Professional Documents
Culture Documents
English Heritage, The Association of Local Government Archaeological Officers and the Institute of Historic Building Conservation July 2013
Local planning authorities should have up-to-date evidence about the historic environment in their area and use it to assess the significance of heritage assets and the contribution to their environment. ... Local planning authorities should either maintain or have access to a historic environment record (NPPF paragraph 169, emphasis added).
In a speech delivered on 24th April 2013, the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport, Maria Miller, drew attention to the immense financial value of the cultural sector, including the heritage sector and made specific reference to the case of Liverpool4. In a response to the speech, RESCUE questioned the logic of emphasising the value of culture while at the same time allowing spending in real terms to fall to the extent that the historic environment is no longer effectively protected5. RESCUE believes that the points made in its response to the Ministers speech are confirmed by the findings of the report on local authority staff resources. On the basis of this evidence, RESCUE asserts that the governments imposition of unrealistic spending limits on local authorities is a transparent tactic designed to deflect criticism of government policy onto local authorities and thus to shift the blame away from central government to local government under the guise of permitting local decision making. RESCUE asserts that responsibility for the nations heritage should be borne equally by local and national government and that the central government should take active steps to fulfil its responsibilities under the NPPF and international agreements (notably the Valetta Convention6) by requiring local authorities to meet those responsibilities and by giving them the resources to do so. RESCUE notes that the provision of heritage services has declined under both the present and previous governments and insists on a cross-party approach to the issues raised in the report. In particular RESCUE expects to see the All-Party Parliamentary Group on Archaeology (APPAG) taking a much more robust role in monitoring and actively supporting the system of heritage protection and taking on a commitment to work with both professional and voluntary heritage groups to ensure that the nations heritage receives the attention and care that it deserves. As a first step, RESCUE calls on the government and the opposition parties to undertake a joint commitment to the following reforms to the system of heritage protection: To make the provision of conservation and archaeological advisory services charged with the safeguarding of the historic and built environment a statutory obligation on all local authorities To make the provision of a fully resourced Historic Environment Record a statutory obligation on all local authorities To make access to a Historic Environment Record free for all citizens, community groups, research students, academics and others with a legitimate interest in the historic environment
Furthermore, RESCUE sees it as essential that local and regional museums are adequately resourced in order to be able to undertake the reception, curation and conservation of archives arising from archaeological fieldwork (both commercial and noncommercial) without the imposition of prohibitive charges on those responsible for depositing such archives. RESCUE believes that the country is close to reaching a point at which the provision of services designed to safeguard our historic environment is no longer adequate to meet the challenges that present themselves on a day-to-day basis. The report reviewed here is the fifth on such issues and the information that it contains is paralleled by the experience of other heritage organisations. The catalogue of losses continues to mount in spite of the publication of such reports and expressions of concern at the worsening situation. At what stage will we decide to act collectively to support under-resourced and vulnerable services and thus ensure that our historic sites and landscapes receive proper protection through the planning process? There is an obvious challenge here for the bodies that have compiled this report and for those who purport to represent the heritage profession to act to address the situation. More broadly there is a need for everyone concerned with our nations heritage, including the wider public to commit to join the campaign in support of threatened services. Will we rise to meet this challenge as we did in the early 1970s or will future generations look back on the early 21st century as the time when we abandoned our past to short-termism and financial expediency? RESCUE The British Archaeological Trust 19th September 2012
Notes 1RESCUE is an independent organisation dedicated to promoting archaeology in Britain and abroad. Details of RESCUEs work can be found on the website: www.rescue-archaeology.org.uk
2A
Planning Policy Framework: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/6077/2116950 .pdf Testing Times: Fighting cultures corner in an age of austerity https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/testing-times-fighting-cultures-corner-in-an-age-ofausterity
4
Testing Times: Fighting cultures corner in an age of austerity A response by RESCUE The British Archaeological Trust http://rescue-archaeology.org.uk/2013/04/26/testing-times/
5 6Details
of the terms of the Valetta Convention can be found here: http://conventions.coe.int/Treaty/en/Treaties/Html/143.htm . RESCUE contends that Britain is
in breach of Articles 2 (i), 4 (iii) and 5 (i, ii and iii) of the Convention as a direct result of government policy.