PEMBROKESHIRE ISLANDS CANDIDATE SPECIAL AREA OF CONSERVATION

MINUTES OF JOINT MEETING OF COMMUNITY AND INTERESTS  LIAISON FORA

TUESDAY,  27 JULY 1999, COUNTY HALL, HAVERFORDWEST

Present

Steve TAYLOR                  (SAT)   Pembrokeshire County Council  (Chair)

Mark ANDREWS               (MA)    Milford Haven Port Authority

Blaise BULLIMORE           (BB)     Countryside Council for Wales

Mike CAMPLIN                 (MC)    Countryside Council for Wales

Phil COATES                     (PC)     South Wales Sea Fisheries Committee

Kate COLLINS                  (KC)     (placement student)

Robin CRUMP                    (RC)     Orielton Field Centre (Skomer MNR rep)

John DEASON                   (JD)      Pembrokeshire Sports Council (Recreation rep)
Yvonne EVANS                 (YE)     Marloes & St Bride’s Community Council (Pembrokeshire Association of Local Councils)

David HARRIES                 (DH)    Texaco (Industry rep)

Jane HODGES                    (JH)      Pembrokeshire Coast National Park Authority
Anne HUGHES                  (AH)    Milford Haven Town Council / Milford Haven Waterway Assembly

Bill KEPPEL-COMPTON   (BKC)   Pembrokeshire Tourism Federation (Tourism rep)

Steve MORRELL               (SM)     Dale Fort Field Centre (Education rep)

Julian ORCHARD               (JO)      Twr-y-Felin Centre (Recreation rep)
Jim PRICE                          (JP)       Pembrokeshire Chamber of Commerce (Business & commerce rep)

Maureen TAYLOR             (MT)     Dwr Cymru Welsh Water

Trevor THEOBALD           (TT)      Pembrokeshire County Council

Steve THOMPSON            (ST)      (Milford Harbour Users Association rep)

Paul VARALLO                 (PV)      Environment Agency Wales

Ian WISBY                         (IW)      Joint Fishing Communities South & West Wales (Fisheries rep)

(Titles and honours omitted.  Relevant authorities / members of the RA Group shown in italics)

1  Welcome & apologies

Steve Taylor (SAT), chair of the Pembrokeshire Islands cSAC Relevant Authorities Group (RAG), welcomed members to the meeting, noting that the gathering was the first group of members of the public to be hosted in the new County Hall.  Members introduced themselves.

Apologies were recorded from Phil Nicolle, Wildlife Trust West Wales (Nature conservation & environment rep) and John Everett, Elf Oil (Milford Haven Waterway Environmental Monitoring Steering Group rep).  Trinity House Lighthouse Service had been invited but did not attend.

2  Agreement of agenda

SAT invited comments or additions to the circulated agenda.  There being none the meeting proceeded.

3  Purpose of Interests Fora

Blaise Bullimore (BB) tabled a draft “Purpose & Terms of Reference” for the Sectoral and Community Interests Fora and led members through the document. 

BB reminded members that the requirement for the two fora was determined by agreement of the 29 May 1999 public meeting in Kaleidoscope, Milford Haven.  He drew particular attention to the purpose of the Fora in meeting the requirements of the EU Habitats and Species Directive, contributing to the practical task of developing a management scheme and for communicating with interested parties.  He stressed the RAG’s view that the Fora must be for liaison and exchanging information and advice, not one-way communication from the RAG.

Grammatical / typographical errors in 4, point 5 and 5, point 2 were noted.

Members were invited to raise queries.

Bill Keppel-Compton (BKC), whilst noting the extent of the conservation features and the scope of legitimate interests, queried what were the ‘relevant issues’ referred to in para 6.  He further noted the possible development of a Pembrokeshire Coastal Forum (PCF) following the 16 July 1999 seminar (‘Building on Pembrokeshire’s Coastal Heritage’) at Pembrokeshire College, and queried the future relationship between the cSAC with this possible future forum.

BB agreed that it will often be difficult to be precise about the relevance of many issues to the cSAC; the criterion will always be whether an issue is relevant to the maintenance in favourable condition of the features for which the site is designated.

SAT anticipated that a PCF would act as an umbrella which would draw together the cSAC and other coastal and marine initiatives.

Yvonne Evans (YE) suggested that once the management scheme was developed, that would make the identification of issues and management more tangible.

BB stressed that it is the RAG’s strong wish that the Fora contribute to the development of the scheme and identification of issues, and not just respond to the proposals from the RAG.  SAT emphasised that the scheme will be dynamic and continually evolve, and that the contribution of all interested individuals is both welcome and essential.

Steve Thompson (ST) asked who was responsible for identifying issues.   SAT explained that they may be identified by anyone and that agreement on their relevance would be determined by consensus, case by case.  It was stressed that no one organisation or individual has a monopoly on information or opinion.  The Relevant Authorities have no additional resources allocated to them to carry out SAC work and that by pooling resources, information and opinions, all parties will eventually be better informed.

