Letter: Profits and lotteries

Mr Denis Vaughan
Tuesday 22 February 1994 00:02 GMT
Comments

Your support helps us to tell the story

From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.

At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.

The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.

Your support makes all the difference.

Sir: Peter Kilfoyle's letter (16 February) about Richard Branson's bid returning the profit element from the National Lottery to the good causes overlooks the fundamental flaws of Oflot's decisions. There is no need for Mr Branson, or any other consortium, to make large profits. The most efficient and successful lotteries in the world pay off their start-up costs immediately, so that they need neither long-term loans from banks nor equity capital.

Profit motivation to increase sales comes when the agents receive more funds by selling more tickets. Only one other person needs such a motive - the director of operations, of whom several outstanding examples are already in this country. In Sweden, he receives pounds 75,000 a year. In Hessen, Germany, the perks which the director has received beyond his pounds 106,000 salary have caused such a scandal that his bosses have been replaced. So pounds 200,000, with a bonus for extra sales, ought to be more than sufficient for the director of operations here, by international standards.

The administration costs of the commercial lottery in Victoria, Australia, are only 4 per cent of the turnover, not the 15 per cent envisaged in Britain. Moreover, Oflot's duty under the Act to maximise the funds to the good causes cannot be achieved here while rollovers are limited to three times, or while unclaimed prizes are not returned to the prize pool.

It is high time the Government revised its plans to create the best lottery in the world in a more thoroughly informed way.

DENIS VAUGHAN

Director, Lottery Promotion

Company Limited

London, WC2

Join our commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

Comments

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged inPlease refresh your browser to be logged in