§ 31. Mr. Murphyasked the Minister for the Arts what steps he is planning to take to promote additional forms of financing of the arts, museums and galleries whereby the receipts are kept by the institutions.
§ The Minister for the Arts (Mr. Richard Luce)As announced in July, the Government intend to change the present system for the treatment of revenue generated by the national museums and galleries. The institutions have been consulted on a range of possible alternative 620 arrangements and I am considering their responses. I hope shortly to make an announcement on proposed changes. It remains my aim to provide greater incentives to the institutions both to maximise their receipts and to use these more effectively.
§ Mr. MurphyI thank my hon. Friend for that answer. Does he agree that any future incentive schemes should be designed to maximise the amount of private funding of the arts, which benefits everyone?
§ Mr. LuceI entirely agree with my hon. Friend that everything must be done to encourage galleries and museums to raise extra funds. Such funds will not in any way replace the basic funding that the Government will continue to give to musuems and galleries.
§ Mr. Chris SmithDoes the Minister's reply mean that he is entirely satisfied with the level of basic funding that his Department gives to museums, galleries and other artistic institutions through the medium of the Arts Council? Is he satisfied with the Arts Council's most recent announcement, which will almost certainly ensure the closure of five nationally known institutions, including Sadlers Wells, which is in my constituency?
§ Mr. LuceThe Government are committed to maintaining their support for the arts and arts institutions. In the past six years we have more than doubled the amount of money given to the arts. The Arts Council's funds have increased by 7 per cent. in real terms in the past six years. I am satisfied that we are maintaining our support for the arts.
§ Mr. BuchanDoes the Minister agree that the real problem is the relative collapse in public funding through the demise of the GLC and the metropolitan authorities, which means a shortfall of at least £10 million or, as I believe, £90 million? Does that not mean that in Liverpool, the Philharmonic Hall and the Empire are likely to close, that in Newcastle the Theatre Royal is likely to close, that in Sunderland the Empire Theatre is likely to close and that Sadlers Wells in Islington is likely to close? If all of those authorities are being faced with cutting, capping and one at least with abolition, how are they to maintain those institutions? Will the Minister intervene?
§ Mr. LuceI remind the hon. Gentleman, although he does not need reminding, that I recently announced a £25 million increase in the amount of money that will be made available to the Arts Council. We now look to successor authorities to play their part. The hon. Gentleman is right to say that, as a result of changes and the abolition of the GLC, there is considerable uncertainty—among receiving theatres for example. We are looking to the local authorities urgently to find a local solution to a problem which is of considerable concern.