|Previous Section||Index||Home Page|
Mr. Don Foster: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport what discussions he has had with (a) his EU counterparts and (b) European Commissioners on the conclusion of negotiations between the EC and the US on the US withdrawal of its gambling commitments from the World Trade Organisation (WTO) and the consequent compensatory adjustments offered by the US in the WTO General Agreement on Trade in Services. 
Mr. Sutcliffe [holding answer 21 July 2008]: I have had no such discussions. I refer the hon. Member to the answer given to him on 15 September 2008, Official Report, column 2124W, by the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department for Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform, my hon. Friend the Member for Harrow West (Mr. Thomas), who has responsibility for trade and consumer affairs.
Margaret Hodge: Buildings that are of special historic or architectural interest are listed under the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990. Listing protects a building against unauthorized demolition, alteration or extension and ensures that its special interest is taken into account when proposals are put forward that affect its character or appearance.
English Heritage, the Governments statutory adviser for the historic environment, gave £24 million in grants in 2007-08 to protect and encourage enjoyment of historic buildings and monuments. English Heritage recommended 564 buildings for listing, and during the year, 57 buildings were removed from the English Heritage Buildings at
Risk Register as their futures had been secured. English Heritage is a statutory consultee in the statutory planning process and gave advice on 17,090 consent applications in 2007-08.
In April 2008, the Government published a draft Heritage Protection Bill. The draft Bill contains provisions setting out a framework to unify heritage protection regimes, allow greater public involvement in decision-making and place heritage at the heart of the planning system, thereby making the system more transparent and making heritage protection easier to understand and manage.
Bob Russell: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport if he will discuss with Sport England making the Institute of Groundsmanship a national partner; and if he will make a statement. 
Andy Burnham [holding answer 15 September 2008]: Sport England has advised that the Institute of Groundsmanship (IOG) is one of several membership organisations who play a role in providing a range of services to the sporting landscape. The IOG has relationships with a number of national governing bodies but not with Sport England. Sport England has advised that it has no plans at present to increase the number of national partners that it supports.
Mr. Drew: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport if he will bring forward proposals to increase the powers of the Advertising Standards Authority to supervise advertising on the internet, with particular reference to its effect on children. 
the advertising industry should continue to drive forward activity already underway to futureproof the current regulatory system, especially in relation to digital advertising.
I recommend that consideration is given to how promotional marketing in non-paid for online space can be brought within the regulatory framework for advertising, in line with principles on the prevention of harmful and offensive advertising to children outlined in the CAP code.
On 24 June we published our action plan from implementing the recommendations from the Byron Review which stated that we would take stock of the evidence in spring 2009 and encourage any further action as necessary.
Margaret Hodge: The information requested is not available. English Heritage's listed building system does not record types of ownership of listed buildings. English Heritage does however hold information on ownership of properties on the English Heritage at risk register.
Mr. Don Foster: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport how many full-time equivalent members of staff in (a) his Department and (b) its associated public bodies are working on projects relating to the London 2012 Olympics and Paralympics Games; how many of them are working on (i) project management, (ii) legacy planning, (iii) project oversight and (iv) financial oversight; and what plans he has for future staffing levels in each case. 
Mr. Sutcliffe: The London 2012 Olympic and Paralympic Games are a key priority across Government. The Government Olympic Executive (GOE) was set up within the Department for Culture, Media and Sport to oversee the delivery of Government objectives for the Games.
As of 1 September 2008 the GOE consisted of 71.7 full-time equivalent (FTE) staff. Of this total, no members of staff are working in roles defined as project management roles, 17 are working in roles mainly relating to legacy planning, 20 on roles mainly relating to project oversight and six on roles mainly relating to financial control/oversight. The remainder of staff work mainly on staging, strategic communications and parliamentary matters.
In terms of further specific posts relating to Olympic projects within DCMS, 7.8 FTE staff are employed on Olympic Programme Management, the Cultural Olympiad and in the Press Office. Of these, approximately 3.7 FTE are in roles relating to project management and approximately 1.1 FTE in roles relating to project oversight.
The purpose of these posts is to manage the wider DCMS interests in relation to staging the Games such as elite sport, sport participation, tourism and culture. The remaining three FTE staff are full-time press officers.
I refer the hon. Member to the answer given to him by my right hon. Friend the Minister for the Olympics on 22 July 2008, Official Report, column 977W in regard to the number of FTE members of staff in the Olympic Delivery Authority.
Mr. Hunt: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport which organisations provided media monitoring services to (a) his Department, (b) Sport England, (c) English Heritage, (d) the Heritage Lottery Fund, (e) the Big Lottery Fund, (f) Arts Council England and (g) the Museum, Libraries and Archives Council in each of the last three years; what specific services were received; and what the value of each contract held has been. 
Mr. Sutcliffe: The following figures have been provided by the bodies requested. They include subscriptions to bespoke media monitoring services and the cost of press cuttings. They do not include the costs of any transcripts or recordings, fees to the Newspaper Licensing Authority, or analysis of press coverage.
|F/Y 2005-06||F/Y 2006-07||F/Y 2007-08|
|(1) BIG media monitoring provides coverage across the UK for the delivery of half of national lottery good cause funding delivery as well as Awards For All; a cross-distributor programme which is funded by four lottery distributors including BIG.|
(2) HLF have advised us that for purposes of commercial confidentiality they are not able to disclose the individual costs associated with each supplier.
All figures are inclusive of vat, other than those concerning English Heritage.
|Next Section||Index||Home Page|