| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
21 May 2003 : Column 876W—continued
Media
Mr. Cummings: To ask the Deputy Prime Minister what assessment has been made of the potential value of (a) film, (b) new media and (c) broadcasting to the UK economy; and if he will break down the results of each assessment by region. [114803]
Dr. Howells: I have been asked to reply.
DCMS gathers information on the economic value of industry sectors from the Annual Business Inquiry (ABI) which is run by the Office for National Statistics. Data from the ABI is presented for Standard Industrial Classifications (SICs) and is not available at the level of detail required to answer the question precisely. We have therefore supplied information on the most relevant available industry classifications.
In 2001 the gross value added of 'Motion picture and video activities' was £2,101 million and the gross value added of 'Radio and television activities' was £4,179 million. This represents 0.3 per cent. and 0.7 per cent. respectively of gross value added across the whole UK economy. There is no classification for 'New media'.
Regional figures are only available for the approximate gross value added of the total of all industries defined by the SIC scheme as falling under 'recreational, cultural and sporting activities'.
Planning Inquiries
Andrew Bennett: To ask the Deputy Prime Minister if he will list public planning inquiries in each of the last five years which took evidence for more than five weeks; how soon after the inquiry the inspector made his report to the Secretary of State in each case; and how long it took the Secretary of State to reach a decision in each case. [112356]
Mr. McNulty: The following table lists called-in planning applications and recovered appeals inquiries which began and sat for 20 or more days (equivalent to five weeks as inquiries do not normally sit on Mondays) in the period from 1 April 1998 to 31 March 2003 (it therefore does not include Heathrow Terminal 5). The cases, with the exception of Thameslink 2000, do not include Transport and Works Act cases (some of which include linked planning cases) as these are the responsibility of my right hon. Friend the Member for Edinburgh Central.
The rules for planning appeals, which came into effect in August 2000, introduced the requirement for the appellant and local planning authority to prepare jointly
21 May 2003 : Column 877W
a statement of common ground. The purpose of this document is to set out the agreed factual information about the proposal in advance of the inquiry, and so reduce the time taken on this when the inquiry opens.
21 May 2003 : Column 878W
Consideration is also being given to increasing the use of pre-inquiry meetings (where the appointed Inspector can set out the timetable and running order in advance of the inquiry) for suitable cases.
| Site | Inquiry duration (days) | Start of inquiry | Close of inquiry | Report sent to Secretary of State | Date of decision |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Shellhaven, Thurrock(16) | — | 25 February 2003 | — | — | — |
| Withdean Stadium, Brighton(16) | — | 18 February 2003 | — | — | — |
| MSAs M3,M4,M25(16) | — | 5 November 2002 | — | — | — |
| MS As Ml, Leeds, Harrogate, Selby(16) | — | 8 October 2002 | — | — | — |
| Alconbury Airfield, Huntingdon | 43 | 22 May 2001 | 16 October 2001 | 28 March 2003 | — |
| Castlegate, York | 30 | 15 January 2002 | 9 August 2002 | 6 February 2003 | — |
| Finningley Airport, Doncaster | 58 | 25 September 2001 | 13 March 2002 | 19 September 2002 | 3 April 2003 |
| Cable Street, Liverpool(17) | 40 | 6 November 2001 | 22 February 2002 | 2 July 2002 | 5 September 2002 |
| MTL site Liveipool(17) | 40 | 6 November 2001 | 22 February 2002 | 11 April 2002 | 30 May 2002 |
| Adj M5, Tewkesbury | 20 | 6 November 2001 | 11 December 2001 | 15 May 2002 | 16 August 2002 |
| Heron Tower, Bishopsgate, London EC3 | 21 | 23 October 2001 | 5 December 2001 | 30 April 2002 | 22 July 2002 |
| Thingwall Hall, Knowsley | 22 | 22 August 2000 | 29 January 2001 | 6 March 2002 | 9 September 2002 |
| Fulcrum and former Castle Donington Power Station | 28 | 13 February 2001 | 6 April 2001 | 1 October 2001 | 28 February 2002 |
| MSAs M42, Solihull(18) | 38 | 30 November 1999 | 16 June 2000 | 17 October 2000 | 6 March 2001 |
| Roaring Meg Retail Park, Stevenage | 21 | 11 April 2000 | 22 May 2000 | 20 September 2000 | 23 November 2000 |
| Flowers Brewery site, Cheltenham | 40 | 28 September 1999 | 15 December 1999 | 9 July 2000 | 12 September 2000 |
| Xanadu development, Wigan | 26 | 1 September 1999 | 9 March 2000 | 16 August 2000 | 20 August 2001 |
| Waterside Park, Tameside | 24 | 6 July 1999 | 17 December 1999 | 16 May 2000 | 30 November 2000 |
| Lamberhurst Farm, Faversham | 21 | 3 February 1999 | 10 March 1999 | 3 August 1999 | 30 August 2001 |
| Otterburn Training Camp | 26 | 23 March 1999 | 27 May 1999 | 19 October 1999 | 4 October 2001 |
| Aldbough, East Riding | 25 | 16 February 1999 | 28 April 1999 | 5 October 1999 | 17 February 2002 |
| TWA Thameslink 2000(19) | 92 | 27 June 2000 | 16 May 2001 | 10 January 2002 | 29 January 2003 |
(16) Inquiries that have started and are estimated to sit for more than 20 days.
