Examination of Witnesses (Questions 40-53)
ADRIAN AXTELL,
LYNDSEY BUNN,
JOHN HARDWICK,
DAVID JEFFERY
AND STEPHEN
WOOLFE
22 MAY 2009
Q40Judy Mallaber: Is there practical
help on the ground, as well as the broad strategic discussions?
Stephen Woolfe: May I begin with
the earlier point, and then move on to that further question?
From the Chamber point of view, I would certainly endorse what
John has said; however, I am not sure about how much the delays
at emda reflected a lack of appreciation at—I am
bound to say—central Government level about the recession
that we were entering. My take on that would be that certainly
smaller and medium-sized businesses were probably only too well
aware, through the course of last year, that things were getting
worse and worse, if not daily, certainly weekly. On the other
hand—I am putting on another hat as a senior partner in
a law firm in Leicester—we had Yvette Cooper in the office
in May or June last year after Patricia Hewitt organised for her
to come to Leicester. Yvette Cooper's take on the recession at
that time was that things would get better and that within three
months things would have turned around. I am not so sure, therefore,
that we can blame emda particularly for not perhaps appreciating
the recession that we were walking into. Having said that, I don't
think that anybody appreciated how bad it was going to be and
how bad it is. In terms of what they are doing now, I certainly
feel that there is very great concern within emda—you
get this from talking to Jeff Moore, Bryan Jackson and other senior
people—to try to help, wherever they can, within the East
Midlands. However, from the other side of it, I don't think there
is much understanding of the help that is on offer or of how to
access it. I think that the message is very lukewarm.
Adrian Axtell: I think that that
is absolutely right. Access is one of the main issues. It relates
to the practicalities of what we were trying to develop actually
before the economic crisis. In the East Midlands, there is a lottery
on redundancy support depending on where the job losses occur.
With Quebecor—for argument's sake—in Northamptonshire,
in Phil Hope's constituency, there was a lot of support on the
ground. Naturally—because the job losses occurred in that
sector—the print and graphical, paper and media sectors
are well-versed in these issues. The level of support there was
top-class. If the same happened in Lincoln or Loughborough, we
are not sure what could be delivered, hence this idea. It was
really about practical help. All the advice and support is out
there—it is not that it is not there; it is just the co-ordination.
We were prepared, as a union, to supply support in the way of
offices and so on and so forth. It was a real, practical step.
It was a central point that an employee or employer could contact
co-ordinators who could tie in all the external bodies.
Q41Judy Mallaber: Do you want that to
come via emda at a regional level, the sub-regional partnerships,
which is where we are getting more support in my area, or through
Business Link? Do you have a view on that?
Adrian Axtell: Overriding, I would
see where that came as being about the funding, to a certain degree.
I thought emda would welcome—should we say?—and
embrace that, to be perfectly frank with you. How that developed
from there was very much embryonic, because the view was—including
during discussions with Phil Hope in particular—that it
was a simple idea, and often the simple ideas are the best. We
can develop and build it from there and see what happens. However,
we were trying to move away from what was in effect a lottery
in relation to support following job losses.
David Jeffery: Adrian is right.
The quality of support that people received was variable depending
on where they were in the region when they lost their jobs. Often,
it depended on somebody from our organisation, usually somebody
who dealt with lifelong learning, in co-ordinating that response.
Our idea was to have a co-ordinated response, not just from UNITE
but from all the unions across the region, and to get that funded
by the regional development agency. There are a couple of examples
on page 13 of the document on the economic climate that was published
in August, such as the skills pledge and encouraging employers
to sign up to that pledge. We have been doing that since the initiation
of the skills pledge, through things such as learning agreements.
We incorporated the pledge into our learning agreements, so that
first, employers were aware of it, and secondly, they would sign
up to it; and thirdly, we then monitored what that actually meant
in practical terms. That was one thing. There is another example
in that document, on page 15—I will be brief. The final
paragraph "Next Steps" states that "emda
will continue to use its strong links to individual businesses,
developers and the CBI, IOD, chambers of commerce, FSB and EEF
to provide in-depth and timely intelligence and analysis to ensure
that Government" do this and that.
Chairman: Judy has another question.
We need to move on.
Q42 Judy Mallaber: You talked about
the issue of co-ordination; again, the unions are not involved.
