Gambling on success

When the interests of the not-for-profit sector coincide with those of the private sector there is often potential for a positive outcome all round. Although currently in the doldrums, commercial sponsorship has been a valuable income stream for the arts for decades and it is widely recognised that both parties can benefit from effective partnerships. In an unlikely turn of events, the arts sector’s financial interests are currently being defended in quite a different way, by none other than the mighty Camelot (p2) – the much derided commercial operator that takes a lot of stick for taking profits instead of returning all its surpluses to good causes. However much we recoil at the thought of Lottery ticket revenues being diverted into private hands, it’s probably worth reflecting on how important it is to the arts that the Lottery succeeds – from a financial perspective, whether the primary motivation for this is profit or altruism is immaterial. If we think a commercial operator can make a better fist of this than a charity or government body could, then presumably the commercial player should be in charge. Evidence suggests that Camelot is currently on top form. In AP249 we reported that Arts Council England could see its Lottery receipts swell by as much as £160m over the next five years as a result of its effective sales drive: at a time when sales at most lotteries around the world are static or in decline, its ticket sales are running at an all-time high and it is lauded as the most cost-efficient lottery in Europe. If something – in this case the equally-commercial-but-far-less-generous (and run by Richard Desmond) Health Lottery – is threatening its success, we should not only sit up and take notice but also be grateful that the invisible hand of the market is intervening on our behalf to make the (expensive) legal case to the Gambling Commission to close its competitor down.