Archived decisions

APPENDIX 1

RIVER HAMBLE HARBOUR AUTHORITY

GOVERNANCE IN THE 21st CENTURY

QUESTIONNAIRE ANALYSIS

1. Background:

Recognising that the Governance of the River Hamble could be enhanced, Hampshire County Council instructed Marine Enforcement to produce a Discussion Paper1 to raise the issues that need to be considered. The purpose of the Paper was to act as a catalyst and discussion document for a formal consultation process. The Discussion Paper which was published in July 2004 recommended that a questionnaire2 was to be disseminated as widely as possible by way of seeking the views of all stakeholders.

The Executive Member for Environment wrote to all stakeholder groups, mooring holders and addresses within 1 km. of the banks of the River. He sought their help to improve the way the River is managed. The questionnaire was enclosed.

The consultation period began on 13th September 2004.

A total of 5,700 letters and questionnaires were mailed. The letter, questionnaire and the Discussion Paper were also available on a dedicated website. The questionnaire could be completed on line. A total of 1,627 questionnaires were returned, a response rate of 29%. 119 copies of the Discussion Paper were mailed to stakeholder groups and to those who requested a copy.

The consultation period ended on 7th November 2004.

2. Methodology:

All the data in the returned questionnaires (responses) was manually input into a Standard Microsoft Access Database. Report queries were then written to enable the data to be extracted and analysed.

Responses from representatives of Clubs, Associations and other bodies and all responses that included comments by way of notes or letters were individually considered.

Of the 1,627 responses that were received, 1,605 of these were submitted by individuals3 and 22 contained text in the section that asked if the respondent represented a group, body or Club. Of these 22 questionnaires 16 were considered to be submitted on behalf of a group, body or Club. Every response was entered into the database including those where not every question was answered, regardless of whether it was received from an individual or a group, body or Club. All the text entered into boxes provided for respondents to complete within the questionnaire was entered into the database. This text was subsequently printed out, read and considered. All accompanying notes and letters were also individually considered.

The full responses from all groups, bodies and Clubs together with a précis were made available directly to Hampshire County Council. The Data Protection legislation does not permit the publication of raw data that identifies the respondent.

This consultation exercise was not a referendum or a vote, its purpose was to seek the views of all stakeholders and to assist Hampshire County Council make an informed decision on the future governance of the River.

The inclusion in this report of comments made by respondents in the questionnaire is only to provide an indication of the range and type of views expressed. Some of the comments are extracts and all of them should be regarded with empirical caution. The inclusion of a comment is not to be construed as support for that comment.

3. Analysis:

3.1 Questionnaires:

The analysis of the questionnaire is at Annex 2.

This analysis shows of the respondents.

    80% were residents;

    46% owned a boat of some description;*

    14% were dinghy sailors;

    6% were professional mariners;

    30% were ramblers;

8% had a commercial interest;

    5% had an interest in a Marina;**

    4% had an interest in a Boatyard;**

    3% had an interest in a Chandlery;**

    6% had an interest in Marine Services;**

    8% had an interest in Pub/Restaurant;**

    4% had an interest in Shops;**

    10% had an unspecified interest in the River.

    * This figure has been extracted by analysis

    ** Some respondents indicated they had a commercial interest in these facilities because they used them as consumers.

By amalgamating the respondents that answered strongly agree or agree to the questions the following emerges:

Constitution

    87% agree that the one Local County Councillor with executive responsibility should be replaced by a Harbour Board;

    84% agree Hampshire County Council should continue to have a role in the governance of the River Hamble;

    89% agree the Board should be "fit for purpose", open and accountable;

    83% agree the Board should be a mixture of Councillors and experts;

    81% agree Board members should act solely in the interests of the Harbour Authority and not sit on the Board as representatives of another organisation, group or body;

    Meetings

    82% agree to public Board meetings;

    78% agree to Board meetings close to the River;

    Independent Panel

    74% agree the Board should seek advice and liaise with an independent Panel;

    80% agree all interested persons and groups should be invited to take part in an independent Panel;

    79% agree the independent Panel should run itself and elect its own Chairman;

    88% agree the Chairman of the independent Panel should report to the Board;

    Funding

    23% agree the Harbour Authority should not rely on funding from Hampshire County Council;

    63% agree Hampshire County Council should provide practical support and accommodation to the Harbour Authority;

    84% are content revenue comes from boats;

    76% agree the Harbour Authority should undertake activities in line with what it can afford;

    Timing and funding of change

    80% agree new arrangements should be put in place as soon as

      possible;

    53% indicated the tax payer should fund any change in the law;

    41% indicated the users of the River should fund any change in the law.

3.2 Responses from Groups, Bodies and Clubs:

It is difficult to reconcile the responses made on behalf of groups, bodies and Clubs. The questionnaire asked that those respondents that completed the questionnaire on behalf of groups, bodies and Club or by representatives explained how the views of members were sought and how many members were being represented. In some cases these details were not provided giving concern as to whether the representative had an appropriate mandate. In some cases a questionnaire was completed, in others a letter was written in lieu of completing the questionnaire. One questionnaire purported to represent the interests of 2000 members but gave no details of how the members had been consulted. Two responses were received from Councils, five were from businesses of various sizes, five were from Clubs, two from Associations and two from other Organisations. The form of all of these responses differed.

All 16 of the responses received from representatives of, or on behalf of groups, bodies or Clubs have been made available to Hampshire County Council in their raw form.

Of the 16 responses received from groups, bodies and Clubs, five advocated that the River Hamble should be run as a Trust Port. The majority of responses of this type supported the need for a "fit for purpose", open and accountable Board.

The questionnaire suggested that "Even though you (the respondent) may be a member of a Club or Association you are encouraged to complete this questionnaire as an individual."

In one case an Association's Committee responded advocating a new Trust Port. Analysis of the database shows 39 members of this Association completed questionnaires as individuals and of these 10 responded that they, in line with their Association's Committee, favoured a new Trust Port. It may be deduced that 29 did not.

It follows that Hampshire County Council need to carefully consider the views of each group, body or Club that responded during the consultation period during the decision making process. It is suggested that each response received from a group, body or Club is considered on its individual merits. It is recommended that a response received on behalf of say, 2000 members is not weighted in proportion to a response from an individual. Similarly, it is also difficult to weight the views of a Council as it is not known the size of their "membership". That is not to say the views of the Councils should not be considered very carefully, they should be but on their individual merits.

4. Points Raised from the Questionnaire:

4.1 Constitution.

The questionnaire provided a number of boxes in which respondents could add their comments.

24% added comments after the questions which focused on the nature of the Harbour Board and the formation of an independent Panel.

Below are listed some of the themes that recur in the comments made. They are reproduced in this report only to indicate the diversity of views. Their inclusion is not subsequent to any formal analysis and it must be remembered that a minority (24%) of respondents added text.

    · A Trust Port is appropriate for the Hamble;

    · The present arrangements are satisfactory;

    · There is conflict between commercialism, conservation and the environment;

    · Board members should be selected on their ability and not because they are Councillors;

    · Councillors not to have majority on the Board;

    · Experts should be elected not selected;

    · The Board should seek advice from experts;

    · A Board could represent the minority interest of yachtsmen;

    · There should be a minimum of bureaucracy;

    · There is no need for an independent Panel provided the Board is accountable;

    · There is a need for multiple independent Panels who represent all stakeholders groups;

    · One Board member should chair the independent Panel;

    · All meetings should be public;

    · No meetings should be public as it stifles the efficiency of the Board.

4.2 Funding

35% of respondents added comments after the questions focused on funding.

Within these comments there is a complete cross section of opinion on funding. Below are some of the points made:

    · Hampshire County Council should assist to fund the Harbour Authority;

    · Harbour and River users should finance themselves;

    · Harbour Authority should seek funding from all who benefit from the River;

    · Hampshire County Council should support the River as it does any other public amenity;

    · Charge the people who do not live in Hampshire more;

    · Environmental aspects should be funded from general taxation;

    · If outside funding occurs, it should not be placed upon Hampshire residents' council taxes;

    · People should not have to pay for things they don't use;

    · The River is used for commercial enterprise and for recreation by those who have the privilege of owning boats, why should the tax payer subsidise this;

    · There is a distinction between a public amenity and a river just for yachtsmen and the funding should reflect this;

However, the overriding recurrent theme is that Hampshire County Council should contribute to funding as should the users of the River.

4.3 The Council's role.

One of the questions in the questionnaire stated:

"The River Hamble is not only a harbour but also a public amenity. Hampshire County Council should continue to have a role in its governance"

84% of respondents either strongly agreed or agreed. Provision was then made for those respondents that did not agree to say why and to set out who or what should replace the present role fulfilled by Hampshire County Council together with how it should be funded. 15% of respondents entered text in this box.

Although the questionnaire asked respondents to say why they did not agree that Hampshire County Council should continue to have a role in its governance few articulated reasons but the majority of respondents who entered text in this box advocated or favoured a Trust Port and made reference to other Trust Ports in the area.

The reasons given by respondents that favoured a Trust Port included the following;

    · Absence of party politics;

    · Decision making by a Board of experts;

    · Independence - Board members appointed because of their fitness for purpose;

    · Financial transparency and accountability;

    · Commitment and application by the Board to the needs and responsibilities of the River;

    · Improved access to the Board;

    · Increased frequency of Board meetings;

    · The Board would be able to convene specialist panels or working groups as needed.

The questionnaire also gave respondents the opportunity to set out who or what should replace the present role fulfilled by Hampshire County Council together with how it should be funded. Few of the minority of respondents that entered text in the appropriate box took this opportunity. Rather, the box was used to express a wide range of opinions and suggestions.

Some of the comments made included:

    · Business interests could destroy the River;

    · Hampshire County Council should continue to have a role but not an overriding influence and should not be influenced by politics;

    · The River is not just an amenity but a natural resource - the use of the River as a harbour is of secondary importance.

    · The River should be run as a Trust Port with input from all river users and not just managed as an asset of the County Council.

    · The general public have an interest as well as boat users.

    · The River Hamble should be run by the County as a public amenity.

    · The new Board should consult and involve the County Council in the management of the River but decision making should be independent of the County Council. The County Council should not be able to appoint a representative (the same restrictions will apply to other organisations.)

    · Hampshire County Council should retain its planning role but even though the River Hamble is a public amenity, this does not mean the County Council should continue to have a role in its governance. However the County Council should retain its right to appoint elected Councillors, Hampshire County Council should not have dominant control.

    · The whole question is Municipal Port or Trust Port - provided it is properly set up and run it really doesn't matter which.

5. Impressions of the Author

The author of this report has read all of the returned questionnaires and has been involved in the review of the governance of the River Hamble throughout. He wrote the Discussion Document and has attended both formal and informal meetings with stakeholders. From his involvement he has formed three impressions. It must be clear that these are personnel impressions and are difficult to support with empirical evidence.

    1) There is a fear that if Hampshire County Council has a role in the governance of the River the decisions it makes (or the decisions of Councillors) will be swayed by party politics. It is clear that the majority of stakeholders want decisions to be made which are good for the River and that party politics should have no role.

    2) Equally there is a fear that an independent Board would become run by those that have an interest in yachting and the commercial activities on the River and the decisions it would make would be for the benefit of yachtsmen and commerce rather than for the benefit of all who use and enjoy the River.

    3) It seems clear that what most stakeholders' desire is that the River is managed sensitively and efficiently for the benefit of all who use and enjoy it by a Board that is fit for purpose, open and accountable.

6. Other Issues the Harbour Authority Ought to Consider:

Whilst not directly relevant to the issue of Governance some respondents raised issues that deserve the attention of the Harbour Authority however it is constituted. These comments included:

    · Litter and garbage from boats (including discharges from toilets and sinks);

    · The lack of parking;

    · Insufficient slipways;

    · Slipways obstructed by marine debris;

    · Riverside paths should be extended to Botley and clear unobstructed public footpaths should be available along both banks;

    · Riverside paths should be available to cyclists and ought to be cycle routes;

    · Access to all parts of the River ought to be easier;

    · The River Hamble ought to become a National Park.

    · The River is under policed and too many boats go too fast.

    · The River is over policed.

7. Conclusion:

This consultation exercise has resulted in an unusually large response from all types of people who have an interest in or use the River. Marine Enforcement acknowledges the help given so freely by over 1600 stakeholders. It may be that the success of this consultation exercise is a reflection of the importance, and one hopes the affection, that so many of the stakeholders give the River.

The Discussion Paper stimulated much debate; it should, coupled with the results of the questionnaire, greatly assist Hampshire County Council in making an informed decision on the future governance of the River Hamble.

Mark G Capon

Marine Enforcement

November 2004