Jimmy Deenihan
Ceist:9 Mr. Deenihan asked the Minister for Finance if the Government intends to introduce legislation limiting the pay-out from the national lottery to £1 million for one person or group of individuals.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - National Lottery.
Jim O'Keeffe
Ceist:54 Mr. J. O'Keeffe asked the Minister for Finance whether he has received a proposal from the third world relief and development organisation, GOAL, calling on the Government to introduce legislation limiting the pay out from the national lottery to £1 million for any one person or group of individuals, on the basis that any prize winnings in excess of £1 million be directed to the poor of the developing world; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
Michael Creed
Ceist:55 Mr. Creed asked the Minister for Finance if he will outline his views on the merits of a proposal to limit the amount of money which any individual can win from the national lottery to £1 million and that any surplus moneys in excess of this amount be re-allocated to Third World support groups.
With the permission of the Ceann Comhairle, I intend to take Questions Nos. 9, 54 and 55 together.
I can confirm that I am in receipt of a proposal from GOAL concerning the limiting of lottery pay-outs to £1 million and the directing of any excess to the developing world and I have noted their observations and comments.
Deputies will be aware of the many deserving organisations and worthwhile activities that have obtained grants from lottery funds. These include areas such as sport, the arts and community welfare projects. To maintain the flow of funds to these socially desirable programmes will require continued support from the public for the lotto.
Occasionally large jackpots are popular with players. They help to sustain public interest in the lotto and encourage additional players to participate. They thus help to ensure its on-going success. Incidentally, I am informed that the size of the Irish lotto jackpots is modest by international standards.
To put a "cap" on the size of lotto jackpots would, I feel, run the risk of undermining public interest in participation and could well jeopardise the long term success of the game. In the circumstances, I do not propose to issue a direction to An Post National Lottery Company to change the prize structure of the lotto.
The question is directed more to the excess of winnings rather than the distribution of excess profits from the national lottery to various organisations. Would the Minister agree that a payout in excess of £1 million is rather excessive? Would he also agree that the fact that people are playing for £1 million should be enough of an incentive and that it would not discourage people from playing the lotto game? Finally, will the Minister reconsider the use of excess funds? There are very special causes at the moment, such as the Kurdish cause, that would benefit from excess lottery funds.
This whole question that is raised by Deputy Deenihan and others was referred to the lottery company for their observations. It might be of interest to the House to hear their comments on it.
In summary what the company are saying is that to impose an upper limit on the jackpot would have a number of negative effects. It would be an unnatural development of lotto. Players would allege that the lottery was being manipulated in the question of the lotto game. The growth in the base of regular lotto players would be inhibited. In future it will have to stand up even more so to international competition and if the restricted jackpot were shared then players could receive relatively low prizes. If they want smaller prizes they can play the instant games which offer the possibility to win from £2 to £250,000.
From the company's point of view, that is, the company who have been charged with the responsibility to operate this game on behalf of the State, they have to offer a choice of products and players are free to participate in these games which offer the prize structures that the players want. It might be of interest to the House to know that there were only ten individual winners, not syndicates, who have won prizes of over £1 million whereas the total numbers, say, of match four winners has amounted to 1,554,954. The commercial view of the company is that to impose an upper limit would take from the game and would consequently weaken the lotto, and we are all aware of attempts to try to sell competitors to the lotto in this country from outside.
Is the Minister aware of the widespread public distress about this Government's record on overseas development assistance, particularly in regard to the Third World, which has undermined the credibility of this country when it speaks at international fora about its concern for the plight of people in the Third World? This proposal offers an interim resolution of, for instance, the Kurdish refugee problem and would restore our credibility. Is the Minister aware of the widespread public concern within this country with the Kurdish problem? Surely in view of that he does not believe that this proposal would undermine the popularity or success of the national lottery but would rather have the reverse effect and increase its attractiveness because people would see that there is a positive benefit. Many people are concerned at the moment about the widespread political abuse of the lottery moneys. The adoption of what is being suggested would be seen to restore to the national lottery some of the credibility that it has lost.
The lottery funding has been used on two separate occasions to aid the aftermath of disasters, famine in Sudan and the Armenian earthquake. These payments were made under the auspices of welfare, a heading under the lottery. This category has since been redefined to welfare within the State. These payments were actually criticised by some of the people the Deputy refers to at the time and by Church representatives on the basis that Third World disaster aid should properly be funded by the Exchequer.
But you are not doing that either. You are cutting it every year.
International aid was reduced during the time when expenditure right across the board was being cut back. It has been restored to a growth path this year the details of which I will not enter into here because it is a matter for the Minister for Foreign Affairs.
Would the Minister agree that lottery prizes in excess of £1 million bring out the worst in people; that the Government are conniving at the "get rich quick" and greed mentality, and that we have enough of it without the Government contributing to it? Would the Minister agree with that statement and, if not, why not?
The Government are not conniving at anything. The Government are carrying out the objectives as laid down by the Oireachtas and by consent of this House. The Government are not conniving at any subterfuge or whatever the Deputy might call it. I dealt with the other question earlier.
I am concerned about the lack of worthwhile progress at questions today. We have only been able to dispose of some nine questions over 45 minutes. That is not satisfactory from any standpoint.
Would the Minister not agree that the extent of the spontaneous generosity of the Irish people towards the various poverty claims from the developing world is such that it would probably mean that such a move as is suggested in this question would have popular acclaim and that the GOAL proposal is an excellent one not designed to remove any of our obligations as a State but in terms of simply making additional money available for the worthwhile projects envisaged?
The subject matter of that question is one for another Minister.
As a representative of the party who introduced the national lottery — it was Deputy Creed's father who spearheaded it through the Dáil——
One of the parties.
There were two in Government, do not forget.
It is rarely you take credit Deputy, only when it suits you. I find it very hard to reconcile what the Minister says in relation to undermining public interest by limiting prizes to £1 million. The questions were put down out of frustration because the recent Kurdish problem indicates that when £200,000 is put up from the national Exchequer——
Let us have a pertinent question.
If the national Exchequer cannot put forward sufficient funding — surely we have indicated how the recent Kurdish situation touched the generosity of the Irish people when they exceeded what was put up by the national purse — it would enhance the credibility of the national lottery——
The Deputy has embarked on a statement and this is not good enough at Question Time.