HC Deb 10 March 2003 vol 401 cc11-3
7. Ms Meg Munn (Sheffield, Heeley)

Which neighbourhoods will be given greater priority in the review of children's play facilities for the New Opportunities Fund. [101460]

The Minister for Sport (Mr. Richard Caborn)

No decisions have yet been made on that. The review is considering the needs of areas that have inadequate play opportunities and groups of children who have limited access to play. A report with recommendations about priorities for play provision will be published in the summer.

Ms Munn

I thank my right hon. Friend for his answer. Is he aware that the splash programme that took place last summer in areas such as Jordanthorpe and Batemoor was successful in demonstrating that constructive activities for young people can lead to a reduction in crime? I urge him to consider the lessons from that scheme by ensuring that neighbourhoods where there are few resources for play and where family incomes are low, which prevent children from being able regularly to go swimming and to access other more expensive activities, are taken into account in using this money to the maximum benefit.

Mr. Caborn

I very much agree. I hope that through the summer splash and splash extra programmes we will be able to continue to fund developments, not only over the summer period, but beyond that. They have proved to be an extremely good investment. They have taken young people off the streets and into creative activities, leading to a tremendous reduction in crime. The steering group—which is chaired by my right hon. Friend the Member for Holborn and St. Pancras (Mr. Dobson), who has been pushing this very hard—has been active in consultations in the regions, of which there have been nine. He has attended all but one, along with Tim Gill, the director of the Children's Play Council, who has been seconded to the Department to consider the areas in which children's play can be most effective.

Mr. Nick Hawkins (Surrey Heath)

The Minister will be aware that the all-party sport and leisure group, of which I am deputy chairman, has long-standing concerns about the diminishing number of playing fields and children's play areas. At last week's meeting, the chairman of the National Playing Fields Association pointed out to hon. Members that the Government's much vaunted protection for play areas does not cover children who are under eight and, in addition, of the 202 fields that have been referred to his Department for consultation, permission for sale has been refused in only six cases. I know that the Minister shares my concern about that, so will he look urgently at his scheme's failure to work, especially in relation to the protection of playing fields and play areas for the under-eights?

Mr. Caborn

The hon. Gentleman paints a gloomy picture, which does not reflect the real world. First, we have introduced the revised PPG17, which is the first time that play areas and playing fields have been brought together in a planning guidance. That guidance, which is very proactive, asks each local authority to carry out a needs assessment of its play facilities.

As regards the 202 applications, the hon. Gentleman did not inform the House that those applications are often made in order to build a pavilion or other accommodation that would enhance the quality of the play area. [Interruption.] Hon. Members are challenging that, so I shall give an example. A rugby club that had several pitches but no proper changing facilities made an application that we approved, which was regarded as the closure, or part closure, of a playing area. One must be objective about the matter, not view it only on the basis of statistics.

Mrs. Betty Williams (Conwy)

As part of the review, does my right hon. Friend have plans to consult the Welsh Assembly Government, and can he tell us how long the review is likely to take?

Mr. Caborn

In terms of the Welsh Assembly, the answer is yes. The planning guidance covers Wales, so it has to comply with PPG17. I hope that local authorities in Wales will respond positively.

Mr. John Greenway (Ryedale)

How many responses did the Minister's Department receive in support of the idea of merging the New Opportunities Fund with the community fund? Is it not now obvious that the public have rumbled that NOF money is substituting Government funds for projects that should be paid for by the taxpayer? Would it not make more sense if the Government redirected more funding to the original good causes, such as the community fund and the sports lottery fund, which are better placed to make independent assessments about play and sports projects that would command the support of lottery players?

Mr. Caborn

We have consulted widely on modernising the lottery and the hon. Gentleman will know that we have received a considerable number of submissions.

Mr. Greenway

How many?

Mr. Caborn

I do not know the exact number but I will find out and supply the information to the Library.

We are trying to be more efficient with the New Opportunities Fund and the community fund. We believe that the case has been made for bringing them together. We will put that to Parliament and to all the funding partners. We believe that things can be streamlined and that the central idea of the National Lotteries Act 1993, which was to do with additionality, is maintained today, as it was in 1993.