|Previous Section||Index||Home Page|
Mr. Don Foster: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport (1) what her Departments most recent estimate is of the costs to industry of complying with the gaming machine regulations to be made in accordance with sections 240 and 241 of the Gambling Act 2005 and the new machine technical standards; 
(2) what representations her Department has received from industry regarding the lead times necessary to convert existing machines and to build new machines to comply with the new technical standards required under the Gambling Act 2005 and the new gaming machine regulations to achieve the planned implementation date of 1 September; and if she will make a statement. 
Mr. Caborn: The Department is consulting industry and other groups on proposals under sections 240 and 241 of the Gambling Act 2005, including on potential compliance costs and lead times, and within the context of the licensing objectives to keep gambling crime free, to make sure that gambling is fair and open and to protect children and vulnerable adults from harm. In the course of doing so the Department has received written representations from a number of organisations.
Mr. Don Foster: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport when she expects to lay before Parliament the statutory instrument implementing the gaming machine regulations to be made under sections 240 and 241 of the Gambling Act 2005. 
Mr. Caborn: My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State is currently consulting with industry and other groups on draft proposals under sections 240 and 241 of the Gambling Act 2005 and currently expects to lay the relevant statutory instruments in August 2007.
The Independent European Sport Review was instigated under the UK Presidency following the expression of concerns about the state of football by both UEFA and FIFA. The Review, conducted by an independent review team, undertook an examination of the challenges to the future stability and success of the game posed by commercialisation and the place of sport within the wider EU legal
framework. Its publication in final form in October has triggered a wide-ranging debate both within sport and at EU level.
The Review contains recommendations aimed at footballs governing bodies, the European Commission and member states. Sport is autonomous and much of the responsibility for taking forward the issues raised lies with sport itself. It is for football to agree what it wants to achieve, develop more detailed proposals and engage with the political authorities. My Department has been encouraging this process and there is a well developed debate taking place among the numerous clubs, leagues and governing bodies across Europe.
UEFA has made good progress and already implemented a range of the Reviews recommendations aimed at it. These include putting in place a new Strategic Council to involve clubs, leagues and players in top-level decision-making, a range of enhancements to its Club Licensing system, the launch of a feasibility study into a European Supporters Direct, based on the highly successful UK model, and enhancement of anti-racism disciplinary measures.
The key issue the Review raises for the Commission and member states is how the 2000 Nice Declaration can be effectively implemented to ensure the special nature of Sport is recognised in policy-making and in the application of EU rules. Doing so will help overcome the current uncertainty facing those involved in the game and help enable them to find the right balance between its commercial and sporting sides.
The UK has been working closely with the Commission and other member states to take this forward. The Commission will publish a White Paper on Sport this summer that will address this issue and respond to the Reviews recommendations aimed at it. I would like to see this set out clearly how the Commission plans to sports-proof its decision-making and thus fulfil the commitments made in the Nice Declaration. I strongly welcome indications that it will also recommend the development of an ongoing structured dialogue between sport and the EU aimed at finding a way forward on the kind of issues raised by the Review.
There is widespread support across Europe to help sport tackle the challenges facing it. The European Parliament issued a Report on the future of Professional Sport on 28 March (the Belet Report) which welcomes the Review and asks the Commission to establish an action plan based upon its recommendations. The Council of Europe has, at the UKs instigation, agreed to consider the issues raised by the Review as part of its new Enlarged Partial Agreement on Sport.
The Review is one of a number of recent initiatives that have acted as a catalyst to the wider debate that has been going on in football, and other sports, about where the right balance between its commercial and sporting sides lies and how it can best secure its future stability and success within the wider EU framework. I look forward to the Commissions White Paper as the next key milestone in taking forward the debate on how the political level can help football, and sport more widely, to achieve this within the wider EU framework.
To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport what representations she has
received from (a) the Premier League and (b) individual Premier League clubs on the European Sports Review. 
Mr. Caborn: Regular discussions have taken place around the issues raised by the Independent European Sports Review with a wide range of professional sports stakeholders. The review covers a substantial number of subject areas that have long been of interest to professional sports and therefore regularly forms part of the backdrop to discussions and correspondence on a variety of issues.
There has been an ongoing dialogue with the Premier League since the review's publication. The Premier League, along with other stakeholders, were invited to set out their thoughts on the review in writing following its publication and took this opportunity to present a written submission to me. I have subsequently met the chief executive and chairman of the League on a number of occasions and recently attended a meeting of Premier League chairs, at which individual clubs had the opportunity to put forward their views and engage in the debate.
Mr. Mark Field: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport what measures her Department plans to take to ensure transparency in the conduct of those television operators employing telephone voting in their programme; and if she will assess the merits of introducing a code of conduct for such operators. 
Mr. Woodward: Responsibility for regulation rests with the independent regulators, Ofcom and ICSTIS. Following a consultation with broadcasters ICSTIS has set out a range of actions to restore public trust. This includes introducing a licensing regime for all premium rate service providers, operating participation TV services. Ofcom has also recently announced an inquiry into the compliance of broadcasters.
Hugh Robertson: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport when she will reply to question numbers 129383 and 129384, on expenditure on the 2012 Olympics, tabled by the hon. Member for Faversham and Mid Kent on 20 March. 
Ben Chapman: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will make a statement on progress on discussions between his Department and the Department for Communities and Local Government on council tax exemption for members of the armed forces serving overseas. 
The MOD also maintains the ability to support the Home Office and the police, who have the lead responsibility for security in the UK through the provision of air defence and other specialist capabilities, such as explosive ordnance disposal.
Mr. Harper: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how frequently the quality of single living accommodation is reviewed for the purposes of assessing grade for charge; how this process is performed; and if he will make a statement. 
Derek Twigg [holding answer 19 March 2007]: The assessment of all Defence accommodation is undertaken by grading boards consisting of a mixture of service officers and technical experts. The process of grading involves assigning deficiency points against a predefined checklist of assessment criteria. The number of deficiency points awarded, if any, then determines the grade for charge, on a scale of one to four, and hence the level of accommodation charge. Normally accommodation is graded on a four year rolling programme. A grading board may also convene on completion of a refurbishment or if the grade for charge is challenged by the occupant shortly after move in.
Derek Twigg [holding answer 16 April 2007]: We are currently looking at a range of options for personnel should the South African Prohibition of Mercenary Activities and Prohibition and Regulation of Certain Activities in Areas of Armed Conflict Bill be enacted so that we can support those who may be affected.
Under current rules eligible South Africans serving in the British armed forces can apply for British citizenship if they have been resident in the UK for a five year period, or three years if married or in a civil partnership to a British citizen. Service in the armed forces, at home and abroad, counts towards the residential qualifying period.
Mr. Harper: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what assessment he has made of the impact of the South African Prohibition of Mercenary Activities and Prohibition and Regulation of Certain Activities in Areas of Armed Conflict Bill on the ability of South African personnel (a) to serve in and (b) to deploy with the British armed forces. 
Derek Twigg [holding answer 16 April 2007]: The proposed Bill, if enacted as currently drafted, would mean that South African personnel would need to apply for permission to serve in a foreign armed force, but that such permission would lapse if the person to whom it has been granted takes part in an armed conflict.
We are urgently investigating the potential consequences for South African personnel currently serving in the UK armed forces, should the legislation be enacted, so that we can support those who may be affected.
Mr. Ingram: There have been a number of trials of the 155mm L20A1 extended range bomblet shell, which contains M85 bomblets. When the totality of test and acceptance firings is analysed over the life of the munition, the average bomblet failure rate is approximately 2 per cent. As part of its ongoing quality and performance regime the MOD continues to actively monitor the performance of this system and explore ways of reducing the failure rate still further in partnership with the supplier.
Mr. Mullin: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence whether it is still official practice to hood and handcuff Iraqi prisoners and to make them adopt the stress position; and if he will make a statement. 
Des Browne: UK forces are expressly forbidden from hooding any prisoners or making them adopt stress positions under any circumstances. During the transit of prisoners, however, the use of blindfolding (usually with blacked out goggles) is permitted when necessary to prevent compromise of operational security or the safety of detainees through identification by other detainees. Handcuffing of prisoners is permitted when necessary to prevent escape and for the protection of UK troops and/or other detainees.
Mrs. Iris Robinson: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many members of the Territorial Army (a) were killed and (b) were injured in action in (i) Iraq and (ii) Afghanistan in each of the last five years. 
(1) Prior to 2005 the WIA statistics may not contain all instances of the lowest severity (unlisted) classification of injury.
Mr. Blunkett: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills how many adults in each (a) parliamentary constituency and (b) Learning and Skills Council area have gained basic skills as a result of the Skills for Life programme. 
Phil Hope: The following table shows the total number of adults (aged 19 and above) achieving at least one Skills for Life/basic skills learning aim in the period August 2005 to July 2006 by Local Learning and Skills Council (LSC) area. (It is important to note that many learners achieve more than one SFL aim and these data are not discounted for repeat learners.) These data are not currently available by parliamentary constituency.
|Next Section||Index||Home Page|