PROSPEROUS PLACES – CONSULTATION ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SUB NATIONAL REVIEW NORTH WEST REGION RESPONSE BY NWRA AND NWDA 1.
Introduction
1.1 The Northwest made a strong contribution to the Sub National Review and welcomed the fact that it endorsed and included many of the reforms proposed by this region. In particular we believe a statutory integrated Regional Strategy will help boost the sustainable economic performance of the North West. It will, for the first time, enable us to bring together actions to maximise economic opportunity and reduce social disadvantage at the same time as delivering the necessary growth in housing and discharging our aims to mitigate climate change impacts and promote equality and diversity. Continuing to improve performance is vital if we are to contribute all we can to meeting the REP PSA target. 1.2 The Government’s intentions as outlined in Prosperous Places also recognise the considerable progress that has already been made in the region and allow us to build on close working relationships at a regional level – especially between the Northwest Regional Development Agency (NWDA) and the existing Northwest Regional Assembly (NWRA). We are also pleased to see support for the development of strong sub regional partnerships and enhanced economic roles for local authorities. Swift delivery of the proposed reforms is now vital to improved performance. 1.3 We have some concerns, however, that the overriding goal of SNR – galvanising improved sustainable economic performance through genuine strategy integration and alignment, and a sharper focus on delivery – may be dissipated by concerns over “process issues” or further delayed as implementation becomes subject to central guidance and legislation. Partners in each region should be empowered to move at the fastest pace possible, not restrained by a national debate about structures and public sector processes. 2.
Summary and Headline messages
Our response is underpinned by a number of important principles and issues. We feel that these are central to the successful delivery and we would encourage Government to treat these as priorities i.
The remit of the Regional Strategy must be fully aligned with the delivery of skills policy. We are very disappointed that it is not recognised that through embedding regional skills and employment priorities in a Regional Strategy this would contribute to economic growth and productivity as well as the various skills PSA targets. Our evidence shows conclusively that skills are both fundamental to economic performance and that skills requirements differ between regions and localities. By seeing skills separately the opportunity afforded by a Regional Strategy - both as a contributor to national PSAs and as a statement of integrated regional priorities with traction on public spending - is fundamentally weakened.
ii.
Success of an integrated Regional Strategy will depend on the ability of this region to successfully join-up, and deliver, an integrated policy at the regional level. However, it will also depend on central Government signing up in the widest possible sense to the Strategy and, once approved, ensuring its investment supports delivery of the Strategy, as Government policy. It will not be enough for Secretaries of State of CLG and BERR to agree it but DEFRA, DWP, DIUS, DFT, DH and HMT must all therefore explicitly support it. Executive Agencies must also “sign-up” to the agreed Regional Strategy. We believe it is important that there is a delivery plan alongside the agreed Strategy and that both are signed up to by Government to ensure the agreed strategy is actually implemented.
1
iii.
The region would support a more wide ranging economic duty on upper tier and unitary local authorities such that they are required to deliver economic development as well as undertake an economic assessment. Local authorities are increasingly taking on a delivery role – often through partnerships at the sub regional level – and this helpful trend in line with the initial SNR document should be recognised and further supported.
iv.
Any central Government guidance to local authorities on undertaking an economic assessment should be light touch, for example confined to a clause or clauses within the legislation. This would prevent further delay to SNR implementation. It should also be made clear through Parliamentary statement that RDAs will take account of these assessments and ensuring this happens should be for the Leaders’ Forum as part of its scrutiny function.
v.
The region strongly supports a second round of the RFA process and the inclusion of greater transport expenditure including rail. However, we believe that asking regions for advice on skills priorities but not on funding allocations is inconsistent and unduly complicated: skills should be one of the funding streams included in RFA. Government should give Regional Skills and Employment Boards “section 4” status so thay can bring together a joint strategy and help to drive the allocation of LSC funding at a regional level. The region also believes that road maintenance expenditure, currently distributed to local authorities, and ERDF, which has already been subject to a regionally agreed strategy and separate EU governance rules, should not be included within RFA.
3. Conclusions and current progress 3.1 The North West has already made significant progress in responding to the challenges set down in the SNR and wishes to make further progress as soon as possible. For example: i.
We have agreed to further align the Regional Spatial Strategy and its current Partial Review and the Regional Economic Strategy and its evidence base. To ensure that our priorities remain up to date and in light of changing economic conditions we are proposing to move immediately to review our overarching vision for the region, the key principles that should inform our future development and the economic and spatial priorities which will, when the legislation allows, form the basis of a Regional Strategy.
ii.
We have already agreed the structure of this Region’s Leaders’ Forum - based on the successful model of the NWRA Executive Board - which we are pleased will not only sign off the proposed Regional Strategy but also help shape it from day one.
iii.
The Northwest Development Agency has already reviewed its Corporate Plan and set out a programme level approach to its investment in RES priorities. This will support an investment planning approach with priority localities and sub-regions.
iv.
The region has five sub regional partnerships that bring together Local Authorities and businesses to set priorities. Four areas have put themselves forwards as pilots for Multi Area Agreements. Whilst these arrangements are in different stages of development across the region, they are already demonstrating the added value of Local Authorities working together across functional economic geographies.
v.
Discussions are already taking place about how local partners can be more involved in decision making and how delegation can be achieved through joint investment planning where capacity exists and there is potential to make a significant difference to the economy.
3.2
In preparing this response the region has agreed to focus on issues where we need Government to reform or to show leadership to resolve an issue. Where we can resolve issues or take opportunities ourselves then the region will work together to do so. We need Government to support this approach through the legislation it is planning. We would be pleased to discuss any aspect of this submission in further detail as and when required.
2
A. Stronger Partnerships for Regional Growth 4.
Capacity and Delegation
4.1
Key messages •
RDA's work closely with a range of strategic and delivery partners. In implementing SNR the Government needs to acknowledge the important role of local authorities but also the role of other local, regional and national partners (eg business, universities, colleges etc).
•
The concept of delegation needs to be firmly set within an ‘investment planning’ model. In other words, decisions about the nature of, and funding for, delivery must follow agreement on priorities.
•
Delegation will differ between places, depending upon their strategic importance, capacity, expertise and the nature of proposed programmes and projects.
•
Partners will need to invest in local capacity in order to effectively plan and deliver economic development and regeneration. It is not clear form current proposals how this issue will be addressed.
4.2 The region welcomes the ambition in the SNR to increase delegation of funding and decision making to the most appropriate spatial level. The NWDA already uses mechanisms to achieve delegation within the existing legislative constraints. For example over a quarter of NWDA’s annual investment is channelled through Urban Regeneration Companies who, with the NWDA and their Local Authority, decide on the business plan and priorities for investment. 4.3 Investment planning should include a wider range of Government departments and agencies. RDA’s delegation should be part of a ‘single negotiation’ with places. This region wants to develop joint investment plans between local areas and investment partners which will include NWDA , HCA, . DIUS/ DCSF and new funding agencies and DWP 4.4 -
-
This approach to delegation would enable: Regional and local programmes increasingly co-specified and commissioned jointly by a range of partners. Enhanced delegation for existing vehicles such as URCs and SPVs when legislation allows New delegatory arrangements for those programmes where the impact of local prioritisation is greatest – e.g. place based regeneration, employment sites, and worklessness Pooling of Local Authority investment to achieve greater value for money, including Working Neighbourhood Funding, where Authorities agree to do so MAA’s to be underpinned by cross boundary delivery programmes.
4.5 It will be important therefore for all local authorities to develop the capacity to better deliver economic development in their local areas. The Regional Improvement & Efficiency Partnership will help deliver this. Q1. How should RDAs satisfy themselves that sufficient capacity exists for programme management and delivery at local or sub-regional level? 4.6 We will not want a one size fits all approach. The region will require different levels of capacity and expertise in different areas depending on their economic potential, industrial makeup, socio-economic factors and economic geography. 4.7 The NWDA, as part of developing the single strategy implementation plan with partners, will apply clear and transparent criteria for establishing capacity and establishing where developing capacity is a regional priority. These criteria will be jointly developed and agreed with the Leaders’ Forum. We therefore do not wish to see central Government developing the criteria by which capacity is determined.
3
5.
Regional Local Authority Leaders’ Forum
5.1
Key Messages •
The Northwest has already agreed a new regional Leaders’ Forum based on the successful model of the Assembly Executive board which incorporates key principles of transparency, engagement and representation. As such we believe no government intervention or guidance is necessary.
5.2 We welcome the proposals in Prosperous Places. The strategic and investment decisions made at the regional tier need to demonstrate clear lines of accountability not only to Government but also to the region. The North West has already agreed a Leaders’ Forum structure which will be based on the existing NWRA Executive Board. It will include three local authority leaders from each sub region plus six leading stakeholders drawn from the business, social and environmental sectors and currently the Lake District National for planning purposes. The Chief Executive of the NWDA and Director of GONW will be participating observers. 5.3 This will help shape as well as agree both the Regional Strategy and the resulting delivery/implementation plan. It is expected that the Leaders’ Forum will be funded by CLG, local authorities and regional partners. 5.4 Membership of the Leaders Forum will be kept under review. In particular we intend to consult widely regarding the proposition that one of the region’s MEPs and one of the region’s MPs (for example the Chair of any North West Select Committee of MPs) should also be invited to be participating observers. In addition, the forum will want to develop working relationships with new Government agencies such as the Homes and Communities Agency so will keep membership under review. 5.5 The Regional Strategy Team, which brings together the Chair of the NWDA with the Chair of the Leaders Forum and the Director of Government Office, will continue its useful role in coordinating and considering strategic organisational issues. Its membership will also be subject to ongoing review. The RES advisory group which has been a valued and effective stakeholder body will evolve significantly so that its membership is appropriate for the new challenge of a wider single regional strategy. Q2. Do you agree that local authorities should determine how they set up a local authority leaders’ forum for their region, and that the Government should only intervene if the required criteria are not met or if it failed to operate effectively? If not, what would you propose instead? 5.6
We agree that Local Authorities should determine the Leaders’ Forum for their region. We have already done so in the North West
6.
Accountability and Scrutiny
6.1
Key messages •
Future parliamentary and local scrutiny arrangements must be complementary, avoid duplication and not place unnecessary burdens on the RDA
•
There are many lessons to be learned from former Regional Assembly scrutiny arrangements
•
Future regional and parliamentary scrutiny must consider the policies and investment decisions of national departments and their agencies in supporting all aspects of sustainable economic growth
4
•
Consider wider powers for regional scrutiny along the lines of local authorities’ ability to compel attendance and provision of information
6.2 The region welcomes clarification that the “local authorities should develop new arrangements for exercising their scrutiny powers at regional level through the Leaders’ Forum”. We also welcome the fact that these powers “can be applied to RDAs and other Government agencies.” 6.3 To respond to concerns about the need for distinction between executive role and scrutiny function, the proposed local authority led scrutiny sub committee as part of the new Leaders’ Forum arrangements will comprise senior local authority members and stakeholders not on the Leaders’ Forum. Q3. Are the proposed regional accountability and scrutiny proposals proportionate and workable? To ensure that the proposals are proportionate and workable government should consider the following: i.
The Leaders Forum scrutiny sub committee should have similar powers to those local authorities have and, for example, be able to compel witnesses to attend and for information to be provided.
ii.
Given that the single regional strategy will include issues such as the environment, transport, skills and housing the remit of the Leaders Forum scrutiny sub committee should over time include the agencies which cover these areas.
iii.
Regional arrangements should be reviewed by the Leaders’ Forum once Westminster determines whether or not to establish a Regional Select Committee: however we believe to be workable these would need to: • Be aligned to, but not duplicate the work of, the Leaders’ Forum Scrutiny Group • Focus on national activity impacting on North West ie what government departments are doing/should be doing for this particular region and not focus on the RDA alone • Have some overlapping membership eg Chair of Leaders’ Forum Scrutiny Group should be a participating observer at Select Committee and Leaders’ Forum Director of Scrutiny should meet with Committee Clerk regularly to discuss future workplans
iv.
Ensure that there is opportunity to build on what has already been learnt in the region about best practice in scrutiny
B.
Integrating Regional Strategies to Promote Growth
7.
