Select Committee on Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Written Evidence


Memorandum submitted by the National Trust (Appendix 13)

SUMMARY

  1.  The Natural Environment and Rural Communities Bill has the potential to help introduce a genuinely fresh and integrated approach to sustainable land management and the protection of natural resources for the benefit of the public and for their own sake. The National Trust welcomes its publication and the opportunity to contribute to the Committee's pre-legislative scrutiny. Our evidence highlights six main issues:

    —  The importance of DEFRA publishing a strong and coherent policy framework for natural resource protection which provides a context for the operation of the proposed new Integrated Agency and taking forward the Rural Strategy—this is a striking gap in DEFRA's suite of strategies which exist for each of its four other strategic priorities. The resource protection strategy needs to be backed by a clearer political vision and develop the rather weak policy statement that accompanies the draft Bill. It also needs a clear framework of national environmental objectives supported by targets audited independently by the new Integrated Agency.

    —  The need to strengthen the Agency's general purpose and remove potential confusion over the priority and importance attached to its different responsibilities for wildlife, landscape, access, learning and management of the natural environment. We particularly urge, on the basis of the experience of our own statutory provisions, that the Agency be charged with a general purpose to "promote" the natural environment.

    —  Gaps in the Integrated Agency's responsibilities for the historic and cultural environment and education and the need for clarity over its role in relation to "quiet enjoyment".

    —  The importance of a strong regional dimension to the work of both the Integrated Agency—which should be the environmental equivalent to Regional Development Agencies' economic role—and the Commission for Rural Communities—which will struggle to gain credibility without an effective regional presence.

    —  Concerns over the resources and powers available to the proposed Commission for Rural Communities which risks playing only a limited rural-proofing role and not realising the expectations of the Rural Strategy.

    —  Concerns over constraints on the international activity of the Integrated Agency in relation to nature conservation and JNCC.

(1)  THE NATIONAL TRUST

  2.  The National Trust is a charity with over 3.4 million members and 40,000 volunteers that works to promote the conservation of the natural and cultural heritage of England, Wales and Northern Ireland for the benefit of the nation. The land in our care extends to over 250,000 hectares and includes the nation's largest farmed estate. We conserve over 1,100km of coastline and offer free access to 820 square kilometres of countryside. We have 50 million visits to our coast and countryside properties annually and are one of the largest out of school classrooms with over 500,000 educational visits by schoolchildren. We are responsible for nearly 10% of the nation's Sites of Special Scientific Interest and Common Land.

  3.  The Trust has played an active role in the development of the Government's Rural Strategy and subsequently the Natural Environment and Rural Communities Bill. We were members of Lord Haskins' Sounding Board, helping to shape his report on rural delivery to Government. Since publication, we have focussed on developing the role, function and policy context for the proposed Integrated Agency and helped to facilitate stakeholder engagement with the voluntary sector. We are members of the DEFRA stakeholder group on the Integrated Agency and DEFRA's Modernising Rural Delivery Strategic Reference Group.

  4.  Our evidence is informed by research into the international and domestic experience of institutional delivery for integrated approaches to the natural environment. This work confirms the innovative nature of the proposed Agency as an arms-length body addressing the natural environment in an integrated way. We have also undertaken a comparison of the legislation with existing bodies' powers and functions. Further information on this research is available on request.

  5.  In many respects the National Trust Acts provide one of the few existing legislative precedents for an organisation charged with combining conservation and access to bring in perpetuity benefits for the nation. We address the relevance of our own statutory provisions below in our recommendations for strengthening of the Integrated Agency's purpose.

(2)  A PARADIGM SHIFT IN LAND AND RESOURCE MANAGEMENT

  6.  The Trust urges the Committee to recognise the potential of the draft Bill to help introduce a fresh and integrated approach to sustainable land management and the protection of natural resources. We have a unique opportunity to modernise the way we manage the natural and cultural resources of our land and seas. New policy drivers, changes to institutional frameworks and profound environmental trends require and enable us to adopt a new and integrated approach to sustainable land management. Increasingly, domestic and European policy requires us to manage land and resources at a much more ecologically relevant and locally sensitive scale, most recently through the Water Framework Directive's integrated river basin management plans. Our domestic political and institutional frameworks have evolved too. Devolution, a new localism, the growth in corporate responsibility and a highly active voluntary sector gives the Government much greater flexibility to develop and implement policy more creatively, effectively and efficiently to ensure sustained provision of public benefits by a broad range of partners. A summary of this new approach is provided in Annex 1 setting out the Trust's ambitions for an integrated approach to "sustainable land management". This approach should suffuse the legislation, policy and political debate around the new Agency.

  7.  The Trust's main concern is the lack of a strategic policy framework to integrate the protection and management of natural resources, including wildlife, landscape, access, soil and water. Without this, the Integrated Agency will be compromised by having to work with the siloed policies of the past. In effect, it will be a new delivery body without policy objectives to deliver. It will also undermine confidence in the level of Government commitment to an integrated approach. This is why we firmly believe a strategy for natural resource protection is essential to give the Integrated Agency, as well as partners like the Trust and water companies, a forward-looking policy agenda that facilitates positive land management change. This will also help realise the benefits of CAP reform, meet Water Framework Directive requirements and enable adaptation to significant pressures such as climate change. A resource protection strategy is the missing part of DEFRA's policy jigsaw, as the "protection of natural resources" is the only one of its five strategic priorities without a strategy.

  8.  Our analysis of international experience in this field also points to the need for complementary measures to ensure the potential of the new Agency will be fully realised. Sweden's Environmental Protection Agency (SEPA) is probably the closest equivalent to the UK's conservation NDPBs and its work is delivered in the context of:

    —  A statutory Environmental Code which brings together all environmental legislation and provides a means of implementing EU Regulations and Directives.

    —  Fifteen Environmental Quality Objectives adopted by Parliament and underpinned by quantified targets and clear auditing and evaluation requirements. These go well beyond the UK's current sustainable development indicators and address issues such as landscape which have no legislative basis or performance measure in the UK They are also monitored and reported independently of the Government.

    —  A formal role for SEPA in evaluating progress in achieving the Environmental Quality Targets.

(3)  INTEGRATED AGENCY

  9.  The Trust believes the Government needs to be bold in realising the potential of the new Integrated Agency to deliver a "fresh approach" to the natural environment. The Agency needs convincingly to integrate all aspects of the natural environment with a strong "people" focus, and to show quickly that it can deliver more than the sum of its previous parts. It also needs to provide intelligent, independent advice to DEFRA and the rest of Government. We therefore welcomed the Secretary of State's announcement following publication of the Rural Strategy and the draft Bill's confirmation of NDPB status.

  10.  The Agency presents a unique opportunity both to advance policy thinking and improve delivery to a diverse customer base in both urban and rural areas. The Trust believes the Agency has exciting potential to make real and lasting connections between people's health and wellbeing and the quality and accessibility of their environment, on their doorstep and in their wider world, and to increase respect for and understanding of the intrinsic value of the natural world.

  11.  The main challenges are to build on the strengths and successes of English Nature, the Countryside Agency and the Rural Development Service, which on the whole have done a good job; to maintain momentum in a period of dynamic policy change; and, most importantly, to grasp fully the opportunities.

  12.  We illustrate the potential of a more integrated approach to management and protection of natural resources in three case studies—Wicken Fen, the Cutler Catchment and the High Peak. These are summarised in Annex 2 and demonstrate the economic, social and environmental benefits of a more integrated approach.

(a)   General Purpose

  13.  We generally welcome the approach taken to the Agency's general purpose in draft clause 2(1). This simply and effectively captures the essence of the new body's role in relation to securing public benefits from the way we look after natural resources, now and in the future. It is important to retain this essential clarity in making any changes.

  14.  The National Trust Acts provide one of the few existing legislative precedents for an organisation charged with combining conservation and access to bring in perpetuity benefits for the nation and the lessons we have learned are summarised in Annex 3. We believe the general purpose, as drafted, falls down in two critical areas:

    —  The lack of a purpose to "promote"—this has been central to the achievements of the National Trust, enabling a broad and flexible approach to the delivery of our statutory purposes which embraces not only ownership and management but also education, research and advocacy.

    —  Recognition of the intrinsic value of the natural environment—the natural world is important for its own sake as well as for the public benefits it provides.

  15.  We broadly support the proposed approach to sustainable development that confirms the Agency's role as an environmental champion first which contributes to social and economic progress through its contribution to management of the natural environment.

  16.  We are concerned by the potential confusion generated by the explanation of the Agency's general purpose in draft Clause (2)(2). This is likely to lead to potentially distracting and confusing debates such as:

    —  the difference between "nature conservation" and "biodiversity";

    —  whether "protecting" biodiversity makes it a higher priority than "conserving" landscape;

    —  why biodiversity can't be "enhanced"; and

    —  why it is only possible to "promote" "access" and "nature conservation"?

  17.  This is exacerbated by providing a definition for "nature conservation" but not for "landscape", "biodiversity" or "natural environment".

  18.  We urge the Committee to identify the need for a more consistent approach in the way the legislation addresses the Agency's responsibilities, especially for landscape and wildlife.

  19.  We should also highlight a weakness in draft Clause 2(2) relating to the contribution of the natural environment to education and learning. As drafted the Agency's role is limited to "securing the provision and improvement of facilities" which could constrain it from undertaking wider activity to promote public understanding and education. As a major provider of education and lifelong learning the National Trust has first hand experience of the importance and power of the "outdoor classroom" in promoting not only learning but also personal development. This was recognised by the Government in the announcement on 11 February 2005 by Education Secretary, Ruth Kelly MP, supported by the Prime Minister to make out-of-classroom education "a part of every pupil's experience" and to prepare a Manifesto for Outdoor Education. The focus of the Agency's learning role on "nature" may also preclude study of cultural and historic aspects of the landscape.

  20.  The Trust would welcome clarification of the role of the Agency in relation to the cultural importance of the natural environment. This goes beyond the current remit of English Heritage. The experience of the Countryside Council for Wales (CCW) highlights the potential for a gulf to develop between the responsibilities of the relevant heritage bodies (eg CADW or English Heritage) with a focus on scheduled sites and the responsibility for the wider landscape vested in CCW or the Integrated Agency. Important cultural aspects of the environment such as tranquillity and dark skies need to be championed by the Agency.

  21.  We are also concerned that the breadth of the Agency's responsibilities does not result in undue bias towards those issues for which there is a strong legislative base or international obligation, especially in the corporate planning process. There is a particular concern about the lack of either international obligations or a strong legislative base for landscape considerations with clear policy targets to underpin a focus in this area. This would suggest the need to establish clear landscape objectives (eg Swedish Environmental Quality Objectives model) and for the UK Government to ratify the Council of Europe's European Landscape Convention as a start. The Agency might also take responsibility for some "wider countryside" regulatory functions such as environmental impact assessment of proposals impacting on uncultivated land.

  22.  We should also support amendments to the draft Clause to clarify the Agency's role in promoting enjoyment of the countryside and open spaces cannot be misconstrued and relates to quiet and other appropriate forms of enjoyment which do not damage the quality of the natural environment.

  23.  The Trust also recognises the concern over how the priority attached to different aspects of the Agency's purpose will be decided. This is difficult to express on the face of the Bill but we support application of the "Sandford Principle" to its work insofar as conservation needs will take priority over access in cases of significant conflict. This works well in relation to the Trust's own activities as well as in relation to National Parks.

