UK government asked to return conservation award for demolition of former embassy building

[DJ54]

The building should have been saved.... 

[maxcorrigan]

3 hours ago, Surasak said:

I want to know wot the deleted word woz????

<deleted>!????

[kevinmartyn]

The sad truth is the Thai Government really does not care about conserving any historical building including the UK colonial building in Wireless Road Bangkok for future generations! The only incentives is cash. Really did Bangkok really need another "Mall"!????

[josephbloggs]

6 hours ago, Misterwhisper said:

Just to set the record straight: It was Central Group that bought the land from the Brits and demolished the building so yet another superfluous luxury department store can be built. In this context, it was a THAI COMPANY that had no regard for "the historical and architectural value of the building."

 

The Brits conserved and maintained the building while it was still their property. The Thais didn't. Recalling the award is unwarranted. And the Thai Fine Arts Department FAILED to declare the building as national heritage, thus protecting it. 

 

Of course there's not a single word as to who is actually responsible for the demolition.  

Wow, that's quite a twist.  So you think somebody can buy the site for £420m and then you expect them to leave the building there and look at it?  Do you not think the fault lies with the people who put it up for sale to the highest bidder with not a scant bit of regard for what might happen to it?

The fault lies firmly with the Foreign Ministry and to pretend otherwise is ridiculous.  

Personally I think it was a historic building but not a particularly beautiful one.  The grounds were beautiful.  I don't think it's worth getting anyone's knickers in a twist but I think it is very disrespectful of the UK to sell it off considering the original plot - not this one - was gifted to them.  It just seems wrong.

And for all the hand wringers on here, if someone offered you close to half a billion quid for a historic building you owned yet you knew it would be demolished to make way for a shopping centre, tell me you wouldn't take it - and I'll call you a liar.  And we DIDN'T conserve and maintain it very well - it was pretty run down.  But yeah, blame the Thais.

[Naamblar2014]

7 hours ago, Jane Dough said:

I propose that all Britons in Thailand club together to pay for a new plaque. 

 

It can go where the embassy once stood with the inscription:

 

"British Embassy woz 'ere. We did <deleted> all for anybody".

 

Rooster

 

 

Poor old Brit's losing their conservation award and next losing the ashes ????

[Jane Dough]

18 minutes ago, Naamblar2014 said:

Poor old Brit's losing their conservation award and next losing the ashes ????

You can't lose them when you don't have them. 

 

Rooster

[Redline]

8 hours ago, keith101 said:

It was the developer not the UK Government that demolished the building so take it up with them , once the building was sold they are responsible for all actions taken .

Yes, and the plaque was still in the building-check the pawn shops ????

[Thaifriends]

What heritage Brits have built? London Bridge? Buckingam palace?

Hong Kong airport? 2 billions receivable for that £

 

Review of history shows that the world heritage like Taj Mahal was stolen of its jewels which were fixed on the walls. So to preserve a heritage is not in the apetite, but money and Middle East oil is

 

So embassy a heritage? Kiss good bye to it ????

 

[Lokie]

Indian Givers!

[Mark mark]

Yes good on them, the Siamese Architects !!! for taking the award back !!!

 

And how Disgusting of the Brits, ... the Greatest Seafaring nation in the world !!! .... But to cash strapped, and Mean, and short sighted, to preserve Beauty, and Historic Culture !!! ... Still "It is only Thailand", isn't it Boys !!! ... Wank Wank Money in the bank !!! ... Knock the F'cxxr down and save the tax payers enough money for a few Extra Bevvies !!! Right ? 

[Shiver]

8 hours ago, kensisaket said:

My guess is they are ticked off; because, that was probably one of the few buildings in Bkk not built to Thai building code; and, it could definitely withstand any kind of natural disaster without crumbling to the ground.  

The English would respond with "rather miffed" ???? 

I'm sorry, I'm English I'm afraid...

[inThailand]

another brake failure?

[Letseng]

19 hours ago, keith101 said:

It was the developer not the UK Government that demolished the building so take it up with them , once the building was sold they are responsible for all actions taken .

Brits sold because they needed money, and they couldn't care less about the history. I'm surprised they didn't sell Queen Vic to the smelter for cash. 

[brianthainess]

18 hours ago, BobBKK said:

They should look to their own laws. What allows this to happen?  planning permission etc.

BTW I understand that the Union Jack will be flown at half mast and black armbands issued. The UK government will be issuing their own plaque to the ASA:

Outstanding Conservation of Architectural Farts

Maybe it should be flown upside down as a sign of distress. ????

[bristolgeoff]

a previous comment is right.they sold it the new owners destroyed the building.nothing to do with the uk government.another high rise or mall for bkk,just what bkk needs

[newatthis]

15 hours ago, kevinmartyn said:

The sad truth is the Thai Government really does not care about conserving any historical building including the UK colonial building in Wireless Road Bangkok for future generations! The only incentives is cash. Really did Bangkok really need another "Mall"!????

It has been 8 -9 months since Iconsiam opened, you know. Bangkokians will be getting bored soon.????

[Pablosbmb]

On 8/24/2019 at 2:25 AM, yimlitnoy said:

But it is all about losing face.  It remains true that the City of Bangkok has complete disregard for their heritage.  Have a look at Hanoi and you will see how important it is for Vietnam to preserve historical sites. 

From what i can see they lose face on a daily basis but refuse to acknowledge it....just like a child who puts their hands in front of their eyes and thinks they are invisible. Ship Of Fools! 

[tgw]

the building was not even old...

[jinjo]

Is this really George Orwell's 1984.  Look it was very charming building obviously of a by gone era.  If it was that important with all due respect the ASA could of raise the funds to buy the property, or bid to do the demolition and removal of the building to a fitting location...

 

Reminds me of the rao against the Donald Trump demolition of the Bonwit Teller Building in particular the Art Deco-Facade Sculpture for the erection of Trump Tower.  The Art community was asking for these two Facade Sculpture of Interest to be preserved.  But no one offer to lift a finger to remove and preserve, only lip service, and public ridicule was ever given... 

 

And as most things in life goes "Time is Money."

 

 

[Just Weird]

On 8/24/2019 at 2:01 PM, stevenl said:

Glad to see many TVF posters immediately coming to the UK defense.

Perhaps that's just a reasonable reaction to the illogical attacks on the British government, in this context, by Thaivisa posters?

[Just Weird]

On 8/24/2019 at 2:05 PM, evadgib said:

 

Up until 2006 or thereabouts queues of 1000+ applying for visas and/or passports from 6am daily were commonplace.

 

A film about the Tsunami starring (among others) Hugh Bonneville was filmed on location including inside the Embassy & Ambassadors residence & more recently an FCO fly-on-the-wall documentary did same.

 

HTH

Yes, I know that, I also know that none of those queueing had access to the rest of Embassy to view the beauty of the buildings!

 

By the way, if you quote my comments, please do not alter the content of my comment as you did by bolding some of the text as that can alter the intended tone of my comment and, potentially, the context, and is not allowed by forum rules.  Thanks.

[Just Weird]

On 8/24/2019 at 2:14 PM, natway09 said:

What you need to remember is that the Brits never paid for the land in the first place.

It was bequethed  to them & that makes it a pure case of greed by the Foreign Office of the UK

Personally I think it is shameful

What you need to remember is that land was paid for by the British government.  It was bought with the proceeds of the sale of the original premises and land in the Charoen Krung Road area that had been presented by the King at the time (partly in recompense for the beating to death of an employee at the original mission).

[Just Weird]

On 8/24/2019 at 7:11 PM, happy chappie said:

Thais passing the buck onto the farang,i would never believe it.

how about we give them the plaque back and they repay the uk the  100s of million pounds we've given them in foreign aid over the decades which would of been split nicely between the corrupt.

i once read some half wit dicks from a uk road safety campaign donated £20,000 to make chalong roundabout safe.all it needed was a used tractor tyre painting white and job done.i wonder how much Thailand gives out in foreign aid each year with the massive booming economy.it probably starts with and ends with a zero.

I'm sure you'll find that the UK gave no money whatsoever to the Association of Siamese Arcitects, never mind "hundreds of millions of pounds".  The request for the return of the plaque has not come from the Thai government!

[Just Weird]

On 8/24/2019 at 7:15 PM, SuwadeeS said:

Thais should learn some important things.

1. Learn to blame the own citizen, not blame always foreigners.

2. Face the truth and learn from your mistakes in your own history.

3. .....

4.......

Thais as the population are not involved in this report, a small group of Thai architects are, that's all.

[evadgib]

27 minutes ago, Just Weird said:

Yes, I know that, I also know that none of those queueing had access to the rest of Embassy to view the beauty of the buildings!

 

By the way, if you quote my comments, please do not alter the content of my comment as you did by bolding some of the text as that can alter the intended tone of my comment and, potentially, the context, and is not allowed by forum rules.  Thanks.

Nonsense; the bold merely explained the point I was responding to. If you feel otherwise report it.

[Just Weird]

Just now, evadgib said:

Nonsense; the bold merely explained the point I was responding to. If you feel otherwise report it.

Sorry, your bold may have been intended to "explain the point" but it was also an alteration to my quote and (a) that is not permitted and (b) it is not nonsense.  If you want to emphasise part of my quote then re-type with bold emphasis.

[Kinnock]

On 8/24/2019 at 1:42 PM, crazykopite said:

It was not the U.k Government that demolished the building they sold it to a Thai development company who have sine demolished such a beautiful building to make way for another ugly shopping mall.   ☹️☹️☹️  

I'm not sure if this is strictly correct.  The original report said that the British Embassy had demolished the building to ensure that it was not an obstacle to the redevelopment. 

 

Either way I doubt Central was able to send Khun Wreckit Ralph onto the grounds of a functioning Embassy without the prior consent of HMG.

 

To quote Sir Humphrey from 'Yes Minister' .....

 

"Unfortunately, although the answer was indeed clear, simple, and straightforward ...... the precise correlation between the information you communicated and the facts, insofar as they can be determined and demonstrated, is such as to cause epistemological problems".

 

[Rookiescot]

Her Majesty's government would be happy to return the award however it was nailed to a wall inside the embassy. We suspect neither the wall or the award are still there.

[evadgib]

6 minutes ago, Just Weird said:

Sorry, your bold may have been intended to "explain the point" but it was also an alteration to my quote and (a) that is not permitted and (b) it is not nonsense.  If you want to emphasise part of my quote then re-type with bold emphasis.

Quote

If you feel otherwise report it.

 

[Just Weird]

11 minutes ago, evadgib said:

Nonsense; the bold merely explained the point I was responding to. If you feel otherwise report it.

 "If you feel otherwise report it".

Ok.