Development Control Committee B – 21 February 2024
WARD:

Central

SITE ADDRESS:

Statue Of Edward Colston, Colston Avenue Bristol BS1 4UA

APPLICATION NO:

23/04315/LA

ITEM NO. 1

Listed Building Consent (Alter/Extend)

DETERMINATION
2 January 2024
DEADLINE:
Proposal to move the statue of Edward Colston from Colston Avenue to M Shed.

RECOMMENDATION:APPLICANT:

Grant subject to Condition(s)Bristol City Council
City Hall
College Green
Bristol
BS1 5TRThe following plan is for illustrative purposes only, and cannot be guaranteed to be up to date.
LOCATION PLAN:

DO NOT SCALE

12/02/24 13:29

Committee reportItem no. 1
Development Control Committee B – 21 February 2024
Application No. 23/04315/LA : Statue Of Edward Colston Colston Avenue Bristol BS1 4UA

SUMMARY
This is an application for Listed Building Consent to move the statue of Edward Colston from
Colston Avenue to the M Shed. The application is made by Bristol City Council. The
application has not been referred by a Ward Member to a DC Committee for a decision.
Listed Building Consent is required because the statue and plinth is Grade II listed. The
plinth would remain in situ and a new plaque is also proposed.
The applicant has provided the following summary of events leading up to the submission ofthis application:“On 7th June 2020, the grade II listed bronze statue of Edward Colston was pulled down fromits plinth on Colston Avenue during a Black Lives Matter demonstration. After being rolled
through the City Centre, the statue was dumped into the Floating Harbour by a crowd ofdemonstrators.
The statue was recovered from the harbour and in the summer of 2021 went on display inthemuseum. While on display, Bristol City Council and the History Commission that had been
established by the authority following the events in June, ran a public consultation processwith visitors to the exhibition and online. This consultation asked what people thought should
now happen to the statue and surviving plinth in the City Centre. The results of thisconsultation process informed a report by the commission that concluded with 6
recommendations for the future of the statue and plinth.” This application seeks to implement
a number of those recommendations.
This significance of the heritage asset has been identified and assessed. This is considered
to be principally artistic and historic, with the historic significance of the statue and plinth
having been increased following the events of June 2020.
It is concluded that the public benefits would outweigh the less than substantial harm posed.
In reaching this conclusion, officers have given great weight to the heritage asset’s
conservation, that is, the sustaining and enhancing of its significance. There is considered to
be clear and convincing justification for the harm.
The proposal is therefore considered to be in accordance with the requirements of the
NPPF, Bristol Core Strategy (2011) Policy BCS22 which seeks to ensure that development
proposals safeguard or enhance heritage assets in the city, with Policy DM31 in the Site
Allocations and Development Management Policies (2014) expressing that alterations tobuildings should preserve or enhance historic settings.
Furthermore, this would be in accordance with Section 16 of the Planning (Listed Buildings
and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 which states that in considering whether to grant listedbuilding consent for any works the local planning authority shall have special regard to thedesirability of preserving the building or its setting or any features of special architectural or
historic interest which it possesses.
Special attention has also been paid to the desirability of preserving or enhancing thecharacter or appearance of the Conservation Area in accordance with Section 72 of the
Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990.
It is therefore recommended that Listed Building Consent be granted. Conditions arerecommended regarding the implementation of the proposed works.

Item no. 1
Development Control Committee B – 21 February 2024
Application No. 23/04315/LA : Statue Of Edward Colston Colston Avenue Bristol BS1 4UA

SITE AND SURROUNDINGSThe site is located in Bristol city centre in a prominent position on Colston Avenue. Colston
Avenue is where many transport routes come together to form a very active and extensive
area of public realm. The area is known as “The Centre”, an important civic and transport
hub for the city.
The site is located within the College Green Conservation Area and close to the City andQueen Square Conservation Area. The Conservation Area has a Character Appraisal that
was adopted in 2016 and the site falls within “The Centre” character area. The Character
Appraisal refers to the Centre as “a major city landmark space and focal point for gathering,
convening and events”. To emphasise the importance of the location, the city’s Cenotaph is
located in relatively close proximity to the site.
The Conservation Area covers a large portion of the city centre, from the Council House andthe Cathedral round to the areas of Colston Avenue that used to be part of the harbour until
it was culverted in the late 19th Century. The linear area of public realm on Colston Avenue
that contains the site, along with the varied and strong built form lining each side, reflect thequayside that was here, while the historic statues and features along the public realm
reinforce elements of the City’s history.
In the College Green Conservation Area Character Appraisal the statue and plinth does notappear to be identified as a local landmark. There are other listed monuments nearby
however.
The specific structure the subject of this application is the plinth that, until 7th June 2020, wasthe pedestal of the statue of Edward Colston that had been in situ since 1895. The statue
and plinth were Grade II listed in March 1977.
The Official List Entry reads as follows:“Heritage Category: Listed Building
Grade: II
List Entry Number: 1202137
Date first listed: 04-Mar-1977
List Entry Name: STATUE OF EDWARD COLSTON
Statutory Address 1: STATUE OF EDWARD COLSTON, COLSTON AVENUE
District: City of Bristol (Unitary Authority)
Parish: Non Civil Parish
National Grid Reference: ST 58628 73014
Details
BRISTOL
901-1/11/555 COLSTON AVENUE 04-MAR-77 CENTRE (Northeast side) STATUEOF EDWARD COLSTON
II This list entry has been amended as part of the Bicentenary commemorations of
the 1807 Abolition Act.

Item no. 1
Development Control Committee B – 21 February 2024
Application No. 23/04315/LA : Statue Of Edward Colston Colston Avenue Bristol BS1 4UA

Statue of Edward Colston, standing in Colston Avenue, to south of central pavement;
the statue faces south. Erected 1895; the sculptor was John Cassidy of Manchester.
A bronze statue on a pedestal of Portland stone. The statue shows Colston in middle
age, dressed in C17 costume and leaning pensively on a stick. A rectangularmoulded plinth with buttressed corners to a moulded pedestal; above this, consoles
to an octagonal base supporting the statue. Inscribed on the south face of the basethe words ‘Edward Colston / Born 1636 / Died 1721’. To each corner of the pedestal,a bronze dolphin (dolphins feature on the Colston family crest), and on each face, abronze plaque with Art Nouveau-style relief. On the south face, the words ‘Erected by/ citizens of Bristol / as a memorial / of one of the most / virtuous and wise sons of /their city / AD 1895’ and ‘John Cassidy fecit’. On the west face, Colston dispenses
charity to poor children; on the north he is shown at the harbour; on the east is ascene with marine horses, mermaids, and anchors.
HISTORY: Edward Colston (1636-1721) was the son of a prosperous Bristol
merchant; the family had long been established in Bristol. Edward Colston wasapprenticed to the London Mercers’ Company in 1654, in which he was enrolled in
1673. Thereafter, Colston established his own successful business in London,
trading with Spain, Portugal, Italy, and Africa. The details of precisely how Colston’s
fortune was accumulated are not recorded, but his business interests were wide.
Besides tr’ding extensively in various commodities, including cloth and wine, he
acted as a money-lender, and had interests in the West Indian island of St Kitts. In
1680 he became a shareholder in the Royal African Company. The Company, which
had been founded in 1672 in place of the Royal Adventurers, had a monopoly on
trade with Africa until 1688, after which time it received fees from English traders.
Colston took a leading role in the Company, serving on several committees, andbecoming deputy governor in 1689. Other members of the Colston family had
connections with the Company; Edward’s brother Thomas supplied beads that wereused to buy slaves.
Although his trade was based in London, Colston continued to take an interest in his
native Bristol; it is thought that he moved here for a while during the 1680s. He
inherited a Bristol business from his brother, and became a partner in a Bristol sugar
refinery, processing sugar produced by slaves in the West Indies. He was elected afree burgess of the city, and a member of the Society of Merchant Venturers, whichmeant that he could trade out of Bristol. By 1689 Colston had taken up residence atMortlake, Surrey, where he lived for the rest of his life, but the philanthropic
benefaction for which he was to become famous was concentrated on Bristol, the city
for which he was MP from 1710-14.
Edward Colston is buried at All Saints’ Church in Bristol, where a monument,
designed by Gibbs and carved by Rysbrack, lists his charities. The bronze statue in
Colston Avenue was commissioned by a committee organised by J. W. Arrowsmith,a Bristol printer and publisher and a promoter of the Exhibition, whose premises
overlooked the site. The statue was unveiled by the Lord Mayor of Bristol on 13
November 1895.
Until the 1990s, Colston’s involvement in the slave trade, the source of much of themoney which he bestowed in Bristol, went largely unremarked. Since that time there
has been growing interest in Bristol’s role in the ‘triangular trade’, which saw ships
leave Bristol filled with goods to purchase slaves, carry those slaves to West Indian
plantations, and return to Bristol laden with sugar. Although Colston’s principal
connection with the slave trade was through the London-based Royal African

Item no. 1
Development Control Committee B – 21 February 2024
Application No. 23/04315/LA : Statue Of Edward Colston Colston Avenue Bristol BS1 4UA

Company, he has come to be seen as the pre-eminent representative of this aspectof Bristol’s history.
SOURCES: Dictionary of National Biography; V. Coules, The Trade: Bristol and theTransatlantic Slave Trade (2007); Bristol Historic Environment Record; D. Merritt,
Sculpture in Bristol (2002); http://johncassidy.org.uk/ accessed on 2 January 2008; R.
Winstone, Bristol in the 1890s (1960)REASONS FOR DESIGNATION The statue of Edward Colston is designated at
Grade II for the following principal reasons: * A handsome statue, erected in the late
C19 to commemorate a late C17 figure; the resulting contrast of styles is handledwith confidence * The statue is of particular historical interest, the subject being
Edward Colston, Bristol’s most famous philanthropist, now also noted for his
involvement in the slave trade. * Group value with other Bristol memorials: a statue of
Edmund Burke, the Cenotaph, and a drinking fountain commemorating the Industrial
and Fine Art Exhibition of 1893”
PROPOSALThis is an application for Listed Building Consent to move the statue of Edward Colston from
Colston Avenue to the M Shed. Listed Building Consent is required because the statue
including the pedestal and plinth is Grade II listed. The plinth would remain in situ and a newplaque is proposed.
The applicant has provided the following summary of events leading up to the submission ofthis application:“On 7th June 2020, the grade II listed bronze statue of Edward Colston was pulled down fromits plinth on Colston Avenue during a Black Lives Matter demonstration. After being rolled
through the City Centre, the statue was dumped into the Floating Harbour by a crowd ofdemonstrators.
The statue was recovered from the harbour and in the summer of 2021 went on display inthemuseum. While on display, Bristol City Council and the History Commission that had been
established by the authority following the events in June, ran a public consultation processwith visitors to the exhibition and online. This consultation asked what people thought should
now happen to the statue and surviving plinth in the City Centre. The results of thisconsultation process informed a report by the commission that concluded with 6
recommendations for the future of the statue and plinth.”
This application, which is made by Bristol City Council, seeks to implement a number of
those recommendations. Specifically, these are as set out in the applicant’s statement
follows:
Recommendation 1
That the Colston statue enters the permanent collection of the Bristol City Council Museums
service.
Recommendation 2
That the statue is preserved in its current state and the opportunity to reflect this in the listing
description is explored with Historic England.

Item no. 1
Development Control Committee B – 21 February 2024
Application No. 23/04315/LA : Statue Of Edward Colston Colston Avenue Bristol BS1 4UA

Recommendation 3
That the statue be exhibited, drawing on the principles and practice of the temporary M Sheddisplay where the statue was lying horizontally. That attention is paid to presenting thehistory in a nuanced, contextualised and engaging way, including information on the broader
history of the enslavement of people of African descent.
Recommendation 4
That the former Colston statue plinth, along with the original plaques, remain in place andthat a new plaque is installed that briefly and factually explains when and why the statue was
put up and taken down.
The following wording for the new plaque is suggested:“On 13th November 1895, a statue of Edward Colston (1636 - 1721) was unveiled herecelebrating him as a city benefactor. In the late twentieth and early twenty-first century, thecelebration of Colston was increasingly challenged given his prominent role in theenslavement of African people.
On 7th June 2020, the statue was pulled down during Black Lives Matter protests and rolled
into the harbour. Following consultation with the city in 2021, the statue entered thecollections of Bristol City Council’s museums.”
It is understood that the applicant sought pre-application advice from Historic England prior
to the submission of the application.
RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY
20/03127/F – Appeal: Temporary art installation for a period of 2 years (retrospective)
entitled, ‘A Surge of Power (Jen Reid) 2020’ on the plinth of the former statue of slave trader
Edward Colston (grade ll listed). (Appeal reference APP/Z0116/W/20/3260461) Appeal
against non-determination dismissed 4th August 2021
20/03128/LA – Appeal: Temporary art installation for a period of 2 years (retrospective)
entitled, ‘A Surge of Power (Jen Reid) 2020’ on the plinth of the former statue of slave trader
Edward Colston (grade ll listed). (Appeal reference APP/Z0116/Y/21/3269256) Appeal
against non-determination dismissed 4th August 2021
20/02458/LA – A Grade 2-listed statue of Edward Colston is proposed for partial demolitionof the metal statue and statue base. The remainder of the pedestal is proposed to beretained. Application cancelled
18/03688/LA – Addition of a new bronze plaque to the stone pedestal. Granted subject toconditions 13th November 201807/03469/F – Temporary artwork constructed around the statue of Edward Colston. Granted
subject to conditions 12th October 2007
07/03470/LA – Temporary artwork constructed around the statue of Edward Colston.
Granted subject to conditions 12th October 2007
01/01753/LA – Maintenance treatment comprising of cleaning and wax treatment of bronze
statue and panels and cleaning of stone plinth. Granted subject to conditions 27th July 2001

Item no. 1
Development Control Committee B – 21 February 2024
Application No. 23/04315/LA : Statue Of Edward Colston Colston Avenue Bristol BS1 4UA

RESPONSE TO PUBLICITY AND CONSULTATION
A site notice was displayed at the site on 22/11/2023 and a press advertisement was
published on 22/11/2023.
There were 4 representations received, comprising 2 objections, 1 neutral comment and 1
comment in support, on the following grounds in summary:Objections to the application•

Object to the statue being put on display at M Shed for the same reason quoted in
the Crown Court for its removal. The statue is offensive in its nature, Colston is
unbristolian.
•

Whatever one feels of the contested history involved, it 'immortalises' and thereby
rewardsa heritage crime and act of art vandalism by people flouting Covid rules at the heightof the pandemic, showing contempt for the democratic process, and undermining thelaw - it is deeply offensive to very many Bristolians and others as a result.
Pre-toppling the council had a 'retain and explain' plan for the statue, with planningpermission, of the type recommended by Historic England for contested monuments,
arrived at with substantial public input and wide support, and aimed at bringing thecity together in a better understanding of its history.
Instead of this positive plan, after the toppling and a cynical disinformation campaign
and flawed survey, we now have this highly divisive misuse of the remnants of thestatue to promote a simplistic polarised, politicised, radicalised and racialised
viewpoint also elevating the often semi-literate ahistorical rants of a lawless mob toprominence, while ignoring law abiding dissenting voices across the city - many ofwhom have a wealth of historical knowledge.
Also object to the proposed wording for the additional plaque for the empty plinth forthe reasons and suggest a reworded version that is fit for purpose.

Neutral comment•

Comment received from Chair of Bristol Civic Society's Blue Plaques Panel with arequest for a condition to be added that a design showing the wording is submitted.

Comment in support of the application•

Comment received from Chair of the History Commission advising that theCommission held an extensive consultation with the city in the summer and autumn
of 2021, linked with the temporary display of the statue in the M-Shed museum.
Just under 14000 people responded - around half from Bristol - with a clear majority
supportive of moving the statue into the permanent collection of the M-Shed museum
and putting it on display there. 80% of Bristol respondents wished to see the statue inthe M-Shed (with smaller numbers - c. 12% of the Bristol sample wanted the statueback on the plinth; c . 4% of the Bristol sample wanted the statue back in the harbour
or destroyed - wanting the statue to end up somewhere else).

Item no. 1
Development Control Committee B – 21 February 2024
Application No. 23/04315/LA : Statue Of Edward Colston Colston Avenue Bristol BS1 4UA

One thing that was important was ensuring that these voices were broadly
representative of the city as a whole.
The proposal to move the statue from Colston Avenue to the M Shed museum is one
that meets with widespread approval from those who responded in their thousands tothe consultation in 2021.
From reading comments most people in the city feel that the statue is too problematicto sit atop a plinth in the city centre, but remains of historical value (including therecent history of its toppling) and so should be placed into a museum where its longand contested history can be explained in more words than a plaque allows, and in aplace where people can choose to visit.
Consultees
Historic England“Summary
In June 2020, the statue of Edward Colston was pulled down and rolled into Bristol’s
Floating Harbour during a Black Lives Matter protest. Subsequently the City Council
arranged for the statue to be retrieved from the waters and for it and the fallen
capstone from the plinth to be taken to Bristol Museums.
The statue of Edward Colston has become a touchstone for Bristol’s connections to
the transatlantic trade in enslaved people. The proposal to regularise its removalfrom its plinth would cause a high degree of harm to the listed ensemble of plinth andstatue; this would be substantial in the language of the National Planning Policy
Framework (NPPF). Planning policy and legislation sets a high bar for justifying sucha proposal.
While it will be for the decision-maker to determine whether the proposals would
deliver substantial public benefits sufficient to outweigh the substantial harm it would
entail, Historic England recognises both that the Council has undertaken a wideranging appraisal of the sentiment of Bristolians towards the future of Colston’s
statue, and that it believes that the removal of the statue is important to the wellbeing of the city. We also note the Council’s commitment to permanently displaying
the statue in the M Shed Museum.
Historic England Advice
Significance
Legally, the statue of Colston and its plinth remain intact and in situ, and together
form a monument listed at grade II on account of its historic and artistic interest. This
provides the correct starting point in planning terms for consideration of the current
proposals, and not the current de facto position, in which the statue has been
removed.
Edward Colston played a central part in the trade in enslaved people of the late 17thand early 18th centuries. His engagement in this trade was both sustained anddirect. In the 1680s and early 1690s Colston was a member of the Royal African
Company, and for a year was its principal official. The company had a monopoly of
trade with Africa and thus of the slave trade. Colston’s involvement in the trade inenslaved people continued after he left the company.

Item no. 1
Development Control Committee B – 21 February 2024
Application No. 23/04315/LA : Statue Of Edward Colston Colston Avenue Bristol BS1 4UA

During Colston’s membership of the Royal African Company, it is estimated that thecompany transported over 84,000 enslaved people from Africa to the West Indies
and Americas. As many as 19,000 people may have died during the Atlantic crossing- the Middle Passage. Conditions for those who survived were harsh, and life
expectancy short.
Colston gave a substantial part of his wealth to philanthropy. His chief benefactions
were to Bristol institutions. They included almshouses, schools and churches.
In 1895 Colston’s benefactions were recognised by the erection of a monument to his
memory. It was intended to commemorate Colston’s substantial benefactions toBristol, and to commemorate his philanthropy. It was commissioned by a committeeorganised by J.W. Arrowsmith, a Bristol printer and publisher and a promoter of theIndustrial and Fine Art Exhibition held on this site in 1893-94.
The monument was the work of John Cassidy (1860-1939). Cassidy was born in
Ireland, trained in Milan and worked throughout his career in Manchester. Much of
his work comprised busts and plaques celebrating commercial and cultural figures inManchester and the surrounding areas. After the First World War he designed aseries of war memorials.
Cassidy’s monument to Colston is an eclectic work, characteristic of the period. It
comprises a substantial plinth which supported a full-length figure of Colston.
Colston is portrayed deep in thought, his head supported by his left hand and arm,
which are in turn supported by his right hand and a long staff. He wears late 17th
century dress. The portrait combines sensitivity in the modelling and mood of theface with an illustrative character in its treatment of the clothing.
The plinth on which the statue was set is Baroque in its general character. Angled
projections at the base support dolphins - Colston’s emblems. Inverted volutes
articulate the narrowing of the main body of the plinth to the cap upon which thestatue itself was set. The principal surface on each side is set with a bronze plaque,which commemorate Colston’s life.
The ensemble of statue and plinth was listed at grade II in 1977. The monument’s
entry on the National Heritage List for England, which was revised in 2007, identifies
the following reasons for the monument’s designation:a)“A handsome statue, erected in the late C19 to commemorate a late C17
figure; the resulting contrast of styles is handled with confidence”;
b)“The statue is of particular historical interest, the subject being Edward
Colston, Bristol’s most famous philanthropist, now also noted for his involvement in
the slave trade”;
c)“Group value with other Bristol memorials: a statue of Edmund Burke, theCenotaph, and a drinking fountain commemorating the Industrial and Fine Art
Exhibition of 1893”.
From this it may be concluded that the significance of the Colston monument, in thelanguage of the NPPF, lies in its artistic and historic interest, both of which areconsiderable.

Item no. 1
Development Control Committee B – 21 February 2024
Application No. 23/04315/LA : Statue Of Edward Colston Colston Avenue Bristol BS1 4UA

Summary of proposals
The current proposals would regularise the removal of the statue from its plinth. The
statue, which has been conserved in its current state, would be displayed in the M
Shed, one of the City’s museums, where the fallen capstone from the top of the plinth
would also be kept. An interpretive panel would be attached to the plinth itself, which
would remain in situ, and the plinth would be used for temporary installations.
Proposals for a cultural programme for the site of the plinth do not form part of thelisted building consent application.
Impact of the proposed development
The removal of the statue of Colston from the monument of which it forms part would
severely impair the monument’s significance.
The statue is the raison d’etre of the monument itself. It represents the man themonument commemorates and is the most artistically important part of the whole.
The removal of the statue would take away much of the monument’s historic andartistic interest.
This notwithstanding, the plinth itself would remain of some interest. It is a
substantial structure, carefully composed and richly adorned, and is of historic andartistic interest in its own right.
Planning legislation and policy context
The NPPF sets out three overarching objectives at paragraph 8, of which two are
relevant to this case.
One of these is “a social objective - to support strong, vibrant and healthy
communities, by ensuring that a sufficient number and range of homes can beprovided to meet the needs of present and future generations; and by fostering welldesigned, beautiful and safe places, with accessible services and open spaces thatreflect current and future needs and support communities’ health, social and cultural
well-being”.
Another is “an environmental objective - to protect and enhance our natural, built andhistoric environment”.
The NPPF explains that heritage assets “are an irreplaceable resource, and should
be conserved in a manner appropriate to their significance, so that they can beenjoyed for their contribution to the quality of life of existing and future generations”(189).
Paragraph 196 makes clear that “where there is evidence of deliberate neglect of, or
damage to, a heritage asset, the deteriorated state of the heritage asset should not
be taken into account in any decision”.
The next paragraph goes on to say that “in determining applications, local planning
authorities should take account of … the desirability of sustaining and enhancing thesignificance of heritage assets” and also “the positive contribution that conservationof heritage assets can make to sustainable communities” (197, a, b).
Paragraph 198 specifically addresses applications to remove historic statues. It
states that “in considering any applications to remove or alter a historic statue,
plaque, memorial or monument (whether listed or not), local planning authorities

Item no. 1
Development Control Committee B – 21 February 2024
Application No. 23/04315/LA : Statue Of Edward Colston Colston Avenue Bristol BS1 4UA

should have regard to the importance of their retention in situ and, whereappropriate, of explaining their historic and social context rather than removal.”
The NPPF continues, “when considering the impact of a proposed development on
the significance of a designated heritage asset, great weight should be given to theasset’s conservation... This is irrespective of whether any potential harm amounts tosubstantial harm, total loss or less than substantial harm to its significance”(paragraph 199).
Paragraph 200 sets out that “any harm to, or loss of, the significance of a designatedheritage asset … should require clear and convincing justification. Substantial harm
to or loss of … grade II listed buildings … should be exceptional”.
Finally, paragraph 201 explains that “where a proposed development will lead to
substantial harm to (or total loss of significance of) a designated heritage asset, local
planning authorities should refuse consent, unless it can be demonstrated that thesubstantial harm or total loss is necessary to achieve substantial public benefits thatoutweigh that harm or loss, or unless four criteria are all met”.
In a Written Ministerial Statement made to Parliament on 18 January 2021, the then
Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government, Robert Jenrick,stated about statues and monuments that “decisions to remove any such heritage
assets owned by a local authority should be taken in accordance with its constitution,
following consultation with the local community and interested parties, and therationale for a decision to remove should be transparent.” This statement ofgovernment policy is a material consideration when deciding applications.
Historic England Position
The City Council’s proposal is to confirm the removal of Colston’s statue from its
plinth, and conserve it within the City’s collection. Historic England recognises thevery difficult history of which the statue has become the touchstone, but considers
that the statue’s removal would cause substantial harm to the listed structure formed
by statue and plinth. The policies referred to above would be engaged.
Most obviously, the City Council’s proposal runs counter to the importance ofretaining statues in situ and interpreting them (NPPF, 198). It must also be tested
against the requirement that local planning authorities refuse proposals which would
cause substantial harm to the significance of a designated heritage asset, unless that
harm would be outweighed by substantial public benefits, or meet all of four criteria(NPPF, 201). The strength of this policy flows from the great weight to be accorded
to the conservation of the significance of designated heritage assets (NPPF, 199).
In this case, in considering the NPPF’s policy in respect of substantial harm, theformer test is the relevant one; the criteria are not applicable. In other words, theproposal must be justified by the public benefits it would provide, or not at all.
While it will be for the Local Authority, as decision-maker, to determine whether the
proposal would deliver substantial public benefits sufficient to outweigh thesubstantial harm it would entail, Historic England can make a number of observations
on the nature of the arguments put forward and the policies engaged.

Item no. 1
Development Control Committee B – 21 February 2024
Application No. 23/04315/LA : Statue Of Edward Colston Colston Avenue Bristol BS1 4UA

At the heart of the Council’s justification is the argument that regularising the removalof Colston’s statue from the monument is of great importance to Bristol’s well-being.
This argument rests on an appraisal of the wishes of the City, a judgement about theconsequences of reinstating the statue and a commitment to explain Colston’s role
as both slave trader and benefactor.
Since 2020, Bristol City Council has deliberated on the future of the statue and themonument of which it forms part. These deliberations have been informed by thework of the ‘We Are Bristol History Commission’, established by the Mayor in theimmediate aftermath of events in June 2020.
Through the work of the Bristol History Commission, Bristol City Council has
undertaken a wide-ranging appraisal of the sentiment of Bristolians towards the
future of Colston’s statue. The Commission reported that four out of five Bristolians
thought the statue should be kept in a museum; seven of ten supported the additionof a plaque to the plinth to reflect the events of 2020; six of ten supported the use of
the plinth for temporary artworks; and five of eight approved the pulling down of thestatue.
The Commission’s report does make clear that opinion, although broadly in favour ofthe points set out above, is also divided. While 65% of Bristolians were positive
about what had happened, 36% - a substantial minority - felt negatively about thepulling down of the statue.
It is not for Historic England to gauge the weight to be accorded to the Commission’s
conclusions, but we acknowledge the seriousness with which this exercise has been
conducted. This approach seems wholly in accordance with the Secretary of State’s
requirement that councils consult communities when considering such proposals.
The obverse of the Commission’s conclusions is the Council’s judgement that the“reinstatement of the statue to Edward Colston… would cause additional upset anddisgust and potentially lead to further public order and health and safety risks as well
as damage community cohesion”.
Again, it is not for Historic England to gauge this judgement, although given the
climate of public opinion in the city, as demonstrated by the consultation process thattook place as part of the History Commission report, it must be taken seriously.
The Framework recognises that the social objective of the planning system, one of
the three objectives which support the achievement of sustainable development, is“to support strong, vibrant and healthy communities” (NPPF, 8, b). Equally, theFramework requires local planning authorities to take account of “the positive
contribution that conservation of heritage assets can make to sustainablecommunities” (NPPF, 197, b). In this case, the City considers in effect that theretention - practically, the reinstatement - of the statue would run counter to the social
objective of the planning system.
The final part of the justification rests on the Council’s commitment to contextualise
and explain the role of Colston as both slave trader and benefactor through thedisplay of the statue in the M Shed Museum and the installation of a new plaque on
the remaining plinth. The impact of the installation of a new plaque on the plinth tothe significance of the listed structure would be very modest. Any harm would be
negligible.

Item no. 1
Development Control Committee B – 21 February 2024
Application No. 23/04315/LA : Statue Of Edward Colston Colston Avenue Bristol BS1 4UA

We recognise the potential of these proposals to contextualise the empty plinth andthe fallen statue, enabling a deeper understanding of Colston’s difficult past.
In summary, the most important part of the City Council’s proposal would be thepermanent removal of the statue of Colston - which remains, in law, in place - fromthe listed structure. This would entail substantial harm to that listed structure, and it
will be for the decision-maker to determine whether the Council’s justification would
provide substantial public benefits to outweigh the harm that removal would entail.
Should it be found to do so, it would be reasonable to conclude that the other policy
tests referred to above would be met, including that requiring the consideration of theimportance of retaining statues in situ, and, where appropriate, explaining their
historic and social context (NPPF, 198).
Conclusion
We recognise the pain that Colston’s role in the transatlantic trade in enslaved
people has caused.
The monument to Edward Colston, a slave trader and benefactor, is of historic andartistic interest. Its permanent removal from its plinth would cause a high degree ofharm to the significance of the listed ensemble of plinth and statue. This harm wouldbe ‘substantial’ in the language of the NPPF. We welcome the work of the Bristol
History Commission, and recognise the wide-ranging approach to the consultation,
which has informed these proposals. Ultimately, however, it will be for Bristol City
Council as the decision-maker to determine whether the proposals would bejustified.”
National Amenity Societies
No comments received.
Conservation Advisory Panel“The Panel recognised that the future location of the statue was a very sensitive
issue, and this was discussed at length. The Panel regret the damage and harm thathas been caused to this heritage asset, and whilst they would prefer that the statue
was replaced and retained in its original location, with an explanation provided on its
background, they acknowledged that this was unlikely to be feasible in practice. It
was agreed that the statue should not be cleaned or repaired, but should forpreference be displayed in an upright position in the Museum.”
Bristol City Council Conservation“Summary:
The proposed development would be harmful to designated heritage assets; that
harm and the public benefit arising from it are wholly exceptional. Harm would bepartially mitigated through the proposed works. On balance, development would besignificantly in the public interest and this is given very considerable weight. Despite
the great weight required in the conservation of the assets, the public benefit
outweighs the degree of harm posed. We recommend the decision-marker approve
development subject to conditions.
Significance:

Item no. 1
Development Control Committee B – 21 February 2024
Application No. 23/04315/LA : Statue Of Edward Colston Colston Avenue Bristol BS1 4UA

Development would directly impact the architectural and historic interest of the Grade
II Listed statue and base, and the character of the City Centre and College Green
Conservation Area. The group value of the collection of Listed civic monuments
along the Centre would also have their setting impacted; these include the Grade II
Listed statue of Burke, drinking fountain commemorative of the 1891 exhibition, andthe cenotaph.
The statue of Edward Colston and its plinth were erected posthumously in 1895, 174
years after his death. The statue was commissioned to stand in the new park laid out
following the culverting of the River From. This presented a new opportunity to host
civic adornments in one of the few open public spaces then available in the city
centre. The selection of Colston as a subject for a statue was championed by JW
Arrowsmith, whose Printing business adjoined the new open space at the head of theformer quay. The choice of Colston, a Tory MP, appears to have been, at least partly,a political reaction to the planned and executed erection of a statue to the eminent
Whig MP, Edmund Burke, by the Wills family, in the same area.
Architecturally, it's a prominent, monumental structure designed and executed inform, detail, and materials intended to impress. The plinth is highly ornate withattractive stepped form and bronze embellishments expressing the opulence andwealth of the age in which it was erected. The statue, in contrast, has a hunched,sullen and downbeat pose, unlike the posturing classical stance adopted in Burke's
statue. The modelling and bronze casting are particularly high quality.
Significance of the statue and plinth is considered to have been considerablyheightened by events of 7.6.20 when it received international attention following
toppling during an anti-racism protest. Edward Colston's involvement in theTransatlantic slave trade, a long-established fact in Bristol, became nationally known
through the pulling-down of the statue from its plinth and throwing into the docks. It
inspired citizen action against totems of intolerance across the world. Statue andplinth, although presently separated, are now historically significant in new ways tothose intended by its creators.
The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) is clear, that: '196. Where there isevidence of deliberate neglect of, or damage to, a heritage asset, the deteriorated
state of the heritage asset should not be taken into account in any decision' The
toppling of the statue from the plinth was clearly a deliberate act of damage, so thedeteriorated state cannot be taken into account in the planning decision. This createsa paradox, where a degree of historic significance of the asset now arises from its
effective separation. Whilst the NPPF states that the deteriorated state cannot betaken into account in the decision, it does not preclude that damage having increased
the heritage significance or the assessment of that significance as part of assessing
against the tests of the NPPF.
Proposals:
This Listed building application seeks to formally remove the statue and base fromthe plinth, and lodge them in the collections of the Council-owned M-Shed museum.
The Museum is Accredited by the Arts Council England and is required to maintain acollections care and conservation policy, and a collections care and conservation
plan; following lodging in the collections, the statue would be protected by those
provisions.

Item no. 1
Development Control Committee B – 21 February 2024
Application No. 23/04315/LA : Statue Of Edward Colston Colston Avenue Bristol BS1 4UA

Proposals also include for the affixing of a new plaque to the Grade II Listed plinth,recording the role of Edward Colston in slavery, and commemorating the pulling
down of the statue in 2020. Drawings or other material showing the design of thisplaque are not provided in the application, though an intended location and draft
wording for the plaque is included in the supporting statements.
Assessment and potential mitigation
Is there harm posed by the development? (NPPF para 200):
As noted above, the NPPF the 'deteriorated state' of the asset cannot be taken into
account in decision making, though it's not clear how damage that has amplified
significance should be dealt with; To what extent has its 'state' been deteriorated orelevated by unlawful actions? It is undoubted that physical harm has occurred to the
Listed structure. The ripping away of the statue has caused material damage to theplinth, and the statue itself is in a technically irreparable condition. The physicaldamage is irreversible. The deteriorated state of the heritage asset is not to be taken
into account in any decision, that is to say, the present state of the asset is aseparate consideration from the procedural assessment of heritage significanceagainst the other tests of the NPPF, and the assessment of significance, harm,justification, and balancing harm against public benefit remain necessary parts of the
The NPPF is explicit that assessment should take into account 'the desirability ofsustaining and enhancing the 'significance' of heritage assets' in our assessment
rather than their physical 'state'. Accepting only the previous physical condition of thestructure, we would be forced to disregard the heritage significance as it presently
exists. The NPPF is clear that significance should underpin the decision-making
process and that the physical state of the asset should not.
The NPPF requires harm to significance to be established. Historic England definesignificance as 'a collective term for the sum of all the heritage values attached to aplace, be it a building an archaeological site or a larger historic area such as a whole
village or landscape.' It defines heritage values as being:
Evidential value: the potential of a place to yield evidence about past human activity.
Historical value: the ways in which past people, events and aspects of life can beconnected through a place to the present - it tends to be illustrative or associative.
Aesthetic value: the ways in which people draw sensory and intellectual stimulationfrom a place.
Communal value: the meanings of a place for the people who relate to it, or for whom
it figures in their collective experience or memory.
Harm would occur to the Listed statue and plinth where its heritage values were
undermined. To summarise these individually:
Evidential value of the structure arises from its location in a prominent civic site, andhow the construction and fabrication of the statue and plinth help inform ourunderstanding of historic techniques. The large chunk taken out of the plinth
moulding evidences the aggressive method of the statue's removal. Despite thepresent intention to separate the statue from the plinth, the evidential value would
remain unaffected, with the location continuing to be marked by the masonry plinth,and the bronze casting secured in a museum collection where it would be available
for inspection and protected by the collection management policies which would
ensure better preservation than in the intended location.

Item no. 1
Development Control Committee B – 21 February 2024
Application No. 23/04315/LA : Statue Of Edward Colston Colston Avenue Bristol BS1 4UA

The historical value derives from the celebration of Edward Colston as a significant
figure in Bristol's past, from the physical expression of the social and political context
in which the statue and plinth was erected, and from the actions of 2020 that brought
it to international interest. It is argued that greater historic and commemorative value
now resides in the plinth as symbolically vacant. Colston's commemoration by theVictorians remains explicit in the remaining plinth and plaques, though without thephysical presence of the effigy itself.
The statue and plinth have aesthetic value together. They are a traditional coupling ofa masonry pedestal and elevated representation of a celebrated personage thatderives ultimately from the traditions of the Classical world; separated this allusion isdamaged. Harmonious composition and proportions of both elements would besignificantly impacted by the loss of the statue. The visually attractive, lifelike, andhigh-quality modelling of the statue would be entirely lost to the Listed building, but
preserved elsewhere. The complementing materials of dark patinated statue, reliefs,
and dolphins set against the bright white Portland Stone would be undermined,though not entirely lost. The stepped form of the plinth would be impacted by the lossof its uppermost masonry section, the statue base, which gave added stature andmonumentality to the whole composition. The foreshortened plinth would retain adegree of aesthetic value in the late-Victorian dolphins and plaques, and thegenerally attractive proportions of the remaining structure, however, it would not havethe same visual and monumental prominence of the complete structure.
Communal value contributes to significance through the collective memory andexperience. The presence of a statue of a prominent slave trader is offensive tomany, whilst Colston's charitable works are well memorialised on the plinth andelsewhere in the city. In the present day, consciousness of the statue and works of
Colston were most frequently experienced when interventions to highlight Coston'srole in the slave trade, artworks or new plaques, or a continuing campaign to address
Colston's role became newsworthy events. Most Bristolians will have experienced
the statue and plinth as an historically controversial monument, whatever their viewmight be on Colston as a man. Despite dating from the 19th Century, what thestructure represented of 17th and 18th Century was how it was most frequently
appreciated. The toppling of the statue in controversial circumstances has escalated
communal value way beyond the boundaries of the city, with international interest
being focussed on the statue, plinth, and notable historic events of June 2020.
In conclusion, whilst the aesthetic value has been significantly impacted, and the
traditional historic and evidential values altered, the actual historic significance of thestatue and plinth have been increased through the actions of 2020 regardless of its
current state.
In considering whether the asset would be harmed by development it is also
worthwhile returning to the Planning (Listed building and Conservation Areas) Act
1990. The act allows for buildings to be added to the national list and protected fortheir 'special architectural and historic interest'. The terminology here is different fromthat of the NPPF and Historic England's heritage values, and lacks the same breadthand nuance. The Act prohibits 'alteration or extension in any manner which would
affect its character as a building of special architectural or historic interest, unless theworks are authorised' by the Local Authority. The protection of the architectural andhistoric characteristics of the statue and plinth are therefore the objective of the Act.
The statue and plinth have been moved several times within the broad area of themodern Centre without the architectural and historic character being impacted. This
demonstrates the location of statue and plinth has little bearing on its special historic

Item no. 1
Development Control Committee B – 21 February 2024
Application No. 23/04315/LA : Statue Of Edward Colston Colston Avenue Bristol BS1 4UA

interest or character, and that those characteristics might be protected and sustainedin alternative locations.
The NPPF requires decision making to 'sustain or enhance' heritage significance.
Where development would fail in those ambitions it can be judged to pose harm. The
development proposed, to remove the statue from the plinth and provide newinterpretation, would ensure the present significance is sustained and enhanced
through the new interpretive plaque. If the statue was still in place and the present
application refused, the overall heritage significance would be less than it is currently
experienced.
In summary, certain of the heritage values underpinning significance would be
harmed by the proposed development, others sustained and enhanced. Conversely,
should development be refused, the heritage values would be harmed in other ways.
However, the statue is an integral and key component of the Listed building and its
removal is, on balance, considered to cause harm to significance. The proposals toprotect the statue in an alternative location and provide interpretation on the standing
plinth help mitigate that harm. Overall, therefore, the harm to significance is not of a
substantial degree.
Has clear and convincing justification been given for the harm? (NPPF para
200):
Before now, Historic England have often posed the question, how else could the
purported public benefits be secured without harm to the asset? It's clear in thisinstance, that the totality of the public benefits could only be achieved through theremoval of the statue to a secure public collection. Allowing the statue to remain on
the plinth would expose it to further attack, damage and the risk of provoking further
civil unrest. It is no longer possible to protect the architectural and historic interest
with the statue and base attached to the plinth. Whilst the approach would usually be'retain and explain' assets of contested heritage, the now-international profile of thestatue and broader understanding of Colston's history in slave trading brought about
for the 2020 actions, have focussed negative attention on the celebration of Colston,and retention would be enticement to future acts of a similar violent nature.
The current condition of the bronze casting is very poor. Whilst it's damaged statecannot form part of our decision making, the statue itself cannot continue to form partof the Listed asset as a whole. We are satisfied that, due to the irreparable andunsafe condition of the statue, it would require recasting if it were to remain integral
to the plinth. Any replacement of the statue would not have the same heritage value
as the original Victorian casting, even if the appearance could be replicated. With a
facsimile in place of the original, the original integrity could not be fully restored. The
replacement would remain provocative, the target of vandalism and antisocial
behaviour, and the potential focus of civil unrest. A statue of Colston remaining on
the plinth is not a reasonable expectation.
What are the purported public benefits? (NPPF para 202):
The NPPF requires public benefits to be of an economic, social, or environmental
benefit. There is an overwhelming degree of public benefit in the removal of thestatue. It would minimise the potential for criminal damage and vandalism of the
Listed structure. The removal of the statue would encourage greater community
cohesion, where the presence of the statue of Colston in a highly trafficked public
place has stoked division. Development would help repair relationships between theItem no. 1
Development Control Committee B – 21 February 2024
Application No. 23/04315/LA : Statue Of Edward Colston Colston Avenue Bristol BS1 4UA

Council and communities, for whom years of inaction have caused upset andalienation.
It would ensure the statue forms part of a secure accredited museum collection withenhanced conservation requirements, where people have the option to view it should
they choose to. It would allow for the interpretation of contested heritage through theretention and contextualisation of the plinth with a new plaque, and the further
explanation of the heritage significance as part of museum collections. The enhanced
interpretation of statue and plinth would have an additional heritage benefit, where
the international significance of statue and plinth could be greatly enhanced.
There are economic benefits where the city's tourism industry would benefit from theinternational attention from the statue and its felling, though it is difficult to attribute a
specific degree of weight in this aspect. There would be economic benefit too, in
removing the significant financial obligation on the local taxpayer of having the
replace the statue where the original is irreparable.
Do public benefits outweigh harm where that harm has clear and convincing
justification? (NPPF para 202)
It's clear there are exceptional circumstances around the current application.
Significant, or 'great' weight is required in the planning balance in favour ofconservation of designated assets. Historic England define conservation as ''The
process of maintaining and managing change to a heritage asset in a way thatsustains and where appropriate enhances its significance.' We have indicated abovethat we consider that consenting to the removal of the statue from its plinth would
enable change to be managed in a way that could enhance the heritage values that
underpin significance.
We acknowledge the harm that would be caused to significance by consenting
removal of substantial proportion of the Listed structure, a key element of its
significance, and the resultant loss or aesthetic value and architectural character ofthe whole composition. That the present state is deteriorated, permanently damaged,
cannot be taken into account in forming a recommendation, however the NPPF
separates consideration of the deteriorated state of the asset from the assessment ofsignificance. As defined by Historic England, the heritage values underpinningsignificance are not entirely dependent on the objective physical state of the asset.
They allow for intangible aspects to contribute to special importance, how an asset is
experienced and appreciated, its meanings and memories, how it intellectuallystimulates and allows for interpretation. The significance would be enriched byformalising removal of the statue of Colston.
We consider the harm posed by development is justifiable, and that there would bevery significant and substantial public benefits to the removal of the statue from thepublic realm, its future protection in an accredited museum collection, thepreservation of the plinth in-situ, and the addition of an interpretive plaque. The
substantial public benefits outweigh the harm posed. In this assessment we haveplaced great weight in conservation of the heritage asset, that is, the sustaining andenhancing of its significance.
Following, and in reaction to, the widely publicised and controversial felling of thestatue, its dropping in the harbour, and subsequent national and international
attention focussed on contested heritage, the Government made a specific addition
to the NPPF:

Item no. 1
Development Control Committee B – 21 February 2024
Application No. 23/04315/LA : Statue Of Edward Colston Colston Avenue Bristol BS1 4UA'198. In considering any applications to remove or alter a historic statue, plaque,memorial, or monument (whether listed or not), local planning authorities should haveregard to the importance of their retention in situ and, where appropriate, of
explaining their historic and social context rather than removal.'
We have regarded the importance of retaining the statue and plinth together in situ,
and the required 'great weight' required in the conservation of designated heritage
assets. We welcome the Government's recognition of the importance of the historic
environment and the need to protect it unharmed. We have agreed that explaining of
the significance of the statue through a permanent plaque installed on the plinth iswholly appropriate and offers a degree of mitigation for the harm that would arise
from development.
Recommendation for decision:
Setting aside the current deteriorated state of the Listed structure, the public benefits
that would be brought about by development are substantial in degree. Any harm
posed to significance ' the collective heritage values ' is judged to be wholly
exceptional in this case, and justified in being overwhelmingly in the public interest.
The harm posed to significance would be permanent, but we do not consider that it
impacts the heritage values to be impaired to a substantial degree. Harm would be
mitigated somewhat in the setting up of a new interpretive plaque and the protectionof the statue of Colston in accredited museum collections.
The significant public benefits, social and to a lesser extent, brought about by
development would be of such a degree that we consider they outweigh the harm
posed; this is despite placing great weight in the planning balance in favour ofconservation.
We recommend the following:' That Listed building consent is granted subject to conditions.
' That the Secretary of State is notified of the Local Authorities intended decision' That Historic England are invited to amend the Listing description of the plinth toomit the statue element and explain the amended the historic interest of theremaining plinth.
Should the local Authority decide to approve development we request that thefollowing conditions are appended:
Prior to commencement of the relevant element, the following detailed drawings shallbe submitted to the Local Authority and approved in writing:a) 1:5 section and elevation drawings of the proposed plaque showing it's intended
materials, profiles, design, fixings, typeface, and wordingb) 1:10 elevation detail of the plinth showing the location of the proposed plaque andits fixings
Development should be completed in accordance with the approved drawings.
Reason: To safeguard the architectural and historic interest of the Listed structure
and the special character of the Conservation Area.
Prior to completion of the works, written confirmation must be provided to the Local
Authority that the statue and statue base have been formally entered as accessioned
artefacts in the Bristol Museums collection.
Reason: To ensure the public benefits of development are secured in their totality.

Item no. 1
Development Control Committee B – 21 February 2024
Application No. 23/04315/LA : Statue Of Edward Colston Colston Avenue Bristol BS1 4UA

Prior to the Completion of the works, a management plan for the display andinterpretation of the statue and statue base as part of Bristol Museums collections
should be submitted to the Local Authority and approved in writing.
Reason: To ensure the public benefits of development are secured in their totality.
Development must be fully implemented within three years of consent.
Reason: To ensure the public benefits of development are secured in their totality.”
Arrangements for handling heritage applications Direction 2021
As noted above, notification of the application has been given to Historic England and the
National Amenity societies. Based on the proposals, the comments received and noting therequirements of Arrangements for handling heritage applications Direction 2021, it is notconsidered that there is a need to refer the application to the Secretary of State.
EQUALITIES ASSESSMENT
The public sector equalities duty is engaged through the public body decision making
process.
Section 149 of the Equalities Act 2010 provides that a public authority must in the exercise of
its functions have due regard to:(a) eliminate discrimination, harassment, victimisation and any other conduct prohibited
under the Act(b) advance equality of opportunity between persons who share a relevant protectedcharacteristic and persons who do not share it(c) foster good relationships between persons who share a relevant characteristic and those
who do not share it.
During the determination of this application due regard has been given to the impact of thescheme upon people who share the protected characteristics of age, disability, gender
reassignment, marriage and civil partnership, pregnancy and maternity, race, religion or
belief, sex and sexual orientation.
Officers have had due regard to the Public Sector Equality Duty contained in the Equality Act
2010 when making the assessment set out in this report.
An Equalities Impact Assessment has been undertaken in relation to this decision which has
been reviewed by the Council’s Equality and Inclusion Team. The Assessment considers
whether the proposal would have any potentially adverse impacts on people based on theirprotected or other relevant characteristics. Disproportionate impacts on those with protectedcharacteristics has not been indicated by the Assessment. The Assessment considers thatthe proposal would have the potential to create benefits in terms of advancing equality ofopportunity between people who share a protected characteristic and those who don’t, andalso through the fostering good relations between people who share a protectedcharacteristic and those who don’t. It would also enable opportunity for a wide variety ofpeople to learn about the history of Bristol through the display of the statue in the M Shed
with associated accessible material.
RELEVANT POLICY
The following are considered to be relevant:Item no. 1
Development Control Committee B – 21 February 2024
Application No. 23/04315/LA : Statue Of Edward Colston Colston Avenue Bristol BS1 4UA

National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) – December 2023
Bristol Local Plan comprising Core Strategy (Adopted June 2011), Site Allocations andDevelopment Management Policies (Adopted July 2014) and (as appropriate) the Bristol
Central Area Plan (Adopted March 2015)
Other relevant documents/guidance:
Written Ministerial Statement by The Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local
Government “Planning and Heritage: Historic Statues, Plaques, Memorials and Monuments”
Monday 18 January 2021
Historic England: Checklist to Help Local Authorities Deal With Contested Heritage
Decisions
In determining this application, the Local Planning Authority has had regard to all relevant
policies of the Bristol Local Plan and relevant guidance.
COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT
Community consultation is not a formal requirement for non-major applications for Listed
Building Consent such as this.
By way of background, the applicant has however referred to the public consultation that has
been undertaken relating to the proposal, and in a section headed “Statement of Community
Involvement” contained within the submitted “Heritage and design statement” a summary of
the key results from the History Commission’s work has been provided.
The applicant submits that the approach for both the statue and plinth as set out by theapplication is the result of an extensive city wide consultation as detailed in ‘The Colston
Statue what next?’ History Commission Report. The ‘We Are Bristol’ History Commission
was set up in September 2020 by Marvin Rees, Mayor of Bristol, after the pulling down of
the statue of Edward Colston in the summer.
In the summer of 2021, the ‘We are Bristol’ History Commission consulted with the public
about the future of the Colston statue and the Colston plinth. People had a chance to see
the statue and learn about its history in a temporary display at the M Shed museum, as well
as view the display online. Alongside the display was a survey that invited people from
Bristol and beyond to share their views on a number of questions.
This survey was a chance for people to help to decide what happens to the statue and plinth.
The Mayor asked the History Commission to review the consultation and offer a number ofrecommendations in the light of it. The ‘We are Bristol’ History Commission Full Report titled
The Colston Statue: What Next? summarizes the findings and also suggests what might
happen next.
The applicant submits that key results from this consultation relevant to this application were
that:
•
•
•

80% of respondents agreed that the statue should be displayed in a museum
70% agreed that a new plaque should be added to the plinth
14,000 people responded to the consultation from a good representative sample ofthe city population, over 50% of whom were from BS postcodes (History Commission
short report pages 10-15)

Item no. 1
Development Control Committee B – 21 February 2024
Application No. 23/04315/LA : Statue Of Edward Colston Colston Avenue Bristol BS1 4UA

KEY ISSUE
IS THE HARM TO THE SIGNIFICANCE OF THE GRADE II LISTED BUILDINGACCEPTABLE?
Legislation and Policy
Under the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990, listed building
consent from the local planning authority is required for the removal or alteration of a statue,
plaque, memorial or monument which is designated as a listed building, or which forms partof a listed building, where it affects the special historic or architectural character of the listedbuilding.
Section 16 of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 states that inconsidering whether to grant listed building consent for any works the local planning
authority shall have special regard to the desirability of preserving the building or its setting
or any features of special architectural or historic interest which it possesses.
There is also a general duty in respect of conservation areas when exercising planning
functions under Section 72 of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act
1990, which states that “special attention shall be paid to the desirability of preserving or
enhancing the character or appearance of that area.”
Bristol Core Strategy (2011) Policy BCS22 seeks to ensure that development proposals
safeguard or enhance heritage assets in the city with Policy DM31 in the Site Allocations andDevelopment Management Policies (2014) expressing that alterations to buildings shouldpreserve or enhance historic settings. Policy BCS21 also requires new development inBristol to deliver high quality urban design and sets out criteria to measure developments
against including the need for development to contribute positively to an area's characterand identity, creating or reinforcing local distinctiveness.
Policy DM26 more specifically states that the design of development proposals should
contribute towards local character and distinctiveness by responding appropriately to theheight, scale, massing, shape, form and proportion of existing buildings, building lines,
skylines and roofscapes. Policy DM27 further expresses that the layout, form, pattern andarrangement of streets, buildings and landscapes should contribute towards to creation ofquality urban space and that the height, scale and massing of development should beappropriate to the immediate context, site constraints, character of adjoining streets andspaces and setting. Policy DM30 further states that any extensions and alterations toexisting buildings should respect the siting, scale, form, proportions, materials and overalldesign and character of the host building and broader street scene. DM30 further states that
extensions should be physically and visually subservient to the host building, including its
roof form.
Section 2 of the NPPF sets out the aim of achieving sustainable development andParagraph 8 describes three overarching objectives for the planning system. These
objectives are as follows:••

an economic objective – to help build a strong, responsive and competitive economy,
by ensuring that sufficient land of the right types is available in the right places and at
the right time to support growth, innovation and improved productivity; and byidentifying and coordinating the provision of infrastructure
a social objective – to support strong, vibrant and healthy communities, by ensuringthat a sufficient number and range of homes can be provided to meet the needs ofItem no. 1
Development Control Committee B – 21 February 2024
Application No. 23/04315/LA : Statue Of Edward Colston Colston Avenue Bristol BS1 4UA•

present and future generations; and by fostering well-designed beautiful and safe
places, with accessible services and open spaces that reflect current and futureneeds and support communities’ health, social and cultural well-being; andan environmental objective – to protect and enhance our natural, built and historic
environment; including making effective use of land, improving biodiversity, using
natural resources prudently, minimising waste and pollution, and mitigating andadapting to climate change, including moving to a low carbon economy.

