Agenda Item 9 Report PP17/14. Policy & Programme Committee. Date 24 July 2014

Transcription

1 Report to Date 24 July 2014 By Title of Report Purpose of Report Policy & Programme Committee Sustainable Futures Manager Our Work with Local Enterprise Partnerships To consider a consultants report on the SDNPA and Local Enterprise Partnerships Recommendation: The Committee is recommended to note and agree the conclusions and recommendations from the report SDNPA and Local Enterprise Partnerships as set out in Appendix 1 of this report. 1. Introduction 1.1 The SDNPA commissioned a report on Local Enterprise Partnerships (LEPs) to help it establish where and how the Authority should focus its efforts in relation to LEPs towards achieving the Partnership Management Plan outcomes and in support of National Park purposes and duty. 1.2 The report produced by Shared Intelligence consultancy, focuses on the SDNPA s current and potential engagement with the three Local Enterprise Partnerships each of whose geographical areas include parts of the National Park: Coast to Capital LEP, Enterprise M3 LEP and South East LEP (SELEP). The report conclusions and recommendations are contained in Appendix 1. The full report is available on request from the Sustainable Futures Manager. 1.3 The report identifies the types and extent of funding streams for which the three LEPs are responsible and the recommendations point to where the SDNPA should continue/ increase its participation in the LEPs and act on the opportunities presented for initiating projects, influencing the LEPs activities and attracting additional funding in support of the Authority s objectives. 2. Background Agenda Item 9 Report PP17/ LEPs are the lead bodies tasked with driving economic growth in the regions and with responsibility for the delivery of a number of European funding streams. The Authority recognises the value in engaging with and influencing the LEPs in support of National Park purposes and duty and to this end commissioned a consultancy to inform and advise on this. Following a tender process, Shared Intelligence consultancy was appointed in March LEPs were established by government in 2010/11 as business-led partnerships, supported by local authorities, to lead on economic development following the abolition of the Regional Development Agencies. There are 39 LEPs nationally and as stated three of these cover parts of the National Park; a map illustrating this is in Appendix The LEPs identified local infrastructure and investment priorities through their Strategic Economic Plans (SEP) , submitted to government in March 2014 and made bids for Local Growth Fund (LGF) funding for housing and jobs growth. The LGF will serve to enhance the delivery of National Park purposes and duty. The government announcement about the allocations of this fund was made on 7 July The LEPs also submitted EU Structural and Investment Fund Strategies (ESIF) to government in January 2014 setting out how they would spend their allocations of European Social Fund (ESF) and European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) and to some extent, the European 6

2 Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD). Links to these strategies and funding details are contained in sections 2 and 3 of the full report. There is a separate report to this Committee on Natural Capital which refers to LEPs funding to support potential landscapescale projects. 2.4 The three LEPs share a number of programme themes e.g. enterprise, housing, transport, employment and skills and section 3 of the report explains these and the outcomes each of the three LEPs is seeking. The full report identifies in section 5 the key areas for joint working with the LEPs, namely access to housing and energy efficiency, enterprise support and supply chain development, broadband, employment and skills, and integrated and sustainable transport. 2.5 Each of the LEPs has a different management structure, detailed in section 4 of the full report; the structures are undergoing some changes to prepare the LEPs for the delivery phase of their growth programmes. SDNPA is awaiting information about these changes. 2.6 Currently the Authority is engaging with and influencing the three LEPs. It is a member of Coast to Capital s Joint Committee, Rural Task and Finish Group and its Rural West Sussex area partnership and Enterprise M3 s Rural Group; engagement with SELEP reflects the fact that this LEP covers only a small area of the National Park. The Authority has influenced the strategic direction all three LEPs by commenting on their draft SEPs and ESIFs and is working with Coast to Capital and Enterprise M3 on the development of their rural strategies. It is also supporting joint projects such as the Community Land Trust project. 2.7 The Shared Intelligence report s main recommendations are that the Authority should: strengthen links with the LEPs and local authorities, to influence forthcoming programmes and help determine the approach to rural growth; and engage in project development related to the LEPs programmes including the development of the forestry supply chain, tourism and food and drink; and assist with cross-lep work possibly on tourism and forestry initiatives. 3. National Parks England and LEPs 3.1 The preparation of an offer for NPAs to deliver on behalf of LEPs both collectively and individually - is one of the three priority actions in National Park England s (NPE) Business Plan. This work is being led by SDNPA s Chief Executive and will utilise the report by Shared Intelligence. SDNPA will work with Shared Intelligence to draw more general lessons from their analysis in order to produce the first draft of an NPA wide offer. This will be put to the National Park Officers in October 2014 for comment, building towards a formal NPE policy stance in the early Spring Resources 4.1 There are no additional resource implications. 4.2 The report s recommendations require a continuing commitment from Members and officers to representation on the various LEP bodies (and related partnerships), including the Chair, Vice Chair, Chief Executive, Sustainable Futures Manager and Sustainable Economy Officer. 5. Risk management 5.1 The main risk to the Authority is insufficient engagement with the LEPs resulting in a failure to maximise project opportunities and secure additional funding from the LEPs various funding streams to support delivery of the Partnership Management Plan. This is mitigated by the engagement with LEPs already established and the current recruitment to the vacant Sustainable Economy Officer post to increase the Authority s involvement in line with the report s recommendations. 6. Human Rights, Equalities, Health and Safety 6.1 There are no implications arising from this report. 7

