Home Page |
Column 651
1. Mr. Clapham : To ask the Secretary of State for National heritage when he next plans to meet the Secretary General of the Arts Council to discuss Government funding for the arts.
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for National Heritage (Mr. Iain Sproat) : My right hon. Friend meets the Secretary Generalof the Arts Council from time to time to discuss a range of issues.
Mr. Clapham : The Minister must be aware that there is a mounting crisis in arts funding. For example, the proposed budget for next year is to be 2 per cent., or £5 million, less. That proposal will have a devastating effect. The former Secretary of State for National Heritage said only a few days ago in The Guardian that the reduction in funding will not be spread evenly across the board, but will fall heavily on the smaller companies, which means that some of them are likely to be put out of business. How does the Minister intend to ensure that those smaller companies are protected and are able to continue to make their cultural contribution to the community?
Mr. Sproat : The hon. Member mentions an important point. This year there will be an increase in the Arts Council grant in aid of £5 million, or 2 per cent. Next year it will be cut by 2 per cent. At a time of economic difficulties, the Arts Council cannot remain immune to those difficulties but must shoulder its burden like everyone else. Much of the unease being expressed results from the Arts Council's deciding on new artistic priorities, not from the amount of funding that it has been given.
Mr. Renton : May I draw a comment from my hon. Friend on the reported decision of the Arts Council to ask three of the great orchestras to submit themselves, their musical standards and future programming to a judge for examination and for a decision on whether they should continue to receive public funding? If the musical experts at the Arts Council cannot reach a decision on that matter, what is the precise purpose of the Arts Council?
Mr. Sproat : It is a matter for the Arts Council to decide how to deal with its funding. We want London to have world-class orchestras and I am afraid--or perhaps I am not afraid--that it is a matter entirely for the Arts Council.
Column 652
Mr. Sheldon : Surely the Minister cannot be immune from commenting on such important matters. He actually set up the Arts Council, which was established to advise on where the funding should go. If it makes a botch of it and relies on a judge to take over such
responsibilities, surely he has something to say on the matter.
Mr. Sproat : I do indeed have something to say about it. There is a firm tradition of an arm's-length relationship between the Department and the Arts Council in these matters. If the Arts Council chooses to make its decision by taking outside advice, that is a matter for the Arts Council.
Mr. Jessell : What is the latest position on Arts Council support for the London City Ballet?
Mr. Sproat : My hon. Friend mentions an important subject. As I understand it, the Arts Council was perfectly prepared for the London City Ballet to go into liquidation. Now that a new company appears, possibly, to be rising from the ashes of the old, the Arts Council has said that it will not even pay the touring grant, which previously it was going to pay. I cannot openly give my views on the subject to the Arts Council because of the arm's-length principle, but I see no reason why my hon. Friend should not.
Mrs. Clwyd : The Minister obviously has a convenient memory. At the last general election, the Conservatives promised to maintain support for the arts, but they have ratted on that promise, just like everything else. Does the Minister feel any concern about the probability that one, and possibly two, of London's orchestras will be forced to close, and that several of our famous regional theatres are now under threat of closure because of Government cuts, or is the Minister totally apathetic about the wreckage being inflicted on the arts by the Government's policies?
Mr. Sproat : Perhaps I could remind the hon. Lady that funding for the arts has gone up by 45 per cent. under the Government. That certainly is doing our bit by the arts. It is true, as I said in answer to an earlier question, that next year there will be a cut of 2 per cent. only. The reason that so many provincial theatres are at risk is not the 2 per cent. cut but the fact that the Arts Council, in its wisdom, has decided that it does not want to concentrate as much on drama in the future. I hope that the Arts Council will read Hansard and see the strength of hon. Members' feelings about its decision.
Mr. Anthony Coombs : Will my hon. Friend confirm that, over the past five years, the Arts Council grant from the Government has actually risen by 20 per cent. in real terms? Will he state, particularly in relation to London City Ballet, that the Arts Council should be far more flexible about the way in which it allocates funding? It is disgraceful that, out of a classical ballet budget of £15 million, the council cannot find even £250,000 a year to give a touring grant to an established ballet company.