Quite apart from co-ordination, do emda and related organisations
and sub-partnerships, such as Business Link, have the tools to
do the job? Is it that communication and co-ordination are not
getting in quickly enough, or do they not have the mechanisms?
Is there anything else that they should be able to do?
John Hardwick: I think the business
support organisations play a very important part in making sure
that our members are aware of what is available to them. For the
majority of businesses, the first port of call is their accountant,
the second is the FSB website—plug, plug—or our own
legal help lines, to which they are entitled to: let's face it,
that is why members join. The third one is what we can get from
Business Link and what it can offer us. The good thing is that
Business Link has changed its emphasis to survival from growth.
I am glad to say that the East Midlands Business Forum had a big
part in making that strategic, attitude change during the summer—it
even got a couple of the leaflets reprinted to reflect that. The
role of Business Link has certainly changed—it had to change.
It had to become more diagnostic, taking down the diagnostic model,
and it had to become something of a signposting service. Making
business people aware of what they can access through Business
Link still leaves a little bit to be desired. There has been a
bit of TV advertising, which is good. Any advertising is good
advertising, and makes people aware of what is available to them,
but it is generally not perceived as the first port of call.
Q43 Chairman: We have about 20
minutes left and we have a lot of ground to cover, so you all
need to be a bit sharper, if that is all right. Let me put in
a very small question at this point. emda has had two studies
done recently, one by PricewaterhouseCoopers, and the other by
EcoTech, which basically say that it does a good job. Has anyone
read those reports?
Stephen Woolfe: A one-word answer:
no.
John Hardwick: I personally gave
evidence to EcoTech back in February, but the answer to the question
is that I have not actually seen the report as yet. I was part
of the evidence, shall I say?
Chairman: I can see that you are diligent—you
have to read the report. I have actually got it sent to you. Can
we talk a bit about the urban-rural work of emda? Judy,
you are going to take us through.
Q44 Judy Mallaber: On this panel,
we have two big-city people, and two of us who are—I do
not know if you would call yourself this—rural and semi-rural.
One of the problems with the East Midlands and how you deal with
it is the diversity that we have, from seriously rural through
to seriously urban, and those of us who are locked somewhere in
the middle. What unique challenges does that mean that we face?
What are the particular problems in the rural areas that often
tend not to get so much attention? I am sure people will be straight
in on this one.
John Hardwick: There are small
business members based in rural areas. Those are not rural businesses,
but businesses based in rural areas. Let us make that clear—they
are not all agriculturally based, and I don't want to label them.
The biggest perception among the majority of those people is that
far too much emphasis is put on the big three—Derby, Nottingham
and Leicester. They feel excluded. We are not talking only about
Lincolnshire; we are talking about Rutland and places south of
Northamptonshire. People are in similar situations and have similar
problems. People in Lincolnshire especially feel very turned off
by emda. That is not my phrase, but it has been bandied
about many times. They feel as if they are left out, and that
all the initiatives tend to be focused along the M1 corridor.
When I go out to meet members in those rural areas, they have
a totally different perspective on emda and its role, and
they say, "It does nothing for us." We as an organisation
try to flag up the fact that those people are entitled to all
the services, just as much as anybody else.
Q45 Judy Mallaber: Do they need different
services? What are their particular challenges?
John Hardwick: One of the biggest
challenges that they have is a simple matter. Those of us who
live in towns and cities expect broadband. In rural areas the
cable is a bit thin—it hasn't got there yet, and speeds
are variable to say the least. There are still areas where broadband
is more or less non-existent. Everybody from the Government down
is saying that we should take advantage of new technologies, but
that is difficult if the companies and providers basically say
that they will concentrate on the areas that give them the biggest
return, and will get to other areas eventually. One of the big
arguments is about the availability of broadband, which is an
essential tool for doing business today, wherever it is. It is
about getting a decent speed broadband throughout the entire country
and especially in some of the rural areas. Lincolnshire especially
flags that issue up.
Stephen Woolfe: I am not sure
that the debate is rural versus city; there are a number of bands
to it. I certainly agree that Leicester, Nottingham and Derby
dominate, but there are some big regeneration projects that emda
is undertaking around the East Midlands. I can't talk a lot about
Lincolnshire as, bluntly, I don't know a lot about it, even though
it comes in the East Midlands generally.
Chairman: Careful what you say.
