The Scottish Military Research Group - Commemorations Project

kinnethmont · Joined: 19 Dec 2006 Posts: 1649 Location: Aberdeenshire

There is more to this than the graffiti of recent years. It does appear that the memorial's condition has not been checked regularly and properly maintained by them, as the Corportion, and consequently it's successors should have done.

The Council / Councillors ought to be totally ashamed. As someone said on the decision to withhold UK entry to Gurkhas, they should be bowing their heads so low in shame their foreheads will touch the ground.
I would quietly set about getting it Listed. Maybe that is already in hand!

David McNay · Posted: Sun Apr 26, 2009 4:31 pm Post subject:

Murray · Joined: 21 Jan 2008 Posts: 64

kinnethmont · Joined: 19 Dec 2006 Posts: 1649 Location: Aberdeenshire

Murray

I am sorry about that.
I see that Keptie has posted something similar, but it does not match the quoted text I lifted from a post I thought was yours.
I cannot find the quoted / lifted text in this thread now, which is a bit odd.

You are correct about the War Memorials (Local Authorities' Powers) Act of 1923. It did only provide Local Authorities with a Power under the Act. There was / is no legal requirment for them to use this Power in order to maintain memorials, nor can they be compelled to do so.
During the period when practically all of Scotland's memorials were erected the Act was not in force.
_________________
Jim

If ye break faith with us who die
We shall not sleep, though poppies grow
In Flanders fields.

www.kinnethmont.co.uk

spoons · Posted: Sun Apr 26, 2009 9:22 pm Post subject:

You could contact Historic Scotland Conservation Bureau for advice on what conservation techniques are appropriate with the memorial. 0131 668 8668 or hs.conservation.bureau@scotland.gsi.gov.uk

\Paul

Murray · Joined: 21 Jan 2008 Posts: 64

The Maintenance of War Memorials

A large number of war memorials which had been erected by private subscription were subsequently handed over to parish councils, urban councils and boroughs to maintain. In order to ensure that every form of local council had the ability to raise appropriate funds to preserve these war memorials, the War Memorials (Local Authorities' Powers) Act 1923 was passed. Under the terms of this Act, as amended by section 133 of the Local Government Act 1948, the Parish Councils Act 1957 and the Local Government Act 1972, responsibility for the overall control of war memorials was vested with local authorities, who were empowered to incur reasonable expenditure for the maintenance, repair and protection of war memorials within their control. The Local Government (Scotland) Act 1973 and the Local Government and Planning (Scotland) Act 1982 also apply for war memorials in Scotland. Those powers also extend to the alteration of a memorial to enable the fallen of any subsequent war to that for which it was originally intended, to be commemorated.

Whilst the above Acts empowered local authorities to care for war memorials, they did not compel them to do so. Responsibility for the provisions of the War Memorials (Local Authorities' Powers) Act 1923 rests with the Home Office. Responsibility for the maintenance, repair and protection of individual war memorials lies with the owner, or the body in which ownership is vested.

Source: http://www.veterans-uk.com/remembrance/maintenance.html

spoons · Posted: Sun Apr 26, 2009 10:02 pm Post subject:

kinnethmont · Joined: 19 Dec 2006 Posts: 1649 Location: Aberdeenshire

Murray

Whilst correct as far as England is concerned, the difficulty is that this did not involve Scotland at the outset, and in consequence our Councils made other arrangements which have, in the main, continued to the present day.

The detail is " A local authority may incur reasonable expenditure in the maintenance, repair and protection of any war memorial within their district whether vested in them or not. "

In reality a Council will generally be reluctant to become involved in anything which is not vested in, or owned by them. Considering Mains is in a public park, if the Council own the park, they also own the memorial assuming they have Title to the land it sits on.

Paul

A misconception does appear to exist that Councils get government funding for maintainance, etc.
CWGC is not funded by central government, it is funded in proportion by the various countries of the former Commonwealth. UK is one of these.
They have arrangements, in some cases with UK local authorities, for the maintainance of war graves in their areas. Other work is done by CWGC staff.

