E. coli

Caroline Spelman Excerpts

Friday 10th June 2011 Written Statements

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

The Secretary of State for Health informed the House on 7 June of how the Government are taking all possible measures to monitor the serious E. coli 0104 outbreak that is centred in Germany and to assess and deal with any associated risks should any arise for consumers in the UK. I will not repeat what he has said in relation to the background of the outbreak.

It is deeply regrettable that this outbreak has resulted in the loss of life. It has also had a disruptive economic impact on growers and others within the supply chain for fruit and vegetables across the EU, including our domestic industry.

At retail level, prices for domestically produced salad—lettuce, tomatoes, cucumbers, sweet peppers and courgettes—have remained relatively stable, although demand has declined, with the result that more produce is being sent to the wholesale market, which is experiencing movement in prices. I welcome the support for UK producers shown by the big retailers who have in some cases increased their offering of UK salad produce, in response to consumer demand for our home crops.

One impact of the decision by the Russian Federation to impose a ban on EU fruit and vegetable produce is that surplus produce has been directed to alternative EU markets, including our own. The consequence has been to depress values in the wholesale market, with volumes down, although here again, I understand that prices for English produce are faring better than those for imported produce. But the situation continues to develop and the latest indications from our trade organisations are that the market has deteriorated.

The impacts of the overall situation are being felt across the EU and because of this, the Agriculture and Fisheries Council on 7 June discussed the need for exceptional measures to address the market situation and to provide financial support for growers affected. Proposals were discussed by Ministers at Council level and considered by officials at the EU Fruit and Vegetables Management Committee but no package has yet been agreed for implementation. Discussions will continue on 14 June.

The proposals build upon existing measures that are available within the fruit and vegetable aspects of the common agricultural policy via its Single Common Market Organisation (sCMO) of agricultural markets. No brand new measures are proposed. The total budget proposed would be €210 million, which would come from the existing European Agriculture Guarantee Fund (Common Agricultural Policy) budget to cover tomatoes, cucumbers, lettuce and also peppers and courgettes. No additional funding is proposed. The proposals cover the extension and relation of the rules covering market withdrawals. In the main this means that produce will go for destruction, because the perishable nature of fresh produce means that intervention is not a viable option. Compensation would be paid only in respect of the withdrawal of produce and it would not extend to compensation for loss of earnings nor to pay for the difference between current and normal expected market value. Details of the proposal are as follows:

Separate maximum compensation rates at €/100kg would be established for tomatoes, lettuce, cucumbers, peppers and courgettes, to represent about 50% of the usual average June price for such produce.

The measures would be open to all member states to implement.

The allocated funding would be available on a first-come first-served basis—there are currently no plans for an allocation per member state.

In general withdrawals of produce must be made via Producer Organisations (POs) recognised under the sCMO. There is already such provision through POs’ existing funding programmes but the proposed new funding will be additional. However, under amended proposals, the Commission are considering an alternative route via the Paying Agency direct, which would be helpful for growers who are not members of a PO.

The proposal is for a temporary measure, to apply retrospectively from 26 May to 30 June, or when the budget is exhausted—whichever is sooner.

At a later stage, the Commission will consider whether a promotional campaign for fruit and vegetables could also be considered, to support the restoration of consumer confidence in the market.

The Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs will continue to maintain close contact with the Food Standards Agency and with industry organisations and is discussing with the Rural Payments Agency and other Government Departments how to implement the proposed measures.

Agriculture and Fisheries Council

Caroline Spelman Excerpts

Tuesday 7th June 2011 Written Statements

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

My noble Friend Lord Henley represented the United Kingdom at the Agriculture and Fisheries Council in Brussels on 17 May

The only item on the main agenda was the participation of the EU in negotiations on a legally binding agreement (LBA) on forests in Europe at the ministerial meeting in Oslo on 14-16 June. The presidency urged the Council to reach consensus on the two decisions required:

i) the Council decision on EU areas of competence; and

ii) the member state decision on areas of national competence.

The Commission wanted the two decisions treated as a package and agreed by consensus and the Council legal service’s opinion was that this mix of EU and MS competence required a consensus agreement. Most member states supported the LBA; the UK, Sweden and the Netherlands were opposed. The UK, while supporting the voluntary aspect of Forest Europe’s work, reiterated its objections on the basis that an LBA would involve both financial and policy costs. Sweden made a robust intervention which defended its national interests in the forest sector and rejected the LBA. However, there was general support for all decisions to be agreed by consensus and that further concessions might be required. The presidency referred the draft decisions back to Coreper for further consideration before the Oslo conference.

There were nine AoB points

Welfare of animals during transport—Sweden called on the Commission to consider reducing the maximum journey time for animals going to slaughter to eight hours. The Commission explained that its report, due to be published in September, would be to provide an overview of the implementation of the existing regulation. The Commission would then consider what actions were needed to address issues identified in that report. While a few other member states supported Sweden, the UK and others emphasised that existing EU legislation should be better enforced and that sound scientific evidence would be required to justify further legislation.

Animal Welfare in the Baltic Region—Lithuania explained that it had hosted a conference in to promote animal welfare in the Baltic region through the concept of responsible ownership. The Commission, a conference co-organiser, added that the conference had highlighted the importance of education and information campaigns to promote animal welfare standards.

Codex alimentarius negotiations—The presidency highlighted the importance of these discussions. The Commission urged member states to provide an adequate level of participation to ensure that the EU could maintain its leading role in setting international food standards.

G20 update—France updated the Council on the five pillar action plan it had drawn up, to tackle the volatility of agricultural commodity prices, for the June meeting of G20 Agriculture Ministers. The Commission would table specific proposals in reaction to the action plan which will be endorsed by the G20 Ministers in June. The importance of boosting the transparency of the agricultural commodity market and strengthening rules banning export restrictions was emphasised by the Commission.

Current drought situation and advance of direct payments —France, with the support from a number of member states called for an advance of 8% of direct payments and suckler cow premium to offset shortfalls in market receipts owing to recent droughts in northern Europe. The Commission observed that advances in direct payments were already permissible under the current rules and would work with France for a solution on suckler cow premium.

Conference on sustainable food consumption and production—The presidency introduced its report of the above conference, which had been based on the findings of the Standing Committee on Agricultural Research (SCAR). The presidency concluded that SCAR would adopt a declaration on research applications for agricultural sustainability in June, while the Commission noted that the future CAP would also need instruments to address challenges identified by the SCAR. To that end, it would be establishing an innovation partnership on agricultural research in due course.

Conclusions of the enlarged advisory group on pigmeat—The Commission reprised the conclusions, noting in particular that it would address the challenges faced by the pigmeat sector as part of the reform of the CAP. A large majority of member states intervened to lament the lack of immediate action. The presidency noted that delegations could continue to raise similar points at the informal Council on 30 May, when the question of sustainable animal husbandry would be discussed by Ministers.

Poland’s request for a 30% increase in intervention price for cereals—Poland justified this request on the basis of recent rises in input costs. The Commission rejected the call as cereals price were at record highs; intervention prices were being maintained at current levels during the CAP health check and it was important that intervention functioned as a genuine safety net for producers and not as a profitable alternative to market sales.

Sugar production quota—Poland, with the support of some member states, called for an increase in the sugar production quota for all beet producing countries to offset shortfalls and high sugar prices on the EU market. Germany, the UK and Portugal argued that balance needed to be maintained on the EU market between beet producers and cane refiners, in accordance with the 2006 sugar reforms. The Commission felt a longer-term view should be maintained, noting the structural changes that would occur.

Natural Environment White Paper (“The Natural Choice”)

Caroline Spelman Excerpts

Tuesday 7th June 2011 Written Statements

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

This is the first Environment White Paper in years and sets out how we will deliver the coalition’s commitment to protect the environment for future generations, make our economy more environmentally sustainable, and improve our quality of life and well-being.

It follows a consultation which elicited a huge public response of 15,000 submissions and I am extremely grateful to all those who took the time to respond and share their ideas.

The White Paper also responds to two major independent studies: the National Ecosystem Assessment and the Lawton report, “Making Space for Nature”.

The White Paper offers an ambitious vision for the next 50 years: to be the generation that leaves the natural environment in a better state than we found it. Key aims of the paper are:

to protect and improve our natural environment;

to grow a greener economy;

to capture the benefits which nature has for our well-being; and

to secure a healthy natural environment overseas.

The NEWP aims to better engage and connect local communities with their natural environments, making it easier for them to get involved in protecting and enhancing nature in their area.

Alongside the White Paper we have also published a more detailed response to the “Making Space for Nature” review, which is available on the DEFRA website.

A copy of the White Paper is available at: www.defra. gov.uk/environment/natural/whitepaper/

Pitt Review

Caroline Spelman Excerpts

Monday 23rd May 2011 Written Statements

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

I am today laying before Parliament a first “National Flood and Coastal Erosion Risk Management Strategy for England” and statutory guidance on “Co-operation and requesting information in flood and coastal erosion risk management”. Both documents are being presented in accordance with section 7 of the Flood and Water Management Act 2010 and stem from Sir Michael Pitt’s review of the widespread flooding in 2007, and will be issued on 18 July unless either House resolves that they should not be issued.

The national strategy will provide a legally binding framework in setting out how communities, the public sector and other organisations will work together to manage flood and coastal erosion risk. The national strategy describes:

The Environment Agency’s strategic overview role for all sources of flood risk and coastal erosion, and the approach they will take to managing the risk of flooding from main rivers and the sea;

The framework within which lead local flood authorities can work with other risk management authorities to manage local flood risk in their areas;

The work by coastal erosion risk management authorities to manage our changing coastlines, and;

How national funding and resources will be targeted towards flood and coastal erosion risk management activity in the coming years.

Copies of the national strategy and guidance on co-operation and requesting information are available to Members of the House from the Official Documents website and the Vote Office.

This Government are committed to making sure that as many communities as possible have the opportunity of benefiting from flood and coastal defences. I am therefore pleased to inform the House that following full public consultation earlier this year, my Department is today setting out a new partnership approach to funding flood and coastal resilience. The new approach aims to be both fairer and more transparent than the system it replaces, and offers the potential for much more to be achieved.

Instead of meeting the full costs of just a limited number of projects, the new approach could make Government money available towards any worthwhile scheme. Funding levels for each scheme will relate directly to the number of households protected, the value of damages being prevented, plus the other benefits a scheme would deliver. For the first time grants for surface water management and property-level protection will be available alongside funding for other risks and approaches. The reforms will not affect the amount of money that the Government themselves will invest in the coming years.

The new approach encourages better value for taxpayers’ money and greater local and private contributions to come forward, in recognition of the benefits being delivered. Choices can be taken locally on whether, and how, contributions might be found. All funds invested in this way will supplement national budgets and mean more communities can be protected. By encouraging greater local choice, and more local investment, we will ensure that local ambitions for protection are not dictated by what Government alone can afford. The new approach reflects suggestions made by Sir Michael Pitt, who recommended Government introduce a scheme that allows and encourages greater local investment.

I have today written to the chair of the Environment Agency to ask this approach be adopted for all future funding approvals. The coming months will be treated as a transitional period allowing lessons to be learned and the approach to be refined before final arrangements are confirmed in time to apply from April 2013.

Finally, I would like to inform the House that summaries of responses to the following consultations and other supporting documents are also being published today:

“Consultation on a National Flood and Coastal Erosion Risk Management Strategy for England”.

“Consultation on Statutory Guidance on Co-operation and Requesting Information in Flood and Coastal Erosion Risk Management”.

“Future funding for flood and coastal erosion risk management: Consultation on the future Capital Grant-In-Aid Allocation Process in England”.

“Consultation on Guidance to Lead Local Flood Authorities on their Contribution to Sustainable Development”.

The first two are available from the Environment Agency’s website, and the latter two can be found on DEFRA’s website.

Environment, Food and Rural Affairs

Caroline Spelman Excerpts

Monday 23rd May 2011 Ministerial Corrections

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

1. What recent representations she has received from local authorities on her Department’s waste review.

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

My ministerial colleagues and I have met a wide range of local authority representatives to discuss our review of waste policy in England. Eighty local authorities, and a range of partnership groups, responded to our call for evidence and many have participated in subsequent discussions with Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs officials, emphasising the diversity of local circumstances.

[Mrs Glindon]

Can the Secretary of State tell me what DEFRA is doing to help local authorities to crack down on persistent fly-tippers in rural and urban areas?

[Mrs Spelman]

Responsibility for dealing with fly-tipping is also a matter for the Department for Communities and Local Government, and I am sure that the hon. Lady is aware that, over time, the fines have been increased. The Natural Environment and Rural Communities Act 2006 makes provision for penalties for fly-tippers, and I want to make it perfectly clear from DEFRA’s perspective that it is a practice that we abhor, and that we seek to catch and prosecute those who perpetrate it.

[Official Report, 12 May 2011, Vol. 527, c. 1333.]

An error has been identified in an oral answer given on 12 May 2011. It is the Environmental Protection Act 1990 (as amended) that makes provision for penalties for fly-tippers, not the Natural Environment and Rural Communities Act 2006.

The correct answer should have been:

[Mrs Spelman]

Responsibility for dealing with fly-tipping is also a matter for the Department for Communities and Local Government, and I am sure that the hon. Lady is aware that, over time, the fines have been increased. The Environmental Protection Act 1990 (as amended) makes provision for penalties for fly-tippers, and I want to make it perfectly clear from DEFRA’s perspective that it is a practice that we abhor, and that we seek to catch and prosecute those who perpetrate it.

Wild Animals in Circuses

Caroline Spelman Excerpts

Thursday 19th May 2011 Written Statements

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

In my statement to the House of 13 May 2011, Official Report, column 48WS, on the question of the protection of the welfare of performing wild animals in circuses, I indicated that the Austrian Government had recently been taken to court for introducing a ban on wild animals in circuses, as a European Circus Association press release stated. However, I now understand that the initiation of court proceedings has been delayed, although a case is in preparation. My understanding is that such proceedings are likely to be issued in the near future. I would like to avoid any misunderstanding.

This does not impact on the policy I announced to the House about this matter. Having taken advice on the legal implications and on the proportionality of all the possible courses of action, I remain convinced that a tough licensing regime which introduces additional safeguards to protect wild animals in circuses is the most effective and legally sound route for the estimated 39 animals concerned.

Agriculture and Fisheries Council

Caroline Spelman Excerpts

Tuesday 17th May 2011 Written Statements

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

My noble Friend Lord Henley will represent the United Kingdom at the Agriculture and Fisheries Council in Brussels on 17 May.

There is only one main agenda item: a discussion on the EU being party to a legally binding agreement on European forests.

There are currently eight items of any other business:

Swedish delegation request in relation to the report on the protection of animals during transport.

Codex alimentarius negotiations—progress and prospects report.

Conference on sustainable food consumption and production—report back from the presidency.

A report from the pigmeat advisory group.

A request from Poland on intervention price for cereals.

A request from Poland on sugar production quota.

G20 agriculture ministerial meeting in June—an update on the plans for this meeting.

A report from Lithuania on the international conference it hosted on animal welfare in the Baltic.

Circuses (Wild Animals)

Caroline Spelman Excerpts

Friday 13th May 2011 Written Statements

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

The protection of the welfare of performing wild animals in circuses is a matter that the Government take very seriously. Rigorous standards for the protection of animals kept by man are already set in the Animal Welfare Act 2006 but there are a few areas—including the use of wild animals in travelling circuses—where additional safeguards are necessary.

The Austrian Government have recently been taken to court for their attempt to ban wild animals in circuses. This Government want to take action as soon as possible to protect wild animals in circuses without waiting for the outcome of that judgment. For this reason we propose to introduce a strict licensing regime using powers provided under the 2006 Act.

Any circuses that perform in England that wish to have wild animals such as tigers, lions and elephants performing in them will need to demonstrate that they meet high animal welfare standards for each animal before they can be granted a licence to keep those animals.

Areas being considered as part of licensing conditions include:

The rules for transport of the animal, including how long animals can spend being transported without rest periods;

The type of quarters that must be provided for the animal, including the size of the quarters and the facilities provided, including winter quarters;

The treatment of animals by trainers and keepers, including performance and the training methods that may be used.

Most circuses choose not to feature wild animals in their shows, and I believe that most people would prefer not to see them performing in circuses. But where circuses do choose to show wild animals, people expect those animals to be kept in the best possible conditions.

If circuses cannot meet these high welfare standards, they will not be allowed to use wild animals in their performances.

The Government will consult on the standards, which will be drawn up in consultation with welfare experts and other interested parties.

The licensing scheme will be enforced through inspections by Government-approved vets.

In the summer of 2009 there were 39 wild animals being used by circuses in the UK, which included elephants, tigers, lions, camels, zebras and crocodiles. There are now no longer any elephants kept in circuses in the UK.

The previous Government were similarly concerned and that is why they launched a public consultation. This consultation closed in 2010 and a summary of the responses can be found on the DEFRA website.

Oral Answers to Questions

Caroline Spelman Excerpts

Thursday 12th May 2011 Commons Chamber

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

1. What recent representations she has received from local authorities on her Department’s waste review. [Official Report, 23 May 2011, Vol. 528, c. 5-6MC.]

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

My ministerial colleagues and I have met a wide range of local authority representatives to discuss our review of waste policy in England. Eighty local authorities, and a range of partnership groups, responded to our call for evidence and many have participated in subsequent discussions with Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs officials, emphasising the diversity of local circumstances.

[Mrs Glindon]

Can the Secretary of State tell me what DEFRA is doing to help local authorities to crack down on persistent fly-tippers in rural and urban areas?

[Mrs Spelman]

Responsibility for dealing with fly-tipping is also a matter for the Department for Communities and Local Government, and I am sure that the hon. Lady is aware that, over time, the fines have been increased. The Natural Environment and Rural Communities Act 2006 makes provision for penalties for fly-tippers, and I want to make it perfectly clear from DEFRA’s perspective that it is a practice that we abhor, and that we seek to catch and prosecute those who perpetrate it.

[Mr Gary Streeter (South West Devon) (Con)]

Given that the South West Devon Waste Partnership has decided that Plymouth is the right place for its energy-from-waste facility, will the Secretary of State please try to persuade Devon county council, in its forthcoming consideration of an application for a commercial waste incinerator in south Devon, that we certainly do not need two incinerators so close to each other in the area? [Interruption.]

[Mrs Spelman]

Whatever I said has resulted in a very rapid departure by the hon. Member for North Tyneside (Mrs Glindon).

