Show Search Form

Search Results

registered interest	true false
date	exactly: or between: and
answering body
answering dept id
answering dept short name
answering dept sort name
hansard heading
house id
legislature	pref label
question text
tabling member constituency
tabling member printed
uin
answer	is ministerial correction true false date of answer exactly: or between: and answer text answering member constituency answering member printed grouped question UIN question first answered answering member label
tabling member	label

Search

759299

	registered interest
	date	11/09/2017
	answering body	Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs
	answering dept id	13
	answering dept short name	Environment, Food and Rural Affairs
	answering dept sort name	Environment, Food and Rural Affairs
	hansard heading	Sheep: Animal Welfare
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, what steps his Department is taking better to control of lamb worrying and to impose greater penalties for people who allow their animals to worry lambs.
	tabling member constituency	Strangford
	tabling member printed	Jim Shannon
	uin	10004
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 19/09/2017 answer text <p>Where a dog is worrying livestock, police and local authorities, with the consent of the local police, can pursue a prosecution under the Dogs (Protection of Livestock) Act 1953. This provides a criminal offence where a keeper has allowed their dog to worry livestock and carries a maximum fine of £1000. Defra and the Animal Health and Welfare Board for England (AHWBE) met police forces, farming and rural interests to discuss this issue earlier this year. Under the auspices of the National Police Chiefs’ Council, five police forces are collaborating to pilot more systematic data collection of incidents and good response practices and we look forward to the results of the pilot.</p><p> </p> answering member constituency Camborne and Redruth answering member printed George Eustice question first answered 19/09/2017 15:50:10 answering member 3934 label Biography information for George Eustice
	tabling member	4131 label Biography information for Jim Shannon

759695

	registered interest
	date	12/09/2017
	answering body	Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs
	answering dept id	13
	answering dept short name	Environment, Food and Rural Affairs
	answering dept sort name	Environment, Food and Rural Affairs
	hansard heading	Livestock: Port of Cairnryan
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, what estimate has been made of the quantity of livestock transported through the port of Cairnryan.
	tabling member constituency	Dumfries and Galloway
	tabling member printed	Mr Alister Jack
	uin	10019
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 20/09/2017 answer text <p>The Animal and Plant Health Agency (APHA) does not hold data on all consignments and quantities of livestock transported through the port of Cairnryan.</p><p><strong> </strong></p><p>APHA only holds data for export consignments where a Journey Log was required that listed Cairnryan as the exit port from Great Britain.</p><p><strong> </strong></p><p>During 2017, 183 Journey Logs have been received by APHA listing Cairnryan as the exit port from Great Britain. 10,128 animals were exported in the 183 export consignments.</p> answering member constituency Camborne and Redruth answering member printed George Eustice question first answered 20/09/2017 14:35:50 answering member 3934 label Biography information for George Eustice
	tabling member	4619 label Biography information for Mr Alister Jack

