What his Department's policy is for increasing the proportion of television programmes that are subtitled. [114851]

The Government's aim is to ensure the provision of the maximum practicable amount of subtitling of television programmes. We are encouraging all broadcasters to respond positively to the Royal National Institute for Deaf People's initiative for a voluntary charter on broadcast subtitling, the foreword for which was provided by my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State.

I am grateful to the Minister for reconfirming the Government's commitment to extending subtitling and other means of improving access to broadcasting for deaf people. I have two requests of the Government. First, will the Minister explore further ways of improving the publicity for subtitling with the Independent Television Commission and the BBC? As well as advertisements for "EastEnders" and other programmes, there should be advertisements for this valuable service. Secondly, will she discuss with the Director General of the BBC the fact that the BBC has a lower percentage of subtitled broadcasts than Channel 4 and ITV? That is not acceptable for our public service broadcaster, which should be taking the lead. Will she encourage the BBC to do so?

I assure the hon. Gentleman that the BBC's policy is at least to match the targets set for any other broadcaster. The BBC has recently increased its targets for the subtitling of new digital services to 50 per cent. within five years and 100 per cent. within 10 years. In the early summer, we shall begin a review of the statutory target for the subtitling of digital terrestrial television services. My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State and I will continue a dialogue with the RNID on these important issues.

There is a generation of deaf people for whom signing is their only language. They find reading difficult. Will my hon. Friend encourage broadcasters to put out more programmes with signing as an integral part, particularly current affairs programmes?

I assure my hon. Friend that we will take every opportunity to raise that with the appropriate bodies. My right hon. Friend and I are very concerned to ensure that access to those services should be as wide as possible.

What steps he is taking to encourage greater participation in swimming throughout the country. [114852]

The Government attach great importance to swimming. It is a fun and healthy sport in which youngsters can aspire to excellence. Swimming is a statutory part of the primary national curriculum, giving all young people the opportunity to participate.

I am grateful to the Minister for that response. Will she come to the Ribble valley and take a swimming lesson with me—she could even give me a swimming lesson—and youngsters from local schools? I promise not to leave her languishing in the deep end. That happened to too many parents in the Ribble valley when the county council cut the money for swimming provision, which meant that parents had to pay. That in turn resulted in a halving of the number of swimming lessons. The county council is offering more money this year, but it is still a real-terms cut on two years ago. Will the Minister use her influence with her colleagues at the Department for Education and Employment to ensure that all our youngsters throughout the country have free access to swimming lessons and that no child will be denied those life-saving skills simply because their parents cannot afford to pay?

I remind the hon. Gentleman that we have already swum together in Botswana. I thank him for his question and for his commitment to swimming, which I share. It is important that youngsters get that opportunity at an early age and that swimming should be a compulsory part of the curriculum. Local authorities must bear that in mind when considering how to use their facilities.

Does the Minister recognise that there are grave problems with the number of primary school pupils who are not getting the amount of swimming that they need? In particular, will she comment on the fact that Labour-controlled Walsall council has engendered a funding crisis, resulting in swimming pools being closed? Will she ensure that school children and other swimmers in Walsall are properly provided for? Will she reinforce her concerns about the need for all primary school pupils to have proper swimming lessons?

As a result of the concern throughout the country that not all primary school children were getting their full entitlement to swimming, my Department and the Department for Education and Employment asked Ofsted to investigate the issue. That is now happening. I do not know the details of the situation in Walsall, but I shall make a point of finding out. I shall write to the hon. Gentleman if I think it necessary.

Will my hon. Friend recognise Loughborough's contribution to this country's excellent swimming reputation? It is the home of the Amateur Swimming Association and its outspoken spokesperson, David Sparkes. We need integration between primary schools, medium-term facilities and the excellent facilities that will be required as part of the UK sports institute. Will my hon. Friend ensure that Loughborough's swimming pool is built as soon as possible, to ensure such integration?

My hon. Friend is quite right. Loughborough has been chosen as one of the sites for a new 50 m pool. Sport England has given its support in principle, and I hope that the first ground work will be done soon. He mentioned David Sparkes, the chief executive of the Amateur Swimming Association. He is a forthright person who has stood up for his sport, and he has done an enormous amount to make sure that sport is available not just to our highly talented swimmers, but to all. He has done an enormous amount of work on the swimming for life campaign too, and I pay tribute to him.

What steps his Department is taking to encourage the regeneration of British seaside resorts; and if he will make a statement. [114853]

Many resorts have been included in the UK's proposals for the new objective 2 structural funds and assisted areas maps. We have also ensured that the chairmen of the new regional development agencies are aware of the importance of resort regeneration. The English Tourism Council has set up a resorts task force, which is due to report in December with a programme of action to assist resorts with their regeneration strategies.

Does my hon. Friend agree that high-quality bathing water is a major factor in encouraging people to visit our seaside resorts? Does she agree that local authorities and water companies should work together closely to make sure that there is an increase in the number of European blue flags flying over this country's bathing beaches?

My hon. Friend is right, and the Government will do all we can to encourage co-operation between local bodies to achieve as many blue flags as possible. I congratulate my hon. Friend on the fact that his constituency is featured in the tier 3 assisted areas map, and on the fact that Dovercourt—which falls within his constituency—has just received a resort award from the Tidy Britain group.

The quality of water and beaches is central to regenerating our coastline. Will the Minister join me in welcoming last week's figures, which indicated that no fewer than 97 beaches in Wales had been awarded the star award—over a third of the total number of beaches to be granted that status? To ensure that we maximise the number of tourists coming to the UK, will the Minister put pressure on the Treasury to achieve a more realistic value for the pound, so that we can get the benefit of those beaches?

I am sure that the right hon. Gentleman would not wish to advocate any policy which would return us to the policies of the Conservative party. As he knows, there is no going back to boom and bust. I congratulate all those concerned on achieving that status, and I hope that that encourages other resorts around the country to do the same.

Will my hon. Friend join me in congratulating my right hon. Friend the Chancellor on his decision to remove the annual licence duty on small amusement-with-prizes machines, as that will provide a huge boost to the operators of seaside arcades? Is not that another example of the Government's commitment to seaside resorts, along with assisted area status and the other measures taken by the Government? After years of neglect by the Conservative Administration, these measures are certainly welcomed in seaside resorts.

I thank my hon. Friend for that timely question. She is quite right to say that my right hon. Friend the Chancellor has shown, by his action, that he understands some of the problems facing our seaside resorts. As my hon. Friend rightly says, that is in stark contrast to the record of the Conservative party, which did nothing whatever to help to regenerate our important seaside resorts.

The seaside resorts are fighting hard to strengthen their appeal, but the Minister will be aware of the understandable concern at the number of asylum seekers being placed in many seaside towns, often in large numbers and without notice. The complete mess that the Government have made of the issue means that asylum seekers already in Britain will remain the responsibility of local authorities this summer.

The hon. Gentleman will be aware that this is a matter for my right hon. Friend the Home Secretary and not for me, but I can assure him that we are concerned that there should not be an adverse impact on seaside towns, and the Home Office is in continual discussion with the Local Government Association and local authorities about the particular problems that they might be facing.

What action he is taking to ensure that former coalfield areas benefit from the national lottery. [114854]

The Government are committed to ensuring that all areas, and especially those in which there are high levels of economic and social deprivation, benefit from lottery funding. My Department and the distributors have therefore jointly commissioned research into the impact of the national lottery on former coalfield areas. The results, which are due shortly, are likely to shed further light on the situation and to suggest recommendations for improving it.

I thank my right hon. Friend for that reply, but is he aware that many poor communities lack the expertise to put in an initial bid; and will he consider providing resources for such communities, so that they can prepare good-quality bids?

I take my hon. Friend's point absolutely. We have already put in place several measures to help by changing the way in which lottery money is distributed. We have issued an instruction to the distributors that they must pay particular attention to areas of social deprivation, and enabled them, through the National Lottery Act 1998, to solicit applications and delegate decisions. We have encouraged the introduction of the small grants scheme, and the distributors now have schemes and programmes—such as Sport England's sport action zones policy—that target funding on areas of particular need.

