(AQW 340/00)

Reply: You have asked for further details on the cost of our visit to the United States in September this year.

The details requested are as follows:

(AQO 169/00)

Reply: We assume that the Member is asking about costs of attendance at North/South Ministerial Council, British- Irish Council and British–Irish Intergovernmental Conference meetings.

Ministers and their staff attend meetings of NSMC in plenary and sectoral formats. They do not attend meetings of the cross border bodies themselves, since these are working meetings of officials and, where relevant, Board members.

Since 2 December 1999 there have been 15 meetings of NSMC, two in Plenary session and 13 in Sectoral format. The cost of travel and accommodation of Ministers and their staff attending these meetings has been some £16,000.

There has been one plenary meeting of the British-Irish Council and one of the British-Irish Intergovernmental Conference. These were held on 17 December 1999 in London. The costs of the Council and Conference were borne by the UK Government, as the host member, with travel costs etc being borne by the respective Governments. The cost of Northern Ireland participants was borne by the Northern Ireland administration. Total travel and accommodation costs for the meetings were £6,365.

One meeting of the British-Irish Council in sectoral format has also been held. The travel and accommodation costs were £2,920

(AQW 289/00)

The Minister of Agriculture and Rural Development (Ms Rodgers): New EU rules on beef labelling came into operation on 1 September 2000. The original proposal included a requirement to show category of animal. This was of particular concern to the local beef industry because it would have added significantly to the costs of implementation. I am pleased to record that following lobbying by me, the industry and local MEPs, this aspect of the proposal was deleted.

(AQW 301/00)

Ms Rodgers: In early discussions with the European Commission on the proposal to develop a Natural Resource Rural Tourism programme, it became clear that officials in the European Commission did not welcome the idea of a programme that would cover all of Northern Ireland’s rural areas. They were, however, more receptive to a programme that would target disadvantaged areas which could also be demonstrated to have some particular natural resource tourism potential. This is why my officials have been seeking to identify the core target areas for the programme.

In identifying the target areas, the rationale of the Natural Resource Rural Tourism programme has been taken as the starting point. Since the rationale argues that that there are parts of rural Northern Ireland that are disadvantaged but have the potential to develop and sustain a strong tourism product based on their natural resources, it is considered that the core of the target areas should be rural areas that are:

(a) disadvantaged; and

On the second of these points, there is a proposal to use Environmentally Sensitive Areas (ESAs) and Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONBs) as the criteria. A number of other designations have been considered, including Area of Special Scientific Interest (ASSI) and Special Area of Conservation (SAC), Special Protection Area and RAMSAR (important waterfowl sites). Because AONBs tend to cover larger and more coherent areas and relate more to the general environmental value of the areas, including the quality of the landscape, they may be the most appropriate designations for the Natural Resource Rural Tourism programme.

I should emphasise that the criteria and the proposed target areas are still being considered by my officials and I have yet to take a decision on any aspect of the Natural Resource Rural Tourism Programme. It is my intention to consult more widely on all aspects of the programme – including aims, possible activities and delivery mechanisms as well as the target areas – when I have had a chance to consider all these aspects in more detail.

As I am sure you will understand, I have a deep interest in the development of the Loughshores and I would like to assure you that if Lough Neagh is not included in the programme’s target areas that will not by any means imply that the Lough will be officially considered to have no natural resource tourism potential. There will be opportunities under the next round of the Rural Development Programme for support to be granted to a tourism strategy for Lough Neagh through its ‘Sectoral and Area-based Development’ theme and I would welcome the development of such a strategy.

Mrs Carson asked the Minister of Agriculture and Rural Development if she will detail the criteria for areas included in the Natural Resource tourism package, and explain why Lough Neagh is not included in this package.

(AQW 302/00)

Ms Rodgers: In early discussions with the European Commission on the proposal to develop a Natural Resource Rural Tourism programme, it became clear that officials in the European Commission did not welcome the idea of a programme that would cover all of Northern Ireland’s rural areas. They were, however, more receptive to a programme that would target disadvantaged areas which could also be demonstrated to have some particular natural resource tourism potential. This is why my officials have been seeking to identify the core target areas for the programme.

In identifying the target areas, the rationale of the Natural Resource Rural Tourism programme has been taken as the starting point. Since the rationale argues that that there are parts of rural Northern Ireland that are disadvantaged but have the potential to develop and sustain a strong tourism product based on their natural resources, it is considered that the core of the target areas should be rural areas that are:

(a) disadvantaged; and

On the second of these points, there is a proposal to use Environmentally Sensitive Areas (ESAs) and Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONBs) as the criteria. A number of other designations have been considered, including Area of Special Scientific Interest (ASSI) and Special Area of Conservation (SAC), Special Protection Area and RAMSAR (important waterfowl sites). Because AONBs tend to cover larger and more coherent areas and relate more to the general environmental value of the areas, including the quality of the landscape, they may be the most appropriate designations for the Natural Resource Rural Tourism programme.

I should emphasise that the criteria and the proposed target areas are still being considered by my officials and I have yet to take a decision on any aspect of the Natural Resource Rural Tourism Programme. It is my intention to consult more widely on all aspects of the programme – including aims, possible activities and delivery mechanisms as well as the target areas – when I have had a chance to consider all these aspects in more detail.

As I am sure you will understand, I have a deep interest in the development of the Loughshores and I would like to assure you that if Lough Neagh is not included in the programme’s target areas that will not by any means imply that the Lough will be officially considered to have no natural resource tourism potential. There will be opportunities under the next round of the Rural Development Programme for support to be granted to a tourism strategy for Lough Neagh through its ‘Sectoral and Area-based Development’ theme and I would welcome the development of such a strategy.

(AQW 312/00)

Ms Rodgers: During 1999, there was extensive consultation with farming and other organisations on the Commission’s Agenda 2000 CAP Reform proposals and on the final decisions taken in Berlin. These consultations included the Rural Development Regulation.

More specifically, the elements of the Rural Develop- ment Plan were consulted on as follows:

• a Forest Service paper entitled "Forestry in Northern Ireland: The Rural Development Regulation and NI Structural Funds" was sent to the farming organisations and other interested bodies in November 1999. Responses were supportive of the Plan proposals;
• the farming organisations, and those with an interest in the environment, were consulted in general terms about the content of the agri-environment element of the Rural Development Plan on 12 October 1999. Consultation papers on the introduction of the voluntary code "Good Farming Practice" were issued on 25 January and 5 September 2000. Both farming organisations and the environmental bodies responded positively;

• preliminary views were sought on the potential changes in the LFA scheme in January 1999 and again in April of that year following the Berlin Agreement. Then, in August 1999, the key features envisaged for a new scheme were sent out for consultation. Following receipt of the Commission’s comments on the draft Rural Development Plan, at the end of May 2000, further consultation has been taking place on a continuous basis. Generally, those consulted were in support of the proposals although, as might be expected, there was clearly not unanimous agreement on the LFA scheme, given the diversity of interests involved.

(AQW 313/00)

Ms Rodgers: As with all consultation responses, the views of the Ulster Farmers’ Union were considered in depth. On this subject there were two separate consultations and the Ulster Farmers’ Union replied to both making in total 5 different comments. Two of their points, concerning a clarification in title for one of the columns and the general spacing within the document, were taken on board.

The Union expressed concern that column E of the flock record requires identification numbers to be recorded for purchases involving different flocks and also urged that the record should only be kept for animals on which Sheep Annual Premium was being claimed. EU Directive 92/102, which governs sheep record keeping, requires the record to include the identification mark and requires records for all sheep, irrespective of whether or not subsidy is being claimed. Indeed the former requirement has been a condition of Northern Ireland legislation since 1997 and the latter since 1969. It was therefore not possible to accede to these two points.

The Union also urged that Northern Ireland flock owners should not be asked to keep records which are any more rigorous than those required anywhere else in the EU. The only aspect of the record which goes further than the Directive is the requirement to record the breed of the animals concerned. This is included for disease control purposes and has been a requirement of Northern Ireland legislation since 1980. It should therefore add no extra burden to flockowners.

(AQW 320/00)

Ms Rodgers: The Tuberculosis Control Scheme relates only to cattle. The incidence of the disease in cattle over the last 5 years is given in the following table:

There is an extensive control programme in place involving identification and removal of infected animals combined with control on movements. All animals are tested annually, as required by European Directive 64/432/EEC, and animals that show a positive result to the test are compulsorily slaughtered.

To prevent onward spread of the disease animals may not be moved from infected herds until the problem is resolved. All animals that have moved from herds before the infection became apparent are traced and tested. In addition, regular testing is applied to the neighbours of herds with problems in order to pick up infection as soon as possible.

That said the Department is presently reviewing the TB control policy to establish whether more can be done to reduce the incidence of the disease.

(AQW 321/00)

Ms Rodgers: The BSE cases for the last three complete years is as follows:

(AQW 323/00)

Ms Rodgers: The Pig Industry Restructuring Scheme (PIRS) was first notified to the Commission for State Aid approval on 30 March 2000. As part of the consideration process, the Commission has requested clarification or assurances on a number of points and has written to the UK authorities on 3 separate occasions concerning specific aspects.

On 18 April, the Commission requested clarification or assurance on 13 points which were mainly related to those enterprises which would be eligible for aid, and on the means by which the required overall reduction of 16% in pig production capacity would be achieved. The UK’s reply of 10 May provided assurance and clarification on all the points raised.

The Commission wrote a second time, on 16 June, to emphasise that any aid provided must not subsidise other enterprises that producers had and that those aided must meet half of the costs involved. The UK’s reply of 26 June sought to reassure the Commission that these concerns were fully met by the requirements of the PIRS. A third Commission letter, dated 21 August, asked for assurance that the proposed aid was fully in line with EU Guidelines for State Aid in the Agriculture Sector. The UK replied on 31 August giving such assurance. On 6 October, the Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food (MAFF) was alerted to a further matter that Commission officials were debating. The view being expressed was that, under EC Guidelines, those producers benefiting from restructuring aid would themselves have to contribute to the reduction in the industry’s production capacity. The UK does not accept this interpretation of the Guidelines and will be writing accordingly to the Commission.

