So, good afternoon everybody and welcome along to our webinar number five of Great Cambridge Local Plan. I know there's lots of you still arriving, so I'll just talk a little bit more, people are still joining the session. So this is number five in a series of webinars that we've been hosting for you on the current consultation on our preferred options or first proposals for Great Cambridge Local Plan. They've all been around a number of different themes and today's theme is all around biodiversity and green spaces and we've already had climate change, jobs and homes, our strategy and we've had one on how to get involved with the consultation as well. They are all up online on our website already and the slides as well from those previous webinars so those of you who have missed particular sessions that you're interested in you can go to them and I'll give you some details at the end of how you can access them. So today's session is an hour long and what we'll do is we'll have a couple of presentations we've got a really good panel for you this morning, this afternoon should I say, of people who have been involved in A making the plan and also being involved in some of the specific areas around biodiversity and green spaces. So we'll have a couple of presentations, we have got a little bit of interactivity for you as well during the middle for you to get involved as well and there will be a Q&A function which is open to you all all the way throughout the session. So if you put questions in right from kind of the word go and some of the panel will not be able to answer those during the session but we will have up 15 minutes at the end as well to have a panel discussion for any remaining questions and you can ask questions in the Q&A either anonymous or leave the names and the sessions being recorded as I said we will we're recording the session so we can put it up on the website afterwards. So what I'm going to do now quickly is I'm going to stop my screen share and I'm going to go around the panel and get them to introduce themselves this morning so I'm going to go around my screen to the left and I'm going to go to Diana first. Diana Manson from Land Use Consultants and we were involved in pulling together the evidence on green infrastructure to support the plan. Thank you Diana, it's nice to have you here today and welcome Bruce. Good afternoon Bruce Waller, Principal Planning Policy Officer at the Greater Cambridge Shared Planning Service and I look after open spaces and sports. Thanks Bruce, nice to have you and John Cornell. Hello, my name is John Cornell, the National Environment Team Leader for Greater Cambridge Shared Planning and I look after the landscape ecologists, landscape architects, ecologists and tree functions within the planning department. Thanks John, it's lovely to have you here today and John Dixon. Hello John Dixon, Planning Policy Manager. Thanks John and Stuart Morris. Hi I'm Stuart, I'm a Principal Policy Officer in the Greater Cambridge Shared Planning Team and I've been leading on the policy site for green infrastructure and biodiversity. Good afternoon Stuart and thanks for coming along as well and in the background we've got Will Smith and then Tim Cliff who are helping run the technology and run all the logistics for today. So hopefully everything will go smoothly, they've done a super job so far. But you know, the mercy of technology. My name is Paul Frohner, for those of you who don't know me, I'm Assistant Director for Strategy and Economy. So part of the team that's putting the plan together for Greater Cambridge and what I'm going to do now is I'm going to probably move straight over quickly just before I do. Just a little bit of an outline of today's session for you. So you guys can just get a feel for what it's going to be about. So we're going to talk a little bit about policy context and the green infrastructure evidence and have a little interactive session. Once that's done, then talk about biodiversity net gain and finish up on open space and recreation. And we'll have a little interactive session at the end as well. And as I said, please do post questions into the chat and those that we can answer during the session, we will answer them as we go along. And so without further ado, I'm going to hand over, I think to John, is that correct? You did the first part of the session. So we'll go to John. I think that's what we agreed. That was yesterday, though, wasn't it? OK, so good morning, good afternoon, everybody. As I've already said, my name is John Cornell. I look after the natural environment team here at Greater Cambridge Shared Planning. And so I suppose when it comes to biodiversity and planning, my team are pretty much at the forefront of ensuring that, you know, what's what's planned is delivered when it comes to biodiversity, when it comes to quality landscaping and things like important trees and important areas for for biodiversity in our patch. We work together with colleagues from other organisations very closely from the city of Cambridge, because Greater Cambridge is, as you know, sort of conglomerate of the district of South Cams and Cambridge City, but we do have split functions within planning. So we work very closely with our colleagues at the city of Cambridge to ensure they're all pulling in the same direction. But beyond that, we work with other organisations, as you can see from the slide that's been put up. We work with organisations such as Natural England. We work with the RSPB. We work with the Wildlife Trust. We also work with local charities such as Cambridge Past, Present and Future. And the reason that we do that, of course, is to ensure that we are all pulling in the same direction or singing from the same hymn sheet, as it were, and that we're not going off. We're not going off on a tangent on some kind of biodiversity crusade without first checking that actually we're going in the right direction and it's a strategic move. So the work that we're doing here today and that we've been doing up to this point supports things like the doubling nature strategy that South Cams District Council bought out in February this year. It also supports things like the supplementary planning document that my team has been working on very hard to get through to adoption. We're looking at that in early next year. And that document sounds like quite a bit of jargon, but supplementary planning document essentially is a guidance document for applicants, for folks to look at and see where is the guidance around biodiversity in green spaces? Have we got it right? What are we doing? Are we on the right track? So that should be coming to you guys early next year. And we're doing all of this work essentially to ensure that this first proposal's conversation is appropriate for residents that it's it's containing the right elements that you guys need to understand what we're doing, how we're doing it and why we're doing it. And it's it's key that you engage with us in this first proposals process so that we do have the feedback you can tell us what you like, you can tell us what you don't like and we can test and we can measure if we're on what we think are the right tracks because it is a very complicated business. We've got emerging legislation in the form of the Environment Acts, which is just recently published. We've got existing legislation in the form of older policies, which are relevant. Of course, we've got emerging local plan process, which we hope will deliver more robust policies for biodiversity and green infrastructure. So it's it's a tricky balancing act and it's only really with the outreach and input from residents that we're going to get that right. And that's what we're here to do today. So the goal, the goal, the aim, the aim of this is to ensure that we increase and network of habitats, wildlife and green spaces for people and that we ensure that development really essentially leaves the natural environment in a measurably better place than it was prior to any development taking place. That's the overarching goal. And I'll speak to that a little bit later when we talk about biodiversity net gain. I've probably said enough for the time being as an introduction. So I'll now hand you over to the team that we've been working with at LUC to talk you through the evidence base that they've collected to help us get to the point that we have now. So, as I mentioned, I'm from LUC and we were commissioned in early 2020 to provide an evidence base on the quantity and quality of the existing GI assets in Greater Cambridge and through analysis and consultation to identify deliverable interventions to enhance and expand the network. And the study was supported by a comprehensive stakeholder engagement program, which began right at the start of lockdown. And but we asked a wide range of consult stakeholders in the in the first instance to to help us look at maps like the one you're looking at now and let us know where the baseline of existing assets wasn't quite right and where we needed to be making changes from a data perspective, just to make sure that we had the right baseline map to start with. And next slide, please. So this slide aims to sum up what was quite a sort of involved method. And overall, the study was undertaken in three stages. So the first stage focused on a policy review, mapping the network, as I just mentioned, and undertaking a comprehensive review of existing and emerging evidence relating to the various functions of GI. And there was a lot of incoming information and a lot of emerging documents and studies. So we organized information into effectively seven green infrastructure themes, which broadly reflect the ecosystem services that GI provides. So you'll see the little icons at the bottom. Those themes were landscape, cultural heritage and sense of place, biodiversity and geo diversity, the water environment, access and connectivity, recreation and play, carbon sequestration and then agriculture and community food growing. So whilst we had those seven themes running across all of those themes, we also looked at climate change, well-being and social inclusion and other environmental quality factors. And we engaged with a large number of stakeholders throughout the early stages and towards the end. And we had discussions, we had technical workshops, emails and surveys to better understand the issues and opportunities as well as what existing GI initiatives were underway. We found there was quite a lot happening and we were also able to liaise with the authors of other emerging evidence bases. So the water study, carbon