Page 56 - Studio International - November 1971

permanent, collections, if imposed by, the Trustees (in the absence of such information) to regard doubling of the basic charge proposed by the
in the form proposed by the Government, are them as in the nature of relatively rough Government (but for the imposition of which
tantamount to taxation. As any well-informed guesswork, very likely optimistic in character. the Trustees are to be in law responsible!). The
person must be aware, special temporary Nevertheless the fact that the figure for the total Paymaster General's additional remark 'we have
exhibitions (involving, as they do, the borrowing amount of the anticipated revenue cannot be not found that museum officials are in favour of
of works of art from other institutions and from assumed to be reliable has not inhibited its use these free days' confuses the issue. The fact that
private persons) are costly enterprises which as a basis for other arguments. in certain cases museum officials may not be in
cannot be mounted without considerable funds. Two examples of this may be cited. (I) In the favour of free days is not due to considerations
Since they are very rare indeed at the National debate in the House of Lords on the 26 May of revenue but to those of the security of the
Gallery, but relatively frequent at the Tate 1971, in answer to a point raised by Lord works entrusted to their care. Some museums
Gallery, the procedure at the latter seems Strabolgi, the Paymaster General said (official are so constructed that they are capable of
relevant. I believe I am correct in supposing it report, col. 1278): 'If one free day a week were housing large crowds, some are not, and some
to take two principal forms. (I) Exhibitions granted, the basic charge would without any find it difficult to assess the potentialities in this
housed by the Tate Gallery, but financed from question have to be 20p the whole year round. respect until they have been tested. Obviously
other sources, notably the Arts Council. In I must also say that we have not found that the question as to whether there should or
these cases the Trustees give permission for a museum officials are in favour of free days'. should not be a free day (such as exists in
charge to be levied, but the proceeds naturally (2) In answer to a Question from Mr G. R. practice, and also in a sense in principle, in very
go direct to the body responsible for financing Strauss as to how much the Secretary of State many European museums) ought to be a matter
the exhibition. (2) Exhibitions organized by the for Education and Science estimated the for local decision. This whole topic typifies the
Tate Gallery itself. In these cases the subjects for anticipated revenue of £1 .3 million would be necessity to protect the individual institutions
exhibitions are put forward to the Department reduced by certain exemptions, she replied from too centralized a direction, a function
by the Trustees, with an estimate of the cost, (House of Commons, official report, 8 July 1971, hitherto satisfactorily exercised, in accordance
the Trustees' proposal for a suitable charge, and written answers, col. 427): 'My noble Friend with well-tried British tradition, by independent
an estimate of the proceeds therefrom, which estimates that if children and retirement Boards of Trustees. In the cases of the National
are appropriated in aid. The Department pensioners were exempted, the reduction of and Tate Galleries both Boards are on record in
finances these exhibitions, and, after account has revenue would be such that the charge for adults favour of at least one free day (Trustees'
been taken of the proceeds, may find itself would have to go up to 20p for several months Foreword, dated 4 March 1971, to the National
responsible for not far short of 5o per cent of the in the year'. Gallery Report, p 20; Public Statement of the
cost. It must be emphasized that the initiative in Answers of this kind are not at all Trustees of the Tate Gallery, 17 June 1971). It
such cases comes from the Trustees; for incompatible with the view that the may of course be assumed that in the event of
example, in the event of the Department's Government's policy, comprehensive as it is, the Directors of those institutions representing
insisting on an admission charge which they is tantamount to taxation and can only properly to their Boards that the safety of the contents of
consider unacceptably high, the Trustees may be imposed by virtue of financial legislation, and the Galleries was being prejudiced by
decide to abandon the particular project therefore not by the sum of a number of overcrowding, the Boards would decide to
altogether. In other words, the discretion individual non-governmental authorities acting authorize the abandonment of the free day, for
remains theirs. only on their own responsibility. But such valid reasons with which in the circumstances
Arguments based on false analogies do not answers also raise by implication other no-one could seriously quarrel.
constitute serious support for the Paymaster fundamental issues, which demand careful This sort of problem raises the whole
General's assertion that what is in fact now consideration, relating to the status and powers question of the independence of these two
proposed is not tantamount to a tax. If the of those Trustees who are responsible for many Boards, and the extent to which the
point is arguable, as Lord Gardiner implies, (though of course not all) of the national Government's proposals, if acceded to in their
ought it not to be thoroughly argued and museums and galleries. present form, would amount to an impairment
investigated before the Trustees commit If, for example, we examine in relation to the of it. No-one would contest that if admission
themselves to any action the propriety of which National and Tate Galleries (which are the charges were imposed and specified in detail by
might eventually, in the last resort, have to face subject of this Memorandum) what the clauses in a Finance Act, the Boards of the
the test of a challenge in the courts ? Apart from Paymaster General said on the subject of free National and Tate Galleries would have no
the fact that the Trustees themselves are far days, we cannot fail to be struck by the extent— option but to endorse their collection and
from likely to welcome any such development, it up to the present without precedent—to which transmission to the Exchequer. Equally if a
must be assumed (unless and until there is these (among other) institutions are expected to clause in a later Finance Act cancelled them
evidence to the contrary) that the Government accept the kind of centralized direction which altogether, this would also have to be accepted
will not wish to require them to run the slightest may be employed in dealing with a government by the Boards. But in both cases the existing
risk of it. department. But the National and Tate powers of the Trustees would be left intact, in
Even after the non-appearance in the Finance Galleries are not in this category, since their the sense that those powers would not be
Bill of the expected clause legalizing the contents are not vested in the Secretary of misused but merely superseded in certain
Government's policy, Government statements State for Education and Science, but (in respects by a sovereign authority.
continued to be made which clearly implied that accordance with the National Gallery and Tate The situation becomes completely different
that policy amounted to a revenue-raising Gallery Act, 1954, 2 & 3 Eliz. 2, ch. 65, sections when Trustees are required to exercise their
project which was to be applied and 7) in Boards of Trustees, who hold them existing powers to enforce upon visitors a
comprehensively, in identical form, to all the in trust on behalf of the nation rather than of any scheme every detail of which depends on the
national museums and galleries whatever their Government. The assumption underlying the say-so of a government Department. It may be
constitutions, and which was required to raise a Paymaster General's statement is that, since the emphasized that once a blanket consent is
global sum for the Exchequer. This sum was attainment of the global figure of receipts accorded by the Trustees to the proposals of the
first stated to be LI million, and later £1.3 previously fixed by the Department (largely by White Paper, a hitherto unprecedented principle
million. But, despite repeated questioning in guesswork) could be prejudiced by the Trustees becomes in essence established; and if, for
Parliament, it has not proved possible to of any institution permitting a free day for the example, the Department decides at a later
ascertain exactly how these estimates were reason that they considered it desirable and date that the charges must be varied upward
arrived at, and it accordingly seems reasonable appropriate, this would make necessary a with a view to attempting to raise more revenue,
204