The hon. Gentleman refers to the big architectural and heritage projects, and of course not every constituency has one of those, but every constituency can benefit from money going to local arts projects, sports and charities. It is interesting that he comments on the amounts going to different constituencies, because it is my understanding that the top 100 constituency beneficiaries of national lottery distribution contains a significant—indeed, overwhelming—number of Labour seats.
I am not making any claims about the political distribution. It is an interesting reflection that the hon. Gentleman is claiming that seats such as his do not have the ability to benefit from the lottery. My argument is that they have that ability, as set out in the clauses of what became the 1993 Act. Local sports clubs and arts projects can benefit, and should be benefiting, as well as local charities. That was the point of the lottery. Under the terms of the Bill, the Government are abandoning the idea that was crucial when the lottery was first established, namely, that distribution should be at arm’s length from the Government.
National Lottery Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Baroness May of Maidenhead
(Conservative)
in the House of Commons on Tuesday, 14 June 2005.
It occurred during Debate on bills on National Lottery Bill.
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
435 c175-6 
Session
2005-06
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-01-26 18:54:28 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_251327
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_251327
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_251327