study, landscape studies. There was really a wealth of information to inform our more integrated GI study. So in the second stage, we looked at all those GI assets and we looked at them individually, but then we also looked at them collectively and we developed a series of theme based maps to help us understand how the network is functioning. And we gave specific consideration to things like the vulnerability of designated sites, to recreational pressure, predicted population change, condition of lowland peak resource and other issues that were brought to our attention through stakeholder engagement. And through all of this, we developed a long list of GI opportunities and where possible, we tried to map them as a series of broad zones. So then these were all overlaid to identify areas of search, which you can see on that rather brightly coloured map. And this is where we started to realise GI interventions could deliver multiple ecosystem services and should be the focus of our attention. So in the third stage, moving to the right of the graphic you can see, we'd had a pause between stages two and three. So we took time again to review emerging evidence and most notably around nature strategies being developed by the councils and the Cambridge Nature Network, the call for greensides and also updated evidence on recreational pressure. And then in that final stage, we brought all of this evidence together. And so looking back at the areas of search that we'd identified, we identified 14 strategic GI initiatives. I'll run through a couple of these examples shortly. Broadly speaking, and these initiatives provide a framework for more specific delivery projects that were identified through the study. And another important output of the study right in the bottom corner. There was a series of policy recommendations and also some non-policy specific recommendations focusing more on the advocacy of GI within the area. Could I have the next slide, please? And so this map sums up those 14 strategic GI initiatives. It's a little bit fuzzy, but of these, you can see nine are spatially specific and shown on the map and five are what we call dispersed initiatives. So these are more relevant to a range of locations rather than being spatially focused in one area. So collectively, the initiatives have a range of objectives from revitalizing the chalk stream network to enhancement of the fence, supporting the expansion of urban tree canopy and tackling things like deficiencies in access to recreation space, amongst other things. And there's a lot of detail in the final report on each of these initiatives. But just to give you a flavor, I thought I'd focus in on two of them. So initiative number one is focusing on revitalizing the chalk stream network. And this initiative aims to conserve and restore this internationally rare chalk and internationally rare chalk streams also to increase their ecological value and alongside that, to protect the East Angling and chalk groundwater resource. And this initiative as a framework builds on going ongoing initiatives as part of the Greater Cambridge Chalk Streams project led by the Council, the City Council, Cambridge Water Company, Wildlife Trust and also the Wild Trap Trust. It knits in with other recommendations from the integrated water management strategy and the water resources East Natural Capital Plan. So it really provides that framework for all of this ongoing work. Taking another example, just north of Cambridge, we've got strategic initiative six, which is named the North Cambridge Greenspace. This was developed to provide new strategic green spaces to the north of Cambridge. This is to address the deficit in accessible GI in this area, but also to reduce recreational pressure on existing sites. And those were issues that were raised by stakeholders numerous times. So it's a well positioned to meet the demand from proposed development and to provide a connection between Cambridge City and News Valley. And we developed this initiative and alongside the local nature partnership and other stakeholders. And it knits together elements of the Cambridge Nature Network a site suggested through the call for green sites and other emerging projects. And next slide, please. So as I mentioned, each of these 14 initiatives has a really detailed write up in the report. And each one covers sort of a structured approach. So we looked at the overall ambitions and objectives of the initiative and it sets out what gene, what GI themes the initiative supports. It's got a supporting map and overview description. It then goes on to detail the relationship with existing projects and initiatives. And that's where if a call for green site was in the area and looked like it could contribute to the overall objective, we would have listed these. And we also noted the relationship with the development strategy, potential delivery partners, potential delivery mechanisms and funding streams. And we had a go at estimating the time scales and addictive costs and also the level of priority. And each one is supported by either a case study from somewhere else in the country or a spotlight on a project that's being led or run in the area already. And next slide. And just thinking back over the most important messages that came out of all of this work. And I think it's really worth reiterating that stakeholders remain so engaged the whole way through the study and everybody that we spoke to demonstrated willingness to contribute to the doubling nature vision. And we also found so many ongoing delivery projects. So what we tried to do was knit them together to achieve the overall strategic initiative objectives. So now there's a framework to bring all of these different work streams together. And it's worth saying that the resulting initiatives have a really close spatial relationship with the Cambridge Nature Network and Natural Cambridges Nature Recovery Areas. So again, going back to what John was saying, everything's growing in the same direction. And by embedding these initiatives in the local plan, there's also a name to use development to contribute towards these initiatives. And also came out really clearly that these initiatives can't be delivered by one body or organization. It's going to take a lot of continual dialogue between neighbouring authorities and other organisations who've got an interest in GI to get these delivered. And what came out clearly as well as partnership working is going to be absolutely crucial to delivering on the vision. It's not easy. No one's saying it's easy. That's probably the beginning. And it's going to take a lot of commitment and monitoring to see these realised. Thank you very much. Just a really, really interesting start to the session and see if any questions coming through already. So next up, just going to get you start to get you involved a little bit in getting your brains thinking about some of this stuff as well. So we're going to run a couple of quick interactive sessions and ask you a couple of questions. And those of you who have used this or been on previous ones, previous seed webinars, you'll know how to do this already. And we're using something called Menti today so you can either scan that QR code with your phone and it will take you to the correct page or you can put in that go to www.menti.com and then stick in that code and it should come up with the questions that we're about to ask you. So what I'll do is if you have any trouble then do let me know stick in the Q&A and we'll try and get it sorted. We haven't had any issues so far and hopefully it will stimulate some views. So we'll just move on. So okay, so what we, so we've got your opinions really. So what do you think I think are the most important issues to address for our green infrastructure network? And you've heard some of those being mentioned by Diana and also a very clear fact that actually this stuff is to be delivered by multiple people, multiple partners, multiple organizations. And actually it's incumbent on us all I suppose to understand how we can make those connections. So, but I think we're interested in obviously this coming through our consultation and I think in one of the questions you've already seen that Stuart's answered, please go and put your detailed comments in. But actually what we're trying to do in this session is get stimulate some views and stimulate our own thoughts and how we continue to kind of draft the plan. So what do you think we get some coming through now? So hopefully you can add, I think there's no word count in this so you can add whatever you like. Please no swearing or anything rude. That would be great. I think I've got swearing that switched off on this anyway. So avoid being all things to everyone everywhere. And I think that's a very good comment because this is a land use plan for a wide area. It's a greater Cambridge plan. So we have to look at that whole area and the strategy session that we outlined, maybe I think it must have been two weeks ago, shows you the nature of the size of the area that we're planning for and where both development and sort of the best place is to put things to green infrastructure whether it be enhanced green infrastructure or enhanced connectivity. And I'm gonna invite some of the panel to jump in on some of these as we go through and if there's anything that sticks out. I mean, well, Link, we talked about connectivity there. John Cornell, I think this is really your area as well. I mean, is there anything to add into that in terms of the connectivity of some of this green networks should we call them? Well, I'm only to say that, I mean, it's just good practice to link habitats with corridors. I mean, that's from an ecological perspective, that's a sort of a 101 goal. It's what you wanna be doing. Otherwise you end up with isolated pockets of bits and pieces that don't really do much. If we can link those habitats and the biodiversity with green infrastructure, that also serves a multifunctional purpose of getting people from A2B on bicycles or electric scooters or whatever we're promoting, that's maybe a win-win. No, I'd agree with that, John. And I think that one of the things that's a real intrinsic link is obviously, we are doing planning, which is there's links with every part of it, but the access to both open spaces and green spaces and nature for people and how that links in with our current 18 months that we've just had, we've all been locked up in our houses for a long time. I think the real value has come through on people's being able to access green spaces and green networks and its connectivity for nature, but also connectivity for us. I mean, there's some comments in there around certainly around developments being located close to green spaces. We've got a session tomorrow, midday. It's our last webinar actually. It's a focus session on Northeast Cambridge, which is one of our areas of development in the plan. It's got an AAP aside in. There's quite a big focus on open spaces in that and then coming forward. Not to overlook the environment close to home as well as nature is important everywhere and absolutely. And obviously the area that we're planning for is diverse. We're a city region with some very rural hinterlands, agricultural land as well. So there's a role, there's all these different mosaics of kind of areas that are really important to try and connect. And then we hope that we've started to really think about this in a comprehensive way. Stuart, is there anything you wanted to say because you've done quite a lot of work on this? Yeah, it's definitely something we're still working on. I think, as you say, it's a key point is that our area is quite different. Different parts of Greater Cambridge have different challenges and opportunities. Existing development and its access to nature is one thing. Maybe it's one thing that's maybe hard to sometimes improve that very local access to nature if you're working with what's already there. Larger scale, new development opportunity provides greater opportunities to identify and design the development around that close access to nature. But it's something we've very much got in mind. There are national access to natural green space standards and those are looking to be reviewed. So it's something we're working on for the next stage, really. Yeah, and it's interesting to see some other parts coming through around empowering communities and talking to the point that Dynamite around how everybody needs to get involved. Just one of the other things before we move on to the other one. And we are taking all these comments on board as well. So these will be captured in our consultation plan in terms of where we capture your comments. But as you have some good stuff coming through, please get this into the consultation as well, it's really important you didn't participate in that. Is it an interesting one there on the Food, Farming and Countryside Commission? So I think the last of our GI initiatives, Dana, is on environmentally sustainable farming and recognising that that's pretty much entirely outside of planning as such because it doesn't involve development. But it's key to recognise that, again, we need to work with everybody to make this stuff happen on a range of scales and in different situations throughout our area. So it's definitely a very important one. It strikes me some of the comments are raising a lot of issues about how developments are designed as well. So there's a lot of overlap here with our Great Places theme. So we've tried in the consultation documents to set out what we think good developments here would actually look like, what features would it need to include? What characteristics would it need to address? And I think we've picked up points about the connectivity and the greening of space and so on in those policies. But you might want to provide some of this feedback on those policies as well. How should we design places to perhaps link to that wider green infrastructure network? So it's part of the whole area, not just a separate element, I guess. Yeah, thanks. What I'm going to do, I'm going to let you talk. Sorry, go on, Diana, talk. I'm just going to move to the next slide so people can get a view of the question while we're talking because it's totally related. So, Diana, sorry. Please go ahead and so use it. I was just going to say that's part of the recommendations from the report, really focus on landscape-led master plans and ensuring that that's the first consideration. Yeah, absolutely. And this is the second question. And John Cornell, and I've got two Johns for me today, is going to talk a little bit about biodiversity net gain in the next section. But before we do that, I think it's really useful and there's some obviously, it's very clear about the links between biodiversity and green infrastructure and green spaces. But I think what we'd like to get you thinking about now is what you think are the most important issues to address in improving biodiversity. I mean, there's a comment in the last section that people are very concerned about, not just habitat loss, but loss of species. And I think we're all very concerned here about those things too. And I think it'd be good to get your views on what you think about that before we go in. And John's going to give you a bit of detail around some of the issues that we're looking at in terms of biodiversity net gain, but some of the kind of moving changes with just, you know, John mentioned at the beginning around the environmental bill, there has been a lot of movement in this area. I mean, you know, prior to my work that I do now, looking after this piece of work, I've come from an environmental background and this is, you know, I remember talking about this stuff maybe 10, 15 years ago when there was very little movement in that space. And it does seem to have gathered traction. Yes, there's a lot of kind of, you know, global international, you know, issues and challenges that we're facing right now that have maybe catalyzed that. But I do think that, you know, that the things have moved quickly and are rightly so. So, you know, what are the things that you think about that? And reduction in the abstraction. I mean, the water issues are absolutely something we're critically aware of. And, you know, we did a whole session last week on climate change and gave, you know, gave a lot of weight to it, trying to explain some of the ways we've approached looking at the water issues. And it's definitely, you know, it's a definite, it's a definite high priority in this plan to ensure that we're, you know, we're doing what we're doing in a sustainable manner and, you know, improving using development or using growth in current economic mechanisms we have to deliver to improve, to provide resilience to, you know, what may have not been improved in the past. So that's definitely one of our high priorities.  We don't know, you know, alongside sort of the fact that we actually try to plan to deliver net zero. We also are aware that climate change is actually happening. So we have to also prepare for that to happen. And our green spaces and our biodiversity has a key role in helping mitigate some of the impact that we're already seeing right now. And of climate change, you know, some of the extreme weather that we're all starting to see will continue to see over time. Anything on there that's ticking out on any of these for you guys on the panel? And there's some questions around BNG. And I'm sure John will be happy to get involved in those in a little minute, because he's right at the sharp end of that with his team in terms of, you know, not just the policy work that we're doing, but also at the development management side of things in terms of assessing that and how we ensure that BNG is included. The thing is, there's a lot of people moving, isn't it? But there's ones about expanding areas for public access so that it doesn't degrade habitats. I think that's really important. And there's just fundamentally there's a balance of stuff for people and stuff for wildlife. And I think that hopefully the strategic initiatives that Diana and colleagues have put together and that we're putting forward provide that balance so that some of them are very specifically to meet the needs of wildlife and to expand the area around those protected sites so that there's less pressure on those sites. And then some of them, such as that North Cambridge green space, are very particularly to provide space for people so that they're not going to, so that we as people don't go over somewhere else and trample all over the wildlife sites. So it's definitely a critical issue. You tell us whether you think we've got that balance right, but we've very much had that in mind. Yeah. There's an interesting one there about peatland, which again overlaps with our climate change evidence. Indeed, that picked up on that particular issue about protecting important carbon sinks when you're planning for future development. So again, another evidence-based link with the climate change evidence, which is also in the document widely. Worth saying, although we looked at sort of broad areas of search, did look for areas of sort of multiple benefits and looking where you've got multiple ecosystem services, sometimes you do just need to focus on the one sort of priority. And sometimes that is sort of biodiversity and the keeping people away, but then sort of alternatively providing them with something else. Yeah. The one that's really sticking in my mind is around urban species as well, because we're doing sessions today on green infrastructure and biodiversity. Of course, biodiversity doesn't just exist in green spaces. And actually, a really important thing in questioning around there are, we have got some small green belt release proposed in the strategy, but there is always a lot of sensitivity around green belt. But the you also must remember that actually ground-field land has huge opportunities for biodiversity as well. And actually, it's really important to consider this stuff in the realm. What are we talking about achieving in terms of impact? Are we talking about numbers and quantity or are we talking about actually quality of space for different things and quality of space for biodiversity? So I think these are all really important things. I'm going to move on because I'm aware that we're running through time. We've got really good little next step from John as well. Some questions coming in here soon. Thank you for your input. I hope that was useful. We'll have a little one at the end as well. So what I'm going to do is move on to John. Thanks, Paul. Okay, so I'm going to talk a little bit about biodiversity net gain now. And of course, we don't want to blind you with gobbledygook. It's all too easy to do when you're talking about these sorts of things, but also we don't want to leave you sort of guessing either. So I've tried to capture some information on these slides and talk you through them in a way that sets out in a clear way what we're trying to do and where that's coming from. So if you could just pass on to the next slide, please, Paul. So biodiversity net gain, as I'm sure many of you are aware, is an approach that aims to leave biodiversity in a measurably better condition than before the development took place. That's assuming that the development does take place, of course. It's a compensation approach to offsetting from loss of biodiversity from development. And it's an improvement. Some folk still have questions about biodiversity net gain. We'll get to those a little bit later, but it is a huge improvement and it's staying with a particular trajectory around enhancing biodiversity and protecting it. The old system, if you wind back the clock a few years, talked about something called no net loss. The no net loss was what it said on the tin that when you develop some land, when you build something, that there's no net loss to the biodiversity that was there. And it didn't really work, to be honest. There usually was net loss, people fudged figures and developers. We don't need to go into too much detail about that, but it wasn't really a very robust mechanism. And so we then had come forward, this thing called biodiversity net gain, where instead of just saying, we're not gonna lose any biodiversity, the approach therefore is now, we're going to actually increase the biodiversity as a result of the development. Now for the last, well, the last few years, certainly going back to 2012, National Planning Policy Framework Document, talked about measurable net gain. But unfortunately, the good folk that put that together didn't talk about how much net gain. And so measurable, well, that can be 1%, can't it? It can be 10%, it can be whatever you want it to be. And so that wasn't, while it was helpful, it wasn't really as helpful as it could, should have been. That's now been fixed, thankfully, by the Environment Bill, now the Environment Act, which was passed and got Royal Assent last Tuesday, possibly the Tuesday before November the 9th. And within the Environment Act, it now says quite clearly, thou shalt require developers to deliver a minimum, okay, a minimum of 10% biodiversity net gain as a result of their development scheme. Okay, so I think we've got a very solid base there from which we can move. And just so you know, other local authorities around England have been doing this for some time in there through their local plan process. Because obviously everybody's on a slightly different time scale in terms of where they are in that local plan process. So we're hitting this just about right because we're developing now a new local plan policies. And one of the things in the new local plan we're aiming for is a 20% minimum biodiversity net gain from development. Now again, we're in the early stages of this conversation. Is it practical? Some will say no. Some will say yes, it absolutely is. Some will tell us it's not enough. So of course, you know, we've got a very mixed bag of opinions and we have to go on the science. We have to go on what the best practice around the country is telling us what works and what doesn't. But I think you can see from this that there's a clear trajectory from a system that didn't really use the deliver for biodiversity. But clearly the intention is that we really wanna see those net gains on the ground making a difference. Next slide please. So why is it required? Okay, well, how long have you got? There's a number of reasons probably as long as your arm. So, you know, this is not everything but there is just a few that I thought of. Biodiversity historically at development sites not everywhere, not everywhere by any means but historically, much like quality landscaping it's been a bit of an afterthought. It's been a bit of a tick box approach. It's been a bit of a, you know, shove it over there in the corner and job done. And so what we've ended up with is really not much of a legacy in terms of biodiversity from previous developments. There are some exceptions here in Campbell but by chance more than design we've got fantastic green spaces managed by the Wildlife Trust which are good for wellbeing, good for walks at lunchtime but they're also good for the biodiversity here. So it does happen but it was, as I said, here in Camborn rather, I think it was rather by design it was more of an accident that we've ended up with what we have. There's also a huge body of shifting public sentiment towards this partly because of COVID. People have found that they like their local park. They don't want it built on. Yeah, they like hearing the birds. So there was a huge body just locally but globally of shifting public sentiment towards nature and biodiversity being something of value, you know, not a nice to have but a must have. And that's also influencing opinions within local and national governments. We need to reverse the biodiversity loss which accelerated in the mid 20th century after the last war really quite a lot. And since then, we've not really done well for biodiversity in this country. It's just gone down and down and down. Development's played a big part of that. So we'd like to reverse that. It's not just about protecting what we have it's about enhancing and growing that network. And again, I've mentioned links to health and wellbeing, who doesn't like a nice walk in the countryside close to where you live with quality green spaces rather than sort of dysfunctional parks with the Coke cans and the blowing debris. We don't want that, do we? So this all links together and hopefully we can join it up. Next slide please, Paul. So how does it work? Briefly, conscious of time. Well, one thing biodiversity doesn't do biodiversity net gain doesn't do doesn't change legal protections from important biodiversity. That stays unchanged really. All existing habitats and their condition on a site. So I want to propose development site before any spades go in the ground. We need to capture what the base conditions are for the biodiversity on that site. We need to measure the habitats. We need to measure what's there. And actually, again in the Environment Act developers are going to have to come forward with something called a biodiversity net gain plan. And that net gain plan will have to demonstrate that they have correctly measured the existing conditions on the site. What's there, they can't fudge it. It's got to be approved by local members with the local planning authority. And so that again, that's a new process that's come forward in the Environment Act. So we're sure when the development takes place we're certain of what's there before it happens and therefore we can measure net gains accurately out the back end of that. Developments must not only protect but enhance and create new habitats. And again, this is similar language. It's about enhancing. It's not just about, you know we're not going to lose that wood over there. What we're going to hopefully move towards is a situation where from development existing biodiversity is enhanced. So we can add to it. We can add to our strategic networks. We can add corridors. We can look at brownfield sites and we can hopefully get it right with the help of the partners like Wildlife Trust, like CPPF, like RSPB, Natural England all of those folks I mentioned earlier because it's a joint effort. That isn't to say, I must just add we will always agree. Much like any debate, any conversation you will have folk on different edges of the spectrum. Some wanting to pull us all the way this way and others wanting to pull us all the way that way. And I think, you know if we're going to have a grown up conversation there must be recognition of that. You cannot please everybody all the time. So there will be elements, I'm sure that will be contentious and it will be difficult to resolve but it's through conversation that we hope we can do that. Next slide please Paul. So this is one of the thorny topics that we're not going to get into too much today because it could last the whole afternoon but on-site versus off-site. We're hoping that, as I said a biodiversity net gain plan is required before any development takes place. But what we're going to hope for and what we're going to push for is that development where possible enhances and protects biodiversity on a given site. I can tell you though now looking at the plans that we get in front of us weekly that that's not the way that developers typically thinking in the past. There's going to have to be a characteristic approach but I suspect we're going to struggle to get biodiversity net gain at 10% even at 5% in some places within the red line boundaries of our development sites. Okay now you might like that you might not like that I'm sure some people won't but it's a reality, it's a fact. And therefore we have to have an answer for taking that biodiversity elsewhere and that will be an off-site biodiversity mechanism which will feed into the sorts of strategic locations Diana, LUC was showing us earlier that strategic mapping that we've done and we've done that in partnership as I've said with all of those other organizations. So we've not gone out on the limb and decided we're like a green blob over here it's been done in a joined up coordinated way. And the thing is, is that if we cannot get the biodiversity net gain on-site then we're going to have to take it off-site and the way to do that is to put it in a strategically agreed location that enhances biodiversity for the district for the county for the wider area. As I said, it's going to be contentious but we're going to have to do something. We can't sit on the fence. The alternative is that you get planning developments which don't meet their net gain requirement and then get refused a planning committee. That's not really an option either is it? So it's going to be tricky. As I've said before, our goal is to protect and enhance existing biodiversity first but then go on to enhance more. Off-site biodiversity and enhancement, sorry, enhancement is an option. It's one that I just talked about and there are various options for that coming forward. Natural England will eventually, hopefully sooner or other later have a register of approved sites around the country that we can use to place enhanced biodiversity on and that will be a mechanism that we're still trying to work out. So we haven't fully thought that through. We don't have all the answers around that but it's the direction of travel that we're moving in. Next slide, Paul, please. So that takes us on to B&G and the local plan, my final slide and really just to say that as I've already said, we are looking at 20% biodiversity net gain for all developments in the forthcoming local plan. That's the part of the first conversation. What do you think? We're using evidence as we've