I will continue to support any action being taken in seeking to obtain approval to this scheme, which is of considerable importance to producers in Northern Ireland. In furtherance of this aim, I have recently written to MAFF Minister, Nick Brown, expressing my disappoint- ment at this latest setback and urging him to contact Commissioner Fischler to ask him to use his influence to have the scheme approved without further Commission- inspired delays.

(AQW 332/00)

Ms Rodgers: The purpose of the Equality Scheme is to show how the Department proposes to fulfil the duties imposed by Section 75 of the Northern Ireland Act 1998 in having due regard to the need to promote equality of opportunity between people of different religious belief and political opinion. There are seven other categories to which the equality of opportunity obligation also applies.

There is no hierarchy of categories and all nine are to be treated similarly. Therefore no specific steps were taken to address issues of religious and political discrimination over and above the other categories.

During the consultation period some 370 organisations received copies of the scheme. The scheme was also placed on the Department’s Internet web-site and is still available at that site.

In the DARD Scheme those consultees who might be expected to have had a particular interest in the religious and political aspects of the Scheme were:

• The four main churches and four other religious organisations
• The Northern Ireland political parties.

(AQW 339/00)

Ms Rodgers: The Erne Catchment Nutrient Management Scheme was introduced in October 1996 under the Special Support Programme for Peace and Reconciliation. The initiative was one of a number designed to provide support and co-operation between the public bodies in Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland in addressing problems of common concern. The object of the Scheme is to reduce farm source pollution of waters in certain river catchments in the Erne system.

The Scheme has progressed satisfactorily with approximately 1200 farmers, representing around a 95% uptake of those targeted, being assisted to draw up nutrient management plans for their farms. Expenditure on the Scheme to date has totalled £984,000. The Scheme is due to end on 31 December 2000.

The expectation for the Scheme is that there should eventually be an improvement in the Erne’s water quality. While early indications are positive, it is likely that full benefits of the Scheme will only be measurable in the longer term, i.e. after 10 years have elapsed. It is proposed to conduct an evaluation of the Scheme’s effectiveness, particularly in relation to phosphate loading, once the final data for the year ending 31 December 2000 has been processed.

(AQW 352/00)

Ms Rodgers: The Northern Ireland Rural Development Plan 2000-2006 includes measures to support the afforestation of agricultural land. The beneficiaries will be owners and occupiers who will receive grants for initial afforestation and yearly payments to offset income foregone. The general population will also benefit from the social, economic and environmental contribution of these woods.

The forestry schemes involved are similar to those which will be running in Great Britain.

(AQW 221/00)

The Minister of Culture, Arts and Leisure (Mr McGimpsey): Over the last five years the Sports Council for Northern Ireland has made lottery awards totalling approximately £41m distributed as follows:

(AQW 255/00)

Mr McGimpsey: One of the commitments in the Belfast Agreement was "to seek more effective ways to encourage and provide financial support for Irish language film and television production in Ireland". The Council of Europe Charter on Regional or Minority Languages signed by the UK Government on 2 March 2000 also deals with media (Article 11).

In a joint statement by the Governments of the United Kingdom and the Republic of Ireland on 5 May 2000 it was announced that a two year Irish language TV and film production pilot scheme would start by April 2001. My Department has commissioned a consultant to prepare an action plan for the pilot project which will have a significant training element. It will also inform us about the demand for such productions. Funding for the project is being considered as part of the 2000 Spending Review.

(AQW 314/00)

Mr McGimpsey: I can confirm that my Department took the following into account when preparing the Equality Scheme:

the purpose of the Equality Scheme is to show how the Department proposes to fulfil the duties imposed by Section 75 of the Northern Ireland Act 1998 in having due regard to the need to promote equality of opportunity between people of different religious belief and political opinion. There are seven other categories to which the equality of opportunity obligations also applies.

there is no hierarchy of categories and all nine are to be treated similarly. Therefore no specific steps were taken to address issues of religious and political discrimination any differently from the other categories.

there was a general consultation and 400+ copies of the DCAL Scheme were issued. In addition an advertisement was placed in the local press advising the public that the consultation was under way and that copies of the scheme could be obtained from a given source. The Scheme was also placed on the Internet.

As part of the consultation exercise the Department consulted with the following political and religious organisations:

• Alliance Party

• Democratic Left

• Democratic Unionist Party

• Labour Party

• Northern Ireland Women’s Coalition

• Progressive Unionist Party

• Sinn Féin

• Social Democratic and Labour Party

• Ulster Democratic Party

• Ulster Unionist Party

• United Kingdom Unionist Party

• Workers Party

• Baha’i Faith

• Church of Ireland

• Hebrew Faith

• Islamic Faith

• Methodist Church in Ireland

• Presbyterian Church in Ireland

• Roman Catholic Church

• Sikh Fait