Artist’s Resale Right Regulations

My Lords, that is the evidence that has been put forward by a number of bodies, and it is what we rely on. That, surely, must be the right way forward. It is clear that the Government have changed their mind in terms of where the threshold should lie, but we believe that they are right to do so. The countervailing argument put forward by BAMF is strongly supported by the report from the London Assembly’s Economic Development, Culture, Sport and Tourism committee—that the imposition of a lower threshold will greatly damage the competitiveness of the London art market. That report faithfully reflects concerns about trade going to New York and Zurich but it does not give any conclusive evidence of this. In any event, such evidence as there is affects the higher priced works of art, not those at the €1,000 to €3,000 level. I accept that at the top level, that may be the case in future, but there is no flexibility in applying resale right at that higher level. It is true that, as the London Assembly report points out, multiple costs add up, but I do not believe that this is a reason to penalise less well known artists. Let us also not forget that there will be a maximum of €12,500 of royalty payments, the exclusion of works sold on within three years for less than €10,000 and the exclusion of works of deceased artists until 2010. I welcome the Minister’s statement about the application for permanent derogation. I strongly agree with the London Assembly committee report on the question of monitoring. I want the Patent Office to publish details of how it intends to measure the impact of the droit de suite on the UK art market. In particular, the committee wanted to assess the impact on the sale of contemporary works, the diversion of the market from London and a full cost/benefit analysis of the application of the minimum price at which the directive applies. Those are all sensible suggestions and I hope that the Minister will reply positively. As regards the collecting society aspect, although DACS is well known in this field, I do not believe that there should be a monopoly. If another body or commercial organisation wishes to perform this role they should be able to do so. I do not know what weight to attach to the Merits Committee report, but it does not clearly state that the regulations are an inappropriate way of implementing an EU directive. The committee’s reasoning does not lead to that conclusion. Finally, I am in good company. The noble Lord, Lord Beaumont, who represents the Green Party in this House and has a much better collection of works by young artists than I do, has asked me to indicate that he also agrees with the Government’s approach.