Asked by: Andrew George (Liberal Democrat - St Ives)
Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs:
To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, pursuant to the oral Answer of 29 January 2015, Official Report, column 996, what percentage reduction in badger numbers was achieved in each of the two 2014 pilot culls.
Answered by George Eustice
In West Somerset, the cull company achieved removal of 70% of the estimated starting population of badgers, indicating that industry-led culling can, in the right circumstances, deliver the level of effectiveness required to be confident of achieving disease control benefits.
The results for Gloucestershire show that continued progress is needed taking into account the additional challenges of interference, harassment and criminal damage by activists.
Cull companies were required to provide more detailed information on progress, and based on the information submitted, Natural England were able to build a more accurate assessment of progress. This is described in advice published in August 2014:
As licensing authority, Natural England closely monitored the performance of each cull company and the effort being deployed across the cull area at frequent intervals, taking into account the actual circumstances being experienced by the cull companies.
Details of the number of badgers removed during year two of the culls were published on 18 December 2014, and can be found at:
Defra’s advice to Natural England on setting minimum and maximum number of badgers to be culled in West Somerset and West Gloucestershire in year 2 of the badger culls can be found at the link above. This advice includes a summary of the methods considered by Defra for estimating the badger populations in these areas. The minimum number is intended to correspond to a 70% reduction of the population relative to the initial starting population before the culls started in 2013. The culling objective is for no more than 30% of the starting population to remain on conclusion of the cull.
Based on the population estimation methodology selected, in Gloucestershire, Natural England set a minimum number of 615. At the conclusion of the 2014 cull 274 badgers were removed.
Based on the population estimation methodology selected, in Somerset Natural England set a minimum number of 316. At the conclusion of the 2014 cull, 341 badgers were removed.
Asked by: Andrew George (Liberal Democrat - St Ives)
Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs:
To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, pursuant to the oral Answer of 29 January 2015, Official Report, column 996, when she plans to publish her Department's estimate of the percentage reduction in badger numbers achieved in both pilot cull areas as a result of last year's cull.
Answered by George Eustice
In West Somerset, the cull company achieved removal of 70% of the estimated starting population of badgers, indicating that industry-led culling can, in the right circumstances, deliver the level of effectiveness required to be confident of achieving disease control benefits.
The results for Gloucestershire show that continued progress is needed taking into account the additional challenges of interference, harassment and criminal damage by activists.
Cull companies were required to provide more detailed information on progress, and based on the information submitted, Natural England were able to build a more accurate assessment of progress. This is described in advice published in August 2014:
As licensing authority, Natural England closely monitored the performance of each cull company and the effort being deployed across the cull area at frequent intervals, taking into account the actual circumstances being experienced by the cull companies.
Details of the number of badgers removed during year two of the culls were published on 18 December 2014, and can be found at:
Defra’s advice to Natural England on setting minimum and maximum number of badgers to be culled in West Somerset and West Gloucestershire in year 2 of the badger culls can be found at the link above. This advice includes a summary of the methods considered by Defra for estimating the badger populations in these areas. The minimum number is intended to correspond to a 70% reduction of the population relative to the initial starting population before the culls started in 2013. The culling objective is for no more than 30% of the starting population to remain on conclusion of the cull.
Based on the population estimation methodology selected, in Gloucestershire, Natural England set a minimum number of 615. At the conclusion of the 2014 cull 274 badgers were removed.
Based on the population estimation methodology selected, in Somerset Natural England set a minimum number of 316. At the conclusion of the 2014 cull, 341 badgers were removed.
Asked by: Andrew George (Liberal Democrat - St Ives)
Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs:
To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, pursuant to the oral Answer of 29 January 2015, Official Report, column 996, what steps her Department took to ensure that if pilot culls had achieved the target of 70 per cent reduction in badger numbers in (a) 2013 and (b) 2014.
Answered by George Eustice
In West Somerset, the cull company achieved removal of 70% of the estimated starting population of badgers, indicating that industry-led culling can, in the right circumstances, deliver the level of effectiveness required to be confident of achieving disease control benefits.
The results for Gloucestershire show that continued progress is needed taking into account the additional challenges of interference, harassment and criminal damage by activists.
Cull companies were required to provide more detailed information on progress, and based on the information submitted, Natural England were able to build a more accurate assessment of progress. This is described in advice published in August 2014:
As licensing authority, Natural England closely monitored the performance of each cull company and the effort being deployed across the cull area at frequent intervals, taking into account the actual circumstances being experienced by the cull companies.
