| Previous Section | Back to Table of Contents | Lords Hansard Home Page |
Lord Luke asked Her Majesty's Government:
- Whether they accept the judgment of Mr Justice Richards that the behaviour of the National Lottery Commission towards Camelot was "conspicuously unfair" and "illegal".[HL4168]
Lord McIntosh of Haringey: The Government fully accept Mr Justice Richards' judgment. The judge recognised that the National Lottery Commission had intended to be fair and made clear that, as a responsible public authority, the commission could be relied on to act in accordance with the judgment.
Baroness Anelay of St Johns asked Her Majesty's Government:
- What estimate they have made of the amount that would be lost to good causes for each week that the National Lottery ceased to operate in any period of hiatus between its operation by the present and the next operating company, in the event that Camelot does not win the new operating licence; and [HL4122]
What mechanism they have put in place to ensure that when the current National Lottery operating licence expires, there is no hiatus in the running of the National Lottery; and [HL4123]
Whether they are confident that the remaining members of the National Lottery Commission can reach a proper and fair decision on the award of the new operating licence for the National Lottery within a timescale that will enable the next operator of the National Lottery to continue the award of moneys to the good causes without any hiatus, in the event that Camelot is not successful in its application to be awarded the new Lottery operating licence. [HL4124]
Lord McIntosh of Haringey: The award of the new Lottery operating licence is the responsibility of the National Lottery Commission. The Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport appointed Lord Burns to the commission last week and the Government have every confidence that Lord Burns will be able to assist the current licensing process to a timely and proper conclusion. The Government have not made any
estimate of the potential loss to good causes of any hiatus in the operation of the National Lottery since they have made clear to the commission that there must be no such hiatus.
Baroness Anelay of St Johns asked Her Majesty's Government:
- Whether they still hold the view put forward in the Labour Party's manifesto, that "When the contract runs out, Labour will seek an efficient not-for-profit operator" to run the National Lottery. [HL4127]
Lord McIntosh of Haringey: The Government have maintained their policy of seeking and welcoming bids from efficient not-for-profit operators. But the decision on the award of the next licence is a matter for the National Lottery Commission. It will make its decision on the need to maximise returns to good causes, subject to ensuring propriety and protecting players' interests.
Mr Alan Howarth
Baroness Anelay of St Johns asked Her Majesty's Government:
- When the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport became aware that Mr Alan Howarth, Minister for the Arts, had acted as a paid adviser to Sir Richard Branson in 1992-96. [HL4125]
Lord McIntosh of Haringey: Upon his appointment as Minister for the Arts in 1998.
National Lottery Commission Chairman
Baroness Seccombe asked Her Majesty's Government:
- When they expect to appoint a permanent Chairman of the National Lottery Commission. [HL4133]
Lord McIntosh of Haringey: The noble Lord, Lord Burns, was appointed to the National Lottery Commission on 12 October 2000 to succeed Dame Helena Shovelton. The National Lottery Commission appoints its own chairman from among its members; the Commission elected Lord Burns chairman on 16 October.
Income Tax
Lord Marlesford asked Her Majesty's Government:
- Whether they will update their Written Answer of 4 May 1999 (WA 84-86) to show the top rate of direct tax on personal income in the United Kingdom (including where appropriate investment income surcharge and surtax and any surcharge on
surtax) for each financial year since 1970-71, indicating the threshold of taxable income at which that rate applied, expressing that threshold in both current prices and 1999-2000 prices. [HL4066]
Lord McIntosh of Haringey: The following information uses the same methodology as presented in my previous Answer except that the final two columns are now presented in 1999-2000 prices.
| Single, non-aged personal allowance for a man with no children | Taxable income above which the highest rate is charged | Highest rate of income tax charged | Retail Price Index | Single, non-aged personal allowance for a man with no children at 1999-2000 prices | Taxable income above which the highest rate is charged at 1999-2000 prices | |
| £ | £ | % | £ | £ | ||
| 1970-71 | 325 | 20,000 | 50 | 18.92 | 2,728 | 175,846 |
| 1971-72 | 325 | 20,000 | 50 | 20.67 | 2,497 | 160,958 |
| 1972-73 | 460 | 20,000 | 55 | 22.13 | 3,301 | 150,339 |
| 1973-74 | 595 | 20,000 | 90 | 24.45 | 3,865 | 136,074 |
| 1974-75 | 625 | 20,000 | 98 | 28.82 | 3,444 | 115,441 |
| 1975-76 | 675 | 20,000 | 98 | 35.91 | 2,985 | 92,648 |
| 1976-77 | 735 | 20,000 | 98 | 41.40 | 2,820 | 80,362 |
| 1977-78 | 945 | 21,000 | 98 | 47.19 | 3,180 | 74,027 |
| 1978-79 | 985 | 24,000 | 98 | 51.11 | 3,061 | 78,114 |
| 1979-80 | 1,165 | 25,000 | 75 | 59.19 | 3,126 | 70,261 |
| 1980-81 | 1,375 | 27,750 | 75 | 68.85 | 3,172 | 67,047 |
| 1981-82 | 1,375 | 27,750 | 75 | 76.77 | 2,844 | 60,130 |
| 1982-83 | 1,565 | 31,500 | 75 | 82.20 | 3,024 | 63,747 |
| 1983-84 | 1,785 | 36,000 | 75 | 86.03 | 3,295 | 69,611 |
| 1984-85 | 2,005 | 38,100 | 60 | 90.37 | 3,524 | 70,133 |
| 1985-86 | 2,205 | 40,200 | 60 | 95.71 | 3,659 | 69,870 |
| 1986-87 | 2,335 | 41,200 | 60 | 98.78 | 3,754 | 69,383 |
| 1987-88 | 2,425 | 41,200 | 60 | 102.72 | 3,749 | 66,721 |
| 1988-89 | 2,605 | 19,300 | 40 | 108.88 | 3,800 | 29,487 |
| 1989-90 | 2,785 | 20,700 | 40 | 117.38 | 3,768 | 29,336 |
| 1990-91 | 3,005 | 20,700 | 40 | 128.74 | 3,707 | 26,747 |
| 1991-92 | 3,295 | 23,700 | 40 | 134.85 | 3,880 | 29,236 |
| 1992-93 | 3,445 | 23,700 | 40 | 139.11 | 3,933 | 28,341 |
| 1993-94 | 3,445 | 23,700 | 40 | 141.48 | 3,867 | 27,866 |
| 1994-95 | 3,445 | 23,700 | 40 | 145.35 | 3,764 | 27,124 |
| 1995-96 | 3,525 | 24,300 | 40 | 150.08 | 3,730 | 26,934 |
| 1996-97 | 3,765 | 25,500 | 40 | 153.73 | 3,889 | 27,593 |
| 1997-98 | 4,045 | 26,100 | 40 | 158.81 | 4,045 | 27,339 |
| 1998-99 | 4,195 | 27,100 | 40 | 163.76 | 4,326 | 27,529 |
| 1999-2000 | 4,335 | 28,000 | 40 | 166.35 | 4,335 | 28,000 |
For 1970-71 to 1972-73 the highest rate of income tax is the highest rate of surtax.
For 1973-74 to 1983-84, the highest rate charged includes investment income surcharge at 15 per cent but this total rate would apply only if the taxpayer's income included investment income greater than the threshold for the highest rate of surcharge, which varied between £2,000 in 1973-74 and £7,100 in 1983-84.