On what date it was agreed that BT and Ford would sponsor two zones of the millennium dome in addition to the original 12. [141873]

The New Millennium Experience Company announced BT as sponsor of the talk zone on 24 February 1998 and the contractual documentation was signed on 18 January 1999 after the necessary detailed negotiation on terms. Ford was announced as sponsor of the journey zone on 5 March 1999. In that case, the necessary contractual documentation was completed and signed prior to the announcement on 15 February 1999.

The dates that the Minister has given indicate that the New Millennium Experience Company must have known two years before it finally revised its budget in February this year, that there would be a shortfall of tens of millions of pounds in its sponsorship budget and that that money would have to come out of lottery funds. Why, therefore, did NMEC fail to change its budget and fail to ask for extra lottery money for two years? Why did the Government allow it to get away with that?

The hon. Gentleman has omitted to point out that the problem was that visitor numbers to the dome did not reach the estimated figure. However, I can confirm that the £46 million sponsorship from Ford and BT for the two zones to which he referred was never included in NMEC's original budget.

When does the Minister expect the Legacy document to be signed off?

Negotiations are continuing and, if all goes well, we hope that contracts will be exchanged in February.

What measures he is taking to support regional theatres. [141874]

We recognise that many theatres in the regions have faced serious problems. We agreed with the Arts Council that it would commission the study that led to the Boyden report. The Arts Council and the regional arts boards are in discussion with local government and the theatre community with a view to developing a national policy for theatre in England. We have provided a 60 per cent. real-terms increase in funding for the arts over five years, which is radically improving the position of regional theatre.

I thank my right hon. Friend. Does he agree that regional theatres, such as the excellent theatres in my Northampton constituency, are important in encouraging and building up live theatre throughout the country? What does my right hon. Friend intend to do to ensure that money identified in the next steps report goes to the English regional theatres? Given theatres' concern about financing, does he agree that it is important for them to know whether the Opposition would maintain the Government's commitment to regional theatre funding if they ever got into power?

I remind the House that that last matter is not the Minister's responsibility.

I congratulate my hon. Friend on the tenacity with which she has championed the Theatre Royal, the Derngate theatre and the Masque theatre company in her constituency, and I hope that she is pleased with the progress that they have made. The merger of the Theatre Royal and the Derngate theatre was assisted by £1 million of Arts Council for England capital lottery money and there has been a 22 per cent. increase in east midlands arts funding.

Order. Perhaps the Minister did not hear the statement that I made a few weeks ago. The policy of the Opposition is nothing to do with him.

We must be approaching the pantomime season, Mr. Speaker.

I am sorry that the hon. Gentleman disparages Mr. Boyden by implication, as I think that he did a remarkable job. I am sorry also that he plainly does not consider it important for us to pursue our strategy to increase access and to encourage and enable a far wider range of citizens to enjoy the theatre. I do not know whether it is in order, Mr. Speaker, for me to note that the hon. Gentleman's protestations about the importance of adequate funding seem hollow in view of the shadow Chancellor's commitment to cut the Government's plans for public expenditure.

What assessment he has made of the impact of regulation on the viability of the tourism industry. [141875]

The Government are committed to reforming outdated, overlapping and overburdensome legislation. Our aims are clearer and better-targeted legislation and a climate that encourages thriving business while providing proper protection for workers, consumers and the environment. That includes the tourism industry.

The impact of regulation on the tourism industry is as nothing compared with the effect on it of the disintegration of our infrastructure. Is the Minister aware of the difficulties of getting to and from the west country? Last Friday, it took me five and a half hours to travel from Paddington to Totnes and, yesterday, it took me six and a half hours to travel from Totnes to London. Is the Minister also aware that plane services are unreliable and unpredictable, that the motorways are gridlocked, and that that is no way to encourage tourists—

Order. I call the Minister.

I do not know whether the hon. Gentleman is suffering from amnesia. He may recall that it was the previous Government who established the current system for running our railways. Of course, the infrastructure is not a matter for my Department, but I remind him that one of the things that we have done for the tourism industry—in stark contrast with the Conservative party—is to establish an annual tourism ministerial summit. [HON. MEMBERS: "Oh!"] If Opposition Members listen, they might learn something. At the summit, we will take every opportunity, in support of the tourism industry, to press matters for which other Departments are responsible.

Although the proposed regulatory changes announced by the Government and their promise of further reviews are welcome, does the Minister recognise the extent to which tourism businesses are being strangled by new legislation introduced by her Government? New employment laws, such as the working time directive and the minimum wage, and new measures on part-time work, maternity leave and parental entitlement have all been heaped on the industry during the past two years. They have prompted the British Hospitality Association to comment that much legislation and guidance was badly drafted and incomprehensible. Hotel and restaurant managers are haunted by the fear of prosecution for inadvertent non-compliance. When can they expect more simplified and workable arrangements?

It would be interesting to know whether the Conservative party would do away with the measures to which the hon. Gentleman refers if it ever returned to government. We look forward to hearing about that.

Does my hon. Friend agree that the Government's Regulatory Reform Bill, a new measure introduced to deal with regulatory powers, provides an opportunity to consider their priority of better regulation, rather than total deregulation? Does not the Government's priority of encouraging the tourism industry involve ensuring that its workers are given proper protection and conditions?

My hon. Friend is right. We should remember that, thanks to the Government, workers in the tourism industry now enjoy the right to a national minimum wage. My hon. Friend is also right about the Regulatory Reform Bill, which will deliver more than 20 reforms to cut and simplify existing regulations. There is no doubt that those measures will help the tourism industry and many other industries.

How will the regulation powers deal with seaside resorts? Having gone round most of the tourist resorts, I feel that nothing is happening. I have also been to the latest tourism forum, but there is much talk and little action. What action has the Minister taken in respect of tourism in seaside resorts?

The hon. Gentleman knows that the Government have done a great deal to help seaside resorts, and I thank him for his continued constituency interest and his deep interest in tourism generally. We have done what we can to help through single regeneration budget money, assisted area status and so on, but he will also know that we await the report of the English Tourism Council's resorts taskforce, which is ably chaired by Peter Moore, the former managing director of CenterParcs. We expect the report early in the new year and look forward to reading the recommendations. I am sure that a number of sensible ones will be made, and we look forward to acting on them.

What steps he is taking to give schoolchildren more opportunities to participate in creative activities out of school hours. [141876]

We are providing a number of new opportunities for schoolchildren to engage in creative activities, including sport and arts, both in and out of school hours, and £130 million is being made available to primary schools under the space for sport and arts scheme. From 2002, my Department will make £40 million available to introduce at least 12 creative partnerships, targeted on particularly deprived areas. The new opportunities fund is already providing £205 million to support a wide range of out-of-school-hours learning projects across the UK.

What impact will the declaration on sport agreed at the European Union's Nice summit have on creative and sporting activities for our schoolchildren?

I am pleased to be able to tell my hon. Friend that the declaration on sport adopted at Nice carries a specific reference, included very much with our encouragement, to the value of using part of the broadcasting income that comes into sport for the benefit of grass-roots sporting activity, especially among children. The declaration rightly identifies sport as special and as having a significance that takes it beyond the normal commodity rules of the EU. However, there is another side to the coin: sport must recognise that it has a responsibility to society, too. That means ensuring that smaller clubs are helped by any transfer fee system; that the grass roots of sport are nurtured with help from income at the top; and, above all, that opportunities are fostered for children to experience and enjoy sporting activity.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that there appears to be ample time for sport, art and other creative activities out of school hours in private schools of the kind to which the hon. Member for Northampton, North (Ms Keeble) is fortunate enough to be able to send her child, but that that contrasts starkly with the position in the state school sector, which more than 93 per cent. of children are obliged to attend? Given the over-prescriptive nature of the national curriculum, what will he do to improve the situation in the interests of millions of children who depend, and will always depend, on a taxpayer-financed education system?

I have to ask the hon. Gentleman which party was in power in the 1980s, when the collapse in provision of out-of-school-hours sporting activity occurred, and which party was in power when playing fields were being sold off at an average of 50 a month? I also have to ask him whether, were he ever to get into government, he would cut the new opportunities fund money that will go to replace those sporting activities and facilities for children up and down the country.

On the new opportunities fund, will my right hon. Friend join me in welcoming the extra £20,000 that is going to one of the most deprived areas in Chatham in my constituency, to provide after-school and holiday clubs? That is on top of the £2.4 million from the sure start programme which is being put into that area and which was welcomed by the Tory chairman of social services. The irony is that he would campaign for that to be abolished should the Tories win the election.

My hon. Friend is absolutely right. That example is just one of many thousands that are now in place around the country. Overall, the new opportunities fund has already committed more than £83 million to out-of-school-hours learning, sporting and artistic activities involving some 6,186 schools up and down the country. That is good news, and we want it to continue.

I do not know whether the Secretary of State had the good fortune to be in the audience last night for the BBC sports personality of the year awards, and hear the brilliant tribute that Steve Redgrave paid to those who had got him into rowing and supported him throughout his career. He is a role model who shows modesty and dignity. Such inspiration points to the importance of encouraging youngsters into sport while they are still of school age. Would the Secretary of State consider the idea of someone outside school interviewing all youngsters, once in primary school and once when they start secondary school, to see what arts or sport they have a particular interest in pursuing that is either not offered by the school or not sufficiently available within the school timetable and school hours?

My hon. Friend the Minister for Sport was present at the award ceremony last night, and I am sure that the whole House sends congratulations to Steve Redgrave on a well-deserved achievement. While we are on the subject of congratulations, can we marry that with congratulations to the England cricket team who, for the first time in almost 40 years, have achieved victory against Pakistan in a test match in Pakistan? The success of our cricketers, rugby union players, athletes and Paralympic athletes has brought a lot of joy to many people in this country. Of course, such success has to be on a broad base of mass participation in sport, especially from an early age. We cannot have success at international level unless we have that broad participation in the early years. School is a very important place for that to start. We shall certainly keenly consider the hon. Gentleman's particular proposal.

What contribution his Department is making to the improvement of arts education. [141878]

Ensuring that everyone has access to high-quality arts education, from pre-school through to lifelong learning, is a key priority for my Department. In addition to initiatives outlined by my right hon. Friend in his answer to my hon. Friend the Member for Bolton, West (Ms Kelly), we are working closely with partners on a range of policies to deliver that priority, including the Department for Education and Employment's £270 million music standards fund and the £30 million lottery-funded National Foundation for Youth Music. The new artsmark scheme will be made available to all schools in January. The Arts Council of England's arts and education interface projects in Bristol and Corby—I know that my hon. Friend has taken a close interest in that—are developing good practice in arts teaching and learning.

I thank my hon. Friend for his reply. He will be aware of the excellent work in Corby, through the education action zone, to introduce and expand the arts in poetry, dance and music. A great job is being done. In particular, an Arts Council-funded study is examining the impact of arts education on the broader general development of children in schools—their behaviour, performance and academic standards. Would my hon. Friend take account of the findings in Corby as he rolls out the £40 million programme for introducing arts education in the most deprived areas of the country?

We certainly shall take account of the early findings. That project is not due to produce its final report until 2004, but we are anxious to make good, rapid progress with creative partnerships. My hon. Friend is right to remind the House of how involvement in the arts leads to improved motivation; encourages young people to develop skills; and enables them to experience success and achievement that spreads across the range of their activities and curricular requirements. What we shall learn from the experience in the education action zone in Corby will be of prime importance as we develop our policy thinking in this area.

On arts education funding, could the Minister confirm whether the extra money that I hope will go through the new opportunities fund to arts education replaces the £97 million reduction in the Arts Council grant from the national lottery? Will he consider what many people think are the ludicrous, complicated criteria for applying for arts funding, particularly arts education funding? Surely applications can be made simpler so that more direct decisions can be taken.

All in all, taking grant in aid and lottery funding together, we are seeing substantial growth. We believe strongly in the priority that we have given to linking the arts with education, and the creative partnerships programme mentioned earlier by my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State will make an additional £40 million available for the development of new models of collaboration between the two.

The Minister will know that not all arts education is school based. There are a number of small local community-based drama groups throughout the country, including La Danse Fantastique in my constituency, which also deals with children with special needs. Such organisations, however, find it difficult to obtain premises. Will my hon. Friend urge county councils and other local authorities to do all they can to secure adequate premises for those groups?

My hon. Friend makes an important point. Through the creative partnerships, we shall examine—initially in 12 areas of deprivation—how we can bring about more collaboration between the formal education system and the range of arts and cultural organisations in those areas.

If he will make a statement on the future of the millennium dome. [141879]

If he will make a statement on the future use of the millennium dome at Greenwich from 1 January 2001. [141880]

If he will make a statement on the sale of the millennium dome. [141883]

On 20 November, my right hon. Friend the Minister for Local Government and the Regions announced that Legacy plc had been awarded preferred bidder status. Negotiations will continue, and if all goes well, we expect to exchange contracts during February. Progress will be reviewed regularly.

Can the Minister confirm reports that the site would be worth £300 million more if the dome were pulled down? Is it not entirely appropriate that the greatest white elephant in history should be worth more dead than alive?

I can only say that the price being offered by Legacy is good value for money. That is the advice that Ministers have received from the competition team, which has also advised us that the site offers as good value as a cleared site might offer.

But the price being offered by Legacy, which is supposedly such good value for money, is £25 million less now than it was in June, when Legacy first made its offer. Moreover, as the Minister just told us, the offer is subject to "all going well". That does not exactly fill us with enthusiasm.

I did not hear that, so I will ignore it.

As the Minister may know, some of us consider the dome to be a rather fine structure, and do not share the Visigoth approach of our friends from the fens. Will she accept, however, that what is important is the provision of transparency and accountability, given the rather sorry history of the National Millennium Experience Company? Will she give an undertaking that, when the deal is eventually done—with whomever it is done—she will explain to the House, in terms that all can understand, exactly what it involves? Will she ensure that the deal is not obfuscated by phrases such as "commercial in confidence", which always raise suspicions that some rather shady deal is being done behind closed doors, to which Ministers are not prepared to admit?

The answer to the hon. Gentleman's question is yes.

Having bungled the operation of the dome, are not the Government now setting about bungling the sale of the dome? How can the Minister possibly be sure that the maximum amount will be raised for regeneration and for paying back some of the appalling losses, when the Government have flatly refused to enter discussions with anyone other than a single bidder, which happens to be run by someone who has given the Secretary of State's local Labour party quite a lot of money? Is that not typical of the deceitful, dishonourable and shameful way in which the whole project has been managed by Labour? Questions have been unanswered and avoided; the public have been misled by weasel words, if not downright lies; and attempts have been made to shift the blame everywhere but where it is properly due—on Ministers. Are we not witnessing a desperate attempt to stitch up a deal before the general election, and the triumph of political expediency over public value?

I am ever more astonished at some of the hon. Gentleman's interventions. He will recall—Labour Members certainly all do—that he was Parliamentary Private Secretary to the former Secretary of State for National Heritage, who first proposed the whole scheme. I also remind him that only two bidders reached the original shortlist: Legacy plc and Nomura. Once Nomura had pulled out, Legacy plc was the sole remaining shortlisted bidder within the rules previously established for the millennium dome competition. It would not have been appropriate to enter negotiations with another proposed bidder while those discussions continued.

How much?

The hon. Gentleman asks from a sedentary position, "How much?" Robert Bourne is recorded in the Labour party's annual accounts as having made contributions of more than £5,000 in both 1999 and 2000. In stark contrast with the Conservative party, we have always been open and transparent about the way in which our party is funded.

If he will make a statement on how his Department intends to promote seaside holidays. [141882]

We are making good progress in promoting resort regeneration. This summer, the Minister for Tourism, Film and Broadcasting toured seaside resorts, including my hon. Friend's constituency, to see at first hand the problems and the opportunities. We fund the British Tourist Authority, which does an excellent job in marketing England abroad. Regional tourist boards, local authorities and other destination organisations all play an important part in promoting seaside holidays. I am pleased that we have been able to secure regeneration assistance for a large number of seaside resorts.

I thank my right hon. Friend for his answer. Not only Scarborough and Whitby but the constituency of the hon. Member for Ryedale (Mr. Greenway) are benefiting from objective 2 status. Will my right hon. Friend make every effort possible to discuss with lottery-awarding bodies whether we can lever in extra assistance for the many seaside resorts throughout the country that desperately need regeneration? I thank him and his Front-Bench team for all their efforts to promote the traditional seaside holiday in Britain.

I thank my hon. Friend for his question. Eight wards in Scarborough are included in objective 2 for potential funding. That is welcome. In relation to lottery funding, we are determinedly bringing pressure to bear on the lottery distributors to ensure that the spread of funding is fairer geographically throughout the country than it has been in the first five to six years of lottery funding. We shall look particularly at seaside resorts that have hitherto lost out in the fair sharing of lottery funds, and shall try to ensure that fairness is re-established over the coming years.

