Lords Hansard text for 19 Dec 200619 Dec 2006 (pt 0003)

Energy: Wind Farms

Lord Jacobs asked Her Majesty's Government:

How much electricity would be generated by the proposed new wind farm on the Isle of Lewis; and how many people this amount of electricity could supply; and [HL907]

How much land the proposed new wind farm on the Isle of Lewis would occupy as a proportion of the whole island; how many more wind turbines could be situated on the remaining area; how much electricity that number of turbines could generate; and how many people this amount of electricity could supply. [HL908]

The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department of Trade and Industry (Lord Truscott): This is a matter for the Scottish Executive.

EU: Defence Industry

Lord Pearson of Rannoch asked Her Majesty's Government:

Whether the framework agreement between France, Germany, Italy, Spain, Sweden and the United Kingdom concerning measures to facilitate the restructuring and operation of the European defence industry, signed at the Farnborough Air Show on 27 July 2000, has been incorporated into British law; and, if so, how it has been incorporated. [HL811]

The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Ministry of Defence (Lord Drayson): The letter of intent framework agreement has not been incorporated into United Kingdom law. Existing legislation was and remains sufficient to implement the provisions of the treaty.

Lord Pearson of Rannoch asked Her Majesty's Government:

Further to the reply by Baroness Royall of Blaisdon on 11 December (HL Deb, col. 1362), how they reconcile her remarks with Article 1(h) of the framework agreement between France, Germany, Italy, Spain, Sweden and the United Kingdom concerning measures to facilitate the restructuring and operation of the European defence industry which states that one of the objectives of the Agreement is “to promote harmonisation of the military requirements of the Armed Forces”; and whether, in view of this framework agreement, they will correct the remarks of Baroness Royall of Blaisdon; and [HL812]

19 Dec 2006 : Column WA284

Further to the reply by Baroness Royall of Blaisdon on 11 December (HL Deb, col. 1362), how they reconcile her remarks with Article 4 of the framework agreement between France, Germany, Italy, Spain, Sweden and the United Kingdom concerning measures to facilitate the restructuring and operation of the European defence industry which states that, “the parties recognise that the likely consequences of industrial restructuring will be the creation of TDCs (Trans-National Defence Companies), possible abandonment of national industrial capacity and thus the acceptance of mutual dependence”; and whether, in view of this framework agreement, they will correct the remarks of Baroness Royall of Blaisdon; and [HL813]

Further to the reply by Baroness Royall of Blaisdon on 11 December (HL Deb, col. 1362), how they reconcile her remarks with Article 46 of the framework agreement between France, Germany, Italy, Spain, Sweden and the United Kingdom concerning measures to facilitate the restructuring and operation of the European defence industry which states that, “The Parties recognise the need to co-operate in establishing a long term master-plan that would present a common view of their future operation needs. This would constitute a framework for harmonised equipment acquisition planning and would provide orientation for a harmonised defence related Research and Technology policy”. [HL814]

Lord Drayson: The reply of my noble friend Lady Royall on 11 December is an accurate reflection of government policy. The aim of the letter of intent framework agreement is to improve the competitiveness and the capabilities of the defence industries of the signatory nations. There is nothing in the agreement which affects the UK's sovereign control of our Armed Forces or requires the loss of essential national industrial or technological capabilities.

Lord Pearson of Rannoch asked Her Majesty's Government:

Further to the reply by Baroness Royall of Blaisdon on 11 December (HL Deb, col. 1362), whether any other European Union member states have signed the framework agreement between France, Germany, Italy, Spain, Sweden and the United Kingdom concerning measures to facilitate the restructuring and operation of the European defence industry since it was first signed. [HL815]

Lord Drayson: No.

EU: Overseas Aid

Lord Tebbit asked Her Majesty's Government:

What is the United Kingdom's share of the expenditure of the European Union on overseas aid. [HL799]

19 Dec 2006 : Column WA285

The Lord President of the Council (Baroness Amos): The latest figures available are for 2005, in which the United Kingdom's share of the EC budget was 17.20 per cent. This accounts for £1,173 million of the external actions budget, of which £814 million can be classed as overseas aid. For the European Development Fund (EDF 9) the United Kingdom currently contributes 12.69 per cent, accounting for £234 million in 2005. Therefore the United Kingdom's total contribution to overseas aid via the European Union in 2005 was £1,048 million.

Freedom of Information

Viscount Goschen asked Her Majesty’s Government:

What are the cost limits imposed on requests for information through—(a) Parliamentary Oral Questions; (b) Parliamentary Questions for Written Answer; and (c) requests from the public under the Freedom of Information Act 2000. [HL900]

Lord McKenzie of Luton: The Financial Secretary to the Treasury announced in a Written Ministerial Statement on 28 November that the disproportionate cost threshold relating to Written Parliamentary Questions would be increased to £700 with effect from 15 November 2006 (House of Commons Official Report; col. 87WS, House of Lords Official Report, col. WS 81). The threshold is an advisory limit only, and the Minister concerned may decide that a Question should be answered irrespective of cost. No cost limit applies to Oral Parliamentary Questions.

A public authority is not obliged to comply with a request for information under the Freedom of Information Act if the authority estimates that the cost of complying would exceed the appropriate limit. The appropriate limit is set at £600 for government departments, both Houses of Parliament, the Northern Ireland Assembly, the National Assembly for Wales and the Armed Forces. The appropriate limit for all other public authorities is £450. Where the cost of compliance exceeds the appropriate limit, the public authority may charge a fee for communicating the information.

Freedom of Information: Northern Ireland

Lord Laird asked Her Majesty's Government:

How many applications under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 have been made to the Office of the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister in Northern Ireland; how many applications resulted in information; how many applications were refused; and in how many cases a fee was required. [HL671]

19 Dec 2006 : Column WA286

Lord Rooker: From 1 January 2005 to 8 December 2006 (inclusive) OFMDFM has received 180 requests for information under the Freedom of Information Act 2000.

Of the 180 requests received, 170 have been completed. Of these 170 completed cases, all the information was released in 136 cases, in 13 it was partially released, in 11 cases the information was not held by OFMDFM and seven requests were transferred to other public authorities. Only in the remaining three cases was the information refused. A fee was required in none of these cases.

Furniture

Lord Dykes asked Her Majesty's Government:

What steps they will take to support the efforts of the British furniture-making industry to secure European Union financial assistance for long-term development. [HL632]

The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department of Trade and Industry (Lord Truscott): The UK's regions and devolved administrations are now in the process of developing their European regional development fund operational programmes, setting out their detailed plans for regional development spending for the 2007-2013 period. The regions will need to demonstrate that their plans are consistent with EU priorities and the UK national strategy for structural funds. Within this framework, they will have flexibility to develop spending plans that reflect regional and local needs.

There will be one national European Social Fund (ESF) programme in England to tackle the problems of worklessness and low skills that exist in all regions. Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland have similar strategies for delivering the funds on their territories.

The regional development agencies, the devolved administrations and the other bodies that have responsibility for delivering the funds will, of course, give careful consideration to all applications for financial assistance, including those from organisations within the furniture industry.