Claire Cox, Programme Manager, will provide an overview of the Economic Redesign work to date and answer questions, to help inform the Committee’s Future Work Programme.

The Economic Growth Re-design Programme Manager gave a presentation on the work being undertaken to redesign Shropshire Council’s Economic Growth Services. This aimed to improve the way that the Council worked with businesses and enabled business growth in the County.

She described the scope of the re-design, and explained that their purpose was to create resilient wealth in sustainable communities.  She described the Council’s role in the County’s economic growth as being that of an enabler and maintaining awareness of the challenges, fluctuations and opportunities of the business climate. 

She explained that the initial design work from March 2014 had identified the areas within the scope of the redesign, the reasons for change, what success would look like and how it could be achieved. 

As part of the initial work for the re-design process a study of the Gross Value Added (GVA) had been completed and this was found to be less than the National average.  It had also been found that the Council had been output orientated and not impact driven. She continued that £80m had been invested by the Council in the economy over the previous seven years, much of which had been used as pump priming.   Since 2001 the Council had secured £86m of external funding, which included funding for large projects such as the Flax Mill in Shrewsbury. 

The key messages from the first Decision Accelerator (DA) in mid-June were:

·      a lot of good work was being done in individual sections of the Council but the individual areas did not always work together as a co-ordinated whole; 

·      too much was being done in a complex environment;

·      projects tended to be output driven instead of impact driven;

·      that equal focus was given to all businesses regardless of potential outcome;

·      businesses viewed the Council as the honest broker; and

·      the Council needed to refocus, with clear priorities.

The Economic Growth Re-design Programme Manager continued that the Council’s future role was that of the ‘informed client’; with the necessary information to effectively commission work from partner organisations and understanding that the commissioned services were being well delivered.

The re-design process had also looked at the funds coming into Shropshire from external sources and whether they remained in the County’s economy.  It had been recognised that work needed to be done to retain these funds within the County’s economy.   

The Decision Accelerator (DA) in June had established four priority work areas and project managers had been assigned to these:

·      Business Growth – Emma Smith – Economic Research Officer;

·      Strategic Growth – Paula Rogers – Team Leader Funding and Programmes;

·      Physical Growth – Andy Savage – Highways Development Control Manager; and

·      Community Business Growth – Sarah Dodds – VCS Assembly Co-ordinator.

Members noted the pilot project in Pontesbury and Minsterley, where the community was being asked to contribute their ideas about the service provided by the Council. 

A Member asked whether the ambition for Shropshire to have a level of economic self-sufficiency and business’ supporting each other was achievable.  The Economic Growth Re-design Programme Manager replied that this was a change in focus for the Council and a topic for the Growth-hub and Marches LEP.  She continued that supporting Star businesses was an objective of the project.

Another Member asked whether the re-design work was working with other council projects such as the commissioning work being undertaken. She expressed concern that the number of pilot projects may prevent real work being done.  The Economic Growth Re-design Programme Manager responded that she had been working closely with members of the Community Enablement Team and once the learning from the pilot project had been gathered, it was planned to roll out the project to other areas in early September.  She agreed that the pilot was resource intensive as it involved detailed examination of the area to identify best practice which could be replicated. This level of intensity would not be repeated when the project was expanded.

A Member asked how partner organisations delivering the County’s infrastructure, such as the water suppliers, telecommunication companies and highways, fitted into the business redesign.  It was noted that these came into the Place Plan work. The re-design work included strategic growth and the provision of the best environment for business through growth plans.

Responding to a query about the community engagement risk the Economic Growth Re-design Programme Manager explained that the plan was to engage with the community to establish their needs and how these could be met through honest and open conversations.

A Member observed that the barrier to further employment for many employers was employee taxes and training costs. The Economic Growth Re-design Programme Manager confirmed that information would be made available to local businesses about government initiatives such as the NI holiday. 

Referring to the roll out of the Pontesbury and Minsterley project a Member requested information on impact assessment and queried whether performance indicators had been established.  The Committee noted that as the pilot was progressing, benchmarks were being established and the project was identifying areas that could or could not be. The project had identified the criteria for success, in addition to this Shropshire was looking to ensure that it received all the funding it which it was entitled to and encouraged company expansion and inward investment.  Success with LEP and infrastructure funds would be a level of success.  It was noted that KPIs could be identified.

A Member suggested that when other information was sent out to small businesses this would be an opportunity to gather information from them. In response the Economic Growth Re-design Programme Manager explained that the Council hosted an annual business summit for small businesses, and sent out a regular newsletter.  She continued that in the project area a large number of small businesses were being surveyed, however not all businesses were registered and this made them difficult to reach.

She assured the Committee that the findings from the prototype would lead to a step change in the work going forward, and in future, provision would be based on need.

A Member requested that as many local businesses as possible be involved with the commissioning process, and suggested that information could be sent out with the mobile library. 

In response to a Member’s question the Economic Growth Re-design Programme Manager explained that defining the Council’s role in supporting business, both new and established, was part of the re-design work.  She continued that it was possible that other organisations were better placed for this and the Council could act as a commissioner or sign poster to these other organisations.

Responding to a comment about the impact on businesses outside the project zone, she explained that there was an ongoing survey would show whether companies expected support from the Council, and if they did, where they looked for it. 

The Head of Business Growth and Prosperity commented that many of the questions being asked were based on opinions or assumptions.  He stressed that the redesign work was about testing the role of the Council in stimulating economic growth in the County and identifying its future role when the Council became a commissioning body. 

A Member raised concerns regarding lack of mobile telecommunications in the county and suggested that broadband provision and mobile phone coverage should be included in the re-design project.  The Service Manager for Business and Enterprise responded that this issue had already been taken up by the Business Board and a questionnaire was being developed to be sent out to businesses.

Another Member expressed concern about the ambition of the redesign team and whether it was sufficiently resourced to do what it planned.  Members noted that the impact of the Council’s work had been taken into account and work on bench marking the starting points for the redesign, including statistics on expenditure and income was being undertaken.

A Member suggested that, during the pilot project the role of the local member and town/parish councils be considered.  He commented on the tremendous work being done by Telford and Wrekin Council that had attracted a significant cluster of new businesses and industries. The Economic Growth Re-design Programme Manager stated that the intention of the work being done with Star businesses was to grow existing businesses and attract others to locate to the area.

SC asked if the pilot project would have a base in the area in the Pontesbury or Minsterley area.  CC responded that it was to be set up in the Youth Centre in Minsterley.  SC replied that it would be useful for himself and other members of the Scrutiny committee to visit this.