(b)   Regional environmental governance

  24.  The Trust attaches great importance to the Agency's potential to strengthen environmental governance not only at the national level, but also at the regional level. Decisions impacting on our natural resources are taken increasingly at regional and local levels and neither DEFRA nor its agencies have had the means to really influence these decisions. We believe that the Agency's regional environmental role and function should be as strong as the Regional Development Agencies' economic role and function, working in collaboration with the Environment Agency. Clauses to this effect should be included in the Bill, including recognition of its role as a statutory consultee in the development of Regional Spatial Strategies, Regional Economic Strategies, significant infrastructure and development projects, Shoreline Management Plans, River Basin Management Plans and other areas of regional and strategic level decision making. It will be essential significantly to strengthen the content and process for preparing Regional Rural Delivery Frameworks for this to be effective. We also believe it should be the norm for the Integrated Agency to have a place on the RDA Board and a concordat should be established with the Regional Assembly.

(c)   Other powers

  25.  We are broadly content with the Agency's proposed powers to advise and undertake research and its abilities to delegate to committees. This could be particularly helpful in strengthening its role at a regional level.

(d)   Culture and Leadership

  26.  The Trust urges the Committee also to consider the way in which the new Agency will come into being as well as its legislative base. The new organisational culture is as important as its structure and the success of the new body depends on investing in change. Developing the new organisational culture and approach will not just happen, particularly when many of the staff will be the same and there will be an imbalance in staff from the different constituent organisations with very different cultures. It requires focussed investment and leadership through a change programme. Resources invested early on in securing successful change will repay themselves handsomely in performance and outcomes and this should be built into the Agency's budgets from the outset.

(4)  COMMISSION FOR RURAL COMMUNITIES

  27.  If the new Commission for Rural Communities (CRC) is to match the ambitions for rural communities set out in the Rural Strategy then it needs to have the independence, capacity, expertise and resources to champion and engage effectively in rural policy proofing, development and delivery at both national and regional levels. It should also provide a rural foresight role for the Government and others. We therefore believe there is a strong case not only for the statutory basis of the CRC as a non-executive public body but also for its rural proofing role. The CRC should be able to undertake primary research and analysis and have an "innovation fund" available to "conduct experiments in order to test new and innovative approaches to delivery" in a similar way to the Integrated Agency. This would enable it to work with, for example, RDAs, the voluntary sector and local strategic partnerships. It needs to both speak out on behalf of rural communities and provide independent advice on the rural dimension of economic, social and environmental issues.

  28.  We are particularly concerned that the lack of an effective regional presence will fatally weaken the CRC. We urge that its regional role is recognised in the Bill and that the Commission is resourced sufficiently in this area, especially given the continuing devolution of decision making on rural policy to this level.

(5)  JOINT NATURE CONSERVATION COMMITTEE

  29.  The Integrated Agency should have the freedom to take actions abroad that contribute to its general purpose. It is important that any such actions do not compromise the work of the Joint Nature Conservation Committee but the requirement in draft Clause 34 that the "development and implementation of policies for or affecting any nature conservation matter" (emphasis added) may only be discharged through the JNCC is too restrictive. It needs to be more carefully drafted. The current effect might require debates over the future of EU agriculture and wider land use policies to pass through JNCC. The current NDPBs work well together in shaping EU policy without legislative recourse to JNCC. The Agency's wider responsibilities for landscape, education, and access may also lead it to take a different approach to JNCC on some nature conservation matters.

(6)  DEVOLUTION AND TRANSFER OF FUNCTIONS

  30.  The Trust has some concerns about the scope of the powers of the Secretary of State in Chapter 1 of Part 3 of the draft Bill to devolve functions to other bodies or transfer powers between them. It is important that relevant stakeholders are consulted before such decisions are made. An assessment should also be required to ensure that any new functions do not fundamentally shift the balance of priorities in a manner that would undermine delivery of the general purpose of a body.

Annex 1

TOWARDS A SUSTAINABLE LAND MANAGEMENT POLICY FRAMEWORK

A paradigm shift in land and resource management

  1.  We have a unique opportunity to modernise the way we manage the natural and cultural resources of our land and seas. The legacy of post-war policies that engendered a remote, top-down, one-size fits all approach, particularly to agricultural land, is ending. New policy drivers, changes to institutional frameworks and profound environmental trends require and enable us to adopt a new and integrated approach to sustainable land management.

  2.  Increasingly, domestic and European policy requires us to manage land and resources at a much more ecologically relevant and locally sensitive scale, most recently through the Water Framework Directive's integrated river basin management plans. Our domestic political and institutional frameworks have evolved too. Devolution, a new localism, the growth in corporate responsibility and a highly active voluntary sector gives the Government much greater flexibility to develop and implement policy more creatively, effectively and efficiently to ensure sustained provision of public benefits by a broad range of partners.

  3.  Our environmental challenges are complex, especially dealing with the profound impacts of climate change on our natural and cultural resources which will have significant consequences for our society and economy. Re-thinking our use of land and resources and preparing now for continual adaptation to change and management of risk will be a more cost effective and publicly accountable response than reactive and sometimes catastrophic adjustments. This requires a forward looking philosophy in policy making that proactively tackles the root causes of environmental problems, not end of pipe fixes. It complements approaches to pollution and health as two related areas where policy is increasingly moving towards prevention rather than cure; securing significant long term cost savings and avoiding damaging impacts and effects.

  4.  The value and function of land in meeting the needs of our C21st society has changed considerably since the last major policy shift post-war towards maximising food production and it will continue to change. Access to a diverse and wildlife-rich public realm, in the countryside and the town, is recognised as an essential contribution to people's health and wellbeing; a vital component of high quality living and working spaces; and a key economic driver. Increasingly, land is becoming highly valued for its function, for example in flood mitigation, water storage and purification.

  5.  These powerful forces of change together create an imperative to develop a sustainable land management policy framework that is more locally relevant, accountable and based on delivering public benefits for all, now and in the future—a paradigm shift in land and resource management policy and delivery. We need leadership in developing this new policy framework if we are to realise the potential delivery benefits of new institutions, most notably the Integrated Agency. Without it, any new delivery body will be operating in a policy vacuum and against the grain of current policy approaches.

TOWARDS SUSTAINABLE LAND MANAGEMENT (SLM)

  6.  Sustainable land management (SLM) is about meeting the needs of current and future generations from land without depleting the natural and cultural resources upon which their needs depend. It is helpful to think of SLM as a new approach to the strategic and integrated planning, use and management of land. It is a clear and positive move forward from the often incoherent and inefficient sectoral and silo approaches to land management—agriculture, forestry, biodiversity, landscape, water, soil, recreation, access—that are a relic of past policy priorities and approaches.

  7.  A SLM approach is based on respecting the quality, integrity and health of land, ensuring the sustainable use of natural and cultural resources within "land capability", founded primarily on the living resources of soil and water. The key ingredients of this approach are:

    —  Strategic—managing flexibly and reversibly for the inherently unpredictable long term.

    —  Scale sensitive—managing at an appropriate catchment, ecosystem and landscape scale.

    —  Dynamic—managing within natural systems and processes, rather than fixed areas and institutional boundaries.

    —  Informed—managing on the basis of robust information and evidence.

    —  Prudent—managing demand for and supply of scarce resources.

    —  Equitable—managing to ensure fair access for current and future generations.

    —  Democratic—managing to local as well as national and international needs and priorities.

    —  Mutual—managing to ensure shared responsibility for stewardship.

  8.  The key tests of whether we are succeeding in moving towards SLM include:

    —  the capacity, functionality and resilience of ecosystems;

    —  the quality and integrity of the countryside;

    —  the natural realignment of the coast and sustenance of natural sea defences;

    —  access for all to the countryside (mental, physical, intellectual);

    —  primary resource availability, reducing use and minimising waste;

    —  the reduction of risks to society (eg from hazards, extreme events, resource shortages);

    —  lower total long term costs (both public and private) in managing resources; and

    —  the leverage of public investment in attracting financial, intellectual and logistical investment from the private and voluntary sectors.

A DEMONSTRABLY NEW APPROACH TO POLICY-MAKING

  9.  A SLM framework challenges many of our current practices in policy-making and the development of a new framework will help to catalyse a change in culture, behaviour and approach not only of government, but also land managers, industry, voluntary sector and the public.

