Category Archives: Devolution

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

8 Aug 2016

Posted under

Accountability, Devolution, Hinkley C, Local Enterprise Partnership, Transparency

EDF board members: conflict of interest?

“EDF’s decision to invest in the £18bn Hinkley Point should be declared invalid, French trade unions have said, as pressure builds against the troubled nuclear power plant project. …

… The CGT, CFE-CGC and FO unions said not enough consideration was given to whether EDF board members were subject to a conflict of interest, because some are employed by companies that stand to benefit from Hinkley.

“Who can say that with a rigorous management of the conflicts of interest and real transparency of information, the board decision would not have been different,” the unions said. …”

http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2016/aug/08/edf-decision-hinkley-point-should-be-declared-void-french-unions-government-approval-nuclear

It seems that conflicts f interest are simply swept under many carpets these days.

Our Local Enterprise Partnership has several members with direct and indirect nuclear interests.

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

5 Aug 2016

Posted under

Devolution, Local Enterprise Partnership

“Book Early for LEP’s Annual Conference 3rd October 2016”

“Message from LEP Partnership Manager –

We suggest that you book your place soon for the LEP’s Annual Conference, which this year will be held in the afternoon of Monday 3rd October near Exeter. You can book your place on Eventbrite at:

https://www.eventbrite.co.uk/e/heart-of-the-south-west-leps-annual-conference-registration-26536396075

The Conference is an opportunity to meet with the wider LEP partnership and to network with other stakeholders. It is a free event that is aimed at the private, public and third sectors, and that will include an update on present economic issues for our area and a look at what is planned for the future. This year the focus will be around Productivity and particularly in relation to the ‘people’ and supply chain elements.

Booking is essential and we recommend that you reserve your place soon, as we already have over 100 people registered. Please use this link and if you have any queries please contact Sam Snowdon at

sam@snowdonmarketing.co.uk

http://us4.campaign-archive2.com/?u=4e59660292bd6b4a5c7d7b8a7&id=1330a3c5dc&e=fa5cdb1f18

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

4 Aug 2016

Posted under

Devolution, Hinkley C, Local Enterprise Partnership

Hinkley C and National Security

An abbreviated article by Max Hastings.

Our Local Enterprise Partnership does not seem to share his concern, pushing hard for the deal to go through. Membership of our LEP is heavily dominated by the nuclear interests of several of its Board members.

The abbreviated article:

“The Prime Minister’s decision to review the £18 billion Hinkley Point nuclear power project has won a cheer from everyone not in line to make money from it. When the holidays are over, there are two good reasons why Theresa May should go further and cancel the scheme. The first is that its electricity will be fantastically expensive.

The second, which we shall consider here, is that it was a critical error of judgement for the Cameron government to invite the People’s Republic of China to fund a huge national infrastructure project.

Allowing the Chinese access to Hinkley Point, and beyond it to other British nuclear plants, would give a hostage to fortune. The record shows that the Chinese can’t be trusted with sensitive industrial data. Fair dealing has no place in their system.
A decade ago, Robert Zoellick, then World Bank president, said the West’s future relations with China required the country to become a ‘responsible stakeholder’ in the international order.

This it has not yet done. Until it happens, we cannot do big business with Beijing.

The last government, and especially the then-Chancellor George Osborne, cherished naive ambitions to create a historic new trading relationship with the dragon. …

… A nation that engages in global industrial espionage, employing an estimated 1.5 million geeks to penetrate other people’s computers — while denying its own people online access — is not a comfortable business associate. … We underestimate at our peril the ruthlessness with which they pursue their objectives. …

… Already, China’s long arm has stretched to Africa and South America, where it is effectively colonising huge areas by buying up the supplies of raw materials such as oil, copper and iron ore which it needs to feed its endless consumption of energy and its vast building programme.

David Cameron and George Osborne hoped to cash in on a slice of the potentially huge trade market available in China, which is why last October the British government staged an unprecedentedly chummy state visit for President Xi Jinping, at which the Queen herself was obliged almost to kowtow. …

… involvement in the design of the Hinkley Point reactor is part of a wider plan, whereby by 2025 the Chinese could hold a £105 billion stake in British infrastructure.

Yet for this to make sense, we need to believe that China can be a benign, honourable, honest industrial partner. None of those adjectives seems appropriate now, or in the near future. …

… The price of industrial co-operation with Beijing is British silence about China’s systemic human rights abuses, of which the highest rate of state executions in the world is only the most conspicuous example. …

… We should be equally worried about the Second Bureau of the Third Department of the People’s Liberation Army — otherwise known as Unit 61398, which is engaged in the theft of intellectual property across the world. President Obama’s national security adviser Susan Rice said last autumn that Chinese industrial espionage is ‘not a mild irritation, it’s an economic and national security concern to the United States’.

Chinese hacking of personal and corporate information, she said, ‘undermines our long-term economic co-operation, and it needs to stop’. …

… David Cameron and George Osborne seemed to believe that Britain, by treating the Chinese nicely, might persuade them to behave better, at least to us. This seemed naively mistaken last year, and is mistaken now.

So, likewise, was British willingness to allow the Chinese telecommunications firm Huawei to bid for contracts in this country, when the United States won’t allow the firm anywhere near its domestic systems.

