Defra provided £4,999 to the Lake District National Park Authority. Defra has not paid any money to UK Wild Camp.

The table below indicates the flood risk management schemes in Leeds, Cumbria, Calder Valley and York that were allocated funding from the £150 million investment announced in the Budget 2016.

The ‘Calder Valley - Flood Risk Reduction Scheme 1’ comprises a package of works to reduce flood risk throughout the Calder Valley while the ‘Calder Valley - Flood Risk Reduction Schemes 2’ entails a package of works to deliver catchment-wide measures and to develop potential schemes for affected communities in place such as Brighouse, Sowerby Bridge, Copley, Midgely, Halifax.

Natural flood management solutions are an important part of our approach to reducing flood risk. The recently announced £15m investment specifically for natural flood management schemes across England presents an important opportunity to further develop the evidence base around working with natural processes to reduce flood risk. We are, therefore, thinking carefully about where these schemes are based, and so have not yet announced specific locations that will be supported by the fund.

The Environment Agency will be administering the £15m investment, and have already been working with Natural England, Forestry Commission and local partners to identify project proposals. Following the announcement of the fund they can now begin to work with partners to fully scope these opportunities, which will then need to be robustly assessed against a set of agreed criteria. Further details of the process for confirming projects and their locations will be announced in due course.

The £15m announced by the Secretary of State to be spent on Natural Flood Management is included within the £700m for flood defence and resilience funding announced in the March Budget.

The Darwin Initiative has funded biodiversity projects in developing countries since 1992 and is managed by Defra. Since 2011 it has been co-funded by Defra and the Department for International Development (DFID). The total expenditure on Darwin Initiative projects and running costs since 2010 is as follows:

2010/11 - £6.1 million

2011/12 - £4.3 million

2012/13 - £5.7 million

2013/14 - £6 million

2014/15 - £6.9 million

Darwin Initiative funding from DFID can only be spent on projects which meet Official Development Assistance (ODA) criteria and this ODA expenditure (reported by calendar year) is as follows:

2010 – Zero

2011 - £2.4 million

2012 - £2.4 million

2013 - £3.1 million

2014 - £5.3 million

Defra additionally manages the Overseas Territories Environment and Climate Fund (also known as Darwin Plus) which is co-funded by Defra, DFID and the Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO). The total expenditure since it was established in 2012 is as follows:

2013/14 - £720,000

2014/15 - £1.8 million

We are investing £2.3 billion in 1,500 flood defence improvement schemes over the next six years - which is a record capital settlement for government. This will provide better protection to at least 300,000 households.

In addition to this, we have identified £600 million of additional partnership funding. Six months into a six-year programme, £250 million has been secured and potential funding contributions to cover the remaining £350 million have been identified.

Of the £250 million secured contributions, £61 million comes from the private sector and £189 million comes from Local Authorities, Local Enterprise Partnerships and other public bodies.

[holding answer 15 July 2013]: These questions relate to departmental strategic objectives that were established as part of the 2007 comprehensive spending review. DEFRA has not reported this breakdown since 2010-11. Therefore, this is the only year for which data is provided.

A table detailing the breakdown of the priorities by programme has been placed in the House Library.

I refer the hon. Member to the answer I gave on 5 July, Official Report, column 828W.

A table detailing the breakdown of the priorities by programme has been placed in the House Library.

The table provided in my answer of 26 March 2013, Official Report, columns 1036-40W, details flood and coastal risk management schemes that are moving into construction in 2013-14. Of the total external contribution spend across these projects, the public contributions amount to approximately £53 million. Private contributions amount to approximately £13 million.

Unless specific permission is obtained from the organisations in question, the Government does not release the names of organisations or the details of specific contributions to individual flood and coastal erosion risk management schemes. In some cases, the Government would be in breach of confidentiality clauses if such information was disclosed.

Prior to partnership funding, income for schemes was not aggregated and therefore a breakdown of schemes is not held centrally.

Unless specific permission has been obtained from the organisations in question, the Government do not release the names of organisations that contribute to flood and coastal erosion risk management schemes. In some cases the Government would be in breach of confidentiality clauses if such information were disclosed.

One example is that Nestle will provide almost £2 million to help deliver a scheme in Derbyshire to better protect the villages of Scropton, Hatton and Egginton from the River Dove. The local community are also making contributions to help fund the £7.1 million scheme. Another example is the £9.7 million scheme at Skipton, North Yorkshire, where £2 million contributed by local authorities and businesses will reduce flooding to over 350 residential and 165 business properties in the market town.

The current Partnership Funding system started in April 2012. Prior to the start of Partnership Funding, income for schemes was aggregated and therefore a breakdown by scheme for 2010-11 and 2011-12 is not held centrally. Information on the aggregate income for these years was provided in my answer of 14 March 2013.

Regarding the data for schemes moving into construction in 2012-13 with confirmed external contributions, I refer to my answer of 5 September 2012, Official Report, column 348W.

For future years, the following table provides details of schemes that are due to commence in 2013-14 with external contributions.

Schemes commencing construction in future years beyond 2013-14 do not have confirmed funding until Grant in Aid allocations are confirmed.

Overall, contributions have come forward from a range of sources, including from businesses, local authorities and communities. However in many cases, external contributors prefer not to disclose their contributions.

It is estimated that Partnership funding will secure around £148 million of external funding on top of the £2.3 billion the Government are investing in flood and coastal erosion risk management over this spending period (April 2011 to March 2015).

The following tables summarise the total external contributions that supplemented Government spending on flood and coastal risk management projects in England in the previous three years and the amounts that are anticipated in each of the next three years.

In 2012-13, the Environment Agency updated the flood and coastal risk management projects programme to reflect the new Partnership Funding approach. Partnership Funding clarifies what level of investment communities can expect so that they can secure funding from other sources to allow schemes to go ahead. It therefore gives local people more choice in how their community is protected as well as a method by which taxpayer funding can be spread further and achieve more.

The figures for the financial years up to 2011-12 represent the total amounts spent.

The figures for 2012-13 onwards are current best estimates of the amounts to be spent, based on expected contributions. They are subject to change based on final scheme outturns and final negotiations with all partners.

None of the figures quoted include local levy income from Regional Flood and Coastal Committees.

The Environment Agency has assessed that the following amounts were allocated to its maintenance of watercourses for each year listed in the following table. The figure for 2014-15 shows the indicative allocation.

The maintenance of assets is carried out using a risk-based approach. This allows investment to be made where it will contribute most to reducing the potential for damage and where it is economically and environmentally justified. Each site is different so the Environment Agency chooses the most suitable maintenance activity for each stretch of river, coastline or defence system.

The figures shown are for maintenance work carried out by the Environment Agency that includes:

maintaining flood barriers and pumping stations;

clearing grills and removing obstructions from rivers;

controlling aquatic weed within rivers;

dredging and de-silting of rivers;

managing grass, trees and bushes on flood embankments; and

inspection and repair of flood defence structures.

The Environment Agency is working in partnership in a number of areas to improve its efficiency. It is on track to achieve its corporate plan target for asset condition in ‘high consequence systems’, ensuring at least 97% of these assets are in target condition.

It is estimated that dredging activities cost approximately £20 million each year. The Environment Agency does not specifically record the amounts spent on dredging per year because dredging work forms part of the wider budget for maintenance of watercourses.

Watercourse maintenance work includes maintaining flood barriers and pumping stations; clearing grills and removing obstructions from rivers; controlling aquatic weed within rivers; dredging and de-silting of rivers; managing grass, trees and bushes on our flood embankments; inspection and repair of flood defence structures.

Of the £36 million paid to lead local flood authorities, £21 million will be provided through the business rate retention system in 2013-14 and 2014-15. The remaining £15 million will be paid through local services support grants. The overall funding for local authorities to manage local flood risks will be the same as this year (2012-13) although will be paid through different routes.

The Flood Forecasting Centre received £2.64 million from DEFRA and the Environment Agency in 2010-11. Since 1 April 2011 the Flood Forecasting Centre receives a total of £3.69 million annually from DEFRA and the Environment Agency. The current contract runs until 31 March 2015. We will review our commitment to continue funding the Flood Forecasting Centre before the end of the current contract.

The Forestry Commission has spent no money on advertising biosecurity protocols during these periods. However, a range of activities have been undertaken to communicate plant health issues and biosecurity guidance. Details are provided as follows:

2009-10

Three Plant Health Days delivered by Forest Research.

Working with the Food and Environment Research Agency (Fera) on a stakeholder engagement as part of the main Phytophthora Programme (staff time 22 days).

2010-11

Working with Fera on communications as part of the main Phytophthora programme (250 days of staff time). This included public awareness;

production of two films on bio-security; a stand at the Chelsea Flower Show, which featured biosecurity (cost: £20,000).

Three Plant Health Days delivered by Forest Research.

South West Phytophthora ramorum stakeholder seminars (cost: £2,000).

2011-12

Working with Fera on communications as part of the main Phytophthora programme, and subsequently the Tree Health Plant Bio-security action plan 300 days staff time—general public awareness; films; Chelsea Show (£20,000).

Produced 5000 biosecurity guidance z-cards, (cost: £1,800).

£1,000 spent on North West P.ramorum events.

Two events on Oak Processionary Moth.

P.ramorum Forest Health day jointly with Forest Research, (cost: £1,700).

2012-13

Working with Fera on Tree Health and Plant Biosecurity communications: 410 days staff time. Direct costs approx £20,000 for the Chelsea show in May 2013, further £20,000 for the two films. Also produced a suite of bio-security posters £1,500.

Produced 40,000 more biosecurity guidance z-cards, (cost: £4,000).

APF sector event biosecurity banners (cost: £280).

Plant health updates for Land Agents (cost: £2,700).

South West Woodlands Show, Phytophthora ramorum awareness (cost: £2,445).

Three Plant Health Days delivered by Forest Research, biosecurity is a part of these.

Phytophthora Ramorum communications toolkit and events (cost: £4,500).

Oak Processionary Moth communications toolkit and events (cost: £3,500).

Chalara Communications toolkit (cost: £15,000).

Chalara symptoms video (cost: £1,800).

Tree health reporting smartphone app (cost: £8,000).

[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 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.