Part of the debate – in the Scottish Parliament am ar 1 Chwefror 2024.
I thank Kenneth Gibson for bringing this important matter to the chamber for debate.
There are many disagreements on policy across this Parliament daily, but it is encouraging that the issue of charity lottery funding does not appear to be one of them. It seems to be clear that needless and outdated bureaucracy is holding back the fundraising of Britain’s charity lotteries.
As has been noted, the sector raises almost £0.5 billion in funding each year, and analysis shows that, with the correct regulatory reforms, it could generate still greater funding. As regards the UK Government, it is only fair to acknowledge that UK ministers partially reformed the charity lottery annual sales limit at the turn of the decade to the present £50 million cap. However, it is also only fair to acknowledge that that fell short of that Government’s own preferred option to raise the limit to £100 million, which it promised to do but failed to deliver.
Given the time that has now passed, the most sensible course of action is the one that is being advocated by the charity sector—to remove the annual sales cap in its entirety. Removing the cap would future proof the sector and avoid the need for the Government to have to revisit the matter continually, which I think is in nobody’s interests. I am pleased that Scottish Conservatives continue to advocate for that important reform. That includes Douglas Ross, who has made representations to the Department for Culture, Media and Sport and to the Chancellor of the Exchequer.
The People’s Postcode Lottery’s analysis demonstrates that removing the annual sales limit would generate more than £175 million for charities over the next UK parliamentary session. It seems to be a fundamentally Conservative way to fund the third sector across the whole United Kingdom. To that end, I join others in urging the Chancellor of the Exchequer to consider the measure for inclusion in the forthcoming spring budget.
As the official regulator, the Gambling Commission has stated on the record that it is unclear why the annual cap exists in the first place. The commission has shown that returns to good causes from sales by the National Lottery and charity lotteries have reached record levels in recent years, and it is clear that both types of lottery can exist happily together.
It will come as little surprise to colleagues that I am not a great gambler—although I am happy to bet with
Mr McLennan on which football team in Edinburgh will end up higher than the other at the end of the season, if he wants to give me his money.
I am concerned about the potentially harmful effects of the commercial gambling and betting industry. For that reason, it is important to place on the record that not-for-profit charity lotteries are recognised by the UK Government, the Gambling Commission and academia as low risk and quite distinct from the commercial gambling sector. I am pleased both that the People’s Postcode Lottery is headquartered here in my region and that its game is recognised as
“one of the safest in the worldwide gambling market” by distinguished professor of behavioural addiction at Nottingham Trent University, Professor Mark Griffiths.
Maggie’s, the cancer centres charity, which does so much important work in the Lothian region supporting people on their cancer journey, currently receives £3 million every year from the People’s Postcode Lottery, but if the annual sales cap were to be lifted it could receive an extra £5.5 million over the next UK parliamentary session. As the owner of a former Holyrood dog of the year winner, I declare an interest, at this point. The Dogs Trust, which also receives £3 million every year, would be in line to receive almost £4 million in extra funding over the next five years, were the cap to be removed.
It is impossible to deny that the third sector, here in Scotland and across the entire United Kingdom, faces a major challenge in its funding environment. The scale of the challenge is such that it cannot be solved with ever greater amounts of public funding—and nor should we aspire for it to be so. As a society, we are stronger when civil society can flourish, which in the case of charities means deploying their expertise to support the most vulnerable people. Removing the annual cap on charity lottery sales would help to fund the third sector better at no cost to the public purse, so I am very happy to support the motion.