Mr Purnell's department has been accused of being behind briefings that Las Vegas-style gambling meccas are "dead in the water" since Gordon Brown took over as prime minister at the end of June.
Just three months earlier, when Tony Blair was in Number 10, Mr Purnell voted for Manchester to host Britain's first supercasino as part of a major extension of gambling.
The vote passed in the House of Commons but was rejected by three votes in the House of Lords - meaning the bid stalled.
Mr Brown also backed Manchester in the vote.
Despite that, when he succeeded Mr Blair, he immediately ordered a review into whether there were better ways of regenerating areas like East Manchester, where the casino was supposed to be built.
Sources have long indicated Mr Brown disapproved of supercasinos, and was simply following the official government line set down by Mr Blair.
Mr Purnell was asked three times by the Manchester Evening News yesterday whether his view of supercasinos had changed since the vote in March. Each time he declined to answer the question directly.
His first answer was: "The government has indicated we are looking at regeneration in that part of Manchester and seeing what the best approach is, whether there is an approach that is more effective."
Review
Asked again whether his personal view had changed, Mr Purnell repeated: "The review is still ongoing."
And asked whether he couldn't say if his own view of supercasinos had changed, the MP said: "I'm just telling you exactly what the position is, which is that the review is ongoing and will report in due course."
Mr Purnell, the MP for Stalybridge and Hyde, also declined to comment on whether Manchester could expect any replacement project to create the same number of jobs as the supercasino - estimated at 3,500.
"It is fair to say we are looking at regeneration through the review," he said.
Sir Richard Leese said at a meeting this month that Number 10 had denied it was the source of the "dead in the water" briefings. Instead he pointed the finger at Mr Purnell's department for culture, media and sport.
The review is expected to be completed at the end of next month, when the fate of the supercasino will be known.
*TO listen to an audio clip of the interview - provided courtesy of Wythenshawe FM - click on the link below. Read more about the visit, and other hot political topics, at David Ottewell's political blog at blogs.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/politics. Tweet
Comments
Login or Register to comment
Let’s not forget that it was while James Purnell was the responsible minister that 24-hour drinking was legalized with all the misery that has ensued.
According to the M.E.N. of 13 September, violent crimes linked to booze have rocketed by almost 50 per cent in Manchester since 24-hour drinking laws were brought in. Further information kindly provided by the M.E.N.:
Some 1,313 incidents were recorded by police between December last year and this July - compared to just 902 in the same period two years earlier before the licensing laws were reformed.
From December 2005 to July last year - just after the start of 24-hour drinking - there were 1,144. The crimes - recorded whenever a police officer believes alcohol to be a factor in a crime - include huge numbers of relatively minor assaults but also include robbery and rape.”
There were 1,292 alcohol-related crimes in the 12 months up to December 2005, when changes were brought in under the Licensing Act allowing premises to apply to open around the clock.
In the following 12 months there were 1,741 alcohol-related violent crimes, but between December last year and July this year there have been a further 1,313. The council had a `target' of 1,034 for an entire year.
The Manchester Royal Infirmary recorded 132,584 visits between April 2005 to March last year - but 142,992 in the next 12 months.
Please don’t let this man anywhere near making a decision on gambling. He gambled with changing the drink laws and we are paying a terrible price. Let’s not do the same with gambling.
What happened to real politicians who stood by their convictions rather than being a "MOUSE" and sitting on the fence, why do people vote for these mouse like politicians who just sit on the fence to save face rather than tell the voters what his views are? Its time to vote this type of money grabbing politician out of office.
There's a lot of talk about 'gambling laws' but really life itself is a 'gamble' and the 'law' is the 'law of nature'. Food for thought indeed.