(17) These two inquiries ran concurrently although they related to different sites in Liverpool and the Inspector's report and the decision were issued separately.
(18) The inquiry covered three recovered appeals concerning MSAs on the M42—a decision on 6 March 2001 refused two and was minded to grant the remaining one. A final decision has yet to be made.
(19) Determined by the First Secretary of State for propriety reasons. Interim decision issued.
Regional Assemblies
Mr Clifton-Brown: To ask the Deputy Prime Minister how much funding each local authority contributes in the financial year 2002–03 to funding regional assemblies; what the expenditure of each regional assembly (a) was in that period and (b) is expected to be in 2003–04; how many staff each assembly employs; and what estimate he has made of the effect upon council tax levels of funding regional assemblies. [114718]
Mr. Raynsford: The information requested is not collected centrally and could only be provided at disproportionate cost. Regional Assemblies are answerable to central Government for the use of their allocation of the Chambers Fund (in both 2002–3 and 2003–4 £5 million per annum across the eight regions); Regional Planning Body money (in 2003–4 £6 million per annum); and Planning Delivery Grant (in 2003–4 £3 million per annum). Their financial arrangements with local authorities are a matter between them and the relevant local authorities.
Mr. Clifton-Brown: To ask the Deputy Prime Minister what the timescale is for (a) English regional chambers to set up regional planning bodies as provided for in the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Bill and (b) drawing up regional spatial strategies; how this timetable will be linked with that for drawing up regional transport strategies; what estimate he has made of (i) the initial and (ii) the annual running costs of regional planning bodies; and from which budgets these costs will be met. [114343]
Mr. McNulty: All the English regional chambers are now regional planning bodies (RPBs). Providing they operate in a sufficiently inclusive way they will be recognised as RPBs once the relevant provisions of the new Bill commence. On commencement my right hon. Friend the Deputy Prime Minister will prescribe which existing regional planning guidance should become regional spatial strategies (RSSs). Thereafter, the timetable for revisions to particular RSSs, including their transport elements, will be agreed between the RPB and the Government Office. RPB running costs are a matter for them. The Office of the Deputy Prime Minister is contributing over £9 million, including planning delivery grant, this year towards RPB running costs. RPBs can also receive moneys or in kind assistance from local authority and other member organisations.
Regional Government (North West)
Mr. Martlew: To ask the Deputy Prime Minister further to the answer of 14 May, Official Report, column 301, on Regional Government (North West), if he will make a statement on how the question to be put in the second vote will be decided on; and whether the result of the second vote will be binding on the Government. [114711]
Mr. Raynsford: Section 3(3) of the Regional Assemblies (Preparations) Act sets out the question to be asked in any local government referendum. The options for unitary local government which are put to voters in two-tier areas in such a referendum cannot be determined until the Boundary Committee has made its recommendations. So the order for a local government
21 May 2003 : Column 879W
referendum to be held will set out the text of the options which are to appear on the ballot paper. Sections 3(7) and 3(8) of the Act provide, respectively, that the Electoral Commission must be consulted on this wording and that their comments are laid before each House when the order is laid. The order will also be subject to the affirmative resolution procedure.Local government reorganisation would only go ahead if an elected assembly is to be established. The local government referendums will be advisory, though the Govemment would intend to be guided by the results.
| Next Section | Index | Home Page |