National Lottery Bill

I support the right reverend Prelate the Bishop of Southwell and Nottingham. It would be quite helpful if the Minister, as a Whip, could give some guidance on procedure in his reply. Are those who wish to raise questions on a clause stand part Motion obliged to put their name on the Order Paper, or can they rely on someone else having indicated that there was likely to be a debate? It will be helpful to know whether in fact we should put our names down. I noticed a slight hesitancy around the Table when the right reverend Prelate rose to speak. The point I wish to make in support of the right reverend Prelate is exactly the same as the one I made on Second Reading—namely, that large projects require more management than the distribution of small grants. Of course the building of cathedrals is unlikely to be a subject which will come under the Heritage Lottery Fund, but it will serve as an example. If Durham Cathedral took 40 years to build—a remarkable achievement in itself in the era in which it was built—the cathedral in Prague took 1,000 years. When one tries to calculate how much management went into the building in Prague over those 1,000 years, one winces. A distributor which leaves money in its balances, and thus earns interest on it, may be doing so in part to compensate for the fact that, because of the nature of the projects, the distribution of the resources takes longer and therefore costs more.