THE PARLIAMENTARY DEBATES
OFFICIAL REPORT
IN THE FIRST SESSION OF THE FIFTY-SECOND PARLIAMENT OF THE UNITED KINGDOM OF GREAT BRITAIN AND NORTHERN IRELAND
[WHICH OPENED 7 MAY 1997]
FORTY-SEVENTH YEAR OF THE REIGN OF HER MAJESTY QUEEN ELIZABETH II
SIXTH SERIES
VOLUME 313
TWENTIETH VOLUME OF SESSION 1997-98
House of Commons
Monday 1 June 1998
The House met at half-past Two o'clock
PRAYERS
[Madam Speaker in the Chair]
Oral Answers to Questions
CULTURE, MEDIA AND SPORT
The Secretary of State was asked--
Regional Theatre
1. Mr. Bill Rammell (Harlow): If he will make a statement on his plans to support regional theatre. [41984]
The Minister for Arts (Mr. Mark Fisher): The network of British regional theatres and touring companies is one of this country's great artistic achievements. We are determined to strengthen and develop that network.
Mr. Rammell: Under the system of theatre funding by the regional arts council, two theatres in my region are funded at the expense and to the exclusion of all the others, including the successful Playhouse in my constituency. Does my hon. Friend agree that such an unfair system of funding should cause concern? Does he further agree that regional arts councils should be charged with distributing their funds more equitably?
Mr. Fisher: My hon. Friend and the new management of the Harlow Playhouse have been having discussions
with the chief executive of the Eastern arts board. I wish them well in those discussions. My hon. Friend is right to say that the record of the Arts Council and regional arts boards in backing new companies and developments is less than inspiring--their priority has tended to be the defence and preservation of existing companies. I am confident that the new Arts Council and its chairman, Mr. Gerry Robinson, will want to take an early and positive look at that.
Mr. Robert Maclennan (Caithness, Sutherland and Easter Ross): The new structure of the Arts Council has led to the resignation of the entire theatre panel. How will the perceived needs of theatre in the regions be communicated to the Arts Council?
Mr. Fisher: The new chairman of the Arts Council and my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State have made it clear, in letters to the papers and in press statements, that they recognise that one of the Arts Council's great strengths lies in its professional, independent, detailed advice from specialist panels. That will continue, and my right hon. Friend's letters and statements have made it clear that that advice is valued and that the council will have access to it.
Mr. Richard Spring (West Suffolk): What does the Minister think about the resignation of the entire drama panel of the Arts Council and the unprecedented refusal by 58 theatre directors to fill the gap--coming on top of the closure of regional theatres such as the one in Farnham, the Liverpool Playhouse and Greenwich theatre? Does he agree that that is a shocking indictment of the Government's policies, as opposed to the false impression of support that was conjured up in the Secretary of State's book?
Mr. Fisher: No, I do not. All those on the advisory group were eminent people who gave good advice, but, as I said to the right hon. Member for Caithness, Sutherland and Easter Ross (Mr. Maclennan), professional, expert advice of that quality is at the heart
of all the Arts Council's decisions. I assure Opposition Members that that specialist advice, not just in drama but in other art forms, will continue.Art Market
2. Mr. Andrew Robathan (Blaby): If he will make a statement on the future of the major art houses in the United Kingdom. [41986]
The Minister for Arts (Mr. Mark Fisher): The Government recognise the great contribution that the United Kingdom art market makes to the national economy. It employs some 40,000 people and has a turnover of £2.2 billion a year. The Government are determined to play their part in ensuring that the market continues to be competitive and to thrive.
Mr. Robathan: I whole-heartedly support the Minister's response. Will he undertake to defend the art market against the threat of harmonisation of VAT across the European Union? He will know that the introduction of 2.5 per cent. VAT on the sale of works of art has already seriously affected the art market in London and in the rest of Britain. If VAT is harmonised, the art market may be driven not just from Britain but from the European Union, and may go to the United States and Switzerland. Will he take action to prevent that?
Mr. Fisher: VAT is a matter for my right hon. Friend the Chancellor. The hon. Gentleman is right to say that it has caused problems for our art market, as has the possible threat of harmonising droit de suite. We have undoubtedly played a major part in trying to get a more rational debate on droit de suite in Europe. Other countries do not have such legislation and support us in being sceptical and critical of droit de suite. We continue vigorously to argue that case in the European Union.
Elgin Marbles
3. Mr. Gordon Prentice (Pendle): Under what circumstances the Elgin marbles might be returned to Athens to mark the millennium. [41988]
The Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport (Mr. Chris Smith): The Government have no plans to return the Parthenon sculptures to Athens.
Mr. Prentice: I suspect that I may not have the House with me on this matter, Madam Speaker.
Thirteen years ago, the then leader of the Labour party, Neil Kinnock, said that the Parthenon without the marbles was like a smile missing a tooth, and pledged to return the frieze to Greece. If the case was so compelling 13 years ago, why is it not equally compelling now?
Mr. Smith:
Although I sympathise with my hon. Friend's view, we have had time over the intervening 13 years to reflect on the matter, and it is clear that the Parthenon sculptures were legally and properly acquired. They have been kept in very good condition--very great care has been taken of them ever since--and they are
Mr. Eric Forth (Bromley and Chislehurst):
Without pursuing the matter of Commissioner Kinnock's marbles, which might be indiscreet at this stage, may I welcome what the Secretary of State has said? The right hon. Gentleman will recognise that it would lead to absolute chaos if we started down the path of relocating works of art, wherever they are in the world. The best, safest and most proper position is the one that he is adopting.
Mr. Smith:
It is rare for me to agree whole-heartedly with every word that the right hon. Gentleman says, but on this occasion I do, because he is right: if we were to open this question, a host of other questions about the location of works of art throughout the world would arise. I do not believe that anyone wants such questions to be reopened.
Mr. Robert Sheldon (Ashton-under-Lyne):
Is my right hon. Friend aware that 13 years ago I took this matter up with Mr. Neil Kinnock and that, with me at any rate, he did not seek to defend the position? Is he further aware that it would be one thing if the marbles could be placed on the Acropolis itself, but that it would be nonsense to take them from one museum and put them in another museum that is not as well looked after as ours?
Mr. Smith:
My right hon. Friend is right to point out that the proposal is not that the marbles should be replaced on the Acropolis but that they should be housed on the Acropolis hill in a museum specially built for the purpose whose architecture has been widely criticised. The marbles were legally acquired; they have been where they are for a long period; and they are seen by many millions of people, not just from Britain but from around the world. We do not believe that the case for their return is in any way compelling.
4. Miss Julie Kirkbride (Bromsgrove):
If he will make a statement on the regulations governing media ownership. [41989]
The Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport (Mr. Chris Smith):
New rules on media ownership were established in the Broadcasting Act 1996. The Government have no plans to change them.
Miss Kirkbride:
I thank the Minister for that response, but I should like to ask him about the proposals for the privatisation of Channel 4. We understand that the Chancellor of the Exchequer is trying to squeeze any amount of money out of any pocket that he can find, and I am sure that £1 billion-worth of proceeds from the privatisation of Channel 4 would make him very popular among his Treasury colleagues. What does the Secretary of State think of that proposed privatisation, especially
Mr. Smith:
The hon. Lady will probably know that, during the election campaign, we made it clear that we had no plans to privatise Channel 4. That remains the case.
Mr. Derek Wyatt (Sittingbourne and Sheppey):
What conversations on European media ownership has the Secretary of State had during our presidency of the European Union? Does he agree that the solution to the problem of United Kingdom media ownership is to be found in a broader European regulation?
Mr. Smith:
Although we accept, and are seeking to implement, the television without frontiers directive, we do not believe that it is necessary to extend to Europe the purview of the entirety of media regulation. We believe that Europe has a role to play, and that is properly reflected in the television without frontiers directive, but we do not want to go further than that at this stage.
Mr. Damian Green (Ashford):
The Secretary of State should perhaps consider straight away a detailed piece of media regulation: the switch-off of analogue television services. Is he aware that his decision not to take a decision for two or three years will put in danger the development of digital television in this country, and will possibly damage the interests of an industry that is culturally and economically vital to our future?
Mr. Smith:
The hon. Gentleman should have been present at the meeting of the digital television group to which I spoke last week. I said that we intended to make a decision on the switch-off of analogue as soon as possible. We are consulting on this matter: we issued a consultation paper a couple of months ago and the deadline for replies is within the next couple of months. We shall consider carefully the results of the consultation process, and shall then come to a view.
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |