Memorandum submitted by Natural England
(SE 09)
SUMMARY
Natural England is a DEFRA NDPB responsible
for conserving, enhancing and improving public access to the natural
environment. We employ 200 staff and deliver some £60M annual
spend in the South East.
The natural environment has been defined in the RES
as a key component of the South East's competitive advantage.
Natural England's strategic goals are a) to align our delivery
work in the region with wider economic and social agenda to provide
full value public benefit from our activities and b) ensure that
regional strategic planning serves to conserve and enhance the
environmental asset base that serves the region. Natural England
(and formerly our founding bodies) has worked closely with SEEDA
on the development of the current RES.
— Natural England supports current RES
aspirations in relation to sustainable prosperity as the underpinning
for regional investment—however, we are concerned that current
pressures may deflect SEEDA from this agenda.
— We have worked with SEEDA and other partners
over recent years to develop and implement the RES—closer
engagement in future RES/SRS planning and delivery management
would be mutually beneficial.
— New structural plans for the region should
build effective partnerships to deliver a sustainable future,
not fragment existing collaboration; in particular we wish to
see the environment sector properly integrated with strategic
decision-making fora.
1. Role, responsibilities and accountability
of SEEDA
1.1 No comment is needed on SEEDA's current
role. There is however considerable regional uncertainty over
the nature of SEEDA, post Sub-National Review. Proposed regional
structure changes raise questions over the new balance of priorities
that SEEDA will take within the region and the means by which
stakeholders from the breadth of sectors will engage effectively
with SEEDA. It is too early to draw any definitive conclusions,
however the risk is that fracture of established regional partnerships
across sectors could lead to reduced capability to deliver on
the crucial sustainable prosperity agenda set out in the RES.
2. Process by which the RES was drawn up
and the level of involvement of regional stakeholders
2.1 There has been extensive and substantial
external consultation, with opportunity for stakeholder input
to the design of the RES through a number of large events.
2.2 The format of consultations could be improved,
with fewer large events—where comments can become lost;
instead more focussed inputs, either through working with individual
partner organisations or through topic based discussion.
2.3 Any future SRS consultation process
needs to be more engaging with more structured opportunity for
input by stakeholders.
2.4 Natural England has worked with SEEDA
in the development of the evidence base underpinning the RES,
in particular work to define the value of the environment sector
to the regional economy. More work needs to be directed in the
future towards analysis of alternative investment strategies,
relating to both public and private finance, to understand better
where investment in the region's environmental asset base might
be best directed (in terms of contributing to regional economic
targets); this work should address both risks, for example climate
change related costs and opportunities, for example effective
marketing and enhancement of our National Parks.
3. Effectiveness of the RES for the South
East in delivering against its targets including the degree to
which the regeneration of areas of deprivation and the former
coalfield areas has been successful
3.1 Natural England work with SEEDA and
other partners on a number of targets, and lead target 13 on Natural
Resources and the Environment. It is early days to make any judgement
on the extent to which SEEDA targets will be met as a result of
activity generated by the RES.
3.2 One area where chances of delivery could
be improved would be through clearer internal linkages within
SEEDA. Whilst officers in the sustainable prosperity side of SEEDA
are well versed with many of the issues relevant to the environment
sector, it is unclear on the extent to which this shapes thinking
elsewhere, either in SEEDA's other strategic teams or at the operational
delivery end. It is unclear whether the wider sustainability agenda
is understood across the business.
4. Effect of the financial and economic situation
on businesses in the region including the effect on different
sectors such as manufacturing, service industries
4.1 The effects of the current economic
situation are seen by Natural England in two key ways: (a) in
terms of a changing economic outlook for land managers, and (b)
through changing development patterns reflected in numbers of
planning applications where we are a statutory consultee.
4.2 Farming profitability has been subject to
large fluctuations in cereal prices, partially offset by changes
to input prices. Prospects of higher prices over the medium term
have led to some farmers staying out of land management schemes
delivered by Natural England. However, we remain in a position
where our schemes are sufficiently competitively priced to secure
the necessary level of uptake in the most environmentally valuable
areas of the region. Within the sector it is unclear yet whether
the economic conditions are changing patterns of demand within
the region, for example for local food products.
4.3 On the development activity front we
have anecdotal evidence of a clear slow down of planning applications,
which we should be able to record more clearly over the coming
months. Whilst this may serve to reduce pressures in some circumstances,
this slow down in activity may also mean development that does
take place may do so operating on finer margins. This could reduce
opportunity for delivery of green infrastructure as part of sustainable
prosperity.
4.4 Finally, there are significant opportunities
for the region to invest in sustainable prosperity as part of
the region's positioning to emerge from the economic downturn;
this does not appear high on SEEDA's agenda at present however.
5. Changes to regional policy proposed in
the Local Democracy, Economic Development and Construction Bill
and the potential effect on the work of SEEDA
5.1 As above, we hold concerns over the
balance of priorities that SEEDA will pursue under new arrangements
and a new funding climate; the risks are that SEEDA may take a
retrograde step away from investing in the region's sustainable
prosperity underpinnings towards more short-term economic growth.
Such a move could prove both environmentally and economically
damaging over the long term, and could result in an unnecessarily
high level of beaurocratic activity between different arms of
government within the region.
5.2 New structures and pressure on public funds
must make SEEDA recognise that the way forward is through more
effective partnership and integration of funding and delivery
objectives, not the fracturing of these same arrangements.
5.3 In planning for the future SEEDA should
consider the impact of global trends on carbon as a key factor
in setting a vision for the region, our economic base and societal
trends.
6. Role of other Government agencies such
as the Government Office for the South East, and of partnerships
between Government agencies, local government and the private
sector, in delivering the aims of the RES
6.1 Natural England works closely at a regional
level with other government agencies in particular the immediate
Defra family. To some extent there are too many regional fora
at present (linked to SEEDA, GOSE and formerly SEERA) with a lack
of clear accountability across these. There would be merit in
providing clearer accountability through a single set of regional
fora operating to deliver a Single Regional Strategy; clearly
this would require the collaborative, engaging approach suggested
above, with objectives set to reflect social, environmental and
economic priorities.
7. Effectiveness of initiatives such as Business
Link in assisting businesses in the current climate, including
helping them to gain access to funding both from Government funding
streams and through the banking system
No comment available.
| 
