Lottery consultation not 'Compact compliant'

Finance | Ian Allsop | 1 Sep 2005

NCVO has called for an extension to the Department for Culture Media and Sport's (DCMS) consultation on the future of the Big Lottery Fund (BLF). The consultation is on the policy directions that the DCMS intends to issue to BLF pending the National Lottery Bill which will be back before Parliament after the summer recess.

NCVO thinks that the consultation, which runs until 30 September, is not Compact compliant as it allows only nine weeks for organisations to respond instead of 12. NCVO is also concerned that the consultation started at the end of July when many people were on leave, despite the Compact stating that 'allowance should be made for holiday periods'.

acevo has welcomed a letter from Lottery Minister Richard Caborn in which he stated: "The Government has absolutely no intention of determining the programmes of the Big Lottery Fund will have the responsibility for determining its own programmes, and how they are delivered, and for making all funding decisions."

Gail Scott-Spicer, deputy chief executive of acevo, said: "Government has stated it will not intervene in individual grants, regardless of whether they meet political priorities. Our members will be pleased by this commitment to keep the lottery at arm's length from Ministers. We would like to see it reiterated in parliament. We will also watch carefully to see how the principle is applied in practice.

Meanwhile, BLF has announced it is providing an extra £100 million this year following an unprecedented number of applications to BLF's voluntary and community funding programmes, which closed for applications on 31 May 2005 to make way for the introduction of its new programmes. Since January, BLF has seen a 123 per cent increase in applications over the same period last year.

Directory: Association of Chief Executives of Voluntary Organisations (ACEVO) | Big Lottery Fund | National Council of Voluntary Organisations (NCVO)

Comments

[Cancel] | Reply to:

Name *

Email *

Organisation

Job Title

Comments *

Verification *

* Please read our Community Standards

Close »

Community Standards

The civilsociety.co.uk community and comments board is intended as a platform for informed and civilised debate.

We hope to encourage a broad range of views, however, there are standards that we expect commentators to uphold. We reserve the right to delete or amend any comments that do not adhere to these standards.

We welcome:

Robust but respectful debate
Strongly held opinions
Intelligent relevant discussion
The sharing of relevant experiences
New participants

We will not publish:

Rude, threatening, offensive, obscene or abusive language, or links to such material
Links to commercial organisations or spam postings. The comments board is not an advertising platform
The posting of contact details for yourself or others
Comments intended for malicious purpose or mindless abuse
Comments purporting to be from another person or organisation under false pretences
Gratuitous criticism, commentary or self-promotion
Any material which breaches copyright or privacy laws, or could be considered libellous
The use of the comments board for the pursuit or extension of personal disputes

Be aware:

Views expressed on the comments board are left at users’ discretion and are in no way views held or supported by Civil Society Media
Comments left by others may not be accurate, do not rely on them as fact
You may be misunderstood - sarcasm and humour can easily be taken out of context, try to be clear

Please:

Enjoy the opportunity to express your opinion and respect the right of others to express theirs
Confine your remarks to issues rather than personalities

Together we can keep our community a polite, respectful and intelligent platform for discussion.