Natural England

Minutes of the 30th Meeting of the Countryside Agency

Present: Ewen Cameron, Chairman

Pam Warhurst

Kate Ashbrook

Janet Bradbury

Martin Doughty

Victoria Edwards

Peter Fane

Tony Hams

Graham James

Philip Lowe

Alison McLean

Frances Rowe

John Varley

In attendance: Richard Wakeford, Chief Executive

Margaret Clark, Director

David Coleman, Director

Jon Tomlinson, Director

Sarah Sleet, Director

Juliet Grace, Head of Management Support Group

Chairman's introduction

1. The Chairman welcomed Countryside Agency staff who had come to observe the meeting and noted that there were no members of the public observing the meeting.

Apologies for absence

2. Apologies had been received from Luna Frank-Riley and Sue Stapely. Martin Doughty would join the meeting at 11.00am.

Minutes of the meeting of 18 July 2002

3. The minutes were approved subject to minor amendments.

Minutes of the Corporate Planning seminar of 9 July 2002

4. The minutes were approved subject to minor amendments.

Matters arising

5. Board members noted matters arising reports on:

• Aggregates Levy Sustainability Fund (AP01/46)
• New Forest Public Inquiry (AP01/50)
• CAP Reform: Consultation on Mid-term Review of Agenda 2000 (AP02/01)   

6. Board members noted that the New Forest Inquiry is likely to be more lengthy and more widely based than expected. This would result in considerably increased costs for the Agency, not covered in the corporate and business plan. Board Members were surprised at the increased length and cost of the inquiry - which seemed to stem mainly from the Secretary of State's unexpected decision to explore the administrative arrangements as well as the boundary at the inquiry. Despite the imposition of extra costs on the Agency, the Chief Executive explained that there was little point in attempting to reclaim them from the Department.

7. The Board discussed the consequences for the South Downs designation and inquiry. There would be an opportunity for discussion at the November Board meeting, where the cost consequences of recommending administrative arrangements as well as making the statutory national park designation could be discussed.

8. Board members noted that the Agency was still waiting for a response from the Department of Health to enable progress on the Agency's health agenda.

Rural White Paper Progress AP02/23

In attendance, Brian Wilson.

9. Introducing the paper, Brian Wilson reminded the Board that DEFRA maintains and updates an implementation plan on progress on the Rural White Paper (RWP). That plan was available on DEFRA's website. It was due to be updated to include all progress up to the end of August 2002. The Agency's own progress on commitments had been good and most actions had been completed on time and within budget. Where there had been delays, action was in hand to ensure that the Agency could fulfil its commitments. Progress by other organisations had been variable. There were also instances where target dates had been slipped where there had been delays, making it difficult to track progress against the original deadlines for completion. The RWP continued to be relevant to both existing and developing priorities for the Agency. In particular the imminent review of the RWP implementation plan was an opportunity to press for a refresh of the action plans and targets so that the a cross-government agenda could be driven forward.

10. In discussion, Board members made the following points:

a.) The RWP and the implementation plan remained an important measure of progress in rural policy implementation. The Agency should credit those organisations who had honoured their commitments, but should also maintain the pressure to ensure delivery of commitments;

b.) Some commitments had slipped or had apparently been forgotten. For example commitment 36 (Annex 3) was originally high on the political agenda but had resulted in little or no action. The practice of slipping targets was not widely used in businesslike organisations and reflected badly on public sector management;

c.) There was too much "considering" and not enough "doing";

d.) The review of the RWP should result in a focus on clear objectives capable of being monitored and tracked to measure performance;

e.) The Countryside Alliance March on 22 September provided a good opportunity for the Agency to demonstrate its support for the Government's progress on implementation of the RWP. The Agency should go on to challenge in those areas where progress had been slow, and through a media release call for a refreshment of the Rural White Paper commitments to take account of developments such as the creation of DEFRA; 

f.) Where relevant, linkages with the Urban White Paper and developments in regional government should be made;

g.) Rural proofing had been a significant new initiative for the Agency. The RWP review should attempt to conceptualise rural proofing by demonstrating the Agency's ownership of this approach, the extent of its impact, its potential and its limitations.

11. Summing up the discussion, the Chairman concluded that:

• the Board had noted the good progress made by most in meeting RWP commitments, despite the unwarranted interference with the original targets;
• the Agency should input to DEFRA's forthcoming review of progress;
• the Agency should input ideas to DEFRA about future reviews to incorporate ideas as recommended
• the Agency should call publicly for a refreshment of the RWP programmes in the run up to the Liberty and Livelihood March.   

