I congratulate the all-party group on its success thus far in persuading us, along with other parties too, to change our minds, and for bringing these amendments to Committee today. When the noble Lord, Lord Renfrew, started praising the Government in such eloquent terms—if I may use that phrase—it was a very refreshing change from what one sometimes hears in this House and elsewhere. But I should have known, of course, that there was a "but"—or a "however" in his case—and indeed there was. I will do my best to deal with this issue shortly this evening.
One thing I can say is that I make the following concession—though it is not really a concession at all at this stage. That is, of course, that we will meet with noble Lords and others between now and Report to discuss the first part of Amendment 74, in the name of the noble Lord, Lord Redesdale. We will certainly arrange a meeting; there is no reason whatever for not having one.
There are two points raised by noble Lords on Amendment 74. The amendment seeks to extend the duty to report treasure finds to those in possession of objects as well as the finders of such objects. Secondly, the amendment seeks to impose a duty on those in possession of objects to deliver them to the coroner for treasure. We accept that there is widespread support for the amendment: there is no reason to disbelieve that at all. But our conclusion, on reflection, is that it just would not be appropriate to go that far to widen the obligation to report treasure finds. Of course, there may well be finders selling treasure items and not reporting them, and those finders remain liable for offences. The real reason why we cannot accept the amendment is that we are just not convinced that it would be practical to monitor this wider duty. In spite of what has been said in Committee tonight, we feel there could be a great deal more work for the coroner for treasure, with finds which perhaps are not treasure within the meaning of the Act, or finds which have already been investigated.
Our reasoning has been put in the letter mentioned by my noble friend Lord Howarth. We believe that a better course would be to improve awareness of the existing duty to report finds among those with an interest in the treasure system. I will repeat what is in the letter: we will continue to work with the members of the various groups that were mentioned by my noble friend to try to solve the undoubted problem that exists.
Coroners and Justice Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Lord Bach
(Labour)
in the House of Lords on Tuesday, 23 June 2009.
It occurred during Committee of the Whole House (HL)
and
Debate on bills on Coroners and Justice Bill.
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
711 c1531-2 
Session
2008-09
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-04-21 12:28:13 +0100
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_569928
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_569928
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_569928