Kathryn Reilly (Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

I welcome the Minister to the House. The national lottery is actually older than me and as the saying goes, if it is not broke, do not fix it. I do not consider the national lottery to be broken as since its inception it has provided the State with a high-quality professional service and crucially, it has the public's trust, which is a point Members must remember. However, a new regulatory code and infrastructure for a service that already is well regulated and well run is being introduced in the Chamber today. It is clear that the purpose of this Bill is for the Government to distance itself from the lottery as a first step in a process that aims to transform it from its current state to something that is very different. In so doing, the Government runs the risk of undermining the very thing that makes the national lottery work.

As of 2011, the national lottery has taken in €12 billion, €4 billion of which went to good causes including community projects, sports facilities and the provision of supports for the Irish language. Now more than ever, community organisations rely heavily on this funding stream. I will add to my concerns the voices of Comhdháil Náisiúnta na Gaeilge, Conradh na Gaeilge and other Irish language bodies regarding the implications of this decision for the Irish language fund, which is a key source of revenue for many of these bodies. While funding through the aforementioned fund has decreased since 2009, the national lottery itself has provided an average of 63% of the overall funds since 2009. Kevin De Barra, acting director of Comhdháil Náisiúnta na Gaeilge, has stated it is incredibly important that whoever is awarded the licence in the future should prioritise the promotion of the Irish language through making adequate provisions for the Irish language fund.

In his contribution, the Minister of State, Deputy Brian Hayes, said "the State may set the terms of both the competition and the licence itself".

Reference has been made to the terms for the upfront payment. I am aware that the Minister intends to hold a competition that will commence in May. Could he advise what other terms and conditions will attach to the competition for the licence? Section 25 refers to the inclusion of matters necessary or expedient in the public interest. I accept the Minister has guaranteed that certain categories of funding will be maintained by the Government. Is the Minister guaranteeing that the same percentage - 30% - will go to good causes, given that the 20-year licence is worth €1.2 billion?

Many speakers have referred to the national children’s hospital and the suggestion that the upfront fee would cover the construction of it. Senator Norris mentioned the baby in the Government's arms. I do not think that should be the spoonful of sugar that helps the medicine go down. I accept that children need the national children’s hospital and that it should be a priority but its construction should be funded through the capital programme or, as other Senators have indicated, there are imaginative ways for funding to be raised.

When the Government legislated for the national lottery in 1986 it made clear that there was a need for public trust and confidence in the operation of a State lottery and it was correct in that regard. Understandably, there is much concern about who the new licence holder might be, whether the public interest will be of concern to the new operator and if the integrity of the lottery will be upheld or if public trust will play second fiddle to a Government get-rich-quick scheme with little thought for the long-term consequences. The truth behind the so-called reform of the national lottery is that the Minister is seeking to make it attractive to commercial interests with the objective of generating the much talked-about upfront payment. In so doing we are forever more going to change the primary purpose of the national lottery. It will no longer be a method by which citizens can take part in a lottery to win a cash prize while simultaneously contributing financially to their local community, which is important. We do not want the lottery to be just a mechanism to generate additional revenue. We will not support the legislation. We believe the national lottery is well run and serves citizens and communities well. There is no need for a change in the regulatory framework of the business model. We support the national lottery and on that basis we oppose the Bill.