Stephen Woolfe: I note that Lincolnshire
is not represented among you, either. We can look at regeneration
projects. For example, The Avenue is a huge regeneration project.
I am not sure whether it is in one of your constituencies or not.
Judy Mallaber: Nearby.
Stephen Woolfe: You wouldn't say
that was in a city, by any stretch of the imagination. I look
at what is happening in west Leicestershire—again, that
is National Forest-based and whatever—and there is huge
regeneration going on there at the site of the old Rawdon colliery,
with significant involvement by emda. I understand that
those examples are replicated around a fair bit of the East Midlands.
If we are looking at the purely agricultural economy, I would
be amazed if there were that many farmers or agricultural workers—agriculture
is a huge employer in the area—who had even heard of emda.
It is as bad as that, I think. There is a divide, but I do not
think that it is simply the cities versus everything else. There
are a number of layers to it.
Lyndsey Bunn: A key concern that
we have at the moment is the decline of market towns and the hinterland
communities surrounding the cities. That is where we are not seeing
the major support. Yes, there has been an awful lot of development
in the former coalfields because of the amount of money that was
coming in from Europe to address those issues. But it is very
different when you look at places like Ollerton, which was quite
near the colliery site—the investment that emda has
put in there has been fabulous for the community—and then
at places like Kettering, which is a declining town, it isn't
really a market town, where you see empty shop units. There are
issues about appropriate work space environments for businesses
that are based in rural areas and their ability to conduct their
business from a location of their choice. It is cheaper for them
to be based in a less urban environment in terms of rental costs
and so on, but there is a lack of focus in terms of developing
appropriate work space units, starter units and growing-on space
within those core towns and communities outside the three cities.
Chairman: Can we take stock with where
we are? We have got about a quarter of an hour left, and I want
to talk a bit about the changes in the regional infrastructure
and sustainability. I know that Bob and myself have concluding
questions, so would you, Peter, talk about these governance changes?
That would be helpful.
Q46 Sir Peter Soulsby: Yes. The
dissolution of the regional assemblies is imminent and there are
going to be some questions about the accountability of RDAs generally
and, for us, emda. How do you see that? Will it leave a
big gap? Is what we have waiting in the wings to fill that gap
going to be adequate?
Lyndsey Bunn: There is a significant
accountability gap, in my view. emda will point to the
fact that it is audited by external and internal auditors and
that it has to provide monitoring reports to the Government office,
but there is a huge concern, from my perspective, that no one
actually goes back to check the figures that emda is reporting.
emda is very good at promoting what it does in terms of
output, achievement and core PSA target outputs in particular,
but we don't tend to hear about the added-value stuff. In terms
of the role that regional assemblies have played, local councillors,
business representatives, environmental partners, trade unions
have been able to ask them searching questions about what they
are doing outside achieving those core PSA target outputs. With
the demise of the assembly, and with all due respect to the Regional
Select Committees that have been established—
Chairman: Nobody else has respect!
Lyndsey Bunn: I think there is
going to be less accountability under the future arrangements
rather than more, and I feel that every public sector organisation
should be under the same degree of scrutiny if they are spending
taxpayers' money.
Q47 Sir Peter Soulsby: How can
we fill that gap?
Lyndsey Bunn: I would say this,
wouldn't I? I think it could be done by a proper stakeholder organisation,
which is being proposed to the regional assembly's joint leaders
board, whereby a group of democratically elected personnel, as
well as business representatives, businesses and other economic,
social and environmental partners, can continue to ask questions
of the RDA or any other Government-funded body in the region.
That would be a way of ensuring that your work, for example, could
be supported, so that you were not duplicating the scrutiny and
accountability that was going on.
Stephen Woolfe: I just think there
is a difference between accountability and scrutiny. I am certain
that accountability would exist through the Select Committee,
but I am not sure what happens after March 2010 when the scrutiny
through the regional assembly finishes. There seems to be a gap
there that needs to be filled.
John Hardwick: The only thing
I would say about that is our involvement—if it is another
forum of the great and the good, we are socially excluded.
Q48 Sir Peter Soulsby: Following
what you have said about the accountability gap, there is also
the prospect of the single regional strategy and the responsibility
for a spatial as well as an economic strategy. Do you see that
as bringing new challenges in terms of accountability?