Is it not possible that former coalfield areas have suffered from a lack of lottery proceeds as a direct consequence of the fact that the Secretary of State's constituency, Islington, South and Finsbury, as of 3 March this year, was the seventh largest recipient of lottery funds? Does he intend speedily to address the problem, for fear that if he does not, the hon. Member for Bolsover (Mr. Skinner) will jump out of his pram?

I am pleased to be able to tell the hon. Gentleman that his constituency has received £8.8 million from the national lottery, which is just below the national average—it has not done especially badly. There has been variation across the country, which is a matter of concern. It is of particular concern in the coalfield areas, which is precisely why we have embarked on detailed research to establish why applications have not been coming in from those areas. That is what we want to rectify.

Does my right hon. Friend recall that, when the lottery was set up and the Tories were in power, my right hon. Friend the Member for Chesterfield (Mr. Benn), my hon. Friend the Member for North-East Derbyshire (Mr. Barnes) and I asked questions on behalf of the Derbyshire coalfield, because the Tories were so embittered by our politics that they put the lottery applications from our constituencies down among the lowest 10 per cent? In the past few months, we have managed to get a few bob back: not yet as much as has been spent on the millennium dome, but we expect to get that much. I do not expect the hon. Member for Buckingham (Mr. Bercow) to know about that, because at the time I was raising those questions, little Noddy was still in his pram.

It is always a pleasure to be able to agree with my hon. Friend. He has rightly identified that we are making progress on that issue. He has also rightly identified that when the lottery was first established it was an application-driven process, with no strategy or provision—as we now have in the directions that are in place for the lottery distributors—for particular attention to be paid to the needs of areas of deprivation. Those factors are now in place and the lottery is working better as a result. I am pleased that my hon. Friend's constituency is now beginning to benefit.

If he will make a statement on his powers to intervene in proposed takeovers of regional television stations. [114855]

My powers in this area are laid down in the Broadcasting Acts 1990 and 1996. They are limited to order-making powers to amend detailed provisions within the Acts. I therefore have no direct power to intervene in a proposed takeover of regional television stations, which is a matter for the Independent Television Commission and the Office of Fair Trading. However, the importance of regional content, regional programme making and the regional flavour of programmes, which were an integral part of the franchises initially awarded to the ITV companies, must remain firmly in place.

I thank my right hon. Friend for that reply. He is well aware of my opposition to the possible takeover of Border Television. Does he agree that Border Television's licence is unique, in that it covers the full length of the Anglo-Scottish border, and that it would be very difficult for a company based in Glasgow, Manchester or London to replicate the excellent provision that we get on the border at the moment? Does he also agree that takeovers such as the one proposed should be discouraged? If it goes ahead, will he give a guarantee that local content of programmes will continue as now and that some job security will be given to my constituents?

My hon. Friend is absolutely right to identify the particular character of Border Television. It covers both the southern part of Scotland and the northern part of England, and operates in a genuinely cross-border manner. That was the nature of the franchise that was awarded in the first place. Whoever takes the franchise over and whatever happens in the current negotiations, that character must remain clearly in place. I shall expect the ITC to uphold that firmly. I do not want to see identikit programming across the world of ITV, because we must have a proper, regional character to the programmes that we receive on that popular channel.

Will the Secretary of State see to it that regional television stations are not taken over by interests outwith the United Kingdom, but remain firmly in local hands?

That is ultimately a matter for the ITC, the Office of Fair Trading and the competition authorities, and not for me. However, I am sure that those bodies will take careful note of the hon. Gentleman's point.

Will the Secretary of State join me in paying tribute to Tyne Tees Television and Yorkshire Television, which cover my constituency? When I was Noddy in my pram, I was brought up on Tyne Tees Television and, like the hon. Member for Carlisle (Mr. Martlew), I am concerned by the proposed takeover and the impact that it might have on local and regional coverage. Can he give a commitment to the House that he will make representations to the decision takers to ensure that the franchise is respected?

The franchises must be respected: the hon. Lady is right. For example, Yorkshire Television makes "Emmerdale", Carlton, which used to be Central, makes "Peak Practice", and Granada makes "Coronation Street". All those programmes have a strong regional character, they are part of the wealth of the fabric of television in this country, and we must protect that.

What steps he is taking to increase the share of national lottery funding for community projects in outer London. [114857]

The Government are committed to the fair distribution of lottery money across all groups and areas of the country and have provided a framework, by means of the National Lottery Act 1998 and policy directions, to ensure that that happens. This framework is already ensuring that a greater number of grants are being given to benefit communities right across the country. Lottery distributors now have schemes in place to focus funding on areas of need, including those in outer London.

I thank my hon. Friend for that reply. I congratulate her and my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State on their foresight in choosing Pickett' s Lock in my constituency as the site for the new national athletics stadium. I wish them good luck in their negotiations with the International Amateur Athletic Federation in Paris next week.

Oh no.

Order. It is Question Time. The hon. Gentleman has had a long preamble. He must put a question to the Minister.

I am delighted that my hon. Friend welcomes the decision by UK Athletics, supported by all bodies in sport, that Pickett's Lock in the Lea Valley in his constituency should be proposed as the site for the world athletics championship in 2005. The championship will leave a legacy for the sport of athletics, and we look forward to the negotiations and to the work that must be done to ensure that the event takes place here.

I recognise that successful lottery applications must be of good quality and that they must be effective in regenerating local areas. However, when the Minister makes her regional assessment, will she disentangle from the rather large amount that goes to London the pretty considerable element that goes to national institutions, as opposed to the amounts that go towards more local requirements? There is a feeling in outer London, and it is not confined to the hon. Member for Edmonton (Mr. Love), that we do not get a proper share of the cake devoted to our great capital city.

I think that the hon. Gentleman speaks for the many people who feel that their areas do not get a fair share of the national lottery. However, it is true that a lot of money went to very large, high-prestige projects in the first few years of the national lottery, but that is probably only natural. I hope that we can now turn our attention to getting the money down to the grass roots, where it can make a real difference. My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State and I will certainly do all we can to ensure that that happens.

If he will make a statement on the distribution of unallocated national lottery funds. [114858]

I am pleased to be able to answer this question, as there has been much erroneous press reporting on the matter in recent days. All the funds in the national lottery distribution fund available for distribution have been allocated to the national lottery distributing bodies, and all but £200 million of this money—just 6 per cent. of the overall amount—has already been committed by them. Where money remains in the fund, it earns tax-free interest that goes to the good causes, not to the Government.

Will the Secretary of State confirm that the amount of unspent lottery charity money is now in the region of £3.5 billion, and that the amount being spent on good causes is only one sixth of the amount people spend on lottery tickets? That is less than half the proportion of lottery proceeds that it was intended would go to good causes. Does not the right hon. Gentleman realise that as long as the money stays in the Government's hands, it will be regarded—quite rightly—as yet another example of a Labour stealth tax? Does he accept that that stealth tax will damage the success of the lottery, just as the Government's other stealth taxes are damaging the British economy?

No, the hon. Gentleman is wrong. For a start, the money is not in the hands of the Government. Secondly, although there is £3.5 billion in the national lottery distribution fund, 94 per cent. of that—more than £3 billion—has been committed by the distributing bodies to particular applications. If the hon. Gentleman thinks—as he seems to—that all normal public accountancy rules should be jettisoned and that, when a project is approved, the entire sum should immediately be given to the project rather being properly fed out as the project is built or developed, I suspect that his right hon. Friend the Member for Haltemprice and Howden (Mr. Davis), the Chairman of the Public Accounts Committee, might have a thing or two to say to him.

Will my right hon. Friend consider allocating some of that unallocated money to Chorley Little theatre, which has applied on several occasions? The theatre would benefit greatly from the money, if my right hon. Friend would consider helping it.

I hear what my hon. Friend says. I am sure that a properly submitted application to the Arts Council of England would receive proper consideration. It is not for me to decide such things.

As we heard a moment ago, the Secretary of State has personally pledged £60 million towards the building of a new national athletics stadium. Can he give the House a single previous example of a Minister making such a pledge, at any time since the introduction of the lottery, before an application was received or, indeed, considered by the lottery distribution body? Can he tell us what personal representations he has received from Sport England as to the legality of how that figure of £60 million was arrived at? Most importantly, will he tell us where the estimated extra £70 million needed to build such a stadium will come from?

