Former PM distressed over flogging of irreplaceable treasures
BNZ is auctioning 200 valuable NZ artworks this month, thought to be worth more than $10m, but critics say the collection should not be for sale, writes Jane Phare
Aformer Prime Minister is among critics angry that an “invaluable” art collection, bought when the BNZ was state-owned, is to be auctioned off to private collectors this month.
More than 200 mid-century works by New Zealand artists, including a painting by Colin McCahon thought to be worth around $2 million, will be sold at two auctions — one tomorrow and the second on September 27 — by Webb’s auction house in Auckland.
The collection represents a who’s who of some of the country’s most renowned artists including McCahon, Rita Angus, Gordon Walters, Toss Woollaston, Gretchen Albrecht, Milan Mrkusich, Don Binney and Ralph Hotere.
But former Prime Minister Helen Clark is angry that the BNZ collection is likely to be broken up, bought by private collectors, corporates and possibly offshore buyers, and no longer be accessible to the public. She points out the artworks were bought when the bank was wholly owned by the New Zealand Government after Wellington art dealer Peter McLeavey was asked to build up the collection between 1982 and 1987.
In 1987 the bank floated 15 per cent of its shares and in 1989 sold a further 34 per cent. But at the time of the sale to the National Australia Bank in 1992, the BNZ was still 51 per cent stateowned. Clark says the art collection should never have been included in the 1992 sale.
“This is something that should have been thought of at the time of privatisation. This [the collection] was acquired by a publicly-owned bank and to think that these treasures are now being flogged off by the private owners is really quite distressing frankly.”
Auckland Art Gallery director Kirsten Lacy only became aware of the BNZ art auction last month after Webb’s sent the gallery copies of a large catalogue of the works. Learning that the “invaluable” collection would be inevitably broken up and sold off came as a shock.
“I feel disquieted that an Australian company would not recognise the significance of national cultural assets in their care and really be kaitiaki [guardian] of that, recognising that the profit of the company has come from the people of New Zealand,” Lacy, an Australian, said.
She said she attempted to engage senior officials at the BNZ in a “conversation” to explore the possibility of the art gallery being gifted some of the more important works, or at least having first refusal. She was unsuccessful, she said.
“The bank is not interested in having that conversation with us.”
For its part the bank said it plans to use proceeds from the Webb’s auctions to establish the BNZ Foundation, which will make grants to community groups working to better the lives of New Zealanders. And at least one artist, Stephen Bambury, whose painting and two drawings are in the collection, is pleased the proceeds are going to a philanthropic enterprise.
“I can’t think of a better thing for me to think about as a legacy of my work,” he says in a Webb’s video. “That someone collected it, paid me very little for it, then sells it for a lot more, and that profit just doesn’t disappear into the Bahamas but gets ploughed back into philanthropic work in our own culture. That seems like a very noble way of completing their journey.”
But Mary Morrison, wife of the late artist Billy Apple, is alarmed that “museum quality” pieces in the collection are to be sold off. She says that as a “good corporate” and custodians of the art, the BNZ should have considered placing the more significant works in public institutions rather than viewing them as a “commodity”.
“It seems to me that the corporates are treating the artwork as a commodity class without any comprehension of their status as taonga. There is value to the community as well as a monetary value.”
Morrison, who has an art history background, is critical of the secondary and auction market that pushes prices up to a “silly” level.
Whereas in the primary market the money goes back to the artist and the dealer who represents them, none of the money from the secondary market goes back into the art world.
DESPERATE NOT to lose the more important works for good, Lacy is pleading with art collectors who bid successfully at tomorrow’s auction to consider gifting important works to the art gallery in their wills.
The gallery has identified key works in the BNZ catalogue that would “significantly transform” its collection. Lacy will not name those artworks but says not all are highpriced items, although three “critical” pieces are in the higher price range.
The gallery, funded by Auckland ratepayers, does have an acquisitions budget, she says, is “actively collecting” and does buy on the secondary market. But it cannot afford to go up against private collectors and corporates in auctions like the BNZ collection.
“We are in effect home to the most significant national collection of New Zealand art and yet we can’t really get a look in at these nationally significant works that were bought in the public interest and public goodwill by a publicly-owned company,” she said.
Both she and Clark say there are lessons to be learned as a result of the BNZ art auction. Collectors and corporates need to think seriously about the future of collections that will inevitably become an important and valuable part of the country’s heritage, they say.
“Collections owned by public companies should be separated out from assets if and when the company is privatised,” Clark said.
The sale of the BNZ to the National Australia Bank was a missed opportunity to secure a collection which was paid for with money from a public corporation, she says.
Lacy urges companies with collections of any sort, not just artwork, to consider making them available to the public, or establishing a relationship with a public institution so that the items will not be lost to the private market.
“Imagine if they [the BNZ] had
given it [the collection] to the gallery,” she said. “The BNZ’s name would go up on the wall. We’d honour them as a corporate partner. It would just be extraordinary. It would be the greatest corporate gift in New Zealand history.”
She acknowledges the intent of the BNZ’s foundation, to give back to the community through the grants process. But she argues that the BNZ could do both — gift significant works as guardians of the art, and set up a foundation.
By selling the art the bank intends to maximise the most amount of return and therefore get the highest tax break possible for cash donations each year made on the proceeds of the investment from this sale.
“That’s great for them,” she said. “But in terms of these assets we are disappointed. They’re irreplaceable.”
The Government needs to think seriously about introducing a cultural gift programme, similar to one in Australia, to prevent extensive corporate or private collections from being broken up and sold off, Lacy said. “It is a matter for Government to look at this because it is just going to happen again.”
Under Australia’s cultural gift programme, the Government offers tax incentives to encourage people to donate cultural items to Australian public collecting institutions, such as art galleries, museums, libraries and
archives. Tax deductions can be spread across five income years.
By comparison, in New Zealand only cash donations to approved charities and organisations are eligible for tax credits at a rate of 33.33 cents per dollar donated. The BNZ might have been more prepared to consider other options for the collection if a tax incentive scheme for cultural gifts had existed in New Zealand, Lacy said.
Clark agrees it is worth looking at the Australian precedent. “Definitely. Our tax systems aren’t so dissimilar,” she said. “The reality is the public purse is too constrained to pay for such works except in exceptional circumstances.
“The reality is that these public institutions are very much at the whim of politicians of the day and what they prioritise.”
Clark believes tax breaks would make a difference.
“Frankly the Government and the public purse would get these priceless gifted paintings at a fraction of what they would have had to pay to buy them themselves.”
But it appears a cultural gift programme is unlikely to be on the state agenda any time soon. The issue was examined nearly 10 years ago by the National Government, at which time officials advised against it. This week Revenue Minister David Parker told the Herald a tax rebate for cultural gifts was not under consideration by the Government.
Imagine if [BNZ] had given [the collection] to the gallery. It would just be extraordinary. It would be the greatest corporate gift in New Zealand history.
Kirsten Lacy, Auckland Art Gallery director (above)
BACK IN 2001 when Clark was Prime Minister, and Minister for Arts, Culture and Heritage, she put a “no way” command on a plan by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade (MFAT) to sell off 59 valuable artworks that were hanging in overseas embassies and Wellington offices. The knee-jerk plan to sell was caused by Treasury’s new accounting system which meant MFAT would have to pay a levy for assets such as its multimillion-dollar art collection.
“I said, ‘These have been acquired at the expense of the people of New Zealand — which frankly is the same as the BNZ collection — and they should come back to the people of New Zealand,’” Clark said.
Home came paintings by some of
New Zealand’s greatest artists including McCahon, Hotere, Walters, Woollaston, Albrecht, Richard Killeen, Frances Hodgkins, Pat Hanly, Charles Goldie and Tony Fomison.
The collection was distributed to 24 art galleries and museums, both large and small, throughout the country, after consultation with art experts.
A four-panel artwork, Fragmented Society, 1990, by Ma¯ori artist Buck Nin, which was commissioned for
New Zealand’s embassy in Beijing, was donated to Pataka Art + Museum in Porirua. The artwork will feature in the gallery’s next exhibition, Tu¯rama — Lighting the Collection, which opens in November.
Clark also warns that a number of the BNZ artworks will fall under the category of protected objects — more than 50 years old and with some significance or association to New Zealand.
“They will be protected works and probably shouldn’t be able to be exported,” she said. “Anyone who cares about this should be alerting MFAT.”
Lacy hangs her hopes on a new generation of philanthropists who will follow the lead of American Julian Robertson, who died last month. Robertson, who owned Kauri Cliffs and Cape Kidnappers resorts, and
Matakauri Lodge in Queenstown, left 15 European masterpieces to the Auckland Art Gallery which, back in 2009 when he made the pledge, were valued at $115m.
It is a donation that Clark describes as “absolutely magnificent” and led her to recall a similar philanthropic gesture by psychotherapist Dr John Money, who left his valuable New Zealand art collection, built up over 50 years, to the Eastern Southland Gallery in Gore in 2002.
A spokesperson for the BNZ said careful consideration had been given by the bank’s senior management and board over a two-year period, with many options considered. It was decided to create a new opportunity to support New Zealand communities through the philanthropic foundation.
The bank would not be gifting any artworks but galleries were welcome to bid at auction. “We encourage galleries and others to do so as the funds are going to help thousands of New Zealanders over many years,” the bank’s statement said.
The BNZ had retained a number of pieces in the collection of particular significance, including a curated art collection of 27 works to be exhibited in public and shared spaces at the BNZ. This collection included works by Apple, Killeen, Hanly, Walters, McCahon, Albrecht and Philip Clairmont.