England’s Secretary of State in the Department for Culture Media and Sport (DCMS), Maria Miller, has offered an interim summary of responses on the consultation over the future of English Heritage and its proposed ‘split’.
DCMS lists the main points as follows:
The main points regarding the Charity include:
• The majority of respondents agreed with the proposed benefits outlined in the model. 20% strongly agreed with the proposed benefits and 40% somewhat agreed. 14% somewhat disagreed and 8% strongly disagreed (497 responses to this question). The remainder neither agreed/disagreed or gave a don’t know response.
• Respondents required more detail to make a better informed judgement about the resilience of the proposed model. Many would like to see the business case in particular the evidence for the earned income projections and fundraising sources.
• Some respondents including those with experience of running/owning heritage assets said that it would be challenging to meet self-sufficiency within the projected timeframe.
• Related to this point was a desire for further clarity on what would happen if the Charity did not become self-sufficient in the time period.
• Some respondents voiced concern that the Charity would be bidding for funding sources that other organisations rely on. Respondents did not want to see the Charity gaining at the expense of others.
• Government/English Heritage needed to clarify governance arrangements – including how they would ensure that revenue factors were not the only driver in deciding where to invest in the National Heritage Collection and that all of the Collection including non-revenue/less profitable sites would benefit from this new approach and additional funding.
• Respondents emphasised that the Charity should maintain its expertise in conservation, interpretation and research and where applicable offer these services to the market.
• The Charity should remain the owner of last resort, with respondents wanting greater clarity on how this would work including funding and resolving disagreements between the Charity and Commission.
• While the majority agreed with the charitable objectives some thought they were too narrow, in particular they required a broader definition of education.
• The majority agreed with the success criteria but felt improvements could be made including focusing on building reserves rather than decreasing tax payers’ subsidy and wider targets around education and training.
• Further clarity on how the Government/Commission would deal with any poor performance was requested.
• Respondents wanted greater clarity on potential outcomes after the eight year period this model covers.
The main points regarding Historic England include:
• Respondents felt the consultation was ‘lighter’ on Historic England. They required more detail on how Historic England would operate and its priorities before drawing a firmer conclusion on the direction of Historic England.
• A key point made by respondents was the need for Historic England to be adequately funded and able to fulfil its functions. This point was made across the spectrum including by local authorities, the development sector and heritage groups.
• Funding for Historic England should be completely separate from the Charity and not be available to the Charity to make up any shortfall.
• Many respondents requested that they continued to be involved in shaping Historic England through further consultation and stakeholder engagement.
• Some respondents felt there was not enough emphasis on heritage protection as the ultimate aim for Historic England and that there was too much focus on sustainable development and the needs of customers (owners/developers etc.). However others welcomed a renewed focus on working with organisations, businesses and individuals involved in shaping a sustainable historic environment.
• Respondents emphasised the importance of working with local authorities, especially in the light of on-going cuts, and volunteers/communities. Some respondents felt these groups were not given enough importance from the consultation.
• In the main respondents were positive towards a strong public engagement role for Historic England.
• A significant minority felt the success criteria could be improved. Some of the main points included having an overarching measurement on the state of the historic environment and a concern about the use of customer satisfaction survey to measure success.
• In the main respondents were positive towards the use of the National Heritage Protection Plan (NHPP) but felt it needed to be broader if it was to be the basis for the Historic England business plan.
Heritage Alliance writes:
‘The DCMS consultation on the English Heritage New Model closed on 7th February with over 600 replies received (of which 218 were from organisations). Secretary of State, Maria Miller, has written to all respondees claiming that ‘nearly two thirds of those who responded agreed or strongly agreed with our proposals’.
‘DCMS is giving full consideration to the concerns raised and will publish a full response to the consultation with additional detail in the summer. The first point in her holding analysis on the proposed new charity calculates that 20% strongly agreed with the proposed benefits, 40% somewhat agreed, 14% somewhat disagreed and 8% strongly disagreed. This means the remaining 18% (including The Heritage Alliance) neither agreed or disagreed or gave a don’t know answer. The second point similarly indicates that respondents required more detail to make a better informed judgment, looking for the fuller business case and in particular on the earned income projections. Other concerns lay in the long term future, governance arrangements, maintaining its specialist expertise and how it would act as ‘owner of last resort’.
On ‘Historic England’, the main points include a strong wish for more detail on how this would operate and its priorities. A key point here was the need for Historic England to be adequately funded and that its funding should be kept separate from that of the new charity. There was also a firm wish to be involved in the shaping of Historic England thorough further consultation and stakeholder engagement.
See also articles at: The Independent and Third Sector News
View a copy of the Secretary of State’s letter on the Heritage Alliance website
