|
SUMMARY BOARD MINUTES OF THE TWENTY EIGHTH MEETING
SOUTH EAST ENGLAND DEVELOPMENT AGENCY
HELD ON THURSDAY 26 JULY 2001 AT
SEEDA HEADQUARTERS
Members Present
Allan Willett CMG (Chairman), Cllr. Ken Bodfish OBE (Deputy Chairman),
Cllr. Kit Oliver (OBE), Caroline Williams, Janis Kong, Jim Baker,
Cllr. David Rogers, Mary McAnally, Cllr. Kevin Wilson, Barry Camfield,
Dr Peter Read CBE, Russ Nathan CBE, Bryan Davies
Apologies for absence
Professor Clive Booth (Deputy Chairman), Sarah Ward OBE
Others in Attendance (for all or part of meeting)
Anthony Dunnett (Chief Executive), Jeff Alexander (Agency Secretary),
Phil Bailey (SEEDA, Head of Secretariat), Paul Hudson (SEEDA,
Director, Regeneration and Infrastructure, Items 10 and 11), Marianne
Neville-Rolfe (SEEDA, Director, Business and International Division,
Item 12), David Saunders (Government Office for the South East
(GO-SE), Regional Director, Items 7 and 8), Andrew Campbell (GO-SE,
Director, Item 7)
Mike Geddes (Regional Assembly, Item 8), Paul Bevan (Regional
Assembly, Item 8)
Summary of Meeting
1. The Board :-
- Considered proposals for taking forward the process of reviewing
and revising the Regional Economic Strategy;
- Reviewed the SEEDA Transport Accountability Plan;
- Reviewed and considered progress on the Public Service Agreement
Negotiations ;
- Received a report on the Chairman's recent activities;
- Received a presentation on Local Strategic Partnerships;
- Discussed the application by Associated British Ports for
the construction of a new deep water terminal at Dibden Bay;
- Approved in principle support for the Surrey Enterprise Hub
proposal and the Milton Keynes Enterprise Hub proposal;
- Reviewed and noted the Finance Report, a Contracts Report
and various SEEDA programme investments.
Regional Economic Strategy (RES) Review Process
2. Members considered a number of emerging issues in regard to
the review and revision of the RES that needed to be completed
by the end of September 2002. These included the proposed timetable,
style and most importantly the consultation process. Members were
anxious to ensure the fullest and participative consultation with
key partners and people across the region. This may be centered
around major consultation events convened in 5 or 6 sub-regions,
each one focusing on specific themes and inviting input on priorities
form a range of partners.
3. Members welcomed the initial proposals that had been prepared.
They noted that the first RES had been well received and had been
a catalyst in that there had been no previous comparable document.
4. It was agreed to establish a sub-group of the Board to focus
on the review and revision of the RES.
Review of Transport Accountability Plan (SAP)
5. The review had confirmed that all necessary work was being
undertaken and that all milestones were expected to be completed
on schedule. The revised Transport SAP will be placed on the SEEDA
website.
"Public Service Agreements" (PSA) Negotiations
6. The Chairman reported that he believed that SEEDA should develop
a strategy to ensure that the region was involved in the PSA negotiations
and were able to sign up to the targets. He reported that discussions
continued with Ministers on the target framework and that SEEDA
would continue to consult partners as appropriate.
Chairman's Report
7. The Chairman informed the Board of some of the key meetings
that he has held since the previous Board meeting.
Working with DTI
8. The Chairman reported that the relationship between RDAs and
DTI had got off to an excellent start and he looked forward to
working with that Department
RDA Chairs meeting in Manchester
9. The Chairman noted that this had been the first meeting of
RDA Chairs outside London. The focus of discussion was the PSA
negotiations.
Shipbuilding Task Force on South Coast
10. The Chairman believed that this task force did good work
and had been helpful in the recent decisions on the Type 42 destroyers.
11. The Chairman concluded his review that noting that he had
accepted the request by Government to continue as Chair of SEEDA
for a further year only.
Local Strategic Partnerships (LSPs)
12. The Board heard a presentation by Andrew Campbell (Director,
Government Office for the South East) on Local Strategic Partnerships.
LSPs aimed to bring together the public, private, community and
voluntary sectors and will be a very important feature of the
new landscape. Their principal role will be to prepare and implement
community strategies but they would very much be driven by the
regeneration and neighbourhood strategies.
13. Members noted that it was important that the respective strategies
of the LSPs and Economic Partnerships were informed by each other.
There might be about 50 LSPs within the South East, generally
aligned with Local Authority boundaries. Groupings of Districts
and Borough authorities and joint work on cross-boundary issues
should be encouraged.
14. SEEDA's role would be to set the region's strategic economic
framework within which LSPs will work and be members of some LSPs.
Government Office for the South East (GO-SE) and Regional
Assembly Liaison
15. The Regional Assembly discussed the following issues with
the Board:-
Strengthening Regional Accountability
16. Paul Bevan reminded the Board that the Government had made
additional funding available to Regional Chambers with a view
to delivering stronger regional accountability. Proposals on how
to use this funding (supported by SEEDA) had been submitted by
the Regional Assembly to Government.
17. The Regional Assembly noted that they had submitted proposals
in a letter to the Chairman from the Chair of the Regional Assembly
on how to take forward their accountability role. SEEDA welcomed
the opportunity to open dialogue on this key issue and looked
forward to working together with the Regional Assembly to develop
its proposals.
Access to Hastings Multi-Modal Studies
18. The Regional Assembly explained that they were seeking additional
information on the basis of the rejection of the proposed schemes
by Government. Paul Bevan added that, given the focus on regeneration
in Hastings, now might be the right time to press forward on the
Area Investment Framework in Hastings.
19. Members noted their dismay at the decision by Government
and endorsed the strong comments made privately by SEEDA to the
Government. Members also noted that the Government's decision
had been received with dismay by nearly all parts of the local
community. There was concern amongst Members that business confidence
in the area will be weakened but lessons from this case should
be learnt. David Saunders confirmed that the Secretary of State
had said that this decision did not set a precedent.
20. The Board concluded that it was important to move forward
in a positive way.
Other Issues
21. David Saunders mentioned the following forthcoming matters
that would be of interest to SEEDA:-
- The White Paper on Regionalisation was expected by the end
of the year;
- There would be consultation on a South East Airports Strategy
feeding into the Airports White Paper;
- Consultation would be taking place on how to improve the
land-use planning system; and
- DTI was carrying out a structural review and a review on
its support for businesses.
Dibden Bay
22. The Board heard that Associated British Ports (ABP) has submitted
proposals to the Secretary of State for the construction of a
new deep water terminal at Dibden Bay opposite the existing Southampton
Docks. The primary use of the terminal would be the import, export
and distribution of unitised freight carried in containers. The
terminal would also be used for the import of aggregates, for
roll-on/roll-off cargo and other lift-on/lift-off cargo.
23. The 1.8 kilometres of quay would provide 6 deep-water berths.
A deep water pocket would be dredged alongside the quay to enable
vessels to stand at all states of the tide and an approach channel
would be dredged to link the pocket with the existing deep water
channel. The operational area of the terminal would occupy some
202 hectares, mostly on land which has already been reclaimed
from the River Test. The remaining 185 hectares of the site would
be devoted to environmental measures and agriculture. Outside
the site, improved access by road and rail are proposed, including
a road approximately 1.4 kilometres long linking the terminal
to the A326 and about 1.3 kilometres of double track railway line
linking the terminal to the Fawley branch line.
24. It is expected that the terminal would be constructed over
a period of approximately nine years in three consecutive phases.
25. The Board acknowledged that SEEDA is not involved as a Statutory
body. Furthermore it was noted that the Secretary of State is
required to hold a Public Inquiry.
26. The Board recognised that it was a particularly significant
application with major economic development and environmental
considerations. There was a clear view that the economic benefits
of the proposed construction had to be thoroughly and independently
researched so that a properly informed view could be reached.
The Board also wished to be informed by a clear appreciation of
the environmental issues. They felt that it was important to take
the national picture into account (e.g. the recent announcement
on Shellhaven) as well as consider the implications on SEEDA's
neighbouring regions. Finally the Board wanted an understanding
of the implications of a decision not to proceed with the construction
of a deep-water terminal at Dibden Bay.
Enterprise Hubs
Surrey Enterprise Hub
27. The Board noted that Surrey have combined three enterprise
hub partnerships to create one large hub for the whole county.
In doing so, they have combined the existing and planned incubation
space and expertise of three centres at the University of Surrey,
Royal Holloway, University of London and Leatherhead Food Research
Association.
28. The Board welcomed the proposal from the Surrey Economic
Partnership and the approach they had taken. They recognised that
the partnership had moved the proposal along well and that the
proposed Hub held much potential for businesses in the County.
29. The Board were content to approve in principle the proposal
for a Surrey Enterprise Hub.
Milton Keynes Enterprise Hub
30. The Board acknowledged that the Hub provided a key mechanism
and opportunity to address the weaknesses in the Milton Keynes
economy. It was also felt that the Hub could exploit the opportunities
expected to flow from the development of the Oxford-Cambridge
Technology Arc concept. Therefore the proposed Hub could be the
catalyst for further growth in the Milton Keynes economy.
31. The Board were content to approve in principle the proposal
for a Milton Keynes Enterprise Hub.
Date of Next Meeting
32. Thursday 13 September 2001, at SEEDA Headquarters, Guildford.
Start time to be 10.30hrs.
|
