| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Coronation Crown of Queen Adelaide
Mr. Gordon Prentice: To ask the Secretary of State for National Heritage if she will take steps to ensure the frame of the coronation crown of Queen Adelaide is classified as regalia and is not granted an export licence to the United States of America. [194]
Mr. Sproat: Following an objection to the issue of an export licence by my Department's expert adviser, the application to export the frame of the coronation crown of Queen Adelaide was referred, in the normal way, to the reviewing committee on the export of works of art. The reviewing committee consulted my Department, the Treasury Solicitor's Department and the Lord Chamberlain's Office on whether the crown frame constituted regalia. The reviewing committee was advised that the discarded crown frame could not be regarded as part of the regalia.
22 Nov 1995 : Column: 159
A decision on the export licence application has been deferred until after 24 January 1996 to give the opportunity for an offer to purchase the crown frame to be made at or above the fair market price of £425,000.
A summary of this case is contained in the annual report of the reviewing committee on the export of works of art 1994-95, which was placed in the Library of the House last 24 October. Decisions on the export licence applications for the frame of the imperial crown of George I and the frame of the coronation crown of George IV have also been deferred until after 24 January 1996 to enable purchase offers to be made.
Mrs. Roche:
To ask the Secretary of State for National Heritage what is the average length of time it takes for her Department to pay invoices. [926]
Mr. Sproat:
The information requested is not available and could be provided only at disproportionate cost, but a sample of invoices received by the Department of National Heritage during this financial year shows that the average length of time for payment of invoices is currently 20 days.
Mrs. Roche:
To ask the Secretary of State for National Heritage how many orders and firms are represented by the 9.4 per cent. of invoices not paid by her Department within 30 days or in accordance with contractual agreements in 1994-95; and how many of those are related to firms with fewer than 500 employees. [916]
Mr. Sproat:
The sample of invoices used in the calculation shows that the figure represents 90 orders and firms. Our records cannot be used to determine firms with fewer than 500 employees.
Mrs. Roche:
To ask the Secretary of State for National Heritage how her Department publicises payment practices other than as percentages of invoices paid late. [962]
Mr. Sproat:
The Department of National Heritage publicises only payment practices as percentages of invoices paid within contract terms or 30 days. As required, these details of our annual payment performance are included in our departmental reports.
Mrs. Roche:
To ask the Secretary of State for National Heritage what is the amount owed to those businesses whose invoices were not paid within 30 days or within agreed contractual provisions in each of the last five years. [1122]
Mr. Sproat:
The information requested is not available and could be provided only at disproportionate cost, but the following has been produced on the basis of the sample of invoices received by the Department of National Heritage and used to reply to the hon. Member on 1 November, Official Report, column 267:
22 Nov 1995 : Column: 160
Mr. Pendry:
To ask the Secretary of State for National Heritage when her Department plans to publish proposals relating to the establishment of the new British academy of sport. [1469]
Mr. Sproat:
I expect the Sports Council to publish a consultation paper on proposals for the British academy of sport on 5 December.
Mr. Pendry:
To ask the Secretary of State for National Heritage what action her Department is planning to prevent any single broadcasting company having a monopoly on the rights to televise live domestic football. [1477]
Mr. Sproat:
The Government have no plans to alter current arrangements under which, with the exception of listed sporting events which cannot be shown on a pay-per-view basis, sports rights holders are free to dispose of their rights to broadcast in the way they choose.
Mr. Pendry:
To ask the Secretary of State for National Heritage how much money the Government have promised to help fund activities associated with the Euro-96 tournament. [1474]
Mr. Sproat:
We have made available £400,000 for the cultural festival linked to Euro-96. We are also considering how National Music Day, which falls on the weekend of the championship finals, can be focused on associated cultural events.
Mr. Pendry:
To ask the Secretary of State for National Heritage when her Department last examined the likely impact of digital technology on the broadcasting of sporting events; and what was the outcome. [1498]
Mr. Sproat:
We have been looking carefully at this and many other issues as we have been developing our proposals for the regulatory framework for digital terrestrial television. Digital technology will mean that there will be more opportunities for the coverage of sport on television, providing greater access and choice for the viewer.
Mr. Cohen:
To ask the Secretary of State for National Heritage if she will list (a) who in her Department has authority to issue public interest immunity certificates and (b) how many have been issued in each of the last five years, giving the reasons for each case. [1420]
Mr. Sproat:
A claim of public interest immunity relating to departmental documents or information would normally be made by the appropriate Minister.
Since my Department was established in April 1992, it has not issued any public interest immunity certificates.
22 Nov 1995 : Column: 161
Mr. Alan Williams:
To ask the Secretary of State for National Heritage what was the cost to grant in aid of the occupied royal palaces in (a) 1990, (b) 1991 and (c) 1992 net of (i) the costs associated with the fire at Windsor and (ii) the costs of the exceptional work started at Windsor in 1987-88. [1321]
Mr. Sproat
[holding answer 21 November 1995]: Costs associated with the fire and costs of the exceptional work were given in my earlier reply on 31 October 1995, Official Report, column 185. The grant in aid net of these factors was:
Mr. Sproat
[holding answer 21 November 1995]: It is estimated that extraction of this information would cost about £2,000 in direct additional staff costs. File handling, transport and supervision could double that.
The PSA files have been put away in bulk. It seems from its lists that we would probably need to screen some 200 volumes to identify the right ones before we could extract and present the right information. Even then, we might not find the information in these files and might have to search further. The estimate was built up on the basis of time for each volume depending on how relevant it is found to be.
Mr. MacShane:
To ask the Secretary of State for National Heritage how many times in the last year she has used (a) the London Underground and (b) London buses while on official business. [423]
Mrs. Virginia Bottomley:
Infrequently. Such records are not kept.
Mr. Cohen:
To ask the Lord President of the Council if he will list all those in his Department who have authority to issue public interest immunity certificates; how many such certificates have been issued in each of the last five years; and what were the main reasons for them.
Mr. Newton:
A claim to public interest immunity relating to departmental documents or information is normally made by the appropriate Minister. No public interest immunity certificates have been issued by my Department in the last five years.
There are no comparable departmental figures for earlier years as the Department's payment system was not in place until 1993, following the establishment of DNH in April 1992.
Amount owed £'000
1993-94: 246
1994-95: 753
1995-96: 166
Mr. Williams:
To ask the Secretary of State for National Heritage what estimate has been made of the cost of providing details of expenditure on the furnishing of directors' apartments in the occupied royal palaces in each year from 1982 to 1991; and how these costs have been arrived at. [1322]
1990-91: £19.93 1 million
1991-92: £19.71 million
1992-93: £15.53 million
This figure assumes that expenditure on the exceptional work was the same in each of the five years 1986-87 to 1990-91. As stated in the earlier answer, figures for each year are not available.
| Next Section | Index | Home Page |