Previous SectionIndexHome Page


David Taylor (North-West Leicestershire): Does my hon. Friend accept that the patterns and worries that he is outlining as examples of the north-south divide also apply to the midlands—especially the west and east midlands? The east midlands is at the bottom of the league table under most lottery distribution assessments, and its failure rate for bids is even worse than that of the north.

Stephen Hesford: My hon. Friend is doing his best for his region and he has a point, which I am sure the Minister and the House have heard.

When I compared more closely the kind of bids from the south that were successful with the two bids from my constituency, I pulled out two examples that might enlighten the Minister in relation to the definite appearance of bias. Bexhill sailing club, which is not on a needy or deprived part of the south coast, received backing to the tune of more than £112,000. Likewise, Weymouth and Portland sailing academy received £2.5 million. Although I do not know the details of those bids, I cannot believe that they were so different from the bid by West Kirby sailing club which was rejected.

I also noted applications that I thought similar to the bid by Pensby boys school. Portsmouth local education authority, on behalf of the Prior school on the Hampshire coast, was awarded £992,000, and Herschel grammar school, which I think is in Sussex, received £2.5 million.

David Taylor: Needy causes.

Stephen Hesford: Clearly.

Those bids demonstrate the type of applications that are successful. They got past the new criteria applied by Sport England whereas it rejected the bids from my constituency. They stand in stark contrast to the bids by Pensby boys school and the West Kirby sailing club.

One of the various suggestions why the bids were rejected—I emphasise that I am not talking about a key single suggestion that one can understand and get a grip of—was that they had no long-term viability. That is a joke. West Kirby sailing club has been established for 102 years. There is no reason to think that the club, which is thriving and could have gone on to benefit my constituents and others in poorer parts of the Wirral, would not have been in operation for another 102 years.

The bid by Pensby boys school had the backing of the local authority, which pledged £400,000 as match funding. The idea that that did not have long-term viability or that it was connected with an excessive risk leaves my constituents cold. Martin Jones, the head teacher, Glyn Davies, the then deputy head teacher, and Paul Churchill, the commodore of the sailing club, put

21 Oct 2003 : Column 620

a lot of work into the bid. I look forward to the Minister dealing with some of the concerns raised, because it looks as though that is something that Sport England does not want to do.

7.48 pm

The Minister for Sport and Tourism (Mr. Richard Caborn): I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Wirral, West (Stephen Hesford) on securing the debate. He made a forceful case in which he raised a number of points about Sport England, in particular the process of adjudicating on lottery awards, to which I shall return in a moment.

My hon. Friend said that about twice as much sports lottery funding is received by applicants from the south than by applicants from the north, leaving aside the national stadium, and he quoted figures from Sport England to support his case. I have some sympathy with him. At times we see too much of the London syndrome in our national life, and that can be unfortunate. However, the figures on which he based his case do not bear close scrutiny.

Sport England has nine regions. I shall not list them all. It does not draw a line across the country between the north and south when it makes policy decisions, and nor do the Government. Aside from anything else, I am sure hon. Members from the midlands and the eastern region would not thank us for placing their constituencies one side or the other of an arbitrary line.

Let us keep things simple and compare the three northern regions—the north-east, the north-west and Yorkshire and the Humber—with the three southern regions, consisting of the south-west, the south-east and London. My hon. Friend has a fair point if we look only at 2002–03, the last year for which full Sport England statistics on awards are available. In that year, the north received 120 awards totalling £32.5 million. On the face of it, that does not compare well with the south's yield of £67.8 million from 163 awards. But matters are not so simple. Across the lottery field, a relatively high proportion of London awards relate to projects that are national in scope, and that does not just mean Wembley stadium.

That is true of awards in other regions, but the concentration of lottery projects that can be said truly to benefit the whole UK is, as one would expect, highest in the capital. In any event, when the figures are adjusted per head of population, the comparison is not nearly as skewed in favour of the south. The population of the three southern regions is much greater than that of the north. I will not do the maths, but others can do the calculations if they wish. The long-term figures show that any perceived inequalities in awards have broadly evened out over time.

