David Lammy's keynote address to the National Historic Environment Champions Conference

Made at the Royal Aeronautical Society, 4 Hamilton Place, London on 12 July 2006.

Opening remarks

Thank you, Sir Neil – and to English Heritage for bringing us together in such magnificent surroundings.

I am very pleased to have the opportunity to address this, the first national conference of Local Authority Historic Environment Champions, and to be able to explain why the Government is proposing to radically reform the current heritage protection system.

However, I am also here to listen to you, for at the heart of our reforms is a desire to simplify what is often perceived to be an overly complex and secretive system. We want to engage local communities in shaping their environment so that regeneration and renewal is enriched by the best of the past as well as welcoming creativity and change. And by this I mean places and spaces that are valued for their local significance as well as those of outstanding national (or international) importance.

As with the reform of the planning system, Government will look to local authorities to take the lead in facilitating this – the best already do, as I hope we shall hear today.

A rich heritage, a living heritage

Ask yourself the question 'what makes heritage special?' and the answer is simple: it is people. To paraphrase the current campaign by the National Trust, English Heritage and other heritage organisations – history matters to people and they want to pass it on.

The historic environment is unique in telling the story of how we have interacted with our surroundings since pre-history – sometimes it is dramatic and obvious, but often it is subtle and complex and deciphering it can involve more twists and turns than the plot of the DaVinci Code.

But that is part of its appeal: it is an everyday reminder of the long continuity of life in our islands that tells us much about who we are, and where we have come from. And we must not forget that it is also a dynamic record, with successive generations and diverse cultures adding their own chapters.

I don't need to tell you, of all people, about the local dimension, about how heritage contributes to the distinctive character of places and to the communal identity of the people who live in them. Nor is this influence confined to bricks and mortar. As the Heritage Lottery Fund does well to remind us, local historic environments provide a multitude of opportunities for social, environmental and economic gain, ranging from an inspiration for the arts to a habitat for wildlife.

Stewardship of the historic environment is a shared responsibility

These values – and the passion and enthusiasm they generate – are something that all of us in government would do well to heed.

In January, at a conference focused on Capturing the Public Value of Heritage, I spoke about the relevance of national heritage in an increasingly global age, and of the importance of engaging people, institutions and society in contributing to its evolving definition. As stewards of the historic environment, it is our collective responsibility to demonstrate the institutional values that encourage and enable this to happen – and, where appropriate, to act on the outcomes.

As a Government we set out our priorities for the historic environment five years ago in a document titled A Force for our Future. Today's conference and the theme of my speech flow directly from two of the objectives we set out then: that the nation's heritage should be effectively protected and sustained; and that public interest in the historic environment should be matched by firm leadership from national and local government.

Local management of the historic environment

The development since 2001 of a cadre of Champions to help place the historic environment at the heart of council agendas is a key step towards achieving the latter. That over 50% of authorities now have a Champion – and that these are almost exclusively at elected member level – is something of which can be justifiably proud. I am delighted that so many of you have been able to attend today.

Responsibility for the historic environment can be difficult to pin down – it cuts across so many policy areas. And like Government, the role of local authorities is complex: custodian, regulator, grant-giver and rescuer of last resort are but a few of the functions. That is why you, as Champions, have such an important role to play in ensuring that it receives appropriate recognition:

In the overarching vision set out in your Sustainable Community Strategy.
In the spatial strategy described in your Local Development Framework.
And in the detailed outcomes, indicators and targets presented in Local Area Agreements.

As I will be saying this afternoon to the Chief Cultural and Leisure Officers Association, we want to ensure that there is equity and quality of service provision. We are already looking to make the Culture Block in CPA more representative of the range of services delivered by local authorities. We are also working with our partners – including English Heritage and the Improvement and Development Agency – to enable better self regulation and peer support. There are clear links to Champions here too.

But more of this later – first I would like to talk about the radical reforms we are proposing through Heritage Protection Review, and what they may mean for you, your council and your local community.

The Heritage Protection Review

It is widely acknowledged that there are shortcomings in the current heritage protection system. I highlight three in particular.

First, as a result of being built up piecemeal over time, the system is complex. There are a variety of different designation systems, each operating to different criteria, administered in different ways by different people, and conferring different levels of protection and regulation. Linked to this complexity is a perceived level of secrecy and poor provision of information. Even where information is available, it can be hard to get hold of and even harder to understand.
Second, the system is slow and expensive for everyone involved. The average time taken to process a listing application is six months, though for complex cases it can be much longer; and processing an application for scheduling takes around four months. The time taken to process consents is much shorter, with most local planning authorities achieving the eight week target, but time-scales can still involve considerable costs for owners, managers and those involved in development.
Finally, the system is regulatory and burdensome. It is a system that is considered to be very good at saying 'no', but less good at encouraging the effective management of change. The number of separate consent regimes, combined with planning permission, involves huge amounts of paperwork.

