HL Deb 21 May 1984 vol 452 cc132-3WA
Lord Jenkins of Putney

asked Her Majesty's Government:

What are the "substantial, administrative, legal and financial problems" (H.L.Deb 26th March, col. 127) which prevent them from ratifying the 1970 UNESCO Convention on the means of prohibiting and preventing the illicit import and export and transfer of ownership of cultural property, and whether they are aware that London is regarded as the centre of illicit trading in antiquities and that their failure to implement the convention is internationally condemned.

The Earl of Gowrie

The problems faced by the Government in ratifying this convention arise from a number of its provisions:

  1. (i) the convention's definition of cultural property is extremely wide and open to numerous interpretations by different countries;
  2. (ii) the certification of exported goods would impose a heavy additional burden of work on both Government and the art trade;
    3. 133
  3. (iii) the implementation of the provisions concerning the acquisition, restitution and prohibition of imports would almost certainly require new legislation and the allocation of substantial additional administrative resources. The identification and verification of claims made against items imported into the United Kingdom would be difficult and create an additional burden on HM Customs and Excise and the police. The Government would not wish to interfere unjustifiably with private rights of ownership;
  4. (iv) the requirement for all dealers to keep registers of origin of the material bought and sold would cause serious difficulties of implementation and enforcement.

London is one of the largest centres of the world art trade, but I cannot agree that it is regarded as a centre in illicit trading. For many years British museums have abided by a voluntary code of practice not to acquire items of dubious provenance. Earlier this year the Art Trade Liaison Committee voluntarily introduced a similar code of practice.