Plenary, 27 Jan 2005

Meeting date: Thursday, January 27, 2005

Official Report 735KB pdf

---

National Lottery Bill

The next item of business is consideration of motion S2M-2255, in the name of Patricia Ferguson, on the National Lottery Bill, which is United Kingdom legislation.

Motion moved,

That the Parliament agrees that the provisions in the National Lottery Bill that relate to the executive competence of the Scottish Ministers should be considered by the UK Parliament.—[Patricia Ferguson.]

It seems that not a day goes by now without our having a Sewel motion. Today's is on the National Lottery Bill.

I acknowledge that some powers are being repatriated to Scotland under the proposals in the National Lottery Bill, but the minister will be aware of continuing concerns in the voluntary sector in Scotland over some of the bill's proposals. Under the bill, the secretary of state who is responsible for the Department for Culture, Media and Sport in London will be able to decide what portion of the lottery cake will be presented to Scotland. The secretary of state will also have powers to top-slice certain amounts of that portion of the cake. Inevitably, that will result in a smaller portion being returned to us here in Scotland. Will the minister give a commitment to the chamber this afternoon that the 11.5 per cent of the lottery budget that is currently spent here in Scotland will continue under the new arrangements in the National Lottery Bill?

I ask the minister to address a further issue. At the moment, the Community Fund provides funding only to voluntary organisations. The new Big Lottery Fund will be able to allocate moneys to voluntary organisations and to public and private projects. Will she assure us that the level of funding that is provided to voluntary organisations in Scotland under the Community Fund will continue under the new Big Lottery Fund to ensure that those voluntary organisations do not lose out? Will she further ensure that we do not find that lottery money is finding its way into public projects that should properly be funded by the Executive itself?

Ministers' new power will be to appoint a new Scottish committee to watch over the application of the Big Lottery Fund in Scotland. Will the minister make a commitment that appointments to the new Scottish committee will reflect Scottish society and be based on a person's ability rather than on which political party's membership card they have in their back pocket?

I have to admit to some surprise at the tenor of Michael Matheson's contribution—not least because the questions that he raised, and others, were dealt with at the meeting of the Enterprise and Culture Committee earlier this week, at which this Sewel motion was considered. As far as I understand it, the committee was content that it had responsibility for scrutinising the motion.

The comments that Mr Matheson made at the end of his contribution were gratuitous rather than exploratory. It might have been helpful if he had expressed his genuine concerns about this particular Sewel motion, as opposed to his—and his party's—manufactured concerns about Sewel motions in general. He might have found another way of raising any genuine concerns prior to today.

The Enterprise and Culture Committee had due opportunity to consider the motion as part of the process that was requested by the Scottish National Party some time ago, when it asked that we consider such matters in committees and not always in the chamber.

For those reasons, Presiding Officer, I am happy to press the motion.

The question on motion S2M-2255 will be put at decision time.