FEEDBACK FORM

Contact Name and Organisation: Tracy Nettleton, Head of Strategy, Policy and Heritage, Brecon Beacons National Park Authority

General Comments;

Firstly, the report says that it explores Options for the delivery of historic environment conservation services in Wales, but it doesn’t. It discusses various options in relation to Built Heritage Conservation, and it makes mention of the role of the Archaeological Trust and that there are additional archaeologists in Wales separate to the Trust system (National Parks, Denbighshire etc.) but it does not examine different options for the delivery of archaeological conservation services in Wales, other than perhaps moving existing curatorial Trust staff into new Conservation hubs, trusts or bodies, or the trusts absorbing conservation officers. Surely a chance to review and appraise options for delivery of Local Historic Environment Conservation Services in Wales should also include a full and frank appraisal of the delivery of archaeological conservation service, including the model already in place and additional options, their strengths and weakness etc and not just take it as read that the status quo position for archaeology should be maintained or amended without full consultation, discussion and consideration of the options.

1. Do you agree with the core and wider functions of Conservation Officers detailed in Paragraph 2.13? Is there anything you would add or remove from either a) core functions, or b) wider functions?

a ) In the main this is a good reflection of the core functions however it does not include enforcement as an issue or the work relating to serving Urgent Works Notices or Repairs Notices. These two areas of work can have a significant impact on the protection of the historic environment. They can also take up a considerable amount of time.

National Parks are special purpose Local Authorities, with statutory duties under the 1949 National Parks and Access to the Countryside Act, and under the 1995 Environment Act. Under these two pieces of legislation National Park Authorities have statutory duties, these are:

 To conserve and enhance the special qualities of the National Park – including its historic environment and cultural heritage

 To provide opportunities for members of the public to access and enjoy the special qualities of the National Park.

Page 1 This means that in respect to the conservation of the historic environment (built heritage and archaeological heritage) National Park Authorities have different priorities to other local authorities. These statutory duties and different priorities may only be served through having in-house specialist staff in both archaeological and built heritage conservation, because a standardised approach across the rest of Wales (whatever approach is adopted) may not be able deliver the specific outcomes that National Park Authorities require in terms of their statutory purposes.

Therefore the core functions need to reflect the statutory purposes for which National Parks were set up.

b) The wider functions should also include the negotiations with Building Control whether in the National Park or in local planning authorities. It is more difficult in National Parks as Building Control sits within the constituent UA’s

2. Do you agree with the strengths and weaknesses for service delivery listed in Section 2 for the various delivery organisations? Is there anything you would add or remove?

It is essential that the Historic Environment service sits within the planning function of an organisation in order to play an integral part in policy formulation, implementation and regulation, through the DC and enforcement services. It is true that Conservation Officers will gain more breadth of experience within the Planning Department but it works the other way as well. It helps DC officers to have direct specialist advice so that they also increase their knowledge of the historic environment and its issues.

In rural areas it is very important to have local knowledge as many of the listed buildings are isolated and good relationships with owners is an effective way of gaining buy in to the philosophy of conserving the historic environment. This can have the knock on effect of reducing the necessity of taking enforcement action and can also lead to superior outcomes.

The position of conservation of the historic environment within LPA’s is very much influenced by local responses and priorities of members. In National Parks it is central to fulfilling the 1st statutory purpose and therefore less influenced by political pressures.

There are resourcing and capacity issues that tend to be due to lack of funds rather than a lack of will.

The level of financial and staffing resources does affect the speed and depth at which conservation of the historic environment can be achieved. However, a great deal of staff time is spent on dealing with the overly complex process and inherently weak powers given to LPA’s and National Parks to accomplish conservation. For example, the ability to tackle the lack of repair to a listed building or significant buildings within conservation areas is too complex and ultimately too weak to quickly protect these buildings.

As the report note many heritage officers are singleton posts and this can and has led to significant capacity issue for example when the officer is off on long term sick. While agreements, whether formal or informal with other authorities can be put in place and this Authority has used this option to provide cover, it only works if there is capacity in the other Authorities. In our experience this is a significant problem as the capacity is limite.

Page 2 In terms of conservation officers being in a silo this may be the case in some Authority’s. However we would argue that it is more about the cultural ethos of the organisation rather than where within the organisation the Heritage Officer is located. Specifically it is often highways department budgets that are an issue in terms of conservation where funding has to be targeted at best value and the hardest wearing materials. These are not necessarily the most aesthetic or suitable materials for a conservation area but unless legislation indicates that highways must use suitable materials in conservation areas then this is unlikely to change.

Building Regulations can also be an issue as applying the regulations is all that is required of these particular officers and not the issue of conservation. Whether the officers are in the same organisation or not will not really alter this although cooperation would improve. More joined up legislation would have a far greater benefit.

Having in-house expert advice is essential for the efficient and effective operation of all aspects of the built environment service. We experience significant issues in undertaking our responsibilities as a planning authority whilst other functions remain with the unitary authorities, for example building control. In this National Park the issues are exacerbated as there are 9 constituent Unitary Authorities. Any proposal to place heritage advice outside of the organisation would have a detrimental effect on the quality of the service and therefore on the historic environment.

However, joint working, advice and sharing expertise is actively pursued wherever possible. For example Monmouthshire County Council and Merthyr Tydfil County Borough Council have both provided cover to the National Park for long term sickness absence and we have collaborated with Powys County Council in terms of the provision of a Conservation Area Improvement Scheme. Willingness in not the issue, but rather the capacity to do so.

Cadw

It is agreed that Cadw could provide a significant amount of expert advice if resources allowed for it. Experience would indicate that the willingness in there, but that scarce resources and capacity are an issue.

The issue with the delegated powers is that it has to be a named officer and in our experience it isn’t the best use of the heritage officer’s time to be processing application. It is more efficient for the applications to be processed by a development control officer with the Heritage Officer to be a consultee. It would be preferable in our view if the delegated powers could be given to a ‘suitably qualified officer to act as expert advisor’.

If this were to happen then Cadw officers wouldn’t have to spend much of their time overseeing minor alterations to Grade II listed buildings and could be more available to give much needed advice on Grade I and II* listed building and to drawing up more strategic guidance.. It would also allow Cadw officers the ability to provide the time for valuable pre-application advice.

Obviously a list of what did need to be referred to Cadw would need to be drawn up, for example, substantial demolition. It could be similar to the one used by English Heritage but with the priorities for Wales reflected in it.

Page 3 This would massively speed up the decision process which can irk applicants. A quickened system will also help in discouraging unauthorised work as this is often cited as a reason for not applying for consent.

Unfortunately the description set out in Section 2 is too simplistic and does not really represent the reality of the situation.

The present delivery model, of course, has draw backs, but much of that is because the legislation is not strong enough in certain areas and has therefore led to problems with implementation. Instead of a wholesale change in the model it might be more cost effective if the legalisation was strengthened to raise the profile of the historic environment services and give more backing to LPA’s to prioritise resources.

Para. 2.27 states that the role of archaeologists in Wales outside the Archaeological Trusts is seen as complementary to the services provided by the Trusts. But seen as complementary by whom? I would dispute that these different services are complementary. Although much can be achieved with local authority archaeologists and archaeologists at the Archaeological Trusts working together and collaborating where there are common aims and objectives, there are areas of work where it is not a complementary relationship but where they work independently, and a service in provided in-house to a local authority that it is entirely separate to and independent of any of the work of the Archaeological Trusts. For example, local authorities such Snowdonia NPA that provide in house archaeological advice on planning applications completely independently of their local Archaeological Trust. The Brecon Beacons NP is also bringing archaeological advice on planning applications in-house beginning in April 2013.

RANKING OF OPTIONS

1= Preferred Option

6= Least Preferred Option

Option Ranking Reasons (1 to 6) Option 1a 1 As explained above Regional Collaboration by Negotiation and Agreement

Option 1b 4 This would dilute the connection with the locality and not Regional Collaboration on a Formal, provide a better service with more resource Constituted Basis

Option 2a 5 The same as 1b but considerably worse as it would take the Regional Hubs decision making out of local area

Option 2b 6 Again this is similar as 2a but the cost would also be Regional Historic Conservation and considerable in travelling and staff time to provide any form Archaeology Hubs of service

Page 4 Option 3a 6 Again this is similar as 2a but the Trust were not set up for Expansion of the Existing Welsh this and would struggle to provide this service Archaeological Trusts

Option 3b 6 Again this is much like 2a and 2b - expensive and the local Creation of Historic Conservation Trusts connection and knowledge would be lost

Use the Table below to score the options using the following system:

üü where the option performs very well and ü where it performs reasonably well.

The number of ticks in each column will give you an overall score for that option.

Opti Opti Opti Opti Opti Option 3b on on on on on Criteria 1a 1b 2a 2b 3a

Outcome: Customers are satisfied with the service provided

The option has the capacity to provide a timely service Locally informative/skilled advice will be available

Integration with planning and other local authority services

The provision of consistent advice across Wales

Outcome: Historic resources are conserved

The option has the capacity to provide an effective service

Locally informative/skilled advice will be available

There is integration with planning and enforcement services

The provision of consistent advice across Wales

Outcome: The cost of provision of historic conservation services is contained at current levels

Degree of control over costs/governance

The level of IT/back office support required by the option

Services are spread geographically (cost implication)

Complexity of arrangements (formal/informal)

Outcome: Historic conservation services delivered & sustained

Local governance issues

The option enables staff cover between authorities (leave, illness)

Services are spread geographically (delivery implication)

Complexity of arrangements (formal/informal)

Collaboration potential

TOTAL SCORE

Page 5 We have not scored any of the options as none of them really address the issues in a satisfactory way and does not deal with the separate issue of National Parks.

Page 6