APPENDIX CHARNWOOD FOREST REGIONAL PARK : TOPIC PAPER 3 : GOVERNANCE : STAKEHOLDER CONSULTATION RESPONSES CFRP = Charnwood Forest Regional Park LDF = Local Development Framework LCC = Leicestershire County Council Name/organisation Comments by question number Response Max Hunt CC TP3/1 Loughborough NW Division, LCC I agree No response required. TP3/2 None, I believe the steering group should be consultative, but decisions Noted. are best made by the parties outlined in the paper TP3/3 None at this time No response required. Roy Denney TP3/1 Chair Leics Local Access Forum I cannot help but fear we are just creating more tiers of bureaucracy. Previous stakeholder The Environment Hub is in effect already a steering group at the strategic events and consultations Chair Leics & Rutland Ramblers level and if we feel we need a stakeholder group we already have one have identified a need Association in the Leicestershire Local Access Forum for a group with a Charnwood Forest focus. Member National Forest Access There must be a tight operation team of officers and an Executive to The Environment Hub is 1 E:\moderngov\data\published\Intranet\C00000135\M00003125\AI00028537\$aqiv131u.doc APPENDIX & Recreation Group oversee their day to day activities. There are pros and cons as to whether still under development. this should be one individual or a small executive committee of no more Although it will cover Member Leics Orienteering Club than 7. If we decided on a committee it would in effect be your steering “Natural and Historic Committee group. Environment” issues this will be at a strategic I note the feeling that parish councils should be involved but do not level, which will not know how many parishes there actually are within the Charnwood Forest necessarily be an area as we have defined it. There are bound to be quite a few and if appropriate level for the they are all to be represented then any steering group would be Regional Park. unwieldy In the short/medium term The LCC already has an annual evening when the parishes are all invited covered by the TP3 into County Hall and the matter of the park could just be an agenda proposals, the Executive item at that meeting affording the parishes a chance to make their views officer team structure is known not financially viable. I think the Access Forum could be the steering group and any member The established wider of a parish council particularly wanting to get involved could join the stakeholder body, which Forum. I have always thought that each District Council should have a TP3 proposes should representative on the Access Forum so that organisation could be continue, is open to expanded to allow for this and that the Executive Committee should representatives from then be elected from within the forum with one councillor from the LCC Charnwood Forest Parish and one from each District Council within the park being put forward Councils. with between one and three other members being also elected to the executive. As above – the importance of This way the LCC and all the Districts would be part of the executive with Charnwood Forest is felt other stakeholders also represented to justify a separate group. Although access is an important issue within Charnwood Forest, there are other important issues too, which the steering 2 E:\moderngov\data\published\Intranet\C00000135\M00003125\AI00028537\$aqiv131u.doc APPENDIX group will have to consider. TP3/2 I have given my preferred option in the previous answer in that I think organisations should be represented on the Stakeholder Group and that people from that group should be elected to the steering group to support the officers. Noted. However if we are to go down your suggested structure then I would still wish to contain the steering group within manageable numbers. The District Councillors represent the people of the area so I think beyond the present make up the others should represent special interest groups. It is acknowledged that The sort of people we might include are those on the Access Forum there will almost certainly already. That body has user groups, environmentalists, the NFU, be some level of landowners and tenant farmers and the steering group should perhaps membership overlap. be looking at something similar. A further report on details Perhaps a member of the Country Landowners & Business Association, of the proposed one from the NFU, one from the Wildlife Trust and if the Access Forum is membership of the new not to be actually used as part of this structure then a representative of steering group will be the Forum should be included as it is a Statutory Consultee. taken to Cabinet in autumn 2011. As at present a case can certainly be made for the National Forest Company given their project overlaps ours to such an extent and Natural England and English Heritage have their direct interests to represent. This then just leaves the user groups, which predominantly means sport and recreation. They could be deemed to be represented by the Forum as they have the chance to be members of the Forum. The steering group under this structure would already be eleven strong and I would think large enough but not too large to be effective. 