Tag: Lord Tebbit

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Tebbit on 2016-03-23.

To ask Her Majesty’s Government what assessment they have made of the levels of pollution in (1) drinking water, (2) river water, and (3) coastal waters, caused by chemicals used in medications which are resistant to present purification techniques

Lord Gardiner of Kimble

The Drinking Water Inspectorate (DWI) published research in 2012 to assess the levels of pollution caused by a range of pharmaceuticals and illicit drugs found in source waters, such as rivers, abstracted for drinking water and the comparative levels after water treatment. Over a year, substances were measured at four sites. Results agreed with similar studies and concentrations in English surface waters are generally low and below 1 microgramme per litre (1 μg/L). Levels of pharmaceuticals and drugs in drinking waters after treatment were generally significantly lower than those found in surface waters. This indicates that the drinking water treatment systems used in England and Wales are effective at removing these contaminants. The study concluded that the presence of low levels of pharmaceuticals and illicit drugs in drinking waters in England and Wales do not pose an appreciable risk to human health.

There is evidence that widely used pharmaceuticals are detected at low concentrations in sewage effluent and receiving surface waters. Due to a lack of good quality toxicity data for many of these substances to assess reliably risks to aquatic wildlife that may be exposed to them, research is underway in the UK, at European level and by the pharmaceutical industry to characterise the risks better. This includes a Chemical Investigations Programme, undertaken by England’s water companies, where significant investment is being made to investigate around 20 substances from 2015-2017. Reported data will improve our understanding of the contamination of surface waters due to these chemicals and information will contribute to assessment of the risk posed to, or via the aquatic environment.

In addition, the UK is participating in a European monitoring network of surface water sites on a ‘watch list’ of contaminants and pharmaceuticals, including the active ingredient of the contraceptive pill, EE2. The Devolved Administrations are doing something similar. Data will inform the Commission’s selection of future priority substances requiring control, and the chemical status of the EU’s surface waters with respect to these chemicals.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Tebbit on 2016-03-23.

To ask Her Majesty’s Government what assessment they have made of the possible role of the contraceptive chemical E22, which is resistant to water purification techniques, in the increase in number of freshwater and coastal water fish bearing both male and female sexual organs.

Lord Gardiner of Kimble

In the UK, environmental regulators, scientific experts and the water industry have been researching the link between the synthetic steroid, 17α-ethinyloestradiol (EE2, used in human oral contraception) and fish populations to understand the role of endocrine disrupting chemicals on the reproductive physiology of fish. Most work has focused on EE2 which has been measured in some of our rivers and downstream of sewage treatment works (STWs); this matches findings in other countries.

Based on scientific evidence from the UK and in Europe, there is reasonable certainty that very low concentrations of EE2 can cause feminisation (intersex condition) in male fish. The incidence of intersex seems to relate to the size of the STWs and the dilution ability of receiving waters. In the UK, fish inhabit comparatively small-sized rivers where limited dilution of EE2 occurs. Conventional STWs can remove EE2 from sewage, but not to the very low levels of less than one nanogramme per litre (ng/L) where no endocrine disrupting effects are predicted. In some cases the impact on fish populations remains unclear, and some affected populations appear to be self-sustaining.

In 2014, EE2 was included on the European Commission’s ‘watch list’ under the Water Framework Directive to gather information on its occurrence in surface waters across the European Union. Data will be reported by the UK and other Member States, and reviewed by the Commission throughout 2017 to assess whether this pharmaceutical is to be prioritised for monitoring and control and is to be included in future versions of the Directive.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Tebbit on 2016-03-23.

To ask Her Majesty’s Government how many people held in Immigration Control Centres are not free to leave to go to other jurisdictions.

Lord Keen of Elie

There are no countries to which, as a matter of immigration policy, the Home Office does not return people if they wish to return voluntarily.

There may be a small number of people who might be detained for immigration purposes who are not free to leave the jurisdiction of the UK because, for example, of ongoing criminal proceedings but this is not centrally recorded.

For those being detained with a view to removal, detention may continue lawfully only for as long as there is a realistic prospect of removal within a reasonable period of time. Home Office guidance is clear that detention must be used sparingly and for the shortest period reasonably necessary to achieve its purpose.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Tebbit on 2016-03-23.

To ask Her Majesty’s Government what assessment they have made of the levels of pollution in (1) drinking water, (2) river water, and (3) coastal waters, caused by chemicals used in medications which are resistant to present purification techniques

Lord Gardiner of Kimble

The Drinking Water Inspectorate (DWI) published research in 2012 to assess the levels of pollution caused by a range of pharmaceuticals and illicit drugs found in source waters, such as rivers, abstracted for drinking water and the comparative levels after water treatment. Over a year, substances were measured at four sites. Results agreed with similar studies and concentrations in English surface waters are generally low and below 1 microgramme per litre (1 μg/L). Levels of pharmaceuticals and drugs in drinking waters after treatment were generally significantly lower than those found in surface waters. This indicates that the drinking water treatment systems used in England and Wales are effective at removing these contaminants. The study concluded that the presence of low levels of pharmaceuticals and illicit drugs in drinking waters in England and Wales do not pose an appreciable risk to human health.

