Lottery Grants Fall

Press, Volume CVIII, Issue 31662, 24 April 1968, Page 1

Lottery Grants Fall

(N Z. Press Association)

WELLINGTON, April 23.

Allocations of lottery profits from the year ended March 31 will be $455 000 less than the previous year—a level much lower than expected.

The allocation would be of sl.4m, compared with $1.85m in the 1967 year, the Minister of Internal Affairs (Mr Seath) announced today. “This is partly because the income for 1968 fell below the conservative estimate made by the board at the beginning of the income year and partly because a realistic estimate of likely income for the ensuing year upon which today’s allo-

cations depend must take account of a possible further reduction in total lottery ticket sales,” said Mr Seath. Forty-one Golden Kiwi lotteries and four Mammoth lotteries were drawn in the 1968 year, compared with 43 Golden Kiwi lotteries and six Mammoth lotteries in the 1967 year.

“People have been spending less on the Golden Kiwi and the Mammoth,” said Mr Seath, “but this seems to be a result of the general tightening of the public purse strings rather than any decline in interest in the lotteries." Other signs of public caution in spending were the 8.8 per cent fall in betting—both off-course and on-course—dur-ing the 1968 racing year, and very substantial increases in savings banks deposits. Increasing Demands ,

“PA the same time there are signs of the public tending to be similarly cautious in its support of voluntary organisations and in its support of the arts,” said Mr Seath. “Golden Kiwi Fund distributing authorities are thus faced with smaller incomes but increasing demands.” Mr Seath said there was

every reason to expect that as the national economy improved, lottery earnings would pick up—but in the meantime, unfortunately for those who looked to lottery funds for help, the money was just not there to be given away in the same quantities. “The remedy, I feel,” he said, “must lie not in increased pressure on the distributing authorities, for they cannot spend funds they do not possess, but in an increased effort to earn more directly from public support and from subscription.”