Stonehenge may be next UK site to lose world heritage
status
Britain is eroding global reputation for conserving
its historic assets, culture bodies are warning
Josh
Halliday North of England correspondent
Fri 23 Jul
2021 16.58 BST
The UK is
eroding its global reputation for conserving its “unparalleled” historic
assets, culture bodies have warned, with Stonehenge expected to be next in line
to lose its coveted World Heritage status after Liverpool.
The UN’s
heritage body has told ministers that Wiltshire’s cherished stone circle will
be placed on its “in danger” list – the precursor to it being stripped of world
heritage status – if a £1.7bn road tunnel goes ahead as planned.
Heritage
bodies said on Friday that Unesco would throw a “harsher spotlight” on the UK’s
other 31 listed sites, which include the Palace of Westminster and Kew Gardens,
after Liverpool became only the third place in nearly 50 years to be stripped
of its world heritage status.
Other sites
expected to come under greater scrutiny from the UN agency include Stonehenge,
Edinburgh’s new and old towns, the Tower of London and Cornwall’s historic
mining area, all of which have attracted concerns over controversial
developments.
Chris
Blandford, the president of World Heritage UK, complained that there was a “low
awareness at the government level” of the importance of the country’s Unesco
sites, which rank alongside international gems such as the Taj Mahal and the
pyramids of Giza. He said many were critically underfunded and that ministers
had shown a “great reluctance to want to make the most of our World Heritage
offer”.
He said:
“These are places of international significance. They are the best of the best
of our cultural heritage. At a time when we’re out [of the European Union] and
want to be taken seriously internationally, why not use these incredible assets
of such significance to help us do that?”
Unesco
chiefs criticised the UK government for failing to “fulfil its obligations” to
protect Liverpool’s Victorian waterfront and blamed years of development for an
“irreversible loss” to its historic value.
Unesco’s
World Heritage Convention, to which the UK is a signatory, encourages
governments to establish national foundations to provide ringfenced funding for
their cultural assets, but the UK has no such body.
Instead,
most world heritage sites are run by cash-strapped local authorities and have
seen their funding slashed since 2010 due to the abolition of bodies such as
regional development agencies. Given the financial strain, many councils are
under increasing pressure to approve contentious developments that adversely
affect the historic value of their cultural assets.
A 2019
report by World Heritage UK, which represents the country’s 31 Unesco sites,
said they received an average of only £5m each from central government between
2013 and 2018. The annual government spend on the UK’s 27 mainland world
heritage sites is £19m, compared with £70m on the country’s 15 national parks,
the report found.
Stonehenge
is expected to be stripped of its status if the two-mile tunnel is built on the
site as planned. The transport secretary, Grant Shapps, gave the green light
for the scheme in November despite warnings from Unesco that it would have on
“adverse impact” on the area’s historic value. The high court is expected to
decide within weeks whether the project can proceed following a judicial review
by campaigners.
Unesco’s
world heritage committee has told ministers that Stonehenge will be placed on
its “list of world heritage in danger” – a precursor step to being stripped of
its status – if the tunnel goes ahead.
Barry
Joyce, a former vice-chair of the International Council on Monuments and Sites
UK, which advises the Unesco committee, said it was “rather shocking” that Shapps
had approved the Stonehenge tunnel despite planning inspectors’ serious
concerns.
He said:
“It is conceivable that other sites will be put on the Unesco at-risk register,
and if steps are not taken to mitigate or avoid the potential damage identified
by Unesco, then it is quite conceivable that other sites will be removed from
the world heritage list.”
Such a move
would make Britain the first country to have more than one historic site struck
off the list, dealing an embarrassing blow to its global cultural standing.
Henrietta
Billings, the director of Save Britain’s Heritage, said Britain was now under
the international spotlight over its “devolve and forget” approach to its
cultural gems. “The world is watching how we manage global heritage. Britain
used to have a reputation for outstanding planning and conservation and the
real concern is that we’re sleepwalking into a situation where we’re losing
that.”
The UK’s
plethora of historic monuments, which range from prehistoric sites such as
Stonehenge to medieval castles and Roman forts, contribute billions of pounds
to the economy each year and draw in millions of visitors from around the
world.
Joe
O’Donnell, the director of the Victorian Society, said he was concerned that
the government’s forthcoming planning bill would weaken the protections for
heritage sites, potentially leaving more of them vulnerable to new
developments. He added: “Sadly, given the combative and dismissive reactions to
the Unesco decision from politicians, improvements in protection do not seem
likely any time soon.”
Jo Stevens,
the shadow culture secretary said it was “vital we preserve and protect these
sites which are not just important parts of our national identity but also
vital for tourism both inbound and domestic”. She added: “It is typical of this
government to make barbed statements about our national culture while failing
to do the very basics to protect it.”
A
government spokesperson said the UK was “a world leader in cultural heritage
protection”, and that the government disagreed with Unesco’s decision over
Liverpool. They said: “Protecting the heritage and archaeology of the
Stonehenge site is a priority for the government and Highways England and we
will continue to work closely with Unesco, Icomos [the International Council on
Monuments and Sites] and the heritage and scientific community on next steps.”
No comments:
Post a Comment