To consider the co-ordination of the LEP and how to maximise funding opportunities to support Guildford as a smart growth hub. More specifically to look at the structure of the LEP, how it operates, as well as funding streams and accountability.
Chris Burchell – Local Economy Manager for Guildford Borough Council, Kathy Slack – Executive Director and Kevin Travers – Transport Lead for Enterprise M3 Local Enterprise Partnership will be in attendance to facilitate a discussion.
Minutes:
The Board received a presentation on Enterprise M3 Local Enterprise Partnership from its Executive Director, Kathy Slack and heard the following:
· The LEP’s job was to facilitate the conditions that would foster growth within companies. The LEP could not create the wealth but worked with other groups and organisations to create conditions that supported businesses and local workforces.
· The LEP would not survive without its partnership with Local Authorities and politicians.
· Enterprise M3 started with only £4,000 in funds compared to current funds of £250 million pounds.
· Enterprise M3 was one of the biggest LEP’s in the country covering areas such as Spelthorne, Guildford, Woking, Winchester through to the New Forest. This area had a high concentration of very successful small and large businesses.
· The LEP had influential Board Members including Dr Mike Short who was the current Chairman and Chief Scientific Advisor to the Department for International Trade as well as the Vice-President of Telefonica.
· The LEP listened to stakeholders who informed the production of the LEP Strategic Economic Plan. The Government had asked the LEP to lead on local industry strategies and therefore did a lot of research around local business needs and bid for funds more generally.
· Guildford was a high performing economy and housed one in five of the digital tech employers in the LEP area.
· Enterprise M3 focused on five key themes; work apprenticeships, Higher Education Review, Innovation, Guildford Local Plan, particularly in relation to housing and affordability for the workforce and the Growth Hub in Guildford.
· Enterprise M3 had four key funding pots: 1. £219 million of Local Growth Funds, which was capital and could be a disadvantage as you needed revenue funds to make the capital funds work for you. The LEP had tried to lobby government on getting more revenue funding but had proven to be difficult. A significant part of those monies would contribute towards improving Guildford’s infrastructure such as roads and sustainable forms of transport such as cycle routes and walkways.
· 2. £22 million in a growing enterprise loan fund, which was open call and the projects, were taken on as they came forward.
· 3. £40 million in European Funds that were dependent upon the interest rates and currency rates in relation to the Euro, managed on behalf of the government.
· 4. £5 million in an equity and escalator fund, which businesses had to bid for.
· The Enterprise M3 Board was comprised of twenty members in total, eight from the private sector, six from Local Authorities, and two from Further Education/Higher Education, not-for-profit sector, MOD, and two from business support. The Board met every six weeks and had a series of sub-groups that supported their work. In addition, there was a Joint Leaders Board.
· Enterprise M3 LEP was Mary Ney compliant and was viewed as one of the best LEP’s in the country. The objectives of the Mary Ney Review was to assess whether the current system provided sufficient assurance to the Accounting Officer and Ministers that LEPs fully implemented existing requirements for appropriate governance and transparency.
· Enterprise M3 had been consulting on the Strategic Economic Plan for the last six months and was now looking at Local Industrial Strategy. A call for funds would shortly go out for capital projects and was looking specifically at projects with big interventions this year.
· 5G test beds were being installed across the whole of Guildford and was a centre of excellence.
· Local growth deal schemes were also being developed such as bringing old landfill sites back into economic use;
· enabling the delivery of over 1000 new homes;
· unlocking Guildford Transport,
· Pirbright Innovation Hub;
· RHS Wisley – Centre of Excellence in Horticultural Science and Learning and;
· Supporting the development and adoption of new digital technologies at the University of Surrey through their Digital Innovation Centre vHive.
A number of questions were raised by Board members in relation to the work of Enterprise M3 and was informed by Kathy Slack that:
· Enterprise M3 was comprised of 15-20 employees as well as apprentices. Consultants were recruited for finite periods for their specific areas of expertise. The National Audit Office had found that some LEPs were doubtful they had the capacity to do the job in front of them. However, Enterprise M3 did have the capacity to take the organisation forward and undertake the work necessary, which was in part thanks to their close ties forged with external organisations that assisted them. Money was frequently invested in research to assist Enterprise M3 in deciding how to most effectively support collaborative local economic growth.
· The Board noted that UK Tech City produced an overseas national report that assisted foreign businesses to identify the best UK based technological businesses. However, Guildford was not detailed in the report when it was one of the key tech hubs in the UK. Only 46 businesses in Guildford responded to the UK Tech City questionnaire compared to 136 in Redruth. The Board heard that Enterprise M3 held a meeting with UK Tech City and found that better awareness needed to be promoted to government and local MP’s of the technological successes in Guildford. This in turn would increase the response rate by businesses to the questionnaire. Only cities featured in the report and perhaps needed to be reviewed considering the importance of Guildford and its contribution towards being a technological hub of excellence.
· The Board recognised the importance of ensuring that infrastructure needs, in terms of improved road and rail connections across the M3 borders were promoted to local government. The Board noted that the Greater Thames Valley LEP was a key player in taking this work forward. In addition, M3 Enterprise had an influential Transport Action Group comprised of representatives from Heathrow, Highways England, South Western Railway, Network Rail and Stage Coach. The Transport Action Group was a key mechanism by which parliament was effectively lobbied on this matter.
· The Board noted that Enterprise M3 was seeking a new Chairman as the current Chairman had secured a role as a civil servant that would conflict with his role, however he would still remain on the Board. It was important that the new Chairman was from the private sector, knew the local area but also had strong international links so that they could lobby abroad. A diverse Board was also actively promoted by Enterprise M3. For the first time, the role of Chairman was being remunerated and paid £20,000 a year as the role demanded two days a week of someone’s time. The Board met every six weeks and alternated between Hampshire and Surrey at different private sector premises.
· In response to a question over how Brexit was affecting Enterprise M3, the Board heard that it was confusing and Enterprise M3 had received mixed messages over the longer-term implications. Solicitors, for example were doing very well in terms of relocation work of businesses. However, there was also real concern about the knock-on effect of Brexit reducing the number of agricultural workers from Europe as well as health sector workers. Brexit was still in its very early stages the important thing was to continue the momentum of Enterprise M3’s work.