Thank you for forwarding to me a copy of the proceedings of the Committee in relation to the application to the HLF by Royal Artillery Museums Ltd of which I am Chairman.

  We much look forward to the visit by the Committee on 2nd December and we are co-ordinating a programme in conjunction with the Borough of Greenwich. We recognise that time is very short. This project and its five collections spread over three locations is so extensive that a visit to see it all and to understand it fully takes a minimum of two hours, better three. Since we recognise that this is impossible we are concentrating on the Site itself and it is my intention to describe our plans as we visit each of the four buildings. We are also providing a very small display of some of our collections.

  To save time I enclose a short brief for Committee Members.

  Finally you kindly gave me the opportunity to comment on the proceedings you sent and I attach a memorandum accordingly.

30 November 1998

HISTORICAL BACKGROUND

  1.  Artillery is defined as any mechanical means of propelling a projectile to its target. Thus Roman catapults and ballistas, the trebuchet and ongars of the Middle Ages, the longbows and crossbows were all artillery in their day.

  2.  Using this definition artillery was first used in Britain at the siege of Maiden Castle in Dorset in AD44 by the Romans with the ballistas. Thus our story is almost two millennia long.

  3.  Gun powder was first invented in Britain by Roger Bacon in 1248 and guns were first used for certain by the British Army at Crecy in 1346. Since then artillery has been present at every campaign fought by the British Army. Thus we are telling the story of the Army through the eyes of its Gunners and we have the material with which to do it.

  4.  In the 14th and 15th Centuries the majority of guns were made in the villages of Sussex because the large number of oak trees in the area burnt with sufficient heat to make the gun barrels. They copied the technology they used when making a beer or water barrel hence a gun "barrel".

  5.  In the 16th Century, to improve efficiency the whole operation was moved to Moorfields in the City of London. Then in 1700 they were casting a gun which exploded killing several people and gun making was banished to the Plumstead Marshes, which is now Woolwich. We still have the actual gun which exploded.

  6.  On arrival at Woolwich the Board of Ordnance built the Royal Brass Foundry, Tower House and Laboratory Square. The architects were Verbruggan and Hawksmoor. These buildings still exist and you will see them.

  7.  Tower House included the Room of the Board of Ordnance when such people as the Dukes of Marlborough, Richmond and Wellington presided over the defence affairs of the Nation. Next door is the first Military Academy in Europe—built for 12 students.

  8.  Between 1346 and 1715, when the Nation went to war, a "Trayne of Artillery" was assembled and trained, but this took time. The Duke of Marlborough "Trayne" for his Campaign in Europe in the early 1700s involved 2,000 horses, 100 guns and was 30 miles long on the road. We can reproduce this with large scale models.

  9.  In 1715 when the Jacobite Rebellion occurred, it was over by the time the "Trayne" was ready—which was not good!

  10.  Accordingly on 26 May 1716 the new Regiment of Artillery was born in Tower House. It became "Royal" in 1722 and expanded so rapidly that new barracks were built for it a mile south on Woolwich Hill by 1800. A new Military Academy was also built.

  11.  The effect was that all design, manufacture and deployment of artillery was controlled from the Arsenal by the Master General of The Ordnance, the oldest continuously held military rank in the world and a Cabinet appointment. He was in today's language, the Secretary of State for Defence.

  12.  In the barracks up the hill were the fighting batteries of the Regiment who trained and fired their guns on Woolwich Common (hence Shooters Hill). They were under the Master Gunner of England.

  13.  From 1700 to 1854 the whole Army deployed to War from Woolwich camping on Woolwich Common or Blackheath and being called forward to the Arsenal to collect war stores and ammunition. They embarked on ships in the Thames and sailed to every Continent in the World during the expansion of Empire period.

  14.  Meanwhile the Arsenal grew to a massive size until by 1920 it employed 80,000 people and the town of Woolwich grew up around it. Now it employs no-one and is as a result an area of high unemployment and run down industry. Our Project is the flagship to begin the regeneration of the area, to bring over 200,000 visitors a year to Woolwich, to employ local people and begin the process of bringing back prosperity. Thus we enjoy full local support, especially from the Borough of Greenwich.

THE COLLECTIONS

  15.  For over 300 years the Gunners have assembled the world's greatest collections of artillery and associated literature and artefacts at Woolwich.

  16.  They are:

a.  The Gun Collection. 750 guns housed in The Rotunda spanning the period 1338 (the oldest) to the present day and still evolving. We have recently put a Gulf War gun and a gun which did so much to restore peace in Bosnia into the Collection. We are working through a programme of conservation of the collection and we will show you the result.

b.  The Medal Collection. This is a collection of 7,000 medals, the largest single collection in Britain including 62 VCs (28 originals) and the two guns from which all VCs are made. They act as memorials to individuals. These are housed in the Officers Mess for security reasons.

c.  The Library. Some 30,000 books including priceless hand written and illustrated notebooks made by cadets at the Academy in the 18th and 19th Centuries and the oldest known book on artillery in English in the world (the original copy) dated 1570. These are housed in the old Royal Military Academy.

d.  The Archives. Over a million documents and records including detailed records of overseas artilleries and the men and women who have served the guns for some 300 years. The duplicate war diaries of 2,000 batteries of World War I and 3,000 in World War II. Also housed in the old Academy.

e.  The Artefacts. Some 7,000 supporting artefacts, uniforms, hats, swords, accoutrements, models, maps, photographs etc. Also in the old Academy.

  17.  These priceless collections are in three separate locations—some a mile apart and are in damp old buildings or stand out in the open (the guns) deteriorating fast. It is thus vital that we succeed with an new project as soon as possible.

  18.  MOD Defence cuts have cut our current staff so much that our Regimental Museum (the artefacts) has had to be closed and the Rotunda closed at weekends. What is more the old Royal Military Academy on Woolwich Common is empty and scheduled for disposal. If this happens we will have to move out and until the new museum is built, we have no-where to put the collections.

THE STORYLINE

  19.  We intend to weave together the long story of artillery from the Roman times to the present day, with the story of The Royal Regiment of Artillery from 1716 to the present day with the Story of the Royal Arsenal from 1696 to the present day with the story of The Borough of Greenwich.

  20.  It involves telling the story of the Army and the social aspects of it. The story of manufacture and invention and of local people. All in a place of education, the arts and leisure in an area which has none of these amenities.

PROCEEDINGS OF 4 NOVEMBER

  1.   Paras 254-259. This is a correct description of the broad history of the application. It would be slightly more accurate to describe the £3 million spent (para 254 lines 16) as, "They have now spent £3 of project funds largely fruitlessly during the protracted application procedures".

PROCEEDINGS OF 11 NOVEMBER

  2.   Para 444. The Chairman's point is well made. We too are surprised that after several years of deliberation the HLF should now question the merit of the collection, indeed we doubt that the HLF trustees really are doing this. Because the HLF has already contracted to provide an interim grant of £5 million it has clearly accepted the heritage significance of the collection. The Chairman subsequently makes this plain in his evidence on 14 November. In the letter of rejection, the quality of the collection is not given as a reason for declining the grant. Furthermore both MGC and South East Museums Services were briefed by RAML several times and neither ever questioned the national significance of the collections.

  3.  With regard to Designation, even were it to be a crucial factor, the Minister is misinformed. A pre-qualification for Designation is Full Registration by the MGC. Although the MGC recognises the importance of the Collection as a whole, four of the collections, the library, the archives, the artefacts and the medals are not accessible to the public because they are located inside secure areas of the barracks and for this reason are only Provisionally Registered. Only the gun collection in the Rotunda is therefore Fully Registered. It is this factor, and not the quality of the collection, which precludes it from Designation. Nor does it follow that because the museum is not designated, the collections are thus of less importance. This is well known to the HLF officers. Indeed the creation of the new museum to concentrate all five collections in one place with full public access is the main reason for the application to the HLF in the first place.

  4.   Para 455. The bid "which had grown to £24.5 million" had indeed become more ambitious but this was because the HLF itself had encouraged an application on a much larger scale. This was for at least two reasons. First the trustees and their advisers place much emphasis on putting the buildings themselves to greater use to guarantee their conservation. This we were happy to do provided that the HLF could find the money (and clearly at the time they were confident of its availability). However the purpose of our fundraising is principally to preserve and grant access to our collections. Although the HLF is served by a distinguished panel of museum advisers (chiefly from the national rather than the independent sector), those involved in this decision have not visited the site or collection in connection with this Application.

  5.  Second, a more expansive scheme was orginally advanced because in consulting with the HLF and our own business advisers, it became crystal clear that unless a substantial "destination museum" could be created it would not be viable. A museum on such a scale demands a big investment and we were encouraged to pursue just that, submitting a bid which did not find favour. But because the HLF agreed with our plans for two of our four buildings and because they recognised that we may need to evacuate the Old Royal Military Academy on Woolwich Common by the end of 1999 they made us an interim award of £5 million for which we were most grateful.

  6.  HLF then agreed to our suggestion to set up a Joint Working Party and to speed up the process and limit costs whilst at the same time seeking better ways to create a museum which delivered broad public appeal, excitement and animation to achieve viability. This was most helpful.

  7.  We were by early 1998 increasingly fearful that much less money would be available and unless we moved fast we would be further disadvantaged. At this point the Working Party was withdrawn, a new case officer appointed and dialogue with HLF staff and monitors became difficult. The impression that we were somehow dilatory in submitting the application is wrong. It took us just 13 weeks compared to the 16 weeks it took the HLF to arrive at a decision. We also scaled down our bid by £7 million.

  8.  Since no reference was made to the views of the MGC or SEMS on our letter of rejection we were surprised to hear for the first time of this apparently crucial factor now. (Having now spoken to SEMS we learn that their concerns lie not with the collection or museum concept but with the size of the Application, SEMS having been told by HLF that the money would not be available for a bid of this size).

  9.  We note that the economic appraisal by Jura Consultants is now given as the real reason for turning down the bid. However, having thoroughly examined their report and revisited our figures we are clear that it is their report which is flawed rather than ours. Their consultant, having chosen to make the harshest interpretation of the "worst case" cash flow which we were asked to give chose to ignore up to 40,000 "travel trade" visitors and their income which at a stroke in his view undermines our case. This is without justification. Moreover the results of reputable consumer research which supports our business assumptions are also largely ignored. In the light of the trustees and their experts apparent wish to otherwise support the scheme we would urge that Jura, who did not raise this in discussion with us before advising the case officer, be requested to revisit their analysis and give better information to help trustees and panel members. Fundamentally we feel that there is a lack of appreciation that independent museums are "cash businesses" and that this is something of an alien concept to those whose financial and museum management expertise is informed largely from the public sector.