South East England Development Agency (SEEDA)

MINUTES OF THE 83rd MEETING OF THE
SOUTH EAST ENGLAND DEVELOPMENT AGENCY
HELD ON 30 JANUARY 2007 GUILDFORD

Present:

Rob Anderson, Pamela Charlwood, Poul Christensen, Rob Douglas (Chair), Imtiaz Farookhi, Bob Goldfield, Sue John, Peter Jones, Keith House, John Peel, Fiona Pollard, Alex Pratt, Bill Wakeham, Phil Wood

In attendance:

Jeff Alexander, Lee Amor, Paul Lovejoy, John Parsonage, Duncan Straughen, Donal Galligan, Tahnee Wright, Peter Rockhill, Peter Cusdin (for item 10), Greg Ward (for item 10), Kate Annison (for item 11)

Item 1 Welcome and apologies for absence

1. Apologies were received from Jim Brathwaite, who was on a SEEDA fact finding trip to Dubai, Pam Alexander on compassionate grounds and Rolande Anderson. The Board expressed their condolences for Pam Alexander’s recent loss.
2. The Chairman welcomed the new Board members, Pamela Charlwood, Sue John, Bob Goldfield and Alex Pratt, to their first Board meeting.

Item 2 Minutes of the last meeting (7 December 2006)

3. The minutes of the last meeting were agreed as a correct record of proceedings.

Matters arising

4. Following up from the discussion at the December Board meeting, Paul Lovejoy informed the Board that the South East had performed well under the allocation of Framework 6 funding from the EU, securing nearly €400 million, 24% of the UK total funding and second only to London.
5. Several key lessons were taken away from the Brussels visit, including the value of regular dialogue with South East MEPs, the need for a close working relationship with the UK Permanent Representation and the need to build on the South East’s credible performance in securing Framework 6 funding into Framework 7. In relation to the last point, Board members highlighted the scale of funding available and the desire to learn from successful lobbying by other EU member states were reiterated. Rob Douglas requested that SEEDA should meet with Graham Meadows’ successor at the European Commission, Dirk Ahner, at the earliest opportunity.
6. John Parsonage highlighted for the Board the update on Local Skills for Productivity Alliance activities in the Agency Report and noted that SEEDA’s Chairman and Chief Executive were due to meet with Henry Ball and Norman Boyland from the Learning and Skills Council (LSC) to discuss future arrangements.

Action: Item 2, Matters arising
Paul Lovejoy to coordinate meeting with Dirk Ahner, Director-General in DG REGIO, European Commission.
Donal Galligan to circulate list of SEEDA acronyms to Board members.

Item 3 Declarations of interest

7. Rob Douglas in respect of item 9, Review of Sub-regional Partnership Arragements, as a member of the Surrey Economic Partnership. Also for the same item: Pamela Charlwood as a member of the Hampshire Economic Partnership and Sue John as a member of the Brighton Area Investment Framework Partnership. John Peel in respect of item 10, Funding Escalator, as Chair of Centurion Marketing Systems; item 13, SEEDA Lean project and MAS, as President of EEF South and item 13, Gatwick Diamond Initiative, as a member of the West Sussex Economic Partnership. Alex Pratt in respect of item 10, Funding Escalator, as a member of Business Link Milton Keynes, Oxfordshire and Buckinghamshire, a co-funder of Finance South East.

Item 4 Rummage: International Business and Competitiveness

8. Jeff Alexander presented to the Board the background information that is shaping the International Business strategy. The Global Competitiveness targets in the Regional Economic Strategy (RES) aim to increase the percentage of businesses located in the South East operating internationally from 8% in 2003 to 12% by 2016; to increase the proportion of businesses reporting Research and Development (R&D) links with universities from 11% in 2005 to 15% by 2016; to encourage innovation and creativity and to secure the infrastructure needed to maintain international economic competitiveness.
9. To achieve many of these aims SEEDA need to fully exploit the opportunities presented by the more focused approach to investment by UKTI, promoted by the Chancellor, and the creation of a unified trade and investment team for the region. The SE Trade and Investment team has 115 personnel in total, contracts with 10 overseas representatives and a budget of £6.6 million. The unified approach has resulted in strong links between inward investment and export advice for companies, which is being driven by the newly formed Investor Development Managers (IDMs).
10. The opportunities in the growing BRIC (Brazil, Russia, India and China) economies was referred to but it was also highlighted that North America is still dominant in the number of companies investing in the South East and jobs created and it was noted that 40% of global R&D still takes place in the USA. Europe is also still a major trading partner and the strengthening of the SEEDA representation in Paris reflected this.
11. Jeff Alexander explained that SEEDA’s global network of partners was being strengthened by using the region’s sector consortia to drive forward engagement. For example, SEEDA’s Chairman, Jim Brathwaite, was currently in Dubai and Abu Dhabi specifically engaging with high ranking Ministers on potential sector synergies in Aerospace and Defence. The Global Network is also being underpinned through University networks, especially the Research Excellence Directory.
12. It was highlighted that the combined size of the four BRIC economies is projected to exceed that of the G-6 in US$ terms by 2039, and that by 2050 China is projected to be the largest economy in the world, followed by the USA, India, Japan, Brazil and Russia. The opportunities in these emerging economies are huge. India is currently the second largest investor in the UK, although that is predominantly through mergers and acquisitions. Over the next 12 months SEEDA will develop Global Partner relationships with India by focusing on the Aerospace, Environment and Infrastructure sectors and is in the process of setting up a South East England India Advisory Board. The South East can also learn from Indian good practice, specifically in Sustainability and Women’s Enterprise.
13. The sheer scale of opportunities in China is daunting and can put investors off. SEEDA is concentrating on the ITC sector to maximise the benefits and the recently established South East England China Advisory Board, a multidisciplinary advisory board that will help position the region to respond to the opportunities and challenges, will meet for the first time in March 2007. The Board welcomed the inclusion of country experts on the India and China Advisory Boards.
14. The Board had a full discussion of SEEDA’s developing international strategy referring to, amongst other things: the question of creating a single integrated ‘regions’ office overseas for all RDAs; the need for UKTI to build closer links with UK Universities; the strength of the £ and its effect on trade; the need to utilise foreign companies that are already located in the South East to attract others; the dangers of copyright infringement as a result of closer working; and the possibility of sponsoring students or potential 2012 athletes in developing countries as a way of solidifying links.
15. Jeff Alexander informed the Board of the next steps, which included developing an integrated International Strategy for the Board’s approval at the March Board meeting, and reviewing RDA/UKTI overseas representation and regional trade services delivery.
16. The Board APPROVED the steps being taken to develop the Agency’s international strategy and looked forward to it returning to the Board in March 2007.

Item 5 Implementing the RES

17. Paul Lovejoy presented to the Board the progress being made on the RES Implementation Plan Framework. The recent letter from Margaret Hodge, DTI Minister of State, which welcomed the uniqueness, realism and analysis of the RES, was summarised for the Board. The Minister’s letter reiterated the importance of the Business Support Simplification Programme, the Strategic Environment Assessment for the Implementation Plan; the importance of addressing disadvantage in the labour market and the need to embed the RES actions in partners’ work.
18. The plan was welcomed as being very challenging and aspirational and the Board felt that more discussion was needed around the tensions and trade offs inherent in successfully delivering the RES, especially with housing and regulation. The critical need to embed the actions in external partners work was addressed, with Phil Wood noting that it was crucial to involve the Trade Unions and other social partners in almost every aspect. Duncan Straughen highlighted that how SEEDA works with partners to deliver the RES is at the centre of the ongoing Organisational Development work. Imtiaz Farookhi noted that the term ‘BME’ (Black and Minority Ethnic groups) is now an outdated concept that is far too general to address the complexities in society and urged that SEEDA use more specific groupings.
19. The next steps for the Implementation Plan were set out, with a draft coming to the Board for approval in March, before going out for a 3 month consultation in April and the final version coming to the Board in July for approval before being published. Board members highlighted the importance of acknowledging and working well with the full range of partners, although noting that unless a structured approach was adopted the sheer number of partners involved in these processes might impede the hitting of targets.
20. The Board NOTED the progress made so far and welcomed the opportunity to discuss further at the Board awayday in February.

Item 6 2007/08 Draft Budget

21. Duncan Straughen introduced for the Board’s discussion the operational budget strategy and provisional amounts for 2007/08. The budget has the complexity of bridging the priorities of the third year of the Corporate Plan 2005-08 and ‘year zero’ of the new RES. It was explained that out of the RES a new Corporate Plan would be developed for 2008-11.
22. The Executive Directors then set out the priorities in their divisions for 2007/08/ Jeff Alexander informed the Board that the spend in the Business and International Division would be on taking forward priorities that had already been set out in the established Corporate Plan, rather than on new initiatives. John Parsonage noted that spend in the Learning and Skills Division would be on the expansion of activities in anticipation of the next Corporate Plan, such as SESETAC, the Technology Strategy Board and employability. Lee Amor pointed out that there was a major shift in the Development and Infrastructure division to embrace sustainability and to make the Agency’s physical projects an exemplar to the market. It was also highlighted that some projects being taken forward, such as Chatham Museums, had not appeared in the previous Corporate Plan budget and the withdrawal of growth funding by Communities and Local Government would have an impact.
23. Duncan Straughen explained to the Board that the 2007/08 budget included a £15 million overprofiling, 10% of the programme budget, to encourage projects to be brought forward to the stage where they could be implemented at short notice in the final quarter if another project slipped. The Board agreed that this was a useful tool but stressed the need to manage partners’ expectations as a result.
24. It was clarified that the increase in administration spend had resulted from an increase in headcount because the Agency had taken on the delivery of programmes previously ran by Government Departments and other agencies. The Board asked for clarification of what funding and projects the Agency controlled in full and those that SEEDA relied on other partners for. There were also questions raised about end year flexibility and the DTI’s recent requests for RDAs to assist with the department’s financial burden. It was also highlighted that SEEDA’s strategic focus should be underpinned by what the Agency can leverage into the region from the private sector.
25. The Board NOTED the steps being taken so far and looked forward to the final proposed budget being presented to the Board in March.

Action: Item 6, 2007/08 Draft Budget
Duncan Straughento provide a list of projects and programmes that the Agency has taken on from external partners, including any corresponding headcount and funding.

Item 7 CSR

26. Duncan Straughen summarised for the Board’s endorsement the submission that had been requested from all RDAs by HM Treasury, as part of the input to the Comprehensive Spending Review 2007 (CSR07), to prepare a two part submission on efficiencies and policy choices. The first stage is to set out where RDAs would be able to achieve 2.5% per annum cashable efficiency savings on existing programmes. The second stage is to identify policy changes and programme cuts which would be taken forward for a further 2.5% cut in budgets i.e. a total of 5% per annum cumulative over the 2008 – 2011 period.
27. The Board were informed that the levels of efficiency are the same as those the Agency were previously required to demonstrate under Gershon but expanded for CSR07 into future years. The difference in this case is that SEEDA cannot assume the reinvestment of the efficiencies gained. This is particularly significant for the Business Links, where major efficiencies are already assumed and contracted for, but elements of which depend on the assumption that savings in administration etc will be able to be reinvested in the front line delivery of targets.
28. It was highlighted that the spread of cuts had been tailored in a way that seeks to recognise the relative strengths of the programmes that are affected, as well as the priorities of the RES. It was explained that other RDAs had offered very similar cuts. RDAs have made clear to the Treasury that the proposed cuts and savings can only be indicative at this stage and that the actual decisions may be different when implemented as strategies develop.
29. Imtiaz Farookhi highlighted that SEEDA would need to know where other organisations were spending their money before deciding on its own cuts, for example what the Learning and Skills Councils priorities were before SEEDA cut its spending on education. The Board raised the issue of possibly sharing administration services such as PR and marketing with other regional partners or centrally with the other RDAs. The Chairman also noted the possible structural changes in Whitehall and the chance that work currently undertaken by the Department of Trade and Industry (DTI) might be done elsewhere, as well as the outcomes of the Leitch and Lyons Reviews which might redirect funding to Local Authorities. Fiona Pollard commented that SEEDA could make use of its successful Independent Performance Assessment (IPA) to attract more money and programmes from elsewhere.
30. The Board ENDORSED the submission to HM Treasury identifying potential efficiencies and programme cuts.

Item 8 Organisational Development

31. Duncan Straughen gave the Board an update on the work being done on Organisational Development. A new management structure was proposed based on six Directorates and would be in place from 1 st April 2007. This would not be the end of the process as the period April-August would be used to finalise team structures and the composition of Area Teams would be considered in light of the review of sub-regional partnerships. The Board were informed that a Leadership programme will be launched at the All Staff Awayday on 26 th February to support people at all levels to address those changes.
32. It was explained that a number of Buzz Groups had been held through which staff had indicated that they recognised the need for change and were in favour of it, and from which some corporate values had taken shape. There was a full discussion around the ‘SEEDA personality’ that had emerged, including the disparity between the positive image that staff had of themselves, and indeed the experience of many external partners with SEEDA staff on a one-to-one basis, and the less positive, process driven corporate image of the Agency that can be encountered. The Board requested that the corporate values be considered further at the Board awayday.
33. Fiona Pollard noted how impressive it was that SEEDA staff were so positive considering the various pressures that the RES, the IPA and CSR07 had put on them and felt it showed the good job that the Executive team were doing to hold it all together. Poul Christensen pressed the Board and the Executive team not to underestimate the possibility of losing established working relationships with external partners as a result of the organisational change and the sheer effort that would be needed to implement that change. In light of the considerable change in the Board’s membership, Jeff Alexander stressed the need for the Board and the Executive team to reaffirm a close working relationship and ownership of the organisational changes.
34. The Board NOTED the progress being made and welcomed the chance to discuss further at the Board awayday.

Action: Item 8, Organisational Development
Duncan Straughento circulate 'values' document and summary of staff survey to all Board members. Corporate Values to be discussed at February awayday.

Item 9 Review of Sub-regional Partnership Arrangements

35. Paul Lovejoy presented for the Board’s approval the proposal to continue funding for the South East Economic Partnerships in 2007/08, and the process and framework for reviewing broader sub-regional partnership arrangements, as part of the RES implementation planning.
36. It was explained that SEEDA currently supported the 11 SE Economic Partnerships, which have been in existence for 5-10 years, as key partners in the Agency’s strategic influencing role. SEEDA provides £1 million per annum to the Economic Partnerships, around a third of their funding, with Local Authorities and businesses supplying the rest. The SEEDA funding consists of core funding of £80,000 for each Partnership (Hampshire Economic Partnership receives an additional £5,000 to support co-ordination of the network), with a remaining £115,000 available to support specific activities agreed with SEEDA which can demonstrate Strategic Added Value.
37. In respect of sub-regional partnership arrangements in general it was highlighted that many of SEEDA’s partners find it difficult to interact with the Agency because of the plethora of bodies in the region and hence there is a need to simplify and integrate partnerships.
38. The Board noted that funding for Economic Partnerships had previously been extended for a year pending a review and felt that the current proposals should be considered in conjunction with the review of all sub-regional partnerships. Peter Jones advocated a radical approach, noting that the political landscape had changed considerably in the past few years and regional partnerships should reflect those changes. Poul Christensen also advocated a root and branch review of existing arrangements at the earliest possible opportunity. The necessity to focus limited resources, both money and people, on key objectives was felt by the Board to be paramount. However, the Board did agree that it would be unprofessional to cut funding for the Economic Partnerships without giving reasonable notice.
39. Alex Pratt was assured by Paul Lovejoy that SEEDA’s use of the consultants to support the work of SEEDA staff in carrying out the broader sub-regional review was not because of a lack of capability within the Agency, but due to the lack of capacity as a result of work on other aspects of implementing the RES.
40. The Board APPROVED funding for the SE Economic Partnerships initially for the first 9 months of 2007-08, with funding beyond December 2007 to be confirmed or modified following a policy decision on future sub-regional arrangements which the Board will take at its July meeting.

Action: Item 9, Review of Sub-regional Partnership Arrangements
Paul Lovejoy to bring a paper on Sub-regional Partnership Arrangements to the Board in July 2007.

Item 10 Major Projects and Programmes

Canterbury Enterprise Hub

41. Lee Amor presented to the Board a proposal to agree in principle an investment of £7.978 million to create the Canterbury Enterprise Hub (Canterbury Innovation Centre). The optimal delivery mechanism for the Hub will be considered at a future Board meeting.
42. The Innovation Centre will deliver 60 units, a mixture of flexible accommodation, for start up businesses in the knowledge based sector. With the exception of Pfizer laboratories in Sandwich, the East Kent area lacks sufficient high-value added, knowledge-based jobs and Canterbury has one of the lowest business start up rates in Kent.
43. The building is the first development on the proposed science park on the University of Kent campus and will further boost private sector confidence and attract further investment.
44. John Peel informed the Board that MPC had discussed the paper at that morning’s meeting. MPC had initially been sceptical of the case for market failure but had been reassured on this point and also understood that the building would seed the development of the science park. MPC had stressed the need for a clear exit strategy in the paper to follow that would set out the delivery vehicle.
45. The Board queried if the Hub building would be better located elsewhere in East Kent, raising concerns specifically on the cost of the site, the accessibility by road and the role of the University of Kent.
46. In response to questions relating to whether there was true market failure and if the Hub would be commercially viable, which had also been aired at MPC, Greg Ward highlighted that the first signs of a technology cluster were appearing with 21 companies housed at the existing hatchery, where the Hub is currently based, and 6 on the waiting list. Fiona Pollard noted that a report circulated to MPC members, prepared by FPD Savills suggested that the Enterprise Hub should be successful.
47. Peter Cusdin explained to the Board that the relatively high costs of the building, £6-6.5 million, stemmed from the high quality design, which includes the use of a biomass boiler, photovoltaics, rain water harvesting and strategic urban drainage, with the intention of achieving a BREEAM Excellent rating and setting a high standard for any future buildings.
48. The Board APPROVED IN PRINCIPLE the investment of £7.978 million, subject to MPC’s satisfaction that the Board’s concerns regarding market failure, the delivery mechanism and the University of Kent’s role have been addressed.

Funding Escalator

49. Greg Ward presented for the Board’s approval a £5.457 million investment over 5 years, alongside an R&D grant of £24 million, to create a South East Early Stage Funding Escalator. It was explained that there was currently too much fragmentation in the funding on offer to companies and the SE Funding Escalator aims to simplify and rationalise the funding available to businesses in the region by creating an integrated and seamless escalator, as envisaged in the first Regional Economic Strategy.
50. The fund would help back a substantial volume of ideas at concept stage, some of which are high growth rather than hi-tech so struggle to secure funding. A further benefit would be that a company’s progress and income could be tracked over a 10 year period, providing invaluable information that is currently missing, and enabling SEEDA to measure outcomes and quantify the impact of the funding.
51. Over the next four years the escalator is expected to support 20 star companies, 100 high performing companies, 120 lifestyle companies and the chance for 400 people to test their ideas.
52. John Peel noted that MPC were fully convinced that there was a clear market failure at the lower end of the current funding arrangements. The Board were informed that MPC had been reassured that Finance South East (FSE) were best placed to run this funding network and that FSE’s structure was considered so successful it was being emulated in other regions.
53. Greg Ward clarified for the Board that it was an aspiration that Higher Education Innovation Fund (HEIF) money would be distributed through the Funding Escalator through collaboration with the university sector.
54. The Board APPROVED the investment of £5.457 million over 5 years to create an early stage South East Funding Escalator. It was requested thatFinance South East report annually to the Board on the progress and outcomes of the fund.

Action: Item 10, Major Projects Committee
Finance SE to report to the SEEDA Board annually on the progress and outcomes of the SE Funding Escalator.

Item 11 Disability Equality Scheme

55. Paul Lovejoy introduced the final version of SEEDA’s Disability Equality Scheme (DES), the draft of which had been discussed briefly at the December 2006 Board meeting, for the Board’s approval. It was explained by Kate Annison, SEEDA’s Head of Development for Economic Inclusion & Social Economy, that the DES is a live document that can be updated continuously and that in the future it could be combined with the Agency’s Race Equality Scheme and Gender Equality Scheme into one document.
56. The Board welcomed the challenging targets set out in the document, of increasing the number of disabled people working for SEEDA from 4% to 8% by 2009 and to 16% by 2016. It was noted that the existing figure of 4% was based on a self classification and that the real figure may be much higher as there is a potential reluctance for people to identify themselves as suffering from a disability for fear of discrimination.
57. Pamela Charlwood also welcomed the use of the Social Model definition of Disability and urged the use of the corresponding appropriate language in everyday activities. Kate Annison confirmed that SEEDA’s intention is to encourage its external partners to adopt the ideas and values set out in the DES.
58. The Board APPROVED the Disability Equality Scheme for SEEDA.

Item 12 Financial & Operational Review

59. Duncan Straughen updated the Board on the progress being made against budget and profiled expenditure, noting that actual spend was higher in comparison to the same stage last year. Despite this the Agency had not managed to achieve the increased rate of spend that it had targeted and was currently behind the profile projected. One of the major contributory factors is the reliance on third parties to deliver the Agency’s planned outcomes and the Executive team were confident that the profiled targets would be reached by the end of the financial year.
60. The Board were informed that the Executive team were more closely monitoring a number of key indicators of the Agency’s administrative efficiency. John Peel urged the Executive team to eradicate the raising of retrospective purchase orders.
61. The Board also noted the corporate risk matrix which would now be a regular item on the Board agenda. Imtiaz Farookhi noted that it would be helpful to discuss one or two of the risks in details at the February awayday. Poul Christensen reiterated that the Executive should be careful to ensure that the risk matrix did not become merely a process, and that the responsibility was taken for actively managing risks.
62. The Board NOTED the financial review.

