National Heritage Bill [Lords] [Money]

House of Commons, 23 January 2002.

Kim Howells (Labour, Pontypridd)

I beg to move,

That, for the purposes of any Act resulting from the National Heritage Bill [Lords], it is expedient to authorise the payment out of money provided by Parliament of—

(a) any expenditure incurred by a Minister of the Crown or government department under or by virtue of the Act; and

(b) any increase attributable to the Act in the sums payable out of money so provided under any other Act.

The motion concerns the private Member's Bill promoted by the hon. Member for Chipping Barnet (Sir S. Chapman). The Government have been content to support the Bill, as its provisions closely mirror the relevant provisions of the my Department's Culture and Recreation Bill, which was lost with the announcement of the general election. This support was ably expressed during the Bill's Second Reading on 18 January, when the House was content for the Bill to move into Committee. The Bill has already been considered thoroughly in another place.

The purpose of the Bill is to broaden the powers of English Heritage in two ways. It will allow English Heritage to trade in overseas countries, and to become involved in underwater archaeology in territorial waters adjacent to England.

The governing legislation for English Heritage at present precludes both activities, but it is widely expected that they would be beneficial. The Bill would also allow my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport to direct English Heritage to carry out certain administrative functions in relation to underwater archaeology, which at present that Department has to carry out itself. The Bill therefore gives new powers to English Heritage, which of course have financial implications—hence the money resolution.

Hon. Members on both sides of the House accept that this is a useful piece of legislation. I commend it to the House.

Anne McIntosh (Conservative, Vale of York)

I thank the Minister and the Government for bringing forward the money resolution. I pay tribute to my hon. Friend the Member for Chipping Barnet (Sir S. Chapman), who so agreeably and successfully moved the Bill's Second Reading on Friday 18 January. I also pay tribute to Baroness Anelay of St. Johns, who revived the Bill and, I am sure that the Minister would agree, put it into an even friendlier form than that which was lost at the time of the general election.

I entirely support the Bill's objectives, personally and on behalf of the official Opposition. The Minister refrained from using the expression that it extends English Heritage's responsibilities to wrecks, and perhaps at this time of the evening I should also avoid any reference to wrecks, but I welcome English Heritage's new powers and the streamlining and extension of its activities.

I have one or two questions for the Minister, relating to the financial implications of the Bill. First, what expenditure will be incurred as a result of the financial provisions? Secondly, can the hon. Gentleman assure the House tonight that, as the Bill simply reflects to a large extent administrative changes that have already taken place, the level of expenditure will be very small? I do not know whether he can share a figure with the House tonight, but if so that would be most welcome.

Kim Howells (Labour, Pontypridd)

We are proposing to transfer the full current budget of £340,000 for these activities to English Heritage.

Anne McIntosh (Conservative, Vale of York)

That answer is extremely helpful. May any potential savings be envisaged in future resulting from the Bill's provisions? Can the hon. Gentleman explain what the day-to-day running costs will be, and whether there will be any additional running costs under the new arrangements envisaged by the Bill? I await the hon. Gentleman's reply with great anticipation.

I thank the Government once again for bringing the money resolution before the House, enabling us to ensure a safe passage for the Bill.

Kim Howells (Labour, Pontypridd)

With the leave of the House, Mr. Deputy Speaker, I shall respond.

The transfer of the Advisory Committee on Historic Wreck Sites secretariat function and the management of the archaeological diving contract—which is, I am told, currently held by the archaeological diving unit at St. Andrews university—to English Heritage are agreed recommendations arising from the departmental spending review. It was a key plank of the spending review findings that the Department for Culture, Media and Sport should not be involved in such executive functions. We are proposing to transfer the full current budget of £340,000 for those activities to English Heritage.

English Heritage considers that those functions should cost £450,000 to carry out. We disagree. When DCMS last let the diving services contract, it made efficiency savings by transferring the cost of the vehicles and vessels to the contractor, in line with current best practice, and English Heritage should also be able to benefit from those efficiency savings. We cannot predict how much the contract will cost when it is re-tendered, and there may indeed, as the hon. Member for Vale of York (Miss McIntosh) said, be scope for more efficiency savings, but what those are exactly I certainly would not be able to tell her now.

Question put and agreed to.