Select Committee on Culture, Media and Sport Written Evidence


Memorandum submitted by Wessex Archaeology

INTRODUCTION

  1.  Wessex Archaeology is a multi-disciplinary charitable company working across the heritage sector, one of the largest practices in Europe. Provision of a comprehensive range of heritage services to local, national and international clients, including Governments, across the UK and abroad enables us to fund our educational objects "to promote the education of the public in the subjects of arts, culture, heritage and science through the pursuit of archaeology". In addition to providing heritage and education services, we also participate in, amongst other areas, the development of sector policy, strategic development and standards, through supporting and leading national cultural and heritage organisations (such as the Institute of Field Archaeologists and the UK National Commission for UNESCO Culture Committee).

  2.  We warmly welcome the CMS Select Committee Inquiry on our nation's heritage, which offers the first opportunity for independent review of Government, and sector, performance on the actions outlined in The Historic Environment: A Force for our Future—(published in 2001) which remains the current Government policy. The scope of the Inquiry, covering management of the historic environment, roles, skills & resources, museums and most importantly access and public engagement, is particularly welcome.

  3.  The UK has a very rich and diverse cultural heritage which needs protection balanced with public accessibility and sound management of change. Much of our heritage is of international significance, as well as of great importance to individual local communities. A key issue is the promotion of a practicable and integrated approach to our heritage across Government and the sector. We look for better and more widespread recognition of the value of heritage across Government and better recognition of the public benefit of heritage in society today.

  4.  As a final general introductory comment, we would encourage the Inquiry to include consideration of the UK's international responsibilities to heritage and its leadership role, and the importance of UK expertise abroad. The UK is, and is recognised as a key player in international heritage matters and has much to offer globally in the sustainable management of cultural heritage, including capacity-building and standard-setting.

WHAT THE DEPARTMENT FOR CULTURE, MEDIA AND SPORT SHOULD IDENTIFY AS PRIORITIES IN THE FORTHCOMING HERITAGE WHITE PAPER

  5.  A key priority is the reform of the present regimes for protection of our nation's heritage, from various forms of registers of historic assets into a unified system encompassing scheduled monuments and listed buildings. Such a unified system would better reflect the need for an holistic approach to understanding, protecting and managing the historic environment and provide more clarity and transparency. The reform should include consideration of the system of class consents, where flaws include the continuing damage to important archaeological sites such as Verulamium through inappropriate agricultural practice,

  6.  The White Paper provides an opportunity for the enhancement of existing national and local registers—Sites and Monuments Records—to a more comprehensive system of Historic Environment Records (HER), reflecting the need for holistic management of the historic environment in which we live and providing a greater degree of public benefit, including public access. These HERs should be made statutory, and conform to a standard level of content and accessibility across the country. These facilities form a critical foundation for decision-making in the planning process and as a portal for public access.

  7.  The timing of the White Paper is important in terms of the review of non-statutory Planning Policy Guidance, which can provide a framework to ensure best practice in the quality of design, delivery and communication of development-lead historic environment investigations. The present guidance (PPG 15 and PPG 16) works reasonably well, but there is an opportunity to ensure greater public benefit through:

    —  requirements for better public access and involvement, where practicable and safe in fieldwork, and including for example the provision of more "popular" literature and web-based information;

    —  clearer requirements for the storage, conservation and display (or access to) material recovered and lodged;

    —  encouraging local planning authorities, and national bodies, to specify a better and more consistent quality of archaeological work carried out in accordance with accredited standards and lead by accredited organisations or individuals. This approach (investigation, recording and accessibility) should apply equally to investigations of below-ground remains and to historic buildings and landscapes;

    —  encouraging a more integrated approach to the designation of Conservation Areas;

    —  encouraging and resourcing the synthesis of the results of development-lead work (which are primarily descriptive and site focused) to feed back into the management system and to make general information more readily accessible.

  The above measures, and any system of managing development with protection of the historic environment and our heritage must provide for a balanced approach which is reasonable, robust and sustainable.

  8.  The White Paper should also address the critical matter of resourcing, (financial and skills) the implementation of reformed legislation and the planning system, at both national and local levels, which is a cause for concern. A reformed approach, in the public interest, will require strengthened skills in community involvement and participation by local authorities and building capacity of heritage groups. It is also an opportunity to review the role, contribution and capacity of the voluntary sector in an inclusive approach to managing our heritage.

THE REMIT AND EFFECTIVENESS OF DCMS, ENGLISH HERITAGE AND OTHER RELEVANT ORGANISATIONS IN REPRESENTING HERITAGE INTERESTS INSIDE AND OUTSIDE GOVERNMENT

  9.  Our cultural heritage, and the historic environment which is part of it, are central to the social and economic fabric of our nation, in providing, for example, community identity and cohesion, enhancing quality of life, and contributing to the economy through cultural tourism. Heritage should be at the centre of government policy, local and national, and represent a positive driver for change, and should not be seen as an impediment.

  10.  Heritage is central to many aspects of our life and hence to many Government Departments. It is imperative that it is championed more effectively and more consistently across all sectors, and the role of DCMS is critical in this respect. Whilst there have been many positive changes, for example within DEFRA, there is a strong case for some form of high-level Inter-Departmental Committee on the stewardship of heritage and historic environment, to support an integrated approach to management.

  11.  The role and remit of the DCMS is wide, appropriately reflecting the diverse nature of our heritage and social fabric. But we would look for a more effective and more public role as champion within Government, and a more effective engagement with the professional and voluntary sectors on policy and implementation. There is much support for the work of DCMS, and more advantage could be taken of the expertise within the wider sector. We would look for a more inclusive approach and more consultation with the wider heritage sector, to provide support and initiative. The DCMS, in liaison with other bodies such as the UK National Commission for UNESCO, also has a key role to play in the recognition of the importance of the intangible heritage, and recent projects such as those by Culture Online are to be welcomed in this respect.

  12.  English Heritage appears over recent times to have been distracted by internal reform and re-structuring, and its reputation has suffered accordingly, which is unfortunate. It has a key role in policy, co-ordination and standard-setting, as well as in public education and access, but there is some confusion about the new structures, the relationship between the centre and the regions. As a result the organisation is not seen as a strong sector leader, particularly in relation to engaging the professional and voluntary sectors. One recent example was the lack of consultation in the development of the recently-published Research Strategy, which was launched in late 2005. There appears to have been little or no preliminary consultation, and there was a strong emphasis on a somewhat inward-looking approach for the future, giving little cognisance to the expertise and strengths of the wider professional, commercial and voluntary sectors, which can support English Heritage and Government in achieving their goals.

  13.  We would look for a stronger approach from English Heritage in supporting the wider sector, encouraging its development and contribution to policy development. This could include more open meetings and seminars, and more presentation of policy proposals in regional meetings (such as the recent presentations on the Heritage Protection Review). In summary we seek a more inclusive approach to policy development and research strategy, which benefits from a wide participation particularly from those working at "grassroots" level.

THE BALANCE BETWEEN HERITAGE AND DEVELOPMENT NEEDS IN PLANNING POLICY

  14.  Our main concern is the apparent ongoing tension between preserving and protecting our heritage assets and promoting development and social regeneration, where heritage is seen as a barrier to change, not as a central driver for change. Broadly the current system for balancing the needs of protection and preservation with development works, though there is potential to improve the system with the new Planning Policy Statement for the Historic Environment. The system fails where there are extreme views (on either side) which are inflexible, or inconsistent approaches.

  15.  There needs to be a more mature debate and promotion of understanding of the benefits of heritage and historic assets to social and economic regeneration. For example adaptive uses of historic assets provide a sense of stability and continuity for communities as well as providing new resources for their use. This brings us back to the point of heritage as central to change rather than peripheral as it can sometimes be seen.

ACCESS TO HERITAGE AND THE POSITION OF HERITAGE AS A CULTURAL ASSET IN THE COMMUNITY

  16.  Wessex Archaeology is a charitable company, working to promote the education of the public in arts, culture, heritage and science through the process of archaeology. Public access to heritage and historic assets and information are critical in our activities. Archaeological investigations and research are only valid if its results are made available to a wider public audience and public benefits flow from it clearly and transparently. The widespread interest in our heritage, promoted by significant media coverage reflects its importance to the public.

  19.  The planning system should promote better public access to local (and national) discoveries, and the new PPS should provide strong guidance on the critical importance of communicating results to the public. It should require practitioners and developers to make information accessible at the appropriate time and emphasise the benefits of this approach, of constructive partnerships, between heritage conservation and development.

  20.  Archaeology—the process of understanding about past peoples and their landscapes, of our current (and future) environment—has much to contribute to individual and community identity and social cohesion. We strongly support moves to promote learning outside the classroom, and would also urge a greater use of heritage and historic assets within the curriculum. The sensitisation of young people and also immigrants to the heritage around them is key to the protection and appreciation of our heritage and environment in the future. But the provision of continuing access through life-long learning is also important, and the apparent decline of archaeology and heritage courses for adults is a matter of concern.

