Previous SectionIndexHome Page

Playing Fields

3. Mr. Andrew Robathan (Blaby) (Con): When he last met the National Playing Fields Association; and what was discussed. [180462]

The Minister for Sport and Tourism (Mr. Richard Caborn): On 27 May 2004, I met representatives from the NPFA, along with representatives from each of the other organisations that make up the national playing fields monitoring group. The purpose of the meeting was to discuss the future role of the monitoring group.

Mr. Robathan: Why do so few on the monitoring group agree with the Government's assessment that the development of playing fields is under control? Has the Minister heard the comments by Don Earley, the deputy director of the NPFA:


 
28 Jun 2004 : Column 6
 

Those who are involved with playing fields know that both development applications and approvals for planning applications are increasing. More than half of the planning applications approved in the past year led to a reduction in playing fields or sports facilities.

Mr. Caborn: First, Don Earley attended the meeting that I referred to, and he did not give that impression. He is aware of the draft terms of reference that we have suggested to take the debate forward, which we want to do, rather than always reflecting on the past. The hon. Member for Blaby (Mr. Robathan) knows that, in 1990, the Conservative Administration gave planning permission, lasting for 15 years, to build an office block on a cricket pitch in his constituency.

We are engaged in a constructive discussion with the NPFA and Don Earley. I do not know where the statement quoted by the hon. Member for Blaby came from, because Don Earley did not make such points to us, and he and other partners want to work constructively to find solutions to some of the problems. We want to advance the debate, rather than always looking at headlines in the Daily Mail and other papers, which will not acknowledge the £250 million investment in 2002–03.

David Taylor (North-West Leicestershire) (Lab/Co-op): I cannot be the only hon. Member who sometimes feels a sense of foreboding and doom when I hear that a particular activity is "at the heart of Government policy". Recent statistics on playing fields and open space sales show that about one third of such sales occur in closed or closing schools, which is understandable, and that another third of such sales lead to improved facilities, which is fine. Is the Minister happy that the policy is sufficiently stringent to prevent other sales and disposals creeping under the wire, because one quarter of approved applications do not fall into either of those two categories?

Mr. Caborn: Very much so. The rules and regulations on the closure of playing fields are robust, and I am convinced that they will address the growth in sales. Planning applications for improvement and development are increasing—many such applications involve a change of use for playing fields—whereas in the past many planning applications involved closure. Conservative Members should realise that our young people want to play using state-of-the-art equipment such as Astroturf pitches, indoor facilities and floodlit areas. When Mick Hill, a fantastic javelin thrower, opened the English Institute for Sport in my city of Sheffield, he said, "If only we'd had these facilities 10 or 15 years ago so that our Olympians were able to practice indoors, we could have produced better results than we are doing now. It is great to pick up a javelin that is warm and not to have to pick the ice off it on a winter's evening somewhere up in Leeds."

Mr. Nick Hawkins (Surrey Heath) (Con): The Minister should recognise that in his Department's categorisation of the number of sites that have been allowed to be built on, the largest sub-category is:


 
28 Jun 2004 : Column 7
 

Many of those involved in sport are mainly interested in children being allowed to kick a ball or play cricket wherever there is a playing field. They do not want that to be used as an excuse for allowing development, as we suspect that the Government have. If one travels to other countries that have produced many more successful Olympians than we have, one does not see their playing fields being built on. The Government are trying to find excuses for building on playing pitches instead of doing what they promised to do—stop the building.

Mr. Caborn: I have heard some claptrap in my life, but that is the best yet. When the Conservative Administration were in power, they closed 40 playing fields a month, whereas we have put in place the most robust criteria on playing fields that there has ever been. The revised version of PPG17 reduces the area of playing fields being built on—admittedly, not by as much as the National Playing Fields Association wanted, but that is part of the ongoing debate. The situation is a darn site better now than it was when the Conservatives were in power.

Arts (North-west)

5. Helen Jones (Warrington, North) (Lab): If she will make a statement on Government support for the arts in the north-west. [180464]

The Minister for the Arts (Estelle Morris): During the current spending period, Arts Council England, North West will spend almost £80 million in support of the arts across the region. Annual investment is increasing from £20.8 million last year to £28.4 million in 2005–06—an overall increase of 37 per cent.

Helen Jones: I am grateful to my right hon. Friend for that reply and sorry that my hon. Friend the Member for St. Helens, North (Mr. Watts) is not here to hear it. However, does she accept that a lot of that money goes into the big regional centres and that smaller towns such as Warrington find it much more difficult to access it? What support can she can give to initiatives such as the Pyramid arts centre in Warrington and the Warrington art gallery, which is one of the oldest municipal art galleries in the country, to ensure that the people of all the towns in the region have easy access to the arts?

Estelle Morris: I believe that the Pyramid centre is one of the organisations in Warrington that has received Arts Council funding. Nevertheless, there is an element of truth in what my hon. Friend says. There is a tendency for regional arts organisations to invest in centres of population because more people can gain access to visit and transport links tend to be better. I agree that that by itself is not sufficient; over time, I want investment to stretch far beyond the urban centres.

I draw my hon. Friend's attention to the "Renaissance in the Regions" initiative whereby money is invested in museums that link with smaller museums serving much smaller population centres. I hope that that is a sign of things to come. Although Warrington museum is not part of the renaissance in the north-west
 
28 Jun 2004 : Column 8
 
of England, it is a hugely successful project, and I hope that given the necessary resources we will be able to expand it.

Mr. Michael Jack (Fylde) (Con): Sadly, the borough of Fylde, unlike Warrington, does not have an art gallery. As a result, its substantial art collection, which includes many of the major works by the Victorian artist Richard Ansdell, remains unseen by members of the public throughout the north-west. Will the Minister use her Department's resources and expertise to provide advice and a strategic way forward to ensure that the people of Fylde and the north-west can at long last see these art treasures?

Estelle Morris: I am not sure whether the Department can do anything to build a museum or to deal with that specific problem, but I understand and am concerned about the number of beautiful objects and artefacts that the public never see. Almost two thirds of the objects that museums hold are never seen or are in storage. There is a need for some radical and innovative thinking to ensure that they are seen. If Fylde does not have a museum, perhaps some of those artefacts could go on loan to neighbouring places, which have museums. I understand that that might be second best as far as the right hon. Gentleman is concerned, but I shall draw the existence of the collection to the attention of the north-west regional Museum, Libraries and Archives Council and hope that it can be seen. It is no good to anybody if it is not seen.

Mr. Boris Johnson (Henley) (Con): How can the Minister reconcile the positive tone of the Secretary of State's recent speech, which was warmly welcomed in the arts world because it appeared to be moving away from intrusive political objectives for arts funding, with the Government's continuing and increasing addiction to quotas and targets? They affect museums, not least in the north-west. Does not she agree that the single greatest act of creativity and human ingenuity that the Government have encouraged in the arts is the invention of bogus statistics, which are designed purely to satisfy their meddlesomeness and Stalinist obsession with quotas?

Estelle Morris: The hon. Gentleman falls into the trap of thinking that, as a country, we have to choose between art, museums and galleries as excellent and worthy in their own right and the contribution that they can make to other parts of civic and national life. My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State said that it was a case not of "either/or" but of "both". Like her, I am happy to defend art for art's sake—I believe that we should always do that—but that does not detract from the contribution that art can make to wider social agendas. It is important that art can contribute to well-being, community cohesion, regeneration, higher educational standards and better mental health. We should not ignore that.

On targets, the Government are investing in the arts—including in museums and galleries in the north-west as well as in other regions. The taxpayer has a right to ask us what return there has been for that investment. We therefore ensure that the investment is targeted and brings about positive outcomes, such as more visitors
 
28 Jun 2004 : Column 9
 
from a wider range of backgrounds. I am pleased that we have those statistics because they allow us to show the success of the Government's policies.


Next Section IndexHome Page