The Weird Case of the Statue
Emmeline Pankhurst is a pretty important person. Through her leadership of the Women's Social and Political Union she was instrumental in getting British women the vote. 2018 is the centenary of women's suffrage (although it was only partial, being granted only to women over 30 with property or husbands with property; full suffrage only came in 1920 1928*) and the celebrations have brought renewed attention on the women who fought for their (our) political representation.
Emmeline is memorialised in a statue that stands in Victoria Tower Gardens, right by the Houses of Parliament. I stopped by to pay my respects when I was there in July.
 | ||
| Emmeline Pankhurst statue |
It's right by the entrance and pretty hard to miss when you enter the park from the Houses of Parliament end. So I was surprised and quite indignant when I read a few months ago that a non-profit organisation proposed to move the statue. According to the article, they originally wanted to move it to Parliament Square "to give it a more prominent location" but then on further reflection decided that a better place would be "the central forecourt of Regent’s University London, Regent Park".
Today I saw that the proposal had been withdrawn but I found myself wondering why the move had ever been mooted in the first place. I'm still not sure but it all seems weird, so I figured I'd write about what I found.
The earliest article about the statue I can find is from late August 2017, by which time the story was already well underway. The Fawcett Society had been campaigning to get a statue of Millicent Fawcett erected in Parliament Square and obtained permission in April 2017, with the statue being unveiled a year later.
In August 2017 the newspapers were reporting that a group of Conservatives and peers led by former Tory MP Sir Neil Thorne also wanted to erect a statue in Parliament Square, but they had chosen Emmeline Pankhurst and had apparently been campaigning for three years to this effect. Prior to Christmas 2016 they reportedly met with the Fawcett Society to see if they could have two statues put up in Parliament Square but they failed to reach agreement.
Their plan, according to The Telegraph, was,
... to move the existing [Victoria Tower Gardens] statue to Canning Green [but this] was scrapped when it was found that it was too small. So the group decided to move the existing statue to mark Pankhurst's grave in Brompton Cemetery and commission artist Angela Conner to create a new version for the position near the Supreme Court.
Canning Green, for those who aren't aware, is a small green next to Parliament Square,
To aid in these aims a company was formed. The Emmeline Pankhurst Trust Limited. It has two directors, Sir Neil Thorne and Lady Sheila Thorne, and the "object" of the company was, according to their Certificate of Incorporation [PDF] (13 April 2017),
And again a few months after that,
At this time they also formed a charity, also called The Emmeline Pankhurst Trust Limited, with objects that matched the latest version of the company objects.
There's two things I find interesting in these objects. The first is that there is no mention of the fact they're trying to relocate an existing statue and the second is that their aims of educating people about the work of Emmeline Pankhurst and the British suffragette movement have fallen by the wayside. It's just about erecting a statue on Canning Green. Who knew you could form a company and a charity around such narrow goals?
But why would they want to move the statue? From The Telegraph article,
To aid in these aims a company was formed. The Emmeline Pankhurst Trust Limited. It has two directors, Sir Neil Thorne and Lady Sheila Thorne, and the "object" of the company was, according to their Certificate of Incorporation [PDF] (13 April 2017),
To erect a statue of Emmeline Pankhurst on Canning Green, London, and all other associated activities. To provide an educational programme to advance the education of the public about Emmeline Pankhurst and the British suffragette movement.
p35
Their objects changed slightly a few months later,To erect a statue of Emmeline Pankhurst on Canning Green, London, as a piece of public art, and all other associated activities. To extol the work Emmeline Pankhurst did to achieve votes for women prior to the centenary in 2018.
Resolutions [PDF] 30 August 2017
And again a few months after that,
The commemoration for the benefit of the public of the life of Emmeline Pankhurst and the work she did to achieve votes for women by establishing and maintaining a public statue of Emmeline Pankhurst on Canning Green, London.
Resolutions [PDF] 26 October 2017
At this time they also formed a charity, also called The Emmeline Pankhurst Trust Limited, with objects that matched the latest version of the company objects.
There's two things I find interesting in these objects. The first is that there is no mention of the fact they're trying to relocate an existing statue and the second is that their aims of educating people about the work of Emmeline Pankhurst and the British suffragette movement have fallen by the wayside. It's just about erecting a statue on Canning Green. Who knew you could form a company and a charity around such narrow goals?
But why would they want to move the statue? From The Telegraph article,
The Pankhurst campaign began three years ago when Sheila Thorne, wife of Sir Neil, noticed an existing statue of the famous suffragette while walking her dog in nearby Victoria Tower Gardens.
That's the only explanation I can find. Apparently while walking her dog, Lady Thorne spotted the statue having probably walked past it a thousand times before and figured that because she'd never noticed it before it couldn't have been prominent enough, so the best way to improve its visibility was to move it. This despite the fact the position was agreed by Suffragettes and they were given as much assurance as was possible that the statue would never be moved.
The fact the Thorne's couldn't have Parliament Square didn't stop them. As I said at the beginning, they changed their proposed new location to Regent's University. In July of this year they submitted plans to The City of Westminster for the,
The fact the Thorne's couldn't have Parliament Square didn't stop them. As I said at the beginning, they changed their proposed new location to Regent's University. In July of this year they submitted plans to The City of Westminster for the,
Removal/dismantling of the statue of Emmeline Pankhurst at Victoria Tower gardens and making good the ground on which it stands.
The documents associated with the plans shows that the statue was to be located in the grounds of Regent's University, in Regent's Park. This may seem like an odd choice, but the logic seems to be this: Bedford College was the first higher education college for women in Britain, founded in 1849. Bedford College used the building in Regent's Park from 1908 until 1985 when it moved to Royal Holloway following a merger. Despite neither the building nor the college having any direct ties to Emmeline Pankhurt, in the words of the Heritage Statement,
Oh, did I mention that Regent's University is a private university? It's ok though, as the Heritage Statement (pt 2) states,
The founders of Bedford College were pioneers in promoting higher education for women and many alumni went on to participate in the suffragette campaigns; moreover the presence of significant works of art at the University relating to and by renowned female protagonists is already established (Margaret M. Jenkin’s Labourers in the Vineyard).
Heritage Statement pt 2 [PDF] Point 5.9
and thus, The proposed relocation site at Regent’s University London is considered to be entirely appropriate for the existing Pankhurst memorial.
Heritage Statement pt 2 [PDF] Point 5.9
Oh, did I mention that Regent's University is a private university? It's ok though, as the Heritage Statement (pt 2) states,
The proposed location site... is a public thoroughfare which means the memorial will be appreciated by large numbers of students, staff and visitors on a daily basis.
Point 5.10
However, a look on Google Maps suggests it's not exactly inviting,
Don't worry though, they had planned to trim the hedge so it could be seen from the street.
... it is proposed to cut back/remove the existing overgrown shrubs and plants adjacent to the boundary with the Inner Circle and to create a more landscaped space behind the memorial comprising a lawn and a boundary hedge limited to 1.2m in height; this will enable the memorial to be seen and appreciated from the wider public realm from the area of the statutorily listed Jubilee Gates and Queen Mary’s Garden.
Heritage Statement [PDF] Point 5.10
In contrast, this is where Emmeline currently stands,
Their Heritage Statement has two parts, the first is about moving the existing statue and the second is about building a new statue in Canning Gardens. From what I can tell no reason is given as to why the existing statue has to be moved. It seems to be that it won't hurt so why not. That doesn't seem like a good enough justification to me.
I have found this an incredibly complicated story to track, not helped by the press who seem to just repeat whatever the first person wrote without looking any deeper. There seem to be two different aims, one of which seems reasonable if unnecessary, the other seems completely unreasonable and illogical. The company and charity The Emmeline Pankhurst Trust Limited is focused solely on erecting a statue of Emmeline Pankhurst on Canning Green. Yet their publicity and planning application is focused almost entirely on moving the existing statue of Emmeline Pankhurst from its current position close to the Houses of Parliament to private property. The stated reasons for this move do not make sense as the statue is perfectly prominent where it is currently.
Maybe I'm just being overly cynical and suspicious but when elder statemen start talking about honouring radical women I can't help but think something else is going on. What, I don't know. But I do know I'm going to be keeping an eye on The Emmeline Pankhurst Trust Limited.
* Oops, got this wrong
Maybe I'm just being overly cynical and suspicious but when elder statemen start talking about honouring radical women I can't help but think something else is going on. What, I don't know. But I do know I'm going to be keeping an eye on The Emmeline Pankhurst Trust Limited.
* Oops, got this wrong
Comments