No money has yet been committed, because there must be a proper application before that can happen. However, £40 million that would have had to be spent by Sport England to create temporary athletics facilities at Wembley has been saved from the exercise. That money and the £20 million that is being returned to the pot by the world of football will—it is hoped—be used for the benefit of athletics. That is a sensible proposal.

Will my right hon. Friend consider making representations to the distribution body about allocating funds to pigeon fanciers in my constituency? They cannot currently benefit from national lottery money because pigeon fancying is not considered a sport. Were my constituents to keep clay pigeons and shoot them, they would be eligible for the money. Will my right hon. Friend take action to show his support for the pigeon fanciers' campaign?

My hon. Friend is right to point out the—perhaps anomalous—fact that pigeon fancying is not statutorily regarded as a sport. Consequently, it cannot, unfortunately, qualify for Sports Council lottery funding. However, if, for example, it was taking place on a piece of derelict ground, it might be eligible for funding under the green spaces initiative of the new opportunities fund. My hon. Friend may want to hold discussions with pigeon fanciers in her area on how to identify ingenious ways of using the lottery system to their benefit.

With regard to Wembley, the right hon. Gentleman should know that the £40 million to which he referred is disputed by Sport England, and that there is no guarantee of the £20 million from the Football Association. It would be nice to have a little more clarity and less spin on the issue.

The hon. Gentleman is wrong about Wembley, as he has been throughout the discussion about it. He is wrong also about the national lottery distribution fund. As I have said, there is only £200 million of uncommitted funds within the NLDF. To ensure that there is no doubt in future about what is happening, I have asked that there should be quarterly reports from each of the lottery distributors, detailing exactly how much they have in the NLDF, what proportion of the funds is committed and what proportion is uncommitted, and their proposals for the spending of that money.

If he will take steps to consult national lottery players on a regional basis on how the proceeds of the lottery are allocated. [114859]

Under the National Lottery Act 1998, I instructed lottery distributors to produce and consult on strategic plans, which proposed their priorities for funding. Distributors now have plans in place on which there has been broad consultation. Distributors also take account of public opinion through open meetings, polls and other research.

I welcome that answer from my right hon. Friend. He will be aware that I do not think that my constituents get a fair deal from the lottery. They have spent £60 million on tickets and received back only £1.5 million. I greatly welcome the changes that are being made, but will my right hon. Friend look into the matter to ensure that they come into force quickly? I accept that it is not possible to allocate funds and to link money and expenditure on a constituency basis, but it can be done on a regional basis. I ask for greater consultation with my constituents, given the amount of money that they spend on tickets, on how the money is being spent in their region.

My hon. Friend raises an entirely understandable point. The changes that we brought in with the 1998 Act have enabled the distributors for the first time—this was not put in place by the previous Government—to delegate decision making to a regional level. I believe that to be extremely important. Regional cultural consortiums have a specific remit to advise the lottery distributors on the regional priorities for spending. That will be an added way of ensuring that the voice of the regions in this process is firmly heard.

Will the right hon. Gentleman acknowledge that the regional voice, because of the substantial size of some of the regions, is not always nearly sharp enough on constituency applications. I endorse entirely what the hon. Member for Basildon (Angela Smith) has said. Sussex has not done well under the national lottery distribution. Will the right hon. Gentleman see what he can do to refine the structure that is there already to ascertain whether he could take up the hon. Lady's suggestion to take the advise-giving process lower than regional level?

I am sure that it will be possible for regional cultural consortiums, regional arts boards, regional committees of the National Lottery Charities Board and other regional elements in the structures now being put in place to consult widely, deep down within the regions, as to the people's priorities for the spending of lottery money. We now have in place—again for the first time ever—an instruction to all the distributing bodies to ensure a fairer geographical spread of national lottery funds. That is beginning to take place, especially as the smaller grants programmes begin to roll out. That contrasts with what happened at the outset when there was a concentration on very large capital projects.

What assessment he has made of the effectiveness of the projects funded by the National Endowment for Science, Technology and the Arts programme. [114860]

NESTA is currently funding a series of pilot projects, prior to going live with its full programmes in the very near future, and I can confirm that it is undertaking detailed assessments of the value and effectiveness of each of these projects. I expect NESTA to make a real difference in tapping the creative potential of the country.

My hon. Friend will be aware that last week was science and technology week, when many young scientists went into schools and deprived areas to teach the wonders of the science. They took their equipment with them and showed young people how to use it. When grants are given, will my hon. Friend guarantee that science and technology are not, as opposed to the arts, the Cinderella groups and that the wonders of science are brought, and money given, to deprived schools?

As a distinguished scientist himself, my hon. Friend speaks with authority on this subject and I very much take his point. He will be reassured by the fact that, among the trustees of NESTA, are Sir Martin Rees and Dame Bridget Ogilvie, who have great authority in the scientific field. I entirely agree with my hon. Friend that it is extremely important that we do all that we can to encourage young people to commit themselves to the creative opportunities that scientific study and the pursuit of scientific careers offer. He may agree that one of the unfortunate features of British life has been that, however brilliant our basic science, we seem to have had a national difficulty in getting the benefits of that science out of the laboratory and into the showroom.

What measures he is taking to increase investment in the British film industry. [114861]

The Government have set up a strategic body, the Film Council, which will be in place on 1 April under the able chairmanship of Alan Parker, with the specific task of helping to develop a sustainable UK film industry. Over the next three years, the council will have about £150 million in grant in aid and lottery funding to support film.

I am sure that the whole House would wish to congratulate last night's British Oscar winners, Michael Caine and Mike Leigh and, in particular, Sam Mendes on his film "American Beauty". Will the Minister therefore examine how it is that more than £100 million of lottery money has been spent on 60 films that virtually no one will ever see let alone go on general release? Would it not be better for lottery funds in the future to go towards seedcorn money producing the Oscar-winning films, such as "American Beauty", of the future?

The hon. Gentleman will be aware that, in future, this will be a matter for the Film Council. The total level of lottery support for film in England is £97 million to date. Perhaps more importantly, the total cost of films supported was £378 million, so the gearing is about three to one. It is important to highlight that, under this Government, investment in film production in the United Kingdom last year was £570 million, up £93 million on the previous year. It is clear that the interests of the British film industry are very dear to the Government's heart.

Does my hon. Friend agree that she and my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State should be beaming with pride at last night's brilliant British successes in the Oscars? Does she further agree that my right hon. Friend the Chancellor's tax concessions and the Government's strategy for film as a creative industry suggests that the success of British film is there? Not only have the Brits arrived, but we are saying to the world that they ain't seen nothing yet.

My right hon. Friend is right. I take this opportunity to pay tribute to him, because when he was the Minister with responsibility for film, he was responsible for the film policy action group, which produced the document, "A Bigger Picture", and for securing the tax concession that has done so much to regenerate the film industry. He is right to say that the Brits have arrived, and we are very proud of the success of all our people in the Oscars last night. That just goes to show that we have a pool of excellent skills and talent here, and it is no wonder that more and more people want to make their films in Britain.

May I associate myself with the tributes that have been paid to our talented people who have again done well in Hollywood, and who include Phil Collins, who has not yet been mentioned? However, those people did not get very much out of the national lottery. Is the Minister happy that hardly any of the 60 films that have so far been funded by the lottery have earned anything like enough money to cover their costs? Is she proud of the fact that of the £97 million of lottery money that has gone into those projects, less than £6 million has so far been paid back?

spend too much, entertain no one and fall flat on their face.

The hon. Gentleman's attempts at humour get more and more pathetic with every Question Time. May I give him a little advice? If he is to continue with this portfolio, he ought to read a little more about the subject and make sure that he is better informed when he comes to the House. "Topsy Turvy", which won two awards last night, for best make-up and best costume and design, is a British film and was made with the help of £2 million of lottery funding from the Arts Council.

How many children have benefited from his measures allowing free entry to national museums and galleries. [114864]

Since additional funds were provided at the start of April last year to enable free entry to those national museums and galleries sponsored by my Department which charge for admission, 4,275,951 children are estimated to have benefited up to the end of January. That figure represents an increase of some 18 per cent. on the same period in the previous 12 months.

