Mr.
Dismore: I thank the Minister for all the work that she
and her officials have done to help with the Bill, and I thank the
Committee for attending on a difficult day because of the tube
strike. I
correct my hon. Friend on a small point that she made. I understand
that in the Netherlands the time for submitting a claim has been
extended indefinitely.
The
Chairman: Order. There are a couple of points that we need
to correct. First, we are not at the end yet, so we are somewhat
premature. This has been a delightfully informal series of exchanges,
which is novel to me in something like 20 years’ experience in
the Chair—a new-found liberty. However, we must return to
business as it ought to be conducted and deal with the question before
the
Committee. Amendment
9 agreed to.
Amendment
made: 10, in
clause 3, page 2, line 12, leave
out subsection (2) and
insert— ‘(2) The preceding
sections of this Act come into force on such day as the Secretary of
State may by order appoint.
(3) An order may make different provision for
different purposes. (4) Before
appointing a day for the coming into force of the preceding sections of
this Act so far as they relate to Scottish bodies the Secretary of
State must consult the Scottish Ministers.
(5) “Scottish body” has the meaning
given by section [Power to return victims’
property](5). (6) This Act
expires at the end of the period of 10 years beginning with the day on
which it is passed.’.—(Mr.
Dismore.) This replaces the current
commencement provision and sunset clause with new subsections. The new
subsections provide for commencement by order. They also provide for
the Bill to expire 10 years after it is
passed. Clause
3, as amended, ordered to stand part of the
Bill.
New Clause
1Power
to return victims’
property ‘(1) A body to which
this Act applies may transfer an object from its collections if the
following conditions are
met. (2) Condition 1 is that
the Advisory Panel has recommended the transfer.
(3) Condition 2 is that the Secretary of State has
approved the Advisory Panel’s
recommendation. (4) The
Secretary of State may approve a recommendation for the transfer of an
object from the collections of a Scottish body only with the consent of
the Scottish Ministers. (5)
“Scottish body”
means— The Board of
Trustees for the National Galleries of
Scotland, The Trustees of the
National Library of
Scotland, The Board of Trustees
of the National Museums of
Scotland. (6) The power
conferred by subsection (1) does not affect any trust or condition
subject to which any object is
held. (7) The power conferred
by subsection (1) is an additional
power.’.—(Mr.
Dismore.) This provides that a body
listed in clause 2 may transfer objects from its collections where two
conditions are satisfied. First, the transfer must be recommended by
the Advisory Panel. Secondly, the Secretary of State must approve the
recommendation (with the consent of the Scottish Ministers in some
cases). Brought
up, read the First and Second time, and added to the
Bill.
New
Clause
2“Advisory
Panel” ‘(1) For the
purposes of this Act “Advisory Panel” means a panel for
the time being designated by the Secretary of State for those
purposes. (2) The Secretary of
State may designate a panel for the purposes of this Act only if the
panel’s functions consist of the consideration of claims
which— (a) are made in
respect of objects, and (b)
relate to events occurring during the Nazi
era. (3) “Nazi
era” means the
period— (a) beginning
with 1 January 1933, and (b)
ending with 31 December 1945.’.—(Mr.
Dismore.) This
defines “Advisory Panel” for the purposes of the Act. The
panel is to be designated by the Secretary of State. The Secretary of
State may only designate a panel whose functions consist of considering
claims relating to events occurring during the Nazi era (1933 —
1945). Brought
up, read the First and Second time, and added to the
Bill.
TitleAmendment
made: 1, in title, leave out lines 1 to 5 and insert
‘Confer power to return certain cultural objects on
grounds relating to events occurring during the Nazi
era’.—(Mr.
Dismore.) This amendment
substitutes a new long title to the
Bill. Question
proposed, That the Chairman do report the Bill, as
amended, to the
House.
Mr.
Vaizey: Thank you, Mr.
Cook.
The
Chairman: Order. I must remind right hon. and hon. Members
that it is customary throughout the parliamentary system that when a
Member seeks to make a statement, they undergo a process called
“catching the Speaker’s eye”. The only way to do
that is to stand in one’s place and make it plain that a
statement is forthcoming. Mr. Vaizey, stand up, please. It
is no good making the request and then sitting on your
butt. 10.00
am
Mr.
Vaizey: I thought that I was getting up. After that
intervention, I shall try, as one of our great actresses said, to
gather my
thoughts. This
is a small but important Bill which Conservative Members welcome. It
has not, despite the broad consensus in this Committee, had the easiest
of passages. In fact, this is an opportunity for me to pay tribute to
the work of Anne Webber and all those who have campaigned for such a
Bill. Although the Bill’s objectives are something that every
right-thinking individual would welcome, there was also, potentially,
an important principle at stake, which was the inviolability of our
national collections. It was therefore extremely important, and
somewhat time-consuming, to engage with those looking after our
national collections, the directors of our national museums, to ensure
that they were comfortable that this was not somehow the thin end of
the wedge. I know that the hon. Member for Hendon may be pushing some
more wedges into our national collections with another private
Member’s Bill not unrelated to friezes from the east of Europe.
