§ LORD VERNONMy Lords, I beg leave to ask the Question which stands in my name on the Order Paper.
§ [The Question was as follows:
§ To ask Her Majesty's Government how many houses of national or architectural interest have been offered to the Treasury in part payment of Estate Duty under the National Land Fund Scheme; how many of such houses have been accepted; and of those accepted, what has been the average length of time between the date of the offer and the date when ownership of the property became formally vested in the Treasury.]
§ LORD SHEPHERDMy Lords, in answer to the first part of the Question, I regret that detailed information is not available. In answer to the second part, out of 97 offers of property and works of art which have been accepted since 1946, 19 were in respect of buildings of historic or architectural interest. In these cases the average length of time between the first notification of the offer and final completion of conveyancing was three and a half years. As each case presents individual problems the time involved varies considerably, ranging from seventeen months in a comparatively simple case to as long as eight or nine years.
§ LORD VERNONMy Lords, I am very grateful to the noble Lord for that illuminating reply. I should perhaps disclose that over a period of time I have had, as to some extent I continue to have, a personal interest in this matter. I should like to ask the noble Lord as a 1952 supplementary whether he does not agree, in the light of the Answer which he has just given, that steps should be taken to expedite and to simplify this very cumbersome procedure, in which a vast number of Government Departments and other agencies are involved. Is he aware that the existing procedure bears very heavily, not only on the individual making the offer but also on the National Trust, who act as the Government's agent in these cases and who frequently find that their estimates of expenditure on the maintenance of these houses are hopelessly out of date by the time they gain possession of them? Finally, may I ask the noble Lord whether he does not think that, since so much of the delay in these cases stems from the difficulty of finding the necessary finance for the maintenance of these houses, the National Land Fund itself might be the source of this revenue?
§ LORD SHEPHERDMy Lords, I would agree with the noble Lord that, if possible, steps should be taken to reduce the time; but, as the noble Lord has himself said that he has a personal interest, he is no doubt well aware of the difficulties in this particular regard. As the House may wish to know, the Treasury has no power or right to hold this property itself. Therefore, when an offer of property is made to offset death duties, the Treasury has to rind some organisation that is willing to take over the property and to maintain it. In many cases an organisation which is interested has then to seek ways and means of finding money for the upkeep of the property. But there are also other difficulties, such as local authority planning permission, alterations of boundaries and road building, which all have an effect upon what may be the decision of an organisation that is willing to take over the property.
It may be of interest to the noble Lord to know that in the early days, under the 1946 Act, which related to real property, the length of time averaged about eighteen months. The difficulty has largely arisen because, by an Act of. I think, 1953, chattels were included. This has very largely contributed to the lengthened period before acceptance of an offer is concluded.