FactCheck: has Labour won the lottery?

Last Modified: 07 Feb 2008
By: Channel 4 News

The Conservatives claim Labour areas get more good-cause cash. Are they right?

The claim

"Labour constituencies have received a lot more [lottery funding] than Conservative constituencies."
Jeremy Hunt, Shadow Culture Secretary, Today, Radio 4, 7 February 2008

The background

Around 28p of every pound spent on the National Lottery goes to good causes.

Earlier this week, the Tories released figures that suggested Conservative constituencies were losing out big-time on lottery largesse.

Today, the Conservatives launched plans for a shake-up of the way lottery cash is allocated. This would, they claim, "free the lottery from government interference" and focus the good-cause cash on projects that have "nothing to do with politicians".

Asked this morning whether he was saying that the government was diverting funds to Labour areas, the shadow culture secretary Jeremy Hunt said: "Well, there is a bit of that: Labour constituencies have received a lot more [lottery funding] than Conservative constituencies."

Is he right?

The analysis

Lottery money goes to good causes via 13 independent distributing bodies, including national arts and sports councils and the UK Film Council. The biggest distributor by far is, as the name suggests, the Big Lottery Fund, which does out half the cash - around £630m a year.

It's these grants upon which the Conservatives have based their claims.

According to the figures, the average payout for a Conservative constituency was £343,754.

Labour constituencies, meanwhile, got an average of £845,023 - nearly two and a half times as much.

However, the biggest grant-grabbers were Lib Dem constituencies - with a whopping average of £1,146,539.

The Tories got their information from the Department for Culture, Media and Sport's online grants database.

A DCMS spokesperson said the database includes details of all grants, based on information supplied by the distributors (e.g. Big Lottery Fund). It's updated regularly: weekly, monthly or quarterly, depending on the size of the awarding body. Sounds like quite a reliable source, then.

The Tories did a lot of searching, a lot more number-crunching, and came up with their breakdown. Their methodology wasn't watertight: the party looked at all grants awarded by the Big Lottery Fund since June 2004, although the May 2005 general election meant some seats changed hands, which wasn't taken into account.

The Big Lottery Fund, however, disputes other fundamental aspects of the way the figures were drawn up.

Because lottery funding goes to places most in need, big Labour payouts doesn't necessarily mean things are amiss.

Firstly, it says they're incomplete - it doesn't include the £49mVeterans Reunited grants, and other smaller grants which BIG administers through Awards for All, of which there've been £210-220m in the last decade.

According to the Conservatives' figures, 47 constituencies, of which a disproportionate 24 are Tory blue, were grantless. But the Big Lottery Fund says all constituencies got something - with, for example, Iain Duncan Smith's Chingford and Woodford Green constituency cashing in to the tune of £2m, and Michael Howard's Folkestone and Hythe bagging nearly £5m.

The Tories' figures - and FactCheck's search of the database today - show both as receiving nothing.

It's also harder than the figures suggest to pin down, on a constituency-by-constituency basis, exactly where the benefit of the funding is going.

For example, Sustrans, a sustainable transport charity, was recently awarded £50m for a project that will cover 79 locations across the UK. But the database shows the charity's award as funding for the HQ's (Lib Dem) Bristol constituency.

BIG also points out that big population centres, such as Manchester, tend to attract larger capital grants and projects - although these benefit a much wider catchment area.

Because lottery funding goes to places most in need, big Labour payouts doesn't necessarily mean things are amiss. If Labour has more seats in the poorer areas, it would be expected that they were awarded more cash.

The verdict

The Conservatives released their figures to FactCheck today with the rider that not all grants may be included. However, a spokesperson said the party put the numbers together in good faith, based on the information it could get.

Although the party is now keen to focus on its proposals for a lottery shake-up rather than levelling accusations of Labour cronyism, a senior Tory still said this morning that more lottery cash goes to Labour areas.

Based on the available evidence, this does seem likely - although it's a more nuanced and complex picture than the numbers suggest. Either way - it doesn't prove or disprove that there's a problem with how money is allocated, although those in Tory constituencies may not see it this way.

FactCheck rating: 2.5

How ratings work

Every time a FactCheck article is published we'll give it a rating from zero to five.

The lower end of the scale indicates that the claim in question largerly checks out, while the upper end of the scale suggests misrepresentation, exaggeration, a massaging of statistics and/or language.

In the unlikely event that we award a 5 out of 5, our factcheckers have concluded that the claim under examination has absolutely no basis in fact.

The sources

Today, BBC
Labour seats 'first in the queue for lottery cash', Telegraph, 5 February 2008
Conservatives
DCMS grants database
Big Lottery Fund

Your view

You've read the article, now have your say. We want to know your experiences and your views. We also want to know if there are any claims you want given the FactCheck treatment.

Email factcheck@channel4.com

FactCheck will correct significant errors in a timely manner. Readers should direct their enquiries to the editor at the email address above.