Please note that these minutes are still subject to revision.

Please also note as a postscript to these minutes that the co-operative has today (24th May 2006) written to DNPA withdrawing their application for a Farm Shop close by the Post Office & Stores.

For a downloadable copy of these minutes please click here.

The meeting was held at 7.30 pm on 23rd May 2006 at the Church House.

Present:

• Rod Newbolt-Young (Chairman)
• Roger Claxton (Secretary)
• Trevor Eveleigh and Sue Irish (Post Office)
• Lloyd Mortimore (Farm Shop Co-operative)
• Richard & Caroline Mann (Farm Shop Co-operative)
• Diane Cameron and Richard Holmes (Farm Shop Co-operative)
• Sebastian & Philippa Hughes (Farm Shop Co-operative)

Chairman’s Opening Remarks

The Chairman initially asked if there were representatives of the media present. One person, who made the Holwell Farm film, volunteered but stated he was here in a purely private capacity because of his interest in the village. The Chairman asked for a show of hands of those who objected to the gentleman remaining in the room. A few raised their hands but they were in a minority and so the gentleman remained on the basis that he was not making any reports.

The chairman then opened the meeting and introduced himself and the Secretary. He emphasised that although he is a Parish Councillor he called the meeting on his own initiative to get information about the proposal into the public domain and give both sides a chance to present their case. He will be standing down on this issue at the Parish Council meeting. The meeting was called at relatively short notice primarily because Trevor and Sue are getting married on Saturday and he did not want this hanging over them then (all send their best wishes to Trevor and Sue). The Farm Shop application is to be heard at the next Parish Council meeting on the 1st June. The original application was received on 2nd May. The site notice is posted 19th May-9th June, (21 days). Adding the required 8 week target time from application takes us to 26th June and so the application could go to DNP planning committee on 30th June but not until the agenda is published. Applications can be withdrawn at any time free of charge and a re-application can be put in free of charge up to one year of the original application.

The meeting was advised that the proceedings were being tape recorded for the purposes of ensuring that no information was omitted from the minutes. In answer to a question from the floor the Chairman stated that the recording would be erased after the minutes had been produced.

Also there would be time for questions at the end. These should be addressed through the chair.

The Chairman concluded by stating that it was paramount that the post office and shop be kept going. Without these facilities the community will suffer significantly. He asked if anyone in the room disagreed with that statement. No one did. He then introduced Lloyd Mortimore to speak for the Farm Shop Co-operative.

The Farm Shop cooperative

Lloyd referred to a letter which had been circulated within the core of the village before the application was made and seeking comments on the proposals. He read this letter out as stating quite clearly what the proposal was. The main points were:

1. The idea was to open a farm shop as a replacement for a redundant shed on the land attached to Manor Cottage.
2. A desire to discuss concerns etc before the planning application was made.
3. Application would be made in the name of the co-operative and so if the shop ceased trading in the future planning consent would be needed for a change of use
4. One of the main reasons behind the project is to help secure the future of the producers supplying the shop. The customer would get varied and guaranteed high-quality local food.
5. Produce sold should not jeopardise or be in direct competition with other businesses in the village. The co-operative is confident that the extra customers attracted are likely to benefit other retailers in the village. Indeed overall it should help to give customers (both local and visitors) a ‘one-stop shop experience’.
6. Principal products will be beef, lamb, pork and vegetables, from members of the co-operative. Importantly, other local producers will be invited to offer products for sale. Dairy products may be available but designed not to compete directly with the Post Office Stores. No food or drink sold would be for immediate consumption.
7. The shop is intended to be a wooden structure of pleasing appearance.
8. Comments were invited by 15th April.

Lloyd then emphasised that they had been open and honest from the start – that there is no ulterior motive. The members of the co-operative are existing retailers of food who have been selling their produce directly for the past 6-7 years. There is a need to sell directly to customers – not indirectly. Their aim is to secure their businesses. They are all agreed that what they do should not be to the detriment of the Post Office.

The members met with Sue and Trevor (S&T) who were concerned but were not dismissive. It was agreed that the co-operative should continue with their proposals and keep S&T informed. A list of commodities on which they would compete was produced and they further met to discuss which if any could be offered with a view to producing a formal agreement which would be binding on all including future owners.

