Agenda item

Report of Ian Curryer, Chief Executive of Nottingham City Council

Liz Jones, Head of Policy, Nottingham City Council presented the item, finalising the D2N2 European Structural Investment Fund Strategy.  A final version of the Strategy for European Structural and Investment Funds (ESIF) needs to be submitted by D2N2.  The Strategy is worth 244million Euros and must include its investment priorities, the structure underpinning the programmes, a financial plan, targets and governance arrangements.  The Local Enterprise Partnership (LEP – D2N2) Board, on 3 June 2014, agreed a number of recommendations (following feedback from central Government) covering arrangements for Governance, approach to European Agriculture Fund for Development and Financial re-profiling.  The feedback received from central Government included:

• The need to develop an Annual Implementation Plan (including a project pipeline) to ensure that citizens and businesses of Nottingham and Nottinghamshire benefit from the ESIF and that the Economic Prosperity Committee (EPC) should ensure that it plays an effective role in developing this plan and subsequent arrangements.

• Governance – D2N2 needs to establish a dedicated ESIF Programme Board and the D2N2 Board must agree the membership template, nominate a Chair of the Programme Board and invite the Managing Authority to nominate a representative to be the Vice-Chair.

• The role of Partners and Statement of Principles on Governance for the D2N2 ESIF sets out the role of partners, including local authority joint committees and the principles of governance.

During discussion the following comments were made:

(a)  Concern was expressed that the EPC should not become merely a consultative body and instead should have real influence and power. The EPC may continue to consider the option of moving to a Combined Authority arrangement, and have regard to potential greater flexibility available for Combined Authorities in the future.

(b)  It may not be desirable to wait to see what happens in the post general election period as the soundings from the current government and shadow ministers is that a Combined Authority is the preferred way forward.

(c)  Some of the key cities such as Derby and Portsmouth are already working together and showing that this can work.

(d)  The existing Combined Authorities are mostly metropolitan authorities and there are currently no two tier Combined Authorities.  It is important that the chief executives approach Sheffield to find out how it has benefited from its Combined Authority and what powers have been delegated etc. 

(e)  Responding to some of the concerns raised Peter Richardson, Chair of the LEP, confirmed that there is value in becoming a Combined Authority and that the benefits of this for N2 may include receiving delegated funding from D2N2. The perception is that the Combined Authorities have stronger governance arrangements than joint committees and as such the LEP could delegate control of some of their budget streams.  It is essential to build strong partnerships to drive projects forward and as a Combined Authority N2 would be able to have significant influence on the priorities. 

RESOLVED to

(1)  note the recommendations on the ESIF Strategy agreed by the LEP Board on 3 June 2014;

(2)  ask the Chief Executives of the member authorities to:

(a)   develop recommendations to inform the EPC’s view on the Annual Implementation Plan (including the management arrangements and a project pipeline) which will underpin this strategy;

(b)   maintain awareness on developments with respect to Combined Authorities, with particular respect to their significance to N2, and to progress on a Combined Authority for Derbyshire.

Reasons for decisions:

D2N2 submitted its strategy for the European Structural and Investment Funds on 31 January 2014 and following feedback from Government it is now required to:

• Make the revisions on the ESIF Strategy as requested;
• Prepare to implement the strategy, including an Implementation Plan by October 2014 with a view to commence spending in 2015.

Other options considered:

It is considered too risky not to make the changes requested by central Government to the ESIF Strategy as non-compliance could mean that funding would not be available.