West of England Partnership Board

Transcription

1 Agenda item 4 Minutes of meeting of the West of England Partnership Board Wednesday 12 January 2011, 10.00, Council House, Bristol Present Bath & North East Somerset Council Cllr Francine Haeberling Cllr John Bull Cllr Paul Crossley Bristol City Council Cllr Barbara Janke Cllr Geoff Gollop Cllr Helen Holland North Somerset Council Cllr Nigel Ashton Cllr Elfan Ap Rees South Gloucestershire Council Cllr John Calway (Chair) Cllr Ruth Davis Cllr Roger Hutchinson Social, Economic & Environmental Partners Stephen Harrison, Skills and Competitiveness Board David Clarke, University of Bristol Rachel Robinson, Bristol and West of England Change Up Consortia Observers David Warburton, Homes & Communities Agency Kevin Tinsley, Government Office of the South West Tony Bray, South West Regional Development Agency In attendance John Everitt, Bath & North East Somerset Council Jan Ormondroyd, Bristol City Council Graham Turner, North Somerset Council Amanda Deeks, South Gloucestershire Council Peter Jackson, South Gloucestershire Council David Draycott, West of England Partnership Laura Grady, West of England Partnership Ian Collinson, West of England Partnership Terry Wagstaff, West of England Partnership Daniel Moore, West of England Partnership 1. Apologies for absence Cllr Nan Kirsen, North Somerset Council

2 2. Declarations of Interest There were no declarations of interest. 3. Member and Public Forum Pete Sewell made an oral statement on behalf of the Avon Local Councils Association (ALCA). ALCA inform and represent all Town and parish councils in the West of England. The organisation had been re-structured recently and was now trying to advocate its services. Primarily it aimed to provide a good communication for its members. More information can be found at Julie Boston spoke on behalf of the Friends of Suburban Bristol Railways (FoSBR) FoSBR hoped the West of England would take the rail powers that parliament were making available to them Julie reminded the Partnership of Bristol s decision to increase their investment in the Severn Beach line for a three year period; and stressed the need for a Portishead link. Ian Crawford made the following statements on behalf of the Transport for Greater Bristol Alliance (TfGB) Ian was concerned about impending bus wars He urged the Board to re-consider their position on the taking up the powers available to an ITA The West of England needed to lobby hard in support of electrification of the railways The Joint Transport Executive Committee had accepted an invitation to visit Nottingham to see an integrated transport system first hand. David Redgewell made the following statement on behalf of the South West Transport Network, raising the following points: David identified a number of proposed local authority budget cuts and a 20% reduction in the Bus Service Operators Grant (BSOG) as being potentially damaging to the provision of local bus services Cuts to services in adjacent authorities will affect commuters across the whole of the Greater Bristol Area He requested that impending bus wars be properly scrutinized He highlighted the importance of lobbying for extra trains; A series of station improvements were highlighted as being of utmost importance Electrification was needed for local trains Public transport improvements were essential to support the regeneration of certain areas The Local Enterprise Partnership must hold local transport powers. 4. Minutes of meeting held on 29 November 2010 The minutes were agreed as a true record. 2

3 5. Matters arising from the minutes, not on the agenda Arrangements for a June 2011 Partnership Board were underway. 6. Local Enterprise Partnership Peter Jackson provided an oral update on the Local Enterprise Partnership (LEP). The West of England LEP arrangements were further advanced than many of those areas starting from scratch due to the existing strength of local partnership working. Membership of the Interim Board had established as follows: Colin Skellett, executive chairman of Wessex Water (CHAIR non-voting) Katherine Bennett OBE, vice president and head of political affairs at Airbus David Sproxton, cofounder of Aardman Professor Joe McGeehan, a managing director at Toshiba Research Europe Ltd Robert Sinclair, chief executive of Bristol Airport John Calway, South Gloucestershire Barbara Janke, Bristol City Nigel Ashton, North Somerset Francine Haeberling, Bath & North East Somerset. The role of the Interim LEP Board would be to: a) Facilitate the LEP s development b) Influence the Government on the LEP s functions and capability c) Promote the new LEP to the business community in the West of England and nationally d) Manage the transition from current partnership working arrangements. Proposals had been received from both the Higher and Further Education (HE and FE) sectors to be represented on the Interim Board (IB) The IB would discuss the matter of overview and scrutiny and recognized the need for early action A report on the future of the West of England Partnership would be brought to the 25 th February Partnership Board A LEP Workshop had been scheduled for the 24 th January at the UWE Conference Centre Subsequent discussion raised the following points: Questions were asked about any decisions to hold the Board in public or in private, and also how those not represented on the Board would be engaged; It was suggested that both FE and HE should be represented on the Board as both had different roles; David Clarke stressed that HE comprised of 4 independent businesses and should be seen as more than representing just the education sector; Scrutiny needed to be conducted by people at the right level in order to challenge the Board sufficiently. It was further suggested that scrutiny of the LEP should be outcome based; Queries were raised about how small businesses could be engaged appropriately and significantly; Members requested more detail on the structure of sub-boards. Robust subarrangements were essential to promote wider confidence in the LEP s work; LEP meetings needed to be a part of the democratic process if they were to cover 3

