16 September 2004
Departmental Publicity

Mr. Moss: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport what her Department's expenditure was on (a) advertising consultants, (b) public relations consultants and (c) press officers, broken down by grade in (i) 1997–98 and (ii) the latest year for which figures are available. [184346]

Mr. Caborn: The Department did not incur any expenditure on advertising consultants or public relations consultants in either 1997–98 or 2003–04, the latest year for which figures are available. Expenditure on press officers for 2003–04, broken down by grade, was:

Grade	£
A	66,124
A/TP	56,325
B	315,021

Information requested for earlier years could be provided only at disproportionate cost.

13 September 2004
Gambling Laws

Mr. Malcolm Moss (North-East Cambridgeshire) (Con): Few Bills could have undergone greater or closer scrutiny than the Gambling Bill, under the expert chairmanship of my hon. Friend the Member for Ryedale (Mr. Greenway). I am grateful to the Minister for mentioning that. The Government's report has elicited almost universal support for the Committee's findings. Given the desire of more or less all involved in the industry for the Bill to be introduced as soon as possible, what reasons can the Government have for delaying it?

Mr. Caborn: The reason is parliamentary time. As a seasoned Member of Parliament, the hon. Gentleman will know that such matters are within the gift not of the Department for Culture, Media and Sport but of those who order the business of the House—in which regard, I look to the Whips to my left. However, I can assure you, Mr. Speaker, that we have been pressing very hard on this issue.

22 July 2004
Tourism

Mr. Moss: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport by how much the Government aims to increase participation in accommodation grading schemes by 2006. [186035]

Mr. Caborn: The improvement of the quality of tourism products is one of the five key priority areas agreed between the DCMS and the tourism industry. These are set out in the Tomorrow's Tourism Today document, which was launched by my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State at the Tourism Alliance's Plenary Session on 19 July.

After detailed consultation, DCMS and its key partner organisations have agreed to aim to significantly increase the rate of participation in grading schemes in England from the present 43 per cent. of accommodation. Work towards this, and in respect of the other programmes outlined in Tomorrow's Tourism Today, will be guided and monitored by the Tourism Review and Implementation Group, which my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State also announced on 19 July. The Group will be informed by the recent Alan Britten report on common accommodation quality standards across Britain, which recommended that at least 75 per cent. of known accommodation stock should be included in the schemes by 2008.

21 July 2004
Recruitment and Employment Costs

Mr. Moss: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport if she will publish the (a) recruiting and (b) salary and other employment costs associated with the post of (i) Chairman of the UK Film Council, (ii) Chairman for the Commission for Architecture and the Built Environment and (iii) Chairman of the Museum, Libraries and Archives Council. [184372]

Estelle Morris: The direct costs associated with the three public appointments referred to are set out as follows. The average cost of officials' time in running an appointments process, based on 2003–04 figures, was £2,500 per campaign.

(i) UK Film Council

Cost of advertising—£14,491.74
Chair's remuneration—The post is unpaid. However, £198 per day may be claimed, plus travel and subsistence. The time requirement for the post is four days on average per month.

(ii) Commission for Architecture and the Built Environment

Cost of advertising—£14,093.81
Chair's remuneration—£45,000 per annum plus reasonable expenses.

(iii) Museum, Libraries and Archives Council

Cost of advertising—£12,477.06
Chair's remuneration—£32,640 per annum plus reasonable expenses.

Tourism

Mr. Moss: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport how many visitor attractions have signed up to the Visitor Attraction Quality Assurance Scheme. [186034]

Mr. Caborn: The Visitor Attraction Quality Assurance Service (VAQAS) has accredited 510 visitor attractions.

Mr. Moss: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport what the rate of productivity in the tourism industry has been in each of the last 10 years; and what criteria are used to measure these rates. [186036]

Estelle Morris: The Department estimates the rate of change of labour productivity in Tourism.

Data is derived from the Annual Business Inquiry, carried out by the Office for National Statistics. This takes the form of estimates of Gross Value Added and numbers in employment. Productivity is estimated as the ratio of Gross Value Added to numbers in employment, and the rate of change from one year to the next is calculated.

Information has been collected in its present form only since 1998. The latest figures are those for 2002.

