Perhaps I may add to that. Obviously, it would be tremendously helpful if we were to conclude that there would not be any more sentences in a policy direction saying, for example, that individuals and individual public libraries shall not be eligible to bid for funds. It is very difficult for us to appreciate the move that the Government are making when the words in the Bill do not make any difference to the position. The position is precisely the same. In fact, the drafting of the directions clause is slightly tighter than that of the 1998 clause and a great deal tighter than the drafting of the 1993 clause. So the position under the law is that the Secretary of State is free to continue with the sort of approach to policy directions in this document, which is 37 pages long, contains 160 significant paragraphs and goes into detail such as I have just read out to the Committee. It is extremely difficult for us to understand that we are faced by a major change in policy. Are we really to believe that?
National Lottery Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Viscount Eccles
(Conservative)
in the House of Lords on Monday, 13 March 2006.
It occurred during Committee of the Whole House (HL)
and
Debate on bills on National Lottery Bill.
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
679 c999 
Session
2005-06
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-04-16 20:16:50 +0100
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_307477
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_307477
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_307477