23rd November 2005, 04:41 PM
As far as I understand it, the Government commitment to statutory status for SMRs/HERs inherently includes a commitment to provide funding. With statutory status comes the right for local authorities to legitimately request funds to aid towards maintainence. I suspect that one of the reasons statutory designation has been slow to arrive despite various noises in this direction over the past few years, is that the central funds to do this haven't been made available. At the moment, SMRs are largely provided for through the largesse of County Councils, English Heritage grants for officers, and the belief by most planning authorities that they should provide one for their planners - not that they have to. Pressure from local Societies and the public helps with this too. The assessment process and unification of statutory lists shouldn't deprive SMRs of funds, because to be frank, SMRs don't actually have any proper "funds" to be deprived of.
Statutory status for SMRs should be right up there at the top of any lists you care to make of things the Government should be doing to improve the state of the Historic Environment. On a seperate note, your point about Politicians' perceptions of statutory obligations and "luxury" spending is probably pretty accurate. It's mostly been the older County Archaeologists who've spent the last 30-odd years making sure that SMRs are maintained in some form or another, despite numerous cuts in spending, resources, reorganisations, abolitions and the like. As a demonstration of how precarious the situation has been, my County only formally adopted its own SMR three years ago - and it's only from this point has the County made a proper commitment to provide funding for an SMR officer - the previous years were a catalogue of grant applications, reviews, financial juggling and neglect. Other remain in this position, so we should be doing our best to push for the change we have been promised.
Statutory status for SMRs should be right up there at the top of any lists you care to make of things the Government should be doing to improve the state of the Historic Environment. On a seperate note, your point about Politicians' perceptions of statutory obligations and "luxury" spending is probably pretty accurate. It's mostly been the older County Archaeologists who've spent the last 30-odd years making sure that SMRs are maintained in some form or another, despite numerous cuts in spending, resources, reorganisations, abolitions and the like. As a demonstration of how precarious the situation has been, my County only formally adopted its own SMR three years ago - and it's only from this point has the County made a proper commitment to provide funding for an SMR officer - the previous years were a catalogue of grant applications, reviews, financial juggling and neglect. Other remain in this position, so we should be doing our best to push for the change we have been promised.