Oral Answers to Questions

Caroline Spelman Excerpts

Thursday 9th September 2010 Commons Chamber

[Kate Hoey (Vauxhall) (Lab)]

1. What recent progress has been made on implementation of the recommendations of the Pitt review.

[The Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Mrs Caroline Spelman)]

I am sure that the whole House would want me to record our condolences to the Prime Minister and to let him know that we are thinking of him at this time.

Good progress has been made since the publication of the Pitt review. We have started to implement the Flood and Water Management Act 2010 and published the national flood emergency framework, and we continue to work with local authorities to develop capacity.

[Kate Hoey (Vauxhall) (Lab)]

I thank the Secretary of State for that answer. She will be aware of the consistently excellent work of firefighters in dealing with floods—indeed, I am sure she has praised it. The Pitt report was clear that to deal with the problems of training, equipment and resources, there would be a statutory responsibility. In fact, the Conservatives, Liberal Democrats and many Labour Members supported such a measure under the previous Administration. Will she give an assurance that during this Session of Parliament—in the next four or five years—that statutory requirement will be introduced, because it is crucial?

[Mrs Spelman]

I can tell the hon. Lady that we have of course read very carefully all the Pitt review recommendations, including that one. I should like to acknowledge the very important role that fire and rescue service authorities play in the face of any flooding incident. In fact, those authorities have not told us of a single case of their being constrained in their response by a lack of powers. The question of the need for a statutory responsibility will be tested in an exercise next year. The option of a statutory duty has certainly not been ruled out.

[Mr Laurence Robertson (Tewkesbury) (Con)]

Sir Michael Pitt himself, however, admitted that his advice with regard to building in flood-risk areas was compromised by the fact that the previous Government had a very high national house building target. Now that that target, and indeed regional targets, has been removed, is it not time to revisit the planning guidance on building in flood risk areas, so that constituencies such as mine will be better protected in future than they were in the past?

[Mrs Spelman]

The Department for Communities and Local Government has started a review of the building regulations regime, and my Department will work with it to consider how that review can support Pitt recommendation 11, being mindful of the Government’s aim to reduce the overall regulatory burden.

[Nia Griffith (Llanelli) (Lab)]

In view of the fact that the Pitt report identifies the problem of responsibility, both if a flood happens and before that in the planning process, and that the Flood and Water Management Act 2010 addresses that, will the Secretary of State tell us what progress is being made on the implementation of the legislation in terms of the designated authorities for flooding, and what talks has she had with the Welsh Assembly Government on how that will affect cross-border areas?

[Mrs Spelman]

We have been making very good progress on that aspect of the Pitt review and will be talking to the Welsh Assembly Government in the next couple of months specifically on the Welsh dimension of the question. I am sure the hon. Lady will agree that it is important to raise capacity at the local authority level in response to flooding. That was a further Pitt recommendation. All those matters will be discussed with the relevant bodies in order to improve our resilience in the face of the threat of flooding.

[Laura Sandys (South Thanet) (Con)]

2. What recent discussions she has had with fishermen in Thanet on their fisheries quotas.

--- Later in debate ---

[Mrs Mary Glindon (North Tyneside) (Lab)]

17. What steps her Department is taking to encourage the procurement of food of British origin by the public sector.

[The Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Mrs Caroline Spelman)]

We are committed to ensuring that food procured by Government Departments, and eventually the whole public sector, meets British or equivalent standards of production wherever this can be achieved without increasing overall costs. I have written to ministerial colleagues asking them to look closely at how they can help us to meet this objective.

[Julie Hilling]

As Ministers agreed, British animal welfare standards are among the highest in the world, which may make products slightly more expensive. I understood that Government policy was to ensure procurement in the public sector of British-produced food wherever possible. I am concerned, therefore, about the response that it may be procured from other sources. Also, how will the Government measure whether food has come from British sources?

[Mrs Spelman]

I can reassure the hon. Lady that we are proceeding with the commitment that I have given and which was outlined in the coalition agreement. With respect to the gap, the Government also intend to develop Government buying standards for the public procurement of food, which means that Departments will have to buy food that meets minimum sustainability standards. We know that our rules, especially on animal welfare, reflect the importance that the nation attaches to this issue.

[Mrs Glindon]

The Secretary of State referred to the fact that she has asked the Cabinet to implement her policy on food procurement. Will she explain more about the practical policies that she will implement to ensure that this procurement goes ahead?

[Mrs Spelman]

Again, I can give the hon. Lady this assurance. I have just said that I have written to all Departments about the importance that the coalition attaches to encouraging the public sector to procure food to the highest possible standards, followed up by the development of Government buying standards for food. However, I would like to give her some encouragement regarding our progress. It is demonstrable that we can implement this policy without increasing overall costs. Nottingham city council is a good example. It procures 90% of its fresh food from the east midlands area while demonstrating that the average cost per meal is 30% lower than the national average. That fact is welcomed by the Secretary of State for Health.

[Jim Fitzpatrick (Poplar and Limehouse) (Lab)]

May I begin by complimenting the right hon. Lady on her choice of outfit? It is very DEFRA-esque—[Interruption.] Mr Speaker, there is surely room for manners in the House of Commons. Will she describe what obstacles she sees in the way of Departments and the rest of the public sector procuring British produce?

[Mrs Spelman]

First, I should like to thank the hon. Gentleman for his very nice compliment, which was received absolutely as it was intended. As much as anything, the obstacle might be a perception in the public sector that buying in food to British standards might cost more. The illustration from the health service that I gave to his hon. Friend the Member for North Tyneside (Mrs Glindon) demonstrates clearly that it is possible to procure to British standards—the highest standards—and save costs, but I will give yet another example that might help to change perceptions. Shropshire council sources local produce for school meals. It uses seasonal, local, organic ingredients and still made a saving of 11% in the first year of shifting to locally produced, British food made to high standards, particularly fruit and vegetables. Perception is an important point to address.

[Jim Fitzpatrick]

I assure the right hon. Lady that seeing British produce procured by the public sector is a shared objective. Will she therefore say how she intends to measure the success of her policy in increasing procurement, and how she will make this information available to the House?

[Mrs Spelman]

I recognise this as a shared objective, as the hon. Gentleman described it. He will know that DEFRA carefully records, by Department, the percentage of farm-assured food from all food supplied to the public sector. In writing to every Cabinet Minister about the issue, I have attached the league table of performance by Departments to provide an added incentive. We believe that the public sector should not spend taxpayers’ money on food that is not equivalent to British standards of production, because it is unfair on our farming and food industries.

[Kerry McCarthy (Bristol East) (Lab)]

I was very reassured to hear the Secretary of State say that animal welfare standards were important, as well as the British origin of the food. If the application for an 8,000-strong dairy factory farm in Lincolnshire is approved, will she join me in urging a boycott of battery milk by the public sector, and does she support the World Society for the Protection of Animals’ “Not in my cuppa” campaign?

[Mrs Spelman]

The hon. Lady is talking about welfare standards and examples of planning applications—well publicised in the press—for large-scale units which, to date, have not been accepted. Logically, however, it is not scale that is the determinant of welfare: there can be animal welfare problems at both small and large-scale units. It has everything to do with the quality of the husbandry.

[Miss Anne McIntosh (Thirsk and Malton) (Con)]

7. What recent assessment she has made of the adequacy of flood defences.

--- Later in debate ---

[The Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Mrs Caroline Spelman)]

The Government have made a commitment to clear and honest food labelling. Our food labelling standards work remains focused on protecting consumers and enabling them to make informed choices, as well as ensuring a level playing field to promote the competitiveness of our food industry.

