FINANCE BILL (Hansard, 3 July 1979)

§ Mr. Norman Buchan (Renfrewshire, West)
On a point of order, Mr. Weatherill. I wish to raise a question relating to the provisional selection of amendments. May I ask that this be reconsidered in relation to amendment No. 18, which raises the question of VAT as applied to the theatre? I understand the difficulties of trying to make exclusions or inclusions. However, may I point out that amendment No. 5 is already selected for independent debate? That amendment refers to thoroughbred horses and bloodstock in relation to racing, and therefore there is a sport and arts analogy there. I presume that that amendment has been selected because of its economic significance. May I point out that the arts, in particular the theatre, are of immense economic significance, especially from the point of view of tourism? The second analogy concerns amendment No. 37 which relates to buildings of architectural and historic importance. By direct analogy, the question of the arts and the economy in relation to tourism is brought into sharp focus.
Since we do not want to be regarded as mean-minded in respect of the arts—I am sure that the Government would not like to be so regarded—may I suggest that they would welcome the opportunity to cut VAT in relation to the theatre, if amendment No. 18 were included in the provisional list of amendments?

§ The Chairman
It is a hideously difficult task to select amendments to the Finance Bill. I am sorry that I have not found it possible to select amendment No. 18, but I have grouped amendment No. 37 with amendment No. 20.

§ Mr. Buchan
Further to that point of order, Mr. Weatherill, I understand the grouping with amendment No. 37. However, amendment No. 5 has been taken separately. Would it be possible to group the amendment with either amendment No. 20, so that it can be brought up in relation to amendment No. 37, which concerns matters of specific architectural and historic importance, or even amendment No. 5, where there is a vestigial relationship between sport and the arts with both to be argued on economic merits? That is the case that I am putting in relation to tourism. If the amendment has to be on economic merits, we should prefer it to be connected with artistic matters. The Government Front Bench might even support me.

§ The Chairman
I repeat that I should have liked to select all the amendments, but that is not possible. If the Committee agrees, we should proceed with the amendments that I have selected and see how we get on.