Next Monday will MPs once again deliberate the proposal for a national UK Holocaust memorial in Victoria Tower Gardens, next to the Houses of Parliament. The session could see the Holocaust Memorial Bill finally complete its parliamentary journey, a significant step forward for what has been both a long-running and a controversial project.
It has been more than a decade since the government accepted the recommendations of a commission, set up by the then-Prime Minister David Cameron, that a “striking new memorial to serve as the focal point of national commemoration of the Holocaust” should be created in central London. Implementing them has been beset by planning and legal complexities and continuing disagreement over the memorial’s location, its design, its cost, and even its precise purpose.
By 2018, the site and a design – 23 bronze fins on a large grass mound coupled with an underground “learning centre” – had been chosen and a planning application submitted to Westminster City Council. Not everyone was happy: concerned that the (then Conservative-run) council might side with objectors, including some local residents who thought the memorial would “profoundly and completely” change the character of the “well-loved” Grade II listed park, the government “called in” the application and gave planning consent itself.
But opponents of the scheme had uncovered an “enduring obligation” under the little-known London County Council (Improvements) Act 1900 to maintain the site as a public garden. The High Court found that this was an “insuperable impediment” and quashed the permission.
Rather than go back to the drawing board, the government decided to legislate – effectively, to pass a new law saying the 1900 Act did not apply to the Holocaust memorial plan. That hasn’t not been straightforward. The Bill almost fell when the 2024 general election was called, and its “hybrid” status – due ot its affecting the private interests of particular individuals and organisations – entailed extra stages of representation and House of Lords committee hearings. And, as that Lords committee reported last year, “the controversy on these issues has not gone away”.
There remain concerns about the memorial’s impact on what is a rare piece of central London open space, including its existing monuments – Rodin’s the Burghers of Calais and memorials to anti-slavery campaigner Richard Buxton and suffragette leader Emmeline Pankhurst. The design is unpopular with some, and the proposed learning centre has been described as both “far too big for the little park” and “far too small” for its purpose. Concerns about security have been raised, and about costs, which are now up to almost £140 million from £90 million in 2019.
There are wider concerns, too, that the project could become a more generalised exhibit about genocides, losing its Holocaust focus, or that it might have too much focus on the past while downplaying uncomfortable aspects of Britain’s history in respect of the Holocaust and contemporary antisemitism. It would “protect the dead but not the living”, one observer memorably told Politico recently.
The memorial nevertheless still retains significant support from major institutions and individuals, including the Board of Deputies of British Jews, the Holocaust Memorial Day Trust, the Holocaust Educational trust and both Houses of Parliament, particularly as memories fade and given the current increase in antisemitism. It will ensure, said former Conservative minister Lord Eric Pickles, co-chair of the foundation overseeing the project with the government, that the Holocaust “narrative” would continue to be “built on truth and honesty and verifiable fact”.
The final issue before MPs is a Lords amendment designed to ensure the memorial will specifically commemorate the mass slaughter of Jews by the Nazis. That bridge crossed, which seems overwhelmingly probable, the Bill will shortly be off for Final Assent.
That won’t be the end of the story, though. The Bill, when passed, will simply remove a legal blockage. The relevant minister will then need to decide on planning permission again, and that will mean, as a new House of Commons library briefing sets out, a fresh look at “the appropriateness of the location, design and other matters”. This could well entail a further public inquiry in front of a planning inspector and argument continuing Will the government meet its target of opening the memorial in 2027? It looks unlikely.
Follow Charles Wright on Bluesky. Image from Adjaye Associates.
OnLondon.co.uk is funded by sales of publisher and editor Dave Hill’s twice-weekly newsletter On London Extra. To start receiving it, become a paying subscriber to Dave’s personal Substack or follow any Support link on this site. Thanks.
Sometimes it’s difficult to criticise something like this, for fear of being labelled anti-semitic.
However, this is the WRONG place. Just look again at the photo and the scale of the people, without even mentioning the large underground building required.
The gardens are perfect as they are now.
I agree with you