The waste review will look at waste in the round. We recognise the difficulties that incineration can cause locally, which is why we strongly support these decisions being made at local level.

[Mr Speaker]

Order. I apologise; this is nothing to do with the Secretary of State. A Member must not leave the Chamber before his or her question has been concluded, whatever other pressures there might be.

[Mr Jamie Reed (Copeland) (Lab)]

Recycling under the last Labour Government increased threefold, but this Government’s continued delays over the waste review have deprived British business of the certainty that it needs if it is to use resources in a smarter way and improve its reuse and recycling of materials. This is damaging for the economy and for the environment. Can the Secretary of State guarantee that the waste review will enable business to make up the ground lost as a result of Government delay? Can she also guarantee that it will provide the right regulatory framework to enable businesses to invest in these areas?

[Mrs Spelman]

The hon. Gentleman wrongly credits his party with being at the centre of the improvement in recycling rates. The fact is that local authorities have achieved this, and the majority of them are Conservative controlled to boot. Perhaps we can also nail this myth about delay. Our business plan makes it clear that the waste review, which was launched in June last year, will be published in June this year. This is not a question of delay. The hon. Gentleman will have to wait just a short while to see the importance that the Government attach to undertaking a thorough review of waste, which includes picking up some of the mess that the previous Government left behind.

[Bridget Phillipson (Houghton and Sunderland South) (Lab)]

2. What recent discussions she has had with the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government on allotments.

--- Later in debate ---

[Graham Evans (Weaver Vale) (Con)]

13. What steps she is taking to increase the level of access to Ministers and engagement with departmental decision making for farming and rural communities.

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

Our new rural communities policy unit is building links with a wide range of organisations representing and supporting rural communities. We are also encouraging the development of a new rural and farming network enabling people from different parts of the country to advise Ministers directly on farming, food and rural issues.

[John Glen]

I thank my right hon. Friend for that helpful reply.

One of the challenges facing rural communities is the sense of isolation that results from poor access to broadband and voice calls. How will my right hon. Friend ensure that Ministers address the problem of rural communities’ feeling of apartness from government in regard to lack of access to online means of communication?

[Mrs Spelman]

My hon. Friend is right to raise this point. Those living in rural areas with no access to broadband are at a digital disadvantage, which is why the coalition Government have committed £530 million to assisting the roll-out of superfast broadband to those areas. That is particularly important to farmers, who are expected to file their forms on line, but it is also important to children, who are nowadays expected to file their homework on line.

[Graham Evans]

Does the Secretary of State agree that one of the most damaging characteristics of the last Government was their apparent distance from issues affecting people living in rural communities such as mine? Can she reassure my constituents that people living in the countryside will be given every opportunity to ensure that their voices are heard directly when it comes to rural policy making?

[Mrs Spelman]

My hon. Friend is absolutely right. He has given the Conservatives strong backing from 2009 onwards on the need to put the rural heart of the country back at the centre of government. May I encourage him, our hon. Friend the Member for Salisbury (John Glen) and all other Members present to persuade their constituents to engage with the new rural and farming network? It will provide an opportunity for people to have direct access to Ministers, and I hope that every Member will take advantage of that.

[Kerry McCarthy (Bristol East) (Lab)]

I welcome the Department’s effort to engage with rural communities, which is obviously important in the south-west, but is the Secretary of State aware of the growing fear that the Department is beginning to represent the interests of food producers and farmers at the expense of those of food consumers? What steps is she taking to ensure that consumers are involved in departmental decision making as well?

[Mrs Spelman]

I do not recognise that distorted view of what the Department does. If I were to list just a few of our achievements over the last 12 months, they would point strongly to the breadth of our remit . For instance, I helped to secure agreement on biodiversity in Nagoya, the Minister of State, Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, my right hon. Friend the Member for South East Cambridgeshire (Mr Paice), helped to secure the ban on illegal timber logging and ensure that the ban on commercial whaling was retained, and we will shortly produce a natural environment White Paper, the first for 20 years. That should give a strong assurance to all Members and everyone we know who cares deeply about the protection of the environment.

[Mark Pawsey (Rugby) (Con)]

9. What steps her Department is taking to encourage greater community involvement in the running of local forests and woodland.

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

I recently had the privilege of planting a tree with the Friends of Kingfisher Country Park, the Tree Council, Keep Britain Tidy, BTCV and local tree wardens to mark the milestone of 100,000 trees planted as part of our big tree plant. Since the launch in December, we have helped local communities and civil society partners across the country to plant trees where they live and work.

