‘Sell art or no Titanic museum’ says council leader

Daily Echo: ‘Sell art or no Titanic museum’ says council leader ‘Sell art or no Titanic museum’ says council leader

THE leader of Southampton City Council has laid down an ultimatum in the city’s art sell-off row – we either flog some paintings or don’t get a Titanic museum.

Tories are planning to sell paintings worth millions to help pay for a “world class” maritime attraction, dubbed Sea City Museum.

They face a race against time to get £15m to build the museum by April 2012, the 100th anniversary of the Titanic tragedy, which claimed the lives of 549 city residents.

Only 200 of the city’s vast 3,500 collection of paintings, worth around £180m, can be shown in the art gallery at any one time and some works have hardly seen the light of day in years.

Opposition councillors have slammed the proposed sale as a “betrayal of public trust” that would leave the reputation of the city’s museums in tatters.

Liberal Democrat group leader Jill Baston said: “I don’t believe its in the interests of the heritage of our city to diminish that very heritage we should be working to protect.”

Labour economic development spokesman Councillor Sarah Bogle added the plan was like “robbing Peter to pay Paul”.

But veteran council leader Alec Samuels insisted: “If we don’t sell some paintings we don’t get a heritage centre. We’ve made our choice.”

He said: “No picture will be sold if it’s unlawful to do so. And if it were to be sold it would go to an appropriate good home.”

Tory Cabinet member for art and heritage Councillor John Hannides said it was right to look at selling some of the paintings.

A review of the gallery’s collection – which includes masterpieces by Turner, Lowry, Picasso and Monet – will be carried out over the summer to identify paintings which could be sold.

Cllr Hannides said museum and art bodies were happy with the council’s approach.

Award-winning architects Wilkinson Eyre have been hired to draw up plans for the museum, which will be built in the west wing of the Civic Centre and feature a massive climb-aboard replica of the doomed liner.

Visitors will experience life on board the ill-fated voyage from the perspective of the crew, many of whom were from Southampton.

Comments (55)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

8:40am Sat 18 Jul 09

Pikey Pete says...

Why Not Copy the originals then sell them. The cost of the copy could come from the sell. That way the Council will raise millions. Plus apart from some "Expert" We will all see great paintings. Every body wins.
Why Not Copy the originals then sell them. The cost of the copy could come from the sell. That way the Council will raise millions. Plus apart from some "Expert" We will all see great paintings. Every body wins. Pikey Pete
  • Score: 0

9:11am Sat 18 Jul 09

mr.southampton says...

Someone please get Alec Samuels et al out of power. This Tory administration has been a disaster. The council makes cuts in one area, sell offs in another, yet wastes money on costly deals with Capita.

Here you go Echo.. open goal.. make a few FOI requests about the spiraling costs of the Cpita IT contract.
Someone please get Alec Samuels et al out of power. This Tory administration has been a disaster. The council makes cuts in one area, sell offs in another, yet wastes money on costly deals with Capita. Here you go Echo.. open goal.. make a few FOI requests about the spiraling costs of the Cpita IT contract. mr.southampton
  • Score: 0

9:17am Sat 18 Jul 09

The Watcher says...

Whilst I think a decent Museum focussing on our heritage and history with regards the sea is a decent idea, I just can't help but think it will be in the wrong place.

We should be looking to include it somewhere near the waterfront and make the most of the "Old Town".

How about the Old Customs House or acquiring/building somewhere where there are other things to look at.

Up in the Civic Centre will mean it is out of touch.
Whilst I think a decent Museum focussing on our heritage and history with regards the sea is a decent idea, I just can't help but think it will be in the wrong place. We should be looking to include it somewhere near the waterfront and make the most of the "Old Town". How about the Old Customs House or acquiring/building somewhere where there are other things to look at. Up in the Civic Centre will mean it is out of touch. The Watcher
  • Score: 0

9:20am Sat 18 Jul 09

Allotmentman66 says...

Why sell them, why not just hire them out to other galleries for a set period of time, (say minimum of two or three years)that way everybody can see and appreciate them.
Who would want to buy copies??? When they can hire orginals.
Why sell them, why not just hire them out to other galleries for a set period of time, (say minimum of two or three years)that way everybody can see and appreciate them. Who would want to buy copies??? When they can hire orginals. Allotmentman66
  • Score: 0

9:21am Sat 18 Jul 09

Condor Man says...

mr.southampton wrote:
Someone please get Alec Samuels et al out of power. This Tory administration has been a disaster. The council makes cuts in one area, sell offs in another, yet wastes money on costly deals with Capita. Here you go Echo.. open goal.. make a few FOI requests about the spiraling costs of the Cpita IT contract.
The Capita deal has saved the council- and council tax payers a fortune.

There's no money in the pot, either we mark the 100th anniversary of the Titanic or we keep a few paintings in a store room. Sadly there's not the cash for both.
[quote][p][bold]mr.southampton[/bold] wrote: Someone please get Alec Samuels et al out of power. This Tory administration has been a disaster. The council makes cuts in one area, sell offs in another, yet wastes money on costly deals with Capita. Here you go Echo.. open goal.. make a few FOI requests about the spiraling costs of the Cpita IT contract.[/p][/quote]The Capita deal has saved the council- and council tax payers a fortune. There's no money in the pot, either we mark the 100th anniversary of the Titanic or we keep a few paintings in a store room. Sadly there's not the cash for both. Condor Man
  • Score: 0

9:28am Sat 18 Jul 09

St.DaveH says...

I have never quite been able fathom Southampton City Council and the short sightedness they have of developing our city and its rich heritage. Recent years have seen massive spending on the West Quay retail park and modern housing around Deanery and Holyrood - surely some commercial agreement should have incorporated a levi for heritage realisation - not only an RMS Titanic museum, but better access to the Bargate, Wool house, old walls and cellars etc. As well as better development of modern waterfront access for all - I do not think selling off the family silver is the answer.
I have never quite been able fathom Southampton City Council and the short sightedness they have of developing our city and its rich heritage. Recent years have seen massive spending on the West Quay retail park and modern housing around Deanery and Holyrood - surely some commercial agreement should have incorporated a levi for heritage realisation - not only an RMS Titanic museum, but better access to the Bargate, Wool house, old walls and cellars etc. As well as better development of modern waterfront access for all - I do not think selling off the family silver is the answer. St.DaveH
  • Score: 0

9:34am Sat 18 Jul 09

Dooody says...

They should flog anything which hasn't seen the light of day in years. It's criminal that the council have locked publicly owned works of art away. Display em or flog em. Someone should ensure that when the works do get flogged the money actually goes into funding the visitor centre and to nowhere else. It is a shame that the visitor centre can't be nearer the waterfront and incorporate solent sky and perhaps a land mark veiwing platform to watch the great liners. This City has less to offer in terms of things do than any other city around. We need a council with some vision and bottle. I think we may be in for a wait.
They should flog anything which hasn't seen the light of day in years. It's criminal that the council have locked publicly owned works of art away. Display em or flog em. Someone should ensure that when the works do get flogged the money actually goes into funding the visitor centre and to nowhere else. It is a shame that the visitor centre can't be nearer the waterfront and incorporate solent sky and perhaps a land mark veiwing platform to watch the great liners. This City has less to offer in terms of things do than any other city around. We need a council with some vision and bottle. I think we may be in for a wait. Dooody
  • Score: 0

9:37am Sat 18 Jul 09

joenice says...

Sell more I say, Great project I really hope they get it done.
Sell more I say, Great project I really hope they get it done. joenice
  • Score: 0

9:41am Sat 18 Jul 09

Interserie says...

Council Leader Samuels sounds like a throwback to the 1930s - what next? -burning books outside of the library.