The following assessment of the proposed works has been undertaken having regard to
Section 16 of the NPPF, “Conserving and enhancing the historic environment”.
Paragraph 195 of the NPPF states that heritage assets (including sites and buildings of local
historic value to those of the highest significance) are “an irreplaceable resource, and should
be conserved in a manner appropriate to their significance, so that they can be enjoyed fortheir contribution to the quality of life of existing and future generations.”
What is the Significance of the Heritage Asset? (Paragraphs 200 and 201 of the NPPF)
When determining applications affecting heritage assets, the NPPF requires throughParagraph 200, that local planning authorities should require an applicant to describe thesignificance of any heritage assets affected, including any contribution made by their setting.
The NPPF defines “significance” as “the value of a heritage asset to this and future
generations because of its heritage interest. The interest may be archaeological,architectural, artistic or historic. Significance derives not only from a heritage asset’s physicalpresence but also from its setting”.
The applicant has submitted a Heritage and Design Statement. This includes information
regarding historic significance of the specific asset, which is the statue and plinth. This isconsidered to be sufficient to understand the potential impact of the proposal on the asset’s
significance. The information provided by the applicant regarding significance is provided inthree sections: Edward Colston; The statue; Significance following 7th June 2020.
The applicant has set out the following in relation to the significance of the asset following 7thJune 2020:“The actions in June 2020 has caused a high degree of harm to the asset’s
significance. The direct connection between the statue and the plinth as well as thestatue’s setting within the College Green Conservation Area adjacent to several otherdesignated monuments has obviously now been lost.
However, the events of 7th June 2020 reached a global audience bringing
international recognition to Bristol, Edward Colston, contested heritage in general
and wider injustices.
The now fallen statue and empty plinth are monuments to an international story
about
enslavement, misguided Victorian commemoration, and modern reactions toinjustice.
However, the historic significance of both statue and plinth has now arguably
increased. They will always be connected with the moment the statuecommemorating a man who had direct connections with the enslavement, torture anddeath of thousands of people was torn down by demonstrators.

Item no. 1
Development Control Committee B – 21 February 2024
Application No. 23/04315/LA : Statue Of Edward Colston Colston Avenue Bristol BS1 4UA

In the weeks and months since, the plinth and surrounding public realm has becomea dynamic space, being the focus of conversations and interventions such as the Jen
Reid statue and other temporary pieces.”
Paragraph 201 of the NPPF states that Local planning authorities should “identify andassess the particular significance of any heritage asset that may be affected by a proposal(including by development affecting the setting of a heritage asset) taking account of theavailable evidence and any necessary expertise. They should take this into account when
considering the impact of a proposal on a heritage asset, to avoid or minimise any conflict
between the heritage asset’s conservation and any aspect of the proposal.”
In addition to the above, the Listing Description notes that the statue of Edward Colston isdesignated at Grade II for the following principal reasons:•••“A handsome statue, erected in the late C19 to commemorate a late C17 figure; theresulting contrast of styles is handled with confidence
The statue is of particular historical interest, the subject being Edward Colston,
Bristol’s most famous philanthropist, now also noted for his involvement in the slave
tradeGroup value with other Bristol memorials: a statue of Edmund Burke, the Cenotaph,
and a drinking fountain commemorating the Industrial and Fine Art Exhibition of1893”

The Conservation comments also refer to Historic England’s guidance regarding significanceand heritage values, which includes: evidential value, historic value, aesthetic value, andcommunal value. This analysis can be read in full above, however they conclude that “whilst
the aesthetic value has been significantly impacted, and the traditional historic and evidential
values altered, the actual historic significance of the statue and plinth have been increased
through the actions of 2020 regardless of its current state.” Insofar as the impacts on theConservation Area are concerned, the Conservation comments note that the proposal would
have the potential to impact the character of the City and Queen Square, and College Green
Conservation Areas. In particular the group value of the collection of Listed civic monuments
along the Centre would also have their setting impacted.
Historic England have also commented on the significance of the asset. This can also beread in full above, and they have concluded that “the significant of the Colston monument, inthe language of the NPPF, lies in its artistic and historic interest, both of which areconsiderable.”
Also of note are the views of the Inspector in their consideration of the non-determination
appeals for the Jen Reid temporary art installation (appeal references
APP/Z0116/W/20/3260461 and APP/Z0116/Y/21/3269256), where the Inspector noted thatthe significance of the asset was artistic and historic.
Taking into account the description of significance provided by the applicant and theavailable evidence and expertise relevant to this application for listed building consent, it isconsidered that the Local Planning Authority has sufficient information to identify and assess
the particular significance of the heritage asset and to take this into account when
considering the impacts. This significance is considered to be principally artistic and historic,with the historic significance of the statue and plinth having been increased.

Item no. 1
Development Control Committee B – 21 February 2024
Application No. 23/04315/LA : Statue Of Edward Colston Colston Avenue Bristol BS1 4UA

Assessment and Potential Mitigation
Historic England have advised that legally, the statue of Colston and its plinth remain intact
and in situ, and as such this is the correct starting point in planning terms. This is also theapproach that the Inspector took in considering the non-determination appeals for the Jen
Reid temporary art installation.
Regard must also be had to Paragraph 202 of the NPPF which states “Where there isevidence of deliberate neglect of, or damage to, a heritage asset, the deteriorated state of
the heritage asset should not be taken into account in any decision.”
The toppling of the statue from the plinth is considered to be evidence of damage having
regard to the wording of the above paragraph, so the deteriorated state cannot be taken into
account by the Local Planning Authority in the decision. As Conservation note however, thiscreates something of a paradox, where a degree of historic significance of the asset may
now arise from its effective separation. Whilst the NPPF states that the deteriorated statecannot be taken into account in the decision, Conservation also note it does not appear topreclude that evidence of damage having increased the heritage significance or theassessment of that significance as part of assessing against the tests of the NPPF.
Paragraph 205 of the NPPF states “when considering the impact of a proposed developmenton the significance of a designated heritage asset, great weight should be given to theasset’s conservation (and the more important the asset, the greater the weight should be).
This is irrespective of whether any potential harm amounts to substantial harm, total loss orless than substantial harm to its significance.”
Accordingly, the Local Planning Authority must give great weight to the asset’s conservation
when considering the impact of the proposal on the significance of the heritage asset andundertaking the assessment that now follows.
Is there harm posed to the significance of the Listed Building by the works?
(Paragraph 206 of the NPPF)
The applicant submits that the harm arising from the proposal would be less than substantial
harm.
They have noted in their supporting statement that the NPPF states that where there isevidence of deliberate neglect of, or damage to, a heritage asset, the deteriorated state of
the heritage asset should not be taken into account in any decision.
The applicant considers that a high degree of harm to the statue and plinth has alreadyoccurred as a result of the events of June 2020. Their view is that the significance of theasset has not been entirely lost and in some aspects, such as historic interest the asset’s
significance has increased, as detailed above.
The applicant further advises that the museum has recovered and placed the statue in its
stores. A condition survey and conservation work to the statue has taken place as set out inthe accompanying documents. The applicant states that the museum’s ‘Collections Care &Preservation Policy and Strategy’ will ensure that no further harm comes to the statue andthis care extends to any display of the artefact.
The applicant also acknowledges that the proposed plaque on the plinth will impact on thecharacter and appearance of the grade II listed asset and will cause a level of harm to theasset. The size of the plaque has been kept to the minimum required to neatly cover theItem no. 1
Development Control Committee B – 21 February 2024
Application No. 23/04315/LA : Statue Of Edward Colston Colston Avenue Bristol BS1 4UA

existing damage to the stonework and the materials have been chosen to complement theaesthetic of the statue and its pedestal.
Having regard to the comments received from Bristol City Council’s Conservation team andHistoric England, it is clear that there is some difference of view from consultees as to thelevel of harm to the significance of heritage asset that would occur as a result of the works.
Based on the comments received this appears to have arisen in part due to the extent towhich the events of June 2020 are considered to have affected the significance of the asset,
having regard to the different types of interest described by the NPPF and the Historic
England Guidance.
The Council’s Conservation team considers that the harm to significance is “not of a
substantial degree”, and so would be less than substantial harm in the terms of the NPPF.
The Council’s Conservation team have commented that “certain of the heritage values
underpinning significance would be harmed by the proposed development, others sustainedand enhanced. Conversely, should development be refused, the heritage values would be
harmed in other ways. However, the statue is an integral and key component of the Listedbuilding and its removal is, on balance, considered to cause harm to significance. The
proposals to protect the statue in an alternative location and provide interpretation on thestanding plinth help mitigate that harm. Overall, therefore, the harm to significance is not of a
substantial degree.”On the other hand, Historic England considers that the harm would be substantial harm in
the terms of the NPPF. Historic England have commented that “the removal of the statue of
Colston from the monument of which it forms part would severely impair the monument’s
significance. The statue is the raison d’etre of the monument itself. It represents the man themonument commemorates and is the most artistically important part of the whole. The
removal of the statue would take away much of the monument’s historic and artistic interest.
This notwithstanding, the plinth itself would remain of some interest. It is a substantial
structure, carefully composed and richly adorned, and is of historic and artistic interest in its
own right.”
Of relevance to how harm should be viewed are also the conclusions reached by the
Inspector in considering the non-determination appeals for the Jen Reid temporary art
installation. The Inspector considered the significance of the designated heritage asset, as
noted above, and considered that the proposal under consideration in that case, noting it
would be for a temporary period and the heritage value of the plinth itself, would result inharm that would be less than substantial.
Having regard to the application and comments received, officers consider on balance thatthe works would lead to less than substantial harm to the significance of the designatedheritage asset.
Has clear and convincing justification been given for the harm? (NPPF para 206):
Paragraph 206 of the NPPF states that “any harm to, or loss of, the significance of adesignated heritage asset (from its alteration or destruction, or from development within its
setting), should require clear and convincing justification.”
There is considered to be clear and convincing justification for the harm that would occur.
The comments from the Council’s Conservation team are considered to address thissuccinctly:

Item no. 1
Development Control Committee B – 21 February 2024
Application No. 23/04315/LA : Statue Of Edward Colston Colston Avenue Bristol BS1 4UA“It's clear in this instance, that the totality of the public benefits could only be achieved
through the removal of the statue to a secure public collection. Allowing the statue to remainon the plinth would expose it to further attack, damage and the risk of provoking further civil
unrest. It is no longer possible to protect the architectural and historic interest with the statue
and base attached to the plinth. Whilst the approach would usually be 'retain and explain'assets of contested heritage, the now-international profile of the statue and broader
understanding of Colston's history in slave trading brought about for the 2020 actions, havefocussed negative attention on the celebration of Colston, and retention would beenticement to future acts of a similar violent nature.
The current condition of the bronze casting is very poor. Whilst it's damaged state cannot
form part of our decision making, the statue itself cannot continue to form part of the Listed
asset as a whole. We are satisfied that, due to the irreparable and Insafe condition of thestatue, it would require recasting if it were to remain integral to the plinth. Any replacement of
the statue would not have the same heritage value as the original Victorian casting, even if
the appearance could be replicated. With a facsimile in place of the original, the original
integrity could not be fully restored. The replacement would remain provocative, the target ofvandalism and antisocial behaviour, and the potential focus of civil unrest. A statue of
Colston remaining on the plinth is not a reasonable expectation.”
Do the public benefits of the proposal outweigh the less than substantial harm?
(Paragraph 208 of the NPPF)
Where works would lead to less than substantial harm that harm should be weighed against
the public benefits of the proposal. Officers consider that less than substantial harm would
be caused to the significance of the listed building and also the Conservation Area. Balanced
against this the applicant has identified public benefits.
They submit that the public benefits of providing an improved historic contextual balance tothe statue and plinth that addresses this sensitive contested heritage issue outweighs thisharm.
To summarise the applicant’s justification for the proposals, they consider that placing of thestatue in the care of the M Shed museum will ensure its long term preservation. This would
be accompanied by contextual information and a new plaque on the Colston avenue plinth.
The original plaques would remain in place. The applicant has provided some suggested
wording for the new plaque, as follows:“On 13th November 1895, a statue of Edward Colston (1636 - 1721) was unveiled
here celebrating him as a city benefactor. In the late twentieth and early twenty-first
century, the celebration of Colston was increasingly challenged given his prominentrole in the enslavement of African people.
On 7th June 2020, the statue was pulled down during Black Lives Matter protests
and rolled into the harbour. Following consultation with the city in 2021, the statue
entered the collections of Bristol City Council’s museums.”
The applicant proposes that the new plaque would be cast in bronze and measure 600mm
wide by 400mm high and fixed to the pedestal using grouting rods set within mortar joints. It
should be noted that Listed Building Consent was granted in November 2018 underapplication reference 18/03688/LA for the addition of a new bronze plaque to the stonepedestal which was of similar dimensions.

Item no. 1
Development Control Committee B – 21 February 2024
Application No. 23/04315/LA : Statue Of Edward Colston Colston Avenue Bristol BS1 4UA

The applicant also submits that “Any reinstatement [of the statue] would cause additional
upset and disgust and potentially lead to further public order and health and safety risks aswell as damage community cohesion.”
In a Written Ministerial Statement made to Parliament on 18 January 2021, the then
Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government, stated about statues
and monuments that “decisions to remove any such heritage assets owned by a local
authority should be taken in accordance with its constitution, following consultation with thelocal community and interested parties, and the rationale for a decision to remove should betransparent.” This Written Ministerial Statement is also a material consideration when
deciding applications.
As noted above, the approach for both the statue and plinth is the result of an “extensive citywide consultation” as detailed in ‘The Colston Statue what next?’ History Commission
Report, the key results from which have been summarised above.
In their comments on this application, Historic England have noted that the report makes
clear that opinion, although broadly in favour of the proposals, is also divided. It is noted thatthe objections received raise concerns regarding this process in terms of the options
presented, but this is considered to be beyond the scope of the assessment of thisapplication.
Historic England however “acknowledge the seriousness with which this exercise has been
conducted” and considers that “this approach seems wholly in accordance with theSecretary of State’s requirement that councils consult communities when considering suchproposals.” Officers consider that the History Commission’s Report should be given
significant weight and that the aims of the Written Ministerial Statement appear to have beenmet.
Whilst the Council’s Conservation team consider that there would be an overwhelming
degree of public benefit associated with the proposal and note specifically that the proposal
would minimise the potential for criminal damage and vandalism of the listed structure, andthat greater community cohesion would be encouraged and relationships repaired.
They also comment that the statue would form part of a secure accredited museum
collection with enhanced conservation requirements, where people have the option to view it
should they choose to. The proposals would also provide opportunity for interpreting
contested heritage through the retention and contextualisation of the plinth with a newplaque, and the further explanation of the heritage significance as part of museum
collections.
They consider that the enhanced interpretation of statue and plinth would have an additional
heritage benefit, where the international significance of statue and plinth could be greatly
enhanced. They also comment that there would be economic benefits associated with
tourism, although it would be difficult to quantify this benefit, along with the costs that may be
incurred associated with the damaged condition of the statue.
There is therefore considered to be clear and convincing justification for the harm. This harm
would be less than substantial harm and this has harm has been weighed against the publicbenefits of the proposal as required by Paragraph 208 of the NPPF. Great weight has also
been given to the asset’s conservation when considering the impact of the proposal on thesignificance of the heritage asset.

Item no. 1
Development Control Committee B – 21 February 2024
Application No. 23/04315/LA : Statue Of Edward Colston Colston Avenue Bristol BS1 4UA

Returning to the aims of achieving sustainable development as set out in Section 2 of the
NPPF, it is considered that the social objective of supporting communities’ health, social andcultural well-being would be central to the public benefits that would be achieved.
Environmental objectives would also be met of protecting and enhancing our built andhistoric environment.
Paragraph 204 of the NPPF states “In considering any applications to remove or alter ahistoric statue, plaque, memorial or monument (whether listed or not), local planning
authorities should have regard to the importance of their retention in situ and, whereappropriate, of explaining their historic and social context rather than removal.” This can besummarised as ‘retain and explain’. The Local Planning authority must have regard to theimportance of this in determining this application.
Whilst the applicant submits that this will address the ‘retain and explain’ requirements of thisparagraph of the NPPF, it is considered that the proposal would conflict with this paragraph,as the statue would be moved from the plinth and put on display in the M Shed museum withaccompanying contextual information however combined with a proposed new plaque on theplinth. Whilst the applicant has set out some suggested wording for this, which it is expected
would be confirmed outside of the planning process, it is recommended that the final details
are to be secured by condition to ensure these can be considered.
Regard has been had to the importance of the retention of the statue in situ together with theplinth, however when also considering the great weight required in the conservation ofdesignated heritage assets and the substantial public benefits mentioned above, it isconsidered that the addition of a new permanent plaque installed on the plinth is appropriate
in the circumstances in terms of contextualising the empty plinth the fallen statue, noting
other the public benefits associated with the proposal.
Assessment to be undertaken if the proposal is considered to constitute Substantial
Harm
Should the Committee be of the view that the harm to the heritage asset would besubstantial harm in the terms of the NPPF, Paragraph 207 would apply. This states thefollowing:“Where a proposed development will lead to substantial harm to (or total loss of significanceof) a designated heritage asset, local planning authorities should refuse consent, unless it
can be demonstrated that the substantial harm or total loss is necessary to achieve
substantial public benefits that outweigh that harm or loss, or all of the following apply:(a) the nature of the heritage asset prevents all reasonable uses of the site; and(b) no viable use of the heritage asset itself can be found in the medium term throughappropriate marketing that will enable its conservation; and(c) conservation by grant-funding or some form of not for profit, charitable or public
ownership is demonstrably not possible; and(d) the harm or loss is outweighed by the benefit of bringing the site back into use.”
It is important to note that this test requires consideration to be given as to whether thesubstantial harm is necessary to achieve substantial public benefits that outweigh that harm.

Item no. 1
Development Control Committee B – 21 February 2024
Application No. 23/04315/LA : Statue Of Edward Colston Colston Avenue Bristol BS1 4UA

Conclusion
It is therefore concluded that the public benefits would outweigh the less than substantial
harm posed. In reaching this conclusion, officers have given great weight to the heritage
asset’s conservation, that is, the sustaining and enhancing of its significance.
The public benefits are considered to outweigh the less than substantial harm. There is clear
and convincing justification for the harm.
The proposal is therefore considered to be in accordance with the requirements of the
NPPF, Bristol Core Strategy (2011) Policy BCS22 which seeks to ensure that development
proposals safeguard or enhance heritage assets in the city, with Policy DM31 in the Site
Allocations and Development Management Policies (2014) expressing that alterations tobuildings should preserve or enhance historic settings.
The statutory provisions of Section 16 of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation
Areas) Act 1990, which states that in considering whether to grant listed building consent for
any works the local planning authority shall have special regard to the desirability ofpreserving the building or its setting or any features of special architectural or historicinterest which it possesses. Have also been taken into account and are considered to havebeen compiled with.
Returning to the general duty to under Section 72 of the Planning (Listed Buildings andConservation Areas) Act 1990 which relates to duty in respect of conservation areas when
exercising planning functions, special attention has also been paid to the desirability ofpreserving or enhancing the character or appearance of that area and the public benefits
would outweigh the less than substantial harm posed.
It is therefore recommended that Listed Building Consent be granted. Conditions arerecommended regarding the implementation of the proposed works.
RECOMMENDATION
Grant Subject to Conditions
1) The development hereby permitted shall begin before the expiration of three years fromthe date of this permission.
Reason: As required by Section 18 of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation
Areas) Act 1990, as amended by Section 51 of the Planning and Compulsory Act 2004.
2) Prior to installation of the plaque, the following detailed drawings shall be submitted to the
Local Authority and approved in writing:a) 1:5 section and elevation drawings of the proposed plaque showing it's intended
materials, profiles, design, fixings, typeface, and wordingb) 1:10 elevation detail of the plinth showing the location of the proposed plaque and its
fixings
The plaque shall be installed no later than 12 months from the date of the statue and basegoing on display as part of the Bristol Museums collections, unless otherwise agreed inwriting with the Local Planning Authority.

Item no. 1
Development Control Committee B – 21 February 2024
Application No. 23/04315/LA : Statue Of Edward Colston Colston Avenue Bristol BS1 4UA

Reason: To safeguard the architectural and historic interest of the Listed structure and thespecial character of the Conservation Area and to ensure the public benefits of development
are secured in their totality.
3) Prior to completion of the works, written confirmation must be provided to the Local
Authority that the statue and statue base have been formally entered as accessioned
artefacts in the Bristol Museums collection. The statue and base shall be retained asaccessioned artefacts unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority.
Reason: To ensure the public benefits of development are secured in their totality.
4) Prior to the completion of the works, a management plan for the display and interpretationof the statue and statue base as part of Bristol Museums collections should be submitted to
the Local Authority and approved in writing. Once approved, the management plan should
be fully implemented unless otherwise agreed.
Reason: To ensure the public benefits of development are secured in their totality.
5) List of approved plans and drawings
The development shall conform in all aspects with the plans and details shown in theapplication as listed below, unless variations are agreed by the Local Planning Authority inorder to discharge other conditions attached to this decision.
Colston Statue Location Plan, received 7th November 2023
M Shed Location Plan, received 7th November 2023
Heritage and Design Statement, May 2023, received 7th November 2023
Bristol Museums & Art Gallery Condition Report, received 7th November 2023
Bristol Culture Collection Care and Preservation Policy & Strategy 2017-2022, received 8th
February 2024
Colston Statue Treatment Report, received 8th February 2024

Supporting Documents
1.

Statue of Edward Colston, Colston Avenue
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.

Colston Avenue Location Plan
M Shed Location Plan
Heritage and Design Statement
Bristol History Commission Report The Colston Statue What Next?
Colston Statue Condition Report
Colston Statue Treatment Report
Bristol Culture Collection Care and Preservation Policy & Strategy
Equality Impact Assessment

Heritage and design statement

Colston Statue,
Implementing the We Are Bristol History
Commission’s Recommendations

May 2023

Contents

1 Introduction

Page no 4

1.1 Background
1.2 Planning policy context
2 Historic significance		

Page no 6

2.1 Edward Colston
2.2 The statue
2.3 Significance following 7th June 2020
3 The recommendations

Page no 10

3.1 The Statue of Edward Colston (1-3)
3.2 The empty plinth (4)3.3 Assessment of harm
3.4 Statement of community involvement
3.5 Conclusion

Appendices
History_Commission_Short_Report_Final.pdf
Colston Condition Report Oct 2020.pdf
Colston statue treatment report Oct 2020.pdf
Bristol Culture Collections Care & Preservation
Policy and Strategy 17-22.pdf

2Colston Statue		
Heritage and design statement

May 2023

May 2023

Colston Statue		
Heritage and design statement

31 Introduction

1.1 Background

1.2 Planning policy context

In 2023, Bristol City Council will be applying forlisted building consent to implement certain
recommendations for the future of the Colston
statue and empty plinth as proposed by the History
Commission.

Despite the events of June 2020, the statueof Edward Colston, now stored in the M Shed
museum, remains a grade II listed heritage
asset along with the surviving plinth on Colston
Avenue. Consequently, any works to the statue
and plinth will require listed building consent inaccordance with the Planning (Listed Buildings andConservation Areas) Act 1990.

On 7th June 2020, the grade II listed bronze statueof Edward Colston was pulled down from its plinth
on Colston Avenue during a Black Lives Matterdemonstration. After being rolled through the City
Centre, the statue was dumped into the Floating
Harbour by a crowd of demonstrators.
The statue was recovered from the harbour andin the summer of 2021 went on display in themuseum. While on display, Bristol City Council andthe History Commission that had been establishedby the authority following the events in June, ran
a public consultation process with visitors to theexhibition and online. This consultation asked
what people thought should now happen to thestatue and surviving plinth in the City Centre. The
results of this consultation process informed areport by the commission that concluded with 6
recommendations for the future of the statue andplinth.
Of the six recommendations (see below, section 3),
1-3 concerning the statue will require listed building
consent to fulfil. Recommendation 4 concerning
the empty plinth proposes that a new plaque isinstalled. There is an existing consent for a plaque(18/03688/LA) and it is the intention to include
the installation of a plaque with the Commission’s
proposed wording as part of this forthcoming
application.

4

Other relevant planning policies and guidance
include:͹ National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF),
Section 12
͹ Bristol Local Plan, policies BCS22 and DM31
In accordance with paragraphs 194, 198 and 200202 of the NPPF this document:͹ Provides a statement of significance for the
statue and plinth in their current state͹ Details how the Council proposes to retain andexplain the asset’s story
͹ Includes an assessment of any harm thatdelivering the recommendations pose for thesignificance of the asset
͹ Provides clear and convincing justification forany potential harm
͹ Sets out public benefits that will result from theCouncil’s proposal

Colston Statue		
Heritage and design statement

May 2023

Plan showing the location of the plinth
Not to scale

May 2023

Colston Statue		
Heritage and design statement5

2 Historic significance

2.1 Edward Colston

2.2 The statue

Edward Colston was born in 1636 within the
Temple area of Bristol. He was the son of a wealthy
merchant and became a member of the Societyof Merchant Venturers, an alderman of Bristol
and later in life represented the city as a Tory MP
in Parliament, although he lived most of his life in
London, dying in Mortlake in 1721.

Following the creation of a fixed bridge, St
Augustine’s Bridge to replace the earlier
Drawbridge in 1890, the northern end of the
Floating Harbour became inaccessible to shipping.
Consequently between 1892 and 1893 the River
Frome was culverted from the Stone Bridge at the
Quay Head, near to the present Electricity House,
and St Augustine’s Bridge close to the end of Clare
Street.

He gave enormous sums from his wealth tocharitable causes establishing Colston’s Almshouseon St Michael’s Hill in 1691 and founding the
Colston’s Hospital boys school in 1710.
Despite this benevolence Colston was selective
about who could receive the benefits of his
charity restricting beneficiaries to those fromsimilar religious (Anglican) and political (Tory)backgrounds.
There is little doubt about the source of the
majority of Colston’s wealth. As an investor in thesugar trade Colston will have directly contributed
from profits derived from the production ofslave produced goods and as a member of theRoyal African Company his connection with theenslavement of Africans is even more explicit.

The space that resulted from this work was used
as a venue for the temporary Bristol Industrial
and Fine Art Exhibition in 1893 before becoming
Magpie Park.
After the exhibition there were proposals forcommemorative statues to be erected in the newpark. The first of these was a statue of Edmund
Burke, former Whig MP for Bristol, by the sculptor
James Haverd Thomas. This sculpture was a gift tothe city from William Henry Wills and was erectedin 1894.

Dimensions:
Statue - 2.6m high with 800mm
square baseStone pedestal - 3.15m highFour relief plaques - 950mm high,
650mm wide
The principle relief plaque states:“ERECTED : BY : / CITIZENS of
BRISTOL / AS A MEMORIAL/ OF
ONE OF THE MOST / VIRTUOUS :AND / WISE : SONS OF / THEIR :CITY / A.D. 1895”

At the same time as the statue of Burke wasbeing proposed and designed there were calls,
mainly from the printer J.W. Arrowsmith, for a
statue of Colston to be added to the park. Fundraising for this statue had limited success and it isgenerally believed that the costs were covered by
Arrowsmith himself.
The bronze statue was created by John Cassidy anderected in 1895. It was cast at Coalbookdale andis consequently one of the last examples of thisconnection, Abraham Darby the founder of the
Coalbrookdale works and Thomas Goldney a key
investor in the company both being Bristolians.

6

The grade II listed bronze statue
stood on a Hopton Wood stonepedestal with further bronze
plaques and bronze figurative‘dolphins’ fixed to the four sides
and corners of the pedestal.

Colston Statue		
Heritage and design statement

May 2023

Statue of Edward Colston, c.1900

May 2023

Colston Statue		
Heritage and design statement72.3 Significance following 7th June 2020
The actions in June 2020 has caused a high degreeof harm to the asset’s significance. The directconnection between the statue and the plinth
as well as the statue’s setting within the College
Green Conservation Area adjacent to several otherdesignated monuments has obviously now been
lost.
However, the events of 7th June 2020 reached a
global audience bringing international recognition
to Bristol, Edward Colston, contested heritage in
general and wider injustices.
The now fallen statue and empty plinth aremonuments to an international story aboutenslavement, misguided Victorian commemoration,and modern reactions to injustice.

Above and left, photographs of theplinth taken 8th June, 2020

However, the historic significance of both statue
and plinth has now arguably increased. They
will always be connected with the moment thestatue commemorating a man who had directconnections with the enslavement, torture anddeath of thousands of people was torn down bydemonstrators.
In the weeks and months since, the plinth andsurrounding public realm has become a dynamic
space, being the focus of conversations andinterventions such as the Jen Reid statue and othertemporary pieces.

8

Colston Statue		
Heritage and design statement

May 2023

May 2023

Colston Statue		
Heritage and design statement93 The recommendations

3.2 The empty plinth

3.1 The Statue of Edward Colston
The first three recommendations relate to
the future of the statue currently stored at M
Shed. Attached to this pre-application are three
supporting documents produced by the museum:͹ Colston Condition Report Oct 2020
͹ Colston statue treatment report Oct 2020
͹ Bristol Culture Collections Care & Preservation
Policy and Strategy 17-22

Recommendation 4
That the former Colston statue plinth, along withthe original plaques, remain in place and that a newplaque is installed that briefly and factually explains
when and why the statue was put up and taken
down.

The plaque will be cast in bronze and measure
600mm wide by 400mm high and fixed to thepedestal using grouting rods set within mortar
joints as shown.

The following wording for the new plaque issuggested:

Recommendation 1
That the Colston statue enters the permanentcollection of the Bristol City Council Museums
service.

Design Specification from consented listedbuilding appliacation 18/03688/LA

The face of the statue following the events of June 2020

Recommendation 2
That the statue is preserved in its current state
and the opportunity to reflect this in the listing
description is explored with Historic England.

On 13th November 1895, a statue of Edward
Colston (1636 - 1721) was unveiled herecelebrating him as a city benefactor. In the latetwentieth and early twenty-first century, thecelebration of Colston was increasingly challenged
given his prominent role in the enslavement ofAfrican people.
On 7th June 2020, the statue was pulled down
during Black Lives Matter protests and rolled
into the harbour. Following consultation with thecity in 2021, the statue entered the collections ofBristol City Council’s museums.

Recommendation 3
That the statue be exhibited, drawing on theprinciples and practice of the temporary M Sheddisplay where the statue was lying horizontally.
That attention is paid to presenting the history
in a nuanced, contextualised and engaging way,
including information on the broader history of theenslavement of people of African descent.

Mortar joints on pedestal

10

Colston Statue		
Heritage and design statement

May 2023

May 2023

Colston Statue		
Heritage and design statement113.3 Assessment of harm
Paragraph 196 of the NPPF states that where thereis evidence of deliberate neglect of, or damage
to, a heritage asset, the deteriorated state of theheritage asset should not be taken into account inany decision.

Consequently we have assessed this harm to bea high degree of less than substantial and feelthat the public benefits of providing an improved
historic contextual balance to the statue and plinththat addresses this sensitive contested heritage
issue out weighs this harm.

The high degree of harm to the statue and plinth
has already occurred as a result of the events ofJune 2020. Our view is that the significance of
the asset has not been entirely lost and in some
aspects, such as historic interest the asset’s
significance has increased as detailed above(section 2.3).
The museum has recovered and placed the statue
in its stores. A condition survey and conservation
work to the statue has taken place as set out in theaccompanying documents.

3.4 Statement of community involvement
The History Commission’s recommendations are
the result of an extensive city wide consultation
process as detailed in the accompanying ‘The
Colston Statue what next?’ report.
The key results from this consultation relevant tothis application were that:͹ 80% of respondees agreed that the statue
should be displayed in a museum
͹ 70% agreed that a new plaque should be added
to the plinth͹ 14,000 people responded to the consultationfrom a good representative sample of the city
population, over 50% of whom were from BS
postcodes (History Commission short reportpages 10-15)
Extract from the History Commission report

The museum’s ‘Collections Care & Preservation
Policy and Strategy’ will ensure that no further
harm comes to the statue and this care extends toany display of the artefact.
As the proposed plaque on the plinth will impact on
the character and appearance of this grade II listed
asset it will cause a level of harm to the asset.
The size of the plaque has been kept to theminimum required to neatly cover the existingdamage to the stonework and the materials havebeen chosen to complement the aesthetic of thestatue and its pedestal.

12

Colston Statue		
Heritage and design statement

May 2023

May 2023

Colston Statue		
Heritage and design statement133.5 Conclusion“Historic England’s approach to contested heritage,
to which the Written Ministerial Statement refers, isto advocate the retention and conservation of such
heritage, coupled with the provision of powerful andlong-lasting interpretation that tells the full story of
the monument or building concerned.
Historic England has already stated publicly that we
recognise that other considerations might outweighthose in favour of reinstating Colston’s statue, evenif accompanied by reinterpretation which is both
powerful and long-lasting,”‘A Surge of Power (Jen Reid)’ appeal statement onbehalf of Historic England by John Neale, Head ofDevelopment Advice, paragraph 1.26.

The statue of Edward Colston, a man with directconnections to the trans-Atlantic trafficking ofenslaved people in the late 17th and early 18th
century, was and remains an afront to many ofBristol’s citizens.
Consequently, the forthcoming listed building
application will not consider the reinstatement of
the statue to Edward Colston. Any reinstatement
would cause additional upset and disgust andpotentially lead to further public order and healthand safety risks as well as damage community
cohesion.
The forthcoming listed building application by theCity Council will propose that placing the statue inthe care of the museum will ensure it’s long termpreservation.
Putting the statue on display in the M Shed
museum with accompanying contextual
information combined with a proposed new plaqueon the Colston Avenue plinth will address the‘retain and explain’ requirements of paragraph 198of the NPPF.
The approach for both the statue and plinth as set
out by the application is the result of an extensive
city wide consultation as detailed in ‘The Colston
Statue what next?’ History Commission Report.
The two remaining recommendations concerning
amending the College Green Conservation
Area Character Appraisal to reflect the eventsof June 2020 (recommendation 5) and acultural programme for the site of the plinth(recommendation 6) will not be the subject of any
forthcoming listed building application.