[Mark Pawsey]

I thank the Secretary of State for her reply. In January 2000, ownership of Brandon wood in my constituency passed from the Forestry Commission to the Friends of Brandon Wood and became the first community woodland in England. Since then, volunteers have worked hard to provide a network of footpaths for all-weather and all-ability walking throughout the woods, and local schools have been involved. Will the Minister ensure that the Independent Panel on Forestry fully considers the benefits that can arise from local ownership of woodlands such as that of Brandon wood?

[Mrs Spelman]

I am sure Members know this, but I should perhaps point out that my hon. Friend has a degree in estate management, and his constituency is therefore very blessed given its appetite for engagement in community forestry. Brandon wood is one of the best examples of community forestry, and I suggest that my hon. Friend should pass it directly to the IPF, because that panel is open to all members of the public, and part of its work will involve going around the country. He has an excellent opportunity to commend this example to the panel.

[Barry Gardiner (Brent North) (Lab)]

Does the Secretary of State agree that one of the best ways of getting local people further involved in woodland management would be by progressing the wood fuel strategy? Responsibility for that now lies with her colleagues in the Department of Energy and Climate Change of course. Several months ago I had a meeting with the Minister of State, Department of Energy and Climate Change, the hon. Member for Bexhill and Battle (Gregory Barker), at which it was agreed that the programme could be doubled, but that it was important that both Departments work together on this because it is important that both demand and supply are matched up and incentivised.

[Mrs Spelman]

The hon. Gentleman is right to point out the potential of wood fuel as part of a portfolio of renewable energy sources. We work very closely with our colleagues at DECC on this matter. We share a vision for the role of renewable energy, and I will address the wood fuel strategy with my DECC colleagues.

[Mr Mark Spencer (Sherwood) (Con)]

I doubt that the Secretary of State will be aware of Nottinghamshire police’s efforts to clamp down on antisocial behaviour in one of my woodlands in Sherwood, but does she agree that opening up woodlands to members of the public for the right use serves to drive out such antisocial behaviour?

[Mrs Spelman]

I can well imagine the problems. I suspect that every Member has some woodland in their constituency, so we will all know that that environment can, from time to time, attract the unwelcome attentions of those who perpetrate antisocial behaviour. It is therefore all the more important that people in our communities are vigilant and active in the right use of woodlands and green spaces, so that, as far as possible, we stamp out the antisocial behaviour that spoils them for everyone.

[Pamela Nash (Airdrie and Shotts) (Lab)]

10. What plans she has to bring forward proposals for mandatory carbon reporting by businesses.

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

Yesterday, my noble Friend the Under-Secretary, Lord Henley, launched a public consultation seeking views on whether or not regulations should be introduced to make it mandatory for some companies to report their greenhouse gas emissions. I commend Christian Aid for raising awareness of this issue in Christian Aid week, and I hope that that will also serve to raise awareness of our consultation among members of the public and encourage them to engage in it.

[Pamela Nash]

I thank the Secretary of State for her answer. Just yesterday, Lord Henley stated:

“More consistent reporting of emissions should help investors make better use of such data”.

Does the Secretary of State therefore agree with me and the 60,000 people who have taken the time to join Christian Aid’s campaign that consistency can be achieved only if the scheme becomes mandatory?

[Mrs Spelman]

We cannot pre-empt the outcome before the consultation, but institutional investors want this information in order to be able to make a more accurate assessment of companies. Most big companies already report their greenhouse gas emissions, but this is the perfect time for the hon. Lady and her colleagues to take part in the consultation, so that views may be ascertained.

[Mr James Gray (North Wiltshire) (Con)]

Although we all want to encourage companies, particularly big companies, to reduce their greenhouse gas emissions, does the Secretary of State agree that there is a risk of over-burdensome regulation, particularly on small and medium-sized enterprises, which will result in only a very small reduction in carbon emissions?

[Mrs Spelman]

The coalition Government are committed to relieving the unnecessary burden of red tape on all of business, but we understand that pressures can be particularly burdensome on SMEs. If my hon. Friend looks at the proposals in the consultation, he will see that these concerns have been taken account of, and I am sure that if he participates in the consultation and further reinforces the views he has expressed in the Chamber, it will all add weight to the outcome of the consultation.

[Mary Creagh (Wakefield) (Lab)]

May I start by saying how unhappy the Opposition are, along with the National Farmers Union, that DEFRA questions have been castrated to a mere 45 minutes, although I understand the Government’s desire to give more time to their stellar parliamentary performer, the Deputy Prime Minister?

In opposition, the Conservative party promised to

“bring forward the date that the largest companies are required to report on carbon emissions”,

yet the consultation the Government published yesterday gives companies an option to do nothing. We heard earlier this week that the hawks in the Treasury and the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills are holding up Cabinet agreement to the UK’s fourth carbon budget. Is there a Cabinet split on carbon reporting as well?

