Oral Answers to Questions
Caroline Spelman Excerpts(13 years, 5 months ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Karl Turner (Kingston upon Hull East) (Lab)
18. Which planned flood defence schemes will not proceed as a result of her Department’s planned reduction in expenditure on flood defences.
The Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Mrs Caroline Spelman)
I am sorry to have to tell the House some sad news. A member of Environment Agency staff was tragically killed yesterday in an accident. I hope the whole House will join me in extending our condolences to his family at this difficult time.
No schemes have been cancelled as a result of the spending review. Schemes already under construction or under contract will be completed. The Department has launched a consultation on how national funding should be allocated to flood protection schemes in future.
Toby Perkins
May I associate myself with the Secretary of State’s remarks a moment ago?
In Chesterfield in 2007, more than 500 homes were flooded and it was expected, from DEFRA’s previous statement, that 145,000 homes across the country would be removed from flood risk by 2011. I understand that the date has now been moved back to 2015. Does the Secretary of State recognise that the reduction in funding for flood defences and the removal of those homes from that earlier expectation flies in the face of the comments that she and her party made in opposition?
Mrs Spelman
With respect, I think the hon. Gentleman is confused about the figures. The Chancellor in fact gave the figure of 145,000 homes as a minimum to be protected during the spending review period—there was never any suggestion that that would happen by 2011.
I know that the hon. Gentleman has constituents in Chesterfield who are flood-affected. The Environment Agency is currently proceeding with the Avenue coking works remediation project, which is under construction. That should help to provide protection to more than 100 properties in his constituency.
Karl Turner
One key recommendation of the Pitt review was that the Government should increase spending on flood defences by more than inflation year on year. With the Government’s 27% cuts to flood defence budgets, have they turned their backs on communities such as mine in Hull East, which is still suffering very badly from the effects of the 2007 floods?
Mrs Spelman
Sir Michael Pitt’s review, which was commissioned by the hon. Gentleman’s party when it was in government, says that we
“should not simply assume that the costs of flood risk management will be met centrally…The Government should develop a scheme which allows and encourages local communities to invest in flood risk management”
schemes. The Government have launched a consultation on payment for outcomes, which will help to provide more flood defences to more communities in future.
Miss Anne McIntosh (Thirsk and Malton) (Con)
May I join the Secretary of State in expressing my condolences to the family of the Environment Agency member of staff who tragically lost his life? I pay tribute to all those who put themselves in harm’s way in the event of floods. All who serve on the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Committee would like to record our appreciation of their work.
I congratulate the Secretary of State on protecting capital expenditure. However, I am concerned to ensure that work will continue on maintaining watercourses and that more work will be done, because that too can protect from floods. May I draw her attention to the fact that the statement of principles may well not be reviewed in 2013? Is she alarmed by that development?
Mrs Spelman
My hon. Friend is right, as Chair of the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Committee, to record the Committee’s sympathy for the EA staff member.
DEFRA is expected to spend £2.1 billion over the period of the spending review on flooding—half will go on maintenance, and the other half on capital—so I am confident that we can maintain our flood defences. The Association of British Insurers has warmly welcomed the proposals under the payment for outcomes scheme. That will assist us in renegotiating the statement of principles.
Anne Marie Morris (Newton Abbot) (Con)
I have mentioned the Teignmouth flood defence scheme to the ministerial team on a number of occasions. May we have an update? Will funding be made available for those very important works?
Mrs Spelman
I cannot comment on individual projects ahead of Environment Agency decisions, which it has said it will make after the end of the consultation period on payment for outcomes, which concludes on 16 February. However, my hon. Friend’s concern about flooding in her constituency is taken very seriously by all of us.
Mr Jamie Reed (Copeland) (Lab)
All on this side of the House share the condolences expressed by the Secretary of State for the Environment Agency worker who sadly lost their life.
I am afraid that the confusion mentioned by the Secretary of State is on the Government’s part. DEFRA’s 2009 report stated that 145,000 homes would be protected from flooding by March 2011. They have abandoned that aim because of huge cuts to the EA’s flood defence budget—27% next year—and instead now hope to protect the same number of homes by 2015, two years after the current agreement with the insurance industry expires. That deliberate choice to delay will cause widespread anxiety and uncertainty for homeowners, businesses and local authorities up and down the country. The Government should now be honest with the country: either they know which flood defence schemes will be abandoned and are aware of the consequences of those cuts, or the cuts are indiscriminate, and the consequences are not understood. Does the Secretary of State know which schemes will be abandoned—yes or no?
Mrs Spelman
I just said in answer to the previous question that the Environment Agency would make decisions on all pending schemes after the close of the consultation on 16 February. As regards the figure that Opposition Members keep quoting, at no point has the figure of 145,000 properties receiving more protection ever been attributed to a time any sooner than 2015, the end of the spending review period. It would be inappropriate to compare spending levels with those of the previous Government, because Labour has failed to say how it would have accommodated the 50% cut in capital that the previous Chancellor had committed it to.
Mark Pritchard (The Wrekin) (Con)
4. If she will bring forward proposals to prohibit the sale of primates as pets.
Stephen Gilbert (St Austell and Newquay) (LD)
7. What progress her Department has made on implementation of the recommendations of the Pitt review on lessons learned from the 2007 floods on levels of flood protection for homes.
The Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Mrs Caroline Spelman)
Good progress has been made on taking forward the Pitt review recommendations. We are implementing the Flood and Water Management Act 2010 and have recently launched a consultation on our national strategy. We published the national flood emergency framework in July, and held a response exercise last month to launch preparations for Exercise Watermark, which will test responses to severe wide-area flooding in March next year.
Stephen Gilbert
I welcome the Secretary of State’s reply and was delighted to welcome her to Cornwall so that she could see for herself the recent flooding in my constituency and that of my hon. Friend the Member for South East Cornwall (Sheryll Murray). One of the lessons we have learned is that the Met Office gave a warning at 10.30 pm of an 80% chance of flooding some six hours before homes were affected and businesses destroyed, but that warning was never passed on to residents. Will she agree to meet me to discuss how we can improve early warnings?
Mrs Spelman
I commend my hon. Friend’s work in helping with the ongoing recovery in his constituency. I am sure that hon. Members will appreciate that it is hard to predict surface water flooding events. In the afternoon of that event, there was only a 20% risk of severe flooding, but by 10.30 pm, when most people are in bed and asleep, it had increased to an 80% risk. One lesson learned from previous flooding incidents is that flood wardens, who can knock on doors and alert, in particular, vulnerable members of the community of the increased risk, can assist a community’s resilience.
Lisa Nandy (Wigan) (Lab)
Simon Douglas, the director of AA Insurance, was quoted in the Evening Standard as saying that “inadequate spending” on flood defences would
“leave thousands of homes uninsurable and thus un-mortgageable.”
What help will the Government offer to the thousands of people who will find themselves in that situation?
Mrs Spelman
I refer the hon. Lady to my earlier answer about the warm welcome that the Association of British Insurers has given to the payment for outcomes approach, which, as the ABI chairman made clear, is what Pitt called for, what the ABI has been calling for and what the communities that would like to build greater resilience have also been calling for. I am sure that it will assist those at risk of flooding.
Susan Elan Jones (Clwyd South) (Lab)
8. When she plans to publish a rural impact assessment in respect of the comprehensive spending review.
The Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Mrs Caroline Spelman)
My Department is the rural champion in government, and we are working with other Departments as they develop their policies following the spending review. Those policies are the responsibility of individual Departments, but DEFRA will work with them to inform a policy statement in the new year, setting out this Government’s commitment to rural people, and our approach to promoting and supporting their needs.
Susan Elan Jones
I am grateful to the Secretary of State for her answer, but will she home in a little and give me one concrete example of something that DEFRA has done in this area?
Mrs Spelman
DEFRA is continually active in rural-proofing all policy that comes through, and hon. Members who have served in government will know that any Cabinet Minister has that function within their Department through DEFRA. The allocations have not yet been made, so the individual working out of the spending allocations has not been achieved. Let us consider, for example, the impact that DEFRA has had, working with the Department for Culture, Media and Sport, in achieving a roll-of out superfast broadband in four rural pilot areas.
Mr James Gray (North Wiltshire) (Con)
The Department is facing deep cuts—34% in capital and 28%, I think, in current costs—thanks to the appalling profligacy of the previous Government. Does the Secretary of State agree that vital to our countryside is the maintenance of environmental schemes on our farms? We have got to preserve biodiversity and a higher level of environmental conditions in our countryside. I hope that she will be able to reassure the House today that despite the cuts, she will be determined to ensure that that still happens.
Mrs Spelman
I am delighted to be able to draw my hon. Friend’s attention to the fact that we anticipate an 80% increase in higher level stewardship schemes, notwithstanding the need for DEFRA to make a contribution to addressing the budget deficit that we inherited from the previous Government.
Mr William Bain (Glasgow North East) (Lab)
We had expected the publication of the rural impact assessment, but I am afraid that all we got was more weak excuses for the Secretary of State’s failure to produce it. If she is having trouble completing her own assessment, will she at least back the findings of last month’s report on rural poverty by the Commission for Rural Communities—soon to be scrapped by her Department—which found a lack of proper business support provided to farmers by the Government, poorer access to welfare services in the countryside and a quarter of farming households living below the poverty line, under the first Government since 1926 to try to remove employment protection from agricultural workers? Is not the reality that this is a spending review that slashes investment from rural bus services and social housing, from a Government who are indifferent to the greater inequality that their policies will cause in rural Britain?
Mrs Spelman
Oh dear. I think that constitutes a serious own-goal. The hon. Gentleman should surely be aware that the data that the Commission for Rural Communities was using to make its assessment relate to the period when his party was in government.
John Robertson (Glasgow North West) (Lab)
10. What representations she has received on her Department's plans for its project to plant 1 million trees in the next four years.
The Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Mrs Caroline Spelman)
Thus far, DEFRA has received around 100 e-mails from local authorities and community groups seeking information on or expressing an interest in the big tree plant campaign and a small number of letters from other individuals and organisations.
John Robertson
How much of the money received through privatisation will be spent in the areas of planted trees? How much of it will be spent north of the border, particularly in Glasgow?
Mrs Spelman
With respect, the question is about the big tree plant campaign, a partnership campaign that DEFRA will support with £4 million of public money. The campaign is being run in conjunction with a large number of partners and charities, including Groundwork, Keep Britain Tidy, the Tree Council and the National Forest Company. In every sense, it is a big society campaign.
Sir Peter Soulsby (Leicester South) (Lab)
Two hundred and fifty thousand a year sounds like a lot of trees, but not when compared with the estimated 250 million trees—1,000 times as many—owned by the Forestry Commission in England, much of which the Government are intent on selling off and putting at risk. Will the Secretary of State tell us what she will say to the Chief Secretary to the Treasury, who is actively campaigning against proposals to dispose of a similar proportion of Forestry Commission land in Scotland—a sale of trees that Lib Dems have described as “hugely flawed” and as a “money-making scam”?
Mrs Spelman
Let me say a couple of things in response to that. With the 250,000 trees a year planted as part of the big tree plant campaign, the challenge is that the majority will be in urban areas, particularly in deprived communities, so significant plantings in those areas will benefit those communities. As for the Forestry Commission, I suggest that the hon. Gentleman, rather than reading the newspapers as a guide to Government policy, should adopt the better-informed approach of waiting for the launch of the consultation proposals, which I have discussed closely and successfully with the Chief Secretary to the Treasury.
Peter Aldous (Waveney) (Con)
11. What recent discussions her Department has had on reform of the common fisheries policy; and if she will make a statement.
Andrew Rosindell (Romford) (Con)
12. What recent steps her Department has taken to maintain the level of biodiversity.
The Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Mrs Caroline Spelman)
We will act on agreements reached at the successful biodiversity conference in Nagoya through a new biodiversity strategy for England, which will be published alongside the natural environment White Paper in the spring.
Andrew Rosindell
Will the Secretary of State outline the Government’s policies on the protection of biodiversity in our 16 British overseas territories? In particular, will she tell us what the Government are doing to protect the biodiversity of the Henderson island, one of the Pitcairn Islands, where an appalling rat infestation has caused 25,000 chicks to be killed every year?
Mrs Spelman
I think that everyone in the House is well aware of my hon. Friend’s concern about, and interest in, the overseas territories. I am delighted to be able to tell him that while attending the biodiversity conference, and the day before, I was able to announce additional spending under the Darwin initiative and, specifically, help with the protection of the Henderson petrel.
Bob Blackman (Harrow East) (Con)
13. What representations she has received on the proposed provision of a super-dairy in Lincolnshire by Nocton Dairies; and if she will make a statement.
Andrew Selous (South West Bedfordshire) (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 commend the work of those who volunteered their services during the extreme weather, particularly our farmers. I am sure that hon. Members on both sides of the House will agree that they provided a valuable service to many communities—from clearing snow to transporting midwives. That is a great example of the big society.
Andrew Selous
Will my right hon. Friend give the House a rough idea of the cost of food imported into the country that we are able, and have the capacity, to grow?
Mrs Spelman
In 2009 the UK imported indigenous food—food that could be grown in season in the UK—with a total value of approximately £15 billion. Total imports of food, feed and drink in the same period were valued at £32.5 billion.
Mary Creagh (Wakefield) (Lab)
The right hon. Lady’s colleague the Minister of State, who has responsibility for forestry, wrote to all MPs in October saying that he would consult the public on the sale of England’s forests before the end of the year. We now hear that he has postponed that consultation until the new year—yet in a parliamentary answer to me he revealed that he is busy meeting forestry companies on this very issue. When will the public get their say on the future of England’s forests?
Mary Macleod (Brentford and Isleworth) (Con)
T3. Green spaces and trees are vital in our cities, and I am fortunate that my constituency has many beautiful parks, including Dukes meadows, Gunnersbury park, Osterley park, Boston Manor park, Syon park and Hounslow heath. Can my right hon. Friend tell me what plans the Department has to plant many more trees across the city of London?
Mrs Spelman
I invite my hon. Friend, and encourage her constituents, to participate in the big tree plant campaign, which was launched at the beginning of December and will continue, and for which there are publicly available funds. We will do this in partnership with a number of charities, and I imagine that they have members in her constituency. In participating, she will demonstrate the effectiveness of this big society approach.
Jim Sheridan (Paisley and Renfrewshire North) (Lab)
T7. This Con-Dem Government propose to abolish the Agricultural Wages Board—a proposal that even Mrs Thatcher refused to implement. The Prime Minister suggests that because of the minimum wage the AWB is just a quango, but that “quango” covers workers’ wages, holidays, sick pay, overtime, standby arrangements and even bereavement leave. Does the Secretary of State agree that it is just a quango?
Simon Hughes (Bermondsey and Old Southwark) (LD)
T4. Following the successful Nagoya conference on biodiversity and against the background of the current very important climate change conference in Cancun, can the Secretary of State tell us how she intends to take forward the protection of biodiversity, both in this country and internationally?
Mrs Spelman
As I said in response to an earlier question, the new biodiversity strategy for England will be published alongside the natural environment White Paper in the spring, to which we have had an astonishingly high number of contributions from the public: there have been in excess of 15,000.
Andrew Gwynne (Denton and Reddish) (Lab)
T10. Given the Minister’s acknowledgement on Second Reading of the Sustainable Livestock Bill of the serious nature of the deforestation caused by the production of soy for livestock feed, what position will the Government take on reform of the common agricultural policy to reduce UK imports of soy?
Agriculture and Fisheries Council
Caroline Spelman Excerpts(13 years, 5 months ago)
Written StatementsRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Mrs Caroline Spelman)
The Minister of State with responsibility for agriculture and food, my hon. Friend the Member for South East Cambridgeshire (Mr Paice), and the Under-Secretary of State with responsibility for natural environment and fisheries, my hon. Friend the Member for Newbury (Richard Benyon), are representing the United Kingdom at the Agriculture and Fisheries Council in Brussels on 29 and 30 November.
There are two fisheries and four agriculture items on the agenda. Discussion will take place on the following:
Total allowable catches and quotas for deep-sea species;
EU-Norway fisheries agreement: discussion with Norway about management of joint stocks in North sea/north Atlantic as part of the December fisheries package;
Plant protection product 1, 3—dichloropropene: the Commission has proposed banning this soil fumigant;
Report on possibility of the European Food Safety Agency charging fees:
Commission communication on the future of the CAP: this is the first chance of the Council to respond to this recently published communication
Communication on the Farm Advisory Service: routine report on its operation.
There are currently six items under any other business
1. Long-term fisheries management plans—information supplied by the Commission
2. Conference on the reform of the plant health regime: report from presidency
3. Conference on animal welfare: report from presidency
4. 2011 budget: update from the Commission on handling agriculture payments, should the EU 2011 budget not be agreed before the end of the year
5. Conference on food security: report back by the Dutch on their recent conference
6. G20 and agriculture: report from the French on their plans for their G20.
Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Caroline Spelman Excerpts(13 years, 5 months ago)
Written StatementsRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Mrs Caroline Spelman)
A report on “The contribution that reporting of greenhouse gas emissions makes to the UK meeting its climate change objectives” will be laid before Parliament today.
The report is laid to meet the requirement in section 84 of the Climate Change Act 2008. Copies will be made available in the Vote Office and can also be accessed on the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs website at: http://www.defra.gov.uk/environment/business/reporting/index.htm.
Flooding (Cornwall)
Caroline Spelman Excerpts(13 years, 6 months ago)
Written StatementsRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Mrs Caroline Spelman)
Members will be aware of the serious flooding that affected parts of Cornwall in particular on Wednesday 17 November, causing disruption and distress to many people. At its height, 10 flood warnings were in place though these have now been removed.
The flooding was caused by very heavy rainfall from Tuesday evening onwards: 38.8 mm fell in one hour at Mevagissey. This resulted in significant surface water and river flooding, causing widespread travel difficulties and damage to more than 250 properties. Affected areas include St Austell, Par, Pentewan, Bodmin, Luxulyan, Lostwithiel, St Blazey, St Blazey Gate, Polgooth, Launceston, and Mevagissey. The issues faced varied from place to place, requiring different local responses. The Environment Agency intends to hold clinics in each community to address the issues and build resilience.
Across Cornwall, around 3,000 properties in vulnerable areas were protected as a result of flood defence schemes. These included up to 100 on the river Fowey at Lostwithiel.
An extreme rainfall alert was issued by the Flood Forecasting Centre on Tuesday afternoon, highlighting the risk of very heavy rainfall overnight. This alert allowed local authorities to prepare to respond. The emergency has rightly been dealt with by responders at the local level who are best placed to make decisions and take action according to local needs.
Helicopters were on stand-by but not needed for flood rescue, though one medical evacuation was carried out. There was some fast-moving water, but no major injuries or missing persons have been reported. Many residents were, however, evacuated and spent the night away from home.
The Prime Minister has spoken to the leader of the Cornwall county council and heard first hand how local authorities are dealing with the situation. I visited the areas affected on Thursday to meet some of the people affected and see how agencies responded. The council held a series of public meetings on Wednesday evening in Lostwithiel, St Blazey and Mevagissey to provide residents and councillors with the latest information and to offer support and advice.
We have all seen on television just what an effect the flooding has had on homes, businesses and communities. It causes significant disruption and we express our sympathy to all those affected and also wish to pay tribute to all who have been involved in responding to this emergency, in particular those who worked so hard throughout Wednesday. This shows what can be done by communities working together.
The Government will continue to work with local authorities to help people rebuild their lives, although we know sadly that it takes time for homes and buildings to dry out. The Department for Communities and Local Government is ready to consider any application for Bellwin assistance from the local authorities affected. Once the damage has been assessed, CLG will be happy to discuss the best way forward with local councils.
The insurance industry has a key role to play in assisting the recovery process. The Association of British Insurers has said that insurers’ first priority will be to ensure that every claim is dealt with as quickly as possible and has put advice on its website for people who have been flooded by the heavy rain in Cornwall. At a recent flood summit on 16 September, Government, insurers and other stakeholders agreed to continue to work in partnership towards 2013 when the current agreement between insurers and Government expires.
As a Government we are committed to ensure that flood and coastal erosion risk is managed effectively. We have started the implementation of the Flood and Water Management Act, providing for greater local leadership and partnership to address local flood risks. We are also protecting forecasting and warning services, and incident response, and prioritising the risk-based maintenance of existing defences. It is clear from the response the lessons of Sir Michael Pitt’s report on the summer 2007 floods are being learnt.
DEFRA will be spending at least £2.1 billion on flood and coastal erosion risk management over the next four years. We intend that, by March 2015, 145,000 households will be better protected.
I want to assure Members that the Environment Agency, and their local emergency partners including the local authorities, are being extremely active and doing all they can to prevent flooding in areas currently at risk.
If people remain concerned about flooding they should visit the Environment Agency’s website or telephone their Floodline on 0845 988 1188.
Waste Water National Policy Statement
Caroline Spelman Excerpts(13 years, 6 months ago)
Written StatementsRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Mrs Caroline Spelman)
The Planning Act 2008 provides for national policy statements (NPSs) that set out Government policy for particular types of development. It requires the draft NPSs to be publicised, consulted on, and laid in Parliament with the intention of enabling public and parliamentary debate to take place.
Public consultation on the waste water NPS for England started today, 16 November 2010, lasting for 14 weeks. At the same time I have laid it before Parliament for a period of scrutiny (the “relevant period”) ending 17 May 2011.
The waste water NPS sets out our need for waste water infrastructure to protect public health and ensure the health of our water environment with the consequent benefits for our water supply and biodiversity. Although we intend to slow the growth in demand for new waste water infrastructure in England, through the use of sustainable drainage systems for example, we will need to continue investment in new waste water infrastructure. This will modernise outdated infrastructure, meet future demands from a growing population and the effects of climate change, and fulfil our EU obligations.
Two projects of potential national significance have been identified through this process: the new sewage treatment works at Deephams in north-east London and a sewerage collection and a transfer scheme along the Thames in London (the Thames tunnel). In line with the Planning Act 2008, the waste water national policy statement has been drafted on the basis that once the particular projects are designated, development consent will be determined by the Infrastructure Planning Commission (IPC). The Government announced in June 2010 their intention to amend the Planning Act 2008 and abolish the IPC and replace it with a major infrastructure planning unit (MIPU) within the Planning Inspectorate. Until such time as the Planning Act 2008 is amended, the IPC will continue as set out in that Act
Publication of the draft waste water NPS follows my statement of 7 September 2010 in which I indicated that development consent for the Thames tunnel should be dealt with under the regime for nationally significant infrastructure projects. I intend to bring the tunnel within the direct scope of the Planning Act 2008 by amending the thresholds in section 14(3), Part 3 of the Act 2008. I plan to consult on the draft order in early 2011. Thames Water also commenced in September a separate consultation on the site specific issues raised by the proposed development of the Thames tunnel in September 2010.
The waste water national planning statement (NPS) is available on the DEFRA website at the following link:
http://www.defra.gov.uk/corporate/consult/waste-water/index.htm
Oral Answers to Questions
Caroline Spelman Excerpts(13 years, 6 months ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Julian Smith (Skipton and Ripon) (Con)
1. What steps she is taking to reform Natural England; and if she will make a statement.
The Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Mrs Caroline Spelman)
First, I welcome the hon. Member for Wakefield (Mary Creagh) and her new team to the Front Bench. I enjoyed cordial relations with her predecessors in the short time we were opposite each other and I hope that cordiality will continue.
The Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs has been working closely with Natural England on substantial reforms to transform it into a leaner, more efficient front-line delivery body that is focused strongly on the Government’s ambitions for the environment.
Julian Smith
I thank the Secretary of State for that response. Will she give a little more detail regarding the impact of the comprehensive spending review on the two stewardship schemes that are run by Natural England and how she sees that impact progressing in coming years?
Mrs Spelman
I am delighted to tell my hon. Friend that as a result of the comprehensive spending review, both types of stewardship scheme will be maintained. There will be new entrants to both the entry-level and the higher-level stewardship schemes. We have ambitions to increase by about 80% the number of farmers in the higher-level stewardship scheme and to increase qualitatively the environmental benefits provided under the entry-level scheme.
Sir Peter Soulsby (Leicester South) (Lab)
Natural England is the nation’s principle conservation agency and our champion of biodiversity. In the name of reform, the Government are leaving it with no choice but to hand over 140 national nature reserves to anyone who will take them on, to put our network of national trails up for grabs and to cut back on the expert support that is vital to delivering the environmental stewardship schemes. We are talking about the nation’s front line in protecting our environment. The Government claim to be the greenest ever, but is not the reality that the Secretary of State is prepared to sacrifice Natural England and our precious environment in a bid to win friends and credit at the Treasury?
Mrs Spelman
I should like to countermand those suggestions. Natural England, in common with all the arm’s-length bodies in the DEFRA delivery network, is taking a pro rata reduction. It is required to make efficiency savings in the same way as the core Department has to. None the less, there will be no changes in Natural England’s statutory functions. It will cease to undertake some activities, such as lobbying and policy making, which should rightly be the domain of the Department at the centre. Consideration is being given to options for improving the management of our national nature reserves because that is consistent with a big society approach.
Annette Brooke (Mid Dorset and North Poole) (LD)
2. What plans her Department has to maintain levels of biodiversity.
The Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Mrs Caroline Spelman)
Tackling biodiversity loss is one of my Department’s top priorities. I have just returned from international negotiations in Nagoya where the UK played a pivotal role in securing agreement on the ambitious new framework to halt biodiversity loss. The challenge now is to implement this domestically. In the spring, I intend to publish a White Paper outlining the Government’s vision for the natural environment, backed up with practical action to deliver that ambition.
Annette Brooke
I thank the Secretary of State for her answer. Given the Government’s intention to sell off a substantial part of the forest estate, what measures will be in place to ensure the biodiversity potential of this land and to ensure that the commitments in the Forestry Commission’s forest design plans will be fully implemented?
Mrs Spelman
I can give the hon. Lady clear assurances on this point, but we need to start with a little myth-busting on the back of press speculation. Only 18% of forests and woodland in England are owned by the state and it is wrong to confuse ownership with any suggestion of a reduction in biodiversity. It is quite right, and in the spirit of the coalition agreement, to consider giving the community who live nearest to the forest the opportunity to own it, as that community and civil society are most likely to give it the best protection. Finally, I should like to reassure her by clarifying that not one tree can be felled without a licence being issued by my Department. In the last analysis, we are committed to forest biodiversity and to enhancing biodiversity. Our forests are among the richest of our genetic resources and we have every intention of protecting them.
Mary Creagh (Wakefield) (Lab)
May I begin by thanking the Secretary of State for welcoming me to my new role and for the briefing that she gave me on Nagoya? I am sure that the whole House will join me in welcoming the new fund that the Government have pledged in order to deliver international biodiversity benefits through international forestry.
On Government plans to maintain biodiversity at home, however, we have seen a series of deeply worrying moves from the right hon. Lady over the past three months. The Government plan to sell off or simply give away 140 national nature reserves; our national parks, which a Labour Government began in 1949, will suffer a catastrophic 30% cut to their budgets, leaving park workers unemployed, our national trails abandoned and precious habitats neglected; and her Department has announced a review of England’s forests, seeing them sold to the highest bidder—asset stripping our natural heritage. Is it not the case that she preaches environmental evangelism around the world and practices environmental vandalism at home?
Mrs Spelman
That is a disappointing opener from the hon. Lady. She appears not to understand that her own party when in government would have had to make cuts, and there will be no credibility to her accusations unless she tells the House where she would have made savings. In any event, however, there is no suggestion that we are poised to sell off nature reserves. Can she not see that it is not necessarily for the state to do everything? The Wildlife Trusts welcome the opportunity to be more involved in the management of our nature reserves.
Mrs Spelman
The hon. Lady shakes her head, but I suggest that she ask them. As for selling off the forests, she just heard my explanation that it is wrong to confuse ownership with the quality of environmental protection, and I believe that the communities and charities that would like to be more involved in protecting and enhancing our forest biodiversity welcome our suggestions.
Mary Creagh
The truth is that the Government have reserved their most vicious spending cut for a 30% cut in environmental spending. We know that in the spending review, the right hon. Lady caved in early to the Chancellor’s pressure, and that she gave away too much too quickly. Why did she sell out the country’s environment to the Chancellor?
Mrs Spelman
The hon. Lady has to answer the question about where she would have made the cuts.
Mrs Spelman
The hon. Lady shakes her head, but her Government were committed to a 50% reduction in capital. Perhaps she would like to identify in the Department’s budget what she would have done. What I can tell the House is that, going into those negotiations with the Treasury, we took a strategic approach, because it was important for us to protect as much of the capital as possible. Her party, had it been in government, would have cut the capital budget by 50%, but we succeeded in reducing that to a 34% reduction, meaning that the bulk of our flood defence capital has been protected.
