n/a
Board Meetings

Breadcrumbs

Minutes of the 45th Meeting of the Countryside Agency

Thursday 11 November 2004 Dacre House, London


Present:

Stuart Burgess, Chairman
Pam Warhurst
Kate Ashbrook
Norman Glass
Tony Hams
Alison McLean
Philip Lowe
Tayo Adebowale
Frances Rowe
John Varley
Graham James
Peter Fane                                                                    

In attendance:

Richard Wakeford, Chief Executive
Margaret Clark, Director
Tim Lunel, Director
Tracey Slaven, Director
Andrew Wood, Director
John Mills, Defra
Juliet Grace, Head of Management Support Group

Chairman’s welcome 

1.   The Chairman welcomed Countryside Agency staff and external observers to the meeting, including Heather Peck, the Integrated Agency Project Director, and Defra representative John Mills.   

2.   The Chairman announced the forthcoming departure of Richard Wakeford to be Head of the Scottish Executive Environment and Rural Affairs Department.   The Board congratulated Richard and wished him well for the future.

3.   The Chairman also said that following consultation with Board Members he had announced that Margaret Clark would take on the role of Acting Chief Executive as from January 2005 for the Agency.

Declaration of Interests

4.   The Chairman asked each Board member to declare any interests they may hold in the issues or papers to be discussed.   No interests were declared.

Apologies for absence

5.   Apologies had been received from Martin Doughty, due to illness.   Martin had attended the recent Chair’s meeting via audio-visual link and would attend the 15 November joint Agency/English Nature meeting.   He was wished a speedy and full recovery.

Minutes of the meeting of 21st September 2004

6.   The Board approved the minutes of the 21st September Countryside Agency meeting.

Chief Executive’s report and matters arising

7.   The Board welcomed the CEO’s reports, including this one compiled by Margaret Clark in Richard Wakeford’s absence in Japan, as particularly useful and helpful documents.

8.   Pam Warhurst apologised to the Board that no summary note about the latest National Countryside Access Forum (NCAF) activity had been prepared.   At the last NCAF meeting, on 2nd November, the main issues discussed included the role (if any) of NCAF in supporting the work of the Landscape, Access and Recreation (LAR) work, and the most appropriate remit, membership and representation of NCAF if it was to continue.   Some NCAF members saw an opportunity to contribute on wider, related issues such as the health agenda; other members did not see this as part of their area of interest.   This needed settling early, if new access issues were to emerge following completion of the current open access project.

9.   Margaret Clark, Tim Lunel and Tracey Slaven had visited premises in London that morning which were considered suitable for the business of LAR and the new Countryside Agency (NCA).   Cromwell House was currently occupied but likely to be vacated by February and refurbished, at no cost to the Agency, by June.   It was part of the Defra’s Nobel House estate, but had a separate entrance.   There was plenty of room for all staff, with the option of space for other IA bound people in the future.   A final decision would be taken in the next 2 weeks once all the selection criteria had been checked.   The lease for Cromwell House would be on a cost neutral basis with no incremental costs for the Agency to cover.

10.   Board members had been impressed by the presentation and impact of the new Countryside Code.

Implementing the Rural Strategy – November 2004    (AP04/38)

In attendance, Richard Wakeford and John Mills.

11.   Richard Wakeford introduced the paper and explained that it outlined the background to the share of projects that were the responsibility of the Agency in the process of modernising rural delivery (MRD).   The Board’s seminar during the morning of the 11 November had approved the proposed outputs on the future governance arrangements which would be formally agreed at the December 2004 Board meeting.   The main recommendations were as follows - 