759697

	registered interest
	date	12/09/2017
	answering body	Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs
	answering dept id	13
	answering dept short name	Environment, Food and Rural Affairs
	answering dept sort name	Environment, Food and Rural Affairs
	hansard heading	Pollinators: Monitoring
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, with reference to the Government's National Pollinator Strategy, published in November 2014, what progress has been made on developing a pollinator indicator under the planned Biodiversity 2020 monitoring strategy.
	tabling member constituency	Bristol West
	tabling member printed	Thangam Debbonaire
	uin	10029
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 20/09/2017 answer text <p>The National Pollinator Strategy was launched in November 2014 and included commitments on measuring progress by developing an indicator on the status of pollinators and by evaluating Nature Improvement Areas (NIAs) and agri-environment schemes.</p><p> </p><p>Defra has developed an indicator of the status of pollinating insects in partnership with the research community and the voluntary sector. The indicator was first published in 2014 and integrated into the suite of 24 indicators used to track progress with Biodiversity 2020: our Strategy for England’s Wildlife and Ecosystem Services. The indicator summarises trends for almost 400 pollinating insect species and was last published on3 August (<a href="http://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/england-biodiversity-indicators" target="_blank">www.gov.uk/government/statistics/england-biodiversity-indicators</a>). It shows that the overall status of pollinating insects has declined since 1980. There are, however, early indications that this trend may have stabilised in recent years. We will continue to take action for pollinators as set out in our Pollinator Strategy and encourage others to do the same through our Bees’ Needs campaign.</p><p> </p><p>The monitoring and evaluation framework for NIAs was updated in 2014 and included two voluntary indicators on population of threatened or widespread species, including a number of pollinating insects.</p><p> </p><p>A report on monitoring and evaluation of NIAs was published in 2015 (<a href="http://www.gov.uk/government/publications/nature-improvement-areas-improved-ecological-networks/nature-improvement-areas-about-the-programme" target="_blank">www.gov.uk/government/publications/nature-improvement-areas-improved-ecological-networks/nature-improvement-areas-about-the-programme</a>). This found no significant change in any of the species indicators in the NIAs over the short period involved. Collectively, however, the 12 NIAs secured beneficial management on over 13,500 ha of important wildlife habitats and put in place action to create 4,500 ha of new habitats, primarily species rich grasslands and heathland which will provide important sources of pollen and nectar for pollinating insects.</p><p> </p><p>For agri-environment schemes, Natural England has a contract in place with the Centre for Ecology and Hydrology and the British Trust for Ornithology to provide a landscape-scale evaluation of the impact of Countryside Stewardship in England on mobile species, including pollinators. Initial findings are expected in 2018.</p><p> </p><p>Since 2015, we have initiated a pollinator monitoring and research partnership with the Centre for Ecology and Hydrology, Scottish Government, the Welsh Government and the Joint Nature Conservation Committee, to strengthen pollinator monitoring across Great Britain and improve our capacity to understand trends in pollination services. Details of the partnership are available on the external Centre for Ecology and Hydrology website.</p><p> </p> answering member constituency Suffolk Coastal answering member printed Dr Thérèse Coffey grouped question UIN 10162 question first answered 20/09/2017 14:54:11 answering member 4098 label Biography information for Dr Thérèse Coffey
	tabling member	4433 label Biography information for Thangam Debbonaire

759696

	registered interest
	date	12/09/2017
	answering body	Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs
	answering dept id	13
	answering dept short name	Environment, Food and Rural Affairs
	answering dept sort name	Environment, Food and Rural Affairs
	hansard heading	Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs: Redundancy Pay
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, how much has been paid to (a) men and (b) women who left his Department under exit schemes since 31 March 2016.
	tabling member constituency	Hemsworth
	tabling member printed	Jon Trickett
	uin	10048
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 20/09/2017 answer text <p>19 employees left Defra under exit schemes between 1 April 2016 and 31 August 2017. Defra has paid out the following amounts.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><ol><li><p>Men – £877,319.17 to 12 employees.</p></li><li><p>Women – £486,000.70 to 7 employees.</p></li></ol><p> </p> answering member constituency Camborne and Redruth answering member printed George Eustice question first answered 20/09/2017 10:32:22 answering member 3934 label Biography information for George Eustice
	tabling member	410 label Biography information for Jon Trickett

418432

	registered interest
	date	11/09/2015
	answering body	Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs
	answering dept id	13
	answering dept short name	Environment, Food and Rural Affairs
	answering dept sort name	Environment, Food and Rural Affairs
	hansard heading	Fracking
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, if she will publish the final version of her Department's report, Shale Gas: Rural Economy Impacts.
	tabling member constituency	Wrexham
	tabling member printed	Ian C. Lucas
	uin	10066
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 18/09/2015 answer text <p>The full version of the draft rural economy impacts paper was released on 1 July and is available on <a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/draft-shale-gas-rural-economy-impacts-paper" target="_blank">https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/draft-shale-gas-rural-economy-impacts-paper</a>. The draft paper was intended as a rapid review of existing literature; it is not analytically robust. Work on this paper was discontinued and we have no plans to update it.</p><p> </p><p> </p> answering member constituency Penrith and The Border answering member printed Rory Stewart question first answered 18/09/2015 10:55:52 answering member 4137 label Biography information for Rory Stewart
	tabling member	1470 label Biography information for Ian C. Lucas

348293

	registered interest
	date	03/06/2015
	answering body	Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs
	answering dept id	13
	answering dept short name	Environment, Food and Rural Affairs
	answering dept sort name	Environment, Food and Rural Affairs
	hansard heading	Dangerous Dogs
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, how many deaths and injuries have been caused by prohibited animals which are (a) not on and (b) on the Index of Exempted Dogs in each of the last five years.
	tabling member constituency	Mole Valley
	tabling member printed	Sir Paul Beresford
	uin	1007
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 08/06/2015 answer text <p>There are no records held on the numbers of deaths or injuries caused by dogs held on the Index of Exempted Dogs. However, annual statistics for the last full five years, published by the Health &amp; Social Care Information Centre, on Counts of Finished Admission Episodes for dog bites and strikes is contained in the attached table (the figures should be read in conjunction with the footnotes to the table).</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>In addition, the number of people killed by dogs each year for the last full five years is as follows:</p><p> </p><table><tbody><tr><td>2010</td><td>2</td></tr><tr><td>2011</td><td>0</td></tr><tr><td>2012</td><td>3</td></tr><tr><td>2013</td><td>4</td></tr><tr><td>2014</td><td>5</td></tr></tbody></table><p><br></p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p><strong>Counts of Finished Admission Episodes (FAEs)<sup>1</sup> for dog bites and strikes<sup>2</sup>, 2009-10 to 2013-14<sup>3</sup></strong></p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>Activity in English NHS Hospitals and English NHS commissioned activity in the independent sector</p><p> </p><table><tbody><tr><td><p><strong>Year</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>FAEs</strong></p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2009-10</p></td><td><p>5,837</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2010-11</p></td><td><p>6,005</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2011-12</p></td><td><p>6,580</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2012-13</p></td><td><p>6,317</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2013-14</p></td><td><p>6,836</p></td></tr></tbody></table><p> </p><p>Source: Hospital Episode Statistics (HES), Health and Social Care Information Centre</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>1. Finished admission episodes A finished admission episode (FAE) is the first period of admitted patient care under one consultant within one healthcare provider. FAEs are counted against the year or month in which the admission episode finishes. Admissions do not represent the number of patients, as a person may have more than one admission within the period.</p><p> </p><p>2. External cause codes</p><p> </p><p>A supplementary code that indicates the nature of any external cause of injury, poisoning or other adverse effects. Only the first external cause code which is coded within the episode is counted in HES.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>ICD-10 code used: W54 - Bitten or struck by dog</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>3. Assessing growth through time (Admitted patient care)</p><p> </p><p>HES figures are available from 1989-90 onwards. Changes to the figures over time need to be interpreted in the context of improvements in data quality and coverage (particularly in earlier years), improvements in coverage of independent sector activity (particularly from 2006-07) and changes in NHS practice. For example, apparent reductions in activity may be due to a number of procedures which may now be undertaken in outpatient settings and so no longer include in admitted patient HES data. Conversely, apparent increases in activity may be due to improved recording of diagnosis or procedure information.</p><p>Note that Hospital Episode Statistics (HES) include activity ending in the year in question and run from April to March, e.g. 2012-13 includes activity ending between 1st April 2012 and 31st March 2013.</p> answering member constituency Camborne and Redruth answering member printed George Eustice question first answered 08/06/2015 16:22:15 answering member 3934 label Biography information for George Eustice
	tabling member	103 label Biography information for Sir Paul Beresford

418422

	registered interest
	date	11/09/2015
	answering body	Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs
	answering dept id	13
	answering dept short name	Environment, Food and Rural Affairs
	answering dept sort name	Environment, Food and Rural Affairs
	hansard heading	Climate Change
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, with reference to the Adaptation Sub-Committee Progress Report 2014, what steps she is taking to minimise the risks to the well-being of UK citizens identified in that report.
	tabling member constituency	Wrexham
	tabling member printed	Ian C. Lucas
	uin	10071
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 21/09/2015 answer text <p>The National Adaptation Programme report sets out over 370 actions that are being taken to address the risks identified in the UK Climate Change Risk Assessment, many of which impact on the well-being of UK citizens. The Government is committed to continue implementing the National Adaptation Programme, working across Government and with business, councils, civil society and academia.</p><p> </p><p> </p> answering member constituency Penrith and The Border answering member printed Rory Stewart question first answered 21/09/2015 13:26:54 answering member 4137 label Biography information for Rory Stewart
	tabling member	1470 label Biography information for Ian C. Lucas

348326

	registered interest
	date	03/06/2015
	answering body	Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs
	answering dept id	13
	answering dept short name	Environment, Food and Rural Affairs
	answering dept sort name	Environment, Food and Rural Affairs
	hansard heading	Dangerous Dogs
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, how many people were (a) proceeded against and (b) convicted of offences under section 3(1) of the Dangerous Dogs Act 1991 in England between 1 January 2014 and 12 May 2014.
	tabling member constituency	Penistone and Stocksbridge
	tabling member printed	Angela Smith
	uin	1009
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 09/06/2015 answer text <p>The number of defendants proceeded against at magistrates’ courts and found guilty at all courts of offences under Section 3 and 3(1) of the Dangerous Dogs Act 1991 can be viewed in Table 1 and Section 2 of the Dogs Act 1871, in England in 2014, can be viewed in Table 2.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>Criminal justice statistics for 2015 are planned for publication in spring 2016.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>Centrally held data cannot separately identify whether or not an attack took place in a public or a private place. This information may be held in individual court files, which could only be inspected at disproportionate cost.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>With regard to the calendar split, no defendants were proceeded against at magistrates’ courts on the enhanced offences until June 2014; hence data for May has been retained together and a split from June to December presented.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>Meanwhile, data reported to the Ministry of Justice, and held on the Court Proceedings Database, pertaining to criminal cases which were concluded at all courts in England and Wales between 20 October 2014 and 31 December 2014 (latest currently available) indicate that none of the Criminal Behaviour Orders (CBOs) issued were as a result of a conviction for a criminal offence specifically relating to dogs under the anti-Social Behaviour, Crime and Policy Act 2014.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>The Ministry of Justice holds no information centrally on Community Protection Notices or injunctions related to powers under this Act.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p><strong>Table 1</strong></p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><table><tbody><tr><td><p><strong>Defendants proceeded against at magistrates courts and found guilty at all courts of offences under selected sections of the Dangerous Dogs Act 1991, England, 2014 <sup>(1)(2)</sup></strong></p></td></tr></tbody></table><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><table><tbody><tr><td><p><strong>Legislation</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>Outcome</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>January </strong></p><p><strong>To</strong></p><p><strong>May</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>June</strong></p><p><strong>To</strong></p><p><strong>December</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>Total</strong></p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Section 3(1) Dangerous Dogs Act 1991</p></td><td><p>Proceeded</p><p>Against</p><p>Found</p><p>Guilty</p></td><td><p>444</p><p> </p><p>325</p></td><td><p>718</p><p> </p><p>553</p></td><td><p>1,163</p><p> </p><p>878</p><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Section 3 Dangerous Dogs Act 1991</p></td><td><p>Proceeded</p><p>Against</p><p>Found</p><p>Guilty</p></td><td><p><strong>-</strong></p><p> </p><p><strong>-</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>3</strong></p><p> </p><p>2</p></td><td><p>3</p><p> </p><p>2</p></td></tr></tbody></table><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>(1) The figures given in the table relate to persons for whom these offences were the principal offences for which they were dealt with. When a defendant has been found guilty of two or more offences it is the offence for which the heaviest penalty is imposed. Where the same disposal is imposed for two or more offences, the offence selected is the offence for which the statutory maximum penalty is the most severe.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>(2) Every effort is made to ensure that the figures presented are accurate and complete. However, it is important to note that these data have been extracted from large administrative data systems generated by the courts and police forces. As a consequence, care should be taken to ensure data collection processes and their inevitable limitations are taken into account when those data are used.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>Source: Justice Statistics Analytical Services - Ministry of Justice. Ref: 271-15 PQC 1009 - 1010 &amp; 1013</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p><strong>Table 2</strong></p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><table><tbody><tr><td colspan="2"><p><strong>Defendants proceeded against at magistrates courts and found guilty at all courts of offences under the Dogs Act 1871, England, 2014 <sup>(1)(2)</sup></strong></p></td></tr><tr><td><p><strong>Proceeded against</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>Found guilty</strong></p></td></tr><tr><td><p>59</p></td><td><p>10</p></td></tr><tr><td colspan="2"><p> </p><p>(1) The figures given in the table relate to persons for whom these offences were the principal offences for which they were dealt with. When a defendant has been found guilty of two or more offences it is the offence for which the heaviest penalty is imposed. Where the same disposal is imposed for two or more offences, the offence selected is the offence for which the statutory maximum penalty is the most severe.</p></td></tr><tr><td colspan="2"><p> </p><p>(2) Every effort is made to ensure that the figures presented are accurate and complete. However, it is important to note that these data have been extracted from large administrative data systems generated by the courts and police forces. As a consequence, care should be taken to ensure data collection processes and their inevitable limitations are taken into account when those data are used.</p></td></tr></tbody></table><p> </p><p> </p><p>Source: Justice Statistics Analytical Services - Ministry of Justice. Ref: 271-15 PQC 101</p> answering member constituency Camborne and Redruth answering member printed George Eustice grouped question UIN 1010 1012 1013 1014 question first answered 09/06/2015 12:16:55 answering member 3934 label Biography information for George Eustice
	tabling member	1564 label Biography information for Angela Smith

348327

	registered interest
	date	03/06/2015
	answering body	Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs
	answering dept id	13
	answering dept short name	Environment, Food and Rural Affairs
	answering dept sort name	Environment, Food and Rural Affairs
	hansard heading	Dangerous Dogs
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, how many people were (a) proceeded against and (b) convicted of offences under section 3(1) of the Dangerous Dogs Act 1991 in England in a (i) public and (ii) private place between 13 May 2014 and 31 December 2014.
	tabling member constituency	Penistone and Stocksbridge
	tabling member printed	Angela Smith
	uin	1010
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 09/06/2015 answer text <p>The number of defendants proceeded against at magistrates’ courts and found guilty at all courts of offences under Section 3 and 3(1) of the Dangerous Dogs Act 1991 can be viewed in Table 1 and Section 2 of the Dogs Act 1871, in England in 2014, can be viewed in Table 2.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>Criminal justice statistics for 2015 are planned for publication in spring 2016.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>Centrally held data cannot separately identify whether or not an attack took place in a public or a private place. This information may be held in individual court files, which could only be inspected at disproportionate cost.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>With regard to the calendar split, no defendants were proceeded against at magistrates’ courts on the enhanced offences until June 2014; hence data for May has been retained together and a split from June to December presented.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>Meanwhile, data reported to the Ministry of Justice, and held on the Court Proceedings Database, pertaining to criminal cases which were concluded at all courts in England and Wales between 20 October 2014 and 31 December 2014 (latest currently available) indicate that none of the Criminal Behaviour Orders (CBOs) issued were as a result of a conviction for a criminal offence specifically relating to dogs under the anti-Social Behaviour, Crime and Policy Act 2014.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>The Ministry of Justice holds no information centrally on Community Protection Notices or injunctions related to powers under this Act.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p><strong>Table 1</strong></p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><table><tbody><tr><td><p><strong>Defendants proceeded against at magistrates courts and found guilty at all courts of offences under selected sections of the Dangerous Dogs Act 1991, England, 2014 <sup>(1)(2)</sup></strong></p></td></tr></tbody></table><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><table><tbody><tr><td><p><strong>Legislation</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>Outcome</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>January </strong></p><p><strong>To</strong></p><p><strong>May</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>June</strong></p><p><strong>To</strong></p><p><strong>December</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>Total</strong></p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Section 3(1) Dangerous Dogs Act 1991</p></td><td><p>Proceeded</p><p>Against</p><p>Found</p><p>Guilty</p></td><td><p>444</p><p> </p><p>325</p></td><td><p>718</p><p> </p><p>553</p></td><td><p>1,163</p><p> </p><p>878</p><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Section 3 Dangerous Dogs Act 1991</p></td><td><p>Proceeded</p><p>Against</p><p>Found</p><p>Guilty</p></td><td><p><strong>-</strong></p><p> </p><p><strong>-</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>3</strong></p><p> </p><p>2</p></td><td><p>3</p><p> </p><p>2</p></td></tr></tbody></table><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>(1) The figures given in the table relate to persons for whom these offences were the principal offences for which they were dealt with. When a defendant has been found guilty of two or more offences it is the offence for which the heaviest penalty is imposed. Where the same disposal is imposed for two or more offences, the offence selected is the offence for which the statutory maximum penalty is the most severe.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>(2) Every effort is made to ensure that the figures presented are accurate and complete. However, it is important to note that these data have been extracted from large administrative data systems generated by the courts and police forces. As a consequence, care should be taken to ensure data collection processes and their inevitable limitations are taken into account when those data are used.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>Source: Justice Statistics Analytical Services - Ministry of Justice. Ref: 271-15 PQC 1009 - 1010 &amp; 1013</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p><strong>Table 2</strong></p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><table><tbody><tr><td colspan="2"><p><strong>Defendants proceeded against at magistrates courts and found guilty at all courts of offences under the Dogs Act 1871, England, 2014 <sup>(1)(2)</sup></strong></p></td></tr><tr><td><p><strong>Proceeded against</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>Found guilty</strong></p></td></tr><tr><td><p>59</p></td><td><p>10</p></td></tr><tr><td colspan="2"><p> </p><p>(1) The figures given in the table relate to persons for whom these offences were the principal offences for which they were dealt with. When a defendant has been found guilty of two or more offences it is the offence for which the heaviest penalty is imposed. Where the same disposal is imposed for two or more offences, the offence selected is the offence for which the statutory maximum penalty is the most severe.</p></td></tr><tr><td colspan="2"><p> </p><p>(2) Every effort is made to ensure that the figures presented are accurate and complete. However, it is important to note that these data have been extracted from large administrative data systems generated by the courts and police forces. As a consequence, care should be taken to ensure data collection processes and their inevitable limitations are taken into account when those data are used.</p></td></tr></tbody></table><p> </p><p> </p><p>Source: Justice Statistics Analytical Services - Ministry of Justice. Ref: 271-15 PQC 101</p> answering member constituency Camborne and Redruth answering member printed George Eustice grouped question UIN 1009 1012 1013 1014 question first answered 09/06/2015 12:16:55 answering member 3934 label Biography information for George Eustice
	tabling member	1564 label Biography information for Angela Smith

759698

	registered interest
	date	12/09/2017
	answering body	Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs
	answering dept id	13
	answering dept short name	Environment, Food and Rural Affairs
	answering dept sort name	Environment, Food and Rural Affairs
	hansard heading	Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs: Pay
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, how many of his Department's staff had a pay increase (a) above, (b) at and (c) less than one per cent in each of the last three years for which information is available.
	tabling member constituency	Shipley
	tabling member printed	Philip Davies
	uin	10108
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 09/10/2017 answer text <p>The table below shows the number of staff in the core-Department who received a consolidated pay increase at (a) above, (b) at and (c) less than one per cent in each of the last three years.</p><p> </p><table><tbody><tr><td><p> </p></td><td><p>2016</p></td><td><p>2015</p></td><td><p>2014</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Above 1%</p></td><td><p>772</p></td><td><p>985</p></td><td><p>1069</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>At 1%</p></td><td><p>19</p></td><td><p>11</p></td><td><p>512</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Below 1%</p></td><td><p>1036</p></td><td><p>1168</p></td><td><p>501</p></td></tr></tbody></table> answering member constituency Camborne and Redruth answering member printed George Eustice question first answered 09/10/2017 10:17:33 answering member 3934 label Biography information for George Eustice
	tabling member	1565 label Biography information for Sir Philip Davies