 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
From
the July 2001 Issue
Contents:
-
Edited text of the keynote speech by the new Secretary of State at the DCMS
-
Edited text of the keynote speech by the head of the New Opportunities Fund
-
Steve Batt explains his county’s approach to rural deprivation
MAIN STORY
PAYMENT
BY RESULTS LICENCE FOR CAMELOT
If
Camelot profits, so will good causes. Jane Taylor reports on the Lottery
operator’s new terms.
Camelot,
the National Lottery operator, will be hard-pressed to raise £10bn for
good causes over the next seven years, despite the inclusion of several
carrot-and-stick measures in the new licence, the Lottery regulator has
revealed.
Lord
Burns, chair of the National Lottery Commission, chose the Lottery
Monitor Annual Conference at the end of June to reveal the details of
Camelot’s second-term licence, commencing 27 January 2002.
Describing
the licence as ‘payment by results’, Lord Burns outlined a series of
penalties and incentives designed to hold the Lottery operator to its
promises, and to maximise returns to prizewinners and good causes.
Lord
Burns confirmed his previously stated view that Camelot’s projected
sales figures for 2002-2009 were over-optimistic. As a consequence,
money going to good causes was, at best, likely to remain at similar
levels to the current licence: £10bn over the seven-year term, rather
than Camelot’s projected £15bn. Lord Burns said: ‘£15bn is a
highly challenging ambition. In fact, we believe the Commission’s own
lower expectations represent a tough challenge.’
Camelot
responded by admitting for the first time that it has abandoned the £15bn
business plan target. This has little to do with the terms of the
licence, however. Rather, Camelot is accepting that the financial
projections it drew up two years ago were over-optimistic, set against
the subsequent performance of its key games. And it is trying to keep up
political pressure to limit the expected liberalisation of gaming laws,
which it believes could seriously affect its sales.
A
major review of gaming law, conducted by the former Treasury economic
adviser Sir Alan Budd, was to have been published in May, but is now
expected towards the end of July.
When
Camelot meets with Tessa Jowell at the DCMS on 12 July, gaming law will
be on the agenda. Sue Slipman, Camelot’s external relations director,
says: ‘The review is critical. We’ll point out to the Secretary of
State that the National Lottery is their brand, and they need a
consistent and coherent policy to protect it.’
To
this end, Camelot is anxious to persuade Tessa Jowell to become a more
enthusiastic champion of the Lottery than her predecessor Chris Smith.
Camelot wants to see a united front with government, regulator and
distributors, to promote the considerable payback of the Lottery, not
just to the Exchequer but also through the good causes.
£150m deprivation scheme announced
The
Community Fund and New Opportunities Fund are to run a joint initiative
to get more Lottery grants to the most deprived areas of the UK. The
initiative, nameless as yet, was announced by the new DCMS Secretary of
State, Tessa Jowell, at the Lottery Monitor annual conference.
The
scheme will start in April 2002 and run for three years. CF will
contribute £100m out of its existing grant budgets and NOF will gain an
extra £50m to contribute. DCMS officials are examining whether they can
enable NOF to distribute its share of money without a new set of
‘policy directions’, as this statutory procedure would slow down the
implementation timetable.
The
two distributors will jointly identify 50 areas on which to target the
cash. Paul Hensby, communications director at the CF, emphasises the
open nature of the process: ‘We will be drawing on our strategic
review to identify areas; and then we’ll discuss it with NOF. What
this won’t be is blind adherence to the 50 most deprived areas.’ A
DCMS official says the department will be taking a close interest in the
selection of target areas.
The
initiative was flagged up by Labour during the election campaign. It is
almost certainly inspired by a pilot scheme run by the Community Fund in
1999-2000, ‘Brass for Barnsley’. In that scheme, the CF took
extensive proactive measures to double the value of Lottery funds going
to an area of high deprivation which had persistently failed to claim
its fair share of grants.
The
CF achieved its impressive result by committing its regional staff to an
intensive local community development role. It recognises however that
it could not support ‘50 Barnsleys’, so that particular model will
be of limited use for the new initiative.
Other
distributors may be drawn into the scheme, too. The Secretary of State,
in her speech, said: ‘I will be looking to other distributors either
to join the initiative or to make similar progress themselves in
targeting...’ While some take this as a general exhortation, DCMS
officials confirm that they see no reason why the other distributors
should not contribute directly to the joint CF/NOF scheme.
The
joint-distributor small grants scheme was further boosted at the end of
last month as Wales launched its own programme, and the New
Opportunities Fund signed up to the English and Welsh schemes. But A4A
Wales has not won universal endorsement.
NOF
expects to join the Scottish and N Ireland schemes by September. It will award grants in its existing
areas of health, education and the environment, and its formal inclusion
technically extends eligibility beyond community groups to a range of
other small and large statutory organisations (including parish
councils). The A4A emphasis remains firmly on favoring small community
groups.
ETHNIC
PROJECTS WIN CAPITAL GRANTS
Distributors
are finally starting to deliver big funding to black groups. Apala
Chowdhury reports.
Black
and minority ethnic projects across England have been given a £53m cash
boost in two recent rounds of Lottery awards made by the Millennium
Commission and the Arts Council of England.
At
the end of June the MC announced £24m for 10 winners of its fifth and
final round of capital projects awards, this one specifically aimed at
BME projects. These included Leicester’s Peepul Centre (£7m), the
Bernie Grant Centre (£5m) in north London, the Stephen Lawrence
Charitable Trust (£4.4m) for its proposed technical college in
south-east London and ASCENT 2000, a project to convert part of an east
London church into an arts and education facility (£336,500). All four
groups had previously applied unsuccessfully, and this time around were
given development funds totalling £623,000 to help improve their bids.
The
Asha Foundation’s £10m bid for a multi-cultural, multi-faith centre
in Harrow once again failed to win MC money. Its director Zerbanoo
Gifford comments: ‘If it hadn’t been for Asha, there would not have
been a fifth round. Last year we calculated that 1% of MC money had gone
to BME groups. In response, the MC introduced round five. We may have
failed, but at least we opened up the system for other minority
groups.’ Gifford is not giving up: ‘There are other Lottery funds
out there and we will be applying for them.’
Community
Fund research reveals a patchwork of voluntary-sector grants for
deprivation projects. Jane Taylor reports
The
timing may be lucky coincidence but the release of the Community
Fund’s latest piece of research chimes nicely with the strong message
from the new DCMS Secretary of State that social inclusion and
deprivation will continue to dominate her agenda, and by extension,
those of the Lottery distributors.
The
CF research, Mapping Grants to Deprived Areas in England, is a brave
attempt by the Newcastle University Centre for Urban and Regional
Development Studies (CURDS) to source funding for an entire sub-section
of the voluntary sector.
Brave,
because no one has ever attempted such a thing before and, as the
authors acknowledge, they haven’t quite succeeded at this pass. But
what they have produced is a tantalising snapshot, behind which lies
important methodological work which both the authors and the Community
Fund hope might form the groundwork for a permanent and far more
comprehensive tracking system.
Alex
Klaushofer sheds some light on the governments latest
In
mid-June the Community Fund launched a review of its strategic plan for
2002 to 2007. The plan will form the framework for the CF’s
grant-making, so is a significant document. The CF is canvassing views
from interested parties up to 14 September, to enable it to produce a
draft plan by December, for implementation by April 2002.
Below
is a short commentary, followed by a summary of the UK-wide consultation
paper. However, if you are considering responding, be sure you get hold
of the additional document which is specific to your English region or
country (see box right for contact details).
The
CF’s current strategic plan runs from 1999 to April 2002. The new one
will last two years longer. While the CF’s overall aim remains the
same, the new consultation document is based firmly on an assumption of
sharply declining income. As noted in Lottery Monitor last month, the
CF’s budget figures are extremely conservative set against not just
Camelot’s increased second-term sales targets, but even against the
regulator’s expectations of income for good causes. Given that the
strategic approach is so heavily linked to this projection of declining
income, it would be reasonable to ask why the forecasts are quite so
pessimistic.
Edited
text of the keynote speech by the new Secretary of State at
the
DCMS
The
effects of the Lottery go far beyond bricks and mortar. There has been a
marked shift away from large capital projects to people-centred
projects. The number of small grants going to community groups has
trebled since 1998.
The
Lottery also makes an enormous contribution to a much wider agenda
shared by central and local government and the voluntary and community
sector. Reducing social exclusion, encouraging lifelong learning,
improving public health, protecting the environment, reducing crime,
developing skills – all these are among the benefits of Lottery
funding which I am keen to see developed.
Edited text of the keynote speech by the Chair of the Lottery
regulator, outlining the new seven-year licence
We
have today published the new seven-year Lottery licence. We are
confident that it offers a fair deal for the Lottery’s beneficiaries.
Under
the new licence the good causes can still expect to get in total at
least 28.5% of sales. This is similar to the amount that was committed
in 1994.
The
commission’s expectations are grounded in realism, and informed by the
worldwide expertise it has developed.
In
cash terms we think that Lottery sales over the next seven years could
well be around the present level of about £5bn a year. This would mean
good causes again receiving more than £10bn over the life of the next
licence, with interest on top of that.
