 Yn y blyw, y blywau ar ddafod 11319 o'u digwydd yn cerddiaeth Cynedd Gibson yw. A byddwn i'n gweithio'r cyfeithio chi'n gweithio'r cyfeithio'r cyflawnydd, Twyrdd yr cyfaith i hynny i'n ddarparu cyflawnydd Cynedd Gibson yw i'r ddiweddau o ohoeliedig. Os ydych yn cyflawnydd Cynedd Gibson yw i'n cyflawnydd Cynedd Gibson yw'n gyfrifiadau Yn Hallad Alun os yw'r gyferwad mewn i'n gweithio'r cyfeithio'r cyffredig, ti'r wneud ymdeithasol gwahanol rydych yn ymdeithasol ei bod atwynt hwnnw iawn yn fawr i gael ei gael chi ddefnyddio i'r ddangos. Felly, mae'r oeddfaenol iawn yn cael ei ddechrau i'r oeddfaenol iawn, ac i drws o gael iawn i'r oeddfaenol iawn yn dechrau yng nghymru. Maewaf y ffordd â eich gwhar maen nhw i compwysgoliarau i gael iawnau i'r oeddfaenol iawn i'r oeddfaenol iawn yn llaw iawn, o'r onw o'r mwy o'r gael iawn. Fyllwch y cyfnodol o'r situationau yma yng Nghymru, sy'n ddigonio'r ffordd o'r cynhyrchu i'r Gwyliannolau Llywodraeth i'r Ffyrdd yng Nghymru yn y rhan o'r ffordd yma o'r 10.9 billion pwysig, oedd yn ddigonio'r Lotterau. Rwy'n ffordd o'r ffordd o'r ffordd o'r ffordd o'r ffordd o'r ffordd o'r ffordd o'r ffordd o'r ffordd o'r ffordd o'r ffordd o'r Llywodraeth i'r ffordd o'r Llywodraeth i'r ffordd o'r According to the University of Glasgow researcher, Dr Robin Ireland, a single English Premier League game between Newcastle and Wolves, both of which have gambling sponsors, resulted in 716 gambling exposures over the course of the game. As MSPs have asked the majority of us who have seen first hand how devastating problem gambling can be for individuals and families and indeed whole communities, online betting, gaming machines and betting shops are all commonly cited sources of debt and despair for problem gamblers. Charity loteries are not, and yet, as things stand under the 2005 UK Gambling Act, its only charity loteries are subject to an annual cap on sales. The cap serves no purpose other than to place an artificial ceiling on an important fundraising stream for charities and good causes, doing phenomenal work in, for example, my Cunning North constituency across Scotland and indeed England, Wales and non-Island too. The reason why charity lottery sales limits exist at all is unclear. The only stakeholder opposition to raising the limit came from Camelot, who until today heard the licence to run the national lottery. The company's opposition came from a desire to diminish competition to the national lottery, however, this notion has been thoroughly debunked. Evidence has consistently shown that they are complement rather than compete with the unique position of the national lottery. A 2022 report by the UK Digital, Culture, Media and Sport Committee into the future of the national lottery found that, and I quote, in society, loteries play a different role from the national lottery and do not pose a threat to its charitable giving. I know that this is an issue that the charity lottery sector has been struggling with for many years now, so it is happening to have cross-party support across Scotland's Parliament for this common-sense move to free up additional charity funding for good causes at no cost to the taxpayer. I hope that today's debate will send strong messages to Westminster of the long overdue need for action. On a UK-wide basis, charity loteries generate over £420 million per annum for charities and good causes of all sizes, and that amount is growing each year. The largest investment in the notary is, of course, Scotland's own People's Postcode Lottery. A true Scottish fund raising success story to date, its players have raised over £1.2 billion for good causes, a scarcely believable number. Players now raise over £18 billion per month for good causes across Britain. From the central Edinburgh headquarters, 2 employ more than 400 people, 2 of whom, Nick Cooke and Andrew Murray, have joined us today in the gallery, and I thank Postcode Lottery for their debate briefing. On Moconstitinsay grass-roots organisations at the Cisarn Youth Foundation's school holiday programme and Lars community first responders have received over a quarter of a million pounds of People's Postcode Lottery player funding. Only last week, four winning tickets in a Southcoats neighbourhood resulted in six charities, the Ayrshire Community Trust, Input SCIO, the Ayrshire Breastfeeding Network, Trussel Trust Food Bank, Ayrshire Children's Services, the CIC and the North Ayrshire and Foran disability, receiving five figure sums of funding for local projects. In respect of large national charities, Scottish-based organisations like Children First, Maggie's and the Ellen MacArthur Cancer Trust, who operate at Largs, are in receipt of long-term multimillion-pound annual funding awards. It's clear that charity lotteries are an integral part of the charitable fund raising and mixing communities up and down in the country. The unrestricted nature of the funding provided only increases its importance. However, People's Postcode Lottery has raised their concerns over the current restrictive limits and it was impacting their players charitable giving. As things stand, four of the 20 trusts administered by People's Postcode Lottery have had to take action to ensure they didn't breach the £50 million annual sales cap, a figure that does not rise with inflation. That means that these trusts will not be able to increase a amount of funds to the good causes of support, even if ticket sales continue to increase. Ten Postcode trusts are set to be within 3 per cent of the legal sales limit in 2024, meaning a larger funding gap and a growing number of charities that will be affected. The current £50 million sales cap came into effect in July 2020, well-shot of £100 million identified as a UK Government's preferred option in their 2018 consultation, and one that they have since stated remains sympathetic towards. Due to high inflation and the cost-of-living crisis that we are experiencing, that is effectively a real-terms funding cut for these charities year-on-year. £50 million today represents a 17.4 per cent decrease in real terms for when the cap was lifted in 2020. People's Postcode Lottery has highlighted charities that are likely to be affected by annual sales caps going forward, as well as the individual amount that they are projected to lose on out over the next five years—24, 28—without removal of significant reforms to the annual sales limit. I am not going to mention the dozens and dozens of those that People's Postcode Lottery has available on the website, but I will mention some. Dogs trust £4.9 million, British Red Cross £4.9 million, Save of the Children £4.5 million, Breast Cancer now £3.6 million, Royal National Institute for the Blind £3.2 million, Akshire Against Hunger £1.6 million, Mary's Wheels £1.3 million, and Topo of the Tree, Amnesty International £5.7 million. The problem will only grow in the years to come unless the cap was lifted or, better still, abolished. It is also worth pointing out that in each of the 20 Postcode Trusts, our individual Scottish charities in the run-right registered with the Office of the Scottish Charity Regulator who have themselves backed reform in this area. Over the next five years, 100 supported charities will lose an estimated £175 million or more in extra funding due to the lottery cap. It is frankly disgraceful and astonishing that good causes providing services to some of society's most vulnerable people will lose out in essential funding due to an outdated and nonsensical regulation. The UK Government has a real chance to make a difference to charities by removing the charity lottery annual sales limit and it should act now. The Scottish Government and MPs across the board including my own wife, Patricia Gibson MP, who has raised this matter last year and most recently in the Commons on the 11th of January, all back removing this limit, which is part of the overall strategy to ensure that we help the charity sector in Scotland thrive. It is also an issue that I know has received support across this chamber. Successive cabinet secretaries for social justice have lobbied a department for digital, cultural, media and sport to ask the sector of state to remove the annual sales limit as a matter of urgency. It is astonishing that it has not happened already and I am sure that the minister will touch on that in her own remarks. If the Scottish Government did the powers that it could and would remove this limit, but as it stands it does not, I thank colleagues across the chamber for taking the time to debate and support this important issue. I hope that the UK Government takes note of the strength of cross-party support in Scotland's Parliament for these common-sense changes. I urge the UK Government to act to remove the charity to lottery funders in camp without delay. It will cost the taxpayer nothing and be appreciated across the board. I call first Jeremy Balfour to be followed by Alasdair Allan in around four minutes. I want to thank Gibson for bringing this important matter to the chamber for debate. There are many policy disagreements across this chamber on a day-to-day basis, but it is encouraging that the issue of charity lottery funding does not appear to be one of them. After all, it seems clear that the needless and outdated bureaucracy is holding back the fundraising of Britain's charity lotteries. As has been noted, the sector raises almost £0.5 billion in funding each year, with analysis showing that, with the correct regularly reforms, it could generate greater funding still. As for the UK Government, it is only fair to acknowledge that UK ministers did partially reform charity lottery and your sales limit to the current £50 million gap. However, it is only fair to acknowledge that it fell short of its preferred option to raise the limit to £100 million, something that it has promised and failed to deliver upon. Given the time that has passed, the most sensible course of action is that it is advocated by the sector itself to remove the annual sales cap in its entirety. Removing the cap would future-proof the sector and would avoid the need for the Government to continually have to revisit the matter, which I think is in nobody's interest. I am pleased that Scottish Conservatives continue to advocate for this important reform, including Douglas Ross, who has made representations to the Department of Culture, Media and Sport and to the Chancellor of its Checker. Given that the people's postcode lottery analysis demonstrates that removing the annual sales limit would generate more than £175 million for charities over the next parliamentary session, it seems to be fundamentally a conservative way to fund the third sector across the whole of the United Kingdom. To that end, I would join others and urge the Chancellor to consider such a measure for inclusion in the forthcoming spring budget. As the official regulator of the Gambling Commission is on the record as stating that it is unclear why such an annual cap exists in the first place, and with the commission showing that sales in return to good causes from the nuts of lottery and charity lotters have reached record levels in recent years, it is clear that both types of lottery can exist happily together. It will come as little surprise to colleagues that I am not a great gambler, although I am happy to bet the Minister of which football team in Edinburgh will end up higher than the other at the end of the season if he wants to give me his money. However, I am concerned about some of the potential harmful effects of the commercial gambling and betting industry. For this reason, it is important to place on record that the non-for-profit charity lotteries are recognised by the UK Government, the Gambling Commission and academia as a low risk and quite distinct from the commercial gambling sector. I am pleased that the People's Portugal Lottery is head quoted here in my region, and their game is recognised as one of the safest and worldwide gambling market by the distinguished professor of behaviour addiction at Nottingham Trent University, Professor Mark Griffiths. Maggie's Cancer Centre, which has so much important work in my lower region, supporting those people on the cancer journey currently receives £3 million every year from the People's Portugal Lottery. However, if annual shares caps were to be lifted, it could receive an extra £5.5 million over the next UK parliamentary session. As a former holiday dog of the year winner, I will at this point declare an interest. However, the dog's trust, which also receives £3 million every year, will be in line to receive an almost £4 million extra funding over the next five years where the cap to be removed. It is impossible to deny that the third sector here in Scotland and across the entire United Kingdom faces a major challenge in regard to its funding environment. The scale for challenge is not one that can be solved with ever greater amounts of public funding and nor should we aspire for it to be. As a society, we are stronger when several societies can flourish, which is the case of charities' means deploying their expertise to support the most vulnerable. Removing the annual cap and charity lottery sales would help to better fund the third sector at no cost to the public purse. I am very happy to support the motion this afternoon. Mr Balfour noted that Mr McLean did not seek to intervene to pick up your gauntlet. I will not have gone unnoticed. I now call Alasdair Allan to be followed by Paul O'Kane around four minutes. I thank Kenneth Gibson for bringing this important debate to the chamber. It focuses on a real source of funding for many charities and highlights a completely needless obstacle that many of them face. I am a long-standing supporter of charity lotteries, which raise funds for good causes and are operated, as others have said, on a not-for-commercial-gain basis. However, those lotteries are being hampered in their support for deserving causes by an unnecessary and unreasonable funding cap, which was originally implemented by the UK Government to protect the national lottery from competition. The gambling commission, in its advice to the UK Government seven years ago, stated that it believed that there was no need for such a cap to remain in place, given record levels of both national lottery and charity lottery sales in recent years. During the UK Government's 2018 consultation on charity lottery limits, its preferred option, as has been mentioned, was raising the annual sales limit to £100 million, yet six years later, charity lotteries are still being constrained by a limit half that size. As Mr Gibson points out, when they could be bringing forward legislation to free up millions of pounds of funding for good causes, the UK Government's continued lack of action on this issue is hard to fathom. Working to remove the annual sales cap is an SNP manifesto pledge and an issue that the Scottish Government has been supportive of for many years. The Scottish Government has made representations to the UK Government about this on numerous occasions, as I understand, frustratingly without progress. The legislation on the matter is, unfortunately, still fully reserved to the UK Parliament. Several of the fantastic charities based in Scotland that people's postcode lottery support, such as Maggie's Centres and Mary's Meals, are seeing their funding indefinitely capped due to the outdated charity lottery annual sales limit. That is despite the people's postcode lottery's desire to increase their activity in support of charities. It is estimated that, over the next five years, Maggie's may lose out on £5 million of additional funding, while Mary's Meals may lose out on over £1 million. During a cost of living crisis where charities are on the front line of providing support across the country, I have to ask how is this fair and what end does such a cap serve? Charity lotteries have raised hundreds of thousands of pounds for good causes in my constituency, with organisations such as the Stornoway Trust, the Burner Community Association and Western Isles for you benefiting from vital funding. Players, as well as charities, of course, do benefit from those lotteries, when my constituents in North Uist and Burnary won £3 million through the people's postcode lottery, the prize was shared between 101 fortunate individuals, and that gave an economic boost to the whole community with much of the winnings being spent locally. Charity lotteries provide transformative funding to charities, and to pick up on a theme raised by Mr Balfour, they do so in a way that deliberately does not include highly addictive forms of gambling, such as scratch cards. Charity lotteries therefore pose a very low risk of gambling related harm to players. To conclude, those lotteries exist to fund and to support good causes. It makes no sense at all that they should face far more regulation than the purely for profit bookmakers who make astronomical sums of money for their shareholders and pose a much higher risk of gambling related harm. So I would urge the UK Government to break a long-standing habit and do something positive, and that would be to remove the unfair and illogical annual sales cap on charity lotteries. Deputy Presiding Officer, it is a pleasure to be able to make a contribution in this debate and let me begin by thanking Kenneth Gibson for securing the debate through his motion and, indeed, for his opening speech, which I think set out in detail many of the issues that I think we would all share across the chamber about why the cap feels arbitrary and unfair, and indeed why reform is so necessary, because I think he got to the very heart of talking about the difference that charity lotteries can make in communities like Cunningham North or indeed more widely across West Scotland, which I represent. I declare an interest, Deputy Presiding Officer, that in a previous life I had the job of setting up a charity lottery for Enable Scotland when I worked there. I know the difference that that lottery has gone on to make even in its care of infancy, although not probably reaching the cap at this stage, but certainly the difference that it can make in terms of the funding for charitable projects for people who have a learning disability. I think that we see that represented in the variety of different organisations that are supported, including our hospice movement across West Scotland, who rely on charity lotteries to support their work. Of course, we have already heard of the important work done by the people's postcode lottery and perhaps the limitations that have been placed upon them due to the cap. In my own local community, I have seen funding from the people's postcode lottery make a real difference. Whether that be community organisations supporting older people and reducing isolation, or whether it be organisations such as the Back to School Bank in East West Scotland, which provides new uniforms and school equipment to children, have really benefited from funding from the people's postcode lottery. It is a real shame that we see that that is limited by the effects of the cap, which is in place. In the context of higher and higher demands on our third sector, and at a time when we see funds being stretched further and further, capping ability to generate funds and in turn to share funds out with organisations that rightly need it does not make to me any sense. Indeed, we know that analysis carried out by the people's postcode lottery has demonstrated that the annual sales cap on the sector restricts funding that can be provided to their 40 large charity partners. As we have already heard, that is millions of pounds annually that could be doing more good in our communities and is currently being restricted from being raised in the first place. I think that we have already heard, articulated by colleagues across the chamber today, that there are a variety of different organisations who would share that view, including not least the Gambling Commission and the Charity Commission in England Wales, and I am sure that Oscar is here in Scotland as well. It is clear that there is consensus across the chamber on listing the cap. It is also clear that there is consensus in the House of Commons. Indeed, I was reading the Hansard of the Westminster Hall debate that was held in July, in which Patricia Gibson and others contributed. I was pleased to see the effort of opposition parties to come together and say that the cap needs to change, that it will not cost the taxpayer money and will improve charities. Indeed, in responding to the opposition for Labour, my colleague Alex Davies-Jones called on the minister to take action and to take a step forward in getting a move on with removing the cap through consulting with the charities and organisations that are most directly impacted and finding the way to do that. If the current UK Government is not willing to do that, then it can get out of the way and let another party come in and take that forward, because I do believe that it is important and it commands, as I say, that consensus. Conscious of time, Deputy Presiding Officer, I will leave it there. I think that it is clear that there is strength of feeling in this chamber and at UK level, and it is time to do the right thing and to remove the cap. I am pleased to be contributing today and congratulate my colleague Kenneth Gibson for the unsecured debate and for calling for the removal of the annual sales limit in charity lottery fund raising. The idea that there could be a restriction of funds raised for the betterment of society is a bit baffling, really. Yet under the 2005 UK Gamblin Act, societal wateries are subject to that maximum sale of £50 million, as we have heard already today. This limitation is seemingly in place to uphold the primary purpose of societal wateries, ensuring that their fundamental mission of raising funds for good causes remains intact. The striking disparity emerges when you consider the other forms of gambling, particularly those that are deemed harmful, operate freely without similar constraints. To provide some insight, the Gamblin Commission reported that, excluding all the reported wateries, the gambling industry generated an eye-water total revenue of £10.9 billion last year—a figure quoted by Kenneth Gibson, but it is certainly worth repeating. Revenue that is not only amassed by preying on societies was vulnerable, but exacerbates issues such as homelessness, crime, fractured relationships, mental health problems and even contributes to suicide rates, impacts that are far reaching and profound. Meanwhile, we impose a £50 million limit on societal wateries, where there is no private profit gained and funds instead go towards organisations that diligently work to eliminate some of the very inequalities that gambling supports. That is nothing short of what Llywodrae Kriss have asked me. Faced by the post-pandemic era and the relentless squeeze of the cost of loving crisis, charities and voluntary organisations are finding themselves grappling with a dual challenge of increasing demand, while their resources are diminishing. As a result, over half of those organisations are struggling to deliver their essential core services, and that is outlined in the third sector tracker report by the Scottish Council for Voluntary Organisations. To put it simply, organisations are absolutely crying out for a lifeline for funding, and with society wateries generating an impressive total of £420 million annually and displaying signs of significant growth, they are really well-placed to provide this essential support. I, too, welcome the representatives that are here today from the people's postcode lottery to the gallery, and I want to say thanks for the leading role that they have played in this campaign and their tireless efforts to remove this absurd upper limit. Reading their briefing for this debate today, it was really disheartening to learn that the existing cap on annual sales, taken over the next five years, will jeopardise a staggering £175 million in crucial funding for 100 supported charities. It seems to me, clearly, ridiculous that such a substantial contribution to charities has been seriously hindered by this outdated legislation, especially when, as we have heard before, it cost the public purse absolutely nothing. Nevertheless, community grants from the people's postcode lottery of £26.4,000 have been distributed across my constituency of Waddingston and Baleshill, and that support is translated into tangible benefits for various projects that affect people on the ground. Examples include funding for equipment for the nurture and nature initiative, and funding awarded to view park gardens allotment in community gardens that allow them to buy arranged seeds, plants, food containers and gardening tools for their growing the community projects. The funding has been transformational, and my team are happy to encourage and support more local organisations to apply to society lotteries, and I am really grateful to Paula Keane for highlighting Enable Scotland as well. In closing, although lottery policy is a reserved matter, I hope that the UK Government is listening closely to the debate, and the call to remove the charity lottery funders and cap. The growth of our community and voluntary sector in fantastic organisations is something that should be celebrated and nourished. We cannot and should not put a limit on social good, and it really is time for the UK, I suppose, in Paul's words again, to get a move on and sort it out. I would like to firstly thank Kenneth Gibson for organising the debate on the £50 million cap placed on charity lotteries and for setting out so clearly what he described as the absurdity of this unique limit. It is lovely to have consensus today, although it is not a surprise given how ridiculous the cap is. The fact that we have all agreed on that highlights the way inarguably absurd the cap is, particularly when you consider, as Kenneth Gibson and Alastair Allen mentioned, the lotteries focus on the less addictive and potentially harmful forms of gambling, which are not subject to the same limit. Stephanie Callaghan was right to make mention of the fact that the charity lotteries often play a part in supporting those who are subject to the harms of gambling addiction. Charity lotteries play an important role funding thousands of good causes in Scotland, from large national charities that operate across the country to grassroots good causes focused on their local communities. In my Highlands and Islands region, charity lotteries have raised millions of pounds for local good causes such as Inverness Highlanders junior ice hockey club, Avymor and Glenmore community trust and The Ledge. Charity lotteries also support large charities such as Maggie's and Guide Dogs, which have a presence across all of Scotland. Having just visited Maggie's Highlands, I know that even the smallest amount of money can make a huge difference to those that they support. Mary's Meals, which was founded in my region, has received almost £4 million from charity lotteries across the years. Valued partners of the Scottish Government, including Crisis and British Red Cross, whom I work closely with in our efforts to support asylum seekers and other new Scots, are also missing out. The Scottish Government fully supports the charity lottery annual sales cap being removed. As Dr Alistair Allen pointed out, we have written to the UK Government on numerous occasions about this. Simply put, it would free up more funding for charities at no cost to the taxpayer. Unfortunately for charities across Scotland, the merry-go-round of secretaries of state at DCMS has led to this important campaign, not getting the attention that it deserves. It is bizarre that the UK Tories, who are purportedly the party of scrapping red tape and regulation, have allowed this outdated and unneeded limit to remain in place for the 12 years that they have been in power. I was glad to hear Jeremy Balfour on behalf of the Scottish Conservatives, urged the Chancellor to take action and agree that the current limit falls short of even the preferred option from the UK Government's consultation—indeed, half of it—and he is right that removing the cap would be in everybody's best interest. Unfortunately, infighting and chaos from his party down south has directly led to charities missing out on millions of pounds of essential funding at a time when it is needed more than ever. After over a decade of Tory austerity, many charities are facing incredible demand for their services, coupled with skyrocketing costs due to inflation. Those charities are often filling the gaps in areas where the UK state has pulled back, and they should be given the opportunity to receive as much funding as possible. In Scotland, we have many charity lotteries such as the People's Postcode Lottery and the Scottish Children's Lottery, which are raising millions of pounds of funding each month. Whether Apollo Cane's enable lottery is currently harmed by the cap or not, I know myself the good work of Enable Scotland, and there should not be a limit on its aspiration to help as many people as possible. Players of the People's Postcode Lottery alone have raised over £1.2 billion for good causes—a truly astronomical sum of money that has made a real difference to thousands of organisations, including those in my region of the Highlands and Islands. Recently, those who have benefited have included Antalya Solis in Alla Pool, which is a fantastic organisation. I have had the privilege of visiting as a local MSP and in my ministerial role last year to learn about how the opportunities that it offers help to address social isolation and loneliness in Alla Pool, as well as tackling depopulation in the area by retaining local artists and offering those who have left the option to return. They have got £18,000 from the People's Postcode Lottery last year. Transition North Ronaldsy is another group that has been supported by the People's Postcode Lottery, with widespread positive effects, including its regular beach cleans, extremely beneficial community garden, and promoting sustainability throughout Orkney's northern Isles. It has got £24,950 from the People's Postcode Lottery last year. I was shocked to learn that People's Postcode Lottery figures show that dozens of charities are set to miss out on millions of pounds of funding over the next five years due to the current £50 million cap. To highlight just one example, Mary's Meals faces a funding shortfall of over £1.1 million over the next five years due to the cap. The charity sector, charity lotteries and politicians from all political parties have been calling for further reform for some time now. As far as I'm concerned, there is no logical reason that the outdated law should remain the same. Quite frankly, it's unclear why there is a limit in place at all, as all that it does is act as a blocker on charities' lotteries' ability to fundraise, and Scotland's brilliant charities deserve to have access to the largest amount of funding possible. As Kenneth Gibson stated, we would be happy to make changes here in Scotland if we had the powers, but we do not. I and the rest of the Scottish Government will continue to push the UK Government on those limits as a matter of urgency and call for the cap to be removed, and I'm sure that many colleagues in the chamber today will do so as well.