Part of National Lottery Bill – in a Public Bill Committee at 1:00 pm on 3rd November 2005.

Alert me about debates like this

Photo of Richard Caborn Richard Caborn Minister of State (Sport), Department for Culture, Media & Sport 1:00 pm, 3rd November 2005

Before lunch I was trying to explain to the Committee that the new clause is very reasonable. I shall resist it because it has one or two flaws, and it was badly argued by the Opposition. They did not do the clause any justice at all.

Our approach is very much in line with the thinking out there from the general public as reflected in the consultation. During all the consultations, it was true that people wanted additionality. It was part of the intention in the mid-1990s when the lottery was set up   and broadly speaking, all Administrations have adhered to it. The protection regarding sports, the arts and heritage exists now and will do so in future.

As an aside, several hon. Members argued about Government direction. That has to be considered carefully. Let us consider the amount of money that the constituents of the hon. Member for Bath (Mr. Foster) received from the New Opportunities Fund. I do not know whether he wants us to withdraw it because it is politically incorrect, but we will do if he desires that. The project was for Bath and North East Somerset council to provide school pupils and local partners with secure and accessible flood lighting and hard court surfaces. The facilities have increased participation in a wide range of sports including soccer, hockey, basketball, tennis and netball.