The figures are as follows:

	Percentage
1998–99	+ 3.1
1999–2000	+ 4.0
2000–01	+ 2.5
2001–02	+ 4.6

19 July 2004
Departmental Administration Costs

Mr. Moss: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport what the cost was of printing her Department's headed notepaper in (a) 1997–98 and (b) the last year for which figures are available. [184373]

Mr. Caborn: A record of expenditure at this level of detail within the overall stationery budget for 1997–98 is no longer available. The expenditure on headed notepaper in 2003–04, the last full year for which information is available, was £3,500.

Government Art Collection

Mr. Moss: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport if she will publish the latest valuation of the Government's art collection. [184375]

Estelle Morris: It is not possible to give an accurate estimate of the value of the Government art collection, which has no current market valuation. The current monetary value of a work of art can be accurately assessed only at the time of purchase or sale or by professional valuation. In the former case, the collection is not actively traded; in the latter, it would not be justifiable expenditure of public funds to have the whole collection valued professionally.

15 July 2004
Mobile Phone and Hospitality Costs

Mr. Moss: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport how much her Department spent on (a) mobile telephones and (b) hospitality in (i) 1997–98 and (ii) the latest year for which figures are available. [184407]

Mr. Caborn: The information requested is contained in the following table. All expenditure on official hospitality is made in accordance with published departmental guidance on financial procedures and propriety, based on principles set out in Government guidance. In 2002–03 changes were made in the way hospitality expenditure was captured to include associated staff costs following the contracting out of the hospitality service. Figures for 2004–05 are not available at present.

		£
	Mobile telephones	Hospitality
1997–98	(29)—	15,269.81
2003–04	35,000	(30)78,144.29

⁽²⁹⁾ It is not possible to provide an expenditure figure for mobile telephones in 1997–98 save at disproportionate cost.
⁽³⁰⁾ Provisional pending finalisation of annual accounts.

Departmental Catering Costs

Mr. Moss: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport what the cost was of running her Department's canteen facilities in (a) 1997–98 and (b) the last year for which figures are available. [184376]

Mr. Caborn: The information is as follows:

(a) DCMS did not have a canteen in 1997–98.
(b) A catering facility was opened in 2001, and in the 2003–04 year, cost £67,431.

Departmental Consultancy Expenditure

Mr. Moss: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport what her Department's expenditure was on (a) head-hunters and recruitment consultants and (b) management consultants in (i) 1997–98 and (ii) the last year for which figures are available. [184371]

Mr. Caborn: The table shows departmental expenditure on management consultants. An analysis of expenditure on head-hunters and recruitment consultants is not recorded on the Department's accounting system and can be obtained only at disproportionate cost.

	£
1997–98	113,527,53
2003–04	(28)10,170.94

⁽²⁸⁾ Provisional pending finalisation of annual accounts.

Departmental Refurbishment Costs

Mr. Moss: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport what the cost has been of renovation and refurbishment of Department-owned buildings since May 1997. [184374]

Mr. Caborn: A total of £1,547,000 has been spent on refurbishment and changes to two occupied buildings to meet operational needs. Fitting-out works prior to occupation of a further two buildings were undertaken by the landlords. A further £120,000 was spent in compliance with lease requirements and £153,000 was spent to replace obsolete fire warning/alarm systems.

14 July 2004
East Cambridgeshire and Fenland Primary Care Trust

Mr. Moss: To ask the Secretary of State for Health by how much the actual revenue funds received by the East Cambridgeshire and Fenland Primary Care Trust in the financial year 2003–04 differed from the allocation determined by the weighted capitation formula. [183614]

Dr. Ladyman: Revenue allocations to primary care trusts (PCTs) for 2003–04 to 2005–06 were announced on 12 December 2002.

The revenue allocation to East Cambridgeshire and Fenland PCT for 2003–04 differed from the target allocation, as defined by the weighted capitation formula, by £7.9 million.

7 July 2004
Tourism

Mr. Moss: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport how many (a) overseas tourists and (b) domestic tourists have visited London in each year since 1992. [182534]

Mr. Caborn: The available statistics for the number of visits to London by overseas and domestic tourists since 1992 are shown in the table. Statistics are only available on visits which included a stay of at least one night.

		Million
	Visits to London by staying:
	(a) Overseas tourists	(b) Domestic tourists(7)
1992	9.2	—
1993	9.6	—
1994	10.4	—
1995	11.9	—
1996	12.3	—
1997	12.3	—
1998	12.3	—
1999	13.2	—
2000	13.1	18.5
2001	11.5	16.9
2002	11.6	16.1
2003	11.8	Not yet available

⁽⁷⁾ Regional data from the UK Tourism Survey are only available back to the start of 2000 due to a significant change in the survey methodology in 1999.

Sources:
1. International Passenger Survey.
2. UK Tourism Survey.

1 July 2004
Fenland Primary Care Trust

Mr. Moss: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what annual financial resources were calculated according to his formula for and paid to the Fenland Primary Care Trust (a) in the years before amalgamation with the East Cambridgeshire Trust and (b) since the amalgamation. [181305]

Dr. Ladyman: For 2003–06 allocations as determined by the weighted capitation formula have been made to East Cambridgeshire and Fenland Primary Care Trust (PCT). Prior to this allocations were made to health authorities.

For 2003–06 East Cambridgeshire and Fenland PCT received the following:

	£000
2003–2004	117,133
2004–2005	128,632
2005–2006	140,862

28 June 2004
Licensing Act

Mr. Moss: Will the Minister kindly explain to the House the difference between a non-invited non-qualifying club member signing into a local Conservative or Labour club and being refused a drink at the bar, and the same person turning up unannounced and invited and signing in for his green fee to play a round of golf while on holiday, yet being allowed to buy himself a drink at the bar afterwards?

Mr. Caborn: If the hon. Gentleman studies the Act carefully, particularly the provisions dealing with associate members and sees how we have been able to incorporate the definition of "guests" in that, it would allay his fears and those of every golfer. We are not affecting activity on the 19th hole. On the contrary, when the Act is implemented, I believe it will bring distinct advantages to golf clubs and other sports clubs. The fears that the hon. Gentleman expresses at the Dispatch Box have been addressed. If he reads the 2003 Act, he will see what it says about associate members, how guests are now incorporated in that, and the definition of a golf club, which is not primarily a club that is licensed for drinking—the bar is an associate part of a golf club. If he interprets the Act with a degree of common sense, he will be able to answer his own question.

Entertainment Licences

Mr. Moss: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport if she will use her powers under the Licensing Act 2003 to include sporting events shown on large screens in bars, public houses and other licensed premises within the definition of regulated entertainment under Schedule 1 of the Act. [180370]

Mr. Caborn: We have no current plans to use the powers in the Licensing Act 2003 to license the showing of live broadcast sporting events on large screens in licensed premises. Under the 2003 Act, all public houses and bars showing live sporting events on television will require premises licences because they sell alcohol and, as a result, will be required to take steps to ensure the promotion of the licensing objectives in relation to the premises. These objectives are the prevention of crime and disorder, public safety, the prevention of public nuisance and the protection of children from harm. If they fail to do so, they could face a review of the licence. Furthermore, it will be an offence under the 2003 Act to allow disorderly conduct on the premises and knowingly to sell, attempt to sell, or to allow alcohol to be sold to people who are already drunk. Finally, the police have powers (in certain circumstances) under the 2003 Act to close down instantly for up to 24 hours any relevant premises where a senior officer believes there is, or is likely to be, disorder on or in the vicinity of the premises, or alternatively where a public nuisance is being caused as a result of noise emanating from the premises.

23 June 2004
Licensing Act

Mr. Moss : My hon. Friend is obviously well versed on the circus environment and has made efforts to find out the detail of what is going on. Does he have any evidence to suggest that there is crime and disorder or public liability associated with circuses? Why was the Home Office happy that they should be exempt and yet the DCMS seemed to have grounds for including them in the legislation?

Mr. Luff : I do not know. Perhaps the Minister can tell us whether the DCMS took a deliberate decision to include circuses. I tend to think that it was accidental. My hon. Friend makes a good point about disorder. There was an article by Philip Johnston in The Daily Telegraph last week, which sadly does not praise hon. Members who have been trying to raise the problem for some time, although that is another point. I suspect that his article derives heavily from my speech of 27 April. He writes:

"When did you last see a punch-up at a circus, apart from among the clowns? The Government says the laws are also about 'the protection of children from harm'. How is this to be achieved by penalising a traditional art form that gets children away from their computer games and the television and instils a lifelong enjoyment of live performance?"

