|
The Horizons
of Heritage:
Towards the new Strategic Plan for the Heritage Lottery Fund
Response
of The Library Association
[Note: This
published response includes the text of those questions in the Heritage Lottery
Fund consultation document to which we have endeavoured to provide answers.
We hope this helps make our response clearer to other readers. However you
will still find it best to refer to the original
consultation document to appreciate the full context of this response.
The consultation document was originally posted on the Heritage Lottery Fund
website at: www.nhmf.org.uk ]
- The
Library Association welcomes this opportunity to comment on proposals for
the Heritage Lottery Fund’s strategy for 2002-2007. The Library Association
is the professional body for library and information specialists in the UK.
It has 24,000 members working in all sectors of economy - in schools, colleges
and Higher Education Institutions; in healthcare and Government; in business,
commerce, industry and the media; in learned and professional societies; and
in public library services, the voluntary sector and cultural organisations.
Under the terms of its Royal Charter it has, amongst other obligations, a
duty to promote the better management of library and information services,
to facilitate the development of the knowledge and skills of its members,
to encourage the appropriate provision of library and information services
in all sectors, and to scrutinise legislation and other proposals of Government
and the policies and actions of other bodies.
- The Library Association
supports the broad tenor of the proposals and agrees that changes need to
be on the margin rather than with the main objectives or programmes. We agree
that conservation, broadening the range of heritage and continuing to work
to increase access, education and social inclusion should remain at the heart
of the new strategy.
Conservation
- The Association supports
the observation that conservation has economic benefits by supporting tourism
and playing a key role in the regeneration of deprived areas – it therefore
also directly contributes to social inclusion in these ways. In response to
the individual questions:
- [HLF Question 2:
We would welcome your views on this list of key areas. What might be added
or subtracted? What should be the order of priority?]
(Q2) – We would support the suggestion of improving training in conservation
craft skills. This should include developing expertise in photographic and
book conservation and will need to embrace conservation skills associated
with more modern mediums of recorded knowledge, including electronic, as well.
Naturally any work by the HLF in this area would need to complement and enhance
existing provision and should be planned in consultation with bodies such
as professional associations (including The Library Association), foci of
excellence in the area such as the National Preservation Office, and educationalists
and trainers such as the Departments of Information and Library Studies that
exist in many universities.
- [HLF Question 3:
Which types of heritage asset do you consider to be most at risk, and is this
where we should be concentrating our funding for conservation over the next
five years? What other resources are available to address these needs?]
(Q3) – The Association continues to be concerned at the precarious state
of many important collections owned by small organisations. Often the specialist
library has outgrown the capacity of the learned society or charity to properly
manage and preserve it – either the collection deteriorates or it may be sold
off in a damaging way. Part of the problem is identifying those collections
that are at risk. Therefore as well as providing a funding stream to help
conserve such collections, we believe that HLF, with others, should undertake
the necessary research to identify vulnerable collections, review case histories
of what has happened to vulnerable collections in the past and establish guidelines
for dealing with future cases.
- [HLF Question 4:
How can we strike the right balance between support for intervention at times
of crisis and support for preventative maintenance?]
(Q4) – The Association supports the idea of supporting maintenance
regimes to raise standards in looking after objects and places. The National
Preservation Office and Resource have both done work on collections care and
would be able to advise on the development of effective maintenance regimes.
It is not possible to define exactly the balance that HLF should adopt between
crisis intervention and supporting preventive maintenance – the latter, of
course, helps prevent the former being needed in the future. In the absence
of full knowledge regarding vulnerable or “at risk” collections any “balance”
must be provisional and subject to change.
Broadening the Range
of Heritage
- We agree that it would
be beneficial to relax and open up the interpretation as to what constitutes
“Heritage” for the purposes of the Heritage Lottery Fund. We would support
extending heritage to more intangible things such as oral history; records
and achievements of the more recent past; and a greater emphasis on a community-focused
interpretation of local heritage. Such a relaxation would bring many worthwhile
projects within the scope of the HLF and benefit the library sector and its
users.
- [HLF Question 8:
We would welcome your views on these key areas. What might be added or subtracted?]
(Q8) – We believe that all the areas identified in the consultation document,
as ones where HLF efforts could be increased, are important. In particular
the suggestion that the “intangible” – oral history, tradition, customs -
as well as the physical should be seen as part of “heritage” would be of importance
to local studies services within public libraries, enabling them to enhance
services and involve local communities more in “heritage” activities. The
accent on the local community defining its own “heritage” is also welcome
– many, for instance, see the local library as an important beacon of local
heritage. The building itself may be old but not listed, and yet much cherished
locally – often this can mean high expenditure is required if the building
is to be kept and offer the functionality of a modern library. Assistance,
where appropriate, from the HLF could help to enable this to happen in many
cases.
- [HLF Question 11:
Should we maintain this approach? (i.e. not supporting acquisition of objects
created within last 20 years)]
(Q11) – We share with others – the Society of Authors and the Arts Council
of England for instance – concern at the impact the 20 year rule is having
on acquiring the literary archives of authors for the country. Such archives
are now often being sold during the author’s lifetime and the HLF restriction
limits still further the ability of UK libraries, museums and archives to
purchase such archives on behalf of the nation. More generally, creative “products”
(eg new media) may appear transient or ephemeral but their impact on society
can be widespread. We need to safeguard a selection of such material for research
purposes – twenty years is a very long time in terms of new media. Perhaps
the way forward is to downgrade the 20 year criteria from a rule to a presumption
that can be challenged and successfully over-ridden where the argument and
justification so to do is strong.
Increasing Access,
Education and Social Inclusion
- The Library Association
supports the strong emphasis that HLF puts on access, education and inclusion.
It is important that all sections of our society can enjoy the benefits of
heritage, but, equally important, that their part of the heritage is recognised
and celebrated alongside the rest – this is why the HLF’s suggestion in the
previous section that increased effort should be put into supporting projects
which celebrate the diversity of all the UK’s communities is both welcome
and vital.
- [HLF Questions 12
and 13: (Q12) We would welcome your views on this list of key areas. What
might be added or subtracted? (Q13) Given our aim to widen access to heritage,
should we prioritise projects aimed at particular sections of the community
(such as disabled people, minority ethnic communities, and the economically
disadvantaged) which are currently under-represented and often excluded from
much of it?]
(Q12/13) – We would welcome increased effort in all the areas suggested.
However those addressing the inclusion agenda – breaking down barriers to
engagement with heritage whatever their nature; promoting projects that encourage
participation of the under-represented, excluded and disadvantaged groups;
and increasing the quality and quantity of learning opportunities about heritage
for adult learners, children and young people – are the most pressing and
important. Whilst it is an attractive idea to prioritise projects aimed at
particular sections of the community, perhaps the most important thing is
to ensure that applications from these communities are encouraged (using the
powers suggested in Q17).
Role of HLF
- The Library Association
welcomes most of the suggestions in this section and would look forward to
cooperating with HLF in working towards some of those aims – for instance
building a broad public support and awareness of the value of heritage, and
promoting heritage-led projects by demonstrating their cultural, social and
economic value.
- [HLF Question 18:
Notwithstanding high demand from the public and voluntary sectors for our
funding, is it now time to show more support for the private sector? Within
this context, are some types of project or areas of heritage more appropriate
than others? How should public benefit be weighed against private gain?]
(Q18) – We would support the extension of Lottery funding to the private
sector. There are many library and archive collections in private ownership
and some of these may be vulnerable and at risk. There are often sound reasons
for leaving collections in private ownership as the collections will retain
the context of arrangement and location. However access arrangements for members
of the public must be incorporated as part of any agreements.
Delivery
- From a library and information
perspective we would like to see greater recognition of our sector’s contribution
to the heritage of the UK within the HLF grants, and - the other side of the
coin - more awareness and greater take-up of the opportunities that do exist
by the sector. It is a matter of disappointment that the indicative funding
earmarked for libraries, archives and the documentary heritage was only 8%
but that the sector was not able to reach even that level.
- [HLF Questions 21
and 22: (Q21) Should we continue to focus these programmes (i.e. HLF funded
programmes) in this way? If not, how should we prioritise our funding in order
to maximise the impact of the funds available in these areas or on areas which
have received little funding to date, which are frequently those with the
greatest social and economic needs? (Q22) How can we best help to develop
the capacity of potential applicants to work up high quality applications,
in particular those from the voluntary and community sector? Is it best to
work in partnership with those already undertaking work in this area? What
would be most useful in terms of pr-application guidance and support for preparatory
work or project development?]
(Q21/22) – We have already suggested a few ways that the HLF could be
made more attractive to the libraries and information sector in our responses
to previous questions. However one structural change would be extending the
Museums and Galleries Access Fund to include libraries and archives. This
would accord well with the Government’s view of the cultural sector and the
remit of Resource, the Council for Museums, Archives and Libraries. It would
not only have the benefit of being a designated fund for an important sector
– making it easier to promote to the constituencies concerned – but it would
also help encourage cross-domain activity and partnerships within the sector
as a whole.
- [HLF Questions 25
and 26: (25) We would welcome your views on what our research programme should
contain, and whether you feel there are any aspects of needs assessment work
in which we should remain engaged. (Q26) What types of information would be
most useful for the sector in terms of raising standards and encouraging a
stream of high quality applications? What other types of strategic communication
would you like to see coming from the Fund, and what would be the most effective
way of disseminating this information?]
(Q25/26) – As indicated in our replies to previous questions, The Library
Association strongly supports the need and value of research not only as a
crucial part of the responsible allocation of funding but also as a way of
demonstrating the impact of the “heritage” sector on all parts of the economy
and society. We are particularly keen to see more research into mapping “at
risk” collections.
Conclusion
- We trust that these
few comments will be of use in shaping the new HLF strategy. Please contact
The Association if you would like clarification of any point or want to discuss
any ideas further.
Contact Officer at
The Library Association
Guy Daines
Principal Policy
Adviser
Tel: 020 7255 0632
E-mail: guy.daines@la-hq.org.uk
The Library Association
August 2001
|