They decided to only circulate the letter in the village core with a copy in the Post Office and the Parish Notice Board. Lloyd emphasised that the letter was not a requirement but a constructive way of keeping people informed and seeking responses. Some feedback was received. Parking is a genuine concern. DNPA are not too concerned because of adequate car parking in the village. One possibility is a voucher system to refund costs to customers. If it became a problem Richard & Di would consider applying for planning for parking behind the shop.

Lloyd re-emphasised that it was fundamental that the village does not lose the Post Office and they would like an agreement as to what each can sell. The timing of the application was unfortunate but not deliberate. It was a myth that it was deliberately timed.

Lloyd apologised that S&T will be away when the application will be heard by the Parish Council. He made the point that the Post Office and Shop was on the market long before the farm shop idea was conceived.

He understood that some people have misgivings about Sebastian and Philippa, so much so that they offered to back out because of the effect on the ‘local boys’. But the others did not want that to happen. Firstly it was felt that people would not believe it and secondly they offer expertise in marketing which would be invaluable.

The intention is that advertising would be joint (e.g. ‘The Farm Shop next to the Post Office’ and thus to the benefit of both businesses.)

Lloyd referred to the ‘filibuster’ anonymous letter. It was cleverly written, perhaps intended as good humour but has caused ill-feeling and sowed seeds of discontent in the village by playing with peoples’ emotions. He asked that the author of the letter should make him or her self known.

In summary the co-operative has no intention of going against the wishes of the village. They have clearly failed to get their message across. Unless there is a huge change in feeling they have agreed that they will pull out of the application. They feel this is an opportunity missed. Others have stated they would welcome such a shop near them. He asked to be put on record that if in the future trade was lost from the village then this would not the fault of the co-operative.

The Post Office & Stores

Trevor Eveleigh spoke for the Post Office& Stores (POS). He asked that this be kept at a business level and not at a personal level. Everyone has to live together after this is over and the POS want customers after it as well.

Trevor then made the following points:

1. Parking – people who park outside the POS have been doing it for years, and wouldn’t want to use the main car park in the village. Congestion from the village market is heavy once per month– this would be a significant problem if it occurred every day. The POS get money deliveries, goods deliveries and a postman 3 times a day. All of these need to park close by.
2. A farm shop should be on a farm not close to another business with conflicting business interests.
3. When initially approached the plan was for 2 days a week for meat and vegetables. Now it is a full-time venture. No problem if it was just for meat and veg. the problem comes with the other goods. The farm shop should not live off back of other business
4. The Post Office generates 9% of the business, so the shop keeps the Post Office and not the other way round. The POS provides numerous services for nothing and next to nothing, e.g. the Church House, the Church, the Sports Group, laundry. If the cream of the business is lost and bread, laundry, papers etc are left then the POS is on a downhill slope. T&S are not going to work for nothing. They will not close the shop but they can’t work for nothing. It is too late for them to start a new business they sold two houses to buy the one business. For the co-operative the Farm Shop is a sideline whereas the POS is their main business. It is on the market but they are prepared to stay for 10 years if that what it takes to sell it. They want to keep it on and hand it on.
5. The Post Office imposes a restrictive contract limiting their diversification. Also the shop has a restrictive covenant: they can’t sell things that are sold by others in the village. This continues the tradition in the village that everyone works together. They feel that this new project crosses that boundary from the start. They would welcome meat and vegetables, it would be an asset, but the addition of dairy products, mustards etc etc is what causes the problems.

In conclusion: it is to be hoped that the ‘Forgotten Farm’ does not lead to the ‘Forgotten Post Office’.

Sue added that she does not believe that having the farm shop on a farm would be to the village’s detriment (by taking trade away) because Widecombe is well known as a tourist destination anyway and this would not change.

Questions

Some questions had been posed by people unable to attend or via the Internet. These were asked first.

Has agreement been reached as to what each will sell?

Lloyd: No. Agreement has not been reached. A letter has been written and discussed and there is a desire to reach agreement as far as the co-operative is concerned. Trevor: From the Post Office point of view they feel it should be meat and vegetables and nothing else.

Is the project the only proposal considered by the co-operative?

Sebastian: Locating a farm shop on a farm is not something that DNPA would approve. They prefer to support a village location as a means to encourage people to come together. The co-operative considered a farm location but were advised that it would not be passed by the DNPA.

Has the co-operative considered the effect this venture might have on the local farm shop at Ullacombe?

