Proceeding contribution from Lord Phillips of Sudbury (Liberal Democrat) in the House of Lords on Monday, 13 March 2006. It occurred during Committee of the Whole House (HL) and Debate on bill on National Lottery Bill.
National Lottery Bill
Maybe. Will the Minister not concede that it might be possible to adopt either the definition given by the noble Lord, Lord Smith of Finsbury, or that of the NCVO—what one might call a very broad common-law definition of additionality—and leave that in the Bill without lots of conditional words? There would just be the broad common-law principle, which would achieve the purpose without obstructing the workings of the boards.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 679 c1055
- Session
- 2005-06
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Lords chamber
- Subjects
- Charities Community development Cultural heritage Artworks Community Fund Licensing Expenditure Distribution Grants National Lottery Distribution Fund Lotteries National Lottery Public expenditure Publicity Public participation New Opportunities Fund Voluntary organisations Big Lottery Fund Heritage Lottery Fund National Lottery Commission
- Legislation
- National Lottery Bill 2005-06
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2024-04-21 09:50:41 +0100
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_307540
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_307540
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_307540