Natural England

Matters arising from the 32nd meeting of the Countryside Agency

REVIEW OF FORMULA GRANT DISTRIBUTION TO LOCAL GOVERNMENT  

 

             The Chairman made it clear last spring in his foreword to ‘Rural Proofing in 2001/02’ that he viewed the effective rural proofing of the then ongoing local government finance review as one of the most important rural proofing objectives for the year. 

 

             The Board endorsed this position and agreed that the Countryside Agency should continue to seek to influence the review. 

 

             The Chairman made a number of representations to both ODPM and Defra ministers last summer and autumn during the final stages of the review. The consultation period officially ended last September, and the Agency submitted a formal statement outlining our views (based on the position agreed by the Board). The provisional local government finance settlement for 2003/04 was announced by the ODPM on 5 December and responses requested by 14 January 2003. The ODPM announced its final decisions on the settlement on 3 February 2003, and made no significant alterations from the provisional settlement.

 

             Our response to last December’s provisional settlement responded favourably to some of the Government’s conclusions whilst highlighting some areas of continuing concern. The key points we made included:

 

Ÿ         Noting that the settlement combined significant methodological changes as well as the provisional distribution figures to individual local authorities for 2003/04. We further noted that the ODPM stated that they did not expect to make further formula changes at least for the following two years beyond this settlement (i.e. until 2006/07). 

  

Ÿ         Shire local authorities received a reasonable settlement of 5.7% (less than the metropolitan settlement of 6.8% but more than the London settlement of 5.3%). This settlement was better, even a lot better, than some shire authorities had feared. Shire districts as a class appeared to have done particularly well, with a 7.6% gain. Rural districts looked to receive an increase in the region of 7.59%. Shire county councils received a 5.7% increase and shire unitary authorities a 6.3% increase. In overall terms, therefore, this settlement was welcome.

  

Ÿ         Nevertheless we noted that there were significant variations between shire authorities. Some (not all) shire authorities in the south east did not fare nearly so well. There were significant regional variations, with the East and West Midlands authorities receiving an average 7.1% increase but south eastern authorities receiving on average only a 4.5% increase. 

  

Ÿ         We expressed our view that the underlying methodology still did fully and properly reflects the requirements of local authorities to spend to meet the needs of rural residents and rural communities. We noted the conclusion of the Select Committee on the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister that insufficient research had been conducted during the three year review period and that too much of the settlement was still dependant on ministerial judgement rather than being evidence based.

  

Ÿ         We welcomed those changes that reflected the cost drivers faced by authorities serving rural populations. In particular we welcomed the refined deployment of a sparsity indicator within the primary schools sub block and noted that this had been properly based on detailed research. 

  

Ÿ         We flagged up the case for continued methodological reforms to further reflect rural cost drivers where justified by the evidence. We noted that sparsity indicators were still not being used in all areas where, prima facie, there was a case that they should be. We expressed concern over continued reliance on the “explanatory power” of regression analysis, as past expenditure is not necessarily an accurate reflection of need to spend. 

  

Ÿ         We outlined our view the current ‘sparsity’ indicators might  still be too blunt a proxy indicator of the need for authorities to spend to deliver services to rural communities. 

  

Ÿ         We noted that the future role of ‘floors’ and ‘ceilings’ in stabilising the system was significant. We noted that potentially negative impacts on some rural authorities had to some extent been cushioned (i) by the size of the overall settlement and (ii) by the use of ‘floors’ and ‘ceilings’. Clearly, it will be important in future years to protect rural authorities from further technical adjustments to the distribution system which might impact negatively on their budgets.

  

Ÿ         We particularly noted and welcomed the proposed introduction of a fixed costs allocation of £300,000, benefiting small predominantly rural districts (a reform we had specifically been backing).

 

             We have now developed a detailed research brief on the potential use of ‘dispersion’ and ‘settlement pattern’ indicators in place of ‘sparsity’ indicators within the new Formula Grant distribution system. We are discussing this with a number of stakeholders as well as with ODPM officials, who have been helpful and supportive and have agreed to serve on the research steering group. We hope that this research will commence next month and that its conclusions will provide some firm foundations for building the rural case in the future.