Dr Alan Whitehead (Southampton, Test) (Lab)
6. What discussions she has had with the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government on the likely effects of the outcome of the comprehensive spending review on the funding available to reduce the amount of waste going to landfill.
The Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Mrs Caroline Spelman)
We have worked closely with the Department for Communities and Local Government to understand cost pressures on local authority waste management over the spending review period and have taken these into account in the overall local government settlement. Significantly increased financial flexibility will free local authorities to allocate resources to meet their priorities and make continued efficiency savings while continuing to deliver our overall environmental goals for waste management.
Dr Whitehead
Has the Secretary of State looked at last year’s estimate by the Waste and Resources Action Programme suggesting that there will be an additional 3 million tonnes of dried municipal recyclates circulating by 2015, while all-materials recycling facilities would be used up and 60% of local authority areas would have insufficient capacity? What has changed in this analysis since May 2010 other than her Department’s withdrawal of seven private finance initiative waste projects and the cutting of local authority budgets by 28%?
Mrs Spelman
I invite the hon. Gentleman, who has a great interest in this subject, to look at some municipal waste statistics that have just been published this morning. The more recent data show three things: first, that we are producing less waste; secondly, that we are recycling more waste; and thirdly, therefore, that we are sending less to landfill. That is what makes us confident that the 2020 targets can be met with fewer publicly funded projects.
Luciana Berger (Liverpool, Wavertree) (Lab/Co-op)
7. When she plans to respond to the recent consultation conducted by her Department on dangerous dogs; and if she will make a statement.
Mr Jim Cunningham (Coventry South) (Lab)
8. What recent discussions she has had with her EU counterparts on reform of the common agricultural policy.
The Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Mrs Caroline Spelman)
I, along with other DEFRA Ministers, regularly meet our EU counterparts to discuss reform of the common agricultural policy. The Minister of State and I attended the Informal Agriculture Council, where CAP reform was discussed, and most recently I hosted the German Agriculture Minister to discuss a range of issues of common interest, including reform of the CAP.
Mr Cunningham
Can the Minister tell me what impact the latest increase in the EU budget will have on the common agricultural policy?
Mrs Spelman
I am sure that the hon. Gentleman will appreciate that the EU budget needs to reflect the straitened economic circumstances that all European member states are experiencing. Last weekend, the Prime Minister met the German Chancellor, Frau Merkel, and earlier this week he met President Sarkozy from France, to have important discussions about the realities of the size of the EU budget. Part of those considerations will be the allocation that goes to the common agricultural policy.
Mary Creagh (Wakefield) (Lab)
We all know that a successful outcome to the common agricultural policy negotiations is vital for Britain’s rural communities. In an interview on “Farming Today”, the right hon. Lady said that the Treasury had conducted a regional impact assessment of the CSR, and that her Department had considered its rural impact. I asked her Department for a copy of that rural impact assessment, and the reply from the Under-Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, the hon. Member for Newbury (Richard Benyon), stated:
“DEFRA has not carried out a formal assessment of the impact of the spending review on rural matters.”—[Official Report, 1 November 2010; Vol. 517, c. 606W.]
Once and for all, can the Secretary of State tell the House whether the rural impact assessment exists?
Mrs Spelman
As I am sure the hon. Lady will appreciate, it is not just the decisions made at DEFRA that have implications for rural communities. As the Government’s rural champion, DEFRA is therefore undertaking an assessment of the implications of other Departments’ elements of the spending review across rural areas. For example, the Department for Culture, Media and Sport has made some positive decisions arising from the spending review, including the roll-out of superfast broadband in rural areas, that will have a positive effect on rural areas. The matter needs to be regarded in the round, and that work has been undertaken since the announcement of the decisions affecting all Departments was made on 20 October.
Matthew Hancock (West Suffolk) (Con)
9. If she will discuss with the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government proposals to extend the power of communities to protect local rural environments.
Duncan Hames (Chippenham) (LD)
16. What discussions she has had with ministerial colleagues on progress by the Government towards its performance objectives on environmental sustainability.
The Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Mrs Caroline Spelman)
This Government are committed to showing leadership on sustainability through our own decisions and policies. I am discussing ways to mainstream sustainable development across Government, specifically focusing on Cabinet-level working, policy making and the Government’s own operations and procurement with Cabinet colleagues. I have also spoken to the Chair of the Environmental Audit Committee to discuss how Government can be held to account for our performance against our commitments.
Duncan Hames
In the Secretary of State’s role of leading mainstream sustainability across the Government, will she continue to meet the designated green Ministers from each Department to ensure that sustainability is the organising principle behind all that they do?
Mrs Spelman
I give my hon. Friend that assurance. Sustainable development cannot be delivered by one Government Department alone. In fact, the Cabinet Office has a cross-cutting role and will report on pan-Government progress against the targets for the sustainable operations of the Government estate. The latest performance data will be published by the end of the year.
Mr Jamie Reed (Copeland) (Lab)
One key performance objective on environmental sustainability is protection from flooding. The Association of British Insurers has expressed disappointment at the Government’s cuts to flood defence spending, and the Institute of Civil Engineers estimates that the cuts could cost us £4.8 billion in future. How will those cuts affect the insurance premiums and excesses of those 5.5 million British properties that are currently at risk from flooding? Can she give a guarantee that the cuts will not lead to any properties becoming either uninsurable or unmortgageable?
Mrs Spelman
I can assure the House that the Government are working very closely with the ABI on the question of insurance. Its statement of principles is up for renegotiation in 2013. My impression of the situation is different from the hon. Gentleman’s, because actually the ABI welcomed the fact that much of the capital for flood defences was protected, so the Government can spend £2.1 billion on flood defences within the spending review period. There will be an 8% reduction per annum, but a lot of that can be absorbed in efficiencies, as the Environment Agency demonstrated this year by building more than its target of flood defences notwithstanding a 5.5% reduction in its resources.