[Andrew Stephenson]

I thank the Secretary of State for that answer. Does she agree that it is important that consumers across the UK are able to see clear and honest food labelling, particularly in relation to the country of origin of meat and dairy products, so that they know where animals have been farmed?

[Mrs Spelman]

I absolutely agree with my hon. Friend. We are negotiating on the proposed EU food information regulation, to ensure clarity in food labelling for consumers, especially on country of origin. That will ensure that unprocessed meat can be labelled as British only if it comes from an animal born, reared and slaughtered in the UK. Processed foods labelled as being made here will also have to show the origin of their main ingredient if that is from outside the UK.

[Alun Cairns]

I am grateful to the Secretary of State for her answer. Will she go further and advise us how far she will push in the negotiations for the nations and regions of the UK to be reflected in labelling?

[Mrs Spelman]

The negotiations have been ongoing for about three years, as the right hon. Member for Leeds Central (Hilary Benn) will confirm, but under the Belgian presidency it is hoped that a political agreement will be reached by the end of the year. The discussion is about country of origin labelling; regional identification is already permitted on labels and is an important part of the Government’s strategy to encourage the recognition and protection of good-quality regionally produced foods, with which all of us as consumers would readily identify.

[Thomas Docherty (Dunfermline and West Fife) (Lab)]

Will the Secretary of State therefore speak to her Conservative MEPs to find out why they do not support food labelling through the European Parliament?

[Mrs Spelman]

With respect, I believe that Conservative Members of the European Parliament did support honesty in labelling, and that has been a Conservative party commitment for as long as I can remember. The European Parliament is currently considering compulsory country of origin labelling, and we have not ruled out the option.

[Andrew Bridgen (North West Leicestershire) (Con)]

15. What further plans her Department has to reduce the number of non-departmental public bodies for which it is responsible.

[The Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Mrs Caroline Spelman)]

The Government are committed to making substantial reforms to public bodies to increase accountability and reduce costs. I have been looking closely to ensure that we deliver our priorities in the most efficient and effective way, and to enhance the role of the big society. I announced reductions in the number of bodies before the recess and will make further announcements this autumn.

[Andrew Bridgen]

Given the overlap of responsibilities and roles between the Environment Agency and Natural England, does my right hon. Friend agree that there could be scope to merge the two bodies and that considerable savings and efficiencies could result?

[Mrs Spelman]

My hon. Friend will have to await the final announcements that will be made this autumn. However, we have already had constructive discussions with Natural England and the Environment Agency, which has been very helpful in our quest for savings that will not involve compromising the front line. Reducing duplication between those organisations will obviously be one way of achieving that.

[Emma Reynolds (Wolverhampton North East) (Lab)]

Given the recent suggestion that the Government will scrap the Commission for Rural Communities, the Sustainable Development Commission and the Royal Commission on Environmental Pollution, how on earth can Ministers come to the House and claim that this will be the greenest Government ever, and how will the functions performed by those bodies be taken over?

[Mrs Spelman]

If the hon. Lady examines our structural reform plan closely, she will see that we have incorporated the important issues of environmental protection and sustainable development in the Department’s mainstream work. They are among its top three priorities.

The Commission for Rural Communities was established a long time ago. I am sure that the hon. Lady would acknowledge that there is a considerable depth of understanding of the issues of rural communities on this side of the House, and that DEFRA is the rural champion at the heart of Government.

[Tony Baldry (Banbury) (Con)]

16. When she next expects to meet the chief executive of the Waste and Resources Action Programme to discuss its work.

--- Later in debate ---

[Mark Menzies (Fylde) (Con)]

20. What steps her Department plans to take to encourage local sourcing of food by supermarkets.

[The Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Mrs Caroline Spelman)]

In response to growing consumer demand for local food, retailers have adopted buying policies aimed at increasing the availability of regional and local food on their shelves. I welcome that, and recognise the need to provide consumers with information on the provenance of the food that they buy. Clearer origin labelling is therefore a key commitment in the Government’s programme.

[Mark Menzies]

I thank the Minister for her answer, but if small food producers are to be able to grow and supply the big supermarkets they must be able to develop their business, and one factor that holds them back is regulation and bureaucracy. What steps is the Department taking to strip out regulation in order to make it easier for such producers to grow?

[Mrs Spelman]

I know that my hon. Friend has long experience of working in the food retail industry and has a keen understanding of this issue, and therefore I would encourage him to participate in the work of the regulation taskforce, and to make his submissions to its chairman in a timely fashion so that, as far as possible, the burden of regulation can be alleviated without undermining the original intention for which it was created.

[Penny Mordaunt (Portsmouth North) (Con)]

21. What recent estimate her Department has made of the retail value of food discarded because it is unsold or unused; and if she will make a statement.

--- Later in debate ---

[Julian Sturdy (York Outer) (Con)]

T1. If she will make a statement on her departmental responsibilities.

[The Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Mrs Caroline Spelman)]

My Department has responsibility for safeguarding the environment, supporting farmers and strengthening the green economy. In line with that, I am pleased to be able to tell the House that since the last topical questions my Department has started work on the natural environment White Paper, which will strengthen the UK’s position as we approach the summit on biodiversity in Nagoya next month. This will be the first White Paper of its kind for 20 years and it will play a vital role in helping us to deliver our pledge to be the greenest Government ever.

[Julian Sturdy]

The Yorkshire region has long been known for its expertise in agricultural matters, and given that part of the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs is already based in York I am keen to put forward a proposal to make York into a centre of excellence for agriculture matters, following the example of Montpellier in France. Will the Secretary of State agree to meet me to discuss that exciting proposal?

[Mrs Spelman]

I will be very happy to meet my hon. Friend, who shows a commendable desire to do his best for his constituency and region. I have to inform him that DEFRA has all around the country a large number of outposts, which, during the recess, the ministerial team—including me; I went to Worcester and Bristol— made a great effort to visit. That diversification is part of our resilience.

[Hilary Benn (Leeds Central) (Lab)]

Given that DEFRA is an economic Department with very big European responsibilities, is it not astonishing that the Secretary of State is not listed as being a member of either of the Cabinet committees responsible—the Europe and economic affairs committees—whereas the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government is a member of both and, moreover, appears to be making waste policy. Why has the Secretary of State allowed DEFRA’s influence to be downgraded in that way, and how can the Department be at the heart of the Government when she is not even on the main Cabinet committees?

[Mrs Spelman]

I am very happy to inform the right hon. Gentleman that I have attended every single one of the economic affairs Cabinet committees. The structure of the Cabinet committee is about to be changed, so there will be a sub-committee of the Departments that have the most dealings with Europe. DEFRA, with 80% of its business determined at a European level, is one of those.

[Elizabeth Truss (South West Norfolk) (Con)]

T2. Could the Secretary of State outline plans to reduce the number of organisations carrying out farm visits and inspections, which in south-west Norfolk includes Natural England, the Environment Agency and the Rural Payments Agency, as that places both a burden on farmers and a cost on the Exchequer?

--- Later in debate ---

[Mr Peter Bone (Wellingborough) (Con)]

T3. The EU Budget Commissioner wants to abolish the UK’s rebate, for which Mrs Thatcher fought so hard, on the grounds that farm payments have fallen as a percentage of the overall budget. If that happens, it will cost the United Kingdom £5 billion a year. Does the Minister have any advice for the EU Commissioner?

[Mrs Spelman]

I have a very clear view for the EU Commissioner, which was articulated by the Chancellor this week: the rebate remains fully justified, given the distortions in the EU budget. This is a matter of fairness for us, as the UK has the lowest per capita receipts. As 43% of the EU budget is spent on agriculture, our quest is also to seek genuine and ambitious reform of the common agricultural policy that will deliver good value for farmers, taxpayers, consumers and the environment alike.