At present Southampton Art Gallery is widely regarded as one of the best in the United Kingdom. However this madcap scheme of Mr Samuels will mean that the City will lose access to the many travelling exhibitions which has visited the gallery over recent years attracting thousands of visitors. Who will want to lend to such a Council?

Over the years I have built up a collection of art from which I have happily lent many items to Southampton Art Gallery. I would like Alec Samuels to be aware that unless he drops his proposal to sell paintings, the City will not see another piece from my collection and my plans to bequest part of my collection to the City Art Gallery will be cancelled.

I am also urging other collectors and galleries to take similar action. Remember, not one painting, Mr Samuels.
Council Leader Samuels sounds like a throwback to the 1930s - what next? -burning books outside of the library. At present Southampton Art Gallery is widely regarded as one of the best in the United Kingdom. However this madcap scheme of Mr Samuels will mean that the City will lose access to the many travelling exhibitions which has visited the gallery over recent years attracting thousands of visitors. Who will want to lend to such a Council? Over the years I have built up a collection of art from which I have happily lent many items to Southampton Art Gallery. I would like Alec Samuels to be aware that unless he drops his proposal to sell paintings, the City will not see another piece from my collection and my plans to bequest part of my collection to the City Art Gallery will be cancelled. I am also urging other collectors and galleries to take similar action. Remember, not one painting, Mr Samuels. Interserie
  • Score: 0

9:51am Sat 18 Jul 09

Linesman says...

Does it need a multi-million pound museum to commemorate a maritime disaster?

What Titanic memorabilia and artifacts are available to put on display? The ship is many fathoms down, and other than a few letters etc there is nothing much to put on display.

A maritime museum, possibly joint funded by the Council, the Government Arts department and various shipping lines would be a viable option. There must be many ex-merchant seamen with photographs and souveniers from the Castle Line, P&O etc etc. Could even include the Hythe and Isle of Wight Ferries!

Does it need a multi-million pound museum to commemorate a maritime disaster? What Titanic memorabilia and artifacts are available to put on display? The ship is many fathoms down, and other than a few letters etc there is nothing much to put on display. A maritime museum, possibly joint funded by the Council, the Government Arts department and various shipping lines would be a viable option. There must be many ex-merchant seamen with photographs and souveniers from the Castle Line, P&O etc etc. Could even include the Hythe and Isle of Wight Ferries! Linesman
  • Score: 0

9:59am Sat 18 Jul 09

Jenjo says...

Great works of art retain their magnificence forever, and the Titanic project can be delivered at a lower cost without needing to sell any of the art. In any case it needs to be near the water, that's obvious to everyone but those who are pushing it through. The Civic Centre - it's a joke. The money should have been raised through other means (eg sponsorship), not by selling what you've already got. The council's claim to be interested in the arts will be blow to smithereens if they flog off paintings by such well-known artists. Of course the art world in general doesn't mind Southampton staging a giant car boot sale - the paintings will be better off somewhere else than in a city that hasn't got a clue about how to promote its considerable heritage. Well done to the opposition councillors - keep up the pressure and stop the Tory philistines. They've lost my vote in 2010 already.
Great works of art retain their magnificence forever, and the Titanic project can be delivered at a lower cost without needing to sell any of the art. In any case it needs to be near the water, that's obvious to everyone but those who are pushing it through. The Civic Centre - it's a joke. The money should have been raised through other means (eg sponsorship), not by selling what you've already got. The council's claim to be interested in the arts will be blow to smithereens if they flog off paintings by such well-known artists. Of course the art world in general doesn't mind Southampton staging a giant car boot sale - the paintings will be better off somewhere else than in a city that hasn't got a clue about how to promote its considerable heritage. Well done to the opposition councillors - keep up the pressure and stop the Tory philistines. They've lost my vote in 2010 already. Jenjo
  • Score: 0

10:08am Sat 18 Jul 09

Condor Man says...

Jenjo wrote:
Great works of art retain their magnificence forever, and the Titanic project can be delivered at a lower cost without needing to sell any of the art. In any case it needs to be near the water, that's obvious to everyone but those who are pushing it through. The Civic Centre - it's a joke. The money should have been raised through other means (eg sponsorship), not by selling what you've already got. The council's claim to be interested in the arts will be blow to smithereens if they flog off paintings by such well-known artists. Of course the art world in general doesn't mind Southampton staging a giant car boot sale - the paintings will be better off somewhere else than in a city that hasn't got a clue about how to promote its considerable heritage. Well done to the opposition councillors - keep up the pressure and stop the Tory philistines. They've lost my vote in 2010 already.
I bet they never had your vote in teh 1st place
[quote][p][bold]Jenjo[/bold] wrote: Great works of art retain their magnificence forever, and the Titanic project can be delivered at a lower cost without needing to sell any of the art. In any case it needs to be near the water, that's obvious to everyone but those who are pushing it through. The Civic Centre - it's a joke. The money should have been raised through other means (eg sponsorship), not by selling what you've already got. The council's claim to be interested in the arts will be blow to smithereens if they flog off paintings by such well-known artists. Of course the art world in general doesn't mind Southampton staging a giant car boot sale - the paintings will be better off somewhere else than in a city that hasn't got a clue about how to promote its considerable heritage. Well done to the opposition councillors - keep up the pressure and stop the Tory philistines. They've lost my vote in 2010 already.[/p][/quote]I bet they never had your vote in teh 1st place Condor Man
  • Score: 0

10:38am Sat 18 Jul 09

Pikey Pete says...

Allotmentman66 wrote:
Why sell them, why not just hire them out to other galleries for a set period of time, (say minimum of two or three years)that way everybody can see and appreciate them.
Who would want to buy copies??? When they can hire orginals.
No Allotmentman66. I mean sell the originals if they are mostly in storage. "NO ONE IS LOOKING AT THEM ANY WAY." Hang the copies on public display and put 180 million raised in selling the originals in the bank for the people of Southampton....
[quote][p][bold]Allotmentman66[/bold] wrote: Why sell them, why not just hire them out to other galleries for a set period of time, (say minimum of two or three years)that way everybody can see and appreciate them. Who would want to buy copies??? When they can hire orginals.[/p][/quote] No Allotmentman66. I mean sell the originals if they are mostly in storage. "NO ONE IS LOOKING AT THEM ANY WAY." Hang the copies on public display and put 180 million raised in selling the originals in the bank for the people of Southampton.... Pikey Pete
  • Score: 0

10:38am Sat 18 Jul 09

Jenjo says...

No comment Condor Man, not worth the effort
No comment Condor Man, not worth the effort Jenjo
  • Score: 0

10:43am Sat 18 Jul 09

mick sterbs says...

sell the art and spend the money on something more worthwhile.

why spend the money on a museum for a ship which sank nearly 100 years ago.

spend the money on something we need like a ice rink, or a mosque or more traffic lights?
sell the art and spend the money on something more worthwhile. why spend the money on a museum for a ship which sank nearly 100 years ago. spend the money on something we need like a ice rink, or a mosque or more traffic lights? mick sterbs
  • Score: 0

10:47am Sat 18 Jul 09

Swalk says...

The point that seems to have escaped the council is that it is their job to create wealth for the city. They've obviously failed to attract enough investment for Titanic, so they're having to flog off another part of the heritage to pay for it (ie the Disneyland-style thing which everyone will only need to go on once). If they pulled their fingers out and got together as many artefacts as they can, got local people to contribute, schoolchildren to paint pictures of the Titanic, plus the stuff they've already got, you could do it for a lot less than 15 million quid anyway. Those who say you can only show so may paintings in the art gallery are missing the point - it's the rotation of pictures that keeps it interesting and the exchange with other galleries that creates new exhibitions. Even so, they could still show more than they do. I note that Samuels and Hannides are both Bassett councillors - I wonder what the posh people round there are making of their little scheme? Could Bassett go Labour at the next election (normally unthinkable)???!!!
The point that seems to have escaped the council is that it is their job to create wealth for the city. They've obviously failed to attract enough investment for Titanic, so they're having to flog off another part of the heritage to pay for it (ie the Disneyland-style thing which everyone will only need to go on once). If they pulled their fingers out and got together as many artefacts as they can, got local people to contribute, schoolchildren to paint pictures of the Titanic, plus the stuff they've already got, you could do it for a lot less than 15 million quid anyway. Those who say you can only show so may paintings in the art gallery are missing the point - it's the rotation of pictures that keeps it interesting and the exchange with other galleries that creates new exhibitions. Even so, they could still show more than they do. I note that Samuels and Hannides are both Bassett councillors - I wonder what the posh people round there are making of their little scheme? Could Bassett go Labour at the next election (normally unthinkable)???!!! Swalk
  • Score: 0

10:56am Sat 18 Jul 09

Allotmentman66 says...

Pikey Pete wrote:
Allotmentman66 wrote: Why sell them, why not just hire them out to other galleries for a set period of time, (say minimum of two or three years)that way everybody can see and appreciate them. Who would want to buy copies??? When they can hire orginals.
No Allotmentman66. I mean sell the originals if they are mostly in storage. "NO ONE IS LOOKING AT THEM ANY WAY." Hang the copies on public display and put 180 million raised in selling the originals in the bank for the people of Southampton....
Pikey Pete
You didn't explain that very well in your first posting did you.
If the art collection was hired out Southampton City Council would have a steady income over long period of time.

[quote][p][bold]Pikey Pete[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Allotmentman66[/bold] wrote: Why sell them, why not just hire them out to other galleries for a set period of time, (say minimum of two or three years)that way everybody can see and appreciate them. Who would want to buy copies??? When they can hire orginals.[/p][/quote] No Allotmentman66. I mean sell the originals if they are mostly in storage. "NO ONE IS LOOKING AT THEM ANY WAY." Hang the copies on public display and put 180 million raised in selling the originals in the bank for the people of Southampton....[/p][/quote]Pikey Pete You didn't explain that very well in your first posting did you. If the art collection was hired out Southampton City Council would have a steady income over long period of time. Allotmentman66
  • Score: 0

11:10am Sat 18 Jul 09

Stephen J says...

By all means sell off paintings if it means investing the cash in improving the quality of care given to those woefully neglected museum collections which are literally rotting away under the council's 'care'. But putting the cash towards, well, what exactly...? Heritage centre, museum, who knows what it is meant to be.
By all means sell off paintings if it means investing the cash in improving the quality of care given to those woefully neglected museum collections which are literally rotting away under the council's 'care'. But putting the cash towards, well, what exactly...? Heritage centre, museum, who knows what it is meant to be. Stephen J
  • Score: 0

11:14am Sat 18 Jul 09

Redback says...

I don't want a museum dedicated solely to a massive failure.

It was an expensive boat, that sank. The romanticism that has grown up around it is mawkish and more than a little desperate. Keep the art.
I don't want a museum dedicated solely to a massive failure. It was an expensive boat, that sank. The romanticism that has grown up around it is mawkish and more than a little desperate. Keep the art. Redback
  • Score: 0

11:20am Sat 18 Jul 09

southy says...

Allotmentman66 wrote:
Pikey Pete wrote:
Allotmentman66 wrote: Why sell them, why not just hire them out to other galleries for a set period of time, (say minimum of two or three years)that way everybody can see and appreciate them. Who would want to buy copies??? When they can hire orginals.
No Allotmentman66. I mean sell the originals if they are mostly in storage. "NO ONE IS LOOKING AT THEM ANY WAY." Hang the copies on public display and put 180 million raised in selling the originals in the bank for the people of Southampton....
Pikey Pete
You didn't explain that very well in your first posting did you.
If the art collection was hired out Southampton City Council would have a steady income over long period of time.

allotmentman66 i been saying that now for a long time, hire them out to the world.
what pikey pete dont relise i think is the all the painting do get an airing, once in a while they get swoop about one that had been on show for a long time end up in storeage while others get move to another location and fresh pictures put up. this is normaly the mayor job to select whitch pictures and where they go.
[quote][p][bold]Allotmentman66[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Pikey Pete[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Allotmentman66[/bold] wrote: Why sell them, why not just hire them out to other galleries for a set period of time, (say minimum of two or three years)that way everybody can see and appreciate them. Who would want to buy copies??? When they can hire orginals.[/p][/quote] No Allotmentman66. I mean sell the originals if they are mostly in storage. "NO ONE IS LOOKING AT THEM ANY WAY." Hang the copies on public display and put 180 million raised in selling the originals in the bank for the people of Southampton....[/p][/quote]Pikey Pete You didn't explain that very well in your first posting did you. If the art collection was hired out Southampton City Council would have a steady income over long period of time. [/p][/quote]allotmentman66 i been saying that now for a long time, hire them out to the world. what pikey pete dont relise i think is the all the painting do get an airing, once in a while they get swoop about one that had been on show for a long time end up in storeage while others get move to another location and fresh pictures put up. this is normaly the mayor job to select whitch pictures and where they go. southy
  • Score: 0

11:49am Sat 18 Jul 09

Allotmentman66 says...

southy wrote:
Allotmentman66 wrote:
Pikey Pete wrote:
Allotmentman66 wrote: Why sell them, why not just hire them out to other galleries for a set period of time, (say minimum of two or three years)that way everybody can see and appreciate them. Who would want to buy copies??? When they can hire orginals.
No Allotmentman66. I mean sell the originals if they are mostly in storage. "NO ONE IS LOOKING AT THEM ANY WAY." Hang the copies on public display and put 180 million raised in selling the originals in the bank for the people of Southampton....
Pikey Pete You didn't explain that very well in your first posting did you. If the art collection was hired out Southampton City Council would have a steady income over long period of time.
allotmentman66 i been saying that now for a long time, hire them out to the world. what pikey pete dont relise i think is the all the painting do get an airing, once in a while they get swoop about one that had been on show for a long time end up in storeage while others get move to another location and fresh pictures put up. this is normaly the mayor job to select whitch pictures and where they go.
Perhaps the Mayor should start hirng out,to other galleries and councils around the country and the world, and get some cash in the councils purse.
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Allotmentman66[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Pikey Pete[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Allotmentman66[/bold] wrote: Why sell them, why not just hire them out to other galleries for a set period of time, (say minimum of two or three years)that way everybody can see and appreciate them. Who would want to buy copies??? When they can hire orginals.[/p][/quote] No Allotmentman66. I mean sell the originals if they are mostly in storage. "NO ONE IS LOOKING AT THEM ANY WAY." Hang the copies on public display and put 180 million raised in selling the originals in the bank for the people of Southampton....[/p][/quote]Pikey Pete You didn't explain that very well in your first posting did you. If the art collection was hired out Southampton City Council would have a steady income over long period of time. [/p][/quote]allotmentman66 i been saying that now for a long time, hire them out to the world. what pikey pete dont relise i think is the all the painting do get an airing, once in a while they get swoop about one that had been on show for a long time end up in storeage while others get move to another location and fresh pictures put up. this is normaly the mayor job to select whitch pictures and where they go.[/p][/quote]Perhaps the Mayor should start hirng out,to other galleries and councils around the country and the world, and get some cash in the councils purse. Allotmentman66
  • Score: 0

12:01pm Sat 18 Jul 09

southy says...

they also could build a art gallery building, and have all the pictures on show.
they also could build a art gallery building, and have all the pictures on show. southy
  • Score: 0

12:02pm Sat 18 Jul 09

Vonnie says...

