Debates between Lord Flight and Lord Inglewood during the 2015-2017 Parliament

Cultural Property (Armed Conflicts) Bill [HL]

Debate between Lord Flight and Lord Inglewood
Tuesday 28th June 2016

(8 years, 5 months ago)

Lords Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text
Lord Inglewood Portrait Lord Inglewood
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

My Lords, I would like to intervene to respond to remarks made by the noble Lord, Lord Redesdale, and by my noble friend Lord Renfrew. Anybody who is selling an item owns it. They have a duty under due diligence not to handle anything that is suspicious. That way, you always have somebody you can go against if it is, in fact, wrong. Is it really the case that providing the information up front in the auction catalogue—which if it is wrong will be false—is going to solve the problem?

Lord Flight Portrait Lord Flight (Con)
- Hansard - -

My Lords, I am curious to know what the minimum value envisaged is in the amendment from the noble Earl, Lord Clancarty. It seems to me that unless those minimums are fairly substantial—maybe a million but certainly in the hundreds of thousands—then it would make a complete shambles of the antique and flea market industry. People can know one generation of owner but they are never going to know the previous generation of owner. Therefore, a passport can operate only where it is clearly an item of substantial value and has had that value for some time.