Natural England

Minutes of the 24th Meeting of the Countryside Agency

Present: Ewen Cameron, Chairman

Pam Warhurst, Deputy Chair

Kate Ashbrook 

Janet Bradbury

Dr Victoria Edwards

Peter Fane

Tony Hams 

Rt Rev Graham James 

Prof Philip Lowe

Catherine Mack

Frances Rowe

Sue Stapely

In attendance: Richard Wakeford, Chief Executive

Margaret Clark, Director

David Coleman, Director

Sarah Sleet, Director

Isobel Coy, Head of Media & Parliamentary Affairs

Wendy Thompson, Head of Management Support Group

CHAIRMAN'S INTRODUCTION

The Chairman welcomed members of the public and Countryside Agency staff as observers to the meeting. 

1. APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE

Apologies had been received from Martin Doughty, Luna Frank-Riley and Jon Tomlinson.

2. MINUTES OF MEETING HELD 18 OCTOBER 2001

The minutes were approved and signed by the Chairman.

3. MATTERS ARISING

AP01/26 MINISTRY OF DEFENCE ISSUES

Voluntary bodies had studied the Secretary of State's decision on the Otterburn Inquiry and had called on the Agency and others to support them in pressing for the successor to the M28 rocket, which would be used at Otterburn, to be subject to a notice of proposed development as well as a full environmental assessment.

AP00/52

The Board acknowledged the tremendous work which had gone into launching the consultation on the open access maps on 12 November and were pleased with the positive press coverage received. The small and patchy areas of access land in the south-east indicated the amount of work needed to restore downland.

AP01/17

Discussions at the final Rural Task Force meeting on 13 November had been inconclusive about a programme to re-launch the countryside in spring 2002, but the Minister of State at DEFRA (Alun Michael) had called a meeting with the Countryside Agency, DCMS, and the English Tourism Council to discuss this on 19 November. 

4. SOUTH-WEST COAST PATH: REVIEW OF NATIONAL TRAIL IN SOUTH DEVON (AP01/43)

(In attendance, Bob Roberts and Anne Cameron)

In introducing the paper, Bob Roberts reminded the Board that in 1998 the Ramblers Association and the South West Way (Coast Path) Association had asked the Secretary of State to use his reserve powers to realign a section of the National Trail between Strete Gate and Warren Point. The Agency was invited to advise and to do this had commissioned a review and then undertook informal consultation with local people and interested parties affected by the re-alignment. He reminded Board members that they had all received the summary of the review, a summary of the responses to the consultation and also a number of direct approaches from representatives of the holders of property in the area. In addition Pam Warhurst and Cate Mack had visited the site of the proposed change the previous day. Whilst acknowledging that there was some strong opposition to the proposals in the paper, the Board were invited to agree that the South-West Coast Path should be re-routed as recommended.

In discussion the following points were made:

a. The Board confirmed that they had received the report, the representations and the full summary of the responses to the informal consultation. The Chairman said that it was the job of the Board that day to confirm that the processes and strategies leading to a decision to re-route were correct, but not to agree the particular route for the diversion.

b. Pam Warhurst and Cate Mack were pleased that they had been invited to visit the area the previous day and thanked the South-West Coast Path team for arranging this. They believed they had been presented with a sensitive, fair and balanced perspective on the proposals. 

c. The part of the coast under discussion was of high scenic quality. However, some parts of the National Trail did not provide a high quality experience for visitors. The constraints of the cliffs, road and properties made it difficult to find the ideal route in some places but it was important to make improvements. The National Trail at this point attracted substantially fewer visitors than elsewhere on the route, perhaps because of the poor quality experience. It had been estimated that the coast path as a whole attracted £15 million a year to the south west economy and there was potential to increase this in the area between Strete Gate and Warren Point.

d. It was important that the realignment respected the views of landowners and the security of their properties, so far as possible. Those who had put across alternative views were thanked for taking the time to do so. The representations had been looked at thoroughly and would help to achieve the right balance between the interests of the individual property owners and the need to improve the National Trail. 

e. The maps presented a concept of where the route should pass rather than a definitive line. The Board concluded that the indicative line was more or less right but there were a few pinch points where it would be necessary to get the exact alignment right. It was important to work with Devon County Council and the appropriate parish councils to work up the final route as quickly as possible. 

f. The scale and timing of any compensation was unknown and had not been provided for in the Corporate Plan. It was likely that there would be a financial burden on the Countryside Agency which was responsible for funding the creation of National Trails. The Agency would explore whether some of the funding could be found from other sources, such as the South West Regional Development Agency. If the costs gave doubt about value for money the Chief Executive would return to the Board for advice. 

g. With the approval of the Board, discussions with Devon County Council staff would proceed with a view to defining the best line for the realignment. The timing of the full process remained unclear until initial discussions about the work programme had taken place.

Summing up the discussion, the Chairman said that the Agency had:

• accepted the recommendation to re-route the South West Coast Path National Trail between Strete Gate and Warren Point and to notify the Secretary of State;
• authorised officers to work with Devon County Council and others to define the best precise line based on the preferred solution recommended by the review and that the Chairman and Deputy Chair should approve this line and submit it to the Secretary of State; 
• agreed that the Agency should fund the payment of compensation to property owners if necessary but should also look at other sources of funding.  

5. REGIONAL GOVERNANCE (AP01/44)

(In attendance Claire Spink)

Introducing the paper, Claire Spink reported that the strategy proposed in the paper had been prepared in consultation with the regional directors. She emphasised the need for a consistent approach to regional governance across the Agency regions and the useful role the Agency could play in working across regional boundaries. She drew attention to the enhanced role proposed for Board members. In recognising their personal time constraints the aim would be to seek to use the knowledge and experience they held strategically. In responding to the White Paper on regional governance she sought confirmation that the Agency should be concerned with getting the policies right for the regions rather than with the structures which would be put in place.

In discussion the following points were made:

a. It was an important role for the Agency to join up regional policy to ensure a cohesive approach overall. The remit of the Agency was relevant to rural and urban people and it should not be sidelined into a 'rural only box'. The Agency needed to be engaged in a range of issues beyond rural proofing. It would need to be prepared to work with others, both strategically and at the point of delivery. This would be challenging - especially at sub-regional level. 

b. The role proposed for Board members involved a fundamental rethink and should be the subject of a more detailed discussion before a decision was made. It was hoped that a workshop, involving Regional Directors, the Executive and Board members, could be arranged the evening before the December Board meeting to provide an opportunity to do this and to explore how to become more engaged in a broad range of regional issues.

c. Foot and mouth disease had led to a lot of suspicion about national policy which emphasised the need for all national initiatives to consider the regional perspective. The Agency should be taking account of the regional dimension in any experimental scheme it operated. 

d. The Agency should also acknowledge what it had already achieved such as the regional state of the countryside reports, the regional rural deprivation maps, the close involvement in some of the regional round tables for sustainable development and the co-authorship of the rural action plan for the north-east.

e. There was a sense of urgency and a need to gear up now for full engagement. The politics of the regions were moving quickly and the Agency needed to keep ahead of the changes. The Executive needed to be sure that the regional directors were fully equipped to do this. The Executive also needed to clarify, through implementation and rural assurance managers, how the national plan approved by the Board could be delivered in a flexible way at the regional level. 

Summing up the discussion, the Chairman said that the Agency had approved the general framework for regional influencing set out in Annex 1 of the paper. Implementation would be discussed with regional directors at a seminar in December. 

6. NATIONAL PARK POLICY REVIEW (AP01/45)

(In attendance, Paul Walshe and Richard Partington)

Introducing the paper Paul Walshe reminded the Board that the draft response had been prepared following the Board seminar held on 18 October in Kings Lynn. 