Lyndsey Bunn: We would welcome
the single integrated regional strategy. We think it is incredibly
useful to have a single document that outlines exactly what economic
development is going to happen, when and where, and how it is
going to benefit communities and individual citizens, not just
businesses. In terms of accountability, our concern is the level
of stakeholder engagement that will be going on outside the relationship
between emda and the local authorities. That is a crunch
issue for this region at the moment in terms of how we ensure
that stakeholders are not just seen as people to consult on a
finished article. We actually want to be there at the beginning,
driving what the strategy contains. We also want to be involved
in consulting on the draft finished article and then in agreeing
a set of principles moving forward.
Sir Peter Soulsby: I want to hear more,
because I saw a lot of nods.
John Hardwick: The only thing
that I would add is that members of the East Midlands Business
Forum have a good reputation for working together. It is not like
different business organisations coming together. That is not
always the case, and it does not happen in every part of the country,
but we have a good reputation for working together. We should
make that work for the benefit of everybody.
Q49 Sir Peter Soulsby: I mentioned
the single regional strategy. To what extent do you think that
emda has the skills to take on this new responsibility
in-house? Do you know anything about any plans to ensure that
it fills any gaps in its skills?
Lyndsey Bunn: It will involve
a change, particularly in terms of spatial experts who currently
reside within the regional assembly. You have planning and transport
experts and so on. Although emda has a very skilled work
force, it will have to consider what skills it has to undertake
that work effectively. Whether it feels that it has the skills
at the moment is for it to answer, I suppose.
David Jeffery: There needs to
be an appreciation of what it seriously means to lose your job
or to be socially excluded and all those things. There are some
good people in emda, and with individual members we have
had some great support as far they could take that. However, we
need some sort of development in how they engage not only with
trade unions, but with community groups, because we are stakeholders,
too. However, it is sometimes more difficult for people who are
not accustomed to it to articulate their needs and desires. Perhaps
emda needs to think about how it engages with our broader
communities.
Q50 Sir Peter Soulsby: Finally
and very briefly, we asked emda about its involvement in
sustainable development and the broader agenda. It is very clear
that it has been involved in some very innovative projects, but—I
hope that I am not being unfair—it did not see itself as
the lead in regional responses to sustainable development issues.
Do you think that that is the right perception of the way in which
it is acting? If it is not in the lead, who ought to be?
Stephen Woolfe: There is an interesting
relationship between emda on the one hand and the county
and district authorities on the other. For example, north-west
Leicestershire—one of the ones that I know best in terms
of sustainable development—has huge policies and strategies
to try to turn it into one of the greener districts in the country.
To the question, "Who will take the lead?", the answer
might be that some of the authorities have to do that, rather
than emda. Over the past few years, there has been an interesting
balance. To return to The Avenue, on sustainability, regeneration
and whatever, I would have thought that the lead would certainly
have been taken by emda—not alone, but it has played
a very significant part. However, with a changing political climate
across the East Midlands, much of the lead must come more locally
than regionally. That is where the emphasis could perhaps be better
applied.
Q51 Mr Laxton: About an hour ago,
Paddy asked what would happen if the RDA was to go. Lyndsey's
response was, "Well, it can be replaced by something else."
May I put that behind the eight ball? Before the RDA, we had the
East Midlands Development Company and before that it was basically
Whitehall and what is now the Government Office for the East Midlands.
GOEM was supposed to be a voice for the regions in Whitehall,
but many people saw it as Whitehall in the East Midlands, in this
case. Has anything changed? If it were to go, how disastrous would
that be? And if you feel it is disastrous, what would you replace
it with?
Lyndsey Bunn: I think emda
can now be considered as one of the larger employers in the region,
so if it were to go there would be an awful lot of people made
redundant, I guess. That would be a particular concern regarding
where those individuals then go on to seek further employment.
As for emda's role, particularly in providing that regional
umbrella-type organisation for economic development, it has been
incredibly successful. There has been perhaps too big a remit
for them to take on rather than just addressing market failure,
or just trying to look at economic growth and increasing economic
growth and productivity in the region. They have perhaps been
sidetracked, as have all the RDAs, by looking into other issues
that perhaps would fit most appropriately under other regional
organisations. If it were to go, perhaps it would just be replaced
by a more streamlined version. I do not know whether that is Government
thinking. In the climate that we have at the moment, there could
be a general election and then who knows what will happen to the
regional scenery? So your guess is as good as mine in terms of
whether it will go and what it will be replaced with.
