|Previous Section||Index||Home Page|
25 Mar 2002 : Column 726W
young people in each of the last four years have subsequently (a) found unsubsidised employment for more than 13 weeks and (b) returned to jobseekers' allowance or other benefits. 
Mr. Morley: Information is not held centrally on the number of new dealers who have found unsubsidised employment for more than 13 weeks or who have returned to jobseeker's allowance or other benefits.
Mr. Bercow: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs how many people have been employed by her Department in each of the last three years under (a) the new deal for young people, (b) the new deal for the over 50s and (c) the new deal for lone parents; and at what cost, listed by category, to public funds. 
The figures for young people include both subsidised and unsubsidised starts. New deal recruits take up existing vacancies so extra costs to public funds are limited to the subsidy, where appropriate, and any additional training and development which may be needed. The cost of the latter cannot be readily identified.
Chris Ruane: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what recent assessment she has made of the impact of nutrients discharged from land-based sources into the Irish Sea. 
Mr. Meacher [holding answer 21 March 2002]: The Urban Waste Water Treatment and Nitrates Directives require member states to undertake periodic reviews of estuaries and near-shore marine areas to establish whether they are adversely affected (or have the potential to become so) by nutrient inputs from rivers and direct discharges. The latest reviews were undertaken by the discharge regulators during 2001 and the results should be available later this year.
Within the work programme of OSPAR, the Convention for the Protection of the Marine Environment of the North East Atlantic, Contracting Parties including the UK are currently assessing the eutrophication status of the various parts of the OSPAR maritime area. An initial stage, to identify the more obvious non-problem areas, found that the wider parts of the Irish Sea fell into the "non-problem" category. The area of the Irish Sea to the east of a line from Anglesey to the Solway Firth is being subject to a more detailed evaluation as it is recognised that this area may be at greater risk of being
25 Mar 2002 : Column 727W
adversely affected by nutrients from land based sources. The UK is due to present the findings of this more detailed evaluation at the end of 2002.
The Department, working in conjunction with the Scottish and Northern Irish Forum for Environmental Research (SNIFFER), made a substantial contribution to the body of evidence from which the co-ordinated UK-Irish assessment of the Celtic Seas was produced in 2000. This Quality Status Report (QSR) for the Celtic Seas, a copy of which is available in the Library of the House of Commons, provides a list of references which includes items of research sponsored by the UK Government.
Since 2000 we have continued to build our evidence base on pollution of the Irish Sea with a view to assessing the status of the North East Irish Sea in relation to nutrient inputs and identifying the key processes determining the potential impact and transport of pollutants. This is a part of our ongoing co-ordinated marine environment research programme which continues to contribute to regional co-operation on research and monitoring through OSPAR (the Convention for the Protection of the Marine Environment of the North East Atlantic) and its Assessment and Monitoring Committee.
In respect of pollution by radioactive substances, the results of a joint research project between the Environment Agency and SNIFFER, entitled Past, Current and Future Radiological Impacts of Radioactive Marine Discharges on Coastal Communities Surrounding the Irish Sea, was published in 1999. A copy of this report is available in the Library.
Mr. Horam: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs whether a householder who has received a grant under Warm Front or Warm Front Plus can receive further assistance under the scheme for measures in addition to those originally installed; and whether a householder who has received a Warm Front grant is eligible, on reaching the age of 60, for assistance under Warm Front Plus. 
Mr. Meacher [holding answer 21 March 2002]: Paragraph 7(3)(e) of the Home Energy Efficiency Scheme (England) Regulations 2000, as amended, requires applications for assistance under the scheme to contain "a statement that neither the applicant, nor to his knowledge any other person, has received or applied for grant under these Regulations in respect of the dwelling which is the subject of the application". The effect of this paragraph is to limit to one the number of grants under the scheme for any household, whether the occupant is under or over 60 years of age.
25 Mar 2002 : Column 728W
St. Vincent and the Grenadines
United States of America.
Mr. Peter Ainsworth: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (1) if she will list (a) the occasions when and (b) the reasons why (i) Oldlands Pig Unit in Wiltshire and (ii) Shoddesden Pig Unit in Hampshire were (A) not accepted onto and (B) suspended from Farm Assurance schemes in the past five years; 
(3) on what grounds pig units of (a) Oldlands Farm, Wiltshire and (b) Shoddesden, Hampshire were suspended from the Farm Assurance scheme in (i) July 2000, (ii) February 2001, (iii) June 2001 and (iv) other times in the last four years. 
Margaret Beckett [holding answer 21 March 2002]: The main pig assurance scheme was originally established by the Government. However, it was taken over by the industry in September 1996 and has since been run as a private initiative by Assured British Pigs (APB). Membership of the scheme is voluntary.
Following the privatisation of the scheme, the State Veterinary Service (SVS) continued to provide inspection services until September 1999 when its contract with ABP ended. Since then inspections have been carried out by a private independent inspection body and the Government have had no role in the operation of the scheme.
Prior to the ending of the contract the Shoddesden pig unit was inspected by a State Veterinary Service veterinary officer in connection with an application for it to be registered under the ABP scheme. The veterinary officer advised the applicant of action that would need to be taken in order to meet the scheme's requirements. We understand from ABP that the Shoddesden pig unit was subsequently registered under the scheme in March 1999 after the work requested by the veterinary officer had been confirmed as complete.
25 Mar 2002 : Column 729W
Mr. Morley: A scheme of compensation was set out in SI 2001/3853, the Fur Farming (Compensation Scheme) (England) Order 2001, which was made and laid before Parliament on 3 December 2001 and came into force on 1 January 2002. Following comments by the Joint Committee on Statutory Instruments, this SI was revoked and replaced by SI 2002/221, the Fur Farming (Compensation Scheme)(England) Order 2002, which was made on 5 February 2002, laid before Parliament on 7 February 2002 and came into force on 1 March 2002. However, the scheme in the latter SI is identical to the previous one in all material respects and also contains a transitional provision for applications made under the 2001 order to be treated as if they had been made under the 2002 order.
|Next Section||Index||Home Page|