The challenge we have set ourselves with the Heritage Protection Review is daunting: to design and implement a new system that is:

Open – so that it is easy for people to understand and to become involved in.
Simple – so, that it is more streamlined and efficient.
Democratic – so that people, including owners and managers, have the opportunity for their voice to be heard in the protection process.
Accountable – so that decisions can be justified.

Of course, the historic environment does not exist in isolation and the Heritage Protection Review is not only a DCMS project. It is an integral part of the Department of Community and Local Government's planning reforms – reforms that have defined sustainable development as the statutory purpose of planning and made clear the importance of community involvement.

Kay will be saying more about this in a moment so I will confine myself to reiterating the point I made earlier – that the historic environment can be an important building block in developing places where people want to live and work, both now and in the future. It can also be a catalyst for public engagement with these processes.

That is why the changes we are proposing seek to give ownership of local heritage back to local communities – and why local authorities will be key to their delivery. The most far reaching changes will require primary legislation and we will be outlining these in detail in a White Paper later this year. Today I want to touch briefly on four of our core proposals.

A new unified Register of Historic Sites and Buildings of England will bring together the current systems of listing buildings, scheduling ancient monuments, and the registration of parks, gardens and battlefields. This will make designation decisions easier to understand, helping local authorities and owners to manage historic properties more effectively.
A reformed heritage consent regime will replace scheduled monument consent and listed building consent. This will streamline the consent process, particularly for owners or managers who have to look after a range of historic assets.
Voluntary 'heritage partnership agreements' will enable a proactive approach to managing large historic sites and reduce bureaucratic burdens on owners and local authorities.
New statutory requirements relating to Historic Environment Records will ensure that everyone with an interest in their local historic environment has access to a comprehensive, current and understandable knowledge base.

Pilot studies have already demonstrated that these reforms could have demonstrable benefits. In my own constituency I have seen how London Underground has worked with English Heritage to develop a management agreement for some of the historic stations on the Piccadilly Line. I have heard first hand from London Underground managers how this agreement has transformed what was, at times, a confrontational relationship, and has enabled them to feel a far greater sense of ownership of the historic stations they manage.

My visit also underlined for me how much heritage surrounds us, and how better information and education can bring this out. Though I have travelled through it thousands of times, it wasn't until I visited with English Heritage that I realised that Turnpike Lane station is a nationally significant example of modernist architecture.

Champions as ambassadors for the public value of heritage

Without doubt, implementation of the new heritage protection system will be challenging and involve change – for DCMS, for English Heritage and for local authorities.

By 2010 we anticipate that local authorities in England will have a statutory duty to implement the new heritage consent regime I mentioned earlier, and to have access to a Historic Environment Record. On the other hand, responsibilities in relation to Heritage Partnership Agreements and local designations will be optional (except for existing statutory duties in relation to Conservation Areas).

While we are aware that new responsibilities for local authorities must be funded, much of what we are proposing will mean new ways of working rather than new burdens. Where new burdens may arise, for example in relation to Historic Environment Records, we have asked English Heritage to undertake cost-benefit analysis to inform our final recommendations.

Together with DCLG, English Heritage and the associations representing archaeologists and conservation officers in local government (ALGAO and IHBC) we also commissioned detailed research into the practical aspects of delivering our proposals. Based on a review of existing evidence and original case studies involving 32 local authorities, this concluded that:

For local authorities that are already strong supporters of the historic environment, HPR will in many ways be an extension of current practice. For others, it is likely to be more challenging.
There is widespread support for the principles of HPR, with district councils in particular seeing it as an opportunity to take greater ownership of the management of the historic environment.
While there are issues about resources, these are primarily about start-up costs rather than ongoing management of a new system.
HPR presents an opportunity to clarify expectations in terms of local historic environment services.

As Champions – as ambassadors for the public value of heritage – you will have a key role in taking forward implementation of the outcomes of the Heritage Protection Review. Therefore I urge you to look carefully at the forthcoming Heritage White Paper and consider:

Does your authority have access to the appropriate range of professional expertise?
If not, could this be sourced locally or sub-regionally, for example through use of service level agreements or by creating additional capacity within development control planning teams?
Are your historic environment services sufficiently integrated with cultural, planning and natural environment services – and within corporate strategies such as e-government?

Concluding remarks

I hope that this brief canter through our programme of reform for heritage protection, and the role we see for Champions in helping to make it happen, has helped to whet your appetite to respond to the White Paper. I hope I have also assured you that the historic environment is prominent amongst our aims to support improvement in local government.

Thank you.

Back to main