§ Mr. Charles ClarkeTo ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what assumption his Department is making in developing its financial504W projections of the proportion of Norwich scientific staff of the Central Science Laboratory who will relocate to York if the Norwich site is closed. [35955]
§ Mr. Rooker[holding answer 24 March 1998]: Only staff in mobile grades would be expected to transfer in the event of a decision to relocate at York.
§ Mr. Charles ClarkeTo ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food for what reasons Central Science Laboratory employees have an average 16 square metres of office and laboratory floor area at Colney Lane, Norwich, and 35 square metres at Sand Hutton, York. [35403]
§ Mr. Rooker[holding answer 20 March 1998]: As I explained to my hon. Friend on 11 March 1998, Official Report, columns 255–56, the difference in area per employee is due largely to the laboratory at York being designed to accommodate approximately 400 fee-earning scientists and support staff, but presently only being occupied by 300 fee-earning scientists and support staff.
In addition, the new laboratory at York was constructed in accordance with the latest health and safety requirements and scientists have therefore been provided with separate offices in which to write up the results of their work. Separate writing up space is not available at the Norwich laboratory as this was not a prevailing health and safety requirement at the time of construction.
§ Mr. Charles ClarkeTo ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he will list the facilities at the Central Science Laboratory at Sand Hutton, York, for which his Department pays directly; and if he will specify the costs or projected costs in(a) 1996–97, (b) 1997–98 and 1998–99. [37113]
§ Mr. RookerThe Central Science Laboratory (CSL) is required to recover its full costs through charges to customers, including those facilities specifically made available for use by the Department. The facilities in question are containment glasshouses, plant health quarantine facilities, constant temperature humidity rooms, controlled environment unit and storage facilities. Associated charges, representing the full cost of operating these facilities, are accounted for against projects at the year end and included in the audited CSL Annual Report and Accounts.
Income received from the Department in respect of these facilities is as follows:
- 1996–97 £0.4 million
- 1997–98 £1.6 million
- 1998–99 £5.0 million.
The facilities were not available for the full 1996–97 year and the Department therefore paid proportionate costs only. Projected income for 1998–99 includes both running costs and the capital charge, which is payable from 1 April 1998.
§ Mr. Charles ClarkeTo ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he will list the financial transfers between his Department and the Central Science Laboratory for each of the years since the Agency was founded and those projected for 1997–98 and 1998–99. [37112]
505W
§ Mr. RookerThe Central Science Laboratory (CSL) was launched as an Executive Agency of MAFF in April 1992. Details of the financial transactions between the Department and the CSL since its launch and up until 31 March 1997 can be found within the CSL Annual Reports and Accounts, copies of which are available in the Library of the House.
The CSL expects to receive £22.2 million income from the Department in 1997–98 and £28.1 million, including an element for the capital charge, in 1998–99.
A complete list of financial transactions involved could be provided only at disproportionate cost.
§ Mr. Charles ClarkeTo ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what length of continued employment would be guaranteed to scientists employed by the Central Science Laboratory relocated from Norwich to York; and by whom this guarantee would be offered and funded. [37110]
§ Mr. RookerIn relation to the previous relocation of permanent staff from MAFF headquarters units and the various Central Science Laboratory (CSL) sites to the York area, assurance of security of employment for a period has been provided in order to give staff the confidence to relocate with their families to York.
In the event of the relocation of the CSL Norwich laboratory to the new CSL site at York, I would, of course, give consideration as to whether similar terms should be offered. Any such guarantee would be the responsibility of the Department.
§ Mr. Charles ClarkeTo ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what is the capital charge payable by the Central Science Laboratory on the laboratories at(a) Sand Hutton, York and (b) Colney Lane, Norwich, for the years (i) 1998–99, (ii) 1999–2000 and (iii) 2000–2001. [37127]
506W
(i) Monsanto Date Reason Outcome 16 May 1997 Meeting to discuss an application under EC Novel Foods Regulation Agreement to submit an application 18 June 1997 Meetings to discuss matters relation of pesticides Improved understanding of requirements 9 July 1997 19 August 1997 11 September 1997 Letter in response to consultation exercise on herbicide tolerant crops Comments noted 23 September 1997 Meetings to discuss matters relating to the regulation of Improved understanding of requirements 8–9 October 1997 pesticides. 31 October 1997 17–18 November 1997 18–19 November 1997 28 November 1997 5 December 1997 23 January 1998 Meeting to discuss segregation and labelling of GMOs Exchange of views 11 February 1998 To discuss matters relating to the regulation of pesticides Improved understanding of requirements 24 March 1998 Courtesy visit from Senior Vice President responsible for GMO issues Exchange of views
§ Mr. RookerI refer my hon. Friend to the answer given to him on 25 March 1998,Official Report, column 186, in respect of the capital charge for the Sand Hutton, York laboratory. The capital charge for the Norwich laboratory is anticipated to be £780,000 for each of the three years 1998–99, 1999–2000 and 2001–2002.
Capital charge valuations are subject to periodic review by an independent valuer.
§ Mr. Charles ClarkeTo ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what proportion of the scientists employed by the Central Science Laboratory at Tony, Aberdeen in January 1995 were still employed by the CSL, at York, in January 1998. [35959]
§ Mr. Rooker[holding answer 24 March 1998]: The closure of the Torry laboratory resulted from the significant financial loss being incurred by the laboratory. On closure, funding for work of particular relevance to Scotland was transferred to the Scottish Office and work programmes and associated staff were transferred to the Rowett Research Institute, Aberdeen University and the Scottish Office Marine Laboratory. 10 staff, 7 of whom were scientists, transferred to the Central Science Laboratory at York and all were still employed there in January 1998.