Last chance for a royal folly

Despite this week's scathing report from the Commons public expenditure committee, the Diana memorial fountain could still be a success - if it pays for itself

Published in the Evening Standard 23 March 2006

In a way, yesterday was ideal for a visit to the Diana Memorial Fountain. It was so bone-chillingly cold, there was hardly anyone about – allowing the dozen or so spectators (most of them American tourists) to have the water sculpture all to themselves. They could stroll around the oval channel in Hyde Park undisturbed by crowds or noise, “thinking about their lives, thinking about Diana,” just as the designer, Kathryn Gustafson said she intended.

Several seemed pleasantly surprised by what they found. Despite the House of Commons public accounts committee, which this week condemned the memorial in a scathing report as “ill-conceived and ill-executed,” there was praise for it. “I think it’s wonderfully simple and direct,” said Craig Shelter, from Philadelphia. Barbara Herod, in from Gloucestershire, reckoned the fountain had been unfairly maligned. “I think it’s lovely. I love the dynamics of the water, the noise of it.”

It was hard to argue. The babble of the artificial stream, sometimes flowing slowly, sometimes like a rapid, is a pleasing sound in the centre of a London park. As we spoke, beams of winter sunlight reflected on the water. For a moment, the carpings of the MPs committee - “This so called water feature will literally be a drain on the resources of the Royal Parks Agency for years to come,” said the Tory chairman Edward Leigh – seemed like the grumblings of a few spoilsport misers.

But most days will not be like yesterday. Come the summer, the numbers will grow – perhaps not to the 5,000 an hour that came when the memorial first opened and which so overwhelmed Parks staff, that the site had to be closed two weeks after it opened – but grow they will. And looking around yesterday, I saw little to convince that trouble won’t strike again.

Everyone knows the litany of woes that befell the fountain; they have entered the capital’s folk memory. Within 24 hours of the official unveiling by the Queen in July 2004, leaves bunged up the works, prompting an overflow of water, turning the surrounding grass into a mudbath. Later that same month, three people who had been paddling in the water – just as Gustafson had said they should - slipped and injured themselves. The culprit: algae growing on the stonework. At the start of 2005, the memorial was closed again, for five months of repairs.

You can see the results. Now a fence surrounds the fountain, one apparently made of green plastic and which might well have been bought at Homebase. To avoid the mudslide problem, a Tarmac-style path hugs the sculpture at several bends. New turf has been laid which, we’re told, functions like the grass on football pitches, draining water efficiently – stopping what was meant to look like a meadow from turning into a bog. This week, though, came word of new problems, with reports of hairline cracks between some of the 545 blocks of Cornish granite.

Managers insist the first woes, at least, are solved. Now the rules tell visitors that they should “Feel free to sit on the side and paddle your feet or hands.” They hope there’ll be no repeat of the scenes that first summer, when burly South African security guards had to patrol this area of contemplation and reflection, telling children to stay the hell out of the water.

Even if the fountain does shake off its initial bad luck, I’m not sure it’s worth the astronomic costs revealed by the public accounts committee. Already £2.2m over its initial £3m budget, maintenance costs have doubled from a planned £120,000 to £250,000 a year. With finite resources, that means the Royal Parks will have to spend less on recreational facilities elsewhere in order to find the £25m needed to maintain the Diana fountain over the course of the century.

Put like that, it hardly sounds a good deal. The Diana memorial is not hideous, it’s not an eyesore or a monstrous carbunkle on the face of Hyde Park. It’s pleasant. Try hard enough and you can even divine a symbolic reflection of the woman herself. The water flows in opposite directions, a reminder perhaps of the conflicting currents in the personality of the late princess. At the top of the slope, the stream cascades down a short flight of steps, reminiscent of the long train on Diana’s bridal dress, as she ascended the steps of St Pauls for her wedding. And if all that sounds too churningly pretentious, you can just see it as a nice spot for an afternoon picnic.

But none of that is good enough to justify the enormous flood of money this project has already swallowed – and will continue to drain for years to come.

There are two realistic options. The first is to find an alternative source of funds. Last May the Royal Parks Foundation floated the idea of seeking sponsorship for the sites in their care, which range from Speaker’s Corner to the sports fields in Regent’s Park. Of course, we would all balk at the prospect of gross advertising hoardings or corporate logos, but there is another way.

A few years back, there was a row when the watchdogs of Diana’s memory allowed Flora margarine to use her likeness on their products. Why not do a simple trade: if a company agrees to foot the bill for the Diana fountain they can have limited rights to the Diana image (so long as they stick to certain guidelines on taste and tackiness). That way, the Diana memorial could truly pay for itself.

If that doesn’t work, there’s a more drastic choice. We can see how things go this summer, see if the crowds come, see if children can follow their instincts and play with the water without causing a disaster. If they can, fine. If they cannot, and things go wrong again, it will be time to stop throwing good money after bad. Give the Diana fountain one more chance: if it fails then, shut it down for good.

Posted on March 23, 2006 05:40 PM

---