St Georges chapel - RAF Biggin Hill
FL
In joke or typo?
And given CAS' background in the RP community he certainly knows how to play "this game". I very much doubt he is doing much sitting on his backside!
Andy Byford
And given CAS' background in the RP community he certainly knows how to play "this game". I very much doubt he is doing much sitting on his backside!
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: East Midlands
Age: 84
Posts: 1,511
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
St George's Chapel - Ministert's Responsw
A colleague of mine received the following from the Minister
A response from MOD:
Direct response, within the hour from Anna Soubry, Defence Minister,
Gary Preston I can assure you I do not want the closure of the Biggin Hill Chapel. It will be preserved and kept open. I am working on how we secure the funding. I am sorry that you have been misled by a newspaper report - the reporter has my phone number. He didn't call me or the Ministry of Defence. If he had he would have been given the facts. Instead people have been unduly worried and concerned. It is inconceivable that this important memorial to the sacrifice of some of our finest airmen would be "boarded up". Thank you for contacting me so I can reassure you. Anna
A response from MOD:
Direct response, within the hour from Anna Soubry, Defence Minister,
Gary Preston I can assure you I do not want the closure of the Biggin Hill Chapel. It will be preserved and kept open. I am working on how we secure the funding. I am sorry that you have been misled by a newspaper report - the reporter has my phone number. He didn't call me or the Ministry of Defence. If he had he would have been given the facts. Instead people have been unduly worried and concerned. It is inconceivable that this important memorial to the sacrifice of some of our finest airmen would be "boarded up". Thank you for contacting me so I can reassure you. Anna
^^^^
So would the Minister like to explain how the Chapel came to be under threat in the first place? It should never have been an option full stop! With words from the Minister on her Twitter feed stating "We are working on how to keep it open" implies that there is a current plan to close it.
It is good to see that the Department now recognises the unique history behind this special Chapel - which Churchill called a shrine to the Few - but it is a shame it took an e-petition and embarassing headlines to achieve it.
Furthermore, why should a newspaper check with the Minister before running a story? It would not be a 'free press' then would it?
In the same way as Jo Johnson MP stated - I too am glad to hear that the MOD plans to save the Chapel from closure and see its continued funding.
LJ
So would the Minister like to explain how the Chapel came to be under threat in the first place? It should never have been an option full stop! With words from the Minister on her Twitter feed stating "We are working on how to keep it open" implies that there is a current plan to close it.
It is good to see that the Department now recognises the unique history behind this special Chapel - which Churchill called a shrine to the Few - but it is a shame it took an e-petition and embarassing headlines to achieve it.
Furthermore, why should a newspaper check with the Minister before running a story? It would not be a 'free press' then would it?
In the same way as Jo Johnson MP stated - I too am glad to hear that the MOD plans to save the Chapel from closure and see its continued funding.
LJ
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: @exRAF_Al
Posts: 3,297
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
She is trying to shape the story (as you might expect from a journo). So let's strip it back. The issue is the underlying intent and now, the frantic back peddling by Soubry as she seeks to limit the damage. If there was never any intent in the first instance, there wouldn't be anything to firefight.
The issue never was that the MoD wanted to close it and she never wanted it to be closed. But it made the decision to stop funding without properly planning the transition or legacy. Soubry was either party to that process which shows lack of judgement on her part or she simply wasn't in the loop which shows lack of oversight, or she simply didn't comprehend the consequences.
Saying, as she has been, "we remain committed to its preservation” is not the same as saying that ultimately, it will remain open and cared for. I'm committed to losing some weight this January but that's not the same as saying it's going to happen. Commitments these days, are mealy mouthed babble, the preserve of the prevaricator.
Similarly, Jo Johnson suggesting "Great news MoD committing to preservation of Battle of Britain Chapel in Biggin Hill -thanks to good sense of Anna Soubry" is nice because it's putting pressure on her but it's still not the same as saying "Great news MoD will be keeping the Battle of Britain Chapel in Biggin Hill open and preserved".
The issue never was that the MoD wanted to close it and she never wanted it to be closed. But it made the decision to stop funding without properly planning the transition or legacy. Soubry was either party to that process which shows lack of judgement on her part or she simply wasn't in the loop which shows lack of oversight, or she simply didn't comprehend the consequences.
Saying, as she has been, "we remain committed to its preservation” is not the same as saying that ultimately, it will remain open and cared for. I'm committed to losing some weight this January but that's not the same as saying it's going to happen. Commitments these days, are mealy mouthed babble, the preserve of the prevaricator.