  10.  SLM provides a critical opportunity to embed a better regulatory approach to land and resource policy making, with packages of measures becoming the norm, based on clear public benefit outcomes and underpinned by risk management. A much greater focus on "soft" measures—such as advice, training and demonstration—will also be required to build the capacity of key groups to respond to change, particularly land and resource managers.

  11.  Understanding the condition of our natural and cultural resources and the current and future pressures on them is a pre-requisite to developing the framework, so investing in a sound evidence base is essential. Equally important is ensuring policy-makers have the understanding, skills and resources to interpret and use the evidence in a multi-disciplinary way.

  12.  As land and resource outcomes are by their nature strongly spatial, a SLM policy architecture will need to be based on a strategic spatial planning framework that covers the whole landmass—and sea. River basin management plans take us part way there, but these need to be integrated with the statutory land use planning system (especially regional spatial strategies and local development frameworks) in a way that strengthens their overall sustainable development purpose. This still leaves gaps, for example, in identifying areas for the large-scale restoration of ecosystem and landscape integrity or identifying areas that provide the greatest health and wellbeing benefits (such as areas of tranquillity).

  13.  In developing SLM policy we will also need to operate beyond the usual organisational boundaries. It will be vital to harness the commitment, resources, energy and experience of partner organisations in the public, private and voluntary sector, not least to multiply the impact of public investment. This collaboration has a key advantage in growing a sense of shared responsibility and accountability beyond the Government for the protection, enhancement and restoration of our natural and cultural resources. The High Peak catchment is one example where this approach is already yielding benefits—see box below.

REAL AND LASTING BENEFITS ON THE GROUND

  14.  The key prize from a successful SLM policy is to enable social and economic wellbeing to be built on a high quality and healthy environment. Moving towards a SLM policy framework should help us realise a number of benefits that are currently proving difficult or expensive. These include:

    —  Developing local economic land-based cultures beyond "agri" culture, for example in tourism, leisure, energy, recycling, health and education.

    —  Developing new enterprises based on environmental services, for example in flood management, water storage and purification.

    —  A culture of stewardship of natural and cultural resources amongst all land and resource managers.

    —  Large scale restoration of ecosystems and landscape through public, private, voluntary partnerships.

    —  Targeting research according to strategic need.

    —  Real public involvement in deciding what they value and need from their public realm, particularly on their doorstep.

    —  Improved public understanding of and support for managing the risks to valued natural and cultural resources, for example from flooding, erosion, land subsidence, climate change.

    —  Real increases in resource productivity and a culture of wise consumption.

    —  More coherent and efficient public spending that achieves sustained improvements in the condition of our resource assets.

    —  Developing natural and cultural resource accounting to measure the real change in national assets—beyond GDP.

Annex 2

CASE STUDIES OF AN INTEGRATED APPROACH

  1.  The following case studies illustrate the potential and benefits of a more integrated approach to natural resource management based on partnership working at a landscape or catchment scale.

(1)  THE HIGH PEAK PARTNERSHIPA VOLUNTARY, PUBLIC, PRIVATE PARTNERSHIP

  2.  The Ashop catchment in the Southern Pennines of Derbyshire covers about 125km2 of blanket peat bog of national and European importance, owned mainly by the National Trust. It supplies drinking water to the communities of Leicester, Sheffield, Derby and Nottingham, through the Ladybower reservoir system of Severn Trent plc. The work here shows some of the financial and environmental advantages from catchment-scale approaches to land management change and the opportunities for new forms of partnership between the public, private and voluntary sectors.

  3.  Much of the peat, especially at high altitude, has been subject to erosion and degradation from the combined effects of drought, fire, overgrazing and atmospheric pollution. This has serious environmental, economic and social consequences:

    —  The designated SSSI and cSAC blanket peat is in unfavourable condition.

    —  The drinking water is discoloured (the reason for 50% of customer complaints) and needs expensive treatment. The problem has been getting worse since the mid nineties.

