North Yorkshire Council

Executive

30 May 2023

Community Networks

Report of Assistant Chief Executive Local Engagement

1.0 Purpose of Report

1.1 To provide Members with an overview of the work undertaken in relation to the ambition to develop and support local partnership working through the establishment of local community networks or partnerships and to seek approval for the draft terms of reference and for a phased implementation approach with a limited number of pilots.

2.0 Background

2.1 The former North Yorkshire County Council’s submission to government for the establishment of a unitary council put forward a case for a locality-based delivery model with four strong and interconnected pillars:

i. Local services and access – locally based and integrated council, partner and community services.

ii. Local accountability – six Area Committees, political accountability for the discharge of statutory functions and services at local level.

iii. Local action – local people, partners and communities coming together in new Community Networks to identify and deliver against priorities.

iv. Local empowerment – devolution of powers to community groups and town and parish councils who want to, to run assets and services.

2.2 The proposal went on to describe the third pillar – Local Action – as being delivered through Community Networks.

“Community Networks will act as local agents for economic and social change. They will be places of collaboration between business, public sector agencies and the communities they serve. Our approach will be centred around the significant economic, cultural, and social assets of market towns, surrounding villages and natural communities in North Yorkshire… This will lead to greater collaboration and will provide the support that helps communities to become more self-reliant and resilient.”[1]

2.3 The unitary proposal made a strong case for having Networks that would bring stakeholders together in localities to form local partnerships to develop local action plans based on shared local priorities.

2.4 There are many examples across the county of successful partnership working. Communities and agencies working together to deliver change or address challenges.

· The multi-agency approach to supporting people through the pandemic – Team North Yorkshire – saw public agencies working alongside community support organisations, faith groups, small grass roots organisations and volunteers, local businesses and town and parish councils to make sure that anyone who asked for help got the support they needed.

· Communities who experience flooding or severe weather events coming together to develop local resilience plans

· Local charities working with partners in health and social care to relieve some of the pressures on the system during periods of high demand by utilising their volunteers and local support networks

· Communities working together across the wider system to address issues like loneliness and social isolation, digital inclusion, anti-social behaviour, or access to services.

3.0 Policy Context

3.1 The Council Plan for North Yorkshire Council as agreed by Council on 22 February 2023, includes the following priority which provides the policy mandate for the proposal to establish community networks:

“Communities are supported and work together to improve their local area.’

We want North Yorkshire to have strong, resourceful, resilient and empowered communities who work together to make decisions on local priorities, enjoy improved local accountability and have the opportunity to run local assets where they want to take on additional responsibilities and where it would be value for money for all involved.”

3.2 It sets out the priorities for the next four years as:

· To set up and support six area committees to discuss local issues, provide direction and local leadership.

· To work closely with, support and empower town and parish councils and community groups to run assets and services where they want to take on additional responsibilities, have the capacity to do so, and where it would be value for money for all involved.

· To establish around 30 community networks, bringing together local Councillors, public sector agencies, communities and businesses to get things done in their local area.

· To establish and maintain strong partnerships across North Yorkshire.

· To support a vibrant and thriving voluntary and community sector in North Yorkshire”.

4.0 Introduction

4.1 The vision described above has been central to the thinking and the development of the arrangements being made for the establishment of the Networks to date. The work has been led by the LGR Localities Workstream.

4.2 Several pieces of work have been undertaken including:

· a series of workshops to establish some key principles; characteristics and high-level terms of reference for the operation of Community Networks;

· exploratory conversations with some of the existing partnerships to understand and learn from them what works well and what some of the challenges are;

· a range of engagement and consultation activities have been undertaken including the initial testing of proposed geographical areas as part of the Let’s Talk Local engagement campaign;

· engagement seminar with Members;

· reports considered by Locality and Committee Governance Member Working Group and LGR Transition Overview & Scrutiny Committee.

5.0 Proposed Terms of Reference

5.1 The work undertaken to date has been used to develop the components of a Terms of Reference, elements of which have been previously shared with staff, Senior Managers, Members of Council and partners (through the series of public webinars).

They set out the purpose, characteristics and principles of what Networks will be - and similarly what they won’t be.

5.2 Vision Statement:

Community Networks will mobilise the energy, resources and partner relationships that exist in our communities to deliver the most appropriate local solutions for their people and place.

5.3 Purpose and Scope

The role of Community Networks is to:

· Mobilise communities, unleash energy and ambition & give them a stronger voice

· Be action oriented, creating the conditions for local action to take place that otherwise wouldn’t happen

· Develop local priorities and action plans utilising the skills, knowledge and assets of a range of partners

· Provide a mechanism for external investment (e.g. UK Shared Prosperity Funding).

In carrying out that role, Community Networks will:

· Have a strong focus on prevention and reducing inequalities

· Be encouraged to look long term to tackle local challenges that:

o improve the local economy and contribute to the creation of community wealth

o drive community action

o improve community, environmental and individual wellbeing

o improve community resilience.

5.4 Characteristics and Operating Principles

It is likely that the networks will look different in different places as they will reflect their local community however it is proposed that they will share some common principles in relation to their membership and mode of operation.

5.5 Community Networks will:

· Be centred around principal towns and surrounding areas, reflecting natural communities

· Be subject to consultation with local communities and will build on existing assets; it is expected that the nature and make-up of them will evolve and flex over time to meet local needs and priorities

· Will be shaped by and have the support of their local North Yorkshire Councillors

· Be multi-agency and operate as an “informal partnership” of local stakeholders that connect people and organisations in a community by bringing together, on an equitable basis, representatives to be drawn from the public, business, faith, voluntary and community sectors that reflect that place.

· Work together to address those local challenges and issues of shared interest that would benefit from them working collectively as a partnership by providing a vehicle for more joined-up approaches

· Identify priorities and develop a Local Action Plan

· Operate independently, having autonomy to elect their own Chair

· Be inclusive, trusted and recognised by local residents and will encourage local collaboration, local action and participation.

5.6 Community Networks will not:

· Be single agencies nor will they have a single focus.

· Be talking shops. Their focus will be on delivering positive change through enabling the delivery of local projects.

· All happen at the same time. Developing partnerships and working collaboratively takes time and it is therefore likely that some will take longer to develop than others.

· Have devolved budgets. They will however be encouraged and supported to explore funding opportunities from a range of sources such as UK Shared Prosperity Funding, Community Infrastructure Levies, national and local trusts and foundations and investment from corporate social responsibility opportunities.

· Be part of the formal governance structure of North Yorkshire Council.

· Have any devolved powers to set public policy or fetter the discretion of any of the individual partner organisations.

6.0 Consultation and Engagement

6.1 Various engagement and consultation activities have been undertaken between September and December 2022:

· Let’s Talk Local (September – December 2022)

· Locality and Committee Governance Member Working Group (26 September 2022)

· LGR Transition Overview & Scrutiny Committee (9 November 2022)

· Member seminar (7 December 2022)

· Parish and Town Council webinars

6.2 The outcomes of the various engagement activities can be summarised as:

· There is public support for the possible spatial distribution of networks being based on principal towns and their natural hinterlands.

· 65% of responses (2,565) agreed that the areas felt right for their community. There were some differences across the county, with support particularly strong in Scarborough, Craven, Hambleton and Harrogate.

· Of those who agreed; the reasons cited included that the size and geography looked logical; they could address local issues; build on local assets and support rural needs and concerns.

· However, there was less support for having rigid geographical boundaries as this doesn’t reflect how places interact with each other. (Let’s Talk Local)

· Engagement with Members raised some concerns in relation to the operation of the networks particularly around democratic representation, relationships with Town and Parish Councils and relationships with Area Committees.

· They also raised the potential for inequity between urban and rural communities. This concern is also reflected in the feedback from town and parish councils.

· However, it was also recognised that there was the opportunity for local partnerships or networks to support communities to deliver their local priorities.

· Support for the suggestion that this shouldn’t be a ‘one size fits all’ approach and that networks will evolve at different speeds in different places.

· Members also acknowledged that the roll-out of networks could be resource intensive initially and suggested the programme should evolve incrementally. (LGR Transition Overview & Scrutiny)

· These views were amplified at the Member seminar who also felt that boundaries should be flexible, recognising that towns need their rural hinterlands and vice versa and that the focus should be on those issues that require collective action on issues of shared interest or concern.

6.3 Whilst there are some concerns and challenges to address further there is also support from communities, partners and parishes to continue to work with us to resolve issues and provide further re-assurance through prototyping the concept through a limited number of early pilots.

7.0 Legal Issues

7.1 Community networks will see a range of local stakeholders working in partnership on matters of shared interest. They will be working in partnership.

