The Joint Committee will receive an update on the National Marine Park.

The Chair, Councillor Briars Delve, left the meeting at this time due to his declaration of an ‘other registerable interest’, as he sat on the Non-Executive Board of the National Marine Park.

Kat Deeney (Head of Environmental Planning) presented an update on the National Marine Park Horizons Project to the Joint Committee, and highlighted the following points-

a)    The Mount Edgcumbe Country Park would benefit from funding under the National Marine Park Horizons Project funding bid, to the Heritage Lottery Fund;

b)    10% of the total Heritage Lottery Funding had so far been received, enabling the 2 year development phase to be undertaken. The remaining 90% (£8.6 Billion) would be provided in the ‘delivery phase’ following successful demonstration of a deliverable and effective project plan;

c)    During the 2 year development phase, the NMP Horizons team had worked with communities, stakeholders and partners to collate ideas, visions and feedback for the later delivery of the project. The Heritage Lottery Fund sought demonstration of community engagement and testing of these ideas, with the ambition of encouraging a diverse group of people to engage with local heritage;

d)    The 2 year development phase had provided key lesson learning and understanding to be attained, so that the later development project could be efficiently and appropriately targeted. This had included encouraging people into the water to try new activities, swimming lessons, archaeology camps, walking programmes, and arts;

e)    Barriers to peoples engagement had been identified, which included finance, transport and water confidence. The project would therefore focus on working with communities to overcome these barriers, enabling maximum engagement with the National Marine Park;

f)     The NMP Horizons project focussed of 3 major sites: Mount Batten, Tinside, and Mount Edgcumbe. At Mount Edgcumbe, the project would be largely focussed on restoring and reopening the Garden Battery to the public.

g)    An Activity Plan was being designed for the delivery phase of the project, which sought to retain the ranger service which had been established, and capitalise on the significant volunteering interest that had been identified during the development phase. A schools programme was proposed to support 30 schools who had barriers to engagement, over a 5 year Period. There would also be a city wide schools programme, including the creation of a digital platform with all the materials to deliver an ocean related curriculum, as well as a teacher training programme;

h)    A young people’s programme would also be created to deliver internship, work experience and job opportunities, allowing people to capitalise on their interests that the National Marine Park aimed to inspire and develop;

i)     A Swim Safe programme would be initialised to develop water confidence and safety, which would be supplement with a programme of opportunities including snorkelling, diving and coasteering, to enable people to engage with the heritage that they usually would not experience;

j)     There would also be a programme focussed on nature restoration of habitats and species, with individual enhancement projects funded by Community Grants, and the corporate Nature Credit Boost scheme;

k)     There had been significant changes to financial markets and global costs since the bid was submitted in 2019. As a result, there were now budget lines for inflation and contingency funds;

l)     The Garden Battery designs were currently undergoing the planning process through Cornwall Council to improve accessibility and provide restoration, and would eventually be opened to the public alongside a digital package to ‘bring the building to life’.

In response to questions from the Committee, it was reported that-

m)  The Horizons Project was just one project that would be undertaken in the National Marine Park, and the National Marine Park itself was a much larger project. Greater engagement with communities in Saltash and other areas of Cornwall would be incorporated in the wider National Marine Park project, rather than the Heritage Horizons project, which had a more specific focus on alleviating barriers to engagement with heritage. Many areas in Plymouth had been identified as not engaging with the water, hence their targeting in the Horizons project;

n)    Members of Cornwall Council recorded their concerns that the Horizons project did not seem to engage communities within Cornwall, which had numerous facilities to enable engagement with the water, and that consultation/ information regarding the National Marine Park was not present in Cornish libraries. It was however noted, that Cornwall Councillors had been provided a separate briefing regarding the National Marine Park;

o)    The 2 year development programme had been a test and trial phase to assess what measures were effective, and how communities responded, and did not reflect the whole scope of the full Park programme which would be expanded in the delivery phase. Furthermore, there was no requirement yet to specify where the individual programmes of engagement would be undertaken.

p)    The next stage bid would need to be submitted by the 15^th September, with a decision expected by Christmas 2023, for commencement in January 2024;

q)    The specific schools to be included in the Schools Engagement programme had not yet been decided, and there would be a process to identify schools most in need, and how best to engage with them. Similarly, the Community archaeology dig would be open to those in Plymouth, and Cornwall.

The Committee agreed- 

1.    To note the project progress through the development stage;

           (Abstentions – 2 – Councillors Tivnan and Pascoe)

2.    To request that the project team return at regular intervals during the delivery stage to update on the progress of the project

(Unanimous)

3.    To request that any future briefings include Cornwall Councillors who’s wards border the National Marine Park

(Proposed by Councillor Ewert, Seconded by Councillor Pascoe, and agreed unanimously)

(Following the conclusion of this item, Councillor Briars-Delve returned to the room)