| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
11 Dec 2002 : Column 346W—continued
Listed Places of Worship
Mr. Whittingdale: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport how much has been paid out under the Listed Places of Worship grant scheme. [84888]
11 Dec 2002 : Column 347W
Dr. Howells: #5,257,404.34 had been dispersed in grant payments under the Listed Places of Worship grant scheme as of 25 November 2002.
Mr. Whittingdale: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport how much has been given by English Heritage in grant-in-aid to listed places of worship in the last five years. [84954]
Dr. Howells: A total of #62,344,000 has been offered to listed places of worship (including cathedrals) in grant-in-aid by English Heritage in the last five years.
11 Dec 2002 : Column 348W
These figures are for grants offered. English Heritage makes offers against which the grantee can then claim. A number of years may elapse between a grantee receiving a grant offer and actually claiming it.
National Endowment for Science,
Technology and the Arts
Nick Harvey: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport how many grants of #48,000 or more were made by NESTA in each year since 1998; and if she will make a statement. [86376]
Dr. Howells: The following table shows how many grants of 48,000 or more were made by NESTA in each year since 1988:
| Financial year | 1998–99 | 1999–2000 | 2000–01 | 2001–02 | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Number of awards over #48k | 4 | 19 | 50 | 62 | 135 |
| Total number of awards | 6 | 25 | 67 | 102 | 200 |
The figures above include every award contracted or commissioned by NESTA to 31 March 2002 (the most recent date for which audited figures are available). The total size of award includes funding that has been released directly to the awardee or to cover the costs of commissioned areas of work but does not include added value expenditure such as the cost of mentoring. It includes any agreed release of contingency funding, but not any reserved contingency which may or may not be spent in the future. It treats as distinct any separate awards to the same project which have involved separate funding decisions.
Public Entertainments Licence
Mr. Whittingdale: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport if there will be a difference in cost between a premises licence which incorporates permission to provide entertainment and one which does not. [84955]
Dr. Howells: A premises will be able to obtain permission for live music at no extra cost to the fee for obtaining permission to sell alcohol. Furthermore, the introduction of a single integrated licensing scheme is estimated to save industry #1.97 billion over the first ten years.
The level of fees will be decided following consultations with industry and local government stakeholders.
Mr. Whittingdale: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport (1) what is the cost of a public entertainments licence in each local authority; [84956]
- (2) how many public entertainments licences were issued by each local authority in the last 12 months; [84957]
(3) how much was received by each local authority from the issue of public entertainment licences in the last year for which figures are available. [84958]
Dr. Howells: The information that has been requested is not held centrally and to obtain it would represent a disproportionate cost to the Department. However, The Chartered Institute of Public Finances and Accountancy estimated that approximately 46,000 public entertainment licences were issued in 2000–01 by the local authorities and that #16 million was received in connection with these.
Licences are reviewed annually and a fee is paid both for each grant and on each renewal. Fees are set by local authorities at their own discretion and in many cases a single fee is not set. Fees are often set in bands on the basis of the capacity of the venue.
Licensing Bill
Mr. Key: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport pursuant to her answer of 4 December, ref.84617, what criteria were used to decide on which organisations to consult on the White Paper, Time for Reform; and for what reason Salisbury District Council was not included. [86680]
Dr. Howells: The publication of the White Paper, Time for Reform, in April 2000, was followed by a well-publicised, open public consultation announced in both Houses of Parliament and which resulted in 1,215 responses being received. Copies of the White Paper were specifically sent to those organisations, including a number of district councils, which had written to us with their views during the review that took place prior to publication and which raised issues relating to licensing generally. Salisbury District Council did not fall into these categories. The Local Government Association, with whom we had established a good working
11 Dec 2002 : Column 349W
relationship, was also sent a copy of the White Paper with the expectation that they would consult their members, including all local authorities.
Mr. Whittingdale: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport if she will publish the guidance to be issued to local authorities under the Licensing Bill [Lords]. [84959]
Dr. Howells: The Government intend to publish draft guidance in Spring 2003. We are currently working with an advisory group of key stakeholders to assist us in meeting this timetable. Detailed framework guidance was published on the Bill's First Reading on November 14.