7.2 Collaborative or partnership working can be challenging, however there is value in different partners coming together, formally or informally, to both gain new insights into often long-standing issues and to better align and plan the resources that are invested by each.

7.3 There are a range of governance models that can be used as the vehicle for collaborative or partnership working. Some are contractual, some form as legal entities with all partners carrying legal obligations and risks others are informal networks or collaborations.

7.4 Different models that are used by partnerships. The following models are based on Surrey County Council’s ‘Guidance for Establishing Good Governance of Partnerships’ framework[2]

a. A separate legal entity such as a company or charitable trust. This should only be used if there is a clearly defined purpose such as directly employing staff or holding assets.

b. A Virtual Organisation created with a distinct identity but without being a separate legal entity. This is less bureaucratic and costly, and it appears independent to the public but is hosted by one partner. This could however be considered a partnership in law, which could expose other partners to joint liabilities and could obscure lines of responsibility and accountability.

c. Informal partnership managed by a Steering Group. This is the simplest model for partnership working. It consists of a steering group without dedicated resources. Its services or activities can be delivered through the various partners’ mainstream activities or acting as an accountable body for projects. This model requires partner organisations to nominate representatives with some – albeit limited - delegated authority to make decisions on behalf of the organisation to whom they are accountable. Any significant decisions would need to be referred back to each of the individual partner organisations and would be subject to their normal decision-making processes and procedures.

7.5 It is proposed that the formation of community networks or partnerships in North Yorkshire operate as “informal partnerships” or local steering groups in the first instance. Joint working arrangements between officers and Members of the new Council with colleagues from public, business, faith, voluntary and community sectors where each organisation commits to work together towards a set of shared goals.

7.6 Each partner organisation will nominate a person or persons as their representative(s) on the partnership steering group and they will determine the level of delegated decision making their representative has in that capacity.

7.7 Each local partnership should agree local Terms of Reference in line with section 5 of the report that clearly set out its purpose; what is expected of each member/stakeholder; roles and responsibilities; processes for decision making (including levels of delegation); how risks will be managed; resources available to them; and their rules of operation.

7.8 The Local Action Plans will detail the short, medium and long-term priorities identified by the Network in consultation with their wider community. To ensure accountability it is suggested that the Local Action Plans should be endorsed by the partner organisations.

7.9 In order to ensure that the status of operating as informal partnerships is explicit to this work, it is suggested that rather than describing these proposals as Community Networks, the Council re-badges this programme to include reference to partnerships, for example ‘Community Partnerships’ or ‘Local Action Partnerships’.

8.0 Relationships with North Yorkshire Council

8.1 Although independent of the Council, the local partnerships will be both supported by and connected into the Council through a number of relationships.

8.2 Community teams

All partnership members, including Councillors, partner agencies, community members and service teams will be able to draw support from a team of community officers, employed by the Council within the Local Engagement service, to help with local coordination, specialist advice and partnership development.

This could include support with training, accessing data and local intelligence, running participatory workshops and accessing external funding. It is recognised that this will also be a new way of working for Councillors, senior managers and service teams and this should be built into any corporate organisational development and culture change programmes being developed as part of the new council’s transformation programme.

8.3 Councillors

Councillors will take a leading role in shaping the arrangements for their divisions, will represent the Council and will be key enablers in bringing the work of their local partnership to the attention of the Council through the Area Constituency Committees.

8.4 Area Constituency Committees

It is not envisaged that the role of the Area Constituency Committees would be to hold the local partnerships to account; instead, they would play an important role in empowering and supporting the partnerships to deliver their own action plans and would provide a forum for local issues of importance to be raised.

9.0 Options for implementation

9.1 The work of the Localities workstream has been identified as one of the core elements of the transformation programme.

9.2 Option One – Full Implementation – Not recommended

To start the process of implementation in all localities.

i. This would provide equity across all communities however it is acknowledged that it is likely that the roll out will take longer in some areas than in others.

ii. This would be a significant undertaking for the Council and would have implications on communities’ staff, service teams, Senior Managers and Members at a time of major change.

iii. This is new work that has previously not been resourced. Teams will need a period of adjustment as roles and structures are reviewed and will have limited capacity to take on new duties until the changes have bedded in without risking an impact on their existing core business.

iv. Teams and Members will need further briefings and training to understand their roles and responsibilities in relation to the new Locality model.

v. Further dialogue is needed with key stakeholders to build reassurance and confidence.