In discussion the following points were made:

a. The draft response was adventurous and reflected the Agency's aspirations for better National Parks. Overall the response was strong and reflected the points made at the October seminar. However, there were slight differences between the points made in the paper and the detailed response in Annex 4 which needed to be corrected. For example, there was a reference in the paper to a regional role which was not fully reflected in the draft response. 

• b. The 'first stop shop' concept should be extended to all rural enterprise schemes and not just farming. The term first stop shop was more accurate than one stop shop and should be used consistently in the response.

c. The Board agreed that National Parks should have more discretion to spend on social and economic objectives. The response needed to expand on the difficulties the Parks had in interpreting the duty to seek to foster the social and economic well-being of local communities. But the legislation did not appear to contain quite the limitations suggested. National Parks were living landscapes, not museums, and depended on a buoyant mixed economy. They should be role models for sustainable development and a narrow interpretation of the social and economic duty would prevent them achieving this. With improved evaluation and monitoring the Parks would be in a position to demonstrate sustainable development in practice. 

d. The response needed to explain the role of the Countryside Agency more clearly. Annex 3 of the paper set out the Agency powers and duties in relation to National Parks. The need for the role of the Agency needed to be fully justified in the paper. The response needed to explain that the Agency had statutory duties which it had an obligation to undertake and was keen to increase its involvement. 

e. On funding, it was right to suggest that DEFRA delegated regulatory and funding control of a ring-fenced National Parks budget to the Agency, although not all of the Board were convinced that it was right for the Agency to decide the absolute size of the National Park Grant. The Countryside Agency would be interested to distribute to the National Parks a budget ring-fenced by DEFRA. This could be a way to help DEFRA make efficiency savings. Either way, a transparent formula for funding National Parks was needed and this should be based on best value performance plans. 

f. The response needed to recognise the wider, international, context of our national parks, the lead they can show to protected areas overseas and also what we can learn from overseas areas.

g. Detailed points on the response included:

• recommending that the number of members on a National Park Authority are reduced;
• stating that the Agency would not support the appointment of National Park Authority chairmen by the Secretary of State;
• recommending that a robust system of accountability was implemented with processes for enforcement;
• adding more detail on the process of appointing parish council members to explain how it would be open and democratic; 
• recommending that all National Park Authority members should be appraised regularly.  

Summing up the discussion, the Chairman said that the Agency had:

• agreed the main elements of the formal response to the DEFRA policy review of National Parks subject to the detailed comments made in discussion;
• authorised officers to engage in further discussions with DEFRA to explain the Board's view.  

7. AGGREGATES LEVY SUSTAINABILITY FUND (AP01/46)

(In attendance, Paul Walshe)

Introducing the paper Richard Wakeford explained that the aggregates levy would be introduced in April 2002 and that the Government were currently consulting on how the funds raised would be distributed. The consultation proposed a role for the Agency along with English Nature and the Environment Agency. The paper recommended that the Agency accept the role. This would involve employing additional staff but the full costs would be recoverable from the scheme. The Board were invited to approve the proposed role for the Agency.

In discussion the following points were made:

a. The additional management burden had been taken into account in weighing up whether to accept the role proposed in the consultation. The Executive had taken the view that it was manageable and there would be benefits to the Agency. The scheme would offer opportunities for staff development and would also provide ways of working closely with communities. 

b. It was assumed that as a funding body the Agency would be able to influence the project criteria which could provide ways of delivering corporate objectives. This was a great opportunity and should be accepted. The Board agreed that the levels of grant should be set at a level that would attract high quality applications capable of being delivered quickly in practice.

c. The fund should be used to tackle the issue of quarrying at root cause, by reducing the amount of aggregates that need to be quarried, and for reducing their impacts, rather than for activities which the companies should be undertaking anyway.

d. The Board advised that it would usually be wrong for the funds to be used to buy extant quarrying permissions in areas where quarrying was not now appropriate. In many cases local planning authorities could obtain voluntary concessions from the aggregates industry and it would be wrong for the new fund to undermine such arrangements.

e. The fund should not be used to compensate for poor restoration schemes by extracting companies: that is the role of the minerals planning authority in its specifications for planning permission. Where there was potential to develop community forests or woodland areas the Agency should be prepared to bring in the Forestry Commission to advise on planting on restored land.

f. The Agency should support projects which would reduce the impact of quarrying and mineral working where it affected the lives of local people. A way of hypothecating the environmental impact of quarrying and mineral working on people living in the area was needed so that the effects could be properly mitigated. It was clear that the Agency would be expected to be involved in local level projects but officers should explore how much freedom the Agency would have to provide such mitigation.

Summing up the discussion the Chairman said the Board had agreed: 

• that the Agency should support the concept of the Aggregates Levy Sustainability Fund and, if invited, should accept the proposed role as a grant distributing body;
• that a team should be established to put arrangements in place so that the scheme could go live in April 2002.  

8. CORPORATE PLAN PROGRESS - HALF YEAR REPORT (AP01/47)

In introducing the paper, Sarah Sleet said that the report formed part of the normal reporting procedures and at this half-year point it was important to identify where action needed to be taken to keep the organisation on course to deliver the Corporate Plan. Overall it showed good progress on many programmes and for some areas such as Vital Villages, even where slow progress was reported, there was now evidence that the momentum was picking up. Foot and mouth disease had led to resources being diverted away from some programmes resulting in slower progress than planned. The Executive had made some adjustments to get spending back on track including proposals to complement some of the Haskins' report recommendations. It had concluded that there was also an opportunity for some short-term investments. Actions were also being taken to control the current predicted overspend of the running costs budget. The proposals had been discussed with Martin Doughty, the lead Board member on Corporate Planning, who supported the direction in the paper.

In discussion the following points were made:

a. The quarterly report summary sheets were useful. But consistency would make it easier for Board members to make comparisons. It was difficult for non-Executive members to strike a balance between being strategic and being hands-on in undertaking their responsibilities in relation to the Corporate Plan. They did not have enough information to judge value for money. The terminology also needed to be more helpful, particularly in saying whether spending was on track where words like 'probably' and 'uncertain' should be avoided. Early difficulties with the CAMIS accounting system were often the cause of incomplete financial information and these problems were being sorted out.

b. Overall it seemed right that the Agency should be able to re-prioritise its spending in the short-term in order to respond to the real needs identified in the Haskins' report. This would not undermine the case for more funds to implement Part I of the Countryside and Rights of Way Act in future years. The proposed scheme to re-launch the countryside was welcome and one idea was to encourage local communities to organise 'Countryside Pride' weeks where the countryside was tidied up, signs repaired and obstructions removed in preparation for visitors.

c. The report included summaries from each regional office for the first time. These had been requested late in the process and were therefore not as complete as some of the other information. In future the regional summaries should cover progress made towards the regional influencing strategy. They should also include reports on regional publicity where the teams should be expected to be proactive.

d. Some of the summaries suggested that funds could be rolled forward in the next financial year but it was confirmed that this was no longer possible now that the Agency sponsorship had transferred to DEFRA. This was something Board members might consider raising with the Minister

e. There was concern about whether the Rural Transport Fund was too complicated and about the ability of parish councils to deliver. Some parish councils were struggling to identify how they could use a grant and lacked capacity to make a scheme work. To address this, the Government had agreed that the Agency would be able to support transport advisers to help parish and town councils to work up their schemes and grant applications. Also, the parish council training scheme, which had been launched the previous week, aimed to develop the right skills at the local level. Some of the larger parish councils were in a good position to mentor the smaller ones. It was noted that the budget available for the Rural Transport Fund was £2 million more than the previous year and the budget would rise again next year. The Vital Villages programme expected to overspend its allocation but the Wider Welcome programme had special difficulties in getting started which were being addressed. The Agency would also look at how it could complement the Blue Peter appeal to raise funds for public transport.