3 7. Sustainability 7.1 The LEPs will contribute to achieving a sustainable economy through their strategies and programmes relating to employment and skills, business support, enterprise and housing and the rural economy. 7.2 The LEPs have established governance arrangements aimed at ensuring sound governance for the approval and implementation of their strategies. 8. External Consultees 8.1 None. ANGIE BLOWMAN Sustainable Futures Manager Contact Officer: Angie Blowman, Sustainable Futures Manager Tel: angie.blowman@southdowns.gov.uk Appendices 1: Conclusions and recommendations from the report South Downs National Park Authority and the Local Enterprise Partnerships by Shared Intelligence 2: Map of Local Enterprise Partnerships (LEPs) SDNPA Consultees Chief Executive Officer, Director of Planning, Director of Strategy and Partnerships, Director of Corporate Services, Director of Operations, Finance, Monitoring Officer & Legal Services Background Documents Coast to Capital Local Enterprise Partnership (LEP) Joint Committee, report to National Park Authority, 26 June 2014 Appendix 3 to report 26 June 8

4 Agenda Item 9 Report PP17/14 Appendix 1 Conclusions and recommendations from the report South Downs National Park Authority and the Local Enterprise Partnerships by Shared Intelligence. 1. Conclusions 1.1 The SDNPA has made some strong and constructive links with Coast to Capital LEP in particular, but less with the other two LEPs. There is scope within the LEP programmes for funding to support the achievement of some of the objectives and policies set out in the Partnership Management Plan. 1.2 All of the LEPs are very willing to engage with the Authority, and would be keen to work with SDNPA officers on rural policy and projects. The SDNPA should also understand that the extent of LEP support will be dependent on the extent to which it is willing to accommodate housing and employment growth within its boundaries, and thereby help the LEPs to achieve their objectives. To access this funding will require continued and strengthened engagement at the strategic and programme management level with the LEPs and their constituent local authorities. It should be noted that the management structures within all three LEPs are currently in transition, and the recommendations made in this report reflect the current position and those proposed changes we are aware of. The structures are likely to develop over the coming few months in preparation for the delivery of the major funding programmes. 1.3 Key areas in which the Authority may wish to exert its influence might be the relationship developed between the various funding streams (eg ERDF, EAFRD and LEADER); ensuring access to support for businesses and residents in the National Park; monitoring the timing of bidding rounds in order to be prepared for bid submission, and identifying programmes and delivery agencies that the Authority may wish to influence to achieve its policy priorities. 1.4 The LEPs will be seeking clarification from their rural interest groups on how their objectives will be translated within rural areas. If the National Park can play a leadership role within these groups this will help to increase the level of influence they can exert. 1.5 It should be noted that both engagement with LEPs and project development and management are resource commitments that will continue over the life of the funding programmes, as new policy areas are tackled and bidding rounds or commissioning processes are announced. 1.6 It is clear that there are a number of areas where the Authority can develop and increase its work with the LEPs to support both organisations' objectives: Using the Authority's planning powers to help unlock developments - Syngenta, Shoreham Cement Works and North Street Quarter; Piloting programmes in areas that will help to achieve growth in areas that otherwise may not be able to accommodate it. E.g. the Community Land Trust pilot which if successful could be rolled out to other areas, and rural self-build schemes; Supporting broadband improvements to increase SuperFast broadband coverage for businesses and communities in rural areas; Rural skills development - identifying gaps in provision in skills in rural areas e.g. business start up for rural businesses, and other skills that would help communities to obtain and maintain a livelihood; Identifying ways in which the Authority can help to signpost and increase access to business support programmes and energy efficiency projects within the National Park; Identifying and developing projects designed to support land-based and forestry businesses and supply chains, and those promoting local products and services such as tourism and food and support them to access funding through the LEPs; and, Working with the LEPs to agree cross-lep projects and support programmes in these areas. 9

5 2. Recommendations 2.1 In response to these conclusions, we would make the following recommendations to the SDNPA: Strengthen links with the LEPs and local authorities 2.2 The Authority is in a strong position to influence forthcoming programmes through discussions both with the LEP and with potential delivery agencies. This would be assisted by a clear statement about the scale of potential for growth within the National Park. Although the Local Plan is not yet available, the Authority would be in a strong position to work with rural partners across the three LEPs in helping to determine the wider approach to rural growth, and the role of the funding programmes in supporting it. 2.3 Maintaining and further developing the Authority s influence with the three LEPs will require both Member and officer participation in the various LEPs bodies and a continuing contribution to their work. Through establishing a more comprehensive set of links with the LEPs, the Authority would be in a better position to: Influence policy and strategy in relation to growth; Work with partners to influence the activities and delivery of projects and programmes to maximise access for rural businesses and communities; Support the development and roll out of pilot projects such as the Community Land Trust; Use its influence to support the development of cross-lep programmes; and, Understand the potential for new projects and timing of bidding rounds. 2.4 It should be noted that developing and maintaining links with the LEPs will require staff resource on a continuing basis. Coast to Capital 2.5 The Chief Executive has strong links with the Chief Executive of the Coast to Capital LEP and the Rural Champion, and we would recommend he attend the proposed Stakeholder Forum, and that the Chair continues to represent the Authority on the Joint Committee. 2.6 Other priorities for engagement at the strategic and programme level should include: Taking up the officer place on the Task and Finish Group - a key programme management group which will oversee funding programmes going forward; and, Participating in the new rural group. 2.7 At project level, there is already engagement in some project areas, including the Community Land Trust and Wood Fuel proposal. There would be further potential to work with the LEP to fund broadband, tourism and enterprise projects. 2.8 Finally if the Authority is able to articulate the skills required by local communities across the National Park it should work with the LEP in order to ensure that these are reflected in the commissioning of skills programmes conducted by the Skills Funding Agency through ESF funding. Similarly the Authority may wish to influence employment and social inclusion programmes as they are rolled out. Enterprise M3 2.9 We would recommend an area for discussion should be representation of the National Park on the Leaders Board In strategy terms, membership of the Rural Group is important, and critical at this time, in relation to developing a coherent approach to rural economic growth. Membership of an EU funding group is another potential area for discussion, and will be a priority in terms of agreeing the relationship between ERDF, EAFRD and LEADER priorities. 10

6 2.11 Individual project and programme discussions on Broadband and the Wood Fuel initiative should continue, but there is potential for the National Park to develop other projects on enterprise and skills, including for example tourism, housing development (rolling out an approach to development through Community Land Trusts and self-build schemes), skills development, and further economic growth and supply chain development. These areas should be approached through discussions with the Director, the Rural Group, and also potentially through a direct conversations with LEP officers. South East LEP and East Sussex County Council 2.12 In terms of representation, we would recommend the Chief Executive maintain his links with the Chief Executive of East Sussex County Council, and explore the potential for participation on the "Team East Sussex" partnership as it evolves into the devolved partnership responsible for overseeing the East Sussex LEP-funded programmes There is also a SE LEP Rural Group which should be a current priority as the focus for the EAFRD programme will be discussed through that group Because of the devolved structure of the South East LEP, outside of these links we would recommend that the strongest links are made with the County Council and Lewes District Council rather than other LEP groups. Principally the economic development team, and transport planners. This would enable participation in discussions with local stakeholders on priorities for the East Sussex area, and identification of potential project partners. Project development 2.15 In order to take forward the employment and business growth related policy objectives in the Management Plan it will be necessary to devote staff resources not only to engagement and influencing programmes, but also in direct project development. Officers within the authority have identified a number of potential projects including support for the development of forestry related supply chain, tourism, food and drink and accommodation, and other supply chains. These could be for the National Park Authority itself or for partner agencies to run In some areas the National Park would be in a very good position to help the LEPs to work across their boundaries and to develop programmes across the entire National Park area. These might include tourism and forestry initiatives. 11

7 Agenda Item 9 Report PP17/14 Appendix 2 - Map of Local Enterprise Partnerships (LEPs) 12