  • Board members to join either LAR (IA) or NCA subcommittee
  • The first meeting of the subcommittees would be on 20 January 2005
  • The Chair of the NCA subcommittee would be Stuart Burgess
  • The Chair of the LAR (IA) subcommittee would be Pam Warhurst
  • Subcommittee meetings would be held in public
  • There would be at least 4 meetings of the full Agency Board in the 2005-06 period
  • Delegations would be developed and approved at December 04 Board meeting
  • The Corporate Governance handbook would be amended to reflect the new arrangements.
  • A contract would be let to deliver an annual appraisal of the whole Board
  • A contract would be let to design & deliver more effective individual appraisal system for Board members
  • An induction programme for new Board members would be developed
  • A training and skills analysis of Board members to be undertaken
  • A forward diary would be presented at December Board meeting
  • The CEO’s report would report back to Board members on any decisions taken by the Board
  • Objectives would be agreed and Board member responsibilities realigned at the December Board meeting
  • The Board paper template would be redesigned to identify whether decisions of subcommittees impacted beyond their own remit.

12.   In discussion Board members made the following points:

Governance

a.   The mission statement in paragraph 12 had been superseded by the work done by the Integrated Agency Steering Group (IASG), and by the legislative process.   The wording of the statement needed to be updated and replaced.

b.   It was important that the role and function of LAR was emphasised.   It was a concern if there was a disconnection between the staff’s ambitions for LAR and the Board’s thinking.   The perception had been that the Boards’ focus of attention had been on the NCA and the balance as regards LAR now needed to be better.

c.     The minutes of the IASG had been circulated to Board members.   The first meeting had been very successful, with many areas of consensus and a lot of ambition demonstrated.   There were unresolved areas, including - 

  • Definition of purpose
  • What sustainable development meant in terms of delivery for the Agency and for English Nature
  • Regionalism
  • The sequence of the huge number of meetings related to IA work and a need to harmonise dates
  • Embedding public benefit at the heart of the IA.

d.    The difference in culture of the Agency and English Nature (EN) should not be underestimated.   Some EN Council members did not appreciate the scale of the changes in the Countryside Agency, and how these would leave LAR within it, and the complexity of issues on identity.

e.   The appointment of new Board members, and the replacement of 2 members who left in March 2004, was taking longer than had been hoped.   Defra aimed to advertise, during the last week in November 2004, for all Agency, EN and Rural Development Service appointees.   Richard Wakeford had been asked to comment on the advert.   Following sifting January 2005, interviews would be in early February and appointments before 1st April.   It was hard to predict when confirmation could be gained from the Secretary of State (SOS) on appointment.   Board Members said that they were concerned about an already under-resourced Board being stretched still further during a period of transition.

Redundancy

f.   Members of staff most likely to find themselves in potential redundancy would be offered other opportunities, both internally and externally, for other posts.   It was important to retain the expertise of staff where possible.   A process of exchange of posts across EN and the RDS might help this process.

g.   It was the first time the Board had seen potential ‘worst-case scenario’ figures of the number of people who may be made redundant.   The figure of 200 was startling.   But this was the outer degree of risk.   Approximately 60 of these people should be appointed into new posts created in the NCA.   In addition, the needs for the IA had not yet been fully defined.   There was a high risk of redundancy for a small number of people, including the Internal Communications staff, RDA/GO facing teams, Local Heritage Initiative (LHI) teams, and mainly regionally based staff currently assigned to NCA functions.

h.   Richard Wakeford’s letter to staff about redundancies had not mentioned the number of staff likely to be at risk.   An intensive period in the appointment process to NCA and LAR posts had begun and the goal was to be able to provide certainty to the majority of staff before Christmas.   Close liaison with the Trade Unions was established at a local level and through Executive de-briefs to support the process of appointments and redundancies.   The Trade Unions had been involved in the drafting of Richard’s letter which had marked the start of the formal consultation process on redundancies.

i.   The Board and Executive commended staff generally for continuing to deliver during a period of great uncertainty.

Transfer

j.   Negotiations for the transfer of work to other organisations were approximately 2 months adrift.   Meetings had been held between the Agency, Defra and regional development agencies (RDAs), and lawyers from all sides.   On the status of RDA/GO transfer there were 3 different sets of legal advice.   An agreement on TUPE was being sought and it was hoped to conclude the separate negotiations with the RDAs and Government Offices by 19th November.   With a minimum six-month notice period of redundancy for Agency staff, the longer negotiations took the more expensive it would become for the Agency.   Richard Wakeford had written to Defra outlining this concern on value for money grounds.   Most critically it was important to make decisions, and progress, to relieve the uncertainty for staff.

k.   The risks associated with this process included damage to the Agency’s reputation.   Delivery of this year’s Corporate Plan could be difficult if staff were not content and there was a risk of some cases ending in industrial tribunal.   Legal opinion was being sought on whether the Agency was likely to win tribunals.   Delivery was already being affected in the regions and meetings with regional teams had begun to agree delivery contracts.

l.   Further legal advice was being sought on Defra’s proposals for an Agency restructure in preparation for partial TUPE of the staff going to RDAs.   The Agency would be unwise to act outside that legal advice.   The key risk was the proposal not dealing comprehensively with every member of staff which could then be open to challenge.   Any agreement must be as water-tight as possible and minimise such risks.   Fairness for RDA staff in the process of transfer to new posts was also required, though only the RDAs were in a position to determine how to manage this risk.

Local Heritage Initiative (LHI)

m.   The proposal to retain LHI was not as simple as it would appear, not least because of the risk of management difficulties resulting in an inability to deliver the outcome of mainstreaming sought by the Board.   Further discussions with the Heritage Lottery Fund (HLF) were concentrating on minimising these risks, and on the Agency’s continued management of the scheme for a further 2 years to achieve the critical outcome of mainstreaming.  

n.   The LHI programme had been a good demonstration of an interdisciplinary approach and of success in galvanising sustainable community action.   The LHI staff had found creative ways to work and had a wealth of skill and experience upon which this success had depended.   The Board valued the scheme highly and did not feel they had had the opportunity to date in ensuring it a proper future.   There was concern that a further 2 years being managed by the Agency would bring with it a slow lingering death with staff members likely to move on.   It was more complex than just a case of finding a financial deal, as proposed by Defra and HLF, for the Agency to manage the programme.

o.   It did not follow Government policy for the Agency to retain LHI, though the Minister valued the scheme, took a pragmatic view on a way forward and saw LHI as an exception to the rule.   Board members were not certain that all possible options had been properly investigated and eliminated during early discussions with HLF, and that further work was required to explore longer-term security for LHI.   A paper was requested to come to the December Board meeting that fully explored the different options available for the future management of LHI and on what basis, and with what likely impact. 

Legislation

p.   Richard Wakeford reported that both he and the Chairman had met Alun Michael and Lord Whitty in a constructive meeting about the instructions for the integrated agency and NCA legislation.   They had debated some of the issues for the integrated agency, including the boundary between the integrated agency and the Environment Agency on recreation and river bank access.   The Agency had been advised that the Department would confirm the statutory status of the NCA, and this would be announced to the Select Committee.   Further discussions were to be continued on the potential functions and prospectus of the NCA, particularly on rural proofing and the obligations on public sector organisations to have regard to rural proofing in both policy and delivery.

q.   Publication of the draft Bill was likely to be in early February 2005.   The Board would meet in January to discuss the draft legislation, provided that Defra were willing to share draft clauses at that point.   A deadline of 2007 for full implementation was still realistic, though the statutory status of the NCA could commence earlier.   Transition leadership had been discussed with Lord Whitty who had advised that progress could be reached on an authoritative advisory role short of the appointment of a shadow chair.   There was reluctance to breach convention on appointment of a shadow chair, and appointment of chief executive would be unwise before a properly appointed shadow chair was in place.

13.   Summing up the discussion the Chairman concluded that:

  • the Board had agreed and noted the outputs from the morning session on future Governance arrangements;
  • the Board had noted the progress updates on NCA, IA, LAR, Core and EDM;
  • the Board had accepted the Chairman’s decision on the future of LHI, but had requested a further and more detailed paper to come to the December Board meeting to provide the opportunity for full debate and reassurance on LHI’s future management;
  • the Board had noted the oral update on the MRD Legislation project; and
  • the Board had noted the oral report on EFRA Select Committee.

