Asked by: Lord McCabe (Labour - Life peer)
Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs:
To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, if he will provide an update on proposals to transfer waterways run by the Environment Agency to the Canal and River Trust.
Answered by Baroness Coffey
As a navigation authority, the Environment Agency (EA) is responsible for over 621 miles of inland waterways. It has been reviewing the future costs required to run and maintain these waterways and, along with the Canal and River Trust (C&RT), has been working to develop proposals for a possible transfer of its navigation responsibilities and assets to the C&RT.
I met the Chairman and Chief Executive of the C&RT recently for initial discussions on proposals for a transfer. We will now look to hold further discussions with both the EA and the C&RT on possible next steps.
Asked by: Lord McCabe (Labour - Life peer)
Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs:
To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, what plans he has to prevent the pollution of rivers by water companies through the disposal of raw sewage.
Answered by Baroness Coffey
There are currently no routine discharges of raw sewage by water companies in England. Discharges from sewage treatment works must comply with permits issued under the Environmental Permitting Regulations (2010) by the Environment Agency. These permits are designed to protect the environment with the provision of sewage treatment to ensure compliance with relevant environmental directives such as the Bathing Water Directive and the Water Framework Directive. It is an offence for operators not to comply with their permit conditions.
Discharges of raw sewage can occasionally occur during pollution incidents. Such incidents may happen if equipment breaks down or if there is damage to or blockages in the sewers allowing raw sewage to enter the environment. In such cases the Environment Agency is notified and the water company is required to mitigate the impact of the pollution. In the most serious cases the Environment Agency can take enforcement action, including prosecution or civil sanctions.
Asked by: Lord McCabe (Labour - Life peer)
Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs:
To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, what recent steps her Department has taken to end the practice of dog fighting.
Answered by George Eustice
The Government has provided the police with a range of powers to tackle dog fighting effectively. Offences cover organising, advertising and taking monies relating to animal fights as well as the possession of equipment used to train dogs for dog fighting.
In addition, the Dangerous Dogs Act 1991 makes it an offence to possess certain types of dog that have been identified as bred for fighting or that are similar to types bred for fighting. The police work with the Special Operations Unit of the RSPCA to target illegal dog fighting rings by gathering intelligence and prosecuting those that are involved in dog fighting.
The police have not asked for additional funding to tackle dog fighting. The maximum penalties for animal welfare offences are kept under regular review. The Sentencing Council has very recently published revised magistrates’ court sentencing guidelines, including those in relation to dog fighting, with the aim of ensuring that the most serious cases of animal cruelty receive appropriately severe penalties within the available maximum penalty.
Asked by: Lord McCabe (Labour - Life peer)
Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs:
To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, if she will provide additional financial and other resources to the police to assist them in tackling the practice of dog fighting.
Answered by George Eustice
The Government has provided the police with a range of powers to tackle dog fighting effectively. Offences cover organising, advertising and taking monies relating to animal fights as well as the possession of equipment used to train dogs for dog fighting.
In addition, the Dangerous Dogs Act 1991 makes it an offence to possess certain types of dog that have been identified as bred for fighting or that are similar to types bred for fighting. The police work with the Special Operations Unit of the RSPCA to target illegal dog fighting rings by gathering intelligence and prosecuting those that are involved in dog fighting.
The police have not asked for additional funding to tackle dog fighting. The maximum penalties for animal welfare offences are kept under regular review. The Sentencing Council has very recently published revised magistrates’ court sentencing guidelines, including those in relation to dog fighting, with the aim of ensuring that the most serious cases of animal cruelty receive appropriately severe penalties within the available maximum penalty.
Asked by: Lord McCabe (Labour - Life peer)
Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs:
To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, whether her Department has made an assessment of the potential merits of bringing forward legislative proposals for more punitive sentences for people involved in the practice of dog fighting.
Answered by George Eustice
The Government has provided the police with a range of powers to tackle dog fighting effectively. Offences cover organising, advertising and taking monies relating to animal fights as well as the possession of equipment used to train dogs for dog fighting.
In addition, the Dangerous Dogs Act 1991 makes it an offence to possess certain types of dog that have been identified as bred for fighting or that are similar to types bred for fighting. The police work with the Special Operations Unit of the RSPCA to target illegal dog fighting rings by gathering intelligence and prosecuting those that are involved in dog fighting.
The police have not asked for additional funding to tackle dog fighting. The maximum penalties for animal welfare offences are kept under regular review. The Sentencing Council has very recently published revised magistrates’ court sentencing guidelines, including those in relation to dog fighting, with the aim of ensuring that the most serious cases of animal cruelty receive appropriately severe penalties within the available maximum penalty.
Asked by: Lord McCabe (Labour - Life peer)
Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs:
To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, what assessment she made of the potential merits of the regulation of commercial cat breeding to improve safeguards for cat welfare through the introduction of cat breeding licensing, welfare conditions and standards and an inspection process.
Answered by George Eustice
There are no proposals to introduce a licensing regime for cat breeding. The only licensing regime for animal breeding relates to dog breeding and this is because of past concerns about the welfare conditions at some such breeding establishments. Local authorities have powers under the Animal Welfare Act 2006 to investigate any concerns about the welfare standards at cat breeding establishments.
Asked by: Lord McCabe (Labour - Life peer)
Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs:
To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, if she will bring forward proposals to reduce the disparities between local authorities in the cost of dog breeding licences.
Answered by George Eustice
The power for local authorities to set fees for dog breeding licences enables them to recover the costs of administering the licensing scheme. Costs vary across different local authorities depending on a number of factors. Defra consulted on changes to the regulations on the breeding and sale of dogs earlier this year. There was no proposal to restrict local authority fees in relation to dog breeding licences but we are working with local government to establish practical and workable guidance in this area. The Government has published a summary of replies to the consultation and the final proposals will be published in due course.
Asked by: Lord McCabe (Labour - Life peer)
Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs:
To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, (a) how many and (b) what proportion of staff employed by her Department are non-UK nationals.
Answered by George Eustice
All Government Departments are bound by legal requirements concerning the right to work in the UK and, in addition, the Civil Service Nationality Rules. Evidence of nationality is checked at the point of recruitment into the Civil Service as part of wider pre-employment checks, but there is no requirement on departments to retain this information beyond the point at which it has served its purpose.
More broadly, the Government will be consulting in due course on how we work with business to ensure that workers in this country have the skills that they need to get a job. But there are no proposals to publish lists of the number or proportion of foreign workers.
Asked by: Lord McCabe (Labour - Life peer)
Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs:
To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, what recent assessment she has made of the impact on the domestic ivory market of plans by other OECD countries to make it illegal to import and export ivory; and if she will make it her policy to impose a total ban on the domestic ivory trade.
Answered by Baroness Coffey
The Government is deeply concerned by the continued poaching of elephants for their ivory, which is why we are committed to maintaining the current global ban on any international trade in new ivory. The UK has made no formal assessment of the impact of other countries’ additional measures to restrict trade in ivory. However, as a further step in delivering the Government’s manifesto commitment to press for a total ban on ivory sales, on 21 September the Secretary of State announced plans for a ban on sales of items containing ivory dated between 1947 and the present day, putting UK rules on ivory sales among the world’s toughest. We will consult on plans for the ban early next year. This will complement the existing UK approach not to permit the trade of raw ivory tusks.
The Government also successfully lobbied for the EU-wide adoption of the existing UK ban on sales of raw ivory tusks, which was advocated through the EU Council Conclusions on an EU Action Plan on Wildlife Trafficking and adopted in June. This urged EU Member States not to issue export or re-export documents under the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES) for raw, pre-Convention ivory (pre-1990) and to consider further measures to put a halt to commercial trade in ivory from elephants.
At the CITES Conference that took place from 24 September to 5 October the UK was involved in negotiations that successfully secured a strong agreement calling for the closure of domestic ivory markets where they contribute to poaching or illegal trade. This was agreed by all 183 Parties to CITES.
Asked by: Lord McCabe (Labour - Life peer)
Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs:
To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, pursuant to the Answer of 5 September 2016 to Question 43316, which elements of the EU Nature Directive transposed into UK law her Department is considering for repeal.
Answered by Baroness Coffey
The Government is considering the impacts of the decision to leave the EU including for existing legislation.