Details of the number of badgers removed during year two of the culls were published on 18 December 2014, and can be found at:
Defra’s advice to Natural England on setting minimum and maximum number of badgers to be culled in West Somerset and West Gloucestershire in year 2 of the badger culls can be found at the link above. This advice includes a summary of the methods considered by Defra for estimating the badger populations in these areas. The minimum number is intended to correspond to a 70% reduction of the population relative to the initial starting population before the culls started in 2013. The culling objective is for no more than 30% of the starting population to remain on conclusion of the cull.
Based on the population estimation methodology selected, in Gloucestershire, Natural England set a minimum number of 615. At the conclusion of the 2014 cull 274 badgers were removed.
Based on the population estimation methodology selected, in Somerset Natural England set a minimum number of 316. At the conclusion of the 2014 cull, 341 badgers were removed.
Asked by: Andrew George (Liberal Democrat - St Ives)
Question
To ask the right hon. Member for Banbury, representing the Church Commissioners, what powers parochial church councils possess to convey (a) capital, (b) property and (c) other assets to a local community organisation or charity they are (i) seeking to assist and (ii) whose objections or plan they support.
Answered by Tony Baldry
A Parochial Church Council is a statutory corporation established for the purpose, among other more specific functions, of "co-operating with the minster in promoting in the parish the whole mission of the Church, pastoral, evangelistic, social and ecumenical”. The Parochial Church Council may properly convey money or property to another charity or community organisation if it considers that doing so would further this charitable purpose. A transfer of land would require the consent of the diocesan authority. No consent is required for a transfer of money or other property.
Asked by: Andrew George (Liberal Democrat - St Ives)
Question
To ask the right hon. Member for Banbury, representing the Church Commissioners, how many and which parochial church councils (a) have and (b) have not registered their entitlement to the benefit of recovery of channel repair liability.
Answered by Tony Baldry
Each Parochial Church Council is an independent charity and it is for them to individually determine whether or not to register chancel repair liabilities in accordance with their responsibilities set out by the Charity Commission. No central register is kept.
Asked by: Andrew George (Liberal Democrat - St Ives)
Question
To ask the right hon. Member for Banbury, representing the Church Commissioners, how many court cases have been brought by parochial church councils to recover channel repair liability since the Aston Cantlow judgement by the House of Lords in 2003.
Answered by Tony Baldry
The Church Commissioners are not aware of any litigation by Parochial Church Councils relating to chancel repair liability since the Aston Cantlow case.
Asked by: Andrew George (Liberal Democrat - St Ives)
Question to the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government:
To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, on how many occasions in each year since it was set up the Ministerial Working Group on Gypsies and Travellers has met; which ministers attended each such meeting; and what steps have been taken by ministers in pursuance of the recommendations and commitments arising from the work of that group.
Answered by Brandon Lewis
I refer the hon. Member to the answer of 11 November 2014, Official Report, House of Lords, Column WA36.
Asked by: Andrew George (Liberal Democrat - St Ives)
Question to the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government:
To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, which ministers are responsible for the implementation of the commitments arising from the work of the Ministerial Working Group on Gypsies and Travellers; and when he expects his Department to fully deliver each of those commitments.
Answered by Brandon Lewis
I refer the hon. Member to the answer of 11 November 2014, Official Report, House of Lords, Column WA36.
Asked by: Andrew George (Liberal Democrat - St Ives)
Question to the Department for Work and Pensions:
To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, pursuant to the Answer of 27 October 2014 to Question 211139, if he will place in the Library the administrative data (Single Housing Benefit Extract) calculation used to estimate the figure of £1 billion pounds; and what estimate he has made of the cost of exempting from the under-occupancy penalty people who would be exempt for reasons set out in sub-clauses 2(1)(a) to (c) of the Affordable Homes Bill.
Answered by Esther McVey
The calculation of the cost of about £1 billion pounds for the Affordable Homes is solely in relation to Clause 2 (1) (a), (b) and (c). This was estimated using both the administrative data (Single Housing Benefit Extract) and the department’s policy simulation model.
As the estimate was made in this way, it is not possible to place the base data in the Library for this estimate.
Asked by: Andrew George (Liberal Democrat - St Ives)
Question to the Scotland Office:
To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland, what discussions he has had with his (a) Ministerial colleagues and (b) counterparts in the Scottish Government on the future balance of fishing entitlements available to the UK and its effect on Scotland.
Answered by David Mundell
I speak regularly with Ministerial colleagues in Defra on fisheries matters, and the UK Government keeps in close contact with the Scottish Government to ensure that the interests of the Scottish fishing industry are reflected in discussions on both UK and intra-UK fishing entitlements.