SO THE Government is committed to free admission to museums but refuses to confirm sufficient funds so that the three northern museums under threat of closure will stay open. Why am I not surprised?

Ed Vaizey, a Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for the Department of Culture, Media and Sport, has passed the buck very firmly back to the Science Museum Group, effectively washing the Government’s hands of any responsibility in the museum closure threat debacle.

In response to York Central MP Hugh Bayley, he said: “Operational decisions, including allocations to individual branches, are a matter for the Science Museum Group. The group has to address a projected operational deficit and is currently assessing a range of options to address the situation.”

Well we know that don’t we? Vaizey is not telling us something we don’t already know – that the Government may well instigate further cuts to maintaining our heritage and culture but it’s clearly up to others to mop up after them.

So how about this for an idea? Given that the Science Museum Group has stuck its head over the parapet and warned the world at large in no uncertain terms that further funding cuts will result in one of our great northern museums having to close, why don’t they steer their eyes away from anything outside London, because clearly we don’t matter as much up here, and swivel them westwards of Westminster to South Kensington instead?

If push really does come to shove, maybe they should be really radical and close museums on a rotational temporary basis, starting with the museum of science and industry in London.

Close it for three years with big signs outside saying ‘Closed due to lack of government interest’ and then see how fast Vaizey and his crowd would do an abrupt U-turn in relation to the policy stance on admission charges.

I know it’s all very laudable that we should have free access to our heritage, but if we really are in a mess financially because the UK plc books are far from balanced, then may be the get-in-free policy should be suspended for a while.

But bear with me for an even more radical idea.

Let me set the scene… Ed Vaizey was one of the MPs caught up in the expenses scandal that broke in the Daily Telegraph in 2009. He had claimed back from the taxpayer a number of furniture items bought at the upmarket Oka store in London, which describes itself as supplying beautiful luxury furniture. It happens to be owned by Lady Astor, Samantha Cameron’s mum and therefore mother-in-law to the Prime Minister.

Not that that’s got anything to do with the price of fish as they say, but just saying…

He had ordered a £467 sofa, a £544 chair, £280.50 low table and a £671 table from the exclusive store and when the Commons Fees office objected he said they were for his second home in his constituency.

In addition he’d bought an antique chair for £300, which he also claimed back. It was only when Vaizey, was rumbled that he paid back all the money.

Quite right too, as he should never have claimed for such expensive stuff that’s beyond the reach of most of us in the first place.

Then in November 2011, Vaizey – who describes himself as “relatively affluent” – submitted expense claims of 8p for a 350-yard car journey and 16p for a 700-yard journey. Whether this was for trips to free-admission museums is not placed on record, but how pathetic and money-pinching is that?

So given that the Science Museum Group is talking about slashing a quarter of its portfolio by closing one of our museums here in the north, why don’t we slash expenses for a quarter of our “relatively affluent” MPs and divert the money the taxpayer would save into protecting our heritage? Just think – we’d probably save so much money we could not only rescue our much-loved museums from the threat of closure, but open up a new one as well.