2 Purpose and role of SEEDA
The need for a Regional Development
Agency
11. The South East Development Agency (SEEDA) was
created in April 1999, along with other Regional Development Agencies
(RDAs), to "drive and co-ordinate regional economic development
and regeneration and to improve their [regions'] relative competitiveness
and reduce imbalances within and between regions."[10]
It has five statutory purposes:
- to further economic development
and regeneration;
- to promote business efficiency, investment and
competitiveness;
- to promote employment;
- to enhance the development and application of
skills relevant to employment; and
- to contribute to sustainable development.
12. SEEDA's Corporate Plan 2008-2011 identified three
key challenges, namely: achieving and maintaining global competitiveness;
raising productivity and increasing employment opportunities for
"smart growth that will spread the benefits of competitiveness";
and investing in sustainable prosperity "for quality of life,
a key source of the South East's competitive advantage".
[11]
13. In oral evidence to the Committee, Jim Brathwaite,
Chairman, SEEDA, explained that SEEDA worked with business organisations
to "improve their performance", with central government
to "let them know what the south-east needs", and with
local councils to "deliver on the economy".[12]
14. Mr Brathwaite pointed out that the South East
had 74 different councils: district councils, unitary councils
and county councils. It was the largest region and "the leading
economy in the UK, the real locomotive". He told us that
SEEDA had tried to "be a bridge between our councils and
central Government" in terms of the growth of the economy.
SEEDA had spent a long time working with "hostile councils
who did not want anything to do with regional architecture".[13]
15. Pam Alexander, Chief Executive, SEEDA, told us
SEEDA was an organisation driven by funding from Government in
order to achieve two Government objectives: "to increase
the growth of every region and to reduce the disparities in growth
between the regions". She explained that the South East,
as the fastest-growing region, focused more on increasing growth
in the region. There were also "substantial disparities"
within the South East, which SEEDA was engaged in looking at to
"help those parts of the South-East that are not growing
as fast as others".[14]
16. Ross McNally, Chief Executive of South East Chamber
of Commerce, was one of several witnesses who argued that more
money should be allocated to the South East region because the
impact "through compound growth" would provide a better
return on Government investment that would benefit the overall
economy with greater funding for "more intervention programmes
in other regions".[15]
In addition, he told us that while there was general support
for the concept of a regional development agency, however there
had been discussion about how it performed and what its key responsibilities
were.[16]
17. The Engineering Employers Federation (EEF) told
us in written evidence that, while many people viewed the RDAs
as "unaccountable quangos", EEF argued that RDAs were
"better able to address what are often region-wide economic
issues than central government" who were too distant, or
local authorities who were perceived as too fragmented, they noted
critics proposed abolishing RDAs had yet to come up with a credible
alternative.[17]
18. We asked the Regional Minister his view as to
what a Regional Development Agency adds and the justification
for it being at a regional level. He said that the RDA was able
to bring other organisations together to coordinate work and leverage
in funding. He also said there were advantages in decision making
and to enable liaison with other organisations at a scale below
national but above local, whichever is appropriate for the issue
being addressed; many government bodies had regional offices so
it was convenient for them to operate at the same level, there
was now more cross-border working beyond district and county boundaries,
and there was a broader understanding that economies of scale
may occur at different levels. He said this change had come about
because of the regional development agencies and other local government
reforms.[18]
19. We concur with the view that
Regional Development Agencies are often better able to address
region wide economic issues than either central government or
local authorities. The failure of some Councils to engage fully
with the Agency is, therefore, likely to be hampering economic
development and we call on such Councils to reconsider their position
in the wider public interest.
10 The Governance of Britain,
Ministry of Justice, CM 7170, para 115 Back
11
South East England Development Agency, Corporate Plan 2008-11,
p 4 Back
12
Q 3 Back
13
Qq 2-3 Back
14
Q 142 Back
15
Q 73 Back
16
Q 65 Back
17
Ev 110 Back
18
Qq 145-146 Back
| 