[Barry Gardiner (Brent North) (Lab)]

The coalition agreement stipulates that the Government will legislate to ban both the import and possession of illegal timber. The Secretary of State has recently made it clear that that commitment has been dropped in favour of the lesser European proposals. Has she discussed that with her coalition partners, and if so, with whom and when?

--- Later in debate ---

[Roger Williams (Brecon and Radnorshire) (LD)]

I draw the House’s attention to my entry in the Register of Members’ Financial Interests. Farmers are very keen to face up to the challenge of producing more food while impacting less on the environment and delivering the public goods of biodiversity, landscape conservation, water management and carbon sequestration, but they need a lead from the Department. When can farmers look forward to having that lead so that they can carry out those vital works?

[Mrs Spelman]

I thank my honourable ally for that question. I refer him to the No. 1 priority in the Department’s structural reform plan which is precisely to support the British food and farming sectors to produce food in a sustainable way that also protects the environment.

[Kerry McCarthy (Bristol East) (Lab)]

Further to the response that the Secretary of State gave me earlier, does she believe that keeping cows indoors in cubicles for more than 10 months of the year when they are in milk, milking them three times a day instead of the usual two and their having an average lifespan of five years, as opposed to the natural lifespan of 20 years, is compatible with good animal welfare standards?

[George Freeman (Mid Norfolk) (Con)]

T9. I am sure that the Minister will agree that our agricultural and food research sector is a vital platform for both sustainable production and unlocking huge new markets around the world. Will the Department comment on the recent Taylor review and the excellent recommendations it has made?

[Mrs Spelman]

I thank my hon. Friend for that question, which allows me to place on the record our very grateful thanks to Lord Taylor, whose experience of working in the horticultural industry has been invaluable in the preparation of the report. It was commissioned while my party was in opposition, was not officially commissioned by the Government and therefore cannot be published as a Government report. However, my Department’s response will be published officially and shortly.

Equine Infectious Anaemia

Caroline Spelman Excerpts

Wednesday 8th September 2010 Written Statements

[The Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Mrs Caroline Spelman)]

I wish to inform the House that on the afternoon of 6 September 2010 the chief veterinary officer for the United Kingdom confirmed equine infectious anaemia (EIA) in one horse in Northumberland following importation from the Netherlands.

A single premises is currently under disease control restrictions and the infected horse has been humanely destroyed.

The infected animal arrived in a group of six horses. The other five horses have tested negative for the disease. There are a further 11 horses on the premises which are also being tested for the disease. As part of our control measures we will be undertaking a detailed epidemiological investigation. We have identified a bridleway adjacent to the premises. We have agreed with the local authority that they will put in place notices at relevant points leading to the bridleway advising horse owners not to exercise their horses in this area.

The risk of further spread among horses is considered by experts to be very low, but this will be kept under review pending further epidemiological investigation. Expert advice from the Health Protection Agency is that EIA is not a risk to human health and that there is no evidence that this incident presents a risk to the local community.

This is the second case of equine infectious anaemia in recently imported horses this year. Prior to 2010 there had been no confirmed cases since 1976. This shows the success of our post-import testing regime. This was an apparently healthy horse carrying a notifiable disease that we are keen to keep out of Great Britain.

Departmental Arm's Length Bodies

Caroline Spelman Excerpts

Thursday 22nd July 2010 Written Statements

[The Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Mrs Caroline Spelman)]

This Government are committed to sustainable development and to becoming the greenest Government ever, promoting economic development, environmental protection and an improving quality of life for everyone in the UK.

In support of this, DEFRA’S new Structural Reform Plan was published last week. It sets out three departmental strategic priorities:

to support and develop British farming and encourage sustainable food production;

to help to enhance the environment and biodiversity to improve quality of life; and,

to support a strong and sustainable green economy, which is resilient to climate change.

To deliver these priorities, sustainability needs to be driven across Whitehall and beyond.

I am committed to increasing the transparency and accountability of DEFRA’S public bodies, to playing my part in reducing public spending and to reducing the burden of regulation. Following my written ministerial statement of 29 June 2010, Official Report, column 36WS, I am today announcing the next series of reforms to DEFRA’S network of arm’s length bodies.

On sustainability—together with my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change—we are determined to play the lead role across the whole of Government. We will mainstream sustainability, strengthen the Government’s performance in this area and put processes in place to join up activity across Government much more effectively. I am not willing simply to delegate this responsibility to an external body. I have accordingly decided that I will withdraw DEFRA funding from the Sustainable Development Commission (SDC) at the end of the current financial year, and instead take a personal lead, with an enhanced departmental capability and presence.

I also fully support the role of the House of Commons Environmental Audit Committee in this area: powerful scrutiny within the democratic process.

The SDC was founded in October 2000 and recently became an executive non-departmental public body (NDPB). It is jointly owned with the devolved Administrations in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland. Each of them has to decide on the best future arrangements to meet their needs and over the next few months my Department will work very closely with them to ensure a smooth transition.

The SDC has made a positive contribution to sustainable development across Government and society over the past 10 years, and I pay tribute to their work and to their current and previous chairs, Will Day and Jonathon Porritt.

I am also announcing today that I intend to abolish the Royal Commission on Environmental Pollution in 2011, subject to the necessary processes and ongoing discussions with devolved Administration Ministers. When the RCEP was set up in 1970, there was very little awareness of environmental issues, with few organisations capable of offering relevant advice. The situation now is very different, and the Government have many such sources of expert, independent advice and challenge. Protecting the environment remains a key Government aim, and DEFRA intends to draw on the full range of expertise available, including Foresight, the research councils, the Living With Environmental Change programme (in which DEFRA and DECC are partners with the research councils) the Royal Society and other academies. In making this decision, I pay tribute to the work of the Royal Commission and its current chair, Sir John Lawton. Over the last 40 years the commissioners have made a significant contribution to raising the profile of environmental issues in the UK.

A range of public bodies affiliated to DEFRA was established by the 1948 Agricultural Wages Act. Over time, this piece of legislation has become outdated, inflexible and burdensome for farmers and workers. So today I am announcing that we will be seeking agreement with the Welsh Assembly Government to abolish the Agricultural Wages Board. In England, we will be taking measures to bring agricultural workers within the scope of the National Minimum Wage Act and my Department will be working closely with BIS to make the necessary amendments to the Act itself. We are discussing with the Welsh Assembly Government the arrangements they wish to propose in respect of Wales, and will agree with them measures for the abolition of the Committee on Agricultural Valuation and, separately, the Commons Commissioners. The 15 Agricultural Wages Committees and the 16 Agricultural Dwelling House Advisory Committees will also be abolished. Appropriate measures for effecting these changes will be brought forward as part of the Public Bodies (Reform) Bill. The cumulative effect of these changes will allow the agricultural industry to adopt flexible and modern employment practices in order to help ensure a vibrant and sustainable industry for the future.

I have decided that DEFRA should have a stronger role in developing policy for inland waterways and have already signalled our preference for moving British Waterways to a civil society model. Today I am announcing that I also intend to abolish the Inland Waterways Advisory Council. DEFRA will lead on developing future policy in this area by consulting all interests directly, by making full use of the evidence which can be provided by the navigation authorities and by forming a closer relationship with stakeholders. This decision highlights the importance I attach to the effective management of inland waterways and my determination to place them on a more sustainable long-term footing.

The changes I am announcing today will help streamline and modernise DEFRA’S network of arm’s length bodies and enhance accountability and transparency. I am continuing to look closely at DEFRA’S other arm’s length bodies and will make further announcements at the appropriate time.

