Correspondence (Hansard, 16 April 2002)

§ Mr. Boris Johnson
To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs when she will reply to the letters from the hon. Member for Henley of 4 September 2001 (Defra ref. 159940), 28 September 2001 (Defra ref. 160862), 18 July 2001 (Defra ref. 158115), 16 July 2001 (Defra ref. 157925) and 10 July 2001 (Defra ref. 157840); and what the reasons are for the delay in replying. [26766]

§ Mr. Morley
The hon. Member's letter of 4 September 2001 was replied to on 26 January; of 18 July 2001 on 5 February; and of 10 July 2001 on 13 March.
The letter of 16 July has been transferred to the Department of Health.
We are unable to trace a copy of the letter of 28 September 2001.
Hon. Members are aware of the difficulties DEFRA faced last year in processing correspondence, following the foot and mouth disease outbreak, and the creation of the new Department. Steady progress is being made towards eliminating the backlog of cases, and performance on incoming letters has considerably improved. I can assure you that all efforts will continue to be devoted to this area until the problems have been fully resolved.

§ Mr. Chope
To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs when she will reply to the letter of 14 December 2001 from the hon. Member for Christchurch to the Minister of State on the Biocidal Regulations 2001. [33639]

§ Mr. Morley
[holding answer 5 February 2002]: I am sorry for the long delay in replying to the hon. Member's letter. The Department transferred the hon. Member's correspondence to the Department for Transport, Local Government and the Regions on 10 April, as they have responsibility for the Biocidal Regulations.

§ Mr. Chope
To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what factors caused the delay between 23 October 2001 and 24 February 2002 in responding to the letter from the hon. Member for Christchurch about refrigerants. [40797]

§ Mr. Morley
(holding answer 6 March 2002]: The hon. Member's letter of 23 October was faxed to the Department on 15 January following an inquiry about the length of time the response was taking. There was no trace of the original letter in the Department.