Regional Strategy
7.1
Key points •
It should be for each region to put in place transitional arrangements. Central Government should quickly address the legislative barriers to developing a single strategy with a statutory basis.
•
National Planning policy should be revised and clarified to ensure that the Regional Strategy is an enabler of sustainable development and is not burdened with detail which is more appropriately covered at a local level.
5
•
There should be a statutory implementation plan, agreed with the Leaders Forum and key Central Government Departments, including DWP and DIUS, which would create the required leverage over funding streams, partners organisations and national departments
•
Government should not exclude skills from the remit of the regional strategy or regional funding allocations. To do so would jeopardise the effectiveness of the regional strategy from the start.
Q4 Do you agree that the regional strategy needs to cover the elements listed in paragraph 4.13? Are there other matters that should be included in the regional strategy to help the delivery of key outcomes? 7.2 The Northwest welcomes this opportunity to link the spatial strategy with the economic strategy given the extent to which they are already linked in practice. In particular the NW will ensure the strategy reflects the strength of functional economic geographies. 7.3 The region is clear that the overarching goal for the strategy should be a stronger and more sustainable economy for the Northwest – one which contributes to meeting the Regional Economic Performance PSA target and helps narrow the north-south divide. 7.4 The remit of the Regional Strategy must fully include the skills agenda. We note with some dismay that it is not envisaged that the Regional Strategy will contribute to the various skills PSA targets. All our evidence shows that skills are a fundamental driver to the regional economy and that skills requirements differ across and within regions. To remove skills from the process of regional prioritisation therefore jeopardises the effectiveness of a Regional Strategy from the start. 7.5 We also believe the remit of the strategy must include those issues which will cut across all aspects of it and need to be embedded from the outset. These include relevant strategic requirements concerning regional health policy issues as well as those emanating from equality and diversity and European policy priorities. Q5 Do you agree with the way in which we propose to simplify the preparation of the regional strategy, as illustrated in the figure (on page 35), in particular allowing flexibility for regional to determine detailed processes? If not, what other steps might we take? 7.6 The region welcomes the staged approach to producing a Regional Strategy, the envisaged regional flexibility in its preparation and the critical role for the Leaders’ Forum in helping the RDA scope the issues and appraise the options at every stage in the cycle. The region also welcomes the proposed flexibility regarding full formal reviews of the Regional Strategy. 7.7 The proposed timetable of 25 months is extremely ambitious and although we support a streamlined approach the suggested timescales, for example two months for Leaders Forum and RDA Board to sign off and two months for CLG and BERR Secretaries of State to sign off, will be extremely challenging in practice. 7.8 There should be an explicit presumption that the Leaders Forum and RDA will agree the drafted Regional Strategy. NWDA and the Leaders Forum will in all instances seek to reach agreement and resolve issues within the region. We will only seek Ministerial intervention as a last resort. 7.9 The proposed ongoing EiP process will need a clearer timetable and clarity about who will meets its costs. In addition we would want to be assured there will be capacity in the Planning Inspectorate to fulfil its envisaged ongoing role in nine regions at once. 7.10 The strategy delivery/implementation plan must be signed off by Government and by the Leaders’ Forum to ensure that all agencies and departments share the same goals for our region, and that investment plans reflect those goals.
6
Q6 Do you think that the streamlined process would lead to any significant changes in the costs and benefits to the community and other impacts? 7.10. We see significant benefits in moving quickly to a single strategy. Government should recognise the strength of the regional partnership in the Northwest and the close relationship between priorities for economic growth and housing in the Northwest and encourage the region to move as quickly as possible to an aligned set of economic and spatial priorities which will include provision to meet the Government’s housing target for the region. We recognise that this may be more difficult to achieve elsewhere in the England. 7.11 Whilst the proposed ‘more streamlined’ process outlined in the consultation documents should allow regions to proceed we are concerned at the potential for long delays i.e. the first integrated regional strategies may not be signed off until 2013/14. We will work together in the NW to refresh and align our priorities more quickly than that to ensure that they are relevant for changing economic conditions and opportunities. We would like Government to consider how it can speed up its approach. The North West, together with other regions, would therefore like to be actively engaged in discussions with Government to identify and overcome barriers to proceeding immediately.
