Hansard

This is a significant debate. I have to say that I disagree strongly with the contention from our friend from the Green party that some folk in the chamber would want to do something that was offensive to the Jewish community in relation to Holocaust spoliation. That is not what the LCM is about. There are concerns about the matter throughout the Parliament and no one would want to strike a balance on the issue that meant that we in Scotland brought in for exhibition items that were not ethically sound. It is on that basis that we sought to develop the guidance.

We are aware of and understand the concerns of those who have expressed reservations about the consequences of the bill. The Department for Culture, Media and Sport has proposed amendments to address the concerns that have been expressed about possible spoliation claims. The criteria for approval would focus on the ability of museums and galleries to demonstrate the satisfactory nature of their due diligence procedures in considerable detail. They would need to demonstrate that they had sought to establish the provenance of the items that they brought in. The regulations and the criteria for registration as a body that can seek immunity reinforce the guidance that is already in place.

I do not think that, in the main stream of our cultural life, there are bodies that wish to bring such items in. In fact, the bill will not affect any claims on objects in UK national collections or other museums, including Holocaust spoliation claims. The UK Government and UK national museums have been in the vanguard of international action on provenance research on the 1933 to 1945 Nazi era and response to Holocaust spoliation claims, so they are very aware of the issues.

Under the proposed amendments, immunity may be conditional on the publication by museums of information about objects before they are exhibited. That relates to David Davidson's point. Museums might be required to provide a description that is sufficient to identify the object, to state the identity of the lending institution and to give the dates of the exhibition.

I acknowledge the concerns about drafting. The comments that were made in the chamber and in committee will, of course, form part of our commentary to the UK Government. I assure the Parliament that all the points that have been made will be brought to Westminster's attention. In relation to the concerns about drafting, however, members should note that the Subordinate Legislation Committee and the Justice 2 Committee explored the issues and supported the provisions.

We do not understate the strong concerns that Ken Macintosh highlighted and we will ensure that they are expressed, but we are clear that there are enough safeguards to ensure that we strike the right balance and that things that are ethically unsound are not exhibited. Museums and galleries will be expected to establish their procedures for checking on provenance and, in those circumstances, Scottish ministers can grant them the right to be part of that register.

This is a small measure that seeks to allow the kind of cultural exchange that we support. In no way does it do anything to allow items of Holocaust spoliation to be displayed in this country without any account being taken of that. I assure Parliament that the issues that have been raised will be pursued with Westminster, but I urge members to support the LCM as a means of protecting the interests of the museums and galleries in Scotland and the cultural life of the people of Scotland.