Lloyd: The co-operative have discussed the proposal with Ullacombe who are supportive and have no objections (also supported by member of audience who works there). The more quality produce available locally the better. The aim is to get people to get into the mindset of buying locally.

It was noted that Ullacombe Farm Shop is located on a farm.

Why are farm shops located on farms no longer supported by DNPA?

It appears this must be a policy change.

Are there grants involved and time limits for application?

Sebastian: Yes there are Regional Development grants available which must be submitted by the end of June. But it has recently been discovered that there is hardly any money left. The co-operative would go-ahead even if there wasn’t a grant available but if there was one they would apply for it.

Questions from the floor:

Have the co-operative produced a Business Plan? How much will the venture cost, including bringing hygiene standards up to the required level?

Lloyd: Clearly we have gone into it but we won’t disclose how much it will cost.

What alternative sites are possible for the Farm Shop?

Richard Holmes: We don’t have any alternative sites. Only one site has been considered so far but it is not necessarily the only site possible.

Sebastian: Being located close to the PO will draw people towards it. Being close is an advantage.

Trevor Yes it is an advantage as long as only meat and veg are sold. Many customers only queue up for stamps or to draw money out. That will not help.

Why don’t the co-operative negotiate with the PO to sell their produce in the PO?

Sebastian: There is a problem with space in the PO. There is only room for about three customers as it is.

Richard H: We understood that the POS was planning to do this but it has not materialised.

Sue it was considered but for staffing, accommodation storage etc reasons it wouldn’t have worked.

Why don’t the co-operative buy the Post Office?

Sebastian: We would be happy to buy it at a reasonable price. Based on a business plan they couldn’t make it work at the price being asked.

Have any independent feasibility studies been carried out to examine the effect?

No independent studies, but the Farmers’ Market is a success and the other shopkeepers in the village increase takings on that day (dispute of this from audience). Farm shops are the rage – they are what the public wants and increasing Widecombe’s profile a good thing (also dispute from the audience).

Can the farm shop be viable based on meat and vegetables alone?

Sebastian: Planning application was specifically for a farm shop selling locally produced products. The bulk will be meat and veg. the difficult items are eggs milk cream. A farm shop can’t really not sell these. It was felt these would be local and more expensive than those offered by the PO and therefore not in direct competition.

Trevor: These items are the most profitable items the PO sells. Why doesn’t the farm shop sell the papers laundry etc? The profitable items in effect pay for the free services provided (such as laundry)

Points

Farm shops are fashionable at the moment: Aren’t you just cashing in on Widecombe?

Be warned: Garages have closed and two Post Offices have closed

Why do we need farmers market and shop in Widecombe?

The two will run together.

Philippa: when village market (note that it is a village market) runs the farm shop will close.

What clientele are the co-operative aiming for? Where will it come from?

Richard H: We expect to do a lot of advertising to attract customers. Probably this will include off the moor. Idea is to attract people who want a day out and to do a bit of shopping while they are at it.

Philippa: the current village market visitors come from self-catering accommodation and there are many day visitors from urban areas such as Plymouth Exeter etc.

Points

Point: there is a new farm shop being opened at Dean Prior. That will get customers that might otherwise come up on to the moor.

Point: how can they supply locally produce milk – there are no local milk producers?

Why will the farm shop be a success when Ashburton farm shop closed? 2.5 people employed will cost quite a bit. How can it be a success? If it fails but Post Office dragged down in the mean time Widecombe will be left with nothing.

Philippa: the timing of the Ashburton venture missed wave of opinion towards fresh local farm produce. Their location should have been OK.

Is the co-operative considering withdrawing the application?

Lloyd: Yes it looks quite likely.

When will this happen? Will it come before the Parish Council?

Lloyd: It will come before the Parish Council.

Can we take a meeting vote?

Chair: No – by the agenda this is not a voting meeting but is for information dissemination. A vote will split the community.

We want to show Trevor & Sue that they are valued by the community.

Chair: But we said at the beginning that it is paramount that the Post Office keeps going. So we are all agreed on that anyway. Individuals need to make their own objections to DNPA.

Sue: We agreed to this meeting on the basis that it was for information purposes.

If the co-operative withdraws will they look elsewhere?

Lloyd: Possibly, but not in the very short term. Certainly not until after July 28th. The next two months are to be the best of his life.

Concluding Remarks

Minutes will be posted on the website as soon as possible.

The chair thanked the meeting for conducting itself so well.