I have a twofold financial interest in the measures because I have six grandchildren under eight and I am 60, so we will all benefit. Does my hon. Friend agree that the railway operating companies could offer cheap fares to school parties, which would be helpful because more children would go to national galleries and museums in term time, alleviating some of the pressures at weekends and in school holidays? I took three of my grandchildren to the science museum last August on three occasions, and each time the queues were so long that they missed many opportunities to participate in activities that I know they would have enjoyed.

I think that there must be an error on my hon. Friend's birth certificate. However, I would not accuse her of misleading the House, so clearly when she takes her grandchildren to any of our national museums and galleries from the beginning of April she will, like them, benefit from free entry. Those places are popular and, as she says, sometimes the queues are long, and those problems certainly need to be managed. I take her point about the desirability of finding ways to enable people to have cheap or even free public transport to national museums and galleries. There is a fund available: the museums and galleries access fund, funded and administered by the heritage lottery fund, which has ring-fenced £7 million to enable museums to run projects that will increase access to their collections. Subject to the discretion of trustees, it would be in order for railway operators to work with museums to take advantage of that funding.

rose—

Order. Time is up. The last question took three minutes—we are taking far too long over questions and answers.

When he will meet a Minister of the Crown to discuss reduced rates of VAT for church repairs. [114843]

The hon. Lady will be pleased to learn that I led a delegation to meet the Minister for the Arts on 23 March. The delegation included the hon. Member for South Staffordshire (Sir P. Cormack) and my hon. Friend the Member for Blackpool, South (Mr. Marsden). I thank the Minister, who is still in the Chamber, for his courtesy and his time, as well as for the manner in which he conducted the meeting. I am pleased to say that the meeting was constructive. Although the Church was disappointed not to obtain any relief in the Budget by way of reduced rates of VAT on church repairs, we continue to journey in hope.

I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman for that answer. Will he join me in renewing our campaign, based on the understanding that other member states of the European Union treat churches as heritage buildings and apply a reduced rate of VAT? Following his meeting with the Minister for the Arts, does the hon. Gentleman think that there is some chance of churches in this country being treated similarly?

I am glad to take the opportunity to thank the hon. Lady and other hon. Members on both sides of the House who have taken an interest in this important subject. It cannot be right that a tax that falls hardest on individual parishes and faith communities also works against the widely accepted view that repair and maintenance play a key role in the conservation and reuse of buildings. We are considering every avenue of discussion with the Treasury, and I shall be glad to examine the point that the hon. Lady raises.

Does my hon. Friend agree that it is nonsense that new build in this country attracts no VAT, whereas repairs to historic buildings and churches attract VAT at the full rate? Does he also agree that the importance of church renewal to the rural economy should be presented to colleagues at the Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions, to be taken into account in the forthcoming rural White Paper?

I am grateful to my hon. Friend for tabling an early-day motion on the subject. He has forcefully pointed out the contradictions between a Government policy that favours conservation and a tax regime that penalises repair and maintenance but zero rates inappropriate alterations and new build, and disadvantages brownfield development in relation to greenfield development. It cannot be right for the Treasury each year to cream off in VAT far more than it gives to English Heritage in grants to help our precious inheritance. My hon. Friend's support and that of hon. Members on both sides of the House will help our efforts to persuade the Treasury, the Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions and the Department for Culture, Media and Sport to accept our proposals.

What processes they use for consulting Church members on their proposals. [114844]

The Commissioners send copies of draft schemes under the Pastoral Measure 1983 by post to parochial church councils and other interested parties. If the scheme is to declare a church redundant, or to deal with the future of a redundant church, they also publish a notice in a local newspaper. Anyone may make representations to the commissioners within the period of at least 28 days prescribed in the notice. On the matter of finances, the commissioners' annual report and accounts will be published shortly and will be widely disseminated within the Church and to the general public.

On the issue of Church finances, the Church Commissioners are the equivalent of the Chancellor of the Exchequer. Can we ensure that every Church member at diocese, deanery and parish level is annually consulted about the Church's financial policy—for example, on questions of ethical investment and where money should be spent? We must establish a democratic process by which to decide how the Church raises money and how it spends it.

