HL Deb 05 August 1971 vol 323 cc1264-7
LORD STRABOLGI

My 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 whether they can give details of the existing legislation which would permit them to require the Trustees of the National Gallery and the Tate Gallery to impose entrance charges but not to retain the sums raised for the benefit of the galleries concerned.]

THE PAYMASTER GENERAL (VISCOUNT ECCLES)

My Lords, except for the provisions of the National Gallery Act 1856 and the National Gallery and Tate Gallery Act 1954, which deal with the acquisition, lending and disposal of the collections, the affairs of the National Gallery and the Tate Gallery are not regulated by Statute. The questions referred to in the noble Lord's Question are therefore not matters for legislation.

LORD STRABOLGI

My Lords, while thanking the noble Viscount for that information, may I ask him whether he thinks that a Treasury Minute of 1880 proposing charges on two days a week for quite a different purpose is sufficient legal basis on which to rely in the present circumstances? If the Government are so keen and believe so much in what they are trying to do, why do they not ask Parliament to approve?

VISCOUNT ECCLES

My Lords, Parliament has debated the charges and approved them. Treasury Minutes, as the noble Lord must realise, can be changed at any time. As a matter of fact, the Treasury Minute initialled by Sir Winston Churchill is dated February 5, 1955, and in paragraph 5 it details the responsibilities as regards finance. There is nothing in that which prevents charges from being collected.

LORD STRABOLGI

My Lords, may I ask whether that Minute of Sir Winston Churchill dealt with the question of charges?

VISCOUNT ECCLES

No, my Lords. If it is necessary to amend a Treasury Minute, it can be amended without any form of legislation. It is not necessary to amend this particular Treasury Minute. If it were, we should do it.

BARONESS LEE OF ASHERIDGE

My Lords, whatever the legal position may be—and I despair, I am afraid, of converting the Paymaster General to the views of some of us on museums and galleries charges—does he not feel that he will be spending money on putting up turnstiles, and all the rest, which will be inconvenient to the public, doubly inconvenient to cripples and triply inconvenient to cripples who are young children? Cannot he do something to get, if not a candle burning for himself in heaven, at least a tiny match, by seeing that crippled children are not subjected to charges?

VISCOUNT ECCLES

My Lords, I think the noble Baroness knows that our estimate of the cost of collection is 10 per cent. of the net take. We have no reason, now that conversations are being pursued with the galleries, to think that it will not come within that. On the second question, I may say that I am in correspondence with the noble Baroness, Lady Masham of Ilton.

LORD GARDINER

My Lords, may I ask the noble Viscount whether he agrees that it is illegal to impose taxation without the authority of Parliament? Secondly, if so, what will happen to Trustees who may decline to impose such charges on the ground that, while they may have a legal right to impose such charges, they have no legal right to impose such legal charges for the relief of the general body of taxpayers?

VISCOUNT ECCLES

My Lords, this is not a tax; this is a charge. It is something quite different. It is a small part of the cost of the service. There are similar services in many other parts of the Arts and in Social Services. Museums do now impose charges, as the noble and learned Lord knows perfectly well—the Apsley Museum and other museums—and for every special exhibition which they put on. The money from the charges raised in that way has always been paid straight into the Consolidated Fund and taken account of in the ordinary Appropriation in Aid procedure.

LORD AIREDALE

My Lords, if the Trustees of these two particular galleries say that they do not propose to levy any entrance charges, whatever the Government may say, is there anything that the Government can do about it, short of introducing legislation?

VISCOUNT ECCLES

My Lords, as the Trustees of the two galleries are at this moment making the arrangements for introducing the charges, the noble Lord's question is hypothetical.

LORD STRABOLGI

My Lords, is the noble Viscount aware that the current report of the Trustees of the National Gallery is on record as saying that they are firmly opposed to these charges and they hope that wiser counsel will prevail?

VISCOUNT ECCLES

My Lords, so would the noble Lord be against charges, and so would I, if we were looking at it in isolation, as Trustees. But they are part of a large policy the net balance of which is very much in their favour.

Forward to