The UK’s intelligence and security committee expressed dismay that the government was so eager to promote Chinese trade and investment that it seemed willing to ignore the obvious risks of admitting the Chinese to our telecoms networks.

For Huawei — like the China Nuclear Power Corporation (CNPC) — is no independent entity. Both are arms of the communist state. The CNPC’s website acknowledges its commitment to ‘the building of national defence’, alongside its economic and industrial objectives.

It’s not necessary to be an old-fashioned Cold Warrior to consider it folly for Britain to treat China as a friend while it promotes values and pursues objectives utterly at odds with those of this country and its allies.

… For now, however, we need to sup with both nations [China and Russia] using a long spoon. There may be a time, when Beijing has showed itself worthy of trust, when we should cut deals for Chinese investment in our infrastructure. But that time has not come yet.

The involvement in Hinkley Point of one of the most repressive and secretive regimes in the world poses unacceptable risks. Britain will have to pay a stiff forfeit for abandoning the project, but it seems right for the Prime Minister to make that decision.

There are many powerful economic arguments for cancellation, but the threat to our national security is the clincher.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-3722766/Espionage-Repression-sheer-folly-nuclear-deals-Chinese-writes-MAX-HASTINGS.html

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

1 Aug 2016

Posted under

Devolution, Hinkley C, Local Enterprise Partnership

Comments

2 Comments

Our LEP’s view on Hinkley C hold up

“Hinkley Point C – UPDATE

Posted: 29 July 2016

Following the news of EDF’s final investment decision on Hinkley, we urge the government to make a quick decision in support of the project. The Hinkley investment and its legacy will have a major benefit for the economy of the surrounding communities and the wider UK for decades to come and is truly transformational.”

http://www.heartofswlep.co.uk/news/hinkley-point-c-update

Transformational for whom exactly!

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

29 Jul 2016

Posted under

Devolution, Local Enterprise Partnership, Post-Brexit Adjustments

Bad news for our devolution councils and LEP

Particularly our LEP which has totally based its strategy on ever-increasing growth and productivity, continuing to receive EU funds or a similar level of funding from the government and for trickle-down from Hinkley C.

Plan B?

Growing uncertainty over the future of European funding for infrastructure and regeneration projects across England will hit economic growth unless there is clarity from government soon, councils have warned today.

In the strongest warning yet on the potential loss of regeneration funding following the vote to leave the European Union, the Local Government Association called for government action to prevent vital developments being lost.

The group said the majority of EU regeneration funding pledged to the UK in the 2014-2020 funding round remains tied up in thousands of growth-boosting proposals submitted to government. As these had not yet been approved, around £5.3bn of funding could potentially be at risk, particularly following the Brexit vote, LGA chair Lord Porter said.

“Communities and local economies have become increasingly reliant on what EU funds can achieve for them. Councils have used EU funds to help new businesses start-up, create thousands of new jobs, roll out broadband and build new roads and bridges,” he stated.

“Losing any of this vital money over the next few years would be a real blow for local economic growth and communities. It is important for the government to end the current uncertainty and guarantee that local areas will receive all of the EU funding they have been allocated by 2020, regardless of whether decisions over which projects it should be spent on have been made or not.”

In order to benefit from European funds, local areas are required to submit proposals, for example to create jobs or build new infrastructure, with government then deciding which projects the money can be spent on. Although the current period started in 2014, the LGA estimates that billions of this EU funding has yet to be released to local areas. For example, Cornwall and the north-east have both only received 20% of their EU funding allocations so far and Birmingham has only received 25%.

If these funds are not released soon, councils are concerned that Whitehall could hold onto this cash amid the uncertainty caused by the vote to leave the EU.

Projects that could be hit include the rollout of superfast broadband in Cornwall, which is part funded by the EU, as well as investments around Birmingham as part of the Midlands Engine devolution drive.

In addition, programmes in Greater Manchester supporting people into work, such as its flagship Working Well pilot programme that has so far engaged 4,000 residents on Employment and Support Allowance, are underpinned by European money. The initiative is being expanded to help a further 15,000 people who are on out-of-work benefits or in low-paid work. The expansion will run until March 2020 but is reliant on £12m of EU cash it is expecting to receive.”

http://www.publicfinance.co.uk/news/2016/07/councils-issue-warning-orn-eu-funding-uncertainty

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

28 Jul 2016

Posted under

Devolution, Hinkley C, Local Enterprise Partnership

Hinkley C: if it brings 5,000 jobs, where are the other 20,000 promised by the LEP coming from?

On Spotlight tonight, the spokesperson for Hinkley C said that it would bring 5,000 jobs to the Devon and Somerset area (presumably mostly in Somerset).

However, our LEP says:

“Hinkley Point C will see investment of by EDF of £20m in training, education and skills in the Heart of the South West. By the time the project is completed, we expect to see 25,000 new employment opportunities with 5,600 people and 400 apprentices employed at its peak. Over the lifetime of the project, over £2bn will go into our area’s economy.”

Click to access Non-tech%20summary%20-%20FINAL.pdf

How do these numbers stack up – 25,000 jobs but 6,000 at its peak? What happens to the other 19,000 jobs? Zero hours? Or is it 19,000 people doing education, training and skills for 5,000 jobs!!!

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

27 Jul 2016

Posted under

Accountability, Devolution, Hinkley C, Local Enterprise Partnership

Hinkley C doesn’t make sense

And yet our Local Enterprise Partnership and its devolution deal puts it at the heart of their plans – not surprising given the nuclear interests of several LEP members:

” … Hinkley C had been described as “the most expensive object on Earth” many months before the National Audit Office (NAO) revealed that subsidies would be nearly five times as big as had been previously advertised. The avalanche of subsidies has produced an ongoing state aid dispute with the UK launched by Austria, a new state aid investigation by the European commission into the reactor builder Areva, and a potential state aid dispute over France’s plans to make up EDF’s credit shortfall on the project.

Hinkley C has now become so uneconomic that it has been condemned in editorials in the normally pro-nuclear Times, Telegraph and Mail, and many EDF executives and employees think it might be a bad enough plan to completely destroy the state-owned utility.

On Thursday EDF’s board will make a widely trailed decision on whether to proceed with this “investment”. After years of delay, this unseemly hurry looks a bit like panic.

The tide has been turning against Hinkley ever since the problems at Olkiluoto in Finland and Flammanville in France, Hinkley’s elder siblings, became horribly apparent. Now, with a new UK government not so publicly committed to the project, EDF may be feeling that its chances of getting Hinkley built are likely to diminish even more quickly. Osborne seemed willing to countenance almost anything in his desperation to get his legacy built, but Philip Hammond might look at thte figures and the alternatives, and start looking for a way out.

To be clear, the Hinkley subsidies are not bungs to power brokers or inexplicable government largesse; Hinkley’s problems are so severe and so numerous that it requires potentially illegally high levels of state support in order for it to be built. Listing them all – the legal risks, the engineering risks, the liability risks, the credit risks, the safety risks – would take so long there would probably be some new ones before I’d finished. But they all spring from a reactor design, which has so far proved impossible to make work, and has even been described as “unconstructable” by an engineering professor.”

http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/jul/27/hinkley-point-c-no-more-than-doomed-attempt-face-saving?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

25 Jul 2016

Posted under

Accountability, Devolution, Economy, Local Enterprise Partnership, Post-Brexit Adjustments, Transparency

South-West MPs much more worried about devolution deal than councillors or LEP

“Devon and Somerset councils are reaching a critical stage in their bid for devolved powers, as they decide whether or not to accept a new combined authority model.

All 17 councils involved in the joint devolution bid are required to vote on the proposals, before leaders can progress with negotiations over the summer. It is hoped this could see a deal announced in time for the Autumn statement – but there are concerns among MPs that the current bid lacks clarity.

South West Devon MP Gary Streeter, said he and fellow MPs “greatly recognise and applaud” the work that Devon and Somerset councils have put in so far. But at the moment they have “more questions than answers”. “I think over the next two to three months, when we sit down with the new secretary of state and council leaders, we’re looking for those questions to be answered,” he said. “This is not the fault of the councils, it’s the fault of Government [that] it is still slightly vague and up in the air. “We’re not hostile, we’re just cautious at this stage, and want these questions to be answered. “We want more information about what the benefits will be to our constituents.”

To date, the Conservative Government has awarded 12 devolution deals to cities and regions across the UK. These have passed down greater control over a range of local services, including public health, transport and education.

Devon and Somerset councils collaborated with local national parks, CCGs and the Heart of the South West (HotSW) LEP to submit a joint bid in February. And following their most recent meeting with former local government secretary Greg Clark, they seem optimistic they will secure a deal. However, any progress rests on the individual district, unitary and county councils supporting the creation of a new combined authority (CA) for the region.

The proposal has already been voted through by a number of local authorities – including Exeter, Plymouth and Somerset – with Devon County Council due to vote on Thursday.

Somerset County Council leader John Osman believes the CA model present a far more suitable option than the alternative of a directly elected mayor. And he wants to clarify that it “will not take any powers or responsibilities” from the existing councils. “There is no appetite for a directly elected mayor in the Devon and Somerset area, so the Government have asked for an alternative,” he said.

“What [the combined authority] means is a board with one representative from every one of the 17 councils, the NHS and national parks, who will decide on the new powers and new responsibilities given. “It wont be a new bureaucracy or anything like that, [and] it wont be a massive committee of everybody. It will be 23 people around the room, one from each authority.”

If the proposals are accepted, Devon and Somerset will become the first region to receive devolved powers through a non-mayoral CA model. However, any progress rests on the individual district, unitary and county councils supporting the creation of a new combined authority (CA) for the region.

The proposal has already been voted through by a number of local authorities – including Exeter, Plymouth and Somerset – with Devon County Council due to vote on Thursday.

Somerset County Council leader John Osman believes the CA model present a far more suitable option than the alternative of a directly elected mayor. And he wants to clarify that it “will not take any powers or responsibilities” from the existing councils. “There is no appetite for a directly elected mayor in the Devon and Somerset area, so the Government have asked for an alternative,” he said. “What [the combined authority] means is a board with one representative from every one of the 17 councils, the NHS and national parks, who will decide on the new powers and new responsibilities given. “It wont be a new bureaucracy or anything like that, [and] it wont be a massive committee of everybody. It will be 23 people around the room, one from each authority.”

If the proposals are accepted, Devon and Somerset will become the first region to receive devolved powers through a non-mayoral CA model.

Leaders are hoping that all councils will be on side with the proposals by the end of July, to enable them to start further negotiations with Whitehall over the summer. Their next aim is to have a draft deal from the Government for local authorities to vote on by the end of October. They believe this could lead to an official deal being announced in November’s Autumn Statement.

Councillor Osman admits that the recent cabinet reshuffle – which saw Greg Clark replaced by Sajid Javid – has created some uncertainty. But he says it remains his ambition “to get a deal done and dusted by November time”. “We are now getting into contact with the new secretary of state and the chancellor to say we are still on track and working with civil servants,” he said. “We need to hear back from them to ensure they are still carrying on with the previous administrations line. “I can’t think why he wouldn’t to be honest, it was a conservative policy. But we’ve made contact and we’ve just got it wait for a response.”

The HotSW bid asks for a range of powers, including greater control over road and rail investment, more influence over house building and land use, and better integration of health and social care. Similar responsibilities have been devolved to other areas, including Cornwall, but only authorities with mayors have gained significant control over health budgets and business rates. The additional funding allocated to fund devolution also varies from deal to deal, starting from £15 million a year in Lincolnshire, to £36 million in the West Midlands.

At a Plymouth City Council meeting earlier this month, Labour councillor Tudor Evans called for a “serious conversation” about money. He argued the South West deal must not “set up the combined authority… for a fall”. He told the council chamber: “We’ve known for along time things like adult social care… health services… public health [are] inadequately funded. “We must use this… to unlock the bad funding formulae that have consigned us to not doing the best we can for too many years.”

Coun. Osman states that “the devil is in the detail” when it comes to finances. But he is confident that as councils take on new responsibilities from Government “funding will hopefully follow”. “If not, there is an inkling that we will be able to get some other sources of funding well,” he said. “Not council tax rises or anything like that, but money from central government or business rate rises.”

An area of underlying tension throughout the development of the bid has been geography, with Government keen for bids to focus on LEP boundaries. However, there are those who argue an authority which straddles multiple cities and counties will lack the sense of unity and identity enjoyed by somewhere like Cornwall. Other large multi-authority bids have come close to unravelling, with the East Anglia deal eventually being split into two after Cambridgeshire County Council rejected plans.

Gary Streeter points out that while the tendency in Somerset is “to look Eastwards toward Bristol and London”, in Devon the natural instinct is to look West toward Cornwall. “Most of us feel that… the region should be Devon and Cornwall, but we seem to have gone past that point,” he said. “Some people feel more strongly about it than others, particularly I think the Somerset MPs…. but is not necessarily a deal breaker. “There seems to be broad support for establishing Devon and Somerset. And there is support for a combined authority, provided we know how its going to work and its not simply adding another tier of government.”

Coun. Osman believes a break-up of the Devon and Somerset alliance is “unlikely”, adding that ministers are “pleased” that the 23 authorities have remained united. He said council leaders and staff will work hard over coming months to make the most of an opportunity to “shape the agenda for the South West”.

Mr Streeter is more reserved, suggesting that the new secretary of state may want to take a fresh look at the devolution agenda. He states that a November timetable “is a possibility” but “a lot of water has got to flow under that bridge yet”, and MPs will get a vote on the final deal. “Over the next two or three months… the detail [of the deal] is likely to change and emerge, so I think people shouldn’t get too hung up on the detail,” he added. “My own feeling is that with the new secretary of state coming in… some of the slight vagueness of the current proposal will be addressed.”

At a glance: What is a combined authority?

The 17 Devon and Somerset councils making a joint bid for devolution have been asked to support a new combined authority in order to progress to a deal.

Councillors stress this is not an attempt to merge authorities, or to take powers from lower tier councils– but there is potential for this to change.

Ministers first legislated for the creation of combined authorities in 2009, to allow councils to pool resources for the delivery of local services.

Their powers were enhanced by the passage of the recent Cities and Local Government Devolution Act, and the model has subsequently been taken up in a number of areas bidding for devolution.

In areas like Great Manchester and the Liverpool City Region, they have opted to establish CAs under the control of an elected mayor. However, the Heart of the South West (HotSW) region could be one of the first areas to secure a devolution package with a non-mayoral CA.

As proposals currently stand, the Devon and Somerset CA would be made up of one member from each council, national park, Clinical Commissioning Group (CCG) and the Local Enterprise Partnership (LEP) involved with the bid. Council leaders claim it will not be a physical entity or a “new bureaucracy,” but will simply be a way to coordinate the distribution of new funds and powers throughout the region.