[Mrs Spelman]

We must set the record straight, for the sake of all hon. Members. It was the official Opposition who asked for the Deputy Prime Minister to be given a 15-minute slot, which had to come from one of the longer sessions of oral questions. If one analyses the number of questions that Opposition Members have tabled, one will see that the answer lies in their own hands. A glance at the Order Paper will confirm that twice as many Members on the coalition Benches tabled questions to DEFRA.

[Mr Speaker]

Order. The Secretary of State has made her point, but she must quickly answer the question on the Order Paper, and then we will move on.

[Mrs Spelman]

The question on the Order Paper concerns woodland cover and encouraging communities to plant more trees. I think I have made it clear how—[Interruption.] As for carbon reporting, the consultation contains four options for companies to engage in carbon reporting. The consultation was launched yesterday, and this is the time for people to express their views on the options in the paper.

[George Freeman (Mid Norfolk) (Con)]

11. What discussions she has had with the Chancellor of the Exchequer on the effects on British farmers of planned EU changes to rates of duty on red diesel.

--- Later in debate ---

[Caroline Lucas (Brighton, Pavilion) (Green)]

12. What recent discussions she has had with the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills on the environmental regulations considered for possible revocation under the red tape challenge.

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

I want to make it clear that there is no intention of relaxing existing levels of environmental protection. As a former MEP, the hon. Lady will be well aware that most environmental legislation emanates from European directives, and their complete removal would not be possible. Nevertheless, it might be possible to improve their implementation arrangements. The red tape challenge should therefore be embraced by all as an excellent opportunity to gather ideas on how we can regulate better.

[Caroline Lucas]

I thank the Secretary of State for her answer, by which I am not entirely reassured. Does she know that in my constituency, in Brighton and Hove, standards for nitrogen dioxide are regularly exceeded at 20 sites across the city? Much of the pollution—as well as its costly health consequences—is caused by traffic. Will she therefore absolutely guarantee to defend the regulations on air quality that set health protection standards should they come under threat from the insidious red tape challenge?

[Mrs Spelman]

The air quality directive is a piece of European legislation. Therefore, it is not involved in any red tape challenge. I share with the hon. Lady a desire to improve air quality, as it has enormous benefits for the environment and for human health. The fact is that air quality demands at a European level are very ambitious and we are working closely with local authorities, the Mayor of London and others to do all we can to improve air quality.

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

14. How many inspections have been carried out by her Department’s zoo inspectors since May 2010; and if she will make a statement.

--- Later in debate ---

[Mr John Spellar (Warley) (Lab)]

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’s priorities are to protect the environment, support farmers and strengthen the green economy. On Monday, I launched a report on climate resilient infrastructure with Lord Krebs and Simon Kirby of National Rail at the remodelled Blackfriars station, along with my right hon. Friend the Minister of State, Department for Transport. This dry spring—the second in succession—which we are closely monitoring, reminds us all of the need to adapt to the increasing frequency of extreme weather events.

[Mr Spellar]

I thank the Secretary of State for that reply. She mentioned climate, so may I ask why she is delaying bringing forward legislation on water and why she is even considering compulsory water metering in areas where there is no water shortage? In this month of the Chelsea flower show, has she considered the impact of this water tax on gardeners or even talked to her Health colleagues about the benefits of gardening for body and soul? What do this Government have against allotment holders and gardeners?

[Mrs Spelman]

There were a number of things there. As part of our achievements in our first year in office I would count the implementation of most of the Pitt review, so there has been clear progress in implementation. The water White Paper is due later this year, and I just mentioned how closely we are monitoring the water situation. I am very concerned that it is already having an irreversible impact on agricultural production and I have convened a meeting of all stakeholders next week as it is very important that we take this matter extremely seriously.

[Stephen Barclay (North East Cambridgeshire) (Con)]

T2. The Department has spent many millions of pounds buying up some of our best farmland next to the Ouse washes to provide extra habitat for birds. The Littleport and Downham internal drainage board has expressed grave concern at the increased flooding risk to homes and other farmland. This action undermines food security and is not a good use of public funds at a time of austerity. Will the Minister agree to meet me and a local delegation to discuss that, and will his Department now publish a detailed assessment of the costs associated with it so that we can assess it properly?

--- Later in debate ---

[Stephen Gilbert (St Austell and Newquay) (LD)]

T3. Early this morning, my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State committed to publishing the waste review in June. It is obviously going to be a landmark document for the United Kingdom, so will she commit to bringing it to the House for debate?

[Mrs Spelman]

It is important that all DEFRA’s publications are laid before the House; we go to great lengths to keep the House informed of all our activities. The waste review is, as the hon. Gentleman says, a landmark publication, and we look forward to publishing it shortly. We will make it widely available to hon. Members.

