|Previous Section||Index||Home Page|
Mr. Boris Johnson: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs when she plans to act upon the results of the consultation on reducing the number of abandoned vehicles; and if she will make a statement. 
19 Mar 2002 : Column 269W
Mr. Salter: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what new recovery and recycling targets for packaging waste for 2002 have been decided; and if she will make a statement. 
Mr. Meacher: New business recovery and recycling targets for packaging waste in 2002 under the Producer Responsibility Obligations (Packaging Waste) Regulations 1997 (as amended) have been agreed by the Government. Subject to the approval of Parliament, these are as follows:
Material-specific recycling 19 per cent.
On the assumption that the UK met these targets last year (and final figures are not yet ready), the targets I am proposing today should allow almost five million tonnes of packaging waste to be recovered in 2002.
My Department has, as was indicated in the recent consultation paper on targets for 2002, reviewed the figures that were used to develop the targets for 2002 in that paper and in light of the changes in the amount of packaging data reported by businesses obligated under the packaging Regulations, and the estimates for the tonnages expected to be obligated in 2002, the Government have decided on a recovery target of 59 per cent. and a material-specific target of 19 per cent.
As in previous years, the national targets for next year need to be seen as leading on to higher targets and the ones proposed by the Government should allow the UK to plan a smooth upward curve towards higher recovery and recycling targets over the next few years.
Mr. Meacher [holding answer 18 March 2002]: We have introduced or are planning to introduce a range of measures to encourage businesses to recycle by both regulatory and voluntary producer responsibility schemes.
The EC Directive on Packaging and Packaging Waste94/62/ECwas implemented in Great Britain by the Producer Responsibility Obligations (Packaging Waste) Regulations 1997 (as amended). In order to comply with the requirements in the Directive, recovery and recycling targets for 2001 under the packaging Regulations were 56 per cent. for recovery and 18 per cent. for material specific recycling of packaging waste.
The Regulations place obligations on certain businesses to recover and recycle specified tonnages of packaging waste. Their obligation is calculated by using three factors: the amount of packaging handled by the business, the national business recovery and recycling targets for
19 Mar 2002 : Column 270W
the year and the "activity obligation" associated with the activity the business carries out on packaging. Businesses can also reduce their obligation by using less and reusing packaging whenever possible. By increasing the amount reused, producers are able to reduce the tonnages of packaging waste they are required to recover and so lessen their costs of compliance.
A voluntary agreement is in place with the Newspaper Publishers Association to increase the recycled content of newsprint to target levels over a period of years up to 2006 and we are currently talking to the producers of direct mail and promotions with the aim of agreeing recycling targets for this material.
Tim Loughton: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what hazardous waste has been handled through Shoreham Harbour in the last two years; and what licences were issued. 
Mr. Meacher [holding answer 15 March 2002]: Shipments of hazardous waste enter the UK under a system of prior written notification and consent rather than licensing. These controls are set out by Council Regulation (EEC) No.259/93 on the supervision and control of shipments of hazardous waste. The UK does not designate specific ports of import for hazardous waste. The Environment Agency, which controls the import of waste, would not, therefore, necessarily know which port is being used for a shipment.
However, the Environment Agency area office believes that there has been one shipment of 60 tonnes of redundant pesticides and agrochemicals imported via Shoreham in the last two years. This arrived in 2002.
Tim Loughton: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what action has been taken to monitor dust emissions from HGVs using Shoreham Harbour on port related business. 
Mr. Meacher [holding answer 15 March 2002]: Local authorities have a duty under part IV of the Environment Act 1995 to assess air quality against objectives set out in the Air Quality Regulations 2000, including an objective in respect of particulate matter (PM10). If the air quality objectives are likely to be exceeded by relevant deadline in areas where the public are likely to be exposed, then local authorities have to declare an air quality management area.
Adur District Council has produced a stage III local air quality management review and assessment report. This report refers to the fugitive dust emissions from Shoreham Harbour, and is available from the Housing and Environmental Services Department at Adur District Council.
An air quality modelling exercise was carried out that indicates that concentrations of PM10 from these fugitive dust sources is unlikely to exceed either the annual mean or 24-hour mean air quality objectives at locations where
19 Mar 2002 : Column 271W
the public are likely to be exposed. The modelling results have been compared to a limited period of monitoring in the Port area. The local authority's report states that it was not possible to undertake extensive monitoring of PM10 in the area of the Port. In September 2000 a cascade impactor was installed for four weeks. The overall conclusion of the report was that no exceedence of the PM10 objective would occur within Adur's District Council boundaries, and this conclusion has been accepted
Mr. Peter Ainsworth: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, pursuant to her answer of 12 March, ref. 42321, when she expects the Environment Agency to publish its research on the "Human Health Review of Incineration and Combustion Techniques". 
Mr. Love: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what proposals she is considering to strengthen the powers of (a) local authorities and (b) the Environment Agency in dealing with fly tipping; and if she will make a statement. 
Mr. Meacher: Local Authorities and the Environment Agency already have wide powers to tackle fly tipping under section 59 of the Environmental Protection Act 1990. Under this Act, local authorities and the Environment Agency have the power to remove fly tipped waste and recover the cost of collection on those who committed the offence. They also have the power to prosecute the perpetrator, and successful prosecution can lead to heavy penalties including an unlimited fine and up to two years in prison.
As part of the local public service agreement initiative, some local authorities have argued that to assist their ability to combat fly tipping, they should be given the power that the Environment Agency has to require companies and individuals to provide the Agency with copies of the duty of care paperwork which these companies and individuals are required to maintain. The Government have asked the fly tipping stakeholders' forum to consider this issue and make recommendations. We are currently awaiting the forum's views.
Llew Smith: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what matters in respect of the future management and repatriation of German radioactive waste arising from reprocessing at Sellafield were discussed with her counterpart in Germany on her recent visit. 
19 Mar 2002 : Column 272W
|Next Section||Index||Home Page|