Action: Item 12, Financial & Operational Review
Duncan Straughento ensure that the February awayday focuses on two of the top corporate risks.

Item 13 Projects

63. The Board NOTED the summary of projects.

Item 14 Committee Update: Audit

64. The Chairman highlighted the significant reduction in the number of retrospective purchase orders being raised and the importance of continuing this reduction.
65. The Chairman reiterated that SEEDA’s Internal Audit had received an excellent rating from DTI auditors and Board members asked that the Internal Audit team be congratulated on this achievement.
66. The Board NOTED the Audit Committee report.

Item 15 Chairman’s Report

67. The Board NOTED the Chairman’s report.

Item 16 Agency Report

68. The Board NOTED the Agency report.

Item 17 AOB

69. Jeff Alexander drew the Board’s attention to the potential reorganisation of Local Government in the South East, with the proposed establishment of 3 Unitary Authorities to replace the present two tier arrangement. The proposal was currently the subject of a preliminary review by the Department of Communities and Local Government, who would determine by the end of March whether the proposal should proceed for more detailed development.
70. Poul Christensen informed the Board that the Rural Advisory Committee was piloting new sustainable and flexible working practices and would report back to the Board on the impact of these changes.

SEEDA BOARD

SUMMARY OF ACTIONS
30 JANUARY 2007 MEETING

Action: Item 2, Matters arising
Paul Lovejoy to pursue a meeting with Dirk Ahner, Director-General in DG REGIO, European Commission.
Donal Galligan to circulate list of relevant acronyms to Board members.

Action : Item 6, 2007/08 Draft Budget
Duncan Straughento provide a list of projects and programmes that the Agency has taken on from external partners, including any corresponding headcount and funding.

Action : Item 8, Organisational Development
Duncan Straughento circulate ‘values’ document and summary of staff survey to all Board members. Corporate Values to be discussed at February awayday.
Completed.

Action : Item 9, Review of Sub-regional Partnership Arrangements
Paul Lovejoy to bring a paper on Sub-regional Partnership Arrangements to the Board in July 2007.

Action : Item 10, Major Projects Committee
Finance SE to report to the SEEDA Board annually on the progress and outcomes of the SE Funding Escalator

Action : Item 12, Financial & Operational Review
Duncan Straughen to ensure that the February awayday focuses on two of the top corporate risks.
Completed.

7 DECEMBER 2006 MEETING

Action : Item 4, SEEDA in Europe
Paul Lovejoyto ensure the development of a Business Plan for the new SE England House

Action : Item 9, Major Projects and Programmes
Shoreham Enterprise Gateway, Ropetackle
Duncan Straughen to take a paper to MPC in March 2007 on lessons learnt and proposals to avoid overspends in the future.
East Brighton Project
Lee Amorto decouple infrastructure element from Community Stadium and bring back to the Board in March 2007.

Action : Item 11, Financial & Operational Review
Duncan Straughen to simplify traffic light reporting structure for Agency targets.

Action : Item 14, Agency Report
Paul Lovejoy to facilitate a discussion on Green Belt building restrictions in 2007.
To be taken at the September 2007 Board meeting.

Action : Item 15, AOB
Paul Lovejoy to arrange for GSE Board members to meet to discuss cross cutting issues
Paul Lovejoy to produce tailor made summaries of the RES drawing out appropriate RES targets for individual Government Departments, local Government partners and businesses in the region.

31 OCTOBER 2006 MEETING

Action : Item 2, Matters arising
Rummage on carbon reduction/climate change to take place in early 2007.
To take place at the May 2007 Board meeting.

Action : Item 5, Tourism South East
Jeff Alexander to arrange programme for HRH Prince of Wales’ potential visit to the region.
This visit is scheduled tentatively for early May.

Action : Item 6, Area Update: Milton Keynes, Oxfordshire, Buckinghamshire and Berkshire (MKOBB)
Jeff Alexander to take the O2C Arc proposals to SESETAC for feedback.
To be taken to SESETAC in March 2007.

Action : Item 12, Agency Report
Jeff Alexander to consult Fiona Pollard on developing the Business Angel network.