THE DISTRIBUTION OF LOTTERY FUNDS BY THE
ENGLISH SPORTS COUNCIL
ENSURING
A
FAIR
DISTRIBUTION
OF
GRANTS
41. One of the underlying principles of lottery distribution
is that it should result in a reasonable spread of expenditure
between regions. Although the National Audit Office found that
awards were being spread throughout the country, there was a wide
disparity in the relative value of awards made to each of the
Sports Council's ten regions, ranging from £15.70 per head
of population in the South down to £8.21 in the East Midlands
(see Figure 1).[40]
Value of awards to each region by head
of population
42. The Committee asked the Sports Council whether,
given that it was a national lottery, this level of disparity
was satisfactory. The Sports Council replied that the distribution
of lottery funds was an application-led process and as such it
was very difficult for the Sports Council to give awards to areas
if the applications did not come forward. They told us that, 18
months after start up, they had a fair geographical spread around
the country if the number of awards were compared to the number
of applications that had come from certain geographical regions.
This analysis showed that the disparities region by region were
less marked.[41] They
told us that they monitored the distribution of lottery funds
on a monthly basis and believed that they had a good track record
of taking action where there were gaps or under-distribution.
They said they had staged special road shows and surgeries and
discussed matters with the local authorities and clubs in these
under-represented areas to try to encourage applications.[42]
43. The Sports Council had analysed the pattern of
applications and awards and identified certain areas and categories
of applicants that were under-represented.[43]
They told us that where they had concerns, particularly in areas
of special need in urban and rural areas, they had introduced
new policies to make sure that the spread of awards was more equal.
Under their Priority Areas Initiative, which was aimed at areas
of deprivation, the Sports Council had introduced a higher rate
of lottery support of up to 90 per cent of the cost of the project.
They were also concerned about the lack of applications from the
education sector and had introduced the School Community Sport
Initiative, under which they increased their level of support
to 80 per cent where the project was available for community use.[44]
44. We asked the Sports Council to what extent these
initiatives were matching the need to redistribute lottery funds
in these particular areas and whether the initiatives were sufficiently
well funded. The Sports Council told us that there was no specific
allocation to the two programmes, but that of the £760 million
lottery funds available for distribution, they had put £230
million into the Priority Areas Initiative and about £100
million into the School Community Sport Initiative. They considered
that this had gone a long way towards distributing lottery funds
to priority areas.[45]
45. The Committee asked the Sports Council whether
their distribution of lottery proceeds reflected the communities
from which the lottery tickets are bought. The Sports Council
told us that they had taken the deliberate step in the first years
of the lottery to fund local community projects and that they
had therefore gone for the small clubs.[46]
They subsequently informed us that awards were made according
to the quality of the project, its needs and benefits to the local
community, and its priority when balanced against other competing
applications and that they did not take into account the spend
per capita in an area on lottery tickets in assessing sporting
needs. They added that if distribution were determined by ticket
sales, there would be no guarantee that there would be a match
between the sporting needs of the sector in a particular region
and the funding available to meet them.[47]
46. We asked the Department whether they would consider
making it a requirement or offering guidance to the distributing
bodies which indicated that the money ought to be distributed
where lottery tickets are bought. The Department told us that
their most recent policy directions to distributing bodies, issued
in June 1998, required them to have regard to the need to ensure
that all parts of England had access to funding and to the scope
for reducing economic and social deprivation. The Department considered
that it was better to focus redistribution on particular aspects
such as social deprivation or young people rather than to say
it should follow ticket purchases. They added that they would
like to see whether the new policy guidance shifted distribution
in the way that was desired, before reconsidering the policy.[48]
47. The Sports Council subsequently told us that
under the new National Lottery Act, they would be required to
prepare a strategic plan showing how they intend to use lottery
money to meet the needs of the sector. This strategic plan must
show how the Sports Council had acted upon the Department's policy
directions on the spread of awards. They believed that this more
strategic approach to lottery distribution would produce an even
more equitable distribution of lottery money.[49]
They also told us that with their new computer based facilities
planning model, they would be able to identify where there was
a lack of a swimming pool or sports centre or athletics track
compared to the population in that area.[50]
Conclusions
48. The Committee noted disparities in the relative
value of lottery awards across the country, which ranged from
£15.70 per head of population in the South down to £8.21
in the East Midlands. We are concerned about these disparities
and welcome the initiatives introduced by the Sports Council to
encourage more applications from geographical areas that are under-represented.
In particular, we note that two initiatives—the Priority
Areas Initiative and the School Community Sport Initiative—have
succeeded in channelling a substantial amount of lottery funds
to such areas.
49. We recognise that, until recently, the Sports
Council have had to be careful not to solicit applications, but
that the new policy directions issued to them in June 1998 require
them to have regard to the spread of awards and to the scope for
reducing economic and social deprivation. We note that the Sports
Council will now be required to demonstrate how their proposals
for using lottery money will meet the needs of the sporting sector
and to take account of the Department's policy directions. We
look to the Sports Council to take this opportunity to ensure
a more equal distribution of lottery funds.
50. We look to the Sports Council to grasp the opportunities
provided by the new National Lottery Act and the revised policy
directions issued by the Department for Culture, Media and Sport
to ensure that they achieve a more equal distribution of lottery
grants around England and that they target more effectively those
geographical areas that are currently under-represented.
40 C&AG's report (HC 617 of Session 1997-98), paras
2.23, 2.26, Figure 10 Back
41
Qs 9, 42-43 Back
42
Q35 Back
43
C&AG's report (HC 617 of Session 1997-98), para 2.27 Back
44
Q9 Back
45
Qs 33, 44-46 Back
46
Q35 Back
47
Evidence, Appendix 2, P18 Back
48
Q70 Back
49
Evidence, Appendix 2, p18 Back
50
Q43 Back
| 
