Report to Follow

4.1      Members received a report which outlined the proposed changes in governance arrangements for the 2015-20 Natural Growth LEADER programme.

4.2       The Chair commented that the proposals comprised a fundamental change in the governance of the LEADER programme, and asked the AONB Partnership Manager to give a little more background.

4.3       The AONB Partnership Manager briefly outlined discussions held during the transition year in 2014, which after much deliberation, had led to the bid submitted in September 2014 based on the benefits of integrating AONB and LEADER functions, and with the Partnership again acting as the LEADER Local Action Group (LAG).  This bid had received formal support from Shropshire Council as accountable body and from the Marches Local Enterprise Partnership (LEP).  In November 2014 a letter had been received from Defra indicating that the bid had been successful, subject to confirmation by contract.  A competing bid for the area based on the AONB Partnership not being the LAG had been rejected.

4.4       The AONB Partnership Manager went on to say that at the end of April 2015, local Defra officers had first raised issues regarding proposed governance arrangements for the southern Shropshire programme, and indicating that key aspects of the proposals as set out in the bid would no longer be acceptable.  For example, the AONB Partnership was now considered to be an ‘interest group’, and since the grant decision making panel could not comprise of more than 49% from any single interest group, that the proposed structure where members of the Approvals Panel would become members of the AONB Partnership would not now conform to this rule.  While Defra would allow an option where the Partnership remained as the LAG, the Panel must be independent of it.  Partnership representatives felt that in this scenario the Partnership would not be truly acting as a LAG in the manner intended, and would lay itself open to risk from decisions made in its name over which it had little control.  Further, Defra’s guidance that the AONB Partnership’s conservation remit could now be considered a ‘conflict of interest’ made the Partnership’s role potentially much more difficult, especially since clear written guidance on this topic was not forthcoming.  The second option, to separate the governance of the LEADER and AONB functions and make the new Panel into the LAG was therefore, with reluctance, favoured.  The subsequent decision of Shropshire Council to take the LEADER Programme Manager in-house had not been expected.

4.5       Ms Jury advised the meeting that the LDS submission had been robust and good, but a recent interpretation around conflicts of interest had required changes.  There was an issue of perception and a need for consistency over the whole of the country.  She added that other Local Action Groups were having to address the same issues.

4.6       The Chair then asked the Head of Economic Growth and Prosperity to inform the Partnership about the Council’s proposed change to the staffing arrangements.  The Head of Economic Growth and Prosperity said that the AONB’s Partnership work and role in securing the LEADER programme was recognised, but since the recent guidance from Defra, the Council felt that the LEADER programme sat better within Shropshire Council than with the AONB Partnership team.  This would strengthen the accountable body role and enable better links with the LEP and other funding programmes.

4.7       The Chair commented that there was need to make a decision swiftly, since a Delivery Plan had to be submitted to Defra by the end of July.  He added that during discussions with Shropshire Council he had received assurances that the Council would find ways for the AONB Partnership to replace the loss of earned income from hosting the LEADER programme, such that the Partnership would not be financially disadvantaged by the Council’s decision.

4.8       A number of comments and queries from members were discussed in considerable depth, including: -

·           How could the AONB Partnership be considered as an ‘interest group’ when it is made up of a large number of different organisations?

·           How could the aims of the AONB Partnership be protected when LEADER grant decisions were made under the new arrangement?

·           The ground had shifted under our feet and it wasn’t clear in this case why Defra had supported the Partnership’s bid to deliver the programme.

·           How would the new Panel be made up and how would members be recruited to it?

·           How would the new LAG avoid conflicts of interest itself?

·           Would there not be some negative perceptions about the location of the Programme Manager at Shirehall, outside the LEADER area?

4.9      The AONB Partnership Manager said that the two elements of the Partnership being the LAG and the team hosting the Programme Manger were the essence of the lead organisation role, and the loss of these was very disappointing, as well as leaving implications for loss of earned income to the Partnership.  He advised the meeting that there would need to be dialogue between the Partnership and Shropshire Council over the recruitment of the Panel as the new LAG.

4.10    The Chair commented that it was important that the Partnership maintained as much influence as possible and that members of the Partnership may wish to apply to be members of the LAG to ensure this.

4.11    The Chair proposed the resolution that ‘The Approvals Panel should be reconstituted as the LAG for the Natural Growth LEADER Programme under the direct organisation of Shropshire Council with the proviso that the AONB Partnership will not lose out financially through these changes.’

4.12    Ms Caffyn proposed that the following amendment be made ‘that the AONB should retain involvement and influence in the programme’.  This was agreed.

4.13    Following a vote, and with great regret and disappointment on the part of all concerned, it was Resolved that: -

            The Approvals Panel should be reconstituted as the LAG for the Natural Growth LEADER Programme under the direct organisation of Shropshire Council with the proviso that the AONB Partnership will not lose out financially through these changes and retains involvement and influence in the programme.