Agenda and minutes

None.

None.

Last meeting held on 21 February 2014 for confirmation

The minutes of the meeting held on 21 February 2014 were confirmed and signed by the Chair.

Report of Mick Burrows, Chief Executive of Nottinghamshire County Council

Mick Burrows, Chief Executive for Nottinghamshire County Council, presented the report updating the Committee on the announcement of an extra £2.63 million available for Nottinghamshire from the Superfast Extension Programme.

RESOLVED to

(1)  note the progress update on the Better Broadband for the Nottinghamshire Programme;

(2)  consider, in advance of any full application to Broadband Delivery UK (BDUK), the collective ability to provide the conditional match funding from local public money via the existing co-investment Local Authority Partnership;

(3)  consider, in advance of any full application to BDUK, the collective ability to underwrite the £2.63 million allocation;

(4)  authorise Nottinghamshire County Council to actively pursue all external and other funding opportunities with a view to sourcing the requisite match funding;

(5)  authorise Nottinghamshire County Council to establish from BDUK the methodology behind the allocation of £2.63 million and its constraints;

(6)  authorise Rushcliffe Borough Council to establish whether  broadband connectivity could form part of planning regulations and/or core strategies and to report its findings back to the Committee in May;

(7)  notify the Broadband Steering Group of communities which are isolated from broadband connectivity.

Reasons for decisions

Broadband Delivery UK (BDUK) announced on 25 February 2014 indicative allocations from the £250 million of government funding for the expansion of superfast broadband. Nottinghamshire’s allocation, which include the City of Nottingham,  is £2.63 million and will help achieve the ambition of extending fibre-based broadband beyond 95% of coverage across the County by 2017.

The funding being made available to improve broadband speeds across Nottinghamshire could be under threat if the existing co-investment partnership of Councils cannot afford to match the indicative funding. The Committee will therefore need to consider various funding sources to match the funding allocation in order to realise the opportunity to get Nottingham better connected to faster fibre-based broadband, narrowing the digital divide and boosting local growth.

Other options considered

To do nothing. The existing Better Broadband for Nottinghamshire programme almost achieves the Government targets at this stage. However, this option has been discounted as although the existing programme already delivers close to 95% coverage across the County, there are discrepancies within this figure with some districts on receiving coverage between 80 – 85%.

The Chair concluded that the reasons for excluding the public from the meeting for duration of the remaining item, in accordance with the Local Government Act 1972, was no longer necessary, on the basis that the Committee’s Strategic Economic Development Plan (SEP) did not include commercially sensitive information.

Presentation by Nottingham City Council and Nottinghamshire County Council

Chris Henning, Director for Economic Development at Nottingham City Council, delivered the presentation, informing the Committee on the Committee’s proposed Strategic Economic Development Plan (SEP) submission to the D2N2 LEP, highlighting the following:

(a)  there are three main elements underpinning the SEP submission, business innovation, employment and skills and housing regeneration. The D2N2 LEP will consider the final draft SEP at its meeting on 25 March 2014 and submit shortly after to Government by 31 March 2014;

(b)  D2N2’s SEP submission will focus on the following 8 priority sectors: transport equipment manufacturing, life sciences, construction, food and drink manufacturing, visitor economy, low carbon goods and services, transport and logistics and creative industries. The number of priority sectors is reasonably manageable in comparison to other LEPs who have included up to 80 priority sectors;

(c)  the submission by the D2N2 LEP will compete with other LEP submissions and the quality of the projects will influence the final scale of the Growth Deal. The Growth Deal will ultimately be agreed between the Government and the LEP in the summer. Further European Union funding is expected in 2014/15;

(d)  in achieving the LEPs ambitions, the right infrastructure and conditions to support business and employment growth will need to be put in place, including cutting edge R and D which will support product and process innovation. Ultimately, D2N2 will contribute to re-balancing the UK economy via its strategic plan;

Following a discussion, the additional information was provided by the Committee:

(e)  there is a recognition of the strength of cross-border developments within the SEP such at Beeston Park and the Rolls Royce project. There is a feeling that Government has a focus on city-developments and this is reflected in the Committee’s submission, as well as D2’s submission;

(f)  the wording of the A57 development could be slightly altered to amplify the importance regeneration would provide in the context, in particular with reference to the link the A57 provides to the A1 and M1. There is further scope to link this development to Robin Hood Airport;

(g)  once the SEP has been submitted to Government, a period of further discussions and negotiations is likely. There is a feeling that should a scheme intended for development in 2015/16 not materialise it would not automatically be considered as a top priority for 2016/17 and ‘top slice’ the funding available for that year;

(h)  following the election in May 2015, it is likely that LEPs all around the country will have to resubmit their Strategic Economic Plans. D2N2 LEP will seek to engage the Committee in the future in establishing what schemes to deliver in the future despite no firm delegation to the Committee being established at by the LEP Board;

(i)  negotiations with Government would be necessary in the scenario where the LEP receives half of the funding included within the submission. Another look at the list of priorities would be inevitable to re-prioritise on the deliverability of schemes;

(j)  at the next meeting in  ...  view the full minutes text for item 16.