National Gallery: Visitor Services Debate

Full Debate: Read Full Debate

National Gallery: Visitor Services

Earl of Clancarty Excerpts
Thursday 5th February 2015

(9 years, 10 months ago)

Lords Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text
Asked by
Earl of Clancarty Portrait The Earl of Clancarty
- Hansard - -



To ask Her Majesty’s Government what assessment they have made of the National Gallery’s decision to privatise their visitor services.

Lord Gardiner of Kimble Portrait Lord Gardiner of Kimble (Con)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

My Lords, the National Gallery is considering plans intended to preserve, enhance and extend the services it provides while enabling improved pay and conditions. The Government recognise that it is for the gallery, as an arm’s-length body, to decide on its staffing arrangements.

Earl of Clancarty Portrait The Earl of Clancarty (CB)
- Hansard - -

My Lords, is the Minister aware that another national museum said this week that it privatised its visitor services simply to save money? Is not the National Gallery’s intended privatisation to be of all gallery services—400 out of its 600 staff—with the loss in the long run of all the expertise that permanent staff bring? Is this not in fact a deep privatisation from the inside, enforced by the cuts and wholly against the public interest?

Lord Gardiner of Kimble Portrait Lord Gardiner of Kimble
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

My Lords, I do not think that the noble Earl is right. This is designed precisely to ensure that the National Gallery is able to extend its opening times and enhance its revenue. The discussions that have been had under TUPE—the Transfer of Undertakings (Protection of Employment) Regulations —are precisely to ensure that, on the transfer of staff, their terms and conditions are retained. There will be no redundancies.