Tag: Kerry McCarthy

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Kerry McCarthy on 2016-04-25.

To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, what funding (a) her Department and (b) the Environment Agency provided for the Climate Ready Support Service in 2015-16; and what assessment her Department has made of the performance of that Service in (a) 2014-15 and (b) 2015-16.

Rory Stewart

Funding provided for the Climate Ready Support Service in 2015-16 was around £1 million. The Climate Ready Support Service Programme Board had regular overview of the performance of the Service. The majority of National Adaptation Programme actions to which the Service was contributing have now been completed.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Kerry McCarthy on 2016-05-24.

To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, what estimate her Department has made of the proportion of waste exported for recycling which is contaminated and is sent to landfill or incinerated.

Rory Stewart

We are not aware of any waste exported for recycling which has had to be landfilled or incinerated due to contamination.

There is a legitimate export market for quality recyclable material – but the law is clear that it is illegal to export waste from the UK for disposal.

The regulatory framework governing waste shipments provides a mechanism for facilitating the takeback of waste to the country of export in cases where it cannot be processed as intended or in the case of an illegal shipment.

The UK environment agencies have adopted an intelligence-led approach to identify and disrupt the movement of waste intended for illegal export. Defra has been working with the agencies to find ways of strengthening their enforcement activities.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Kerry McCarthy on 2016-07-07.

To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, whether her Department has amended its draft of the 25 year plan on food and farming as a result of the outcome of the EU referendum.

George Eustice

Following the result of the EU Referendum, we now have an opportunity to consider our long term vision for food and farming outside of the EU.

It remains essential that the UK has a thriving food and farming industry with high animal welfare and environmental standards, access to international markets and a long term commitment to boosting productivity through innovation and skills. We are now focused on taking forward the actions that support these objectives, in order to develop our long term vision. To do this, we will continue to work with a wide range of interests to develop that vision, and to work together to deliver it.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Kerry McCarthy on 2016-10-07.

To ask the Secretary of State for Health, how many breaches of animal welfare regulations (a) in slaughterhouses and (b) during transportation his Department recorded in each of the last six years.

Nicola Blackwood

The new legislation Welfare at Time of Killing implemented in Wales in 2014 and in England in 2015 introduced new welfare reporting requirements. In addition, during 2015/16 the Food Standards Agency (FSA) introduced new animal welfare measures in slaughterhouses which included increased consistency of reporting of transport related breaches. Both these factors are likely to have contributed to the increased instances recorded in the previous two years.

The FSA does not record the numbers of individual animals which died as a result of transportation to slaughterhouses. The FSA records the number of instances that animals were found to be Dead on Arrival (DOA). The number of DOA instances for the last six years are set out in the following table:

2010/11	2011/12	2012/13	2013/14	2014/15	2015/16
144	64	5	16	28	265

The FSA does not record the number of individual animals involved in a welfare breaches in slaughterhouses or during transportation. The FSA records the number of instances of breaches. The number of critical welfare breaches in slaughterhouses and transportation for the last six years are set out in the following tables:

Slaughterhouses

2010/11	2011/12	2012/13	2013/14	2014/15	2015/16
158	132	65	113	217	234

Transportation

2010/11	2011/12	2012/13	2013/14	2014/15	2015/16
394	342	308	535	1,488	2,097

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Kerry McCarthy on 2015-11-10.

To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, how much the Government has spent in England on (a) cattle testing for TB, (b) compensation as a result of a test for bovine TB, (c) surveillance activity associated with bovine TB by the Veterinary Laboratories Agency and Animal Plant Health Agency, (d) Tuberculin supply and (e) research connected to bovine TB in each year since 2010-11; and what the total expenditure was on measures to prevent bovine TB in each such year.

George Eustice

The costs of TB testing are included in the overall sum delegated to the Animal and Plant Health Agency for the delivery of bovine TB controls in England which is given in the table below.

TB Expenditure	£/million	£/million	£/million	£/million
	2010/11	2011/12	2012/13	2013/14
APHA expenditure, including field operations and TB testing	64.1	67.1	58.3	67.9
APHA TB surveillance: laboratory and science costs	3.9	3.1	3.0	3.3
TB Cattle compensation (net of salvage receipts)	24.3	23.5	23.9	22.6
Cost of tuberculin purchase	2.2	2.6	2.8	2.5
TB R&D	6.9	7.9	8.0	8.9

Foot note: – This data was extracted from the Defra Oracle Financial system on 11 November 2015 and does not take account of EU receipts.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Kerry McCarthy on 2015-12-16.

To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, what her policy is on proposals for an EU ban on the prophylactic treatment of groups of animals where no disease has been diagnosed in any of the animals as part of the review of the EU Veterinary Medicinal Products legislation.

