§ Lord Freybergasked Her Majesty's Government:
Further to the Written Answer by Lord McIntosh of Haringey on 10 June (WA5), by what criteria the Treasury determined that the threshold above which "not to sell items…with the greatest historical and heritage significance" should be £1 million; and whether these criteria are those followed by all government departments; and [HL5218]
42WAFurther to the Written Answer by Lord McIntosh of Haringey on 10 June (WA5), why there is such a discrepancy between the Treasury's threshold of £1 million and the open general export licence limit of £39,600 for antique silver, when the purpose of the OGEL system is to prevent the dispersal of the national heritage; and [HL5219]
Further to the Written Answer by Lord McIntosh of Haringey on 11 April. (WA115), by what criteria the Treasury determined that these 15 items of silver should be classified as a single group under their policy "not to sell items valued at over £1 million with the greatest historical and heritage significance"; and [HL5221] Further to the Written Answer by Lord McIntosh of Haringey on 11 April (WA115), why the lots of Privy Council silver that were withdrawn from auction on 29 October 2001 were not classified in the same group as the 12 candlesticks and inkstands, and therefore protected by the decision "not to sell items valued at over £1 million with the greatest historical and heritage significance". [HL5222]
§ Lord McIntosh of HaringeyThe noble Lord's questions suggest that the Treasury has adopted a policy of not selling items valued at more than £1 million. That is not the case. The candlesticks and inkstands to which he refers were excluded from the sale because some of them are in operational use, not by reference to any arbitrary threshold or other policy. My previous statement that the items were valued at more than £1 million was an observation of fact, not an explanation of a policy.
§ Lord Freybergasked Her Majesty's Government:
Further to the Written Answer by Lord McIntosh of Haringey on 11 April (WA115), why, when the Treasury has stated that they are of "the greatest historical and heritage significance", these 15 items of silver are not classified as "heritage assets" under the guidelines provided in the Resource Accounting Manual. [HL5220]
§ Lord McIntosh of HaringeyWhile the items are of the greatest significance of any item in the Treasury's silver collection, they are not of such significance as to merit classification as heritage items—which is a term used to cover items of national importance such as Stonehenge and Nelson's column.
Lord Freyberg askedHer Majesty's Government:
Further to the Written Answer by Lord McIntosh of Haringey on 10 June (WA5), by what criteria the Treasury distinguishes an "antique asset" from an object classified under "fixtures and fittings". [HL5223]
§ Lord McIntosh of HaringeyThere is no special definition of the term "antique"; it is taken as having its plain English meaning. All items which might possibly be considered as antiques are drawn to the attention of professional valuers, who confirm or reject this classification.