Appendix A
1.
Introduction
1.1 Detailed below are responses to the 12 recommendations of the Local Growth
and Business Support Overview and Scrutiny review. Given the length of the
review process and the level of ongoing engagement with the County Council's
Economic Development service, many of the initiatives shared with the Task
Group have had more time to mature, whilst some initial concerns have been
addressed.
1.2 In addition to responding to the issues raised, the narrative within this report
aims to provide a further update on recent progress.
2.
Responses to the Task Group's Recommendations
Recommendation 1
2.1 The LEP reviews the membership of its board, committees and advisory
groups on a regular basis to ensure the most appropriate representation
on the appropriate body. This should include:



The best way to ensure the perspective of the SME entrepreneur
is heard
The role and contribution of the Universities
The benefits of integrating Marketing Lancashire.
Response to Recommendation 1
2.2
The LEP regularly reviews the membership and composition of its main board
and subsidiary groups to ensure that they are fit for purpose and reflect the
increased tasks and responsibilities being channelled via LEP structures
across the country.
2.3
As an example, the LEP's Skills Board is presently broadening its
membership base to strengthen the employer voice to ensure its actions
remain focused on local business demands.
2.4
The LEP is also looking to strengthen the voice of SMEs within the
development of the LEP's business support policy. We can report that the
LEP's SME Consultation Group, convened and led by East Lancashire
Chamber of Commerce, is now meeting on at least a quarterly basis. This
group contains representatives from both Lancashire Chambers, the Institute
of Directors, the Federation of Small Business and Downtown in Business
network. The Group is also being used as a sounding board around the use
of European Structural and Investment Funds (ESIF). For example, the Group
recently met with the Chief Executive of the North West Fund to determine the
size and configuration of this business finance offer in Lancashire from 2015
onward.
2.5
Universities are already well represented on both the LEP board and in areas
like the LEP's Skills Board. At present, representatives are predominantly
drawn from Lancaster and UCLAN, but specific efforts are being made to
strengthen the engagement of Edge Hill University via their appointment of a
new Pro Vice Chancellor for External Relations. However, the recently formed
Higher Education Institutes (HEI) Group, which involves all four universities
(Lancaster, UCLAN, Edge Hill and Cumbria) operating in Lancashire provides
the opportunity to meet to develop shared thinking on new LEP priorities and
projects.
2.6
Marketing Lancashire is already well integrated with the strategies and work
programme of the LEP by actively developing and promoting growth within the
visitor economy and in the wider promotion of the County. This linkage will be
further strengthened as Marketing Lancashire is developing a major LEP
event for spring 2015. The LEP is also currently funding the development of
Marketing Lancashire's new visitor and destination management strategy.
Recommendation 2
2.7
All partners should work with the LEP to develop a sense of place for
Lancashire - a strong, coherent and single economic voice for
Lancashire to make the further progress required, whilst recognising
delivery arrangements can reflect the requirements of local areas with
specific needs/opportunities.
Response to Recommendation 2
2.8
The recently announced Growth Deal clearly indicates the LEP is continuing
to make strong progress in becoming the single economic voice for
Lancashire. For example, the LEP's Strategic Economic Plan (SEP) has
helped to secure one of the largest Growth Deals in the country (c.£234m)
after nearly a year of intense national competition for Local Growth Funds.
2.9
The Growth Deal itself is underpinned by a shared sense of local priorities
and a commitment by relevant local authorities and private sector partners to
co-invest in their delivery.
2.10
The Growth Deal is similar in approach to the recently secured City Deal, and
with an agreed SEP and future rounds of Growth Deal funding there are
further opportunities to develop and deliver strategic priorities relevant to local
needs in Lancashire.
2.11
The implementation of Lancashire's new (£231m) ESIF framework along with
on-going investment funds such as Growing Places, will also provide further
opportunities to deliver strategic priorities of local importance. The challenge
to local partners is to continue developing a strong pipeline of strategic and
eligible project proposals.
2
Recommendation 3
2.12
There should be a stronger communications strategy to underpin
agreed business support programmes delivered in Lancashire reflecting
the recommendations above and including a coherent, legible brand for
key "Lancashire" business support products, notably and especially
Boost.
Response to Recommendation 3
2.13 The process of developing a coherent business support offer across
Lancashire and establishing Boost as the primary brand is progressing well.
2.14







2.15
Since its launch in September 2013, Boost has:Signed Up over 1,100 businesses seeking business support
Featured in 214 pieces of print/online media coverage
Had 14,500 website visitors
Received over 800 phone enquiries
Had over 1,000 views of case case-studies and tutorials on YouTube
Been mentioned 1,600 times on Twitter
Attracted 27 business "multipliers" as Boost and Co members
This portal is not only directing business to the core Boost business support
programmes, but is also referring to national and District level business
support programmes. These are now also captured in an easy to use director
within the Boost site itself.
Recommendation 4
2.16
Efforts should be made under the auspices of the LEP to audit and
review the range of business support programmes on offer in
Lancashire, in particular those available to micro-businesses and startups and SMEs. Such audits should be regularly carried out. To support
this work, any publicly funded business support initiative should be
notified to the LEP by the organisation responsible.
Response to Recommendation 4
2.17
We constantly review the range of business support programmes available to
Lancashire businesses, including those for the business sectors highlighted,
but at present there is no requirement for the LEP to be notified of publicly (or
privately) funded business support initiatives.
2.18
Within the LEP area, there is a significant opportunity to rationalise and bring
even greater coherence to the business support landscape in the
commissioning of new ESIF funded provision. From early 2015, there will be
the opportunity to use this leverage to commission services on the basis of a
simplified range of provision that works through the single portal and gateway
service established by Boost.
3
2.19
The two areas in which we have less control are around new national
programmes (having closed Business Link, Government is beginning to relaunch some national business support offers under the Business is Great
brand) and District level programmes, driven by the incentive of retaining
additional business rates.
Recommendation 5
2.20
In considering the range of support programmes on offer, consideration
should be given to ensuring the needs of different types of business are
met, taking into account how support is presented to make it
appropriate and attractive to businesses that may not meet, or want to
meet, the "growth hungry" criteria.
Response to Recommendation 5
2.21
The level of national mainstream resource made available to local/regional
business support services is significantly reduced from that once available via
the abolished Regional Development Agency and Business Link structures.
2.22
This means that the County Council and the LEP cannot sustain a universal
business support service and must target the available resource where the
greatest economic impacts can be achieved.
2.23
Funding support for lifestyle businesses is not a County Council or LEP
priority. However, all businesses are welcome to access the available Boost
provision subject to eligibility, though the focus for public funding support will
be on those young/old, small/medium sized business wanting to grow to
deliver new jobs and GVA for Lancashire.
Recommendation 6
2.24
The complexity of the Business support landscape in Lancashire is
recognised, but efforts should be made through the LEP to develop as
far as possible a one stop shop to signpost businesses to the help
available to them.
Response to recommendation 6
See Response to Recommendation 4.
Recommendation 7
2.25
Business representative organisations should be encouraged to mirror
the efforts made by the public sector to streamline and integrate
representation and delivery arrangements to enable a coherent panLancashire business support strategy to be developed and delivered.
4
Response to Recommendation 7
2.26
Whilst the LEP's refreshed SME consultation arrangements are more effective
in bringing together the business representative organisations across the LEP
area, it is undoubtedly true that a more streamlined structure would assist
both the County Council and the LEP to make greater use of this valuable and
established channel of business engagement.
2.27
However, the consolidation of local Chamber arrangements in Lancashire, for
example, is a matter for the three Chambers concerned.
Recommendation 8
2.28
Opportunities should be sought by the LEP to work with and learn from
other LEPs in neighbouring areas, particularly Merseyside and Greater
Manchester.
Response to Recommendation 8
2.29
There is now an established North West LEP Business Support Co-ordination
Group, which includes Lancashire representatives from the County Council,
East Lancashire Chamber and UCLAN. This Group acts as a platform for the
exchange of good practice, for exploring joint working and for lobbying
Government.
2.30
Boost also benefits in having Mr Mike Blackburn, a LEP and Manchester LEP
Board Director, as the Chair of Boost's Programme Board. Mr Blackburn is a
lead member of the Manchester Growth Hub.
Recommendation 9
2.31
The Boost scheme should continue to develop its evidence base,
promote its availability and seek to develop and target its support
services based on user feedback.
Response to Recommendation 9
2.32
The Boost initiative is consistently improving its intelligence and feedback
systems to better understand the services businesses are looking for and their
experience of the programmes which are presently on offer. For example,
Boost's programme performance and market survey work has consistently
pointed to accessing business finance and skills as the main issues
constraining growth.
2.33
Google analytics also indicate the search terms people are using when they
arrive at the Boost site.
2.34
This intelligence will help inform the design and commissioning of provision
moving forward.
5
Recommendation 10
2.35
Local authorities in Lancashire should consider further how their
procurement activity could be aligned more closely with the wider needs
of businesses and business growth within Lancashire.
Response to Recommendation 10
2.36
The Social Value Act (2013) supports the use of procurement strategies,
placing a requirement on public bodies to consider how the services they
commission and procure might improve the economic, social and
environmental wellbeing of the area.
2.37
It is important to recognise however that if these outcomes are to be delivered
in a meaningful way the public bodies involved need to invest time and
resources in developing their policies and processes so that they can robustly
and demonstrably show progress on delivering the stated social outcomes.
2.38
The County Council's Procurement Strategy has been developed in
consultation with local businesses, and is scheduled to be presented for
approval at the 9 October meeting of Cabinet. This initiative coupled with
related approaches from councils like Preston provide a focus on the positive
role local procurement practices can play in promoting economic growth.
Recommendation 11
2.39
The availability of superfast broadband to all businesses is important
and efforts to achieve universal coverage in Lancashire should
continue.
Response to Recommendation 11
2.40
The Superfast Lancashire roll-out programme aims to achieve 97% coverage
of local businesses by June 2015. Further work is now underway with BDUK
to utilise the national Strategic Expansion Programme to secure 99%
superfast coverage for the whole of Lancashire.
Recommendation 12.
2.41
The opportunities for economic growth and the creation of jobs in the
energy sector, in particular in terms of energy efficiency should be
explored.
Response to Recommendation 12
2.42
The County Council's Economic Development service includes an energy
sector lead who is focussed on understanding the breadth and potential of all
aspects of the energy sector. The new ESIF investment process also requires
the LEP to commission activity which will contribute to carbon reduction
targets and the development of green technologies. This offers the potential to
build capability and demand particularly for energy efficiency measures
6
through programmes and access to finance which complement national policy
in this area.
2.43
The LEP's Growth Deal has also secured the opportunity for Blackpool and
Fylde College to play an integral role in the development a new national
college for onshore oil and gas.
3.
Recommendation
3.1
The Task Group's recent review has been helpful in ensuring the County
Council's Economic Development service remains focused on the local
business demands and responsive to new ways of working.
3.2
To this end, this response aims to demonstrate strong progress is being
against the recommendations of the Task Group.
3.3
Notwithstanding what has already been done, the County Council's Economic
Development service will, where ever possible, continue to show leadership
and develop activity, both directly and in conjunction with others, to help
ensure that the needs of local businesses inform the shape of future provision.
3.4
The Overview and Scrutiny Committee are asked to note this response to
their recent recommendations, as a basis for discussion on the 12 September.
7