Treasure (Designation) Order 2002

Part of the debate – in the House of Lords at 8:16 pm on 10 October 2002.

Alert me about debates like this

Photo of Baroness Trumpington Baroness Trumpington Conservative 8:16, 10 October 2002

My Lords, I listened to the Minister's words with great interest, especially as this is the first time that matters pertaining to treasure have been debated in the House since our debates on Lord Perth's Treasure Bill in 1994 and 1996. As the then government spokesman on such matters, perhaps I may say how delighted I am at the success of the Treasure Act 1996 since it came into force. I think that I can see some old, familiar friends sitting in the far corner who helped me no end at the time. I should add that when Lord Perth's Bill became a government Bill, my noble friend Lord Inglewood was in the hot seat occupied by the noble Baroness today.

The Minister touched on the fact that the Treasure Act 1996 has resulted in a tenfold increase in finds reported as treasure—from 25 to 250 a year—that have been offered to museums for them to acquire for public benefit. We hope that the order before us will bring in another 50 cases a year. I am therefore wholly in favour of the order and revised code of practice and should merely like to ask the Minister a few questions of which I have given her notice.

In view of the Government's decision to extend the Act, do they accept the need to provide long-term stable funding for a nationwide network of finds liaison officers to make it work? Secondly, the Minister will realise that the Act has placed considerable extra burdens on other bodies such as the British Museum, which has the main responsibility for examining and reporting on treasure finds from England. No additional funding has been provided by the Government for the 10 extra posts involved in that work. Indeed, the museum now faces a funding crisis involving a £6.5 million deficit. What assurance can the Minister give that the additional burdens imposed by the order will be funded by government?

While the Act has led to a great increase in finds offered to museums for acquisition, museums must raise the money to pay the rewards for those finds from their own resources. They are finding that increasingly difficult because of budget cuts. As a result, treasure finds are being returned to finders because museums have been unable to raise the money.

Your Lordships will appreciate that if museums cannot acquire treasure finds when they want to, the Act is failing in its purpose. What is the Minister's solution to that problem? Would the Government agree to inaugurate a joint dedicated funding stream from the Heritage Lottery Fund and the Resource/V&A purchase grant fund for treasure finds? There should also be greater help for small museums on how to apply for funding and an urgent review of museum collecting areas.

The Act contains a criminal offence of failing to report treasure. Although that has helped to ensure a high rate of reporting, there are still cases of unreported finds coming onto the market. I understand that, at present, it is difficult to invoke the law in such cases. Can the Minister confirm that the Government have accepted the case for introducing a new criminal offence? If they have, it is essential that the new offence be included in a criminal justice Bill in the next Session. I look forward to the Minister's reply.