2.    Action points from last meeting. Those not dealt with elsewhere on the agenda:

Biodiversity Charter: JF reported that the CTG had decided to put this in abeyance pending the Communications Strategy.

Web Site: JF reported that a holding page had been set up (not yet advertised) and the Audit would go on sometime in May. The Web page will also need to be integrated into the Comm. Strategy. RG reported that although some info. had gone onto the London Initiative page, the Audit maps will be put on over the next few days.

Cultural issues paper: AH is still progressing this paper with Mathew Frith, JF and others and more meetings are planned.

Calendar of events: CTG taken this idea on board.

Communications Topic Group

No recommendation. JF reported that the group is gaining momentum, developing a communications strategy and looking at target audiences for the Partnership and mechanisms for reaching such groups.

Habitats, Species and Data Topic Group. The Board endorsed the following recommendation:

‘The BAP should address the value of London’s introduced species, both in a separate chapter and in the preparation of individual action plans’.

David Bevan is drafting a paper on the above.

JF/AH reported that all 4 sectors have met successfully and have appointed sector representatives. The response has been positive from the boroughs, who feel that the Forum fills a gap. In addition to sector meetings, the whole Forum intends to meet annually. The 4 sector co-ordinators will attend the Steering Group. It was envisaged that there would be Forum representation on the HSDTG as and when appropriate, but that a borough communication ‘expert’ would be drafted onto CTG. The Forum meetings need to feed into the Partnership meetings programme: JF agreed to draw up a flow chart setting out such a process. Action JF

JF and RSPB drawing up bid for a further year’s funding for Bridgehouse Estates Trust Fund. There was a discussion regarding Project funding which highlighted the following:

The assimilation of LEU into the GLA raises the issue of David Goode’s continued Chairmanship of the Steering Group/Partnership. However, David had indicated that he could continue to Chair the group but this will depend on a GLA decision – the GLA may propose to nominate someone else, even a politician.

Once the GLA’s position is clear, and following the July Steering Group meeting, there will be a need to review the structure of the Partnership and Steering Group, particularly concerning partners outside of the Steering Group.

The Board made the following recommendation to the Steering Group:

The Board were happy for NM to continue to Chair the Project Board at least until July when the GLA position will be clearer.

See attached sheet. In terms of action plan progress, JF reported that all 7 of the HAPs and 8 of the 11 SAPs now have initial contacts. Still looking for initial contacts for house sparrow, tower mustard and mistletoe. Relevant working groups were now taking the plans forward with variable progress – the tidal Thames and the chalk grassland groups were quite advanced, whereas others (e.g. wasteland) were yet to really get underway. Inevitably, some plans will not be ready by December (the funding driven deadline). JF agreed to list progress in his progress report. Action JF

Chair elected: Mathew Frith

All 7 first round habitats and 8 SAPs (out of 11) have initial contacts.

Pellitory-of-the-wall has been removed from the list of Species Statements endorsed by the StGp.

Recommendation 1: The BAP should address the value of London’s introduced exotic and/or alien species, both in a separate chapter and in the preparation of individual action plans.

No recommendations yet. The Topic Group is working on a Communication Strategy for the Partnership, which will include communication-related direction for the Action Plans. The Group met on 14.3.00, 6.4.00 and will meet again 18.5.00 and in June.

All 4 sectors met (NE, NW, SE, SW) and have named representatives. JF attended 3 out of 4 meetings.

4 reps will attend Steering Group meetings. They have been invited to the HS&D TG and have been asked to invite a council Communications expert to the Comm TG. The Project Board is a slightly different case.