The aim is to improve oversight without resorting to a directly elected mayor system, which many see as unsuitable for a region as large and diverse as Devon and Somerset. However, reports state that it is possible to change to a mayoral CA at a later date, and for powers to be transferred from lower tier councils “subject to agreement”.

http://www.plymouthherald.co.uk/devon-and-somerset-on-cusp-of-devolution-deal-but-mps-want-more-clarity/story-29549453-detail/story.html

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

23 Jul 2016

Posted under

Accountability, Devolution, EDDC, Local Enterprise Partnership, Scrutiny, Spin, Transparency

Devolution: Horses, carts, stable doors …

EDDC issues a press release on 21 July 2016 saying that on 13 July 2016 its Cabinet decided to press ahead with devolution plans:

http://www.midweekherald.co.uk/news/cabinet_agrees_to_continue_east_devon_devolution_talks_in_principle_1_4625365

THEN

the Overview Committee discusses it on 28 July:

Click to access 280616-overview-agenda-combined.pdf

And STILL we are not allowed our say!

Priceless.

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

21 Jul 2016

Posted under

Accountability, Devolution, East Devon Alliance, EDDC, Independent Councillors, Local Enterprise Partnership, Transparency

EDDC votes to continue devolution deal despite absence of consultation and facts

Talks on the devolution of power from Westminster to East Devon will continue ‘in principle’ amid calls for a public consultation and more concrete facts.

If successful, the Heart of the South West (HOTSW) bid would see local authorities work with the Local Enterprise Partnership (LEP) to take on more responsibility for economic growth and infrastructure in the region.

East Devon District Council’s cabinet agreed to carry on the conversation in principle at a meeting last Wednesday (July 13) but there was a consensus that more ‘concrete facts’ are needed.

[Independent, East Devon Alliance] Councillor Cathy Gardner said: “One thing that has concerned me since the beginning of this process is the complete absence of a public consultation. It could have a huge impact. It would be remiss of us to take this forward without seeing what people want.” EDDC’s full council will need to give the final go-ahead to continue talks.”

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

18 Jul 2016

Posted under

Consultation, Democracy, Devolution

Advice for the new Communities Minister on Devolution

So many instututions are now seeing what is wrong with devolution deals – but does the newly-constituted government care? Does it have the time or the will to care? Great words on inequality and a government that failed to understand ordinary people from Mrs May but will actions follow?

But the final sentence below on “networks and influence” is chilling, and just about negates the rest of the advice and may be pointing another, more worrying, way.

” … Grasp the democratic opportunity of devolution. With mayoral elections due next spring in the devolution deal areas, a more devolved system of governance will soon have new faces and voices, which will contribute to a shift in the political centre of gravity away from Westminster.

Yet democratic engagement through devolution should not begin and end with mayors. The speed of the process has created little space for democratic innovation to accompany reform, but there is an opportunity now for a richer democratic discussion, already being led by councillors, to take place. The next phase should be much more directly shaped by local people who need to feel more connected to the tangible opportunities reform can bring – open policymaking, citizens juries and using digital tools to reach people in new ways.

Above all, the new secretary of state shouldn’t think of devolution as giving power away, but as enhancing his own ability to get results. We live in an age that respects networks, not hierarchies. Some of the shocks convulsing through the institutions of Westminster and Brussels are the effects of this. The traditional clunking levers of Whitehall machinery struggle for impact in a complex, interdependent world. So use devolution as an opportunity to create a different model of governance – where influence and relationships are prime.

We look forward to seeing where Javid takes devolution next.”

http://www.publicfinance.co.uk/opinion/2016/07/five-priorities-new-communities-and-local-government-secretary

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

17 Jul 2016

Posted under

Accountability, Cornwall, DCC, Devolution, Economy, Education (local), Post-Brexit Adjustments, Rural communities, Small and Medium businesses, Transparency

Comments

1 Comment

Brexit: where now for Devon and Cornwall businesses?

Devon and Cornwall Business Council:

… “1) DEVOLUTION. This process may be very welcome to the business community (or it may not). There has been inadequate consultation for us to know what the implications might be. Either way it will create a period of uncertainty. We cannot afford to risk this whilst so many critical matters are up in the air. I propose that we ask for, at least, a 12 month moratorium whilst clarity is restored. Then we need a proper period of consultation knowing what we then know. Devolution has the potential to provide significant opportunities for devolved administrations to determine their own future when it comes to skills, transport, investment and development, but this agenda needs to be developed collaboratively with the private sector standing shoulder to shoulder with Government.

2) EUROPEAN MARKETS. More than 50% of South West trade is with near Europe. There have been some bold statements that 90% of trading opportunities will be outside the EU in the next 10-15 years. Many, however, of our investors are based in Europe – IMERYS, EDF Energy, Sibelco, Princes Yachts, Plymouth Gin, Barden Corporation to name but a few. Decisions are made in European capitals which affect a large number of our jobs and future growth prospects. We need to ensure that the existing investments are maintained and that we will feature in future investment decisions – access to the Single Market is vital. UK Trade and Industry (UKTI) department officials are already fully stretched (inadequate funding currently, with an increasing workload), we need to establish our own business trade ambassadors to ensure direct contacts are maintained and developed. From this base we can then begin to start creating a forward order book for whatever new trade agreements might emerge. This will also allow a programme to be developed to enable access into new global markets.

3) INFRASTRUCTURE. The South West has for too long been the Cinderella of the UK in terms of infrastructure investment. We have clearly supported plans for future spending on road, rail, air, marine and broadband projects. We must now directly lobby for these, acting as a single voice and ensuring that our South West MPs are lobbied to also speak with one voice. What, however, will make this happen is a demonstration that investment in infrastructure will result in direct business investment. We need to clearly demonstrate what we will contribute in return.

4) PLAY TO OUR STRENGTHS. Some of our most successful business sectors should be the subject of focussed programmes for ambitious expansion – food and drink, tourism and e-health are good examples of where the South West has specialist skills. Add to these; marine / maritime technology, aerospace / space, advanced engineering, digital and creative economy. Designed and co-ordinated tasks forces could achieve spectacular results in these areas of the economy.

5) GOVERNANCE/REGULATION. The system of regulation has been often complained about as a barrier to business growth – red tape, EU regulations or Gold plating from Whitehall? Staffing levels at regulators have been cut making the problems more acute. The establishment of voluntary codes and working partnerships led by trade bodies and self-regulated by them (with rewards for best practise) could greatly improve the current confrontational systems which have become entrenched – particularly in areas such as planning and environmental health.

6) PRODUCTIVITY. We have routinely lagged behind the average UK productivity levels (between 15-20% lower than UK average for Devon and Cornwall1). There are many drivers of productivity; investment, innovation, skills, enterprise and competition. This problem can be partly addressed by self-help. Simple work based systems can achieve significant improvements to outputs (and profits). These include Lean Production techniques. Training for all staff on digital skills and improvements to work/life balance (flexible working hours) which can reduce lost time off through stress / illness.

7) YOUNG BUSINESS. The Business Community has a collective responsibility to re-engage with the next generation to ensure we have attracted the huge talents of our young people. Business support can start by involvement as a Governor at Primary School all the way through to being a voluntary mentor for new start businesses. There are also great opportunities for assisting with work experience. The SW is blessed with some exceptional people with invaluable skills and experience. This should be high on the business agenda.

8) INNOVATION/SKILLS. We are proud of our Universities and Further Education Colleges. They deliver with national and international standards. The ground breaking research they produce is helping to change things around the world. We complain about a lack of relevant skills; however, do we fully engage with these institutions? Do we share with them our future business plans so that skill sets can be anticipated? Do we share with them our challenges in order to co-develop innovative solutions? Do we respond to their outreach work which can tackle production/system deficiencies? The answer is we could all do better. New partnerships should be formed as a priority. In part focusing on achieving young people with relevant skills (matched to growth sectors) through apprenticeships which, have the potential to greatly reduce our reliability on skilled labour from outside the UK, EU or otherwise.

9) URBAN/RURAL. For too long we have allowed ourselves to get sucked into Whitehall speak on the growth of Cities. Seen from the Whitehall bubble this is the best place to concentrate investment decisions. What we are missing by not forging strong urban/rural partnerships represents one of the greatest untapped opportunities for the growth of our economy – natural energy, local food production, health and well-being, water quality, flood/climate change management are all on our doorstep. DCBC will spearhead a rolling programme of partnership opportunities.

10) FUNDNG. The expectation that Government cash will still arrive as before is fool’s gold. Austerity will get worse before it gets better. Business will become even more important in the funding of growth opportunities. This could include matched funding with Devolved Authorities and perhaps taking advantage of cheap Government borrowing. We must set out our investment priorities more clearly and take these to our key stakeholders in the public sector for early discussions in order that improved delivery be achieved.”

http://www.dcbc.co.uk/news/brexit-where-next-business-community-10-point-recovery-plan#

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

13 Jul 2016

Posted under

Accountability, Austerity cuts, Devolution, Hinkley C

Hinkley C: top-up payments could add £30 bn to the bill

“A government spending watchdog has launched a devastating critique of Hinkley Point C, warning the nuclear project could cost energy consumers £30bn in “top-up payments” due to falling wholesale power prices.

The National Audit Office (NAO) also expressed fears that taxpayers could end up with a range of other payments under debt guarantees agreed by the government with EDF, the French energy group wanting to develop Hinkley.

There could also be potential liabilities for disposing of spent fuel and meeting claims in the event of a nuclear accident, argues the NAO, which says renewables may be a cheaper option.

“Supporting early new nuclear projects could lead to higher costs in the short term than continuing to support wind and solar. The cost competitiveness of nuclear power is weakening as wind and solar become more established,” says the report, entitled Nuclear Power in the UK.” …

http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2016/jul/13/hinkley-point-c-cost-30bn-top-up-payments-nao-report

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

12 Jul 2016

Posted under

Accountability, Devolution, Hinkley C, Local Enterprise Partnership, Transparency

Nuclear south-west

“… Referring to study commissioned by the Heart of the South West LEP, he added that the next 20 years is expected to see “up to £50 billion of nuclear-related opportunity” generated in the South West. …”

http://www.plymouthherald.co.uk/booming-nuclear-industry-creating-opportunities-from-plymouth-to-gloucester/story-29504664-detail/story.html

That would be the Heart of the South West LEP where a large number of its Board members – who make the decisions about how to spend millions of pounds in Devon and Cornwall – are in the nuclear industry … and which is in charge of our devolution bid.

Sweet!