Similarly, Jo Johnson suggesting "Great news MoD committing to preservation of Battle of Britain Chapel in Biggin Hill -thanks to good sense of Anna Soubry" is nice because it's putting pressure on her but it's still not the same as saying "Great news MoD will be keeping the Battle of Britain Chapel in Biggin Hill open and preserved".
she simply wasn't in the loop which shows lack of oversight
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: @exRAF_Al
Posts: 3,297
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The airport steps in - a bit of a 'third way' result. What a shame that, if it wasn't for the airport, there would have been a closure. If there was no intent to dispose of it, why would the airport have to step in? The plan was to offload it all along. Soubry's hands have ink on them.
Biggin Hill Airport steps in to save RAF Chapel of Remembrance | Sevenoaks Chronicle
Biggin Hill Airport steps in to save RAF Chapel of Remembrance | Sevenoaks Chronicle
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Back to the fold in the map
Posts: 382
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes
on
1 Post
I too signed the e-petition and so, of course I am glad that the chapel will now remain open. However, the discussion here has raised some interesting points. I have made this statement in other posts but - "there is no money" and so of course everything is up for grabs. If one wants to bash the Government (and it would seem that many do) for trying to close the chapel then crack on - " someone who knows the cost of everything and the value of nothing" springs to mind. However, the chapel will remain open - by fair means or foul so why don't we move on? I seem to remember that one of the very first things I learnt at OCTU (so that dates me!) was if you want to criticize, then be sure it's constructive criticism. Sorry - rant over! Happy New Year to All. CB
You see a buy out by Biggin Hill Airport Ltd isn't good enough for me. Here is why from a quote in the Airport Newsletter by Mr Will Curtis, the Managing Director of Biggin Hill Airport Ltd from Jan 15:
So who feels comfortable this after seeing the above? Yes, Biggin Hill Airport Ltd could take this on - but what happens when times get tough? As a business it is suggested that when times are tough that they are very unlikely to provide full support of the Chapel - I couldn't blame them for that, either. So the MoD needs to be encouraged to keep this as a heritage site in my opinion, gifting (or more like ditching!) the responsibility to a commercial operation should not be an option. We should have a strategic policy on this as too many new 'heritage' projects keep springing up when old and historically important ones like this Chapel are allowed to fade away into obscurity. The depth of feeling on this is plain to see and the Minister's 'rescue plan' just doesn't cut it.
There are the last remains of aircrew scattered in the grounds of this Chapel - as a relative, how would you feel if all the Commonwealth War Graves were given to say McDonalds, ASDA, WH Smiths and Wetherspoons to run?
I still think this 'new' plan is poor, I'm afraid (that isn't actually new and they were talking about the past 12 months at least by looking at some of the Parish minutes and other local newsletters).
Shame on those that think that the Minister's solution is OK.
LJ
P.S. Having re-read the above quote, I would suggest that the Company's apparent keeness to preserve the Chapel may have a hint of their need to placate the local NIMBYs for the Company's planned expansion as a Bizjet Airport. Maybe, I'm being harsh on them, and maybe they are very good people wanting to help, so I reserve judgement on their actual motive to fund this. If it is genuine, then I apologise for my thoughts on this up front, unreservedly.
Seriously though, we need to ensure that we all take part in the Council's own consultation and respond positively as, if we are not careful, the small minority of "antis" will yet again get a disproportionate amount of air time and attention. It seems that the NIMBYs are not interested in jobs for the younger generation, nor in the future success of the airport which they would ideally like to see closed for good. They slate the airport openly for failing (in their opinion) to support the heritage of the airport, all the time ignoring the fact that the airport has volunteered, for no reward, to underwrite the cost of operating a heritage centre if it can be built and to underwrite the cost of maintaining and protecting St. Georges chapel if and when the MOD decide to take it off their books. It is difficult to see what more we might do to support the heritage of the airport. We see our heritage as important and we are keen to protect and honour the history of Biggin Hill airport for future generations, but this will cost money and money, as you all know, does not grow on trees. It has to be earned by commercial activity. The antis, it seems, care only about themselves. The fact that many of them moved into their very substantial houses around the airport, or under its approach, relatively recently and certainly long after the airport was in operation does not seem to matter to them at all. Ironically, they seem as keen as us on honouring the heritage of the airport . They believe, it seems, that Biggin Hill airport can survive purely to service the odd Spitfire flight and host some bits of bent metal carefully placed in an exhibition centre.
Of course, it is more complicated than that, and the £6 million annual cost of operating an airport of this size can only be met by commercial Business Aviation traffic. In the absence of that, I can see Biggin Hill falling prey to airlines, or alternatively following in the footsteps of West Malling aerodrome - also an important WWII fighter base - whose heritage is now buried under 1,500 affordable homes
Of course, it is more complicated than that, and the £6 million annual cost of operating an airport of this size can only be met by commercial Business Aviation traffic. In the absence of that, I can see Biggin Hill falling prey to airlines, or alternatively following in the footsteps of West Malling aerodrome - also an important WWII fighter base - whose heritage is now buried under 1,500 affordable homes
There are the last remains of aircrew scattered in the grounds of this Chapel - as a relative, how would you feel if all the Commonwealth War Graves were given to say McDonalds, ASDA, WH Smiths and Wetherspoons to run?
I still think this 'new' plan is poor, I'm afraid (that isn't actually new and they were talking about the past 12 months at least by looking at some of the Parish minutes and other local newsletters).
Shame on those that think that the Minister's solution is OK.
LJ
P.S. Having re-read the above quote, I would suggest that the Company's apparent keeness to preserve the Chapel may have a hint of their need to placate the local NIMBYs for the Company's planned expansion as a Bizjet Airport. Maybe, I'm being harsh on them, and maybe they are very good people wanting to help, so I reserve judgement on their actual motive to fund this. If it is genuine, then I apologise for my thoughts on this up front, unreservedly.
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: @exRAF_Al
Posts: 3,297
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I imagine that the lines were glowing today. Why EH didn't step in is curious.
For £50,000 pa though? There are two schools of thought here; those who suggest that if you look after the pennies the pounds will look after themselves and those who suggest penny wise, pound foolish. It's a cliche, but it seems that the third option wins out - this is about knowing the price of something and not the value of it.
Anna had her hand forced and as a result of that, due to the original thought processes at work, we have a shocking result. I agree, trusting this to a small local company, whatever the motivation or however benevolent the intent, is a shocker. But Soubry, can she now backtrack? Saying sorry or conceding she got it wrong isn't her style.
For £50,000 pa though? There are two schools of thought here; those who suggest that if you look after the pennies the pounds will look after themselves and those who suggest penny wise, pound foolish. It's a cliche, but it seems that the third option wins out - this is about knowing the price of something and not the value of it.
Anna had her hand forced and as a result of that, due to the original thought processes at work, we have a shocking result. I agree, trusting this to a small local company, whatever the motivation or however benevolent the intent, is a shocker. But Soubry, can she now backtrack? Saying sorry or conceding she got it wrong isn't her style.
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: @exRAF_Al
Posts: 3,297
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
thePipeLine | FALLON FACES BATTLE OF BRITAIN CHAPEL EMBARESSMENT
Many would argue that £50,000 is a small price for the Government to pay on behalf of the taxpayer to remember permanently the RAF personnel who flew from, or died at, Biggin Hill and who helped ensure they still had a sovereign Parliament to sit in.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 1,797
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The petition is now approaching 26k. Far from jumping for joy at resolution, the cynic in me believes that only a Trust or Govt body can ringfence long term security of this national asset. No disrespect to Biggin Hill Airport, but I feel that some astute back peddling has taken place and many will hope it now dies a death. Personally, I would like to see the 100,000 required for it to be answered 'in the house' and as such be documented on public record.
I agree, although politics are conspiring against us. Firstly, the 'new' announcement about the airport taking it over (that isn't that "new") and the fact that the Govt goes into purdah in just over 2 months time makes hitting the 100k required difficult and also once there even harder to fit in as a debate.
They're not called politicians for nothing...
Somehow, the momentum needs to be renewed.
LJ
They're not called politicians for nothing...
Somehow, the momentum needs to be renewed.
LJ
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Farnham, Surrey
Posts: 326
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Question on PMQs
Just caught a bit in passing, apparently the Bromley (Tory) MP asked a question of the PM regarding the fate of the Chapel.
"We will do whatever it takes to preserve this for our and future generations" was the reply, or something similar.
Not a bad result.
"We will do whatever it takes to preserve this for our and future generations" was the reply, or something similar.
Not a bad result.
Transcript from PMQs
Robert Neill (Bromley and Chislehurst) (Con):
Will the Prime Minister update the House on the future arrangements for the upkeep of the Royal Air Force memorial chapel at Biggin Hill, the iconic former Battle of Britain airfield?
The Prime Minister:
I can absolutely confirm to the House that that chapel will be preserved for future generations, as we have always recognised its importance and its rich heritage. I think it possible that of all the great moments in British history, the Battle of Britain 1940 stands out as one of the most important times that there have been. So we will protect the chapel, and will do all that we can to protect it for future generations.
Will the Prime Minister update the House on the future arrangements for the upkeep of the Royal Air Force memorial chapel at Biggin Hill, the iconic former Battle of Britain airfield?
The Prime Minister:
I can absolutely confirm to the House that that chapel will be preserved for future generations, as we have always recognised its importance and its rich heritage. I think it possible that of all the great moments in British history, the Battle of Britain 1940 stands out as one of the most important times that there have been. So we will protect the chapel, and will do all that we can to protect it for future generations.