Holocaust memorial critics warn of creating ‘monument to death and the Nazis'
Concerns were again raised at Westminster as legislation paving the way for the delayed development took a further step forward.
The chosen site in Victoria Tower Gardens, located immediately adjacent to Parliament, has been contentious, with disquiet over the loss of green space in central London, the design of the scheme and security implications.
A main obstacle to supporters was a 1900 law protecting the small triangular Grade II-listed park, which led to the quashing of planning permission after a legal battle.
To overcome this, the Labour Government reintroduced the Holocaust Memorial Bill, proposed by the previous Tory administration.
It will both authorise expenditure on the construction, maintenance and operation of the memorial and learning centre, and also disapply sections of the 1900 Act, removing the legal obstacle that has prevented the project from going ahead.
The Bill received its third reading in the Lords on Tuesday and now goes to the Commons for MPs to consider a single change made by peers, making clear the sole purpose of the learning centre 'must be the provision of education about the Holocaust and antisemitism'.
Independent crossbencher Baroness Deech, who lost her grandparents in the Holocaust, has been a leading critic of the proposed scheme.
She said: 'Once we are free of the fears of this Government that any alternative is somehow giving in to the antisemitism of which the party was accused a few years ago – that is simply not the case – we will go forward with a planning process that might yet rescue this botched plan.
'It is not too late to tweak it and build not a monument to death and the Nazis but one dedicated to the need to preserve and understand Jewish life.
'At a time when a new version of the desire to destroy Jewish life in the Middle East and elsewhere is playing out as we speak, we could have a learning centre that extended to the achievement of the survivors of the Holocaust in building what was a safe haven for Jews, a land of their own.
'Is it not ironic that this Government are so respectful of six million dead but so cavalier about the fate of seven million of their descendants in Israel right now?'
She added: 'We who understand what is at stake will continue to press our case. The fight is not over.'
Liberal Democrat Baroness Walmsley said: 'I thank all those who pointed out the risks and drawbacks of the choice the Government have made about the location of the learning centre and express a hope that, on reflection, the Government may in time make a different choice.'
Tory former minister Lord Robathan said: 'As somebody who cares hugely about the Jewish Holocaust and the ghastly thing it is, the site for the learning centre is wrong.
'It will be cramped and is not worthy of what we wish to commemorate.
'I say to the minister and others that back this, I personally don't believe it will be built, because there are going to be so many problems once you start destroying Victoria Gardens to do this.'
Independent crossbencher Lord Inglewood, who is president of Historic Buildings & Places, said: 'I have to say to the House that, the more the Bill progressed, the more I became convinced that this proposal was overdevelopment and in the wrong place.
'I do not wish to say any more, other than, with sadness, that this Bill, the Holocaust Memorial Bill, will no doubt shortly be going on the statute. In my view it is not properly named. It is the Victoria Tower Gardens Destruction Bill.'
Backing the project, Tory shadow communities minister, Baroness Scott of Bybrook, said: 'We have made a solemn commitment never to forget the horrors of the Holocaust and to work to ensure that it will never happen again.
'Holocaust education is an essential part of our efforts to make good on those promises.
'It has been the policy of successive Conservative governments that we need a national Holocaust memorial and learning centre.'
Communities minister Lord Khan of Burnley said: 'Through this Bill, the Government are moving a step closer to delivering on the long-standing commitment to build a national Holocaust memorial and learning centre next to Parliament, where it rightly belongs.'
He added: 'I think there are still some outstanding concerns, but let me reassure members who have them that, subject to the passage of the Bill in the other House and on to the statute book, there will be a process for people to put their representations, views and ideas forward about prospective future planning.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Spectator
25 minutes ago
- Spectator
Top five lowlights from Sturgeon's memoir
They say good things come to those who wait, but Steerpike will let readers be the judge of that when it comes to Nicola Sturgeon's memoir Frankly. The 450-page account by Scotland's former first minister was supposed to be hitting bookshelves on Thursday, but some shops decided to release it ahead of time and Mr S has got his hands on an early copy, reading it so you don't have to. Here are the top lowlights from Sturgeon's new tome… Trans U-turn One of the controversies that, some suggest, prompted her resignation in 2023 was the gender reform bill – and the scandal of double rapist Isla Bryson being housed in a women's prison. The question of whether Bryson is a man or a woman proved rather difficult for the then-first minister to answer at the time – and Sturgeon still hasn't managed to square this circle, pointedly calling the rapist 'they' in an ITV interview last night. At the time, Sturgeon first voted down Tory MSP Russell Findlay's amendment to ban sex offenders from obtaining a gender recognition certificate and later voted against SNP MSP Michelle Thomson's amendment to pause applications by those charged with rape or sexual assault. While she dismissed concerns from the bill's critics then, now Sturgeon admits in her book: 'The question I ask myself most when I reflect on this period is whether I should have hit the pause button when I realised, sometime in 2022, just how polarised the issue was becoming. With hindsight I wish I had.' Too little, too late… Salmond fallout Sturgeon's infamous fallout with her political mentor and boss Alex Salmond has had books written about it – and so of course the ex-FM had to include at least a nod to it in her own. But she hasn't held back. She broke down in tears when her colleague Ian Blackford told her Salmond had passed away in October 2024 and confessed she wondered whether she should cut the chapter on him from her book. 'Would I just be stirring up pain for his wife and family (which I truly don't want to do)?' she pondered. Regardless, she went and published it anyway. Charming! Sturgeon claimed that the former SNP leader hadn't read the independence white paper, accused him of undermining John Swinney during the latter's first attempt at leading the SNP and alleged he had planted questions via opposition MSPs on the committee assessing the Scottish government's handling of harassment complaints. In short, despite her claims of grief on hearing of her former boss's passing, the SNP's Dear Leader decided to pull no punches. 'I have tried not to rewrite history,' she begins the chapter, later adding: '[Alex] was trying to rewrite history.' Talk about tit for tat! Cross-party politics Scotland's former FM has long been accused of creating a divisive political culture over both independence and the trans debate. Yet in her memoir she claims that her motivation for a deal with the Scottish Greens after falling short of a majority in the 2021 Holyrood election was down to her desire to 'champion a more constructive style of politics'. Er, right. She goes on: At the tail end of the last parliament, embroiled in the Salmond saga and worn down by Covid, I had become weary of the opportunism and perpetual game-playing of opposition parties. It was partly a result of electoral frustration, but they had become impervious to any attempts to build cross-party consensus. And this is the woman lauded for her high emotional intelligence?! Brexit The Queen of the Nats wouldn't ever exploit a democratic result for her own political gain, would she? Not according to her memoir, anyway, in which she writes that, after Britain voted to leave the EU: The established narrative now, though, is that I went hell for leather for a second referendum immediately after the Brexit vote. It isn't true. On the contrary, I spent the next nine months doing the precise opposite. I tried hard to persuade the UK government to pursue a compromise option… It was in good faith, therefore, that we published 'Scotland's Place in Europe' in December 2016, mapping out what a different outcome for Scotland might look like and how it could be achieved. I was explicit that this was a solution for Scotland within the UK; in other words, an alternative to independence. It seems rather odd, then, that in the aftermath of the Brexit vote, Sturgeon told a journalist that the chance of another independence referendum was 'highly likely'. And since then, the SNP has consistently stood on a platform that advocates for closer ties with the EU – if not rejoining the European Union altogether. How very interesting… London The SNP's Dear Leader has spent most of her life calling for Scotland's independence from the United Kingdom – but in a rather amusing revelation, it doesn't seem like she wants to practice what she preaches. In her book, she writes: 'I am determined to see more of the world. I might live outside of Scotland for a period.' In fact, she has since admitted to both the Sunday Times and the BBC that: 'I love London.' Just one of those nationalists who'll do anything for their country but live in it, eh?