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

12 Jul 2016

Posted under

Accountability, Community Infrastructure Levy, Devolution, Local Enterprise Partnership, Transparency

Publc being consulted on East Anglia devolution

Whereas, here, we are being allowed no say at all:

https://www.eastangliadevo.co.uk

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

11 Jul 2016

Posted under

Accountability, Devolution, Local Enterprise Partnership, Transparency

“A la carte devolution” says government minister …

Anyone see a recipe for disaster in this so-called a la carte menu for devolution? Owl thinks it smacks of “make it up as you go along” and would prefer a set menu! And Owl prefers to know its destination before it starts its journeys (see last paragraph).

“Greg Clark has set out a “continuous devolution” plan to boost the role of local councils so they become equal partners with Westminster in the governance of the country.

In a speech in Manchester on Friday, the local government secretary said government was moving towards a system where local areas were able to negotiate devolution with Whitehall on a “à la carte” basis and when communities identify new opportunities.

“If you lift the lid on Whitehall, what you see is an ongoing negotiation between different departments and ministers, an open process of give-and-take, proposal and counter-proposal,” he stated.

“This is how things work within central government, and I see no reason why it shouldn’t be the same between central government and local government: each with its own role and mandate, but equal partners in the governance of the nation.”

Although the government was “not quite there yet”, the Cities and Devolution Act included three enabling mechanisms that would make this happen. …

… Clark acknowledged that “to those of an excessively tidy frame of mind, this is quite unbearable”.

He added: “It’s not that they oppose devolution, it’s just that they want it implemented in a uniform, one-speed manner from the top-down. To me, that is to miss the point completely.

“Clearly, there are common principles that must be respected – such as democratic accountability and co-operation across local boundaries – but beyond that, I believe that the flexible approach to devolution has been vindicated.”

A uniform process of devolution would lead to reform at the pace of the slowest, which would have held back cities like Manchester and Liverpool, Clark added.

“I have always been clear that each deal and each piece of decentralising legislation represents a fresh point of departure not a final destination.”

http://www.publicfinance.co.uk/news/2016/07/clark-promises-continuous-devolution-cement-central-local-partnership

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

10 Jul 2016

Posted under

Accountability, Devolution, Hinkley C, Local Enterprise Partnership, Transparency

“South West to showcase the UK’s £50 billion nuclear opportunity in Westminster”

Well, easy to see why so many members of our LEP who have nuclear interests are spinning this! Anyone notice any declarations of interest here? And it seems without our ever being aware of it, our biggest industry is NOT tourism it’s nuclear energy.

“50 billion worth of business opportunities are up-for-grabs for firms who can provide services for the nuclear industry in the south west. And on Monday 11th July 2016, businesses and representatives from the Government will be able to find out more about how they can play their part at a special event in Westminster.

Taking place in the House of Commons, the event: “The South West – Powering the UK’s Nuclear Future” is being hosted by Bridgwater MP Ian Liddell-Grainger, in whose constituency Hinkley Point C is situated. It features high profile speakers Tom Greatrex, former Shadow Energy Minister and now chief executive of the Nuclear Industry Association, Andrea Leadsom MP, Minister of State for Energy, and Matt Burley, chair of the Nuclear South West Industry Network Board.

The event aims to bring together parliamentarians and south west nuclear industry leaders to set out the economic potential the region has to support the UK energy sector and ensure the Government recognises the unique opportunities that exist in the south west.

Nuclear South West is capitalising on the South West’s unparalleled strength and potential in the global nuclear industry; and generating transformational economic benefits to the UK and regional business community. The facts and figures are:

There will be at least £50billion worth of contracts available to south west companies across 15 projects over the next 20 years in new build, decommissioning and defence.

There are over 180 nuclear companies and organisations in the area, with over 8,000 highly skilled workers;

70% of the UK’s low carbon electricity comes from nuclear power stations; and two new ones are being built at Hinkley Point – creating 25,000 new jobs and £100m to the local economy;

There’s a £1.8bn nuclear defence programme at Devonport in Plymouth; and 44 colleges and training providers are working with Hinkley Point Training Agency.

Matt Burley, Chair of NSW Industry Network Board said: “The future of the nuclear industry in the south west and the scale of financial opportunity that could be unlocked for businesses of different sizes and sectors is enormous.

“We’re working hard to raise awareness and understanding of this opportunity across the region. Businesses are in a fantastic position to take advantage of the national and international nuclear programmes. There are many different services required to support the industry, from equipment suppliers to waste management, and nuclear research facilities to specialist consultancies.”

Ian Liddell-Grainger MP said: “The South West is a global contender in the nuclear energy sector and it offers the potential to create tens of thousands of new jobs and generate billions of pounds for the local and national economy. MPs in our region are committed to supporting and championing the sector. It’s great to see nuclear industry businesses bringing the South West opportunity to Westminster and working with Government to help create the right conditions for growth in the sector – there’s never been a more important time to do this.”

Steve Hindley, Chair of the Heart of the South West Local Enterprise Partnership said: “The South West is the UK’s leading region in the global nuclear renaissance.

“We’re at the ready to claim first-mover advantage in the UK’s nuclear sector, due to the next generation of power stations being started right here at Hinkley Point C. It’s Europe’s largest engineering project, will generate 25,000 new jobs and £14billion investment.

“It’s not just about Hinkley though. There are 15 nuclear opportunities worth £50 billion in this area; so we’re very excited about our cross-LEP & business–led partnership under the banner of Nuclear South West. We urge our Right Honourable Members to join us in showcasing the South West’s unparalleled strength and potential for transformational growth; right here at the nucleus of the nuclear industry.”

West of England LEP chair, Stephen Robertson, said: “The south west is at the forefront of the UK nuclear industry and is leading the way with research and skills training. With over 180 nuclear companies and organisations already in the south west the potential growth and innovation in this sector is huge. Getting nuclear right in the south west will harness the supply chain potential for local companies of all sizes across the south west.”

Dr Diane Savory OBE, Chair of GFirst LEP, said: “The nuclear-based power generation industry has long been a feature of the Gloucestershire economy and we must ensure that the skills infrastructure supports the growth in the economy, by future proofing and meeting the skills needs of businesses affected by workforce displacement to the demands of the nuclear industry.

“Funds from our Growth Deal have been invested in a Gloucestershire centre of excellence in Renewable Energy, Engineering & Nuclear skills (GREEN) in anticipation of the unprecedented expansion of nuclear, low carbon energy, and engineering in Gloucestershire and the South West. The centre will open in September 2017.”

Nuclear South West (NSW) is a partnership between the nuclear industry network in the south west and the stakeholder alliance of the Local Enterprise Partnerships: Heart of the South West, West of England and GFirst; the academic and skills sector and business support agencies.”

http://www.heartofswlep.co.uk/news/south-west-showcase-uk%E2%80%99s-%C2%A350-billion-nuclear-opportunity-westminster

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

10 Jul 2016

Posted under

Accountability, Devolution, Freedom of Information Act, Local Enterprise Partnership

LEPs must be subject to Freedom of Information Act says media

“Local Enterprise Partnerships must be covered by local government transparency rules and the Freedom of Information Act “to prevent billions of pounds of taxpayers’ money being hidden from public scrutiny”, media organisations have argued.

The News Media Association, which represents the industry, said LEPs were set to receive £12bn in funding between 2015-16 and 2010-21 to invest in local projects and businesses.

However, it claimed that most LEPs tended to make only headline information available, “making it difficult for journalists and members of the public to scrutinise how investment decisions are being made”.

The NMA added that an examination of the organisations’ websites had revealed that only 15 of the 39 LEPs in England and Wales published registers on board members’ interests and only seven of the LEPs’ full-year reports included clear, comprehensive statements of income and expenditure including salaries.

“There were 19 LEPs that appear to publish either no breakdown of money in or out in their annual reports or filed either dormant or highly abbreviated accounts at Companies House,” the NMA said in a submission to a government consultation on local government transparency rules.

Lucy Gill, NMA legal, policy and regulatory affairs advisor, said: “LEPs wield immense power, making investment decisions worth billions of pounds to local communities, yet journalists have enormous difficulty getting hold of even basic information about how this money is being spent.

“As the role and resources of LEPs expands, there can no longer be any justification for excluding them from local government transparency standards and the Freedom of Information Act.”

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

7 Jul 2016

Posted under

Accountability, Devolution, Hinkley C, Local Enterprise Partnership

Hinkley C cost has risen to £37 billion

“The total lifetime cost of the planned Hinkley Point C nuclear power plant could be as high as £37bn, according to an assessment published by the UK government.

The figure was described as shocking by critics of the scheme, who said it showed just how volatile and uncertain the project had become given the same energy department’s cost figure of 12 months earlier had been £14bn.

The latest prediction comes amid increasing speculation about the future of the controversial project in Somerset, now beset by worries about whether Brexit financial jitters could further undermine it.

Hinkley has been a flagship energy project for the British government and the chancellor, George Osborne, in particular, who lobbied hard and successfully for China to take a stake in the scheme.

Officials at the Department of Energy and Climate Change (DECC) on Thursday confirmed the £37bn figure but said it was a provisional, set in September 2015 when wholesale power prices were very low and would not affect bill payers. …

“… Critics of the scheme have claimed that the fall in the value of the pound since the referendum vote will increase the costs of the scheme to EDF’s French contractors, who work in higher cost euros. …

… The fall in power prices in the UK and continental Europe that have influenced the latest lifetime cost assessment for Hinkley is also responsible for some of the financial difficulties at EDF.

There have also been suggestions that Chinese investors are becoming more nervous about Hinkley and are demanding more concessions from EDF, so that more Chinese project managers and suppliers are involved. EDF denied this.”

http://gu.com/p/4z5ha

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

7 Jul 2016

Posted under

Accountability, Consultation, Devolution, EDDC, Local Enterprise Partnership, Spin, Transparency

Cabinet to rubber-stamp devolution deal with no consultation with members or public

“Heart of the South West Formal Devolution Bid (pages 52-56)

‘This report seeks approval to sign up ‘in principle’ to the pursuit of a Devolution Deal and the creation of a Combined Authority for the Heart of the South West sub- region to administer the powers devolved through the Deal. An ‘in principle’ agreement from all of the authorities, partners and MPs involved in the Heart of the South West devolution process will open up negotiations with Treasury to work towards a deal.”

Click to access cabinet130716combinedagenda.pdf