Reforms over how one of the largest green spaces in Bristol is run will be pushed through despite lingering questions about a landmark survey.
Clifton Down and Durdham Down are managed by a committee made up of Bristol City Council councillors and members of the Society of Merchant Venturers.
But after a huge controversy last year, when car parking on the Downs was mooted for Bristol Zoo, the Downs committee agreed to carry out reforms, addressing concerns that some critics saw the committee as too secretive and opaque.
Read more: South Bristol pub will be converted into flats after appeal
This spring, a huge survey was conducted asking Bristol what the Downs should be used for, such as music festivals, funfairs and conservation. The committee is using this survey to justify the changes it’s pushing through, which include more transparency—but also keeping the Merchant Venturers involved. Now campaigners have raised key questions about the survey.
During a committee meeting on Friday, May 20, Cllr Paula O’Rourke, who is due to become lord mayor of the council and chair of the Downs committee, said only half of the 1,888 survey respondents answered questions about how the Downs are governed.
She said: “The survey creates a clear picture of what people want and what people think. I would like to have more dialogue about the funding. We need to do some work on how we report the finances of the Downs. But I was surprised that about half of the people who filled in the report filled in the section on governance. People aren’t as interested in that.”
Most of the survey questions asked about what kind of events should be held at the Downs, as well as funding. But the final question, tacked on at the end as a separate second survey, asked whether the Merchant Venturers should remain involved in governing the Downs. However, that question was heavily caveated, informing respondents that removing their involvement would mean changing an Act of Parliament, which could cost £500,000.
Despite politicians and campaigners calling for the Merchant Venturers to give up their control of the Downs, a whopping nine out of 10 people who answered the final question on governance said they did not want to change the Act of Parliament.
The Downs for People campaign said: “Governance issues were covered only as an undeveloped add-on in the survey, and the analysis is predictably weak. We’re glad the draft work plan recognises the need for further appraisal, but we don’t accept this should be confined to structures compatible with the Downs Act—legislation shouldn’t be ruled out unless effective, non-legislative reforms are agreed and trialled successfully.”
The campaign is calling for a new panel set up to help run the Downs, with different stakeholder groups all represented. Campaigners also said the question about whether the Merchant Venturers should be involved in running the Downs was difficult to find on the survey, and confusingly worded.
Also raising questions about the survey were Friends of the Downs and Avon Gorge, who said many of the respondents were older and not representative of Bristol’s population. Robert Westlake, chair of the Friends group, welcomed the move to more openness and transparency. But he also urged the Downs committee to consider letting stakeholder groups have a greater voice.
He said: “Any check-box exercise is limited in data gathered and should be considered more of a snapshot of public opinion, rather than a definitive response. The survey indicated nearly 60% of responses are from over 55-year-olds—who are only 20% of the population. It would appear that young people aren’t well represented. Over-reliance on the survey, when coming to important decisions about the future of the Downs, would be a mistake.”
New reforms include making governance more transparent and open, and consulting the public more often on how the Downs are run. Councillors on the committee said they spent hours reading every response, including those in text boxes. And one noted that the Downs committee is much more transparent than it was a decade ago.
Councillor Steve Smith, current lord mayor of the council and chair of the committee, said: “I and council officers spent many hours, including weekends and late nights, reading every one of those text comments and they are taken into account. If we agree to adopt the principles and work plan today, that’s not the end but the beginning of a process."
Cllr Geoff Gollop, a former lord mayor, said: “I have a surprising amount of sympathy with those who comment about the way the Downs committee has engaged in the past. 10 years ago when I was [lord mayor], there was information as chairman that I was unable to get access to, which is now in the public domain. So however dissatisfied some are with openness and transparency, it’s actually come a heck of a long way from what it used to be.”
