National Lottery Bill

I am only too happy to enlighten the movers of amendments in Committee if it is within my power to do so. However, I am not sure that on this occasion it is; hence my hesitancy. I spelt out that we were talking about very broad categories indeed. We have already had illustration that under the existing legislation the specific areas are dealt with using a light touch. I indicated that those areas were well defined in good causes. I indicated how the legislation worked. With the creation of so large a body—the Big Lottery Fund, with 50 per cent of the expenditure—it seems sensible to the Government and, I believe, to people whom we have consulted, that that expenditure should have some broad parameters. We are not prescribing details of schemes in regions. The moneys that will be allocated to Wales, Scotland or Northern Ireland will follow a broad-based formula. The one that we are operating at present constitutes an elaborate calculation. If anybody thinks that the Big Lottery Fund would dare to allocate money to Wales, Scotland or Northern Ireland unfairly and without following clear criteria in that regard, they are placing little emphasis on the power of the devolved institutions and the people they represent. The Big Lottery Fund distributors follow a formula, based on census data and various deprivation factors, which determines detailed percentages of funds being allocated to the three countries. On the broad issues of policy, I could not have given broader prescriptions. I indicated that community learning, community safety and cohesion, and physical and mental well-being would be promoted. If it is contended that that is a very narrow prescription that the Government are seeking to develop, I emphasise again—I have made this clear—that we will bring these powers before both Houses in an order so that the concepts can be fully examined. I hear what the noble Viscount says about the amendment but he is not talking about narrow amendments to the potential descriptive themes, as I understand it. He is saying, ““You should not have these prescriptive themes in there at all””. I say that we need them because this is such a substantial part of the lottery and that we are open and transparent about how we will go about it. I cannot for the life of me understand—even if one accepted that the noble Viscount had a case on prescriptive powers with regard to these themes—how on earth we could take away prescriptive powers with regard to allocation to the devolved administrations. It must be recognised that it is necessary, as this clause envisages, to make prescription in that area.