Clause 18 - Non-commercial society

Part of Gambling Bill – in a Public Bill Committee at 3:45 pm on 11 November 2004.

Alert me about debates like this

Photo of Richard Caborn Richard Caborn Minister of State (Sport and Tourism), Department for Culture, Media & Sport 3:45, 11 November 2004

I had a very long explanation, but now it is only a long one: my officials have cut it down a little. The present definition of ''society'' is in the 1976 Act and it includes

''any club, institution, organisation or association of persons, by whatever name called''.

The Bill leaves ''society'' undefined, except in so far as clause 330 makes it clear that a separate branch or section of a society is to be treated as a society, so that it can promote its own lotteries if it so desires.

The concept of ''a society'' is inevitably very general and I have some sympathy with what I take to be the idea behind amendment No. 108. If there is an organisation or entity that is genuinely non-commercial, it is hard to see why the simple fact that it is established as a company should debar it from running a lottery or lotteries. Many charities are legally companies and already run lotteries without difficulty under the current law. From their point of view, the amendment might help to make their position more certain and would otherwise do no harm.

However, we need to be a little careful about the stretching of the concept of a society to include any corporation. Apart from anything else, that would allow at least some statutory corporations to run lotteries and I do not think that that would be at all welcome to the charity world, which we have been trying to protect. I therefore undertake to consider the

amendment further, but without giving any commitment.

We do not consider that the change proposed in amendment No. 109 is necessary. The definition of a non-commercial society in clause 18 is a society that is established and conducted for the purposes listed in the clause. If the purpose of a commercial society changes, the society re-establishes itself as non-commercial. It will conduct itself as a non-commercial society and will be covered by the definition in the clause.

Amendments Nos. 190, 187, 188, 191 and 192 make various changes to the definition of a non-commercial society that are either unnecessary or undesirable. We are grateful to the hon. Member for Surrey Heath for his explanation of the amendments, as we have been a little puzzled about the reason for them. The Government do not wish to exclude organisations that enable participation in a cultural activity from being able to run lotteries or from benefiting from the non-commercial society provision.

The word ''athletics'' has been included in clause 18 to avoid any doubt that such activities are covered. I have sympathy with the hon. Gentleman's suggested change, as there is a respectable argument that the word ''sport'' generally includes athletics. However, the 1976 Act draws a distinction between athletic sport and other games. We are therefore keen to retain the word ''athletics'' to avoid any argument that such activities have been deliberately excluded from the scope of the clause.

Amendments Nos. 190 and 191 would exclude societies that are not charitable and do not enable participation in sport, athletics or cultural activities, but are not established or conducted for private gain from the definition of non-commercial societies. We see no reason to exclude such societies.

Amendment No. 192 proposes the addition of a new subsection to clause 18. It would add to the definition of non-commercial societies,

''a race night at which films of past horseraces are shown in order to raise funds for a voluntary organisation''.

Although I sympathise with the amendment's intention, it is not necessary, because such events are provided for later in the Bill. If betting is involved, it will require regulations under the Bill only if it is being offered in the course of a business. That will always be a matter of fact and degree. I do not perceive any immediate problems with voluntary organisations running such race nights, provided that all the money raised goes to good causes. Such organisations should be able to rely on the non-business betting exemption.

In light of that explanation, I hope that the hon. Member for North-East Cambridgeshire will not press amendment No. 108.