§ 8.15 p.m.
§ Lord McIntosh of Haringey rose to move, That the draft order laid before the House on 10 December 2003 be approved [3rd Report from the Joint Committee].
§ The noble Lord said: My Lords, this order specifies a new initiative to provide facilities and activities intended to reduce the social exclusion of young people, to be funded by the National Lottery through the New Opportunities Fund (NOF).
§ I shall explain the process which brings us to this point. We made a commitment last July in the National Lottery funding decision document to establish a new lottery young people's fund. At present, as is well known, the New Opportunities Fund can distribute lottery money only on projects which are designed to give effect to initiatives specified in an order by the Secretary of State under Section 43(b) of the National Lottery etc. Act 1993. Those are at present health, education and the environment. We are adding "young people" to that.
§ Before I go further I should say that in my view the provisions of the draft order are compatible with the European Convention on Human Rights.
§ NOF funding has produced more than£2 billion to a range of initiatives within the categories of health, education and the environment, which are making a real difference to the lives of individuals and communities 989 throughout the United Kingdom. Our proposals as set out in the decision document are designed to build on that success.
§ The decision document announced our intention to set up a young people's fund, funded initially with£200 million from NOF's balances. Our aim is that the young people's fund might develop into a cross-distributor programme adding value by drawing together the various strands of activity relating to young people.
§ The focus of the young people's fund will be on projects promoting youth inclusion—in other words, against social exclusion—specifically by providing facilities and activities both after school and in holiday periods. In England it will be very much in line with the aims and principles of the Green Paper, Every Child Matters, which we published last September. It will cover being healthy; staying safe; enjoying and achieving, including developing the skills for adulthood; making a positive contribution to the community; and overcoming socio-economic disadvantages to achieve full potential in life. In Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland there will be a similar focus but it will be as determined by those nations to suit their own needs.
§ We are carrying out consultation with groups of local children and young people and we shall complete that before we make decisions. Involving people in this way means that we shall be funding provision that young people feel ownership of and will want to use. We have carried out consultation which reveals, as I think is well known, that young people are particularly concerned about the phrase "having things to do". That comes out in many aspects of social research. They would like more places to go where they can not only spend time in a safe environment but have access to more structured activities.
§ The young people's fund will be spread across the country but in order to help those most in need it will be targeted at those who are at greatest risk of social exclusion. It will build on the experience of previous initiatives including Splash, the lottery-funded Splash Extra and the Positive Activities for Young People initiatives.
§ We have carried out an evaluation of the Positive Activities for Young People. That suggests that those involved in the scheme both as professionals and as young people perceive the programme as working, with evidence of increased school attendance; reduced noise and youth crime; improved behaviour; and improved community cohesion.
§ Through the young people's fund we shall be able to offer young people an opportunity to take part in activities which they not only enjoy but which can help them to make a real difference to their lives and the communities in which they live.
§ The responses to public consultation on the decision document have shown clear support for the development of a young people's fund. They build on the work which NOF has already done to help thousands of communities to improve their health, education and local environment. This fund will address the particular 990 problems faced by young people at risk of social exclusion and will provide a welcome new focus for lottery funding for this age group. I beg to move.
§ Moved, That the draft order laid before the House on 10 December 2003 be approved. [3rd Report from the Joint Committee].—(Lord Mclntosh of Haringey.)
§ Baroness BuscombeMy Lords, I begin by thanking the Minister for his clear explanation of the provisions specified in the draft order.
As the Minister stated, the order establishes a new funding initiative, administered through the New Opportunities Fund by money raised as a result of National Lottery ticket sales. This new initiative, which will grant funding for facilities and activities, is intended to reduce the social exclusion of young people thus implementing the Government's proposal to establish a new lottery fund for young people. The initial funding for this initiative has been set at£200 million and the proposals are said to be closely aligned with the objectives detailed in the September 2003 Green Paper, Every Child Matters.
I read with interest Hansard from yesterday's debate in the 4th Standing Committee on Delegated Legislation on the provisions of this draft order and I have a number of concerns, which I would be grateful if the Minister could address.
To begin with, I am concerned that the term social exclusion is rather vague and non-committal. Whilst I understand that the precise scope of the fund is still under consideration, would the Minister agree that it is imperative that the ambit of such an initiative should be closely targeted and monitored to ensure that it is working effectively? Her Majesty's Opposition have often expressed unease at the method by which the Government have altered the mechanism of lottery funding since they came to power in 1997. This criticism relates to the way National Lottery funding has been used to further Government spending objectives. The Government appear to have become increasingly willing to intervene in the way that National Lottery money is spent.
We welcome the assurance from the Minister in another place and the Minister's this evening that this new funding initiative will not be attributed to Government spending. However, we are keen to ensure that public confidence is restored, with lottery money being used to fund genuinely good causes, in particular helping young people and their communities. I should like to echo the concerns raised by the honourable Member for Surrey Heath yesterday in Committee in another place. The New Opportunities Fund must ensure that the money reaches the projects where it is needed and that any unnecessary bureaucracy is avoided.
My Lords, make no mistake, I wish to support the purpose of this order. Indeed, as a mother with three teenagers, that phrase "having things to do" rings regularly in my mind. I remember being the same when I was a young person constantly complaining there was not anything to do. However, much depends on its effective implementation. We welcome the Government's commitment to promoting social 991 inclusion for young people yet we believe that lottery funding should not be used to further Government spending targets or meet policy goals. The phrase "social inclusion" requires further thought and consultation and we welcome the Government's move to address this concern. It is for these reasons that we do not oppose this order and we hope that its objectives can be successfully achieved.
§ Viscount FalklandMy Lords, we on these Benches also thank the Minister for explaining the order. I have to confess we have little enthusiasm for it. It continues the practice we deplore—the use of lottery money as a substitute for Exchequer spending. We have had discussions on this in the past. The New Opportunities Fund will now be permitted this additional project—a young people's fund—to add to the three which it already has: health, environment and education. The Minister has amplified some issues in the explanation. They all sound very worthy but are rather loosely presented. We would not disagree with any of them but we would not be so opposed to the setting-up of a young people's fund through lottery money if there were a clear good cause with long-term aims.
In this order the vagueness of these proposals has been amplified by the Minister's amplifications. The noble Baroness, Lady Buscombe, has expressed some sympathy with them. I suppose if I thought a little longer I might well have the same sympathy. However, the irritation that the Government are meddling again in lottery funds makes that difficult for me to do. Perhaps tomorrow I may think more kindly of it. The Government are trying to do what is best left to the distributors. Persistent meddling of this kind with lottery funds goes directly counter to their own policy as stated in the July White Paper on the lottery. We would not have disagreed at all with the policy of additionality stated in it. All this takes place against a background of falling lottery sales that will ultimately dilute all of the good causes. Most of us have views on why sales are declining. I dare say the noble Baroness has similar views to mine. But when are the Government going to come out and tell us what their views are about this decline and what do they think can be done to address it?
I take this opportunity to register a concern of noble Lords on these Benches. It is a concern, which has been echoed by the Government, about the£3 billion undistributed lottery moneys. They say that something will be done but nothing happens. What is going on? Is this some kind of float being used by the Government for future eventualities?
To end, perhaps I may draw attention to the fact— because I think it is relevant—that since the lottery was introduced the DCMS budget has fallen by roughly one third. When registered as a percentage of GDP, in the year 1993–94 it was 0.16 per cent and in the year 2003–04 it has sunk to 0.11 per cent. In comparison with other countries the allocation for culture is absolutely pitiful. When represented as a percentage of state expenditure, the United Kingdom commits 0.29 per cent against 2.4 per cent, which is committed by both France and Germany.
992 What kind of record is that when one considers the original aims of the lottery—and one does not need a very long memory—which we in this House and in another place agreed. I am sorry to take this rather jaundiced view of the order. Of course there is nothing that we can do about it, but it leaves a somewhat nasty taste in the mouth.
§ Baroness PitkeathleyMy Lords, I rise briefly to support the order. I declare an interest as the chair of the New Opportunities Fund. It seems to us entirely appropriate that the programmes that the New Opportunities Fund funds continue to fit strategically with government priorities, while at the same time aiming to meet the needs and wants of young people at a local level, particularly those in disadvantaged areas.
I have no doubt in assuring the House that the fund is a genuine good cause and that it will be spent in the interests of young people. In view of what has been said, perhaps I should also assure the House that the issue of balances is taken very seriously by the lottery distributors, as is the issue of additionality. The distributors feel just as strongly about that as do other noble Lords who have spoken.
In preparation for the young peoples fund, the New Opportunities Fund has undertaken a mapping exercise of organisations and programmes working with young people, which resulted in a database of relevant projects. In addition, members of the fund have held informal meetings with key players in the youth sectors. There are a number of themes which we want to pursue through this fund, including helping children stay safe, supporting activities and facilities for young people, and enabling young people to contribute to their communities through grants, to individuals or groups of young people.
Once we receive the policy directions we will consult with key stakeholders in government departments and in the voluntary and community sector, outlining the prospectus or framework for the programme. We will also consult with young people. We aim to ensure that some elements of the fund are launched and open for activities by this summer and expect the remainder of the strands to be launched by the autumn.
In conclusion, perhaps I may also point out that as young people have been involved in consultation about the programme they will also be involved in the evaluation of it, so that we can use this fund really to address the needs of this most important group.
Lord Mclntosh of HaringeyMy Lords, I am very grateful for the responses of my noble friend Lady Pitkeathley and the noble Baroness, Lady Buscombe, and less grateful for the response of the noble Viscount, Lord Falkland. The noble Baroness, Lady Buscombe, is of course entirely right that it is important that what we do with this new initiative should be closely targeted and monitored—I think those were her words. I hope that she has been given some reassurance by my noble friend Lady Pitkeathley.
I would also add that the proposed work builds on the Positive Activities for Young People programme, which I described and which has been closely targeted 993 and monitored and indeed can be well-defined as an appropriate good cause. The noble Baroness expressed some concerns about the way in which the objectives have been altered. The New Opportunities Fund has survived without its objectives being altered since the beginning. We were finding that the conditions on the New Opportunities Fund were a little tight. Confining them to concentrating on health, education and the environment meant that some things that were targeted on people rather than on themes did not fit into any of the categories. That will be possible now, with this additional initiative.
The issue of additionally was raised particularly strongly when the legislation to set up the New Opportunities Fund was introduced. We argued that through in some detail in this House at the time—I remember it well. The noble Baroness, Lady Buscombe, is not right in thinking that it is necessary for public confidence to be restored. There has been continued public confidence. I certainly have not seen or heard the kind of generalised criticism that was anticipated when the New Opportunities Fund was set up.
Similarly, it would not be right to follow the advice of the noble Viscount, Lord Falkland, and leave the matter to the distributors. We the people ought to have a say in this. We have been successful; the distributors have been successful in maintaining what they want, which is an arm's-length approach from government and the assurance that we are not spending the money on things that the Government would otherwise do. I agree with the noble Baroness, Lady Buscombe, that it is important to avoid bureaucracy. I am glad that she welcomed the social inclusion element of this new initiative.
I hope that the contribution of the noble Baroness, Lady Pitkeathley, has helped to convince the noble Viscount, Lord Falkland, that we have a clear and specific good cause here, not least because we have piloted it in the positive action for young people. Of course we are concerned with the decline in lottery sales. We rely on Camelot to redress that with continued new marketing initiatives and new products. It has approached this imaginatively.
The noble Viscount referred to "undistributed lottery money". It is only undistributed in the sense that it has not been taken up by those to whom it has already been committed. All lottery money, except for a margin, is committed. However, it is the nature of the beast that many of the projects to which it is committed take months or even years to complete. The money is not actually distributed until it is needed. In any case, any balances are held, and both the money and any interest on the money are devoted to good causes.
The noble Viscount, Lord Falkland, talked about the DCMS budget falling as a percentage of GDP. The DCMS budget has not fallen in real terms. The economic policies of this Government have been so successful that GDP has been rising faster. Of course, we would all like more money for DCMS subjects. I will treasure his words and make sure that they are used in our submission for the 2004 spending review.
§ On Question, Motion agreed to.
§ Baroness Farrington of RibbletonMy Lords, I beg to move that the House do now adjourn during pleasure until 8.40 p.m.
§ Moved accordingly, and, on Question, Motion agreed to.
§ [The Sitting was suspended from 8.34 to 8.40 p.m.]