Is the Secretary of State aware that the recent flooding has caused damage not just to seaside resorts, but has turned many parts of the Vale of York into a seaside lookalike attraction, causing many caravans and mobile homes to be evacuated? What measures do the Government intend to take to ensure that those who are likely to lose their livelihoods over the next year because of the flooding damage will have some tourism industry to look forward to in the next year?

Of course, my right hon. Friend the Deputy Prime Minister, who has primary responsibility for the matter, is already taking action with local authorities to ensure that the best possible measures can be taken, as rapidly as possible and at as little cost to local authorities as possible, to ensure that the damage is put right, and particularly that economic livelihoods—be they in the tourism industry or any other industry—can be re-secured after the flooding has died away.

My right hon. Friend will know that many of Britain's seaside resorts are areas of high unemployment. Thanks to the Government, however, many of them—including Lowestoft in my constituency—have assisted area status. Will my right hon. Friend approach the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry to seek clarification on tourism businesses' eligibility for assisted area status money? It is very important that we maximise employment in all industries, and in those towns tourism obviously has enormous potential for growth.

My hon. Friend is right about the enormous potential of the tourism and hospitality industry: already, more than 1.7 million people in this country are employed in tourism and hospitality. They are among the fastest-growing categories of employment in the United Kingdom, and it is important that we ensure that that strength continues. I am particularly pleased that, under round 6 of the single regeneration budget, Lowestoft has received £1.25 million. We hope that it will be able to ensure that some of that funding goes into the generation of new employment opportunities in those sectors.

Is the Minister aware that there is one east coast seaside town that is proving very successful—much more successful than Lowestoft and Scarborough; is attracting an increasing number of people; and is not bothering him about public funds, subsidies or anything else? That town—which I entirely recommend him to visit to see how all that can be managed—is Skegness.

I certainly commend the hon. Gentleman for his devotion to the bracing atmosphere of Skegness, and I am sure that almost everything he says about it is true. The only quibble that I might have is with the unfair comparison that he made with both Lowestoft and Scarborough, which I am sure are every bit the equal of Skegness in the delights that they have to offer the visitor.

What discussions he has had with officials of the millennium stadium, Cardiff about the hosting of the FA cup final. [141884]

I have had no discussions with the officials of the millennium stadium on the issue. The arrangements for the FA cup final are a matter for the Football Association and the stadium authorities.

Does my hon. Friend agree that the millennium stadium, Cardiff is a world-class venue and a worthy place at which to bring the FA cup back to Wales for the first time since Cardiff City beat Arsenal in the 1927 cup final?

I shall remember that fact. I am very confident that, should the millennium stadium be the venue for the FA cup final, it will be a wonderful venue. As my hon. Friend says, it is a wonderful stadium: indeed, it was a terrific venue for the rugby world cup final just last year.

Does the Minister agree that the best solution is to get the FA cup final back at Wembley?

Clearly the hon. Gentleman is aware that, once the new Wembley stadium is built, the FA cup final will come back. However, at this stage—the FA would have to give us the final version on this—it is not suggested that the FA cup final will be played there again until the new stadium is built.

In view of Murrayfield's outstanding success earlier this year in hosting the rugby league world cup final, it is a great honour for the millennium stadium to be hosting the FA cup final. Keeping it in mind that the Football Association will have to look for alternative venues for the next two or three years, does the Minister not believe that it is a good idea for Murrayfield again to be consulted on the potential for hosting the FA cup final in that time?

I share my hon. Friend's praise for Murrayfield—in particular for its hosting of the rugby league cup final, which I was privileged to attend. However, where FA cup finals are held is a matter for the FA, which will consult various bodies and supporters around the country. I am sure that it will make a decision that is in the best interests of football and football supporters.

I am not decrying the attractions of either the millennium stadium in Cardiff or Murrayfield as hugely successful rugby venues. However, does the Minister agree that it is now a huge embarrassment for the Government that Wembley's future has once again been thrown into turmoil? We know, as do the public, that there is a huge difference of view on that matter between the Minister for Sport and the Secretary of State. Is not this yet another fiasco, following the shambles of the dome? We want athletics back in the new Wembley stadium. Will the Minister now ensure that her views prevail over those of her boss?

