To consider an update report following internal NMB discussions concerning future governance.

Led by: All

An overview of the governance proposals was given. The main points included:

1. Why it was collectively agreed that work on governance should be carried out. This covers:
   1. The distinction between the statutory agencies and stakeholders.
   2. References to the board which talk about the board being able to influence and advise and challenge.
2. Clarity on those who have legal remits to work within the catchment on what affects the water quality in the catchment.
   1. Feedback about the naming of the Executive Statutory Group has led to the change to River Wye Statutory Officers Group.
3. The proposals that have been put forward for discussion.
   1. An outline of the Terms of Reference includes an aim for the board would be for stakeholders to come together across the catchment and have the ability to influence the decisions and actions that have an impact either directly or indirectly on the catchment.
   2. To advise the River Wye Statutory Officers Group on their proposals, plans, decisions, and actions and to challenge them on those and the delivery of those.

It was noted that there were still some outstanding issues for discussion during this meeting. These included:

1. The name and making sure that the name reflects what the remit of the group is.
2. The membership which covers voting rights and the engagement with wider groups across the catchment.
3. The chairing of the group going forward.

The key points made by members in the discussion included:

1. Name:
   1. Support was expressed to keep the name ‘board’, particularly as a change in name could cause confusion for members of the public.
   2. It was added that use of the term board helps to align with the Welsh model.
2. Membership and voting rights:
   1. On voting rights, there was concern raised regarding members who sit on both this board and the Statutory Officers Group.
   2. It was noted that voting would be rare, however, where voting is necessary, it was also commented that members should not be able to vote across different groups.
   3. A two-tier system for voting was regarded as inappropriate and would not be consistent with the Nolan principles.
   4. It was added that depending on what the board decided on the Terms of Reference, this would need to be reviewed against local authorities’ constitutions and the views within those local authorities.
   5. Support was expressed to give voices to both the river and tourism on the board.
3. Chairing:
   1. Support was expressed for Cllr Elissa Swinglehurst to remain as Chair of the board, including from Cllr Catrin Maby, Cllr Jackie Charlton, and Cllr Sid Phelps, particularly as it would be difficult for those respective councillors to have the capacity to take on the role of Chair.
   2. Cllr Swinglehurst suggested potential possibilities including having a co-chair or vice-chair from the councillors on the board so that there is a good representation from the Welsh side.
   3. Cllr Jackie Charlton supported the suggestion of vice-chair and noted that she would be happy to take on this role and learn from the Chair with the potential to take on the role in the future.

The Chair then confirmed that the board had arrived at a consensus with the governance arrangements as presented and that no changes are to be made to the chairing arrangements. The board agreed with the Chair.

Clare Dinnis clarified that updates would be incorporated into a final document from this discussion to establish the new governance arrangements going forward. A copy of the amended document is attached to the minutes.