Quarter 2 Report   (AP04/39)

In attendance, Tim Lunel.

14.   Introducing the paper, Tim Lunel outlined that the paper provided a summary of achievements over the last quarter.   The traffic light system indicated many successes, including loan of staff to Defra, the launch of more Beacon Towns and influence on the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister on housing and homelessness.   There had been an increase in expenditure and a significant increase in accomplishing outcomes over the last quarter including the successful open access commencement launches, national trails work commissioned and delivered and £400k of Doorstep Green delivery work undertaken.

15.   There was still a significant underspend, though this had decreased to £3.4m.   A slowdown in delivery was expected for the next quarter, and the possibility of redundancy for some staff would bring an uncertain impact.   The forecast spend under D2.4 included EDM activity and £2.5m of work being done on Quality Parish Investment, Research into Rural Views and Regional Rural Events.   The future forecast was now £92.5m.   A1 area would underspend by between £800k and £1-2m and the A3 forecast was £1.5m.   A cautious approach had been adopted by taking the upper range of the forecast, but there was now greater confidence that the underspend would be closer to £2m than £5m.

16.   In discussion Board members made the following points:

a.   A professional approach had been adopted to the production of the report and forecast.   The Board were pleased with the progress that had been made.  

b.   The strategic input from the Executive was important to help the Board recognise where the Agency was.   It was important that there was not complacency, as last year’s circumstances had been very different and spend this year could still be seriously unbalanced by the change in circumstances that the Agency now faced.

c.   The risk to achieving this year’s spend were very high.   A process of early warning needed to be in place to help indicate where any slippage may be occurring.   The worse case scenario should always be presented to enable sensible discussion on a way forward.

17.   Summing up the discussion the Chairman concluded that:

  • the Board had approved the Quarter 2 report for July 2004 to September 2004 and had noted the main achievements;
  • the Board had noted that at the half year there was a grant-in-aid expenditure of £41.6m which represented a significant increase in activity, but still represented an underspend of £3.9m;
  • the Board had noted the anticipated slowing of delivery programmes in the socio-economic area as a result of an uncertain future for staff;
  • the Board had noted the EDM forecasted spend on project management, and evaluation and dissemination activities;
  • the Board had noted that the Quarter 2 forecast included work for the Quality Parish Investment Fund, Research into Rural Areas and Regional Rural Events; and
  • the Board had noted a Quarter 2 forecast outturn in line with the grant-in-aid budget of £92.5m and that the Executive’s forecast was that the underspend would be at the lower end of the range of the £2-5m underspend predicted at period 5.

Exit Strategies   (AP04/40)

In attendance, Andrew Wood.

18.   Introducing the paper, Andrew Wood outlined that the paper identified the issues related to the transfer or mainstreaming of functions from the Agency to other organisations as a result of MRD.   The exit strategies explained the way forward and some of the work was already in hand.   The outcomes were unknown, though there was some optimism.   For example, the Market Towns Initiative was being moved forward through discussion with Defra, Action for Market Towns and the RDAs.   There was, however, a long way to go.

19.   In discussion Board members made the following points:

a.   It was remarkable that in such uncertain times the Agency’s staff continued to deliver, and to such a high standard.   This hard work and commitment could not necessarily be guaranteed in the future.

b.   Progress was dependent on others.   This resulted in much being unknown and significant gaps might yet be identified.  

c.   An exit route was now clear for some, but not all areas of work.   This would bring issues for both the NCA and LAR.   It was particularly important that the link between the exit strategies and the work of the NCA was made.

d.   An exit strategy report at each Board meeting would be valuable to keep track of progress.   Any slippage could be damaging.  