Sustainable Development in the Thames Gateway AP02/24

In attendance, Jeremy Worth.

12. Introducing the paper, Jeremy Worth outlined the Agency's proposed role within the Thames Gateway Partnership. A meeting had been held with the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister (ODPM) Urban Policy Unit to stress that the Agency should not be viewed as the "token" environmental presence in the partnership, but as a broadly based expert on sustainable development. The Agency had been working on major projects within the Thames Gateway for the last ten years, including a community forest and the Kent Green Grid, and had an established network of partners in the area. It would be important for the Agency that the project moved quickly from principles to demonstration on the ground in partnership with others.

13. In discussion Board members made the following points:

a.) Thames Gateway would be an exciting project for the Agency providing opportunities to work closely with other organisations to achieve good practice in sustainability and planning issues in rural and urban areas. The project was a good opportunity for the Agency to put into practice the approach it had long advocated to major commercial projects and developments, and to further spread the Agency's philosophy on urban fringe planning and development.

b.) The project would have a very high profile was therefore a high risk. venture for the Agency. We should be both cautious and well prepared. 

c.) The Board would welcome more briefing about the Thames Gateway project area, the work the Agency would carry out, resourcing of the project and the partners involved as it developed. 

d.) The Board expressed concerns about resources for the project, which were surely minimal compared with the scale of the challenge. Jon Tomlinson explained that the current budget of £100K would establish the broad issues and the framework which would then guide all work and developments. Additional resources would be available within the current Corporate Plan through recycling resources from existing programmes, which should allow its inclusion within the new 2003/04 Corporate Plan and a bid within the 2004 Spending Review. It would be easier to argue for more resources from the inside than from the outside.

e.) Evaluation and monitoring of the project would be essential. The Agency should encourage the immediate development of an influencing strategy to demonstrate what had already been achieved through existing demonstration work elsewhere - not only through community forests, but through health walks too. This approach would help to mainstream the project and to encourage new resources for similar schemes.

14. Summing up the discussion the Chairman concluded that:

• the Board had approved the Agency's involvement in the development of a Sustainable Development Framework for the Thames Gateway;
• The Board had recognised the potential risks involved in this project which should be mitigated through careful attention to resourcing and monitoring and a positive influencing strategy from the start.   

Countryside access and the health connection

In attendance, Jon Tomlinson.

15. Introducing the paper, Jon Tomlinson outlined the Agency's work with the Department of Health and Sport England. Our goal was to ensure that the countryside would in future be realised as a major asset and resource for the National Health Service in the programmes to prevent major health problems including heart disease, diabetes and strokes. At the previous meeting, the Board had been informed of progress on the development of nine pilot schemes. Further negotiation and close partnership working had secured an agreement for three of these pilots to focus on the countryside. These would encourage the Department of Health to mainstream healthy activities related to countryside access. Proper and full evaluation was planned to ensure lessons are learnt.

16. In discussion Board members made the following points:

a.) The project was considered to be of its time. Primary care trusts would be fully involved in the development and implementation of the pilots, which was important as they hold the majority of resources for preventative health care measures.

b.) There were many existing partnerships which could be drawn upon to ensure best practice, as well as lessons from the Walking the Way to Health project managed by the Agency. New partners were interested in being involved, including the British Heart Forum and the Health Development Agency. Local authorities and local strategic partnerships were also interested and this would provide opportunities to show the way to make good use of the rights of way improvement plan powers in the Countryside and Rights of Way Act. Forest Enterprise should also be encouraged to be involved in a pilot schemes if they had resources to bring. So should the regional development agencies. National parks should be involved too, if they wished, to focus on the health of their own communities.

c.) The staffing resource allocated by the Agency of one officer seemed small. But it should be considered in the light of the need for regional liaison and the cementing of partnerships at a regional and local level. The Department of Health were insisting that they must manage the project. Even so, we needed to involve our staff in the regional offices and centrally to represent our interests.

d.) The Agency would be represented on a management committee and should not be shy of influencing the non-countryside pilots if we had relevant experience.

e.) Each pilot would be based in a Health Action Zone or Sport Action Zone. 

17. Summing up the discussion the Chairman concluded that:

• the Board had approved the Agency's participation in the pilot project to promote physical activity with the Department of Health and Sport England;
• the Board had agreed the Agency's contribution of £900,000 over the period 2003/04 to 2005/06, provided for in the draft corporate plan using resources recycled within the relevant programme.   

