A REVIEW for the Government containing proposals on how to best manage all 10 National Parks in England has suggested sweeping reforms of how the parks are managed.

Included in the review’s 27 proposals are plans to create a National Landscapes Service which would manage ‘vibrant communities’ – and the formation of a new National Landscapes Housing Association to build affordable homes. So how might this affect Dartmoor and why are some people so concerned?

‘Siesmic changes’ are feared in the way our Dartmoor National Park Authority (DNPA) is run, and two of the authority’s leaders spelled out what this could mean for the park.

One of the big issues is the Glover Review’s proposed creation of a National Land Service, something the Government will be considering in its response to the review.

Kevin Bishop, CEO of DNPA, said: ‘Our concern is that if the BBC is correct then the direction of travel is a step backwards. A centralised service running all 10 national parks in the same way, we don’t see that as a positive reform.

‘We think that would weaken local accountability, it would remove a powerful champion for Dartmoor, it would mean less resources for Dartmoor.

‘Our staff, who would probably transfer across to the NLS, would be working on a broader landscape, rather than just Dartmoor, and I can’t see a centralised service being able to respond quickly to Dartmoor’s needs be that visitor management or shaping a future for our farming community or rolling out superfast broadband for our communities which is what we’ve done in the past nor can I see a central service levering in more money for Dartmoor.

‘If that is the direction of travel I think it is quite disappointing and deflating.

‘But if the Government were to establish a small, powerful advocate in the heart of Government that effectively championed our National Landscapes and National Parks and AONBs, and worked across Government departments and could deliver more resources then that would be a positive step in the right direction and that could reinforce what we’re doing at a local level.’

DNPA chairman Pamela Woods agreed that ‘seismic changes’ were feared but added: ‘There is a lot of conjecture at the moment and not many firm ideas or decisions. I think we can safely say that no decisions have been made.’

She pointed out the review was published in 2019 and so far the Government had not responded to it.

‘Should there be a move to centralised management that would not be helpful.

‘There are some advantages to be had to have a National Landscape Service with a national voice, it could become an advocate for our National Parks, it could ensure our funding is adequate, at the moment it is not adequate.

‘It could certainly be a voice for the National Parks across all Government departments.

‘But what would be less helpful would be a merged service, managed centrally because we feel this would have a dilaterious effect on our relationships with our communities and with our partnerships,’ she said.

‘We don’t think one size fits all because the parks are so different, we have all got unique needs and unique qualities.’

‘We would hope any future NLS would value that local accountability and relationship that we have with people in the community.’

She added: ‘Our duty is to remember the wellbeing of people who live and work in the park.

‘We hope that the Government will come up with a National Landscape Service that allows us to retain our closeness and those relationships.’

Kevin added: ‘In response to Glover, we have no lack of ambition, or vision as to what we would like to do for the national park, but delivering ambition in a continued age of austerity is really difficult.

‘Our biggest weakness is the lack of resource, and tools to do the job. I suppose our ask of Government would be to give us the tools and resources to deliver our national parks so that they are better for the people who live in them, better for the people who visit and better for nature.’

‘A central service is not going to deliver that.’

Asked about the Glover Review remarks that the authorities’s boards needed to be more representative of their diverse communities, Pamela said there were ‘ways of tweaking the governance we have’ with a slimmed down authority with three elements of national Government appointees, appointees from local authorities and directly elected people from the parishes.

‘We feel that would be a good balance of national, local and directly elected people. We are disappointed that the Minister has not been able to come to us with his views on that.’

Neither expected a Government response to the report until after the May 6 elections when they thought there would be a Ministerial statement setting a ‘direction of travel’ with consultation to take place later this year with a Bill in the following Parliamentary session to enact the changes.

He added: ‘We’re not against change, we just want the change to move us in a positive direction rather than a negative direction. And for us the governance changes that we put forward were all about increasing local accountability not decreasing it which is what we saw the centralist agency doing.

‘Glover made 27 proposals and we don’t want the NLS proposal being the dominant one, there were a whole lot of other proposals that will have much more practical value to Dartmoor and its communities than just focusing on one – the NLS.

Tell us what you think of the proposals and what could be done for our outstanding moorland. Email [email protected].