The Three Graces: Export Application (Hansard, 4 April 1990)

§ The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department of the Environment (Lord Hesketh)
My Lords, my right honourable friend the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry announced on 2nd March in another place that he proposed to take into account in the future private as well as public offers. He is currently considering representations by persons affected by this change of policy, and will reach a decision shortly on the Canova and on any other export applications deferred until 4th April.
Noble Lords will also be aware that the Barclay brothers have offered to purchase the statue and place it on loan for 20 years to the Victoria and Albeit Museum and a Scottish institution.

§ Lord St. John of Fawsley
My Lords, I thank my noble friend for that reply and I give it, if I may, two cheers. I ask him to accept my congratulations on having advanced this cause so substantially. Does he realise that a private purchaser is wholly acceptable provided the public have permanent access to the object? Meanwhile, can he tell the House what has happened to Mr. Jacob Rothschild's ingenious offer? Has that fallen into limbo or is it about to be resurrected?

§ Lord Hesketh
My Lords, I am not too certain about limbo or resurrection, particularly at this time of the year. The fact is that my right honourable friend the Secretary of State put forward the date of 4th April for any representations on behalf of any parties interested or concerned. As my noble friend pointed out, there is the recent offer by the Barclay brothers, together with the previous Rothschild concept which was discussed in this House the last time I replied to a similar Question from the Dispatch Box, and there have been other representations. That is why my right honourable friend is now considering the sum total of those various interests.

§ Lord Strabolgi
My Lords, as the position is extremely complicated will the Government consider deferring the export licence for a much longer period— say, six months— rather than on a monthly basis so that they can consider fully the two very generous offers that have been made?

§ Lord Hesketh
My Lords, I am sure that all your Lordships would like to see not only a satisfactory but also a speedy solution. If that is possible the Government hope to achieve it. But it is important to remind your Lordships that the Government's position is in a sense at arm's length because The Three Graces is the property of a private company.

§ Lord Peyton of Yeovil
My Lords, does my noble friend agree that an offer of this kind deserves more than two cheers? It deserves three rather enthusiastic cheers. It is a generous offer that would result in keeping the Canova here indefinitely and on exhibition to the public. Will he take the opportunity to express some appreciation in order to encourage others to do exactly what the Barclay brothers are offering to do?

§ Lord Hesketh
My Lords, certainly I shall give three cheers. I agree entirely with my noble friend.

§ Baroness Birk
My Lords, in giving three cheers, in which I join up to a point, will the Minister point out to his right honourable friend the difference between the offer by the Barclay brothers and that by the now noble Lord, Lord Rothschild? Is it not true that the Barclay brothers' offer is that the statue should be on public view for 20 years at the V&A and at a Scottish gallery?
Does not the Minister further agree that in discussing objects of this kind and value 20 years is a dot in time, which could be varied by a court during that period? Will he press his right honourable friend to look again at the offer by the noble Lord, Lord Rothschild, in which he makes a gift to the nation of the Canova? There is then no question of the statue going back to the family and no question of only a limited period of time operating. To many of us, including those in the arts world and the Museums and Galleries Commission, that would seem a much better result for the nation.

§ Lord Hesketh
My Lords, there are two distinct points on which we must focus. First, whatever offer is made by the Barclay brothers, it is not made to Her Majesty's Government; it is made to the owners of The Three Graces and it is up to them to decide whether they consider that 20 years is acceptable. It has nothing to do with Her Majesty's Government.
The second point made by the noble Baroness, Lady Birk, relates to the offer from the noble Lord, Lord Rothschild. It is not the same offer in any shape or form because it is a variation on an offer of art in lieu, and that has substantial public expenditure implications.

§ Baroness Birk
My Lords, I am sorry to press this point, but is it not a fact that £ 10 million a year is supposed to be put aside by the Treasury for these acceptance-in-lieu offers? That allowance was not 1401 used up in 1989–90; it seldom is. The fact is that money is available for that purpose. I appreciate the difference which the Minister pointed out, but the fact remains that in one case it is an offer of a gift to the nation of a pre-eminent object whereas the other is something which, as he rightly says, the Government do not come into.

§ Lord Hesketh
My Lords, I remind the noble Baroness that the key to the problem is that the Rothschild offer is a variation on a scheme which does not exist. As I said earlier, that is one reason that further consideration is taking place.

§ Lord Hutchinson of Lullington
My Lords, I wish to ask the Minister about the new policy which was hidden in his Answer. Hitherto the export control procedures affecting heritage items have always been based on the public interest. How is it possible for a Minister, without any previous discussion in Parliament, completely to alter those procedures which hitherto have always meant that the item would go to a public gallery? Now it will be open to any dealer to make an offer for such an item and then, at a later date, to flog it off in the public domain at an enhanced price and to the detriment of the public. How has that change of policy been made possible?

§ Lord Hesketh
My Lords, I am surprised that the noble Lord does not recall an event which caused a certain amount of concern in the art world last October when a private offer was made for the Blake-Varley sketchbook. That offer was unable to fulfil the conditions that existed at the time and thus the sketchbook was lost to this country, even had it remained in a private collection available to scholars.

§ Lord Jenkins of Putney
My Lords, will the Government express some preference in this matter in favour of the Rothschild scheme despite the fact that it involves Government expenditure? Will the Government further examine the scheme with a view to ascertaining whether or not this item can be brought within the customs and practises which have existed hitherto?

§ Lord Hesketh
My Lords, the noble Lord, Lord Jenkins, is now trying to draw me into a very general area of nearly unlimited public expenditure in anticipation that all estates will be allowed to apply to offset estate duty arrangements for any cause which one may care to name. I look at the noble Lord, Lord Barnett, as his eyes roll somewhat at the thought that I should be able to commit the Government to that. I assure your Lordships that I cannot provide an answer which the noble Lord, Lord Jenkins, would consider to be suitable and satisfactory.

§ Lord St. John of Fawsley
My Lords, cannot we all give four cheers for the Barclay brothers? If one simple amendment to the offer were made, instead of the public being allowed to see the item for 20 years, they would be allowed to see it in perpetuity. In those circumstances everybody would be happy.

§ Lord Hesketh
My Lords, the object of the Secretary of State's change in policy was not to restrict but to expand the opportunities for retaining artistic objects of virtue in this country. There was no public offer to fund the purchase of The Three Graces at the time. Regardless of what the Government do, agreement has to be reached between a willing vendor and a willing buyer. The Government cannot intervene in that arrangement.

§ Lord Strabolgi
My Lords, can the noble Lord please answer my question? I believe that the deferral period for the export licence is due to run out today. For how long are the Government going to extend it? In view of the complications of the matter, which have been evidenced in this exchange, will it be extended for several months, as I suggested?

§ Lord Hesketh
My Lords, the purpose of the date, 4th April, was to provide an opportunity for views to be received by the Secretary of State. He is now reviewing those views.