9.3 This is therefore considered a high-risk option and is not recommended.

9.4 Option Two – Phased Implementation - Recommended

To take a phased implementation approach with a limited number of areas to further refine the model and work through any outstanding concerns highlighted during the engagement work.

i. This would be more manageable in terms of staff capacity both within the Local Engagement Service units and other service teams. It would enable the new structures the chance to start to bed in.

ii. This option would enable the conversations with partners and staff teams and those partnerships who have indicated a willingness to work with the Council to continue, in order to develop the concept further and address the concerns that have been highlighted in section six of the report.

iii. This option also allows time to design a staff development resource to help service teams, Senior Managers and Members to feel confident in their roles.

9.5 This carries lower risks than option one and is the preferred option.

10.0 Proposed Implementation Plan

10.1 It is proposed that if Members favoured a phased implementation this would be operated as a rolling programme. Initially a limited number of five areas would be included for the further proof of concept phase.

10.2 The following pilot areas are proposed. All have the support of their local Councillors:

· Easingwold

· Leyburn & Middleham

· Ripon

· Sherburn

· Thornton Dale and rural hinterland

10.3 It is proposed that the arrangements for initiating community partnerships in new areas be kept open and flexible and as capacity is released within the new staff structures, more areas can be added with the support of the local Member(s).

10.4 It is proposed that the decision to initiate community partnerships in new areas is taken by the Executive Member for Corporate Services in conjunction with the Assistant Chief Executive for Local Engagement.

11.0 Risks

11.1 The following principal risks are highlighted:

· The timetable for development and implementation of this work is significantly pushed back leading to reputational damage for new the council

· Agreement on spatial options for circa 30 partnership areas not easily reached leading to delays and possible increase in resource requirements

· The emerging partnerships fail to engage and attract the membership from a broad range of local partners or have a narrow agenda

· The new council seeks to control the partnerships compromising their independence.

12.0 Financial implications

12.1 As outlined in paragraph 5.6 it is not proposed that the partnerships will have devolved budgets, however there will be a requirement for some small pump-priming investment in both the development and early administration of them.

12.2 It is anticipated that this can be found from existing financial resources, including external funds such as UK Shared Prosperity and the Rural Fund and it is therefore not proposed to include these costs as a new recurring pressure in the base revenue budget.

12.3 As they establish and produce their local Action Plans, projects may be eligible for community grants. The Action Plans can also act as a local investment prospectus for other external funding opportunities.

13.0 Equalities implications

13.1 An equalities impact screening form has been completed and is included in the report as Appendix 1. There are no significant issues raised.

14.0 Climate Change implications

14.1 A climate change impact assessment screening form has been completed and is included in the report as Appendix 2. There are no significant issues raised.

15.0 Reasons for Recommendations

15.1 The proposals in relation to the formation of community partnerships is to form local multi-agency partnerships; a coming together of willing partners with resources, connections and insights to share these for the common good. This was included in the proposals to government for a single unitary Council for North Yorkshire and has been agreed as a priority in the Council Plan for the new Council.

15.2 The partnerships will be informal and will not have any powers to make policy or fetter the discretion of any of the individual partner organisations. The focus will be to bring the collective resources of partners together to deliver on matters of common interest when, by working as a partnership, they can achieve more than if acting alone.

15.3 The partners will have access to resources that councils do not currently have either access to or any control over. These proposals can create the opportunity and mechanism for partner organisations to work together in their local areas on shared priorities for the benefit of residents and businesses.

15.4 The formation of the new single unitary Council is a major undertaking and as such staff and service teams are inevitably experiencing a period of change. It will take time for the new arrangements to bed in and release the capacity required to undertake this work on a large scale.

16.0 Recommendations

16.1 It is recommended that the Executive accept the report and:.

i. Agree the Terms of Reference as detailed in section 5 of the report.

ii. Agree the proposals for the proposed initial governance model to be that of an informal partnership as detailed in section 7.5 of the report.

iii. Consider re-badging this programme as Community Partnerships or Local Action Partnerships.

iv. Approve Option 2 – Phased Implementation - as detailed in section 9.4 of the report.

v. Agree the 5 pilots as proposed in section 10.2 of the report.

vi. Agree that the decision to initiate community partnerships in new areas is taken by the Executive Member for Corporate Services in conjunction with the Assistant Chief Executive for Local Engagement.

