Confusion over trust for royal art works

The debate about how much of one of the world's most important art collections is owned by Queen or country raged yesterday after the announcement that a charitable trust is being set up to tend the Royal Collection, writes Dalya Alberge.

Although Buckingham Palace's report describes the Queen as a curator and trustee who is unable to sell items from the Royal Collection, there was confusion within art circles about the point of the trust and how it would improve access to the collection. They wanted to know which works are in the Royal Collection and which works are owned by the Queen herself.

Sir Roy Strong, the writer and historian, said: 'What is this Royal Collection? Which works are on its lists? Are the Queen's 50 or 60 tiaras among the Crown Jewels?

'It's all terribly vague. What about John Piper's views of Windsor, at the Queen Mother's house? Does it include those?'

He said that until more information on the trust was made available, 'it seems to be business as usual . . . like an old bottle with a new label. It sounds like reorganising to meet the tax situation and not a change of policy'.

One source said that 'if the collection belonged to the nation, it was exempt from tax anyway'.

According to the Palace, the trust will make the Royal Collection self-financing. It will conserve, maintain and display the collection, funded by income from visitor admissions to the State Apartments at Windsor Castle, the Queen's Gallery at Buckingham Palace and other Royal residences.

But there is nothing new about admission charges to royal residences: indeed, the collection has been maintained through both an annual income of some pounds 2.5m from admissions and related shop profits and the Civil List.