e.   In February 2004 the Board had received a paper on the mainstreaming of the Community Renewables Initiative (CRI), with a plan for the Agency to mainstream the project from March 2005.   The uncertainty of MRD meant that the CRI was in a position to engage with delivery at a regional level, but not to secure mainstreaming at the national level.   For full mainstreaming to be achieved, recognition was needed by DTi, but this would require the involvement of the Agency over a long period of time.   The Board needed to be certain that they wished to continue with the project if neither DTI nor Defra could be persuaded of its merits.

f.   Mainstreaming was the focus of attention for Government departments and RDAs, but it was clear that the Agency had provided much of the functions of national rural governance structure.   There was real concern that this national perspective on rural social and community issues might disappear, and so with it expose the weakness of the Rural Strategy.   The Secretary of State, in her initial response to the Rural Strategy, had emphasised the NCA’s role in developing a national perspective.   The NCA would need to develop a good understanding and provide guidance on the process of mainstreaming.

20.   Summing up the discussion the Chairman concluded that:

  • the Board had noted that certain Agency functions were being transferred or mainstreamed to other organisations as a result of MRD;
  • the Board had noted the exit strategies or action plans in place for most programmes to guide management of the change;
  • Board members would be consulted with about their influencing role in achieving successful exit strategies;
  • the Board had requested an update paper at each Board meeting on progress; and
  • a plan would be implemented to capture the knowledge of staff to be included in a tool kit for everyone involved and to provide feedback to the NCA.

Countryside Agency Submission of Views on the Future of Local Government    (AP04/41)

In attendance, Crispin Moor.

21.   Introducing the paper, Crispin Moor outlined that the Agency’s proposed submission to the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister (ODPM) had been developed from the Board’s visits to both the North East and the East of England regions which had focused on regional governance issues.   The recent results of the referendum in the North East and the proposed reorganisation of regional governance made changes in structure questionable.   The Agency’s route was to move towards an appropriate single tier of local governance in shire areas at a local level.   There was no one right answer to the size of unitary authorities.

22.   In discussion Board members made the following points:

a.   The role for community action planning was supported.  

b.   There was little mention of the role for National Park Authorities, or of the need for more involvement of the local strategic partnerships in future local governance.

c.   A view on governance structures could be taken.   There was little public appetite for unitary authorities, but there was a desire for an effective local tier of governance and delivery.   There were practical issues to be sorted out on who would be responsible for what, and for delivery to rural communities.

d.   Local governance was crucial for successful mainstreaming as had been seen in delivery of rural transport.   The work of the NCA would be heavily affected by any decisions about the future of local government.   Further Board discussion was required before a position reached.

e.   During their visit to Cambridge the Board had been impressed by the support parish councils had shown for unitary authorities.   Parish Councils had viewed this as the best route to having their work and ambitions taken on board.   Many people in rural areas believed in localised government, but not in its current guise. 

f.   The Government was unlikely to want to set new policy before a general election.   It was wise to hold back on expressing a view at this stage on the status of unitary authorities.   ODPM had not yet taken on the message on the importance of a local tier of government.   The Agency should focus on this in its submission.

g.   There was an opportunity for both the NCA and LAR to have forward thinking on this subject by further Board discussion, particularly on delivery and on making sense of community and voluntary action and the interaction with statutory agencies.   Advocates from both sides of the fence should be asked to join Board members for this piece of work.

23.   Summing up the discussion the Chairman concluded that:

  • the Board had approved the draft submission setting out the Agency’s views to the ODPM’s consultation, ‘Local Vision’ on the future of local government, subject to the views outlined above; 
  • the Board had agreed that further debate was required with key partners and stakeholders; and
  • the Board had agreed that this submission should be circulated to partners and stakeholder bodies.

Future Reports on Rural Proofing, Rural Services Standard and Rural Trends (AP04/42)

In attendance, Brian Wilson.

