Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from David Leslie Taylor (Labour) in the House of Commons on Thursday, 19 January 2006. It occurred during Debate on bill on National Lottery Bill.


National Lottery Bill

The hon. Gentleman says that new clause 2, which was tabled by the Conservatives, would tighten up the arrangements in some respects, but it suggests that lottery distributors should consider whether the Government ““would usually be”” the source of the provision. The word ““usually”” implies that a category of activities and projects would not fall within the proposed definition. How on earth will the lottery bodies make a distinction between the two? Unless we state that the Government will always make such provision—that could be impractical as well—new clause 2 is a dead letter, is it not?


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
441 c1005 
Session
2005-06
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
Subjects
Charities Community Fund Licensing Distribution National Lottery Distribution Fund Lotteries Prize money National Lottery Public expenditure New Opportunities Fund Millennium Commission Voluntary organisations Big Lottery Fund National Lottery Commission
Legislation
National Lottery Bill 2005-06
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk