Single Regeneration Budget (Hansard, 19 December 1994)

§ Mr. Gordon Prentice
To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will make a statement on the reasons why single regeneration budget bids in the north-west failed.

§ Mr. Curry
No. Bids for funding from the single regeneration budget were considered individually against the criteria set out in the bidding guidance. Government regional offices will be ready to discuss with the partnerships concerned issues relevant to the performance of the bid.

§ Mrs. Wise
To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will list those authorities whose single regeneration budget bids were unsuccessful.

§ Mr. Curry
I shall write to the hon. Member.

§ Mr. Vaz
To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment further to his statement of 6 December on

Question reference number:

Government office (a) (b) £ million (c)(i) (c)(ii) (d)(1) (d)(2) (e)(x) £ million (e)(y) £ million

Eastern 11 2.66 13 5 5 — 1.449 —

East Midlands 15 9.487 11 13 3 3 2.39 0.282

London 75 52.513 38 52 14 17 22.442 19.394

Merseyside 9 7.563 14 7 1 — 1.1 —

North East 26 6.395 27 18 3 — 4.955 —

North West 35 14.930 19 25 6 5 8.287 2.690

South East 33 8.415 19 25 4 2 2 0.87

South West 24 7.373 10 21 2 — 4.939 —

West Midlands 24 13.999 12 14 6 6 14.071 9.639

Yorkshire and Humberside 16 20.564 20 12 7 5 27.511 16.039

Total 268 143.899 183 192 51 38 89.144 48.914

	Question reference number:
Government office	(a)	(b) £ million	(c)(i)	(c)(ii)	(d)(1)	(d)(2)	(e)(x) £ million	(e)(y) £ million
Eastern	11	2.66	13	5	5	—	1.449	—
East Midlands	15	9.487	11	13	3	3	2.39	0.282
London	75	52.513	38	52	14	17	22.442	19.394
Merseyside	9	7.563	14	7	1	—	1.1	—
North East	26	6.395	27	18	3	—	4.955	—
North West	35	14.930	19	25	6	5	8.287	2.690
South East	33	8.415	19	25	4	2	2	0.87
South West	24	7.373	10	21	2	—	4.939	—
West Midlands	24	13.999	12	14	6	6	14.071	9.639
Yorkshire and Humberside	16	20.564	20	12	7	5	27.511	16.039
Total	268	143.899	183	192	51	38	89.144	48.914