  21.  Government needs to promote and support heritage communities in providing training for teachers on how the heritage and historic environment can be used as a key resource for learning and enhancing quality of life. It should also continue to emphasise the economic, social, educative, community and regenerative impacts which heritage projects can deliver.

FUNDING, WITH PARTICULAR REFERENCE TO THE ADEQUACY OF THE BUDGET FOR ENGLISH HERITAGE AND FOR MUSEUMS AND GALLERIES, THE IMPACT OF THE LONDON 2012 OLYMPICS ON LOTTERY FUNDING FOR HERITAGE PROJECTS, AND FORTHCOMING DECISIONS ON THE SHARING OF FUNDS FROM LOTTERY SOURCES BETWEEN GOOD CAUSES

  22.  Funding remains a central issue for the whole sector. We are concerned to find solutions to alleviate pressure on funding including that of the Heritage Lottery Fund, and the potential diversion of funds from heritage to the Olympics. The HLF has been fundamental in promoting community access to heritage and has provide great public benefit. To this end the HLF share of funds for heritage projects should be protected, as should direct Government funding for heritage matters. Consideration should be given to resources for capacity-building as a priority for maintaining standards in policy making and practice.

  23.  Funding for museums (local and national) is critical and stretched. The impacts of the planning guidance on museums have not been fully appreciated, and there is a substantive issue of the costs of storage on both museums and heritage service providers. Such material also needs to be accessible to the public. It would be an appropriate time for an independent review of the state of public collections and their relationship to historic environment stewardship in contemporary society.

WHAT THE ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES SHOULD BE FOR ENGLISH HERITAGE, THE HERITAGE LOTTERY FUND, LOCAL AUTHORITIES, MUSEUMS AND GALLERIES, CHARITABLE AND OTHER NON-GOVERNMENTAL ORGANISATIONS IN MAINTAINING THE NATION'S HERITAGE

  24.  Having restructured and recently published its strategic plan, it is important for English Heritage to have a period of stability to deliver its core strategic objectives with adequate resources in place to do so. English Heritage's key roles are in policy-making, advice to Government and standard-setting as well as providing education and access for the public. English Heritage has a good reputation for leadership in the international field, which should be maintained (though not at a cost to its national responsibility), and which should also promote the expertise available in England and the UK generally. It should take advantage of the range of sector skills in developing policy and practice using an inclusive consultative approach. It should provide support to the profession and voluntary sector in developing those skills and sector capacity.

  25.  The Heritage Lottery should retain its separate identity and share of the Lottery fund for heritage projects, where it has a very sound track record and has successfully engaged public participation through supporting archaeology and historic environment works.

  26.  The voluntary sector and private sector have crucial roles to play in complementing the work of English Heritage and the HLF, not least in engaging with a modernised planning and heritage management system. These sectors operate at grassroots level and are sensitive to public opinion and engagement with heritage matters. They are key links between Government policy and implementation, and should be encouraged and supported by Government, English Heritage and the HLF. A more inclusive working environment needs to be established.

  27.  The role of owners of historic assets should also be considered. A substantial amount of the nation's built heritage is owned and managed by them and they also need to be engaged with a modernised system, through participation in policy development and by promoting understanding of the benefits of active and sustainable management.

WHETHER THERE IS AN ADEQUATE SUPPLY OF PROFESSIONALS WITH CONSERVATION SKILLS; THE PRIORITY PLACED BY PLANNING AUTHORITIES ON CONSERVATION; AND MEANS OF MAKING CONSERVATION EXPERTISE MORE ACCESSIBLE TO PLANNING OFFICERS, COUNCILLORS AND THE GENERAL PUBLIC

  28.  This is an issue which is equally applicable to the whole heritage sector, not just to those directly concerned with the management of built heritage. There are shortfalls in capacity and skills deficits across the sector, particularly at local authority level, as recent surveys have shown (Heritage Links 2005). Bodies such as the Archaeology Training Forum, the Institute of Field Archaeologists, English Heritage, and the Sector Skills Council have begun to address this, but the demands of new standards of delivery for local services will make this shortfall more acute.

  29.  Careers in the heritage sector are seen to be hampered by poor pay and conditions and lack of status, which could be seen at least in part as reflecting the importance placed on heritage in policy-making. Some form of effective and robust continuing professional development programme for all those working in the heritage and historic environment sectors could be considered as a matter of urgency. Skills' building in local communities is also an essential complementary move, and may be best achieved by local professional and voluntary sector groups. The support of the national agencies will be essential to the work of professional bodies and the voluntary sector in achieving these aims.

18 January 2006





 
previous page contents next page

House of Commons home page Parliament home page House of Lords home page search page enquiries index

© Parliamentary copyright 2006
Prepared 19 April 2006