| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Industrial Heritage (Museums)
4. Yvette Cooper: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport what assessment he has made of the role of museums in preserving the industrial heritage. [7499]
Mr. Fisher: The industrial heritage is of immense importance to the understanding of our past. Museums clearly have a central role to play in its preservation.
Yvette Cooper: Is my hon. Friend aware of the vital contribution made to our national industrial heritage by
the national coal mining museum in the Wakefield district not far from my constituency? Does he agree that the children of Pontefract and Castleford mining families have a great opportunity in that underground museum to learn about their industrial and social history? What can be done to safeguard the future of the national coal mining museum?
Mr. Fisher: Yes, I know of the excellent work of that museum, which I have visited on more than one occasion. My hon. Friend is, of course, right to say that such museums are extremely important, especially for children in understanding the past of their region and where they came from.
My hon. Friend asked about safeguarding the museum's future. I am glad to say that the previous Government provided some money. The Museums and Galleries Commission and local authorities, together with the private sector, have contributed to the museum. The heritage lottery fund has offered 75 per cent. of the development costs of £1.3 million to see whether a way forward can be found for funding the museum.
My hon. Friend will, however, understand that mining museums have problems over and above other museums. Just to keep the underground site going, before one begins to consider the work of the museum, costs £340,000 a year. That is an additional cost over and above any educational, conservation or interpretive work. That is a major barrier. I am sure, however, that the director of the museum will continue the constructive dialogue that she has had with me and with others over the past few years. We are anxious to try to find ways forward so that the museum can prosper.
Mr. Maude:
How does the Minister reconcile his two apparently conflicting policy objectives--that admission to the great museums, including the industrial heritage museums, should be free to the public, and that museum trustees should be free to set charges if they wish? Will he reassure trustees that his Department will not discriminate against those who decide, in pursuance of their public duties, that charges are the right policy for their museum?
Mr. Fisher:
The right hon. Gentleman is right to say that trustees of museums have always decided and will continue to decide whether a particular museum charges for admission. There is no conflict between that duty on trustees and the Government's determination to pursue ways of ensuring the widest possible access for members of the public to the national collections--I emphasise that we are speaking of the core collections of the national museums, which have been collected with public money and maintained with taxpayers' money from all over the country. The two objectives are not in conflict.
Mr. Derek Foster:
I commend my hon. Friend's extraordinarily imaginative and progressive decision to give national recognition to the Bowes museum and the Beamish open air museum, both in the county of Durham. May I invite him to go further and to work in his Department to unlock the fund raising that would assist those two museums to enhance the superb work that they are already doing?
Mr. Fisher:
I am glad that my right hon. Friend finds those decisions imaginative. It is surprising how people
5. Mrs. May:
To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport if he will make a statement on the British academy of sport. [7501]
The Minister for Sport (Mr. Tony Banks):
I have visited all three sites and had discussions with the UK Sports Council and officials. I hope to make an announcement in September.
Mrs. May:
Does the Minister recall that on 9 May, referring to the location of the British academy of sport, he said that there was no firm decision in his mind, but that it would not take him long to work it out. If a week is a long time in politics, what on earth is four and a half months? Why has it taken the Government so long? Why have they been sitting on the fence, given that the Minister of State visited the sites fairly soon after the election? What has got in the way of his coming to the House with a decision earlier than September?
Mr. Banks:
The hon. Lady obviously has problems grasping the theory of time. The Government have been around for only nine weeks and I have been doing this job for only eight weeks. I have not yet made Minister of State, and I doubt whether I will, but I will settle for Parliamentary Under-Secretary. We have survived for a long time without a British academy of sport and it is essential to get it right. I have inspected the three sites, but it is a very difficult decision. I do not want to make a decision in such haste that I shall have to repent at great leisure. The decision will be made, and it will be made in the best interests of sport in the United Kingdom.
Mr. Grocott:
In agreeing with my hon. Friend that it is important to get the decision right, may I draw his attention to the excellence of the submission from the central consortium, and the widespread support for that submission from both the east and the west midlands? Does he agree that one of the reasons why it is such a strong application is that it consists of a number of centres of excellence, including Lilleshall on the boundaries of my constituency? I know that my hon. Friend has been travelling around seeing as many centres as possible. When Chelsea are away at Aston Villa, for instance, and he has good reason to be in the west midlands area, may our hon. Friend the Member for The Wrekin (Mr. Bradley) and I invite him to come and see the work being done at Lilleshall, which I am sure will enable him to reach a speedy and correct conclusion?
Mr. Banks:
And I know which decision my hon. Friend thinks would be the right one. There are three
Mr. Hawkins:
Does the Minister agree that, whichever site is chosen, it will be important to continue the previous Government's policy of regional academies for sport in addition to the national academy? Does he agree that the two unsuccessful bidders should immediately be invited to become regional academies? May I further ask the hon. Gentleman whether, as a new Minister, he feels comfortable working in a communist-style ministry of culture?
Mr. Banks:
Once the central academy is set up, the need for regional centres will be essential. On the last part of the hon. Gentleman's question, when I ran the arts and recreation department on the Greater London Council I was referred to as the snarling tsar of culture. I am happy where I am.
6. Mr. Jim Cunningham:
To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport if he will make a statement on the progress made by the film review group. [7502]
The Minister for Film and Tourism (Mr. Tom Clarke):
Following the film review group's first meeting on 3 July, co-chaired by Stewart Till of Polygram and myself, the six specialist sub-groups have been established and are drawing up detailed work plans for their specific areas.
Mr. Cunningham:
What effect will the Budget have on the deliberations of the film review group, especially on the future of the film industry?
Mr. Clarke:
The film tax concessions in the Budget were warmly received by the whole industry. Both the industry and my right hon. Friend the Chancellor accept that the concessions will provide the opportunity to improve the capacity of the UK film industry, increase the number of skilled workers in film and production and ensure that we have strategies to build on those skills and talents. That is how the industry will respond, thus justifying my right hon. Friend's confidence in it and its in him.
Mr. Nicholls:
First, I welcome the fact that the Minister has shown more enthusiasm today for his brief than when he recently spoke to the all-party film group, when he made it clear that his indignation at not being in the Cabinet was not greatly reduced by his films portfolio. Will the Minister take this opportunity to say that he would reject any suggestion by the film review group for the Government to join the Eurimages project, which has so far failed to secure the widespread distribution of European films and has instead used substantial sums of public money to pile up a European film mountain of films that are unwatched and may prove unwatchable?
Mr. Clarke:
I had planned to welcome the hon. Gentleman back to the Dispatch Box, but I trust that he
Mrs. Betty Williams:
Surely the financial aspect of film production and distribution should be the main area of concern. Will the members of the film review group be able to address that matter?
Mr. Clarke:
The groups, including the main group, have been working extremely hard and have considered that issue. I wish to make it clear, however, that, despite the excellence and the comprehensive nature of the main group and the sub-groups, those who are not in membership are very welcome to make a contribution in evidence, either in writing or in person. I include in that an invitation to my hon. Friend.
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |