THE LAND FUND (Hansard, 11 July 1978)

§ Baroness EMMET of AMBERLEY
My Lords, I beg leave to ask the Question which stands in my name on the Order Paper.

§ The PARLIAMENTARY UNDER-SECRETARY of STATE, DEPARTMENT of the ENVIRONMENT (Baroness BIRK)
My Lords, current legislation provides only two uses for the National Land Fund: first, to pay for property accepted in lieu of tax and, secondly, to reimburse the cost of the acquisition of historic buildings by Government Departments. These two provisions have in the 1434 past contributed to the Government's efforts to help to preserve the national heritage. But, as the noble Baroness will be aware, the Expenditure Committee in another place has published a report on the National Land Fund and the heritage. The Government are considering its recommendations and criticisms, and will be responding to them.

§ Baroness EMMET of AMBERLEY
My Lords, while thanking the noble Baroness for that reply, may I draw her attention to pages 136–7 of the report of the Land Fund, where it says this: Some great national treasures have left the country and many great collections which should have been preserved intact have been broken up". On the other page it says this: The reviewing committee believe that the combination of the capital transfer tax and the proposed annual wealth tax, in the form now suggested, will lead to a flood of sales which can only destroy the present system". Perhaps the noble Baroness will realise that I am not asking for more money but for relief of taxation, in particular for the people who own these treasures and who are placed in an impossible position at the present moment.

§ Baroness BIRK
My Lords, this is something of which the Government and my colleagues in the Treasury are aware. I would say that is a different Question from the one which the noble Baroness is asking.

§ Lord ROBBINS
My Lords, is the noble Baroness aware that those of us who had the good fortune to be intimately connected with the late Lord Dalton are convinced that the interpretations which have since been placed on his ambitions by Ministers of both Parties represent a travesty of his intentions?

§ Baroness BIRK
My Lords, I would certainly agree that the way in which this has been implemented is very far from the intention of Lord Dalton. What happened was that his intention appeared in quite a different form in the Finance Act 1946. It is not only a question of going back through that history. It is because we want to conserve our heritage—which is what, I think, we are all in agreement about—that the Government are considering very seriously, and in depth, the recommendations of the sub-committee.

§ Lord REIGATE
My Lords, is it not a fact that there has been another committee set up by, I think, the noble Baroness, and which is chaired by the Treasury, which is considering this whole matter? Can we be assured that that report will be published, and can we know when it is likely to be before us?

§ Baroness BIRK
My Lords, I can certainly give no undertaking as to whether the report will be published or when, because that report is also being considered by the Government. As I think the noble Lord is aware, it is an inter-departmental committee report and, again, it depends on my colleagues deciding collectively what to do about it. But it is being looked at at the moment, in conjunction with the sub-committee's report.

§ Lord DAVIES of LEEK
My Lords, is my noble friend aware that some of us believe that the original intentions behind the National Land Fund are being thwarted? Also, can she say whether there will be an opportunity before the Recess to discuss this problem, because I am sure that from both sides of the House some constructive and valuable suggestions could be made about this Fund?

§ Baroness BIRK
My Lords, if I remember rightly, my noble friend raised the first part of his question when I was replying to the Question put by the noble Lord, Lord Sandys, a week or so ago. It is something which I have specifically passed on to my colleagues in the Treasury. But, of course, the question of discussing it depends on going through the usual channels in the House, though it may be wiser to wait for a Statement from the Government.

§ Lord GIBSON
My Lords, can the noble Baroness indicate whether the Government would allow the Fund to be used for endowment for maintenance purposes of historic buildings, instead of merely for annual maintenance grants as in the past?

§ Baroness BIRK
My Lords, this is one of the recommendations of the sub-committee and, again, I am afraid that I have to give the same reply, that this is under consideration with all the other recommendations.

§ Lord SANDYS
My Lords, will the Government at the same time consider very carefully the lessons which should have been learned from the Mentmore incident, in regard to the National Land Fund? Will the Government further consider the republication of the Gowers Report, which, the noble Baroness will recollect, was originally published about 1950, shortly after the Land Fund was brought into being?

§ Baroness BIRK
My Lords, to the best of my knowledge the Gowers Report is still obtainable. I do not think that it has to be republished. If there is any difficulty in getting it, I shall be grateful if the noble Lord will let me know. I am sorry, but I missed the first part of his question.

§ Lord SANDYS
My Lords, the Gowers Report is not available and I ask the Government to investigate the position, because it had to be reprinted in very small numbers about a year ago.

§ Lord SEGAL
My Lords, perhaps my noble friend will correct me on a point of accuracy. But is it not a regrettable fact that the late Mr. Hugh Dalton was not ennobled during his lifetime?