SAT asked members to provide any comment on the Purpose & Terms document in good time to enable any revision prior to the next meeting.  In the meantime, the RAG would work to the document as it stands.   ACTION: ALL

4 Membership

Members attention was drawn to the revised list of representatives tabled.  SAT asked members to consider representation of interests and identify any concerns.  He specifically asked about representation of recreational interests.

John Deason (JD) considered that the Pembrokeshire Sports Council (PSC) was an appropriate body as it represents a wide range of sports and activities.  He suggested that future representation at this forum may come from the PSC’s watersports subcommittee.  He expressed the view that representation of non-organised activity interests is, and will always be, problematic.

Julian Orchard (JO) explained that he would seek to represent the interests of ‘commercial recreation’ through the Association of Outdoor Centres.

SAT queried the best way of communicating with recreational ‘non-joiners’.

ST reported that the Milford Harbour Users represent some, but by no means all, small power boaters; many of which could be described as ‘non-joiners’.  JO pointed out the potential communication value of the specialist recreational press.

BKC considered that, including the non-local interests which would be reached through tourism representation channels, the proposed mechanisms for liaising with recreational interests would be difficult to improve on.

SAT thanked members for their contributions.  He reminded them that the RAG will not direct interest groups but will provide the forum for them to meet with the relevant authorities.  He stressed that the decision on how sectoral interests will continue to be represented at this forum rests with the interested parties.

SAT asked the local community representatives what progress had been made to determine membership of the Community Liaison Forum. 

Anne Hughes (AH) suggested that membership could be drawn from an expanded Waterway Assembly which included open coast Community Councils.  In the meantime she had begun consultation with the Pembrokeshire Association of Local Councils.

5  Facilitation of the Fora

Jane Hodges (JH) reported that the RAG had agreed to facilitate the two fora, and would provide venue, chair, secretariat and focal point for communication between the SIGs and the RAG CCW).

She confirmed that individual relevant authorities were free to meet with SIGs or their representatives on invitation and as necessary.

6. Recap of briefings to the Kaleidoscope public meeting

SAT led members through a brief recap of the public meeting.  The RAG had been pleased with the turnout for the meeting and considered that it had more than met the Group’s expectations.  He reminded members that the decision of the Kaleidoscope meeting had been that an annual public was insufficient liaison with interested parties which was why this Forum meeting had been convened.

MA reminded SIG and Community representatives that the objectives of the SAC are to meet the requirements of the Habitats and Species Directive.  The purpose of the site’s management scheme will be to achieve this by enabling activities within the site to co-exist in harmony with its features.

ST asked who determines whether the objectives for the site have been met and what would be the penalties for failing to meet them.

SAT explained that:

- it is CCW’s responsibility to monitor the condition of the site’s features;

- each relevant authority has a responsibility to carry out its functions to meet the requirements of the Habitats Directive;

- failure to meet the sites objectives may result in prosecution under UK and European law.

RC asked what additional resources were available to monitor the sites features and to conduct research to establish baselines and targets.

SAT explained that there were no additional resources or powers granted to members of the RAG. The lack of resources for SAC related work was a fundamental problem across the RAG, and for all other SACs. The RAG had spent some time researching various resourcing options for a project officer and in support of development of the management scheme. There had been no success yet though there may be opportunities under the EU Objective One programme.

7. Communication with sectoral interest group members and Community Councils

MC reviewed the mechanism and importance of communication between the RAG and both the Liaison Fora. The membership of each sectoral and community interest group had been passed to the group representatives and CCW would maintain a contacts database to keep these lists updated. For this to work it was important that liaison fora representatives and CCW shared and kept up to date their contact details.       ACTION: ALL

General communication with the SACRAG should be through CCW, as secretariat. Minutes of RAG meetings would be circulated to all liaison fora representatives. RAG members would not be able to attend all sectoral interest group meetings but MC assured members that consideration would be given to any invitation received.

MC re-enforced point 5 in the draft Terms of Reference, emphasising that the effectiveness of the fora will be determined by good communication.

8. Meetings timetable & other housekeeping issues.

SAT suggested that two liaison fora meetings and the annual public meeting could be spread evenly across the year, each being 4 months apart.

BKC observed that this would result in an 8 month gap between liaison fora meetings and suggested that a third liaison fora meeting occur back to back with the standing conference, to reduce the interval to 4 months..

Some consideration was given to the frequency and time of liaison fora meetings with eventual agreement that the date and time for the next meeting would be set now and a decision on future meetings could be made then.

The next meeting of the Liaison forum was set for 17:15 on Tuesday 23rd November 1999; venue to be advised.

NOTE: Venue - Boardroom, Milford Haven Port Authority, Gorsewood Drive, Hakin, Milford Haven.  Members requiring location information should contact the CCW secretariat.