National Lottery Bill

This has been a fascinating debate and, like the noble Lord, Lord Clement-Jones, the Government agree with the spirit. That is the nature of the problem, but we are dealing with legislation. At Second Reading, I challenged the Opposition to come forward with an amendment that would work in legislation. We all subscribe to the principle—that was enjoined in the early days of the development of the National Lottery. The noble Lord, Lord Brooke, expressed just how categorical one could be about certain areas where one could say, ““We’ll support capital projects””. There was a clear definition, because those projects were not undertaken by the government of the day and they were clearly additional. But we all know that the lottery has moved on considerably in recent years and there is a whole range of expenditure where matters are by no means so clear. I was enormously grateful to my noble friend Lady Pitkeathley, who has vast experience of these matters, for identifying just how difficult this issue is. She defined the problem with accuracy and was supported by my noble friend Lord Smith, who has also had enormous experience in this area. Of course, we all support the spirit. I make no bones about it: we are not going to resile in any way, shape or form from the spirit of additionality. We challenged the Opposition to produce an amendment that would translate this issue into effective law, because, with our combined resources through two Administrations over more than a decade, we have not been able to do so in a satisfactory way. That is the nature of our problem. I heard the noble Lord, Lord Clement-Jones, castigating my right honourable friend Mr Caborn. As I understand it, my right honourable friend Mr Caborn was merely saying, ““I have a department whose core funding is quite clear. It spends a great deal on the arts; it spends a great deal on sport; and it spends a great deal on other worthwhile projects. I don’t know where it ends and the National Lottery begins easily in these terms””. I imagine that the Minister of State, replying to the noble Lord, Lord Brooke, who was then in the Commons, was wrestling with the same problem. We all do, as do the Opposition in putting forward this amendment. As the noble Lord, Lord Clement-Jones, indicated, it is not a satisfactory position. I give way to the noble Lord.