National Lottery Bill

The noble Viscount obviously had a good and reflective dinner, and he has had the chance to brush up on points on which to cause me some embarrassment. In this case the answer is no, because we are going to achieve our objectives by clearly expressed agreement, which I am sure is applauded right across the Committee. The wording,"““the distinction between core government expenditure and lottery funding””," does not allow the flexibility for changes in ideas over time on what the Government should be funding or allow a complementary approach as set out in the framework agreed by distributors. Finally, the amendment would require all lottery distributors to say how much funding they have given to voluntary and community sector bodies. The Big Lottery Fund, as we have already discussed, gave an undertaking that 60 per cent to 70 per cent of its funding will go to that sector. That reflects the fact that one of its constituent bodies, the Community Fund, was originally set up to fund voluntary and community sector organisations. The Big Lottery Fund wants to ensure that such organisations receive at least as much money in future as they do now. Other lottery distributors may of course also fund the voluntary and community sector, but it is only the Big Lottery Fund that has given a specific undertaking on percentages. We are not therefore convinced of the need for all distributors to report on this matter any more than they report on the proportion of funding allocated to any other sector or type of organisation. The Government believe that our approach is the best way of dealing with these issues. Our proposals for reporting will be transparent and will impose minimum bureaucratic burdens—a concept that I know will commend itself to both Opposition Front Benches—yet will allow for appropriate parliamentary and public debate should that be appropriate. I accept the principles behind the amendment and the spirit in which they have been presented, but I hope that the noble Lord will recognise that I cannot accept the amendment, although I accept the substance of his argument.