Gordon Banks (Ochil and South Perthshire) (Lab)
17. What recent discussions she has had with the Gangmasters Licensing Authority on the use of child labour in the farming and food industry sectors.
Kerry McCarthy (Bristol East) (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)
I am sure that Members on both sides of the House will want to welcome the agreement secured in Nagoya, not least because, as Members will know, the previous Government, and many before them, sought over a long period to secure agreement on a protocol on access to, and benefit sharing of, genetic resources, putting in place the tools to help countries halt the loss of biodiversity. It is right for us all to pay tribute to the officials in the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs who have worked so hard for so long to achieve this agreement.
On my way back, I represented the UK at the closing ceremony of Expo 2010 in Shanghai, and I am delighted to be able to tell the House that the UK won the top award for a pavilion part-funded by DEFRA on the theme of biodiversity, and that the Chinese premier himself recognised its excellence. I would like to thank the Foreign and Commonwealth Office staff who delivered this considerable achievement—Simon Featherstone, who rescued the project, and Carma Elliot and her team, who spent four years driving the project to its successful conclusion.
Kerry McCarthy
In June, the Secretary of State said that the Hunting Act 2004 had not been a demonstrable success and was difficult to enforce, but figures published by the Department last year showed 57 prosecutions in 2009—an average of one every week—and more convictions than any other piece of wildlife legislation. How do Ministers square that with her belief that it has not been a demonstrable success?
Natascha Engel (North East Derbyshire) (Lab)
Investment in anaerobic digestion not only helps farmers to become more competitive, but helps small rural communities such as those in North East Derbyshire both to process waste and to make energy. What is the Department doing to ensure that farmers can diversify in this way?
Mrs Spelman
Anaerobic digestion has great potential in helping the farming industry reduce its overall carbon emissions and will be an important part of the Government’s aim, as part of being the greenest Government ever, of achieving those reductions. Anaerobic digestion is something that we welcome, but the important thing is to have constant feedstocks. Anaerobic digestion has a wider application in the communities that we all live in, but for farming it is definitely an interesting option.
Margot James (Stourbridge) (Con)
T7. Can my hon. Friend advise the House on whether he has had any discussions with independent animal welfare organisations about the prospects for intensive dairy farming of the sort proposed by a planning application in Lincolnshire?
Joan Walley (Stoke-on-Trent North) (Lab)
Given the reference made to the Environmental Audit Committee, I hope we can return to the issue of resources in due course. On a constituency matter, I met the Staffordshire wildlife trust last week and it is looking to make a submission to the EU LIFE+ programme to enhance biodiversity in Stoke-on-Trent. Will the Secretary of State commit DEFRA officers to give support to any proposal that comes out of that?
Mrs Spelman
I am delighted to be able to offer that support. The wildlife trusts do an excellent job, which is why we see great scope in the concept of the big society for more work of this kind.
I might have made an error, Mr Speaker, in not responding myself to the question put by the hon. Member for Bristol East (Kerry McCarthy). I apologise, as I should have taken it—but, of course, I agree with everything that the Minister of State had to say.
Mr Speaker
The right hon. Lady, whom I have known for 15 years, is unfailingly courteous, and I think that will be very much appreciated by the House.
Convention on Biological Diversity
Caroline Spelman Excerpts(13 years, 6 months ago)
Written StatementsRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Mrs Caroline Spelman)
I attended the High-Level Segment 10th Conference of Parties to the convention on biological diversity, known as the Nagoya biodiversity summit, from 27 to 30 October. A team of officials from my Department and the Department for International Development supported me, having attended throughout the conference to prepare the ground for the ministerial High-Level Segment.
The conference concluded with all three of the UK’s main objectives fully achieved:
Agreement on a new strategic plan for global biodiversity conservation to 2020 and beyond. This comprises an ambitious, realistic and deliverable international mission, underpinned by 20 sub-targets on halting species loss and habitat degradation, reducing pollution and over-exploitation, and increasing financial support to developing countries
Agreement on a resource mobilisation package to ensure that developing countries would have the capacity to implement the strategic plan; and
Agreement on a new “Nagoya Protocol” on access and benefit sharing. It has taken 18 years to achieve this agreement, which establishes a regime under which developing countries will allow access to their genetic and natural resources in return for a share of the benefits—financial and other—for their use.
In addition to the three key issues under discussion, the Nagoya meeting saw nearly 50 individual decisions relating to a wide range of biodiversity issues—such as protected areas, biofuels, and invasive alien species—approved. The agreement emphasises the value of the natural environment to human welfare and livelihoods, and reflects the links between biodiversity, climate change and development. Notably, we gained agreement for the CBD to develop advice on the application of safeguards for biodiversity under REDD+ (Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation in Developing Countries). The UK played a key role in securing this agreement.
Additionally on 26 October, I represented the UK at a ministerial meeting of the REDD+ partnership, a group of some 60 countries. This was an important opportunity to generate momentum before negotiations on REDD+ recommence at the UNFCCC meeting in Cancun later this year. At this meeting, I outlined the extended commitment to international climate finance provided under the spending review.
On the first day of the High-Level Segment, 27 October, I gave a speech, which included commitments on:
new funding to deliver biodiversity benefits through international forestry;
funding for the proposed Intergovernmental science-policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES); and
support for key projects on the economic value of nature, building on the landmark “The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity” (TEEB) report, which was published in Nagoya.
The new strategic plan will set the framework within which all 193 parties to the convention of biological diversity will be expected to operate domestically in order to play their part in the global conservation effort. Plans for implementing key elements of it in England will be included in the natural environment White Paper to be published in the spring.
Environment Council (14 October)
Caroline Spelman Excerpts(13 years, 6 months ago)
Written StatementsRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Mrs Caroline Spelman)
I represented the United Kingdom at the Environment Council on 14 October in Luxembourg, together with the Minister of State, Department of Energy and Climate Change, my hon. Friend the Member for Bexhill and Battle (Gregory Barker).
