| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Genetically Modified Crops
9. Joan Ruddock (Lewisham, Deptford): If he will make a statement on the progress of the review of separation distances for GM crops undergoing farm-scale trials in the UK. [123997]
The Minister for the Environment (Mr. Michael Meacher): My right hon. Friend the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food explained to the House on Thursday 8 June that his Department is conducting a scientific review of separation distances and their relationship with crop varietal purity. He is also consulting interested parties, including conventional and organic farmers, and will take account of any lessons that can be learned from the Advanta seeds issue.
Joan Ruddock: I thank my right hon. Friend for that answer. Has he formed an opinion about the risk matrix-based separation distances recommended by the National Pollen Research Unit? Will he take a lead in the matter and can he guarantee that new separation distances will be put in place before the 1 August notification deadline for new, autumn-sown, genetic modification farm-scale trials?
Mr. Meacher: I am concerned about the issue, as my hon. Friend knows. We are examining appropriate separation distances as a matter of urgency. Indeed, we take seriously the variable matrix model produced by the National Pollen Research Unit, which is supported by the Soil Association, with which I have been having discussions, and others. The survey is being conducted by MAFF, to which those proposals should be sent.
Contamination and separation distances are traditional, having been determined by agronomic practice over 50 or more years, and 99.5 per cent. of the pollen will not get
beyond those distances. However, small--sometimes vanishingly small--amounts of pollen may, and indeed can, travel considerable distances. The problem is knowing exactly where to draw the line in a continuous deposition level over long periods.
Mr. Owen Paterson (North Shropshire): The Mayall family have been farming at Pimhill in my constituency for 51 years. Their organic farm is a highly successful enterprise. Important GM trials are taking place not very far away. It is absolutely vital that we establish safe separation distances as soon as possible. GM crops have been grown in bulk in the United States for more than 10 years. How many visits have the Ministers' officials made to find out what the distances are there?
Mr. Meacher: I cannot answer the specific question, but I will ensure that the hon. Gentleman receives an answer. We have been increasing the number of visits made by the Central Science Laboratory, which took over from the Health and Safety Executive in the supervision of GM sites.
I repeat that I am concerned about the issue. There should be due and adequate notification of GM trials. We have arranged local meetings in villages and towns so that people are properly informed and can make representations.
I am concerned that we should have a fresh look at the matter by the August sowing deadline, which my hon. Friend the Member for Lewisham, Deptford (Joan Ruddock) referred to, and that we shall be able to establish a fairer cordon sanitaire, possibly on the variable matrix model, which I favour. It is false to pretend that any distance will prevent all contamination; the question is how we can minimise that to a level that is acceptable to those buying the product, because they will have to determine what degree of GM food in a non-GM product is acceptable.
Empty Houses
12. Mr. Peter L. Pike (Burnley): What steps his Department proposes to take to assist those local authorities with large numbers of empty private sector houses. [124000]
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions (Mr. Chris Mullin): We are considering the recommendations of the empty property advisory group which are aimed at building on the steps that we have already taken to assist local authorities. In addition, from this year we are requiring all authorities to account to local people for their actions by publishing indicators of their performance in tackling empty privately owned homes.
Mr. Pike: My hon. Friend will know that Burnley has almost 3,000 empty private sector terraced houses, in addition to many private sector houses that need major renovation. Do the Government accept that it is a problem that Burnley and councils in a similar situation cannot solve alone? Government help is needed and people must work together.
Mr. Mullin: The Government certainly accept that the problem cannot be solved by councils alone. Many other
parts of the north, including my constituency in Sunderland, have a similar problem. That is one of the reasons why we have set up the empty property advisory group, and we certainly recognise that help will be needed.
Mr. Don Foster (Bath): If tackling the scourge of empty homes is so important to the Government, why was no reference made to it in any of the 43 key recommendations in the housing policy paper? Will the Minister acknowledge that there are 750,000 empty homes in this country, and that a quarter of them are in London and the south-east? Would not it be better to start bringing those back into use before concreting over the green belt in the south-east?
As a way of making that happen, will the Minister join the right hon. Member for Skipton and Ripon (Mr. Curry), me and many other Members in a campaign to persuade the Chancellor of the Exchequer to change the crazy VAT arrangements whereby one pays full VAT on renovation to bring homes back into use and nothing on new build?
Mr. Mullin: There have been recommendations on empty homes. Although the original question was about private housing, I agree with the hon. Gentleman that there is a serious problem of empty public housing in London. We are doing all that we can to encourage local authorities to deal with it. It is partly a question of resources, and over this Parliament, we are putting an extra £5 billion into housing. As the hon. Gentleman knows, VAT is a matter for the Chancellor, who will have heard the point made by the hon. Gentleman and many others.
Miss Geraldine Smith (Morecambe and Lunesdale): Is my hon. Friend aware of the large number of Victorian properties which were formerly used as hotel accommodation that lie empty in seaside resorts? Many are sold cheaply at auction--a 10-bedroomed property in Morecambe sold for £4,000--and are bought by unscrupulous absentee landlords who provide poor housing in the rented sector. That problem faces all British seaside resorts, especially Morecambe, and I am interested in the Minister's plans to deal with it.
Mr. Mullin: Unscrupulous absentee landlords are not a problem only in seaside resorts. Sunderland has exactly the same problem; I hesitate to class it as a seaside resort, although it is on the sea. It is one of the reasons why we will introduce licensing for houses in multiple occupation. We have some other measures in mind. We recognise that it is a serious problem.
Mr. James Gray (North Wiltshire): It is important in these considerations to make a clear distinction between so-called management vacants--those houses that are ready to be re-let shortly--and the total number of vacants. Will the Minister confirm two things: first, that the five authorities with the highest number of vacants and the highest number of management vacants are all controlled by the Labour party? Secondly, will he explain why 7.5 per cent.--I believe that that is the figure--of
management vacants in the Deputy Prime Minister's local authority of Kingston upon Hull are ready to be let tomorrow, but, for some reason or other, are not being let?
Mr. Mullin: One of the reasons is that, in the north of England, which is generally controlled by Labour authorities, there tends not to be the same demand for housing, public or private, as there is in the south.
Mr. Mullin: It is a fact, whether the hon. Gentleman agrees or not. There is no point in him shaking his Wiltshire head. It is one of the facts of life, with which anyone in government must grapple. Who knows, one day he and his colleagues may be faced with the same problem. There is a massive surplus of demand in the south and insufficient demand in the north. Of course that gives rise to vacancies. We are anxious that those vacancies be properly managed and we are taking steps to do so.
Mr. Hilary Benn (Leeds, Central): Does my hon. Friend agree that, in certain circumstances where there are many empty properties, comprehensive redevelopment of an area is the best solution? If so, does he share my concern at the recent ruling of the European Commission, which has declared that gap funding is outwith state aid rules? Is he aware that that ruling is threatening many housing and other redevelopment schemes on brownfield sites, including the proposed Holbeck urban village in my constituency?
Mr. Mullin: I am aware of the European Union ruling; we are looking at it. I agree with my hon. Friend that sometimes the best solution is wholesale redevelopment. That is happening in some parts of the country, including, as he says, in his constituency.
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |