SUMMARY/PURPOSE

1 This report summarises the Isle of Wight Council’s response to the Review of the Regional Economic Strategy for South East England 2006-2016 (RES). Members are requested to consider the issues and give approval that the points made are put forward as the Council’s formal response to this consultation.

RULE 15 – ACCESS TO INFORMATION RULES

2. The invitation from SEEDA to make comments had a shorter timescale than anticipated and therefore did not appear on the Forward Plan.

BACKGROUND

3. The first Regional Economic Strategy (RES) for the South East region of England was produced by SEEDA (the South East England Development Agency) in 1999 in consultation with partners from a range of representatives from the public, private, voluntary and community sectors. This was reviewed in 2002, with the revised RES covering the period 2002 – 2012. SEEDA are currently carrying out a mid-term review of the RES, with the intent to roll the strategy forward to 2016, and are again consulting widely with a range of sectors throughout the SE of England.

4. The purpose of the strategy is to set a regional framework with agreed priorities, both topical and by geographic area, for the ongoing development of the economy of the SE region. This sits alongside other regional strategies such as the SE Plan, Regional Transport Plan etc and influences where resources managed or influenced at regional level (including funding) will be targeted. To enable support for local priorities it is important that these are reflected in the regional strategy.

5. The consultation document can be view by clicking on a link within this report. Page 33 of the “Responding to the Consultation Document” details specific questions that SEEDA would like responses to.

RESPONSE TO THE RES CONSULTATION

6. The Isle of Wight Council welcomes the opportunity to respond to the review of the RES 2006-2016. Whilst agreeing with the overall direction of the proposals the Council would like to make the following points:

General

7. Geographical Zonation

For the purposes of the RES the SE region has been split into economic zones – Inner South East, Outer South East and Coastal South East. These have been used to identify priorities under each of the 6 drivers for regional prosperity. The Isle of Wight has been included in the “Coastal SE” for this purpose and whilst the priorities under this area do, in the main, apply to the Island, in many cases the priorities identified for the “Outer SE” are equally or, in some cases, more relevant. It is therefore of concern that resources to address these issues should not be restricted to the geographical “zone” if the priority is equally important to an area in one of the other zones.

8. Rural Aspects

As a predominantly rural area, the Council welcomes the fact that rural aspects have been addressed under each of the 6 drivers. However, many of the comments made under this heading are very general (eg “tackle economic disadvantage and exclusion”). If rural issues are to be seriously addressed then “rural aspects” should be shown to be cross cutting across the 6 drivers with more specific priorities. This may be a question of presentation to make it clear that rural priorities have equal weighting to those in the geographic zones.

9. Priority Areas

Previous versions of the RES have identified priority areas for concentrating resources and actions (disadvantaged areas, potential growth areas etc) in an effort to ensure that intra-regional economic disparities are addressed and that all areas within the SE are being given the support to enable them to contribute to and benefit from the aspiration of the SE being a “world class region”. In this context the Isle of Wight has been identified both as a Priority Area for Economic Regeneration and as a Rural Priority Area. The current proposals do not make any reference to these areas.

10. The Isle of Wight is an area of comparative disadvantage within the SE, but one which has potential to contribute to the economic success of the region (ie potential growth area). The support given over the past few years is starting to realise this potential and the Council is concerned that this support should continue to help the Island carry on improving its economy. Whilst having many issues in common with both other rural and coastal areas there is also an “island dimension” to be added on, primarily linked to accessibility and transport to the mainland and the impact this has in terms of additional costs and the limited ability to benefit from economies of scale.

11. SEEDA’s Specific Consultation Questions:

(1) Which of these or other challenges do you believe are the most important for the future of the SE economy?

o Global competition can be seen as the overarching challenge. There is a high risk that while UK regions and sub-regional areas only see each other as competitors, the emerging economies identified in the RES will overtake them. The other headings under “key challenges” make up the component elements that will need to be addressed to enable the SE to meet the global challenge. Of these employment productivity, enterprise and innovation, and skills are seen as priority elements for the Island and are reflected in the priorities identified in the Local Area Agreement (LAA). However, to support these there is an urgent requirement for adequate infrastructure in its widest sense (water, waste, energy as well as transport and IT) – and, particularly in rural areas, this includes social infrastructure (schools, doctors, shops etc)

o Sustainable development – whilst there has been a lot written and spoken about sustainability, progress on ensuring this is included in delivery actions has been slow. If the SE economy is to develop in ways that can maintain its position as a prosperous region without jeopardising future resource then the sustainability ethos will need to be seriously adopted and adhered to. This includes social sustainability – teleworking (identified as one of the keys to sustainability) has its limitations and has been shown to have social and productivity disadvantages as employees can become very isolated.

The issue of social sustainability is of particular importance in rural areas. Whilst for many of the priorities mentioned the desired outcome may be the same (better employment, higher skilled workforce, higher entrepreneurial activity) the mechanism for achieving this may be different. It is therefore essential that a range of solutions are considered when considering the problems of access to services, training, jobs and leisure facilities (eg transport, ICT, delivery of services in the locality).

(2) Which are they key issues and opportunities for intervention and who should intervene?

Some issues are more appropriate for solution at a local level. Ones suitable for regional consideration, and the type of activity identified under 6 below, are those where:

o There is an issue common to the whole (or majority) of the region where a joint solution makes sense (eg adequate water or energy supplies)

o The issue is across the region and not limited to one area (eg transport infrastructure such as major road or rail networks)

o The issue will have an impact across the region (eg development of sub-regional port or airport)

o Opportunity for joint work, promotion or lobbying in a national, EU or international context where a regional approach will have more impact than a sub-regional one (eg lobbying regarding regulations / legislation that will not be of benefit to the SE).

o There is a role for dissemination of best practice and “cross fertilisation” of ideas. Regional agencies such as SEEDA are in an ideal position to act as a catalyst or “match maker” in these circumstances.

(3) What future inspiration of vision do you have for the SE economy?

o The SE economy should be one where all sectors and areas are given the opportunity to contribute to and benefit from shared prosperity (economic, social and environmental). It should also promote the uniqueness of the region and its sub-regional areas (eg the Isle of Wight is the only Island in the SE and has exceptional environmental qualities).

(4) Which of these or other objectives, measures and key tasks would you prioritise?

The Council would prioritise the following key objectives:

o Support and assist areas of deprivation to increase and improve their contribution to the economy of the SE. (skills, employment productivity, entrepreneurship, innovation)

o Identify, encourage and support sectors that have high potential of being the “industries” of the future (ie lay the ground for long term prosperity in the SE)

o Encourage and support land based industry to adapt to the changing agricultural environment and anticipated future needs (eg change in produce, including energy crops; production methods, added value)

o Ensure there is adequate infrastructure (in its widest sense) to support all proposed development

Specific topics that are a priority for the Island are:

§ To improve skills and educational attainment, particularly in relation to employers’ requirements

§ The support and promotion of business networks and clusters, particularly those seeking innovative approaches, in key industry sectors:

o Marine (including composites)

o Environmental (energy, waste, land use)

o Construction

o Knowledge based

o Hospitality

o Health and social care

o Media

§ Joint initiatives between regional and local bodies, public and private sector that will help provide the infrastructure needed for sustainable growth:

o Private Finance Initiative (PFI) – Highway maintenance, integrated waste management, integrated transport networks, Solent Travel.

o Local Investment Company (Local Delivery Vehicle) – a company set up to manage and develop local property assets (mainly land) currently in public sector ownership in accordance with local priorities and plans. As land is developed and sold on the funds received are recycled into further local development initiatives, thereby becoming self-perpetuating.

(5) What will your organisation contribute to the achievement of the objectives and key tasks?

o The Council is one of the key organisations promoting and supporting economic regeneration on the Isle of Wight and will contribute both in an enabling role and as a delivery agent through:

o planning processes,

o support services,

o delivery of regeneration and economic development

o services

o lead body for the development and delivery of the LAA

o In particular the Council will seek to align public sector spending to support the priorities of the Island that contribute to the SE Region. These will be delivered through:

§ The Island Plan (local development framework) - this is the only one in the SE which is driven by regeneration factors linked to housing need (including present need)

§ The LAA

§ The Council’s Capital Plan

§ LTP2

§ Sect 106 Agreements

o The Council is also engaged in a number of joint initiatives seeking to maximise the use and benefits of partners’ combined resources, including those of the private sector. These include:

§ A range of PFI (Private Finance Initiatives) – Highway maintenance, waste, Solent Travel.

§ Local Investment Company (LDV)

(6) How should SEEDA’s own activities be concentrated in contributing to the objectives and key tasks?

§ Acting as co-ordinator and catalyst to move things forward, particularly when a range of regional bodies is involved or need to work together.

§ Acting as intermediary or influencing agent where co-operation of national agencies, government or European bodies are needed to progress particular projects or priorities.

§ Ensuring that the resources they control or influence (including discretionary grant funding from national or EU sources) is targeted in the most efficient way to ensure that priority actions are achieved.

§ Acting as a lead body on regional projects

§ Playing an active role as a key partner in joint initiatives for key projects such as the PFI and LDV mentioned in paragraphs 10(4) and 10(5) above.

STRATEGIC CONTEXT

12. The RES lays out the regional policy objectives and priorities for the economy of the SE over the next 10 years. This will inform where funding and other resources administered or influenced at a regional level will be concentrated to achieve the proposed aims and objectives over this period. This consultation provides an opportunity to ensure that key local priorities (as identified in the Local Area Agreement, Island Plan and other local plans and strategies) are reflected as far as possible in the RES, thereby ensuring that they will be seen a priorities for the allocation of these resources.

CONSULTATION

13. The content of this report is the Council’s response to a consultation by SEEDA, a regional body. Members of the Regional Strategy Group have been asked for their comments; membership is as follows:

a. Councillors:

Cabinet Member for Care, Health and Housing

Cabinet Member for Economy, Regeneration, Tourism and Leisure

Cabinet Member for Environment, Transport and Planning

b. Representatives from the following Council services:

Strategic Director of Economic Development and Regeneration

Planning

Housing

Tourism

Engineering (transport)

Culture and Leisure

c. External members:

IWEP (Isle of Wight Economic Partnership)

RCC (Isle of Wight Rural Community Council)

14. Other organisations on the Island (eg Rural Community Council, Isle of Wight Economic Partnership) have been approached separately by SEEDA for their comments and will be making their own replies.

FINANCIAL/BUDGET IMPLICATIONS

15. There is no direct financial implication in responding to this consultation. However, there is the potential to influence where future funding that is controlled or influenced by SEEDA will be allocated (eg SEEDA “single pot” money, SEEDA investment in land and property, future national and EU monies that are managed by SEEDA).

LEGAL IMPLICATIONS

16. The Council has discretionary economic well-being powers under part 1 Local Government Act 2000. The Isle of Wight Council considers that part of that duty is to take every opportunity to influence strategies, plans and allocation of resources to the benefit of the Island. By making robust and timely response to this consultation they are carrying out that duty.

OPTIONS

17. The following options are available for consideration:

c. No response is made by the Council to the RES consultation

d. An official response is made by the Council to the RES consultation including all the points made in paragraphs 5 to 10 inclusive as they stand.

e. An official response is made by the Council to the RES consultation, but the points made in paragraphs 5-10 inclusive are amended following consideration by the Cabinet.

EVALUATION/RISK MANAGEMENT

18. Option b set out a range of points relating to the RES that the author considers should be made to SEEDA after internal consultation. However, after having the opportunity to read the consultation document and hear the presentation from SEEDA’s Area Director for Hampshire and the Isle of Wight on 30 January, Members may wish to add to these or amend them. The recommendation therefore allows Members the choice of adopting comments as they stand (option b) or of amending these (option c).

19. Risks to consider, and mitigating actions are:

f. No response is made to the RES consultation, with the potential result that the interests and priorities of Isle of Wight are not considered when setting regional policies and allocating resources, including funding.

g. SEEDA will not include the points made by the Council in their final RES, either in part or in total. However, that risk is part of the consultation process. If the Council were to put forward suggestions for priorities or activities that are unreasonable or would be of detriment to all or part of the SE region, these could not be accepted by SEEDA. This risk is mitigated by putting forward considered comments that are in line with other local and regional strategies and priorities, which are not considered pejorative to other areas.

20. Staff will continue to monitor the evolution of the RES and take every opportunity to try and ensure that the interests of the Isle of Wight are promoted and protected, seeking Member support where this considered necessary.

RECOMMENDATIONS

21. Members approve Option b) or c).

BACKGROUND PAPERS

22. Supplementary reports supporting the RES consultation are:

h. Regional Economic Strategy for South East England 2002 – 2012.

i. SEEDA: Economic Impact Assessment of the Regional Economic Strategy; Final Report; October 2005 (prepared by KPMG)

j. SEEDA: Review of Regional Economic Strategy 2006-2016; The Evidence Base; Interim Paper; November 2005.

APPENDICES

23. Appendix 1: Executive Summary of Review of Regional Economic Strategy for South East England 2001 – 2016; Consultation Document.

Please click here to view the - Review of Regional Economic Strategy for South East England 2001 – 2016; Consultation Document -

Contact Point : Lesley Williams. Tel: 01983 823797 email: [email protected]

MR DEREK ROWELL

Strategic Director for Economic Development and Regeneration

CLLR TIM HUNTER-HENDERSON

Cabinet Member for Island Economy, Regeneration, Tourism and Leisure

APPENDIX 1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

REVIEW OF REGIONAL ECONOMIC STRATEGY FOR SOUTH EAST ENGLAND 2006 – 2016

Consultation Document

Introduction

The purpose of the Regional Economic Strategy (RES) is to shape the future economic development of the South East Region. Whilst the role of SEEDA is to lead the development and overall implementation of the RES, all parties who have an interest in the future performance of the region have a part to play.

The document is split into the following sections:

1 Progress with the current RES (2001 – 2012)

The RES has been most successful in:

§ Providing a shared vision for the region

§ Aligning strategies

§ Influencing external agencies

§ Influencing funding and resource allocation within the region

§ Providing a context and reference document for partners within the region

§ Highlighting issues and geographical priorities for the region to address

§ Developing specific successful projects

It has been less successful in:

§ Sharing best practice across the region

§ Encouraging agencies to plan and deliver projects jointly

§ Encouraging more effective partnership working

2 The evidence base - key points

Comparing economic performance for 1997 – 2003 against other UK regions the SE achieved:

§ The fastest growth in GVA at 35.3% per head

§ The second highest absolute level of GVA per head at £18,400

§ Highest economic activity rate – averaging 82.9%

§ Lowest employment rate, averaging 4.2%

§ Second highest household income per head, at almost £14,300

The SE has been divided into 3 broad economic areas (ref map page 6):

§ Inner SE – a relatively wealthy core around London

§ Outer SE – largely rural with well-established market and county towns.

§ Coastal SE – less prosperous periphery, with large urban areas offering strong economic potential and coastal towns that have had mixed success in reinventing themselves

3 Key challenges facing the SE

§ Global

§ Smart Growth

§ Prosperity and Sustainability

4 The vision: sustainable prosperity

5 The Strategy:

This is discussed under the following topics, which are seen as the “drivers” for the economy. At the end of each section a table is presented showing the proposed regional priorities for the topic are listed under each of the 3 economic areas or zones (Inner SE, Outer SE, Coastal SE) with an additional list of priorities addressing the “Rural Aspects” of the driver. For ease of reference the page number with the relevant table is shown in brackets after each driver.