C. Strengthening Sub-Regional Economies – the Role of Local Authorities 8.
Economic Assessments
8.1
Key Messages •
It is vital that a joined up approach to the development of economic assessments is developed as appropriate to ensure common quality and consistency (as well as efficiency) across the evidence base
•
The SNR seems to have stepped back from the intent in the original document to give a duty for Local Authorities to perform economic development rather than an ‘Assessment of conditions’. We would encourage government to revisit this proposal in line with the original aim of increasing economic growth of the region rather than a focus on public sector process.
8.2 Most Local Authorities in the region already have regard to the economic conditions in their boroughs. Most have economic development strategies, and well performing economic sub groups of their LSPs. The enhanced role for local authorities – both in terms of the duty to undertake an assessment and the increasing delivery role – is therefore strongly welcomed by the North West (although we believe the statutory duty should be widened to encompass delivery of economic development.) 8.3 We will analyse where capacity exists and, where, as a region, we need it to be augmented. We should as a region, focus our efforts where LAs are working together to drive our economic hotspots or tackle deep seated decline as shown by our economic evidence base and existing priorities. 8.4 In this region both assessment and delivery will be closely aligned at the sub regional level. Local economies are no respecters of local authority boundaries and in some sub regions the need for co-operation extends beyond Metropolitan areas. In sub regions with substantial joint working, the authorities should produce a joint assessment. The Governance structures in place should resolve differences between Local Authorities and drive prioritisation. Q7. Which of the options for the local authority economic assessment duty (or any other proposals) is most appropriate?
7
8.5 We do not support any of the three options presented in the consultation document regarding the guidance that central government could provide on what to include in an economic assessment. Central Government guidance to local authorities on undertaking an economic assessment should be light touch, for example confined to a clause or clauses within the legislation. This would prevent further delay to SNR implementation. It should also be made clear, for example through Parliamentary statement, but not legal duty, that RDAs will take account of these assessments and that the Leaders’ Forum would be expected as part of its scrutiny function to ensure this happens in a co-ordinated way to add most value. Q8. What additional information or support do local authorities consider valuable for the purpose of preparing assessments? 8.6 All relevant elements of the evidence base should be available – to be managed by regional and/or sub regional observatories. Q9. How should lead local authorities engage partners, including district councils, in the preparation of the assessment? 8.7 District Councils should be fully involved (and have the capacity to be able to do so) as should a wide range of leading stakeholders especially the private sector. Q10. Which partner bodies should be consulted in the preparation of the assessment? 8.8 Economic monitoring will require substantial local engagement: LSPs, RDA, SRPs, business, 3rd sector, health, trade unions and other govt agencies with local presence Q12. Do you agree that there is value in creating statutory arrangements for sub-regional collaboration on economic development issues beyond MAAs? What form might any new arrangements take? 8.9 Statutory sub regional bodies will be a good idea in those areas where they have the capacity to take this step: this option should be available where local authorities in a sub region wish to pursue this option. However it will not be the case that all areas will want a blanket approach to this issue. At least initially the region is likely to get more traction through Sub Regional Organisations without a nationally formulated specific statutory approach. The sub regional level will still be an important level for collaboration even if there are a number of MAASs within that sub region. Q13. What activities would you like a sub-regional partnership to be able to carry out and what are the constraints on them doing this under the current legislation? 8.10 In the North West we already have some advanced sub regional partnerships whose key function is to bring Local Authorities and business together to agree priorities and action plans for economic development. In talking about economic development we refer to this in its widest sense including for example health, transport, housing, planning and the environment. Government should ensure partners can collaborate on this full range of economic development issues. We would expect this strategic role to continue and develop as appropriate for that area without central Government guidance or control. Q15. Should there be a duty to co-operate at sub-regional level where a statutory partnership exists? To whom should this apply? 8.11 All relevant local authorities, the RDA, new Homes and Communities Agency, new Skills Funding Agency, DWP, Jobcentre +, Environment Agency and others should have a duty to cooperate at a sub regional level where a statutory partnership is agreed by partners. This should be consistent with the Local Government and Public Involvement in Health Act 2007 which sets out a comprehensive list of those that have a duty to co-operate with a Local Area Agreement.
8