Anschutz Entertainment Group
20 December 2005

Mr. Moss: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport (1) when (a) Ministers and (b) officials have held meetings with the Anschutz Entertainment Group; where each meeting took place; and which potential sites for casinos were discussed; [38049]

(2) what meetings (a) Ministers and (b) officials have held in the last four months with casino operators interested in securing licences under the Gambling Act 2005. [38050]

Mr. Caborn: DCMS Ministers and officials have met representatives of the Anschutz Entertainment Group and Kerzner International, its partner in the development of the Millennium Dome site, as they have representatives of many companies that may be interested in securing one of the 17 new casino licences permitted by the Gambling Act 2005. The meetings that have been identified are listed in table 1. All these meetings took place in the United Kingdom. Where available, minutes of meetings up to July 2005 have been published on the DCMS website, following requests made under the Freedom of Information Act.

Table 1
 

	DCMS Minister and/or official(s) present	Who attended the meeting
15 March 2003	Official(s)	Anschutz Entertainment Group
22 January 2004	Lord McIntosh and official(s)	Kerzner International
24 May 2004	Lord McIntosh and officials)	Kerzner International
23 June 2004	Lord McIntosh and official(s)	Overseas casino operators including Kerzner International
8 July 2004	Official(s)	Kerzner International
22 July 2004	Official(s)	Kerzner International
12 August 2004	Lord McIntosh and official(s)	Overseas casino operators
24 February 2005	Lord McIntosh and official(s)	Overseas casino operators including Kerzner International
21 March 2005	Lord McIntosh and official(s)	Overseas casino operators including Kerzner International
18 May 2005	Official(s)	Kerzner International, MGM Mirage, Caesars
18 July 2005	Richard Caborn and official(s)	Kerzner International, MGM Mirage, Ameristar, Packer Organisation and Aspinall Group, Sun International
13 September 2005	Official(s)	Kerzner International, MGM Mirage, Caesars
30 October 2005	Secretary of State	Private dinner hosted by Matthew Freud at which Philip Anschutz and another representative of AEG were present
31 October 2005	Richard Caborn and official(s)	Dinner hosted by Lord Heseltine at which Philip Anschutz was present
14 December 2005	Official(s)	Kerzner International, MGM Mirage, Harrahs

In addition to the meetings listed in table 1, DCMS Ministers and officials with responsibility for gambling issues have also held meetings with other casino operators or their representatives during the last four months. Relevant meetings that have been identified are

20 Dec 2005 : Column 2656W

listed in table 2. Competitions for the 17 new casino premises are not expected to begin until mid-2007, and the identities of the bidding companies will not be known until then.

Table 2
 

	DCMS Minister and/or official(s) present	Who attended the meeting
6 September 2005	Secretary of State and official(s)	British Casino Association
21 September 2005	Official(s)	British Casino Association
27 September 2005	Official(s)	British Casino Association
5 October 2005	Richard Caborn and official(s)	Dinner including representative of Casino Association of South Africa
6 October 2005	Richard Caborn and official(s)	Sun International
19 October 2005	Richard Caborn and official(s)	Business in Sport and Leisure, including a representative of Gala plc
4 November 2005	Official(s)	London Clubs International
10 November 2005	Secretary of State and official(s)	British Casino Association Annual General Meeting
14 November 2005	Official(s)	Representatives of gambling industry, including the British Casino Association
16 November 2005	Richard Caborn and official(s)	Meeting with Bingo Association, including representative of Gala plc
21 November 2005	Official(s)	Rank Group
7 December 2005	Official(s)	British Casino Association

 

Licensing Act 2003
19 December 2005

Mr. Malcolm Moss (North-East Cambridgeshire) (Con): Earlier in the year, the Prime Minister gave an assurance in a reply to my hon. Friend the Member for Faversham and Mid-Kent (Hugh Robertson) on licensing fees, that the Government did not

"want sports clubs to be unfairly burdened by disproportionate fees."

Given that the latest evidence from the Central Council of Physical Recreation shows that 56 per cent. of sports clubs fall into the higher licensing bands C to E, can the Prime Minister's words be trusted?

James Purnell: Of course they can. That is why we have asked the independent review by Les Elton to look into exactly that issue, and it has committed to doing so. If it makes any recommendations, we will look at those seriously. But obviously it is also open to sports clubs to apply to benefit from community amateur sports club status, which would save them far more money than any fee that would be covered under the Act.

Points of Order
1 December 2005

Mr. Malcolm Moss (North-East Cambridgeshire) (Con): On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. At Culture, Media and Sport Question Time on 21 November, I asked whether the Secretary of State thought it proper

"to have held ministerial meetings with Philip Anschutz and other members of the Anschutz Entertainment Group to discuss their plans for . . . a casino at the millennium dome".

The right hon. Lady replied:

"I am not aware of any ministerial meetings as such having been held."—[Official Report, 21 November 2005; Vol. 439, c. 1227.]

However, in a written answer today, the Minister for Sport and Tourism states:

"Ministers and officials have had a number of meetings with casino operators . . . These include meetings with representatives of the Anschutz Entertainment Group and Kerzner International, its partner in the development of the Millennium Dome site."

Setting aside the disgraceful fact that the Secretary of State does not know what meetings Ministers in her Department are holding, I seek your advice about how best we can have the record put right.

Business of the House
1 December 2005

Mr. Malcolm Moss (North-East Cambridgeshire) (Con): Given that an increasing number of housing developments built on contaminated land are coming to light, such as that in Littleport, which is in my constituency; given the contradictory views of the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister and the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs about the inclusion of soil sampling in the house sellers pack; given the comments of the Leader of the House in response to a recent question from the hon. Member for Birmingham, Hall Green (Steve McCabe); and given the now obvious problems in implementing part IIA of the Environmental Protection Act 1990, will the Deputy Leader of the House arrange an urgent debate on contaminated land development, so that we can clear up this mess?

Nigel Griffiths: I can ensure that the concerns that my right hon. Friend the Leader of the House reflected in his response to that question are drawn to Ministers' attention, so that the hon. Gentleman can assist his constituents and we can hopefully ensure that the policy is appropriate to the contaminated site issue.

November 2005

Casinos
21 November 2005

Mr. Malcolm Moss (North-East Cambridgeshire) (Con): Given that the decision on the location of the one super-casino has been delegated to the independent panel, does the Secretary of State think it right and proper to have held ministerial meetings with Philip Anschutz and other members of the Anschutz Entertainment Group to discuss their plans for such a casino at the millennium dome as part of their redevelopment of the site? Will all other super-casino operators be given similar high-level access, and, if so, why?

Tessa Jowell: I am interested in the hon. Gentleman's question. I am not aware of any ministerial meetings as such having been held. I attended a dinner at which Philip Anschutz was a guest. He certainly talked to me about casinos, but got absolutely no information that was not freely available in the newspapers.

IsItFair Campaign
7 November 2005

Mr. Malcolm Moss (North-East Cambridgeshire) (Con): It is my privilege to present a petition on behalf of my constituents, a list of names collected by Mr. C. Perrin of March, a town in my constituency. It is part of the IsItFair council tax protest campaign. I do not necessarily agree with the campaign's conclusions, but I certainly agree with the thrust of the campaign, which is that this Government have used council tax as a means of stealth taxing huge swaths of our population who can hardly afford the levels of council tax that are now being charged. I personally do not agree with the idea behind the petition, which is completely to remove council tax and replace it with an alternative, which I suppose would have to be income tax. I believe that a property-based tax is a sensible way forward, and it would not take a massive injection of Government money from general taxation, including income tax, to bring the levels of council tax down to a more manageable level.

The Petitioners therefore request that the House of Commons votes to replace Council Tax with a fair and equitable tax that, without recourse to any supplementary benefit, takes into account ability to pay from disposable income. Such tax to be based on a system that is free from any geographical or politically motivated discrimination, and that clearly identifies the fiscal and managerial responsibilities of all involved parties.

July 2005

Licensing Act
18 July 2005

Mr. Moss: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport when she intends to lay the statutory instrument for the nomination of the second appointed day under the Licensing Act 2003 before Parliament. [9554]

James Purnell: We intend to lay the Order setting the second appointed day, following our recent commitment that this date will be 24 November, very soon.

Licensing Act
13 July 2005

Mr. Moss: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport what complaints she has received from licence applicants under the Licensing Act 2003 concerning the requirements for statutory plans of premises. [9456]

James Purnell: I know that some applicants have concerns about meeting the requirements for plans to accompany licence applications under the 2003 Act. These issues have been formally raised in the High Level Group of senior stakeholders which we established to monitor the implementation of the 2003 Act and identify actions to help ensure a smooth transition. As a result of discussions at the High Level Group, I recently wrote to all chief executives of local authorities to express the Group's hope that authorities would look favourably at using or amending existing plans and, where necessary, be as flexible as possible about allowing alternative scales.

