This page will probably only be of interest to those who already have some knowledge of  the current means by which the historic environment is protected. In particular, it is assumed that the reader is familiar with the operation of the ecclesiastical exemption, by which some denominations are allowed to make their own decisions regarding listed buildings, rather than being reliant on the local authority.

NEWS - August 2005
The Department's report Ecclesiastical Exemption - the way forward - is now available. It will allow voluntary management agreements for church sites for exempt denominations.

Background

A consultation document was launched by the Department of Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS) in July 2003, following their review of the protection of historic assets. Now rather out of date, but details below, under 'Original Designation Consultation Document'.

More recently (early 2004) a new consultation document has been launched focussing on ecclesiastical exemption. You can find out more about this by scrolling down until you get to the heading 'Ecclesiastical Exemption - Recent Consultation Document (early 2004)'.

Responses

Here are six responses to the 2004 consultation paper.

The response of the Victorian Society (added 2 August 2004)

The response of the Chapels Society (added 12 July 2004)

The response of the Joint Committee of the National Amenity Societies (added 8 July 2004)

The response of the Church Heritage Forum (for the Church of England) (added 7 July 2004)

The response of English Heritage (added 1 July 2004)

The response of the Institute of Historic Building Conservation (added 1 July 2004)

We hope to add more as they become available.

Ecclesiastical Exemption - Recent Consultation Document (early 2004)

The new consultation document is called The Future of the Ecclesiastical Exemption. It is intended that exemption will continue, and be made available to any other faith groups who wish and are able to operate in this way.

The paper has one central idea, but this is very vaguely expressed. It is suggested that denominations should strike a 'management agreement' with a validating body for how they go about operating the examption. At one extrement, the management agreement could presumably be identical to the current arrangements. At the other extreme, it could contain almost anything. As the paper give very few clues as to its contents, it's hard to reach a considered view on this big idea.

About the only thing which the document is clear about is the need for better archaeological control. Unfortunately, archaeology is normally done at the expense of parishes, especially those with medieval sites (about 8000 churches). As many parishes are already strapped for cash, it is hard to see this going down well.

It is suggested that English Heritage be the validating body to agree the contents of the management agreement, and also that it should act to monitor the way it is carried out and its impact. On a quick reading, there is no particular suggestion that this should be done with a light touch. Some might say that this would put English Heritage in the position of policeman, judge, jury, chief prosecutor and expert witness.

We'd like to hear your views. Send us an e-mail.
 

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Original Designation Consultation Document

You can read the original Desgination Consultation document (July 2003),by clicking on DCMS review. Click here for a useful set of discussion links produced by the CBA.

The review is centred on examining the legislation through which the most important archaeological and historic assets are protected - which is
primarily by designation as Listed Buildings and Scheduled Ancient Monuments, or Conservation Areas, Historic Battlefields, Historic Parks and
Gardens, Protected Wrecks etc. Such statutory designation usually affords additional controls which helps to protect historic and archaeological
assets.

The review consultation document advocates bringing together the different regimes for protecting historic buildings and ancient monuments into a
single List of Historic Sites and Building in England ; devolving the responsibility for maintaining such a list to English Heritage; creating a unified
consent regime for all items on the list; and allowing management agreements as an alternative to a consents regime in some circumstances. Other
proposals include allowing discretion to English Heritage decide whether assets should be listed or protected by other means (i.e. development
control and/or recording); migration of some grade II buildings which are felt to be of lesser significance to local lists; requirements for inclusion of
appropriate historic environment policies in Regional Spatial Strategies and local development plans; and to promote joint agreements covering both
environmental and heritage protection in rural areas.