Asked by: Lord Lucas (Conservative - Excepted Hereditary)
Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs:
To ask His Majesty's Government whether, in formulating rules for the natural capital markets, farmers and landowners will be permitted to ‘stack’ trades, that is to sell credits in different markets from the same operation; if so, whether carbon credits will be included in the stacking system; and, if not, what effect they expect that to have on the viability of new broad-leaved woodland as compared with coniferous plantations.
Answered by Lord Benyon - Minister of State (Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office)
The Government is committed to supporting farmers and other land managers to access revenue streams for ecosystem services, including carbon, from their land. As set out in the Nature Markets Framework, published in March this year, it is currently possible to ‘stack’ credits for different ecosystem services from the same land, in limited circumstances. Defra is funding research to enable consideration of whether a broader range of opportunities for stacking could be permitted in future without risking the environmental integrity of credits.
Asked by: Lord Lucas (Conservative - Excepted Hereditary)
Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs:
To ask His Majesty's Government what research they are supporting into the options for introducing parasites and diseases of oak processionary moth into the UK as an alternative to the use of sprays that kill all lepidoptera larvae.
Answered by Lord Benyon - Minister of State (Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office)
Government is actively supporting research into alternative control methods for Oak Processionary Moth (OPM). This research aims to minimise or avoid the use of chemical sprays that can have negative impacts on other species, and is exploring nature-based management solutions, mating disruption and biopesticides.
Research has shown that there are at least five species which parasitise OPM in its natural range abroad. One of these species, Carcelia iliaca, has been naturally established in the UK since 2015, and is found commonly associated with OPM here. Current research is looking at ways to manage habitats to increase populations of C. iliaca and other natural predators.
Asked by: Lord Lucas (Conservative - Excepted Hereditary)
Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs:
To ask His Majesty's Government whether all farmers piloting the Sustainable Farming Incentive are members of their local farmer cluster; and if not, what plans they have to require such farmers to join.
Answered by Lord Benyon - Minister of State (Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office)
The SFI pilot is testing a version of SFI with 840 farmers across the country for three years and commenced in November 2021. Those taking part in the pilot represent a broad range of farmers that include owner occupiers and tenants; large and smaller scale businesses; and arable, livestock and mixed farming enterprises. The pilot is testing the end to end operational side of the scheme as well as the delivery and effect of the environmental Actions. Learning from the SFI pilot is feeding back into our policy teams in Defra to help develop and iterate the full schemes. Whilst some farmers within the SFI pilot may already be part of their local farm cluster group, land in the SFI pilot is not subject to any existing additional agri-environment scheme. This is so we can ensure the learning we gain from our farmers taking part in the pilot is directly related to the elements of the scheme we are testing and learning from.
As we evolve our existing Countryside Stewardship (CS) scheme, this will pay for more locally-targeted actions relating to specific habitats and features that can be done alongside food production. Through CS Plus we plan to increase the impact of the scheme by adding in more ways to incentivise and reward those who work together across multiple holdings to deliver specific environmental outcomes relevant to the locality, and join up connecting habitats across local areas.
Both SFI and CS will be available to all eligible farmers that wish to take part and as we develop these schemes, we will continue to refine the actions with farmers and land managers to make sure they work on the ground, are good value for money, and deliver the intended outcomes for sustainable domestic food production and the environment.
Asked by: Lord Lucas (Conservative - Excepted Hereditary)
Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs:
To ask Her Majesty's Government how many farmed animals have been slaughtered for human consumption for each of the last 10 years, broken down by broad species group.
Answered by Lord Benyon - Minister of State (Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office)
Statistics for the total amount of species slaughtered for human consumption in the last 10 years are as follows:
Year by Year Breakdown:
Year | Cattle | Sheep | Pigs | Chickens | Turkeys |
2012 | 2,038,900 | 11,899,100 | 10,034,500 | 873,788,600 | 18,420,300 |
2013 | 2,018,200 | 12,447,800 | 10,049,700 | 902,247,700 | 17,518,500 |
2014 | 2,071,800 | 12,814,500 | 10,227,200 | 900,382,000 | 15,411,800 |
2015 | 2,030,300 | 13,188,400 | 10,627,000 | 953,111,200 | 16,952,100 |
2016 | 2,099,100 | 12,844,500 | 10,733,100 | 992,639,100 | 15,568,400 |
2017 | 2,092,200 | 13,297,600 | 10,420,200 | 1,036,679,600 | 14,923,500 |
2018 | 2,115,200 | 12,817,100 | 10,667,100 | 1,083,094,200 | 16,154,000 |
2019 | 2,140,900 | 13,154,700 | 10,862,100 | 1,049,761,000 | 16,093,900 |
2020 | 2,137,000 | 13,059,400 | 10,923,400 | 1,096,698,900 | 16,224,100 |
2021 | 2,019,000 | 11,774,300 | 11,264,200 | 1,123,196,600 | 11,982,600 |
Asked by: Lord Lucas (Conservative - Excepted Hereditary)
Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs:
To ask Her Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of (1) the benefits of introducing a Digital Deposit Return Scheme, through which consumers could recycle drinks containers via kerbside collections using unique barcodes to reclaim deposits, and (2) the potential for incorporating a digital element into their existing proposals for a deposit return scheme.
Answered by Lord Goldsmith of Richmond Park
We consulted last year on how a deposit return scheme (DRS) might operate. The consultation set out information on a return to retailer model similar to those used successfully in other countries and we also asked for information on digital systems that could be used for a DRS.
The technology for a digital DRS is not yet available at the scale required for full implementation but we are aware of trials and research in the digital field. As these progress, we hope to be able to access more information concerning the practicalities and feasibility of using this technology, most notably in ensuring the scheme continues to deliver on its objectives, particularly with regard to improving the quality of material collected. While a return to retailer model forms our main proposal for a DRS at this stage, we remain interested to see and encourage innovation in DRS.
Asked by: Lord Lucas (Conservative - Excepted Hereditary)
Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs:
To ask Her Majesty's Government what are the reasons for the changes made in the prospective regulations for the use of asulam in 2020; and what alternative means of controlling bracken will be available in species-rich environments in lowland England.
Answered by Lord Gardiner of Kimble
Asulam is an herbicide active substance that has been used for a number of years to control bracken in the form of the formulated product “Asulox”.
All uses of herbicides are subject to strict regulation to protect people and the environment on the basis of a scientific risk assessment. The usual regulatory process involves approval of the active substance followed by authorisation of the product. However, asulam is not currently approved and so the use of Asulox to control bracken requires an application each year for so-called emergency authorisation. Emergency authorisation requires: a strong case for the importance of bracken control; a strong case that there are no alternatives to asulam use; ensuring that the use of asulam will be limited and controlled; and providing appropriate levels of protection for people and for the environment.
The application for use of Asulox this year has been assessed by the Health and Safety Executive, which concluded that restrictions were necessary. These include a buffer zone to protect aquatic organisms and a restriction to allow aerial application only. Ground-based application has not been allowed as alternative products containing amidosulfuron are available for this purpose. Amidosulfuron products are authorised for use where bracken is present on grassland (which includes moorland and rough grazing). Bracken can also be controlled by mechanical methods such as cutting, crushing and rolling.
Asked by: Lord Lucas (Conservative - Excepted Hereditary)
Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs:
To ask Her Majesty's Government what plans they have to undertake an independent assessment of the safety of asulam before the 2021 spraying season.
Answered by Lord Gardiner of Kimble
Applications to use asulam to control bracken are considered afresh each year. The assessment involves consideration of the need for use of asulam, ensuring that the use will be limited and controlled, and ensuring the protection of people and the environment. The assessment is carried out by the Health and Safety Executive with advice from the independent UK Expert Committee on Pesticides. This process will apply to any application received for the use of asulam in 2021.
Asked by: Lord Lucas (Conservative - Excepted Hereditary)
Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs:
To ask Her Majesty's Government what data on the full costs and revenues of the various ways of recycling, or otherwise disposing of, the UK’s domestic waste stream they use to inform their policy in this regard.
Answered by Lord Gardiner of Kimble
We use the latest industry data on the cost of collection of waste and recycling, waste treatment and disposal. We work closely with the Waste and Resources Action Programme (WRAP) which has strong industry links and is well placed for tracking and revisiting the latest evidence on costs and revenues.
In terms of costs, one of the key sources of information is the so called gate fee price, i.e. the prices asked by different waste and recycling industry actors to process a certain type of material. Our latest Digest 2017, shows the latest trends in gates fees across facilities like materials recovery facilities, energy from waste plants, anaerobic digestion plants or landfill. There is more detail on the latest gate fee prices on WRAP’s website.
In terms of revenues, a key public source for material recycling revenues can be accessed at letsrecycle.com.
With respect to local authority costs and revenues of waste and recycling activities, a WRAP Consistency Framework summarises the core data in an evidence report (2016) which can be found on WRAP’S website. This is built on detailed assessments of local authority costs of collection and treatment, including elements like staff and non-staff costs as well as average revenues received for sold recyclates. Further information on this is provided in the WRAP Kerbside Analysis Tool available on Wrap’s website.