Supplementary memorandum by English Regional
Development Agencies (RG 42 (a))
1. INTRODUCTION
1.1 On 15 May 2006, the English Regional
Development Agencies (RDAs) gave oral evidence to the Select Committee
in support of previous written evidence. Ms Jane Henderson, Chief
Executive, South West RDA, Mr Alan Clarke, Chief Executive, One
North East, and Ms Pam Alexander, Chief Executive, South East
RDA gave oral evidence.
1.2 During the oral evidence session it
was agreed that the RDAs would provide additional written evidence
to the Select Committee on the following:
— Further detail on the RDA scrutiny
arrangements adopted by Regional Assemblies (RAs).
— Examples of how each RDA has followed
up on and/or decided not to follow recommendations made by RAs.
This second written submission from the RDA's
addresses the Committee's request for additional information in
this regard.
2. SCRUTINY ARRANGEMENTS
WITH REGIONAL
ASSEMBLIES
2.1 The Regional Assemblies are responsible
for the scrutiny of the policies and actions of the English Regional
Development Agencies. This responsibility is outlined under section
8 of the Regional Development Agencies Act 1998(the Act).
2.2 The Government expects RDAs to be held
to account in the regions they serve as well as through national
departments. The Act states that RDAs are required to have a scrutiny
relationship with their Regional Assembly. The Act outlines that
RDAs are required "to supply the chamber (now assembly) with
information, to answer questions put by the chamber about information
supplied to it by the agency, and to take such other steps for
the purpose of accounting to the chamber for the exercise of its
functions". Regional Assemblies are seen as being "well
placed to work with the RDAs—and other regional partners—to
help ensure that the RDAs' strategy and activities fit in with
the wider framework of strategies across the region"[16].
2.3 The Act only requires RDAs to "have
regard to" the views of the Assembly and does not necessarily
require them to agree with or act upon these views. The Department
of Trade and Industry has the sponsor department of RDAs recently
stated that scrutiny by Assemblies should not be confused with
the issue of democratic accountability of the RDA as this is to
Parliament via Ministers.
2.4 The ODPM "Evaluation of the Role
and Impact of Regional Chambers" feasibility study (2005)
reported that the Chambers (now Assemblies) have the flexibility
to choose how they approach the scrutiny function that is expected
of them under the RDA Act 1998. It found that there are different
approaches adopted by the Regional Assemblies, but also some broad
similarities particularly as all regions have adopted a collaborative
approach. The RA scrutiny process allows the RA to provide advice
through a close examination of RDA policies and actions, particularly
the Regional Economic Strategy and RDA Corporate Plan.
2.5 The scrutiny process seeks to improve
the effectiveness of RDA policies and the integration of these
policies with other strategies and policy initiatives in the region.
Overall each Assembly does carry out its scrutiny role in different
ways and examine different issues. Some hold twice yearly scrutiny
meetings (for example the North West) where others have formalised
protocols agreed with their RDA often supported by scrutiny boards
and/or panels or non-panel sessions on agreed topics (for example
the East Midlands and the North East). Where a protocol has been
agreed it sets out the general scrutiny principles to be adopted,
and establish the responsibilities of each organisation. These
aim to be fit for purpose for that particular region's requirements.
Some regions adopt a three-year rolling programme of agreed topics,
others an annual work plan.
2.6 Some regions (for example East of England)
also hold sub regional scrutiny meetings to obtain further feedback
to their regional level panels.
2.7 The LDA's unique status among England's
Regional Development Agencies in terms of its governance structure,
and accountability to the elected London Mayor as a functional
body of the Greater London Authority has a bearing on the way
in which the LDA considers and reacts to recommendations arising
from London Assembly Committee scrutiny investigations. There
is no standard approach and, in practice, if a Committee publishes
a report whose recommendations have some bearing on the LDA, a
response may or may not be appropriate; the decision on whether
and how to respond is taken on a case-by-case basis. It is also
worth noting that the LDA is accountable to the London Assembly
for its budget. The Mayor must submit his budget proposals for
the LDA and other functional bodies to the Assembly. Subsequently
representatives must attend the Assembly Budget Committee to respond
to questions. Unlike other RDAs the LDA has a statutory duty under
the GLA Act to co-operate with the Assembly on scrutiny investigations
as the Assembly have powers to subpoena LDA documents and people.
2.8 As we outlined in the oral evidence
session, every RDA aims to respond to a scrutiny paper from their
RA where a jointly agreed timescale for doing so is in place.
2.9 In some regions, for example the South
West, the RDA and RA jointly commissioned an independent review
of scrutiny activity to help inform the development of their scrutiny
protocol and programme. This review emphasised that the scrutiny
process has made significant progress in developing its approach
and that it is working well. It underlined the shared commitment
to a collaborative approach to scrutiny, recognising the shared
responsibility for developing, agreeing and overseeing the implementation
of the Regional Economic Strategy and other key regional strategies.
The consultants were also cautious about the Regional Assembly
seeking to scrutinise a wider set of regional agencies. In some
regions feel they have made really progress with in the scrutiny
process themselves. For example in the West Midlands it is agreed,
by the RDA and Assembly that the Scrutiny process has developed
over last two years, particularly through a revised protocol and
improved, more open approach. There is now a more constructive
attitude and tone to the process leading to improved recommendations
and outcomes. In addition the RDA and the Assembly are working
together to ensure that the Scrutiny process complements the Independent
Performance Assessment (IPA) process. The improvements probably
also reflect the maturity of the two bodies.
2.10 All Assembly's and RDA's have developed
a sound approach to scrutiny, although the detail of the process
and arrangements differs for each region. For further clarity
on each regions approach to scrutiny Annex 1 outlines the key
arrangements in place.
2.11 Scrutiny should not be confused with
RDA accountability to other bodies. Other RDA accountabilities
include:
— From April 2005, a new RDA Tasking
Framework was established. This resulted in the introduction of
an Independent Performance Assessment, conducted by the National
Audit Office for the RDAs. This new assessment is similar to the
Audit Commission's Comprehensive Performance Assessment for local
authorities and builds on the learning experience of the London
Development Agency that went through a similar process of assessment
in 2004[17].
— RDA's performance is monitored and
reported to their Boards on regular basis with a minimum requirement
that this is shared with the Government Offices for the Regions
and the Department of Trade and Industry every six months at the
mid year point and at the end of the year.
3. EXAMPLES OF
HOW EACH
RDA HAS FOLLOWED
UP ON
RECOMMENDATIONS MADE
BY REGIONAL
ASSEMBLIES OR
DECIDED NOT
TO FOLLOW
RECOMMENDATIONS
3.1 The following examples provide evidence
of how the RA scrutiny process has added value to the strategies
and operations of the RDAs and where the RDA did not agree with
particular recommendations.
Southwest
Following a scrutiny exercise on SWRDA's approach
to Information and Communication Technology and the development
of broadband across the region it was recommended that SWRDA worked
with the Assembly to engage with SWeGG, the LGA and the ODPM's
South West Centre of Excellence. This enabled the Agency to improve
co-ordination with the region for delivering e-government, which
SWRDA consider to be the largest single regional engine for growth
in e-procurement and developing the Small and Medium sized Enterprise
supply chain.
An independent consultancy report on the overall
scrutiny process recommended that scrutiny reports should be directly
reported to the RDA Board rather than simply being covered by
the chief executives report. The RDA has agreed and is committed
to actively following up the recommendations on the scrutiny process
with the Assembly and reporting back.
North East
In a recent scrutiny exercise on the draft Regional
Economic Strategy One NorthEast provided written responses to
progress made with the eighteen recommendations, attended two
committee meetings and provided additional material and evidence
on request. Examples of scrutiny sessions where recommendations
have been followed up are: Small and Medium sized Enterprises
(Creations and Survival)—One NorthEast agreed to progress
the delivery of the business brokerage model to provide a seamless
and integrated business support service; Strategy For Success
(Innovation, Industry and Science)—One NorthEast agreed
to set the Science City initiative in the context of the wider
SFS programme; Tourism—One NorthEast are progressing the
implementation of the "green accredited" business scheme
and reporting back after it has been operating for a meaningful
period; Sites and Premises—One NorthEast agreed to develop
a coherent method of measuring strategic added value, which will
apply to all the Agency's activities and initiatives.
Following a scrutiny exercise on the One NorthEast's
activity on job creation in deprived areas a difference of emphasis
emerged. The RA recommended that One NorthEast develop a more
targeted programme that focussed on the deprived areas of the
region. One NorthEast recognised this view but decided to maintain
its strategic interventions on economic growth and opportunities
where more of the whole region could benefit and the RDA could
maximise the return on its investments.
East of England
Following scrutiny of the Regional Economic
Strategy, EERA recommended `the early and voluntary review of
the timescale and breadth of the strategy's headline target for
the East of England to become a top twenty European region by
2010 (measured on a GVA per head basis).EEDA, EERA and the region's
strategic planning authorities jointly funded research to investigate
the achievability and spatial planning implications of the target.
The research informed the development of the revised Regional
Spatial Strategy (RSS) influencing, in particular, projections
of job growth. The resultant job growth targets were ultimately
adopted in both the RSS and the 2004 RES, thereby replacing the
RES headline target for GVA growth.
Following a scrutiny review of the Business
Link transformation process a recommendation from the Conservative
Group to the Executive Committee of EERA stated that they rejected
part of the proposal by EEDA, which would reduce County-based
business links to a brokerage role vis-a"-vis a regionally
operated service on the basis this would deprive the medium and
small business sector (including those businesses owned by overseas
companies) of a locally based one-stop shop of support across
the full spectrum of business concerns. The recommendation was
also based on the belief that the proposed changes would also
have an adverse impact on the financial viability of Business
Links since they would be unable to recover input VAT. EEDA did
not agree as research showed that the "brokerage" model
was the overwhelming preference of businesses and the model being
advocated nationally by the Government. EEDA demonstrated that
their Corporate Plan provided the necessary levels of funding
to ensure that there would be no reduction in the services available
to business and continued to pursue the "brokerage"
model to transform the region's Business Link into a regionally
operated service.
West Midlands
Following a scrutiny review of Advantage West
Midlands Rural Renaissance initiative it was recommended that
AWM provide existing and prospective partners with clear information
regarding its role, constraints and methods of working, and should
clarify the relationship between economic development and wider
regeneration goals. This would form part of the information circulated
to partners to inform the option development stage of the RES
revision. AWM agreed and AWM has provided information accepting
that more needs to be done and the lessons will be applied in
future rural and generic communication.
A further recommendation was for AWM to examine
its current process for approving projects and granting funding
to identify efficiency improvements. AWM agreed and during 2005-06
the Agency started its "Building Better Projects Faster"
initiative to deliver a more accessible first stage application,
a more structured assessment process, and clearer guidance to
applicants on how to develop projects. As a result from 2006-07
the Agency will operate a single approval body for grant applications.
It is anticipated that this will further reduce the time spent
on Agency approval of projects.
Following the same scrutiny exercise the RA
recommended that Advantage West Midlands, as part of the RES process,
develops and consults on a rural proofing mechanism with a clear
monitoring and reporting arrangement for regional partners. This
was not agreed by AWM as a further mechanism was seen as unnecessary
since the principles of rural proofing were already integrated
in to the Agency's approach to rural renaissance.
East Midlands
the East Midlands RDA/RA scrutiny arrangements
are carried out through a Regional Scrutiny Board (RSB). The primary
means of Scrutiny is through thematic Scrutiny Panels, which are
set up within an agreed three Year Delivery Plan. The outcome
of these is the production of a scrutiny report, which provides
detailed recommendations. The board is given further opportunities
to comment on RDA delivery at quarterly Regional Scrutiny Board
Meetings. Representatives of EMDA, EMRA and Government Office,
attend these meetings.
Following a scrutiny review and recommendations
on their approach to Sustainable Development in 2005 EMDA responded
with the production of a Sustainable Development Action Plan and
the nomination of an EMDA Board member to lead on, and champion
sustainable development. EMDA has also produced detailed action
plans in response to the Scrutiny Panels examining Inward Investment
activities and Tourism delivery. In some cases further additional
action has not been required because the recommendations made
have effectively duplicated existing or planned RDA activity,
or it has been agreed through discussion with regional partners
that other activities principally addressed these recommendations.
Yorkshire and Humber
Yorkshire and Humber have held eight scrutiny
sessions since 2002 on topics including marketing, inward investment,
business birth rates, public sector investment and the Regional
Economic Strategy.
Following a scrutiny review on the impact of
cluster policy, the objective of developing competitive business
of the revised regional Economic Strategy now features clusters
strongly. Whilst the revised RES does not identify any new priority
areas for cluster investment, individual action plans for each
cluster have been prepared, it encourages continued work on the
five original and two new clusters alongside seeking increased
key sector activity in Financial and Business Services, Logistics
and Construction.
As a result of scrutiny recommendations following
the marketing review the Regional Marketing Forum has progressed
actions to market the "Yorkshire—Alive with Opportunity"
brand. The Yorkshire Forward website now includes a comprehensive
section promoting the region, including a profile of each of the
five key cities in Yorkshire and Humber, a royalty free photo
library and key statistics.
The same scrutiny exercise also looked at Inward
Investment and the recommendations to review of internal and inter-organisational
working arrangements and protocols at the regional, sub-regional
and local levels have been agreed and undertaken for North and
South Yorkshire, and information has been disseminated. A new
framework for Inward Investment was also agreed and work continues
to encourage the development of similar targets across the region's
Local Authorities.
Yorkshire Forward had no specific examples where
they had not acted upon recommendations from the scrutiny process.
