According to the “Taking Part” survey, 70% of adults attended a historic environment site in 2005-6. Heritage is right at the top of what people want to do with their leisure time. Membership of the National Trust and English Heritage is at an all-time high of four million between them. And the latest data indicates there are nearly half a million volunteers in the sector.

But for many people, commitment to the historic environment goes deeper than just visiting historic sites. It is self-evident to all of us here that we must cherish and protect historic places beyond just the ticket booth.  It has been said – and I agree - that buildings are the art in which we live and that they should be valued as such. 

I would go further and say that the built environment - past, contemporary and future - is the geography of life.  It inspires people’s passions.  It defines our identity.  It’s the common reference point for community.  It is part of what makes Britain what it is. History matters. But it is also valued across all our social groups and across the country.

Sense of place has an intrinsic value but it is also about wellbeing. Mori has done some work on whether the built environment can make us happy which suggests that the quality of the public realm has a clear relationship with quality of life- over 7000 studies demonstrate the links between architecture, the built environment and that wellbeing.  This gives us all a special responsibility.

We won’t be able to do it alone.  English Heritage, the National Trust, other heritage bodies and all the volunteers – each of you are integral to this effort to protect and promote the historic environment.

Let’s just take one example.  Housing.  Everybody knows we need new houses, especially here in the South East.  There are more single person households, shifts in population have created new pressures, coupled with longer life expectancy and the overall state of the housing market. All these factors bring irresistible pressure for development.

And of course, houses need to be affordable, energy efficient, fit for purpose for today's needs and those of the future.

Some will say we need to get rid of old buildings and spaces and sacrifice some of our history in the cause of progress. Some will even say that protecting the historic environment is a luxury that has to give way on occasion to the realities of the present day.  Some will say that's the price we have to pay for progress.

Well, I believe they couldn't be more wrong. It’s just not that simple. Yes we need more and better places to live - but that cannot mean clearing away our past.  That mistake has been made before and we won’t be making it again.

If you take away the buildings, places and spaces people know, value and identify with, you are simply subtracting from the soul of the community.  You may reduce your building costs in doing so, but if the new place you create does not have a sense of its own history, it will offer no sense of belonging, it won't encourage loyalty to place or community, it won't encourage civic engagement or pride. Without all these emotions and attachments the place will be much less than the sum of its parts.

We know that the best way of preserving an historic building is to keep it in economic use- the Old Royal Naval College is an excellent case in point. 

Sometimes that can mean some degree of compromise to render it suitable for modern needs.  There will inevitably be differences of view about what level of adaptation is acceptable.  But in arriving at decisions about the future of buildings we need to ensure that the cultural value of a building, structure or site - its special historic or architectural importance - is given full weight.

We need to get this message across and if we are to do so, we must ensure we have an efficient, open, participative system of heritage protection.  We need a system which is widely understood, credible and supported by all parts of the community. We need a system which takes full account of the things ordinary people value as well as of the views of experts and enthusiasts.

The ultimate purpose of the Heritage Protection legislation currently being prepared is to do just this.  To create a system which will help to realise the contribution of the historic environment to the world we want to live in today and in the future. 

Now, of course, this does not mean that there won’t be controversial choices.  In particular with heritage, it is often our task to stand against today’s fashion or market trends.  We sometimes have to stand up for the unpopular.  If we hadn’t done so, we would have lost St Pancras, and we might have lost Centre Point – still a talking point after all these years.  There was a time when St Pancras was dismissed as ‘yesterday’s architecture’.  And Centre Point has been both castigated and then praised for its modernity. 

top

The pendulum of fashion is unlikely to come to rest any time soon.  However, architectural and historic significance is more of a constant.  Quality is not ephemeral. Future generations will thank us.

But that can’t mean us having a monopoly on what is important and what is protected and preserved.  And it places on us a huge responsibility to explain our decisions clearly. 

So what are we doing about all this?  I have already spoken about Heritage Protection.  We are planning to publish a Draft Bill for pre-legislative scrutiny in the Third Session of Parliament.

As Simon said, the CSR settlement means that we can go on and implement not just Heritage Protection Review but also other priorities including help for places of worship.

Some of you will know that we are currently looking at excellence in the McMaster review.  As recognised in Heritage Counts, there is a need for top class skills across the sector to manage the historic environment in partnership with other agencies - working in particular with local authorities.  I am very keen to press on with this work.  Much work has already been done to research the heritage skills base, to set up new projects and partnerships.  There is a big skills gap here to fill, but these are not skills which can be learnt overnight, and the impact will take time to come to fruition.

So, we want to do more work with you on skills.

I want to see more of the heritage-led regeneration I spoke about earlier.  To arrive at a point where the choice is not between old and new, but heritage informing the present and future. 

For my part, I want to work across Government to continue to make clear the important connections between the built environment and the wider Government agenda – be that housing, education or place making.  And to do so I want to work with you to build that case.

And lastly, I want to support you in widening the opportunities to support children and their families in their learning, using the fantastic resources the built and historic environment has to offer. The examples we have seen this morning may raise aspirations of the young people taking part. We know how important this work is.  The most recent research- published in “Heritage Counts” today- has shown that children who visit heritage properties are much more likely to become lovers of heritage for life.

And we now have further evidence- published last week in the “Taking Part” Children’s Survey- that over the last year 72% of all 11-15 year olds visited the historic environment – which demonstrates the enthusiasm young people have for heritage. This gives us a good base to move forward, but we shouldn’t rest on our laurels.  That is why DCMS will continue to work with the historic environment sector to improve what we offer children and young people.

So, in conclusion, Heritage does count.  It is a really important force to make lives better. We are all here today because we care about the places where we live and are committed to working with others to manage them for now and for the future.

I look forward to the next five years – much has been done, and there is much still to do.  It is a pleasure and a privilege to have the opportunity to work with you all to do this.