Constructive thoughts on the effect of cuts to archaeology and heritage

[kevin wooldridge]

I remember many many years ago (well before I became actively involved in field archaeology) out local archaeologist (well intentioned amateur with some family fortune to sustain his efforts) stood as an independent in the county council elections against the leader of the ruling Conservative party. I forget the imperative that inspired him to run for high office (probably the refusal at the time of the county council to fund some minor watching brief), but I do remember his election address. He spoke of the vast wealth of that particular county council and how it would only require a small percentage of the money spent on social services to be reallocated to ensure that all of the county's archaeological assets could be protected in perpetuity!! Needless to say his appeal had little appeal to the general voting public, even in a traditional Tory area where you would think that archaeology and heritage matters would have a potentially receptive audience.....I was reminded of this when listening to the podcast of yesterday's Any Questions and hearing the government spokesman regretting spending cuts, but reminding us that 'we face difficult choices'.......

In the light of the 'Save Our Archaeology' campaign coming up against the 'difficult choices' argument, shouldn't we, rather than defining archaeology, be making the case for how maintaining archaeology spending can be justified in light of cuts to social services or defence or hospitals or schools or libraries or universities etc etc or at least how an effective balance can be achieved....?