Examination of Witness (Questions 560-566)|
MP AND MR
WEDNESDAY 14 NOVEMBER 2001
560. Do you know what happens with your money
after this has been made public?
(Mr Caborn) It not our responsibility to dispense
it, as you know, it is through Sport England or NOF, they have
561. It is public money. Does anybody monitor
how effectively these organisation are doing their work?
(Mr Caborn) The answer to that is yes. That is why
you have the Public Accounts Committee in our institution here,
to also that make sure that public money is dispensed in the way
the government feel it should be.
562. There is a suggestion that some of these
schemes provide capital money for local authority and then having
spent the capital they do not actually maintain them to the standard
that is necessary for anyone to benefit out of the capital?
(Mr Caborn) I think that is a very valid point. In
terms of Sport England that is part of the sustainability criteria
they put into the funding regimes. I think you are right in terms
of the question of revenue spending and the maintenance and indeed
the operation hours of medical sports facilities and I think that
is something that Sport England are taking on board and something
that I am very keen to make sure happens. That is why the new
development of sports facilities and the refurbishment through
the NOF fund via the local education authority and the LEA that
does make it easier. It is very, very clear indeed that they have
to be able to facilitate the community as well as it has for the
educational establishment. That is therefore incumbent to find
a solution to this the question of maintenance and opening hours.
Opening hours is a very important issue, people who play amateur
football use school facilities at the weekend and the big argument
is, is the caretaker going to come in to open the building up,
should the school bear that responsibility, what are the charges,
which is another big issue that we have to look at.
563. We will not go into all those issues today.
Can I just take you on to a much simpler area, that is Picketts
Lock and Wembley, were those two issues helped by the existing
PPG17 or would they be helped more by the new one?
(Mr Caborn) I do not think that would have any significance
on either of those decisions.
564. You do not think the planning process caused
problems at all with those two?
(Mr Caborn) To the best of my knowledge the answer
to that would be no. As indicated by my official they both secured
planning permission, I do not think it was a major problem.
565. The planning process was not a problem
(Mr Caborn) The amount of time it took to make decisions
on Picketts Lock and Wembley they are probably both in sync and
not very satisfactory, if I may say so.
566. On that note, thank you very much indeed.
(Mr Caborn) Thank you very much.