Tag: 2015

  • Rory Stewart – 2015 Speech on Hedgehog Preservation

    Rory Stewart – 2015 Speech on Hedgehog Preservation

    The speech made by Rory Stewart, the then Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, in the House of Commons on 10 November 2015.

    Multa novit vulpes, verum echinus unum magnum, Madam Deputy Speaker.

    Tom Tugendhat (Tonbridge and Malling) (Con): In every happy home is a hedgehog, as the Pashtuns would say. I urge my hon. Friend to encourage our Pashtun community in this country to follow that example.

    Rory Stewart: I am very grateful for that Pushtun intervention, but my hon. Friend refers, of course, to the Asian variety of the hedgehog rather than the western hedgehog, which is the subject of our discussion today.

    The fox knows many things, but the hedgehog knows one big thing.

    I am extremely pleased to have the opportunity to respond to my hon. Friend the Member for Plymouth, Sutton and Devonport (Oliver Colvile). I believe that this is the first time that Parliament has discussed hedgehogs since 1566, when the subject was famously raised in relation to the attribution of a bounty of tuppence for the collection of the hedgehog throughout the United Kingdom.

    The hedgehog has undergone an extraordinary evolution. The year 1566 seems very recent, but the hedgehog was around before then. It was around before this Parliament. The hedgehog, and its ancestor, narrowly missed being crushed under the foot of Tyrannosaurus rex. The hedgehog was around long before the human species: it existed 56 million years ago. It tells us a great deal about British civilisation that my hon. Friend has raised the subject, because the hedgehog is a magical creature. It is a creature that appears on cylinder seals in Sumeria, bent backwards on the prows of Egyptian ships. The hedgehog has of course a famous medicinal quality taken by the Romany people for baldness and it represents a symbol of the resurrection found throughout Christian Europe.

    This strange animal was known, of course, in Scotland, Wales and Ireland originally in Gaelic as that demonic creature, that horrid creature, and is the hedgehog celebrated by Shakespeare:

    “Thorny hedgehogs, be not seen…

    Come not near our faerie queen”,

    and famously of course in “Richard III” there is that great moment when Gloucester is referred to as a hedgehog. It tells us something about Britain today; it represents a strange decline in British civilisation from a notion of this magical, mystical, terrifying creature to where it is today, and I refer of course to my own constituent, the famous cleanliness representative of Penrith and The Border, Mrs Tiggy-Winkle.

    I want to be serious for a moment. The hedgehog is of course an important environmental indicator, with its habitat, its ability to occupy 30 hectares of land, and its particular relationship to the hibernaculum, by which I mean the hedgehog’s ability, almost uniquely among animals in the United Kingdom, to go into a state of genuine hibernation. Its heartbeat goes from 240 a minute to only two a minute for six months a year. It has a particular diet—a focus on grubs and beetles. The street hedgehog initiative, which my hon. Friend has brought forward, reminds us that, by cutting holes in the bottom of our hedges, we can create again an opportunity for hedgehogs to move.

    The hedgehog provides a bigger lesson for us in our environment—first, a lesson in scientific humility. The hedgehog has of course been studied for over 2,000 years. The first scientific reference to the hedgehog is in Aristotle; he is picked up again by Isidore of Seville in the 8th century and again by Buffon in the 18th century, and these are reminders of the ways in which we get hedgehogs wrong. Aristotle points out that the hedgehog carries apples on his spine into his nest. Isidore of Seville argues that the hedgehog travels with grapes embedded on his spine. Buffon believes these things might have been food for the winter, but as we know today the hedgehog, hibernating as he does, is not a creature that needs to take food into his nest for the winter.

    Again, our belief in Britain that the five teeth of the hedgehog represent the reaction of the sinful man to God—the five excuses that the sinful man makes to God—is subverted by our understanding that the hedgehog does not have five teeth. Finally, the legislation introduced in this House, to my great despair, in 1566 which led to the bounty of a tuppence on a hedgehog was based on a misunderstanding: the idea that the hedgehog fed on the teats of a recumbent cow in order to feed itself on milk. This led to the death of between of half a million and 2 million hedgehogs between 1566 and 1800, a subject John Clare takes forward in a poem of 1805 and which led my own Department, the Ministry of Agriculture, in 1908 to issue a formal notice to farmers encouraging them not to believe that hedgehogs take milk from the teats of a recumbent cow, because of course the hedgehog’s mouth is too small to be able to perform this function.

    But before we mock our ancestors, we must understand this is a lesson for us. The scientific mistakes we made in the past about the hedgehog are mistakes that we, too, may be mocked for in the future. We barely understand this extraordinary creature. We barely understand for example its habit of self-anointing; we will see a hedgehog produce an enormous amount of saliva and throw it over its back. We do not understand why it does that. We do not really understand its habit of aestivation, which is to say the hedgehog which my hon. Friend referred to—the Pushto version of the hedgehog—hibernates in the summer as well as the winter. We do not understand that concept of aestivation.

    For those of us interested in environmental management, the hedgehog also represents the important subject of conflict in habitats. The habitat that suits the hedgehog is liminal land: it is edge land, hedgerows and dry land. The hedgehog is not an animal that flourishes in many of our nature reserves. It does not do well in peatland or in dense, heavy native woodland. The things that prey on the hedgehog are sometimes things that we treasure. My hon. Friend mentioned badgers.

    Rebecca Pow: Does the Minister agree that the successful survival of our hedgehog population is a direct reflection of how healthy and sustainable our environment is? It is important that we should look after the environment, because the knock-on effect of that will be that our hedgehog population will be looked after.

    Rory Stewart: That is an important point. The hedgehog is a generalist species, and traditionally we have not paid much attention to such species. We have been very good at focusing on specialist species, such as the redshank, which requires a particular kind of wet habitat. The hedgehog is a more challenging species for us to take on board.

    As I was saying, the hedgehog is a good indicator for hedgerow habitat, although it is not much use for peatland or wetland. The hedgehog raises some important environmental questions. One is the question of conflict with the badger. Another is the question of the hedgehog in the western isles, which relates to the issue of the hedgehog’s potential predation on the eggs of the Arctic tern.

    Patrick Grady (Glasgow North) (SNP): On the point about the hedgehog in the western isles, we have established that hedgehogs are a devolved matter. My hon. Friend the Member for Na h-Eileanan an Iar (Mr MacNeil) is not in the Chamber at the moment. Scottish Natural Heritage is doing careful work to humanely remove hedgehogs from the Hebrides, and it would be interesting to hear how the UK Government intend to support that work.

    Rory Stewart: This is an important reminder that things that matter enormously to our civilisation, our society and our hearts—such as the hedgehog—have to be in the right place. In New Zealand, hedgehogs are considered an extremely dangerous invasive species that has to be removed for the same reasons that people in Scotland are having to think about controlling them there. It does not matter whether we are talking about badgers, hedgehogs or Arctic terns—it is a question of what place they should occupy.

    Finally—and, I think, more positively—what the hedgehog really represents for us is an incredible symbol of citizen science. The energy that my hon. Friend the Member for Plymouth, Sutton and Devonport has brought to the debate is a great example of British, or perhaps English, eccentricity, and it is on the basis of English eccentricity that our habitat has been preserved. Gilbert White, the great 18th century naturalist, was himself an immense eccentric. It has been preserved thanks to eccentrics such as my hon. Friend and, perhaps most famously of all, Hugh Warwick, the great inspiration behind the British Hedgehog Preservation Society. He has written no fewer than three books on the hedgehog, and he talks very movingly about staring into the eyes of a hedgehog and getting a sense of its wildness from its gaze. These enthusiasts connect the public to nature, sustain our 25-year environment programme and contribute enormously to our scientific understanding of these animals. This is true in relation to bees, to beavers and in particular to Hugh Warwick’s work on hedgehogs. I am also pleased that the hon. Member for East Kilbride, Strathaven and Lesmahagow (Dr Cameron) mentioned national hedgehog day in an earlier intervention.

    Ultimately, we need to understand that the hedgehog is a very prickly issue. The reason for that is that my hon. Friend the Member for Plymouth, Sutton and Devonport has raised the question of adopting the hedgehog as our national symbol. Some hon. Members will remember that the hedgehog was used by Saatchi & Saatchi in an advertising campaign for the Conservative party in 1992 general election. We should therefore pay tribute to the hedgehog’s direct contribution to our election victory in that year. But I would like to challenge my hon. Friend’s assertion that the hedgehog should become our national symbol. I ask you, Madam Deputy Speaker, as I ask those on both sides of this House, because this question concerns not only one party, but all of us: do we want to have as our national symbol an animal which when confronted with danger rolls over into a little ball and puts its spikes up? Do we want to have as our national symbol an animal that sleeps for six months of the year? Or would we rather return to the animal that is already our national symbol? I refer, of course, to the lion, which is majestic, courageous and proud.