The Church Commissioners will spend their money in accordance with the statute, to pay the stipends of the parish priests and also the pensions. That is our statutory responsibility. In relation to the annual report and accounts, we will seek to disseminate that information as widely as we can. While we welcome suggestions about how we should spend our money, we are nevertheless bound by statute and our statutory obligations.

Although I welcome the attempts to make the process as open and accountable as possible, does my hon. Friend agree that ordinary church members in the constituencies, like ourselves, feel a long way away from the decision-making process, particularly on questions of ethical investment? Will my hon. Friend give the matter further consideration to see whether there could be greater involvement for ordinary church members, like many of those in the House, who have little say over the present arrangements?

I am grateful for my hon. Friend's question. He will be pleased to know, as the House will be pleased to know, that the unaudited results of the Commissioners for 1999 show that their assets fully committed to the support of the Church's ministry were valued at more than £4.4 billion at the end of last year. I am sure that every churchgoer in the land will be happy to see that, if I may say so, under my stewardship the assets of the Church Commissioners has risen from £3 billion to £4.4 billion.

What recent discussions he has had with the Chancellor of the Exchequer on the implications for the National Audit Office of proposals within the Government Resources and Accounts Bill. [114845]

Together with the Chairman of the Public Accounts Committee, I met the Chief Secretary to the Treasury in December to put our concern that the Government Resources and Accounts Bill represented a wasted opportunity to bring the powers of the Comptroller and Auditor General and the National Audit Office in line with modern government. That concern was most recently set out in the Public Accounts Committee's ninth report of this Session. Since then, the Bill has addressed some of our concerns and the Chief Secretary has announced a study to recommend suitable audit and accountability arrangements for central Government in the 21st century. I hope that during the remainder of the Bill's passage, the Government will add appropriate enabling clauses to ensure that the review's recommendations can have statutory force.

I am sure that I speak for the entire House in warmly welcoming the right hon. Gentleman back to his place.

Clearly, there is much to be done. Parliamentary accountability must go hand in hand with Government accountability. Many Treasury Ministers in the past have been allies of the ideas of the Public Accounts Committee in bringing these matters to the front, so that we could follow public money where it goes. That is the important aspect. We must be able to follow that public money, in most cases—not necessarily all, but in most cases—so that we can show that the money has been properly spent. That is the only way in which we can achieve such accountability, which both the Public Accounts Committee and the Public Accounts Commission dearly want.

On the behalf of the staff of the National Audit Office, may I express their thanks to Mr. Duncan Goodhew for ensuring that my right hon. Friend is here today to represent the National Audit Office in the dispute with the Treasury?

I am overwhelmed by the generosity of so many friends.

May I, too, offer the right hon. Gentleman a warm welcome on his return to the House? Does he recall that during the passage of the Government Resources and Accounts Bill, we had a long discussion about the fact that the European Court of Auditors in many instances has greater access than our own Comptroller and Auditor General? Does he think that that is right?

Clearly, that is wrong. Not only that, but the Audit Commission has power to seek information, which the National Audit Office does not. There are obviously a number of gaps, which must be closed.

What is his estimate of the proportion of Church revenues that will be donated by congregations in 2020. [114846]

In 1997, congregations provided approximately 62 per cent. of the Church of England's income. It is the hope and aspiration of the Church that giving by individuals will increase and that they might, on average, give 5 per cent. of their net income by 2020.

Did my hon. Friend read a rather bleak forecast in a recent edition of the Church Times, which said that if current trends in the decline of congregations continued, they would reach nil by 2020? While I congratulate my hon. Friend on the great improvement in the finances of the Church under his stewardship, does he accept that a problem was created by the clergy of the Church of England opting out of the state earnings-related pension scheme, and thus not benefiting from the marvellous far-sighted initiative of a previous Labour Government that is enjoyed by retired clergy of the Church in Wales?

My hon. Friend will be interested to know that more people attend church on a Sunday than go to football matches on a Saturday. The Church has been around for 2,000 years; I therefore surmise that it will survive the next 20.