Mr. Whittingdale: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport what estimate she has made of the financial impact on the hospitality industry of the measures included in the Licensing Bill [Lords]. [84960]
Dr. Howells: Appendix 4 of the White Paper XTime for Reform: Proposals for the Modernisation of our Licensing Laws" published in April 2000 estimated, using figures supplied by industry, that the hospitality and leisure industry would benefit from savings of #1.9 billion over the first 10 years of the licensing regime proposed in the Licensing Bill. The calculations used were subsequently refined and the Regulatory Impact Assessment published alongside the Bill and placed in the Libraries of both Houses estimates total savings of #1.97 billion over the first 10 years.
TRANSPORT
A49
Mr. Paul Marsden: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport if he will make a statement on extending the speed restriction south of Bayston Hill on the A49. [86528]
Mr. Jamieson: I have asked the Chief Executive of the Highways Agency, Tim Matthews, to write to the hon. Member.
Letter from T. Matthews to Mr. Paul Marsden, dated 11 December 2002:
- I have been asked by the Transport Minister, David Jamieson, to reply to your recent question about extending the speed limit south of Bayston Hill on the A49 Trunk Road.
- There are a number of criteria that are used when deciding an appropriate speed limit, including the nature of the road and its surroundings, existing traffic speeds and the accident rate. The speed limit should appear reasonable to most drivers and have the support of the police, who have responsibility for enforcement.
- The 30 mph speed limit through Bayston Hill was introduced in 1997 as part of a traffic calming scheme through the village. The length south of Bayston Hill is much more rural in character, there have been only two incidents in the last three years, resulting in two minor injuries. Most drivers would consider that a reduction in the limit there would be inappropriate for the conditions and it is unlikely that the police would support any change. In the circumstances, it would therefore be difficult for us to justify an extension of the limit.
- That said, the Route Management Strategy for the A49 between Ross-on-Wye and Shrewsbury, which went out to public consultation earlier this year, is examining the appropriateness of all existing speed limits along the route, including Bayston Hill. Amongst other things, it will identify a short and long term
11 Dec 2002 : Column 350W
- programme of improvements and aim at a consistent speed strategy. If anomalies are found, changes will be made. A report is due early in the new year.
- I hope this is helpful. If you would like more information, the Agency's Route Sponsor for the A49, Dennis Wheeler, would be pleased to assist. He can be contacted at our offices at Broadway, Broad Street, Birmingham B15 1BL, or by telephone on 0121 678 8126.
Airports
Andy King: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport how many letters he has received (a) supporting and (b) opposing the (i) Midlands New Site Option contained within the National Consultation on the Future of Air Transport in the UK: Midlands and (ii) the closure of Birmingham International Airport, as proposed in the National Consultation on the Future of Air Transport in the UK: Midlands. [85735]
Mr. Jamieson: We have not yet analysed all the responses but we will produce a summary when the consultation comes to a close.
Mr. Prisk: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what steps his Department will take to ensure that those who have responded to the consultation are (a) informed of the forthcoming Gatwick consultation paper and (b) able to adjust their submissions accordingly. [86265]
Mr. Jamieson: My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Transport announced to Parliament on 28 November 2002, Official Report, columns 474–75, that the consultation on airports capacity will be kept open until we have consulted on options for new runways in relation to Gatwick.
Those who have already responded to the consultation will be able to amend, add to, or replace their response having considered the new document. We will set out our plans for the remaining stage of the consultation process, including how we will inform respondents, when we publish the further consultation paper in the new year.
Mr. Prisk: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what assessment his Department has made of the implications of airport policy options for the South East for the (a) rail and (b) road networks. [86264]
Mr. Jamieson: The South East and East of England Regional Air Services Study included an assessment of the type of road and rail infrastructure that would be needed both to connect the airport options to the strategic network and the type and scale of improvements that might be required on the strategic network.
The results of these appraisals are summarised for each of the published options in XThe Future Development of Air Transport in the United Kingdom (South East)" main consultation document, and further details are contained in supporting reports.
John Barrett: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport when he expects to reply to the letter from the hon. Member for Edinburgh West of 8 November on Edinburgh airport; and for what reason the reply has been delayed. [85877]
11 Dec 2002 : Column 351W
Mr. Jamieson: We have received a large number of responses to our consultation The Future Development of Air Transport in the United Kingdom, both from Members of Parliament and from members of the public. Latest estimates put the figure at over 35,000 including letters and electronic responses. These are all being processed as quickly as possible.
| Next Section | Index | Home Page |