7 Feb 1997 : Column 1245
House of Commons
Friday 7 February 1997
The House met at half-past Nine o'clock
PRAYERS
[Mr. Michael Morris in the Chair]
Orders of the Day
Horserace Totalisator Board Bill [Lords]
Mr. John Greenway (Ryedale): I beg to move amendment No. 1, in page 1, line 9, leave out from 'betting' to end of line 12.
If we have to be in the House on a Friday, as our duties occasionally require, I cannot think of many better subjects for debate than the great sport of racing. We can think about what you, Mr. Deputy Speaker, are hoping to do tomorrow--that is, attend a race meeting--even though we might have preferred to be at one today or on some other Friday, perhaps during the recess.
My hon. Friend the Member for Sutton and Cheam (Lady Olga Maitland) asked as she came in, "Why are you amending your own Bill?" That is a good question and the explanation is equally succinct: it is that the amendment would, to all intents and purposes, put the Bill back in the same form as it was when it first entered another place. I want to persuade my right hon. Friend the Minister that the Government were wrong to insist upon an amendment being made in another place and that reversing it would make a great deal of sense.
There is one slight difference in that, as well as deleting the words,
Despite their not being there originally, it makes sense to keep the words "on any event" in the clause because those three words go to the heart of what we are seeking to do in this measure. The legislation that established the
7 Feb 1997 : Column 1246
It is ironic that, had the Bill completed all its stages on 13 December--instead of being considered in Committee on Wednesday and proceeding to Report and Third Reading in the House today--we might well have got the Bill on to the statute book before Christmas, which was the first time for many years that there was snow on the roof of the Meteorological Office on Christmas day, and it would have cost the Tote a few shillings had it accepted bets on it. Notwithstanding that little difficulty, it is ridiculous that the Tote should be in the disadvantaged position in its 200 or so betting shops--as opposed to the 9,000 betting shops operated by the main bookmakers, especially the big three, William Hill, Ladbroke and Coral--of not being allowed to receive bets on the outcome of any event, sporting or otherwise.
Mr. Harry Greenway (Ealing, North):
I am sorry that I missed my hon. Friend's first sentence. I congratulate him on his consistently good work as chairman of the Racing and Bloodstock Industries Committee, which is a powerful, important body of which I am glad to be a member. However, bearing in mind the benefits that result from the fact that the takings of the totalisator board pass directly into racing, which is crucial to the survival of that great sport--we had Desert Orchid this week at the Palace to celebrate the 50th anniversary of the founding of the British Horse Society, which brings it to mind--would a percentage of takings from other than racing bets go into racing if they were allowed? The answer to that question would be crucial in forming my view. We need that in the racing industry, as my hon. Friend well knows, for the benefit of all punters, jockeys, horses, owners and so on.
Mr. Greenway:
My hon. Friend is a valued member of the committee and I am grateful for what he said about my chairmanship. I suspect that he knows more about horses than anyone in the House--the horse's friend indeed. We share, not only a love of horses, but a surname--not that we are related, at least in the recent past; we may have been, centuries ago.
My hon. Friend has put his finger on the point of the measure, which is to remedy the loss to the totalisator board's profits that has arisen as a result of its inability to take bets on events other than sporting events. From March to 20 December 1996, the Tote estimates that the profit lost as a result was between £1.5 million and £1.75 million. All that money would have gone directly to racing, and everyone who follows the racing industry knows how important it would have been.
A statutory instrument approved by Parliament on 20 December made it possible for the Tote to take bets on the Irish lottery, as all the other High Street betting shops had been doing. It is important to understand, however, that the loss of bets is not the only problem. Punters--the people who go into betting shops--want to
7 Feb 1997 : Column 1247
Lady Olga Maitland (Sutton and Cheam):
Will my hon. Friend spell out exactly how the profits are used to further racing? Are they spent on management of courses? Are they used to support the widows and orphans of jockeys who have been killed, unfortunately, in accidents? Exactly how is the money spent?
Mr. Greenway:
It is slightly outside the scope of the amendment but, with your permission, Mr. Deputy Speaker, I am more than happy--
Mr. Deputy Speaker (Mr. Michael Morris):
Order. It is not for me to prejudge whether the hon. Gentleman responds to any intervention. However, I am listening attentively.
Mr. John Greenway:
The simple answer is that the money from the Tote supports racing in several ways, especially by redeveloping race courses by creating new stands and facilities, but also by sponsoring races. I shall discuss that subject later during the debate on amendment No. 1 or, if I catch your eye, Mr. Deputy Speaker, on Third Reading.
The Tote is one of two funding bodies under the auspices of the Home Office which support racing. The Tote provides money direct because all its profits go to racing. The Horse Race Betting Levy Board takes money from the bets placed in betting shops other than Tote betting shops. That money amounts to about £56 million a year, and it is also used to develop new race courses but is primarily used to support racing through prize money. There are, however, many racing charities, which my hon. Friend the Member for Sutton and Cheam (Lady Olga Maitland) rightly mentions, especially charities relating to horses, and those are also supported by both funding bodies. Racing is keen to ensure that the welfare of horses, and the interests of injured jockeys and so on, are strongly supported.
I shall now outline the key point about amendment No. 1. At present the Bill seeks to deny totalisator board betting shops the opportunity to take bets on the outcome of the United Kingdom national lottery. Rightly or wrongly, Ministers, especially those in the Department of National Heritage who have responsibility for the lottery, have convinced themselves that if bets were allowed to be placed on the outcome of the lottery, the lottery's turnover, and therefore the amount of money available for good causes, would be damaged.
7 Feb 1997 : Column 1248
The betting industry does not accept that argument. The evidence from Ireland, where bets are permitted on the outcome of the Irish lottery, is that such betting has not undermined the success of the Irish lottery. The people who buy lottery tickets from among the many thousands of high street UK national lottery outlets are not the type of people who usually go into a betting shop. I do not believe that there is any significant evidence that allowing bets on the outcome of the national lottery would seriously damage the lottery.
The lottery provides the opportunity to win several million pounds. This week, the mid-week draw gave £10 million worth of prizes to the person with the six numbers. A person would not get that sort of return from a betting shop, but he might get slightly better odds if he had three or four of the correct numbers. That is why betting on the outcome of the Irish lottery is so attractive.
I am grateful to the Minister of State, Home Office, my right hon. Friend the Member for Penrith and The Border (Mr. Maclean), for being present today. I make it clear that my support for the national lottery is unequivocal. It has been a tremendous success, and throughout the country many organisations--especially sporting bodies and charities, as well as the arts--have benefited enormously from it. Had we not had the national lottery, that money would not have been available. The fact that that money has come at a time when money for capital expenditure is tight is all to the good. I am grateful for what the lottery has done and is doing for organisations in Ryedale.
"except bets on the outcome of any lottery forming part of the National Lottery for the purposes of Part I of the National Lottery etc. Act 1993",
the amendment would leave in clause 1 the words, "on any event", which were not included when the Bill was originally introduced in another place by my noble Friend Lord Kimball. I pay tribute to my noble Friend for successfully piloting the Bill through another place, with the support of several other Members of that House who are keen supporters of the racing industry. Many are active and loyal members of the all-party racing and bloodstock industries committee, of which it gives me great pleasure to be chairman.
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |