Agenda item

The Chair informed the Committee that a question from a member of the public had been received and although it had arrived late he had accepted it as it related to this agenda item.  The member of the public had been unable to attend but would be viewing via the webcast.

 

C Marriott read out the question:

 

“How can this Scrutiny Board be satisfied with the paper at item 10 on your agenda?  There is no reference to any actions being taken in response to your engagement.

 

To take an example, the Climate Alliance argued strongly for urgent investment in retrofitting skills training – very poignant as the Government unveiled its Heat and Buildings strategy this week – but no such investment is being made.

 

We consider that the Net Zero engagement process is both genuine and actually of exceptional high quality but these engagement efforts will lack credibility if they solely relate to process but do not result in action being taken.”

 

R Sulley informed members that he would respond to the question as he went through the report.

 

The Chair commented that members would ensure the question was answered during the presentation or by their follow-up questions.

 

Members were reminded that the paper was in response to questions around public engagement and consultation following the climate change emergency declaration from the Overview and Scrutiny Committee.

 

As background, R Sulley reminded members that in January 2020 the MCA Board approved the Climate Response Framework which split the challenge into five areas which were detailed in the report.

 

The MCA then commissioned a report from Urban Foresight which identified 18 strategic activities which should be delivered over the next two years as part of a net zero programme.  The report highlighted that a communications strategy would be vital to the long-term success of delivering against the targets set.

 

To do this the MCA would need to collaborate with different organisations in designing the communications messaging including pressure groups such as the South Yorkshire Climate Alliance, business membership groups and other community stakeholders.  This would ensure that the messages were clear and consistent and in line with the targets.

 

Members noted the following activities:

 

• SYMCA had appointed a Net Zero Project Director (NZPD) with the aim of operationalising the Net Zero Project.
• The Mayor had taken up the role of Vice-Chair of the Yorkshire and Humber Climate Commission.
• MCA officers were involved in formulating the action plan of the commission and incorporating the commission’s findings and public input into further programme development.
• The NZPD had developed networks with interest groups to understand their concerns and regular meetings had been held with the South Yorkshire Climate Alliance.
• The business and industrial communities had been approached through specific meetings with trade association representatives and individual companies.

 

Where necessary or appropriate , public consultations were undertaken.  It was noted that, at this point, no overarching consultation on the MCAs climate emergency response had been undertaken or was planned.

 

With regard to the point that was made in the public question, this related specifically to a recent meeting with representatives from Green New Deal South Yorkshire, who were encouraging local authorities and the MCA to invest in training and skills within green industries for the future.

 

The meeting had been productive in that Green New Deal South Yorkshire had been able to get their point across about the urgency of action and the potential for the creation of quality jobs across the region.

 

Officers had been able to feedback the process needed to deliver on that requirement.  There were certain budgets that could be drawn on for further education but the process was that typically the private sector would need to request that training, identify a lack of skills in a certain area and make a request to the further education colleges.

 

It had been identified in that meeting that the system needed looking at in that it could not respond too far into the future, it tended to respond to the immediate need rather than the potential for future need.  Officers would try to understand how that imbalance could be addressed and how the market could be primed to understand what the potential future job and skills would be within their industries.

 

This also included housing retrofit which was a hot topic at the moment.  Central government had issued a Building and Heat Strategy and there was the potential for funding for heat pumps in homes.  It was recognised that the region didn’t currently have the skills to deliver that.

 

The Committee was informed that Sheffield Hallam University had been commissioned to do some work analyse the gaps and potential opportunities within South Yorkshire to meet the green skills that would be needed.

 

Public consultation and engagement at the moment was targeted.  As the programme was developed it may be needed to consult the public and the MCA wanted to eventually seek public views as to whether they were heading in the right direction, but not at this time.

 

The Chair commented that it was evident that everyone agreed that there was a climate emergency and that action needed to be taken, but this had to be done with the public and not to the public.

 

In answer to a question from Cllr Ennis, R Sulley agreed that pressure groups would always want the MCA and partners to do more, further and faster and it was incumbent upon the Authority to explain what could and couldn’t be done and ascertain where and what there was a need to consult on.

 

Cllr Jones commented that communication with all groups was vital.

 

R Sulley confirmed that the MCA was in touch with businesses directly, meetings had been scheduled with SMEs to understand their needs and what support they may need.

 

The Committee also discussed how the MCA and local authorities had influence over housing stock and the work that went on with it in social housing and with partner Housing Associations and how information on funding available and the size and scale of requirements could be collated to give the private sector deliverers an idea of the size and scale of the market to come.

 

The Chair expressed the need to be reactive.  Although there was a lot to be done with regards to the climate emergency.  It was not just about retrofitting but the whole of the renewable agenda.  The workforce needed to be ready when the jobs became available.  It was important to energise businesses to think longer term with regard to upskilling their workforce.

 

R Sulley agreed and commented that work was ongoing in this area.  Unfortunately, apprentices could not be trained for jobs that did not exist at the moment.  Therefore, there was a need for the market to think ahead of the work to be done with the private sector and delivery partners to design a suitable scheme.

 

Cllr Hurst asked when the point would be reached when it was known who the potential partners were and what opportunities would be available.

 

R Sulley replied that there wasn’t an answer available as yet.  This was a live problem that was currently being worked on.  As soon as there was something substantial to report on, such as an action plan, this would be publicised.

 

Cllr Jones questioned whether there were enough resources for all the consultation needed and also suggested a newsletter as a way of communication.

 

Dr D Smith commented that actions to achieve the low carbon goals could not be addressed by employing more people.  Much of the effort and focus came from across the SCR teams and with partnerships with local authorities and other public bodies.

 

He gave examples of how the MCA and the two Sheffield universities were working with the energy sector and the housing sector to stimulate markets to grow in the right direction and create new jobs.

 

The MCA were committed to developing the Apprenticeship Hub, the details of which were still being considered.  In broad principle it was a co-ordination to link businesses seeking apprentices to those who were wanting to access the apprenticeship system.  D Smith would feedback the Committee’s comments with regard to green jobs and how that might be factored into the consideration of the Apprenticeship Hub.

 

It was noted that rather than use a newsletter the MCA used social media channels such as Facebook and Twitter to get messages across.

 

Cllr Johnson queried whether the MCA were missing an opportunity to go into schools to educate the younger generation.

 

R Sulley replied that the MCA were not directly engaged with schools but had supported a Schools Climate Conference and would look to support this again next year.

 

There was more that could be done, and funding had been received to run some schools street events which would entail the closure of streets around schools during opening and closing time to encourage active travel.

 

RESOLVED – That the Committee:

 

i)         Note the contents of the report including the current engagement strategy and the increased and targeted communications during COP 26.

 

ii)        Write to the author of the public question to ensure that a full response         had been given to the question and ask whether they require to raise        any further points.