---

Science and Heritage (Science and Technology Committee Report)

It was a great privilege to serve on the committee under the able chairmanship of the noble Baroness, Lady Sharp. It was a particular pleasure as this was a topic that combined my interests in the opposing cultures of the arts and sciences. I hope that I will be forgiven if I am autobiographical for a moment, but it will explain where I am coming from in emphasising the need for craft skills as well as heritage science. My degrees are in psychology, which is perhaps a quasi-science in the eyes of some people present, but I have always been fascinated by botany and by hard sciences such as astronomy. I therefore understand the importance of scientific rigour. On the other hand, many of my past and present relatives are artists and architects. One of my great uncles, Charles Harrison Townsend, was a distinguished member of William Morris’s arts and crafts movement and was the architect of the Whitechapel art gallery, the Horniman museum and the Bishopsgate library. The whole object of those institutions was to offer art and culture to everyone. I went to a school whose ethos was inspired by the arts and crafts movement and which believed that craft skills were as valuable as academic ability. It was therefore fascinating to be allowed behind the scenes at the National Gallery and the Uffizi in Florence during this inquiry and to observe practical conservation in action. It was astonishing, as has already been mentioned by previous speakers, to find the extent to which conservation work in our museums and galleries is underfunded and fragmented, and where it does exist it is dependent on informal networks and the ingenuity of individuals. There seems to be no strategic framework or database of methods, materials and expertise. The fact that the National Gallery’s equipment for analysing paint samples is redundant hospital machinery is a tribute to individual enterprise but an indicator of how little attention is paid to preserving our national heritage. If that is so at a major gallery, it is all the more true of local museums and galleries throughout the country. The focus of the Government has been all about increasing public access, but unless thought is given to the future of our collections of artefacts they will continue to rust and decay, and future generations will be impoverished and will not wish to visit our collections. The Government have increased spending onthe arts and have recognised the importance of the creative arts as a contributor to 7 per cent of the country’s GDP. That spending has been almost entirely directed at the innovative arts, such as music and computer games. Little has been directed to preserving our cultural heritage, which contributes greatly to our GDP, mainly through the tourism industry. Much has been made in the past few weeks of the need to establish an English or British identity. It is surely through our historical and cultural artefacts, stately homes, buildings and so on, that some of our identity is established. We are a society that is divided not only on the grounds of ethnicity and religion but on the basis of class and education. We still elevate academic qualifications above practical knowledge and skills. We therefore have to do much more to value and motivate the 50 per cent of our young people who will not go to university and to offer them satisfying alternative careers. The Heritage Lottery Fund provided English Heritage with £7 million to fund two-year bursaries in traditional heritage craft skills such a hedge laying and stone wall building. It would surely be possible for the DCMS to establish similar bursaries or apprenticeships for conservation work in museums and galleries. I was delighted that the noble Lord, Lord Waldegrave, also mentioned the need for craft skills. I was particularly interested by our visit to the conservation departments at the Uffizi in Florence. The Italians preserve a very rigid distinction between scientific analysis and the practical skills of the conserver. Meticulous scientific analysis of the state of artefacts such as Michelangelo’s ““David”” and the Baptistery doors established the strategy for restoration, but in some instances the actual work of restoration is carried out by artisans in the various workshops. In the Pietra Dura workshop, school leavers at the age of 18 start a four-year apprenticeship learning the art of stone cutting, which culminates in the making of magnificent inlaid marble table tops. Other Uffizi workshops also have three or four apprenticeships. Compared to Italy we have a flourishing economy, and a very small outlay of government funds could ensure that we maintain a basis of conservation skills, provide interesting career opportunities for our young people and help to maintain our cultural heritage. The arts and crafts movement was of course hopelessly idealistic, but it set out to enhance respect for craftsmanship, whether in furniture making, textiles or stained glass. It valued human beings for a range of skills and not just for their ability to make money. It would be attractive if some of that vision were to infuse the present Government, and in particular the responsible department, DCMS. We argued strongly in our report for a strategic approach to conservation, and it is splendid that the sector and Research Councils UK have done much in the past year to improve the situation. However, much more could be done by a committed government department to inspire further change and more targeted development.