Rural economies - stepping stones to a healthier future AP02/26

In attendance, Roger Turner.

18. Introducing the paper, Roger Turner explained that the emerging themes and five key characteristics for rural economies had been heavily influenced by research, as well as the Board's visit to Herefordshire. This paper was a part of a process of disseminating Agency messages to the heart of government and representatives of businesses over the next six to eight months. A conference in 2003, with DEFRA and the Small Business Service, would bring relevant organisations and individuals together to improve co-ordination for businesses in rural areas. Important progress had been made toward information gathering of an evidence base on those sectors of the rural economy not often provided with a voice, including the self-employed. The move towards publication of the paper as part of an influencing strategy would be important to ensure that these issues were addressed within mainstream policy.

19. In discussion Board members made the following points:

a.) The draft paper was very welcome. The Agency had a diminished role in the rural economy, although the Foot and Mouth crisis had demonstrated that it could still lead on the strategic approach to the rural economy - not focusing entirely on food and tourism. The crisis had also demonstrated that the Agency had an effective monopoly on analysis and understanding of some of the economic issues raised. There was great urgency for good information and understanding;

b.) The policy suggestions in the paper need to be downgraded and replaced with examples and further analysis. The messages needed to be refined to ensure that the information would be easily accessible to a wide audience;

c.) A comprehensive communication plan would be required to ensure that the value of the paper was fully exploited. Different target groups might require differently tailored messages;

d.) The presentation of the paper needed careful thought. An executive summary concentrating on the key messages was required, and the regional dimension properly considered;

e.) The rural economies field was already very busy with other organisations and players. It is important for the Agency not to become involved in mainstream rural economics work or on delivery, but to focus on new concepts and approaches to influence others. The content of the paper will be a surprise to some of the traditional audiences and groups;

f.) Other areas currently missing from the paper include, a checklist of what the Agency would do and what other organisations should do; consideration of growth sectors and a need to move away from vulnerable sectors; a vision for higher wages on a wider scale; and the increased concern that exists about the quality of employment; 

g.) The publication should not be considered to be the end of the Agency's influencing role, but part of an ongoing process. More detailed work would be required to develop key corporate messages;

h.) One immediate use of the paper to influence others should be to work with the regional development agencies and provide them with the tools and measurements to enable them to deliver their part of the relevant PSA target. Another would be to inform the group looking at assistance to small businesses, which had been reconvened by the Government.

20. Summing up the discussion the Chairman concluded that the Board:

• had approved the emerging line of argument (in paragraph 3) as a basis of the Agency's work on rural economies;
• looked for further thought on how to engage other organisations and groups. These messages should be promoted through a communication strategy to ensure that different audiences would receive information in the different ways that would suit them, not us. The communications strategy should be circulated to Board Members for information.   

The Digital Divide AP02/27

In attendance, Brian Wilson.

21. Introducing the paper Brian Wilson reminded the Board of the Agency's current involvement in projects and in influencing level. The paper sought the Board's approval to engage more strategically and to offer an Agency stance on equitable rural access to IT networks. Future projections on access to broadband suggested that rural businesses and households could fall behind urban counterparts. This might have a negative knock-on effect on rural services and the rural economy. The Government had invested in some facilities and had developed some policies, but had not yet formulated a rural strategy. The Agency needed to provide its unique approach, which would involve three additional pieces of work - to engage at the regional level and work more closely with regional partners; to undertake a study of best practice and to identify the gaps in provision; and to develop a manifesto to inform government and other key players about this issue.

22. In discussion (and in a note from Luna Frank Riley) Board members made the following points:

a.) There was a danger that even if the technology was put in place it could still be under used, therefore the demand for capacity was difficult to determine. Research and pilot schemes on latent demand were needed in order for the Agency to influence the debate in this area;

b.) Some rural communities were already using the available technology in innovative ways. Other communities in rural areas had little or no IT connectivity. Information should be shared with service providers to influence their approach and to ensure the right technological solutions were in place;

c.) The delivery of services in rural areas was the critical factor. Ways to achieve this through technology were not conclusive. Broadband may not prove to be the right method, and public subsidies to deliver it in rural areas would be difficult to argue for;

d.) Local authorities and national park authorities were under pressure to reach targets on e-government. Regional development agencies were tasked with producing IT strategies. Regional Agency offices needed to be up to speed on this area of work to be able to influence effectively;

e.) The Agency had been punching above its weight. It now needed to position itself on service delivery and learning from pilot projects. That would distinguish our work from the work now being undertaken by the Countryside Landowners Association and others in IT development;

f.) Technical solutions were difficult for the Agency to advise on, without technical knowledge. The Agency could not rural proof service providers without in-depth knowledge. 

g.) It was important for the Agency to be forward looking and open to new ideas and solutions. For example, third generation mobile phones may be the choice of younger people living in rural areas and would deliver broadband equivalent services once the network of new masts needed was up (but would rural planning authorities be ready to approve these to open up the service?). Further research was required to develop an informed evidence base.