    —  Peat erosion leads to sedimentation of the reservoirs, with 1-10 tonnes of peat slurry removed every day from Ladybower Reservoir and disposed of in landfill.

    —  Oxidation of a significant carbon store.

  4.  Dealing with these issues "end of pipe" and in isolation is proving expensive and ineffective, with a growing financial burden on the water company, its customers, the National Trust and the public purse.

  5.  It is clear that to restore the health of the blanket peat and the quality of the hugely valuable water resource, a proactive approach was needed at a much larger spatial and temporal scale.

  6.  A voluntary, public, private partnership between the National Trust, English Nature, Severn Trent and Nottingham Trent University has bought together financial, intellectual and logistical resources to identify and tackle the root causes of the poor condition of the water. Through research and experimentation with moorland management techniques, the partnership aims to move towards the sustainable land management of the whole catchment.

  7.  There is significant potential for creative policy and delivery measures to pay farmers for providing clean water services through direct contracts with the water company, which should be far more profitable than subsidised sheep production. Improving the quality of the environment in this way will mean that any investment through agri-environment schemes will buy the public far greater benefits than they are able to currently.

(2)  WICKEN FEN—GREEN SPACE WITH GROWTH

  8.  The Trust's Wicken Fen in Cambridgeshire is one of Britain's oldest nature reserves. Forming around 325 hectares of wetland, it is one of the last remnants of the traditional landscapes of the fens. It supports 7,000 species, including over 120 Red Data Book species and has designations including status as a Special Area of Conservation and a Ramsar site. Despite its long history, impressive species list and high visitor numbers, in its current form Wicken is too small and too isolated to have a sustainable future.

  9.  Our intention is to turn Wicken Fen into an invaluable social, economic and environmental resource. The aim is to increase the Fen tenfold, by acquiring 3,700 hectares of surrounding arable land to return it to wetland, creating what will be equivalent to a new mini National Park. As well as securing Wicken's long term future, this will create substantial social and economic benefits for the Cambridge sub-region and the East of England as a whole. This is one of the fastest growing areas of the country.

  10.  The Integrated Agency could play a vital role in realising the potential of large-scale landscape and ecosystem restoration projects like the Wicken Vision, helping to break down the barriers. As a strong regional player, the Agency will have a unique and strategic view of the public and environmental needs of the region and an ability to ensure these are reflected effectively in the land use planning system. The Agency will be able to integrate and target investment in the environment where it contributes most to environmental and public well-being and to foster wider support from the public, private and voluntary sectors. Through being both a strategic environmental champion and a provider of practical support, the Integrated Agency would help the Wicken Vision achieve its ambitious goal.

(3)  CUTLERS CATCHMENT: INTEGRATED CATCHMENT PLANNING AND DELIVERY

  11.  The Cutlers catchment near Derby includes Cutler, Mercaston, Mackworth and Markeaton brooks. The work here shows the benefits of an integrated and partnership approach to tackling the impacts of a multitude of problems within a catchment. The Trust's Kedleston Hall estate sits within the catchment. The site has an 18th century designated landscape, with a series of lakes created by the damming of Cutlers Brook, one of which is designated SSSI which also provide significant recreational benefit to the people of Derby and beyond. Further downstream Derby City Council (DCC) has a number of settling ponds and lakes which play a vital role in the city's flood management system.

  12.  Upstream, the catchment contains arable and dairy farms, a sewage outlet and trout farm. The mix of slope, topography and soil of the surrounding landscape renders the catchment prone to generating runoff and sediment. Inappropriate land management practices such as ploughing up and down the gradients, ploughing close to river banks, cultivating on too steep a gradient, ploughing across gateways on slopes next to roads, poor slurry containment, have led to an increase in the sediment and runoff washing into the lakes.

  13.  This diffuse pollution not only results in poor water quality of the lakes with consequent impacts on biodiversity and amenity value, the rising levels of silt are also affecting the flood storage ponds, significantly reducing Derby's flood storage capacity. The DCC ponds were last de-silted in 1995 and are in urgent need of doing so again, an expensive and unsustainable process.

  14.  The National Trust has played a lead role in establishing a catchment partnership to tackle the problems at source and develop integrated solutions. The partners include the Environment Agency, English Nature, Derby City Council, DEFRA, FWAG and neighbouring farmers. The following measures are being considered:

    (1)  Development of willow and alder carr at appropriate points along the watercourses to trap silts and remove eutrophic and other inputs from the water. Areas of swamp, shallow open water and marsh to increase biodiversity.

    (2)  An area of permanent pasture as a buffer for the upper Mercaston Brook.

    (3)  A change of farming practises to reduce soil erosion eg contour ploughing, buffer strips, under-sowing, uncultivated zones around gateways, reduced grazing pressure, etc.

  15.  A catchment plan is being developed to implement these measures at the most appropriate points. This will help with targeting of public investment through Environmental Stewardship, the Single Farm Payment (cross compliance), the flood defence budget and any future expenditure on preventing diffuse water pollution from agriculture and meeting Water Framework Directive requirements.

  16.  All the main partners have contributed funding (mainly for capital works) and staff expertise to deliver the project. EA has provided data on discharge and abstraction licences, pollution incidents and water quality to inform the catchment risk management.

  17.  The integrated solutions to the multiple problems require changes to farming culture and practice throughout the catchment. This is heavily dependent on advice to farmers and catchment-scale facilitation of land management change.

  18.  The goal is for land managers within the catchment to be paid for providing a public service to the people of Derby, that not only improves flood protection and water quality, but also safeguards biodiversity and the quality of the public realm.

Annex 3

THE NATIONAL TRUST ACTS AND THE INTEGRATED AGENCY

  1.  The National Trust Acts provide one of the few existing legislative precedents for an organisation charged with combining conservation and access to bring in perpetuity benefits for the nation. Our purposes are as follows:

        "The National Trust shall be established for the purposes of promoting the permanent preservation for the benefit of the nation of lands and tenements (including buildings) of beauty or historic interest and as regards lands for the preservation (so far as is practicable) of their natural aspect features and animal and plant life"

  National Trust Act 1907

        "The purposes of the National Trust shall be extended so as to include the promotion of:

      (a)  The preservation of buildings of national interest or architectural, historic or artistic interest and places of natural interest or beauty and the protection and augmentation of the amenities of such buildings and places and their surroundings.

      (b)  The preservation of furniture and pictures and chattels of any description having national or historic or artistic interest.

      (c)  The access to and enjoyment of such buildings, places and chattels by the public"

  National Trust Act 1937

  2.  Whilst much of this wording may be dated it has served the National Trust well in integrating our approach and provides some helpful pointers for establishing the new Integrated Agency. We would highlight the following:

    —  "promoting", "promotion"—The general purpose to "promote" has been central to the achievements and success of the Trust, enabling a broad and flexible approach to the delivery of our statutory and charitable purposes which embraces not only ownership and management but also education, research and advocacy.

    —  "for the benefit of the nation"—Our purposes clearly state that we need to work for the widest possible public benefit and not just for those who visit our properties or join as members. This underpins our outreach and advocacy work and the role we play in working with others for the benefit of people and places beyond the boundaries of our properties.

    —  conservation and access/natural and historic environment—The Trust's responsibilities for conservation and access and bringing together both the natural and historic environment present similar challenges and opportunities as the new Agency. In our experience they combine to provide stronger and more effective management of places and together they deliver more lasting public benefits than they would separately.

    —  "permanent"—The bulk of the Trust's properties are inalienable and managed for permanent public benefits. This has the advantage of injecting truly long term thinking into our planning and operations, which allows options and choices to be made which would not be possible on "normal" business planning horizons. We plan and operate on a "balance sheet" rather than a "profit and loss" basis and know that when and where we invest we will be responsible for the consequences for ever.

National Trust

February 2005





 
previous page contents next page

House of Commons home page Parliament home page House of Lords home page search page enquiries index

© Parliamentary copyright 2005
Prepared 4 April 2005