Minister Criticises English Heritage over Marble Hill House Closure

12.00.00am GMT Mon 2nd Feb 2004

In question time in Parliament on Monday, MP Vincent Cable raised with Estelle Morris the issue of English Heritage's drastic cuts in public access to Marble Hill House. She acknowledged that public consultation was "not as effective as it might have been" and recognised "local heartache". She was however reluctant to intervene directly since the agency has an 'arms length' relationship with government.

Vincent Cable said: "By the usual standards of ministerial waffle this was the nearest thing to a rap over the knuckles for English Heritage. I hope this rebuke will spur English Heritage to get back into dialogue with the Marble Hill Society and repair some of the damage they have caused. It may now be too late to stop the publication of the guide with the new opening times but it is not too late to put the House on a stable long term footing".

English Heritage

6. Dr. Vincent Cable (Twickenham) (LD): If she will make a statement on the funding of English Heritage. [151925] The Minister for the Arts (Estelle Morris): English Heritage received Government funding of £115.4 million in the financial year 2002-03. The allocation for 2003-04, 2004-05 and 2005-06 is £121.7 million in each year. In addition, it received £1.5 million this year to support its modernisation programme.

Dr. Cable : Granted the need for financial economy in English Heritage, is the Minister aware of the crass and incompetent way in which it has gone about drastically reducing public access to Marble Hill house in my constituency, one of the leading English historic homes, and the anger that that has created among local supporters who have spent years generating money for it? Will she therefore intervene to ask for a postponement of that decision until there can be proper public consultation and consideration of other options?

Estelle Morris: I understand the strength of feeling of which the hon. Gentleman speaks, because I know that this is a very important issue in his constituency. English Heritage is an organisation at arm's length from the Government and it is not for Ministers to tell it to stop carrying out its proper business either because hon. Members raise a matter in the House or because there is local opposition. English Heritage must look at the management of its properties, and the proposal of which the hon. Gentleman speaks is in response to the quinquennial review. Where I would share with him a concern is in the local heartache that such difficult decisions can cause, and from what I have heard, the consultation may not have been as effective as it might have been. In that respect, I shall ensure that my view is passed back, but I emphasise that that is not with a view to stopping English Heritage carrying out its proper business.