Meeting documents

For Members to consider the attached report.

Contact officer: Claire Britton / Tracey Aldworth 01296 585471

Local Enterprise Partnerships (LEPs) were set up as locally-derived business led partnerships between the private and public sector to drive forward economic growth across the country. Announced in 2010 and established in 2011 by the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills, LEPs replaced the former Regional Development Agencies as part of Government’s ambition to shift power away from central government. Aylesbury Vale was within LEPs: Bucks Thames Valley LEP (BTVLEP) and South East Midlands LEP (SEMLEP). LEPs have responsibility for around £12bn of public funding up to 2021 and were the mechanism for channelling the Local Growth Fund to localities delivering their investment priorities.  One of the great strengths of LEPs was their ability to bring together business and civic leaders across local administrative boundaries and provide strategic direction for a functional economic area.

On 24 July 2018, the government had published a document entitled Strengthened Local Partnerships which outlined a range of leadership, governance, accountability and geography reforms for LEPs.  The publication asked LEP chairs and other local stakeholders to come forward with considered proposals by the end of September 2018 on geographies which best reflected real functional economic areas, removed overlaps and, where appropriate, proposed wider changes such as mergers. The publication asked for comments:

• on revised geographies which best reflected ‘real’ functional economic areas.
• on the most appropriate geographical levels to maximise the efficiency and effectiveness of decision-making and delivery going forward.
• to remove overlaps and where appropriate, proposing wider changes such as mergers.

Government now considered that retaining overlaps dilutes accountability and responsibility for setting strategies for place and allocating funding. Therefore it was seeking transparent and consistent arrangements to ensure that all businesses and communities are represented by one Local Enterprise Partnership and were able to see a single vision and a compelling plan for their area. This would ensure that each LEP was in the best position to identify and align local interventions that maximise their economic impact and to meet the Government’s increased ambition for the activity and responsibility of the LEPs which may include the allocation of money from the UK Shared Prosperity Fund (post-Brexit pot comprising of previous EU structural funds). A simple unwinding of the 2011/12 arrangement would place the AVDC singularly in SEMLEP according to objective economic geography criteria.

The Committee received a report which detailed a number of possible arrangements for Aylesbury Vale and for future LEP arrangements.  These included:-

• Just be a member of BTVLEP.
• Just be a member of SEMLEP.
• Merger of BTVLEP and SEMLEP.
• Merger of BTVLEP and Oxfordshire Local Enterprise Partnership (OXLEP).
• Creation of a "Super LEP" – a merger of BTVLEP, SEMLEP and OXLEP.

‘No change’ was not an option due to the requirement of removing overlapping LEPs and any decision would require additional work. The report contained positives and negatives of each proposal as well as detailed information on the geographic, economic (including population and housing growth, house prices) and other factors (e.g. Cambridge – Milton Keynes – Oxford corridor, impacting on Buckinghamshire). The report asked Members for their views ahead of Cabinet considering the proposal on 12 September 2018.

This item was attended by Richard Harrington (BTVLEP) and Hilary Chipping (SEMLEP) who both addressed the Committee ahead of Member debate. Members then had the opportunity to ask the LEP representatives additional questions which included:

·         The relationship between the LEP decision and the Modernising Local Government decision in Buckinghamshire

·         Any feedback from businesses on their LEP preference

·         How a ‘Super LEP’ (BTVLEP, SEMLEP and OXLEP) may work and whether it was a realistic prospect

·         Whether overlapping LEPs had a negative impact on performance

·         How local authorities were represented on LEP Boards

Following this, Members sought further information from officers and were advised that:-

      i.        Approaching Milton Keynes to come out of SEMLEP and join BTVLEP had not been considered as it was understood there was no appetite for Milton Keynes to come out its current LEP.

     ii.        No discussions had been had with regards to a merger of BTVLEP and OXLEP or BTVLEP, SEMLEP and OXLEP. It was expected that OXLEP would not be interested in merging.

Members felt that this was a difficult decision to make and discussed the rationale that had led to AVDC joining both LEPs. The Committee saw value in the work that had been carried out by both LEPs in Aylesbury Vale and the positive relationship the council had with them. Members appreciated that an overlap created a lack of accountability and that joining one LEP would resolve this. It was felt that a balance needed to be struck between being part of a LEP that was large enough to be relevant and exert influence yet not too large for AVDC to lose its voice and lose local influence and identity. When discussing the merits of surveying businesses for their perspective, it was considered that responses would not necessarily represent smaller business in the Vale who may not have the time or interest to respond.

The Committee discounted the option of a ‘Super LEP’ but were unable to draw a firm conclusion on which option to recommend to Cabinet.

RESOLVED –

That the comments and views of the Scrutiny Committee be referred to Cabinet for their consideration. The Committee also thanked the LEP representatives for their attendance.

Note:

Councillor Branston declared a personal interest in the above item as a former employee of Bucks Business First until 2011.