Licensing Act
11 July 2005

Mr. Malcolm Moss (North-East Cambridgeshire) (Con): In relation to the Licensing Act, when did the Government ever take on board the concerns of local sports clubs, village halls and music groups? Answer: never. Why do the Government seem incapable of implementing anything successfully? The whole farce of the Licensing Act is heading for a total debacle. Is that the fault of Ministers or civil servants? Either way, as a local publican in my constituency said to me recently, they could not organise a proverbial in a brewery.

James Purnell: The hon. Gentleman is on thin ice in saying that the Government cannot implement anything effectively given that we have just delivered the Olympic bid. Perhaps he should have taken a leaf out of the book of the Liberal Democrats, who at least had the good grace to acknowledge that, unlike any member of his Front-Bench team, two of whom have now spoken, but have failed to mention that once.

We made specific concessions for village halls and clubs during the passage of the Licensing Bill. As the hon. Gentleman knows, we made specific concessions on temporary events notices so that the regime would be extended to make it much easier for people to get them. We have listened and we will continue to listen, but when people look back, they will say that it is much better to have a regime that will save the industry £2 billion, that will be more flexible for consumers and that will provide much greater powers to deal with binge drinking. In one or two years' time, I am sure that people will agree that the legislation is much better than the current framework, which was allowed to continue to exist by the Conservatives.

Mr. Moss: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport what representations she has received from the (a) Local Government Authority and (b) individual licensing authorities about the timetable for licensing applications before (i) 6 August and (ii) the second appointed day in November. [9457]

James Purnell: The Local Government Association has made clear that they are not in favour of changing either the 6 August date for transitional applications, or the second appointed day of 24 November, when the Licensing Act 2003 comes into force. Some individual local authorities have sought that these dates be delayed. We do not intend to move either of these dates. A change to the 6 August deadline would require primary legislation, which is not feasible before that date. Any delay in implementing the Act would be counter-productive as it would also delay the important powers under the Act to deal with alcohol-fuelled violence and antisocial behaviour.

Mr. Moss: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport what her estimate is of the number of applications for licences under the Licensing Act 2003 received by licensing authorities by 30 June; what percentage of the projected total those represent; what proportion have applied for a variation; and what proportion have applied for an entertainments licence. [9553]

James Purnell: As at 30 June we estimate that approximately 47,500 applications for premises licences and club premises certificates under the Licensing Act 2003 have been made. This represents approximately 25 per cent. of existing licensed premises and registered clubs. We would expect 65 per cent. of these applications to involve variations. We have no estimate of the number of applications that will have included regulated entertainment as a licensable activity.

Mr. Moss: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport what representations she has received from Action with Communities in Rural England on the impact of the Licensing Act 2003 on village halls and village social life. [9755]

James Purnell: Representations from Action with Communities in Rural England (ACRE) have primarily concerned the complicated nature of some aspects of the new legislation, the role of designated premises supervisors and the limitations placed by the 2003 Act on the number of temporary event notices that may be given in respect of any individual premises in a calendar year. In response, my Department have continued to work closely and constructively with ACRE. The organisation recently commented publicly that DCMS have been very helpful in explaining the new processes and providing guidance and legal interpretation of the new legislation.

Licensing Act 2003
7 July 2005

Mr. Moss: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport what recent representations she has received from sports clubs about the impact on them of the Licensing Act 2003. [9455]

James Purnell: Since 16 May, my Department has received 22 letters from sports clubs via their constituent MPs, one letter from the National Golf Clubs Advisory Association and another from the English Golf Union, and two letters from individual sports clubs. Most of the letters have concerned the impact of the 2003 Act's fee structure on the running of sports club bars. My Department recently announced the Independent Review Panel, chaired by Sir Les Elton, which will review fee levels and associated costs, including those payable by amateur sports clubs.

June 2005

Disability Discrimination Act
13 June 2005

Mr. Malcolm Moss (North-East Cambridgeshire) (Con): I am not really surprised that the Minister did not give his assessment of the progress in this area, because accurate statistical information on disability provision, or on any matter, is woefully inadequate in the tourism sector. Given that the Government have made commitments both nationally and to the European Union to move to a basis defined by specifications laid down by the United Nations and the World Trade Organisation, when will they invest the money for the tourism statistics improvement initiative to which they say that they are committed? Only when they do so will we really know how provision for disabled people is progressing.

Mr. Caborn: As I have said, we are working through VisitBritain to promote accessibility standards in the tourism industry. There are 8.5 million people with disabilities in the country, they have 6 million carers, and their spending power amounts to about £40 billion a year. The industry has a vested interest in attracting those people, and it is doing that. I think that we have a very good record.

If the hon. Gentleman wants an assessment, I will write to VisitBritain and obtain one for him, but he should support what is being done, rather than deriding it. He would do a lot more to change people's attitudes than he does by carping.

March 2005

Tourism Deficit
21 March 2005

Mr. Malcolm Moss (North-East Cambridgeshire) (Con): As the Minister confirmed in an answer a few moments ago, the Government can accurately measure the tourism deficit and take steps to narrow the gap only if they have reliable statistics or sound data. Given that the Secretary of State, after the Hartwell meetings, made better statistics a priority—a fact later confirmed by the Government's policy document "Tomorrow's Tourism Today"—and that the Department of Trade and Industry's science review of DCMS last year said that only if DCMS implemented the tourism statistics improvement initiative's findings would the statistical base be accurate and reliable, why are the Government continuing their miserly approach and turning their back on the needs of the tourism industry by denying funding for TSII?

Mr. Caborn: That would be absolutely wrong. As the hon. Gentleman knows, because we held a conference a few weeks ago in Birmingham, the industry has acknowledged very clearly to us that we are sitting down with it in the implementation group, which I chair. We are addressing, probably for the first time in a long time, the real structural weaknesses. Data are one of those, but not the only one. We are looking very seriously at those structural weaknesses and driving that agenda for change—not just in the industry, but through the development agencies, with which there is now a very strong partnership. Data are part of that and we are acting on the issue. As the hon. Gentleman knows, I said in an answer that we will produce those data in the not-too-distant future.

This is one of a number of issues that we are considering in terms of ensuring that the industry is fit for purpose and can achieve the objective, which is to increase its worth from £74 billion to £100 billion by 2010. That is achievable, it will mean a lot more jobs and those data are important to achieving it.

February 2005

Overseas Visitors
21 February 2005

Mr. Moss: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport how many overseas visitors to the UK there were in each quarter of the last five years. [217126]

Mr. Caborn: According to data published by the Office for National Statistics, the number of visits to the UK by overseas residents in each quarter of the last five years was as follows:

	Total (Thousand)
2000
Q1	4,993
Q2	6,733
Q3	7,943
Q4	5,540
2001
Q1	4,863
Q2	6,279
Q3	7,100
Q4	4,593
2002
Q1	4,525
Q2	6,375
Q3	7,555
Q4	5,724
2003
Q1	4,944
Q2	6,073
Q3	7,534
Q4	6,165
2004
Q1	5,495
Q2	7,014
Q3	8,433
Q4	6,600

Sports Clubs (Tax Relief)
21 February 2005

Mr. Malcolm Moss (North-East Cambridgeshire) (Con): I confirm that Conservative Members very much welcome the CASC scheme, which, the Minister will no doubt be delighted to learn, I promoted in my local press last week. While tax relief is indeed helpful, it is the total level of costs and taxes that interests amateur sports clubs. Why then has the Minister reneged on a commitment made to me in Committee by his predecessor carefully to consider discounts on licensing fees for sports clubs?

Mr. Caborn: I thank the hon. Gentleman for congratulating the Government on their work on the community amateur sports club scheme and mandatory rate relief. Those clubs waited 30 years for that but at least we have now delivered it.

I believe that the licensing fee would be approximately £90 for sports clubs. The minimum fee for sports or social clubs is £25. The cost per person would therefore be negligible and could be reflected in the product sold behind the bar. The Licensing Act 2003 provides for many advantages for sports clubs. It amalgamates six licensing authorities into one. It covers entertainment and the development of clubs. If the provisions are used effectively, clubs will make considerably more profit than £90, the licensing fee.

Andrew Bennett (Denton and Reddish) (Lab): Does my right hon. Friend agree that there is an illogicality in giving some of the amateur clubs rate relief and taking it away by setting the licensing fee on the basis of the rateable value? For example, much of the rateable value of a bowling green in my constituency is based on the greens, which have almost no source of income. Surely local authorities should treat such groups favourably in the licensing process.

Mr. Caborn: If people want free booze at the clubs, that is fine. The CASC scheme is designed for those who play sport and many sports clubs do not run a bar. The CASC scheme and mandatory rate relief will apply fully to them. My hon. Friend refers to clubs that have a bar. They will pay £90 for that in the first instance.

Mr. Moss: More than that.

Mr. Caborn: Well, if they pay more than that, they are selling much more booze and making a much greater profit. The sports clubs that have licensed bars should be able to reflect the fee in the price of the commodity. The CASC scheme is not only about licensing authorities. Many sports clubs do not run a bar. They will receive the full benefit of the CASC scheme and the mandatory rate relief.

Betting, Gaming and Lotteries Act
10 February 2005

Mr. Moss: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport whether the Government plan to amend the Betting, Gaming and Lotteries Act 1963 by statutory instrument to enable betting shops to open in the evenings between September and March. [215471]

Estelle Morris: We have no present plans to amend the 1963 Act as the hon. Member suggests.

However, should the Gambling Bill achieve royal assent we do envisage using the powers in clause 166 to set default conditions for betting premises licences which will include longer opening hours in the winter months than is currently allowed.

Sugar Regime
10 February 2005

Mr. Moss: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs if she will make a statement on reform of the sugar regime. [215601]

Margaret Beckett: As I have already reported to the House, the November 2004 Agricultural Council broadly accepted that the existing EU sugar regime is unsustainable. We now await detailed legislative proposals from the European Commission to take forward the approach set out in its July 2004 Communication.

NHS Funding
9 February 2005

Mr. Malcolm Moss (North-East Cambridgeshire) (Con): It would be churlish not to welcome these increases, particularly in my constituency, but does the Secretary of State not accept that if my local PCT, the East Cambridgeshire and Fenland PCT, had received its proper funding allocation—it had a shortfall of £8 million last year alone—it would not now be colluding with the Cambridgeshire and Peterborough mental health trust in closing a 16-bed mental health in-patient unit at Alan Conway Court, Doddington hospital? Perhaps my constituents can take some comfort from the Secretary of State's statement today when he said, "We must give the public what they want."

Dr. Reid: I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman for going so far as to say "thank you" at one point. One of his PCTs is getting the third largest increase in the country.

Mr. Moss: Long overdue.

Health Funding (Cambridgeshire)
3 February 2005

Mr. Moss: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what the (a) grant levels calculated on the capitation formula basis and (b) amount of grant paid to (i) the East Cambridgeshire Primary Care Trust and (ii) the Fenland Primary Care Trust (A) were in each year before the merger of the trusts and (B) have been in each year since the merger. [213128]

Dr. Ladyman: I refer the hon. Member to the reply I gave on 1 July 2004, Official Report, column 408W.

Mr. Moss: To ask the Secretary of State for Health which trusts amalgamated to form the Cambridgeshire and Peterborough Mental Health Trust; when amalgamation took place; what grant payments were made to each trust in the three years prior to amalgamation; what the grant payment has been made to the amalgamated trust in each year since inception; and what the budget deficit of the amalgamated trust at inception was. [213213]

Dr. Ladyman: The creation of Cambridgeshire and Peterborough Mental Health Trust was as a result of the merger of Lifespan national health service trust and North West Anglian Healthcare NHS Trust. The new trust came into effect on 1 April 2002, in line with Statutory Instrument 2002 No. 1690.

Information relating to grants payable to NHS trusts are not held centrally.

I am advised that Cambridgeshire and Peterborough Mental Health Trust did not inherit any deficit from its predecessor bodies. Surpluses were reported in both 2003–04 and 2004–05; these were carried forward to the next financial year to assist the trust in managing its financial position.

Tourism
3 February 2005

Mr. Moss: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport what the balance of payments in the tourism sector was in each of the last two years for which figures are available. [213075]

Mr. Caborn: The balance of payments in tourism for the UK in each of the last two years for which figures are available is shown in the table.

		£ million
Tourism balance of payments	2002	2003
Expenditure by overseas residents in the UK	11,737	11,855
Expenditure by UK residents overseas	26,962	28,550
Balance of payments	-15,225	-16,695

Source:
International Passenger Survey

Provisional figures for 2004 will be published on the 9 February on the National Statistics website: http://www.statistics.gov.uk

English Heritage
3 February 2005

Mr. Moss: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport what the projected grant in aid funding for English Heritage is for each of the next three years. [213076]

Mr. Caborn: English Heritage's grant in aid funding for the next three years is as follows:

	£
2005–06	127,768,000
2006–07	130,768,000
2007–08	131,738,000

 

Tourism
1 February 2005

Mr. Moss: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport how much was spent by her Department and the agencies for which she is responsible to promote tourism in (a) the UK as a whole and (b) each of the UK regions in 2003–04. [211555]

Mr. Caborn: Grant in aid from the Department for Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS) to VisitBritain totalled £45.9 million in 2003–04, of which £35.5 million was allocated to promoting Britain overseas, and £10.4 million to promoting England within Britain.

