Open Letter on Cuts and working together.

[kevin wooldridge]

.... how are we going to convince the idiots who elected the odious that they want us more than a hospital bed?

Indeed and that is why I think the present governments policies need to be opposed across the board and that archaeology needs to affiliate with other 'cuts' campaigns....and not just look at itself in isolation. My trade union Prospect have already declared as much, refusing at the last annual conference to pursue a singular heritage cuts campaign separate from its general campaigns against all cuts.....

Rescue is a non political, non-affiliated body soley concerned with campaigning on behalf of the archaeological resource in all its manifestations. I can't think of a better organisation behind which all UK archaeologists can unite to fight the cuts.....but will they. Probably not!!. And if you can't convince people/organisations to unite behind a group that have spent over 30 years campaigning on exactly these issues, what chance is there that they will create a new Frankenstein monster from the dead and rotting corpses of the old. Probably very little!!

I don't want to sound a Jeremiah , but I can already see this campaigns sole ambition (from the institutions anyway) ending in a letter to a national newspaper signed by the 44 archaeological professors and a few other greats and goods, a small noise on the Today programme, maybe a question in Parliament on a wet Wednesday afternoon, lots of hand wringing but a general appreciation that 'we did what we could' and then let hang all of the potential in Andy and JS Stone and David's polemics.

How can I be so certain......30 years beaten battered and bruised by UK archaeology, a ton of lost oportunities and many many broken promises. I just wish that wasn't the case and I think if we could inspire a campaign led through Rescue we might be onto something. Not least that even if we failed in achieving all our goals, we would at least realise we can unite and fight on all kinds of issues, if there are enough of us willing to do so. I suspect that some organisations in UK archaeology would not be cherishing that prospect....

[BAJR]

In a way, the voice will be the leader, the mouthpiece is the campaign, - can you name the leader of the forestry campaign? To me it was just a campaign worth supporting. Box though does make the point... Clear Direction, and All behind it. The need for unity is paramount, which is becoming clearer and clearer ( no sh#t sherlock I hear you cry.) as is the need for existing organisations to lose some of the "I am the only one" attitude. Like Box, I would hate to see a committee... a collective conciousness ... but no more committees and sub working party groups.! The IfA and CBA as well as REscue do seem to be agreeing in principal... the secret is to get them to cope with not being the leader. This needs a groundswell of public support - and not to be too cruel, I still remember with horror the Mike Pitts of a Plinth video, when - late at night ( after all archaeology is that important!) he was shouted at with abuse and catcalls. WE need Guardians and Daily Mail, BBC and Channel 4 we need local papers and nationals to go... eay up... this looks interesting - this is something to hang a story on, to support, to publisise, to get people going. NO NO NO!

BEtween us we have contacts (from Tony Robinsons phone number to Julian Richards email, from BBC reporters to Guardian journalists... One simple message... one simple explanation of what happens if archaeology (in ALL its varied and amazing forms) is broken over the chopping board of cuts. What will the public lose, what does out culture lose. It was the public that ensured the rise of developer funded excavation and in reality we have failed the trust they put in us... now it is possible to win it back... with humility and with a strong united voice. With allies that can help and a mission.

ahem...

And this happens NOW!

[moreno]

Kevin's post made sense. I don't see the point in reinventing the wheel. If some organisations in UK archaeology take exception so be it. It wouldn't be the first time, I'd prefer to stand with like minded people.

We are all voices so let's craft a well written letter outlining the many salient points raised in this thread (too many to list), or as Kevin suggests involve Rescue, then utilising the media (Guardian, Daily Mail, BBC, Channel 4 etc) and local papers and nationals we create interest and move this cart forward.

[Sith]

"...What I want to know is what have we got for our money? A heart bypass in the NHS could be done for ?2,500 so in those terms they have cost us 400 heart bypass operations over that time and continue to cost us 40 heart bypass operations each year."...

Chopping curators, NHS buraucrats or anyone else who seems to be on the hit-list for public sector cuts won't give us a single additional heart operation, and the sooner the general public realise that the better for everyone. Pickles, Lansley and their ilk will be first against the wall come my revolution. Under the current regime, as an archaeologist attached to an NHS manager I'm b*ggered.

PS. I know the the quote is not Madweasels himself, but I got fed up trying to code it.

PPS. Sorry for rantingly deviating off topic.

[kevin wooldridge]

I understand from mails to and from Andy Brockman that Chris Cumberpatch of Rescue is going to meet with him and discuss these issues (probably at or after the upcoming Rescue AGM...Woking April 2nd )....that seems to suggest to me anyway that Rescue may see some potential in harnessing the anger being expressed here and on Britarch and taking the campaign further forward....

[BAJR]

To add to this... here is the offer.