May 2023

Colston Statue		
Heritage and design statement

14

BRISTOL HISTORYCOMMISSION REPORTThe Colston Statue
What Next?

2

BRISTOL HISTORY COMMISSION REPORTWith thanks to all those at Bristol City Council who contributed to
all aspects of the display and engagement, in particular to
Ray Barnett, Amber Druce, Simon Fenn, Jon Finch, Fiona Gilmour,
Lisa Graves, Gail Kendell, Lauren MacCarthy, Laura Martin,
Barry Norris, Becky Peters, Fiona Russell, Jon Severs andFinn White. Thanks also to colleagues in Design, Conservation& Documentation, External Communications, Consultation &Engagement, Participation & Communities, Neighbourhood
Engagement, Digital, City Design, and the M Shed Front ofHouse teams and Curatorial colleagues.
Short Report Authors: Joanna Burch-Brown(University of Bristol and Co-Chair of ‘We Are Bristol’ History
Commission) and Tim Cole (University of Bristol and Chair of‘We are Bristol’ History Commission), with Edson Burton,
Nigel Costley, Steve Poole, Shawn Sobers and Estella Tincknell.
Design: Shirine Watts (University of Bristol
Design Team, Print Services)
Research: Jon Toy and Lauren Maddox(Bristol City Council Consultation & Engagement),
Tim Cole and Ana-Maria Cretu (University of Bristol)
Copy editing: Rob Mitchell (University of Bristol
Print Services)
Photos: Cover & p6 Khali Ackford; p7 Jo Norman;
p11 LucyOn / Shutterstock.com; p13 Adrian Sherratt / Alamy Stock;
p17, p.23 Carol Burch-Brown; p20 JMF News / Alamy Stock Photo;p24 Joyce Nelson / Shutterstock.com; Inside back cover Bristol andBath snapper / Alamy Stock Photo
Cite as: Burch-Brown, J & Cole, T et al. 2022. The Colston Statue:
What next? We Are Bristol History Commission Short Report.
Bridging Histories: Bristol
Thanks to University of Bristol and UWE Bristol for funding this report.

THE COLSTON STATUE

In the summer of 2021, the‘We Are Bristol’ History
Commission opened a public
engagement about the future of
the Colston statue and the plinth.
Nearly 14,000 people joined in toshare their ideas and views.
Participants had a chance to see the statue andlearn about its history in a display at the M Shed
museum. People also viewed the display online.
Alongside the display was a survey that invited
people from Bristol and beyond to share their views.
We have seen this survey as a chance for the city
to speak and for people to listen to each other.
This report summarises findings from this historic
engagement. We are very grateful to all who took
the time to participate, and in due course themillions of words people shared will be available
in the city archives in an anonymised format, foranyone to read. The answers you have given will
help to decide the future of the statue and plinth.

WHAT NEXT?

THE SURVEY QUESTIONS
1. Do you agree or disagree that the
Colston statue should be put on display ina museum in Bristol? If you don't agree thatthe statue should be in a museum, pleasetell us what you think should happen to it
instead? If you agree that the statue should
be in a museum permanently, please tell us
how you would like to see it displayed.
2. What should be in the plinth space?1• Update the plaque on the plinth to reflect
the events of 7 June 2020.
• Use the plinth for temporary artworks /sculptures.
• Use the plinth for a permanent artwork /sculpture.
• Keep the plinth but leave it empty.
• If 'other', please specify.

3. How do you feel about the statue being
pulled down?2 Please tell us why you feel
this way.
1 People were asked to say how strongly they agreed with each
option: Strongly agree; agree; neither agree nor disagree; disagree;strongly disagree.
2 People selected from these options: I feel very positive; I feel quite
positive; I feel neither positive nor negative; I feel quite negative;
I feel very negative.

3

4

BRISTOL HISTORY COMMISSION REPORTTHE COLSTON STATUEWHAT NEXT?

5

Number of respondents per
10,000 residents

Amongst Bristol
respondents, peopleof key social groups
participated in numbers
broadly representative of
the general population.

HENBURY & BRENTRY
126

AVONMOUTH &LAWRENCE WESTON100BISHOPSTON &ASHLEY DOWN

SOUTHMEAD
101

HORFIELD
162

Who created the survey?
The survey was a collaboration between theBristol History Commission, Bristol City Council
Consultation and Engagement, and the
M Shed museum.
What were the aims of the survey?
⊲ To give everybody a voice⊲ To help people learn about each other’s views⊲ To help make it easy for elected officials todecide next steps for the statue and plinth
What were the values behind the survey?
⊲ Fairness⊲ Inclusive participation

Who joined in?

WESTBURY-ON-TRYM& HENLEAZE
135

Nearly 14,000 people completed the survey(13,984). Of these, just over half were from Bristol
City Council area (55 per cent). The Bristol
participants were a largely representative crosssection of the city. Amongst Bristol respondents,
people of different neighbourhood deprivationlevels, ability, and sex participated in numbers
broadly representative of the general population.
There was some variation in participation alonglines of age and ethnicity, with slight underrepresentation of people 24 and below, and slightunder-representation of people identifying as Blackor Asian. Every geographical area of the city waswell represented: roughly 100 to 200 people per
10,000 residents filled in the survey from almost allof Bristol’s 34 wards. People joined in equally fromless well-off and more well-off neighbourhoods.

EASTVILLE
128

REDLAND
170
144

ASHLEY224

COTHAM
181

CLIFTON175

CENTRAL
121

EASTON
268

HILLFIELDS
138
ST GEORGE
CENTRAL
79

141

LAWRENCE
HILL
218

80

ST GEORGE WEST214
HOTWELLS &HARBOURSIDE

SOUTHVILLE 176

ST GEORGE TROOPERS HILL
WINDMILL HILL

174

BEDMINSTER145

BISHOPSWORTH
91⊲ Transparency⊲ Evidence-based decision making

116

167

STOKE BISHOP84

CLIFTON DOWNFROME VALE187

LOCKLEAZE

Based on 6,517
postcodes in Bristol

HARTCLIFFE &WITHYWOOD60

KNOWLE
125
FILWOOD
80

HENGROVE &WHITCHURCH PARK
115

BRISLINGTON
EAST
111
111

STOCKWOOD
116

BRISLINGTON WEST

6

BRISTOL HISTORY COMMISSION REPORTTHE COLSTON STATUE

How did you make sure you heard every Bristol
neighbourhood fairly?
A few neighbourhoods had lower response rates,
so we distributed paper questionnaires and did
extra outreach in neighbourhoods with lower initial
response rates. We held 16 events at schools
including City of Bristol College, Badminton School,
Orchard School, City Academy and Bristol Brunel
Academy. We held live events for residents ofneighbourhoods with lower initial participation: twotours of M Shed with community leaders, and roadshows in Fishponds High Street, St Paul’s Learning
Centre, Ridingleaze in Lawrence Weston, Oldbury
Court and Lawrence Hill Urban Park.

WHAT NEXT?

For multiple choice questions, we included every
response in our results. We then gave equitablevoice to each area of the city when analysing thefree-text comments people had written.3 This
helped us to be confident that we were hearing
from all parts of the city.
What will happen next?
Our findings and recommendations are being
shared with the Bristol Mayor and elected officials,
to help them decide on next steps.

3 With each multiple choice question, there was space for people to add free-text comments. Because there were 14,000 surveys, we could not analyse every
comment in detail. Instead we chose a random sample of responses from 2,798 people, from across all Bristol wards. We took the same proportion of commentsfrom each ward, to ensure that people from every area of the city had their voices heard.

7

8

BRISTOL HISTORY COMMISSION REPORT

WHAT DOPEOPLE
WANT?
1. Most people wish to see the Colston statue
on display in a Bristol museum.
3 out of 4 people said to put the statue in a Bristol
museum (74 per cent).
Bristol residents agreed with this option evenmore strongly, with 4 out of 5 people from Bristol
saying the statue should be on display in a
Bristol museum (80 per cent).
Around 1 in 6 people from Bristol (16 per cent) did
not want the statue on display in a Bristol museum.
Of this 16 per cent, around three-quarters wanted
it returned to the plinth and around one quarter
wanted it destroyed or not on display.
4% of Bristol respondents did not have a strong
opinion on the matter.

THE COLSTON STATUE

4 OUT OF 5
Bristol residents think thestatue should be displayed
in a Bristol museum

In our sample, for every 1 person from Bristol who
said they would like the statue displayed verticallyand cleaned up, 5 said to present it in its current
state. The most common view was that it should
be horizontal and with graffiti intact. Many people
said they liked how it appeared in the temporary
display.
2. A majority of people support adding a plaquein the vicinity of the plinth to reflect the eventsof 7 June 2020.
More than 5 out of 8 people (65 per cent)support adding a plaque. Around 3 out of 10
people (29 per cent) disagree with adding aplaque. Support for a plaque is even stronger in
Bristol, where 7 out of 10 Bristol residents(71 per cent) agree with adding a plaque toreflect the events of 7 June 2020.

7 OUT OF 10
Bristol residents are in favour ofadding a plaque to the plinth toreflect events of 7 June 2020

6 OUT OF 10
Bristol residents agree withusing the plinth for temporary
artworks or sculptures

3. Nearly 6 out of 10 Bristol respondents(58 per cent) support using the plinth for
temporary artworks or sculptures, and another
15% neither agreed nor disagreed, suggesting a
total of 7 out of 10 are open to this option(72 per cent).
Opinion was mixed on what to do with the plinth,
but a clear majority either support or are open tousing the plinth for temporary artworks. Across thesurvey as a whole, nearly 5 in 8 either agreed with
(49 per cent) or neither agreed nor disagreed(15 per cent) with using the plinth in this way. Fewer
people were in favour of using the plinth for apermanent artwork (supported by fewer than 4
out of 10) or leaving the plinth empty (supportedby 3 out of 10). Smaller numbers wished to see
the Colston statue put back up on the plinth(supported by 1 in 10 in the city) or for the plinth tobe removed entirely.

WHAT NEXT?

5 OUT OF 8
Bristol residents said they feelpositive about the statue
being pulled down

4. More than 5 out of 8 Bristol residents(65 per cent) said they feel either very positive(50 per cent) or positive (15 per cent) about thestatue being pulled down.
Across the survey as a whole, over half
(56 per cent) said they feel positive about thestatue being pulled down. Just over 1 in 3 people(36 per cent) reported feeling negative about
this, with the manner of removal the number one
explanation for feeling this way.

9

10

BRISTOL HISTORY COMMISSION REPORTTHE COLSTON STATUEHOW DO DIFFERENTGROUPS FEEL ABOUT THE
STATUE COMING DOWN?
Attitudes by ethnicity
Broadly speaking, people from different ethnic
groups felt similarly about the statue coming down,
and gave similar reasons for their feelings.4

Positive
Neither positive
nor negative
Negative

4 Based on 6152 Bristol residents who reported ethnicity and stated how
they feel about the statue being pulled down. Respondents answered on a
Likert scale: very positive, positive, neither positive nor negative, negative orvery negative. Results simplified here into positive, neither, or negative.

Attitudes by age
FOR EVERY 20 MIXED ETHNICITY / MULTIPLE HERITAGE
Bristol residents, 15 felt positively, 1½ felt neither
positively nor negatively, and 3½ felt negatively

FOR EVERY 20 WHITE BRITISH Bristol residents,
13 said they felt positively, 2 felt neither positively
nor negatively, and 5 felt negatively.

Age appeared to make the biggest
difference in how people felt about thestatue being pulled down.5 Younger
people reported more positive feelings
about the statue coming down.

18-24
25-34
35-44
45-54
55-64

FOR EVERY 20 ASIAN / ASIAN BRITISH Bristol
residents, 12½ felt positively, 3¼ felt neither
positively nor negatively, and 4¼ felt negatively.

FOR EVERY 20 BLACK / AFRICAN / CARIBBEAN / BLACK
BRITISH Bristol residents, 12 felt positively, 2 felt neither
positively nor negatively and 6 felt negatively.

0-17

65-74
75+
5 Based on 6489 Bristol residents who reported age and stated
how they feel about the statue being pulled down.

WHAT NEXT?

11

12

BRISTOL HISTORY COMMISSION REPORTTHE COLSTON STATUE

Attitudes by neighbourhood
People felt similarly about thestatue coming down, whether
they were from more well-off
neighbourhoods or lesswell-off neighbourhoods.6

LESS WEALTHY
NEIGHBOURHOODS

Attitudes by sex
The survey showed some variation
in attitudes by sex. 13 out of 20 female
respondents felt positively, with similar
feelings amongst people identifying
as other, whereas 10 in 20 male
respondents felt positively.7

FEMALE
MALE
OTHER

Positive
Neither positive
nor negative
Negative

WEALTHIERNEIGHBOURHOODS

6 Based on 6466 residents who provided full postcodes in Bristol and stated how they feel about the statue being pulled down.
These figures were arrived at by looking at full postcodes and neighbourhood deprivation levels, using indices of multiple deprivation.

7 Based on 12312 respondents from all locations who stated their sex and stated how they feel about the statue being pulled down.

WHAT NEXT?

13

14

BRISTOL HISTORY COMMISSION REPORTTHE COLSTON STATUE

Reasons for positive feelings about the statue coming down

Further education and moreprogress towards racialequality are needed.
Toppling was a symbolof progress toward
racial equality.

Reasons for negative feelings about the statue coming down
Colston was aman of his times

The statue should be in a museum.
Colston's and Bristol's links to slavery
have historically been obscured bya focus on Colston's philanthropy.

Colston should not becelebrated or commemorated
with a statue given his rolein transatlantic slavery.

June 2020 made history.
Toppling sparked an
important, honest
conversation about
Bristol's involvement
in slavery.
The people of Bristol
wanted the statue
removed. June 2020
was an example ofpeople power.

Legal removal orcontextualisation of
Colston statue was
overdue. The council
were never going to act.

Colston's statue
was insulting toblack residents.

The statue did not reflect the modern,diverse Bristol of today. Bristolians can
now take greater pride in their city.

WHAT NEXT?

Colston did great things
for Bristol and should behonoured with a statue

Removing the statue
should have been done
democratically, withsupport of all Bristolians

Toppling the statue
was illegal / wrong
and should havebeen stopped

Colston and thestatue are part ofBristol history

Bristol shouldn't change, ignore orforget unpalatable aspects of history

15

16

BRISTOL HISTORY COMMISSION REPORTTHE COLSTON STATUEWHAT NEXT?

17

RECOMMENDATIONSFUTURE OF THE COLSTON STATUE
Recommendation 1

Recommendation 3

We recommend that the Colston statue enters thepermanent collection of the Bristol City Council
Museums service.

We recommend that the statue be exhibited,drawing on the principles and practice of thetemporary M Shed display where the statue
was lying horizontally. We recommend that
attention is paid to presenting the history in anuanced, contextualised and engaging way,
including information on the broader history of theenslavement of people of African descent.

Recommendation 2
We recommend that the statue is preserved in its
current state and the opportunity to reflect this in
the listing description is explored with
Historic England.

18

BRISTOL HISTORY COMMISSION REPORTTHE COLSTON STATUE

FUTURE OF THE EMPTY PLINTH

19

BROADER ISSUES EMERGING FROM THE CONSULTATION

Recommendation 4

Recommendation 5

We recommend that the former Colston statue
plinth, along with the original plaques, remain inplace and that a new plaque is installed that briefly
and factually explains when and why the statue
was put up and taken down. We suggest thefollowing wording for the new plaque:

We recommend that the Conservation Area
Character Appraisal is updated to includea) the events of 7 June 2020, b) this process of
public engagement and c) the decision to locate
the statue within Bristol City Council Museums
service. We recommend that the opportunity toreflect the current state of the plinth in the National
List description is explored.

'On 13 November 1895, a statue of
Edward Colston (1636 - 1721) was
unveiled here celebrating him as acity benefactor. In the late twentiethand early twenty-first century, thecelebration of Colston was increasingly
challenged given his prominent rolein the enslavement of African people.
On 7 June 2020, the statue was pulled
down during Black Lives Matter protests
and rolled into the harbour. Following
consultation with the city in 2021, thestatue entered the collections of Bristol
City Council’s museums.

WHAT NEXT?

Recommendation 6
We recommend that the city think creatively about
the empty plinth and its immediate vicinity. We
recommend that funding is sought from public andprivate sources to commission temporary artworks
and activities. These might take a digital or physicalform, on and around the plinth. We recommendthat two principles guide future use of the plinth:⊲ We see the need for a city-wide commitment
to creating opportunities for younger and older
generations to interact, share experiences andperspectives and develop greater empathy andmutual understanding, including sharing viewson the city’s past, present and future.
⊲ We see the need to develop processes andpractices, both locally and nationally, thatencourage active engagement in creating more
representative public space. When making
decisions around contested heritage, publicbodies should develop and follow processes
that are fair and transparent, inclusive,
participatory, evidence-based and committed tojustice.8⊲ The history of the city’s involvement with thetransatlantic enslavement of African people is
not an issue that can or should be consigned
to the past, but rather remains embedded inpresent-day concerns. Strong feelings remainon this topic, and the toppling of the Colston
statue has opened the opportunity for thehistory to be addressed urgently, appropriately
and sensitively. We recognise the leadership ofthe Legacy Steering Group on the question of
how Bristol might best memorialise and respondto the transatlantic trafficking and enslavementof African people.9• that there are periods of intentional emptinessand presence;• that this is a space for dialogue andconversation about things that matter in andfor the city, including the legacy of transatlantic
slavery.
8 Further guidance on possible processes can be found at Ben Stephenson, Marie-Annick Gournet and Joanna Burch-Brown, ‘Reviewing contested statues,
memorials and place names: Guidance for public bodies’, University of Bristol, 2021 available at www.bridginghistories.com/heritage-resources
9 For more information, see the Project TRUTH report, by the Legacy Steering Group and Black South West Network: www.blacksouthwestnetwork.org/acc

20

BRISTOL HISTORY COMMISSION REPORTTHE COLSTON STATUEBRISTOL VOICESHow do you feel about the statue being pulled down?

