Guidance

Guidance for custodians on how to deal with commemorative heritage assets that have become contested

Published 5 October 2023

Applies to England

Introduction to the policy and guidelines

Our history is an essential part of the heritage of our country. The government, national agencies, local authorities and other custodians all play a role in conserving, protecting and explaining our heritage for current and future generations. Our commemorative heritage assets bring our history to life, illustrating many great people and events of the past, as well as reminding us of the human costs often linked with them.

There are times when a commemorative heritage asset in a public space depicts people or events that we might disapprove of today. On some occasions, this disapproval may result in calls for the commemorative heritage asset to be removed or relocated. Government policy is that these commemorative heritage assets should remain in situ. We should not hide from aspects of our history that we may deem unacceptable today. Decisions made about our heritage must not be based on a partial or partisan view of our history, but should seek to explore our past fully, attempt to understand it, and encourage people to learn from it. Retaining an asset in situ is often sufficient and no ‘explanation’ is needed. However, in some cases, retained commemorative heritage assets could be accompanied by a comprehensive explanation that allows the whole story of the person, building, or event to be told so that a fuller understanding of the historic context can be known and understood. This policy has become colloquially known as ‘retain and explain’.

Whilst some custodians of commemorative heritage assets may be experts themselves, or have curators and researchers within their organisation with expertise, other custodians may not have relevant experience given that commemorative heritage assets can be found across the built environment. Any discussion about how to deal with a contested heritage asset must not just be an internal conversation; the public and wider community will also have views and should be included. This guidance sets out advice and options for all custodians who are facing calls for the removal of commemorative heritage assets in their care or ownership.

What is in scope of this policy and guidance

This guidance applies to any commemorative heritage asset (statue, monument, or commemoration) which is a structure, or is part of a building or structure, which is on public display or in places accessible to the public.

The guidance does not include:

• Museums’ and galleries’ collections, including objects on temporary or permanent display, or in storage.
• Items that do not form part of a building or structure, items that that may be in place on a temporary basis, or items that are part of an exhibition. This may include items owned by institutions that are subject to restitution claims. Guidance on restitution is published by Arts Council England.
• Intangible forms of heritage such as dialects and dance.
• Heritage outside England, as heritage is a devolved matter – although custodians of heritage assets around the UK may like to consult this guidance.

How this guidance has been developed

A Heritage Advisory Board was established by the Secretary of State for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport to advise on the development of this guidance.^{[footnote 1]}

Historic England, the government’s adviser on the historic environment, was consulted on the preparation of this guidance. It developed a set of case studies to illustrate the variety of ways that reinterpretation has already been put into practice.

Who this guidance is for

Many custodians will routinely assess and reassess the story of the commemorative heritage assets in their care, in light of new research or evidence. More exceptionally, custodians may face calls from internal or external stakeholders for the removal or relocation of an asset in their care.

This guidance is for use by all custodians of commemorative heritage assets needing advice on how to deal with calls to relocate or remove them from public display. Many custodians will never have faced calls for the relocation of assets, so will have little, if any, experience of handling them. Responding appropriately to calls for removal may involve significant time and resources from an organisation, alongside legal and reputational considerations.

Other guidance

There are other sources of guidance of which custodians may want to be aware, to help them in their decision-making.

• For guidance on implementing historic environment policy, see Historic England: Managing Significance in Decision-Taking in the Historic Environment.
• For guidance for local authorities to help identify and assess relevant considerations in contested heritage planning applications see Historic England: checklist to help local authorities deal with contested heritage decisions.
• For advice on listed building consent, owners should follow the guidance set out in Historic England: Listed Building Consent.
• For guidance on contested heritage in Church of England buildings, see Church of England: Contested Heritage in Cathedrals and Churches.

How to use this document

• Part 1 is a glossary of terms and description of roles and responsibilities for those involved in considering contested commemorative heritage assets.
• Part 2 is the main guidance section which includes a process map, and detailed guidance on how to implement each stage.
• Annex A outlines a summary of legislation, existing policies and guidance in England associated with commemorative heritage assets that have become contested.