already seen from Diana's presentation to identify where to put that B&G. We're going to introduce a mechanism for ensuring in perpetuity. This was one of the questions on the chat. How do we ensure that this stuff's managed and monitored? Well, in perpetuity means 30 years. Don't ask me who thought of that but that's the goal, the gold standard 30 years. In the biodiversity net gain plan, there will need to be a transparent and a costed management plan that sets out how the proposal plans to meet that 30 year commitment. We can't just have things popping up for five minutes and then being dead or plowed up in a few years. That will not happen. It can't happen. It's not, the system's not designed for that sort of short termism. It's more designed for the long term. And of course, as I've already said, all of this is really helping us to support things like the doubling nature strategy and the other council goals, which we have to enhance biodiversity on our patch and hopefully improve wellbeing for everybody and a place to live for our biodiversity. So that's my brief whip through biodiversity net gain. We'll try to answer questions if you have any. And I believe we're going to move on to green spaces now. Thanks. Thank you, John. So my name is Bruce Waller. I look after sports and open spaces and the Greater Cambridge Share Planning Service. I just want to briefly cover the evidence studies we're going to be preparing to help support the review of the local plan for Greater Cambridge. So I'll start off with the Greater Cambridge playing pitch strategy along with the indoor sports facility strategy. We already have these strategies in place which covers the growth in the current local plans for 2031. And we have started to update these, taking into account growth that we've outlined in the first proposals to 2041. These basically follow Sport England's methodology, focusing in playing pitch strategy to do with outdoor cricket, football, hockey and rugby pitches. And the indoor sports facility focuses on indoor sports halls, other indoor sports facilities, including swimming pools. In addition to these two strategies, we're also going to be completing an outdoor courts and rink strategy. This looks at those smaller, yet still useful spaces such as multi-use games areas, outdoor tennis courts, bowling rinks, netball courts. There's a lot around the whole area, some of which perhaps need improving rather than additional facilities. So the idea is, is that we will have a comprehensive portfolio of documents to support our strategy for providing sports and recreation for Greater Cambridge. And the next year, we are planning to update the open space and recreation strategy. If we could have the next slide please. I'm just going to go into this bit more detail because I know it's quite very important for people. So this to clarify focuses on the urban and village open spaces. So it will involve reviewing the current open spaces. At the moment, there's standards for the city and standards for the South Cambridge here. So we're going to be reviewing these standards and given how Cambridge of extensions have started to move into South Cambridge here, in effect, we're thinking that maybe it'll be more appropriate to have an urban and rural standard to reflect their differing urban characteristics. So it'll be exploring this option and looking at perhaps the suitable areas which include an urban standard. So this might be, for example, the urban, the Cambridge itself, including the urban extensions which extend up to the A14 and M11, to the North and West respectively. And as well, including the new towns of Campbell and North Stonewater Beach, which themselves will be more of an urban development as opposed to your traditional rural developments often seen in South Cambridge here. Next slide please. So they will review the quantum quality and access of open spaces, which as I've discussed earlier, is all very important. But I think it's important to highlight how open spaces is going to be quite pivotal in helping to deliver a number of area-wide strategies. For example, helping to mitigate changing climates and helping to reduce urban heat islands in urban areas, helping to provide spaces to support ecological improvements, as well as helping to deal with flooding, such as the provision of sustainable urban drainage schemes. And obviously with the recent past 18 months of how there's been much greater focus on health and wellbeing, both physical and mental, it's important that we take account of how these spaces can deliver on these agendas, as well as encouraging people to actually live active, healthy lifestyles, not just when it's fair weather, but throughout the year, for all ages, all abilities, we're all different people, we all want to do different things at different times, and it's seeing how we can perhaps help deliver on that. So, and I think this really reflects what was made earlier, comments made earlier about the importance of the quality of the open spaces to ensure that they're actually being as functional as possible because they're all limited spaces as a finite resource, and they offer opportunities to really deliver on a wide range of strategies which will improve people's lifestyles. I also want to follow up on green spaces, local green space designations in particular. So, we originally tried to do local green space designations through the local plan process. However, it was quite difficult to actually get sites designated to the inspector, it has some rather high standards, and it was difficult to prove the local significance at a district level. So, we're proposing that in future, local green space designations will be reviewed through the neighborhood plan process. Okay, hopefully that was a succinct review of my slides and information. Over to you, Paul. Thanks, Bruce. Thanks, John. Very helpful, and as I said, the slides will be up afterwards. So, we've got a bit of time now. We have got an interactive session, but we also want to take some questions. We have been answering questions in the chat. There are still some coming through. So, please do start putting your questions in and we can answer them as we go along. We just have a quick interactive session. We've run it whilst you're asking questions as well, and I'll kind of compare both of them at the same time as is. So, have a bit of a think about, you know, in relation to what Bruce has said as well, but also in kind of the wider piece around what's important to you about locations for play spaces in your local area. So, good to see some comments coming through. And whilst we're doing that, I'm going to answer a couple of questions in the chat. So, there's a question on the work of the FPA. So, for those of you who don't know what that is, it's the Future Parks Accelerator, which has been operating in Cambridge and Peterborough for the last year. It's an accelerator program. It's government-led or National Lottery Funded, I think, as well. One of the things that's really complicated about an area like ours, and I'm just talking about great multiple layers of governance, the multiple stakeholders, the multiple landowners of particularly green spaces, parks, open spaces. Each council, and it kind of goes to the question earlier on around, you know, how do we ensure that the who looks after who stewards green spaces going forward? And much of that stuff is actually outside of what we can do in planning policy. But actually, that's why we need to be collaborating on different levels with different organizations about how these things run. You know, certain councils run their own parks and open spaces still, three in-house teams, some of them do it very differently, some are third sector. The way that the FPA is currently working, as my understanding of it goes, is that actually all of the members of all councils within the entire Cambridge and Peterborough area are actually sat on that project board at the moment and are feeding into both funding mechanisms and also kind of stewardship models for the future. And that project will be up and running. And what I'll try and do is I'll get away and I'll put a link up on the site to the FPA project so you can see what it is that's happening there. So some thoughts coming through into the... Can I just answer a quick question from... Sure. I meant to answer earlier when I was talking about B&G and got sidetracked, I'm afraid, but Dick Newell wrote in right at the beginning actually about nest spaces and swift boxes. And I just wanted to reply to Dick that we've been looking at this in the SPD because we want the guidance in that document to be accurate and up to date and fit for purpose. And actually what we've discovered, having had a bit of a look around the country, what's going on elsewhere with bird boxes and bat boxes provision for developments is that there's a British standard now for this. And so we've gone ahead and purchased that. I think it's about 20 quid, it's not much. And we're going to incorporate the guidance in that British standard into the SPD, right at the place, I think, Dick, where you have previously an action for swifts as previously said, you know what? This is a bit lacking. You've got a paraphrasing. You've got to tighten this up. So we're absolutely taking that on, Dick, we're taking your comments on. We're going to get that British standard in the SPD and hopefully that'll help to improve things and clear things up. Thanks, John. That's really helpful. I'm going to answer a few questions here. I think we feel free to add some thoughts into the mentee and we can discuss them as we're working through questions as well. I'm going to go to where do the existing and proposed country parks fit in? Are these considered more nature's places or recreation? And I'm going to pick that up. Stuart, maybe you? I think it probably comes back to that balance again. Obviously, they can do both of that. And it's just important, I think, to make for those people managing those parks to be clear on what's for nature and what's for people such that you don't put too much pressure on what I think probably would say biodiversity being a key point, but then providing that space for people provides an extra benefits so long as it's not impacting negatively on the biodiversity. So I think it is just in each instance, it's just working out what the priorities for that space, but seeking to manage that balance so we can provide the best for both. Yeah, absolutely. And I've got a comment here around how confident can we be that policies seeking to protect and enhance biodiversity will not be undermined by other big issues that still have to be resolved such as water supply, sufficient quality or quantity needed for new development plan. Don't know if John Dixon, you might want to talk to this one actually. So I guess that's really the role of the evidence base and the plan making process we're going through. So as you've seen today and that the other webinars, we're trying to develop a, I think as a comprehensive evidence base exploring what all the sustainability issues around environment, social and economic issues to inform that plan making process to understand that we have a sustainable development strategy and we'll continue to develop that evidence base as we go through the process. And when we reach the end of the process and we submit the plan, the councils wish to adopt, that itself will be subject to the independent examination which will test whether that plan is sound being informed about evidence base and comments received on consultation to those later stages. So there is a lot of work going on to make sure we do have a plan that delivers sustainable development and there's a lot still to do, but I would hope that gives you the answer to that one as we go forward. It might be worth mentioning that, I think I mentioned it earlier, but whilst we were developing the GI evidence, we were lucky enough to be able to have quite open conversations with them, those who were developing the integrated water management strategy. So they were looking through the lens, through those discussions, we could look through their lens, they could look through our lens. So the strategic initiatives, you'll see some of them do actually pick up on points that have come from that strategy as well and thinking about how they can integrate. So hopefully we've picked up the big issues. Yeah, I mean, I'm aware on time, but I'm happy to run over for a few more minutes because I think there's some questions here, it'd be good to answer them now. So I might come back to you, Dianne actually on this one, so it feels like GI ambitions overwhelmingly biodiversity-focused, GI can perform many ecosystem functions, might not be part of the network to form green infrastructure functions, or example, sustainability and drainage in highly urbanised areas. Will other GI functions also be given a considerable way through planning system? For example, through ENG on actual capital, I think ENG, you were talking about environmental net gain, it's probably less worked up as a concept than BNG, but Dianne, do you want to... Yeah, I mean, perhaps some reassurance, we were definitely a multi-disciplinary team, so yes, there were a sort of ecology-focused specialist, but there was also landscape specialist and heritage or sort of historic environment specialist. So I do think through our sort of themed approach, we gave each theme enough attention and then we focused on how those could be woven together. So I don't think it is overwhelmingly biodiversity-focused, I mean, biodiversity is incredibly important, but there are definitely some initiatives which tackle sort of people issues and access and sort of health and wellbeing issues, so I think there's a wide range of objectives. You might find biodiversity weaves through quite a lot of them because we've tried to pull those different strands together. But yeah, definitely the integrated approach is one that I would say we definitely used. Thanks, Dianne. There's another question here about the impact of light on wildlife and as it's tricky as people will know this, why can't we carry lights? And I think it's really important that we understand that there are different views on these things and actually what's appropriate in one place might not be appropriate in the other. I think that there are light issues and specific species certainly from bats and things like that, from my memory of my environmental times. But actually at the same time, what we're also trying to do is make places inclusive for people and there are parks and open spaces where people want to be able to use them or people want to be able to access connectivity during the night or in the evenings and we've got other issues to consider in the round and I think that's why it's important we get balance use across the board with this stuff because what works for somebody doesn't necessarily work for somebody else in that sense.  I'm sorry we can't do longer sessions in some ways. We would love to do lots of this stuff. We do have a lot of stuff to unpack in this consultation, in this local plan. I make no apologies actually for the level of detail and the number of documents that are involved in putting this together because it is a comprehensive land use plan and a very important piece of work to shape the development and the future of this area and there is a huge amount of what we've tried to do in this in this sense is demystifying some of this and these sessions really are supposed to pick up some of that and highlight you to where you can actually actually get some more information. I think we've picked up most questions anyway. If there are further questions, happy to go through what I'm going to do I'm just going to get rid of my screen over here now. I'm going to spin to do that because we don't need to touch on that. I'm going to start this slide. If you have got any comments, please visit the website. There's ways you can contact us on May if you've got questions but you can get involved through these consultations. You can pick up a survey. There's a really short anonymous survey which we've put in place because not all people like to give their names out and I know there's been some noise around that but actually it's important that we try and get as many users as possible so we need to try and open it up. So there's a short survey you can get involved in where you can go into your name and address details and have some really detailed comments on the policies, the proposals, the strategy, all of these sort of things that we've talked about today. I'm always happy to help. My team always have to help signpost to people with big fill like their things that they can't access or don't understand. It is quite difficult in some ways to explain some of this stuff because it's quite complicated. Not all of us know everything about any of this stuff to be honest with you. It's very special. So I'm just going to pick up a couple of questions before. One last question I think we've got on there before we go. I'm really concerned the offsite BNG option may be a cop out for land-based developers. I'm probably sure that a few of my team might feel like that as well. On-site and possibly near-site options that can bind a place for displaced wildlife to move into must surely be priorities. John Cornel probably best place to answer this question. I knew I wasn't going to get away so easily. Of course it is an emerging theme now that as offsite BNG is being worked up as a concept there are lots of people standing and saying that's not good enough. It's a cop out. It's about placing the appropriate habitat in the appropriate locations for the appropriate species. So it's not going to be a sort of a willy-nilly you can't make your BNG work on site. Let's just drive up the road 10 miles and stick it in a field. It's not going to be like that at all. We wouldn't get away with that. But as I said earlier, there are very real challenges when you have development going on some sites to get any kind of net gain for biodiversity within the red-line boundary. Now what we've seen in other parts of the country where this has happened is the shift in how things work has actually begun to affect land prices. Would you believe?  Can you imagine what kind of seismic shift that would mean? So we don't have any answers. We're conscious that it's not ideal to take BNG offsite but there will be, as I've said before, instances where there is no other option. We're going to have to work with developers and applicants to ensure that they prioritise, maybe this is something that we can bake into the local plan that's not in the Environment Act, that they prioritise on site first, and then any that's left over possibly can go towards a more strategic site that will benefit habitat and species elsewhere. But it's the thorny issue and it's not something we're going to duck out of. We're going to try and get it right working with everybody to move that in the right direction. Thanks, John. Alongside a thousand other thorny issues as well. It's absolutely right that this is a start of a journey with some of this stuff in many aspects. Now it's become enshrined. I think the first point of the point is ensuring that we've got strong policy frameworks to be able to enforce and leave. I'm going to just quickly say there is a question here around the Water Treatment Works Plant location. I'm not ignoring the question. And we know that this is a really sensitive issue and we've discussed it in pretty much all of the sessions so far that's been a question that's cropped up and we're certainly not avoiding it. There is a session on EC tomorrow and we understand that it's difficult to understand why the two processes between the DCO process and the local plan are not aligned in some ways. They are very separate processes. We've done a lot of FAQs on this and we understand it's not the answer that people want to hear but it is the factual answer in this stage and I will put the FAQ on the specifics around that is on the website. But we do have a session on northeast Cambridge tomorrow where we will touch on that as well. What I'd like to do is I'd like to thank everybody for coming. I'd like to thank the panel, the fantastic this morning effort and content that's gone into it. Thank you for being here. Thank you for all of those who attended and thank you for your questions and also for your input into the Mentimeter. It's really good to see some of that stuff coming through from some of you as well. As I said, we're running the last of our theme sessions that they're all available on the website. Please go to the Greater Cambridge Planning but all local plan link on your screens right now. That will tell you how best you can get involved. You can participate in this. There are events as well that we're running as well. All those events are listed up on there and you can either get there through that or scanning their code. If you want to hear updates as well, a lot of the stuff on social media has been is trending with hashtag that you see local plan and I wish you all a fantastic rest of your week and hopefully we'll see you some of you again tomorrow.


Do you struggle with relationships? It's easy to get lost in life and in your relationships. It comes and goes and there were probably times you wondered what went wrong. There are certain types of behavior that damage your relationships and sometimes you don't even notice when you're doing them. So today, we're going to find out what they are and how to prevent them. Number one, refusing to say sorry. How do you resolve fights or misunderstandings? Do you sometimes refuse to back down? Even if it's your own mistake, practicing healthy communication is vital for relationships. This includes the ability to admit that you are the one at fault. There is power in this act. It shows that you are mature enough to look at your own shortcomings and capable of overcoming them to the best of your ability. But why is it so difficult to say sorry? Well, saying sorry can lead to feelings of shame. This can make you feel bad about yourself and rethink whether you're a good person or not. It helps to remember saying sorry doesn't equate to you having a bad personality. Saying sorry just means that you're willing to admit that you're wrong and you cherish the other person and will try to be better for them. Number two, having low self-esteem. Do you tend to be insecure about your own self, skills or appearance? People who have low self-esteem try to diminish these feelings by fully relying on their relationships for emotional or psychological stability. This is called codependency. And this can make a relationship go from healthy to toxic fast. Being codependent can stem from abusive families, childhood upbringing or exposure to people with mental or physical illnesses. But don't worry, there's always room for growth. For starters, you can try developing your own self-care routines to encourage feelings of relaxation and happiness. What makes you feel good? Do you like going to the spa, taking long walks, doing some exercise? It's important to explore and identify the things you like doing so you can incorporate them into your own schedule, spend time with your supportive friends or even go to a therapist. Someone will always be there to help you when you need it. Number three, refusing to compromise. Relationships are about getting close to someone else, but being two different people, you're bound to have some disagreements along the way. And that's why we have the magic of compromise. You discuss your side of the story and get to a unified decision that satisfies you both, leading to further growth as a team. But do you feel like you're sacrificing more than compromising? Or perhaps you feel like you're asking too much of someone already. These types of situations can cause negative feelings such as bitterness or resentment to develop. So how do you prevent this? Understand that you, your friend, family or partner are completely different people. You'll never be on the same side all the time and that's okay. Find a new alternative that works for you both and try to build an environment that's both peaceful and yet open to healthy arguments. Communicate and put yourself in their shoes as you listen. Number four, always putting them first. When you love someone, you have a natural inclination to shower them with affection. Sometimes it even comes at the expense of your own physical and mental health. You go out of your way to make them feel happy. You give them gifts, tell them compliments and protect them whichever way you can. That's all good. But are you also giving the same treatment to your own body and self? Remember that your relationship with yourself comes first before everything else. So it needs some love and care as well. Try taking some time off for yourself. Pursue your passions, hobbies or even get new ones. Keeping your sense of independence alive is a way to stop depending on others for your own emotional and psychological stability. Own your life. You matter. Number five, always putting yourself first. This is just the exact opposite of number four but it needs to be said. Just like how some people have an inclination to always put themselves last, others have the tendency to always put themselves first. This is not self love. Self love means nurturing yourself to become a better presence all around.  However, when you're doing whatever you wanna do without considering other people's feelings, you may come off as selfish. This is why it helps to be aware of your own actions.  Did they seem to be hurt by what you said? Are some people putting some distance away from you? Keep an eye out for any possible indicators and don't be afraid to face them head on if you do.  It's a sign of maturity and your loved ones will certainly appreciate the effort. And number six, harboring grudges. Are you the type of person who likes to hold onto a grudge?  Keeping grudges may cage you in a whirlwind of negative emotions like anger, bitterness, resentment and hopelessness. There really aren't a lot of benefits to it and can damage your relationships. When you're angry, give yourself some time to let the steam off.  After you've calmed down, reflect on what happened and try to build your way to a resolution. Should you talk it out with them, give them space. Whatever it is, it's important to get to a conclusion which is what harboring grudges doesn't do. Patience, understanding and acceptance will help you get through it. It's certainly not easy, but you're more than capable of being a better person. Choose forgiveness. Have you ever called it quits with a friend or partner? Why do you think it happened? Please share your stories in the comment section below. We appreciate hearing your experiences with different relationships. Remember communication with yourself and the other person is essential. You never stop growing as a person. What you experience now will be a lesson for tomorrow. If you found this video helpful, like and share it with friends that might find insight in this too. Remember to subscribe to Psych2Go and hit the notification bell for more content. All the sources used are added in the description box below. Thanks for watching. Until next time.


Your position is totally unsatisfactory, sir. You have these boys. You and Curley, you ever do any of these boys? I'm afraid that I'll do some thank you, but I have a few, just some souvenirs. Thank you, Mr. President. Our guy, when I was doing this to one, no, I think so. It was miscountable. Was that church, was that process every day from home? Every time you go out there? Sam said, you know, he asked Sam once, what would he do if he couldn't be on the television? Sam said, I'd go door to door. Sure. This position is that I can't go out. See something like the nice kids. Would you like to have it on the National League side? No. No. Very good. We'll be going. We moved across town a little bit. We did the socks games. And at that time, of course, the Cubs was the big audience, and the big audience, and the doggies. We're going to be that way this year, too. It looks like it's July. In July 4th? That's also a good idea. Right. It's like shooting the photos. Right. Rio is a great part of America. You know, we try to mess it up a little while, especially with Pete's survival. It really does. I agree it's number one. Every now and then, we try to find a way to change it. It's been running very well for 100-some-odd years. Little by little, we try to make it in-road so it's so new. The VAs, those people, the family. I think that we just leave it alone and manage to survive all of it. We vote. Do you find time to be our commission? I don't think so. Two days away from that. I don't think that. You're still hiring. No, we have one. You can go over there. Oh, I see. That's right. He's a good man. You know, the industry that I then went to used to be in Hollywood. Turned to baseball for the answer to that problem. Most people don't realize or remember that motion pictures have gotten just about as scabby as they are today. And the people in this country just rebelled. It was family entertainment. They took their kids to the movies, and they said, well, whatever they want. And the major students together hired Will Hayes, who today is so bizarre, who would come in as an answer to the Black Sox. Right. And he straightened up the motion picture industry. And why they never left that goal. So that was, you know, not a great problem. But Hayes, he said, he would be bizarre. What he said would go. And he said it cold. And lots of times, it was a little bit, but it was too restricted.  Motion picture kisses were pretty circumspect today. When I look at a love scene on the screen, I think they're trying to eat their way through each other. Mr. President, how was it playing Grover Cleveland in that exam in the movie? Oh, that was a wonderful experience. If someone here was... Yes, to me. It was a part of that connected with that.  But we had to hire a certain number of extras to keep them happy to be ballplayers too. And we had got to be wonderful. I never forget they had this camera set up on me one day. And I was so they could get front shots of me pitching. And so I was throwing the pass to the camera. And... Grover, what was your name? Alliance. He just put on a glove back there to catch him and toss him back in so that I could catch him, you know. I think that's my sign, you know. And throw on him and throw on him and he kept on throwing him. And I threw one on the wrong side of the camera. And he made a wild stab with his bare hand and caught it. And afterward, Al came up to me and he said, gee, Alex, I'm sorry but I had to catch your blazer. And... Oh, and they wanted a shot of an outfielder coming in and falling trying to catch it all. And so they had to use one of the exercises for that. And he fell and dislocated his shoulder. And he's sitting there on the ground and dislocated his shoulder and crows all gathered around. I can't remember whether it was Pina's about here or who came in. And he pulled it all the way through. And again, it was Al Lyons who was the... He's standing there and tossing the ball and Watt took him to this fellow. And Pina said, which is what happened? Al says, they're not putting the material into these things. Well, that was in the picture. No, no, we're there. Oh, yes. But he also reported early and he was the guy that called me and had to pitch. I thought I knew how to throw, but I discovered the pitch in this an entirely different method of throwing. It's about 8.30 in the morning, Mr. President, we're at Rift Park and they've done some tight scenes with you. Now, Luefeld directed that picture, as I remember. And at least late lights one and light first base and one and side. And the director asked for the first pitch between the first base and the second. Oh, circle. Now I can hear Luefeld in no way. I sure will be there three days before they get that shot. Oh. And Metkovic. Oh, I played with George. Well, I have to tell you, he would all day long doing these scenes there, and then we got on the bus like we went from location after we'd been out there, he'd start playing in the scenes that I'm over with. So finally, one day, I wanted a ball player to play and shot on the ball player and the umpire, and the umpire calls a strike. And wanted Metkovic to just really do what he thought it wasn't a strike. Now, he's been just forcing a little bold all the time, you know. And Lue picked him, thought he'd be the father to be able to just do what you do. The hunts called a strike and you're convinced it was a ball. Now, there's the camera, and he's up to play. And it was all the difference in the book. All the way in the umpire. Stir right. And Metkovic changed. It was no strike. LAUGHTER All right, straight. He did. I don't know how many of you know this, but in that picture, we had the best-kept secret in the history of baseball. And Warners wouldn't let us use the word. They were afraid to use the word because things people thought differently in those days. So all we could do was have that in addition to his drinking, Alex was covering up kind of a nervous seizure or something. They wouldn't let us use the word what he actually had. And he was so ashamed of that that when a judge publicly dressed him down, he was picked up in the gutter. And it's a role model for kids and how ashamed he should be that he was drunk of it. He wasn't drunk in the gutter. But he would rather take that and be able to leave the other than the medical. But the biggest thing when he went out to the place and faced that man in that 1926 World Series, Saturday night, nobody out in base is looking. He was facing the only other epileptic in baseball. And many tourists, they knew it above each other. They already knew it. Yeah. If I got to see you, this is exactly what I should show you. No, I agree with you. Full guide. Yeah, I got it. Thank you. Thank you. Very good. Nice to meet you. Yeah. Good to see you. I'll be in a minute. I don't have to wait. I'll be in a minute. I'll be in a minute. I have to find our places here. I know that we can't always see you. We can't always weigh in. I have to. I have to. Okay, let's go.


Welgo'n gyfransio ItTV iddwn mount reaction bearing Three, Everton Two and Everton have gone and done it, they've gone and lost. The game that was the sixth pointer, the biggest game that we've had for years plenty a year and Evanton has snatched the fee from the Llose of Victory really, the gifted bornley, the victory and deserve everything that comes with it now, that's gonna come their way Dyffensively, dyna'n absolut mes. Dy manad yet, went with a back four of John Joe Kenney. Be'n gof free, Jarrah Branthwy, Michal Enco, whole gate was in midfield, with a wall being the core, a ni arddant ni'n gof yn y talus yn y dom o front. For once, Everton got off to a really bad start, barely with the better side, certainly in the opening 15 minutes. They were the team pushing. Everton found it difficult to deal with a long ball, which is incredible. Just one-on-one defending isn't it, straight balls, but we make it look difficult. And barely with face to everything in the opening 15 minutes, fair play to them, they come flying out. But Everton started to get into the game and, you know, started to get a little bit of control, but then still managed to go behind off a corner. And I don't know what Joven Pickford was doing, running across his goal. He just stands and waited to back pass into his hands, and he comes and it goes beyond them and you're one-nil down, and you think here we go again. But they did really well, they responded really well to the goal, going behind, and at the golden, done brilliantly on the edge of the box, got into the penalty area, was brought down. It was a penalty, a stone wall penalty. Mike Dean didn't really hesitate stone wall penalty. And the talus and stepped up and despatched it brilliantly. And then Everton with a better side, took over, you know, got in a few times, and then got in again with Alex O'Wobee Ball in behind. Michael Encoe, Aaron Lennon, clearly took him, I don't know why. Mike Dean had to look at it seven times. It was a stone wall penalty again. And the talus and stepped up again and slaughtered to give us a two-one lead in. They were good value for it half-time, despite barely putting us under pressure for the last five minutes of the first half, which they did, we saw that out. Went in a half-time, two-one up, and then you think, and right, can we just come out and manage this game? It'll be difficult. You know, we'd make some whole gate, got a booking in the opening, couple of minutes, and so he was walking a little bit of a tightrope. And come out for the second half, started slowly again. We got through that first five minutes, and then we had opportunities, ourself on the break.  It takes too long, get it out of his feet, got to hit the target, smashes it against the outside of the post. You know, he's really got to do better. We have another breakaway where John Joe Kenny's in acres of space, he's got Rytialysen and I know, whoa, we only put the ball to neither of them and eclipse the bar and goes behind. But if he just plays a better ball, it's three-one. And then you knew what was coming. You knew that Bernley would equalise because we wasted two opportunities to put the game to bed. And they equalised from awful defending by Everton again. The opportunity, it's, we clear our lines. Dominic Calvert-Lewons putting Tarkovski under pressure. He let them out too easily. They've been better just throwing them on the floor and giving a free kick way on the halfway line. He let them out too easily. It gets flicked down the line. Kenny's nowhere to be seen. He's had off, Taylor runs in behind and pulls the ball back and it's a tapping. And it's just, you know, it's a bit fortuitous because it goes through Brantwyd's legs and it's tapped in, but it's just really poor defending, really, really bad defending. True, true, you're obviously worried. Everton got on top again and basically controlled again. And looking like they were going to get the winner, Anthony Gordon gets played in, it's a brilliant block by Tarkovski. Rytialason has an overhead kick which Nick Popmeet a really good shave from Brantwyd Edd, one over.  He didn't really do anything, to be honest. And barely then some are gifted another goal to win the game. And again, really bad defending. We don't stop the cross. We give the ball away first of all. We then don't stop the cross and then Ben Goffrey makes the right hash of the clearance. Absolutely pathetic from him. But that can happen.  But then he's got one job going my corner. Look what the danger is. There was already Holgate was running out of the lad who was going to knock it across. Just have a look and see where the danger is. And he doesn't go to the ball as well. The ball's cut back in corner. He smashes it in to give barely the winner. And then Everton couldn't really muster up anything to get a draw out of it. And like I said, he's snatched the fee from the hands of victory in. The steering down the barrel of a gun now and looking at that, the way he collapsed it, you can't see them doing anything away from home. That's for sure. You know, you look at the away games.  They get no points out of them games. None at all. Wofford, Wofford of good in attacking areas and we can't defend. So, you know, maybe Jerry Meener will make it a little bit better when he comes back. But you can't do it all on his own. That defense is shambolach, absolutely shambolach. And so you've got a fear the worst because you can't see any way right now that if you can't close a game out like that and you can't even get a point out of it, then you are in massive trouble. That's Westam and Burnley with evidence you're the truck at least four points from the two games and they're trucking on. Seven straight defeats away from home. Diaboligol. Diabol, absolutely diaboligol. And I don't know where we go from here. We've got Manchester United at home at the weekend. And it's in a situation now where we have to win against the team. We've got so many attacking options. Yeah, I honestly, it looks like, you know, we could definitely be going down. That's how it looks. I don't know how, what he can do. Frank Llanparth, Alan will be back at the weekend. Does he make that much of a difference? That defense will still be there. You know, maybe Michael Keane will come back. And Jarrod Branthwaite, I thought was the only defender who can hold his head up tonight, I didn't go, I did okay. The rest of them were poor tonight. It's one of them, isn't it? In real, real trouble and it's looking unlikely that they're going to be able to get out of it. Never say never there's nine games to go. They're still ahead of Burnley, of course. But Burnley go to Norwich on Sunday and you'd expect them to win that, so. Yeah, it's certainly, it's going to be very difficult now for Everton, I think. But this has been six years in the making and awful decisions by the owner. A board, Bill Kennaith, Denise Barapax and Del, who have overseen this decline as well. The financial records are abysmal. The financial, you know, the state of the football club when the owner's an accountant. There's loads of things on with it, it's embarrassing. And it's going to, it looks like it could well end in relegations, so. There you go, man, it doesn't matter to me, he was with Charles and I thought he was good all night, he took his pens, well, he should have given us the, he should have scored a hat-trick and won us the game, but he was the one who had a real good go. Damwna cald fel yw, and I thought it was awful tonight, really poor, didn't match his strike partner at all. But there you go. That's it from me. See you later.