Apologies: Table of Decisions

Transcription

1 Draft Minutes of the Great SW Steering Group Meeting 16 th May 2018 At Santander, Exeter Attendees Cllr Rebecca Knox, Leader of Dorset County Council Luke Rake, Principal/CEO Kingston Maurward College Ian Girling, Chief Exec Dorset Chamber of Commerce Jim Stewart, Chief Exec Poole Harbour Commission and Chair Dorset LEP Lorna Carver, Director Dorset LEP Rob Dunford, Deputy Director Dorset LEP Steve Hindley, Chairman Midas Group and Chair HotSW LEP Chris Garcia, Chief Exec HotSW Karl Tucker, MD Yeo Valley Stuart Brocklehurst, Chief Exec Applegate Sarah Heald, Director of Corporate Affairs Pennon Group Cllr David Thomas, Torbay Council Matt Silver, Cornwall & IOS LEP Kate Kennally, Chief Exec Cornwall Council Michael Beadel, Partner & Chairman Stephens Scown LLP Amie Fulton, Exeter University Toby Parkins, President Cornwall Chamber of Commerce Deborah Fraser, Regional Director CBI Tony Bray, Regional Director, Cities and Local Growth Unit Other in Attendance Emma Buckman (presenting) Apologies: Mark Duddridge, Chair CIOS LEP Tim Bagshaw, CIOS LEP Jonathan Eddy, Cities and Local Growth Unit John Vinney, Vice Chancellor, Bournemouth University Judith Petts, Vice Chancellor, University of Plymouth Cllr David Hall, Somerset County Council Table of Decisions Board Item Decision Required Decision Agreed 2A Accept Terms of Reference Amend quorate requirement from 20 people to 50% Review timing of

2 meetings after 3 months 3. Election of Chair Steve Hindley elected as Chair, Jim Stewart elected as Vice Chair 4 and 5. No decisions required. Key points of agreement were: Business engagement and support can be mobilised behind a clear proposition and narrative Brand/PR and marketing strategy are required The need for concerted effort in next 2-3 months to take advantage of political cycle Infrastructure is a key priority 6. Transport The group agreed that Local Authorities should continue work with Government to establish a Sub-National Transport Body for the SW. The preference was for one body to serve the whole SW, but if this did not develop, the Great SW should continue to pursue a body for the Southern part of the region and look to establish connections with the other body. Rural The approach being taken was endorsed Trade and Investment The approach being taken was endorsed 7 It was agreed to write to the Secretary of State to announce the official formation of the group LC It was agreed that the group should aim to host an event in Westminster in September The Universities in the area will take the lead on further developing the evidence base. AF Agenda 1. Welcome Action Steve Hindley welcomed everyone and attendees introduced themselves. 2. Terms of Reference Steve Hindley introduced the discussion by highlighting the significance that this is

3 the first time the group has come together as the Great SW with representation from the three LEPs, Business, Local Authorities and Education. There have been a number of meetings in the past and two successful conferences, but if we are to progress shared agendas and increase the prosperity of the region, we need to be able to form a united front. The following points were made: The area is perceived as below the water from a ministerial perspective There is a need to get traction for business cases in order to change the status quo We need to focus on a) what are the agendas we can progress as a partnership; b) send a message to Government that we are a partnership with a shared ambition and terms of reference. The terms of reference are significant, because they send a message about our partnership Specific comments on the ToR included: The need for 20 people (75%) to make the meetings quorate was questioned, it was agreed to amend to 50% in order to ensure that meetings could be decision making Section was highlighted as important. It is not about a fixed geography, but a coalition of the willing. Section 1.2 Clarity was sought about the timing of meetings, were they bimonthly or quarterly. It was also noted that they are monthly for the first 3 months. It was agreed that the frequency of future meetings would be agreed after the first three months. RD 3. Election of Chair Stuart Brocklehurst nominated Steve Hindley as chair of the partnership. This was seconded by Karl Tucker. It was agreed that Jim Stewart would be Vice Chair. 4. Background and Context Lorna Carver provided some background and context as follows: The Pennon Group have been a founder Member instigating activity over 2 years ago in order to: Talk to Government with a louder SW voice Be seen and heard on the national/international stage Recognise the opportunity to deliver for government That we have many interesting and exciting opportunities in the SW The door is open for other LEP geographies to join and indeed places, institutions etc. are welcome as an opportunity to celebrate our places and communities. The discussion included:

4 Support for the initiative That it will enable us to support UK plc It is not just an interface with Westminster, but provides a platform to engage with other audiences e.g. trade and investment to raise the profile of the SW on the global stage It provides an opportunity to build networks and contacts We are seeking investable opportunities to take to global markets There are huge numbers of businesses across the area and some are more likely to drive change, growth and trade aspirations than others, however, there is a need to engage with the wider business community so they can support the initiative. The business community needs to feel informed and engaged, but not many know what the GSW is or why there is the need for it. We need to find ways to engage with the rising stars which can contribute to our strategy and for them to take ownership of it. The 5 chambers are currently in discussions about forming an alliance and this will also add weight to the joined up voice The CBI SW now have GSW as a dedicated slot on their council agenda It was questioned how we will work to deliver our purpose and the need to develop working structures so members can contribute. It was agreed that this is for the group to define and to identify the most effective actions to take forward. It was highlighted that this initiative needs proper resourcing. Brand and PR were thought to be very important in gaining support, momentum and backing. It was highlighted that many people were sceptical about the Northern Powerhouse, but as it created momentum more parties joined. There is a need to promote and publicise, through development of a marketing strategy. The role of the Pennon Group so far as a sponsor was acknowledged. The need for a political sponsor was also highlighted and deferred to item View from Government Tony Bray provided the background and some context from a Government perspective. In terms of background the following points were made: Government has previously been material in instigating regional partnerships, George Osborne instigated the Northern Powerhouse and the Midlands Engine followed. The Cambridge/Oxford/Milton Keynes corridor has arisen from the National Infrastructure Commission work, recognising that London cannot accommodate all the UK s growth. In the SW there has not been a significant Government approach to catalyse a regional partnership, but this need not be a disadvantage. Some concerted work over the next 2-3 months could help the partnership make a mark in the political cycle i.e. targeting acknowledgment in the Autumn Statement The SW does not have as much profile as other areas; therefore it doesn t get prioritised as much. That does not mean it does not get funding or

5 misses out entirely, just that when decisions are being taken, they are not being taken with a view of a consolidated plan for the area. Within MHCLG a commitment has been made to support a partnership in the SW, with 1 year to see some progress Collectively they recognise that there are tangible issues that need to be addressed in terms of resilience, opportunities, social mobility, deprivation and marginalisation etc. The partnership needs to become the club that people want to join It is frustrating that there is a lack of cohesion across the SW It is important to remember that working together does not dilute individual focus and conversations with individual areas and other partnerships; it provides an alternative route to aggregate issues and elevate them to provide a set of opportunities that government could invest in. The level of private sector involvement is different to the Northern Powerhouse and others and this provides a distinguishing feature for the GSW. It provides an opportunity to craft a different collaborative approach that is with business, not for business, large and SME, across all sectors. There is a need for consistency of message, clear identified priorities with a raft of support behind them. There is some discipline required to make it work. It provides the opportunity to become the partnership that Government comes to, to test ideas and that seeks such opportunities Within the partnership, there are still opportunities for deals to be made with individual members, for instance a 2 nd devolution deal for C&IOS would still be part of the GSW In terms of ministerial support, Sajid Javid has played a role up to now, but is not going to take this with him to his new position. Engagement with the new Minister, James Brokenshire will be initiated through BEIS/MHCLG It will also be important to involve and engage MPs and local councillors In terms of the West of England, in an ideal world it would be good if they were involved as the largest city in the region, with significant growth. This is likely to be a gradual, iterative process. Potentially as businesses get more engaged, sufficient momentum is built to encourage involvement from WoE. The discussion raised the following points: Large organisations such as EDF are strongly supportive of a whole SW organisation and could exert influence The business community has already shown strong support for the initiative. The first GSW Growth Summit saw 120 businesses signed up and the 2 nd over 300. The business representative organisations would like to know what more they can do to help move this forward. It was suggested that there is a need to enhance the engagement, keep businesses engaged and help businesses to speak with a cohesive private sector voice. It was suggested that 3,000 businesses backing the campaign would be powerful. The chambers highlighted their willingness to engage with their members through their expanded partnership/alliance. However, the call to business needs to be clear