North West
Following two scrutiny review meetings on RDA
policy relating to Sub-Regional Partnerships (SRPs) recommendations
were made on the governance, capacity, potential delivery role
of SRPs, and performance management of SRP activity in relation
to fulfilling the Regional Economic Strategy. All recommendations
were jointly agreed with NWDA and the Sub Regional Partnerships
and NWDA has provided additional capacity building resources for
SRPs and further guidance on their role. NWDA did not report any
instances of not following up on recommendations.
South East
Following scrutiny of SEEDA's impact on manufacturing
it was recommended that, as lead RDA on manufacturing, SEEDA should
lobby the Department of Trade and Industry for greater regional
devolution of resources for best practice, sectors and innovation
in the Comprehensive Spending Review. SEEDA agreed with this recommendation
as part of the RDA approach to simplification of business support.
A further recommendation was for SEEDA to work with business representative
organisations and other bodies to identify other measures to support
manufacturing beyond the current Manufacturing Advisory Service.
SEEDA accepted this recommendation and has since instigated formal
working arrangements with business representative bodies to take
this forward.
Following scrutiny of SEEDA's approach to Regeneration
and Area Investment Frameworks a recommendation was made that
the RDA take forward the progressive devolution of a broader range
of SEEDA expenditure to well-performing partnerships. SEEDA took
the view that its 2005-08 Corporate Plan, on which the Assembly
was consulted, already provided for the appropriate degree of
progressive devolution.
London
Following a committee request to the London
Assembly the London Mayor responded to recommendations made regarding
the opportunities for small and medium sized London businesses
of the London Olympics 2012. The Mayor made the official response
with significant input from the LDA and it highlighted the progress
being made for joining up and streamlining business engagement
and support and development of a 2012 business club. The LDA arrangements
with Serco to support thousands of small business entrepreneurs
and the roll out of the "Supply London" programme to
get companies ready for the procurement process for the Olympics
were key elements of the agreed response.
Annex 1
SUMMARY OUTLINE OF REGIONAL ASSEMBLY SCRUTINY
ARRANGEMENTS OF THE RDA IN EACH ENGLISH REGION
| Region | Scrutiny arrangements with RA and RDA
| Additional information |
| North East | Written agreement on scrutiny and policy development
Annually reviewed work plan of topics
Scrutiny committee manages and reviews the process
| Eight scrutiny topics completed |
North West | Scrutiny review panel meetings
Review Panel questions and discussions
| Two reviews of RDA policy on sub-regional partnerships in 2004 and 2005
|
Yorkshire | Regional Scrutiny Board
Formal Review panels and "trials" on specific topics
Action plans produced in response to all scrutiny reports.
| Eight scrutiny enquiries completed.
Less formal "trials " being tested/conducted for Northern Way and Innovation reviews
|
East Midlands | Written Scrutiny Protocol (inc. GOEM)
Regional Scrutiny Board
Thematic Scrutiny Panels called on a case by case basis and ad-hoc non panel reviews
Three year rolling scrutiny programme
| Final assessment reports produced by EMDA 12 months after scrutiny report setting out the Agency's view of usefulness of the report.
|
West Midlands | Written protocol for scrutiny and strategic review (inc GOWM)
Assembly Strategic review group
Annual report provided to full assembly
Two types of review by panel-Individual topic based scrutiny reviews of AWM and strategic reviews of regional issues.
| |
East of England | Full Assembly and Executive committee strategic scrutiny lead
EERA/EEDA Liaison Panel has delegated authority on scrutiny business and meets quarterly
Annual programme of quarterly reports shared with EERA on all RES topics
| Annual Regional Accountability and Sub regional Accountability meetings support the overall process
|
South west | Written protocol on scrutiny activity, process and Regional Strategic reviews
Scrutiny Panel of assembly, business and others
Annual scrutiny programme
| Inclusive regional workshops developed to involve other regional stakeholders
Protocol under review to cover 2006 to 2009
Independent assessment in 2005
|
| Southeast | Annual programme of scrutiny topics
Scrutiny panel/select committee and chair selected by the Assembly
SEEDA invited to respond to each scrutiny report
| Three topics per year
Assembly chair or Chief Executive report on full years scrutiny at SEEDA Open Public Meeting
|
London | Functional body of the GLA
Statutory duty under GLA Act to cooperate with the London Assembly
Scrutiny via the elected London Mayor and his strategies
Direct questioning at Assembly meetings
Scrutiny committees hold investigations
Assembly has powers to subpoena LDA documents and personnel
| No standard approach
Decision on whether to respond taken on a case by case basis
|
16
Strengthening Regional Accountability, DETR, 9 March 2001. Back
17
As a functional body of the Greater London Authority, the London
Development Agency is subject to a separate assessment regime
performed by the Audit Commission.
Back
| 