Q52 Mr Laxton: Sorry to interrupt,
but I wanted your guess. My question was: if it went, would it
be disastrous? If you felt that it was partially, wholly or critically
disastrous, what would you want to replace it?
Chairman: We ask the questions. I am
not offering a view. I have a view but I am not offering one.
Lyndsey Bunn: It would be disastrous
in terms of the number of employees that it has and the number
of agencies that it funds.
Q53 Mr Laxton: No, not the employers
and the organisation. I am talking about the region.
Lyndsey Bunn: It would be a loss
to the region—that is what I would say. Yes, I believe that
there should be an organisation that is looking at economic development
across the region, and developing economic growth and productivity
and supporting businesses to generate productivity and wealth.
That is about as much as I would like to say, if that is okay
with you. I am not sure I have answered your question.
Mr Laxton: Well, if you believe your
answer is deficient—that is your opinion. I don't have an
opinion—I just wanted to know your view, that's all.
Stephen Woolfe: I've let you off
the hook now, haven't I? emda has done a lot of good for
the East Midlands. One of the really good things it has done is
to start making the East Midlands think of itself as a region.
The world is a big place. Leicestershire, Nottinghamshire, Derbyshire
and Lincolnshire—don't forget Rutland—haven't got
a terribly large standing in the world. The East Midlands is small
enough as a region. Some people say it should be the Midlands
we talk about. I think the East Midlands is a good region to come
together. If emda were to disappear, what would be one
of the biggest downsides? I think perhaps the loss of our ability
as a region to pursue a regional approach and strategy would be
a huge loss. What would come in its place? Hopefully, emda
mark 2. If I take your analysis of GOEM, which is Whitehall in
the regions—I am not sure it is right, but that is certainly
how GOEM has been perceived—I think the region wants something
rather more strategic than that. It wants to be able to feed through
a body and feed down to London and make its impact that way. I
have no doubt whatever that we will need emda mark 2.
Adrian Axtell: Overall, it does
do a good job, for two specific reasons. One is that the east,
from my understanding, and certainly from a trade union perspective,
has always been the poor relation to the west. Coupled with the
East Midlands it is very easy, again from an industrial base,
to be Derby and Rolls-Royce-based, but it is a bigger and more
important and more diverse region than that. I think it would
be a loss, to a degree. What would take over? I think it needs
an emda mark 2. Perhaps more direction should be given
to the stakeholders that are involved. As was said earlier about
being involved at the start and right the way through the process,
that is from a broad perspective, or however you want to take
it. I think it is all a bit in the auspices of being open and
so on, but perhaps it doesn't necessarily attract people. We were
classed as natural leading players, from an industrial perspective
in that environment, to hold that discussion and tackle some of
the issues that affect the East Midlands.
David Jeffery: Just briefly, we
said in the beginning that we agreed with the analysis that emda
did of the region. It is sophisticated and highlights the differentiation,
as a colleague said earlier. We have something as distinct as
the East Midlands now. That is good, and we can build on that.
Mr Laxton: Paddy, I feel ever so guilty.
Can I just say what my view is? I once had a conversation with
someone who was a permanent secretary—a top-notch civil
servant in the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs—who
was in the business of handing out big gobfuls of money—billions
here, there and everywhere. I was talking to him about Derby,
and he said, "Derby, Derby, Derby. Oh, I know Derby. I went
through it once on the train." I thought, "My God. This
is an individual who has some influence in terms of where money,
influence and power to shape industry and the economy are located
and directed." I thought, "God, you must always follow
the money. You have got to get a little bit closer to it, rather
than having a view as remote as that." You know where I stand
in terms of my enthusiasm for the regional agenda. I hope that
makes you feel better.
Chairman: I think we had better get this
permanent secretary to come and give evidence. Thank you all very
much for coming; it has been really helpful. I have an apology
to make, as I have cut people off at various points. It is clear
that there is a lot more to be said about the matter. So when
you are on the bus, those of you who are sustainable—I got
the impression that you are not very sustainable—or if you
are going back in a car, and you think, "Gosh, I wish I could
have told them that," perhaps just three or four key points
that we haven't had the chance to talk about with you, don't hesitate
to let us know what you think. Thank you all very much indeed.
|
