House of Commons
Monday 2 February 2004
The House met at half-past Two o'clock
PRAYERS
[Mr. Speaker in the Chair]
Oral Answers to Questions
CULTURE, MEDIA AND SPORT
The Secretary of State was asked—
Olympic Bid
1. Huw Irranca-Davies (Ogmore) (Lab): If she will make a statement on the impact of the Olympic bid on grass-roots sport. [151920]
The Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport (Tessa Jowell): We decided to bid for the Olympics for two reasons: first, as an expression of our ambition for sport and for Britain to be given the chance to host the greatest sports event in the world; and secondly because the process of bidding will enthuse and inspire young people to participate in sport at every level.
Huw Irranca-Davies : I thank the Secretary of State for that reply. She will know that one of the most lasting long-term benefits of hosting any Olympics is its impact on grass-roots sports, not only through the development of infrastructure, but through providing champions, such as the excellent Lyn "The Leap" Davies from Nant-y-moel in the 1964 Tokyo Olympics. However, although it is quite understandable that the majority of the infrastructure development will take place in the south-east, how will she spread the benefits for our youngsters in Wales and elsewhere to inspire them to go on to future Olympics beyond 2012?
Tessa Jowell: I thank my hon. Friend for both his question and his interest in and concern about the matter. This is one of the most important challenges facing my Department and the Government, and we are seeking to rise to it in two ways: first, through unprecedented levels of investment in new facilities—nearly £700 million for England alone and £750 million from the New Opportunities Fund if one includes Wales and Scotland—and also by ensuring that by 2007–08, every child will have the opportunity to undertake at least two hours of high-quality physical education and sport every week. That is expressed as a target, but we are seeking first to invest in facilities, and secondly, to ensure that young people are motivated to take part in sport to help to deliver champions for 2012.
Mr. Nick Hawkins (Surrey Heath) (Con): The Secretary of State is well aware that Conservative
Members strongly support the Olympic bid, but does she recognise that it would be possible to raise even more money for grass-roots sport if the new Olympic lottery game were not to start in 2005—when, as we hope, we win the bid—as her Government have suggested, but contrarily, as we have suggested, to start so that it coincides with the Athens Olympics when the Olympics will be at the height of public interest? The Minister for Sport and Tourism has accepted that it would be possible under International Olympic Committee rules to start an Olympic lottery to coincide with this year's Athens Olympics. That would raise more money for sport, so will she continue to consider that?
Tessa Jowell: The hon. Gentleman will be aware that we will no doubt return to that matter during the business of the House later this afternoon. I shall make it absolutely clear why we have taken our decision: first, as he will be aware, because the IOC will simply not permit an Olympic lottery to be mounted on any premature assumption that a specific city will host the games; and secondly, because I have given undertakings to the many good causes that will suffer some reduction in funds as a result of the Olympic lottery that that will not happen until and unless—as we all hope—London wins the bid to stage the Olympics. That decision will be announced in 2005.
Mr. Barry Gardiner (Brent, North) (Lab): I am sure that the whole House agrees with the Secretary of State about the way in which a London 2012 Olympics could inspire a new generation of young athletes. Will she tell the House what she will do to ensure that the 2012 games will be clean and free of drugs? How are we going to get drugs out of sport so that our young people know that the role models who they follow are good, clean role models?
Tessa Jowell: I thank my hon. Friend for that point. Of course, the issue is of great concern to not only the IOC, but, more generally, the governing bodies of sport. We can say with great pride that our contribution to the World Anti-Doping Agency is widely recognised by the IOC and, indeed, I hope that that will be seen as a strength when our bid is considered. I place on record my appreciation for the efforts of my right hon. Friend the Minister for Sport and Tourism in ensuring that the UK Government maintain leadership on that important matter.
Tourism
2. Mr. David Heathcoat-Amory (Wells) (Con): Whether she seeks to spend an equivalent sum per head of population in England on tourism promotion as is spent in other parts of the UK. [151921]
The Minister for Sport and Tourism (Mr. Richard Caborn): I am satisfied that the current level of funding is producing excellent results, particularly in England. For the first time for many years, as I think the right hon. Gentleman knows, we are now promoting England domestically. Last November, VisitBritain launched its domestic marketing strategy for England, which has a
strong emphasis on the public-private partnership. Building on the success of last autumn's enjoy England campaign has given us good results indeed.
Mr. Heathcoat-Amory : Will the Minister confirm that Government expenditure on tourism promotion is 24p per head of population for England per year, but that the equivalent figure for Scotland is £5.50 a head and in Wales it is £8.10? Does he think that that is in any way reasonable or fair? What would he say to a west country tourism operator who sees tourists and tourism jobs going across to neighbouring Wales simply because of the large state subsidy, much of which is paid for by English taxpayers?
