Unfinished Business: The Gowers Report at 75
Sarah Roller, Director of Policy & Public Affairs, reflects on the importance of the Gowers Report in determining heritage policy today.
On 23 June 1950, seventy-five years ago today, the government published a report on Houses of Outstanding Historic or Architectural Interest (1948). The Gowers Report, as it is commonly known, quietly laid the groundwork for heritage policy which underpins how the sector operates today.
A committee, chaired by Sir Ernest Gowers, and commissioned by Clement Attlee’s Labour government, spent nearly two years investigating the question of what ‘general arrangements might be made by the Government for the preservation, maintenance and use of houses of outstanding historic or architectural interest which might otherwise not be preserved’.
Their conclusion?
‘That it is in the public interest for houses of outstanding architectural or historic interest to be preserved is implicit in our terms of reference. That the owner of the house is almost always the best person to preserve it was the unanimous opinion of our witnesses, and is our own firm conviction. That taxation is the chief cause of his being unable to do so is notorious’.
The Committee offered a variety of recommendations to the government about next steps, making suggestions to improve the taxation environment these houses operated in, as well as suggestions about improving the relationships between various larger heritage bodies, planning policy and government. Very few of these were ever put into action. The introduction of conditional exemption, in 1975, has proved the closest government has come to specifically making the fiscal framework more supportive for historic houses and collections.
Despite the lack of action in policy terms, historic houses have had a remarkably successful revival. From huge visitor attractions to wedding venues, wild swimming spots to techno festivals, the entrepreneurial owners of historic houses across the UK have found ways to generate income from the heritage they find themselves custodians of, bringing new life into old buildings as they do so.
Today, Capital Taxation and the National Heritage still states “it has been the policy of successive governments that this national heritage should be conserved and protected for the benefit of the public. They have taken the view that so far as possible property of this kind should remain in private hands and that its owners should be encouraged to retain and care for it and display it to the public”. But the fiscal framework which encourages owners to retain, care for, and display heritage to the public is ever more precarious.
The changes announced in the Autumn Budget to inheritance tax reliefs will have a huge impact on many historic houses – having set up and run historic houses as a variety of different businesses, many planned to make use of Business Property Relief as they passed these businesses on to the next generation. A new inheritance tax liability (our members reported an average estimate of an additional £4 million IHT bill, thanks to the changes announced in autumn 2024) means cash will have to be found somewhere – whether that be redundancies, cancelling planned business investments, sales of chattels, or simply selling up lock, stock and barrel.
Increased regulation, higher taxes, cumbersome bureaucracy – all of this eats into the time, money and energy of those who run businesses, and particularly for those whose businesses are centred around houses of outstanding historic or architectural significance. Re-reading Gowers today, it is both gently amusing and slightly sad that so much of it continues to ring so true.
It is no mean feat that quite so many historic houses have not just survived, but thrived in the modern era, given all that the past 75 years has thrown at them, and without the changes recommended by Gowers and his committee being properly enacted. They have changed and adapted – as they have always done – to make themselves relevant to the world around them. Private ownership remains by far the most cost-effective way for our historic buildings to be cared for and managed, and indeed the vast majority of the UK’s 400,000 or so listed buildings remain in private ownership.
Where will be in another 75 years?
Historic house owners are a resilient bunch: their houses have weathered many a storm, both literally and metaphorically. That there are so many success stories today speaks not just to a benign political framework, but the genuine love people across the UK feel for historic houses, and indeed heritage more widely. And we see no sign of the deep-seated appreciation for historic houses going anywhere: our latest report, Keeping History Alive, illustrated that Gen Z cares as much about heritage as any previous generation.
There is undoubtedly a bright future for historic houses—but only if we create the conditions to sustain it. For too long, these buildings have thrived in spite of the policy framework, not because of it. Their owners have shown extraordinary resilience and creativity, adapting historic spaces into hubs of cultural, economic, and social activity. They are custodians, employers, community leaders — and in many cases, lifelines for local economies.
Yet love and dedication are not enough. The climate crisis, mounting repair costs, and an increasingly unsupportive fiscal environment all threaten the future of these places. A £2 billion repair backlog is not a sign of neglect: it is a warning light, flashing red.
Historic house owners are not asking for handouts. They are asking for the freedom to continue doing what they do best: driving economic growth in rural areas, caring for the nation’s heritage, sharing it with the public, and keeping history alive for future generations.
Seventy-five years on from Gowers, the case for supportive, thoughtful policy is clearer than ever. If government is serious about conserving the UK’s built heritage, it must act—before more doors close for good.