f. Nevertheless, there were general concerns about making grant funds more accessible to the bodies which could use them. Some of the money intended to alleviate the effects of foot and mouth disease was caught up with bureaucratic processes and did not get to where it was needed.

g. Although a decision had been made to exit from funding Community Forests, it was right to bring forward expenses for payment this financial year where possible. This did not contradict the decision made. As it was no longer possible to roll forward funds to the following year it would help to ensure that other programmes which had been slow to get started could continue to spend in the next financial year. 

h. The summaries did not always explain why there was slippage in expenditure or activity and what would be done to get the programme back on track. The following detailed points were made: 

• on tourism a member of staff had recently returned to work from extended sick leave and it was expected that the work would get back on track. However, the English Tourism Council had limited funds to take forward the full extent of the activity planned;
• there had been fewer applications to the Local Heritage Initiative in the early part of the year which had been attributed to foot and mouth disease. The number of grant applications in November had increased again and the Executive would monitor to see if this level was sustained;
• for National Parks and AONBs, there was a mismatch in the information in the text compared to the figures in the table. Also there was no explanation about a scheme being disbanded and what it would be replaced with;
• Foot and mouth disease had led to some uncertainty about the Land Management Initiatives and these now needed to be considered in the light of the Haskins' report. Farmers markets had also been set back but had got going again. On Eat the View progress was dependent on European Union rules and approvals;
• it was good to see that the rural housing enablers initiative was on target but it would be useful to see how effective the enablers were in the next report;
• the Agency had responded well by setting up the Rural Community Support Fund but this had led to slippage elsewhere in the programme;
• it was right for the Agency to work with the RDAs on the market towns agenda, but also important to get others to contribute funds to support the action plans;
• future reports should include PR activity. Staff training on how to put messages across to the media effectively was suggested;
• where budgets were incorrectly set at the beginning of the year progress would appear on target but extra funds would be vired to the programme;
• the Agency's aim to enhance rural enterprise complemented RDA work. A paper was in preparation to clarify the relationship.  

i. Board members urged, following a constructive meeting with the Chief Executive, the Director of Strategy and Communications and the Head of Press and Parliamentary, that whenever possible the Agency should be described briefly in all materials issued by it, and that attempts should be made to simplify the language it used to aid accessibility.

Summing up the discussion the Chairman said that the Agency had noted the good progress being made with delivery, despite foot and mouth disease, and had endorsed the adjusted priorities set out in the paper. The points made in discussion should be fully reflected in the third quarter report.

ITEMS FOR INFORMATION

9. LAND USE PLANNING GREEN PAPER (AP01/48)

The Chairman reported that he had discussed the forthcoming Green Paper with Lord Falconer the previous day. Lord Falconer had indicated support for the approach outlined in the Agency's published policy and appreciated the proposals set out in Annex 2 of the Board paper on the development plan process. He had agreed that it was necessary to create a stronger and more strategic forward planning process based on sustainable development objectives. 

In discussion the following points were made:

a. Annex 2 to the Board paper was a welcome document which made the proposals in Planning Tomorrow's countryside  more real. The proposals were radical and would involve a shift in culture but the time was right to do that.

b. There was concern that the proposals implied removing the decision making role from local councilors. This would be looked at carefully, as that was not the intention.

c. The recommendations on the use of planning obligations and impact fees should not ignore the regional variations in levels of development. Some areas were having to work hard to attract development and the policies would need to reflect that if they were to be effective.

d. In positioning the Agency in the debate, care should be taken to use language which is active, assertive and not patronising. 

The Board looked forward to considering a draft response to the Green Paper at the appropriate time.

10. DATE OF NEXT MEETING

The next Countryside Agency Board meeting would be on Thursday 13 December 2001.