24.   Introducing the paper, Brian Wilson outlined that the Rural Proofing, Rural Services Standard (RSS) and Rural Trends reports were critical to the role of the NCA.   The recommendation was to reduce the number of reports produced, and for the State of the Countryside Report (SOCR) to subsume the Rural Trends report and the RSS to be subsumed within the Rural Proofing report.  

25.   The Rural Proofing report had grown significantly but the process was not outcome based.   The new product would better fit the remit of the NCA with a themed approach.   The risk of a themed approach was that the perception would be that coverage of the report would not be as comprehensive as before.   It would be important to demonstrate that the NCA was looking at all rural issues.   Regional issues would be a challenge as the NCA would have no regional presence.   Negotiation was needed with partners, including Government Offices, to secure support from the regions to help inform the work of the NCA, and with the Regional Affairs Forums (RAF) to validate the information provided.

26.   The proposed changes to publication dates would see a move to September for the Rural Proofing report.   This was in part a practical issue as the same staff within the NCA would be responsible for both the SOCR and Rural Proofing reports which currently were published close together.   It would also be easier to attract media attention if publication dates were apart from each other.   Finally the NCA would have more time to establish itself and function within is remit before the 2005 interim report needed to be published.

27.   In discussion Board members made the following points:

a.   This was an excellent and welcomed paper.   It was a good demonstration of the ability of the Agency to readjust its work now to achieve the new remit of the NCA.

b.   Rural proofing had been a major success and was now firmly embedded in the operations of others.   Rural proofing would be established within the core business of the NCA.

c.   It was sensible to subsume the reports to limit their number.   There was a risk of being seen to lessen the commitment to, or clout on, rural proofing with a delay to publication next year.   It was essential that communications were clear about why the change in date was occurring.

d.   It was important to find a practical way to link agendas to encourage the RAFs engagement, and provide the NCA with a connection in the regions.  

e.   There was an increasing importance of a monitoring role for the NCA on the rural proofing of government departments.   Defra’s own role was unresolved, though it was understood that the current role and finding new ways to ensure rural proofing was firmly embedded in other’s agendas would continue.   This would include facilitation of the tri-lateral meetings between the Chairman, the Minister and ministers of other departments.

28.   Summing up the discussion the Chairman concluded that:

  • the Board had agreed that in addition to an overall report on how government departments and government offices were performing, future rural proofing reports would focus mainly on a few policy areas that had been the subject of NCA studies or evaluations;
  • the Board had agreed the annual publication date should be moved from June to September;
  • the Board had agreed that the RAFs should be asked to comment on reurns from Government Offices for the Regions, to enhance independent validation; and
  • the Board had agreed that the RSS and Rural Trends reports would be in future subsumed within rural proofing and SOC reports.

Developing Proposals for NCA Thematic Studies and Inquiries    (AP04/43)

In attendance, Brian Wilson.

29.   Introducing the paper, Brian Wilson outlined that there were some emerging models for thematic studies and inquiries for the NCA.   The Board were asked to endorse the process that had been developed to agree subjects for studies and inquiries for the first year.   There was provision made within the Corporate Plan for 3 studies or inquiries for the first year.   A clear distinction was made between a study and an inquiry.   Inquiries would collect evidence in order to better scrutinize today’s policy issues.   Studies would provide forward thinking for the future benefit of rural communities.   Cross agency and joint working would be critical.   Board member involvement would focus on the follow-up to studies and inquiries to ensure that they were used, and in monitoring what happened as a result of the studies and inquiries.   Selection criteria for studies and inquiries were proposed.

