Memorandum submitted by Institute of Conservation
(ICON)
Icon is the lead voice for the conservation
of cultural heritage in the UK. Icon's membership embraces the
entire conservation community as well as members of the public
who are keen to learn more or show their support for conservation
work. Icon welcomes the Select Committee's inquiry into protecting,
preserving and making accessible our nation's heritage.
1 What the Department for Culture, Media and
Sport should identify as priorities in the forthcoming Heritage
White Paper
(i) Clarification of the long term view of
the commitment the state is prepared to make through its various
agencies to protecting, preserving and making accessible our nation's
heritage. Identification of the aspects of heritage work which
are to be publicly funded and which aspects are to be left to
private and voluntary initiative. Identifying sustainable sources
of funding for all organisations charged with the responsibility
of caring for the nation's heritage.
(ii) Implementation of the proposals identified
in the recent Heritage Protection Review.
(iii) VAT reform on repairs/maintenance.
The current regime is prejudicial to heritage protection since
new build has more favourable VAT treatment than repair and restoration.
Reform should benefit historic buildings (including the significant
number in private ownership), monuments and places of worship.
(iv) A review of the UK's tax regime to encourage
greater charitable giving to museums, galleries, archives and
charitable activities promoting access to, understanding of and
preservation of our cultural heritage.
(v) Consideration of the need for a statutory
duty of care for local authorities in respect of the Historic
Environment.
(vi) Consideration of a statutory responsibility
towards provision of museums similar to the existing provision
for libraries.
2 The remit and effectiveness of DCMS, English
Heritage and other relevant organisations in representing heritage
interests inside and outside Government
(i) There is significant duplication in the
sector. DCMS has devolved certain activities to organisations
including English Heritage and MLA but there are currently both
overlaps in what they do, and gaps filled by neither. There is
now a need to clarify each organisation's roles and responsibilities
(including that of DCMS) inside and outside Government.
(ii) Greater and more open collaboration
should be encouraged between the National Statutory bodies (English
Heritage, Historic Scotland, CADW and DOENI) to maximise resources
and improve effectiveness in dealing with heritage issues across
the UK.
(iii) DCMS sponsored bodies should be encouraged
to refocus on the heritage assets under their care as well as
on core collections activities such as preservation and conservation
which are critical in enabling access and community engagement
through exhibitions, loans and outreach. DCMS should be more aware
of and supportive of conservation and conservation science as
key activities of its sponsored bodies (eg English Heritage, MLA,
national museums, galleries, libraries and archives).
(iv) DCMS should act as a stronger advocate
for conservation and heritage issues to other Government departments,
in particular: DTI, Office of Science and Technology, DfES, ODPM,
English Nature and DEFRA. There is a need for the value of heritage
to be recognised by Government departments (and NGOs) other than
DCMS, and for heritage issues to be integrated in all appropriate
policies regardless of the department through which they are generated.
(v) DCMS and English Heritage should explore
ways to ensure wider dissemination of the results of Heritage
Counts—the state of the historic environment reports, both
within government and to the private sector. These reports should
also be extended to include data collection across the UK.
(vi) MLA needs to play a more active role
in advocating higher standards of conservation and preservation
eg through supporting the used of accredited professionals and
the use of "Benchmarks in Collections Care".
(vii) Since the restructuring of regional
agencies there is a lack of identified funding for conservation
and smaller institutions no longer have an obvious place to turn
for advice and support. Sources of funding need to be clearly
identified with greater emphasis placed on front line resources.
3 The balance between heritage and development
needs in planning policy
(i) A balance needs to be agreed between
heritage and development needs in planning policy. Regeneration
is often a pressing priority in certain areas. It can benefit
the heritage if it helps economic and social revival, leading
to an increased sense of pride in one's town or area and hence
encouraging people to take a greater interest in their heritage.
It can also open the way to increasing the number of visitors
who will come from outside the area to visit places of heritage
interest. Equally, good investment in heritage can form a core
part of a successful regeneration initiative, as the transformation
of the Bankside power station into Tate Modern or the role of
the Baltic Mill in the revival of Gateshead both illustrate. The
balance is best assured sometimes by preserving historic buildings
and environments as they are, while at other times by adapting
them to innovative uses. We advocate the view that the heritage
dimension needs to be considered as part of forward-looking regeneration
plans, and not seen as an obstacle to them. Certainly heritage
significance needs to be assessed at a very early stage in regeneration
proposals according to agreed standards and methodology (ie well
before the "Conservation Plan" methodology used by organisations
such as English Heritage and the HLF).
(ii) Professional accredited conservators
should be involved early in the planning of projects to help with
specification and adequate budget allocation to conservation processes
(of buildings and artefacts). Planning officers and architects
in particular need to be aware of professional conservators as
a resource.
(iii) Planning and development policy needs
to be supported by practical and helpful guidance in relation
to heritage issues (such as the English Heritage interim guidance
on Part I of the Building Regulations). Good practice case studies
need to be more widely published and promoted and there needs
to be a clearly-identified body with responsibility for this.
(iv) There is a need to revise PPGs which
govern planning and archaeological investigations to improve the
public benefit.
(v) Sufficient resources must be separately
identified in developer's budgets for the post-excavation care
of archaeological finds—this is an area in which there is
a great temptation to cut costs, particularly during the process
of competitive tendering. Advice notes should include proposals
for at least a minimum level of investigative conservation. If
the funding of post-excavation finds is not to be met by developers,
alternative sources must be identified.
4 Access to heritage and the position of heritage
as a cultural asset in the community
(i) The HLF has been of real benefit to the
heritage sector. The benefits have not only been in the form of
capital and buildings projects, but in the greater community involvement
with heritage and increased access to heritage for a more diverse
audience. The "Your Heritage" and "Local Heritage
Initiative" schemes have been particularly good at broadening
access to heritage and reinforcing the position of heritage as
a cultural asset in the community. Heritage can help to create
a sense of identity in a diverse society, and again the HLF has
contributed to this debate through the "Who do we think we
are?" and "Who do we want to be?" conferences.
The work of the HLF and others in this field should be supported.
(ii) Icon is committed to supporting diversity
and inclusive access to our heritage, but we believe it is important
to be sensitive to context and recognise that some institutions
will find it much more difficult to reach access and inclusion
goals than others. In particular, Government and funding agencies
need to recognise that it can be difficult for small organisations
in rural locations to meet diversity targets. This should not
undermine access to funding or distract from the good work carried
out by such organisations and their volunteers.
(iii) People find conservation fascinating,
and the more they see of it the more their interest grows. Museums
which have made some of their conservation work visible to the
public have found that this can add significant value to their
museum experience. Conservation also enriches our means of revealing
and interpreting information—as demonstrated by recent increased
media interest in heritage (such as Restoration and Time Team).
Exciting opportunities are also offered by scientific techniques
and digital technologies eg the award winning "Turning the
Pages" project developed by the British Library. Conservation
and access are not mutually exclusive; indeed conservation provides
access to collections and buildings and this message needs to
be reinforced. Conservation both makes access possible and enhances
the quality of that access, for instance by unlocking the stories
within objects.
5 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
(i) Heritage contributes to people's quality
of life and is an important tool in economic activity, regeneration
and tourism. Heritage and culture formed a significant part of
the attraction of London as the winning city for the 2012 Olympics.
A programme of conservation and maintenance is needed in advance
of the Olympics to ensure that Britain can maximise this opportunity
to proudly showcase the wealth of its heritage and enhance the
visitor experience with the additional benefit of generating future
tourism. Well maintained and presented heritage sends a strong
message of good governance and a confident society.
(ii) HLF funding has been extremely beneficial
to collections and must be protected. Heritage lottery funding
should not be cut to subsidise sport funding, particularly given
the role of heritage in enhancing the visitor experience in 2012.
(iii) It is probable that new project funding
through organisations such as HLF or the MLA Renaissance programme
is negated through cuts in LA funding of core activities and posts;
medium-sized and small museums are particularly vulnerable to
cuts in LA funding. The project culture has achieved much but
there is a problem of sustainability, of continuity of know-how
and of inadequate budgets to maintain things once a project is
over. It is not clear where continued funding for stewardship
will come from.
(iv) It is important to maintain English
Heritage's budget in real terms. This has been cut in successive
years despite the expectations placed on the organisation to deliver
increased outputs and efficiency. There is a need for clarification
as to its funding remit. English Heritage must be able to continue
to allocate grant-aid funding for conservation, both independently
and in partnership with other funding sources (eg HLF) as they
are best placed to ensure the highest standards of work while
maintaining an objective position towards value-for-money. The
English Heritage research strategy 2005-10 proposes focusing more
resources on socio-economic research. This should not be at the
expense of the valuable contribution English Heritage research
makes to the fields of conservation science and conservation techniques.
(v) Recent years have seen an increase in
funding directed towards social inclusion and diversity; this
is very a good thing but there should also be sustained funding
for the low profile collections care activities which support
collections and are required to underpin sustainable inclusion
and diversity activities.
(vi) The accountability of public funding
is very important, but the application processes to secure funding
from eg HLF are still often extremely time-consuming and complicated.
While the HLF has made significant progress in simplifying the
application process for certain small grants, there is still a
significant disincentive for small voluntary organisations and
local groups to make applications. If there is a desire to broaden
access to our heritage and understanding of it, to build community
participation and involve the widest range of stakeholders in
our heritage, it is important that these procedures be reviewed
and made as simple and as accessible as is consistent with robust
accountability
6 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
(i) In general, we are concerned that the
number of organisations which set out to "develop a strategy",
"lead initiatives" and "broker partnerships"
continues to proliferate, while resources for front-line collections
care and preservation work is always hard to course and sustain.
The recent shift of resources towards strategic approaches in
the MLA and the regional agencies has resulted in a lack of practical
support, funding and advice.
(ii) The role of professional institutes
in the sector has historically been undervalued, eg in the setting
and maintaining of standards and in the provision of expertise
to aid decision making.
(iii) Churches, their contents and churchyards
form a significant part of the nation's heritage but, other than
recent significant HLF funding, are severely under-resourced with
few dedicated funding streams. The Council for the Care of Churches
is a significant provider of conservation advice for the Church
of England but there needs to be wider recognition of, and support
for, their work. The relationship between English Nature/DEFRA
and DCMS/English Heritage when responding to the issue of bats
in churches is an example of the importance for the need for effective
cross-departmental working in providing a balance between nature
and historic conservation.
(iv) A large proportion of national heritage
is in private ownership—both buildings and collections.
Private owners need access to sources of advice and/or funding
to assist in the stewardship of this heritage, to help them improve
the extent and the quality of public access. For example, there
is an expectation to maintain grade II private buildings (of which
there is a significant number) but there is little obvious help
available to owners.
7 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
(i) Britain has an excellent reputation for
the education and training of conservators and other historic
environment experts. Conservation requires a high intensity of
training but suffers from long term prospects of low levels of
pay combined with poor and uneven opportunities for progression.
These factors all discourage access to the profession in general
and the evolution of a more diverse workforce in particular.
(ii) Icon operates the PACR (Professional
Accreditation of Conservator-Restorers) scheme which enables planning
officers, curators and the general public to identify highly qualified
and experienced conservators. Icon champions high standards in
conservation and strongly encourages organisations to use accredited
conservators (ACRs) and build requirements for the use of accredited
conservators into guidance documents associated with the commissioning
of conservation work and grant funded conservation projects.
(iii) To make conservation skills accessible
to planning officers, fellow professionals and the public, Icon
also operates the Conservation Register which provides access
to information businesses with accredited professionals. There
is no charge to the public for running searches on the Conservation
Register and the bulk of the costs of managing it are borne by
the profession. 18,000 searches for conservators were carried
out on the Conservation Register in the last year.
(iv) The important role played by the private
sector in the provision of conservation expertise should be recognised.
In some highly specialised disciplines small business may be the
only source of advice and expertise.
(v) Our heritage is not static—it is
ever growing, and the objects, artefacts and buildings we wish
to preserve today require expertise which was much less called
for in previous decades. One example is in conservation of natural
history collections in museums. Another is the conservation of
20th century machinery and technology, such as World War 2 aircraft.
As the lead body for conservation in the UK, Icon is committed
to ensuring that these emerging areas of needs are identified
and that appropriate education and training are developed to meet
them.
(vi) The skilled and professionally accredited
conservation workforce is both relatively small and, in many respects,
highly specialised. This means that entire areas of conservation
are dependent on a very small group of people. If these people
retire, die or move away from front-line conservation into managerial
roles, there is a complete absence of skills to fill the gap.
Icon is currently developing workforce profiles which will serve
to highlight these weaknesses and areas of acute need, but present
initiatives in education and training, either by Icon or by other
parties, are not sufficient to replace lost capacity in many fields.
(vii) Major national institutions such as
English Heritage, The National Trust and our leading museums galleries
and archives are both the incubators and developers of conservation
skills and the major customers for them. It is important that
they recognise this dual role and commit to developing the conservation
skills which they will expect to call on in the future. The move
to outsourcing conservation services in recent years has meant
that there are fewer in-house training opportunities than before.
For the present, institutions are able to buy in the conservation
skills which they often developed in-house in previous decades
before downsizing and outsourcing changed their workforce profile.
Icon expects that significant shortages of skills professionals
across conservation generally will appear in 10-15 years time
as an entire generation of conservators reaches retirement age.
While there are many examples of effective commitment to training
and professional development of conservators in our institutions,
we believe that overall, an effective balance between the short-term
financial benefits of outsourcing conservation work and the longer-term
cost benefits of having well trained and affordable conservators
available to undertake required work has not yet been found. Major
national institutions need to make a renewed commitment to training
new generations of conservators, and to the professional development
and accreditation of those who continue to work for them.
(viii) Future requirements for conservation
skills will be demand-led, and largely dependent on the commitment
made by major national institutions to preservation of their collections
and buildings. Given the significant investment of time and resources
required to train an expert conservator, the long-term commitment
of large organisations which commission conservation work is the
key determinant of the size and profile of the future conservation
workforce. At the moment we face the prospect of a serious mismatch
between supply and demand for conservation skills in coming years.
(ix) There are already areas of significant
skills shortage and Icon is committed to improved data gathering
and workforce profiling to guard against future crises of skills
shortage. The need for conservation skills relevant to collections
of objects and documents should not be a lower priority than the
skills relevant to the built environment. Current areas of skills
shortage include: books, ceramics, industrial and transport collections,
modern materials and stained glass. There is also a shortage of
archaeological conservators to address the work necessary for
archaeological archives and collections. Icon will be running
an HLF bursary scheme to address the shortage of work-based training
in the conservation profession. This is a significant development,
but funding is only for four years and the provision of skills
is more than a four year problem. Again, sustainability is crucial.
(x) Money for heritage conservation and preservation
is usually only available in small quantities on a project basis
and is often hard to track down. Accessing information about available
resources is often as much of a problem as the level of resource
provision itself. Icon, the MLA, MDA and the NPO are working to
establish a Collections Link service which will act as a gateway
for information on funding and other forms of support for the
MLA sector. There is a need to integrate sources of advice on
conservation through this and similar initiatives.
(xi) An assessment of the condition of the
nation's collections would be extremely beneficial as it could
inform forward planning and allowing the prioritisation of scarce
funding. Some of this information already exists in various formats
and there would be a significant benefit in drawing it all together.
(xii) The Portable Antiquities Scheme would
benefit from the incorporation of a full conservation remit. This
will ensure that metal detectorists have proper access to conservation
knowledge and that finds liaison officers can advise them correctly.
A conservation remit will help promote access to conservation
and conservation science within the community and promote the
long term preservation of metal detected finds in private or public
collections.
|
