PAPER A

POLICY COMMISSION MEETING

Meeting	Policy Commission for Economy, Tourism, Regeneration and Transport
Ref	E.PC. 13/9/06
Date	13 September 2006
Time	18.00 hours
Place	Committee Room 1, County Hall, Newport
Purpose of meeting	Formal Public Meeting
Attendance	Commission	Cllrs George Brown (Commissioner), Jonathan Fitzgerald-Bond, Ivan Bulwer, Charles Hancock, John Hobart, Lora Peacey-Wilcox
	Cabinet
	Cabinet Secretariat
	Other Councillors	Cllrs Arthur Taylor, Mike Cunningham, John Effemey, Brian Mosdell,
	Officers	Miss Vanda Niemiec, O&S Team Ms April West, O&S Team Mr Barry Cooke, Corporate Property Manager
	Stake holders	Kevin Smith, Chamber of Commerce, Tourism & Industry Matthew Hill, IW Economic Partnership Astrid Davies, Acting Head of Cultural & Leisure Services
	Apologies	Cllr Henry Adams
Agenda Items
1. To agree the notes of the previous meeting	1.1 The notes of the meeting held on 9 August 2006 were agreed.
2. To invite Members to declare any interest they might have in the matters on the agenda	2.1 There were no declarations of interest.
3. To receive an update on the Highways PFI enquiry Cllr Ivan Bulwer	3.1 The expression of interest was sent to the relevant government department on Friday 8^th September 2006. 3.2 The bid has wide support as a pathfinder project for rural areas. 3.3 A detailed business case will be submitted by April 2007, once feedback is received, and the project is likely to commence in May 2009, once the tendering process has been completed. 3.4 The new Director of Neighbourhoods and the Environment, Stuart Love, will be lead officer on the project. He has previous experience of dealing with PFI’s. 3.5 It was recognised that this project was started in 2003 by the previous administration.
	The Commissioner stressed that the Commission’s task in all projects was to examine the elements of prospective policies and to take evidence from stakeholders prior to making recommendations to the Cabinet. The Commissioner emphasised that Commissions were not decision making bodies.
4. To receive evidence on Hubs enquiry E6/06 Ms Astrid Davies, Acting Head of Cultural & Leisure Services, (IWC)	4.1 As Help Shop Manager for Surrey County Council in 1996, Ms Davies was invited to brief the Commission on her experiences in respect of this enquiry. 4.2 Surrey CC chose to make a commitment to the accessibility of services by providing Help Shops, which received massive support from the public. 4.3 Help Shops were set up in partnership with Borough and District Council’s. 4.4 They utilised sites where members of the public already visited, such as retail sites that could accommodate a public facing facility together with private office space. 4.5 There is a distinction between making services more accessible to the public and utilising existing accommodation by incorporating other facilities. 4.6 Facilities for peripatetic staff could be included, to enable access to desk space and files/diaries etc with the use of Wide Area Network (WAN). 4.7 The use of public buildings could be improved with Parish/Town Councils using Council buildings and Council staff using Police and Health buildings. 4.8 Care needs to be taken when deciding on which site to use and which services are to be provided. It may not be appropriate for a help centre to deal with a customer’s complaint in the public area of a Tourist Information Centre, where the local environment is being promoted. 4.9 The sites should be customer focussed, with good quality accommodation and friendly staff to show we value our customers. 4.10 Hubs must be customer service driven and based on service delivery to ensure we are responding to the needs of our customers. 4.11 In view of the time, further questions on this topic were requested to be sent to Ms Davies after the meeting. Replies would be provided and details given at the next meeting.
5. To receive evidence on the Ports enquiry E106 Mr Kevin Smith Chamber of Commerce, Tourism & Industry	5.1 This evidence is provided by the Tourism Executive which represents a focus group of the members of the Chamber of Commerce. 5.2 The comments are based on consideration of various plans and guidelines which support the sustainability of the local area in respect of protecting our environment, improving our facilities and safe guarding our rural community. 5.3 The main areas of concern relate to marshalling yards and freight transport. 5.4 Attractive gateways to the Island are essential in creating a positive first impression. 5.5 Additional cross Solent operators could be considered but this could jeopardise the services provided by existing operators. Concern was raised over the potential for competitors to ‘cream off’ the business in the busy summer months, leaving the existing operators to provide the winter service. 5.6 Close working with the PFI is needed to ensure improvements with the road network to assist with travel to and from any port. 5.7 The movement of heavy goods around the island is a concern. Specific HGV routes could be considered. 5.8 Larger loads could be transferred to smaller loads to reduce the amount of HGV traffic. This would increase the amount of traffic and be time consuming, therefore potentially increasing the cost of supplies. 5.9 Unlike most other islands in the European Union, the Isle of Wight receives no central funding for the provision of transport services. The Island is integrated with Hampshire in respect of economic indicators and therefore gets overlooked as an island, and suffers from its uniqueness. 5.10 The Chamber encourages cross Solent operators to give good value for money in respect of fares, especially to local customers.
Action	All major retailers have been contacted to provide evidence on this enquiry, with a very poor response. Mr Smith will raise the issue with members of the Chamber and encourage their involvement.
6. To receive evidence on the Ports enquiry E106 Matthew Hill IW Economic Partnership	6.1 The view of the IWEP is that the transport infrastructure on the Island is critical and consideration of expanding existing ports and the airport as well as provision of a new port is required. 6.2 Road and rail connections on the mainland as well as the island are important to our local economy to ensure effective accessibility. 6.3 Employment sites could be located near to any new large-scale transportation infrastructure to provide efficiencies in the transport of workers. 6.4 The import and export of bulk material is important to the local economy. Island companies could benefit from the provision of a shared facility to enable the breaking of bulk and the storage of trailers, to enable smaller loads to be distributed. 6.5 A computer model could be used to display relevant data from the IW Council and other agencies, to demonstrate the impact cross solent travel has on the road network etc. This would require specialist advice and investment. However, commercially sensitive data would not be available.