NO ONE should underestimate the enterprise and skill of Camelot in putting together from scratch the National Lottery, and turning it into the most efficient venture of its kind anywhere in the world.

But for all that, the rejection of its bid to continue operating the Lottery should come as no surprise.

It lost out on the chance of winning the second licence in February 1998, when a libel jury ruled it had tried to bribe Richard Branson to withdraw his bid to run the Lottery when the first licence was up for grabs.

That judgement came hard on the heels of the fat cat row over the pay and perks of Camelot executives.

While the executives had enabled the Lottery to deliver more than had been forecast for good causes, they had also turned it into a gravy train for themselves and their shareholders.

A Labour Government, with a manifesto commitment to have a non-profit making Lottery, was unlikely to let Camelot stay in control.

The perception was that Camelot was more interested in making money for itself, rather than worthy projects.

It has now fallen to Sir Richard Branson to come up with a "People's Lottery" that is worthy of the name.

Assuming he gets the go-ahead to run the Lottery, he will be judged by the Government on his pledge to raise £15bn for good causes.

But it is the judgement of the British public which will be the crucial factor.

Whatever we may like to think, we play the Lottery in the hope of attaining instant wealth above our wildest dreams, not to buy a brick for the National Opera House or a coach for an Olympic athlete.

Sir Richard's challenge is to run the Lottery every bit as efficiently as Camelot, but without the profit-making incentives.

He has to come up with a winning format that creates millionaires and persuades people to continue playing the game week in, week out.

Only if he keeps the people on board will he make a success of the "People's Lottery".