National Lottery Bill

I heard the Minister’s speech and his explanation of how the title ““Big”” was chosen by the New Opportunities Fund and proposed to the Government. If the argument for calling it ““Big”” was because it was the biggest, the Minister seems to have played into the hands of the argument put forward by my noble friend Lord Eccles. The disadvantage is that it has that central role. Opinion polls can be used to prove anything; I heard the figures which the Minister quoted on the previous amendment. I have a recollection—I am perfectly happy to be argued out of it, persuaded or corrected—of a different opinion poll asking people what they thought the money should go to. About a third said that it should go to arts, sport and heritage; a third said it should go on health and education and similar issues; and a third had no opinion at all. I agree that on that basis, the Minister has a degree of argument for the conclusion he has reached, but I do not think it is right to say that the overwhelming majority of people are in favour of what he describes as the ““Big”” proposition in the way he indicated.