§ Mr. KeetchTo ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport what account the Heritage Lottery Fund takes of correspondence from the public in reaching its decisions; and if she will make a statement. [86842]
§ Dr. Howells[holding answer 12 December 2002]The Heritage Lottery Fund looks for evidence that the project is supported by the local community in which it is situated. It will also look at letters of support it receives for the project from the public, or further evidence which applicants are able to give it about the level of public support for their proposals. It also will take into account views of interested parties, particularly those who may be closely affected by a funding decision. However, this does not alter the consideration it must n give to each request for funding against the stated criteria, and against the specific issues outlined in the application pack. Letters of support received after a decision is reached are noted, but cannot affect a decision retrospectively.
§ Mr. KeetchTo ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport how often the Heritage Lottery Fund has reversed a decision not to award lottery funding to a cause; what reasons were given; and if she will make a statement. [86843]
§ Dr. Howells[holding answer 12 December 2002]The Heritage Lottery Fund has an independent Reviews and Complains Committee Organisations which feel that their application for a grant has not been considered fairly or properly can ask for the Committee to review it. The Committee has reviewed 33 cases over the last five years, and asked the Board (or the Heritage Lottery Fund Committee that took the original decision) to look again at its decision on four occasions. On two occasions a decision was reversed. In the first instance, after careful reflection, the Board concluded that the application comprised a number of unique features of heritage merit which, in combination, warranted support. In the other case, the Committee drew attention to a misunderstanding of project costs and partnership funding which altered the level of grant requested by the applicant. This resulted in the then Committee for the English Regions concluding that the application now offered value for money and awarded a grant.