Daily Mirror
25 minutes ago
- Daily Mirror
Brits call for 'terrified' Prince Andrew to pay ultimate price for scandals
New research has found 67 per cent of Brits would back a move to strip Prince Andrew of his Duke of York title as well as lose his status as a prince Two-thirds of Brits back Prince Andrew's remaining royal titles being stripped, a new poll has shown. Research has found that 67 per cent of the public would back Andrew's Duke of York title being removed - as well as his status as a prince being taken away. It comes as a damning biography of the disgraced Duke and his ex-wife, Sarah Ferguson, delved into his private life, depicting him as sex obsessed, a "useful idiot" and easy prey for Jeffrey Epstein. The book also accuses Andrew of using taxpayer-funded overseas trade trips for private business and accepting questionable gifts and loans from wealthy associates. Three years ago, 62 per cent of people thought Andrew's York title should be removed - meaning there has been a jump of five percentage points in those who would back the move amid the book's allegations. It also comes just days after a separate YouGov survey found that just five per cent of Brits have a positive view of the late Queen's second son. He languishes at the bottom of royal favourability ratings, beneath Meghan, who has a 20 per cent positive rating and Prince Harry, who is viewed favourably by 28 per cent of people. For him to be stripped of his Duke of York title, legislation would be required by Parliament to stop him from using the style. His birthright to be a prince, as the son of a monarch, could only be removed if a Letters Patent were issued by the King to strip his brother of the title. Andrew stopped using his style of His Royal Highness following his disastrous Newsnight interview, but it could be removed entirely by a Letters Patent. He stepped away from his public role in 2019 amid the furore over his friendship with convicted billionaire paedophile Epstein. Behind palace walls, aides are understood to be advising the prince to remain in the UK and avoid any appearance that could reignite public fury. Earlier this week, the Mirror revealed how Andrew may "never set foot" on US soil again as lawmakers in the States press for him to provide under oath testimony about his friendship with Epstein. The disgraced duke has not been to North America for more than a decade, and senior sources say he is now 'too terrified' to even contemplate the trip. One well-placed Washington insider told the Mirror: 'If Prince Andrew sets foot on US soil again, he will be met with an avalanche of political, legal and media scrutiny. He knows it, and so does Buckingham Palace. The safest option for him is to stay put in Britain and hope the storm dies down. But it won't.' Senior diplomatic sources say the unofficial ban on travel now extends far beyond America, with some close allies of Washington unlikely to roll out the red carpet for a royal under such scrutiny. 'He's effectively a grounded duke,' one insider said. The Duke of York has been contacted for comment.
Telegraph
25 minutes ago
- Telegraph
Liz Truss criticises ‘multicultural' Olympic ceremony 12 years after praising it
Liz Truss has criticised the London 2012 Olympics opening ceremony as not representing 'the views of the average Briton'. The former prime minister suggested that 'the views expressed' at the event were not those shared by people outside of London but of 'an elite that hates Britain', even though she praised the ceremony in 2013. Speaking to Ben Shapiro, a Right-wing US commentator, Ms Truss claimed that the 'elite are trying to suppress' the voices of those in small towns and rural communities. Shapiro, who hosts the Ben Shapiro Show, asked the former Tory leader about the 2012 Olympics opening ceremony, which took place in the capital. Former UK PM Liz Truss on what Britain must learn from Trump — The Ben Shapiro Show (@BenShapiroShow) August 11, 2025 He asked: 'Can there be a restoration of a true pride in what Great Britain was and should be in the middle of this bizarre sort of melange of multiculturalism that has taken over London?' Ms Truss replied: 'The views expressed in the Olympic ceremony are not the views of the average Briton. 'The problem is we have an elite that hates Britain, and they have done for some time, that is the history of people like Jeremy Corbyn [and] Keir Starmer. 'They want to help the human rights of anybody who doesn't live in Britain, but they're very reticent about actually defending our own interests. 'We need to galvanise the people who are patriots in our country, but they have been neglected. They generally don't live in London. They live in small towns, they live in rural areas. They don't have much of a voice. And what is happening is the elite are trying to suppress those voices.' But Ms Truss had previously praised the 2012 opening ceremony, which took place shortly before she became an education minister under Lord Cameron. In a speech in 2013, she said: 'Last summer's Olympics opening ceremony seamlessly combined Isambard Kingdom Brunel and William Shakespeare, Tim Berners-Lee and Mary Poppins.' In 2019, she told The Sunday Telegraph: 'I think we need to revive what I call the Olympics 2012 spirit [with] a modern, patriotic, enterprising vision of Britain and we need to use Brexit to achieve that.' The opening ceremony of London 2012 was directed by Danny Boyle and attracted some 900 million viewers. It featured a cameo appearance of Queen Elizabeth II alongside Daniel Craig in his role as James Bond. The pair apparently jumped out of a helicopter together into the Olympic stadium, where the late monarch was wearing the same outfit as she had been when she met Bond in Buckingham Palace. The show also featured references to the novel Peter Pan, the Chariots of Fire film, and several hymns and folk songs such as Jerusalem and Danny Boy. In a segment designed to celebrate the NHS, performers danced in traditional nurse uniforms and white doctors' coats.