30.   In discussion Board members made the following points:

a.   The distinction and the relationship between studies and inquiries needed further clarity.  

b.   The NCA should look at the desired outcomes in determining the thematic studies and their timings.   Opinion-informed inquiries were what would make the work of the NCA distinctive.   Inquiries would be evidenced based and supported with both statistics and views or opinions.   Inquiries would also look to be innovative in the collection of evidence.    The NCA would use inquiries to provide a quick reaction to topical issues.   Studies would be able to provide longer term and more detailed work into issues.

d.   The recommendation for the NCA to announce the themes for the first thematic study or inquiry on 1 April 2005 would give a strong signal about the work of the NCA.   However, it was important to establish subjects for more than one year in advance.   This would enable information to be collected in good time and provide a programme and timetable to plan for.   A five year plan would be appropriate to support this major launch event.  

e.   It was important to ensure that the subject matter for the first round of studies and inquiries grabbed people’s attention at the launch, as well as provided the NCA with an opportunity to influence others.   According to the Secretary of State, the NCA’s remit was to focus on rural disadvantage.   It would be wise to have regard to this in the choice of subjects.   It was also recognised that the NCA was there to advise Government and that to date the Government had not taken sufficient advantage of access to the Board for advice.   It was important to ensure that the subjects would support the needs of both.    

f.   Crime, policing and vandalism, young people, or affordable housing and homelessness were all valuable subjects to consider.   It was important that if tackling an issue as complex as affordable housing where many organisations were involved that the NCA’s role was distinct and provided visibility for the NCA.   It would be appropriate for the NCA to undertake a stock take to identify where NCA involvement could add value.   The decision criteria for studies and inquiries needed to be carefully evaluated by the NCA subcommittee.

31.   Summing up the discussion the Chairman concluded that: 

  • the Board had agreed the scope and working model for thematic studies and inquiries;
  • the Board had agreed the process for drawing up a programme of study and inquiry topics; and
  • the Board had commented on possible topics for a first thematic study or inquiry, which the NCA would announce around 1 April 2005.

Public Health, the Countryside and Green Spaces – LAR’s Future Role    (AP04/44)

In attendance, Tracey Slaven.

32.   Introducing the paper Tracey Slaven outlined that there was a request for a strategic direction on the role of LAR on the subject of health and the countryside or green space.   The review was timely as discussions about the public benefit functions of an integrated agency (IA) were currently high on the agenda.   The Walking the Way to Health Initiative (WHI) was the Agency’s main activity in this area.   It had been very successful and the evidence base to support the work was excellent.   This paper set out a second phase with a broader basis and a holistic programme.   It would utilise the contacts already established in the Department of Health (DoH) and the skills within the WHI team in working with private and voluntary sector partners.

33.   The risks were a failure to mainstream.   WHI was dependent upon training volunteers who then support people wishing to take part.   This would be mitigated against with a small amount of call-off support from the team.   As a delivery programme the Agency’s role would reduce.   This would be mitigated against by continuing to use the brand name that had been adopted by many organisations, including Kelloggs.   Buy-in of the rest of the Confederation partners was being tested already.   Significant buy-in was possible but further work was required.   The work was well timed with increasing emphasis from major sponsorship bodies, including the Lottery, on health related projects and programmes.

34.   In discussion Board members made the following points:

a.   The team was to be congratulated on the huge success of WHI with a traditionally conservative partner, such as DoH.

b.   Public benefit was critical to the success of the IA.   This work should continue to be facilitated and its credibility built upon further.

c.   The language in the paper needed to reflect the language of the IA.   Countryside should also include coast and urban fringe opportunities.

d.   It was important to learn the lessons and not to lose the exemplary work from WHI that had been recorded on gathering evidence.   LAR needed to design its work to ensure quality assurance and a function for research and criteria based work. 

35.   Summing up the discussion the Chairman concluded that: 

  • the Board had agreed to the establishment of a facilitating role for LAR as part of the confederation of partners, focused on improving the public’s health through contact with the countryside and green spaces, supported later by the delivery of appropriate externally funded initiatives; and 
  • the Board had agreed to continue WHI activity beyond its lottery funded life, but without the funding for projects on the ground, which others such as the PCTs should now be ready to provide.

Date and location of the next meeting

36.   The next meeting of the Countryside Agency Board would be on 16 December 2004.   It would be held at John Dower House, Cheltenham.