Memorandum submitted by the National Trust
INTRODUCTION AND
SUMMARY OF
RECOMMENDATIONS
1. The National Trust welcomes the opportunity
to contribute to the House of Commons Culture, Media and Sport
Committee Inquiry into Protecting, preserving and making accessible
our nation's heritage. It comes at a critical moment for the historic
environment sector—a moment when we are engaging in major
reform of the system of heritage protection, reviews of the National
Lottery (from which the sector is a major beneficiary) and the
forthcoming Government Comprehensive Spending Review. We do so
against a backdrop of huge popular interest and support for history
and heritage as well as growing pressure on limited fiscal investment
in, and growing costs of, maintaining heritage assets people care
so passionately about.
2. The Committee's inquiry is, therefore,
a welcome opportunity to reinforce the central role the historic
environment plays in defining our sense of identity and quality
of life, to recognise the wider economic and social benefits that
it provides and to challenge the misconception that, despite huge
public interest in history and heritage, protection of the historic
environment is a barrier to progress and unworthy of investment.
3. Our key points and recommendations are:
— whilst some progress has been made,
the current public policy and funding framework fails to adequately
reflect the contemporary public value of heritage or the scale
of investment needed to care for the assets the wider benefits
heritage provides are derived from;
— in particular, the current approach
is in urgent need of reform to better reflect a bottom-up, people-focused
approach to protecting heritage all around us (rather than a simple
focus on the special and the rare) that is more responsive to
the public as well as the expert view of what is important and
why;
— the contemporary relevance of heritage
and its contribution to the nation's quality of life need to be
better understood and more effectively championed across Government—this
includes the role of heritage in relation to regeneration, culture
and national identity, education, volunteering, tourism, skills,
local environmental quality as well as the importance of heritage
for its own sake;
— addressing these weaknesses has the
potential to create some meaningful opportunities to engage more
people in understanding and taking positive action to participate
in the management of the historic environment and that seizing
such opportunities will deliver wider benefits for society as
a whole;
— the forthcoming Heritage White Paper
should be seen as an important mechanism to re-assert and establish
role of historic environment across a range Government interests—delivering
more than the legislative reforms necessary to implement the Heritage
Protection Review;
— critical action is needed to reverse
the recent decline in resources available for the maintenance
of assets themselves—including through the forthcoming Government
Comprehensive Spending Review and safeguarding the current levels
of investment in heritage from the National Lottery;
— such fiscal and policy investment
in the management of the historic environment needs to be accompanied
by measures to equip the people in the sector with the skills
and resources required to foster wider engagement—as well
as in delivering the proposed heritage protection reforms; and
— in the short term, urgent action
is needed to address some of the most pressing needs including:
— more visible leadership and support for
the historic environment across Government from the lead Department,
DCMS;
— embracing management approaches such
as public value as a means to recognise and support the public
benefits from heritage;
— development of a range of indicators
to measure progress and target resources;
— establish a new national cultural forum
to inform and oversee delivery the work of the DCMS on the culture
agenda, including the historic environment;
— development of a support package to ensure
the delivery of the current DCMS Public Service Agreement target
PSA3 on new audiences;
— introduction of a range of measures (including
a reduced rate of VAT and increased levels of investment in capital
grants for heritage) which support the repair and maintenance
of historic properties;
— fully implementing the recommendations
of the Goodison Review into support for retaining works of art
and culture that might otherwise be sold abroad;
— investment in a solution that properly
addresses the current threats to the setting of the internationally
significant site at Stonehenge;
— investment in the local authority skills
needed to deliver conservation services at a local level and in
ensuring the availability of specific building conservation and
craft skills;
— a range of measure to encourage workforce
diversification and create opportunities for career progression
across the heritage sector.
— supporting ways of managing historic
properties for visitors which help to reduce the impact of rising
traffic levels through, for example, Visitor Travel Plans; and
— give official support to local means
of identifying the importance and significance of places.
THE ROLE
OF THE
NATIONAL TRUST
4. The National Trust is Europe's largest
conservation body with over 3.3 million members, 43,000 volunteers,
an annual turnover of more than £300 million and a presence
throughout England, Wales and Northern Ireland. We currently protect
and manage on behalf of the nation over 600,000 acres of countryside
and 600 miles of coastline together with a significant proportion
of the country's designated sites and buildings of heritage significance.
This includes six World Heritage Sites, over 6,000 listed buildings,
1,200 scheduled ancient monuments, 149 registered museums and
8% of registered historic parks and gardens.
5. Our property portfolio is hugely diverse
ranging from some of the nation's most iconic and well-known sites—from
Sutton Hoo to the great country houses of Hardwick Hall or Kingston
Lacy. We also care for many of the more ordinary and everyday
elements of our rich and diverse cultural heritage. This includes
places like the Back to Backs in central Birmingham, the Workhouse
in Southwell, Nottinghamshire, over 1,000 vernacular buildings,
three lighthouses, a gold mine and the national lawn mower collection.
As well as our houses, we look after an amazing collection of
gardens and historic landscapes, like Stourhead or Sissinghurst,
have fantastic works of art, from Titian to Turner, and a rich
and diverse industrial archaeology, like the Stone Age Axe factories
in the Lake District.
6. Our approach to conserving these assets
is a creative, not static activity. We believe that ideas of historic
significance constantly change—as each generation discovers
fresh meaning and value through interacting with the historic
environment around them. Listening and involving is therefore
central to our work—helping us to understand and respond
to changing views of significance and value. As some of our more
recent acquisitions demonstrate (for example, Mendips—John
Lennon's childhood home), this both informs what we look after
as well as how we look after and interpret these assets. Our leaflet
History and Place (copy enclosed) describes our approach in more
detail.
THE ROLE
OF THE
HISTORIC ENVIRONMENT
IN THE
21ST CENTURY
7. Our starting point is the widespread
concern that all too often heritage is caricatured as a special
interest, elitist or irrelevant to contemporary issues and an
obstacle to change. This lack of understanding impedes and undermines
the wider role that the heritage sector can play in delivering
benefits across the Government's agenda and to society as a whole.
It also takes too little account of the profound changes that
have transformed our society in recent decades and the impact
this has had on society's view of heritage.
8. Post-war moves to preserve a way of life
defined by privilege, private interest and academic nostalgia
have long given way to a bottom-up, people-focused and consumer-driven
search for more meaning and resonance in our daily lives. Globalisation,
changing lifestyles, increased communication, political devolution,
multiculturalism and the emergence of a strong voluntary sector
have all led to changes in the way we think, feel and act towards
our local environment and heritage and how it reflects our sense
of identity and community.
9. As History and Place demonstrates, conservation
bodies like the National Trust have responded to and embraced
this wider societal change, no longer simply preserving places,
but learning to manage change and engage people in the process
in ways that benefit them as well as their heritage. We are concerned,
however, that this approach is stifled by a public policy framework
which is no longer fit for purpose—an approach that is pre-occupied
with sites and special places rather than the wider historic environment,
that fails to sufficiently embrace and engage the community and
lay person's views and values alongside that of the expert, and
an approach that fails to promote and connect the positive contribution
of the historic environment across a whole range of contemporary
social, economic and cultural issues.
10. The Select Committee Inquiry is, therefore,
a welcome opportunity to examine the ways in which heritage enriches
lives and stimulates enterprise and to recommend ways in which
public policy and investment can respond to contemporary needs
and this more democratic, individualistic and immensely popular
concept of heritage. The popularity of heritage was most recently
confirmed by Taking Part the DCMS's own research into participation
levels across its range of interests—with visits to historic
sites coming top of the list.
11. We believe the historic environment
is about ordinary people and ordinary places as well as iconic
sites and rare artefacts. Heritage is a source of inspiration
and learning for us all and makes a huge contribution to the quality
of people's lives and the distinctiveness of the places, both
rural and urban, we inhabit. Engaging people in the local significance
of these real places and objects contributes to a sense of community,
underpins quality of life and can make the difference between
aspiration and disillusionment. We know from our practical experience,
enabling 500,000 school visits, inspiring over 43,000 volunteers
and engaging thousands more in a wide range of ways, including
the re-skilling of offenders, that opportunities to understand,
experience and contribute to real places promotes well-being and
confidence in individuals.
12. Distinctiveness also makes business
sense, driving tourism and creative industries, and generating
employment and demand for skills. Managers of the historic environment
are investors in local economies: buying and attracting services,
building financial and social capital, caring for public spaces
and creating new models of development in rural and urban areas.
Our research shows that each National Trust job generates between
five and nine full time equivalents in the local economy (see
copy of Valuing our Environment (enclosed)). Heritage is a fixed
asset and a critical part of our infrastructure, already widely
valued and likely to become a bigger influence in decisions over
where people and businesses want to locate, and how people spend
their leisure time or go on holiday. For example, research for
Visit Britain find that history, heritage and culture are all
important attractors for international tourists to this country.
It is, therefore, a powerful yet vulnerable resource which, harnessed
effectively and with the right support, can make a major contribution
to the Government's objectives for economic, social and environmental
progress.
13. Despite growing recognition that heritage
matters, it remains in very real need of investment and protection.
Only 5% of our historic environment is protected by statutory
legislation, and the annual State of the Historic Environment
Reports shows that even protected sites are at risk. The costs
of building and repair work are inevitably higher for conservation
work and are likely to escalate the longer work is left undone.
The National Trust alone estimates that our maintenance backlog
for buildings and their contents is over £200 million. This
is at a time when building costs are rising faster than the general
rate of inflation and the voluntary sector is struggling to bear
the burden of rising pension costs, insurance premiums and low
investment returns. Successful regeneration projects in places
as diverse as Grainger Town, Newcastle and the Lizard, Cornwall
have shown how timely intervention can release private capital
and restore optimism, but the lessons learnt there have yet to
be applied more widely or enshrined in planning policy, and more
innovative fiscal solutions remain untested.
14. We are determined not to see this potential
wasted, and recognise the need to do more ourselves in promoting
and championing the historic environment. As well as seeking to
get our own house in order, we have been working closely with
our partners in the historic environment sector to address fragmentation
and ensure a more coherent voice and articulation of the benefits
and needs of the sector. This has included supporting the establishment
of Heritage Link and leading the development of sector-wide priorities
and activity (which have been developed in isolation from any
Government commitment to its own contribution) to help us modernise,
broaden our appeal and deliver greater public benefit. Critically,
unless such activity is supported by wider reform and investment
from Government, we will struggle to realise the true potential
of heritage.
15. The sections below set out the case
for such wider reform.
1. What the DCMS should identify as priorities
in the forthcoming Heritage White Paper.
Role of the Heritage White Paper
16. As part of the welcome modernisation
of the system of the heritage protection (the Heritage Protection
Review (HPR)), DCMS has committed to the development of a Heritage
White Paper. To date, however, the Department has been keen to
play down expectations of the White Paper and to view it narrowly
as a vehicle for the legislative reform to deliver the HPR. We
believe this would be a missed opportunity.
17. The Heritage White Paper is one of the
few Government heritage initiatives that potentially has a profile
beyond DCMS and, as a result, could provide a significant vehicle
to demonstrate the role and value of the nation's cultural heritage
across a range of Government policy areas and Departments. By
setting the heritage protection reforms within a wider context
of the historic environment's role in contributing to quality
of life and sustainable development, the Heritage White Paper
could offer an important opportunity to build support. In so doing
it should provide the next step in the process of understanding
and strengthening the role of the historic environment initiated
by the heritage sector in Power of Place and confirmed in the
Government White Paper The Historic Environment: A Force for our
Future.
Priorities within the Heritage White Paper
18. As well as setting a vision for the
historic environment as a whole and challenging some of the commonly
held misconceptions about the historic environment which inhibit
its management and support, the White Paper should:
— make the case for the better protection
and management of the historic environment—outlining its
role in improving our quality of life, fostering community identity
and engagement and underpinning both urban and rural regeneration;
— look beyond the boundaries of existing
statutory designations and the predominantly "expert"
view in determining what is important and why, towards a system
of heritage protection that engages a range of people in the process
and values the local and the everyday as much as the precious
and the rare; and
— better integrate heritage protection
and incentives with other systems of protection and support, including
agricultural support and land use planning—ultimately introducing
a programme of measures to ensure heritage assets are maintained
in favourable condition—a mix of fiscal incentives, capital
investment, public policy and skills.
19. A key element of the White Paper should
rightly focus on the delivery of the Heritage Protection Review.
This should seek to ensure the effective management of, and engagement
with, the historic environment in ways that ultimately "democratises"
and encourages positive engagement with the historic environment
without weakening the existing levels of protection.
20. Overall, the National Trust is very
supportive of the approach adopted by DCMS and with the changes
being made. This includes the creation of a single and unified
List of heritage assets and the enhanced responsibilities for
English Heritage. We are working closely with English Heritage
on a couple of the on-going pilot projects and look forward to
sharing and discussing the lessons from these initiatives as they
emerge. At this stage, we have four key concerns which it would
be helpful to explore during the course of the Committee's inquiry.
These are:
— Delivery Capacity: There is widespread
concern that, despite the welcome thrust of the proposed reforms,
they will become unstuck by limited capacity across the sector
to deliver them—especially, but not exclusively, in local
authorities. What guarantees can the Government give that the
reformed system will be adequately resourced? What plans does
it have to assess the delivery needs of the new system at local
level? What does it see as the needs of the wider heritage sector
(including the voluntary sector) in preparing for the new system
and what plans do they have to support these needs?
— Scope of Protection: Whilst the proposed
reforms address many of our key heritage assets, we are concerned
that they fail to enhance the protection and profile for historic
parks and gardens, including their setting. We know from our own
experience that such assets are tremendously popular and yet they
currently enjoy only the weakest levels of protection and the
proposed reforms will do little to address the problem. As a result,
some of our most popular landscapes and gardens, for example the
setting of Kedleston Hall on the outskirts of Derby or Saltram
on the edge of Exeter, are being undermined and eroded by incremental
change and development.
— Tools for Engagement: Our hope is
that the proposed reforms should result in greater levels of engagement
in the historic environment—helping people to understand
and engage in decisions about what is protected and why, how it
is managed and its wider use. We believe greater emphasis could
be given to using and developing a range of engagement tools—including
the use of Statements of Significance—to deliver this;
— Sector Skills and Competence: Delivering
a reformed heritage system in which more people are engaged with
the historic environment requires more than a change in the process—it
also requires a change in culture and ways of working. It requires
an approach in which people (rather than simply places) move centre
stage. For many currently operating the system, this already lies
at the heart of what they do but for others, communicating and
engaging people in the historic environment will require a new
skills set and confidence in dealing with people. The delivery
of the HPR needs, therefore, to be accompanied by a programme
of development of the sector's communication and engagement techniques
and skills.
2. The remit and effectiveness of DCMS, English
Heritage and other relevant organisations in representing heritage
interests inside and outside Government
Understanding Heritage Interests and Impacts
21. Heritage is all around us and not just
in self-contained sites. It delivers a wide range of benefits
and is relevant across Government. These benefits are not always
immediately visible and, as a result, a key role for DCMS as the
heritage champion within Government is to identify, raise awareness
and support for promoting and enhancing the positive contribution
of the historic environment in its many dimensions, including
meeting its needs. Of particular importance are the links with
ODPM on land use planning and regeneration and with Defra on local
environmental quality, sustainable development, cultural landscapes
and land management. But there are also important Departmental
and policy links with the Home Office on volunteering and community
engagement; the DfES on out of classroom learning and skills;
and the DTI on regional productivity.
Role and Effectiveness of DCMS
22. DCMS currently has this critical role.
We are concerned, however, that this is not properly being fulfilled
and that important opportunities to enhance the contribution of
the historic environment are being missed and the overall quality
of the historic environment undermined. Whilst it is important
to acknowledge the progress that has been made, for example in
taking forward the Heritage Protection Review, and the attention
the Secretary of State gave to heritage in her pamphlet Better
Places to Live, much more needs to be done. Of critical importance
is the need to address the visible impact of the Department on
cross-Government agendas. This includes the failure to address
the "national disgrace" that is the current state of
the Stonehenge World Heritage Site; the lack of visible evidence
of the Department playing a role in shaping major Government investment
programmes (like the ODPM's Sustainable Communities Programme);
standing up for heritage in the face of major developments that
threaten heritage assets (such as the impact of the Stansted Airport
expansion plans on Hatfield Forest); tackling the low priority
given to the historic environment at a regional level—including
with Regional Development Agencies; and capitalising on opportunities
to promote the contribution of heritage to other agendas (for
example, out of classroom learning). Moreover, some of the mechanisms
introduced by Government in The Historic Environment: A Force
for Our Future to better integrate heritage interests across Government
(ie the "heritage proofing" role for Green Ministers)
have proven inadequate and lacked commitment.
23. Such weaknesses are perhaps symptomatic
of wider problems within the Department itself. By comparison
with other Departments with which the National Trust deals, DCMS
performs poorly as a champion for its sector. In particular, we
would like to highlight to the Committee the problems caused by:
— the lack of priority given to the
historic environment within DCMS itself. For example, there are
only 17 mentions given to heritage or the historic environment
given in the Department's current five year plan and it regularly
fails to secure Ministerial attention or be promoted by DCMS.
Only 23 out of 146 press announcements last year had a heritage
focus. This is despite the DCMS's own evidence that heritage is
the most popular aspect of the Department's areas of responsibility—with
the recent participation survey Taking Part showing the most frequent
activity undertaken by the public was visiting historic sties.
This makes it difficult for the wider sector to engage and contribute
to more mainstream initiatives—both internal and external
to the Department;
— the lack of resources and delivery
plan supporting the PSA target for the historic environment (PSA3).
Whilst we broadly welcome the target to encourage greater access
to the historic environment to new audiences, there are very real
risks that sector will fail to deliver it. We believe the process
of developing the target is symptomatic of the lack of political
and senior level support for the historic environment within the
Department. This included a lack of engagement of the sector responsible
for delivering the target when it was broadened beyond English
Heritage in 2005, the failure to allocate additional resources
to support delivery and the lack of a clear delivery plan. Whilst
a group has now been established to help develop a delivery plan
(which includes the National Trust), the lack of additional resources
to fully embrace the challenge of reaching new audiences remains
a real obstacle; and
— missed opportunities to join up internally.
For example, the historic environment struggled to get recognised
in the DCMS voluntary sector work and an earlier pamphlet on culture
(published by the Secretary of State in 2004) failed to mention
the important role of the historic environment in relation to
culture. This was later remedied by a subsequent pamphlet Better
Places to Live. Despite the welcome broadening and integration
of the brief for the new Culture Minister, linking historic environment
with the wider work of the department remains difficult with new
challenges including the preparations for the Olympic Games in
London in 2012.
24. If heritage is to secure its proper
place in the lifeblood of the nation, DCMS needs to become a more
committed and effective champion of the historic environment.
We believe the arrival of a new and energetic Minister (with a
broad portfolio) is a real opportunity to redress the current
imbalance and low priority given to heritage. The challenges are
to ensure the visibility of the historic environment internally
and across Government, to constantly challenge the caricatures
and sell the positive contribution of the historic environment
to quality of life, to champion heritage for its own sake (making
a robust case for investment) and building the capacity of sector
help with the wider reform and modernisation of heritage management
and public engagement. Without more substantial progress on these
and other fronts we believe the case for exploring alternative
structures to DCMS for dealing with our cultural heritage may
need to be explored.
25. As highlighted above, the Heritage White
Paper is a key opportunity to raise the game—to establish
the rationale and support for heritage investment (in policy and
fiscal terms)—and the outcome of the forthcoming Comprehensive
Spending Review will be a tangible measure of both the Department's
and wider Government's willingness and commitment to this agenda.
We look forward to working closely with the Department as it prepares
the case for greater investment in the historic environment.
26. As well as a greater commitment to the
historic environment, we believe there is also a case for the
establishment of a national cultural forum—that reflects
the make-up of the English regional Cultural Consortia. This new
mechanism would seek to better integrate the historic environment
into DCMS's work and oversee delivery of the on-going reforms
in ways that allow for greater participation of key sector stakeholders.
Overall Role and Effectiveness of English Heritage
27. Following the most recent Quinquennial
review of English Heritage, it has played an increasingly important
role in growing and developing the heritage sector as well as
providing clear and independent advice to Government on historic
environment issues. Some of the most recent and welcome developments
include the role English Heritage has played in supporting Regional
Historic Environment Fora, developing the annual Heritage Counts
reports (which monitor the state of the historic environment and
create a valuable platform to highlight the benefits of heritage
as well as the need for greater investment), its support for Heritage
Link (which provides a valuable focus for collaborative action
within the sector), and its increasingly participative approach
to research and developing projects (especially through the Historic
Environment Review Executive Committee and the Heritage Forum).
28. A key problem, however, has been the
ability of English Heritage to influence wider policy and investment
and to build wider support for the historic environment. This
is due, to a large extent, to the low priority given to the historic
environment by DCMS as well as wider Government we highlighted
above. This has been exacerbated by the overall reduction in grant
in aid to English Heritage in real terms over the last five years—undermining
its work in many areas including its critical role in providing
grants for conservation work.
29. This lack of support and cut in resources
has been exacerbated by the uncertainty created about the future
of English Heritage and other public sector heritage bodies following
DCMS's stated intention in its five-year plan to "take a
radical look at the way heritage bodies work together to preserve
and provide access to heritage and the built environment".
Whist we believe more could be done to enhance the role of English
Heritage—especially in relation to its support for the wider
historic environment sector—we believe it is more important
to give it the time and resources needed to deliver the benefits
of recent reforms and to further develop its enhanced role. In
other words, we believe the proposed plans for wider reform of
English Heritage as indicated in five-year plan would be an unwelcome
distraction at this time and urge the Committee to call for a
clear statement from DCMS to this effect. Instead, we believe
DCMS should redouble its support for English Heritage and the
historic environment and, in particular, reverse the decent decline
in grant in aid.
30. Recent cuts in the English Heritage
budget, however, have highlighted the underlying tensions between
its role as an advisor, sponsor, regulator and provider of historic
environment assets. We are concerned that when resources are tight,
the current terms of reference and the role of English Heritage
in managing sites can place the organisation in an invidious position
of having to make choices between its responsibility to look after
the assets in its direct management, its role as an advisor and
its ability to deliver wider sector support.
31. We, believe, therefore, there may be
advantages in formalising the key role of English Heritage in
sponsoring and developing the sector—provided such reforms
are backed with the resources needed to make this a reality. Key
areas which would benefit additional resources and clarity would
include:
— supporting the proposed national
cultural consortia and ensuring the sector is represented and
engaged in policy development and delivery at a national level;
— leading the development and supporting
delivery of strategic sector priorities—building on the
success of the Historic Environment Review Executive Committee;
and
— developing and sharing best practice
tools and techniques across a range of areas of expertise including
deepening and broadening public engagement with the historic environment.
Role and Effectiveness of Other Bodies
32. Given the broad scope of the historic
environment, there are also a range of other bodies that have
a significant impact on the sector and the wider management of
our cultural heritage. In particular, we would highlight the following
bodies:
— Museums, Libraries and Archives—the
MLA, with its targeted remit and dedicated support, has played
a critical role in raising awareness and fostering support for
the museum, library and archives sector. The Renaissance in the
Regions initiative has, in particular, provided a catalyst for
wider reform and development of this sector at a regional and
local level. The National Trust, with 149 registered museums welcomes
our recent accreditation as a museums authority and looks forward
to working more closely with the MLA in the coming years. As both
a major player in the museums world and a leading body within
the heritage sector, we would welcome greater joint working between
the MLA and English Heritage and other heritage sector bodies—to
share resources, expertise and wider support for the sector. A
current area of concern remains the lack of progress in fully
implementing the recommendations of the Goodison Review Securing
the Best for Museums: Private Giving and Government Support which
looked at the support to regional and national museums and galleries
to help them acquire works of art and culture of distinction that
might otherwise be sold abroad.
— Heritage Lottery Fund—the HLF
has had a hugely positive impact on the sector—changing
attitudes and perceptions about who and what heritage is for (including
targeted support for the local and everyday, as well as special
and rare); driving culture change within the sector (specifically
on social inclusion and engagement); and critically funding capital
investment—for which there are limited other opportunities
or bodies to turn to. Its support has enable the Trust to undertake
major renovation work (for example, at Hardwick Hall, Derbyshire);
acquire some of most exciting and significant properties (for
example, Tyntesfield near Bristol and the Chambre Hardman photographic
studio at Rodney Street in Liverpool); and to develop our participative
approach to conservation—engaging new and existing audiences
in our work and deriving wider benefits to society (for example,
our innovative approach to interpretation and the arts—Untold
Story).
— Heritage Link and the wider voluntary
sector—Much of the energy of the historic environment sector
comes from the diverse range of voluntary groups and local organisations
that it comprises. In its relatively short life, Heritage Link
has rapidly become an invaluable focus for the sector, enabling
greater participation of the voluntary sector in policy development;
helping to combine and build our influence; and sharing and developing
our capacity and expertise. Underpinned by welcome support from
English Heritage, it delivers well above its weight and with more
support can deliver more for the sector and the public.
— Private Owners—It is also important
to recognise that the vast majority of heritage assets are in
private ownership. The HHA has an important role to play in representing
the interests of privately owned houses and more work is needed
to ensure private owners are adequately supported in their work
looking after the historic assets in their care. There are also
opportunities through the Heritage Protection Review, to do more
to engage and build the support of private owners for heritage
management.
3. The balance between heritage and development
needs in planning policy
33. The protection of heritage assets and
regeneration are all too often seen as opposing forces. Heritage
is misunderstood as a barrier to progress—something that
needs to be overcome to enable development to take place. We know
from our own experience, however, that the reality is that with
care and attention heritage protection and regeneration can go
hand in hand. Indeed, research has shown that heritage protection
can deliver greater regeneration benefits (see, for example, the
English Heritage report Heritage Dividend). Our own work investing
in our properties shows the positive contribution of heritage
protection to economic and community regeneration.
34. Whilst we accept that we cannot protect
everything, we believe that given the positive benefits of heritage
protection, current levels of protection are not strong enough.
We see the impacts of this lack of protection across our estate—from
the threats of major development to the more insidious impacts
of small-scale change. For example:
— the growing urban sprawl of Derby
around the classical Palladian mansion and surrounding Robert
Adam designed parkland at Kedleston Hall is eroding the setting
and integrity of this important asset;
— the proposed major development at
Stansted Airport, and the new second runway proposal, will potentially
have a devastating impact on the ecology and tranquil character
of the ancient hunting ground of Hatfield Forest and on the countryside
and settlements nearby; and
— the numerous insensitively located
telecommunications masts and wind turbines in and around the Lake
District are disturbing much treasured views and tranquillity
of this important landscape.
35. The recently published primary planning
policy statement PPS1 states that planning should facilitate and
promote sustainable development by "protecting and enhancing
the natural and historic environment, the quality and character
of the countryside and existing communities". This is a welcome
principle, and an improvement on earlier drafts of the PPS but
it is still too early to assess its impact on the wider planning
and development control process. In the meantime we still await
the long overdue revision of Planning Policy Guidance notes 15
and 16 (following the Heritage Protection Review)—which
should clearly set out why planning authorities should be committed
to protecting and enhancing the historic environment and ensure
planning authorities have the tools needed to deliver this. This
includes communities and planners having the tools and knowledge
to understand what is important and why (see Recharging the
Power of Place: Valuing local significance (copy enclosed)).
36. As important as ensuring the planning
policy framework encourages and supports the protection of the
historic environment is ensuring those implementing or engaging
with the planning system understand and support the contribution
of the historic environment to regeneration and a range of other
objectives. The work of English Heritage in actively engaging
local authorities, developers and other partners at an early stage
of planning and development is critical—and maximises the
chances of securing a win-win outcome.
4. Access to heritage and the position of
heritage as a cultural asset in the community
The Benefits of Access to the Historic Environment
37. As we highlighted in paragraphs 7 to
15 above, we believe heritage has a central role to play as a
cultural and community asset in the 21st century. History and
heritage are enjoying tremendous popularity and public interest.
Membership of organisations like the National Trust and English
Heritage are at record levels, TV schedules packed with history
programmes and the DCMS Taking Part survey found that visiting
a historic environment site was the most popular activity across
the DCMS's range of interests.
38. We believe this interest is being driven
by a wider desire to understand our place in the world, to find
meaning and resonance in our daily lives. Providing access to
the historic environment also provides a range of wider benefits
including fostering social inclusion, encouraging community engagement,
generating civic pride, and underpinning national and cultural
identity. There are also wider economic benefits of heritage which
we highlighted above. Such benefits come over and above the intrinsic
value of heritage—its existence value.
39. The National Trust is committed to fulfilling
our core purpose of looking after special place for ever, for
everyone. Access is central to what we do and what we stand for.
Indeed it was a primary motivation for our founders including
Octavia Hill, the social reformer, who was passionate about ensuring
people had access to beautiful and inspiring places as a means
of improving their lives. We have stayed true to this passion
throughout our existence and currently invest significantly in
ensuring access to our properties and that this experience is
a rewarding one. We welcome over 12 million visits to our pay
for entry properties each year and over 50 million to our open
countryside and coastal properties. We also offer a range of deeper
levels of engagement including catering for 500,000 school visits,
33,000 students in formal education, 43,000 volunteers (without
whom we couldn't open—but the vast majority of whom really
enjoy and value the experience) and countless projects from theatre
and arts projects to wildlife walks, tours, talks and other events.
40. Such opportunities provide a range of
wider benefits. For example, a recent evaluation of our volunteering
effort Vital Volunteers (copy enclosed) found that their work
for the Trust also helped our volunteers to develop new skills,
widen horizons, make friends, keep active and feel good about
the fact that they are giving something back to the community.
More recently, we have evaluated the long term impacts of our
education programmes. Some of our early findings are that engaging
with the National Trust properties has helped pupils understand
and feel responsible for their local environment and to develop
social skills like tolerance, group work and understanding different
perspectives.
41. A growing concern has been the impacts
of the tourism and leisure sector's dependence on visitors arriving
by car. Research show that the distance travelled for day trips
in the UK has increased more than 30% since 1985. More than seven
out of ten day trips, and nearly eight of ten holiday trips are
currently made by car. Not only is such car dependence (sensitive
to increases or shortages in fuel), the impacts of traffic and
traffic management can damage the quality of the visitor experience
and undermine the assets visitors are attracted by in the first
place. Our leaflet Visitor Travel: Policy from Practice (copy
enclosed) outlines the scope of the problem and makes a series
of recommendations to tackle these. In particular, we urge the
Committee to call on DCMS to work with DfT and Defra to develop
ways of managing historic properties for visitors which help reduce
the impacts of rising traffic levels.
Reaching New Audiences and PSA3
42. The National Trust is committed to deepening
and broadening our engagement with the public. Whilst we have
been concerned about the process by which the current PSA3 target
was established, we are committed to supporting its delivery.
To be successful, however, we need help. Not only does reaching
new audiences require significant investment in marketing and
product design (and in many respects is a business risk), it also
requires the tools and expertise to engage new and different audiences
and it comes at a time when we as an organisation are focusing
on deepening our engagement with existing audiences.
43. If we are to maximise access to the
historic environment then some of the key barriers we will need
to address include:
— challenging perceptions among new
audiences about what we are about—demonstrating our wider
relevance;
— understanding their needs and developing
"offers" that reflect these needs and interests; and
— ensuring our staff and volunteers
are trained and feel comfortable about welcoming new visitors.
44. We look forward to working with DCMS
and our sector partners in making the vision underlying the demanding
PSA3 target a reality. This means ensuring the subsequent delivery
plan addresses the key issues and develops the tools and techniques
to tackle these.
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
Costs and Levels of Support for Maintenance and
Repair
45. The costs of maintaining and managing
the assets which so many people care about and from which the
benefits we have outlined above are derived, is becoming a major
concern and challenge—for the National Trust and the wider
sector. For example, the Trust's current backlog of maintenance
work amounts to more than £200 million, and this is over
and above our short term and regular maintenance costs. More widely,
English Heritage estimates the total amount needed to bring all
the buildings on the buildings at risk register into a good state
of repair to be over £400 million.
46. We face such costs against a backdrop
of declines in real terms of available resources and support.
This includes the cuts in English Heritage grants, pressure on
resources available through the National Lottery and a threat
in the medium term of reductions in support available through
other channels such as the agri-environment schemes. For example,
over the last three years the Trust has seen a 38% reduction in
grant support from English Heritage. This grant is used to support
the maintenance and repair costs in places like Hardwick and Keddleston
Halls and for activity which is not eligible for support from
any other public funds. Such pressure on resources has a knock-on
impact on other parts of our work. For example, as our limited
resources are absorbed into maintaining the fabric of the assets
in our care, so our ability to find the resources needed to develop
and broaden appeal is undermined.
Benefits of Heritage Investment
47. We know, however, that investing in
heritage assets can deliver a range of wider benefits. For example,
the National Trust's Valuing our Environment work demonstrated
that our activities in looking after the historic and natural
environments alone generate between five and nine additional full
time jobs for every person (Full Time Equivalent) directly employed
by the Trust. It also demonstrated the wider connections between
a high quality environment and a healthy economy—with, for
example, up to 70% of jobs created through tourism dependent upon
the quality of the environment.
48. More widely, there is a range of research
that demonstrates the broad benefits of heritage investment. For
example:
— the Heritage Dividend report
for English Heritage found that £10,000 of heritage investment
levers £46,000 match funding from the private sector and
public sources;
— research on behalf of the Association
of English Cathedrals and English Heritage found that the additional
spend in the local economy by visitors to cathedrals was estimated
to be some £91 million a year. When additional multipliers
are added to this, the total economic impact rises to £150
million; and
— a report for Heritage Link into the
contribution of the voluntary sector to regeneration The Heritage
Dynamo found that local conservation groups rather than being
an obstacle to change were a catalyst for action—spotting
opportunities for investment, providing skills and advice and
generating economic benefits for the local area.
49. More recently, we have been exploring
new methods of assessing the benefits of heritage investment—including
the concept of public value. This has found a way of capturing
both the economic and wider social or public benefits of historic
places. This includes, for example, the fact that over 90% of
our visitors leave our properties having learned something—whether
or not that was a motivation for going there in the first place.
It is helping us find ways of assessing and measuring the true
value of heritage—as people experience it—and the
value of investing in the care of the assets themselves.
50. With the Government now preparing for
its Comprehensive Spending Review in 2007, there is now a critical
and important opportunity to reverse this recent cycle of decline
in heritage investment. This needs to go beyond the restoration
of English Heritage grant and the retention of a heritage strand
to Lottery to consider the whole range of ways in which Government
can support the historic environment. This includes:
— a reduction in the level of VAT on
repairs;
— fiscal incentives for the management
of heritage assets in private ownership;
— developing an approach to tax efficient
giving which supports the donation of heritage assets, such as
lifetime legacies;
— support for skills and capital investment
through agri-environment measures; and
— incentives to address the loss and
dispersal of collections from their local or historical context
and to meet the challenge of conserving them in the long term
(implementing the Goodison Review).
Impact of Olympics
51. The success of London securing the 2012
Olympic Games presents both tremendous opportunities as well as
some potential threats to the heritage sector. On the positive
side, the prominence of heritage sites and assets in the bid itself,
and the role of our cultural heritage as an integral part of the
UK's tourism offer, means the Games and the publicity around them
potentially provide a once in a lifetime opportunity to showcase
this to the world and raise awareness of their inherent and wider
value. Funding and ensuring a successful Games will inevitably
demand a diversion of attention and potentially much needed resources
away from the existing good causes. The challenge is to maximise
the potential and minimise any short-term negative impact. Critically,
it will be important to ensure the reality of attending the Games
and experiencing our unique heritage meets visitor expectations—especially
if to encourage repeat and longer-term benefits of the Games.
52. We are already engaging with DCMS and
others to ensure the success of the Games and to make the most
of the opportunities they create for the historic environment.
Our main concerns are that:
— the heritage assets showcased in
the run-up and during the Games are in good condition and that
there is a lasting and meaningful legacy from the Games for the
wider heritage sector. This includes seriously addressing the
transport solutions that are urgently needed to address the loss
of tranquillity and quality of Stonehenge, exploring the value
of establishing a new Sporting Heritage Trust (to care for some
of most important sporting heritage sites and stories) and a general
raising of public and political awareness and understanding of
heritage and its value;
— there is a strong focus on domestic
marketing (rather than a concentration on international visitors)—to
reduce the potential displacement of current domestic visits and
make the most of the economic impact of the Games (as most people
attending will be UK residents);
— a historic environment visitor offer
is developed that seeks to spread and lengthen the impact of the
Games beyond London; and
— the development of the cultural programme
for the Games with a strong heritage focus is launched in Liverpool
(City of Culture 2008) in 2008 and is designed to build up to
the Olympics themselves.
6. Roles and responsibilities for English
Heritage, Heritage Lottery Fund, local authorities, museums and
galleries, charitable and other non-Governmental organisations
in maintaining the nation's heritage
53. See previous answer to question 2.
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
54. There is also growing evidence that
as well as the lack of funding to support the maintenance of heritage
assets, a shortage in the availability of maintenance skills is
making the job all the more difficult. This shortage has been
identified in a number of reports including by the National Heritage
Training Group and a skills mapping exercise undertaken by Heritage
Link. We have recently secured funding from the HLF to develop
a new heritage building skills bursary scheme with English Heritage
which should help address some of the key shortages but a more
concerted effort to address the issue of skills is needed. This
includes raising the profile of the heritage sector with the new
sector skills councils—including the Creative and Cultural
Industries Sector Skills Council. Some of the more generic issues
that need to addressed, in addition to shortages of people with
specific skills, include career progression, workforce diversity
and volunteer management.
55. As well as ensuring we have the skills
needed to maintain our heritage assets, we also need to ensure
we have the skills and resources needed to manage the new system
of heritage management. This has a number of dimensions including:
— the numbers and capacity of staff
(especially in local authorities) to deliver the new system of
protection;
— the skills and understanding of these
people of the requirements of the new system—which potentially
impacts on private owners, volunteers and voluntary organisations
who are also engaged in heritage management; and
— ensuring that all of those people
involved in heritage are equipped with the skills and confidence
to communicate and importance and value of the historic environment—to
build support, encourage engagement and ensure the heritage in
our care reflects the contemporary views and values of people
today.
January 2006
| 
