| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Mr. Bob Russell (Colchester): Is the Minister inviting the organisers to go through the procedure now? If they did so, would he regard that as almost a pre-emptive strike?
Let me also point out that it is possible for similar memorials to be placed in locations around the country. Only last month, ladies in their twilight years unveiled such a memorial in my constituency.
Mr. Howarth:
I am speaking of the specific circumstances of Trafalgar square. If the hon. Gentleman will bear with me, I will unfold a little more about the procedures that we anticipate as we move towards being able to make a decision on the future of the vacant plinth.
That is the Department's formal position on the possible use of the plinth. Whether or not it would be an appropriate site for the proposed memorial to the women of the second world war I cannot say, although that does not of course detract from my personal support for the campaign to erect a memorial in an appropriate place.
As the House will know, the Royal Society for the Encouragement of Arts, Manufactures and Commerce is currently showing a series of contemporary works on the vacant plinth over a period of two years. The "fourth plinth project", which I find enormously exciting, is very much the brainchild of the RSA's deputy chairman, Prue Leith. The project was originally intended to find a permanent solution for the problem of the vacant plinth that would have widespread public support, but, that having proved elusive, the purpose became to stimulate public interest in contemporary British art, and to stimulate debate about the long-term future of the plinth.
Twelve eminent British artists were asked to suggest ideas for the plinth, and the three works being displayed were chosen from those. Planning permission and listed-building consent were granted by Westminster city council in March this year, and my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State gave formal consent for the temporary erection of the three sculptures in April. The first sculpture to be displayed--a life-sized white marble figure of Christ by Mark Wallinger entitled "Ecce Homo"--was unveiled on 21 July. I feel a deep admiration for what has been achieved in that work. It is extremely moving and beautifully made, and stands as a striking representation of purity and vulnerability among its brasher neighbours in and around Trafalgar square. It has already become a much-discussed and greatly admired work of art.
"Ecce Homo" will be followed, in March 2000, by a challenging piece by Bill Woodrow called "Regardless of History". There is some irony in the choice of title, in the context of this debate. The final sculpture in the trilogy will be an untitled work by Rachel Whiteread, which will be installed on the plinth in the autumn of next year. Each
piece will remain on the plinth for approximately eight months; then, in mid-2001, the plinth will become vacant again, unless another proposal has been agreed in the meantime to follow the "fourth plinth project".
Considerable numbers of people--their imagination having been caught by the wonderful scheme proposed by Prue Leith and the RSA--may feel that a continuing rotation of temporary works on the plinth would be preferable to a single, permanent solution. The outcome of the RSA's project, which I shall await with interest, should show whether that approach has gained public support.
As my hon. Friend the Member for Selby has reminded the House, on 9 April 1999, my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State announced that, at his request, Sir John Mortimer had agreed to chair a small advisory group to be set up to consider the long-term future of the vacant plinth. Sir John's group is seeking proposals and submissions from the public and interested organisations on a fitting permanent solution to the question of how the vacant plinth should be used.
The group is taking evidence and soliciting opinions from many people who are eminent in the fields of both traditional and contemporary public art. In early summer 2000, the group will make its recommendations to the Secretary of State. The views of the public will be widely sought and considered before any final decisions are taken.
My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State believes that that is the best way to try to find a long-term solution for the future of the vacant plinth. Such a solution might, of course, be to continue rotating different sculptures on the plinth, but on a more formal basis. The solution might be the proposal made today by my hon. Friend the Member for Selby, or it might be one of many other proposals that have been made in the consultation process. The House will understand that we cannot prejudge.
The inaugural meeting of Sir John's group was held on 29 June, and my right hon. Friend met the members of the group who were able to attend. The group is now meeting regularly, on a monthly basis.
The full membership of the advisory group consists of Sir John Mortimer, chairman; Professor Peter Clarke, professor of modern history at Cambridge university; Richard Cork, chief art critic at The Times; Bob Crowley, award-winning stage designer for the Royal Shakespeare Company and the national theatre; Councillor Bob Harris, chair of the arts and leisure committee of the Association of Local Government and deputy leader of Greenwich borough council; Neil MacGregor, director of the national gallery; Elsie Owusu, London-based architect and principal of Elsie Owusu Associates; and Baroness Rendell, the crime novelist Ruth Rendell. It is a very distinguished group, and the House can be confident that they will give fair and wise consideration to the matter that we have put before them.
I know that details of the campaign for a memorial to the women of the second world war have been sent toSir John Mortimer, and that Madam Speaker, as patron of the campaign, has written to him commending the use of the vacant plinth in Trafalgar square for that purpose. Sir John has replied to Madam Speaker, inviting a representative on behalf of the women of the second world war to give evidence to his group. The
Under-Secretary of State for Social Security, my hon. Friend the Member for City of York (Mr. Bayley) has also written to Sir John, to reinforce the case.
I assure my hon. Friend the Member for Selby that Sir John's advisory group will give the proposal the full and serious consideration that it merits, taking into account the range and weight of support that it has already achieved.
Many other suggestions have been received from the public and numerous organisations about what should go on the plinth, and Sir John's advisory group will need to take all those into account. The group is looking for the best solution for the plinth in that hugely important civic location, and may feel that it should not be a war memorial. There are other sites in central London where such a memorial might be placed: the vacant plinth in Trafalgar Square may not necessarily the best place for it. I assure my hon. Friend, however, that the proposal will be given fair consideration.
Mr. Peter Bottomley (Worthing, West):
The debate has two parts: the first deals with whether there should be a memorial; and the second deals with where such a memorial should go. If by chance Trafalgar square is not the best place for the memorial, will the Government consider establishing a team led by Ministers to determine a better alternative?
Mr. Howarth:
The hon. Gentleman has made a very constructive and helpful suggestion, which I shall certainly ask my hon. Friend the Secretary of State to consider.
I shall conclude by reminding the House of the commitment that was made in the White Paper on London Government, "A Mayor and Assembly for London", published in May 1998, to transfer management responsibility for Trafalgar square to the new Greater London Authority. The square will remain Crown land, but day-to-day responsibility for its care, management and use will, subject to the passage of the legislation now before Parliament, pass to the new mayor of London. Clauses to effect that transfer of responsibility have been included in the Greater London Authority Bill.
Subject to the agreement of Parliament, the mayor should take over responsibility for Trafalgar square in July 2000, or soon after. I therefore anticipate that it will ultimately be for the mayor to decide what, if anything, goes on the vacant plinth once the RSA's project has reached its conclusion and Sir John's advisory group have made their recommendations. My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State will, however, have a continuing involvement in decisions on what will occupy the vacant plinth by virtue of his responsibility to give final approval under the Public Statues Act 1854, which will not be extinguished by the Greater London Authority Bill.
I am grateful to my hon. Friend the Member for Selby for putting forward an important case with such dignity, humour and eloquence.
Question put and agreed to.
Adjourned accordingly at twenty-six minutes past Seven o'clock.
| Index | Home Page |