Mr. Sproat : My hon. Friend makes an extremely good point, and I hope that he will make it forcefully to the Arts Council. He is correct in pointing out that the Government spend a great deal on the arts. At a time of economic pressure, the Arts Council grant this year is £225.6 million, which is a great deal of money.
Column 653
2. Mr. Kirkwood : To ask the Secretary of State for National Heritage what steps he proposes to take to protect the independence of the smaller independent television companies ; and if he will make a statement.
7. Mr. Etherington : To ask the Secretary of State for National Heritage what discussions he has had with the Independent Television Commission about the rules concerning the ownership of C3 franchises.
The Secretary of State for National Heritage (Mr. Peter Brooke) : I am reflecting on the discussions I have had with both the Independent Television Commission and the ITV companies about the ownership rules and other issues.
Mr. Kirkwood : Does the Secretary of State acknowledge the value of a genuinely produced and transmitted independent commercial television service to local areas such as my own in south-east Scotland? Will he say more about the discussions? Is he aware that the small independent companies are expressing great concern at the lack of protection that may exist for them after 1 January? Will he give an assurance that they will have a degree of protection similar to that afforded to the larger companies under the existing rules? Will he confirm that an article in today's Financial Times indicating that he will make an announcement in September is something like the truth?
Mr. Brooke : I am happy to join the hon. Gentleman in his commitment to, and endorsement of, the importance of regional quality. The Broadcasting Act 1990 was written in such a way as to ensure that the ITC made certain of that. As to protecting the small companies, the hon. Gentleman will know how the legislation is written. The meeting that I held on 14 June, on which I am still deliberating, obviously related to events after 1 January in a number of directions.
Mr. Etherington : No, 7, Madam Speaker.
Madam Speaker : Questions Nos. 2 and 7 are linked.
Mr. Etherington : Things are not always too good on a Monday, Madam Speaker.
When the Secretary of State speaks to the heads of ITV companies, will he make them aware that many people in the industry are deeply concerned about the prospect of an internal carve-up and a free-for-all? It is also widely felt by many in the industry that this is merely a self-propagating effort by those with a vested interest in the matter. Will the Secretary of State ensure that those who are stating that in the region of £100 million can be saved by doing away with duplication between various companies are made to explain fully to the Secretary of State's satisfaction that that is the case, and that it is not just another example of the companies advancing their own views to their own advantage?
Mr. Brooke : The rules relating to ownership are written into the 1990 Act. I acknowledge--as I did to the hon. Member for Roxburgh and Berwickshire (Mr. Kirkwood)--that my meeting with ITV companies on 14 June related to that and to other matters. As to the £100 million savings, that issue was raised at the 14 June meeting and I have had subsequent correspondence with a number of those present pressing just the point that the hon. Gentleman made.
Column 654
Mr. Simon Coombs : My right hon. Friend will be well aware that there is, to put it mildly, some dispute between the chairmen of the various ITV companies over whether the moratorium at the end of the year is likely to lead to a greater risk of a foreign takeover of some of the smaller ITV companies. Does he have a view on that dispute and if he has concluded that there is some likelihood of a foreign takeover, does he propose taking any action to prevent it?
Mr. Brooke : The issues that relate to what happens after 1 January came up at the meeting that I held on 14 June, so I was made fully aware of the views of individual Channel 3 companies about that proposition. We are of the view that our rules should be on all fours with those of the rest of the Community and we are taking an interest in those countries where we feel that the rules are not drawn up on the same basis as our own.
Mr. John Marshall : Does my right hon. Friend accept that immunity from takeover and protectionism for existing management do nothing for the quality of programmes or for the efficiency of companies?
Mr. Brooke : I could not possibly disagree with my hon. Friend. On the other hand, if we were to proceed with the Broadcasting Act 1990 as currently written, companies in this country would be in a slightly different position from those in other Community countries after 1 January.
Mrs. Clwyd : As there is some dispute, will the Secretary of State tell us the net amount he expects the ITV companies to pay to the Government this year compared with the amount paid under the old levy system? Is he aware that Yorkshire Tyne Tees Television is to axe a further 188 jobs in yet another cost-cutting exercise? Does that not confirm what the Labour party has repeatedly said about the discredited Broadcasting Act 1990 and the damage being inflicted on ITV? When will the Secretary of State understand that staff loyalty, staff continuity and, above all, adequate staffing levels are critical to maintaining programme quality?
Mr. Brooke : I am, of course, aware of the commentary in one of today's newspapers about the specific amounts that ITV companies are paying in levy this year, although I have not yet done my own detailed cross- analysis of those figures. The hon. Lady knows that I share her views on the need to maintain the production base of television in Britain and that there are many aspects to that question beyond those that she has mentioned.
Mr. John Greenway : Does my right hon. Friend agree that strict enforcement of programme obligations, the current ownership structure and the regionality of ITV make it all the more important that the House should have regard to the funding of ITV? Does he accept that commercial pressure is being brought to bear on ITV at the present time? As a constructive way to resolve that problem, would he consider bringing forward the review of the ITV franchise arrangements to coincide with the review of the BBC charter?
Mr. Brooke : I understand my hon. Friend's proposition, but it would be premature to take a decision of that nature. On the other hand, I mentioned to the hon. Member for Cynon Valley (Mrs. Clwyd) a moment ago my
Column 655
concern that we maintain the production base in this country. That larger issue will certainly inform our thinking.3. Mr. Sedgemore : To ask the Secretary of State for National Heritage what plans he has to seek to amend the Broadcasting Act 1990.
Mr. Brooke : I have no present plans to amend the Act.
Mr. Sedgemore : As the stability of commercial television is now threatened by takeover mania, and as Granada has expressed an interest in taking over London Weekend Television, as has Carlton, and in taking over Central, Yorkshire and Tyne Tees, will the Secretary of State guarantee that there will be no change in the legislation to enable major regional companies to be taken over by national monopolistic conglomerates? Should not people like Jerry Robinson, the tea boy at Granada, concentrate on programme making rather than on pushing up Granada's share price for his personal benefit?
Mr. Brooke : In answer to an earlier question, I paid tribute to the issue of regional quality and to the fact that the legislation is written in such a way that the Independent Television Commission can ensure that that quality is maintained. On the rest of the question, I have made it clear that the issues that we discussed at the meeting with the heads of the Channel 3 companies on 14 June covered a wide agenda. It was a lively but good-natured debate. All aspects of the issue were discussed constructively by all parties.
Mr. Streeter : In any future amendments to the Broadcasting Act 1990, will my right hon. Friend consider introducing provisions to ensure that the Arts Council continues to fund excellent municipal theatres such as the Theatre Royal in Plymouth, which has attracted more people per £1 of grant--
Madam Speaker : Order. What has this to do with broadcasting? The hon. Gentleman is referring to an earlier question.
Mr. Streeter : In any amendment to the Broadcasting Act, is it possible to include a provision whereby the Arts Council can be made to ensure that it supports mainstream municipal theatres--
Madam Speaker : Order. I understand the hon. Gentleman's enthusiasm, but I think that we should now move on.
Mr. Bryan Davies : Does the Secretary of State accept that the fact that the heads of a number of major independent television companies seek to change the fundamental terms of their franchises and the fact that Richard Branson is seeking to alter the waveband on which he has received his franchise throw into question the whole operation of the Broadcasting Act? Is that not a comment on the fact that the legislation is so misguided that it is creating an absolute shambles in the broadcasting industry?
Mr. Brooke : Taking the second premise relating to Virgin Radio and the waveband first, in any negotiation for an exchange of the waveband, it would not be within the gift either of Mr. Branson or of anybody with whom
Column 656
he sought to effect such an exchange to make that exchange. Control over the wavebands remains with the Radio Authority, with which he should therefore treat. The purpose of the meeting on 14 June --at which, I hasten to say, the smaller companies were as interested in being present as the larger companies were--was to discuss a way forward, looking at the larger objective of maintaining the quality and the production base of British television.4. Mr. Cohen : To ask the Secretary of State for National Heritage what proportion of London hospital facilities are listed buildings.
Mr. Sproat : There are some 90 hospitals in the 12 central London health districts, of which 25 are subject to 80 statutory listings.
Mr. Cohen : Did not the 1987 report show that there were 770 listed hospitals in Britain, of which 11 were grade I--the equivalent to this place and Westminster abbey--a further 58 starred grade II and all the rest of historic significance? Has not Save Britain's Heritage been fiercely critical of the neglect of many hospitals, including the neglect emanating from the Government? Is not the position set to get a lot worse with the closure of hospitals in London? Will the Minister step in as part of his departmental responsibilities to save London's heritage hospitals such as St. Bartholomew's, or is the neglect part of a conspiracy with health Ministers, business-oriented health managers and developers, who see listed hospitals only as the source of a quick buck?
Mr. Sproat : The hon. Gentleman asks a very important question. The answer is that the Secretary of State for Health is responsible for ensuring that the heritage aspects of hospitals are maintained. Only last week, we issued general guidance to those who find that they are in charge of listed buildings, but who find that there is no longer a commercial use for those buildings. We are trying to reach an agreement whereby people understand that for the buildings to be preserved for commercial use one or two of the statutory listings may have to be changed. My Department has also set up a task force between the Department of Health and ourselves to ensure that the considerations that the hon. Gentleman mentioned are taken into account.
Mr. Ward : Is my hon. Friend aware that many of us appreciate the work being done by his Department in listing London hospitals and many other buildings? Will he proceed with extreme caution, however, before committing public money to buildings that clearly have no use or no useful life to come?
Mr. Sproat : We will certainly be careful. That is why I mentioned that where it is possible to maintain a building with a commercial use, we quite understand that there may have to be one or two changes in the statutory listings in order that the building as a whole may continue. As to my hon. Friend's question about hospitals, that is primarily a question for the Secretary of State for Health.
Mrs. Dunwoody : Is the Under-Secretary of State seriously saying that those hospitals that have been maintained over centuries, such as St. Bartholomew's, will
Column 657
not be given any special concessions, and if it is in the commercial interests of the Secretary of State for Health to let that building go, presumably because it is a city centre site for which she can obtain a large amount of money, he will do nothing to ensure protection for existing buildings? If that is his implication, we shall begin to understand rather more clearly why the Secretary of State for Health is so anxious to get rid of that major centre of importance.Mr. Sproat : I am absolutely not saying that. I am saying that the Secretary of State for Health has a duty to look after the heritage buildings within her remit. Her Department spends £500 million a year on the maintenance of a current estate. Within that, the listed aspects of the building will be protected. If the buildings are sold off, that is a matter for her. The heritage aspects will absolutely not be neglected either way.
5. Mr. Luff : To ask the Secretary of State for National Heritage what representations his Department has received about the impact on British performing arts of local authority discretionary grant policy.
Mr. Sproat : Since the establishment of the Department of National Heritage last year, we have received more than 300 letters about local authority discretionary grant policy and its impact on students of dance and drama.
Mr. Luff : Does my hon. Friend agree that the British performing arts make an enormous contribution not only to cultural life but to the economy? Is he aware that the local education authority discretionary grant policy in many counties, including my county of Hereford and Worcester, means that many talented young people are unable to play their full part in that success story? Does he share my concern at the damage that that is doing to the future success of the British performing arts?
Mr. Sproat : My hon. Friend has been a persistent and assiduous campaigner for this important subject. It is certainly true that most of the letters and representations that we have had have shown that an awful lot of students are not able to take up places because local authorities have declined, for whatever reasons, to fund them--
Mr. Tony Banks : Your lot did it.
Mr. Sproat : The hon. Gentleman should wait. I accept that there is a serious problem. It may well be that there is a genuine shortage of money, although local authorities were given sums that the Department of the Environment thought sufficient. To settle the matter, the National Foundation for Educational Research will examine precisely what the facts are. Depending on what those facts are, the Secretary of State and I will speak to the Department for Education, which has a lead in the matter, to see what needs to be done to sort it out.
Ms Glenda Jackson : I welcome the Minister's response to the previous question--that there could indeed be a financial shortfall, which is having a deleterious effect on those young people who manage to gain the very few and highly contested places in drama schools--but does he agree that there is little or no point in any young person taking a place in a drama school if the Arts Council is
Column 658
allowed to pursue its stated policy of closing 10 regional theatres? Is there any aspect of the cultural life of this country for which the Government take responsibility?Mr. Sproat : We certainly take responsibility and the £225.6 million that we shall give to the Arts Council this financial year is proof of that. That sum will be spent at the decision of the Arts Council. It has taken decisions that are nothing to do with me. Indeed, I am prevented by the arm's-length principle from lavishing so much as a breath of praise or dispraise upon it. It is up to the Arts Council. If the hon. Lady disagrees with the Arts Council's policy of moving away from drama and music towards contemporary dance, she should lose no opportunity of telling it so.
Mr. Dickens : Is the Minister aware that in the borough of Oldham, we have a theatre workshop, the Oldham Coliseum theatre and one of the best repertory companies in the United Kingdom? Does he agree that it is important not only that funding reaches those worthy causes but that all hon. Members who purport to support the arts should help the National Lottery, etc. Bill complete its passage through Parliament before the summer recess?
Mr. Sproat : I hope that the Bill will get its Royal Assent before the recess. Otherwise, I agree, as so often, with my hon. Friend's words of wisdom.
Mr. Corbett : Does the Minister care that 23 theatre in education companies in England and Wales, including the Collar and Tie in the constituency of the hon. Member for Worcester (Mr. Luff), have lost around £1 million in grants this year, mainly because of cuts in what the Government will allow local authorities to spend, and that they face further cuts because of money being taken from the Arts Council grant? Does he understand that this may see the end of the unique blend of theatre and educational drama, mainly for children in areas where no other theatre exists? Will he set up an independent inquiry into how theatre in education companies can be funded from next April or is he content simply to see another slice of our theatre wither away?
Mr. Sproat : The issue arises on a later question and if the hon. Member will contain himself in patience, he will get a powerful answer at that point. However, I fear that I would be trespassing on your patience, Madam Speaker, if I gave a longer answer on that now.
6. Mr. Ian Bruce : To ask the Secretary of State for National Heritage when he expects the first moneys to be paid out by the National Lottery Charities Board.
Mr. Brooke : We hope that money will be available to be paid out by late 1994 or early 1995 for charities and the other good causes.
Mr. Bruce : I am grateful to my right hon. Friend for that answer. Does he know that I am being pressed by the local Liberal Democrats in my constituency to get that money through as quickly as possible? Can he ensure that all parties in the House understand that all my constituents, from whichever party they come, are keen to see that money come through as quickly as possible so that it can go to all the excellent sports and arts projects that they wish it to support?
Column 659
Mr. Brooke : I am delighted to hear that the Liberal Democrats of South Dorset are pressing to get the Bill through as early as possible, as their party in the House voted against Third Reading of the Bill.
Mr. Enright : Will the Secretary of State kindly tell us whether there is any particular significance in the archaic use of the word "monies" in the question as originally tabled, and more particularly in the archaic use of that form of the plural, or is it merely a dry run for the Government's English test for 14-year-olds?
Mr. Brooke : As the hon. Gentleman may know, in terms of such textual criticism, his question should be addressed to my hon. Friend and not to me.
12. Mr. William O'Brien : To ask the Secretary of State for National Heritage if he will make a statement on the promotion of tourism in West Yorkshire.
Mr. Sproat : That is a matter for the English tourist board through its strategy for support to the regions, and for the Yorkshire and Humberside tourist board through its strategy for meeting local needs and priorities.
Mr. O'Brien : I accept the Minister's reply, but does he accept that there are problems with the Yorkshire and Humberside tourist board and the English tourist board over financing? West Yorkshire, with its loss of jobs both in traditional industries such as mining, textiles and engineering and in other sectors, is looking for Government help towards tourism. Is the Minister prepared to meet the leaders of West Yorkshire council to discuss tourism and allow them to put to him their concerns over lack of resources to promote tourism throughout West Yorkshire?
