HL Deb 25 July 2002 vol 638 cc532-4

3.15 p.m.

Lord Corbett of Castle Vale asked Her Majesty's Government:

What progress has been made on completing agreements for the financing and construction of the proposed national stadium.

Lord McIntosh of Haringey

My Lords, the Football Association, whose project this is, made it clear on 22nd May that it would take up to 10 weeks from signing heads of agreement to reach financial close. Officials remain in close contact with the Football Association and Wembley National Stadium Ltd and we understand that good progress is being made by the FA on its commercial negotiations.

Lord Corbett of Castle Vale

My Lords, does my noble friend understand that those of us who want to see a modern national stadium have little remaining faith in the ability of the FA to deliver it? Will he acknowledge that all that has really happened in the past six years is that the Wembley turf has been dug up? Are there not lessons to learnt here from the strength of the regions and their ability to deliver projects on time and on budget, as shown by the city of Birmingham in the case of Millennium Point and the world indoor athletics championships to be held next May, and, superbly, by the city of Manchester where the Commonwealth Games open tonight? Will my noble friend now blow the whistle on the Wembley fiasco and honour earlier undertakings to consider seriously the bid for the much better Birmingham Solihull site?

Lord McIntosh of Haringey

My Lords, fortunately, I do not answer for the Football Association from this Dispatch Box. Therefore, I can only say that my noble friend's comments will be communicated to the Football Association.

Viscount Falkland

My Lords, will the noble Lord tell the House whether it is now considered good practice in government circles, or more particularly in Sport England circles, not to commit lottery funds—in this case £120 million—to a project where the financing is not in place?

Lord McIntosh of Haringey

My Lords, Ministers from the Department for Culture, Media and Sport have made it very clear since last December that they set very stringent conditions for that part of the project which is in receipt of public money; namely, the £120 million contributed by Sport England for the site. Some of those conditions have been met. The condition for financial support, which is adequate and fully committed, has yet to be met. We shall see what happens when we come to the conclusion of that fourth condition.

Lord Tomlinson

My Lords, as my noble friend rightly insists, he does not answer for the Football Association. Will he therefore tell us why the Government became so involved in making statements in favour of Wembley in the first place?

Lord McIntosh of Haringey

My Lords, my noble friend wishes to go back a considerable way. I am not sure that that is fruitful. The contribution made by Sport England to the Wembley site has been £120 million, which is not enormously high by international standards for public funding of football stadia. Naturally, the Government are concerned that there should continue to be safeguards. That is why there is a staging agreement.

Viscount Bledisloe

My Lords, does the noble Lord have any idea how long it took and how much it cost to erect the superb stadia which we saw being used for the World Cup in Japan and South Korea? Can he explain to the House why those countries can do it so much more quickly and cheaply than appears to be possible here?

Lord McIntosh of Haringey

My Lords, I have figures for a number of the stadiums built in Japan and Korea. Generally, they were built more quickly and more cheaply than is proposed for Wembley. However, they are also much smaller than Wembley. For example, the Sapporo stadium, which has received much well deserved praised, seats only 42,000.

Lord Faulkner of Worcester

My Lords, are not a number of the Japanese stadiums now in the process of being dismantled, as the Japanese Government took the view that they should exist for the period of the World Cup only and that the sites would then no longer be available for sports?

On a separate issue, will my noble friend confirm the accuracy of reports in today's press that the Government will be making up their mind on whether to make a bid for the Olympics in 2012 on the basis of the experience with the Commonwealth Games, which we all hope and are confident will be a success? Does an Olympic bid depend on the success of the Commonwealth Games? Can he also confirm that if the Olympics come to Britain, the only site where they can be staged is London?

Lord McIntosh of Haringey

My Lords, those are two very different questions. First, a number of the Japanese stadiums were built in places where the population is not enough to sustain continuing spectator numbers. I think that some are being dismantled. I have not seen the reports in today's press about the Olympic Games in 2012, but it has been common knowledge that any bid for the Olympic Games in any year would have to be based on London.

Lord Woolmer of Leeds

My Lords, does my noble friend recognise that in the regions outside London there is genuine concern that yet another major international stadium appears to be going to London?

If the FA fails to bring the project successfully to the next stage, will there come a time in the coming weeks when the Government reopen the Birmingham bid?

Lord McIntosh of Haringey

Yes, my Lords. It is a hypothetical question, but if that were to happen the question of a stadium in Birmingham certainly would have to be reopened.

Lord Addington

My Lords, does the Minister agree that public money has been used, whether it comes from the National Lottery or elsewhere? Will the Government therefore assure us that a Minister will ultimately make sure that something happens to give us a national stadium no matter where and that a start will be made very shortly? At the moment, everybody is losing out.

Lord McIntosh of Haringey

My Lords, the implication of public funding, which has come from Sport England, is that the Government should ensure that there are adequate safeguards. It does not mean that the Government should take over the direction of the project. It is important to understand that.

Forward to