[Joan Walley (Stoke-on-Trent North) (Lab)]

In view of the forthcoming European Commission conference on the LIFE+ programme to protect biodiversity, will the Secretary of State give me an assurance that officials in the Environment Agency and Natural England will work right across the UK to make sure that we can get the maximum funding from that programme, particularly for the proposal that I am working on in Stoke-on-Trent to improve access to natural resources and to keep biodiversity?

[Mrs Spelman]

I share the hon. Lady’s passion for the protection of biodiversity and the enhancement of biodiversity where there has been biodiversity loss. I am sure that every sinew will be strained by every member of the DEFRA family to make sure that the United Kingdom does well out of any resources that are being made available through the European Union so that we can benefit by putting those resources where they will make a difference—with the protection of biodiversity.

[Mr James Gray (North Wiltshire) (Con)]

T4. When my right hon. Friend the Member for Witney (Mr Cameron) and I were campaigning long and hard against the introduction of compulsory horse passports—identification cards for horses—legal advice to DEFRA was that Ministers had three options. The first was to seek to extend the EU derogation on the subject for a further 10 years, the second was to bring in a minimal regime so that horses at abattoirs would have to have some kind of documentation, and the third was an all-singing, all-dancing, bells and whistles option, requiring every zebra, donkey, horse and pony in the land to have an ID card. Will the Minister re-examine that legal advice from 2005 to work out whether it might be possible to make horse ID cards voluntary rather than compulsory?

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

Notwithstanding the Minister of State’s previous defiant answer, could the Secretary of State find it in her heart to praise The Independent for its campaign to ban wild animals from circuses? Perhaps she will join the 10,000 people who have already signed the petition that the newspaper is running by signing it herself.

[Mrs Spelman]

Every Member of the House can find it in their heart to do that—of course they can. We have all read newspaper reports about the terrible suffering of Anne the elephant, and I am very glad that she is being spared and has a new, far more enjoyable home. However, the report in The Independent clearly states that the Austrian Government have been taken to court by a German circus company because of a breach of the EU services directive. It would be irresponsible of any Government—I hope he is not saying that he would do this if he were part of a Government—to recommend something that is in legal dispute.

[Greg Mulholland (Leeds North West) (LD)]

T5. Yesterday at the Westminster youth fête, I was delighted to join other hon. Members in signing the Red Tractor 4 Wheels manifesto. I know that the Government and my right hon. Friend are committed to supporting UK farmers and to giving consumers information about environmental quality and assurance. How will they support the initiative?

“Climate Resilient Infrastructure: Preparing for a Changing Climate”

Caroline Spelman Excerpts

Monday 9th May 2011 Written Statements

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

This morning I will launch “Climate Resilient Infrastructure: Preparing for a Changing Climate”. This outlines the Government’s vision for an infrastructure network that is prepared for the future changing climate to help protect the economy and its future growth. The document encourages a much stronger focus on adapting infrastructure to the impacts of climate change as part of a green economy.

Publishing this document fulfils a commitment made last year, when the Government launched the country’s first ever national infrastructure plan, to publish a document focusing on adapting infrastructure in the energy, ICT, transport and water sectors.

The document makes it clear that climate change will have significant implications for infrastructure in particular from more unpredictable extreme weather. Higher temperatures, changing rainfall patterns, rising sea levels and more frequent extreme weather events ranging from drought to freezing winters, mean it is necessary to look now at how to prepare new and existing infrastructure for the impacts of climate change.

This approach will help minimise risks of disruption to infrastructure and higher economic costs to business and the country from climate change. That is why my Department’s business plan has a priority to

“Support a strong and sustainable green economy, resilient to climate change”;

adapting infrastructure to the impacts of climate change is a key part of delivering on this priority.

Hundreds of experts in infrastructure and engineering have been engaged throughout this work to provide a thorough analysis of the challenges and potential solutions to increasing the climate resilience of infrastructure. “Climate Resilient Infrastructure” makes the case for action, identifying who needs to act, the challenges they may face, the opportunities available and how Government can assist.

The infrastructure we rely on to keep the country running is already vulnerable to severe weather; this risk will only increase if we are not proactive and adapt to climate change. The document I am launching today emphasises the importance of early action now to minimise this risk. Importantly, it also sets out the economic opportunities climate change could present to our leading infrastructure and engineering companies.

The document covers UK Government policy in England and in the UK for reserved matters. The House will be updated on progress made in implementing the actions in the document when the Government publishes its first adaptation programme, required by the Climate Change Act in response to the climate change risk assessment due in January 2012.

I have arranged for copies of “Climate Resilient Infrastructure: Preparing for a Changing Climate” to be placed in the Vote Office. The document is also available on DEFRA’s website at www.defra.gov.uk.