I am sure that the hon. Gentleman will have read the statement issued by the Football Association on Friday, which the Government welcome. The FA will assume greater day-to-day control over the redevelopment of Wembley, and it will focus more on the core aspects of building a football stadium, which is what football supporters and the country want. The Government are committed to ensuring that a wonderful stadium is built at Wembley. We also want to ensure a long-term future for athletics in this country, and we are keeping in touch with the FA and with UK Athletics. The FA has now decided to scale down the project, and to look at the matter again. It is going to take hands-on control, which I welcome.

What the timetable is for awarding the next licence to run the national lottery. [141885]

The award of the next licence to run the national lottery is a matter for the National Lottery Commission. The commission expects to announce the outcome of the bidding process for the new licence later in the month.

Does the right hon. Gentleman agree that, given that the previous Conservative Government successfully set up the national lottery, it would be a tragedy if this incompetent, rotten Labour Government were to kill it? Will he assure the House that, if the contractor should change, the national lottery would not be suspended, even for a short while?

No, I do not agree with the assumptions on which the hon. Gentleman's question is based. Yes, I can give him the assurance that he seeks.

Does the Secretary of State now regret how warmly he welcomed the original and unlawful decision to kick Camelot out of the competition? If anyone can sort out this mess, I suppose it is Lord Burns. Is not the fact that the award of this important contract is now six months late yet another unsightly scratch on the Secretary of State's increasingly battered Teflon coating? Will he take this opportunity to reflect on a year in which he has messed up the national lottery, messed up Wembley stadium, and wasted hundreds of millions of pounds on the dome? Will he now say, "I'm sorry. It's my fault. I'm just not up to the job."?

No, Mr. Speaker

What his latest estimate is of the number of visitors to Tate Modern. [141886]

At the close of business on Sunday 10 December, Tate Modern had attracted 3,721,254 visitors.

As one of the 3 million-plus visitors, may I tell my right hon. Friend what a hugely enjoyable experience a visit to Tate Modern provides? Does he agree that this is a complete vindication of the Government's policy to provide free entry for all to the new gallery—a policy in marked contrast to that pursued by the previous Government?

Yes. The wonderful thing about Tate Modern is not just that it has attracted so many visitors, or even that their experience has been excellent, but that the whole spectrum of society is reflected in the people going through the doors. They are from all parts of the country, all incomes and all backgrounds. That is very welcome, and it is thanks to a Labour Government that entry to Tate Modern is free to everyone. We are very proud of that fact.

In responding to the message of Sir Nicholas Serota in his Dimbleby lecture, to the effect that modern and contemporary art are not only appreciated by millions of people in this country but are not accessible to people in other parts of the country—Sir Nicholas drew particular attention to the inadequacies of our regional museums in this respect—will the Secretary of State indicate what remit he is giving to his newly appointed committee, under the chairmanship of Resource, to encourage it to look at the need to sponsor and promote our contemporary arts in Britain?

As the right hon. Gentleman knows, I have asked Resource to establish a working party to look particularly at the needs of regional museums. That working party will include Sir Nicholas Serota as one of its members. I have asked it to look widely at the issues involved, but have asked that its first priority should be to consider the deployment of the £10 million a year extra for regional museums and libraries that we are making available under the new spending review. I have also asked the working party to consider how it may be possible for the nationally funded museums and galleries to assist the regional museums through exchanging and sharing personnel, good practice and exhibitions.

If he intends to increase the allocation of resources to English Heritage; and if he will make a statement. [141887]

English Heritage will receive grant in aid of £112.7 million in 2001–02. In 2002–03 it will receive £119.7 million—an increase of 3.62 per cent. in real terms—and in 2003–04 it will receive £121.7 million, an increase of 2.78 per cent. We have been glad to make this additional funding available.

I thank my right hon. Friend for that reply and for the information that English Heritage is now to receive increases in its allocation. My concern was heightened when I was making representations on behalf of St. Peter's church in Horbury in my constituency and learned that, over the past four years, there has been no increase in the allocation to English Heritage. Churches such as St. Peter's miss out because of that restriction on finances. I realise that English Heritage has a difficult task, but I am pleased that we are now ensuring that increased resources are to be made available.

