§ 2.49 p.m.
§ The Lord Bishop of WAKEFIELDMy 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 there is a case for the restoration of admission fees to museums in view of the financial situation leading to one-day closures at certain museums and cuts in museum staffs.
§ The MINISTER of STATE, DEPARTMENT of EDUCATION and SCIENCE (Lord Donaldson of Kingsbridge)My Lords, before replying, I would point out that this is probably the last Question which we shall have in this House from the right reverend Prelate, as I believe that next week he leaves our company; so I think we should all like to wish him well.
§ Lord DONALDSON of KINGSBRIDGEMy Lords, one of the first acts of the present Administration in February 1974, was to honour its Election pledge to remove the requirement to charge for entry to the national museums and galleries. I should need a good deal of convincing that this step should be reversed. Quite apart from wider issues of policy and other costs of administration, the restoration of museum charges would involve additions to musiums' staff.
§ The Lord Bishop of WAKEFIELDMy Lords, I thank the Minister for his Answer. May I remind him that in the first year of the opening of the National Railway Museum in York 2 million people attended it? Therefore, may I ask the Minister whether it is not preferable to persist with museum charges, bearing in mind the reduction of museum staff and the redundancies resulting therefrom?
§ Lord DONALDSON of KINGSBRIDGEMy Lords, I am, of course, aware of the tremendous success of the National Railway Museum at York, and nobody is more pleased than I am about this. This museum, however, is part of the Science Museum and cannot be considered in isolation from other national museums. Exact numbers of the visitors attracted to the museums cannot be measured, but they include many people from overseas, to the great benefit of the economy and of the City of York. The 269 rising costs of living and of travel are making it increasingly difficult for many with modest means to visit the museums and galleries, and I repeat that whatever museums which are not part of the national group may like to do, I think that it would be quite wrong at this stage to reverse the decision which was made in the Manifesto and which we have carried out.
§ Lord VAIZEYMy Lords, is my noble friend aware of the enormous number of people in the art world who will support the line that he has taken?
§ Lord DONALDSON of KINGSBRIDGEMy Lords, it is always a surprise to me but also a pleasure.
§ Lord REIGATEMy Lords, could the noble Lord explain why a charge is made to see the Mantegna pictures at Hampton Court, since these pictures belong to the National Gallery?
§ Lord DONALDSON of KINGSBRIDGEMy Lords, this is another question which I do not think I can answer without reference back. However, there arc a number of places, like Stonehenge, which arc not part of the national museums and galleries, which always have charged and which will go on charging for as long as they want to do so. Should they wish to stop charging, or to carry on charging, they can do so.
§ Lord REIGATEMy Lords, is the Minister aware, however, that the Mantegna pictures are part of the National Gallery collection?
§ Lord DONALDSON of KINGSBRIDGEMy Lords, that is why I should like to have further notice of the question.
§ Lord ROBBINSMy Lords, would not the noble Lord agree with me that the Mantegna pictures at Hampton Court unfortunately do not belong to the National Gallery but are part of the Royal Collection?
§ Lord DONALDSON of KINGSBRIDGEMy Lords, I think I was right to ask for further notice of the question!
§ Lord CONGLETONMy Lords, may I ask the noble Lord to explain how it is 270 that the Department of the Environment apparently sanction the levying of visitors' fees to national monuments, to the Tower of London and to historic houses in their ownership (Stonehenge has already been mentioned by the Minister) and that apparently there is no policy to stop the levying of those charges? Indeed, I understand that a rattling good business is going on at some of these places, and I welcome it. On the one hand, the Department of the Environments allowed to levy charges while on the other the Department of Education and Science will not contemplate the levying of charges for visits to the national museums and galleries.
§ Lord DONALDSON of KINGSBRIDGEMy Lords, I think I have already answered the Question. The undertaking in the Manifesto was specifically in relation to charges imposed by the noble Viscount, Lord Eccles. I remember sitting opposite the noble Viscount here day after day and feeling very sorry for him because of the obvious discomfiture he was suffering as a result of trying to impose charges. We undertook to reverse the imposition of those charges. No comments were made about other museums, other places and other things. Some of them have charged before; others have not. If they want to charge they will not be stopped by me. I speak only for the nationally controlled museums and galleries.
§ Lord MERRIVALEMy Lords, will the Minister take an early opportunity to look at the various museum; in the South Kensington area, for instance, where it appears that the lack of admission fees introduces quite a large lumber of elements who are not interested in art or culture but go there just to pass freely the time of day? Secondly, can the Minister say which other countries within the European Economic Community do not have any admission fees?
§ Lord DONALDSON of KINGSBRIDGEMy Lords, if the Science Museum, which is presumably the museum about which the noble Lord is speaking, or the Victoria and Albert Museum felt very strongly that they wanted to consider the imposition of charges I should not rule it out of court. I should I consult them, come to a conclusion and then put 271 it to my colleagues. But this has not happened and I do not expect it to happen. I do not think that the imposition of charges would necessarily keep out the people who give the trouble to which the noble Lord has referred, because most of them have a great deal of pocket money.
§ Lord ORR-EWINGMy Lords, is the noble Lord aware that other nations who are in a rather stronger financial position almost invariably charge for entry to their museums? In retrospect, does the noble Lord think that as Socialism is the religion of priorities, he was right to give overriding priority to the abolition of these charges in the Government's legislative programme?
§ Lord DONALDSON of KINGSBRIDGEMy Lords, I repeat what I have said. I stand by the pledge. I think that we were right to abolish charges and I do not believe that the superior financial position of certain countries to which the noble Lord has referred is due to their museum charges.
§ Lord ORR-EWINGMy Lords, it is a question of priorities.
§ Lord MACKIE of BENSHIEMy Lords, is it not time that the Manifesto was put into a museum?