financial year £ 2005-06 35,003 2006-07 110,279 2007-08 134,803 2008-09 143,644 2009-10 to date 50,368 Domestic Waste: Fixed Penalties Mr. Stewart Jackson: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what assessment the Government have made of the merits of introducing a statutory appeals process for fixed penalty notices issued under the Clean Neighbourhood and Environment Act 2005. [294900] Jim Fitzpatrick: The Government do not consider that a statutory appeals process for fixed penalty notices is needed. Fixed penalty notices for offences, such as littering, are issued as an alternative to prosecution in a magistrates court. Accepting and paying a fixed penalty notice removes all liability for the offence. An individual served with a notice may choose instead to have their case tried in court. Domestic Waste: Greater London Ms Buck: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what the figures for each London local authority for (a) household waste per head, (b) percentage of all household waste recycled, (c) total non-household waste and (d) percentage of all non-household waste recycled were for (i) 2006-07, (ii) 2007-08 and (iii) 2008-09. [295797] Dan Norris: The following table shows the data requested for 2006-07 and 2007-08. Local authority level data for all of 2008-09 will be published on DEFRA’s website on 5 November 2009. As requested, reuse is not included in any of the recycling data so will therefore not match some published data which includes reuse. Collected household waste per person (kg) Household recycling and composting rate Total non-household waste Estimated non-household recycling and composting rate Authority 2006-07 2007-08 2006-07 2007-08 2006-07 2007-08 2006-07 2007-08 Bexley LB 507.50 483.60 40.00 41.64 23,366.08 25,014.71 17.30 17.38 Tower Hamlets LB 396.40 406.91 11.75 13.04 22,485.24 26,659.36 1.23 3.41 City of London 570.20 700.09 28.19 33.39 39,091.19 34,950.09 2.16 4.23 Westminster City Council 334.70 357.32 20.38 22.72 110,322.00 110,661.00 2.90 2.39 Redbridge LB 417.10 408.02 18.60 22.38 14,708.58 16,944.95 12.50 11.79 Newham LB 448.60 474.64 13.58 14.40 30,707.55 28,287.94 8.44 12.43 Havering LB 517.80 489.52 20.43 23.98 17,158.24 17,912.69 0.28 17.61 Barking and Dagenham 524.80 526.81 21.08 20.41 15,824.98 15,931.36 20.98 24.94 LB Waltham Forest LB 445.00 454.59 27.51 29.74 26,439.42 24,985.04 14.40 12.02 Islington LB 433.30 404.21 23.50 26.33 38,316.60 38,018.33 4.61 4.16 Haringey LB 341.50 366.08 24.72 25.68 43,837.38 42,230.82 10.83 10.63 Hackney LB 394.60 379.78 19.57 22.38 49,088.72 46,532.65 2.58 2.57 Enfield LB 409.10 422.38 29.64 28.19 25,417.98 24,729.78 7.04 11.21 Camden LB 335.00 317.77 28.05 27.12 60,224.80 60,027.82 3.73 5.03 Barnet LB 431.60 438.68 29.47 30.68 33,400.64 32,656.04 3.24 4.54 Southwark LB 427.00 412.50 18.46 20.02 29,123.18 29,129.90 8.63 12.60
Page 1 and 2:
Monday Volume 498 26 October 2009 N
Page 3 and 4:
HER MAJESTY’S GOVERNMENT MEMBERS
Page 5 and 6:
HER MAJESTY’S GOVERNMENT—cont.
Page 7:
HOUSE OF COMMONS THE SPEAKER—The
Page 10 and 11:
3 Oral Answers 26 OCTOBER 2009 Oral
Page 12 and 13:
7 Oral Answers 26 OCTOBER 2009 Oral
Page 14 and 15:
11 Oral Answers 26 OCTOBER 2009 Ora
Page 16 and 17:
Page 18 and 19:
Page 20 and 21:
23 26 OCTOBER 2009 Territorial Army
Page 22 and 23:
27 Territorial Army 26 OCTOBER 2009
Page 24 and 25:
31 Marine and Coastal Access Bill 2
Page 26 and 27:
Page 28 and 29:
Page 30 and 31:
Page 32 and 33:
Page 34 and 35:
Page 36 and 37:
Page 38 and 39:
Page 40 and 41:
Page 42 and 43:
Page 44 and 45:
Page 46 and 47:
Page 48 and 49:
79 Marine and Coastal Access Bill [
Page 50 and 51:
Page 52 and 53:
Page 54 and 55: 91 Marine and Coastal Access Bill 2
Page 60 and 61: 103 Marine and Coastal Access Bill
Page 74 and 75: 131 26 OCTOBER 2009 Territorial Arm
Page 76 and 77: 135 Territorial Army 26 OCTOBER 200
Page 78 and 79: 139 Territorial Army 26 OCTOBER 200
Page 80 and 81: 3WS Written Ministerial Statements
Page 83 and 84: 1W Written Answers 26 OCTOBER 2009
Page 103: 41W Written Answers 26 OCTOBER 2009
Page 155 and 156:
145W Written Answers 26 OCTOBER 200
Page 157 and 158:
Page 159 and 160:
Page 161 and 162:
Page 163 and 164:
Page 165 and 166:
Page 167 and 168:
Page 169 and 170:
Page 171 and 172:
Page 173 and 174:
Page 175 and 176:
Page 177 and 178:
Page 179 and 180:
Page 181 and 182:
Page 183 and 184:
Page 185 and 186:
Page 187:
1MC Ministerial Corrections 26 OCTO
Page 190 and 191:
Col. No. COMMUNITIES AND LOCAL GOVE
Page 192 and 193:
Members who wish to have the Daily
show all

View PDF - United Kingdom Parliament

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?