The Council agreed conclusions on the EU’s negotiating position for the Nagoya conference on biodiversity. In support of the conclusions, I underlined the need for a united EU position to push for an ambitious but at the same time deliverable and realistic agreement. I pointed to the need to find a satisfactory agreement on a protocol on access and benefit sharing (ABS) and innovative ways of financing. I also highlighted the interconnection between biodiversity, climate change and development. Finally, I stressed the importance of the intergovernmental platform on biodiversity and ecosystems services (IPBES) work and the progress of the economics of ecosystems and biodiversity (TEEB) study.
Environment Ministers exchanged views on the Commission’s proposal on the cultivation of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in the EU. The discussion revealed that there are differing views among the member states on the proposal. In particular, several member states questioned how the proposal would work in practice and the compatibility of the proposal with WTO rules. I set out that the UK had yet to finalise its position but welcomed the Commission’s proposal as an attempt to find a way through the current impasse on GMO decisions. I underscored that careful reflection was needed of the wider impacts, in particular on the consistency of the proposal with the WTO and the single market as well as the impact on consumer perceptions of food and food security.
Moving on to climate change business, the Council adopted procedural conclusions on the analysis of options to move beyond 20% greenhouse gas emission reductions and assessing the risk of carbon leakage. These take note of the report prepared by the presidency to follow up the Commission communication adopted at the end of May; welcome the ongoing discussions to assess policy options; invite the Commission to conduct further analysis; and indicate that this should also be informed by the roadmap for a low-carbon economy by 2050 currently under preparation by the Commission. The Council decided to revert to these issues as soon as possible with a view to the spring 2011 European Council.
Climate Change Ministers agreed the EU’s negotiating position to take forward to COP 16 in Cancun at the end of November, adopting conclusions which set out the need to achieve a balanced outcome which paves the way for a global and comprehensive legally binding framework. The main focus of the discussion was the EU’s position on agreeing a second commitment period of the Kyoto protocol, which will be a key issue for these negotiations. The Minister insisted on the need for the EU to send a clear signal of its willingness to agree a second commitment period provided that other countries enter a parallel legally binding agreement and the environmental integrity of the Kyoto protocol is addressed.
Under any other business, Hungary informed the Council about their ongoing efforts to contain the environmental damage from the recent red sludge.
Agriculture and Fisheries Council (26 October)
Caroline Spelman Excerpts(13 years, 6 months ago)
Written StatementsRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Mrs Caroline Spelman)
The Under-Secretary of State responsible for natural environment and fisheries, my hon. Friend the Member for Newbury (Richard Benyon) will represent the United Kingdom at the Agriculture and Fisheries Council in Luxembourg on 26 October.
There are three items on the agenda relating to fisheries and a joint item on agriculture. Discussion will take place on the following:
Baltic sea total allowable catches and quotas for 2011—about the level of fishing opportunities in the Baltic sea.
EU/Norway: Annual consultation for 2011—joint management of fish stocks with Norway in the North sea and Atlantic.
International Commission for the Conservation of Atlantic Tunas (ICCAT) meeting (management of Atlantic tuna stocks).
A single presentation on two agriculture items on regulations to simplify management rules in both rural development and the single common market organisation, and to provide Lisbon treaty alignment.
There are currently five items under any other business:
Presidency announcement of a “day of reflection for the pig sector”.
North Atlantic Fisheries Organisation (NAFO)—Commission handling of the last negotiations.
Presidency feedback on the September Informal Agriculture Council.
African swine fever control measures—paper from the Lithuanian delegation.
Sugar—paper from the Portuguese delegation.
Environment Council (14 October)
Caroline Spelman Excerpts(13 years, 7 months ago)
Written StatementsRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Mrs Caroline Spelman)
My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change and I will represent the UK at the Environment Council in Luxembourg on 14 October.
The Council will hold an exchange of views on the proposal for a regulation modifying the directive concerning the possibility for member states to restrict or prohibit the cultivation of GMOs on their territory. The Belgian presidency will seek the adoption of Council conclusions on; the 10th meeting of the Conference of Parties to the convention on biological diversity; and on the preparation of the 16th session of the Conference of the Parties to the UN convention on climate change and the sixth session of the Meeting of the Parties to the Kyoto protocol. The presidency will also seek the adoption of procedural Council conclusions on an analysis of possible options to go beyond the objective of a 20% reduction in greenhouse gases and evaluation of the risk of carbon leakage.
The following topics will be covered under “any other business”:
Presentation by the Commission concerning state aids to the coal industry;
Presentation by the Commission on the results of the technical committee work on a draft regulation concerning the “end of waste criteria”;
Presentation by the Commission on Stakeholder Consultation on:
Report and possible proposal of a methodology to apply to emissions from carbon stock changes caused by indirect land use changes;
Communication on a road map for a low-carbon economy by 2050, also with a view to determining the necessary scenarios for 2030;
Communication on mainstreaming climate adaptation and mitigation in EU policies and climate-proofing of EU financial instruments;
Information from the Commission on progress towards achieving the Kyoto objectives concerning a mechanism for monitoring Community greenhouse gas emissions for implementing the Kyoto protocol;
Information from the Commission on Aviation and Climate Change—Developments at the ICAO Assembly;
Information from the Commission on the implementation of the Commission decision on the use of 300 million allowances from the new entrants’ reserve of the emissions trading scheme for the demonstration of carbon capture and storage and innovative renewable energy technologies;
Information from the Czech delegation on the sixth session of the Conference of the Parties to the Convention on the protection of European bats; and
Information from the presidency on the main environmental events organised by the Belgian presidency;
Presentation from the Swedish delegation on a review of the Community strategy on mercury—possible future action;
Presentation from the Finnish delegation on International environmental governance: preparation of the second meeting of the advisory group of Ministers;
Presentation from the Dutch delegation concerning a seminar on the financial perspectives and the environmental aspects of the EU budget.