National Lottery Bill

The Government are very supportive of the intentions behind this amendment and agree with much of the sentiment that has been expressed. I am delighted, therefore, to confirm the expectations of the noble Lord, Lord Clement-Jones, and the noble Viscount, Lord Astor. We agree that decisions on which projects to fund should be for distributors. We agree that distributors should follow the principle of additionality. As already discussed, we support the undertaking of the Big Lottery Fund that 60 to 70 per cent of its funding each year will go to voluntary and community sector organisations. We have already mentioned our agreement with distributors that they should report annually on additionality. To ensure transparency on additionality while respecting the independence of lottery distributors and allowing the necessary flexibility, I am pleased to tell the Committee that we have now agreed some further details with the UK and England distributors. First, they will adopt a common framework for reporting on the principle of additionality, which will comprise each lottery distributing body’s own policy on additionality, how it informs the design of their funding programmes, and how it works at the grant-giving level. Secondly, they will adopt a common interpretation of the principle of additionality. I can accept the interpretation of the principle of additionality, whereas noble Lords will have noticed I resisted the notion that we could translate that into the precision of law. The common interpretation will be:"““Lottery funding is distinct from Government expenditure. Where appropriate it complements Government and other programmes, policies and funding””." I hope that definition satisfies the Committee. Thirdly, the distributors have confirmed that annual reports will be the main vehicle for reporting on additionality. The Government feel that those additional commitments on the part of distributors should meet the concerns expressed by noble Lords and others about transparency. The Government do not believe that the amendment is appropriate and there are a number of reasons why we cannot support it. First, there is no need to require in the legislation that distributors report on how their decisions are independent of government. Distributors have always had that policy and they have had financial directions setting out the high level policy framework and financial propriety. That was introduced under the previous government and was continued by the current one. Beyond that, decisions on lottery funding are for distributors themselves to make. Secondly, the distributors have of their own volition agreed to adopt a common framework and interpretation of the principle and to report annually in this area, as I have already set out. It is bad regulatory practice to increase the volume of legislation on the statute book by putting into legislation something that can be achieved by other means such as, in this case, a voluntary agreement. Noble Lords will recognise the strength of that position.