House of Commons
Monday 12 June 2000
The House met at half-past Two o'clock
PRAYERS
[Madam Speaker in the Chair]
Oral Answers to Questions
CULTURE, MEDIA AND SPORT
The Secretary of State was asked--
Lottery Awards
1. Gillian Merron (Lincoln): What steps he has taken to assess the equity of the distribution of lottery awards across the country. [123668]
The Minister for Sport (Kate Hoey): We require distributors to take into account the need to ensure that all parts of the country have access to funding and the need to reduce economic and social deprivation. We monitor lottery awards given to each constituency and remain keen to encourage a fairer distribution of funding across the country.
Gillian Merron: Will my hon. Friend ensure that the distributing bodies press ahead with redressing imbalances throughout the country, so that Lincoln people can see the gap close between the welcome £9.5 million that they have so far received and the national average of £11.9 million?
Kate Hoey: Yes, that is exactly why we set up the report into lottery funding for coalfield areas and former mining communities. Last week my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State announced a package of measures designed to ensure that those areas receive greater benefit from national lottery money. We have to try to get more equitable funding, while recognising that some areas of greater economic and social deprivation have not been as proactive as they might have been about getting their forms filled in and so attracting benefit from the lottery. Now, with the new powers under the National Lottery Act 1998, we are seeing changes and increases; it is all about equity.
Sir Sydney Chapman (Chipping Barnet): Further to the point that I made at the Department's previous Question Time, has the Minister had time to consider the amount and proportion of funds going to outer London boroughs? Understandably, much of the money that goes to London goes to great national institutions, and although we accept that the quality of applications is an important
factor, there is a feeling among those living on the outskirts of London that we are not being dealt with correctly.
Kate Hoey: I understand how the hon. Gentleman feels. The amount of money that has gone to my constituency of Vauxhall seems huge, because it has several major tourist attractions along the River Thames; however, little money has gone into community projects. Furthermore, if a constituency contains the head office of an organisation, that constituency is credited with having received the money given to the organisation, even if it is spent in many other places and none is spent in the constituency itself.
Helen Jones (Warrington, North): My hon. Friend touches on an important point about how we assess the sums that go to each constituency. Will she discuss with the National Lottery Charities Board how it arrives at its figures? Many of the grants included in figures sent to me were made not in my constituency but in that of my hon. Friend the Member for St. Helens, North (Mr. Watts). Although I have no objection to my hon. Friend's constituency receiving grants, I would prefer that they were not included in the allocation for my constituency. Will my hon. Friend the Minister also examine the assessment of ticket sales, whereby tickets sales in town centres are often allocated to only one constituency, even though they are bought by people from several neighbouring constituencies?
Kate Hoey: As I said, I fully understand hon. Members' concerns. It is frustrating to be told that one's constituency is receiving a lot of money when one knows that it is not, in fact, going there. Such matters will be the subject of our on-going discussions and of the negotiations surrounding the award of the new franchise. The ticket-buying public want to know where their money goes, and they want the figures to be clear and objective; similarly, we as Members of Parliament want to know what is happening in our constituencies.
Mr. John Greenway (Ryedale): First, will the Minister join me in wishing the England team all success in Euro 2000, and echo our hope for a peaceful, trouble-free tournament?
On the question of lottery funding, does the hon. Lady agree with the recent comments of the vice-chairman of Sport England, Des Wilson? He says that because of the Government's raid on the lottery and the recent decline in ticket sales,
- many community organisations that could have taken a positive reply for granted five years back will now be disappointed. The money just won't be there.
Kate Hoey: Of course I join the hon. Gentleman in sending the England team our best wishes for their first match tonight--and, indeed, for the whole tournament.
We are especially keen for the tournament to be free of trouble, and for our supporters to represent our country in the best possible manner.I believe that the hon. Gentleman has misquoted the vice-chairman of Sport England. I heard Des Wilson speak on Radio 5 just a few hours after that quote came out, and he did not say that. I remind the hon. Gentleman that when the lottery was set up five years ago, it was said that about £1.8 billion would go to sport over the first seven years of the contract. That was guaranteed. In fact, the sum will be increased. The hon. Gentleman can talk about percentages and new developments, but the amount going to sport over the seven years will be more than was originally promised. In addition, some of the money from the new opportunities fund goes directly to after-school activities related to sport. Of course, we want more people to play the lottery, because if people do not buy tickets, there will be no money for any of the good causes.
Digital TV
2. Mr. Ben Chapman (Wirral, South): What action he is taking to promote take-up of digital TV. [123669]
The Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport (Mr. Chris Smith): We have set in place two firm tests of availability and affordability, which must be met before the full switchover to digital television can take place. In the meantime, we are working with the industry on a public information campaign about digital television, and we will shortly set up a viewers panel to ensure that policy is well informed by consumer concerns.
Mr. Chapman: Does my right hon. Friend agree that when digital was rolled out, it was done in a way that perpetuated the anomalies inherent in the analogue system, in that some parts of the United Kingdom receive regional television coverage that is entirely inappropriate to the area? For example, my constituency, which is patently in the north-west, gets terrestrial television only from Wales and the midlands. Does my right hon. Friend agree that in any future broadcasting Bill, broadcasters should be required to provide appropriate regional television, and that the take-up of digital television would thereby be enhanced?
Mr. Smith: My hon. Friend raises a genuine concern with regard to analogue coverage, and I am well aware of the problems faced by a number of his constituents in that respect. Digital terrestrial television at present covers only about half of the country. That proportion will increase progressively over the next two years. My aim is to ensure that as digital television becomes universally available, it will provide a solution to the problem faced by my hon. Friend's constituents.
My hon. Friend's question highlights the fact that it is not only infrastructure that matters, but content as well. We have noted in recent days considerable concern about some of the content on television, particularly in relation to Channel 5. Government cannot and should not directly intervene, but I believe that the broadcasters have a commercial and a moral duty to take good account of the views of the public, and I urge them to do so.
Mr. Crispin Blunt (Reigate): Does the Secretary of State accept that one of the consequences of the roll-out
of digital television is even more control of what people can receive is placed in the hands of the broadcasters? I am thinking, in particular, of access to sport. Individual broadcasters have a monopoly of the supply of television coverage of a particular sport to sections of the population who are keen on that sport. Should the Government now examine that issue?
Mr. Smith: We have put in place the list of protected sporting events that are of national importance and must be shown free to air on terrestrial television. Shortly after coming to office, we expanded that list to include more sporting events. In addition, it is important that the terrestrial broadcasters, not just the subscription broadcasters, ensure that sport forms a key part of their provision for the public. I certainly look to the terrestrial broadcasters to do that.
Mr. Derek Wyatt (Sittingbourne and Sheppey): Does my right hon. Friend's definition of digital television include digital access to the internet? We do not want digital television sets that deliver only television programmes. We want them to offer internet access as well. Does my right hon. Friend's definition that digital television should be widespread and available to 95 per cent. or more of the population include internet access?
Mr. Smith: As my hon. Friend knows, perhaps more than most, the boundaries between what we previously described as television and personal telephonic communication have been merging rapidly in recent years. In my speech to the Royal Television Society in September, I made it clear that one of our aims is to ensure that universal access to the internet forms part of the universal availability of digital television.
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |