Antarctica: Scott and Shackleton Huts (Hansard, 11 October 2004)

§ Baroness Symons of Vernham Dean
My Lords, New Zealand has territorial responsibility for the Scott and Shackleton huts located in the Ross Dependency in Antarctica. The British Government, through the British Antarctic Territory, provide an annual donation of £12,500 to the UK Antarctic Heritage Trust, which in turn supports the conservation of the Ross Island huts. In 2002, the Foreign Office, again through the British Antarctic Territory, donated £70,000 to support the proposed Ross Sea heritage restoration project to undertake major preservation work on the huts in question.

§ Baroness Hooper
My Lords, in thanking the noble Baroness for her detailed reply, perhaps I may pick up on the fact that, because of the unique treaty status of Antarctica, these historic huts are unable to receive funding from the National Heritage Memorial Fund and cannot be designated as UNESCO world heritage sites. If the Government are unable to make a contribution towards the conservation of these historic huts, even though the amounts involved are very small, can the noble Baroness give an assurance that the Government will do something to extend the criteria of the National Heritage Memorial Fund and UNESCO to cope with Antarctica? These huts and the celebrated explorers who used them are of both national and international significance.

§ Baroness Symons of Vernham Dean
My Lords, I agree that this is a difficult problem, but I take issue with the noble Baroness. It is because of the treaty status that the UNESCO world heritage site fund cannot be accessed. Designation under the world heritage site convention is confined to sites within the territories of contracting parties, and under the Antarctic treaty all claims to Antarctica are in abeyance. The noble Baroness is entirely right about that, but on her second point, the fact is that the National Heritage Memorial Fund did consider the application made for £2.4 million towards the restoration of Sir Ernest Shackleton's hut, just one of the four concerned. However, the board of trustees concluded that while it would be highly desirable to preserve the huts, it would not be possible to finance that work from the limited resources available. It is not a question of changing the status of the fund—it would be if it was the heritage fund, but not the memorial fund—but of the priorities that the trustees have chosen to adduce.

§ Lord Moran
My Lords, when I entered this House, the late Lord Shackleton sat on the Labour Front Bench. Had he survived, he would have put the case for saving the Antarctic huts with unique eloquence and authority. Does the Minister agree that these wooden huts—built by distinguished British explorers—along with their remarkable contents, are a notable part of our heritage? They have miraculously survived 100 years of extreme Antarctic weather, but are now in real danger of being lost unless they are conserved as a matter of urgency. The New Zealand Antarctic Heritage Trust has produced a first rate conservation plan. Does the Minister accept that the British people ought to help the New Zealanders to preserve these memorials of British enterprise and that the British Government should take a lead?

§ Baroness Symons of Vernham Dean
My Lords, I agree that the plan that has been put forward is a comprehensive one; but it is also very ambitious. The conservation that is being suggested will cost £10 million in all, and that sort of funding has to be considered by the appropriate authorities. The National Heritage Memorial Fund has an independent board of trustees which oversees the Heritage Lottery Fund and I think it would be inappropriate for me to second guess the reasons why it came to its decision. It reached that decision as an independent body and I as a Minister must respect that.

§ Lord Forsyth of Drumlean
My Lords, surely these men are national heroes and these are very important artefacts and relics. Should not the Government make this a priority? Indeed, £10 million is a lot of money; but the Scottish Parliament was spending an extra £10 million every week and the money was found for it. Why can the Government not find money to support these important heritage sites in Antarctica?

§ Baroness Symons of Vernham Dean
My Lords, I hesitate to go where angels fear to tread in relation to Scotland. I agree, of course, that these huts commemorate national heroes of this country. I agree also that it would be desirable, if it were possible, to ensure that they are preserved. However, I hope that the noble Lord will agree that £10 million is a great deal of money and that it has to be spent by those with expertise in how it should be used. I understand that Sir Neil Cossons has agreed to hold a further meeting on this issue with the appropriate authorities. I hope that we will be able to look forward to some helpful advice from him.

§ Lord Greenway
My Lords, does the noble Baroness agree that, in paying tribute to the New Zealanders for the excellent work they are doing year on year in conserving these huts, helped by advances in regeneration techniques, it would be a great pity if—as I believe one of the conservation plans advocates—the huts were enclosed in sort of aircraft hangars, as that would destroy the whole idea of their present remote situation?

§ Baroness Symons of Vernham Dean
My Lords, I think that any sensible suggestion about how the huts 8 can be preserved is worthy of consideration. As I said, the chairman of English Heritage has recently offered to meet the chair of the Heritage Lottery Fund and of the UK Antarctic Heritage Trust to explore whether other potential avenues for funding might be available and could be usefully explored. At the moment, I am in no better position to judge on the issue of aircraft hangars than I suspect are many other noble Lords.
I do not think that what I am saying in any way undercuts the point that it would be a good thing if these huts could be saved. However, it has to be done at a cost that is reasonable and does not entail valuable funds being taken away from other projects. We must remember that, I think in the last year for which we have figures, there were only over 13,000 visitors to the region as a whole.

§ Lord Redesdale
My Lords, considering that these huts were prefabricated and bought in London to be erected in Antarctica, and that they were made of wood and therefore have a finite life period in Antarctica, would it not be much cheaper simply to buy another prefabricated kit to put down there in Antarctica? Perhaps I can also ask why the huts are locked, given that so few people have the means to get to them. In seriousness, however, the noble Baroness said that the chairman of English Heritage, Sir Neil Cossons, is looking at the issue. However, under law, English Heritage is not allowed to act outside the United Kingdom. When do the Government plan to bring forth legislation to allow English Heritage to act overseas?

§ Baroness Symons of Vernham Dean
My Lords, I think that Sir Neil's role in this is as a facilitator for those who feel, as I am sure many of your Lordships will feel, that it would be a nice thing to save them if we could. However, we are not convinced that £10 million is the right amount of money, particularly in view of the fact, as the noble Lord said, that so few people go to the region anyway. As for the issue of prefabrication being cheaper, it is important to remember that when these huts were erected, they were never intended to be permanent. Some might regard it as a real tribute to British expertise of over 100 years ago that they are still standing today.

§ Lord Barnett
My Lords, I congratulate my noble friend on resisting the temptation to spend too much money and not taking the advice of the noble Lord, Lord Forsyth. The Scots have found their money only by, unfortunately, still having available to them money that they should not have from the Barnett formula.

§ Baroness Symons of Vernham Dean
My Lords, it would be an even braver angel to venture there.

§ Baroness Hooper
My Lords, given that the noble Baroness has referred to the amount of £10 million for this project, does she agree that the bulk of that amount will be put up by the New Zealand 9 Government and that the application to their heritage fund was for less than £3 million, which is not quite the same as £10 million?

§ Baroness Symons of Vernham Dean
No, my Lords, it cannot be that. As far as I know, the New Zealand Government have guaranteed only £130,000. We have already, in the past few years, put in more than £100,000 for the maintenance of these huts. This whole project—all the proposals put together—is worth £10 million, but the project that was put forward to the memorial trust fund was for £2.4 million, for just one of the four huts. In any one year, the memorial fund has only £5 million to spend. So I must ask the noble Baroness also to consider what are the real priorities for expenditure here.