Memorandum submitted by the Business Archives
Council
1. INTRODUCTION:
BUSINESS ARCHIVES
COUNCIL
The BAC, founded in 1934, advocates the preservation
of business records of historical importance; supplies advice
and information on business archives and modern records; encourages
interest in and study of business history and archives; and provides
a forum for the custodians and users of business archives. Membership
includes corporate patrons, corporate members, institutional members
(such as record offices, libraries and museums) and individual
members.
The BAC is a registered charity and its activities
are undertaken by its trustees and members on an entirely voluntary
basis.
This submission has been prepared specifically
for consideration by the Committee.
2. FUNDING
— Archives are very much the poor
relation of the heritage sector. They are often owned and funded
by organisations and institutions that place the support of archives
very low on their list of priorities. For instance, local record
offices are run and funded by local authorities, and corporate
archives are owned and funded by the businesses which created
them. In these kinds of environments, the budgets of archive services
are vulnerable to being cut or frozen in order to extend the budgets
of other parts of the organisation which are perceived to be of
a higher priority. The core services of an archive repository
- providing adequate accommodation for the archives and the skilled
staff to care for them and make them accessible - are often underfunded.
As a result, archives are kept in conditions detrimental to their
survival and staff are unable to develop the archive services
to fulfil their potential.
— The archives sector receives
a tiny fraction of the financial support which has been extended
to Museums and Libraries through funding from the DCMS. In 2005-06,
the DCMS spent almost £340 million on museums and galleries,
and a further £8.6 million on local libraries whilst archives
received a mere £0.3 million.
— Archives have been able to access
funds from The Heritage Lottery Fund, indeed in some cases the
HLF has been the only source of money to improve archives collections
and open them up to new audiences. However, these funds can only
be used to support specific projects and do not address the underlying
problem of lack of funding for the core businesses of archive
services.
— Privately owned archives, including
those of many businesses, often are unable to get support from
public funds to improve the care of their archive collections
or to widen their use—even though a clear public benefit
can be proven from these activities.
— Although the Designation scheme
for collections of national importance has now been extended from
museums to include archives, there are at present no new funding
streams available for these designated archives.
3. ACQUISITION
AND DISPOSAL
POLICIES
— Most archive services have very
limited funds available for acquisition - most take in records
of historical importance through deposits or loans. Although there
are some funds available for help with acquiring archives—for
instance the V&A purchase grants—these would not be
adequate to secure the purchase of a large and valuable archive
collection.
— Archive services need to continue
collecting archives to ensure that the historical record does
not remain static and frozen at a certain date. This has inevitable
consequences for resources—as archives continue to collect,
so they will need larger accommodation; the new archives will
need conserving and cataloguing; and staff time needs to spent
in deciding exactly what to collect. However, the historic lack
of underfunding for archives means that in many cases, archive
services are unable to devote the requisite resources to collecting
new archives.
— There are a certain amount of
gaps in the collecting policies of the archive sector. For instance,
although the records of local businesses are collected by county
record offices, it can be difficult to find homes for the records
of national businesses. These collections can often be very large
and many record offices do not have the capacity to house the
material, or the staff resources to conserve or catalogue it.
Some universities have developed specialised archives where these
fit with the research interests of the university—for instance
the Museum of English Rural Life at the University of Reading
collects the business records of the agricultural sector—and
these accept business archive collections where they fit with
their collecting policies. However, the coverage is not comprehensive
for all industries and inevitably there are business records that
do not come within the remit of any collecting repository.
— This situation leads to periodic
crises in the archive sector especially when a national business
closes or fails and its records become effectively homeless with
no repository willing or able to take them in. If the records
are in the hands of administrators, then the situation is exacerbated
as an attempt is made to sell them at a high price. Many business
records of national significance have almost been lost because
of these factors.
— An encouraging new initiative
is working to address some of the issues outlined above. The Business
Archives Council, The National Archives and a number of other
organisations are working together to provide funding and support
for a new post—The Business Records Development Officer.
The postholder is working on the first National Strategy for Business
Archives, and also works with local archives and business organisations
to identify where business records may be at risk and how best
to save them. Unfortunately, at present this important post only
has funding for two years.
4. REMIT AND
EFFECTIVENESS OF
DCMS, MLA AND OTHER
ORGANISATIONS
— DCMS seems a little unsure about
its commitment to archives. It rarely mentions archives in its
literature or priorities, and it does not have an individual within
the department whose sole responsibility is archives. This may
be due partly to the situation of split responsibility for archives
within government—the DCA is responsible for The National
Archives; and the DCLG is responsible for local authorities and
their record offices. All these bodies were previously brought
together through IDAC (Inter-Departmental Archives Committee)
but it is our understanding that the powers and remit of this
committee have now been reduced. The situation for business archives
is further complicated in that responsibility for business issues
lies with the DTI.
— MLA has tried to represent archives
to DCMS but it seems to speak with a very quiet voice. It is our
perception that MLA's main role is to promote the government's
agenda to the sector rather than representing the sector to the
DCMS. The regional MLAs used to support regional archive councils
and these councils would act as sounding boards and give advice
on the situation and priorities of archives in the regions. However,
funding for these councils has now been withdrawn and MLA seems
to be diminishing its contact with users and practitioners, rather
than listening to the concerns of the sector.
— The hopes of the archive sector
were severely dashed by the failure of MLA to secure any funding
whatsoever to implement the recommendations of the report of the
Archives Task Force. MLA itself commissioned this report which
was published in 2004. Its recommendations would have transformed
the archives sector and modernised its services and work force.
Although DCMS accepted the findings of the report and the recommendations,
there was no money at all forthcoming to change the words into
action. This has led to a loss of confidence in MLA by the archive
sector.
— The archive sector has a single
voice through the National Council on Archives. This organisation
attempts to bring together all the various archive organisations
and institutions on matters of common concern, and it also supports
the very valuable work of the Archive Awareness Campaign and the
Archive Lottery Advisor. However there are worries over the sustainability
of the funding for the National Council on Archives—it receives
funding on a year-by-year basis from MLA and from The National
Archives. It would enhance the ability of this organisation, and
the sector, to act in a strategic fashion if it were funded in
a longer-term way.
September 2006
|
