Asked by: Lord Rooker (Labour - Life peer)
Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs:
To ask Her Majesty's Government, further to the Written Answer by Lord Gardiner of Kimble on 15 May (HL7422), what were the details of the exhaustive tender and selection process used in 2006; whether the restructuring in 2012 involved the same parties; and if so, whether a bidding process was used.
Answered by Lord Gardiner of Kimble
The Forestry Commissioners decided in 2004 to initiate a public private partnership to enable the development of the in house Forest Holidays business. An invitation to submit outline proposals went to perspective bidders in 2004. Eight responses were received, four candidates were short listed and invited to submit a business plan for setting up and managing a joint venture company. These bids were evaluated in 2005, and a preferred bidder appointed by the end of 2005. The negotiations were concluded with the joint venture, Forest Holidays LLP being set up in May 2006.
The Forestry Commission held a minority interest in the business that was restructured and refinanced in 2012. This interest was retained and rolled over into the two new distinct businesses, Forest Holidays and Camping in the Forest.
Lloyds Development Capital invested in the Forest Holidays business and became the new majority owner, following a negotiation led by the partnership with the support of its professional advisers.
Asked by: Lord Rooker (Labour - Life peer)
Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs:
To ask Her Majesty's Government, further to the Written Answer by Lord Gardiner of Kimble on 15 May (HL7422), who decided the 125 year leases were an essential element in securing the investment needed; and on what advice this decision was taken.
Answered by Lord Gardiner of Kimble
Long leases of up to 75 years were an integral part of joint venture business set up in 2006. The decision taken to extend the site leases for up to 125 years was taken by the Forestry Commissioners, in consultation with their professional advisors, as part of the commercial restructuring and refinancing of the Forestry Holidays business in 2012.
Asked by: Lord Rooker (Labour - Life peer)
Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs:
To ask Her Majesty's Government, further to the Written Answers by Lord Gardiner of Kimble on 15 May (HL7421 and HL7422), whether they will place in the Library of the House a copy of the 2006 Forestry Commission Framework Agreement with Forest Holidays.
Answered by Lord Gardiner of Kimble
I have placed the document in the Library of the House.
Asked by: Lord Rooker (Labour - Life peer)
Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs:
To ask Her Majesty's Government whether ministers have approved Forestry Commission plans to privatise parts of public forests.
Answered by Lord Gardiner of Kimble
Neither the Government nor the Forestry Commission has any plans to privatise any part of the public forest estate. We remain committed to maintaining the public forest estate in trust for the nation.
Asked by: Lord Rooker (Labour - Life peer)
Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs:
To ask Her Majesty's Government whether the Forestry Commission has prepared environmental impact assessments for proposed private developments for building accommodation units in Mortimer Forest on the Herefordshire–Shropshire border.
Answered by Lord Gardiner of Kimble
The Forestry Commission has not undertaken an Environmental Impact Assessment. Forest Holidays received an Environmental Impact Assessment screening opinion from the planning authority on 29th March 2018 and it will be a decision for Forest Holidays on how to respond to this opinion.
Asked by: Lord Rooker (Labour - Life peer)
Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs:
To ask Her Majesty's Government what steps the Forestry Commission has taken, since the original planning application was made regarding proposed developments in Mortimer Forest on the Shropshire–Herefordshire border, to ensure that residents who have an interest have been kept informed of any changes to those plans in an open and transparent manner.
Answered by Lord Gardiner of Kimble
There has not been a planning application by the Forestry Commission, or any other organisation for any developments in Mortimer Forest. Information regarding the proposed Forest Holidays development has been made widely available to local communities. Public Exhibitions were held on 27 and 28 February 2018 where people had the chance to view the proposals and discuss them with members of the Forestry Commission and Forest Holidays teams. Close neighbours were invited to an earlier exhibition. Following these events, exhibition materials and other updates and information have been made available on the Forestry Commission’s website. Any subsequent planning application will be made publically available by the planning authority and anyone who wishes to do so will be able to view and comment on the application.
Asked by: Lord Rooker (Labour - Life peer)
Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs:
To ask Her Majesty's Government what bidding process has been used by the Forestry Commission in respect of granting private companies leases of up to 125 years for the building of accommodation units in public forests.
Answered by Lord Gardiner of Kimble
The Forestry Commission undertook an exhaustive tender and selection process in 2006 to identify a private sector partner for its existing Forest Holidays operation. This led to the formation of Forestry Holidays as an independent Limited Liability Partnership with the Camping and Caravanning Club. The business was restructured in September 2012, to form two separate companies: Forest Holidays and Camping in the Forest. Forest Holidays is now a cabin only business. The 125 year leases were an essential element in securing the investment needed for the business to succeed.
Asked by: Lord Rooker (Labour - Life peer)
Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs:
To ask Her Majesty's Government whether the financial arrangements employed by the Forestry Commission to grant private access to developers to build accommodation units in public forests have been approved by the National Audit Office.
Answered by Lord Gardiner of Kimble
There is no requirement for approval by the National Audit Office. The Forestry Commissioners have the power under the provisions in the Countryside Act 1968 to carry out recreational developments on the land placed at its disposal (the public forest estate), including the provision of accommodation for visitors. The 2006 Regulatory Reform (Forestry) Order enabled the Forestry Commissioners to go into partnership in order to undertake any of the activities it is authorised to carry out under the Countryside Act 1968.
Asked by: Lord Rooker (Labour - Life peer)
Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs:
To ask Her Majesty's Government what is their estimate of the annual cost of fortifying flour which the law requires to be fortified with iron, calcium, thiamine and niacin; and whether any of that cost is borne by public funds.
Answered by Lord Gardiner of Kimble
The continued need for the fortification of flour, was last reviewed in 2013. A 2012 Impact Assessment estimated the cost of fortification to be around £2.84 million per year based on the production of 4 million tonnes of flour for food production every year, or around 71p per tonne of flour. This is at most 1/3 of 1% of the flour itself and therefore an even smaller part of the cost of flour products such as bread and cakes. This cost is not borne by public funds.
Asked by: Lord Rooker (Labour - Life peer)
Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs:
To ask Her Majesty’s Government what plans they have to move responsibility for flour fortification from millers to food manufacturers.
Answered by Lord Gardiner of Kimble
In June this year the Government held an informal consultation in order to seek views on possible additions to the exemptions currently allowed under the Bread and Flour Regulations 1998 from the requirement to fortify flour with calcium, iron, niacin, and thiamine. The exemptions that were envisaged would allow more efficient and streamlined manufacturing operations for foods produced for export as well as for the home market, without compromising the public health benefits which accrue from fortification. A range of interested parties were consulted including millers, flour users, retailers, fortificant manufacturers and health professionals.
The options proposed in the consultation would allow millers to produce unfortified flour in England when used as a secondary ingredient which undergoes further processing, or is used in relatively small quantities in products. This approach was welcomed by most consultees and the Government is now considering how to take this forward.
The Department of Health and Public Health England has considered the proposals and concluded that it is unlikely that an exemption from fortification for flour used in such products will have a nutritionally significant impact on the intakes of calcium, iron, thiamine or niacin.
The changes proposed would apply to England only since food legislation is a devolved matter. The devolved administrations are aware of these proposals but have not yet made any decisions on whether to introduce similar changes.
Respondents to the consultation also asked for some additional flexibility around the point at which the fortificants are added to flour. At the moment flour must be fortified at the mill and the four fortificants are added as a premix at the end of the milling process. Many businesses which manufacture foods both for the home market and for export requested the flexibility to be able to add the fortificants at the bakery stage. They highlighted that the requirement for separate storage and handling for, both fortified and unfortified flour (which is used for exported products) was creating significant manufacturing complexities. That resulted in a more restricted product range and is having an adverse effect on their export potential and their ability to diversify into new global markets. The Government is currently considering this.