    If I may finish with a little testimony to my hon. Friend and to those innocent creatures which are hedgehogs, perhaps I can reach back to them not as a symbol for our nation but as a symbol of innocence to Thomas Hardy. He says:

    “When the hedgehog travels furtively over the lawn,

    One may say, ‘He strove that such innocent creatures should come to no harm,

    But he could do little for them; and now he is gone.’

    If, when hearing that I have been stilled at last, they stand at the door,

    Watching the full-starred heavens that winter sees,

    Will this thought rise on those who will meet my face no more,

    ‘He was one who had an eye for such mysteries’?

    Madam Deputy Speaker (Mrs Eleanor Laing): I paused because I wanted to encourage some more positive noises for the Minister, who has just made one of the best speeches I have ever heard in this House.

  • Caroline Lucas – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    Caroline Lucas – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Caroline Lucas on 2015-11-06.

    To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, what assessment her Department has made of the potential financial effect of proposals to deny refused asylum seekers access to financial support will have on (a) local authorities and (b) (i) homelessness, (ii) health and (iii) mental health service providers,

    James Brokenshire

    An assessment of the financial impact of the proposed changes to support for failed asylum seekers was published on 4 August and can be found at:

    https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/reforming-support-for-failed-asylum-seekers-and-other-illegal-migrants-impact-assessment

    The government has consulted widely on the proposals, which are now contained in Schedule 6 to the Immigration Bill published on 17 September, and is discussing the detail of how they will be implemented with local authorities and others. The financial impact of the changes will be reviewed in light of these discussions and reflected in a revised impact assessment.

  • Ben Bradshaw – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Ben Bradshaw – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Ben Bradshaw on 2015-11-30.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, whether his Department has made an assessment of the effect of inflammatory arthritis on an individual’s ability to stay in work.

    Jane Ellison

    We are aware that a high proportion of people with inflammatory arthritis are of working age. Inflammatory arthritis is a major cause of sickness absence.

    Treatment for inflammatory arthritis has improved dramatically with the development of new drugs. It is essential for people with relevant symptoms to present early to their general practitioner and for the condition to be diagnosed promptly. Ensuring that people have access to the best possible treatment and support provides the greatest scope to enable people with inflammatory arthritis to stay in work.

    The newly formed Work and Health Unit is a joint endeavour between Department of Health and Department for Work and Pensions. The Unit has been established to lead the drive for improving work and health outcomes for people with health conditions and disabilities, as well as improving prevention and support for people absent from work through ill health and those at risk of leaving the workforce.

    In the Spending Review the Government has provided at least £115 million of funding for the Unit including a Work and Health Innovation Fund.

  • Jim Cunningham – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for International Development

    Jim Cunningham – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for International Development

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Jim Cunningham on 2015-11-06.

    To ask the Secretary of State for International Development, what assistance and support her Department is providing to food sovereignty movements in developing countries; and if she will make a statement.

    Grant Shapps

    DFID supports strengthening household food security through improving agricultural productivity and improved incomes from agricultural production, building resilience against climate change and linking smallholder farmers to markets and supply chains. We help with a context-specific range of programmes, which all contribute to the inclusive and more sustainable economic growth that will lift poor people out of poverty.

    The UK Government believes that a key element in strengthening food security is to encourage diverse sources of supply. We will not support approaches that undermine open markets and free trade, which allows consumer choice and options for a healthier diet, and so does not specifically support food sovereignty movements in developing countries.

  • Stephen Timms – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    Stephen Timms – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Stephen Timms on 2015-11-30.

    To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, what estimate she has made of how many Syrian refugees in the vulnerable persons programme will be resettled in (a) North East England, (b) North West England, (c) Yorkshire and the Humber, (d) the East Midlands, (e) the West Midlands, (f) the East of England, (g) Greater London, (h) South East England, (i) South West England, (j) Wales, (k) Scotland and (l) Northern Ireland by 2020.

    Richard Harrington

    We are still in discussions with many local authorities to establish whether they wish to participate in the Syrian Vulnerable Persons Resettlement Scheme.

  • Lilian Greenwood – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    Lilian Greenwood – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lilian Greenwood on 2015-11-06.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, how much his Department has spent on (a) temporary agency staff, (b) consultants, (c) non-payroll staff, (d) administration and (e) marketing and advertising in real terms in each year since 2010-11.

    Mr Robert Goodwill

    The Department’s spend on temporary agency staff, consultancy and administration for the financial years from 2010/11 to 2014/15 is published in the Department’s Annual Report and Accounts and is included in the tables below.

    (a) Temporary Agency Staff

    Temporary Agency Staff (£m)

    2010/11

    2011/12

    2012/13

    2013/14

    2014/15

    Department for Transport (central)

    6.87

    4.10

    6.85

    12.80

    15.77

    Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency

    3.70

    1.00

    3.13

    1.22

    0.98

    Driving Standards Agency

    0.34

    0.00

    0.01

    0.13

    0.80

    Highways Agency

    3.76

    2.45

    1.01

    5.83

    9.82

    Maritime and Coastguard Agency

    0.48

    0.17

    0.14

    0.57

    1.07

    Vehicle Certification Agency

    0.15

    0.12

    0.17

    0.36

    0.14

    Vehicle and Operator Services Agency

    1.00

    1.59

    2.28

    3.02

    5.39

    Department Total

    16.30

    9.43

    13.59

    23.93

    33.97

    (b) Consultancy

    Consultancy (£m)

    2010/11

    2011/12

    2012/13

    2013/14

    2014/15

    Department for Transport (central)

    5.54

    5.57

    10.30

    8.12

    19.25

    Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency

    0.76

    0.48

    0.56

    0.70

    0.12

    Driving Standards Agency

    0.10

    0.00

    0.00

    0.04

    0.31

    Highways Agency

    3.87

    0.30

    0.19

    0.27

    0.00

    Maritime and Coastguard Agency

    0.13

    0.05

    0.10

    0.13

    0.00

    Vehicle Certification Agency

    0.00

    0.00

    0.00

    0.05

    0.00

    Vehicle and Operator Services Agency

    0.39

    0.01

    0.07

    0.97

    0.09

    Department Total

    10.79

    6.41

    11.22

    10.28

    19.77

    The figures for temporary staff and consultancy have been produced based on Cabinet Office definitions for these categories of expenditure. Consultancy is defined as work of an advisory nature designed to inform policy or to assist with strategic decisions and complex legal issues. Temporary Staff category includes expenditure where it is clear that specific individuals are being engaged to work on projects and ‘business as usual’ functions.

    Please see (d) Administration for further information

    (c) Non-payroll Staff

    Most non-payroll expenditure is included as either Temporary Staff or Consultancy answered in parts (a) and (b) above, with the exception of:-

    Non-Payroll Staff (£M)

    2010/11

    2011/12

    2012/13

    2013/14

    2014/15

    Vehicle Certification Agency (VCA)

    1.68

    1.76

    2.05

    2.18

    3.04

    VCA figures include overseas contractors and locally employed staff. There was a large increase 2013/14 to 2014/15 as they took over a Turkish contract.

    (d) Administration

    Administration costs reflect the costs of running the Department, including staff, accommodation, IT costs, and operating lease rentals. The administration budget figures below are substantially lower than the 2009-10 figure of £297m.

    Department for Transport Spend Category (£m)

    2010/11

    2011/12

    2012/13

    2013/14

    2014/15

    Total Administration Budget

    276.26

    216.74

    242.93

    240.08

    271.38

    To ensure that the Department was resourced to deliver its agenda, particularly around letting and managing rail franchise contracts following the Laidlaw and Brown reviews, HM Treasury agreed to switch £25m from DfT’s Programme to Administration budgets, increasing the Department’s 2014-15 Administration budget to £275m, plus £13m for depreciation.

    The increases in (a) temporary staff and (b) consultancy spend was covered in this switch.

    Notes:

    1. Government Car & Despatch Agency disbanded during 2012/13 following which the work has been undertaken within the Department. The Administration therefore falls under Central Administration section from

    2013/14 onwards.

    2. General Lighthouse Authorities consolidated into the Department’s accounts for 2013/14 and beyond.

    (e) Marketing and Advertising

    Spend on marketing, including marketing related advertising, by the Department and its Executive Agencies for the financial years 2012/13 to 2014/15 is set out in the table below.

    Marketing spend in 2014/15 is 83% less than the £48.4 million recorded for 2009/10.

