NATIONAL AUDIT OFFICE REPORTBY THE COMPTROLLERAND AUDITOR GENERAL Protectingand Managing England’s Heritage Property ORDEREDBY THE HOUSEOFCOMMONS TO BE PRINTED 10 JULY1992 LONDON:HMSO 132 f8.75 NET PROTECTING AND MANAGING ENGLAND’S HERITAGE PROPERTY This report has been prepared under Section 6 of the National Audit Act, 1983 for presentation to the House of Commons in accordance with Section 9 of the Act. John Bourn National Audit Office Comptroller and Auditor General 9 July 1992 The Comptroller and Auditor General is the head of the National Audit Office employing some 900 staff. He, and the NAO, are totally independent of Government. He certifies the accounts of all Government departments and a wide range of other public sector bodies; and he has statutory authority to report to Parliament on the economy, efficiency and effectiveness with which departments and other bodies have used their resources. PROTECTING AND MANAGING ENGLAND’S HERITAGE PROPERTY Contents Pages Summary and conclusions 1 Part 1: Introduction 4 Part 2: Identifying, recording and protecting properties 7 Part 3: Grants and other help for. heritage properties 17 Part 4: Maintaining property in care 25 Part 5: Managing and presenting property in care 33 Appendices 1 Independent voluntary and private organisations who provided evidence to the National Audit Office 50 2 Listing criteria and responsibilities 51 3 Studies on computerising the statutory lists 52 4 Aims and objective* for presenting property in care 53 List of figures, tables and photographs 54 PROTECTING AND MANAGING ENGLAND’S HERITAGE PROPERTY Summary and conclusions “The genius of English architecture is the glory of England, second only to the written word” - Sacheverell Sitwell. I England has over 500,000 listed historic buildings and scheduled monuments. Nearly all of these properties are owned privately and their care and preservation depend on the efforts of owners and voluntary and private sector organisations. The Government support this work with a range of grants and other assistance. They are also responsible for custody and management of many of the country’s most outstanding heritage properties. Local authorities too have an important role in heritage matters through their statutory powers to enforce planning controls and consents on listed buildings. 2 The Department of the Environment have overall responsibility for this work and spend nearly El20 million a year on grants to five major sponsored heritage bodies: English Heritage, the National Heritage Memorial Fund, the Historic Royal Palaces Agency, the Royal Armouries and the Royal Commission on the Historical Monuments of England. They also spend about E0.5 million a year on support to a range of voluntary bodies. From April 1992 however, most of the Department’s responsibilities in this area have been taken over by the newly created Department of National Heritage (paragraph 1.9). 3 This Report deals with the results of a National Audit Office examination of the arrangements for identifying, recording and protecting heritage properties and for controlling grants and other assistance. It reviews the measures taken to maintain and manage the heritage properties in government care and their marketing and presentation to the public. The examination took place in 1991 when heritage responsibilities rested with the Department of the Environment. 4 The National Audit Office’s main findings and conclusions are as follows: On listing and scheduling (a) Determined efforts over a number of years have increased the number of listed buildings of special architectural or historical interest from around 120,000 in 1970 to almost 500,000 in 1991. Further work is in hand to improve the completeness and content of the lists. Computerisation would increase access to and encourage more positive use of the lists in the care and protection of properties (paragraphs 2.5-2.13 and 2.20-2.241. (b) On scheduling of monuments, by contrast, there is much still to do with some 13,000 sites scheduled against an estimated 60,000 sites that might deserve scheduling. A programme to improve the schedules was set in hand in 1989 but progress has been slower than planned and the original target of completing the work by the year 2000 is no longer regarded as likely (paragraphs 2.14-2.19). 1 PROTECTING AND MANAGING ENGLAND’S HERITAGE PROPERTY (c) There has been very limited reliable information on the physical condition of listed properties, the Department having decided that collecting and maintaining such information would not be cost- effective. However, after a special survey exercise in 1990-91, English Heritage estimate that across England there are some 37,000 heritage properties [seven per cent of the total) at risk because they are in a poor or very bad state of repair. In particular, there may be some 2,400 buildings of outstanding or exceptional interest (Grade I) or of more than special interest (Grade II*) at risk. Another 73,000 buildings (14 per cent] are estimated to be vulnerable to neglect and may need repair to prevent them falling into poor condition. There is also concern about the condition of many ancient monuments (paragraphs 2.25-2.32). (d) English Heritage do not monitor how far the advice they give to local planning authorities is taken into account when deciding on listed building consent applications. Neither the Department nor English Heritage have sufficient information on which to judge the performance of local authorities in enforcing listed building controls. Without such information it is hard to establish how far the objectives of heritage policies in this area are achieved. Although it is Government policy to leave listed building consent decisions with local authorities as far as possible, the Department agree that better information in this area would be helpful (paragraphs 2.33-2.45). The Department and English Heritage do carry out some monitoring of the results of their work in protecting scheduled monuments although better use could be made of the available information (paragraphs 2.46-2.48). On financial assistance for heritage properties (e) There have been some weaknesses in the selection, appraisal and targeting of grants by English Heritage. But the need for improvement in these and other areas has been fully recognised and a number of measures are already in hand to strengthen planning, allocation and control procedures. Otherwise examination confirmed that grants have successfully helped secure heritage property in good condition and that costs were well controlled (paragraphs 3.3-3.18 and 3.27-3.32). (f) Owners are normally required to provide an agreed level of public access to properties as a condition of receiving grants. There are sometimes problems to be overcome but generally access appeared to be negotiated successfully, though some individual caseshave proved difficult (paragraphs 3.19-3.26). (g) There are a number of risks in properly controlling the arrangements under which alterations to listed properties may be zero rated for Value Added Tax; and it is difficult to establish how far the benefits of the relief are commensurate with the cost of between E8 million and f20 million a year (paragraphs 3.34-3.36). On maintaining property in care (h) English Heritage cannot readily reduce or rationalise their estate of some 400 properties in care, and there is considerable uncertainty over the condition of many of the properties they hold. Regular survey and inspection procedures have now been introduced to increase the information available as a basis for a planned repair and preservation programme (paragraphs 4.2-4.10). 2 PROTECTING AND MANAGING ENGLAND’S HERlTAGE PROPERTY (i) Despite uncertainty over the full extent of the work, English Heritage are faced with a major backlog of repair and conservation. They are now devoting a’major share of their available resources to tackling this work. But it is difficult to establish the progress made and what remains to be done, and the total cost of the repair programme has not yet been calculated. In 1992 they concluded that it was no longer feasible to achieve an earlier target of clearing the backlog and putting the whole of the their estate in good repair by the year 2000 (paragraphs 4.11-4.14). (j) Further improvements are needed in English Heritage’s management and control of works projects. particularly those carried out by their direct labour force; they plan to turn this into an independent conservation force, managed on a commercial basis, and they are developing improved and more rigorous project management procedures. The position is developing much more satisfactorily at the Historic Royal Palaces, where a number of key steps are being taken to tighten up control of their works programme in preparation for taking over responsibility from the Property Services Agency in 1992 (paragraphs 4.15-4.31). On marketing and presentation (k) English Heritage have been successful in securing a significant increase in visitor numbers in an expanding market, and total income has risen substantially in real terms. Growth at the Historic Royal Palaces has been less satisfactory for a number of reasons; but the new Agency, established in 1989, now expect the position to improve as a result of planned investment in visitor facilities and better marketing and presentation. However, both organisations, and the Royal Armouries, face increasing competition from other heritage organisations and leisure attractions (paragraphs 5.7-5.22). (1) All three organisations have given increasing attention in recent years to improving the display and presentation of the historic buildings and contents in their charge; and the survey and other information available suggested that across much of the field there was a high level of visitor satisfaction. But standards and customer expectations are growing all the time, and further efforts appear to be needed to improve presentation and visitor facilities (paragraphs 5.23-5.46).