Although plant health is a devolved issue it is important to adopt a strategic UK approach as plant pests do not recognise borders. Senior officials from the devolved Administrations are members of the UK Plant Health Strategy Board which meets quarterly.

During the Chalara outbreak the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, my right hon. Friend the Member for North Shropshire (Mr Paterson), chaired cross-Government COBR meetings on 2 and 9 November to which Ministers from the devolved Administrations were invited. A Minister from the Scottish Government joined the meetings while the other devolved Administrations were represented by senior officials. Officials from the devolved Administrations also join by telephone the Policy Core Group and the operational update meetings.

In relation to the period between May 2010 and March 2012, I refer the hon. Member my answer of 26 March 2012, Official Report, column 978W.

An additional expenditure of £12,401 was made from March 2012-November 2012 on cut flowers, much of which resulted from Jubilee and Olympic related events.

Government Hospitality—a section within the Foreign and Commonwealth Office's (FCO) Protocol Department—provides corporate hospitality services for the whole of Government, at Lancaster House, the FCO Fine Rooms, 1 Carlton Gardens and 10 Downing street, among other venues. It is used both for government business hospitality and commercial hire to fee paying private clients. It hosts over 200 events each year. Government Hospitality provides semi-permanent plant displays in public areas, decorative arrangements for weekly display and individual table arrangements for lunches and dinners. Fresh flowers are only used when it is appropriate and necessary. Decisions are made on an event-by-event basis and costs are carefully monitored to ensure value for money. Much of this expenditure is reimbursed by revenues generated by the events.

There is no direct cost to the FCO for pot plants as this is included in the fixed-price element of a contract with our supplier and included in the figures given.

The Department spent a total of £12,383.80 on plants and trees in the period May 2010 to March 2011 for its core headquarters estate, but cannot separately identify any expenditure within that amount on cut flowers or pot plants. No specific expenditure has been incurred in the period from April 2011 to date.

The Department has a Facilities Management contract with Emcor Facilities Services. Since April 2011, any expenditure on cut flowers or pot plants has been made directly by Emcor and is not reimbursed by the Department.

Given the growing incidence of plant disease across the globe and the increasingly global nature of trade, what plans does the Minister have to address the long-term threat of disease to our plants and trees?

On 30 October, my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State asked DEFRA’s chief scientific adviser to convene an independent expert taskforce on tree health and plant biosecurity to review the current arrangements and make recommendations to address long-term tree and plant disease risk. Today, the taskforce published its interim report and made a number of recommendations on measures to address the increasing threat to the health of our plants and trees. They included strengthening our approach to risk assessment, improving biosecurity and clarifying governance.

[holding answer 13 November 2012]: The import of soil from most countries outside Europe is banned under the EU Plant Health Directive (2000/29/EC), with the exception of some countries in the Mediterranean basin. Commission Directive 2008/61/EC provides the possibility for material to be imported under licence for trial or scientific purposes. The UK is working with other member states to address the risks presented by soil movements within the EU.

Defra’s International Disease Monitoring Team and the Animal Health and Veterinary Laboratories Agency (AHVLA) constantly monitor new emerging or high impact animal diseases in the UK and across the world. When we become aware of a new animal disease outbreak in another country, we carry out an initial rapid assessment of the risk of introduction of that disease into the United Kingdom taking into account the level of trade from that region and any possible illegal movements. This helps inform risk-based activity of enforcement agencies.

Should a new risk be identified, the Human Animal Infections and Risk Surveillance (HAIRS) group may also be involved in identifying whether an emerging disease may pose a threat to UK public health.

The Secretary of State recently announced the establishment of an expert taskforce to review our strategic approach to plant health and to prevent pests and diseases from entering the country. We are also urgently bringing forward those actions in the Tree Health and Plant Biosecurity Action Plan particularly aimed at keeping out serious pests and pathogens not currently present in the UK.

[holding answer 2 November 2012]: DEFRA funding for forestry research and plant health research is set out in the table. Against a background of efficiencies being made in base budgets for Forest Research and FERA, in which frontline expenditure has been protected, the Government has recognised the importance of this area by making available an additional £8 million to fund the Tree Health and Biosecurity Action Plan over the next four years. The THBAP funding covers both tree and plant health research. This investment has leveraged at least a further £4 million in additional funding from Research Councils, which is not reflected in the spending totals listed.

The figures for 2014-15 are provisional planning assumptions. Ministers are currently exploring what can be done to strengthen further the resources in this area.

[holding answer 7 November 2012]: The UK was instrumental in securing a review of the EU plant health regime which has remained largely unchanged since its introduction at the start of the Single Market. In partnership with key stakeholders the UK has been active in influencing the Commission's approach with key objectives being:

Faster decision making as plant health risks change and new pests arrive.

Better risk targeting and a shift of inspection effort from plant produce to plants and propagating material (including addressing threats from new and emerging trades).

More co-operation between plant health inspectorates across the EU.

The Commission's formal proposals for a new plant health law are expected early next year.

When undertaking vegetation clearance work during the bird nesting season, Network Rail is bound by the provisions of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 as amended. The company must ensure that it does not contravene the legislation put in place to protect birds while they are nesting. This legislation does allow work to be carried out in the interest of safety.

The Department has spent £1,558.34 on plants in the last 12 months.

In 2007-08, the cost was £24,730; in 2008-09 it was £15,025; in 2009-10, it was £15,027.39; and in 2011-12, it was £2,278.

