Memorandum submitted by the Heritage Railway
Association
INTRODUCTION
This submission is supplementary to the HRA
submission, dated 12 January 2006, to the House of Commons, Culture,
Media and Sport Committee which was published under Reference
Ev 170 in Volume 2 of the Third Report of Session 2005-06. The
paragraphs of this supplement are numbered consecutively with
the original submission.
The Heritage Railway Association (HRA) is the
co-coordinating body for heritage railways and tramways, railway
museums and steam centres in the United Kingdom and Eire and has
250 member organisations. In 2005, our members in the UK attracted
some six million visitors who spent around £50 million. Heritage
railways have over 400 miles of track with over 300 stations and
operated around 4.2 million passenger train miles. HRA members
directly employed 1,300 staff and engaged the efforts of over
13,550 volunteers.
HRA is a Company Limited by Guarantee and is
staffed entirely by volunteers. This response has been prepared
by the HRA Heritage Committee.
8. Funding, with particular reference to the
adequacy of the budget for museums, galleries and archives, and
the impact of the London 2012 Olympics on Lottery funding for
their sector.
8.1 We would refer the Committee to the
points made in Section 5 of our original submission. These remain
relevant to this inquiry but we would like to add the following
points.
8.2 There appears to be a need for a change
in the relationship between the DCMS policies on Tourism and National
Museums. It has become apparent in recent years, since the Government
introduced free admission to the national museums, that whilst
DCMS is encouraging the growth of visitor numbers to improved
world class attractions, particularly with respect to the Olympics,
it is, at the same time, reducing the year on year budgets for
the national museums and the amount of money that HLF can distribute
in capital grants so that the Olympics can be paid for. There
is also a clash between the requirements of different sections
of DCMS. Whilst one section, and HLF, encourages museums to increase
the social range of their visitors, another wants them to maximize
the numbers of high spending overseas visitors.
8.3 There is also a problem with the lack
of long-term planning in the relationship between government and
the museums and heritage sector. Conservation and restoration
needs long-term planning. For example, it can take as long as
20 years to restore a large steam locomotive from scrapyard condition
or as long to construct a new working replica locomotive; examples
of both of which have been completed by HRA members. Once commissioned
a steam locomotive requires continual maintenance to allow it
to operate and, after 10 years operation, if not before, will
require a complete overhaul, which may take several years and
cost well into six figures, before it can be used again. This
applies equally to locomotives owned by individuals, heritage
railways and national and local museums. Similar conditions, but
often on a longer timescale, apply to the built heritage and to
many artifacts in collections, both public and private.
8.4 Continuing conservation and constant
care for collections need an ongoing conservation budget. In particular
machinery and artifacts need suitable accommodation for storage
and protection. It is apparent that DCMS take little account of
these requirements when deciding funding for museums or for MLA.
8.5 In the railway heritage field proper
recognition should be given to the value of the dispersed collection
of national significance cared for by HRA members. Members are
encouraged to adhere to the standards of restoration, conservation,
maintenance and operation set out in the Riga Charter, a copy
of which was appended to our original submission.
9. Acquisition and disposal policies with
particular reference to due diligence obligations on acquisition
and legal restrictions on disposal of objects
9.1 HRA members are required to adhere to
a code of conduct which includes a clause requiring that any member
wishing to dispose of an artefact should make all possible efforts
to ensure the future existence, conservation and maintenance of
that artefact. A significant number of HRA members are also accredited
museums and therefore are required to be compliant with the requirements
on acquisition and disposal set out by MLA. Some members are also
charities and again have to comply with the requirements of the
Charities Commission.
9.2 HRA is an active member of the Railway
Heritage Register Partnership, with the National Railway Museum,
and The Transport Trust. RHRP has prepared and maintains Registers
of many thousands items of preserved railway rolling stock, both
passenger carriages and freight wagons. An important aspect of
these projects is to survey each vehicles present condition and
record sufficient information to be able to assess its historical
significance. Information is recorded on a computer database (http://www.heritagerailways.com/coachdb.html)
which can be freely accessed and searched on-line, so allowing
comparisons and information retrieval to be readily accomplished.
Other benefits include helping towards "Collections Management"—by
allowing an assessment of how individual vehicles compare with
one another, not only within any particular Railway's or Museum's
collection, but also when compared with similar vehicles located
at other sites within the UK. These registers are used by bodies
such as HLF, MLA, NMSI (Prism Fund) and NRM as a systematic tool
for assessment of the importance of items.
9.3 HRA and its members enjoy a close working
relationship with the National Railway Museum and its outstation,
Locomotion, at Shildon, Co Durham. Items cared for by HRA members
are often displayed at the NRM and items from the National Collection
are sent on loan to suitable heritage railways and museums who
are able to display, conserve and, sometimes, operate them. HRA
strongly encourages this mutual co-operation and would encourage
MLA and museums, national, regional and local to follow this lead.
10. The remit and effectiveness of DCMS, the
Museums, Libraries and Archives Council and other relevant organisations
in representing cultural interests inside and outside Government
10.1 It is apparent that there remains much
for DCMS and its agencies to achieve in representing cultural
interests both inside and outside of government. As set out in
section 8 of this submission and in section 5 of our original
submission DCMS has been unable to provide the funding required
to allow its agencies to operate and fully carry out their various
functions. It has allowed the funds of the National Lottery to
be diverted to support the Olympics at the expense of heritage
and the other good causes. It has failed to protect the heritage
sector from the, sometimes unintended, effects of clauses in legislation
proposed by other government departments and agencies that would
have potentially catastrophic consequences if applied to the heritage
sector.
10.2 Volunteer run organisations both in
the heritage and other sectors can be/are being swamped by requests
for information. Effective action is needed to obtain real benefits
for all types of collections in the UK.
27 September 2006
| 
