To receive a presentation as previously requested by Members.

Mr D Mouawad delivered a presentation that set out the context for the South East Midland Local Enterprise Partnership (SEMLEP).  It was stressed that in economic terms Central Bedfordshire was part of a wider geography that encompassed several areas and in totality encompassed 1.8m people and 67,000 businesses.  The aim of SEMLEP was to articulate a collective approach to growth and to ensure that the ambition for growth was balanced and sustainable for the future.

SEMLEP were focused on developing logistics and advanced manufacturing sectors as a means of supporting economic growth.  This included the development of enterprise zones (such as Northampton Waterside) to stimulate economic growth and support the accrual of business rates that could be used to support further development in the region.  SEMLEP was focused on delivering greater connectivity, enterprise and skills although quality of life was also a significant driver for the region.  In response to feedback from businesses SEMLEP had delivered the Velocity Growth Hub to provide business support and would continue to attract investment and help businesses to reach the market.  SEMLEP also had an important role in relation to strategies for social inclusion

The Strategic Economic Plan (SEP) set out plan and priorities for major capital investment projects for which SEMLEP could bid to Central Government and Europe although funding was limited.  Priority schemes for the area were the Woodside Link and dualling the A421.

In response to the presentation the Committee discussed several issues for which responses were provided by officers as follows:-

·         The geography of the south east midlands region was predominantly determined by the travel to work area.  Localism had become a focus for the partnership more recently, which was aware of the need to fully articulate this approach to localism.

·         SEMLEP was a channel for funding for major infrastructure projects.  The partnership would support the process to collectively define and argue the case for investment but money for infrastructure projects would not be kept by the partnership.  Whilst there were no guarantees that the region would receive funding there was no other mechanism to apply for funding for major capital projects.

·         Clearly defined assessment criteria were applied to schemes to determine their benefits and priority in relation to other schemes for which LEPs would compete for funding.  Ministers would meet privately to discuss which schemes would be granted funding.

·         The time-bank scheme operating in Central Bedfordshire had not been duplicated by the introduction of the velocity growth hub.  The Hub would advise on sources of support that was available, including national programmes from which businesses could benefit and local schemes such as time-bank.

·         Any benefit accrued from the business rates relating to the Northampton Waterside Enterprise Zone would come into the SEMLEP area as a whole.

·         A minimum of 20% of European funding was required to be used for social inclusion. Other European funding streams could be used on small and medium sized enterprises and innovation

·         A particular governance mechanism for the partnership had been set out by Central Government and this demonstrated that the Government would control funding, contracts and the procurement of delivery.  Scrutiny of the partnership was provided by the businesses that were involved in the SEMLEP Board.

The Committee thanked Mr D Mouawad for attending the meeting and agreed that an annual report should be delivered to the Committee to report on the progress of delivering schemes.

RECOMMENDED that an annual report be received by SEMLEP to provide an update on the delivery of schemes.