There is evidence that widely used pharmaceuticals are detected at low concentrations in sewage effluent and receiving surface waters. Due to a lack of good quality toxicity data for many of these substances to assess reliably risks to aquatic wildlife that may be exposed to them, research is underway in the UK, at European level and by the pharmaceutical industry to characterise the risks better. This includes a Chemical Investigations Programme, undertaken by England’s water companies, where significant investment is being made to investigate around 20 substances from 2015-2017. Reported data will improve our understanding of the contamination of surface waters due to these chemicals and information will contribute to assessment of the risk posed to, or via the aquatic environment.

In addition, the UK is participating in a European monitoring network of surface water sites on a ‘watch list’ of contaminants and pharmaceuticals, including the active ingredient of the contraceptive pill, EE2. The Devolved Administrations are doing something similar. Data will inform the Commission’s selection of future priority substances requiring control, and the chemical status of the EU’s surface waters with respect to these chemicals.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Tebbit on 2016-03-23.

To ask Her Majesty’s Government what assessment they have made of the possible role of the contraceptive chemical E22, which is resistant to water purification techniques, in the increase in number of freshwater and coastal water fish bearing both male and female sexual organs.

Lord Gardiner of Kimble

In the UK, environmental regulators, scientific experts and the water industry have been researching the link between the synthetic steroid, 17α-ethinyloestradiol (EE2, used in human oral contraception) and fish populations to understand the role of endocrine disrupting chemicals on the reproductive physiology of fish. Most work has focused on EE2 which has been measured in some of our rivers and downstream of sewage treatment works (STWs); this matches findings in other countries.

Based on scientific evidence from the UK and in Europe, there is reasonable certainty that very low concentrations of EE2 can cause feminisation (intersex condition) in male fish. The incidence of intersex seems to relate to the size of the STWs and the dilution ability of receiving waters. In the UK, fish inhabit comparatively small-sized rivers where limited dilution of EE2 occurs. Conventional STWs can remove EE2 from sewage, but not to the very low levels of less than one nanogramme per litre (ng/L) where no endocrine disrupting effects are predicted. In some cases the impact on fish populations remains unclear, and some affected populations appear to be self-sustaining.

In 2014, EE2 was included on the European Commission’s ‘watch list’ under the Water Framework Directive to gather information on its occurrence in surface waters across the European Union. Data will be reported by the UK and other Member States, and reviewed by the Commission throughout 2017 to assess whether this pharmaceutical is to be prioritised for monitoring and control and is to be included in future versions of the Directive.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Tebbit on 2015-11-26.

To ask Her Majesty’s Government, further to the Written Answer by Lord Gardiner of Kimble on 16 November (HL3254), what is the UK share of the Common Agricultural Policy budget for 2015 in percentage and cash terms respectively.

Lord Gardiner of Kimble

In 2015, the UK was allocated 7% of the Common Agricultural Policy budget which is equivalent to €4 billion.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Tebbit on 2016-04-26.

To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether the obligations upon member states of the EU include any duty to observe the requirements of the European Convention on Human Rights.

Baroness Anelay of St Johns

The EU is not itself a party to the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR). Any agreement for the EU to accede would need to be agreed unanimously by all EU Member States (including the UK) and all other contracting parties to the ECHR.

Our renegotiation deal reaffirmed that the Charter of Fundamental Rights does not extend the ability of the Court of Justice of the European Union or domestic courts to rule on compliance with fundamental rights.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Tebbit on 2015-12-01.

To ask Her Majesty’s Government what assessment they have made of whether and how the government of President Assad in Syria threatens the national interest of the UK.

Baroness Anelay of St Johns

As the Prime Minister, my right hon. Friend the Member for Witney (Mr Cameron), has said, Assad has been one of Daesh’s most effective recruiting sergeants. His regime’s brutal suppression of the Syrian people, including through the use of chemical weapons, has created the chaos and instability in which Daesh has been able to thrive. Defeating Daesh will require action on a number of fronts including, ultimately, a political transition to a new Syrian government which is able to protect the Syrian people and with whom the international community can partner against Daesh.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Tebbit on 2016-05-04.

To ask Her Majesty’s Government, further to the Written Answer by Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon on 3 May (HL7756), in what manner they ensure that cyclists pay fines imposed by fixed penalty notices.

Lord Faulks

When a fixed penalty notice is issued offenders have 28 days in which to pay the amount ordered. No enforcement action is taken during this period but if the offender fails to pay within this time the fixed penalty notice is increased by 50% and registered as a court fine. HM Courts and Tribunals Service can then take the same enforcement steps as for any court ordered fine.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Tebbit on 2016-01-13.

To ask Her Majesty’s Government what progress has been made towards agreement within the EU on updating the fourth Anti-Money Laundering Directive.

Lord O’Neill of Gatley

The Fourth Anti-Money Laundering Directive (‘the Directive’) has been agreed and was formally adopted in June 2015. Member States now have until June 2017 to transpose its requirements into national law. The Government plans to publish a consultation on transposition of the Directive by early Spring which will run for a full 12 weeks. We will consult on areas where the Directive gives us options or discretion on how we transpose its provisions as well as areas where we can improve the UK’s anti-money laundering and counter-financing of terrorism regime.

We will continue to consider any further changes to this regime in response to emerging threats.