3 E:\moderngov\data\published\Intranet\C00000135\M00003125\AI00028537\$aqiv131u.doc APPENDIX If you do feel it should be further expanded then the principal sporting interests using the Forest are shooters, runners and orienteers, ramblers and horse riders. We could invite a representative of each of these but how they would select from within the various clubs would be problematical in exactly the same way it would be deciding which Parish Council should be invited if that was also felt appropriate. Perhaps the user groups should be restricted to those with a regional structure where the county organisation could nominate a representative. Alternatively it could be restricted to those which are themselves, Statutory Consultees. Another organisation which might well justify a presence might be the Woodland Trust. TP3/3 I would like to suggest a different name for the Park. Regional sounds Noted. overbearing and adds no value and I would just call it the Charnwood To be taken forward for Forest Park consideration by the new steering group. Tony Lockley TP3/1 LCC Agree with the proposed course of action No response required. TP3/2 Aggregate industry Noted. NFU A further report on details of the proposed CLAB membership of the new steering group will be STWA taken to Cabinet in 4 E:\moderngov\data\published\Intranet\C00000135\M00003125\AI00028537\$aqiv131u.doc APPENDIX autumn 2011. EA House builders federation – Leicestershire branch TP3/3 Well done . No response required. Tina Boddington TP3/1 FWAG No response required. It would seem that the do nothing course of action may mean Charnwood misses out on future opportunities therefore the proposal is supported. TP3/2 FWAG would like to be involved – we hope we would be able to meet Noted. the 2 meetings per year commitment. A further report on details of the proposed membership of the new steering group will be taken to Cabinet in autumn 2011. TP3/3 Climate change does not seem to be mentioned specifically in the Noted. paper. This will be an area of growing importance as the UK’s legally The objectives set out binding target of 80% reductions in Carbon dioxide equivalent emissions, within the Vision comes closer. There are more immediate carbon budget figures and Statement refer to the renewable targets to be met. need for sustainable One area to consider could be how landowners adopt initiatives that leisure and tourism within help combat climate change whilst still encouraging the biodiversity and the Forest. habitat priorities of Charnwood Forest Regional Park. Climate change could be considered in more detail as individual 5 E:\moderngov\data\published\Intranet\C00000135\M00003125\AI00028537\$aqiv131u.doc APPENDIX initiatives are taken forward. Peter H Gamble TP3/1 Loughborough Naturalists’ Club Yes No response required. TP3/2 Leicestershire & Rutland Trust for Nature Conservation – owns and Noted. manages large areas of the Charnwood Forest eg Charnwood Lodge A further report on details National Nature Reserve and Ulverscroft and Lea Meadows Nature of the proposed Reserves etc. membership of the new Loughborough Naturalists’ Club – has carried out surveys of the ecology steering group will be of many of the most important wildlife sites on the Charnwood Forest, taken to Cabinet in including field by field surveys, over the past 50 years. autumn 2011. TP3/2 Leicestershire & Rutland Trust for Nature Conservation – owns and Noted. manages large areas of the Charnwood Forest eg Charnwood Lodge A further report on details National Nature Reserve and Ulverscroft and Lea Meadows Nature of the proposed Reserves etc. membership of the new Loughborough Naturalists’ Club – has carried out surveys of the ecology steering group will be of many of the most important wildlife sites on the Charnwood Forest, taken to Cabinet in including field by field surveys, over the past 50 years. autumn 2011. Paul Tame TP3/1 NFU No response given No response required. TP3/2 The NFU feels that landowners and farmers need to be represented on Noted. the proposed steering group. We believe that this group is so important A further report on details to the success of the proposed regional park that the NFU and CLA of the proposed should have one place each on the steering group. As far as the NFU is membership of the new concerned we would try to ensure a local farmer from within the steering group will be 6 E:\moderngov\data\published\Intranet\C00000135\M00003125\AI00028537\$aqiv131u.doc APPENDIX proposed park boundaries is put forward.