Modern Britain loves its heritage ... It’s taken a revolution to make us a nation that values our ancient buildings and monuments. Heritage! The Battle for Britain’s Past I: From Old Bones to Precious Stones, BBC 2013
This is the story of how the heritage movement was ignited. ibid.
Ruskin spread his gospel through a string of books and packed lecture tours. ibid.
Morris founded the Society for the Protection of Ancient Buildings. ibid.
In September 1918 Britain’s most famous monument – Stonehenge – was given to the nation. Heritage! The Battle for Britain’s Past II: The Men from the Ministry
The men from the ministry would command a massive rescue operation. ibid.
The cities of Britain were modernising and expanding haphazardly into the countryside. ibid.
In 1918 many great ruins were on the verge of collapse. ibid.
Office of Works v National Trust. ibid.
Out of the ruins was born the modern listing system that signalled a new hopefully safer future for the best old buildings of Britain. Heritage! The Battle for Britain’s Past III: Broken Propylaeums
It was even called the Rape of Britain ... Modernism became discredited. ibid.
The provision of new housing: a new generation of architects was ready. ibid.
Georgian buildings remained underrated. ibid.
In his trusty Austin 1100 and taking twenty-three years to do it, [Nikolaus] Pevsner methodically criss-crossed the country cataloguing England’s most important buildings. ibid.
The fight to save The Euston Arch [Propylaeum] from demolition. ibid.
The attack on old buildings continued for several years. ibid.
By 1975 ... the country was losing a listed building every day to demolition. ibid.
... Army equipped to fight for Britain when the balloon goes up – Communists, Maoists, Trotskyists, neo-Trotskyists, crypto-Trotskyists, union leaders, communist union leaders, atheists, agnostics, long-haired weirdos, short-haired weirdos, vandals, hooligans, football supporters … The Fall and Rise of Reginald Perrin, Jimmy
At the moment in Britain we’re facing such enormous cutbacks in education programmes and music programmes and art programmes that you feel you are knocking your head against a brick wall. Peter Maxwell Davies
Fifty years on from now Britain will still be the country of long shadows on country grounds, warm beer, invincible green suburbs, dog lovers, and – as George Orwell said – old maids bicycling to Holy Communion through the morning mist. John Major, speech 22nd April 1993
It is time to get back to basics. John Major, speech 8th October 1993
Society needs to condemn a little more and understand a little less. John Major, interview Mail on Sunday 21st February 1993
One of the reasons the ruling class in this society survive is because they keep from us what they do in spite of parliamentary institutions. The ruling class have to protect themselves against democracy and that’s what this story is about.
The Scott inquiry is the most important public inquiry ever held in the history of British politics for this reason.
It was set up in a tremendous panic. The government had their backs to the wall, and in order to convince people that it wasn’t just another whitewash they insisted all the old rules about previous inquiries would be dispensed with. Paul Foot, lecture Marxism 95 conference & article ‘What Have They Got to Hide? Tories, Arms & The Scott Report’ 19th August 1995
This difference between selling them arms and saying they were not selling lethal equipment went on until three politicians – Sir Richard Loose, Sir Adam Butler and Paul Channon – decided that something ought to be done about it. These three had all – by complete coincidence – been at university together and they were the ministers of state at the foreign office, the defence ministry and the department of trade.
They drew up a series of guidelines. The first was that we should maintain our consistent refusal to supply any lethal equipment to either side. The second was that, subject to that overriding consideration, we will attempt to fulfil existing contracts and obligations. Huge sighs of relief went through all the big companies which sell arms equipment. The third added we should not in future approve orders for defence equipment which in our view would significantly enhance the capability of either side to prolong the conflict.
Then a curious thing happens. Having decided on these guidelines, the three decide they are not going to publish them. Why?
The guidelines went to the prime minister – Margaret Thatcher – and she said, ‘Hold on a minute. I am negotiating the biggest arms deal in the history of the world with Saudi Arabia, and Saudi Arabia are friendly with Iraq.’
They didn’t publish the guidelines for a whole year until Thatcher and Michael Heseltine – who declares himself completely clean on all these matters – signed the £20 billion contract. ibid.
At The end of the Iran-Iraq war in 1988 there was enthusiasm in the West because Saddam Hussein was building up a whole armoury in Iraq. There was a tremendous opportunity to make money.
The problem was the guidelines. So in December 1988 three ministers of state – Waldegrave at the foreign office, Alan Clark at the Ministry of Defence and Trefgarne at the department of trade – held a secret meeting to devise new guidelines.
They changed the rules so it was alright to send arms for defence. As a result the amount of equipment that went to Iraq grew by ten times in the first year and by 100 times by the time the scandal came to light.
These three ministers decided not to publish the fact they had changed the guidelines. ibid.
The first terrible event was encountered by Nicholas Ridley, then secretary for trade, when he was enjoying his Easter holiday. Someone told him that customs had seized some rather unpleasant goods – vast cases of what appeared to be the biggest gun ever built, for export to Iraq.
This was lethal equipment even by Ridley’s definition. It had been made in two of the biggest engineering factories in Britain, who were in constant contact with the department of trade. ibid.
The second embarrassing event was that Saddam Hussein invaded Kuwait. Suddenly the whole public attitude is whipped up against Iraq. Everyone is in favour of prosecuting the merchants of death.
Customs arrest the engineer in charge of the supergun project and the managing director. Guilty as hell of breaking the export law, a straight-forward conviction is expected.
Except that customs are called in by the attorney general, Sir Patrick Mayhew, who says it is not a good idea to prosecute. He told customs they were free to do it but he would stop them going ahead with the prosecution. Customs withdrew – but they proceeded against another company called Matrix Churchill.
The directors were appalled. They said we did this in concert with the government and intelligence. One of the key intelligence agents in Iraq at that time was a man working for Matrix Churchill. Paul Henderson. He was managing director and a government intelligence agent.
They started to leak documents. One document leaked to The Sunday Times said that Alan Clark, when he was minister of defence, held a meeting of all the machine tool manufacturers. He said from now on when you want to sell arms to Iraq put it under general engineering. ibid.
It is obviously going to come out that the defendants did what the government told them to do. They were guilty of selling arms to Saddam Hussein, but not half as guilty as the people who were cooperating with them in the government.
When the defendants wanted to prove the government had known about their illegal exporting, the government issued a public immunity certificate. Most people think this certificate has something to do with security. It has nothing whatever to do with security. It defends the discussions between civil servants and ministers from any revelation or disclosure.
But at the trial the lawyers forced the government documents out, the trial collapsed and the Scott Inquiry was set up.
There has been the most tremendous attack against the Scott Inquiry from the establishment. The ruling class is trying to protect itself from the revelations. Many of the people named in the Scott report have been promoted. ibid.