Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Lord Touhig (Labour) in the House of Commons on Tuesday, 28 October 2008. It occurred during Adjournment debate on Newbridge Memorial Hall.


Newbridge Memorial Hall

I will certainly come to that point shortly. It is a matter that I wish to develop in my argument. Both Ministers in the Wales Office come from true working-class stock and know only too well the debt that we owe the mining communities of Wales. Just as the whole community came together to build the Memo in the first place, they now rally behind the Friends of the Memo and their chairman, Howard Stone. The Friends of the Memo are all volunteers. All give endless hours of their time and all make a contribution to the quality of life of the people of Newbridge that is beyond measure. Their last application was turned down by the Heritage Lottery Fund, but they have not been deterred. They have already embarked on a second bid with determination and grit. My worry is whether the pot will be empty when their bid goes in. So much money for good causes has been diverted to the 2012 Olympics—as I well know as a member of the Public Accounts Committee—that I fear the cupboard will soon be bare. The permanent secretary at the DCSF and David Higgins, chief executive of the Olympic Delivery Authority, appeared before the PAC on 14 November 2007. The PAC was told that the national lottery fund would have to contribute £2.17 billion to the Olympics—an increase of £675 million. Surely that cannot be good news for projects such as the Newbridge Memo, which need lottery funding so badly. We heard in the PAC that a £5 billion error had been made in estimating the true cost of the Olympic games, and the national lottery—or should I say worthwhile projects such as ours—will pay the price for that error. I am concerned that the Heritage Lottery Fund will be squeezed, that people who work hard to restore amazing buildings such as the Memo will become discouraged and that those worthwhile projects that celebrate working-class history will be lost for ever. The 2012 Olympics will, I am convinced, be a time of great celebration and success for this country, and I want the Olympics to succeed, but I hope that those celebrations will not leave a bitter aftertaste for the Memo if our further bid is to fail. The truth is that funding for causes such as the Memo has been pillaged to help the Olympics and that has to stop now. Today, I am seeking a cast-iron assurance from the Government that no more lottery money will be siphoned off, thus putting projects such as the Memo restoration at risk. I said earlier that the Memo was the palace of the valleys, and so it is, which makes me wonder: if it were a royal palace or a great family's stately home, would it be treated better by the Heritage Lottery Fund when bidding for money? This palace celebrates the history not of royalty or great families, but of the working class of Britain—the people who put the word Great into Great Britain. Sadly, many people no longer have an idea of how important coal mining was to the communities that we grew up in. It is important that the restoration of the Memo goes ahead, because for some of us it is our last link to the historic past of the valleys in which we were born. It is important to support the social and historical heritage of working people embodied in such places as miners institutes. They are fast disappearing from our towns and villages. If we want to prevent that, we must ensure that when restoration projects are proposed, the funding bodies give a fair share to those projects as they do to stately homes, palaces and castles. Many of those institutes have either gone to rack and ruin or become one of the many faceless Wetherspoon's pubs that we see throughout the country. I am determined, as are the Friends of the Memo, that we will not let that happen to the Newbridge Memo. Even though the Memo lost out on the £3 million prize from the ““Restoration”” programme, they made an application for £4.9 million to the Heritage Lottery Fund. Following advice from the officers of the HLF to turn the restoration into a two-phase project, they made an application for £3.2 million, which was turned down by the HLF trustee board. I met Jennifer Stewart, head of the Heritage Lottery Fund in Wales, following the failure of the last bid, and I was told that there was nothing wrong with the bid but the Memo lost out because there was just £6.5 million left in the pot because of funding having to go elsewhere. I thank Jennifer Stewart and her team, because they have been very encouraging and supportive to the Friends of the Memo, who, as I said, are all volunteers. I spoke to her only this morning, and she told me how impressed she had been that the Friends of the Memo, having been turned down by the HLF just recently, have come back determined to fight back and make a further bid. They have a very positive approach. Jennifer Stewart is encouraged by that, and so am I. What concerns me, however, is the criteria used by the Heritage Lottery Fund when judging bids. Indeed, when I asked that very question of the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport, I was told:"““The Heritage Lottery Fund assesses all applications against its strategic aims. In addition, the Heritage Lottery Fund considers project planning and delivery, projects costs and partnership funding, long-term viability and value for money.””—[Official Report, 15 September 2008; Vol. 479, c. 2024W.]" Does the Newbridge Memo not have long-term viability? Of course it does. Does it not give value for money? Yes, of course it does. I am sorry, but I still do not understand how the Heritage Lottery Fund can decide that one project should be judged more worthy than another. Perhaps it should apply common sense—although I remember my mother saying to me as a lad, ““Son, in life you'll find that sense isn't that common.”” A little common sense should be applied, so that if two projects of equal merit are being considered, preference or added weight ought to be given to projects in county boroughs such as Caerphilly—I share the borough with my hon. Friend the Minister—that have not had their fair share of lottery funding. The Memo has probably had one of the highest profiles of any heritage project restoration in Wales. I am sure that the hon. Member for Caernarfon (Hywel Williams) will confirm that. It is seen in headlines almost every week. However, the popular vote seems to count for nothing for the trustee board of the Heritage Lottery Fund. The borough of Caerphilly has had just 38 Lottery awards, totalling £566,000. It is the second lowest supported area of Wales. We have been let down. All we want is a fair share so that that wonderful project can go ahead. In a couple of weeks, we will be marking the 90th anniversary of the end of first world war. The historical importance of the Memo needs to be recognised, of course it does; but more important is the fact that the Memo is no museum. It is the very heart of a very special town. The people of Newbridge and the Memo deserve better treatment with the new bid. I hope my that my hon. Friend will have something encouraging to say. I invite him and the Wales Office to stand shoulder to shoulder with me and the community of Newbridge as we make a renewed bid for funding to restore the Memo. It is a palace for the valleys—a palace for working people to enjoy and celebrate. It deserves a great future.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
481 c220-2WH 
Session
2007-08
Chamber / Committee
Westminster Hall
Subjects
Historic buildings Repairs and maintenance Newbridge Memorial Hall
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk