
The Guardian view on statues: new monuments reflect changing values and reinvigorate the public realm
Statues in Britain have gradually reflected evolving social values. A statue of the suffragette leader Emmeline Pankhurst was unveiled in Westminster in 1930, two years after women were finally granted the vote on equal terms to men. Nelson Mandela joined Winston Churchill in Parliament Square in 2007. The nurse Mary Seacole became the first named black, Caribbean woman to be honoured with a UK statue in 2016. In the same year, the Monumental Welsh Women campaign was established. It set itself a target of five statues, and has only one to go.
But are statues of individuals out of step with democratic sensibilities? Rather than raise subscriptions to cast models of great men and women from the past, contemporary backers of public art often opt for different styles and forms – for example, the giant statue of an anonymous black woman that was recently displayed in New York's Times Square. Called Grounded in the Stars, this was the work of a British artist, Thomas J Price.
In other cases, enthusiasts continue to fundraise for traditional, lifesize statues of individuals. While the vast majority of such statues in Britain represent men (many of them aristocrats), the highest-profile recent campaigns have been for memorials of women. According to the Public Statues and Sculpture Association, there are currently 147 statues of named, non-royal women. Among them is Jane Taylor, who wrote the lullaby Twinkle, Twinkle, Little Star, and since last year has stood with her sister Ann on the high street in Colchester, Essex. Another is Mary Anning, the pioneering fossil hunter, who can be seen striding towards the seafront with her dog in Lyme Regis, Dorset. In Brighton, the Mary Clarke statue appeal aims to erect a statue of this overlooked women's suffrage campaigner by the same sculptor, Denise Dutton. Clarke, who was Mrs Pankhurst's sister, died on Christmas Day 1910 after being force-fed in prison and has no memorial anywhere.
Permanence can be problematic: statues erected in one era may celebrate traits later condemned. But it is refreshing to see the achievements of women celebrated, and municipal statuary become more representative of a diverse nation – and less dominated by the aristocratic and imperialist values of the past. Campaigns for new outdoor monuments are generally spearheaded by those with a strong commitment to a place as well as a person. When they succeed, these projects can boost confidence in the local public realm. Amid a tortuous debate about the statue of Cecil Rhodes in Oxford – which remains in place in spite of a lengthy campaign to remove it – Bristol's anti-Colston protesters proved that direct action can decisively alter the built environment. It also sparked an unprecedented public reckoning with the legacies of slavery in Britain in the months after – with the removal or alteration of almost 70 tributes to enslavers and colonialists.
One that went was a statue of slaveholder Robert Milligan in east London. Next year, its spot will be filled with a sculpture by the artist Khaleb Brooks. Called The Wake, the bronze shell will stand as a memorial to transatlantic slavery's millions of victims. Symbolic change isn't a substitute for tackling today's inequalities. But it's still meaningful.
Do you have an opinion on the issues raised in this article? If you would like to submit a response of up to 300 words by email to be considered for publication in our letters section, please click here.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


The Independent
43 minutes ago
- The Independent
Photos from a street festival of circus performers in the Russian town of Staritsa
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging. At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story. The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it. Your support makes all the difference.


The Sun
an hour ago
- The Sun
Ed Miliband's dash for Net Zero could cost every UK household £389 a year by 2030, bombshell research warns
ED Miliband's Net Zero policies will cost every household £389 a year by 2030, Tory analysis today reveals. The Labour government has pledged to totally decarbonise Britain's energy grid within the next five years. 4 They plan to do this by splurging vast amounts on new wind and solar farms as well as banning new oil and gas drilling in the North Sea. Brits have already spent £700 million this year to pay wind farms to STOP producing energy because the National Grid cannot cope with energy surges. The government's dash to go green will send the cost of bills rocketing to a whopping £22.8 billion by 2030, Tory number crunchers say. This will leave the government's pledge to cut £300 from energy bills in tatters, according to the research. Instead it will end up adding another £389 to the cost of household bills for 27 million UK Brits. Tory MP Nick Timothy - who carried out the research - said: 'Energy becomes more expensive with each day Ed Miliband remains in office. 4 'While Miliband blames fossil fuels for higher bills, he is pumping up prices by throwing more government-imposed costs onto energy bills. 'Wind and solar are being propped up by a complicated web of hidden cash to hoodwink you into thinking they are cheap. But they are not. 'Renewables will cost billions more. This is Ed Miliband's world – and you're paying for it.' Sir Keir Starmer is under massive pressure to act on UK energy costs - which are some of the highest in the world. In stark contrast the US - which uses more fossil fuels - has far lower prices. Donald Trump used a meeting with the PM in Scotland earlier this week to launch a blistering attack on wind farms for pushing up prices and scarring the countryside. In toe-curling scenes, the PM sat ashen-faced as the US President unleashed both barrels on his wind farm push - branding them a 'con job'. Speaking at his Turnberry golf course, Mr Trump fumed: 'Wind is the most expensive form of energy, and it destroys the beauty of your fields and your plains and your waterways.' Urging the PM to lift the ban on new oil and gas drilling, he added: 'You can take a thousand times more energy out of a hole in the ground this big - it's called oil and gas.' The analysis carried out by Mr Timothy's office looked at the hidden cost of renewable energy by trawling through official figures and research papers. 4 It found that Brits pay billions of pounds to subsidise the building of renewable energy plants, like wind and solar. But the National Grid - which carries electricity from power plants to peoples homes - is very old and cannot cope with large surges of energy. This results in a barmy situation which means the government actually PAYS wind farms to stop turning when it is too windy. Some £700m has already been paid this year to turn wind farms off. Wind farms are also paid more for their energy than fossil fuel providers, the analysis found. Offshore wind will cost £113 per MWh under the latest contracts. The average cost of electricity last year was £72 per MWh. These direct subsidies for renewables inflate the cost of energy bills. There are also extra costs known as 'Balancing Costs' - the name given to the process the National Grid has to pay to ensure balance and supply of power is maintained daily. These charges end up being passed onto consumers in higher bills, researchers said. The study found the hidden cost of renewables on our bills was £12.3BN in 2023/24. This is predicted to hit £22.8BN by 2030. This is just the estimated cost to Brits's bills over the next few years - and the overall cost of going green by 2050 is far higher. The Office for Budget Responsibility estimated it will cost a massive £803 billion to hit Net Zero by 2050. 4 A spokesman for the department for Net Zero said: 'These claims are fundamentally misleading. 'They wilfully ignore the benefits of clean power and wrongly assume the required network infrastructure will not be built over the next five years. 'Only by sprinting to clean power by 2030 can the UK take back control of its energy and protect both family and national finances from fossil fuel price spikes.' IT was the most excruciating television I have seen in years. Sitting next to the Prime Minister, Donald Trump said Labour's taxes on North Sea oil and gas 'make no sense' and he called Ed Miliband's wind farms a 'con job'. Keir Starmer looked like a rabbit in the headlights, because he knew what Trump said was true. The eco policies this Labour government is pursuing simply make no sense. They are spinning us a lie. The government tells us we must urgently hit Net Zero targets because the cost of fossil fuels are unaffordably high. But renewables cost more money and push up bills. They say Britain must build more wind and solar farms so we can wean ourselves of foreign gas and become energy sufficient. But at the same time No10 bans new oil and gas drilling in the North Sea - leaving us more dependent on imports. And the government tells us this dash to go green will create thousands and thousands of new jobs. Yet the trade unions who actually represent energy workers say Labour's zealous eco policies could cause tens of thousands of well-paid British workers to be laid off. It is a mad Alice in Wonderland world where down is up and up is down. Ed Miliband has gone through the Looking Glass. His policies are the stuff of the Mad Hatter. And today I can reveal that Labour's Net Zero drive will cost an estimated £23 billion a year by 2030. That is the equivalent of slapping another £389 a year onto the cost of living for households. It is a cost this country cannot afford. Let me give you a few examples to show you just how barmy our energy policy has become under 'Red Ed'. First- the oil and gas industry. Just weeks after winning the election, Labour banned new licences to drill for oil and gas in the North Sea. Furious trade unions said that up to 30,000 UK jobs could be lost, but their dire warnings fell on deaf ears. But the most ridiculous thing is that Britain still imports oil and gas taken from the very same seabed from Norway. So, Norway gets to keep the taxes, profits and jobs, while the UK goes without. It is a grotesque example of self-harm. Second - the bizarre case of the Drax power station in North Yorkshire. It imports wood from halfway around the world to burn, yet the UK taxpayer has spent billions of pounds in green subsidies on the power station. This simply makes no sense. Third - the sky high cost of wind and solar energy. Labour has set the UK insane targets to quadruple offshore wind and double onshore wind in just five years. But energy produced by these wind farms is actually MORE expensive. Ed Miliband has promised wind farms a fixed price of £113 per MWh for the next 20 years. That is 50 per cent HIGHER than the average cost of electricity. The cost of building new wind and solar farms is also enormous. An estimated £40 billion a year will be spent upgrading the National Grid, and rolling out new pylons and battery storage sites. Worst of all, wind and solar are even paid NOT to produce energy. This is because our creaking National Grid cannot handle big surges of energy. So when it is particularly windy they have to pay wind farms to switch off. This year alone we have paid £700 million to wind farms to STOP generating power. It is bananas. Brits also have to pay for environmental levies. These are extra charges baked into energy bills to pay for the development of new greener energy supplies. Labour are sending environmental levies hurtling towards £14.8 billion in 2030. The PM promised he would cut energy bills by £300 by the next election. But the opposite is true. They are getting bigger and bigger. No wonder President Trump thinks we are mad. Our energy costs are twice those in America. As a result their economy is booming while ours is stagnating. The US President could see the truth and was unafraid to say it. Britain needs to completely change course. It's time to junk the clean power target and support energy policies that actually work. We should take the US President's advice and 'drill baby drill' in the North Sea. We should expand nuclear energy. And we should ditch our expensive green energy levies and subsidies. Otherwise we remain Ed Miliband's mad world – and we will all pay the price.


Telegraph
an hour ago
- Telegraph
Labour targets anti-migrant protesters with terrorist tracking software
A Whitehall 'disinformation' unit used tools created to hunt for jihadists to find critics of asylum hotels, The Telegraph can reveal. The secretive team was this week revealed to have flagged 'concerning' narratives about migrants to tech platforms during the Southport riots. The disclosure prompted the Trump administration and US congressmen to warn of a free speech crackdown in Britain. The Telegraph can now reveal that some of the tools used by the National Security and Online Information Team (NSOIT) were originally developed to hunt terrorists. In 2017, ministers commissioned Faculty, an AI firm, to help search for recruitment videos posted by Isil. At the time, use of the technology was strictly limited to stopping British social media users from encountering grisly beheading videos and calls to commit acts of terrorism. The firm developed tools that could automatically spot Islamic State content spreading online, so it could be flagged to tech companies by the Government. 'Counter disinformation data platform' The same firm has since been awarded a £2.3m contract to develop a 'counter disinformation data platform' to look for posts that pose a 'national security and public safety risk'. The Telegraph has established that the platform is a direct descendant of the tool used by the UK Government to hunt for terrorists in 2017, although it has since been improved and updated. A video released by Faculty shows Matt Collins, the current UK deputy National Security Adviser, explaining that the tool was required to prevent the spread of terrorist ideology. 'We had a concerted effort to basically encourage social media companies to do more to remove content which was radicalising individuals to either travel to Syria or to conduct terrorist attacks,' he said. Faculty is understood to have sold the software to the Government to monitor foreign interference in elections, but has no power to stop it from being used for domestic purposes. A second firm enlisted to monitor online trends was Global Strategy Network, an intelligence outfit established by Richard Barrett, the former MI6 head of global counter-terrorism. The company has been used to look for content that could pose a risk to public safety, which includes posts about migrant hotels during the riots. On Thursday, The Telegraph revealed emails between the NSOIT and TikTok, which showed officials in August last year raising concerns about posts that could incite violence. They included posts about asylum hotels and reference to 'two-tier' policing of protest, which later became a damaging political critique of Sir Keir Starmer's government. The revelation that the team was using terrorist-hunting software to monitor posts about immigration policy will raise further concerns about 'censorship' of the internet by Labour. Mr Trump's State Department said on Friday it was concerned about free speech in Britain, and would 'closely monitor' the situation to ensure American companies were not censored. A delegation of US congressmen met Peter Kyle, the Technology Secretary, this week to make their fears of online censorship known. Sir Keir is also facing significant backlash to new rules under the Online Safety Act, which require social media companies to verify the age of users to access adult content. The threat of huge fines for breaching the rules has led to companies censoring harmless material out of an abundance of caution. Free speech warnings On Friday X became the first platform to criticise the new rules, warning that 'free speech will suffer' if they are not changed. A spokesman for Big Brother Watch, the civil liberties campaign group, criticised the use of anti-terror software to find opponents of government policy on asylum. They said: 'It is alarming that the Government is aiming social media surveillance technology at law-abiding British citizens. 'The Government should abandon its intrusive and unaccountable monitoring of legal online content and urgently commission an independent review of its so-called 'disinformation' units.' A Government spokesman said: 'National security is not only our top priority but also our foremost duty. We will not compromise public safety by letting harmful narratives fester and multiply online, leading to real world harm as we saw in the wake of the horrific Southport attack. 'Put simply, these are widely used analysis tools and we do not use them to track individuals. They monitor trends safely, legally and transparently.'