Report Authors:

Rachel Joyce – Assistant Chief Executive Local Engagement

Marie-Ann Jackson - Head of Stronger Communities

Background Papers

1. Stronger Together: A Unitary Council for North Yorkshire – The Case for Change

2. The Council Plan 2023-27

3. Transition (LGR) Overview & Scrutiny Committee (9 November 2022)

4. Guidance for Establishing Good Governance of Partnerships’. Surrey County Council (2010)

APPENDIX 1
Initial equality impact assessment screening form This form records an equality screening process to determine the relevance of equality to a proposal, and a decision whether or not a full EIA would be appropriate or proportionate.
Directorate	Central Services
Service area	Policy, Partnerships and Communities
Proposal being screened	Community Networks
Officer(s) carrying out screening	Tom Jenkinson, Stronger Communities Delivery Manager
What are you proposing to do?	As a key element of the new North Yorkshire Council’s locality-based delivery model the Council intends to introduce Community Networks centred around the significant economic, cultural and social assets of market towns, surrounding villages and natural communities in North Yorkshire. Over time every place will be part of a geographically identified Community Network.
Why are you proposing this? What are the desired outcomes?	The vision for Community Networks is that they will mobilise the energy, resources and partner relationships that exist in our communities to deliver the most appropriate local solutions for their people and place. Community Networks will enable local action by bringing local people, partners and communities together to identify and deliver against priorities and acting as local agents for economic and social change. Although they will not have a devolved budget the Council anticipates that they will provide a mechanism for localities to apply for and ideally obtain external investment (e.g. UK Shared Prosperity Funding). This proposal was one of four interconnected pillars of the locality based delivery model which was the focus of North Yorkshire County Council’s successful submission to government for the establishment of a unitary council. As the new North Yorkshire Council’s vesting day of 1 April 2023 approaches planning for the Community Networks is accelerating. The intention is that Community Networks will support and enable greater collaboration between local Councillors, public sector agencies, communities and businesses to develop plans around shared interests and act to get things done in their local area with the result that communities become more self-reliant and resilient. One of the expectations is that the partnership of stakeholders in each local Network will develop ten-year local action plans based on shared local priorities. The geographies of each Network will be subject to consultation with local communities and it is expected that the nature and make-up of them will evolve and flex over time, to meet local needs and priorities.
Does the proposal involve a significant commitment or removal of resources? Please give details.	Community Networks will be new structures independent of the Council. There is no associated removal of resources. There will be a low level of investment predominantly in officer time. They will not hold a devolved budget. They will be supported by and connected to the Council through relationships which will require some resource allocation in terms of time from Council Officers. A team of community officers will help with local coordination, specialist advice and network development. A Senior Manager (Assistant Director or above) will be the named lead officer for each Network acting as the key link between the Council and the Network at senior level. Members will also be involved within their local Network. There is likely to be a small funding allocation to support secretariat functions with this probably outsourced to a local voluntary sector organisation in each place.
Impact on people with any of the following protected characteristics as defined by the Equality Act 2010, or NYCC’s additional agreed characteristics As part of this assessment, please consider the following questions: · To what extent is this service used by particular groups of people with protected characteristics? · Does the proposal relate to functions that previous consultation has identified as important? · Do different groups have different needs or experiences in the area the proposal relates to? If for any characteristic it is considered that there is likely to be an adverse impact or you have ticked ‘Don’t know/no info available’, then a full EIA should be carried out where this is proportionate. You are advised to speak to your Equality rep for advice if you are in any doubt.
Protected characteristic		Potential for adverse impact				Don’t know/No info available
		Yes		No
Age				X
Disability				X
Sex				X
Race				X
Sexual orientation				X
Gender reassignment				X
Religion or belief				X
Pregnancy or maternity				X
Marriage or civil partnership				X

People in rural areas				X
People on a low income				X
Carer (unpaid family or friend)				X
Does the proposal relate to an area where there are known inequalities/probable impacts (e.g. disabled people’s access to public transport)? Please give details.		The proposal involves the bringing together representatives of local stakeholder organisations. We know that some people may find it more difficult to engage with or be involved in activity including employment, civic engagement or volunteering for reasons of age, disability, caring responsibilities and rurality in particular. We would expect all organisations participating to have policies and procedures in place to support people across all protected characteristics to get involved in their organisation if they wish to do so and meet any other relevant criteria. Early support provided by the Council will include compilation of a handbook for Networks to help guide them through various processes and considerations including those relating to equalities. This approach worked well when delivering the Community Libraries programme. One of the obvious issues for Networks will be ensuring that meetings are held in accessible venues and supported by technology as appropriate. Access will include ensuring that transport to venues is considered when planning in person meetings. Council officers will also support Networks to Identify issues in their community, particularly those that result in inequalities so that these can be addressed and to involve the wider community through participatory and engagement activities. All engagement and participatory activities would be undertaken in ways which reduced or eliminated barriers related to protected characteristics for example by using a range of activities and platforms.
Will the proposal have a significant effect on how other organisations operate? (e.g. partners, funding criteria, etc.). Do any of these organisations support people with protected characteristics? Please explain why you have reached this conclusion.		The proposal will ask other organisations to engage in partnership working which is a familiar and successful approach across the County. We do not expect involvement in Networks to add a heavy resource demand on organisations involved but will be seeking to develop a way of operating in consultation with organisations choosing to participate. The partner organisations will determine how their Network runs and will take individual responsibility to ensure no adverse impact for them. We would anticipate that all these organisations will involve or support some people with protected characteristics and for some this will be their primary focus. The intention of the Networks is to maximise positive outcomes for local communities through the power of collaboration. This should have positive impacts on residents across all or most protected characteristics over time.
Decision (Please tick one option)		EIA not relevant or proportionate:	ü		Continue to full EIA:
Reason for decision		The introduction of Community Networks should have positive impact on all residents. Individual decisions or actions of Community Networks will give due regard to any impacts on people with protected characteristics. No adverse impacts on people with protected characteristics have been identified through this screening exercise. Community Networks will be rolled out gradually rather than in a “big bang” which will allow any unanticipated adverse impacts on people with protected characteristics to be identified and addressed if they arise.
Signed (Assistant Director or equivalent)		Neil Irving
Date		6 February 2023

[2] Guidance for Establishing Good Governance of Partnerships’. Surrey County Council (2010)

Environmental factor to consider	For the county council	For the county	Overall
Greenhouse gas emissions	No effect on emissions	No Effect on emissions	No effect on emissions
Waste	No effect on waste	No effect on waste	No effect on waste
Water use	No effect on water usage	No effect on water usage	No effect on water usage
Pollution (air, land, water, noise, light)	No effect on pollution	No effect on pollution	No effect on pollution
Resilience to adverse weather/climate events (flooding, drought etc)	No effect on resilience	No effect on resilience	No effect on resilience
Ecological effects (biodiversity, loss of habitat etc)	No effect on ecology	No effect on ecology	No effect on ecology
Heritage and landscape	No effect on heritage and landscape	No effect on heritage and landscape	No effect on heritage and landscape

Title of proposal	Community Networks
Brief description of proposal	As a key element of the new North Yorkshire Council’s locality based delivery model the Council intends to establish Community Networks centred around the significant economic, cultural and social assets of market towns, surrounding villages and natural communities in North Yorkshire. Over time every place will be part of a geographically identified Community Network. Current estimates are for there to be around 30 Networks.
Directorate	Central Services
Service area	Policy, Partnerships and Communities
Lead officer	Marie-Ann Jackson
Names and roles of other people involved in carrying out the impact assessment	Tom Jenkinson, Stronger Communities Delivery Manager

Decision (Please tick one option)	Full CCIA not relevant or proportionate:	√	Continue to full CCIA:
Reason for decision	Community Networks will bring together local partners in geographic localities generally centred around a market town or other significant settlement to identify and deliver against shared local priorities and act as local agents for economic and social change. Composition will include local Councillors, public sector agencies, communities and businesses. The overarching aim is for communities to become more self-reliant and resilient. The Networks will receive Council support through officer time, data, guidance but will be independent of the Council. Some very low level environmental impacts are possible but these can either be mitigated against or will be positive. As the Networks are intended to bring people together there may be some increased travel and in rural areas this is likely to be by private car. However Networks will be in relatively small geographic areas so travel will be minimal and relationship building will support car sharing etc. In addition this forum may reduce the need for other meetings and associated travel. As Networks become embedded there will be opportunities for them to adopt net zero and environmental sustainability priorities as part of their local action plans. Depending on the issues which each Network chooses to have as a focus there is potential for some positive action to make communities more able to respond at local level to adverse weather events and to protect local heritage and landscape and contribute to net zero. These actions will however sit within the broader context of national and local government and their decisions and actions which are likely to have far greater impact.
Signed (Assistant Director or equivalent)	Neil Irving, Assistant Director
Date	6 February 2023