Proceeding contribution from Lord Evans of Temple Guiting (Labour) in the House of Lords on Monday, 30 October 2006. It occurred during Question for short debate on Museums and Galleries.
Museums and Galleries
When we talkabout what we will do in the future, it is essential to establish where we are now. My point is that this Government—my Government—have done the most extraordinary things in the past 10 years to contribute to museums, galleries and many other art forms. It is essential that I lay the groundwork before going on to say what we should do about it. The question is, after all, what we should do about it. The noble Viscount, Lord Astor, made a very important point when he said that this is not one political party’s problem but our problem. It is a national problem, and it must be dealt with in an overarching, intelligent and creative way. So that is money. Policy, of course, is a more elusive creature. The Government believe in the arm’s length principle, which means, as we have heard, that detailed decisions on individual art forms should be taken not by Government but in the field. The Government do what they can to create the conditions in which culture can flourish. For museums and galleries, this begins with appointing the very best directors, chairmen and trustees. Here we come to a positive point. As chairman of Resource, I spent some considerable time looking at museums and talking to museum directors. The noble Lord, Lord Howarth, made the important point that some trustees should be appointed if they have entrepreneurial skills. It could be argued that the museum world is too passive. It waits for things to happen rather than making them happen, and it should be more entrepreneurial. The noble Viscount, Lord Astor, too, made an important point about how philanthropists should be encouraged to move into this world, particularly when one compares the situation and the atmosphere in the UK with what happens in America. Such an important change in the direction that museums and galleries take would be of benefit and would help to alleviate some of the problems about which we are talking. Creating the conditions goes beyond this. The Treasury has created a number of tax reliefs over the years—I urge the noble Lord, Lord Inglewood, not to say that he knows all this; he may do, but there is a sting in the tale—that help private owners to give, and public institutions to receive, important cultural items. There is, for example, a conditional exemption, which allows estates to defer the settlement of inheritance tax bills in exchange for public access to fine works—douceurs, or sweeteners if you prefer, that make private treaty sales of works of art to public institutions more tax effective. Again, I repeat that these opportunities are there, but they are not being exploited to the full. It weakens any argument for further tax concessions and further help from the Treasury if things that are already in place are simply not used.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 686 c53-4GC
- Session
- 2005-06
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Lords Grand Committee
- Subjects
- Cultural heritage Artworks Finance Licensing Exports National Lottery Museums and galleries National Heritage Memorial Fund Prices Objects in lieu of tax Sales Tax allowances Collections
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2024-04-22 02:28:40 +0100
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_355840
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_355840
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_355840