Mr. Caborn: Not to be too pedantic, the expenditure is actually 21p in England and 570p in Scotland—[Interruption.] I said "not to be too pedantic". Output is relevant as well. I am sure that the right hon. Gentleman is a good Conservative and wants good value for money. We spend that 21p in England and receive £208 per head spend from inbound visitors. In Scotland, the spend from visitors is £159 per head and in Wales it is £86 per head. It is real value for money when 21p brings in £208 in England and 570p brings in £159 in Scotland. As a very good Conservative, the right hon. Gentleman should welcome those figures.
Jim Knight (South Dorset) (Lab): I certainly praise the value for money we receive in England for our tourism spend and press the case for the south-west to get even more value for money by getting more money.
The Minister will know from talking to the Secretary of State following her big conversation in Dorset, how important the tourism industry is to the south-west but tourism is not just about spending; other issues matter as well. Will the Minister spread some light on his conversations with the Department for Education and Skills about the six-term organisation of the school year and its effect on the tourism industry?
Mr. Caborn: The school year is a matter for local authorities.
On the south-west, we recently moved all matters relating to tourism into the development agencies so that they could become a major part of the economic driver. [Interruption.] The right hon. Member for Wells (Mr. Heathcoat-Amory) just crowed on about putting more money into tourism and if he just would listen, he would hear me confirm that the South West of England Regional Development Agency is now putting £14 million into the south-west. One NorthEast is investing £13.1 million in its area. That dwarfs the 21p per head that he mentioned. The regional development agencies are taking tourism seriously and see it as one of the major developments in terms of inward investment and employment. Many of them are doing a first-class job with VisitBritain.
Mr. Patrick McLoughlin (West Derbyshire) (Con): If the Minister is correct that the Government are giving more importance to the amount of money spent by individuals when they visit areas, will he consider ways in which he could help the peak district, which gets more
than 20 million visitors a year who, on average, spend very little? That is not good for the rural industries in the area.
Mr. Caborn: The hon. Gentleman raises an interesting and serious point: how can we get tourists, especially those who come to see day attractions, to stop overnight? It is a good question. The industry is working hard on that. VisitBritain and VisitEngland are also working to that end. The major visitor attractions are trying not only to get people to stay overnight, but to extend the tourist year. A lot is going on. We have regional development agencies and I hope that tourism is now seen as a major part of the economic development of the regions.
The trade deficit in tourism is £15 billion a year, but the business reaps in around £75 billion a year. By 2010, that will have reached £100 billion. We have to grow it at 3p to 3.5p per annum to stand still. That is the challenge to the industry.
Mr. Kelvin Hopkins (Luton, North) (Lab): My right hon. Friend mentions the trade deficit in tourism. Is he concerned about the depreciation of the dollar and the continuing high parity of the pound, which must be having a serious effect on tourism? Has he made an assessment of that and will he look into it to see what can be done about it?
Mr. Caborn: We always make a continuous assessment. In terms of tourists from north America, it is not so much the dollar that matters. We are working hard to get those visitors back into the UK, but it is about confidence. VisitBritain's work and its million visitor campaign in north America has paid dividends, but the parity of the dollar and the pound is not that important at this stage for north American visitors.
Mr. Malcolm Moss (North-East Cambridgeshire) (Con): According to Tourism Alliance, 85 per cent. of overseas visitors to the UK come to England, but we heard the derisory and paltry figures that are spent on promoting England. In view of the balance of payments deficit in tourism, to which the Minister alluded, does he agree that we should invest more, not less, in promoting England as a destination?
If we adopt the Government's present strategy of investing more through the regions, will we not pit region against region instead of concentrating on promoting the whole?
Mr. Caborn: It is unfortunate that the hon. Gentleman finished in that tone, because there has been nothing of that sort involving the regional development agencies. When the agencies were set up, there was the negative argument that region would be set against region, but that has not been the reality: on the contrary, the agencies have worked together. There have been many examples of such collaboration over the past three to four years.
We must address many structural weaknesses in the tourism industry as we seek to develop it, for example, the industry's skills base. If we ask young people in schools and career offices whether they would consider going into the tourism industry, they reject it as second-
rate. To help the industry, we have set up a sector skills council that will begin to operate within the next two months. As a result, I hope that we will be able to put tourism alongside any other industry by ensuring that it offers opportunities, well-paid jobs and a career structure. It is important to change current attitudes, because that is how we shall see a growth in tourism.
Chris Bryant (Rhondda) (Lab): Is it not true that we need to get the tourist associations from Wales, Scotland, England and Northern Ireland working far more closely together? The vast majority of international visitors coming to the UK visit only London. If they leave this country without having seen the beauties of Scotland or Wales, we have not served them very well.
Mr. Caborn: We all work together through VisitBritain, which is a UK-wide organisation that my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State set up. We also meet the Tourism Ministers of the devolved Administrations. My right hon. Friend has developed that joint structure much more firmly and has brought the Tourism Alliance together so that, for the first time, the industry speaks with one voice. In that sense, we are trying to bring the UK tourism industry together. I hope that we are working with a much stronger partnership because we want to tackle some of the structural weaknesses in the industry.
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |