C O N T E X T 1 1 4 : M A Y 2 0 1 0 55 Notes from the chair Days of future past By the time this column is printed, we will have a new UK government with new ministers and with more than half of MPs being new to the house. Key decisions over the coming months are likely to impact on the built environment sector. Public spending priorities in particular will affect heritage jobs and projects across the public, private and third sectors. Hang on to your seats! The pre-election period was interesting for the heritage sector, with uncertainty to the last minute over whether or not the new PPS5 would be issued. The IHBC was involved in talks with English Heritage and the Department of Communities and Local Government until the very late stages of developing the PPS, and the final version of the document took account of many of our concerns. Indeed, the feedback from members so far has ranged mainly from neutral to fairly positive. In particular, there appears to be a real sense of relief over the content of the final PPS, given the rather dismal state of the earlier consultation document. The ministerial statement in particular has been welcomed by many. The guidance document that accompanies the PPS is generally felt to be the weaker of the documents, especially on issues like design, where it fails to integrate with wider planning policy and guidance. But we can hope that the guidance can be strengthened over the coming year. The new format for planning policy statements does mean an even greater tendency for policy and guidance affecting historic environments to be spread across a range of policy statements. The current draft PPS on sustainability illustrates this. This could have a massive impact on local designations. It could be damaging not only to local areas, economies and communities, but could lead to the technical failure of some buildings. This would be bad in heritage terms and would lead to less sustainable outcomes. Addressing climate change is clearly a priority for the sector, but we must be careful of unconsidered and counter-productive, knee-jerk reactions. It remains to be seen how heritage protection reform will develop under the new administration. It is likely that more limited reform of legislation will have to be considered than was envisaged, perhaps on the back of a general planning bill. There are key questions to address if legislative reform is to proceed. For example, how would an integrated list differentiate between buildings with utility value and monuments incapable of use? It would clearly be nonsensical to apply demolition criteria based on viable uses to structures incapable of use. I am due to stand down as chair in June. It has been a pleasure to serve the IHBC, which continues to grow in terms of membership and influence. My roles with the IHBC have included consultations secretary, policy chair, vice chair and finally chair. The experience has been fantastic and I would really recommend to members to get actively involved with the institute, including younger members with whom our future lies. It does take time and commitment, but it is uniquely rewarding. There have been frustrations too, such as some surprising misconceptions about the nature of professional bodies and the different professional disciplines that deliver heritage services in all sectors. But hopefully there is now a better understanding that it is neither desirable nor realistic to try to merge spatial planners, architects, surveyors, urban designers, archaeologists and others into a generic profession. Rather there is a need to appreciate the range of skills and disciplines in all sectors necessary to deliver complex heritage projects and services in a changing built-environment sector. It is not enough to understand heritage significance alone. It is also necessary to understand the role that heritage plays as part of the infrastructure of our society and economy. This requires heritage priorities to be reconciled with the needs of owners and occupiers, local communities and a wide range of social, economic and environmental factors. The last three years have seen transformations in the economy, the planning system, environmental priorities and heritage policy. The IHBC has had to adapt accordingly. Our membership has grown and the characteristics of that membership have changed, with an increasing proportion from the private sector. There has been a great deal of change. I will doubtless remain to be actively involved with the IHBC, but I am looking forward to a slightly more restful time ahead. Dave Chetwyn, [email protected]
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MjgyMjA=