23. Summing up the discussion the Chairman concluded that:

• the Board had agreed to the three additional pieces work - to prepare a manifesto, to influence all eight RDA strategies and to commission a study on rural best practice.   

Response to Consultation Following the Review of National Park Authorities AP02/29

In attendance, Jeremy Worth. 

24. Introducing the paper, Jeremy Worth reminded the Board that this paper had been requested at the July Board meeting. The paper set out a draft response to the specific questions DEFRA had posed following the review and the outstanding issues the Board had offered advice on and still justified pressure on the Department. In addition, the Edward's Report which had provided a benchmark for national park funding was getting dated and a new evidence base was needed to distinguish an informed case for funds from mere aspirational rhetoric.

25. In discussion Board members made the following points:

a.) The review had produced broadly positive outcomes.

b.) Realistic targets were needed on delegation of development control decisions to planning officers. A best value approach was preferable to a crude target.

c.) The tone of the response on responsibilities for rights of way was correct, though it was recognised that in practice this would be difficult to achieve without sufficient resource transfer from highway authorities.

d.) The proposals on membership were satisfactory. The Agency's response to independent chairs should carefully set out the arguments in relation to this measure. The view of Board members was that the appointment of independent chairs would have positive benefits - not least because they would have direct access to the Minister, as well as the decision making processes. It would also help ensure that national parks are seen as national. Whatever the decision, however, the appointment process needed to be transparent. Board members recognised that an independent chair could lead to local communities feeling disenfranchised. Local knowledge and sensitivity to local concerns should be part of the job description for independent chairs to make sure these concerns were addressed.

e.) No existing mechanism was in place to monitor the performance of the Secretary of State's appointees, or for independent chairs to report back to the Secretary of State. The Agency should continue to press for this.

f.) Board members supported the approach that would make clear that national parks were effectively wholly funded by DEFRA.

g.) The governance section of the letter to DEFRA should avoid mention of a 'contract' and instead recommend a declaration, pledge or commitment to uphold national park purposes. There should be an obligation on park authorities to undertake regular appraisals. Inclusion of the commitment in a code of conduct would allow some sanction against any member ignoring the pledge, as this could be deemed to be bringing their authority into disrepute. 

h.) On the proposals for funding the national parks in 2003/04 - by increasing allocations across the board by 2.5% - the Board was concerned that the time DEFRA had allowed for a response was far too short for any thoroughly informed advice to be offered. Our advice to the Minister should recommend that a simple methodology needed to be in place to inform future settlements. The ultimate goal had to be a settlement at the level recommended by Edwards, since there was no better source of evidence. The 2.5% advice was the best that could be offered at this stage.

i.) It would be important to work closely with both National Park Officers and the Association of National Park Authorities on the implementation of the action plan following the review.

26. Summing up the discussion the Chairman concluded that:

• subject to minor amendments the Board had approved the draft response to seven specific aspects following the Review of National Park Authorities by DEFRA.   

Transport in Tomorrow's Countryside AP02/28

In attendance, Canda Smith.

27. Introducing the paper, Canda Smith provided an overview of transport issues and the Agency's current thinking and approach. Transport cut across all of the Agency's work and it was accessibility rather than transport itself that enhanced people's lives in rural areas. Ten key principles had been developed covering issues of accessibility, safety, sustainable development and countryside character, demand and supply, empowering local communities and choice and mode of travel.