    Marketing related expenditure (£m)

    2012/13

    2013/14

    2014/15

    Department for Transport (central)

    3.47

    4.79

    5.96

    Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency

    0.56

    Nil

    Nil

    Driver and Vehicle Standards Agency1

    0.23

    Driving Standards Agency1

    0.04

    0.03

    Government Car and Despatch Agency2

    Nil

    Highways Agency

    0.46

    0.43

    1.91

    Maritime and Coastguard Agency

    0.18

    0.16

    0.21

    Vehicle and Operator Services Agency1

    0.06

    0.06

    Vehicle Certification Agency

    0.04

    N/A

    0.05

    Department Total

    4.80

    5.47

    8.36

    Notes:

    1. The Driving Standards Agency and Vehicle and Operator Services Agency became the Driver and Vehicle Standards Agency in April 2014.

    2. The Government Car and Despatch Agency ceased on 30 September 2012.

    Most of the additional spend in 2014/15 compared to the previous year is attributable to the THINK! Drug Drive campaign in March 2015 supporting the implementation of new enforcement regulations and the Highways Agency public information campaign on the implementation of new traffic management and payment methods at the Dartford Crossing.

    Figures for 2010/11 and 2011/12 were not prepared and could be compiled now only at disproportionate cost.

  • Craig Whittaker – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills

    Craig Whittaker – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Craig Whittaker on 2015-11-30.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills, how much his Department spent on educational materials for prisons in 2014-15.

    Nick Boles

    The Department for Business, Innovation and Skills funds the Skills Funding Agency to administer and deliver education in the majority of adult prisons in England via the Offenders’ Learning and Skills Service (OLASS).

    The OLASS budget for 2014-15 was £145.6m. This figure includes funding for the National Careers Service in custody. It excludes a number of private prisons where the operator is responsible for providing education under their contract with the National Offender Management Service.

    The OLASS budget includes funding to cover the provision of educational materials. The costs of those materials are not collected separately.

  • Lord Beecham – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Communities and Local Government

    Lord Beecham – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Communities and Local Government

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Beecham on 2015-11-05.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government what steps they will take to ensure that residents in council areas with low levels of business rates are protected from the effects of the change to funding council tax benefit by retained business rates in 2020.

    Baroness Williams of Trafford

    By the end of this Parliament, when local government will keep 100% of the £26 billion of business rates they raise locally, our ambition is that local councils will meet their spending needs, including local council tax support, from local taxation and other locally raised income. At the point that we introduce 100% business rates retention, there will continue to be a measure of redistribution to ensure that no authority loses out just because it starts from a relatively weaker position.

  • Sadiq Khan – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    Sadiq Khan – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Sadiq Khan on 2015-11-30.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, how many assaults there were on staff working for (a) London Underground, (b) London Overground, (c) London buses, (d) Docklands Light Railway and (e) Tramlink in each hour of the day in 2014.

    Mr Robert Goodwill

    The Department for Transport does not collect this information.

    However, I am able to say that the British Transport Police will shortly be launching Project Servator, which aims to detect and deter crime on the railways. It deploys highly visible and unpredictable police patrols to prevent a range of criminal activity, from pickpocketing and theft to more serious crimes including terrorism.

  • Lord Oates – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for International Development

    Lord Oates – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for International Development

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Oates on 2015-11-05.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government what assessment they have made of the current food security situation in Ethiopia.

    Baroness Verma

    We are extremely concerned about the impact of the current drought on the food security situation in Ethiopia. A joint Government of Ethiopia and UN assessment is underway and we are in touch with our UN and Non-Governmental Organisation partners on the ground to determine the extent of need.

    In October, the Government of Ethiopia announced that about 8.2 million people are in need of emergency food aid, up from the 4.5 million estimated in August. The number of severely malnourished children under five years old admitted to therapeutic feeding programmes this year has increased notably.

    Britain has acted quickly and decisively by providing emergency support for 2.6 million people. This includes food aid for 2.1 million people for a month. The Government of Ethiopia has also committed its largest ever response to a drought. The international community will need to work hard with the Government of Ethiopia to prevent the crisis from worsening in the coming months.

    DFID is at the forefront of resilience work to reduce the impact of crises in developing countries. In Ethiopia, DFID’s Productive Safety Nets Programme (PSNP) has helped turn desert land into land that can be farmed again.