§ 2.52 p.m.
§ Lord St John of Fawsleyasked Her Majesty's Government:
When the undertaking given by the Lord McIntosh of Haringey on 24th October 2000 (HL Deb, col. 142) that the millennium exhibition of Ronald Rae statues in The Regent's Park would be removed by March 2001 will be implemented.
§ The Minister of State, Department for Culture, Media and Sport (Baroness Blackstone)My Lords, Mr Rae was unable to move the sculptures to the Yorkshire Sculpture Park as planned last year because of restrictions on movements due to the foot and mouth outbreak. I understand that Mr Rae has now assured William Weston, the chief executive of the Royal Parks Agency, that the exhibits will be removed by the end of April.
§ Lord St John of FawsleyMy Lords, I thank the Minister for that helpful and constructive reply, which was worth waiting for. Is she aware that during this long campaign I have had the generous support of my noble friend Lady Oppenheim-Barnes—who unfortunately cannot be with us today—so much so that we have become known in park circles as "Bonnie and Clyde"? Does she agree that it is not a question of residents' interests, but the rights of all urban dwellers to enjoy the parks—they are their countryside—and to enjoy the grass, flowers and trees, among which they can walk, play and picnic peaceably?
§ Baroness BlackstoneMy Lords, I hope that "Bonnie and Clyde" do not come to the bad end that the fictional characters came to, in a shoot-out in one of the Royal Parks. Of course I entirely agree that the Royal Parks are there to be enjoyed by people throughout London and, of course, by visitors from all over the world. However, in earlier plans for the park put forward, I believe, by the Marquess of Bute, it was suggested that sculptures should he exhibited in different parts of the park. I believe that the Ronald Rae sculptures, which I know the noble Lord did not much like, were appreciated at least by some members of the public. But the important point to make is that they are now going to be removed.
§ Viscount FalklandMy Lords, is the noble Baroness aware that in October 2000 the noble Lord, Lord St John of Fawsley, described the statues as "disfiguring" that corner of the park? However, when I visited the area on my motorcycle earlier today, I found three people—only three because it is a Monday—visiting and photographing the area. Two of them were entirely in support of the statues and liked them very much, while one was non-committal. I have been lobbied by a number of people— all of them young, curiously enough—who love the statues, particularly now that they have weathered. Will the noble Baroness take into account the fact that that corner of the park has now been established as a very good area for statues? Furthermore, when the statues are removed, as is likely to be the case, will she be certain that we do not go down rather than up in terms of quality and suitability in that part of the park; that is, if she does intend to see that other statues are put in the place of the Ronald Rae statues?
§ Baroness BlackstoneMy Lords, I agree with what the noble Viscount has just said. Not everyone disliked the sculptures. Indeed, we have had very few 527 complaints about them. Obviously it is all a matter of taste. What I cannot tell the noble Viscount is whether in the future other sculptures will be put in their place. That is a matter for consideration by the agency. However, I should like to repeat what I said earlier to the noble Lord, Lord St John of Fawsley: there is scope for having sculpture in our London parks, and in particular in the Royal Parks.
§ Baroness Carnegy of LourMy Lords, returning to the noble Baroness's original Answer, how could a statue have become infected with foot and mouth disease in Regent's Park?
§ Baroness BlackstoneMy Lords, perhaps I may explain further to the noble Baroness. I did not actually suggest that the sculptures had caught foot and mouth disease, but I did suggest that removing them to Yorkshire was a problem. I have not seen the sculptures myself, but I am told that they are rather large and therefore require to be transported across the countryside in large lorries. It proved to be impossible to do that while the restrictions were in place during last year.
§ Lord RedesdaleMy Lords, does the Minister agree that, given that earlier this year London Zoo lost its elephants, which are prone to foot and mouth disease, it will be a great shame to lose the rather fine elephant statues that are now to be removed? Can the Minister say whether, as a result of the loss of the real elephants, we might have some further sculptures of elephants to replace those which are to be transferred to Yorkshire?
§ Baroness BlackstoneMy Lords, I am not sure whether a sculpture of an elephant is a replacement for a real elephant.
§ Lord St John of FawsleyMy Lords, will the noble Baroness take this opportunity to say something about the future of the Royal Parks Agency? Are any developments being planned? Is it to be guaranteed that any activities will be adequately funded from public money rather than from private events, which destroy the very characteristics which people visit the parks to experience?
§ Baroness BlackstoneMy Lords, the noble Lord, Lord St John of Fawsley, may be aware that there is a plan to turn the Royal Parks Agency into a non-departmental public body. That will allow the new body to obtain support from a variety of different funds for different projects, including the lottery, which is not possible at the moment. However, that does not in any way mean that the current public funding of the Royal Parks will decline.