That is a powerful point.

7 June 2004
Local Government Finance (Cambridgeshire)

Mr. Moss: To ask the Deputy Prime Minister what the (a) formula spending share for and (b) grant paid under the floors and ceilings policy to (i) Cambridgeshire County Council and (ii) each district council in Cambridgeshire were for (A) 2003–04 and (B) 2004–05. [176278]

Mr. Raynsford: The information requested is tabled as follows:

(£ million unless otherwise stated)

Local authority	2003–04 formula spending shares	2003–04 formula grant after floors and ceilings	Adjusted 2003–04 formula spending shares	Adjusted 2003–04 formula grant after floors and ceilings
Cambridgeshire	448.965	288.141	432.888	279.796
Cambridge	15.936	11.218	15.131	10.413
East Cambridgeshire	10.282	5.253	9.574	4.545
Fenland	12.364	6.900	11.815	6.351
Huntingdonshire	20.789	9.504	19.462	8.177
South Cambridgeshire	15.960	6.296	15.400	5.736

Local authority	2004–05 formula spending shares	2004–05 formula grant after floors and ceilings	Percentage change in formula spending shares	Percentage change in formula grant
Cambridgeshire	462.402	302.047	6.8	8.0
Cambridge	15.615	10.725	3.2	3.0
East Cambridgeshire	9.938	4.820	3.8	6.1
Fenland	12.111	6.658	2.5	4.8
Huntingdonshire	19.931	8.731	2.4	6.8
South Cambridgeshire	15.833	5.938	2.8	3.5

Due to changes in the funding and functions of local authorities between 2003–04 and 2004–05 it is inappropriate to compare these directly. The 2003–04 Formula Spending Share (FSS) and Formula Grant have therefore been adjusted to enable comparisons on a like-for-like basis. The percentage changes in both FSS and Formula Grant have been supplied for convenience.

Mr. Moss: To ask the Deputy Prime Minister from which (a) businesses, (b) charity organisations and (c) individuals he has received representations asking for Fenland District Council to have its council tax increase for 2004–05 capped. [176299]

Mr. Raynsford: Over the last few months the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister has received a large volume of correspondence about council tax, some covering specific local authorities and others concerning the council tax system in general. An analysis of this information by type of respondent, subject matter and by local authority is not held centrally and could only be provided at disproportionate cost.

27 May 2004
Regional Tourist Boards

Mr. Moss: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport what the membership of each regional tourist board has been in the last three years. [176312]

Mr. Caborn: Regional Tourist Boards are not Government agencies, their board members are not appointed by Ministers and records of their membership are not held centrally.

Mr. Moss: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport what the expenditure of each regional tourist board has been in the last three years, broken down by main budget heading. [176318]

Mr. Caborn: Regional Tourist Boards (RTBs) are not Government agencies and records of their expenditure are not held centrally. Most of them are private companies limited by guarantee and they have income in addition to Government funding.

Funding via the English Tourism Council in 2001–02 and 2002–03 and via the Regional Development Agencies in 2003–04 totalled £6.5 million, £5.7 million and £3.6 million in these years respectively. Government funding passed to the RTBs in these years for specific tourism projects, delivery of national objectives at a regional level and activities in line with regional strategies. Separately, funding of £1.9 million per annum passed from DCMS to the Greater London Authority who, worked with the London Tourist Board (renamed VisitLondon in 2003), on marketing London overseas and tourism development.

Licensing Act

Mr. Malcolm Moss (North-East Cambridgeshire) (Con): It is all very well the Minister saying that the problem seems to have gone away. The English Golf Union wrote to us only today saying that it is still not happy with his and his civil servants' so-called interpretation about why, under the guidance and under the Act as written, many golfers who are neither members of other qualifying clubs nor guests in the strict definition of that term will not be able to buy a drink on the 19th hole.

Mr. Caborn: The English Golf Union has not got back to me personally on that. Nothing has crossed my desk—if it does, I will hope to answer the point more fully. I reassure the hon. Gentleman that the position remains the same as under the previous Act, when the 19th hole was quite well watered—and I expect that it will continue to be quite well watered in the future.

