20th June 2010, 01:11 PM
(This post was last modified: 20th June 2010, 01:16 PM by drpeterwardle.)
This cut was from a review of projects that had yet to start and could therefore be stopped without penalty, and the project was not without its critics anyway. I have not seen the reasoning for axing it. If I was the current Chief Secretary to the Treasury hastily making these decisions I would axe it for the following reasons:
1. Can it be funded by the lottery or can more lottery funding be used?
2. Can it be funded by the private sector – it should make a profit?3. What difference will it make if it is delayed for a few years?
4. It would only create a few jobs?
Indeed the Culture Minister said
"I recognise the disappointment that everyone in the heritage community feels at today’s announcement. But I hope that they, and others, will understand why this has come about - the costs and benefits of this project had to be considered in the light of the current financial picture. We all have to accept trade-offs, but even though we can’t afford to fund the project today, it remains a priority for the future.”
This project only received planning permission in January and after allowing three months for legal challenge of the permission the actual date for government’s commitment to the funding was April, that is within the projects committed to in the last month of the Labour Government.
The decisions to commit to the funding of the project were all subject to there being a satisfactory business case. This was still being considered in Jan 2010 see
http://www.regeneris.co.uk/news.asp?ID=249Stonehenge has been a national disgrace for decades and clearly something has to be done the question is what and by whom. There are no easy answers which is why the debate has taken so long and so much money has been spent on it.
The actual government funding for the projected new visitor centre is as follows:
DCMS budget ?10 million
EH (EH are government funded) ?9 millionHighways Agency ?4 million
Lottery Funding ?5 million
In 2008 887,000 people visited the monument paying ?6.90 for an adult which would generate about ?4.6 million income per year. In addition there is the revenue from the shop and the food stall. So even EH must make a profit from it of say ?2 million per year. To my mind the question is how much more profit would the new visitor centre generate?
The decision to put the visitor centre 1.5 miles away is an expensive one. A transit system will be involved which will mean employing sufficient people to operate it at peak times, say 1000 visitors in an hour. So how much would this cost to run?
This could therefore be a good rational logical decision by government to review something to see if better value for money can be obtained. (I am however sceptical that this is the case.)
English Heritage’s comments can be found at http://www.stonehengevisitorcentre.org/pdfs/10-million-pound-17-june.pdf.
They say:“This does not necessarily mean this is the end of the project. We will be discussing the withdrawal of Government financial support with the Department for Culture, Media and Sport. We will be making an announcement as to the future of the project after the English Heritage Commission meets on 30 June.”
Peter