Mr. Sproat : Yes, I will glady meet a delegation if the hon. Gentleman wishes to bring it along. Let me take this opportunity to congratulate his region on the fact that the latest figures show 7.2 million overnight visitors in his area. Other areas in the United Kingdom have been more badly hit during the recession, but the excellence of the tourist facilities in his area ensured that the number of visitors there were kept up.
Mr. Robert Banks : Does my hon. Friend agree that the project to house the royal armouries in a brand new museum in Leeds will be, when completed, one of the largest and most important international tourist attractions in this country? Does he also agree that all political parties should come together to get the project built as soon as possible?
Mr. Sproat : I agree with my hon. Friend. The armouries in Leeds would be a tremendous addition to the city's tourist attractions. I hope that the project will go ahead as my hon. Friend said.
Mr. Pendry : The Minister is to receive a copy of the Coopers and Lybrand report that has been commissioned by the English tourist board steering committee, on which sits one of his representatives. If that report condemns the cuts in funding to the English tourist board that were made by the Minister's predecessor, will he take the best
Column 660
initiative to encourage tourists to Normanton, Bradford, Halifax and elsewhere in West Yorkshire by being bold, brave and sensible enough to restore the funding?Mr. Sproat : So far as West Yorkshire is concerned, I note that two applications for tourism renewal grants have been received from Wakefield and Dewsbury. No doubt both those applications will be considered properly by the tourist boards.
Although it is true that overall funding to the British Tourist Authority and the English tourist board has been cut, the British Tourist Authority's grant will be maintained. We believe that, within the cuts that have been made necessary by the economic climate, there should be a slight shift away from centralised English tourist boards to those run by the regions.
Lady Olga Maitland : While continuing to promote tourism in West Yorkshire, will my hon. Friend also contn increased costs to the customer?
Mr. Sproat : My hon. Friend makes a good point. In West Yorkshire, and elsewhere in the country, there is no doubt that the competitive edge of our tourist industry--when compared with other countries--has been worsened by the heavy regulatory burden. I am determined to remove as much of that unnecessary burden as possible and to make our industry more competitive when compared with other countries.
13. Mr. Hall : To ask the Secretary of State for National Heritage what plans he has to meet representatives of theatre in education to discuss funding.
Mr. Sproat : theatre in education companies have traditionally been funded by local education authorities together with the Arts Councils and regional arts boards. Any discussions on funding are most appropriately undertaken with those agencies.
Mr. Hall : The Minister will be aware, from the question put some moments ago by my hon. Friend the Member for Birmingham, Erdington (Mr. Corbett), that theatre in education companies are under threat. Some theatres have closed and others are facing closure because they have lost revenue, because of council tax capping placed by the Government on local authority spending, because of the lack of money that is available through the local management of schools and because of the threatened cuts in Arts Council grants.
The Minister should recognise that theatre in education provides a unique dimension to education in many thousands of schools throughout the country. Does he agree that the shortfalls--amounting to £1 million--should be met by the Government? Will he instigate a full public inquiry into the funding of theatre in education for the years to come?
Mr. Sproat : No to the hon. Gentleman's last question, no to his second last and yes to his third. I agree that theatre in education can make an important contribution to schools, but those involved now must realise that they must sell themselves to individual schools because of the
Column 661
local management of schools process. If they do that, and if individual schools want to have theatre in education, the projects will continue.14. Mr. Barnes : To ask the Secretary of State for National Heritage what representations he has received concerning the operation of the Independent Television Commission.
Mr. Brooke : This year, I have received five representations from four hon. Members about various aspects of the ITC's activities.
Mr. Barnes : I do not know whether any of those representations backed the ITC's position on "News at Ten". I hope that the Minister will support that position and that adopted by the National Heritage Select Committee, which wants the programme to remain at 10 o'clock, so that political news--including 10 o'clock votes from this House--sports news, news from America and hard-hitting news generally can be properly dealt with. We need news at ten, not nudes at ten.
Mr. Brooke : The obligation of the Channel 3 companies is "simultaneously to broadcast high quality news programmes dealing with national and international matters at peak viewing times". The hon. Gentleman has drawn the attention of the House to the action of the chairman of the ITC, who will be awaiting a response from the Channel 3 companies.
Next Section
| Home Page |