Part 1: Glossary of terms used and responsibilities

Commemorative heritage asset is the summary term used to describe all commemorative structures to which the ‘retain and explain’ policy applies (including statues, monuments, memorials, etc.). The term ‘heritage asset’ is also used in this guidance and refers to ‘commemorative heritage asset’ as defined above.

Community is a summary term to mean all parts of the community at large. It can mean the local or national community, ad hoc networks of people who share interest in, knowledge about or understanding of a particular commemorative heritage asset, and those who could have a wider interest in the asset now or in the future.

Contested refers to when the status and / or dominant narrative concerning a commemorative heritage asset is challenged. This challenge could be by individuals or groups such as employees, academic researchers, or external voices.

Custodians are owners and guardians of commemorative heritage assets and have primary responsibility for making the final decision on what, if any, action is proposed for the commemorative heritage assets that have become contested in their care, including calls for their removal. In the case of public bodies[^2], a non-executive board is usually deemed the custodian and will have responsibility for all its heritage commemorative heritage assets.

Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities (DLUHC): DLUHC is responsible for the planning system which includes mechanisms for the protection of commemorative heritage assets. Planning applications are required to seek the permission relating to the demolition of commemorative heritage assets. The Secretary of State for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities can exercise his power to take over (‘call in’) any planning application and to make the final decision.

Local Planning Authority: The Local Planning Authority (LPA) has responsibility for determining planning applications in relation to changes to any commemorative heritage asset (which has been in place over 10 years) and applications for listed building consent. The LPA must operate in accordance with the planning system, including the National Planning Policy Framework and subsequent directions (see Annex A) issued by the Secretary of State for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities.

Department for Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS): DCMS is responsible for national policy on heritage including the statutory framework for heritage protection. This includes all designations, including listed buildings and the policy on contested heritage.

Historic England: is the government’s adviser on the historic environment. It advises the government on listing and advises local government and other decision-makers on proposals affecting listed buildings and other designated commemorative heritage assets, as well as publishing a range of expert advice and guidance to help people care for and protect the historic environment. Historic England publishes a checklist intended to help planning authorities identify and assess relevant considerations in contested heritage cases when carrying out their planning functions, and to make decisions in the wider public interest in accordance with legislation and policy including the National Planning Policy Framework.

Stakeholder: Custodians will very likely have to engage with a number of internal and external stakeholders who are directly affected by the review of the commemorative heritage asset. This may include but is not limited to employees, organisation members or ‘friends of’, volunteers, board members, and local authorities, all of whose interests in the commemorative heritage asset endures beyond the review.

Part 2: Guidance for custodians dealing with commemorative heritage assets in the face of calls for their relocation.

Policy summary

Government policy on commemorative heritage assets which are subject to calls for removal is to keep them in situ; to retain them. Removing commemorative heritage assets diminishes our understanding of the past. Moreover, removing these commemorative heritage assets risks suppressing our ability to understand and learn from aspects of our history, including past actions which may not be considered acceptable today.

Retention in situ may be accompanied by appropriate ‘explanation’ of the history of the individual or event commemorated. Custodians may conclude that retaining the asset in situ is sufficient and that no ‘explaining’ is needed. If, however, custodians decide to add further explanation to a commemorative heritage asset, it must be in a balanced way, which enables the public to learn about it in its entirety and to make up their own mind. Explaining our heritage should be based on a rigorous, balanced and comprehensive interpretation of the past.

Decisions about how to retain and explain are complex and should be taken on a case-by-case basis. The physical setting, historic character or event commemorated, and the extent of public attention and comment, will be different in each situation. Custodians must examine and comprehend all the evidence from a range of opinions before deciding on a course of action.

Custodians should consult the community and stakeholders as part of their decision-making process. Wide consultation to gauge sentiment and understanding of the heritage asset should be integral to the discussion on decision-making. Consultation should be accessible, inviting a wide range of opinion to avoid a mistaken or partial understanding of the person or event commemorated being accepted as fact. The outcome of the consultation will only be one part of the evidence that is used in decision-making by the custodians. In weighing up this evidence, custodians should be mindful of those who cannot be consulted, including past and future generations.

The historical evidence provided to assist custodians in deciding a course of action should be rooted in academic rigour. Assessment of the evidence may involve making authoritative academic research accessible, so that views can be based on up-to-date historical knowledge.

Commemorative heritage assets are often in the public realm, or in spaces accessible to the public. Public bodies, or bodies in receipt of public funds should  ensure that they have given due consideration to the views and opinions of the wider community  throughout the retain and explain process.

If custodians decide that an explanation is needed, it does not have to be a plaque or textual, and a range of approaches can be considered by custodians. There are many ways to explain, and the policy encourages innovation in alternative media, including creative ways to explain and contextualise the story of the person or event that is commemorated. Whatever approach to explaining is undertaken, custodians should reach their decision based on the approach set out in these guidelines, including making good use of historical research and consultation.

Custodians may feel pressure to make a decision quickly, especially if under intense public and media scrutiny. It is important that custodians running the review have time to gather all the evidence and historical information. Time should also be taken to engage the community to help inform the decision and on any subsequent action.

The policy of retaining and explaining commemorative heritage assets does not preclude the relocation of commemorative heritage assets in all circumstances. Following appropriate statutory approvals, some heritage assets may be required to relocate to allow major development or infrastructure projects to take place, or where unavoidable impacts such as natural erosion or subsistence movement necessitates it.

Where such unavoidable issues are not present, it is anticipated that custodians would only decide to relocate a commemorative heritage asset once all other options had been examined and discounted, so this is only justifiable in very few circumstances. Custodians should consider the legislative process needed to relocate a commemorative heritage asset, including the planning consents required from the relevant local authority before deciding on a course of action.

Summary of steps for dealing with calls to remove commemorative heritage assets

Step 1: Custodians face calls to remove a commemorative heritage asset in their care

Custodians are responsible for making a judgement on whether the calls for the commemorative heritage asset to be relocated represent a body of opinion that has some standing in the matter and whether the case being made appears credible. Custodians should not be obliged to respond elaborately to clearly unfounded or partial assertions.

If there is no valid evidential case for removal, or for an explanation, the custodians could decide to do nothing further and close the review. If the persons making the case for change are credible and informed, custodians should undertake an initial assessment of all currently held information on the commemorative heritage asset. This initial assessment should help custodians decide whether there is merit in inquiring further into the calls for relocation.

The initial evidence collection might include:

• Ownership status: who owns the heritage asset?
• Designation status: is the heritage asset listed, or in a conservation area?
• Provenance and history of the heritage asset: what is the current known history of the asset, how was it produced, and by whom? What was it commemorating? Was it designed for this location, or has it previously been placed in a different location? Is the asset listed? (If so, this information will be available on the National Heritage List for England
• Historical understanding: is the wider history of the individual or event depicted incomplete and /or misleading?
• Availability and amount of evidence: is the existing evidence gathered adequate, or is further research needed?
• Context of the time: what were the prevailing attitudes at the time of the subject’s life/actions and/or when the asset was erected?

Outcomes of Step 1: Custodians should review the initial assessment of available information and decide their next step

• Formally close the review if no further research or action is necessary with the commemorative heritage asset.
• Decide whether more action (including further research) is required, or whether the asset is already adequately and accurately interpreted.
• Correct any historical information that the assessment has highlighted to ensure the heritage asset is accurately described.
• Go to Step 2 if further research/ action is required.
• Go to Step 3 if the pre-existing information held is robust enough to inform a consultation.

Step 2: Custodians commission a more detailed examination of the asset

If, despite the pre-existing information gathered, custodians feel further evidence is needed to inform their review, they should commission detailed examination of the asset to assist their decision-making.

The following list will help custodians commissioning detailed research into the concerns of those advocating relocation of the commemorative heritage asset. The examination might include:

• building on the known research from Step 1
• incorporating any scholarly published information relating to the provenance of the heritage asset (to the extent that it is available)
• identifying who decided to commemorate the individual(s) and the rationale presented at that point in time
• undertaking an assessment of the artist/sculptor and the commission, understanding the genre, materials, level of quality and craftsmanship, and the significance of the artist
• considering the wider historical context of the time in which the asset was commemorated and developing an awareness of the nuances of the fuller historical debate
• presenting a full and rigorous review of the historical evidence available, including:
  • primary source material and authoritative secondary works, including, e.g. the Oxford Dictionary of National Biography
  • peer assessment of the evidence and conclusions, if proportionate
  • commissioning a recognised academic expert(s) in the person portrayed or historic period under enquiry, if proportionate
  • consideration of how recently the commemorative event happened or the person depicted lived
  • consideration of the social and cultural context of the time in which the subject lived and/or the object was commissioned

This examination may reveal new information that adds to the understanding of the person, or period in question. Any new information should be robustly verified prior to deciding any action and the outcome of the examination being formally recorded by the custodians. Custodians should decide whether to publish the outcome of the detailed examination to help interested stakeholders and the wider public understand the rationale behind any future decision.

If custodians decide to retain the asset without amendment, they should consider making the reasons public, (for example, in the organisation’s board minutes, or through a written statement).

Outcomes of Step 2: Custodians should review the output of the detailed examination of available evidence and decide their next step.

The detailed examination of the commemorative heritage asset leads custodians to decide whether:

• the asset is adequately and accurately interpreted, meaning the custodians can close the review, or
• that a consultation based on the findings of detailed examination should be undertaken to explore community and stakeholder sentiment and going to Step 3

Step 3: Custodians consult stakeholders and the community

Listening to and understanding the range of sentiment is an important consideration in the custodians’ decision-making process. The individual(s) or organisation identified to undertake any large-scale or formal consultation should be credible, professional and experienced in this field.

Custodians should use the evidence gathered from the review to ensure that the consultation is based on a full understanding of the person or event. The consultation should gather views on the range and depth of sentiment prompted by the person or event depicted.

To ensure that the consultation is proportionate and focused, custodians should consider whom to consult, thinking broadly about the range of people or groups that might be interested. This may include members of the public who share their space and daily lives with the commemorative heritage asset and other groups campaigning for either the retention or relocation of the asset, as well as potentially interested communities outside the immediate local area. The consultation approach should be balanced, with no over-representation of the views of particular groups, and efforts should be made to seek the views of those who are less vociferous, as well as those who are vocal. Custodians should ensure the consultation process is proportionate to the issue in hand.

As well as seeking views on the commemorative heritage asset itself, custodians should use the consultation to set out possible options for explaining it, beginning with the presumption that it will be retained. In rare and exceptional cases, and after careful consideration of the implications and viability of such an option, the consultation may include testing the option of relocation.

Custodians should not rush to make a decision once all the evidence has been received and the consultation is complete. When making a decision, the consultation results should be considered alongside all the other evidence gathered and with custodians also thinking about the interests of past and future generations.

Outcomes of Step 3: Custodians should review the output of the consultation and decide their next step.

• Custodians have all the relevant evidence from Steps 1 and 2 , plus an understanding of the range and depth of sentiment towards the commemorative heritage asset, and move to Step 4.

Step 4: Custodians decide how to proceed

Custodians should now have the necessary evidence, research and stakeholder views to make an informed decision on how to respond to calls for the commemorative heritage asset to be relocated.

Custodians will need to weigh up multiple factors and make a decision that is robust, evidenced and defensible, in the knowledge that not all stakeholders are likely to agree with the decision. This Step 4 decision should take into account:

• the costs of the options, including the preferred approach and value for money considerations
• the organisation’s charitable purpose and whether the cost of implementing the decision is an appropriate use of funds^{[footnote 3]}
• the impact of and strength of feeling in the community for retention and relocation, plus any legal implications of the chosen course
• the custodians’ responsibility to protect and represent the interests of past and future generations

Where custodianship is held by a board of Trustees, there should be collective responsibility for the decision, even where the proposed decision is put forward by an individual.

If custodians decide to retain the asset without making any changes to explanation, they should consider making the reasons public (for example, in the organisation’s board minutes or through a written statement).

Outcomes of Step 4: By the end of this step, custodians should have made a decision on how to proceed:

• retain the commemorative heritage asset in situ without any amendment and close the review
• proceed to Step 5 – develop an additional explanation of the asset with it retained in situ
• in rare and exceptional circumstances, the decision might be to seek permission to relocate the asset to an alternative site (and undertake the necessary planning and legislative requirements). For more information on this, see Moving commemorative heritage assets and the planning process

Step 5: Custodians decide how they will explain the asset

The purpose of the explanation or contextualisation is to provide a fuller understanding of the history of the commemorative heritage asset than was previously the case.

When considering how to explain the commemorative heritage asset, custodians should consider:

• which medium will be used for the explanation and whether multiple media are required
• who is best qualified to undertake the additional explanation or interpretation work
• how the evidence gathered in the review process will inform the interpretation work
• whether audience testing is required, for example with a broad and representative panel of local residents or others with a close connection to the place and its history
• the budget available to undertake the work
• the timescale for completing the work.

Making physical/textual changes to a heritage asset is just one way to explain it more fully. Other ways of explaining might include:

• a separate, publicly-accessible exhibition close by, allowing a fuller story of the heritage asset to be told in its context – the explanation does not have to be purely textual and could take the form of an artistic interpretation of the original asset, but should be rigorous and balanced whatever form it takes
• updating existing explanatory material in proximity to the heritage asset (for example, a permanent street-level notice)
• making a digital account of the history available, for instance by a QR code close to the statue or memorial – digital interpretation allows for a variety of viewpoints to be shared easily;
• organising cultural events which help to explain the context of the asset and/or the installation of temporary or permanent counter-memorials;
• installing a separate plaque in recognition of any contemporaries connected to the commemorated person or event (for example, people harmed or exploited by them, or those who disagreed with them at the time)
• non-permanent, appropriate illumination of the heritage asset to draw attention to wider context of the person or event commemorated
• installation of a complementary statue or other artwork to provide commentary or a counter-perspective
• amendment of formal records, such as list descriptions or entries in the local Historic Environment Record
• a dedicated education or learning programme focused on the contested elements of a particular history

Once the explanation at Step 5 is complete, custodians should close the review and give a clear public statement that the process is over. There may still be calls from some quarters to relocate the heritage asset. Custodians should make clear that, given the resource and time committed to the review, they do not intend to reopen it.

The explanation made by the custodians must be given time to become embedded locally and familiar to all stakeholders and interested parties. The custodians also need time to consider the impact and efficacy of their decision. A pause in activity, following what is likely to have been a difficult period locally, is an opportunity for all concerned to reflect on the new explanation of the asset with it retained in situ.

Moving commemorative heritage assets and the planning process

Government policy is clear: it opposes the removal of commemorative heritage assets. Custodians must in the first instance seek to retain and, if necessary, explain any commemorative heritage assets which have become contested before considering any application for removal.

Custodians may still decide that the most appropriate course of action at Step 4 is to seek to reposition or relocate the commemorative heritage asset. Custodians might make this decision if there is evidence of an overwhelming case for broader benefits of a move. For instance, there may be a ‘heritage benefit’ in a move that might involve returning an object that has been moved in the past back to its original position. The consultation undertaken in Step 3 should have tested the views on the location of the commemorative heritage asset.

Custodians who decide to seek to relocate a commemorative heritage asset at Step 4 should pause before starting the planning application process. Custodians who make the significant decision to relocate a commemorative heritage asset should not rush into taking this action. There should be a significant pause between decision and action to allow custodians and others the time to assess the impact on public sentiment of the decision to relocate the asset.

A significant pause also allows time for custodians to plan thoroughly and consider the legal, financial, reputational and organisational risks of making a planning application for a change, i.e. removing or relocating a commemorative heritage asset. Making a planning application for relocation or partial relocation is likely to need significant organisational resources, and could be a costly process.

For any changes to a commemorative heritage asset which  has been in place for over 10 years, custodians will need to make an application to the Local Planning Authority. Custodians should consider Annex A of this document and the further guidance which outlines the relevant processes and permissions needed for changes to commemorative heritage assets. Custodians should also be aware that the Secretary of State for the Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities also has the power to ‘call in’, i.e. determine, applications for change.

If custodians decide that it would be most appropriate to seek to move a commemorative heritage asset to a museum, they would need to agree this with that institution. Any museum faced with the request to acquire the commemorative heritage asset is likely to need the agreement of its trustees or board to decide whether to accept it.

Annex A: A summary of legislation, policy and existing guidance in England associated with commemorative heritage assets which have become contested

Since Spring 2021, there has a clear statutory framework in place within the planning system to ensure that the relocation of statues, memorials and monuments and plaques is subject to planning control and scrutiny where appropriate:

The demolition or alteration of listed statues, memorials, monuments and plaques has always been subject to listed building consent and in, most cases, planning permission, but the Arrangements for Handling Heritage Application Direction 2021 extended notification of an application to Historic England to the demolition of Grade II listed assets (as well as Grade I and Grade II* assets).

The Town and Country Planning (Demolition – Description of Buildings) Direction 2021 reformed the general exemption for the demolition of small structures so that the full or partial demolition of unlisted statues, memorials and monuments which have been in place for at least 10 years now requires planning permission (i.e. it does constitute the development of land).

The Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development etc.) (England) (Amendment) Order 2021 excludes unlisted statues, memorials and monuments which have been in place for least 10 years from the permitted development right to demolish buildings.

The Town and Country Planning (Consultation) (England) Direction 2021 requires Local Planning Authorities to consult the Secretary of State on planning applications for the full or partial demolition of relevant statues, memorials, monuments and plaques if they are minded to grant permission – to enable the Secretary of State to ‘call in’ the decision and determination the application him/herself.

The National Planning Policy Framework was amended so Local Planning Authorities have to have regard to the government’s policy on retaining these historic assets in situ when making decisions.

Background

On 22 September 2020, the then Secretary of State for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport, Oliver Dowden, wrote to DCMS arm’s-length bodies to outline the government’s position on contested heritage.^{[footnote 4]}

In January 2021, Robert Jenrick, the Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government, issued an update on the role of the planning system in relation to the protection of historic statues, plaques, memorials and monuments.^{[footnote 5]} This update informed subsequent Directions (see below) and changes to the National Planning Policy Framework (also see below).

In 2021, the scope of the planning system was extended including changes to the National Planning Policy Framework, putting in new legal protections for heritage assets.

On 17 January 2021, new laws to protect England’s cultural and historic heritage were announced, strengthening the measures protecting statues, plaques, memorials and monuments which have been in place for at least 10 years. This confirmed that the demolition of unlisted statues, memorials and monuments requires planning permission (i.e. it does constitute the development of land). This legislation came into effect from 21 April 2021 via The Town and Country Planning (Demolition – Description of Buildings) Direction 2021, and was introduced at the same time as the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development etc.) (England) (Amendment) Order 2021, which excludes from the existing permitted development right the demolition of unlisted statues, memorials and monuments that have been in place for 10 years or more.

The Secretary of State for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities may choose to ‘call in’ an application to remove a statue, monument, plaque or memorial for determination.

The guidance and legislation highlighted in this Annex should be read alongside the chapter on conserving and enhancing the historic environment in the National Planning Policy Framework,^{[footnote 6]} which states that:

In considering any applications to remove or alter a historic statue, plaque, memorial or monument (whether listed or not), local planning authorities should have regard to the importance of their retention in situ and, where appropriate, of explaining their historic and social context rather than removal.

Directions and Orders

Arrangements For Handling Heritage Applications – Notification to Historic England and National Amenity Societies and the Secretary of State (England) Direction 2021

• Confirms the new requirement to notify Historic England in respect of the demolition of Grade II-listed statues, monuments, memorials or plaques.
• The definition of relevant works to Grade II-listed buildings is extended to include ‘commemorative object works’ – which are themselves defined as ‘works for the full or partial demolition of a statue, monument, memorial or plaque that are, or are part of, a listed building’.
• This new Direction replaces the 2015 Direction (Arrangements for Handling Heritage Applications – Notification to Historic England and National Amenity Societies and the Secretary of State (England) Direction 2015).

The Town and Country Planning (Consultation) (England) Direction 2021

• This introduces the requirement for Local Planning Authorities to consult the Secretary of State on planning applications for the full or partial demolition of a statue, monument, memorial or plaque which has been in place for ten or more years, where the Local Planning Authority does not propose to refuse the application.
• Specifically, Local Planning Authorities are required to consult the Secretary of State in relation to proposals for ‘commemorative object development’, namely ‘development which consists of or includes full or part demolition of a statue, monument, memorial or plaque which is, or is part of, a building in place for a period of at least 10 years on the date of any proposed demolition’.
• The exceptions to this are statues, monuments, memorials or plaques which are:
  • listed buildings (as these are covered by Listed Building Consent);
  • scheduled monuments (as these are covered by Scheduled Monument Consent);
  • within a cemetery, on consecrated land, or within the curtilage of a place of public worship;
  • within the grounds of a museum or art gallery;
  • within the curtilage of a dwellinghouse.
• The Secretary of State may then still seek Historic England’s views on these applications, but no formal protocol is proposed for this;
• Circular 02/09 (The Town and Country Planning (Consultation) (England) Direction 2009) is withdrawn.

The Town and Country Planning (Demolition – Description of Buildings) Direction 2021

• This Direction confirms that the demolition of a statue, monument or memorial needs planning permission (i.e. it does constitute the development of land).
• The 2021 Direction replaces The Town and Country Planning (Demolition – Description of Buildings) Direction 2014.
• It is introduced at the same time as the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development etc.) (England) (Amendment) Order 2021, which ‘excludes from the existing permitted development right the demolition of certain statues, memorials and monuments that have been in place for 10 years or more’.

National Planning Policy Framework (published 2021)

Paragraph 198 reads: ‘In considering any applications to remove or alter a historic statue, plaque, memorial or monument (whether listed or not), local planning authorities should have regard to the importance of their retention in situ and, where appropriate, of explaining their historic and social context rather than removal.’

Planning Practice Guidance

New paragraphs 125 and 126 of the Planning Practice Guidance address the following:

• Do I need to apply for planning permission to demolish a building or structure? This section includes helpful tables setting out which consents are needed within and outside conservation areas.
• Do I need planning permission to demolish a plaque? This clarifies that demolition of a plaque would require an application for planning permission where it materially affects the external appearance of the building.
• Local Planning Authorities are required to consult both the Secretary of State for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities and Historic England on any planning applications for the full or partial relocation or demolition of any statue, monument, or memorial or plaque, which has been in place for ten or more years, where the Local Planning Authority does not propose to refuse the application. The Secretary of State can exercise his/her power to take over (‘call in’) these planning applications and make the final decision.

1. The advisory board had seven members, and reported its recommendations directly to DCMS/the Secretary of State. For more details, please see The Heritage Advisory Board. ↩

2. What to send to the Charity Commission and how to get help ↩

3. Letter from culture secretary on HM government position on contested heritage. ↩

4. Planning and Heritage Update -Statement made on 18 January 2021 ↩

5. National Planning Policy Framework ↩