Asked by: Richard Arkless (Scottish National Party - Dumfries and Galloway)
Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs:
To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, what discussions she has had with local authorities in Northern Ireland and Scotland about the illegal trafficking of puppies from the Republic of Ireland; and what assessment she has made of the effect on such trafficking of the transfer in Scotland of search powers from Trading Standards to local port authorities.
Answered by George Eustice
The Government takes the illegal movement of dogs and puppies seriously and it is committed to working with the Devolved Administrations, delivery bodies, enforcement agencies and non-government organisations to tackle this issue.
Whilst there have been no recent Ministerial meetings on the illegal movement of dogs, Defra’s Chief Veterinary Officer has recently discussed the issue with his Scottish, Welsh and Northern Ireland counterparts. Additionally, there have been discussions on this issue between other Defra officials and officials within the Devolved Administrations.
Defra has not carried out an assessment of the impact of transferring Trading Standards search powers to local port authorities in Scotland as this is a devolved matter. However, we will continue to work closely with the Scottish Government and other interested parties to ensure that there is a full exchange of ideas and information on combating the illegal importation of puppies.
Asked by: Richard Arkless (Scottish National Party - Dumfries and Galloway)
Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs:
To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, what steps the Government is taking to support milk producers in ensuring milk prices in supermarkets are maintained.
Answered by George Eustice
We support the farming industry by reducing red tape, funding research to foster innovation, extending the tax averaging period for self-employed farmers and working to open up new export markets.
To provide some relief to hard-pressed farmers we secured a £26.6m aid package for the UK from the European Commission – the third largest of all Member States. Dairy farmers across the UK are being paid a one-off, flat rate payment linked to milk production. The majority of payments were made by the RPA on 16 November 2015.
The Government is working with the food industry – including supermarkets, retailers, manufacturers and caterers – on even more consistent labelling and branding of British dairy products, improving transparency across the supply chain and allocating more space on shop shelves. This will make it easier for consumers and food businesses to know when they are buying British dairy products.
A number of supermarkets have pledged to pay a premium over and above the current market price and we should welcome that. It won’t solve the problem but it will give some respite to farmers.
Asked by: Richard Arkless (Scottish National Party - Dumfries and Galloway)
Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs:
To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, how much Forestry Commission England spent on replanting in each year since 2000.
Answered by Rory Stewart
The area felled in any one year on the public forest estate in England is not recorded separately, but the total area that has been felled and which is in the process of being either restocked, or being converted to another land use, such as open habitats for landscape or conservation reasons, is recorded. This is given in the table below, along with the area restocked each year and the expenditure on restocking operations.
Year ending 31 March | Total felled area 1 (thousand hectares) | Restocked area 2 (thousand hectares) | Expenditure associated with restocking 3 (£ ,000s) |
2001 | 7.9 | 2.1 | 5,181 |
2002 | 8.4 | 2.3 | 5,779 |
2003 | 7.9 | 2.3 | 5,979 |
2004 | 8.1 | 2.2 | 5,735 |
2005 | 8.1 | 1.9 | 5,635 |
2006 | 7.5 | 2.5 | 6,356 |
2007 | 8.2 | 1.9 | 6,562 |
2008 | 8.3 | 2.1 | 5,915 |
2009 | 8.7 | 1.8 | 5,924 |
2010 | 9.2 | 1.5 | 5,880 |
2011 | 8.1 | 2.5 | 7,340 |
2012 | 8.2 | 2.2 | 7,384 |
2013 | 8.6 | 2.2 | 6,448 |
2014 | 8.7 | 2.1 | 7,399 |
2015 | 8.6 | 2.3 | 7,884 |
1 ‘Felled area’ is the area of the public forest estate that is recorded as felled on the sub-compartment database, the Forestry Commission’s electronic record of current land use. Because there is generally a two to four year gap between felling and restocking, or the reclassification as another land use, the total area classified as ‘felled’ is significantly greater than that which is felled in any one year.
2 ‘Restocked area’ is the area of the public forest estate that has previously been felled and which is recorded as having been restocked in the previous 12 months, including by natural regeneration and replanting.
3 Expenditure associated with restocking is all money spent on activities directly attributed to restocking after felling, including preparation of the site and maintenance during the initial establishment phase.
Asked by: Richard Arkless (Scottish National Party - Dumfries and Galloway)
Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs:
To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, how many hectares of trees have been (a) felled and (b) replanted on Forestry Commission land in England in each year since 2000.
Answered by Rory Stewart
The area felled in any one year on the public forest estate in England is not recorded separately, but the total area that has been felled and which is in the process of being either restocked, or being converted to another land use, such as open habitats for landscape or conservation reasons, is recorded. This is given in the table below, along with the area restocked each year and the expenditure on restocking operations.
Year ending 31 March | Total felled area 1 (thousand hectares) | Restocked area 2 (thousand hectares) | Expenditure associated with restocking 3 (£ ,000s) |
2001 | 7.9 | 2.1 | 5,181 |
2002 | 8.4 | 2.3 | 5,779 |
2003 | 7.9 | 2.3 | 5,979 |
2004 | 8.1 | 2.2 | 5,735 |
2005 | 8.1 | 1.9 | 5,635 |
2006 | 7.5 | 2.5 | 6,356 |
2007 | 8.2 | 1.9 | 6,562 |
2008 | 8.3 | 2.1 | 5,915 |
2009 | 8.7 | 1.8 | 5,924 |
2010 | 9.2 | 1.5 | 5,880 |
2011 | 8.1 | 2.5 | 7,340 |
2012 | 8.2 | 2.2 | 7,384 |
2013 | 8.6 | 2.2 | 6,448 |
2014 | 8.7 | 2.1 | 7,399 |
2015 | 8.6 | 2.3 | 7,884 |
1 ‘Felled area’ is the area of the public forest estate that is recorded as felled on the sub-compartment database, the Forestry Commission’s electronic record of current land use. Because there is generally a two to four year gap between felling and restocking, or the reclassification as another land use, the total area classified as ‘felled’ is significantly greater than that which is felled in any one year.
2 ‘Restocked area’ is the area of the public forest estate that has previously been felled and which is recorded as having been restocked in the previous 12 months, including by natural regeneration and replanting.
3 Expenditure associated with restocking is all money spent on activities directly attributed to restocking after felling, including preparation of the site and maintenance during the initial establishment phase.
Asked by: Richard Arkless (Scottish National Party - Dumfries and Galloway)
Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs:
To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, what steps her Department is taking to tackle the illegal transport of farmed puppies from the Republic of Ireland and southern Europe into the UK.
Answered by George Eustice
All movements of puppies into the UK that are not covered by the Pet Travel Scheme are subject to the provisions of the Council Directive 92/65/EEC (Balai Directive). This is implemented by the Trade in Animal and Related Products Regulations 2011. Commercial movements of puppies may be subject to a post-import check at the place of final destination by the Animal and Plant Health Agency.
Responsibility for enforcing the Trade in Animal and Related Products Regulations 2011 falls to local authorities. They are also responsible for enforcing welfare in transport legislation which makes it an offence for anyone to transport animals or cause animals to be transported in a way likely to cause injury or unnecessary suffering to them.
The act of smuggling puppies in contravention of the animal health and welfare requirements may give rise to the commission of a number of different criminal offences depending on the circumstances of the illegal import. Defra is working with interested parties with a particular interest in improving the collection, analysis and use of intelligence relating to this illegal trade. We are also aware that some EU countries, such as the Republic of Ireland, have recently tightened up their regulatory requirements for puppy breeding, which we hope will also have a positive impact on the problem of illegal trade.
Asked by: Richard Arkless (Scottish National Party - Dumfries and Galloway)
Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs:
To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, if she will seek a ban on the sale of puppies from retail outlets; and if she will make a statement.
Answered by George Eustice
Under the Pet Animals Act 1951 local authorities can already apply conditions to individual pet shop licences. This includes, for example, restricting the species that can be sold. The power to apply conditions to an individual licence is in section 1(3) of the 1951 Act and is intended to help secure the welfare requirements set out in that section.
Asked by: Richard Arkless (Scottish National Party - Dumfries and Galloway)
Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs:
To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, what recent progress has been made with the US and Scottish Governments on lifting the US import ban on haggis.
Answered by George Eustice
The United States does not accept imports of haggis containing sheep lungs. Former Secretary of State for Defra, Owen Paterson, lobbied US authorities during his visit in 2014 and the Government continues to encourage the US to adjust its ban on UK haggis. Scottish haggis producers are developing a US-specific recipe to allow them to access the market once the wider EU negotiations on lifting the Transmissible Spongiform Encephalopathy restrictions on EU lamb are concluded.