Breadcrumbs
Minutes of the 32nd Meeting of the Countryside Agency
Present: Ewen Cameron, Chairman
Pam Warhurst
Kate Ashbrook
John Varley
Martin Doughty
Victoria Edwards
Tony Hams
Graham James
Alison McLean
Philip Lowe
Sue Stapely
Luna Frank-Riley
Peter Fane
In attendance: Richard Wakeford, Chief Executive
Margaret Clark, Director
Jon Tomlinson, Director
Marian Spain, Director
Graham Cory, DEFRA
Juliet Grace, Head of Management Support Group
Chairman's introduction
1. The Chairman welcomed Board members.
Apologies for absence
2. Apologies had been received from Janet Bradbury.
Minutes of the meeting of 18 July 2002
3. The minutes of the 14 November Countryside Agency meeting were approved.
Matters arising
4. Board members noted a matters arising report on access legislation implementation. The Board noted that, following on from the November Board seminar on access business risk, the implementation team had developed a media strategy. All principal managers had received training in this area.
5. The Board noted that a series of meetings had been held with the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister (ODPM) about the Thames Gateway. Discussion with ODPM had concentrated on the Agency's role in developing a framework for the project. The Board noted that Agency staff were working to finalise a service level agreement with ODPM. It would not be everything the Board had sought at Hexham, but in the view of the Deputy Chair it would be enough.
6. The meeting noted that the outcome of the provisional local government finance settlement for 2003/04 had been very positive for many rural areas, though a lot more work was still required on the evaluation of the settlement. Given the previous interest of the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Select Committee, the Chairman asked for confirmation that the Agency was still doing all it could to achieve influence.
7. The Board noted the recent government announcement on transport. The announcement placed heavy emphasis on road building, rather than the multi-modal study approach. The meeting noted that balanced and integrated investment in transport was critical and that there was more that the Agency could do to influence policy in this area. The Strategic Rail Authority needed more funds, while the Government seemed more set on investing in airport expansion that was out of line with its environmental goals.
8. The Board noted the recent publication of DEFRA's Strategy for Sustainable Farming and Food, and the Audit Committee's local authority league table.
9. The Board noted that the Local Heritage Initiative website had won a prestigious design award for its accessibility, especially for people with visual impairments
Implementing the lost ways project AP02/38
In attendance, Jeremy Worth and Jill Hobbs.
10. Introducing the paper, Jeremy Worth outlined the opportunity provided by the Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000 (CROW) to ensure that the definitive map would eventually be a true and complete record of public rights of way. Resources had been made available to the Agency to accomplish the task, over a long period (to 2026), but that there was concern on the part of some local authority highway authorities that this was still not a realistic timetable. Agency evidence suggested that there was latent demand for a comprehensive rights of way network and that the fragmented nature of the current network was a key issue for users. Missing links in the network were to be prioritised through Rights of Way Improvement Plans in conjunction with the lost ways project. This approach would be cost effective and, because the timetable was not tight, it would be possible to ensure a well planned approach.
11. In discussion Board members made the following points:
a. The provision within CROW, and the proposed approach of the lost ways project, provided an excellent opportunity to secure a balanced and pragmatic approach to the establishment of a logical rights of way network. The approach embraced professionalism and value for money, although the Board would need to be confident in the proposed monitoring to assure value for money.
b. The operation of an independent Rights of Way Claims Trust at a national level would need to be clarified to ensure this was realistic and workable. It could prove difficult for a national body to deal with localised routes and claims.
c. There was some concern about the assumed economic benefits. The figures detailed in the paper needed to be adjusted to take into consideration all public costs incurred, not just the Agency's costs. In addition, there was a need to develop mechanisms to monitor and address expenditure which had been predicted to rise as the claims process developed over a ten year period. The early miles might well be cheaper and more useful for people than later claims with less support.
d. The Agency should not underestimate the importance of the role of volunteers, and should look for ways to make their invaluable work easier to accomplish. The work volunteers undertook on identifying and researching rights of way was critical. Volunteer good will and commitment to the process would need to be gained early on to ensure the project was a success. Those voluntary bodies involved should be financially supported for their contribution to the research and claims processes.
e. It was recognised that voluntary work was not consistent in quantity and quality throughout the country and it had been identified that the work to be done by 2026 was way beyond what volunteers alone could reasonably accomplish. In addition the support from local authority highway authorities for volunteer work was equally patchy. The Agency should press highway authorities to come up to the best practice among them.
f. Rights of way claims were not a high priority for most local authorities. The process proposed in the lost ways project could ensure much more progress if highway authorities accepted their role of accepting and processing claims put forward by the Trust as a priority. This needed to be achieved by building better relationships between the Agency and highway authorities. It would also help if the objectives of the lost ways project were included within Rights of Way Improvement Plans, although local authorities should not assume that the improvement priorities would necessarily be the "lost ways". New routes might be more useful.
g. The quality, not just the extent, of the rights of way network established through the lost ways project was important. In many cases the priority would be simply to upgrade suitable routes designed as footpaths to bridleways, following earlier decisions by highway authorities which now made cycle and horse circuits difficult to devise.
h. The geographical areas covered by local access forums, rather than a regional approach, should be used to ensure that work on specific routes are not constrained by inconsistent local authority processes.
i. The Board would require periodic monitoring of the project to check on progress and expenditure.
12. Summing up the discussion the Chairman concluded that the Board had agreed to:
- the proposed process to undertake extensive research into historic rights of way;
- an arms length Archive Research Unit to identify and record lost ways;
- an independent Rights of Way Claims Trust to convert the Unit's findings into formal applications to modify the definitive map to standards agreed with appropriate professional bodies.
- officers should now press highway authorities as discussed and establish as adequate monitoring process.
Corporate Plan 2003/04 - 2005/06 AP02/39
In attendance, Fiona Hope and Amanda Peck.
Closed paper.
Audit and risk management Committee AP02/40
In attendance, Mike Doughty.
Closed paper.
Countryside Agency target audience research AP02/41
In attendance, Isobel Coy.
Closed paper.
Any other business
Haskins Review
13. Board members discussed the process for inputting to Lord Haskins' Review and the opportunity to present the Agency's work to Lord Haskins early in 2003. The Chairman explained that he would be writing to Lord Haskins and would raise the Board's concerns about the terms of reference developed for the Review. The Board requested immediate development of a strategic influencing plan for the Agency and a report in time for the Board Away Day planned for the 23 January 2003.
Date and location of the next meeting
14. The next meeting of the Countryside Agency Board would be on 20 February 2003, John Dower House, Cheltenham.
