Memorandum submitted by Ken Wigfield
THE NEED
FOR A
LEVEL BETWEEN
CENTRAL AND
LOCAL GOVERNMENT
I see considerable value in having some form
of sub-national authority responsible for strategic development.
This need, however, comes with a number of caveats:
1. The number of "regions" should be
less than is currently the case—in other words the "regions"
should be bigger. Something like half the current number with
twice the governable area would seem appropriate.
2. There should be a Cabinet Minister whose sole
responsibility it is to coordinate the activities of these large,
regional authorities and to help plan and resolve issues about
inter-regional projects.
3. In order to reduce the plethora of lower authorities
that currently exists in some parts of the regions, counties should
become unitary authorities so that the tier below regional level
is manageable. This tier must be instrumental in the local implementation
of any development programme.
4. This sub national authority should be the
only official body controlling all aspects of economic and spatial
development within their region. All other government agencies
that operate in the field (eg Business Link) should be directed
by it; all support (both national and European) should be channelled
through it. (In other words there is no need for Government Offices
(eg GOWM), City Regions, etc).
5. The officers who run such regions should have
sufficient business acumen to be able to understand the generation
and implementation of a true strategy. They must be "big
picture" operators. Obviously, they will have to work within
the broad policies of the government in power at the time. However,
the short-term, changeable whims of various Parties should not
be allowed to redirect the overall purpose of, what should be,
a first-class, long-term development strategy.
6. These strategic planning process proposed
by the region should be subject to the controlling scrutiny of
an external panel or governing body. That panel should comprise
a majority of personnel concerned with wealth generation and a
minority of those with a wealth distribution interest. All members
of the panel should understand the meaning and process of strategy.
7. More extreme blue sky thinking leads me to
the conclusion that these regional authorities should be independent
and apolitical. Much along the lines of the way the Bank of England
currently has an independent control of inflation, so these regional
agencies could do much the same for economic development. Obviously
their terms of reference would be far more complicated but such
a structure would enable the UK to embark upon a much-needed programme
of long-term planning.
THE EFFECTIVENESS
OF RDA'S
AND THEIR
ROLE IN
ADDING VALUE
My experience has been solely with one such
Agency—Advantage West Midlands. It is that experience that
is noted here.
In their recent publication "the West Midland's
economy—a joint response to changing economic circumstances"
[by the way, the apostrophe in the word Midland's was not included
!!!] AWM states "From 2007 to 2012, Advantage West Midlands
is directly investing some £2.2 billion in economic development
and regeneration activity.". This must roughly match what
it has spent over the past seven years since its inception for
which it is proud to report:
"In the past seven years Advantage West
Midlands has achieved the following:
2,563 people assisted into new jobs in the West
Midlands
3,235 businesses created in, or attracted to,
the West Midlands
34,480 West Midlands businesses given access
to the resources they need to improve performance
956 West Midlands businesses have become engaged
in new collaborations with the region's Research & Development
community
83,158 people in the West Midlands have improved
skills
11,489 community enterprise initiatives have
been supported
£634 million in additional public and private
sector funding levered into the West Midlands
768 hectares (1,900 acres) of brownfield land
reclaimed or redeveloped."
How much of this scoreline would have been achieved
without AWM's involvement? I suspect their influence has been
marginal.
How much of that past £2 billion has been
spent on supposed "strategic thinking activities " and
the publication, approximately every two years, of a new, glossy
strategy document?
How much of that past £2 billion has been
spent on new buildings and the refurbishment of old ones for their
own purposes?
How much of that past £2 billion has been
spent moving staff around every 12 to 24 months and on the recruitment
of new personnel in a high staff turnover environment?
If £2 billion has been spent over the past
seven years I see little evidence of any major or significant
returns on that money. AWM may have added some value but it most
certainly has not been valued for money.
RDA EXPERTISE
In a word—poor. I understand that when
the RDA's were conceived they were intended to be business-led
organisations. In the early days of AWM it was, indeed, largely
populated by people that had worked in businesses. Unfortunately
the majority to whom I spoke had been made redundant or in some
way ousted from those businesses—obviously those businesses
would shed their best people !
Over more recent years it would seem that the
majority of AWM employees have more of an "administrative"
background having worked in government functions, quangos, academia,
etc it is essential that the staff, particularly at senior level,
have hands-on experience of the private sector, both large and
small, along with start-up, expansion and closure involvement.
Worst of all, and most critically, it seems
that few in AWM have the long-term, "big picture" capabilities
to build a clear, long-term strategy for the West Midlands.
OVERSEAS ACTIVITIES
I believe all regions are and have to be competitive
in attracting investment from overseas. If, however, this activity
is uncoordinated it has a detrimental effect on UK PLC. Overseas
marketing should be the coordinating role of a Cabinet Minister.
Under that person's direction overseas forays should be valuable
but they should be undertaken under the auspices of UKTI.
EXPANDING THE
RDA'S REMIT
Under the proposals of the SNR the RDA is should
become responsible for economic and spatial strategy is. Such
a move is essential as both strategies are interdependent. To
do so with the current makeup of AWM would be disastrous. As mentioned
above they do not have the expertise to embrace even the current
strategic planning process.
Furthermore, the idea that these strategies
have to be agreed (through the Local Authority Leaders Forums)
and implemented by local authorities is risible when considering
the capabilities of some of them within Worcestershire.
To relegate the possible involvement of the
community and especially businesses to the level of local authorities
is one further nail in the poultry coffin of the SNR.
RDA'S ACCOUNTABILITY
AND MEASUREMENT
Under current arrangements it would appear,
superficially, that AWM is virtually unaccountable for what it
does. However, on digging deeper one realises that the plethora
of accountability elements is so wide that it as good as hides
its overall effectiveness.
The RDA should be run as a business. Just like
any other well-run business it should generate its long-term strategy
which should be broken down into staged goals. It is the achievement
of those stage goals that should be its primary measure of success.
19 September 2008
| 