Under the terms of their Royal Charter CWGC can only commemorate service personnel ( and specific others ) who died within the qualifying dates 1914 - 1921 and 1939 - 1947.
Although CWGC seek to erect a war grave headstone in every case, where this is not possible the casualty will be named on a memorial to the missing. As you write there are many overseas and some memorials in the UK eg, Brookwood and Tower Hill.

Special Memorials are in cemeteries ( some in UK ) where the location of a grave(s) have been lost but casualties are known to be buried there. The Known to be buried in this cemetery type stone would then be used as a Special Memorial. There are many variations of headstone which are classed as Special Memorials.

Where the NOK have declined the CWGC offer of a war grave stone their obligation to erect a headstone is ended. The grave will still have war grave status and the casualty will be recorded in the Debt of Honour register.
_________________
Jim

If ye break faith with us who die
We shall not sleep, though poppies grow
In Flanders fields.

www.kinnethmont.co.uk

Adam Brown · Posted: Sun Apr 26, 2009 11:19 pm Post subject:

I haven't had a chance to upload the photographs yet but after my visit yesterday I am convinced the real culprits in all of this are not the teenagers who did the damage but the charlatans at Dundee City Council who have done nothing to save this memorial over many years and are now very quickly and dishonestly trying to shift the full blame onto local youths.

They were incredibly quick to give this memorial a clean after a flurry of media interest but why wasn't it cleaned after the first bit of graffiti when it would have been easier to remove? Are they trying to pretend this graffiti only happened last week and have acted with speed and efficiency to protect one of their monuments?

There was probably so much graffiti because local kids saw that someone else had defaced it / damaged it and no-one from the council was bothered one jot about the memorial. If the council workers maintaining the park didn't care about it why should they? There was no-one cleaning up the mess so it got steadily worse.

If that memorial had been shown the slightest bit of care by Dundee City Council over the last 5 or 10 years it would not be in this shocking state now.

My personal opinion is that it was an inconvenience for the Council to have this memorial to look after and they have been waiting for a point of disrepair when they could quietly demolish it saying the locals don't care about it.

The same excuses were trotted out by the Council in Blairgowrie when they had started demolishing the WW2 Memorial Park Gates last year and look what happened when they were taken to task. The Gates were put back better than ever and rededicated.

The council should not only hang their heads in shame about the state of the memorial they should also be ashamed of the way they are treating the local kids.

1. They are obviously not educating them properly about the respect they should be giving war memorials
2. They are not giving them things to do which would keep them from vandalising memorials
3. Like wee bairns the council are pointing their fingers at the local youths and saying it is all their fault instead of admitting that the root of all this problem is the sustained and deliberate neglect of the Mains War Memorial over many years by the chancers at the City of Dundee Council

Adam

Ian Robertson · Joined: 20 Apr 2009 Posts: 24 Location: Broughty Ferry

Murray, Paul, Jim, Adam, david

Many thanks for all the information, advice and opinion which you have posted in last page or so. Keep it coming, all help gratefully received
We will be following up on most of it and we will be starting our own investigations today with regard too the feasability of the memorial's restoration. I have promised that we will keep david up to speed with any developments.

regards
Ian

kinnethmont · Joined: 19 Dec 2006 Posts: 1649 Location: Aberdeenshire

George Armstrong Custer · Joined: 09 Jan 2007 Posts: 29

Photo of the results of the Council's panic cleanup of the memorial after last week's adverse publicity here:

[img]http://frontforum.westernfrontassociation.com/viewtopic.php?f=29&t=663&start=15[/img]

After having neglected it for years they'd have been better leaving it alone until an expert evaluation of how to proceed with a full restoration without causing further damage had been undertaken.

Best,

George

George Armstrong Custer · Joined: 09 Jan 2007 Posts: 29

Link wasn't correct in my last post, and for some reason I cannot edit posts in this forum to correct it. Her it is again:

http://frontforum.westernfrontassociation.com/viewtopic.php?f=29&t=663&start=15

Adam Brown · Posted: Mon Apr 27, 2009 10:50 pm Post subject:

Here are some photos I took myself on Saturday morning

You can see how much damage has been done in a week compared to Mark's original photos. You can also see how bad the damage is around the edges and that is damage that has been there for years.

unfortunately the battery in my camera failed at this point but David got some more shots of the damage on the columns.

Adam