Edited text of the keynote speech by the head of the NewOpportunities
Fund
believe
the New Opportunities Fund has been developing a very distinct approach
to distributing Lottery funding.
There
are three components. The first is the way we complement mainstream
funding. We are looking to fund activities which are additional to
government expenditure, but which fit within the strategic frameworks
for health, education and environment and, where possible, support or
develop existing initiatives.
So,
for example:
our
Community Access to Lifelong Learning programme is providing revenue
funding to UK Online centres, which complements government funding for
capital costs, and is tied into the National Grid for Learning;
our
new-build neighbourhood nurseries programme will provide capital funding
which complements revenue funding from the Department for Education and
Skills.
Steve Batt explains his county’s approach to rural deprivation
In
May, Lottery Monitor reported on the latest government attempt to
encourage local joined-up working. And in June, you carried a letter
from a council officer concerned that official deprivation indices miss
areas of poverty, particularly in rural areas.
I
would like to explain how I believe we are tackling both issues in our
project in Devon. It is a good example of ‘brokering tables’ working
in a rural county at local level.
As
your correspondent said, national statistics tend to a more urban
dimension and are often difficult to assess in rural areas. We think our
programme is important in targeting those areas in greatest need, often
within wards that score highly on indices of multiple deprivation –
but not necessarily so.
The
programme is called Community Action for Rural Devon (CARD) and is being
run as a pilot project over two years. It started in April 2000 and
covers four of the seven rural District Council areas: Torridge, North
Devon, West Devon and South Hams.
Four
communities’ support workers have been employed to act as ‘GPs’,
with a remit to work both with communities that are statistically
recognised as having deprivation, and also with those that may fall out
of these statistics at a very local level, such as one village in an
otherwise affluent area.
Continuing
my exclusive, free recruitment-agency service for top Lottery jobs, I
can announce this month that the Community Fund is officially seeking a
new Chief Executive to replace Nigel Pittman’s caretaker role. If you
are an entrepreneurial, risk-taking character with a sparkling track
record in the private sector, you may wish to consider applying. To the
CF Chair Diana Brittan, of course, not to me.
Once
more, a government minister repeats the call for a more joined-up
approach by the distributors. Tessa Jowell made the exhortation at our
annual conference and from the evidence of delegates’ comments during
workshop and panel sessions, the need is still great. Let me offer two
examples from this month’s newsletter as more evidence. First, we
learn that the frequently lauded Awards for All scheme is up and running
in Wales, but without two of the five bodies participating. Both Huw
Jones and Richard Turner put up vigorous defences on behalf of Sports
Council Wales and Arts Council Wales respectively. They are, they say,
already more local, more efficient, more democratic. But not necessarily
more accessible – and surely it cannot be beyond the wit of either
body to enter the joint scheme whilst preserving the best of their
existing arrangements.
My
second example is at the opposite end of the scale: why on earth have
the recently successful groups seeking capital funding such as the
Stephen Lawrence Charitable Trust and the Peepul Centre had to go
through two entirely separate Lottery applications to two different
boards? Let’s not even consider the benefits to the applicants of
joining-up that process: what about the efficiency savings for the
boards themselves? No doubt I’m being simple-minded about this, but
that’s my prerogative in this column. Feel free to tell me why I’m
wrong.
While
I’m in brickbat mode, here’s one for the government. I was quizzing
the DCMS about the various post-election shuffles in departmental
responsibilities and we got onto the subject of regions. ‘Oh,’ came
the comment, ‘They’ve been scattered to the four winds.’
And
so they have: the inert English assemblies are left as a rump
responsibility at the DTLR, Government Offices and the Regional
Co-ordination Unit go to Cabinet Office, RDAs are jettisoned off to DTI
and the new DEFRA claims a bit of rural regeneration interest. SRB and
ESF are floating between DTLR and DTI. Strategic? Joined-up? Practise
what you preach.
Am
I being too cynical to think that there’s a slight tension between two
elements of a ministerial statement that says, firstly, there must be
more targeting of Lottery funds on areas of need, and secondly, there
must be more public involvement in deciding on Lottery projects?
One
way the two notions can be married up is by ensuring that formal
consultation opportunities are maximised. Two strategic reviews are
running at the moment, as well as NOF’s Third Round consultations. The
Community Fund has promised (see news story, page 1) to take account of
its current consultation when it draws up its shortlist of candidate
areas for the new £150m targeted initiative with NOF. This matters. I
hope readers will grab the opportunity and extend it to anyone they know
with an interest in Lottery funding. But hurry, because the summer
always disappears before you know it.