| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
17 Jan 2007 : Column 1179W—continued
Genesis Review
Kate Hoey: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport when the Genesis Review on developing sporting talent commissioned by Sport England will be published; what the cost was of the review; what the terms of reference were of the Genesis Review; and what the review recommended. [115627]
Mr. Caborn: The Genesis Review on developing sporting talent commissioned by Sport England was published on 29 August 2006. The cost of the review was £49,749 exclusive of VAT.
The terms of reference of the Genesis Review are provided as follows:
A sport’s ability to articulate in a written document the athlete pathway (e.g. Long Term Athlete Development framework/performer development model) including:
(a) The player curriculum;
(b) The sport’s competition programme (competition framework);
(c) The athlete pathway and support structures (e.g. clubs/squads/etc);
(d) The nature of talent, and requisite attributes for identification/selection;
(e) The constituent parts of an appropriate ‘performance environment’ (e.g. club).
The application of the athlete pathway to the sports programmes and operations (e.g. club development programmes/coach education systems).
The capacity of the NGB to lead talent development in the community setting including the development of coaching excellence.
The key geographical areas in which the sport may have the ability to deliver support to talented athletes (given viable improvements).
The recommendations of the review are as follows:
Following its recent structural and staff changes, Sport England should re-establish its understanding of national governing bodies and their sports; seeking to understand them, know them, support them, challenge their thinking and, where possible, provide them with the resources to deliver their plans—to hold them to account but not to judge them.
Sport England should support, as appropriate, all the sports under the scope of the review so that the breadth of choice remains for those participants and prospective participants who may not be attracted to the major sports—and may even dislike them!
Sport England should work with the NGBs to identify where new investment will have most impact, building on the findings outlined in the report. This will mean funding different areas and different levels for different sports, as their needs dictate e.g. for one sport, investment in community clubs may be most appropriate; for others, it could be the development or strengthening of county or even regional centres of excellence; and for some of the smaller sports, this may mean providing them with help to develop their plans in greater detail.
Sport England should devise an application process to enable funding to be released as quickly as possible, as many NGBs already have robust plans in place and have identified key areas for investment.
Sport England should acknowledge that differing sports are at different stages of evolution in their talent development programmes and will require different types and levels of support.
Sport England should ensure that all sports are supported in the most appropriate way for them. Sport England, while working through its regions, should not lose sight of the bigger national picture for each of its sports. Sport England regions will determine which sports they can provide substantive support to but Sport England must ensure there is a mechanism in place to support other, smaller sports.
Sport England must ensure that sports can deliver national programmes, albeit with regional variations.
Sport England should seek to play a role that individual NGBs would find difficult or impossible to do for themselves.
Sport England should seek to “add value” to the work of the NGBs by providing services that they would find difficult to resource/provide themselves.
An audit of all available facilities in county/region and of the sports’ needs for that county/region followed by liaison with local authorities and other providers to ensure the optimum affordable use of all available facilities. Greater use could be made of the Facilities Planning Model, not just for facility development, but also for the development of talent.
Providing support services for smaller NGBs that lack the infrastructure to do keep up to speed with the various developments in sport.
Ensuring co-ordinated action across the regional sports boards and county sports partnerships.
National Lottery
Mr. Evennett: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport how much funding the Big Lottery Fund has provided for sports programmes and projects in (a) London and (b) Bexley borough since 2004-05. [115502]
Mr. Caborn: The Big Lottery Fund has made the following awards in London and Bexley borough through its programmes which specifically benefit sport since 2004-05:
| £ | ||
| London | Of which: Bexley borough | |
Active England is a joint programme with Sport England. The Big Lottery Fund has provided £77.5 million and Sport England £31 million.
In addition the Big Lottery Fund has made various grants which benefit sport via its non-sport programmes but the value of these is not known.
National Lottery: Post Office
Mr. Swire: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport on how many occasions since 1997 National Lottery funding has been distributed to community projects for the support of post offices. [115991]
Mr. Caborn: It is not possible to answer the question in precisely the terms asked. My Department’s Lottery Grants Database, which uses information supplied by the Lottery distributors and can be searched at www.lottery.culture.gov.uk, records 40 awards in which the phrase ‘post office’ occurs in the project description. Approximately one-third of these are to do with village halls or other community facilities buildings which provide, among other functions, post office services. The other awards listed were made for a variety of purposes. For example, there are two awards to groups of post office pensioners, one to an adult education project also supported by Consignia plc, and several to projects which happen to be located near a post office.
Olympic Games
Mr. Jim Cunningham: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport what events or initiatives are planned to ensure that the West Midlands is involved in the 2012 Olympic games. [115473]
Mr. Caborn: The Government are committed to ensuring that the whole of the UK, including the West Midlands, can contribute to and benefit from the 2012 Olympic games and Paralympic games. We are working closely with the London Organising Committee of the Olympic Games and Paralympic Games (LOCOG) and the Nations and Regions Group (NRG), chaired by Charles Allen, which brings together representatives from every nation and region. Each nation and region is developing its own plan to maximise the impact of the games in its area, as well as the wider opportunities to deliver a sustainable legacy from the games.
The West Midlands Leadership Group for the 2012 games (the regional steering group) will be working with LOCOG to maximise the opportunities of the London 2012 Volunteering Strategy for the region. Advantage West Midlands, the regional development agency for the West Midlands, will also be hosting business opportunities workshops over the forthcoming months in partnership with West Midlands Business Council, including providing more detailed guidance on procurement opportunities.
LOCOG is also developing its plans for how the Cultural Olympiad will be delivered in the regions, and has conducted a tour of the regions to establish how best to make the festival a truly UK-wide event. LOCOG’s plans currently include a nationwide torch relay, and we are currently setting up the Legacy Trust, to support cultural and sporting programmes designed to support the games, across the UK. Coventry will also host the UK Schools games in 2007.
LOCOG will be working, through the Nations And Regions Groups and through a comprehensive ticketing strategy, to ensure that as many people as possible throughout the UK can participate in the games by attending events. Further detailed information regarding plans for future involvement and activities can be provided for the West Midlands by the relevant NRG co-ordinator, Jenny Drew (Culture West Midlands, The Regional Partnership Centre, Albert House, Quay Place, Edward Street, Birmingham, B1 2RA).
Seminars
Mr. Hayes: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport what seminars have been hosted by her Department in the last 12 months. [109580]
Mr. Lammy: The information is as follows:
Heritage Protection Regional Seminar—Manchester (October 2005)
Heritage Protection Regional Seminar—London (November 2005)
Better Regulations initiative seminar—(January 2006)
Finance Directors Seminar—(February 2006)
NDPB Chief Executives’ Seminar—(March 2006)
Strategic Risk Seminar—(April 2006)
Comprehensive Spending Review and Efficiency Programme Seminar—(April 2006)
Crisis Management Seminar—(May 2006)
Procurement Seminar for NDPB procurement community—(September 2006)
Built Environment and the Olympics Seminar—(November 2006)
Procurement workshop on sustainability—(November 2006)
Managing Conflicts of Interest in Charitable Museums Seminar—(December 2006)
Learning as part of the museums strategy Understanding the Future—(December 2006)
Climate Change Seminar—(November 2006)
Equality and Diversity Seminar for NDPBs—(November 2006)
NDPB Capability Review Seminar—(November 2006)
Meeting the Challenges of Demographic Change Seminar—(November 2006)
Conundrums of Reform Seminar—(November 2006)
Sports Coaching
Hugh Robertson: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport how much (a) Exchequer and (b) Lottery funding (i) was put into sports coaching in each year since 1997 and (ii) is expected to be committed in each year to 2012. [114787]
Mr. Caborn [holding answer 15 January 2007]: It is not possible to provide all the information requested without incurring disproportionate costs. However, we are able to provide the following funding information:
The DCMS and DfES are spending nearly £70 million of exchequer funding on sports coaching between 2003-04 and 2007-08 to implement the key recommendations of the Coaching Task Force and support the National School Sport Strategy:
| £ | |||
| DCMS funding | DfES funding | Total | |
| n/a = not applicable | |||
Exchequer funding beyond 2008 is subject to the outcome of the comprehensive spending review.
UK Sport and Sport England advise that they have allocated the following amounts of exchequer funding to support sports coach UK(scUK) since 1997. This is additional to the Coaching Task Force funding received by scUK.
| £ | |||
| UK Sport funding | Sport England funding | Total | |
| Next Section | Index | Home Page |