§ Mr. JesselTo ask the Secretary of State for National Heritage what consideration was given to repeating the assertion of his accountability for the policy, operations and resources of the Historic Royal Palaces Agency, contained in the 1990–91 review of the agency, in its 1991–92 report, and if he will make a statement.
§ Mr. Brooke[holding answer 22 January 1993]: Responsibility for the subject of the question has been delegated to the Historic Royal Palaces Agency under its chief executive, Mr. Beeton. I have asked him to arrange for a reply to be given.
Letter from David Beeton to Mr. Toby Jessel, dated 28 January 1993: 206W
I am writing to confirm our recent conversation about your Parliamentary Written Question on the Secretary of State's accountability for the policy operation and resources of the Historic Royal Palaces Agency.The statements about this in the two documents you referred to derived from the Agency's Framework Document, which is it's Constitution, and was the basis upon which the Agency was established in 1989. That document was to be reviewed after 3 years. This is now in hand and I understand that no changes to the Secretary of State's above stated responsibilities are proposed. I am certainly not seeking any.You also asked me whether the rumour that Bushy Park might be transferred to the Agency was true. I said that the question had been considered when the maintenance of Bushy Park had been put out to contract as to whether the same should happen at Hampton Court. It was decided then that merged management would not be appropriate and I do not expect this question to be raised again, at least until the present maintenance contract at Bushy Park expires, which is several years from now.