Lottery grants, as many hon. Members know, are cyclical, and my hon. Friend is looking at only one year. If we look at the whole period from 1995 to 2003, the north received a total of 1,200 grants totalling £466.3 million. That compares favourably with the 1,751 awards totalling £579.4 million received by applicants in the three southern regions over the same period. It could be said—indeed, it has been mentioned this evening—that the central regions have a common complaint. The midlands and the eastern region received 1,278 awards totalling £351 million, which is a respectable showing, but well behind the north and south before adjustments per head of population.

21 Oct 2003 : Column 621

That is the position under a funding structure without a significant regional focus. Until this year, Sport England has not been formally required to ensure an even spread of awards. Its policy directions required it to take into account


and

"the scope for reducing economic and social deprivation."

Sport England built on that with its 1999 lottery strategy, which confirmed that


It put that into practice by designating 12 sport action zones, which are deprived areas that qualify for additional lottery support. Going back to our definitions of north and south, six of the zones are in the north—in Bradford, Manchester, Liverpool, south Yorkshire, the Wear valley and Cumbria—and only two are in the south. The designation of those zones sprang from admirable sentiments, and was backed up with real achievements. Sport England has gone a long way towards putting regional equity into practice, but its directions, strategy and action zones did not amount to a formal requirement to spread funding fairly across the country when addressing need.

That is changing with the reorganisation of Sport England. As part of the Government's modernisation drive, Sport England will in future make 60 per cent. of its total funding available to sport through the new regional sports boards. Each of the nine boards will receive its share of the total based on population, weighted for the index of social deprivation. Each brings together local and regional expertise to ensure that the awards truly reflect regional priorities.

With my Department, I have spent a great deal of time getting the structure right. I am confident that the nine boards will make a significant impact on the way that sport is funded in the regions. The boards will not only make sure that money goes to where it is needed in the regions; they will have the necessary clout and powers to bring in supporting funding from both the public and the private sectors. My hon. Friend will be reassured to learn that I know the chairman of the regional board in the north-west, Andy Worthington. I know from speaking to my hon. Friend earlier that he also knows him well, as he worked in his authority. Andy Worthington will bring a great deal to sport in the north-west.

Stephen Hesford: Amid a situation that is dreadful for my constituents, I confirm what my right hon. Friend

21 Oct 2003 : Column 622

said. Andy Worthington worked as a director of leisure services. I know him well, and I wish him well in his new capacity.

Mr. Caborn: I am sure that that will be passed on to Andy Worthington and that he will put an effective board together. That will no doubt have an impact in the medium to long term on the structures for sport in the north-west.

Let me take a brief look at the wider lottery position. Since 1995, the three northern regions have received a total of nearly £2.6 billion in all lottery funding. That compares favourably with the £3.3 billion received by the three southern regions, so the north has not done so badly in the past, after all. In sport at least, I believe that it will do even better in the future. So much for the bigger regional picture.

My hon. Friend is understandably concerned with the interests of his constituents. He put that case forcefully to the House. He referred to two sports lottery applications that, he maintains, were affected by this year's reforms at Sport England. As he said, the reform programme included a stock-take of all lottery-funded projects in January. That led to a number of applicants' schemes being capped, deferred, or—in Sport England's terminology—decommitted. Fifty-four projects were decommitted, and 41 deferred. Of those 95, 20 were in the north-west.

On the face of it, that appears to be a high proportion. Why the proportion should be so high is a matter for Sport England. I cannot answer the specific question raised by my hon. Friend, but I will write to Sport England and, I hope, be able to give my hon. Friend a much fuller answer. As he said, two of the decommitted projects were in his constituency in the Wirral. West Kirby sailing club's application for £88,000 for a new boathouse was turned down, as was Pensby high school's application for £893,000 for sports facilities.

My hon. Friend asked for my views on those two Sport England decisions. He knows full well and acknowledged in his contribution that, as both applicants have appealed to the independent adjudicator, it would be improper for me to comment on either case while the adjudication is going through. For the same reason, I cannot comment on the points he made about officials in Sport England's regional offices, other than to note that these—

The motion having been made after Seven o'clock, and the debate having continued for half an hour, Mr. Deputy Speaker adjourned the House without Question put, pursuant to the Standing Order.


Next Section

IndexHome Page