Mr Nick Hawkins (Surrey Heath, Conservative)

I beg to move amendment No. 68, in

clause 32, page 17, line 8, at end insert—

'(aa) Paragraph (a) applies only on the basis that the net assets shall then all be used for the benefit of sport in the UK'.

The amendment concerns the question of what happens on the dissolution of the Olympic lottery distributor. I have already said that we hope that this will not be necessary until after a successful Olympic games in 2012.

We wanted to put forward an amendment to probe the Government and to suggest that the transfer of property rights or liabilities should go, as set out in the Bill, to the Secretary of State, or any other person, but, as the words of our proposed amendment suggest, only on the understanding that the net proceeds should be used for the benefit of sport in the UK. This is a genuine attempt to improve the wording of the Bill. I hope that the Minister will respect the spirit and intent of the words we seek to add. I do not claim any particular perfection in our drafting, and the Minister may well say that he is advised that the drafting may

not be quite right. If he cannot accept the amendment, I hope that he is able to say that it is the clear intention of the Government to ensure that whenever the Olympic lottery distributor is dissolved, the net assets arising from that dissolution will be provided for sport, and will not go into the all-encompassing maw of Her Majesty's Treasury.

Mr Richard Caborn (Minister of State (Sport and Tourism), Department for Culture, Media & Sport; Sheffield Central, Labour)

I can give no more explanation than I did before. We are looking seven, eight or nine years ahead. There may well be assets, such as property, that would not necessarily suit sport, so we would not wish to tie any assets down to a particular area. We believe that the formula in the Bill—the transfer of assets to the Secretary of State or other persons—is sufficiently broad to enable sport to benefit, and it would be at that time that sport could make its case. I have no doubt that in this arena, the Olympics, the vast majority of proceeds would go to sport in one way or another. The hon. Gentleman stated that the legacy of the Commonwealth games was, broadly speaking, to sport in general, and I see no difference between that case and this one. To tie it down too tightly, as the hon. Gentleman seeks to do through his amendment, would not be helpful, and for that reason I ask him to withdraw it.

Mr Nick Hawkins (Surrey Heath, Conservative)

I am slightly disappointed with what the Minister said. It is helpful that he has put on the record that he envisages that the vast majority of the money will probably be going to sport, but it would be helpful, given that we may be looking some years ahead, to have something in the Bill that guarantees that. Governments come and go, and it would be useful, if we are looking to 2012 or 2013, for the Bill to show what Parliament had in mind. We may need to pursue the matter further, on Report and in another place, but in order to preserve that opportunity, I beg to ask leave to withdraw the amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Clause 32 ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Clauses 33 and 34 ordered to stand part of the Bill.