Southampton owned artwork is already part of the national, international, and local lend/lease style of loaning out to other venues and art galleries, so do shut up, Southy. Get your facts right. Don't you remember the hoo-ha a few months ago, to which you may have contributed, regarding Southampton Police Dept returning Artwork because their budget would not allow them to pay the lease fees?? That is just one tiny example.
Southampton owned artwork is already part of the national, international, and local lend/lease style of loaning out to other venues and art galleries, so do shut up, Southy. Get your facts right. Don't you remember the hoo-ha a few months ago, to which you may have contributed, regarding Southampton Police Dept returning Artwork because their budget would not allow them to pay the lease fees?? That is just one tiny example. Vonnie
  • Score: 0

12:07pm Sat 18 Jul 09

Stephen J says...

This is what the Museums Association says about selling items from from collections:

Museums(and art galleries)should:

Consider financially-motivate
d disposal
only in exceptional circumstances and
when it can be demonstrated that:
• it will significantly improve the long-term
public benefit derived from the remaining
collection
• it is not to generate short-term revenue
(for example to meet a budget deficit)
• it is as a last resort after other sources of
funding have been thoroughly explored
• extensive prior consultation with sector
bodies has been undertaken
• the items under consideration lie outside
the museum’s established core collection
as defined in the collections policy.

Ring-fence any money raised as a result of
disposal through sale, if this exceptional
circumstance arises, solely and directly for
the benefit of the museum’s collection.
Money raised must be restricted to the
long-term sustainability, use and
development of the collection.


We can decide for ourselves whether what the council is poposing fits within the rules.
This is what the Museums Association says about selling items from from collections: Museums(and art galleries)should: Consider financially-motivate d disposal only in exceptional circumstances and when it can be demonstrated that: • it will significantly improve the long-term public benefit derived from the remaining collection • it is not to generate short-term revenue (for example to meet a budget deficit) • it is as a last resort after other sources of funding have been thoroughly explored • extensive prior consultation with sector bodies has been undertaken • the items under consideration lie outside the museum’s established core collection as defined in the collections policy. Ring-fence any money raised as a result of disposal through sale, if this exceptional circumstance arises, solely and directly for the benefit of the museum’s collection. Money raised must be restricted to the long-term sustainability, use and development of the collection. We can decide for ourselves whether what the council is poposing fits within the rules. Stephen J
  • Score: 0

12:15pm Sat 18 Jul 09

senseofsouthampton says...

Can anyone who is against this idea name one bit of art that is owned by Southampton? It makes perfect sense to sell the paintings if they are sat around gathering dust in favour of a plan that will boost visitor numbers to the city.
Can anyone who is against this idea name one bit of art that is owned by Southampton? It makes perfect sense to sell the paintings if they are sat around gathering dust in favour of a plan that will boost visitor numbers to the city. senseofsouthampton
  • Score: 0

12:43pm Sat 18 Jul 09

southy says...

Vonnie wrote:
Southampton owned artwork is already part of the national, international, and local lend/lease style of loaning out to other venues and art galleries, so do shut up, Southy. Get your facts right. Don't you remember the hoo-ha a few months ago, to which you may have contributed, regarding Southampton Police Dept returning Artwork because their budget would not allow them to pay the lease fees?? That is just one tiny example.
southampton art is loan out but its more locally than national and very rare international.
what would make more since would be to build an art gallery, and keep 3/4 off it on show at any one time, there be more money in a art gallery than there would be in a titanic museum over the long term, a titanic museum would make good money for a small amount of years, but an art gallery would go on making money for a long period off time, some thing like an art gallery would bring in people internationally in higher numbers over the long term.
[quote][p][bold]Vonnie[/bold] wrote: Southampton owned artwork is already part of the national, international, and local lend/lease style of loaning out to other venues and art galleries, so do shut up, Southy. Get your facts right. Don't you remember the hoo-ha a few months ago, to which you may have contributed, regarding Southampton Police Dept returning Artwork because their budget would not allow them to pay the lease fees?? That is just one tiny example. [/p][/quote]southampton art is loan out but its more locally than national and very rare international. what would make more since would be to build an art gallery, and keep 3/4 off it on show at any one time, there be more money in a art gallery than there would be in a titanic museum over the long term, a titanic museum would make good money for a small amount of years, but an art gallery would go on making money for a long period off time, some thing like an art gallery would bring in people internationally in higher numbers over the long term. southy
  • Score: 0

12:48pm Sat 18 Jul 09

Stephen J says...

senseofsouthampton wrote:
Can anyone who is against this idea name one bit of art that is owned by Southampton? It makes perfect sense to sell the paintings if they are sat around gathering dust in favour of a plan that will boost visitor numbers to the city.
I would agree if the plan was to create a new museum that could secure the future of the council's existing, diverse collections of real things from Southampton's past, important parts of which are deteriorating quickly. But I fear for the future of anything in the museum collections that doesn't have a Titanic link. Once they've got used to selling off paintings, it will be tempting to see anything else that's not directly related to the 'big project' as fair game for disposal.
[quote][p][bold]senseofsouthampton[/bold] wrote: Can anyone who is against this idea name one bit of art that is owned by Southampton? It makes perfect sense to sell the paintings if they are sat around gathering dust in favour of a plan that will boost visitor numbers to the city. [/p][/quote]I would agree if the plan was to create a new museum that could secure the future of the council's existing, diverse collections of real things from Southampton's past, important parts of which are deteriorating quickly. But I fear for the future of anything in the museum collections that doesn't have a Titanic link. Once they've got used to selling off paintings, it will be tempting to see anything else that's not directly related to the 'big project' as fair game for disposal. Stephen J
  • Score: 0

12:54pm Sat 18 Jul 09

Interserie says...

Pikey pete says "Hang the copies on public display and put 180 million raised in selling the originals in the bank for the people of Southampton...."

£180 million !!!! What's this? Another Council fairytale?

Walk round the Art Gallery and look at the labels next to the paintings. Many were donations to the Gallery and the Council has no powers to sell them. Others are on "permanent loan" and are not the council's property.

Only a small % of the total were ever bought outright by the Council - mainly some 50 years ago. £180 million - pull the other one.

Compare the Councils - Southampton can't find money for a Titanic museum with stealing our city's art heritage whilst Eastleigh Council can raise £30 Million for developments at the home of Hampshire Cricket without spending a penny from the local taxpayers.

Makes you wonder who's running the asylum.
Pikey pete says "Hang the copies on public display and put 180 million raised in selling the originals in the bank for the people of Southampton...." £180 million !!!! What's this? Another Council fairytale? Walk round the Art Gallery and look at the labels next to the paintings. Many were donations to the Gallery and the Council has no powers to sell them. Others are on "permanent loan" and are not the council's property. Only a small % of the total were ever bought outright by the Council - mainly some 50 years ago. £180 million - pull the other one. Compare the Councils - Southampton can't find money for a Titanic museum with stealing our city's art heritage whilst Eastleigh Council can raise £30 Million for developments at the home of Hampshire Cricket without spending a penny from the local taxpayers. Makes you wonder who's running the asylum. Interserie
  • Score: 0

12:57pm Sat 18 Jul 09

Pam W says...

Expanding the art gallery into the space intended for Titanic would cost very little because the paintings are there anyway. Part of the space could be used for Titanic exhibits anyway don't need a Titanic theme park). Approx saving - 15 million pounds, the city gets to keep its art and the reputation of the city as an arts centre is enhanced. So simple, please consider it council
Expanding the art gallery into the space intended for Titanic would cost very little because the paintings are there anyway. Part of the space could be used for Titanic exhibits anyway don't need a Titanic theme park). Approx saving - 15 million pounds, the city gets to keep its art and the reputation of the city as an arts centre is enhanced. So simple, please consider it council Pam W
  • Score: 0

1:10pm Sat 18 Jul 09

allsaintsnocurves says...

I don't really see the problem here. There's 3,500 paintings and only 200 can be shown at one time. They're not going to sell off all of them if they're all worth about £180m.

No one will actually know the difference with a few being sold off but the city will benefit from a museum we should have had years ago!

It would have been different I think if the Tyrell and Green building development had gone ahead where the plan was to have an arts gallery. Until that happens the gallery isn't big enough and the money is needed now!

Some people just like complaining about things I think.
I don't really see the problem here. There's 3,500 paintings and only 200 can be shown at one time. They're not going to sell off all of them if they're all worth about £180m. No one will actually know the difference with a few being sold off but the city will benefit from a museum we should have had years ago! It would have been different I think if the Tyrell and Green building development had gone ahead where the plan was to have an arts gallery. Until that happens the gallery isn't big enough and the money is needed now! Some people just like complaining about things I think. allsaintsnocurves
  • Score: 0

2:05pm Sat 18 Jul 09

Paramjit Bahia says...

Pure blackmail, that is what Tories are trying to do when they say either flog the art collection or forget the museum. Didn’t that Tory Blair also use the similar trick to sell the Iraq war?

Instead of flogging the paintings People should be flogging the Tories and save the precious heritage.

Our art collection is one of the very few things left in Southampton to make it appear on the national stage and the Tories want to hand it over to their rich friends, who will buy it on the cheap under the excuse of current recession and then sell it at huge profit later. I suspect part of that profit will be donated back to the Conservative coffers.

Only way to save not only the art collection but our city, or whatever will be left of it after the conservative vultures have finished feasting, is to vote them and others like NuLabour who copy their Thatcherism OUT.

Otherwise if you keep on voting for the vultures you will get neither art nor the culture.
Pure blackmail, that is what Tories are trying to do when they say either flog the art collection or forget the museum. Didn’t that Tory Blair also use the similar trick to sell the Iraq war? Instead of flogging the paintings People should be flogging the Tories and save the precious heritage. Our art collection is one of the very few things left in Southampton to make it appear on the national stage and the Tories want to hand it over to their rich friends, who will buy it on the cheap under the excuse of current recession and then sell it at huge profit later. I suspect part of that profit will be donated back to the Conservative coffers. Only way to save not only the art collection but our city, or whatever will be left of it after the conservative vultures have finished feasting, is to vote them and others like NuLabour who copy their Thatcherism OUT. Otherwise if you keep on voting for the vultures you will get neither art nor the culture. Paramjit Bahia
  • Score: 0

2:11pm Sat 18 Jul 09

Ian24 says...

Unfeasible idea. The council will sell the work then plough money into an unfeasible project by out of town consultants. It wont get built as they will conclude it will cost too much and we the city wont have any art.
It would be quite simple and much cheaper to run an attraction around the artwork. But Samuels wants to take take take while he is in power then blame blame blame when he is voted out.
Unfeasible idea. The council will sell the work then plough money into an unfeasible project by out of town consultants. It wont get built as they will conclude it will cost too much and we the city wont have any art. It would be quite simple and much cheaper to run an attraction around the artwork. But Samuels wants to take take take while he is in power then blame blame blame when he is voted out. Ian24
  • Score: 0

2:54pm Sat 18 Jul 09

Baybrit says...

Interserie wrote:
Council Leader Samuels sounds like a throwback to the 1930s - what next? -burning books outside of the library. At present Southampton Art Gallery is widely regarded as one of the best in the United Kingdom. However this madcap scheme of Mr Samuels will mean that the City will lose access to the many travelling exhibitions which has visited the gallery over recent years attracting thousands of visitors. Who will want to lend to such a Council? Over the years I have built up a collection of art from which I have happily lent many items to Southampton Art Gallery. I would like Alec Samuels to be aware that unless he drops his proposal to sell paintings, the City will not see another piece from my collection and my plans to bequest part of my collection to the City Art Gallery will be cancelled. I am also urging other collectors and galleries to take similar action. Remember, not one painting, Mr Samuels.
There is no legal way that the Council would be able to sell art that does not belong to them, so this post seems a little petty, somewhat paranoid and a lot confusing.
'Burning books outside the library'? With all due respect, this is a ridiculous comment. Whatever Alec Samuels is suggesting, it is not the destruction of any art. Nor is he suggesting the wholesale and arbitrary disposal of any and all art. He seems to be posing the possibility of a selected sale of SOME art in order to be able to provide funds for a museum to remember yet another part of the citys rich maritime history. If the writer of this post then choses not to lend their art to the city then so be it but I suspect that city art gallery will still survive, will continue to attract important travelling exhibitions and will thrive with its reputation intact despite that 'loss'.
[quote][p][bold]Interserie[/bold] wrote: Council Leader Samuels sounds like a throwback to the 1930s - what next? -burning books outside of the library. At present Southampton Art Gallery is widely regarded as one of the best in the United Kingdom. However this madcap scheme of Mr Samuels will mean that the City will lose access to the many travelling exhibitions which has visited the gallery over recent years attracting thousands of visitors. Who will want to lend to such a Council? Over the years I have built up a collection of art from which I have happily lent many items to Southampton Art Gallery. I would like Alec Samuels to be aware that unless he drops his proposal to sell paintings, the City will not see another piece from my collection and my plans to bequest part of my collection to the City Art Gallery will be cancelled. I am also urging other collectors and galleries to take similar action. Remember, not one painting, Mr Samuels. [/p][/quote]There is no legal way that the Council would be able to sell art that does not belong to them, so this post seems a little petty, somewhat paranoid and a lot confusing. 'Burning books outside the library'? With all due respect, this is a ridiculous comment. Whatever Alec Samuels is suggesting, it is not the destruction of any art. Nor is he suggesting the wholesale and arbitrary disposal of any and all art. He seems to be posing the possibility of a selected sale of SOME art in order to be able to provide funds for a museum to remember yet another part of the citys rich maritime history. If the writer of this post then choses not to lend their art to the city then so be it but I suspect that city art gallery will still survive, will continue to attract important travelling exhibitions and will thrive with its reputation intact despite that 'loss'. Baybrit
  • Score: 0

3:05pm Sat 18 Jul 09

Stephen J says...

Paramjit Bahia wrote:
Pure blackmail, that is what Tories are trying to do when they say either flog the art collection or forget the museum. Didn’t that Tory Blair also use the similar trick to sell the Iraq war? Instead of flogging the paintings People should be flogging the Tories and save the precious heritage. Our art collection is one of the very few things left in Southampton to make it appear on the national stage and the Tories want to hand it over to their rich friends, who will buy it on the cheap under the excuse of current recession and then sell it at huge profit later. I suspect part of that profit will be donated back to the Conservative coffers. Only way to save not only the art collection but our city, or whatever will be left of it after the conservative vultures have finished feasting, is to vote them and others like NuLabour who copy their Thatcherism OUT. Otherwise if you keep on voting for the vultures you will get neither art nor the culture.
Selling off art from the local gallery is not something from which Labour is immune. See Bury Council, 2006.
[quote][p][bold]Paramjit Bahia[/bold] wrote: Pure blackmail, that is what Tories are trying to do when they say either flog the art collection or forget the museum. Didn’t that Tory Blair also use the similar trick to sell the Iraq war? Instead of flogging the paintings People should be flogging the Tories and save the precious heritage. Our art collection is one of the very few things left in Southampton to make it appear on the national stage and the Tories want to hand it over to their rich friends, who will buy it on the cheap under the excuse of current recession and then sell it at huge profit later. I suspect part of that profit will be donated back to the Conservative coffers. Only way to save not only the art collection but our city, or whatever will be left of it after the conservative vultures have finished feasting, is to vote them and others like NuLabour who copy their Thatcherism OUT. Otherwise if you keep on voting for the vultures you will get neither art nor the culture. [/p][/quote]Selling off art from the local gallery is not something from which Labour is immune. See Bury Council, 2006. Stephen J
  • Score: 0

3:10pm Sat 18 Jul 09

Vonnie says...

southy wrote:
Vonnie wrote: Southampton owned artwork is already part of the national, international, and local lend/lease style of loaning out to other venues and art galleries, so do shut up, Southy. Get your facts right. Don't you remember the hoo-ha a few months ago, to which you may have contributed, regarding Southampton Police Dept returning Artwork because their budget would not allow them to pay the lease fees?? That is just one tiny example.
southampton art is loan out but its more locally than national and very rare international. what would make more since would be to build an art gallery, and keep 3/4 off it on show at any one time, there be more money in a art gallery than there would be in a titanic museum over the long term, a titanic museum would make good money for a small amount of years, but an art gallery would go on making money for a long period off time, some thing like an art gallery would bring in people internationally in higher numbers over the long term.
I totally agree with you about not selling an Art collection that has been, in the main, donated and/or bought from donations, and as a result of good management by the Trust Funds since the early 1920's, but you are wrong about where art work from Southampton's collections goes to. It is internationally loaned and good money is brought in to the Trust Funds that way.
Southampton Councillors are Phillistines.
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Vonnie[/bold] wrote: Southampton owned artwork is already part of the national, international, and local lend/lease style of loaning out to other venues and art galleries, so do shut up, Southy. Get your facts right. Don't you remember the hoo-ha a few months ago, to which you may have contributed, regarding Southampton Police Dept returning Artwork because their budget would not allow them to pay the lease fees?? That is just one tiny example. [/p][/quote]southampton art is loan out but its more locally than national and very rare international. what would make more since would be to build an art gallery, and keep 3/4 off it on show at any one time, there be more money in a art gallery than there would be in a titanic museum over the long term, a titanic museum would make good money for a small amount of years, but an art gallery would go on making money for a long period off time, some thing like an art gallery would bring in people internationally in higher numbers over the long term.[/p][/quote]I totally agree with you about not selling an Art collection that has been, in the main, donated and/or bought from donations, and as a result of good management by the Trust Funds since the early 1920's, but you are wrong about where art work from Southampton's collections goes to. It is internationally loaned and good money is brought in to the Trust Funds that way. Southampton Councillors are Phillistines. Vonnie
  • Score: 0

3:38pm Sat 18 Jul 09

Redback says...

Baybrit wrote:
Interserie wrote:
Council Leader Samuels sounds like a throwback to the 1930s - what next? -burning books outside of the library. At present Southampton Art Gallery is widely regarded as one of the best in the United Kingdom. However this madcap scheme of Mr Samuels will mean that the City will lose access to the many travelling exhibitions which has visited the gallery over recent years attracting thousands of visitors. Who will want to lend to such a Council? Over the years I have built up a collection of art from which I have happily lent many items to Southampton Art Gallery. I would like Alec Samuels to be aware that unless he drops his proposal to sell paintings, the City will not see another piece from my collection and my plans to bequest part of my collection to the City Art Gallery will be cancelled. I am also urging other collectors and galleries to take similar action. Remember, not one painting, Mr Samuels.
There is no legal way that the Council would be able to sell art that does not belong to them, so this post seems a little petty, somewhat paranoid and a lot confusing.
'Burning books outside the library'? With all due respect, this is a ridiculous comment. Whatever Alec Samuels is suggesting, it is not the destruction of any art. Nor is he suggesting the wholesale and arbitrary disposal of any and all art. He seems to be posing the possibility of a selected sale of SOME art in order to be able to provide funds for a museum to remember yet another part of the citys rich maritime history. If the writer of this post then choses not to lend their art to the city then so be it but I suspect that city art gallery will still survive, will continue to attract important travelling exhibitions and will thrive with its reputation intact despite that 'loss'.
I think you may be missing the point in part.

An art collector lends his collection to a gallery because s/he feels that the wider public deserve to see it. If a gallery is depleted, then that collector may well feel that their collection would be better housed in a gallery of more prestige, and which attracts more visitors.

Essentially the thought is: If you're not bothered about your OWN works, why should I lend you mine?

I think that's a reasonable point of view personally.
[quote][p][bold]Baybrit[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Interserie[/bold] wrote: Council Leader Samuels sounds like a throwback to the 1930s - what next? -burning books outside of the library. At present Southampton Art Gallery is widely regarded as one of the best in the United Kingdom. However this madcap scheme of Mr Samuels will mean that the City will lose access to the many travelling exhibitions which has visited the gallery over recent years attracting thousands of visitors. Who will want to lend to such a Council? Over the years I have built up a collection of art from which I have happily lent many items to Southampton Art Gallery. I would like Alec Samuels to be aware that unless he drops his proposal to sell paintings, the City will not see another piece from my collection and my plans to bequest part of my collection to the City Art Gallery will be cancelled. I am also urging other collectors and galleries to take similar action. Remember, not one painting, Mr Samuels. [/p][/quote]There is no legal way that the Council would be able to sell art that does not belong to them, so this post seems a little petty, somewhat paranoid and a lot confusing. 'Burning books outside the library'? With all due respect, this is a ridiculous comment. Whatever Alec Samuels is suggesting, it is not the destruction of any art. Nor is he suggesting the wholesale and arbitrary disposal of any and all art. He seems to be posing the possibility of a selected sale of SOME art in order to be able to provide funds for a museum to remember yet another part of the citys rich maritime history. If the writer of this post then choses not to lend their art to the city then so be it but I suspect that city art gallery will still survive, will continue to attract important travelling exhibitions and will thrive with its reputation intact despite that 'loss'. [/p][/quote]I think you may be missing the point in part. An art collector lends his collection to a gallery because s/he feels that the wider public deserve to see it. If a gallery is depleted, then that collector may well feel that their collection would be better housed in a gallery of more prestige, and which attracts more visitors. Essentially the thought is: If you're not bothered about your OWN works, why should I lend you mine? I think that's a reasonable point of view personally. Redback
  • Score: 0

4:18pm Sat 18 Jul 09

Lone Ranger says...


Lets have a referendum on it.
Lets have a referendum on it. Lone Ranger
  • Score: 0

4:30pm Sat 18 Jul 09

Rob444 says...

Wow, do we actually have a choice from this normally overbearing, dictatorial council (unlike the fluoridation fiasco).

We already have a maritime museum (which, unfortunately, imposes a thatcheristic admission charge), so we don't need a dedicated titanic museum and can keep OUR art collection.

A win-win result all round.

Wow, do we actually have a choice from this normally overbearing, dictatorial council (unlike the fluoridation fiasco). We already have a maritime museum (which, unfortunately, imposes a thatcheristic admission charge), so we don't need a dedicated titanic museum and can keep OUR art collection. A win-win result all round. Rob444
  • Score: 0

5:50pm Sat 18 Jul 09

mr.southampton says...

Condor Man wrote:
mr.southampton wrote: Someone please get Alec Samuels et al out of power. This Tory administration has been a disaster. The council makes cuts in one area, sell offs in another, yet wastes money on costly deals with Capita. Here you go Echo.. open goal.. make a few FOI requests about the spiraling costs of the Cpita IT contract.
The Capita deal has saved the council- and council tax payers a fortune. There's no money in the pot, either we mark the 100th anniversary of the Titanic or we keep a few paintings in a store room. Sadly there's not the cash for both.
Well I don't know who you're sources are but I'm hearing a different story. A few city schools certainly aren't happy with Capita's broadband charges.

There is a real danger of selling off a valuable art collection and creating a white elephant. After all Condor Man, you are, along with Alec Samuels, quite a free marketeer, so if there had been demand for a titanic museum/titanic experiience surely this would have been picked up by the private sector?

Alec Samuels and his administration are a disaster for this City.

If you need any evidence, take a look at this:

http://mattdeansoton
.blogspot.com/
[quote][p][bold]Condor Man[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]mr.southampton[/bold] wrote: Someone please get Alec Samuels et al out of power. This Tory administration has been a disaster. The council makes cuts in one area, sell offs in another, yet wastes money on costly deals with Capita. Here you go Echo.. open goal.. make a few FOI requests about the spiraling costs of the Cpita IT contract.[/p][/quote]The Capita deal has saved the council- and council tax payers a fortune. There's no money in the pot, either we mark the 100th anniversary of the Titanic or we keep a few paintings in a store room. Sadly there's not the cash for both.[/p][/quote]Well I don't know who you're sources are but I'm hearing a different story. A few city schools certainly aren't happy with Capita's broadband charges. There is a real danger of selling off a valuable art collection and creating a white elephant. After all Condor Man, you are, along with Alec Samuels, quite a free marketeer, so if there had been demand for a titanic museum/titanic experiience surely this would have been picked up by the private sector? Alec Samuels and his administration are a disaster for this City. If you need any evidence, take a look at this: http://mattdeansoton .blogspot.com/ mr.southampton
  • Score: 0

6:55pm Sat 18 Jul 09

flower49 says...

Could we not introduce a scheme where people buy shares to the art gallery. Then they will get a return on their shares and have a say on what happens to any of the stock, maybe a small charge could be made by schools, tourists etc,surely somebody could come up with an idea to keep our heritage in Southampton for generations to come. How can Eastleigh raise 30 million and we cannot raise 15 million? Sometimes you have to stand up and be counted.
Could we not introduce a scheme where people buy shares to the art gallery. Then they will get a return on their shares and have a say on what happens to any of the stock, maybe a small charge could be made by schools, tourists etc,surely somebody could come up with an idea to keep our heritage in Southampton for generations to come. How can Eastleigh raise 30 million and we cannot raise 15 million? Sometimes you have to stand up and be counted. flower49
  • Score: 0

7:50pm Sat 18 Jul 09

mr.southampton says...

If the Titanic museum is a viable proposition, surely private funding can be attracted
If the Titanic museum is a viable proposition, surely private funding can be attracted mr.southampton
  • Score: 0

8:51pm Sat 18 Jul 09

Nikki Goff says...

Why not have current living artists, working in the area or not donate or sell on commission, works to raise money for this project. A Titanic themed exhibition with all the work for sale. I would donate a painting, .....
Or have people got their hearts set on coveting certain works from the collection?
As for a purely Titanic museum, there is more to maritime history than just the Titanic.
Even the museum at Cobh where the ship stopped also, is an extensive museum of local history and other ocean liners.
Why not have current living artists, working in the area or not donate or sell on commission, works to raise money for this project. A Titanic themed exhibition with all the work for sale. I would donate a painting, ..... Or have people got their hearts set on coveting certain works from the collection? As for a purely Titanic museum, there is more to maritime history than just the Titanic. Even the museum at Cobh where the ship stopped also, is an extensive museum of local history and other ocean liners. Nikki Goff
  • Score: 0

10:54am Sun 19 Jul 09

St.DaveH says...

Levi all new city develpomenets (West Quat etc opportunity missed) - Redevelope pier as a waterfront focal point with a smaller RMST meuseum. Easy.
Levi all new city develpomenets (West Quat etc opportunity missed) - Redevelope pier as a waterfront focal point with a smaller RMST meuseum. Easy. St.DaveH
  • Score: 0

1:40pm Sun 19 Jul 09

Jenjo says...

Some good ideas in the last two posts. How did the pier building ever become a Thai restaurant (albeit a good one) when it was crying out to be developed as a heritage centre? Another missed opportunity for the city.
Some good ideas in the last two posts. How did the pier building ever become a Thai restaurant (albeit a good one) when it was crying out to be developed as a heritage centre? Another missed opportunity for the city. Jenjo
  • Score: 0

2:08pm Sun 19 Jul 09

Stephen J says...

There was a plan for a new maritime museum in the docks in the mid '80s. Plans had got to quite an advanced state, but a new council of a different colour was elected and wanted nothing to do with anything they hadn't invented, and the project was dropped.
There was a plan for a new maritime museum in the docks in the mid '80s. Plans had got to quite an advanced state, but a new council of a different colour was elected and wanted nothing to do with anything they hadn't invented, and the project was dropped. Stephen J
  • Score: 0

4:52pm Sun 19 Jul 09

Southampton says...

Condor Man wrote:
mr.southampton wrote:
Someone please get Alec Samuels et al out of power. This Tory administration has been a disaster. The council makes cuts in one area, sell offs in another, yet wastes money on costly deals with Capita. Here you go Echo.. open goal.. make a few FOI requests about the spiraling costs of the Cpita IT contract.
The Capita deal has saved the council- and council tax payers a fortune.

There's no money in the pot, either we mark the 100th anniversary of the Titanic or we keep a few paintings in a store room. Sadly there's not the cash for both.
Well well well, either you are a top bod in SCC that gets paid well or you know nothing. My mates who work for SCC are gobsmacked at what a mess CAPITA have done, as do the public, with awful call centre's.
[quote][p][bold]Condor Man[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]mr.southampton[/bold] wrote: Someone please get Alec Samuels et al out of power. This Tory administration has been a disaster. The council makes cuts in one area, sell offs in another, yet wastes money on costly deals with Capita. Here you go Echo.. open goal.. make a few FOI requests about the spiraling costs of the Cpita IT contract.[/p][/quote]The Capita deal has saved the council- and council tax payers a fortune. There's no money in the pot, either we mark the 100th anniversary of the Titanic or we keep a few paintings in a store room. Sadly there's not the cash for both.[/p][/quote]Well well well, either you are a top bod in SCC that gets paid well or you know nothing. My mates who work for SCC are gobsmacked at what a mess CAPITA have done, as do the public, with awful call centre's. Southampton
  • Score: 0

4:52pm Sun 19 Jul 09

Southampton says...

Condor Man wrote:
mr.southampton wrote:
Someone please get Alec Samuels et al out of power. This Tory administration has been a disaster. The council makes cuts in one area, sell offs in another, yet wastes money on costly deals with Capita. Here you go Echo.. open goal.. make a few FOI requests about the spiraling costs of the Cpita IT contract.
The Capita deal has saved the council- and council tax payers a fortune.

There's no money in the pot, either we mark the 100th anniversary of the Titanic or we keep a few paintings in a store room. Sadly there's not the cash for both.
Well well well, either you are a top bod in SCC that gets paid well or you know nothing. My mates who work for SCC are gobsmacked at what a mess CAPITA have done, as do the public, with awful call centre's.
[quote][p][bold]Condor Man[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]mr.southampton[/bold] wrote: Someone please get Alec Samuels et al out of power. This Tory administration has been a disaster. The council makes cuts in one area, sell offs in another, yet wastes money on costly deals with Capita. Here you go Echo.. open goal.. make a few FOI requests about the spiraling costs of the Cpita IT contract.[/p][/quote]The Capita deal has saved the council- and council tax payers a fortune. There's no money in the pot, either we mark the 100th anniversary of the Titanic or we keep a few paintings in a store room. Sadly there's not the cash for both.[/p][/quote]Well well well, either you are a top bod in SCC that gets paid well or you know nothing. My mates who work for SCC are gobsmacked at what a mess CAPITA have done, as do the public, with awful call centre's. Southampton
  • Score: 0

5:03pm Sun 19 Jul 09

MrGMan says...

I phoned actionline and found them helpful so Im not sure what call centres you are referring to.

I don't see why art which is owned by the taxpayers is sitting in a valut that we taxpayers cannot go and visit.
I phoned actionline and found them helpful so Im not sure what call centres you are referring to. I don't see why art which is owned by the taxpayers is sitting in a valut that we taxpayers cannot go and visit. MrGMan
  • Score: 0

5:06pm Sun 19 Jul 09

goard says...

I wanted to put a really beautiful work of art in a museum - it was worth thousands, but an employee at the B'mouth museum said 'don't bother we have thousands of valuables left by people and they never see the light of day, just gathering dust in the cellars'. I wonder if there is some agreement that these items are never sold but perhaps given back to families?

goard
I wanted to put a really beautiful work of art in a museum - it was worth thousands, but an employee at the B'mouth museum said 'don't bother we have thousands of valuables left by people and they never see the light of day, just gathering dust in the cellars'. I wonder if there is some agreement that these items are never sold but perhaps given back to families? goard goard
  • Score: 0

6:59pm Sun 19 Jul 09

Paramjit Bahia says...

goard wrote:
I wanted to put a really beautiful work of art in a museum - it was worth thousands, but an employee at the B'mouth museum said 'don't bother we have thousands of valuables left by people and they never see the light of day, just gathering dust in the cellars'. I wonder if there is some agreement that these items are never sold but perhaps given back to families? goard
Goard,
What you are saying is shocking but not surprising. I assure you most of us admire people like you who generously and voluntarily donate to local bodies. But it is sad that the authorities not only fail to appreciate the good deed but on top of that add insult to the injury by ignoring the wishes of the donors.

Our art collection is one example and parcels of expensive land donated for educational purposes (as was the case with old Aldermoor School in Lordshil) that have been sold for profit is another. This is immoral and scandalous appears to be going on all over the place.

Ungrateful local authorities who fail to appreciate donations and respect the wishes of donors are nothing but disgrace. Surely this must be having a knock on effects upon how many donations are made.
[quote][p][bold]goard[/bold] wrote: I wanted to put a really beautiful work of art in a museum - it was worth thousands, but an employee at the B'mouth museum said 'don't bother we have thousands of valuables left by people and they never see the light of day, just gathering dust in the cellars'. I wonder if there is some agreement that these items are never sold but perhaps given back to families? goard[/p][/quote]Goard, What you are saying is shocking but not surprising. I assure you most of us admire people like you who generously and voluntarily donate to local bodies. But it is sad that the authorities not only fail to appreciate the good deed but on top of that add insult to the injury by ignoring the wishes of the donors. Our art collection is one example and parcels of expensive land donated for educational purposes (as was the case with old Aldermoor School in Lordshil) that have been sold for profit is another. This is immoral and scandalous appears to be going on all over the place. Ungrateful local authorities who fail to appreciate donations and respect the wishes of donors are nothing but disgrace. Surely this must be having a knock on effects upon how many donations are made. Paramjit Bahia
  • Score: 0

7:46pm Sun 19 Jul 09

King Mush says...

Redback wrote:
I don't want a museum dedicated solely to a massive failure. It was an expensive boat, that sank. The romanticism that has grown up around it is mawkish and more than a little desperate. Keep the art.
Sorry but it was much more than this simplistic putdown.

I cant be @rsed to explain again (did it before) but just do some reading on the wider picture.

The tragic (and avoidable) sinking brought about a much tighter safety profile as well as echoing the change in the class system of that time.

The clouds of war were gathering on the horizon and much was learned from the mistakes that surround the story.


Not forgetting Southampton's link with lost crew and much more
[quote][p][bold]Redback[/bold] wrote: I don't want a museum dedicated solely to a massive failure. It was an expensive boat, that sank. The romanticism that has grown up around it is mawkish and more than a little desperate. Keep the art.[/p][/quote]Sorry but it was much more than this simplistic putdown. I cant be @rsed to explain again (did it before) but just do some reading on the wider picture. The tragic (and avoidable) sinking brought about a much tighter safety profile as well as echoing the change in the class system of that time. The clouds of war were gathering on the horizon and much was learned from the mistakes that surround the story. Not forgetting Southampton's link with lost crew and much more King Mush
  • Score: 0

8:58am Mon 20 Jul 09

BrixtonSaint says...

Crikey, how many Sotonians even know there's an art gallery let alone care for ones that haven't seen the light of day in years. Get shot of them and build a WORLD CLASS sea faring museum. Let the planners and architects visit the best of the lot around the world and come back and make ours better. If SCC doesn't take this opportunity to ammend for the atrocious mistakes its made with our heritage down the years, the effect on the city's future as seen by the world outside will be as devastating as the deaths of 1500 back in 1912. Southampton really needs to wake up and realise it has a last chance here to make a name for itself. Otherwise I fear this is the last throw of the dice and yet again the council will have let us all down with a half hearted attempt to enliven the city with a world class visitor attraction.
The budget for this is derisory and should be put back up to the original £28m. Sell what's needed of the paintings, there'll still be plenty to satisfy the art lovers.
Crikey, how many Sotonians even know there's an art gallery let alone care for ones that haven't seen the light of day in years. Get shot of them and build a WORLD CLASS sea faring museum. Let the planners and architects visit the best of the lot around the world and come back and make ours better. If SCC doesn't take this opportunity to ammend for the atrocious mistakes its made with our heritage down the years, the effect on the city's future as seen by the world outside will be as devastating as the deaths of 1500 back in 1912. Southampton really needs to wake up and realise it has a last chance here to make a name for itself. Otherwise I fear this is the last throw of the dice and yet again the council will have let us all down with a half hearted attempt to enliven the city with a world class visitor attraction. The budget for this is derisory and should be put back up to the original £28m. Sell what's needed of the paintings, there'll still be plenty to satisfy the art lovers. BrixtonSaint
  • Score: 0

3:40pm Mon 20 Jul 09

goard says...

Bahia, very nice of you to say about the museum piece, you must have really thought it was a 'tall story' BUT my Mum was with me and it was she who asked the curator of the Museum, having seen similar on show, she specifically wanted to bequest it. Unhappily, her home with her estate had to be sold for her nursing home fees. thank goodness she did not know anything, she had dementia.
Bahia, very nice of you to say about the museum piece, you must have really thought it was a 'tall story' BUT my Mum was with me and it was she who asked the curator of the Museum, having seen similar on show, she specifically wanted to bequest it. Unhappily, her home with her estate had to be sold for her nursing home fees. thank goodness she did not know anything, she had dementia. goard
  • Score: 0

2:55pm Tue 21 Jul 09

wilson castaway says...

A titanic museum is a great idea, many of my american friends cannot believe that there is not such a place already, SCC really have let the city down, our museums are a place you visit once every 10 years, although every respect to the museum workers they are a disapointment, small and crammed full.A decent museum is what Southampton needs, one to rival Portsmouth.
A titanic museum is a great idea, many of my american friends cannot believe that there is not such a place already, SCC really have let the city down, our museums are a place you visit once every 10 years, although every respect to the museum workers they are a disapointment, small and crammed full.A decent museum is what Southampton needs, one to rival Portsmouth. wilson castaway
  • Score: 0

10:05pm Wed 29 Jul 09

Jenjo says...

Ever been to the Wool House Maritime Museum? It's excellent.
Ever been to the Wool House Maritime Museum? It's excellent. Jenjo
  • Score: 0

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree