---

16 Oct 2002 : Column 850W—continued

Wembley Stadium

Mr. Gardiner: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport when she expects the final report of the English National Stadium Review to be published; and if she will make a statement. [75044]

Tessa Jowell: I am today publishing the final report of the English National Stadium Review led by Patrick Carter and placing copies in the Libraries of both

16 Oct 2002 : Column 851W

Houses. The report reflects the detail of the agreements concluded by all principal parties on the National Stadium project on 26 September.

I set out on 19 December 2001, Official Report columns 291–3, four tests which I expected the Football Association (FA) and Wembley National Stadium Ltd (WNSL) to meet before the offer of Government support to the National Stadium project could be confirmed:

First, an independent assessment of the Multiplex stadium construction contracts. This was undertaken by Cyril Sweett Ltd and copies were placed in the House libraries in May. Since May the contract has changed from a Design, Construct and Finance arrangement to a Design and Construct contract. Cyril Sweett Ltd have therefore reviewed the new contract and produced an addendum report that concludes the new contract remains value for money. I am placing copies of the addendum report in the House libraries today.

Secondly, as I explained in my 7 May statement, Official Report columns 21–2, WNSL have made available to the Comptroller and Auditor General papers relating to the project.

Thirdly, corporate governance changes to be made to produce a management structure capable of delivering a complex project within procedures acceptable to the public sector. In addition to the significant strengthening of the WNSL Board, already announced, a range of improved procedures are now in place.

Fourthly, confirmation that financial support was adequate and fully committed. As Patrick Carter's report sets out, this is now the case.

Having reviewed the steps the FA and WNSL have taken since December, last year, and Patrick Carter's assessment of the progress made by WNSL, including his view that on balance my four tests have been met, I have confirmed the Government's support to the National Stadium project which I had first offered in December. I have however also ensured that the public interest in the new National Stadium is protected by stronger safeguards than those secured at the previous project's failed syndication in 2000.

The time has come for Government to stand back as the project moves into the construction phase and is taken forward by the FA and WNSL. But, as Patrick Carter has noted, to safeguard the public interest, the project as a whole will require careful monitoring and with Sport England and the London Development Agency we shall be putting in place new arrangements as recommended by the Office for Government Commerce.

Mr. Greenway: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport (1) what advice she has received from the Football Association about progress in concluding the financing of the proposed redevelopment of Wembley Stadium; [74298]

(2) what advice she has received from the Football Association about changes in costs, including legal and professional fees, of the proposed redevelopment of Wembley Stadium; [74300]

(3) when she expects the final contracts for the proposed redevelopment of Wembley Stadium to be concluded; and if she will make a statement. [74299]

16 Oct 2002 : Column 852W

Mr. Caborn: The contracts relating to the construction of the English National Stadium at Wembley were signed on 26 September. My right hon. Friend has published today the final report of the English National Stadium Review team which included Wembley National Stadium Limited's data on changes to the costs of the project including fees. Copies of the report are available in the House libraries or from my Department's website www.culture.gov.uk.

BBC

Mr. Brady: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport if she will make a statement on the BBC curriculum online proposal; and when she expects to reach a decision on the proposal. [74314]

Dr. Howells: My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State is currently considering the BBC's application for a digital curriculum service, together with the responses to the public consultation, against the criteria set out in the Department's published guidelines on proposed new BBC public services. My right hon. Friend will announce her decision on the application as soon as possible.

Television Licences

Mr. Burstow: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport (1) what changes she proposes to the working of the concessionary scheme so that eligibility for concessionary TV licences is not lost when someone under 60 years moves into the beneficiary's sheltered housing; [74538]

(2) how many representations from (a) members of the public, (b) charities and (c) hon. Members she has received regarding sheltered housing schemes being charged for a television licence because a resident is under 60; and if she will make a statement; [74540]

(3) when the proposals she has to change the working of the concessionary scheme so that eligibility for concessionary TV licences is not lost when someone under 60 moves into the beneficiary's sheltered housing will be published. [74539]

Dr. Howells: The Government proposes to introduce preserved rights for beneficiaries of the Accommodation for Residential Care (ARC) concessionary television licence scheme when the social mix or the level of warden cover in their sheltered housing change, so long as the accommodation continues to be provided or managed by a local authority, a housing association or a development corporation. We intend to publish amending regulations as soon as possible, but the ARC scheme is complex and it is important that, in amending it, we avoid creating any new anomalies or unnecessary administrative burdens.

Information about the number of representations received on different aspects of the concessionary television licensing arrangements is not recorded separately.

16 Oct 2002 : Column 853W

FOREIGN AND COMMONWEALTH AFFAIRS

Senegal

Mr. Drew: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will make a statement on the supply of general purpose machine guns to Senegal, for use as part of a UN peacekeeping mission in the Democratic Republic of Congo. [74948]

Mr. MacShane: Following consultations with the Foreign and Commonwealth Office and Ministry of Defence, the Department of Trade and Industry recently approved a licence to export general purpose machine guns to Senegal. These arms will be used by the Senegalese Armed Forces in the UN peacekeeping mission in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC).

DRC is subject to an EU arms embargo, imposed by a Declaration of 7/4/1993. The embargo was put in place mainly to ensure the safety of international troops and civilian personnel deployed in the DRC. The decision to grant an exemption does not affect HMG's continued support for the EU arms embargo on the DRC.

The decision to permit export was made on the basis that the equipment is needed by bona fide UN peacekeepers and is proportionate to the humanitarian needs of the Senegalese peacekeepers.

HMG fully supports the Senegalese troops deployed to the UN peacekeeping mission in the DRC. The decision underlines our continued support for the work being done by peacekeepers within the country.

Iraq

Mr. Dawson: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what goods on the Military List have recently been approved for export to Iraq. [74949]

Mr. MacShane: Following consultation with the Foreign and Commonwealth Office and the Ministry of Defence, the Department of Trade and Industry recently approved a licence to export de-mining equipment to United Nations Office for Project Services in mine clearance operations in Northern Iraq. The export included an electronic hand held exploder that appears on the Military List. The conclusion that this export does not represent a proliferation threat has been reached after careful assessment.

The UN Iraq Sanctions Committee approved this export to Iraq under the Oil for Food programme (OFF). Under OFF Iraq is allowed to export unlimited quantities of oil to fund the purchase of humanitarian goods. The export is consistent with the consolidated EU and national arms export licensing criteria.

Belize

Mr. Drew: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will make a statement on progress to resolve the territorial dispute between Guatemala and Belize. [74950]

Mr. MacShane: The Organization of American States (OAS) concluded its two year process to help the Governments of Guatemala and Belize settle their territorial dispute on 30 September. Detailed proposals

16 Oct 2002 : Column 854W

drawn up by independent Facilitators appointed by both Governments were presented to the Governments on 16 September, provide the basis for a fair and honourable settlement to this long-standing dispute. We hope both Governments will now seize this historic opportunity.

The Facilitators have recommended some adjustment to the land border, and proposed new maritime limits giving Guatemala an Economic Exclusion Zone and Continental Shelf in the Gulf of Honduras of some 2000 square nautical miles. The Governments of Belize and Honduras have each agreed to contribute 1000 square nautical miles to this zone.

The Facilitators have also recommended the establishment of a tri-national ecological park covering coastal, insular and maritime areas of Belize, Guatemala and Honduras and a substantial Development Trust Fund. Details can be found on the Belize Government's website www.belize.gov.bz/.

At a ceremony in Washington on 30 September marking the end of the facilitation process, Dr. MacShane spoke of the UK's full support for the OAS process. He welcomed the proposals highlighting the potential for investment and economic growth that will result if the referendums that are now due to be held simultaneously in both countries are successful.

HMG believes that the Facilitators have worked patiently and meticulously to produce proposals that are fair and honourable to the Governments of Guatemala and Belize. They represent the best chance yet of settling the dispute. Settlement would also have a global significance, demonstrating that with good will and determination even the most intractable problems can be resolved by negotiation. A settlement would open a new chapter of peace and harmony between the two countries and reduce the risk of potential conflict along the border.

We urge the Governments and civil society of both countries to enter into constructive debate on what a settlement would mean to their populace before putting the proposals to referendums.

---