Drought (North West)

Caroline Spelman Excerpts

Thursday 22nd July 2010 Written Statements

[The Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Mrs Caroline Spelman)]

The House will be aware that the first six months of 2010 have been the driest since 1929—this is partly attributable to more of our winter and spring wind coming more from the north than is usual (bringing with them the ash cloud earlier in the year), rather than the usual winds from the west which bring us much of our winter/spring rain. This has had a broad impact on the availability of water in rivers, reservoirs and canals, and on the environment and agriculture, with the lack of rain reducing grass growth and stressing other crops.

The problem has been particularly acute in the North West which has received only 60% of its average rainfall in the first half of this year. Public water supplies in this region are more reliant than most on reservoirs which are quick to replenish when it rains but also quick to empty when there is a long dry period as now. As a consequence United Utilities, the water company in the region, has encouraged consumers to be careful how they use water and on 9 July they imposed a hosepipe ban to reduce consumption.

I have been following developments closely and receive full briefing weekly from the Environment Agency, which has responsibility for managing our water resources. In addition, I recently met Philip Green, CEO at United Utilities, who updated me on the actions the company is taking to help protect supplies of water to its customers. Since the last drought in the North West in 1995-96, leakage has halved and is now operating at its economic level of leakage; this has contributed to a drop of almost a quarter in the total demand for water over the same period; United Utilities is increasing resilience of supplies through a new west to east link that is nearing completion. Other water companies are also taking positive action, as I saw for myself in a recent visit to Yorkshire Water; this company has improved resilience of its water supply since 1995-96 through creation of a network to redistribute water taken from rivers, reservoirs and groundwater across its supply area.

All water companies plan for secure supplies through their 25-year water resources management plans. These set out how a company will provide for a sustainable supply and demand balance taking into account pressures such as population growth and climate change. But that does not mean that they can avoid introducing restrictions in times of water shortage: typically they plan for restrictions once every 20 years. To plan for resources that would meet demand in any circumstances would build in significant additional costs, which would fall to their customers, and would have impacts on the environment too. And so all companies take a risk-based approach, balancing a planned level of service, to include measures such as hosepipe bans, against the costs customers are willing to pay for a secure supply.

None of us can predict what the weather will bring over the coming year and, while I am advised by the Environment Agency that no other part of England is anticipating imposing hosepipe bans at present, after such a dry six months we should all take care to protect the resources available for essential uses and not let it run to waste unnecessarily. Householders can get good advice on how to make best use of water from their water supplier, and from Waterwise (www.waterwise.org.uk).

Looking more broadly at the UK situation we must recognise that the United Kingdom has finite water resources, with some parts of England having less water per person than many hotter and drier countries. Using our water supplies wisely so that we have what we need for essential domestic and industrial purposes, while minimising the impact on the natural environment at a time of climate change and population growth is the challenge for the future. It is now 20 years since the current regulatory regime was put in place and the White Paper I plan to publish next summer will examine the options for reforming the industry to drive greater efficiency and improving the way we value and use our water resources.

I will continue to monitor the situation and will keep the House updated if there is any material change in the situation.

Agriculture and Fisheries Council

Caroline Spelman Excerpts

Thursday 22nd July 2010 Written Statements

[The Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Mrs Caroline Spelman)]

My hon. Friend the Minister of State for Agriculture and Food represented the United Kingdom at the Agriculture and Fisheries Council in Brussels on 12 July, the first under the Belgian presidency.

Belgium’s Federal Agriculture Minister (Laruelle) and Flemish Minister-President (Peeters—who will chair fisheries items at Council), gave an overview of their priorities for the next six months. On agriculture, there will be a continuation of discussions of future CAP in advance of the forthcoming communication; and legislative proposals on dairy, food for the needy and quality policy. There would also be other discussions on the transmissible spongiform encephalopathy (TSE) roadmap, animal health strategy and the regulatory framework on genetically modified organisms (GMOs). On fisheries there would be the annual cycle of decisions on total allowable catches (TACs) and quotas, but also discussion on CFP reform, in particular on the link between science and fisheries.

Commissioner Ciolos introduced the dairy high level group recommendations as a means to enable the EU to achieve market stability for the milk sector and pave the way for a future without quotas. There will be a legislative package at the end of the year concentrating on the first three recommendations on contractual relations, bargaining power of producers and the role of producers (POs) and interbranch organisations (IBOs).

Council was divided between those calling for more regulatory and market management intervention, and those urging more competitive responses, using the full scope of existing provisions. Some called for mandatory contracts between producers and milk purchasers, but others, led by the UK, wanted these kept voluntary.

The UK and the Netherlands argued that no changes were needed to competition law to allow better functioning of the milk supply chain, but a number of others urged relaxations of competition rules to allow producers more scope to manage sales.

Origin labelling also featured, with a number of member states against compulsory labelling, whilst others preferred voluntary labelling, especially for imitation products. On market measures there was broad consensus that reform should continue, but still a need for some form of safety net.

There was a mixed response on POs and IBOs, with France and most southern Europeans wanting their powers extended in the milk sector.

Northern member states urged caution around changes to role of POs and IBOs, warning against with the risk of creating an IBO monopoly.

The UK stressed the need for rebalancing producer power, but noted that there was already scope to do so under current rules and that it should not interfere with free market principles. The UK also underlined the clear differences in market organisation between member states—one size solutions would not fit all, and any legislation would have to minimise burdens.

The presidency (Laruelle) plan Council conclusions to steer the Commission’s legislative package for the September Council.

Next, Ciolos noted the derogation from the state aid rules which allowed the German alcohol monopoly to buy spirits from certain distillers at guaranteed prices. The German authorities accepted that the derogation could not continue and therefore it was proposed that this be phased out by 2013, although Germany would be able to continue paying state aid to the sector up to 2017. Germany concurred and in order to allay concerns about distortion to the market, highlighted that the monopoly only represented less than 1% of the EU market of ethyl alcohol and that there was free access to its market for spirits produced elsewhere in the EU. The special Committee on agriculture (SCA) would continue discussions on the proposal in September.

Under any other business, Lithuania (with some support) requested that it be allowed to make advance direct payments (from 16 October rather than 1 December) to farmers due to the exceptionally harsh winter which had led to the loss of winter crops in many areas. The Commissioner said his services would deal with any individual request made, but stressed that member states must demonstrate that the circumstances were truly exceptional.

Marine Policy Statement

Caroline Spelman Excerpts

Wednesday 21st July 2010 Written Statements

[The Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Mrs Caroline Spelman)]

The Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs and the devolved Administrations are launching today a public consultation on the draft UK Marine Policy Statement (MPS). As required by the Marine and Coastal Access Act 2009, I am laying the consultation draft before both Houses of Parliament, and placing copies in the House Libraries.

The MPS forms a key element of the coalition Government’s programme for implementing the Marine and Coastal Access Act 2009. The draft MPS is UK-wide and has been developed jointly with officials in the devolved Administrations. The Marine Act provides for the introduction of marine planning in UK waters for the first time and the MPS is the first step in this new marine planning system.

The MPS is defined by the requirements placed on it by the Marine and Coastal Access Act 2009, with the overall aim of contributing to the achievement of sustainable development. The MPS will be the decision-making framework for the UK marine area and will guide the development of marine plans and licensing regimes across the UK. It will ensure that, going forward, decisions about the marine area are made strategically, according to a clearly set out vision, policies and objectives. The MPS therefore covers all major activities and sectors from renewable energy to nature conservation and from fishing to tourism. The MPS sets the policy context and direction in each of these areas and the considerations that must be given to each activity in the development of marine plans or when licensing decisions are taken. By bringing together the wealth of policy objectives for the marine area, and by setting out in one place the breadth of the legislation that exists for the marine environment, the MPS will provide clarity for regulators and developers. The aim of the MPS is to ensure the necessary consistency and coherence across the UK in the way we manage our seas, while providing the flexibility for marine plans to reflect the characteristics and needs of different marine areas.