Dear Andy,

I have discussed this briefly with other members of the Rescue Committee and we would like to offer our Open Meeting on 2nd April as a possible venue for an initial meeting to discuss the points you make and the wider issues involved - of course time is rather short but as we have the meeting already set up and the venue booked, it seems like an opportunity that should not be missed. E-mail is good but there's nothing like a face-to-face meeting to get things moving and to focus people's minds. If you agree, then please feel free to circulate the details to those on your list below (perhaps with some additions as suggested below). The details of the venue are on our website (www.rescue-archaeology.org.uk) but are, briefly:

Venue: Surrey History Centre, 130 Goldsworth Road, Woking, Surrey GU21 6ND
Time: Saturday 2nd April 2.00pm onwards (our AGM is from 1.00pm to 2.00pm)

We have also invited the newly appointed Heritage Alliance parliamentary liaison team (Sarah McCarthy and Henry Russell) to the meeting as their input could be very useful (having had considerable experience of banging our heads against the brick wall of government ignorance over the last twenty years or so we are very supportive of their role!). I should emphasise that this isn't an attempt by Rescue to hijack your initiative in any way but simply to move it on and to facilitate discussion.

Possible additions include (but should not be limited to):

Peter Hinton (IfA): peter.hinton@archaeologists.net
Don Henson (CBA & archaeology in education): donhenson@britarch.ac.uk
Paul Blinkhorn (Time Team and numerous community groups): paul.blinkhorn@ntlworld.com
Mark Pluciennik (Leicester University - Adult & Continuing education & distance learning): mzp1@leicester.ac.uk

If I come up with any other names I'll let you know.

Chris

and my response.... which may sound a bit ranty... it is a great offer... but to quote myself (before you read on)

By all means discuss it at the AGM open meeting, but discuss how the campaign is going, not how to start it.

I don't give a flying fck who is the voice... I really don't... as long as the jostling to the front stops. But this is about Archaeology - bot RESCUE, not IfA not CBA not BAJR or any other individual or group... it is Archaeology. If rescue speak as the Voice... they speak as us...

However, my reply is thus

This is a great offer however. I have two issues with this.

number one... its two weeks away... we should really have it in the bag by then
number two... only those organisations or individuals who are able to pay for a journey to Surrey, stay the night and travel back, or live within that area will be able to go. So I guess that's the IfA and CBA then perhaps someone from EH?. The meeting will miss out a massive constituency, it will become a meeting that none of us (and I use that term for all of us that won't be there) will have a voice in.

Look - we have already worked out the basics.

A template of the issue, the response and the importance of archaeology that mentions only Archaeology as the focus - we can agree on the using our entire membership and mailing lists pretty quickly

A campaign petition and organisation on 38 degrees

A connection with all our various media outlets (and between us we have lots from internet to tv from paper to electronic lists, from memberships to readerships, journalists, radio... )

A voice that has the backing of all those involved in archaeology that says

... All the archaeological organisations in the UK (yes Scotland to please) are coming out the trenches together and need your help to protect your heritage.


Although this is a kind offer, it will not be attended by the majority and the discussion and any decision is (without wanting to be too militant) will be limited to and by those that have - so far - been unable to act swiftly and decisively other than have another consultation meeting. At the CA conference I challenged all the speakers to have done something by the next conference... at this rate we may have a draft agenda looking at the potential to consider a consultation.

This is not some knee jerk campaign, it has been coming for years, we should know the argument already... and be ready to act with one single deadly blow.

By all means discuss it at the AGM open meeting, but discuss how the campaign is going, not how to start it.

no offence is intended - I just would hate to see this get bogged down.

[GPStone]

Can I suggest that, if anyone is currently feeling the need to do something but hasn't settled on a single route, they start by joining RESCUE. Its ?15 a year subscription and, if you look at their website they do have a cuts related campaign already up and running, as Kevin has pointed out.

I also back Moreno's suggestion of crafting something tangible on this forum - the talent, opinion and I suspect willingness to act are all here so lets do something simple to begin with.

And BAJR's assessment of the voice and the leader is exactly what I've been getting at. We need to forget about the differences and get behind something simple which carries the principle that we all agree on: don't hit heritage! It doesn't need personalities or leaders, it just needs the appropriate forum for people from all backgrounds to express support. It is then down to the various groups including RESCUE , as to how they use that support, something that can be crafted and diplomatised over seperately. The current absence of that effective, clear voice needs to be corrected and it needs to happen now.

[moreno]

@BAJR

Is this meeting open to "us"? It's a bit of a haul to attend, but I would feel obligated given the circumstances, issues within the thread, the well thought out responses, the willingess to do and not just to vent. If this is the case and we are

[GPStone]

Ok, how about starting a seperate thread to list in constructive form:

1) The benefits of archaeology to society.
2) The implications of cuts and any attack on this discipline.
3) What can/should/could be done.

This doesn't need to become a rant or an attack on each others ideas or positions. Its simply a way of getting everything down and organised so it can then be put to a constructive use.

[moreno]

Sounds like a start. I agree, let's keep it proactive. On the side, I met up with and had dinner with some mates. They own their homes in the village, one just bought a grade II listed property. Inevitably the subject of listed buildings and archaeology came up. I explained the relationship of archaeology and planning. Their most important issue was the added cost, and they asked me only one question in terms of expense and importance that I had trouble answering:

Why is archaeology important?