The UK was instrumental in securing a review of the EU plant health regime which has remained largely unchanged since its introduction at the start of the Single Market. In partnership with key stakeholders the UK has been active in influencing the Commission's approach with key objectives being:

faster decision-making as plant health risks change and new pests arrive;

better risk targeting and a shift of inspection effort from plant produce to plants and propagating material (including addressing threats from new and emerging trades);

more co-operation between plant health inspectorates across the EU.

The Commission's formal proposals for a new plant health law are expected early next year.

DECC has not spent anything on soft furnishing, plants or artwork since May 2010. A number of other office improvements have been carried out over the period, primarily to redecorate after wear and tear or to increase the capacity and efficiency of the estate. These are shown in the following table:

The direct cost of controlling invasive non-native plants primarily rests with landowners and the impacted sectors; examples are provided in the CABI report on the ‘Economic Cost of Invasive Non-native Species to Great Britain’. DEFRA directly funds some specific priority measures such as the development and release of a biological control agent for Japanese knotweed. The Department's contribution to that project to date is £309,234 with a further commitment of £75,000 until 2015. DEFRA is also funding further research into the biological control of invasive non-native plants.

Through water framework directive funding, DEFRA is also supporting partnership projects taking action on invasive non-native species locally as follows:

2011-12: £264,678;

2012-15: £977,761.

A proportion of this funding directly supports control of invasive non-native plants.

Other funding for direct control or collaborative projects which wholly or in part tackle invasive plants is provided through a range of bodies. With a few exceptions the funding often supports the management of a range of plant species and the specific cost of managing non-native plant species is not separately recorded. For example, the Environment Agency estimates that it spends approximately £1,700,000 per year on control of bank and in-water vegetation, with approximately £500,000 of this in connection with reducing flood risk.

Natural England funds the control of non-native plants through a variety of funding mechanisms, including the Higher Level Scheme within Environmental Stewardship. As of June 2012, Natural England expects to provide a total of £2,100,000 over the life of the agreements (which last up to 10 years).

Natural England has provided £257,000 to local projects aimed and controlling invasive plants during 2011-12 and forecasts £150,000 for 2012-13. This is also a key activity under the Conservation Enhancement Scheme funded from Natural England's grant in aid; however, non-native species costs are not separately identifiable.

From 2009-10 to 2011-12 the Food and Environment Research Agency has spent £2,075,000 on the removal of Rhododendron ponticum to reduce the risks from Phytophthora ramorum. Natural England has also provided approximately £50,000 in 2011-12 for the control of this species on Sites of Species Scientific Interest and expects to spend a further £1,300,000 over the next three years through capital funding for the Conservation Enhancement Scheme. Funding for rhododendron control is also provided through the Forestry Commission's Woodland Grant Scheme.

It is expected that broadly similar levels of expenditure are likely to be required in future years, subject to significant new developments such as new threats or the need for the development of more ambitious control programmes. DEFRA will seek to support action on preventing new priority threats but, given the unpredictability of these, it is not possible to be more specific about the level of funding that might be required. Any additional expenditure would require re-prioritisation within existing budgets.

The direct cost of controlling invasive non-native plants primarily rests with landowners and the impacted sectors; examples are provided in the CABI report on the ‘Economic Cost of Invasive Non-native Species to Great Britain’. DEFRA directly funds some specific priority measures such as the development and release of a biological control agent for Japanese knotweed. The Department's contribution to that project to date is £309,234 with a further commitment of £75,000 until 2015. DEFRA is also funding further research into the biological control of invasive non-native plants.

Through water framework directive funding, DEFRA is also supporting partnership projects taking action on invasive non-native species locally as follows:

2011-12: £264,678;

2012-15: £977,761.

A proportion of this funding directly supports control of invasive non-native plants.

Other funding for direct control or collaborative projects which wholly or in part tackle invasive plants is provided through a range of bodies. With a few exceptions the funding often supports the management of a range of plant species and the specific cost of managing non-native plant species is not separately recorded. For example, the Environment Agency estimates that it spends approximately £1,700,000 per year on control of bank and in-water vegetation, with approximately £500,000 of this in connection with reducing flood risk.

Natural England funds the control of non-native plants through a variety of funding mechanisms, including the Higher Level Scheme within Environmental Stewardship. As of June 2012, Natural England expects to provide a total of £2,100,000 over the life of the agreements (which last up to 10 years).

Natural England has provided £257,000 to local projects aimed and controlling invasive plants during 2011-12 and forecasts £150,000 for 2012-13. This is also a key activity under the Conservation Enhancement Scheme funded from Natural England's grant in aid; however, non-native species costs are not separately identifiable.

From 2009-10 to 2011-12 the Food and Environment Research Agency has spent £2,075,000 on the removal of Rhododendron ponticum to reduce the risks from Phytophthora ramorum. Natural England has also provided approximately £50,000 in 2011-12 for the control of this species on Sites of Species Scientific Interest and expects to spend a further £1,300,000 over the next three years through capital funding for the Conservation Enhancement Scheme. Funding for rhododendron control is also provided through the Forestry Commission's Woodland Grant Scheme.

It is expected that broadly similar levels of expenditure are likely to be required in future years, subject to significant new developments such as new threats or the need for the development of more ambitious control programmes. DEFRA will seek to support action on preventing new priority threats but, given the unpredictability of these, it is not possible to be more specific about the level of funding that might be required. Any additional expenditure would require re-prioritisation within existing budgets.