South East England Development Agency (SEEDA)

MINUTES OF THE 55th MEETING OF SOUTH EAST ENGLAND DEVELOPMENT AGENCY HELD ON 23rd MARCH 2004 AT SEEDA HEADQUARTERS

Present

James Brathwaite CBE (Chairman – item 4 on)
Elizabeth Brighouse
Poul Christensen
Cllr. Sarah Hohler
Cllr Peter Jones
Janis Kong OBE
Terry Mills
John Peel
Dr Peter Read
Phil Wood
Mary McAnally

In Attendance

Pam Alexander (SEEDA, Chief Executive – to item 11)
Marianne Neville-Rolfe (Agency Secretary and Director, Strategy and Corporate Services)
Paul Hudson (SEEDA, Director, Development and Infrastructure)
John Parsonage (SEEDA, Director, Learning and Skills)
Charlotte Dixon (SEEDA, Director, Economic Inclusion and Sustainability)
Jeff Alexander (SEEDA, Director, Business and International)
Valerie Box (SEEDA, Head of Secretariat)
David Hendon Director, Business Relationships at the Dti,

Item 1 Welcome and Apologies for absence

Apologies were received from:

In the absence of the Chairman and both Deputy Chairs, Sarah Hohler proposed and Peter Read seconded that Janis Kong chair the meeting until James Brathwaite arrived.

Janis Kong welcomed David Hendon, Director of Business Relationships at the Dti, as an observer to the meeting, as part of his week of work experience with SEEDA.

Item 2 Minutes of last meeting (25 th February 2004)

• It was noted that details of a “rummage” discussion should not be part of the formal minutes of the meeting and that this should be removed. The reference to wind farms in paragraph 34 should be newer, not unknown, technology and a typing error was noted in paragraph 47. John Peel requested that the minutes be amended under item 10 paragraph 40 to include his views that partners would wish to know whether SEEDA was bearing the same degree of budgetary pain internally. Subject to these agreed amendments, the minutes were approved as an accurate record of the meeting of the 25 th February and signed by the Chairman.

Action Items:

• The Chairman and Chief Executive have been regularly making the case for development tax gains and railway infrastructure investment with Ministers and members noted that some of the suggestions had been included in the budget and mentioned in the Barker review.
• The process for noting, endorsing or approving project approvals is being revised and roles will be clearer when the new systems are fully implemented.
• All other actions were complete. Charlotte Dixon and Pam Alexander agreed to review the timing for preparing an energy strategy for the region, including input from businesses on relationship to competitiveness, so that it could be considered by the Sustainable Development Committee before coming back to the Board in June or July. Members regarded this as an important issue and the Chief Executive agreed to invite the Board to input if appropriate before the strategy was fully devised.

Item 3 Declarations of interest

• There were no declarations of interest to report.

Item 4 Kent area team report

• Susan Priest, Area Director for Kent and Medway, presented her paper and provided members with further statistics and a profile of her sub-region. She reported that AIF partnerships were working well in the 3 priority regeneration areas. In the Thames Gateway, SEEDA is working with the East of England and the London Development Agency. The Thames Gateway partnership with the local authority leaders were successful in securing ODPM funding for priorities identified in the AIF .
• In Thanet, a low cost operator is about to begin flights to several European destinations from Manston that will provide economic opportunities in the area. Passenger predictions are for 300,000 movements in the first year. Although Kent has three motorways, some major ports and two international railway stations, the supporting infrastructure is weak with rail services particularly poor.
• Susan Priest identified three main issues for the sub-region: how to get balanced communities within the Sustainable Communities Plan with an attractive offer to businesses and an appropriately skilled workforce; reviving the fortunes of the coastal towns; and accessibility by road and rail. She emphasised the importance of partnership working and networks and said she enjoyed particularly strong working relationships with key partners.
• Members questioned what SEEDA could do directly to improve Kent ’s poor rail services. Jim Brathwaite said that the attitude of the Strategic Rail Authority was changing with an acknowledgement that access to Kent has to be addressed in the right way. The opportunity to influence the future service provision exists whilst the current franchises are being renegotiated. SEEDA is contributing to the consultation process. The problem is that the Department of Transport does not have sufficient funding to pay for the necessary improvements and it will require innovative thinking to achieve new funding mechanisms.
• Kent and Medway have had considerable investment from SEEDA over the past 5 years. Members requested information on a sub-regional basis on how much investment had been made and the breadth of projects implemented

Action: from Area team report, paragraph 10

Marianne Neville-Rolfe to compile a ‘5 year report’ on the scale and spread of SEEDA’s investment activity on a sub-regional basis

Item 5 Report by the Regional Director of GOSE, Paul Martin

• Paul Martin reported on issues for SEEDA from the Chancellor’s 2004 Budget. He pointed out that Sir Michael Lyons, in his report on redistributing civil service jobs, had responded to regional representation and recognised that the South East is not economically homogeneous.
• Paul Martin concentrated primarily on the Barker Review of housing supply and its focus on affordable home ownership, with a fixed house price: income ratio as a PSA target. There is no regionally specific breakdown in the report but London and the South East might be expected to bear the brunt of the increase in supply that Barker suggests should be 50 – 100% above current Regional Planning Guidance. She proposes that RPG and the new Regional Housing Boards should be merged into a Regional Planning Body and that local authorities identify additional buffers of land above those in local plans to meet extra unexpected demands.
• Paul Martin identified both the positive and the potentially unwelcome proposals in the review, pointing out the destabilising effect of Barker on the Spatial Plan currently at the consultation phase. SEEDA has an important role to play and is in a position of influence between interested parties – Government, business and local authorities. SEEDA will also have legitimate views on the organisation and use of the proposed community funds, financed by local authorities keeping development gain taxes.
• The Chairman said that SEEDA’s job was to deliver the RES and our response to Barker should be in the context of the constraint on the economy posed by housing that is being increasingly identified by businesses across the region. The risk to business needs to be evaluated so that when the number of houses is determined by ODPM in the context of the Regional Spatial Strategy from SEERA, there is a clear view from SEEDA on whether the plan is well formulated, sufficiently ambitious or adequately linked back into the RES.
• The Chief Executive expressed concern that government acceptance of Barker’s housing targets could limit the success of the Sustainable Communities Plan where the current emphasis is on building communities and the necessary infrastructure before radically increasing housing numbers. Members suggested that SEEDA needs to work with London to encourage a change in the ‘dormitory’ relationship and encourage London to house more of its own workforce. Additional land will have to be released for housing to include those currently excluded from the housing market but the use of that land will have to be directly controlled by local authorities if it is to meet market failure rather than market demand.
• There will be an 18 month period of consultation. The RDAs will be submitting a joint response through One North East, but SEEDA will also be making its own submission. SEEDA has a role as a landowner and housebuilder and as a member of the Regional Housing Board. The Chief Executive proposed an initial response to the Board at the next meeting for further development. Members requested that Kate Barker be invited to a “rummage” debate at the June meeting.

Action: from item 5: GOSE report, paragraph 16.

Paul Hudson to bring an initial response to the Barker review to the May Board meeting.

Secretariat to invite Kate Barker to June Board meeting

Item 6 Business Plan 2004 –05

• The business plan sets out detailed proposals for 2004-05 by division and Marianne Neville-Rolfe’s cover paper focuses on the expected outputs. The process being developed between the RDAs and Whitehall involving more alignment of national, local and regional PSAs should provide a better iterative circle of framework and delivery rather than a hierarchical line of instruction downwards.
• Members welcomed the strategic overview paper from the Chief Executive in which she outlined four main themes for the coming year: engaging with business and developing a science and innovation strategy with SESETAC; bending mainstream programmes (ours’ and others’) to meet the priorities identified through the AIF process; delivering the Sustainable Communities Plan and consolidating regeneration along the coastal fringe through a multi-agency approach; and working through the skills for productivity alliances to ensure better demand-pull for skills provision. SEEDA’s programmes for the next year will be implemented within a reduction in administration expenditure of between 4 and 5%, approximately twice that to be recommended by the Gershon report (2.5%) for Whitehall . .
• Members approved the draft SEEDA 2004 – 05 Business Plan for submission to SEERA, subject to some further refinements as discussed in the paper.

Item 6(1) SEEDA Business Plan: communications strategy

• Members endorsed and welcomed the communications strategy which they would edit appropriately for use with partners.

Item 7 Trafalgar Day

• The opportunities of Trafalgar Day are being considered.

Item 8 Major Project Update: Enterprise Hubs and Gateways

• Greg Ward, Head of Incubation Services, introduced the paper on Hubs and Gateways and the evaluation of the 10 oldest hubs that has just been completed. The project started in 2000 and now has 20 Hubs and 6 Gateways. The model has changed over the four operational years, as the value and nature of the support network, and the relatively less importance of a physical building, became more evident. The SEEDA model is unique and has been very successful at incubating and growing companies.
• Most local areas now see Hubs and Gateways as the cornerstone of their economic development plans. The network of companies accessing hub services is much greater than could be achieved from stand alone incubation services. The parts of Hampshire and West Sussex without a physical hub were being considered for rural enterprise gateways.
• Members congratulated Greg and his team on rolling out a very successful programme. The Chairman said he would be using Enterprise Hubs as his ‘best practice’ example at the July meeting of RDA Chairs as it has worked well in both successful and deprived areas.
• There are many success stories from companies involved in the programme that could be publicised and this is being pursued. A further paper will be brought to the Board in June or July on the next phase of the programme’s development, including ways of making the programme sustainable long term without further SEEDA funding.

Item 9 Project Report

• The items scheduled under executive delegation and those projects reviewed and endorsed by the Major Projects Committee were noted by the Board.

Item 10 Chairman’s Report

• The Chairman reported that the meeting held between Dti and the regions had given the Department a clearer understanding of how to work better in partnership with the regions. He requested that members reinforced within their own networks that it was important for industry and enterprise to have a voice within Government. The Chief Executive was attending a follow up meeting later in the day. The Chair of EMDA, as Chair of Chairs, had produced a model for working together that is being promoted for implementing Lambert and the Innovation review. Jim Brathwaite asked for this model to be distributed to members.
• Members noted the Chairman’s report

Action: from item 10 – Chairman’s report, paragraph 34.

Secretariat to circulate Derek Mapp’s model of partnership working.

Item 11 Agency report

• The Chief Executive presented the agency report, saying that this had changed its name from being her report to reflect its ownership more accurately. She drew out several developments and mentioned how valuable she had found the sector chairs meeting. She highlighted the developments on science, engineering and technology on page 4 of the report, saying that there has been considerable doubt as to the current capacity of RDAs to deliver this agenda as well as concerns about matched funding. Treasury are supportive of RDAs managing a business-led demand-pull. At a meeting last week between RDAs and Research Councils, it was agreed that the Regional Skills For Productivity Alliances and the Science and Industry Councils in each region would be fundamental partners in demonstrating capability and understanding of what is required in each region.
• A response to the 10 year science and innovation strategy consultation paper is required by the end of April and will have to show long and short term capacity with the actions being taken to ensure success. Some RDAs already think they are in a strong enough position to contribute to the agenda because of the high level of funding they put into science to achieve regeneration. The NW contributes £70m compared to a national figure of £90m for HEIF. This is a fast moving debate, with HEIs fearful that their money might be channelled through the RDA s in future.
• The Chief Executive concluded her report by noting that an evaluation of the benefit of attending MIPIM would be brought to a future board meeting.

Action: from item 11 – Agency report, paragraph 38.

Chief Executive to produce evaluation of the benefits of attending MIPIM for a future board meeting

Item 12 Operational review

• Members noted the operational report.

Item 12(2) Operational Review: 3 rd Quarter report.

• Members noted the 3 rd quarter report

Item 13 Audit Committee Report

• In the absence of the Chairman of the Audit Committee, (Rob Douglas) Peter Read presented the minutes of the Audit Committee meeting held on 25 th February. The Board formally endorsed Peter Read’s continuing membership of the Audit Committee. In response to questions, he confirmed that the committee looks at risk on a regular and ongoing basis and that budget forecasting is not part of their remit.
• Members noted the report of the Audit Committee.

Item 14 AOB

• Valerie Box asked members to let her know if the list of board dates for 2005 was acceptable.

Item 15 Date of next meeting

• The next SEEDA Board meeting will be held at the SEEDA HQ on 12 th May 2004.