§ 22. Mr. Abseasked the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster what consultations he has had with the review committee on the export of art relating to the Algardi bust.
§ Mr. St. John-StevasI refer the hon. Member to the answer that I gave my hon. Friend the Member for Staffordshire, South-West (Mr. Cormack) on Thursday 7 February.
§ Mr. AbseIs there not a real mischief, which is damaging to Britain's place as the centre of the art world, if reputable 20 auctioneers such as Christies fail to be give notice of any agreements or partnerships that are formed? Does the right hon. Gentleman agree that, to protect our art treasures and the reputation of our art market, it is essential that dealers ensure that they have as officers in their associations people whose behaviour and conduct are impeccable?
§ Mr. St. John-StevasI can express my agreement without drawing any inferences from what the hon. Gentleman said. This matter involves a number of important technicalities which are being examined by the Department of Trade.
§ Mr. FellWill my right hon. friend please not stand in the way of the export of this bust, which is not all that brilliant?
§ Mr. St. John-StevasI value my hon. Friend's opinion, but others in the art world, who are equally expert, think that this is an outstanding piece of sculpture. I have not yet been able to reach a decision because of the technical questions which are under consideration. I am most anxious to dispose of the matter as soon as they are out of the way.
§ Mr. FauldsThe right hon. Gentleman really must do better than that. Is he aware that Agnew's did not, as required, put on the application export form the co-owners of the bust, and that even the reviewing committee was not told, as it should have been, that the three buyers, were acting in syndicate? Is it not desirable, in the right hon. Gentleman's own interests, that a decision on a prosecution be come to speedily so that there can be no appearance of his involvement in the cover-up of an illegal conspiracy?
§ Mr. St. John-StevasThe hon. Gentleman is his usual moderate and balanced self. I am not involved in any cover-up. The question of bringing prosecutions is for the Attorney-General and the police. Until the investigations have been completed I cannot reach a decision. As soon as the investigations are complete I shall reach an early decision.
§ Mr. FauldsAgain, that is not good enough. Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that I received an answer today from the Attorney-General, in which he said that no complaint had been made to him? What is the right hon. Gentleman doing?
§ Mr. St. John-StevasIt is not up to me to make complaints to the Attorney-General. I am saying that it is a matter for him. If the hon. Member for Warley, East (Mr. Faulds) is so keen that a prosecution be brought, and if he is sure of his facts, why does not he approach the Attorney-General himself?
§ Mr. GoodladIs my right hon. Friend aware that the Waverley committee took the view that where a fully substantiated international market price has been agreed at arm's length, that price should determine an offer to be made by a British public body? Does he further agree that in this case the review committee was not equipped to pronounce on value, did not seek independent advice on value, as required by the Waverley committee, and was advised by three museum officials—a category of person who was said specifically by the Waverley committee not to be impartial?
§ Mr. St. John-StevasThe Waverley report, on whose recommendations our export control system is based, recommended that for every export stopped a clear market price should be specified. As a general proposition, I believe that where there is a genuine offer to purchase that must constitute the fair market price.