Keskowethyans an Taves Kernewek Cornish Language Partnership

Dydh : 1 mis Hedra 2014, 2wh Date: 1 October 2014, 2pm

Le : Stevel-dhybri an Kaderyor, Lys Kernow, Truro Venue: Chairman’s Dining Room, County Hall, Truro

ROL NEGYS AGENDA

1. Diharasow ha diskleryans a les Apologies and declarations of interest.

2. Kovnotyansow Minutes

3. Materow ow sordya Matters Arising

4. Towlenna Forward Planning 4.1 Restructure

5. Derivadow Reports

5.1 Derivas Arhansek Financial report

5.2 Derivas an Dyghtyer General report

5.3 Derivas Bagasow Oberi 5.3.1 Plans for new groups 5.3.2 Signage Panel report

5.3. Derivasow an eseli Member organisation reports

6. Negys aral Any Other Business

7. Dydh an kuntelles nessa Date of next meeting

tbc

Arhesans Keskowethyans an Taves Kernewek yw provies gans Asran Kemenethow ha Governans Leal ha Konsel Kernow.

The Cornish Language Partnership is funded by the Department for Communities and Local Government and Cornwall County Council.

KESKOWETHYANS AN TAVES KERNEWEK CORNISH LANGUAGE PARTNERSHIP

Kovnotyansow an kuntelles synsys: 1a mis Hedra, 2014 Draft Minutes of the meeting held: 1st October 2014

Present: Julian German, CC (Chair), Jim Candy, CC, Ray Chubb (Agan Tavas), Peter Harvey (Gorsedh Kernow), Loveday Jenkin (Kowethas an Yeth Kernewek), Jan Lobb (Cussel an Tavas), Maureen Pierce (Kesva an Taves Kernewek),

In attendance: Jenefer Lowe (Maga), Nev Meek (Chair, Management Board), Julie Seyler (CC)

Observers: Rael Harvey, Dee Brotherton, Peter Long.

No. Item Action 1. Apologies Andrew Long CC, Tim Deeble, CC

2. Chairman’s Remarks The Chair asked to make some remarks before the commencement of the meeting. He noted the success of Speak Cornish week as part of the journey towards putting Cornish in the wider domain and drew attention to the contributions from around the world.

The Management Board had been considering re-structure as part of their ongoing work. There had been time to reflect since the Board meeting and the feelings and comments had been translated into the documents before the Partnership.

During the year, the Partnership had secured government funding of £120K for the current year. It was not as much as had been wanted and the time-scale was unhelpful. However it had allowed the Partnership to maintain current levels of support. During the year the SWF Review had been finished which was important for future stability.

He said that he was looking forward to the meeting which would provide direction on taking the Partnership and the language forward.

3. Minutes and Matters Arising The Minutes of the meeting of 10 th March 2014 were read and agreed. Matters raised were: • Tregedna Est. It was confirmed that this was going ahead at Boswinger Youth Hostel at the beginning of November.

• Bid. This had resulted in the one year settlement from DCLG at £120K. • Progress on the new strategy was questioned. It was noted that this had been put back by the Management Board due to other priorities. • Management re-structure – discussion was deferred to the item on the agenda. • Cornwall Council plan. A page on achievements thus far was circulated. An incremental approach was being implemented. Visibility on the website was queried and it was noted that the first action had been in respect of the page on the Framework Convention which was bilingual. Other actions in respect of the messaging from the call centre and training for reception staff were in progress,

It was noted from the floor that the St Ives Neighbourhood Plan now had Cornish language built in and an introduction in Cornish.

LJ queried the use of Cornish in minutes. She asked that where a councillor spoke in Cornish, the minute should be recorded in both languages. JL to take up with Democratic JL services.

It was further noted that draft guidance from DCLG which had stipulated that only English be used in Council meetings had been successfully challenged and the wording subsequently changed, so that Councils would be able to use Cornish as well as English.

4. Re -structure Documents relating to a new structure for the Partnership had been circulated.

It was queried whether it was the right time for the Partnership to be looking at undertaking a root and branch review and create new structures at a point where it should be preparing both for a good scenario and a bad scenario post the next funding decision.

In response it was noted that the landscape had changed with the FCPNM and that gave a moment of opportunity. In going back to government the Partnership should be on the front foot and therefore it was the right time to go with a slightly different case.

It was felt by some that the widening of the Partnership looked like a way of emasculating it. JG confirmed that the Partnership was still the sovereign body and that any widening of representation should strengthen rather than weaken it. However it was for the Partnership to decide the way forward and the papers had been brought to the meeting for that purpose.

LJ asked why if it was up to the Partnership to decide, a decision to dismiss the Board had been taken before the meeting with no consultation. Given the timetable, this risked a bid going in with no consultation and it would therefore be more sensible to keep the Board in place.

It was noted that the Board had already discussed restructure and had decided that there should be a change with the Board taking the responsibility for strategic direction. However it was also noted that the Board had not been consulted over the actual proposals.

NM noted that there had been things wrong with the communication and presentation. There was a need to enshrine certain things with Maga: 1) the ability to act as an umbrella for the language movement and 2) the ability to act as a central point of contact. How the position could be secured against a background of uncertain funding was difficult and how a strong voice for the language community would be expressed in the direction needed consideration. However the papers had changed since the first iteration presented to the Board and were now moving in a better direction. NM suggested that the meeting could now take this forward in several ways including via the Partnership itself, setting up a working group or re-convening the Board.

JG asked how the Partnership wished to take this forward.

LJ felt that the dismissal of the Board was not a decision the Chair should have taken. The Partnership had not been aware of the discussions and the documents changed the governance.

Proposal: that the Board be re-instated, that the Partnership remain in its current format with overall responsibility and that work be undertaken over a period of time to effect any changes. Proposed L. Jenkin Seconded M. Pierce Agreed .

JS noted that the language community do a huge job on little resource, but that the structure was a not a truthful one in that the Management Board could not manage as it did not have the teeth to do so. CC was the lead Partner and hosted the Maga team. The question was who sets the strategic direction?

NM queried whether the Partnership was happy with the people on the Board and with him remaining as Chair. With that agreement, he noted that Board would re-unite and consider change and the way forward.

There was discussion over the potential effect of the FCPNM. It was noted that the FCPNM and the Charter were linked and that the one would strengthen the other.

LJ suggested that the Board could use the Partnership more and that the new strategy could be the subject of a focus group. NM noted that a new strategy was important but had not been prioritised.

JS noted that there was a tension in the line management. Were the Partnership a stand-alone charity it would be more straightforward. That scenario did not make sense financially, but the result had been an imperfect model.

There was a fear that the language could be left to unknown politicians. JC noted that there were bound to be polarised ideas when there were 123 councillors involved, but that there was recognition of the economic benefits involved. Cornish distinctiveness should be good both economically and politically.

5.1 Financial Report The report was noted. It was confirmed that the intention was to keep a reserve equal to two months core costs.

5.2 General Report The report was noted. Issues raised were as follows: • Members asked about the class survey. It was confirmed JL that despite frequent reminders, there was still data missing from some classes. However the results were being analysed for those that had responded.

• Additional information was given on the Research conference, which was due to take place at the end of October and the Economic Value of Culture seminar at which both the Chair of the Partnership and the Maga Manager would be speaking.

• The Partnership Board welcomed the hard work put into and the success of, Speak Cornish week.

5.3.1 Management Board report The report was noted.

5.3.2 Signage Panel report The report was noted. Additional information was given on • A request had been received from Marston’s brewery

• A searchable database was under construction for the place-name section of the work.

• There was a query as to whether there was a role for CC in talking to planners early about early discussions on naming. It was noted that developers were often late in coming to Address Management, though early queries direct to Maga were increasing.

5.4 Member organisation reports

5.4.1 Kesva an Taves Kernewek • One Teachers’ Day had been held in July and another was planned for November 22 nd , in conjunction with Maga • The number of candidates for the exams had been up on last year. A certificate ceremony had been held in September. • A book on the place-names of Torpoint had been published to coincide with the Gorsedh ceremony.

5.4.2 Gorsedh Kernow It was noted that 11 language bards had been initiated.

5.4.3 Kowethas an Yeth Kernewek • A successful Pennseythen had been held with around 100 attending. It had included an intensive day on the Friday held under Tregedna rules • There had been a number of summer stalls and activities • Three Topsy and Tim books for children had been published, with an accompanying CD • A website refresh was under way • The HLF funded project, Taves an Tir had started, aimed at engaging communities with Cornish through place-names. The project included education work undertaken with Maga which would provide sessions in schools and a resource pack, sessions for communities on place-names led by the Signage Panel and the Kesva and a publication on the findings in the three communities.

5.4.4 Federation of Old Cornwall Societies • The Crying the Neck ceremony had been held in various places • The FOCS was looking at re-publishing some of Morton Nance’s early work.

5.4.5 Cussel an Tavas • Continuing with classes. • Neil kennedy and Dan Prohaska were working on dictionaries • Dan Prohaska was extending his online course • There were a total of 60 email students • Several books were in the pipeline for publication

5.4.6 Agan Tavas • New facebook page had been launched • A programme of visits and days for Cornish speakers had been held

6. Any Other Business • It was noted that the second Cathedral service in Cornish would be held later the same day • It was noted that the Partnership had agreed that the User survey should be undertaken annually and therefore the 2014 survey would be released in November. Member organisations were asked to promote the survey to members.