Enough money has been spent saving Venice

Enough money has been spent saving Venice

12 Jun 2006

The panel debate whether it is financially and culturally worthwhile to maintain attempts to prevent Venice from subsiding. Those who think Venice cannot be saved argue that financial aspects are not the main obstacles in resolving the flooding issues, and that other aspects, such as political and organisational problems, will be difficult to surmount; the sceptics say that every effort must be made to save the most beautiful city in the world. Is it possible to put a price on preserving such a beautiful and historic city?

Arguing in favour of the motion ‘Enough money has been spent on saving Venice’ are Professor Sir David King and Professor John Kay.

David King starts the debate by asking the audience if it is possible to put a price on saving Venice. Citing the example of the London Thames barriers, he suggests two main goals that need to be achieved: firstly, the necessity of taking global actions, in order to limit future global warming and sea rise; and secondly, the need to adapt ourselves to the changes that climate change has already started to bring about. John Kay captures the audience’s attention by stating that Italian Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi has just sold Venice to the Disney Corporation with the aim of transforming it into an amusement park. Kay explains how the city needs to improve its tourism management system, in a way similar to that achieved by the Yosemite National Park in California. He concludes his speech by emphasising that Venice’s problems are not just financial and technological, but also political and organisational.

Arguing against the motion are Professor Joseph Rykwert and A N Wilson.

Joseph Rykwert provides a different point of view by saying that flooding is not the only problem affecting the city of Venice: geologically, bradyseism (the regular uplifting of the earth’s surface) is irregular and more unforeseeable than flooding; instead, tourism industry and homogenisation of culture are the main threats. Rykwert finishes by suggesting that Venice has to reconsider its resources, and that if Venice is going to be saved, a different kind of political will is needed. A N Wilson asks the audience to imagine a world without Venice, where the city omly exists in museums, and provokes them by asking “Are you ready to destroy the most beautiful city in the world?”. He ends the debate by stating that money reasons are not sufficient to justify such a cultural loss, and suggests that every effort must be made to preserve Venice for future generations.

First vote: 101 For, 347 Against, 197 Don't know.

Final vote: 151 For, 475 Against, 34 Don't know.

The motion is defeated by 324 votes.

BUY THE DVD