The draft MPS is supported by an appraisal of sustainability (incorporating a strategic environmental assessment), a habitats regulations assessment, an equality impact assessment screening report and an impact assessment. These documents have also been published today as part of the consultation package, and copies will be placed in the House Libraries.

The public consultation being launched today invites comments on all the documents listed above. The consultation can be found online at: www.defra. gov.uk/corporate/consult/marine-policy/index.htm. The consultation closes on 13 October 2010. All interested parties are invited to participate in consultation events being organised by my Department and in the wider engagement programme set out in our revised Statement of Public Participation, which can be found at: http://www.defra.gov.uk/environment/marine/documents/legislation/ukpolicy-publicpart.pdf. My officials will make a summary of the consultation responses available to Parliament at the end of the consultation period.

Paragraph 10(7) of schedule 5 to the Marine and Coastal Access Act 2009 requires the Secretary of State to specify the period allocated for legislative scrutiny of the consultation draft of the MPS. The relevant period for this purpose begins on 21 July 2010 and ends on 28 January 2011.

My Department is also launching today consultations on the marine planning system and the marine licensing systems in England. Together, these three consultations represent a coherent package of action that the Government are taking to improve the management of our seas.

Agriculture and Fisheries Council (June)

Caroline Spelman Excerpts

Monday 12th July 2010 Written Statements

[The Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Mrs Caroline Spelman)]

My hon. Friend the Minister of State and the Under-Secretary with responsibility for the natural environment and fisheries, my hon. Friend the Member for Newbury (Richard Benyon), represented the United Kingdom at the Agriculture and Fisheries Council in Luxembourg on 29 June. Richard Lochhead MSP also attended. This was the last Agriculture and Fisheries Council under the Spanish presidency.

On fisheries Commissioner Damanaki set out a fairly clear picture of the current state of fish stocks. The Commission had published its annual policy statement which set out the framework for determining what catch limits would be proposed for 2011, once the scientific advice was published. However, it proposed more strict catch limits for over-exploited stocks to reach the level of maximum sustainable yield (MSY) by 2015, in line with agreements at the 2002 Johannesburg World Sustainable Development Summit.

Most fishing member states commented. The UK stressed the following points (with a number of member states supporting each):

Achieving MSY should be done pragmatically given differences of scientific opinion, and the difficulty of establishing targets for single stocks in mixed fisheries;

Catch limits for stocks with insufficient data should be set as per last year, rather than reduced in line with catches as proposed;

Catch quotas (rather than current landing quotas) should be more widely used on a pilot basis in order to reduce discarded fish;

The quality and coverage of scientific data should be improved, including using industry input.

The Commission welcomed broad support on its approach, but remained firm on pleas for certain stocks; fisheries could not remain sustainable with current levels of fishing and numbers of vessels; changes needed to be made.

Damanaki also pressed the need for radical and fundamental reform of the common fisheries policy (negative economic outlook for most fleet segments; overcapacity driving down profitability leading to unsafe fishing practices, non-EU crew and leading to undue pressure on fishing stocks; negative social aspects; the amount of aid directed to the industry; low employment forecasts). A new regime should include a mix of individual transferable rights and effort management for limiting fishing opportunities and be operated on a much more regionalised basis.

The UK lead the support for this (against French, German and Polish defence of much of the current regime) emphasising the following points:

Simplified and decentralised decision-making with a more regionalised CFP;

Move away from rigid quota rules; rights for fishing should be transferrable within a member state;

Support for the social and cultural aspects of fishing in coastal communities;

Reduce discarded fish;

Greater integration of fisheries with other marine policies, especially environmental;

No additional regulation of aquaculture at EU level, external fisheries policies to be consistent with internal ones.

There were two points raised under any other business—the Commission emphasising the importance of immediately submitting national programmes for take up of the European Fisheries Fund (EFF); and Ireland drawing attention to Iceland’s recent declaration of a very large unilateral quota for mackerel in its waters (with the Faroes also threatening similar action). The UK stressed the vital importance of the mackerel stock to its industry being the most important to it economically. The present actions by Iceland and Faroe Islands were threatening the future sustainability of the stock. The Commission were encouraged (lead by the UK) to adopt a strong position to defend EU interests. The Commission undertook to talk to both countries.

Finally on fisheries, Ministers had an informal discussion on the future of the common market organisation of fisheries.

On agriculture, Council conclusions on the international competitiveness of the European agri-food model adopted as an A item without any comments.

Commissioners Ciolos (Agriculture) and Dalli (Health and Consumer Protection) made presentations on simplification and better regulation. This responded to ongoing pressure from the Council to reduce burdens that affect the competitiveness of the sector, and recognising that these can originate from across the Commission. Attention was drawn to the work the Commission had already completed to simplify existing CAP regulation, but noted too that simplification would not halt there; they would adopt a further simplification package in October. The longer-term reform of the CAP would be a further opportunity for simplification.

Eighteen member states, including the UK, had submitted a political memorandum on CAP simplification. This called for continued simplification now and in CAP reform post-2013, a more risk-based approach to financial controls, to dispense with the use of flat-rate financial corrections, and to proceed in cases of financial irregularity with an eye to the real risk to Community funds. The UK also outlined the newly established UK task force assessing the burden of farm regulation, while drawing particular attention to the complexity, cost and disproportional nature of the Commission’s financial control regime.

Next, the presidency sought confirmation of member states’ voting intentions on the Commission’s proposals to approve the placing on the market for food and feed use (but not cultivation) of five new varieties of genetically modified maize and to renew one existing authorisation. The six draft decisions were referred to the Council under the comitology rules having failed to attract a qualified majority in support when first tabled at the Regulatory Committee earlier this year. Since there was neither a qualified majority in support nor against in the Council, it fell to the Commission to adopt the decisions under its own competence.

Ciolos then introduced the dairy quarterly report which, like its two predecessors, continued to show strongly positive trends for all dairy commodities. The Commission flagged its intention to adopt a dairy package later in the year responding to the final report of the High Level Group on the dairy sector. The incoming Belgian presidency said it would debate the High Level Group report at the July Council.

There were three points raised under any other business. Greece urged the Commission to take action in respect of Argentina’s apparent breach of its WTO commitments in blocking imports of Greek canned peaches. The Netherlands encouraged Ministers to attend a conference it would be hosting on 31 October to 5 November in The Hague on food security and climate change. Poland drew attention to the floods that had recently inundated parts of the country.

Agriculture and Fisheries Council (July)

Caroline Spelman Excerpts

Monday 12th July 2010 Written Statements

[The Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Mrs Caroline Spelman)]

My hon. Friend the Minister of State with responsibility for agriculture and food will represent the United Kingdom at the Agriculture and Fisheries Council in Brussels on 12 July.

This will be the first Agriculture and Fisheries Council under the Belgian presidency, and they will present their Work programme. Discussions will also take place on the following:

Report of the High Level Group on Milk;

Report on the German Alcohol Monopoly;

Proposal for a regulation amending the Single Common Market Organisation (CMO) regulation with regard to the aid granted in the framework of the German Alcohol Monopoly.

Arm's-length Bodies

Caroline Spelman Excerpts

Tuesday 29th June 2010 Written Statements

[The Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Mrs Caroline Spelman)]

The delivery of public services is at the heart of DEFRA’S role. From flood defences to animal health, from making payments to farmers to conserving biodiversity, DEFRA protects our natural environment, supports British food and farming industries and promotes the green economy.

But DEFRA has a very big network, with over 80 arm’s-length bodies. In my first month, I have made it my priority to examine the network critically. In line with the coalition Government’s commitments, I am applying the “three Government tests” to each of our bodies: Does it perform a technical function? Does it need to be politically impartial? Does it act independently to establish facts?

I am announcing today the first results of this work.

The Government are committed to improving the quality of life for those living and working in rural areas and intend to put the fair treatment of rural communities at the centre of Government. Ministers will lead rural policy from within my Department; I have decided accordingly to abolish the Commission for Rural Communities as an independent body.

The Commission for Rural Communities (CRC) is a DEFRA-funded non-departmental public body that was established under the Natural Environment and Rural Communities Act on 1 October 2006.

The Government believe policy advice should be carried out by Departments, not arm’s-length bodies. DEFRA will, therefore, reinforce its capacity to undertake rural work within the Department: a strengthened Rural Communities Policy Unit will work across Government to ensure that the interests of rural communities are fully reflected in policies and programmes.

In taking this action, I pay tribute to the commitment and quality of work undertaken by the Commission for Rural Communities, its staff, commissioners and its chairman, the Rev. Dr Stuart Burgess CBE, over the past four years. My Department will continue to work closely with the CRC during the transition to the new arrangements so that we build on its achievements.

The Animal Health Agency and the Veterinary Laboratories Agency, are the two principal DEFRA executive agencies which work to combat animal diseases. I intend to merge these two agencies. This will allow us to bring together services, expertise and scientific capability on animal health. It will improve our resilience in delivering important services, including our animal disease emergency response capability and science requirements for animal health. In resource-constrained times, the merger will enable the agencies to create more efficient ways of working, reduce the cost and bureaucracy needed to manage the interfaces between these agencies, DEFRA and the devolved Administrations, and their customers.

The merger of the executive agencies will go ahead shortly, with as little disruption to staff and customers as possible.

A single chief executive will be appointed for the new agency this summer, and will be tasked with working out how to achieve the full integration of the agencies, including structures and ways of working, by the autumn.

In the meantime, both agencies will continue to be led by their chief executives and senior teams. In implementing this change to our arm’s-length bodies, the Department will work closely with the Responsibility and Cost Sharing Advisory Group, as well as devolved Administrations and other stakeholders.

Following the principle that Government should do only those things which only Government can do, we are examining how parts of the DEFRA network’s assets could be marketed or be run better through the voluntary sector, while protecting key DEFRA outcomes. Further announcements will follow, against the principles outlined above.

Oral Answers to Questions

Caroline Spelman Excerpts

Thursday 24th June 2010 Commons Chamber

[Matthew Hancock (West Suffolk) (Con)]

11. What discussions she has had with the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills on the roll-out of broadband to rural areas.

[The Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Mrs Caroline Spelman)]

As I am sure the House is aware, a former Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food and Secretary of State for Wales, Peter Walker, has passed away. I felt it right to record our gratitude for his services to agriculture, and our condolences to his family.

I wrote to the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport, and have followed that up with conversations with my right hon. Friends the Secretaries of State for Business Innovation and Skills and for Culture, Media and Sport about this important issue. I have spoken to the latter—the Government lead on broadband—to express my support for the initiatives announced on 8 June to take broadband to rural communities.

[Richard Drax]

I welcome the Secretary of State to her post, and thank her very much for coming down to South Dorset during the election campaign. I also welcome the Government’s plans to roll out broadband. Can she please confirm that there will be a rapid broadband legacy in rural South Dorset after the Olympics?

[Mrs Spelman]

I thank my hon. Friend for his kind words. I have seen for myself that his constituency presents challenges in terms of broadband provision, especially given the high ground before the acute descent to the coast. He is, however, fortunate to have the opportunity provided by an Olympic facility that will leave a lasting legacy in his constituency.

I take the view that we should not try to reinvent the wheel. Where broadband infrastructure is already in place, of course we should seek to use it. However, I will use my good offices to speak to those at the DCMS and to ensure that the legacy is a good one.

[Nadhim Zahawi]

I, too, welcome the Secretary of State to her post. Yesterday’s Budget confirmation that the Government will fund three pilot schemes to bring super-fast broadband to hard-to-reach areas is crucial to my constituency. It is especially crucial for the 50 to 80 age group—which, for various reasons, is one of the fastest-growing groups of internet users—and, obviously, for enterprises in the area. Can the Secretary of State tell us a little more about her discussions on those three pilot schemes?

[Mrs Spelman]

I thank my hon. Friend for drawing attention to the importance of super-fast broadband provision to all generations in our society, and to the social inclusivity it provides. The coalition Government have made a clear commitment to roll out super-fast broadband to ensure that those who live in rural communities are not disadvantaged. As my hon. Friend pointed out, that includes businesses, but it also includes children, who often need broadband to complete their homework. I assure him that this is a priority for the Department, and that the choice of location for the pilots will be decided shortly.

[Matthew Hancock]

I welcome the Secretary of State and her team to the Front Bench. I also welcome what she said about rural broadband. In counties such as Suffolk, it is an important part of our modern infrastructure. The people of Suffolk are enterprising and innovative, and I know that they too will warmly welcome what the Secretary of State has said. However, will she tell us more about the importance of community initiatives for improving broadband, and what she will do to support them?

[Mrs Spelman]

Obviously, broadband is very important to my hon. Friend’s constituency, which contains many farmers. It is simply assumed that those farmers will have access to broadband in order to complete form-filling online.

As I said earlier, this is a community opportunity. There are some excellent examples of the big society at work in Northumberland and Rutland, where communities have come together to ensure that good broadband access is available to all.

[Mark Menzies (Fylde) (Con)]

2. What plans her Department has to reduce the level of regulation on farmers; and if she will make a statement.

--- Later in debate ---

[Karen Bradley (Staffordshire Moorlands) (Con)]

13. What recent discussions she has had with the farming industry and other interested parties on reform of the common agricultural policy.

[The Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Mrs Caroline Spelman)]

I have attended the Agriculture Council twice and have discussed the CAP with Agriculture Ministers from other member states. Last night, I hosted a dinner attended by the Commissioner for Agriculture and Rural Development, Commissioner Ciolos, my colleagues here and from the devolved Administrations, the Secretary of State for Scotland and other key UK stakeholders. We discussed a number of issues, including CAP reform, and I have more European visits planned in the coming months.

[Karen Bradley]

I thank the Secretary of State for that answer. She will be well aware of the problems caused by the Rural Payments Agency’s remapping exercise, particularly in non-flat areas such as Staffordshire Moorlands. Can she reassure farmers who are still waiting to agree their revised maps that the single farm payment will not be delayed and that they will not suffer undue hardship?

[Mrs Spelman]

I am sure that my hon. Friend’s farmer constituents will be very grateful to her for bringing up this issue. If she gives us the details of any significant problems with the mapping in her area—I understand that they might relate to the slopes and gradients of the land—I am sure that my hon. Friend the Minister of State will look into it closely, as he has offered to chair the board of the RPA.

[Dr Eilidh Whiteford (Banff and Buchan) (SNP)]

May I also welcome the right hon. Lady and her team to their posts? I believe that her talks yesterday with the Scottish Government’s Cabinet Secretary for Rural Affairs and the Environment were very constructive, but will she clarify for the benefit of the House how she intends to work with the devolved Administrations? In particular, how does she see the future of pillar one support in the common agricultural policy reform process?

[Mrs Spelman]

I thank the hon. Lady for that question, and I can tell her that discussions with her honourable colleague from Scotland were indeed very constructive. I made it clear to him that I would always consult before taking a position ahead of any Council meeting. I added that we will have very close and good contact with all the devolved Administrations, and I said specifically that I am confident that pillar one and direct payments will continue.

[George Freeman (Mid Norfolk) (Con)]

May I, on behalf of the people of Mid Norfolk, send a warm welcome to the members of the Government Front Bench? It is nice to see a DEFRA team with such a rich experience of the countryside, after 13 years of feeling rather neglected.

On CAP reform, will my right hon. Friend reassure the House and the people of Mid Norfolk that, as far as possible, we will seek a revised structure that rewards our farmers for growing food competitively? Such a structure should reward them for what they do in the countryside, for which they get no support at the moment.

[Mrs Spelman]

I thank my hon. Friend for those warm words. In fact, I should like to take this opportunity to say to all Government Members that the Front Bench is grateful for their admirable level of support. I can assure my hon. Friend that in the CAP reform negotiations, we will be seeking the best deal for farmers, consumers, taxpayers and the environment. There is no doubt that sustainable food production is a public good, and there is broad support across European countries for recognising the contribution that farmers make.

[Jim Fitzpatrick (Poplar and Limehouse) (Lab)]

May I add my welcome to the Secretary of State and her ministerial team, and congratulate them on their new positions? Indeed, I extend that welcome to all new Back Benchers on both sides of the House.

A few moments ago, the Secretary of State mentioned her discussions with other interested parties, but do they include the Treasury? Reductions in the overall CAP budget might be attractive to the Treasury, but does she agree that that would be to the detriment of British agriculture? Will she assure the House that she will defend the interests of British agriculture, in both Brussels and Downing street?

[Mrs Spelman]

Of course I can give the hon. Gentleman that assurance. I just said that I was seeking to get a better deal for farmers, consumers, taxpayers and the environment, and he can be assured of that. DEFRA is an economic Department with a very clear role in the economic recovery that this country needs. It is absolutely at one with the objectives set out by the Treasury in that regard.

[Harriett Baldwin (West Worcestershire) (Con)]

15. What recent discussions she has had with the farming industry and other interested parties on the Animal Health Agency; and if she will make a statement.

--- Later in debate ---

[Grahame M. Morris (Easington) (Lab)]

17. What estimate she has made of her Department’s expenditure on flood defences in 2010-11.

[The Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Mrs Caroline Spelman)]

DEFRA’s estimate of its expenditure in 2010 to 2011 on flood and coastal erosion risk management is currently £664 million. This does not include local authority expenditure, estimated at £87 million, which is funded by Government through the formula grant.

[Grahame M. Morris]

In welcoming the new ministerial team to the Front Bench, may I point out that on 23 March last year the right hon. Member for Arundel and South Downs (Nick Herbert), the then shadow Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, said that it was

“essential that the Government takes a strong lead and implements the key recommendations from the Pitt review”

on flood defences? This was at a time when Labour was committed to protecting flood defence expenditure, which is very important in the north-east—in Morpeth and Carlisle—in view of the recent floods. Will cuts to her Department mean that key recommendations from the Pitt review will not now be implemented?

[Mrs Spelman]

I can give the hon. Gentleman an absolute assurance, because the coalition agreement states our commitment to taking forward the findings of the Pitt review on the 2007 floods. We are considering how best to put this into effect, against the difficult spending background, and as he will have heard earlier from my hon. Friend the Under-Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, this year, because the Environment Agency was ahead of the game with the amount of flood defences it had provided, there is no question of this important front-line service being compromised. In the spending review we will of course give priority to flood defences.

[Damian Collins (Folkestone and Hythe) (Con)]

The Secretary of State will be aware of the importance of the investment in sea defences in my constituency at Dymchurch, the Romney Marsh coast and Dungeness. May I ask that she continues to give consideration to the importance of that work when reviewing the budget in the future?

[Mrs Spelman]

My hon. Friend will not know this, but Dymchurch and Hythe have a special place in my heart because as a small girl I used to enjoy my summer holidays taking the light railway to such places. So I perfectly understand the importance of defending that part of the Kent coast with effective coastal defences.

[Amber Rudd (Hastings and Rye) (Con)]

18. What recent discussions she has had with the fishing industry and other interested parties on reform of the common fisheries policy.

--- Later in debate ---

[Elizabeth Truss (South West Norfolk) (Con)]

19. What plans she has to review the (a) functions and (b) accountability of the Environment Agency.

[The Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Mrs Caroline Spelman)]

In the Queen’s Speech, the Government announced their intention to bring forward a Bill to reform public bodies. DEFRA is carrying out a critical examination of the number and cost of its arm’s length bodies. The Environment Agency is being considered as part of that review.

[Elizabeth Truss]

I thank the Secretary of State for her answer. I am worried about the bureaucratic and remote nature of the Environment Agency’s processes, specifically on the flooding of the A1101 at Welney and flood defences at Wiggenhall St Germans. Will she tell us how local communities can hold the Environment Agency’s functions further to account and make it more responsive?

[Mrs Spelman]

One assurance I can give about unnecessary bureaucracy is that every one of the arm’s length bodies with which DEFRA does business will be subject to the three tests applied to arm’s length bodies across Government. They are: does it perform a technical function; does it need to be politically impartial; and does it act independently and transparently to establish the facts? The Environment Agency will be subject to those criteria.

I shall certainly take up my hon. Friend’s concerns about flooding. She has made it clear on her website and in a number of interventions how anxious she is to ensure that her constituents are protected from flooding. I shall impress that upon the Environment Agency.

[Mr Tom Watson (West Bromwich East) (Lab)]

Will the Secretary of State ask the Environment Agency to act independently and establish the facts of the use of aminopyralid herbicides, which have recently been licensed by the chemicals regulation directorate? They have got into manure and the toxic chemical has destroyed allotments in my constituency and allotments belonging to thousands of our citizens. She might not be an expert on the subject now, but I hope that she will take some responsibility and look into the misery that the chemical is causing.

[Mrs Spelman]

I thank the hon. Gentleman for his question, although I took my chemistry O-level so long ago that I have a little difficulty unravelling the description of the pesticide. There is also a pesticides inspectorate, but whether the Environment Agency or some other DEFRA agency is the appropriate body, I will take up his specific question.

[Dr Thérèse Coffey (Suffolk Coastal) (Con)]

21. If she will take steps to support fishermen in Suffolk Coastal constituency subject to restrictions in fishing activity arising from quota allocations and regulations on fishing vessels under 10 metres in length.

--- Later in debate ---

[Chris Skidmore (Kingswood) (Con)]

22. What plans she has to increase levels of biodiversity; and if she will make a statement.

[The Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Mrs Caroline Spelman)]

I assure the House that biodiversity is one of my highest priorities. I shall take action domestically through a White Paper on the natural environment, which will promote green spaces and wildlife corridors to restore and increase biodiversity. At international level, I shall ensure that the UK shows leadership in this international year of biodiversity by working to achieve a global agreement on a new biodiversity framework at the meeting of the convention on biological diversity in Nagoya in October.

[Chris Skidmore]

I am sure the Secretary of State agrees that a key aspect of improving our nation’s biodiversity is planning. In Kingswood, our much treasured green belt has been threatened by the previous Government’s disastrous regional spatial strategy and the plan to build 10,000 houses on it. Does my right hon. Friend agree that the urgent abolition of the RSS and returning powers to build houses to local communities will help to protect our green belts and defend biodiversity?