4 areas such as transport and planning for example. Peter Jackson reminded members that this was an interim LEP Board, tasked with developing and putting in place the priorities and composition of the full Board. In response to points raised by Cllr Holland, he agreed that ownership was critical and that, politically, the 4 Unitary Authorities needed to have ownership. Scrutiny was likely to be conducted differently in the LEP than it had been for the West of England Partnership. It was possible that there could be 2 different processes, one for business and one for the public sector, though nothing had been arranged yet. It was understood that the business representatives on the LEP Board should speak on behalf of all businesses in the area. Business were developing their own representative and organisational arrangements. 7. Increasing Higher and Intermediate Skills David Draycott reported progress on activities since the last report in November Work was underway to replicate for Higher Education the successful joint agreement that existed between the area s FE colleges. Cllr Calway thanked both David Draycott and Stephen Harrison, and the Board formally recognised their work in making the FE agreement happen. Subsequent discussion raised the following points: It was for the FE college to decide if they would try to mitigate against the ending of EMA as a collective Members highlighted problems with older people not moving on in the work place, thus blocking career progression routes Similarly, there was a problem with graduates taking jobs for school leavers David Draycott was due to attend a graduate utilization meeting that afternoon, to identify more effective ways of engaging the sector. Members noted the report. 8. Tackling Worklessness David Draycott introduced the item, reporting progress against the West of England Tackling Worklessness Plan. A series of events had been held, joining together the Single Work Programme prime contractors, the voluntary & community sector (VCS) and other stakeholders in order to better understand the implications of the programme. The following points were raised: There was currently a clear skills agenda running in parallel with the emerging LEP arrangements but a long term strategy was required; The most effective method of tackling worklessness was to engage communities in their own areas; The West of England had very strong VCS providers who needed to be properly engaged. Bristol City Council was cited as an example of good third sector commissioning. 4

5 Agreed That the Board: Endorsed the report That David Draycott would circulate a list of the area s prime contractors along with a timescale for sub-contacting. 9. Joint Supplementary Planning Document Ian Collinson introduced the report, stating 4 specific objectives of the Joint Supplementary Planning Documents (JSPD). To direct investment in infrastructure in order to maximise growth in homes and jobs at priority locations set out in Core Strategies; To demonstrate a joint sub-regional development trajectory based on 5-year tranches; To identify the large scale barriers to development and the steps required to unlock strategic sites; To encourage collaborative working between the authorities and other delivery partners on large scale planning issues. The following points were also made: The JSPD was not a policy document. Rather it reflected the content of each authority s Core Strategies and provided a strategic sub-regional overview; This type of thing had not been done in an SPD before and it was a unique way of looking at 5-year land supplies; The document had the support of both GOSW and CLG; The JSPD looked to identify barriers to growth. It also set out a sub-regional housing trajectory Timing was critical for consultation on the document. If all went according to plan then it was anticipated the document would go to cabinet on then get endorsed before public consultation began on the 14 th February, with a view to adoption in June/July Terry Wagstaff explained that the document had the support of the 4 UAs Heads of Planning and that officers were taking specific advice through one authority. Cllr Ap Rees endorsed the document, but stressed that North Somerset did not recognise the need for a West of England Green Infrastructure Framework (GIF). Terry Wagstaff added that the GIF would not be a drain on resources; rather, it was a tool to direct investment to maximise the benefits of green infrastructure. Following suggestions from Cllr Davis and Terry Wagstaff, the recommendation in the report was amended as follows: Agreed That the Board endorsed progress with the Joint Supplementary Planning Document and requested the work be finalised by the local authorities, in conjunction with the Partnership office, to enable public consultation to take place from the 14th February Cllr Crossley did not endorse this recommendation. 5

6 10. Project Management Monitor Terry Wagstaff introduced the Project Management Monitor, explaining that the transition to the LEP would help decide which work was to continue. Members noted the report. 11. Partnership Board Forward Plan Arrangements were being made for a June 2011 meeting. This would be reflected in the forward plan brought to the next meeting. 12. Next Meeting Friday, 2.00pm, 25 February 2011, Fry Club, Keynsham. The meeting closed at S:\WEP\WEP meetings\1. Board\2011\2. 25 February 2011\Draft Board Minutes doc 6