My hon. Friend has championed the need for St. Peter's, Horbury to receive funding so that that magnificent grade 1 listed church can be repaired. He has made it very plain to me how disappointed he has been that, so far, that application has not been successful under the joint places of worship scheme, which has been heavily over-subscribed. It is run jointly by English Heritage and the Heritage Lottery Fund. The Heritage Lottery Fund has chosen to increase the funding that it puts into the scheme, and English Heritage has kept its funding constant, as my hon. Friend says. However, we have made additional funding available for the future, and I very much hope that my hon. Friend's wonderful church will, at long last, be able to secure the funds needful for its repair.

What his latest estimate is of the total building and running costs of the millennium dome. [141890]

The forecast total project costs set out in the New Millennium Experience Company's budget, placed in the Library on 2 October, is £798 million. Of that, the capital build costs are forecast at £505.7 million; the non-capital costs for the project to 31 December 2000—including national programme costs and London new year's eve 1999—are forecast at £265.6 million; and the closure costs are forecast at £30.3 million.

From my memory of the original estimates of costs, that seems a pretty astonishing admission of inefficiency. Will the hon. Lady now address the question that she failed to address earlier? Given that her Department gave us the Bernie, can she explain how she thinks it appropriate that Mr. Robert Bourne, a well known donor to the Labour party, should be the only appropriate bidder for the dome after the end of this year?

I can only assume that the hon. Gentleman was not listening earlier; I repeat that Ministers took the decision to make Legacy the preferred bidder after receiving full and rigorous advice from the competition team, as well as from a wide range of other sources, including English Partnerships and the New Millennium Experience Company.

If he will make a statement on his policy on the level of service that public libraries should provide to local communities. [141891]

Public library authorities have a statutory duty to provide "a comprehensive and efficient" service across their areas. Early next year we intend to introduce national library standards so that library authorities and users understand better what that means in practice, and we shall monitor the performance of authorities through annual library plans.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that, in deciding on the level of public library service locally, councillors should take account of the views of local residents, user groups and, where they exist, local library forums? Will he join me in encouraging the new leader of Merton council, Councillor Peter Holt, who is meeting the Merton library forum, to listen to the concerns expressed through that forum and to respond positively to them? Perhaps in that way, we can start to make up for the council's previous mistake whereby branch libraries were closed—including Wimbledon Park branch library in my constituency—to help pay for modernisation.

I shall certainly give the encouragement sought by my hon. Friend. I hope that his constituents know how relentless he has been in putting pressure on me to ensure that Merton did not act improperly and unlawfully in that closure. He made absolutely sure that my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State and I were fully aware of the impact on his constituents of the closure of Wimbledon Park library. I know of the importance he attached to keeping that library open.

What assessment he has made of the financial implications of ordaining female bishops. [141903]

No such assessment has been made.

If the existing rules, which allow a parish to opt out of the care of its own bishop, are revoked, and/or female bishops are consecrated, and if, as a consequence, incumbents feel that they cannot in conscience remain within the Church, will they be compensated?

In reply, I can only quote Dean Inge, who once said, "I have had a great many problems—most of which never happened". I doubt that the situation described by the hon. Gentleman will arise.

Does my hon. Friend agree that it is for the Church of England and the General Synod to decide on theological grounds whether women should be ordained as bishops? If the Church of England so decides, it should be on those grounds, rather than on financial grounds, that women are ordained as bishops in the Church of England.

I am grateful to my hon. Friend. Last July, the General Synod requested the help of bishops in initiating further theological study on women in the episcopacy, with a report-back in two years. The House of Bishops is setting up a working party, but its membership has not yet been settled.

The hon. Gentleman will be aware that a large number of members of the Church of England would warmly welcome the consecration of female bishops. Given the need for so many additional members of the priesthood, what assessment has he made of the cost of this House's not allowing the consecration of female bishops?

As I said in response to the hon. Member for New Forest, West (Mr. Swayne), no assessment has yet been made of the financial impact of the ordination of female bishops. When the General Synod advances along those lines, no doubt it will take the matter into account.

What submission the Commissioners have made to the BBC with regard to their policy on religious broadcasting. [141904]

The hon. Gentleman may know that the Church of England's General Synod expressed its concern in February last year at the reduction and rescheduling of certain religious programmes, and that the Church is involved in work to monitor the output of the BBC and ITV in that respect.