6 PR and marketing were highlighted as important in gaining business support, with a combination of newsquest engagement, events and consistent messaging It was also highlighted that it takes time to build momentum; the Midlands Engine focused on a small number of issues, secured government investment and built up propositions, which in turn secured support and momentum. We need to bring forward our propositions as well as learn from other partnerships C&IOS went to MIPIM and observed the presence of other areas. Northern Powerhouse, the Midlands Engine, London and the West of England all had significant teams/presence at the event. It would be good if the GSW could have a presence at these set piece events, to be seen and noticed and out of the SW. Private sector sponsorship/involvement could be helpful here The CBI offered access to their policy experts to ensure policies are grounded in evidence as well as offering to support consultation with businesses It was suggested that the area s full employment/low wage economy offers an opportunity for improving productivity, which could feed through to better wages and lower benefit bills for government. This could form a key part of our offer to Government. Tony Bray highlighted that different funds have different criteria. For instance the Housing Infrastructure Fund was targeted at areas where there is high unaffordability and large potential for land value uplift, which the SW fits well. Overall we need to make the case for why every 1 invested in the SW is wise, ensuring proposals feel innovative, exciting and interesting. We need to work up the evidence, priorities, vision and narrative to engage upon in a short timeframe Target high profile events include: o GSW in Westminster o MIPIM in Oct/Nov (fronted by business) The CBI offered to put their event in Westminster on hold for now Business case studies were thought to be important highlighting some of the exciting businesses that are already here. The business groups highlighted that these have already been developed, but what is needed now is the narrative to accompany them It was also highlighted them these businesses are doing well despite the various challenges facing the area, therefore they need to be presented in terms of what more we can do with the right investment It was agreed that infrastructure is one of the top priorities 6. Update on Workstreams Transport (b) Rob Dunford presented the Transport Infrastructure paper (see paper 6 b and maps). Rob highlighted the rising importance of sub-national transport bodies and the potential to develop one (or two) in the South West. The group s role will be to help feed in evidence and prioritisation to inform the body once set up, as well as to provide support and backing to proposals.

7 Tony Bray set out that DfT would respond to evidenced, supported propositions. They would need to be of a scale to coalesce, but Government is not going to push, they will want to see the scale come from the bottom-up. Two bodies for the SW would likely be regarded as sub-optimal. There will be a meeting with DfT officials to have conversations with partners in the SW to discuss this. It was agreed that the group a) supports the creation of a sub-national transport board; b) that this would ideally be for the whole SW region. The issue of one or two sub-regional groupings was then debated. The business representatives were clear that they favoured one body and that they intended to use their influence to push for this across the region recognising that the major priorities are shared across the region. The business groups would be disappointed to see two bodies emerge. It was also suggested that there were valid reasons why the northern part of the region would not wish to pursue a whole SW approach. These were: The West of England area is a higher performing economy and does not wished to be dragged down by the rest of the region; That the area also sits within functional economic geographies of Cardiff and South Wales As a recently established Combined Authority it will not wish to cede its recently received powers to a new organisation. It was also noted that in other parts of the country there is a longer history of cooperation between transport authorities and other public bodies and that this is relatively new in the SW. Alternative approaches were suggested including: Work up the southern Peninsula option, in parallel with pushing for a one SW option, bringing together the evidence base and Peninsula priorities Continue to work up two regional boards and then look for the linkages between the two (i.e. where roads cross boundaries) Look to establish linkages between the newly established HOTSW joint committee and the WoE combined authority The group agreed that work should continue work with Government to establish a Sub-National Transport Body for the SW. Their preference was for one body to serve the whole SW, but if this did not develop, the Great SW should continue to pursue a body for the southern part of the region and look to establish connections in the future.

8 Rural Workstream (a) Emma Buckman gave a brief introduction to the Rural Workstream (see papers 6a ), highlighting the SW Rural Productivity Commission context. Emma highlighted how some rural productivity recommendations would be taken forward locally by LEPs and local authorities, some merited a regional collective approach and others warranted collective action by rural LEPs across the country. She set out how her proposals included: a) Developing a GSW rural deal covering three strands, digital, food and drink and tourism. b) Working nationally with other rural LEPs to advocate/influence on rural issues that affect all rural LEPs. She also highlighted some areas of concern previously expressed about the inclusion of the national strand and inclusion of tourism within the regional strand. It was agreed that work should continue to develop the rural strand as set out. Trade and Investment (c) Rob Dunford provided an update to the Steering Group on early progress with the Trade and Investment Workstream (see paper 6c). The DIT team have been involved with this and are in the process of undertaking a sector based mapping exercise to identify who the companies are. A one pager has been produced setting out proposals on how this could be taken forward and the marine sector will be used as a test case. The private sector members highlighted that: The accredited chambers already have a workstream to support international trade of members and this results in over 160m of exports. This is a useful resource which should be considered in developing the proposition Colleagues travelling abroad to trade shows etc. notice how the Northern Powerhouse is resonating and that there may be a resonance with the Greater SE when selling the SW abroad 7. Next Steps It was agreed to write to the Secretary of State to announce the official formation of the group. LC It was agreed to that the group should aim to host an event in Westminster in September. Plymouth University have offered some resource to develop an evidence base. It was agreed that the Universities in the area will take the lead on further developing the evidence base. BEIS are also finalising an evidence base for the SW (whole AF

9 region) and this will be made available to the group. It was also suggested that public health data can be very informative, especially in relation to deprivation and need. 8. Any Other Business TB Steven Hindley highlighted that this would be Chris Garcia s last meeting. He thanked him for all of his effort and contributions to the Great SW.