First St Stephen’s Chapel executive board meeting
King’s Manor, University of York
Tuesday 20 May 2014, 2.30pm
MINUTES
In attendance: Elizabeth Hallam Smith (chair), John Cooper, Tim Ayers, Miles Taylor,
Caroline Shenton, Mark Collins, Rosemary Hill, Mark Ormrod, Anthony Geraghty, Dee Dyas
1. EHS welcomed all present. Apologies were received from Paul Seaward. AG was thanked
for joining the board.
2. JPDC delivered his PI’s report, commenting on staffing and project space, academic
objectives, the budget, and the relationship with project partners. 6 month reports have
been received from James Jago, Simon Neal, Elizabeth Biggs, and Martha Vandrei. The
board welcomed the highly skilled and collaborative core team of researchers already in
place, and look forward to RH joining as research fellow on 1 July 2014. Dr Martha Vandrei
(in post 1 November 2013-30 April 2014) was thanked for her excellent contribution to the
project. The board welcomed the impressive degree of co-operation established between
the AHRC research team, TA’s Leverhulme project and the separately funded AHRC PhD
students James Hillson and Becki Moore, as evidence that we are fulfilling our co-ordination
role as set out in the case for support submitted to AHRC.
A project meeting and academic seminar were held at the Palace of Westminster on 25
November 2013. The project has presented its objectives and some preliminary findings in
Parliament (Lords and Commons works of art committees), at research seminars, and in the
IHR ‘Past and Future’ magazine. There was discussion about how to identify and carry
forward the recommendations by Peers and MPs which fall most clearly within the
parameters of the project. CS suggested we consider producing a publicity leaflet for
distribution during the 2015 Year of Parliament. [Update: following the meeting, CS
suggested the idea of writing a popular book on St Stephen’s arising from the academic
research and VSS reconstruction. CS to discuss with her agent; JPDC to consider with MC]
The tightness of the overall budget, especially in regard to travel expenses, was noted.
Suggestions included using Skype for some meetings, and the Mark Fitch and William
Lambarde funds as potential sources of travel money for researchers. RH’s later start
should allow some resource to be re-allocated to travel expenses and/ or VSS.
The three period leaders (TA, JPDC, MT) agreed to review and set achievable targets for the
academic outputs to which we are committed in the case for support. The board welcomed
1
the valuable co-operation between the project and its partners (Palace of Westminster, IHR,
History of Parliament) and discussed ways in which these relationships might be further
developed.
Action points:
 To conduct a preliminary audit of the budget with Melanie Macrae [JPDC]
 To review the recommendations of the works of art committees, and identify
which to prioritise [JPDC, EHS]
 To set achievable targets for academic outputs in the three period areas [TA, JPDC,
MT]
 To investigate the Mark Fitch and William Lambarde funds [JPDC]
 To consider a publicity leaflet for 2015 [TA, James Jago]
 To identify and pursue ways of consolidating the project’s partnership with the IHR,
including seminar presentations and the IHR website [MT]
 To plan for a presentation at the conference of the International Commission for
the History of Representative and Parliamentary Institutions (30 June-2 July 2015,
invitation of Paul Seaward) in co-ordination with the project’s own summer 2015
colloquium [MT to consult with PS]
3. TA delivered a report on the Virtual St Stephen’s reconstruction project and broader
impact-related activity. Monthly meetings have been held with Christianity and Culture to
establish priorities for the research, and enable the virtual modelling to proceed in tandem.
At the most recent of these meetings, Anthony Masinton presented the tantalising first
glimpses of the St Stephen’s chapel model. The idea of focusing on three ‘pausing points’
(1360s, post-Wren, 1832) was discussed. The importance of complementing, rather than
duplicating, material already available on the Palace of Westminster’s Living Heritage
webpages was noted. The board thanked TA and the Christianity and Culture team for their
hard work, which is already yielding exciting results.
Progress on the project website was also welcomed. Some necessary updates still need to
be implemented, but the site is expanding in content and is visually impressive. The site will
need to be frequently refreshed; blog posts would be welcomed from any member of the
research team and executive board (thanks to EHS for her own contribution). A project
Twitter feed has been established, maintained by Elizabeth Biggs with additional
contributions from the project team.
Action points:
 To implement updates to the website [James Jago]
 To contribute blog posts [TA, JPDC, others]
2
4. The three period leaders (TA, medieval; JPDC, early modern; MT, modern) gave oral
reports. Good progress is being made, notably by Elizabeth Biggs (on the College 13481548, supervised by WMO and JPDC); by the partnership of James Jago and Simon Neal (on
the early modern Commons chamber); and by Martha Vandrei, who has created a miniarchive of material to hand to RH. JPDC shared his concern that his personal research had
barely begun, owing to the start-up costs of the project and also the need to prepare for the
parliamentary committee appearances (an opportunity which clearly had to be seized). He
will need to keep this closely monitored. MT reported that his own research had not yet
gathered momentum, although he would be free to concentrate on it when he stood down
as director of the IHR.
5. TA reported that a proposal has been submitted to the Westminster Hall Advisory Group
regarding the 2015 exhibition. [Update: since the board meeting, this proposal has been
accepted for the north wall of Westminster Hall.]
6. MT reported that arrangements for the 2015 project colloquium at the Palace of
Westminster were in hand. After consultation, a list of people to invite had been identified.
Delegates will be local rather than international, thus reducing the travel costs; even so, the
project budget will have to be examined carefully before offers of travel and
accommodation can be made. The intended venue remains the Jubilee Room; Lord
Cormack to be approached for his support if necessary.
Action points:
 To co-ordinate with Lord Cormack to book the Jubilee Room for the 2015
colloquium, and to finalise the list of delegates [MT]
 To begin planning for the 2016 project conference [MT]
7. Discussion was had regarding ideas for broader project impact, including a re-enacted
parliamentary debate (possibly in St Stephen’s Hall and involving current Members of the
two Houses), a concert of sacred music in St Mary Undercroft (the possibility of the
parliamentary choir singing the state prayers was warmly welcomed), and the busting of
parliamentary myths (eg Spencer Perceval and the tiles). The advice of PS should be sought
on the re-enacted debate. The project blog and Twitter feed could be used to discuss and
dispel myths. EHS proposed a separate meeting with JPDC to discuss these ideas. Tom
O’Leary and the public engagement and learning team, and BBC Parliament, should also be
involved in the conversation.
3
WMO alerted the board to the AHRC Follow-on Funding for Impact and Engagement
scheme, to ‘explore unforeseen pathways to impact’. Applications can be made either
during or following the funded life of a project.
Action points:
 To identify historic debates relating to St Stephen’s, suitable for re-enactment by
Members [PS, JPDC]
 To organise a follow-up meeting to decide which events to prioritise [EHS, JPDC,
Tom O’Leary, BBC Parliament]
 To consider the AHRC FoF scheme as a means of stimulating and co-ordinating
impact, eg through the appointment of an impact officer [JPDC to consult with
WMO and Sarah Burton]
8. JPDC reported ongoing discussions with Mark Fielder from Quickfire Media regarding a
television documentary. BBC4 has not picked up the idea, so JPDC and TA are working with
Mark on a re-calibrated treatment for BBC2. Michael Portillo is interested in presenting.
Success may depend on the access that can be negotiated to the Undercroft Chapel and
Cloister.
9. The forthcoming presentation of the project to the House of Commons administration
committee (Sir Alan Haselhurst) was noted. Thought will need to be given to how this
should differ (if at all) from previous presentations to the works of art committees, and also
what kinds of support should be sought.
Action point:
 EHS and JPDC to discuss the tone and content of the committee presentation. To
decide who should present [JPDC, TA, MT].
10. Under AOB, thanks were sent to Dr Suzanne Cooper for the cake.
The meeting closed at 4.30pm.
JPDC 23-v-14
4