George Eustice

The current compromise text of the proposal for an EU Regulation on the manufacture, placing on the market and use of medicated feed, states that “Medicated feed containing antibiotics shall not be used to prevent diseases in animals, or to enhance their performance.” However, a similar provision has not been included in the proposal for an EU Regulation on veterinary medicinal products.

The Government’s policy is that the administration of antibiotics in the absence of disease is not a responsible way to use antibiotics. In groups of animals where some are sick and others have not developed clinical signs, the veterinary surgeon has to be free to use their clinical judgement to prescribe antibiotics to ensure animal welfare. This policy is being put forward during the current negotiations.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Kerry McCarthy on 2016-02-19.

To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, what recent assessment her Department has made of the sensitivity of the single intradermal comparative cervical tuberculin test for Bovine TB; and what steps her Department is taking to improve testing for TB.

George Eustice

The single intradermal comparative cervical tuberculin (SICCT) commonly known as the ‘skin test’ is the legal standard approved in the EU legislation for the diagnosis of TB in live cattle in the UK. SICCT has a very high specificity giving on average only one false positive result for every 5,000 or 6,000 uninfected cattle tested, although it is only moderately sensitive (with about one in five to one in four infected cattle potentially missed by the test).

The skin test is a good herd screening test and it is supplemented by post-mortem meat inspection at commercial slaughter of cattle. When one or more infected animals are detected in a cattle herd, we apply a number of strategies to improve the overall sensitivity of TB testing until the infected herd regains officially TB free status. This includes testing the herd every 60 days, lowering the positive cut-off of the skin test (‘severe interpretation’) and supplementing the skin test with the more sensitive interferon-gamma blood test.

We have also increased the number of interferon-gamma blood tests carried out in conjunction with the SICCT to maximise the detection of infected cattle in TB breakdown herds. This number has more than quadrupled since 2009 to reach just over 74,000 blood tests in 2015. The use of this blood test to help remove infected animals from breakdown herds has been compulsory in the Low Risk Area of England since 2006 and in the whole of the Edge Area since January 2014.

My department plans to launch a public consultation that will set out proposals for enhancing the sensitivity of TB testing in TB breakdown herds.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Kerry McCarthy on 2016-03-08.

To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, what research her Department has funded into the effects of micro-plastics in the marine environment in the last 12 months; what the terms of reference are for such research; what institution is undertaking that research; when such research will report; and if she will make it her policy to publish the results of such research.

George Eustice

Defra has funded a project, undertaken by the University of Plymouth, to study the effects of micro-plastics in the marine environment. The project studied whether chemical pollutants stick to plastic particles, whether marine organisms ingest plastic particles and pass them along the food chain, and whether the plastics themselves, or associated chemical pollutants, could cause harm to those organisms. The final report is currently undergoing peer review and is expected to be published shortly.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Kerry McCarthy on 2016-03-24.

To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, if her Department will launch a consultation on proposals for a deposit return system for single use drinks containers.

Rory Stewart

Defra analysed the costs and benefits of implementing a deposit return system (DRS) for single use drink containers as part of the 2011 Review of Waste Policy in England, and sought views in the 2012 consultation on higher packaging recycling targets.

This work showed that introducing a DRS may increase recycling and reduce litter but might impose additional costs on businesses, consumers and local authorities (which would lose revenue from recycling). However, we lack evidence to quantify these benefits and costs appropriately. The current approach has driven a significant increase in packaging waste recycling rates, from less than 47% in 2003 to nearly 65% in 2013.

Last year, the Scottish Government published a feasibility study and a call for evidence investigating the implementation of a DRS for single use drink containers in Scotland. This valuable work highlighted significant uncertainties regarding the impacts and benefits that a DRS would have, notably regarding costs, environmental quality and littering, and existing waste collection systems. The Scottish Government is doing further work on the topic and we will review any new evidence arising from this in due course. However, in the meantime, we will continue to focus on improving existing waste collection and recycling systems, and developing a new National Litter Strategy for England to help coordinate and maximise the impact of anti-litter activity by local government, industry and others.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Kerry McCarthy on 2016-04-21.

To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, how many and what proportion of herds had bovine TB breakdowns in 2015 which had also had such breakdowns in the previous three years in (a) high risk, (b) edge and (b) low risk areas.

George Eustice

The Animal and Plant Health Agency (APHA) maintains and manages this information on behalf of Defra and is responsible for its publication in the annual England TB surveillance reports. The data for 2015 is not yet available. The most recent data available is for 2014 and published in the England TB surveillance report for 2014[1]:

• High Risk Area: 3078 herds had a breakdown of which 1798 (58%) had a breakdown in the previous 3 years.

• Edge: 332 herds had a breakdown of which 85 (26%) had a breakdown in the previous 3 years.

• Low Risk Area: 107 herds had a breakdown of which 15 (14%) had a breakdown in the previous three years.

[1] Bovine tuberculosis: Infection status in cattle in England