My Lords, the noble Earl has ample time for dinner. I believe that this is an important Bill, as I hope he does—and I hope that he stops and listens.
There are three ways for the smaller bank or building society to act. They could create or add to their own charity, or they could give to a community foundation, which now covers 95 per cent of the country. Indeed, they could have a discrete fund within the foundation. Or they could do nothing. They could say that by order the figure of £7,000 million could be raised. The Skipton Building Society, which gave evidence to the Treasury Select Committee of the other place, raised the issue with its members, and 88 per cent of its members believe that the money should not go in the direction of government. Half its members agree with the potential scheme. I suspect that many people would think that the National Lottery was somewhere near government—and this is an area in which we have to be careful.
On the Big Lottery Fund, as the Minister knows, since we have been here before, I have a preference for local and regional decision-making on grants. But if the local element is enhanced, perhaps the system as described could be right. There is a case for the Big Lottery, with its expertise in grant-making covering the national scheme. The Bill is clear in its transparency as to accounts. But I am doubtful of the name—the Big Lottery—being used for the money. Perhaps a new brass plate could be ordered, even if it is placed outside the doors of the Big Lottery, and perhaps rather than ““dormant”” it could refer to the ““reawakened”” fund, so that it is clear that these funds have not been raised from gambling, which is an issue that has been upsetting to some.
Finally, this is an important and exciting Bill. I return to the theme of a rich seam. Early calculations in Ireland were that there would be €3 million from the scheme, and €196 million came out of it in the first year. They were wrong by a factor of 64. Early estimates here are £450 million, on these very restricted proposals. If that factor were applicable here, the figure raised would be £28.8 billion in the United Kingdom. That is not a forecast—but it could be that £450 million is a little on the low side.
I look forward to the Committee stage in which we shall endeavour to improve, enhance and localise the splendid opportunities available in the Bill.
Dormant Bank and Building Society Accounts Bill [HL]
Proceeding contribution from
Lord Shutt of Greetland
(Liberal Democrat)
in the House of Lords on Wednesday, 21 November 2007.
It occurred during Debate on bills on Dormant Bank and Building Society Accounts Bill [HL].
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
696 c881 
Session
2007-08
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-16 01:51:57 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_423438
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_423438
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_423438