|Previous Section||Index||Home Page|
Tessa Jowell: The cost review group chaired by the Minister for Sport assessed opportunities for reducing costs. This included the consideration of alternative options for the configuration of the Olympic park, alternative locations for venues, and for rationalising the design of supporting infrastructure. The group did not produce a report, although the output of its work informed decisions on the new Olympic park master plan announced on 7 June 2006.
Mr. Hoban: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport pursuant to the answer of 22 May 2007, Official Report, column 1178W, on the Olympic Games: Greater London, on what date discussions of VAT with HM Treasury in relation to the proposed Olympic Delivery Authority (a) commenced and (b) concluded. 
Tessa Jowell: I refer the hon. Member to the statement I made to the Culture, Media and Sport Committee on 21 November 2006, reported in paragraphs 48 to 50 of the Committee's report, published on 24 January 2007, where I stated that it was known at the time of the bid that the bid did not include VAT. The basis for that was the understood and agreed assumption that it was not possible to sort out the tax treatment until the delivery structures were in place, and that matter could not be known before the bid was won. This issue was taken forward as part of the cost review work, and I announced the VAT position in respect of the Olympic Delivery Authority in my statement to the House on 15 March 2007.
Mr. Hoban: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport whether her Department received representations before 15 March 2007 from (a) the Olympic Delivery Authority and (b) other bodies involved in the delivery of the 2012 Olympics on the need for swift agreement on a revised Olympics budget in order to avoid increased costs. 
Tessa Jowell: Following London winning the bid, I instituted a thorough review of costs and provisions for the Olympic games. This included consultations and discussions within Government, with the Olympic Delivery Authority (ODA) and with other delivery partners. This also incorporated consideration of what funds needed to be available, and by when. Following the conclusion of this cost review, I announced on 15 March 2007, Official Report, column 450, a budget for the ODA and on a number of issues including wider security, tax and contingency provision.
Mr. Swire: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport when she plans to publish the Memorandum of Understanding on profit-sharing arrangements in respect of the 2012 Olympics agreed between her Department and the Mayor of London. 
Tessa Jowell: The work to develop the revised Memorandum of Understanding between the Government and the Mayor of London is progressing well. The revised Memorandum will be published as soon as possible, following its agreement.
To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport (1) what consideration was
given to matters of specifically Scottish interest when drafting the terms of reference of the Olympic cost review steering group; 
(2) what provision is made for consideration of impacts on Scotland in the contractual specification and terms of reference governing KPMG's provision of on-going advice on the cost of the Olympic games in 2012. 
Tessa Jowell: After winning the bid to host the 2012 Olympic games, I instituted a thorough cost review. This cost review, to which KPMG provided advice, was overseen by the Olympic cost review steering group.
No specific assessment of the interests or impact to Scotland formed part of the drafting of the terms of reference of the Olympic cost review steering group, or the contractual specification and terms of reference governing KPMG's provision of on-going advice on the cost of the Olympic and Paralympic games.
The Government are committed to ensuring that people across the UK, including Scotland can benefit from, and participate in, 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 finalising its own plan to maximise the impact of the games in their area, as well as the wider opportunities to deliver a sustainable legacy from the games.
Further detailed information regarding Scotlands plan can be provided by the relevant NRG Coordinator, Ian Campbell (Scottish Executive, Sports Division, Room 1-B(N), Victoria Quay, Edinburgh, EH6 6QQ).
Tessa Jowell: I refer the hon. Member to the answer I gave to the hon. Member for Faversham and Mid-Kent (Hugh Robertson) on 6 November 2006, Official Report, column 565W and in my evidence to the Culture, Media and Sport Committee on 21 November 2006. My response sets out the basis on which VAT was dealt with in the candidature file prepared in 2004, and the action I took to initiate a review of costs and funding following the success of the bid in autumn 2005. This is also summarised in paragraphs 48 to 50 of the Committee's report published on 24 January.
Anne Milton: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport what assessment her Department has made of the UK's ability to encourage overseas visitors visiting London to visit the rest of the UK; and if she will make a statement. 
Mr. Woodward: DCMS provides funding of around £50 million per annum to VisitBritain, which promotes Britain as a whole. The Department's funding agreement with VisitBritain includes a target that, of the additional expenditure by inbound visitors generated by VisitBritain, a specified percentage should be achieved outside London. For 2005-06, the target was 55 per cent. and VisitBritain exceeded this by achieving a regional spread of 61 per cent.
Campaigns run by VisitBritain and enjoyEngland highlight attractions across the country to both inbound and domestic visitors. They target, for example, the growing demand for city breaks and the lifestyle market (including the appeal of food, sport, culture and family friendly attractions).
VisitBritain also co-funds (with Visit London) the Britain and London Visitor Centre. This acts as a gateway for visitors to learn about, and set out to explore, the rest of the country. VisitBritains quality assessment schemes for accommodation and visitor attractions ensure uniform national standards for visitors.
The Department, along with our partners, will shortly publish a strategy to ensure that the tourism sector makes the most of the opportunities provided by the 2012 Olympic and Paralympic games. One of the principles of this will be that the benefits of the games are felt as widely as possible throughout the UK.
Anne Milton: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport pursuant to the answer of 22 May 2007, Official Report, column 1180W, on VisitBritain, how the changes referred to will improve VisitBritain's ability (a) to promote Britain to overseas visitors and (b) to support the tourism industry's progress towards the target of £100 billion turnover. 
Mr. Woodward: VisitBritain has restructured to meet the challenges posed by market trends, such as the move away from printed consumer literature and towards online marketing. VisitBritain will focus its activities on developing new and growing markets, including proposed increases in staffing levels in the Asia-Pacific region.
Mr. Heath: To ask the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster how much revenue her Department received from advertisements on her Departments (a) public information leaflets and (b) public websites in each of the last 10 years; and if she will make a statement. 
Mr. Heald: To ask the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster pursuant to the answer of 21 May 2007, Official Report, column 1122W, on Departments: manpower, what the estimated annual cost is to the public purse of employing the members of staff without posts. 
Hilary Armstrong: All members of staff in the Departments Priority Talent Pool are engaged in work to deliver the Departments business objectives to ensure that there is no additional cost to the public purse.
Mr. Heald: To ask the Minister without Portfolio what visits she has made involving a mix of political and official engagements where Government car service vehicles were used in 2007; and whether the Government was reimbursed a proportion of the cost in each case. 
Mr. Dai Davies: To ask the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster if she will post each of the policy papers drafted for the Energy and Environment strand of the policy reviews, as referred to in paragraph 9.3 of the Prime Ministers strategy unit report on building on progress: energy and environment, dated 5 June, on the Cabinet Office website. 
Mr. McFadden: Information relating to the policy review is available on the Cabinet Office website http://www.cabinetoffice.gov.uk/policy_review/index.asp. Papers were drafted for working group meetings of each strand of the policy review. However, these were working papers prepared for internal discussion by Ministers and have not been disclosed as to do so could harm the frankness and candour of internal discussions in future.
Tony Baldry: To ask the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster how many people have been assisted through the National Youth Volunteering Service; how many regional outlets have been set up; and what proportion of the £100 million budget has been spent. 
In addition to the grant funded and match funded projects, v has commissioned 20 teams based within local communities with the aim of creating a further 22,800 local opportunities over the next two years.
Mr. Heald: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills how much his Department spent on (a) print and (b) online campaign advertising and sponsorship related to The Guardian newspaper Side by Side supplement. 
Mr. Heald: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills (1) how much his Department has spent on (a) sponsoring newspaper and publication supplements and (b) funding advertorials in newspapers or publications in the last year for which figures are available; and what the topic of each was; 
(2) when he expects to answer Questions (a) 129957 on publications tabled on 22 March 2007 and (b) 129955 on advertising and sponsorship tabled on 21 March 2007 by the hon. Member for North East Hertfordshire. 
|(1) Covers two supplements in Guardian Education and Guardian Society|
Keith Vaz: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills when his Department was informed that the company Centerprise had made the decision not to provide computer equipment in Leicester under the Building Schools for the Future projects. 
Annette Brooke: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills how much was spent on training on multi-agency safeguarding for all services working with parents and children in 2006-07. 
Beverley Hughes: The core statutory guidance document Working Together to Safeguard Children sets out the way in which the training and development of staff and volunteers should be undertaken to help them safeguard and promote the welfare of children effectively. The guidance states that it is the responsibility of employers to identify adequate resources and support for multi-agency training. It is the responsibility of the local authorities (LAs), with their partners in childrens trusts, and in discussion with the Local Safeguarding Childrens Board (LSCB) to decide, which bodies should commission or deliver the training. In some local areas it is the LSCB themselves who are commissioned to deliver the multi-agency training.
The Department only has data on this final type of trainingdelivered by LSCBs themselves. LSCBs were invited to take part in a voluntary survey in December 2006. In those survey returns, planned expenditure on the delivery of training in 2006-07 across those LSCBs for which we have dataaround two thirds of all LSCBs in Englandtotalled around £2 million. If this is representative of all LSCBs then across the whole of England we could expect LSCBs to have spent around £3 million on safeguarding training in 2006-07. However this LSCB expenditure will be only part of the overall expenditure on multi-agency safeguarding training.
|Next Section||Index||Home Page|