Foreign Office's antique anaconda cost £10,000 to re-stuff

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-20174582

The Foreign Office has spent £10,000 on the "essential maintenance" of a stuffed anaconda called Albert.
The 20ft snake has been hanging in the library of what is now William Hague's department since the 19th Century.
But officials sent it for a scan after noticing it was in poor condition - and the sorry-looking snake was re-stuffed.
Foreign Office officials say they are obliged to maintain the department's assets - and Albert is seen as one such asset.

Sigh!How can I take the government's cuts seriously?Really?Getting a stuffed snake re-stuffed is more important than saving money?

I don't know, if it's been there since the 19th century that it might be a act of barbarism to let it go.

Sorry Damien I think that's rather a poor reason..

Originally Posted by Maggy J

Sorry Damien I think that's rather a poor reason..

I don't. £10,000 is the grand scheme of things is nothing. Letting historical items or buildings go to waste to save money needs to be a decision that isn't taken lightly. The Government probably has a multitude of these types of items and buildings, items and locations that have seen generations of British royalty and politicians pass them by. I think it can be a sobering and inspiring thought when you're in a place that has seen so much history. Imagine staff working on desks on which their predecessors conducted affairs of Empire or plotted during World War 2. Some countries do not have that.

That isn't to say it's always justified but it's not a obvious choice. Is £10,000 really too much to pay to restore such an item?

^This.

As an antique it has value, which belongs to the nation. The Government has a responsibility to protect the value of such assets. Allowing valuable national assets to rust and rot would be short term cultural vandalism.

[Derek]

£10,000 isn't really a huge amount when you look at how much the impending renovations of Westminster are going to cost.

Originally Posted by Derek

£10,000 isn't really a huge amount when you look at how much the impending renovations of Westminster are going to cost.

Maybe not but it would be a reasonable way to save money.

Originally Posted by Maggy J

Maybe not but it would be a reasonable way to save money.

Not if failing to spend £10k on preserving an antique asset results in that asset's value plummeting or vanishing entirely.

Originally Posted by Chris

^This.

As an antique it has value, which belongs to the nation. The Government has a responsibility to protect the value of such assets. Allowing valuable national assets to rust and rot would be short term cultural vandalism.

If it was something useful I might have agreed with your suggestion.However one can't sit on a stuffed snake or write on a stuffed snake or put books on a stuffed snake.As an antique it wouldn't have been missed at all and for £10,000 I'm sure they could have bought a reasonably cheaper antique.

I'm just getting rather sick of being told that we should all be spending money more wisely in our own lives and that the nation must try and make cutbacks as a nation and then they do something like this.

And I think you've been gripped by an attack of the sort of short-termism for which politicians are often criticised. That, and a failure to grasp the magnitude of the national budget and the fact that £10k is less than a rounding error that could not even be easily transferred to another department. I can see how this makes shocking headlines but seriously, this is simply what it costs to maintain our historic buildings and their contents.

Think of it this way. If things get *really* bad, at least Albert is now in a state where he can be sold, hopefully for something well in excess of £10k.

[danielf]

Originally Posted by Maggy J

If it was something useful I might have agreed with your suggestion.However one can't sit on a stuffed snake or write on a stuffed snake or put books on a stuffed snake.

Strange reasoning for someone whom I think teaches Art?

[Osem]

Originally Posted by Damien

I don't. £10,000 is the grand scheme of things is nothing. Letting historical items or buildings go to waste to save money needs to be a decision that isn't taken lightly. The Government probably has a multitude of these types of items and buildings, items and locations that have seen generations of British royalty and politicians pass them by. I think it can be a sobering and inspiring thought when you're in a place that has seen so much history. Imagine staff working on desks on which their predecessors conducted affairs of Empire or plotted during World War 2. Some countries do not have that.

That isn't to say it's always justified but it's not a obvious choice. Is £10,000 really too much to pay to restore such an item?

I must be slipping as I find myself in agreement...

---------- Post added at 20:10 ---------- Previous post was at 20:09 ----------

Originally Posted by heero_yuy

A better option would have been to put it up on Ebay, saved the £10K and made what it was really worth.

This sort of waste is endemic across all sections of government and it really has to stop. It has nothing to do with preserving treasures for the nation and everything to do with the waste that the elite think they should spend our money on.

It's hardly the Mona Lisa is it?

It's probably a good deal prettier than the Mona Lisa.

Originally Posted by danielf

Strange reasoning for someone whom I think teaches Art?

What the hell does a stuffed snake have to do with art?

[Osem]

Originally Posted by Maggy J

What the hell does a stuffed snake have to do with art?

Ask Damien Hirst.

Originally Posted by Chris

And I think you've been gripped by an attack of the sort of short-termism for which politicians are often criticised. That, and a failure to grasp the magnitude of the national budget and the fact that £10k is less than a rounding error that could not even be easily transferred to another department. I can see how this makes shocking headlines but seriously, this is simply what it costs to maintain our historic buildings and their contents.

Think of it this way. If things get *really* bad, at least Albert is now in a state where he can be sold, hopefully for something well in excess of £10k.

£10,£10,000,£100,0000 or ten million..it's still waste surely?

I'm not even playing party politics here folks.I truly think it's a waste of public money and my inner soul cringes.