National Lottery Bill

moved Amendment No. 14:"After Clause 11, insert the following new clause—" ““DISTRIBUTING BODIES: REPORTING    After section 25E of the National Lottery etc. Act 1993 (c. 39) (as inserted by section 11 of this Act) insert— ““25F   Distribution of funds: reporting (1)   Distributing bodies, as set out in section 23, shall make a report to the Secretary of State no later than 30 days after the end of each financial year about how decisions on the awards made during that year have been reached. (2)   Matters which shall be dealt with in the report under subsection (1) include— (a)   the independence of funding decisions; (b)   the principles applied to maintain the distinction between core government expenditure and lottery funding; and (c)   the proportion of funding that has been allocated to bodies (other than public bodies or local authorities) whose activities are carried out not for profit. (3)   The Secretary of State shall lay a copy of each report received by him under this section before both Houses of Parliament.”””” The noble Lord said: During the stages of the Bill in the other place, the Big Lottery Fund gave a commitment to report on how it has upheld the additionality principle. That commitment was reciprocated by the other lottery distributors, which agreed to determine a policy on additionality and make it publicly available, most likely through their annual reports. While we on these Benches welcome those commitments, we believe that they must be enshrined on the face of the Bill if they are to be meaningful and lasting. This issue is supported in both the arts and voluntary sectors. The Minister may well have seen a statement made by those sectors today on their support for this amendment. The amendment requires all lottery distributors to report on the nature and destination of their funding on an annual basis. In addition to increasing the transparency and accountability of lottery distributors, this would address the two fundamental issues of additionality and the proportionate funding flowing to the voluntary and community sector. I acknowledge the commitments that have already been made in these areas but placing this requirement on the face of the Bill would ensure that they are upheld in the long term irrespective of the future leadership and priorities of lottery distributors. If the Government and the distributors are genuinely committed to reporting on how they have allocated lottery funding, there is no reason why they should resist this amendment. I was particularly interested to read how the Minister, Mr Caborn, responded to this amendment, which is very similar in form to that tabled by my honourable friend Mr Foster in the other place. He gave it an extremely sympathetic hearing. I very much hope that the Minister will follow that splendid precedent and give it a similar fair wind. Rather than going off into the realms of trying to define ““additionality””—this is the important thing about it—it tries to get to the core of reporting and distinguish in a practical way between core funding and funding which is properly being spent on the voluntary sector. Indeed, it reinforces some of the commitments that have been made about 60 to 70 per cent of the Big Lottery Fund’s money being spent on the voluntary sector. I very much hope that it will be seen as a practical way of addressing this issue. I think of the hunting of the snark when trying to define ““additionality””. However, this is not an attempt to hunt the snark; I hope that it is a wholly more practical solution. I beg to move.