Nevertheless, it is very welcome that we have arrived at this point
today. I
know that national museums have worked very closely with the
Government, the hon. Gentleman, Anne Webber and others to ensure that
this Bill will be passed. The Bill is very clear in its aims. It gives
all those who feel that they have a justified claim to an object looted
by the Nazis which is in a national collection the opportunity to make
that claim. It provides a very sensible mechanism in which an advisory
committee can make a recommendation, the Secretary of State can approve
it and the trustees may have the final decision before that object is
released, thereby keeping in place the principle that the trustees are
the guardian of the collection.
I also
welcome the fact that there is a sunset clause. As other hon. Members
have pointed out, sunset clauses are, in principle, a very good thing
to include in any legislation. Conservative Members wholeheartedly
welcome the Bill.
Lembit
Öpik: The hon. Member for Wantage says that this is
a small but important Bill. I would say that it is a simple but
important Bill, because, for those whom it assists, it is of tremendous
importance in righting a wrong that dates right back to Nazism and the
second world war. Nazism nearly destroyed Europe, and it was thanks to
the courage of the British people and our unassailable ally, the USA,
that Hitler was ultimately defeated. Nevertheless, the Bill illustrates
the reach of Nazism and the damage that was done by that appalling
creed. There are many families, including my own, who were permanently
affected by the consequences of the second world war. It is a matter of
honour for me to serve on this Committee and to see a collective
consensus across parties which is far more important than any partisan
dispute. I
am involved with the Holocaust Education Trust because I think that we
must never forget what happens if good men sit and do nothing when evil
is perpetrated. This restitution draws a line in the sand which
indicates that Britain, and, indeed, no right-thinking country, will
ever again allow that kind of injustice to be perpetrated, either in
the name of democracy or of humanity. I pay tribute to the hon. Member
for Hendon, who has made a powerful statement in simple terms, which I
am sure we all agree with, that Nazism, injustice and inhumanity must
never be allowed to
triumph. Mr.
Lee Scott (Ilford, North) (Con): May I say, for anyone who
was unable to get here this morning, that I apologise for my
constituent, Mr. Crow, not allowing people to get here? I
will be passing that message on to him when I see him next.
I would like
briefly to pay tribute to the hon. Member for Hendon. Many of my own
constituents, along with people from all over the country, owe
him a debt of gratitude for this Bill, and I thank him for
introducing
it. Mrs.
Louise Ellman (Liverpool, Riverside) (Lab/Co-op): I, too,
pay tribute to my hon. Friend the Member for Hendon for his work and
perseverance, and I would also like to thank everybody else who has
been involved in bringing the Bill to this point today.
The wrongs
and the horror of the Nazi era can never be put right, but there are
areas where restitution can be made in an attempt to keep memories
alive and bring some kind of justice for the descendants of those who
perished in such a terrible way. This is one such area. It is very
important that the matter has been approached in a careful and balanced
way, with safeguards written into the process. The fact that we have
got to this point is due to the work of so many people in looking at
the detail and operation of the measure, as well as the principle. I
would like to record my appreciation to everybody who has been involved
and give particular thanks to my hon. Friend for his dedication,
initiative and perseverance.
Barbara
Follett: I reiterate my tribute to my hon. Friend the
Member for Hendon and thank all members of the Committee. As you said,
Mr. Cook, it has been more informal than usual. Perhaps that
is because the matter is more consensual than usual; perhaps it is also
because there are no Whips present. I am very glad that we have
cross-party consensus on this issue.
I would like
to pay tribute to my right hon. Friend the Member for Barking (Margaret
Hodge). It was under her aegis, when she was holding the job that I now
hold, that we began work on this Bill. I particularly thank all those
outside Parliament who have worked so hard to make sure that this
happens. They have put right a very old wrong, one that needed to be
corrected. Finally, I thank you, Mr. Cook, for your patience
with us all today.
Mr.
Dismore: I thank all hon. Members for their kind remarks
about the Bill and repeat my thanks to my hon. Friend the Minister and,
indeed, her predecessors. Several of them, including my right hon.
Friend the Member for Barking, have taken an interest in this issue. I
also thank my hon. Friend’s officials, who have been patient
with me throughout my e-mail bombardment of them, which I hope did not
cause too much offence.
I thank Anne
Webber, who has given me a lot of assistance with the Bill, and also
Jon Benjamin. We should also mention Lord Janner, who has run an
indomitable campaign on this issue. He first got me interested in the
subject shortly after I was elected in
1997. At that time the campaign was to get the Spoliation Advisory Panel
set up. That took a couple of years, and we thought that that was the
end of the problem. As time went by, it became clear that it was not. I
sincerely hope that the Bill will now end the problem and that art can
be returned to its rightful owners. In the end, it is for them to
decide what happens to that art; whether they want to leave it where it
is, take compensation or have it back. That should be their choice
because they are the owners of something that was stolen from them and
their families so many decades ago under the tyranny of the
Nazis. I also thank
you, Mr. Cook, for your patience and wonderful chairmanship
today. The fact that we have been able to get through the proceedings
in 39 minutes is a tribute to that and to the Committee as a
whole.
The
Chairman: I am afraid that my patience is now
exhausted.
Question put and
agreed to.
Bill as
amended, accordingly to be reported.
10.9
am Committee
rose.
| 