 

 

MID TERM REVIEW OF THE COMMON AGRICULTURAL POLICY  

 

             The European Commission issued its draft legislative proposals for the Mid-term Review of the CAP late in January and the Greek Presidency hope that the negotiations can be completed by June 2003.   The Franco-German agreement on a ceiling for the CAP budget last autumn has set the framework for the review.   It is now being seen more as a reform that will probably determine the shape and funding of the CAP until 2013.   Last week Defra issued a consultation paper on the proposals seeking a response by the end of February.   Agency officers are participating in numerous consultation meetings with Defra and are discussing the proposals with other LUPG agencies on 12th February.   We are drawing together a response based on the line agreed last year by the Agency Board.

 

 

TRANSPORT  

Matter arising from meeting of Multi Modal Studies (MMS)

 

            

             Fifteen of the multi modal studies have now reported. Ministerial decisions were made on three of these in 2001 and a further five at the end of 2002. In these latest announcements, we were pleased to see that the Government did not approve two schemes that we had argued against due to their impact on AONBs and has instead asked the Highways Agency to undertake further feasibility work. The two schemes are:

·             Dualling of the A303 through the Blackdown Hills AONB (where the Highways Agency has been asked to investigate the feasibility of dualling the A358 to Taunton instead – as originally assessed by the former Countryside Commission 10 years ago).

·             Dualling the section of the A1 north of Alnwick which lies 1km east of the Northumberland Coast AONB

             We look forward to contributing to the further work by the Highways Authority but are disappointed that these schemes have not been ruled out entirely.

 

             Decisions on a further five studies are expected in Spring 2003, including on the South Coast study. We are particularly concerned about this study as the recommended strategy includes a number of schemes which would have a serious impact on the proposed South Downs National Park if they were approved.

 

             Our Influencing Work in this Area

       1.       Influencing the outcome of individual studies

·             Engagement with study consultants and Government Office officials at regional level (particularly on studies which we have major concerns about such as SWARMMS and SoCoMMS)

·             National responses to Department for Transport (DfT) on all of the MMS that have reported to date

·     Close working with Defra - following advice from Richard Wakeford to Lord Whitty, there are now quarterly meetings between Defra and the statutory bodies

·             Supplying Defra with our ‘headline’ concerns for input into Lord Whitty’s responses to DfT

       2.    Rural proofing the MMS process and the application of the guidance

·       Contribution to a review of the MMS process commissioned by DfT

·       Submission to the Transport Select Committee Inquiry into MMS

·       Contributed the landscape appraisal element to a training course for MMS consultants organised by DfT (likely to be repeated next year)

       3.    Closer working with the Highways Agency (HA)

·             Richard Wakeford due to meet Tim Matthews (HA CEO) to discuss closer working relationship and emphasise importance of CA involvement in some of the proposals emerging from the MMS (e.g. A303)

·             Agreement for HA to meet each CA regional director to agree priority schemes for CA involvement as a consultee         

 

 

DISASTER RECOVERY PLAN specifically for the Agency’s Information Technology Systems   (Matter raised in December when the Agency Board considered the risk management plan - AP02/40)

 

             The existing SPIRIT contract provides for the regular backup and secure storage of Agency data.   It does not make a concrete provision for disaster recovery in the event of the loss of equipment.   The renegotiation of the SPIRIT contract will include a provision for disaster recovery based on defined responsibilities.   Terms of Reference have been defined for a study of the Agency’s disaster recovery requirements for information technology systems to the extent that this is not covered by the SPIRIT contract.  

 

 

TARGET AUDIENCE RESEARCH  

 

             To address the fundamental issues raised surrounding the Agency's role, its relationship with government and its priorities for the future, our revised strategy document and   new corporate plan, based in better focusing of our work,   will be launched by the chairman at a parliamentary briefing on   Tuesday 4 March, at which the Rural Affairs Minister Alun Michael will speak on the relationship between Defra and the Agency, and the importance of Agency activity.   

 

             Together with our revised structure, these will enable staff to convey our work in a more compelling way with clearer priorities and outcomes identified.

 

             To enable more effective communications with stakeholders and policy makers, we have introduced fortnightly strategy meetings to plan our strategic influencing programme, and are developing regional influencing plans. We are also putting in place programmes to provide better evaluation of our communications, and and to make sure staff have the necessary skills.

 

 

COUNTRYSIDE ACCESS AND THE HEALTH CONNECTION (AP02/25)

 

             In September 2002 the Board approved the Agency’s participation in a new pilot project with the Department of Health and Sport England.   The purpose of the project is to promote physical activity leading to better health outcomes by using the countryside and other recreational assets to increase participation.   The project now carries the title LEAP (Local Exercise Action Pilots).

 

             LEAP will:

 

·   fund  9 pilot projects across England, one in every region.   (Each pilot is led by a Primary Care Tust - the new local level of the NHS);

·              evaluatewhat happens to find out what works and why; and

·    share  the ideas and experiences amongst everyone interested in promoting activity and better health .

 

             A crucial next step is to select 9 pilots which satisfy the potentially differing requirements of the three partners.   A rigorous invitation and selection process involving Agency staff is due for completion by mid February.   By the time of the Board meeting it should be clear where the pilot projects are and what they will do.

 

SUMMARY OF THE NINE PILOTS SELECTED

 

Location	Interventions	Target Audiences	Relevance to Countryside Agency
North East Durham Dales	1. preventative programme with schools and communities. 2. out door residential camps (to tackle barriers to rural isolation). 3. peer champions. 4. young persons forum	5-14 year olds	low density, isolated rural area with market towns   countryside the location for some interventions
North West   Wigan	1. outreach work with older   people including social care settings. 2. extend senior health walks. 3. tackle barriers of transport and community safety.	older people	mixed urban and rural area with 14 towns and villages   walking and other low key activities promoted
Yorkshire and Humber   North Kirklees	1. targeted marketing campaign. 2. one to one motivational interviews leading to low key activities. 3. referring patients to exercise programme including 3 new health walks	Overweight and obese young people   South Asian girls   older people with diabetes	mixed urban and rural area with market towns   walking to be promoted
West Midlands   Dudley	1. encourage the use of parks and green spaces in five disadvantaged locations converting parks to ‘activity stations’	young people older people   high risk of heart disease and stroke   black and ethnic minorities	mixed urban and rural area with number of townships, no urban centre and 52% of borough open space    entire focus is use of parks and green spaces
East Midlands   Nottingham	1. audit of local opportunities. 2. peer mentoring. 3. training programme for primary care staff to increase knowledge of physical activity.	older people in 21 deprived wards	little direct relevance apart from audit model which is transferable to other communities
East of England   Great Yarmouth	1.   create 7 ‘community heartbeat’ way-marked walking routes 2. individual weight management programmes using gym, swimming and walking. 3. fitness programmes   delivered in isolated communities	community wide	mixed urban and rural area with satellite villages and pockets of deprivation, 12 miles of coastline   strong emphasis on walking routes and delivery in village halls
London   Wandsworth	1. personal advice about physical activity choices provided in GP surgeries. 2. healthy living map of choices. 3 promoting walking and cycling along refurbished river sides	young people   older people   high risk of heart disease and stroke	23% of area is open land and 19% of area is 60 green spaces   activities include walking and cycling
South East   Hastings	1.   food for sport. 2. after school activities. 3. health walks. 4. green gym	young people at risk of crime   older people at risk	use of green spaces and focus on the environment with green gym and health walks.
South West   West Cornwall	1. ‘activators’ to work face to face with target individuals who have been recommended for physical activity by health professionals, providing tailor made programmes and buddy support	high risk of heart disease and stroke   older people	remote rural area with few formal facilities for physical activity