13 May 2004
Regional Tourism

Mr. Moss: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport how much funding for tourism has been made available to each regional development agency (RDA) in the current year; and how much of this funding each RDA passed on (a) to its regional tourist board, (b) to local authorities, (c) to local and regional businesses and (d) for use for marketing. [172389]

Mr. Caborn: In 2004–05, the RDAs will receive £3.6 million specifically for tourism as follows:

	Amount (£)
Advantage West Midlands	252,000
East of England Development Agency	543,000
East Midlands Development Agency	252,000
North West Development Agency	713,000
One North East	333,000
South East Development Agency	744,000
South West Regional Development Agency	403,000
Yorkshire Forward	360,000

This money is ring-fenced for the Regional Tourist Boards until the end of 2005–06. Those regions which no longer work with an RTB have sought the Department's approval to pass the money to other designated tourism delivery bodies. The RDAs will determine what objectives and targets the RTBs or other organisations should meet in return for the funds, working as appropriate with local authorities and businesses.

In the North East, ONE has taken over the core functions of the former Northumbria Tourist Board, and will retain the funding on the basis that it is ring-fenced for this purpose. In the North West, the NWDA has established four destination management organisations to take over the role of the former NW Tourist Board.

12 May 2004
Tourism

Mr. Moss: To ask the Deputy Prime Minister how much was spent by local authorities in promoting tourism in each of the last 10 years to (a) domestic markets and (b) overseas markets. [172393]

Mr. Caborn: I have been asked to reply. The only information available, for English local authority net expenditure on tourism, is as follows:

Sources: Revenue (Outturn) Forms 1998–99 to 2002–03, and Revenue Account (budget) form 2003–04.

27 April 2004
Tourism

12 Feb 2004
Exercise

Mr. Moss : The Minister for Sport and Tourism accepted that his Department has an important role, if not the lead role, to play. Why then has it presided over a decline in the amount of time spent on sport and physical activity by five to 16-year-olds since 1999?  That has been a continuing decline, as the recent report by Sport England confirmed. Furthermore, why has his Department reduced the commitment, first
announced in October 2002, that all five to 16-year-olds will have access to at least two hours of high quality PE and school sport by 2006? That was reduced in the most recent public service agreement to only 75 per cent.

Mr. Caborn : That is a bit rich coming from a Conservative Member on the subject of facilities for physical activity.

Mr. Moss : Is it true or not?

Mr. Caborn : No, it is not true, because we have given a commitment to provide two hours of quality physical activity or sport for every child from the age of five to 16. We have had to invest, because the lack of investment over the previous 15 to 20 years left us in a difficult position. We are now investing more than £500 million through local education authorities to achieve that objective and to arrest the serious problem that 75 per cent. of young people do not continue active sport on leaving school. Therefore, a precondition of the investment through the local education authorities is that facilities will be open to the community.

We are working with the governing bodies on the club-to-school links. I know that the hon. Gentleman was there a week last Monday when I announced that 15 more governing bodies will link their clubs to schools. That will at least start to arrest some
problems that young people have when they leave school. We are on course to achieve the target of two hours of quality physical activity or sport, but we have to work through the backlog of under-investment that we inherited on coming to power.

2 Feb 2004
Tourism

Mr. Malcolm Moss (North-East Cambridgeshire) (Con): According to Tourism Alliance, 85 per cent. of overseas visitors to the UK come to England, but we heard the derisory and paltry figures that are spent on promoting England. In view of the balance of payments deficit in tourism, to which the Minister alluded, does he not agree that we should invest more, not less, in promoting England as a destination?

If we adopt the Government's present strategy of investing more through the regions, will we not pit region against region instead of concentrating on promoting the whole?

Mr. Caborn: It is unfortunate that the hon. Gentleman finished in that tone, because there has been nothing of that sort involving the regional development agencies. When the agencies were set up, there was the negative argument that region would be set against region, but that has not been the reality: on the contrary, the agencies have worked together. There have been many examples of such collaboration over the past three to four years.

We must address many structural weaknesses in the tourism industry as we seek to develop it, for example, the industry's skills base. If we ask young people in schools and career offices whether they would consider going into the tourism industry, they reject it as second-rate. To help the industry, we have set up a sector skills council that will begin to operate within the next two months. As a result, I hope that we will be able to put tourism alongside any other industry by ensuring that it offers opportunities, well-paid jobs and a career structure. It is important to change current attitudes, because that is how we shall see a growth in tourism.