[Mrs Spelman]

I can reassure my hon. Friend that he is speaking to a Secretary of State whose constituency is entirely within the green belt and who has campaigned tirelessly on its erosion and, in particular, the unfortunate consequences of the phenomenon of garden grabbing. Those matters are the responsibility of the Department for Communities and Local Government and I am well aware that my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government intends to abolish the regional spatial strategy and to protect and maintain the green belt, as my hon. Friend would like.

[Sajid Javid (Bromsgrove) (Con)]

24. What plans her Department has to reduce the level of regulation on farmers; and if she will make a statement.

--- Later in debate ---

[Peter Aldous (Waveney) (Con)]

T1. If she will make a statement on her departmental responsibilities.

[The Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Mrs Caroline Spelman)]

I will be publishing my Department’s priorities shortly in our structural reform plan, but I can share with the House that they are: to support British farming and food and encourage sustainable food production; to enhance the environment and biodiversity to improve the quality of life; and to support a strong and sustainable green economy, resilient to climate change.

[Peter Aldous]

Fishing and farming are important industries in my constituency of Waveney in north Suffolk, and the forthcoming reviews of the CAP and the CFP provide a great opportunity to improve the prospects of those two industries. Can the Minister and her team assure my constituents that they will stand up for British farmers and fishermen and show the leadership to get them the best possible deal?

[Mrs Spelman]

I can assure my hon. Friend that the coalition Government are engaging effectively and constructively with the EU in the UK’s national interest. I hope that the early evidence of the invitation to the commissioner, which was accepted last night, will demonstrate that we are taking the concerns of British farmers and fishermen right to the heart of European matters.

[Hilary Benn (Leeds Central) (Lab)]

Sixteen conservation organisations have recently written to the Secretary of State urging her to protect agri-environment schemes from spending cuts. Given that every pound that we spend brings in money from Europe, and given that once biodiversity is lost, it is very hard to bring back, can she give the House an assurance that she will make the natural environment a priority in the decisions that she makes?

[Mrs Spelman]

I can give the right hon. Gentleman that absolute assurance. In answer to a question about biodiversity, I have just made it clear that I and the Department attach great priority to it, and agri-environment schemes are an integral part of ensuring good biodiversity.

[Robert Halfon (Harlow) (Con)]

T3. It is a shame that the former Prime Minister and right hon. Member for Kirkcaldy and Cowdenbeath (Mr Brown) made only a fleeting visit to the Chamber, as I would have liked him to have heard my question. Does the Secretary of State agree that the previous Government’s payments agency was an expensive shambles? Will she visit Matching and other villages in my constituency and meet farmers who were threatened with financial ruin when payments were delayed? Will she take steps to simplify that service?

--- Later in debate ---

[Philip Davies (Shipley) (Con)]

T6. Does the Secretary of State understand the frustration of people who hear the European Commission for ever promise to reform the common agricultural policy, and Governments of all parties promise to get it reformed, when nothing ever happens? Does she not agree that the failure to reform the CAP, which costs this country £10 billion a year, is yet another perfect example of why we would be better off out of the European Union?

[Mrs Spelman]

I perfectly understand the frustration of my hon. Friend and, in fact, farmers, who feel that we could and should get a better deal from the common agricultural policy. From the preliminary stages of the negotiations, however, I can share with him the fact that, across Europe, there is a clear consensus on lifting the regulatory burden on farmers. That augurs well for the issue being an important part of CAP reform and for my ensuring that the UK gets the best possible deal for its farmers, fishermen, consumers and taxpayers alike.

[Mr Jim Cunningham (Coventry South) (Lab)]

T4. Has the Secretary of State had the chance to talk to her colleague in local government about the building of 7,000 houses on Coventry’s green belt in Keresley and Kings Hill? Will she honour her pledge to stop that proposal, which was put forward by the previous Conservative-controlled city council?

[Mrs Spelman]

I assure the hon. Gentleman that with the abolition of the regional spatial strategy the local plan is what determines where and how many houses are built. That will be a matter for Labour-controlled Coventry city council: it is within its gift to decide where the houses that are needed for the people of Coventry should go.

[Guy Opperman (Hexham) (Con)]

T7. The electronic sheep tagging rules were introduced by the previous Government. Will the Minister review the practical operation of those hated rules? Traceability can surely be maintained without the unnecessary cost and bureaucratic burden on farmers and Government alike.

--- Later in debate ---

[Mrs Spelman]

Obviously, the common agricultural policy determines in large part the remuneration that farmers receive, and taxpayers from all member states contribute to its funding. As the hon. Gentleman will just have heard, I have made it clear that, as part of the CAP reform negotiations that will take place shortly, my objective is to ensure that we get the best deal for farmers, taxpayers and consumers alike.

[Tom Brake (Carshalton and Wallington) (LD)]

T8. Smallholdings in Carshalton suffer badly from fly-tipping. What consideration have the Government given to the National Farmers Union’s request to extend fines for people who fly-tip and to extend the Flycatcher database to include private land?

[Mark Lazarowicz (Edinburgh North and Leith) (Lab/Co-op)]

Does the answer that the Secretary of State gave to my hon. Friend the Member for Bassetlaw (John Mann) a few moments ago mean that she will indeed be arguing aggressively within the European Union for Europe-wide cuts in agricultural subsidies?

[Mrs Spelman]

I have made it clear that my objective as part of the CAP reform negotiations is to get a better deal for Britain’s farmers and taxpayers. That should include, for example, proper recognition of the measures that farmers take to protect the environment at the same time as producing food in a sustainable way. The negotiations are at the early stages. It will be quite some time before we know how the UK will be affected, but my objective is to get us the best deal.

[Tony Baldry (Banbury) (Con)]

On landfill, the coalition agreement says that the Government hope to promote energy from waste through anaerobic digestion. How will that be done?

[Mrs Spelman]

My hon. Friend, whose constituency is not far from mine, will perhaps have observed that our local authorities find that the increasing cost of the landfill tax is a strong incentive to try to reduce the amount of material that goes into recycling. There are opportunities for organic waste not to go to recycling at all; it is often composted by people who live in a rural or suburban locations. As regards anaerobic digestion, it is possible to consider collection from places where large quantities are produced, such as hospitals, catering outlets and schools.

[John Cryer (Leyton and Wanstead) (Lab)]

The plan to privatise British Waterways by the back door—that is what the Minister is planning—has been knocking about for decades. What makes him think it will work this time?

--- Later in debate ---

[Ann Coffey (Stockport) (Lab)]

What support can the Secretary of State’s Department give to traditional markets to encourage the sale of local produce?

[Mrs Spelman]

I thank the hon. Lady for that question. As I am sure she has seen, there is now a proliferation of farmers markets in most locations, because consumers very much like the diversity of high-quality produce that they offer. The decision about facilitating a farmers market in a particular location rests with local government. However, I am happy to discuss with colleagues at the Department for Communities and Local Government how we might give further encouragement so that we see more such markets.

[Duncan Hames (Chippenham) (LD)]

As part of her forthcoming review of arm’s length bodies, will the Secretary of State consider the track record of the Environment Agency in facilitating the introduction of hydroelectric power schemes on rivers? Its indecision and delay are an obstacle to progress on the River Avon in my constituency.

[Mrs Spelman]

I thank the hon. Gentleman for his question, but I believe that the question of hydroelectric power is one for the Department of Energy and Climate Change rather than the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs. However, the Environment Agency operates as an arm’s length body and, as I have previously said, will form part of the review.

[Meg Hillier (Hackney South and Shoreditch) (Lab/Co-op)]

Canals and waterways are vital in my constituency in inner London, where there is a huge renaissance thanks to the Olympics. I welcome the Minister’s tone, but what conversations has he had with the Treasury? It is vital that British Waterways is not sold down the canal but is there for the long term, to protect this asset for the British public as a mutual.