Biggin Hill RAF memorial chapel under threat

I know this is opening a ‘can of worms’ but I do fear MOD bean counters thinking ‘Well we got rid of that liability now what else?’ Perhaps casting their thoughts towards the BBMF?
mmitch.

Yes that would be a can of worms, and maybe a little too much thread drift to discuss here.
It was talked about on another thread, and I am sure someone will post the link 🙂

I know this is opening a ‘can of worms’ but I do fear MOD bean counters thinking ‘Well we got rid of that liability now what else?’ Perhaps casting their thoughts towards the BBMF?
mmitch.

More from this mornings email

The e-petition ‘Please Don’t Close St. George’s RAF Chapel of Remembrance Biggin Hill’ signed by you recently reached 30,284 signatures.

This e-petition remains open to signatures and will be considered for debate by the Backbench Business Committee should it pass the 100 000 signature threshold.

Personally I would have thought that it was very appropriate that the MOD funded this memorial to honour and remember the FEW, that way it remains in government hands with as certain a future as is possible in this world.

Finally some good news, the petition has the correct amount of signatures to provoke a response which sounds positive to a point, granted it links with the above report but at least they did something.

We fully recognise the significance and rich heritage of the Chapel and the Garden of Remembrance. It is precisely because of this that the Ministry of Defence (MOD) has been in discussions with Bromley Council for 18 months to preserve the Chapel and the Garden of Remembrance. Indeed, the Prime Minister has confirmed that as the Chapel represents one of the most significant events in British history, it will be preserved for future generations. Bromley Council wish to create a heritage centre at the site and, subject to agreeing suitable terms to secure it, the site will be leased to them on a long –term basis for a minimal rent. As such the MOD will continue to work with Bromley Council to support their heritage proposal which we believe will enhance access to the Chapel and ensure its long term preservation.

Curlyboy

Update 22 January 2015:

‘Bromley Council wish to create a heritage centre at the site and, subject to agreeing suitable terms to secure it, the site will be leased to them on a long term basis for minimal rent’

Anna Soubry, 28 January 2015.

Note: Notwithstanding the online petition, and as pointed out in ‘Britain at War’, it was never the intention of the MOD to see the chapel ‘close’ only to dispose of it to a third party and relinquish responsibility for its maintenance, upkeep, admin and ecclesiastical support as this was deemed an ‘inappropriate use of defence resources’.

See, it was the Mail wot done it!

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2905009/MoS-victory-David-Cameron-steps-save-memorial-Battle-Britain-aces.html#

At PMQs just now, David Cameron has said that the Chapel “will be saved for future generations”, but not explained how.

For those who are continuing to follow this case, this has just appeared on the internet. Posted without comment :

http://thepipeline.info/blog/2015/01/06/fallon-reverse-ferret-as-biggin-chapel-saved-sort-of/

Indeed – your last point is very well made!!

The phrase that comes to mind whenever the MOD in particular is mentioned, and the government generally, is “they know the price of everything, but the value of nothing”. Although the MOD’s track record would suggest that they don’t actually know the price of very much either, but I’ll set that to one side for the moment.

I partially agree WP but I think if you went along to the local recruiting office and put your last point to those there I would be surprised if any gave it consideration. I think we all who never made that sacrifice feel a need to take it upon ourselves. Not all perhaps but many.

Fair points CH, and certainly when you join up you don’t do so with the thought that you will be a) killed or b) then memorialised. At least, I didn’t. But I think it is part of the wider expectation that there is a quid pro quo between soldier and country. Repatriation is a modern issue, of course, but I think the point stands. If the country won’t honour the duty to maintain the memory of those that did make the ultimate sacrifice, why would anyone else think their duty is to make it?

Re 35

I’m quietly amazed that you would even consider ‘going back onto Facebook’ to avoid the free education available to all from the pages of this Forum !

A thought, which is not intended to be provocative. When men have signed up over the decades have they given a second’s thought about their legacy. That’s not why you join up is it? And of course bringing the dead home is a relatively recent phenomenum.

Part of the military convenant is the expectation that the sacrifices made by our servicemen and women are acknowledged and remembered. Why would anyone put themselves in danger close if they think the country (as represented by the MOD) will brush their memory aside when it suits them? It’s the thin edge of the wedge. Accept this and what’s next? Refusal to fly home the bodies of casualties, or expect their families to pay the fare? It’s shocking and a very dangerous precedent.

One possibility might be that a religious body takes on the upkeep – seems unlikely. Otherwise, if the building is considered of historic importance, it might be a case for English Heritage or the National Trust?

A sustainable business plan for a chapel/memorial?

Welcome to Britain.

Seems to me people need to decide where their taxes go and what the MoD is for. Is the MoD a heritage organisation or a Government department that must ensure the protection of UK and that UK’s service men and women have the right tools when the bullets start firing around? I’d suggest it can’t be both.
Great a Chapel gets saved at tax payers’ expense but young men and women die unnecassarily when the politicians send them out to the next war because we could not afford the right kit. Imaging you are in charge of the Mod budget, now make the decisions…..
Biggin Hill Airport’s proposal is therefore just pants if this is not part of MoD’s selling to a long term sustainable business plan. Someone else jumping on the band wagon for a bit of publicity by the sounds of it then.

Might I just point out that the offer of funding from the airport is not necessarily the matter resolved. Very far from it. The MOD have stated that a sustainable business plan is required before any future for the chapel outside of MOD control may be decided.

I would suggest this has a way to run yet.

Meanwhile, those following the matter may find this of interest:

http://thepipeline.info/blog/2015/01/05/fallon-faces-battle-of-britain-chapel-embaressment/#more

So MoD were looking for someone to take it over from 2016 (and never said it would close) and someone is found. This must be the biggest non story of the year and its only Jan 5th.
Perhaps I can go back onto facebook again and not be confronted by this petition and have to read people’s rantings about welfare scroungers, the “Tories” , defence cuts, overpaid Civil Servants and Ministers, immigrants and rich bankers.