‘Heritage: The threat facing our most precious sites is ever greater’ was the headline in the Observer as IHBC’s past-Chair, Jo Evans, offered sobering context to the news that up to four of the UK’s World Heritage Sites (WHS) might be in danger.
With the newspaper also providing the tag ‘Conservation officer posts have been drastically cut and developers seem to have free rein’, writing as IHBC Chair and on behalf of the UK’s professional body for built and historic environment conservation specialists, the IHBC, Jo Evans highlighted how the recent news about UNESCO’s concerns over the threats to UK’s inscribed heritage ‘from ill-considered developments’, was ‘only the tip of the iceberg’.
Jo Evans’ original text was:
‘Many readers will have been shocked at the revelation in last week’s Observer that UNESCO are so concerned at the threat to our heritage from ill-considered developments that they are considering adding three further UK World Heritage Sites to the ‘endangered’ list – including the Houses of Parliament. Sadly, for those of us working in the heritage sector, we know this to be only the tip of the iceberg.
English Heritage has had its government grant reduced by nearly 40% – with the attendant loss of experienced Inspectors, while Cadw and Historic Scotland have also suffered significant reductions. Local government cuts have seen the loss of over a third of the conservation officer posts working in planning departments.
The most vulnerable officers to these cuts are often the most experienced as they will occupy the more senior and better paid posts and, therefore, offer the biggest ‘savings’. Not only have conservation services been weakened in this way, but those that remain do not have the ear of chief officers and, dispiritingly, face the continual threat of redundancy. Where now is the confident and independent conservation voice that will advise planners and Planning Committees against the kind of poor development and short-termism revealed in your article?
It appears that somehow government has decided that we can no longer afford as a nation to protect our heritage; a heritage, they might pause to consider, that is the cornerstone of our tourism industry, a major player in efforts to regenerate our towns and cities, the familiar and cherished setting for our daily lives and internationally recognised as amongst the most important in the world.
What a shame that it has taken an outside body in UNESCO to shock us into realising what has been put at risk. We share the Observer’s concerns at the distortions of current planning policy and hope others will join us in campaigning for a more mature and sustainable approach to our heritage.’
For the IHBC NewsBlog on the original article see: LINK
For the original article see: LINK
For the letter see: LINK
