Agenda and minutes

Members’ apologies were noted as above.

·         In relation to any agenda item

·         In relation to any activity since the last formal meeting

·         In relation to any forthcoming activity

No declarations of interest were made in relation to any agenda item, any activity since the last formal meeting or any forthcoming activity.

It was agreed that the notes of the meeting held on 20^th May are a true and accurate record.

The meeting received a report and presentation to provide Members with an understanding of the evidence base and the emerging narrative for the Sheffield City Region (SCR) Strategic Economic Plan (SEP) and Local Industrial Strategy (LIS).

It was noted the strategic report is currently in a draft format, and is being presented at this stage to stimulate discussion and objection, prior to informing ongoing discussion on the emerging evidence base, which itself will inform the next stage of development of priorities for the economic plan.

Evidence was therefore presented in support of what the SCR should emphasise within the SEP, the importance of productivity as a primary indicator of future economic success.

Regarding trend data, members noted discrepancies in the SCR’s historic productivity trend and considered what the contributory reasons may be behind these trends. It was acknowledged these discrepancies are not necessarily reflected in the trend data of other indices.

It was suggested an ambition based on productivity can’t necessarily be at the risk of lower employment levels, and proposed that ‘jobs for everyone’ must also remain an ambition of the SCR.

The presentation provided evidence in relation to the various contributory factors and levers that affect the region’s levels of productivity (presented with reference to the SCR’ 5 substantive development themes).

The Board acknowledged and discussed the relationship between education and skills attainment and productivity.

Consideration was given to skills development and whether more could be done to improve rates of employer participation in the skills sector.

Regarding the SCR’s currently high levels of low skills jobs, it was suggested these jobs are at the highest risk of being lost through automation and digitalisation.

Consideration was given to the importance of the need to identify future employment demand, and future growth sectors, and where it would be in the best interests of the SCR districts to act collectively on matters.

It was suggested that despite decades of investment, the SCR is still somewhat beset with cyclically lower than average levels of expectations, attainment and consequently dissatisfaction. Members considered how this cycle might be broken. The Chair provided thoughts on how this might be achieved, including the need to act as a collective voice when negotiating with government, having a real transformational plan, and the attraction of significantly higher levels of investment.

It was questioned whether changing demographics, including the aging nature of some sector’s skills forces, and also the inward migration of workers from other areas have been factored into the future plan development work and confirmed this is the case. It was also suggested that some of the issues being experienced by the SCR are national issues and therefore require tackling in a different way. It was noted work is ongoing with neighbouring LEP areas to identify where issues would be best addressed across a wider economic geography.

Members voiced general support for the evidence, analysis and outline conclusions presented.

It was acknowledged there are a number of supply and demand related choices to consider going forward  ...  view the full minutes text for item 4.

A report was received to provide an update to the LEP Board on the SCR’s engagement with the Northern Powerhouse 11 (NP11) LEP Partnerships.

It was noted NP11 brings together Local Enterprise Partnerships across the North of England. The NP11 Board, comprising all eleven LEP Chairs from across the North aims to create a space to identify activity best facilitated at a pan-Northern level, where activity will add strategic value to unlocking the North’s economic potential.

It was noted meetings will be held on a regular basis (Chairs and Chief Executives) to develop a work plan and engagements are likely to become more structured over time.

RESOLVED, that the LEP Board note the report and the intention of the LEP Chair and the SCR Executive to engage fully with the NP11.

A report was received to update the Board on progress made in the Leaders budget workshop and to set out the actions to be taken.

Members were reminded of the key issues facing the 2019/20 budget, noting these will potentially affect £2m of the £6.5m in year budget.

It was confirmed there would be a further Leaders’ workshop on Monday at which mitigation plans will be further explored ahead of recommendations being brought back to the MCA and LEP after the summer recess.

The Board recognised the significance of a 30% reduction in the budget and considered what could be done to protect the Mayoral Capacity Fund (acknowledging the business rate matter is less open to consideration.

Action – The Chief Executive to consider changes based on the potential loss of the individual budgetary elements at risk and report back to the LEP ahead of the Board formulating its position.

Members were asked to be mindful of the need to appropriately plan for all possible scenarios well ahead of time

RESOLVED, that the LEP Board would be presented with a further report detailing potential changes after the summer recess.

A report was received to provide a briefing on the current SCR European Structural Funds programme and to seek members’ guidance on representation on the regional committee for the remainder of the Programme.

An overview of the current ESIF programme and information explaining the MHCLG-led management arrangements (and how the membership of the sub-Committee has changed over time) were provided.

Concerns were noted regarding the local ESIF sub-committee’s apparent isolation from the LEP and levels of underspend.

It was noted the committee is a product of government, with MCHLG acting as the managing agent and thus responsible for determining processes. However, it was noted there could be further LEP representation on the sub-Committee

Noting the suggestion the additional LEP representation on the sub-Committee be aligned with the private sector representation on the Skills and Employability Board, it was questioned whether there were enough private sector LEP Board members on the SCR thematic boards and suggested there should be 4 to ensure the private sector members are able to comply with requests to represent the thematic boards on other bodies such as this. It was confirmed there would be a review of the new thematic board arrangements once the current arrangements have had a chance to settle into a working pattern.

Members agreed there was no merit in considering a change to the ESIF sub-Committee Chair at this stage.

RESOLVED, that the LEP Board endorses the 3 vacant places on the ESIF sub-Committee being taken up by the SCR LEP private sector board members.

Received for information.

Received for information.

No further matters noted.