28. In discussion Board members made the following points:

a.) the paper provided an excellent overview of policy which could be used to influence at a national level. But the Agency should be bolder in promoting it. There was a strong need to influence government decisions that impinged on rural communities and to implement multi-modal studies in a way that would result in balanced public and private transport outcomes with investment in infrastructure and behavioural change strategies.

b.) At a local level the document should be used to provide a framework and greater consistency of the work of regional staff who were working to influence local authorities and the content of local transport plans;

c.) there was a danger that only some of the multi-modal study conclusions would be 'cherry picked', since the Highways Agency was raring to go, while public transport providers were fragmented;

d.) publicity of the policy measures should be publicised primarily to transport professionals, not the general public. Too much publicity might draw the Agency into difficult and complex arguments which were already being tackled by others;

e.) the quality of life issues relating to transport infrastructure and walking conditions within villages with heavy and fast traffic flow should be more fully considered in Principles 7 and 10. In particular consideration should now be given to the Agency's stance on providing more roadside footpaths and where resources for this could be found. Local authorities should be encouraged to include rights of way strategy implementation in local transport plans. 

f.) It should also be recognised that local people do contribute to creating unsafe roads for pedestrians by driving fast on minor rural roads;

g.) The Board would welcome more detail on access to the countryside for inner city residents and on how transport can add to the local rural economy debate. The document seemed to lack advice on transport for business people;

h.) there is a need to recognise the changing face of transport. Where the ability to expand the rail network proves difficult then coaches could play an important role in accessing services and facilities;

i.) the paper would help to make better use of the resources available and help to reinforce the Agency's rural assurance work. It would be the first step towards providing the Agency with a stronger voice on transport;

29. Summing up the discussion the Chairman concluded that:

• the Board fully endorsed the quality of overall approach to transport issues as illustrated by the ten guiding principles;
• the document should be published as part of a wider influencing strategy;
• the Board required more detail on how the principles would be applied and the direction the Agency should go with them.   

Steps Towards a New Country Code AP02/30

In attendance, Jon Tomlinson.

30. Introducing the paper, Jon Tomlinson reminded the Board that they had requested the opportunity to add value to the development of a new country code. The development process was already in hand and work had begun on the code's content, as well as considering potential audiences and methods of communicating the messages within it. 

31. In discussion Board members made the following points:

a.) the new country code would need to be backed up by an explanation of the context within which it is set. The public would demand an explanation of the content to understand the need for it;

b.) the promotional campaign would need to provide simple, clear, consistent and positive messages. Cartoons and humour should be considered as useful methods for getting the message across;

c.) the format and outlets used to promote the code needed full consideration to ensure they are as effective as possible in reaching target audiences. Different campaigns would be required for different audiences;

d.) the code would be obsolete without enforcement. Thought was required on how enforcement could be implemented;

32. Summing up the discussion the Chairman concluded that:

• the Board agreed to the proposals for consultation on the new Country Code and looked forward to approving proposed wording at the December meeting.   

2002 Spending Review White Paper: Outcomes and lessons for next time AP02/31

In attendance, Margaret Clark.

33. Introducing the paper, Margaret Clark explained that this paper provided the additional detail the Board requested on the 2002 Spending Review (SR2002). The paper focused on the Agency's work to ensure the rural dimension is followed through in departmental delivery plans and identified those actions still required to take forward for the next review. The SR2002 was the second review that the Agency had contributed to and highlighted actions on rural proofing and cross cutting issues. Strategically the Agency had done well. A secondment to the Treasury had been important, the rural assurance work had been reinforced and there had been positive outcomes with about half of the Agency's suggestions having the rural dimension applied to them. The next stage would be for the Agency to influence delivery plans and to consider building a better evidence base in time for the next spending review. This work was staff intensive but was considered of high priority for the Agency's influencing role.

34. In discussion Board members made the following points:

a.) Rural proofing of the spending review has been an important piece of work from which there has been a lot to learn and apply in the future. Some work now required follow-up to maintain the pressure already brought to bear;

b.) the 2004 spending review required a robust rural evidence base to ensure that the Agency could be clear about priorities. Effective rural proofing needed to be in place;

c.) where there had been significant gains and successes in the Agency's input, for example on PSA targets, these areas should remain a priority for the Agency team in rural proofing performance;

d.) the Agency was well placed to identify issues rather than the broad canvas through involvement in meetings with DEFRA on researching a rural evidence base;

e.) all rural assurance teams within the Agency should be involved in supporting this work.

35. Summing up the discussion the Chairman concluded that the Board:

• had noted the rural content in July's 2002 Spending Review White Paper with approval;
• had endorsed the work in hand to influence departmental delivery plans;
• had provided guidance on actions to better prepare the Agency for the 2004 Spending Review, as recommended.   

Date and location of the next meeting

36. The next meeting of the Countryside Agency Board will be on 14 November 2002, John Dower House, Cheltenham.