That is not a straitjacket. It does not say, moreover, that they shall ensure, like the Big Lottery Fund, that they give not less than 60 per cent of their funding to the voluntary community sector; it is simply a matter of fact. I must confess that I am somewhat baffled by that objection, because I cannot see that the provision of information is in any sense a constraint on any of those lottery distributors, other than the Big Lottery Fund, which we know has made a commitment and is able to report.
The Minister’s objections are somewhat extraordinary, particularly since he produced from one cuff, in a sense, part of a trick, while making it clear that in practice all the necessary ingredients of that reporting structure had been, or were being, put in place. That is welcome. So the next step onto which I hope to take the Minister will be at Report stage. I will read the Minister’s words carefully, but I can guarantee that I shall take him carefully through his words tonight and urge him to take the next logical step—to enshrine this reporting requirement in the legislation. Meanwhile, I beg leave to withdraw the amendment.
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
Clause 12 agreed to.
National Lottery Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Lord Clement-Jones
(Liberal Democrat)
in the House of Lords on Monday, 13 March 2006.
It occurred during Committee of the Whole House (HL)
and
Debate on bills on National Lottery Bill.
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
679 c1079 
Session
2005-06
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-04-21 10:54:38 +0100
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_307551
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_307551
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_307551