In addition, the Greater London Authority received funding of £1.9 million from DCMS to promote tourism in 2003–04.
 
In 2003, the Regional Development Agencies (RDAs) were given strategic responsibility for tourism in the regions. Of the total estimate of £58.9 million allocated to tourism by the RDAs in 2003–04, the following amounts were paid by DCMS specifically for tourism:

Regional Development Agency	Funding in 2003–04 (£000)
East of England	543
West Midlands	252
East Midlands	252
North East	333
South East England	744
South West England	403
Yorkshire and the Humber	360
North West	713

January 2005

Tourism
31 January 2005

Mr. Moss: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport how many people are employed in the tourism sector. [211553]

Mr. Caborn: As at June 2003 there were 2.2 million people working in the tourism-related industries in Great Britain. Tourism employment estimates are regularly published in the National Statistics series 'Labour Market Trends'.

Mr. Moss: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport what percentage of gross domestic product was accounted for by the tourism industry in the last year for which figures are available; and what the change in percentage of gross domestic product has been in each of the last 10 years. [211554]

Mr. Caborn: The available data for tourism's contribution to total United Kingdom gross value added (GVA) are shown in the table.

	Tourism GVA as a percentage of UK GVA
2000	3.8
2001	3.6
2002	3.5
2003	3.4

Industry-specific data are only available for GVA, not GDP. GDP differs from GVA in that subsidies on products are subtracted and taxes are added to yield estimates of GDP, but these flows are estimated at the whole economy level only.

These figures are sourced from the 'UK Tourism Satellite Account—First Steps Project' publication, which was completed in September 2004. The project assessed the size of the tourism industry as at 2000 and produced forward estimates of key headline indicators, based on the available data, up to 2003.
 
Mr. Moss: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport what the rate of productivity in the tourism industry was in (a) 2002–03 and (b) 2003–04. [211556]

Mr. Caborn: The rates of productivity for the tourism industry in 2001 and 2002 are shown in the table.

	Output per worker (Percentage change on previous year)
2001	2.2
2002	3.9

Data is sourced from the Annual Business Inquiry which uses calendar, rather than financial, years. Provisional data for 2003 was released on 16 December 2004 and will be used to update the tourism productivity figures in February.

Mr. Moss: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport how many (a) overseas tourists and (b) domestic tourists visited London in (i) 2003 and (ii) 2004. [211557]

Mr. Caborn: The number of visits by (a) overseas tourists and (b) domestic tourists in 2002 and 2003 are shown in the table. Figures for 2004 will be published on 8 April for overseas visitors and in May for domestic visitors.

Million
 

	2002	2003
Visits by domestic tourists	16.1	14.3
Visits by overseas tourists	11.6	11.7

Source:
UK Tourism Survey, International Passenger Survey
  

BBC
17 January 2005

Mr. Malcolm Moss (North-East Cambridgeshire) (Con): Following on from the Minister's response to my hon. Friend the Member for South-West Bedfordshire (Andrew Selous), is she aware that the BBC board of governors continues to argue that it has no role in pre-viewing material before broadcast and thus refused to intervene before the transmission of "Jerry Springer—The Opera", despite 50,000 complaints from the public? Given that the job of adjudicating complaints after broadcast has passed to Ofcom, the question arises as to what the point of the BBC governors is. Will the right hon. Lady make that a priority in the review of the BBC's charter?

Estelle Morris: I am amazed that the hon. Gentleman wants to give the BBC governors the power of censorship before something is broadcast. That is exactly what would happen if he had his way. What is clear is that there is not pre-viewing to censor what is broadcast, but that afterwards representations can be made. I am sure that the hon. Gentleman has looked at the range of measures that Ofcom can use if it finds that the boundaries have been crossed. To give BBC governors the power to watch what is broadcast, ahead of Ofcom and ahead of the public, and for the governors alone to decide whether the public are able to see it, would be censorship that is almost worse than the censorship we got rid of between 20 and 30 years ago.