I wonder how the synod feels about the recent abrupt resignation of Ernie Rea, who is the BBC's head of religious broadcasting, who said that BBC 2 did not appear to want traditional Christianity at all and that it just wanted "new-agey stuff". Will the hon. Gentleman confirm that he will join the synod in saying that, in this new digital age of the BBC, we do not want a dumbed-down, happy-clappy, newey-agey, trendy-bendy BBC?

I remind the hon. Gentleman of what was said 2,000 years ago:

Render therefore unto Caesar the things which are Caesar's.

I wrote to the BBC to raise that very issue, but the response that I received did not give me much confidence. Does my hon. Friend agree that broadcasting "Panorama" at the time at which it is shown on Sunday nights serves the purpose neither of current affairs documentaries nor of religious broadcasting?

My hon. Friend makes a valid point. I understand that the Bishop of Wakefield is chairing a monitoring group that is working to devise the appropriate mechanism to monitor the range and nature of all religious programmes. The point that my hon. Friend makes will no doubt be taken fully into account.

Given the care with which the broadcasters must proceed when they govern party political broadcasting, and given the somewhat colourful row about the fact that the leader of the Conservative party appeared on "Songs of Praise" yesterday—the Prime Minister will appear on that programme in January, and my right hon. Friend the Member for Ross, Skye and Inverness, West (Mr. Kennedy) is waiting for his invitation—can we have a serious assurance that somebody is regulating the political content of religious broadcasting so that it does not become abused or disrespected and so that such programmes are treated, as they should be, as religious broadcasts rather than party political ones?

I am a little nonplussed by the hon. Gentleman's remarks. The Leader of the Opposition visited Middlesbrough football ground the other day. I am not entirely sure that that was a political appearance, although it was the same day as "Match of the Day" and the right hon. Gentleman appeared on television that evening. I think that in a religious democracy—if I may call it that—we should encourage our political leaders to take every opportunity to link themselves to our Christian faith, even if that involves appearing on television in such programmes as "Songs of Praise".

What assessment the Commission has made of the results of the Government's move to resource accounting. [141905]

The Public Accounts Committee has closely followed the introduction of resource accounting. In general, the Commission and the Committee have endorsed the change as offering the potential to improve departmental management and information for Parliament. However, resource accounting has only just been introduced and its impacts will not be felt fully until 2001–02, when resourced-based supply is introduced. It is therefore too early to assess the impacts.

I thank the right hon. Gentleman for that reply. Can he confirm whether all Departments will produce full resource accounts for the year ending 5 April 2001? If so, what benefits can we expect from those more detailed accounts?

The difficulty is that not all Departments will produce their resource accounts in the next year. There will be parallel operation—old cash accounting will operate together with resource accounting. That is required to ensure that there is no slip-up between the two methods. I hope that there will be an acceleration next year and that resource accounting, and the benefits that derive from it, will be available to all Departments.

If the Church Commissioners will review their policy of allowing tenants of Church Commission land to decide whether to allow access to hunts. [141906]

The commissioners have no plans to review their policy on hunting on their land and will continue to allow tenants to decide for themselves whether to allow hunts on the land they rent from them.

That is a very disappointing reply from my hon. Friend. We shall debate the Hunting Bill next Monday and some hon. Members may look to the Church for guidance on the issue, but, yet again, there is just a deafening silence. When will the Church of England get off the fence on an issue that is so crucially important for many of its communicants and many of our constituents?

I am not entirely sure that there is a deafening silence, given that I have just responded to my hon. Friend. As I told him on 8 May, there is not a single viewpoint on hunting within the Church and the commissioners feel that it is right that tenants should be able to make their own decisions. The Church has noticed that, coming up fast on the starboard side, there is a vote next Monday. The commissioners will monitor the progress of any proposed legislation and will decide how best to deal with the ban on hunting, when and if it becomes law.

May I warmly thank the hon. Member for Middlesbrough (Mr. Bell) for his robust reply and urge him to continue to resist the siren voice of intolerance that is represented by the hon. Member for Pendle (Mr. Prentice)? As long as the hon. Member for Middlesbrough takes such a robust and principled stance, he will enjoy the support not only of Conservative Members but of millions of decent, right-thinking, tolerant folk the length and breadth of the United Kingdom.

I am not entirely sure that that was a question—it was more like a statement. I am sure that the whole House has heard the hon. Gentleman's views.