Imperial War Memorial (Arms Manufacturing Funding Prohibition) Bill

A

BILL

TO

Amend the Imperial War Museum Act 1920 to probit the Board of Trustees entering into financial arrangements with entities involved in the arms trade

BE IT ENACTED by the Queen’s Most Excellent Majesty, by and with the advice and consent of the Lords, and Commons, in this present Parliament assembled, and by the authority of the same, as follows –

SECTION 1 Prohibition on arrangements involving the arms trade and the Imperial War Museum

(1) The Imperial War Museum Act 1920

is amended as follows

(2) After Section 2A

,insert—

”SECTION 2B Restrictions on certain activities regarding arms manufacturers

(1) The Board of Trustees of Imperial War Museum shall not enter into any financial arrangement with any entity directly involved in the manufacturing or exporting of arms

(2) The Board of Trustees of Imperial War Museum shall not accept any donation from any entity directly involved in the manufacturing or exporting of arms

unless–

(a) the donation is made unconditionally by the donor to the Imperial War Museum, and (b) the donor receives no benefit, financial or otherwise, in return.

(3) A benefit to the donor includes–

(a) a public acknowledgement of the donation, and (b) a benefit received by another person at the express or implied request of the donor.

(4) No member of The Board of Trustees of Imperial War Museum shall simultaneously serve on the board while being employed or being a part of any entity directly involved in the manufacturing or exporting of arms”

SECTION 2 Extent, commencement, and short title

(1) This Act shall extend across the entirety of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland

(2) This Act shall come into force on the first day of the financial year after receiving Royal Assent.

(3) This Act may be cited as the Imperial War Memorial (Arms Manufacturing Funding Prohibition) Act.

This Bill was submitted by mikiboss on behalf of Unity.

Opening Speech

Deputy Speaker,

The role that the UK’s Cultural institutions play in educating the public, archiving and storing vital information, and generating fascinating new fields of research and inquiry can not be overstated. These institutions, be they art museums, historical centres, archives, or other landmarks help fill our great nation with the kinds of things that make it great.

The work that the Imperial War Museum has done in preserving the story of conflict and war has been noted since its establishment, and it continues to do its work with great pride in ensuring that the public knows more about the history of war, the causes of war, and the tragedies that war brings. In its most recent annual report, the Imperial War Museum estimates that during the 2021-22 period

, the IWM saw over one million visitors to their sites, and that’s excluding special corporate guests or online and digital exhibitions. This includes over one hundred thousand kids under the age of sixteen, and about twenty-four thousand kids visiting as part of their education path. Clearly, the work and value of the Museum to the British public has been established.

However, there has been a rather uncomfortable trend that has been emerging in war memorials and museums across the world recently, and the IWM is no exception to this trend, and that’s of arms manufacturers and exporters financially supporting these institutions. This very much reminds me of the trend of fossil fuel corporations using shareholder money to throw at universities and scientific research centres, and has the obvious risk of compromising their independent research and leading to a distortion of the principles of the institution

.

With the IWM, the concern however is slightly more tragic, given that arms manufacturers and exporters directly profit out of the event of war, which sees soldiers experience death, wounding, and often permanent life-changing injuries. This risks seeing the national perception of war as being a tragic, regrettable, and last resort approach to horrible circumstances shift towards a different lens, one which sees war as just another rational and reasonable approach, which is often the approach of these arms manufacturers and exporters.

This bill would seek to insert three limitations on the Board of Trustees that, in my view, fairly maintain the independence of the board while acting to prevent this clear concern. This bill would seek to prevent the board from entering into is financial arrangements, such as sponsorships, with any arms manufacturer or exporter, would prevent the board from accepting any donation from any arms manufacturer or exporter, and would prevent any sitting member of the board from simultaneously holding a position at any firm involved in the arms trade.

In my view, these restrictions would prevent the IWD’s work and contribution to the national memory. During the work I did in researching this issue, I found that during the 2010s, the Museum’s Afghanistan Exhibit was sponsored by Boeing, despite the fact that Boeing was one of the most profitable firms as a result of the Afghanistan Conflict, suggesting that the work the Museum does to remember the dead and learn the lessons of war could be compromised. While I am pleased to see their name not on the most recent annual report, the fact that this was even a possibility was deeply troubling to me.

Deputy Speaker, if we are to learn the history and lessons of war, to remember the fallen and to recall how wars were started as a way to prevent future wars from arising, we must ensure that institutions that recall and archive war have integrity. It is my hope that this bill achieves that end.

This division will end at 10pm on the 9th August.