Proceeding contribution from Doug Henderson (Labour) in the House of Commons on Monday, 13 June 2005. It occurred during Debate on bill and Committee of the Whole House (HC) on Finance Bill.
Finance Bill
I have only one short point to make, but first I declare an interest as a member of the National Trust and a proud member of Beamish, which is a marvellous museum in County Durham. As has already been said, small museums, as well as private and specialist museums, which often have charitable status, have to compete with the state’s museums, which are free—although I completely support that. However, that situation affects museums such as Beamish, which is quite a large organisation. As the Financial Secretary knows, the practice has developed over the past three or four years of paying gift aid with membership subscriptions. The hon. Member for Rayleigh (Mr. Francois) referred to that in his introduction. People standing in the queue eating their ice creams at Beamish, or at the ticket desk, get leaflets about gift aid so they know about it already. When the Government are considering the small print, I urge them to make it clear that we are not worsening the current position but that the measure merely establishes in law rights that are currently applied. I hope that we can mount a campaign on that. I understand why the Opposition are raising those points, because various museum groups have also raised them, but the important thing is that the Government respond to what is happening and maintain the situation. We must get that message across. I ask the Financial Secretary to be generous in considering some of the suggestions. The suggestion made by the hon. Member for Wimbledon (Stephen Hammond) was a good try, but it would create so many anomalies in our tax legislation that it cannot be a runner. I do not know whether the period should be 12 months, three months or one month, but I rather suspect that, whatever the provision, it will be theoretical. Museums are ingenious and they can usually find ways of getting round the regulations that we establish. One of the ways of doing that—it is quite legal—is to give an annual member privileges that someone who is the member for a day or three months does not have. For example, an annual member may be able to get the kids in a bit cheaper. There are ways in which the institutions can respond to the points that have been made. I am not absolutely stuck on the 12-month rule, but I think that it is fairly reasonable. Although the points made by the Opposition sound reasonable, they would not apply to most museums. If one joins the Beamish, it is a 12-month deal. Most people visit once a year, but I recognise that some go more frequently. However, the revenue for gift aid comes from those who go once a year. I hope that the Minister will be generous in his response and make it clear to museums that there will be no worsening of conditions.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 435 c35-6
- Session
- 2005-06
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Commons chamber
- Subjects
- Complaints Disclosure of information Admissions Charities Companies Corporation tax Charitable donations Finance EU law Investment Exemptions Interest payments Gift aid Ownership Museums and galleries Property Loans Open ended investment companies Small businesses Tax avoidance Taxation Transfer pricing Financial Ombudsman Service National Savings and Investments Collective investment schemes
- Legislation
- Finance Bill 2005-06
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2024-01-27 13:49:31 +0000
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_251766
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_251766
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_251766