A beautifully
powerful act.

A bravething to do.

There is ademocratic
process andthey didn’t
exhaust it.
It shouldn't havebeen vandalised as
it is a work of art.

The law is the law andmust be respected.
It should have been
removed earlier.

At first I saw it as
destruction... but seeing it in
the M Shed today it felt good.

As a Bristolian I feelproud of the fact that thishappened in my city.

WHAT NEXT?

It was criminal
damage by an
unlawful mob.

It was hard for any
black person to walkpast every day.

Direct political action
accomplished whatbureaucracy couldn’t.

21

22

BRISTOL HISTORY COMMISSION REPORTTHE COLSTON STATUE

Should the Colston statue be on display
in a museum in Bristol?

It should bereinstalled onto
the plinth, thenput to a vote.

It should be in a museum.
Statues are celebratory,
museums are educational.
I’d like to know more about
how much of the city’sarchitecture came frommoney, directly or indirectly,
due to the triangular trade.
Display it in a way thatencourages reflection
on Bristol’s past and theripples of that past in thepresent, not reverence.

It’s not ‘rewriting history’
to remove a statue if it’spreserved in a museum in
an appropriate context.

It should becleaned up andrestored to its
rightful placeon the plinth.

It should be part of amuch bigger, dedicatedmuseum / memorial andvisitors center to educate
the city about thetransatlantic slave trade.

It shouldn’t be on display. We don’t
need statues to be displayed ofpeople who killed and murdered
thousands. We do not need statues
to remember their crimes.

WHAT NEXT?

I would like it to be
displayed with the whole
history surrounding it.

23

24

BRISTOL HISTORY COMMISSION REPORTTHE COLSTON STATUE

What should be on the plinth?
The plaque must be
updated to reflect history.

Pulling down one statue won’t
solve racial inequality, so whatelse can we do using thisspace to further that cause?

Let’s have ameeting place forpoets, speakers,
musicians, actors.

I really don’t think anythingshould be put in placethat commemorates what
happened on 07/06/2020.

A permanent
replacement could
be divisive.

The replacement should
be non-political andconciliatory to everyone– after all Bristol is thehome to people of allages, beliefs and politics.

A real heroic Bristolian
like Paul Stephenson.

HOW ABOUT PUTTING UP...
BRUNELA CLIMATE CHANGE MEMORIAL

THOMAS CHATTERTONMARY SEACOLEA SLAVERY MEMORIAL
MARY CARPENTERHEROES OF COVID 19
BANKSYQUEEN ELIZABETH II

PRINCESS CAMPBELL

25

Remove plinth. People
will not agree on whatshould go on it.

An empty
plinth leads toconversation.

Empty is the only acceptable
thing unless the statue isrepaired and returned toits plinth, so that the world
knows Bristol does not
sanction riots and rioters!

Love the idea ofchanging what is there!
It is quite ‘Bristol’.

WHAT NEXT?

As a work is replaced it
could be displayed next toColston in the museum, tokeep the connection andconversations moving.

GROMITGEORGE MULLERCARY GRANT

HANNAH MORE

26

BRISTOL HISTORY COMMISSION REPORTTHE COLSTON STATUECONCLUSION
Thinking differently is not
a problem, but something
to be celebrated.
The survey has shown that there is much that we
as a city agree on. Most of us think that the bestplace for the statue is in a museum in the city.
Most of us think the plinth should remain, with a
new plaque, and should be a space for ongoing
conversation. There are also areas where ourviews differ. We should welcome this. Thinking
differently is not a problem, but something to becelebrated. A core principle of democracy is not
simply tolerating but valuing differences in opinion.
The world – and our city – would be all the poorer
without differences in the ways we think about thepast, present and future.

Explore more …
⊲ The full report gives you a chance to look in
more depth at how we did the survey, who
responded, and at more of the voices andviews of people who joined in.
www.bridginghistories.com/heritage-resources⊲ Let us know your thoughts and feedback.
activities@bridginghistories.com⊲ Explore and share your own history andheritage with Bridging Histories.
www.bridginghistories.com

WHAT NEXT?

27

You can get this document in large print,
by email, in Braille, on CD, as a BSL
DVD, in easy read with pictures or incommunity languages. You can also geta summary with pictures.
Please contact history@bristol.gov.uk

Bristol Museums & Art Gallery
Condition Report
ObjectBronze Statue of Colston

Dimensions (approx.)
980mm (Height)

Digital Photos

B

D

A

2565mm (Length)
850mm (Width)
Date of Report

1/10/20

Conservator

A. Drewdun

Description
Large bronze statue of the Mr Colston, attached to a limestone base.
Condition
Overview:
The object has suffered damage from being torn down. The bronze has detached from thestone base, and the figure has suffered a large amount of graffiti. Overall, the bronze is
missing the proper left lower side of the coat-tail, as well as the walking stick. The walking
stick knob remains in the proper left hand. Significant surface abrasions and deep
scratching has occurred in multiple places throughout the figure; most notably on the highpoints of the figure such as the arms, back, proper right lower part of the coat-tail, and sideedges of the base. Silver, red and blue paint have been used / sprayed over the face, chest
and arms, down the proper right of the coat, and on the proper leg. Due to nature of theacrylic paint used for the graffiti, and the many layers of wax, oil based varnish, along withthe object being thrown into the harbour; the paint and protective layer has bubbled andflake off a fair amount overall. The protective layer of wax and varnish, and the paints
continue to flake overall. Remnants of silt are exhibited throughout the exterior and interior.
Due to the damage to the base of the bronze, the statue could not safely stand without
significant intervention.
Condition starting at the head and working down to the base:
The top of the head shows a casting plug. The back of the head, as well as the front
forehead / hair shows some surface abrasion and scratching along with silver and red
graffiti paint. A small piece of cigarette paper (old) was also found stuffed up the proper rightnostril. The loss of paint and protective layer is clearly observed throughout the bronze
surface. The proper left arm was cast separate to the torso and has become a little
misaligned from the fall. The arm remains secure but the join in the casting is very evident.
Severe loss through abrasion is observed on the cuff / lower arm area. Further deep surface
scratching noted on the proper right shoulder, elbow, with significant loss to the end of thecoat cuff. Red and silver paint has been sprayed over the chest and arms. Silver paint has

1

also been sprayed in the arm cuffs and stomach area. Active spot corrosion is observed on
the freshly abraded areas of the bronze, as well as in the interstices of the casting aroundthe cuffs, folds of the coat around the stomach, the centre on the cane knob, the proper left
hip and thigh, the underside of the coat-tail, and the underside of the base. Most corrosion
is copper alloy; however iron pins / dowels have been used and so have corroded, on theknob and on the base.
The lower part of the coat has been cast in two sections. The proper right side has popped
its rivets at the front and has become misaligned somewhat. This section is slightly wobbly.
The proper left section is missing. The blue paint continues down the proper right side of thecoat on the front. Significant loss is observed to the end and edges of the proper right frontof the coat. There is a large vestige hole that is visible from the loss of the proper left lower
part of the coat, in the hip / thigh area. Both legs display some blue paint, but most notablyon the proper right leg. Both legs have flaking wax layers as well as paint. There is a tear in
the bronze around the proper left heel of the shoe. The bronze base itself has torqued anddeformed a little in this area from being wrenched off of the stone plinth that has several
large bronze steaks / pins embedded, used to attach the statue to the base. The exteriorside edges of the base have been hugely scratched and abraded, showing corrosion on theunderside. Most of the corrosion overall is not significant enough to be a structural issue.
The stone base has staining over the writing from graffiti, pollution, and algae / plantmaterial. There is significant loss to the stone on the high points of the carving such as thescrolls. The metal pins show some loss from the tearing down, with minor surface corrosion.
The base also displays some minor cracking / fissures running through the carving. Theselook stable at present.

Face with silver and red paint, and silt.
2Torso with silver and red paint, and silt.

Flaking paint.

3

Proper right cuff with deep abrasions and spot corrosion.

Proper left side showing loss of coat-tail and vestige hole.

4

Detaching proper right side of coat-tail.

Abrasion and surface damage on the end of the proper right coat-tail.

5

Proper left leg.

Tear in bronze under the left heel and bent base.

6

Stone base.

Stained stone with areas of surface abrasion.

7

Significant loss to the stone.

Damaged corner and edges of the stone with significant staining.

8

IRN 12552

Internal - Antiquities Conservation
September 25, 2020
ECMAG.3640.1; Social History; statue Edward Colston statue

Bronze statue of Edward Colston. Cast in bronze. The clothes include a frock coat (earlyGeorgian style/ possibly 1730s cut) over an unbuttoned waistcoat, shirt and breeches, a cravat
around the neck, stockings gartered at the knee, and shoes with square buckles. Broad cuffs.
One coat tail and the cane are missing. The ferrule of the cane remains in the palm of the handMaterials

Dimensions
Approx: object laid down: H: 980, L: 2565, W: 850,

mm

Treatment
The graffitti was cleaned with cotton wool swabs and deionised water to remove silt . The rest of the bronze exterior wascleaned with cotton wool swabs, small brushes, with 70/30 IMS/deionised water, 0.5% Vulpex, and cleared with 80/30
deionised water and IMS. The interior of the bronze was cleaned using soft wire wool, stiff brushes , 50/50 deionised waterand IMS, with 1% Vulpex, then cleared with 20/80 deionised water and IMS only. This removed more of the silt but not all as
much of the interior was inaccessible through the cast hole in the left hip. Corrosion on the exterior was reduced using
scalpels, abrasive medium and fine grit abrasive erasers, cleared / degreased with IMS, and dried with acetone.
Microcrystalline wax was applied to these areas to provide an initial barrier. Cleaning process was interspersed with 10%
Paraloid B67 in acetone used for the graffitti, and the flaking wax and resin layer - 5% Lascaux 495 50/50 deionised water /ethanol; both treatments activated using a heated spatula barriered with Melinex. The interior of the object was dried andwarmed by two dehumidifiers and a small heater in-between consolidation. After 8 consolidate treatment campaigns
consolidating the graffitti and 4 campaigns consolidating the old wax / resin layer, these areas were lightly buffed with dry
cotton wool swabs to blend with the sheen of the rest of the bronze. There were several areas throughout that had lost thegraffitti and the old protective wax/ resin layer, therefore after cleaning, these areas had a layer of 50/50 carnauba andmicrocrystalline applied and buffed with a soft cotton cloth to help protect it . Once dried, the rest of the bronze (not graffitti)
was waxed overall with 50/50 bees wax/ microcrystalline wax for further surface protection. The interior was left
unconsolidated and waxed to allow the metal to dry completely and adjust to the store environment, in order to prevent
further exterior surface loss, particularly of the graffitti.

Date commenced: 12/Sep/2020
Date completed: 17/Oct/2020

Total hours: 148
Treated by:

Bristol Culture Collection Care and Preservation Policy & Strategy
2017-2022
Policy:Bristol Culture has a primary commitment to the preservation of its collections. It
seeks to achieve this through ensuring that: Preservation priorities are included in the aims and objectives of all forward
planning.
 Those responsible for preservation priorities are included in any decision
making team within the institution.
 There are regular reviews of the collections care strategy, which contribute to
the revision of collections policies and programmes, ensuring a planned
approach to improvements in overall collection care.
 The management team receives a quinquenial report on the generalcondition of the collection, which includes a description of areas of concern
or special problems and an action plan containing recommendations on how
the situation can be improved.
 Objects are cared for in accordance with recommendations in the relevant
British and European Standards encompassing conservation and collections
care as well as other relevant contemporary published research.
Bristol Culture is committed to assisting where possible with improving the standardof collections care and preservation throughout the South-West Region, in its
position as the largest such service in the region.
Strategy:
The preventive conservator will liaise with the Operations Team on:
 Planned maintenance and other work on the structure of the museum
buildings including cleaning regimes.
 Improvements to environmental control when the need is identified, throughthe Storage & Gallery KPI review document.
 The Senior Archivist takes on this role at BRO.
Standards of collections care are driven upwards through: Training of Collections and Archives staff in object handling, insect pest
management and good housekeeping.

 Management support of Conservation staff CPD goals and enabling oftraining opportunities.
 Regular inspections of display and storage areas by responsible Collections &Archives staff. Any situations found requiring attention should be promptly
reported to the appropriate officer.
 Regular communication and liaison between Collections and Conservation
staff when planning any significant changes to storage and display
arrangements.
 Best practice standards across all collections care areas are maintained:
insect pest management; environmental monitoring and control; object
handling, object labelling; housekeeping.
Standards of collections care will be maintained through ensuring: All artefacts must be labelled or marked according to the Bristol Culture
policies.
 Good housekeeping practice and appropriate cleaning must be considered as
the primary method of pest control.
o Regular monitoring for pests by the preventive conservator andarchivists with immediate reporting of pests by all staff must be
observed.
o Appropriate treatments must be ordered when necessary.
o Artefacts on arrival at all sites must be inspected by a conservator andquarantined if necessary.
 Appropriate Collections or Archives staff must always supervise the handling,
moving, operating and filming of artefacts and archives respectively.
 Records are kept of all environmental monitoring (RH, temperature, light andUV) and these are kept in a systematic way and retained for a minimum of
five years.
 Environmental monitoring systems are regularly examined andimprovements to control measures made where practicable, with the aim ofachieving appropriate conditions.
 The conservation programme is regularly reviewed to set and monitor clear
targets, and to check whether previous recommendations have been
implemented.
 All conservation work is recorded according to professional practicestandards on Bristol Culture’s Collections Management System, EMu.

 A set of disaster guidelines is regularly updated and annual disasterprocedure awareness training given to all staff.

Equality Impact Assessment [version 2.12]
Title: Assessment and determination of application for Listed Building Consent for “Proposal to move thestatue of Edward Colston from Colston Avenue to M Shed.” (Application reference 23/04315/LA)☐ Policy ☐ Strategy ☐ Function ☐ Service☒ New☒ Other Planning Decision☐ Already exists / review ☐ Changing
Directorate: Economy of Place
Lead Officer name: Jonathan DymondService Area: Development Management
Lead Officer role: Case Officer

Step 1: What do we want to do?
The purpose of an Equality Impact Assessment is to assist decision makers in understanding the impact of proposals
as part of their duties under the Equality Act 2010. Detailed guidance to support completion can be found here
Equality Impact Assessments (EqIA) (sharepoint.com).
This assessment should be started at the beginning of the process by someone with a good knowledge of the
proposal and service area, and sufficient influence over the proposal. It is good practice to take a team approach tocompleting the equality impact assessment. Please contact the Equality and Inclusion Team early for advice andfeedback.

1.1 What are the aims and objectives/purpose of this proposal?
Briefly explain the purpose of the proposal and why it is needed. Describe who it is aimed at and the intended aims /outcomes. Where known also summarise the key actions you plan to undertake. Please use plain English, avoiding
jargon and acronyms. Equality Impact Assessments are viewed by a wide range of people including decision-makers
and the wider public.
This proposal relates to the assessment of an application for listed building consent for “Proposal to move thestatue of Edward Colston from Colston Avenue to M Shed.” The reference for this application is 23/04315/LA, it
was submitted in November 2023.
The proposal seeks to implement recommendations made by the We Are Bristol History Commission in theirreport “The Colston Statue: What Next?”, following the events of June 2020.
The application has been made by the City Council and is currently under assessment. It is expected that theapplication will be considered by a Development Control Committee, where a decision will be made on theapplication.
The decision on the application will be made under the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act
1990.
The Public Sector Equality Duty is engaged, and it is therefore necessary to have due regard to the need to—(a) eliminate discrimination, harassment, victimisation and any other conduct that is prohibited by or under thisAct [the Equality Act 2010];(b) advance equality of opportunity between persons who share a relevant protected characteristic and persons
who do not share it;(c) foster good relations between persons who share a relevant protected characteristic and persons who do notshare it.
It should be noted that an Equality Impact Assessment was undertaken in March 2022 by the Council in relation to
the Cabinet approval to endorse and give authority to explore the steps required to implement the six
recommendations within the We Are Bristol History Commission report “Colston Statue: What Next?”. To also

include acknowledgement of broader considerations, where they impact on Bristol City Council, and how thesemight be folded into the wider work done by the Council.
The applicant is Bristol City Council and they have stated in the application submission that “the statue of Edward
Colston, a man with direct connections to the trans-Atlantic trafficking of enslaved people in the late 17th andearly 18th century, was and remains an afront to many of Bristol’s citizens.” The application therefore does notpropose the reinstatement of the statue as it is considered that “any reinstatement [understood to mean the
return of the statue to the plinth] would cause additional upset and disgust and potentially lead to further publicorder and health and safety risks as well as damage community cohesion.”

1.2 Who will the proposal have the potential to affect?
☒ Bristol City Council workforce☐ Commissioned services
Additional comments:☒ Service users☒ The wider community☒ City partners / Stakeholder organisations

1.3 Will the proposal have an equality impact?
Could the proposal affect access levels of representation or participation in a service, or does it have the potential tochange e.g. quality of life: health, education, or standard of living etc.?
If ‘No’ explain why you are sure there will be no equality impact, then skip steps 2-4 and request review by Equality
and Inclusion Team.
If ‘Yes’ complete the rest of this assessment, or if you plan to complete the assessment at a later stage please statethis clearly here and request review by the Equality and Inclusion Team.

☒ Yes

☐ No

[please select]

The proposal is considered to have an equality impact. This is considered to include impacts relating to quality oflife, social cohesion and wellbeing.

Step 2: What information do we have?
2.1 What data or evidence is there which tells us who is, or could be affected?
Please use this section to demonstrate an understanding of who could be affected by the proposal. Include general
population data where appropriate, and information about people who will be affected with particular reference toprotected and other relevant characteristics: How we measure equality and diversity (bristol.gov.uk)
Use one row for each evidence source and say which characteristic(s) it relates to. You can include a mix of
qualitative and quantitative data e.g. from national or local research, available data or previous consultations andengagement activities.
Outline whether there is any over or under representation of equality groups within relevant services - don't forget
to benchmark to the local population where appropriate. Links to available data and reports are here Data, statistics
and intelligence (sharepoint.com). See also: Bristol Open Data (Quality of Life, Census etc.); Joint Strategic Needs
Assessment (JSNA); Ward Statistical Profiles.
For workforce / management of change proposals you will need to look at the diversity of the affected teams using
available evidence such as HR Analytics: Power BI Reports (sharepoint.com) which shows the diversity profile ofcouncil teams and service areas. Identify any over or under-representation compared with Bristol economically
active citizens for different characteristics. Additional sources of useful workforce evidence include the Employee
Staff Survey Report and Stress Risk Assessment

Data / Evidence Source[Include a reference where known]
Information included within the application for Listed
Building Consent submitted by Bristol City Council (reference
23/04315/LA)

We Are Bristol History Commission “The Colston Statue:
What Next?” report – referred to in the application for Listed
Building Consent submitted by Bristol City Council

Publicity relating to Listed Building Consent Application

Summary of what this tells us
The application includes a detailed supportingstatement setting out the background to the proposal.
It describes key events that took place prior to thesubmission of the application:“On 7th June 2020, the grade II listed bronze statue of
Edward Colston was pulled down from its plinth on
Colston Avenue during a Black Lives Matterdemonstration. After being rolled through the City
Centre, the statue was dumped into the Floating
Harbour by a crowd of demonstrators.”“In the summer of 2021, the ‘We are Bristol’ History
Commission consulted with the public about the
future of the Colston statue and the Colston plinth.
People had a chance to see the statue and learn about
its history in a temporary display at the M Shed
museum, as well as view the display online. Alongside
the display was a survey that invited people from
Bristol and beyond to share their views on a numberof questions”.
According to the Listed Building Consent application,
the key results from this consultation relevant to thisapplication were that:- 80% of respondees agreed that the statue
should be displayed in a museum- 70% agreed that a new plaque should be
added to the plinth- 14,000 people responded to the consultationfrom a good representative sample of the city
population, over 50% of whom were from BS
postcodes (History Commission short reportpages 10-15)
The Mayor of Bristol published a blog post on 9th
November 2023 titled “The future of the Colston
statue”(https://thebristolmayor.com/2023/11/09/the-futureof-the-colston-statue/). This stated the following
relating to the application:“ It was through the We Are Bristol History
Commission that we held a citywide conversation
about the future of the statue and how we can buildand present a better understanding of our history forthis generation and the next. Nearly 14,000 people
responded to the commission’s survey, with local
residents and people from further afield taking part.
The vast majority (80 per cent) of Bristol residents who
responded agreed that the best place for the statue in
future was in one of our museums.
The History Commission made the same
recommendation in their report. To help make this areality, an application to regularise the legal position

Data / Evidence Source

Summary of what this tells us[Include a reference where known]of the listed asset, away from its plinth, has recently
been submitted which will go to a planning committee
early in the new year. It was submitted following
discussions with Historic England, the government
advisory body responsible for designating listedbuildings, as part of the pre-application process.
Alongside this, a new M Shed exhibition is being
developed and will open in March 2024, refreshing thetheme of ‘protest’ in the People gallery. This will
include Colston’s statue as part of an exhibit focusing
on racial injustice.”
Bristol Live also reported on the proposals in
November 2023:
https://www.bristolpost.co.uk/news/bristolnews/colston-statue-go-permanent-display-8895509
Responses to the consultation on the application Listed
Building Consent (reference 23/04315/LA) fromconsultees
Responses to the consultation on the application Listed
Building Consent (reference 23/04315/LA) from thepublicComments have been received from Historic Englandand the Council’s Conservation team. In summary,both responses do not raise objections to theapplication.
At the time of writing, four comments have been
received, comprising two objections, one neutralcomment and one comment in support.
The consultation undertaken is a statutory
consultation method that is prescribed by planninglegislation. In this instance, this has included displaying
a site notice at the site and publishing anadvertisement in the local press. Where suchconsultation is undertaken in connection with anapplication, members of the public may view theapplication documents on the Council’s website andsubmit their comments.

Additional comments:
These are the main sources of evidence that are considered to directly relate to the assessment anddetermination of the application for Listed Building Consent under the Planning (Listed Buildings andConservation Areas) Act 1990.

1.1 2.2
Do you currently monitor relevant activity by the following protectedcharacteristics?
☐ Age☐ Marriage and Civil Partnership☐ Religion or Belief☐ Disability☐ Pregnancy/Maternity☐ Sex☐ Gender Reassignment☐ Race☐ Sexual Orientation

2.3 Are there any gaps in the evidence base?
Where there are gaps in the evidence, or you don’t have enough information about some equality groups, include anequality action to find out in section 4.2 below. This doesn’t mean that you can’t complete the assessment without
the information, but you need to follow up the action and if necessary, review the assessment later. If you areunable to fill in the gaps, then state this clearly with a justification.

For workforce related proposals all relevant characteristics may not be included in HR diversity reporting (e.g.
pregnancy/maternity). For smaller teams diversity data may be redacted. A high proportion of not known/not
disclosed may require an action to address under-reporting.
As this is a planning decision, protected characteristics are not monitored.
Regarding the consultation, further comments may be submitted prior to a decision being made on theapplication which will need to be taken into account and Public Forum Statement may also be made at theDevelopment Control Committee meeting.

2.4 How have you involved communities and groups that could be affected?
You will nearly always need to involve and consult with internal and external stakeholders during your assessment.
The extent of the engagement will depend on the nature of the proposal or change. This should usually include
individuals and groups representing different relevant protected characteristics. Please include details of any
completed engagement and consultation and how representative this had been of Bristol’s diverse communities.
Include the main findings of any engagement and consultation in Section 2.1 above.
If you are managing a workforce change process or restructure please refer to Managing a change process or
restructure (sharepoint.com) for advice on consulting with employees etc. Relevant stakeholders for engagement
about workforce changes may include e.g. staff-led groups and trades unions as well as affected staff.
Under the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990, there are specific requirements relating to
publicity and consultation which must be followed in relation to any application for Listed Building Consent.
In this case, this has involved displaying a site notice at the site and the publishing of an advert in the local press. A
site notice was displayed at the site on 22/11/2023 and a press advertisement was published on 22/11/2023.
Consultation was also undertaken with Historic England, National Amenity Societies, the Council’s Conservationteam and the Conservation Advisory Panel. Comments have been received from consultees and the public, as
mentioned above.
The Council is the applicant in this case and the application seeks to implement recommendations made by the
We Are Bristol History Commission in their report “The Colston Statue: What Next?”. The report includes thefollowing summary:“Nearly 14,000 people completed the survey (13,984). Of these, just over half were from Bristol (55 per cent). The
Bristol participants were a cross-section of the city with people of every age, gender, ethnicity and deprivationlevel participating in large numbers. Every geographical area of the city took part. However, a few neighbourhoods
had lower response rates, so we used outreach to encourage more people to join in from these neighbourhoods,
and then gave equitable voice to each area of the city when analysing what people had written.”
According to the Listed Building Consent application, the key results from this consultation relevant to thisapplication were that:- 80% of respondees agreed that the statue should be displayed in a museum- 70% agreed that a new plaque should be added to the plinth- 14,000 people responded to the consultation from a good representative sample of the city population,over 50% of whom were from BS postcodes (History Commission short report pages 10-15)

2.5 How will engagement with stakeholders continue?
Explain how you will continue to engage with stakeholders throughout the course of planning and delivery. Please
describe where more engagement and consultation is required and set out how you intend to undertake it. Include
any targeted work to seek the views of under-represented groups. If you do not intend to undertake it, please set
out your justification. You can ask the Equality and Inclusion Team for help in targeting particular groups.
Insofar as the listed building consent application is concerned, conditions are likely to be recommended regarding
the implementation of the works in order that the heritage benefits of the proposal can be secured – theenforcement of these conditions would be a matter for the Local Planning Authority.

If anyone had concerns regarding the planning decision or wished to challenge it, they could pursue this throughthe appropriate channels in the normal way.
Following the implementation of the proposal, however outside of the listed building consent application process,the M Shed also has a Collections statement (https://www.bristolmuseums.org.uk/collections/action-ondecolonisation/collections-statement/)

Step 3: Who might the proposal impact?
Analysis of impacts must be rigorous. Please demonstrate your analysis of any impacts of the proposal in thissection, referring to evidence you have gathered above and the characteristics protected by the Equality Act 2010.
Also include details of existing issues for particular groups that you are aware of and are seeking to address or
mitigate through this proposal. See detailed guidance documents for advice on identifying potential impacts etc.
Equality Impact Assessments (EqIA) (sharepoint.com)

3.1 Does the proposal have any potentially adverse impacts on people based on theirprotected or other relevant characteristics?
Consider sub-categories and how people with combined characteristics (e.g. young women) might have particularneeds or experience particular kinds of disadvantage.
Where mitigations indicate a follow-on action, include this in the ‘Action Plan’ Section 4.2 below.
GENERAL COMMENTS (highlight any potential issues that might impact all or many groups)
The applicant is Bristol City Council, and the application was submitted to the Local Planning Authority inNovember 2023.
The applicant is Bristol City Council and they have stated in the application submission that “the statue of Edward
Colston, a man with direct connections to the trans-Atlantic trafficking of enslaved people in the late 17th andearly 18th century, was and remains an afront to many of Bristol’s citizens.” The application therefore does notpropose the reinstatement of the statue as it is considered that “any reinstatement [understood to mean the
return of the statue to the plinth] would cause additional upset and disgust and potentially lead to further publicorder and health and safety risks as well as damage community cohesion.”
The proposal is therefore to move the statue to the M Shed. It is understood that a new M Shed exhibition is
being developed and will open in March 2024, refreshing the theme of ‘protest’ in the People gallery. This will
include Colston’s statue as part of an exhibit focusing on racial injustice. A new plaque will also be added to theplinth to provide additional explanation.
The statue forms part of the listed building and it’s display in a museum would help protect the physical object
from further damage.
As noted above, the consultation on the listed building consent application has followed the normal methods
required by legislation, however it should be noted that there has also been wider publicity associated with thesubmission of the application including a blog post by the Mayor of Bristol and coverage in the local press.
PROTECTED CHARACTERISTICS
Age: Young People
Does your analysis indicate a disproportionate impact? Yes ☐ No ☒Potential impacts:
Mitigations:Age: Older People
Does your analysis indicate a disproportionate impact? Yes ☐ No ☒Potential impacts:
The report “The Colston Statue: What Next?” summary report, submitted with the
Listed Building Consent application states the following with regard to how different
groups feel about the statue coming down and attitudes by age:

“Age appeared to make the biggest difference in how people felt about the statue being
pulled down. Younger people reported more positive feelings about the statue coming
down”
Mitigations:
Disability
Potential impacts:
Mitigations:
Sex
Potential impacts:

Does your analysis indicate a disproportionate impact? Yes ☐ No ☒Does your analysis indicate a disproportionate impact? Yes ☐ No ☒The report “The Colston Statue: What Next?” summary report, submitted with the
Listed Building Consent application states the following with regard to how different
groups feel about the statue coming down and attitudes by age:
“The survey showed some variation in attitudes by sex. 13 out of 20 female
respondents felt positively, with similar feelings amongst people identifying as other,whereas 10 in 20 male respondents felt positively.”

Mitigations:Sexual orientation
Potential impacts:
Mitigations:
Pregnancy / Maternity
Potential impacts:
Mitigations:
Gender reassignment
Potential impacts:
Mitigations:
Race
Potential impacts:

Does your analysis indicate a disproportionate impact? Yes ☐ No ☒Does your analysis indicate a disproportionate impact? Yes ☐ No ☒Does your analysis indicate a disproportionate impact? Yes ☐ No ☒Does your analysis indicate a disproportionate impact? Yes ☐ No ☒“On 7th June 2020, the grade II listed bronze statue of Edward Colston was pulled downfrom its plinth on Colston Avenue during a Black Lives Matter demonstration. Afterbeing rolled through the City Centre, the statue was dumped into the Floating Harbour
by a crowd of demonstrators.
The statue was recovered from the harbour and in the summer of 2021 went on display
in the museum. While on display, Bristol City Council and the History Commission that
had been established by the authority following the events in June, ran a public
consultation process with visitors to the exhibition and online. This consultation asked
what people thought should now happen to the statue and surviving plinth in the City
Centre. The results of this consultation process informed a report by the commissionthat concluded with 6 recommendations for the future of the statue and plinth.”
The report “The Colston Statue: What Next?” summary report, submitted with the
Listed Building Consent application states the following with regard to how different
groups feel about the statue coming down and attitudes by ethnicity:

Mitigations:

Religion orBeliefPotential impacts:
Mitigations:“Broadly speaking, people from different ethnic groups felt similarly about the statue
coming down, and gave similar reasons for their feelings”
The application proposes that the statue be moved to be displayed in the M Shed
museum with accompanying contextual information combined with a proposed newplaque on the Colston Avenue plinth.
Granting this Listed Building Consent application would regularise the position andprovide certainty from a planning perspective regarding the proposed way forward.
Does your analysis indicate a disproportionate impact? Yes ☐ No ☒

Marriage &Does your analysis indicate a disproportionate impact? Yes ☐ No ☒civil partnership
Potential impacts:
Mitigations:
OTHER RELEVANT CHARACTERISTICS
Socio-Economic
Does your analysis indicate a disproportionate impact? Yes ☐ No ☒(deprivation)
Potential impacts:
Mitigations:
Carers
Does your analysis indicate a disproportionate impact? Yes ☐ No ☒Potential impacts:
Mitigations:
Other groups [Please add additional rows below to detail the impact for any other relevant groups as appropriate e.g.
asylum seekers and refugees; care experienced; homelessness; armed forces personnel and veterans]

Potential impacts:
Mitigations:

3.2 Does the proposal create any benefits for people based on their protected or otherrelevant characteristics?
Outline any potential benefits of the proposal and how they can be maximised. Identify how the proposal will
support our Public Sector Equality Duty to:✓ Eliminate unlawful discrimination for a protected group✓ Advance equality of opportunity between people who share a protected characteristic and those who don’t✓ Foster good relations between people who share a protected characteristic and those who don’t
Granting consent for the application would allow for the positive impacts associated with the proposal to berealised in terms of advancing equality of opportunity between people who share a protected characteristic andthose who don’t, and also through the fostering good relations between people who share a protectedcharacteristic and those who don’t.
In particular given that the statue relates to a man that the applicant submits has direct connections to the transAtlantic trafficking of enslaved people in the late 17th and early 18th century, was and remains an afront to manyof Bristol’s citizens.
It would also enable opportunity for a wide variety of people to learn about the history of Bristol through thedisplay of the statue in the M Shed with associated accessible material.

Step 4: Impact
4.1 How has the equality impact assessment informed or changed the proposal?
What are the main conclusions of this assessment? Use this section to provide an overview of your findings. Thissummary can be included in decision pathway reports etc.
If you have identified any significant negative impacts which cannot be mitigated, provide a justification showing
how the proposal is proportionate, necessary, and appropriate despite this.
Summary of significant negative impacts and how they can be mitigated or justified:
The presence of the statue in the M Shed may still cause offense to some. Some mitigation may be achieved
through the new M Shed museum refreshing the theme of ‘protest’ in the People gallery. This will include
Colston’s statue as part of an exhibit focusing on racial injustice.
Summary of positive impacts / opportunities to promote the Public Sector Equality Duty:
There is considered to be overriding social benefit associated with the proposal.

4.2 Action Plan
Use this section to set out any actions you have identified to improve data, mitigate issues, or maximise
opportunities etc. If an action is to meet the needs of a particular protected group please specify this.
Improvement / action required
The application has been made by the City Council and is currently
under assessment. It is expected that the application will beconsidered by a Development Control Committee, where adecision will be made on the application.

Responsible Officer
The Local Planning
Authority will be
responsible for
enforcement

TimescaleOngoing

If the Committee resolves to grant Listed Building Consent, theapplicant will have a set period of time to implement the consent.
They will be required to comply with any relevant conditions.

4.3 How will the impact of your proposal and actions be measured?
How will you know if you have been successful? Once the activity has been implemented this equality impact
assessment should be periodically reviewed to make sure your changes have been effective your approach is still
appropriate.
Insofar as the Listed Building Consent application is concerned, once consent is granted the applicant then has aperiod of time within which to implement the works. If any further applications were to be made, these would beassessed separately.

Step 5: Review
The Equality and Inclusion Team need at least five working days to comment and feedback on your EqIA. EqIAs
should only be marked as reviewed when they provide sufficient information for decision-makers on the equalities
impact of the proposal. Please seek feedback and review from the Equality and Inclusion Team before requesting
sign off from your Director1.

Equality and Inclusion Team Review:

Reviewed by Equality and Inclusion Team12.2.2024

1

Review by the Equality and Inclusion Team confirms there is sufficient analysis for decision makers to consider the
likely equality impacts at this stage. This is not an endorsement or approval of the proposal.