HC Deb 05 November 1954 vol 532 cc770-4
The Temporary Chairman (Mr. G. Thomas)

The next three Amendments in the name of the hon. Member for Bournemouth, East and Christchurch (Mr. N. Nicolson) may be discussed together.

Mr. Nigel Nicolson (Bournemouth, East and Christchurch)

I beg to move, in page 2, line 24, to leave out "from among themselves."

An important question now arises concerning a difference of opinion between the two bodies of trustees on the question of the transfer or loan of pictures from the one to the other. Subsection (1) provides such powers of interchange or loan between the Tate Gallery and the National Gallery, and the provision which is the subject of the first of the three Amendments standing in my name is that in subsection (4), which allows the setting up of an ad hoc committee to adjudicate between the two bodies of Trustees should a dispute arise.

It is immediately evident, on looking at the Clause, that except for the chairman, the ad hoc committee will be composed of exactly the same people who have hitherto failed to agree, and any dispute, instead of being referred to neutral arbitration of the committee, will be once more fought out by a committee composed almost entirely from the two bodies at disagreement.

It will be a great pity if no new point of view was able to be introduced in a dispute such as this, and my Amendment would simply have the effect of making it possible for the trustees to appoint to the committee outsiders who are conversant with their point of view but who are not as closely associated with it as would be the trustees themselves. If the Clause is accepted as it stands, an intolerable burden would be placed upon the chairman, the only neutral member of the committee, and I believe that the trustees themselves would welcome an outside and fresh point of view to aid their deliberations.

1.15 p.m.

The second Amendment is purely consequential upon the first, but the third Amendment deals with an important point. If my third Amendment is not accepted and the Clause remains as now drafted, it will not be possible for another person except the appointed chairman to take the chair at the meeting of the committee. In fact, the committee would be unable to function if the chairman either died, was ill or was temporarily absent abroad. If my third Amendment is accepted, one of these neutral outsiders will be able to take the place of the chairman as acting chairman, and in no way will the neutrality of the chairman be compromised, because the acting chairman will be in exactly the same position.

Mr. H. Brooke

I am grateful to my hon. Friend the Member for Bournemouth, East and Christchurch (Mr. N. Nicolson) for the interest he is taking in the provisions which we are making here for resolving any disputes which may arise. At the outset, I should like to repeat what I said on Second Reading, that it is greatly hoped that no dispute will ever arise and that the committee will never have to be set up.

I notice that my hon. Friend referred to it as an ad hoc committee. What we are therefore seeking to do here is to ensure that there is some machinery which will bring the two bodies of trustees together when, meeting separately, they cannot agree. It would be somewhat invidious to leave out these Words "from among themselves," because in all probability the best way of reaching a decision will be for some of the trustees, as laid down here, to meet some of the trustees from the other gallery, under a neutral chairman acceptable to both bodies of trustees, and to have a thorough talk about the matter. I hope it would not be necessary for the neutral chairman to give a casting vote, but that an accommodation may be arrived at.

As to my hon. Friend's third Amendment. I should like to stress again that this body is regarded as an ad hoc committee, and not as a standing committee which will be in constant existence. In view of the fact that it will be an ad hoc committee, if the independent chairman fell ill, I have no doubt whatever that the committee would not wish to meet until the chairman was well enough again to preside at the meeting.

I therefore would advise hon. Members that there is no need for the third Amendment, and I hope the Committee will be prepared to leave this subsection as it is. I should like to inform my hon. Friend that, when I saw his Amendment on the Notice Paper, I took steps to consult the chairmen of both bodies of trustees, and both have assured me that they were entirely satisfied with the composition of this committee as laid down in the Bill and were not asking for any Amendment of it. In these circumstances, as the matter is acceptable to both chairmen of the trustees, I hope my hon. Friend will feel able to withdraw his Amendment.

Mr. Nicolson

In view of what my hon. Friend reports of his conversations with the people most affected, I can only agree to do what he asks. I hope that any acts of violence will be confined to social occasions outside and will not spread to the committee room. I beg to ask leave to withdraw the Amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Clause stand part of the Bill."

Dr. Stross

I should like to ask for an assurance from the Financial Secretary. In another place there was a good deal of discussion as to what significance there was in the division of paintings and works of art between the two institutions. One gathered that there was some misunderstanding, and assurances were given. We should have the assurance given to us, also, that the original conception, which dates back at least 100 years to the Select Committee of 1853, should be borne in mind and that the collection in the National Gallery which is mentioned in subsection (2, a) should remain as it existed until 1939, when it was temporarily dispersed for reasons of safety. It was a collection of paintings not only of "established merit or significance," as the Clause says, but of great beauty; it represented the history of art in the Western world, including post-classical art.

A good deal of feeling has been created by reason of the fact that many of the galleries in the national institutions are still not in use, having been rendered unfit for use during the war. The term "elbow room" has been used, and we were happy to hear from the Financial Secretary during the Second Reading debate that Lancaster House is to be used as a kind of annexe to the National Gallery as soon as the Bill is passed. I believe the hon. Gentleman said that six paintings would go across at once and another 10 later. Sixteen paintings are not a very substantial part of our national collection, and we should like an assurance that the collection as a whole is going to be made easily available to people who come to London, and that it will be as comprehensive as it was before the war.

Although we entirely accept that it is desirable to hang paintings discretely, so that they can be seen in the best context and be appreciated most easily, we must insist that enough space should be made available in the centre of London—whether in the National Gallery, or the National Gallery plus Lancaster House and other buildings—so that everything that was on view before the war shall be on view again.

Mr. H. Brooke

In broad terms, I willingly give the assurance for which the hon. Member has asked. It will be the aim of the Government and the trustees to ensure that a magnificent collection of works of art shall be maintained at the National Gallery, untrammelled by the wartime difficulties which, by degrees, we are managing to remove. I assure the hon. Member that the words to which he has drawn attention are not intended as a comprehensive definition of the kind of pictures which could be included in the collections at the National Gallery. The words are inserted as principles of guidance when the two bodies of trustees have to decide whether a certain picture should be in one institution or the other.

Question put, and agreed to.

Clause ordered to stand part of the Bill.