Written evidence from the Campaign to
Protect Rural England (CPRE)
INTRODUCTION
1. We welcome the opportunity to submit
evidence to the Business, Innovation and Skills Committee on the
proposed new Local Enterprise Partnerships (LEPs). As a leading
environmental charity, CPRE has worked to promote and protect
the beauty, tranquillity and diversity of rural England by encouraging
the sustainable use of land and other natural resources since
our formation in 1926. In the past an important part of our work
has been undertaken at the regional level, in particular helping
to shape regional plans.
2. While we welcome the revocation of the
top-down housing targets we believe there is a need for some form
of strategic planning. The letter from the Secretaries of State
for Business, Innovation and Skills and Communities and Local
Government, dated 29 June, suggests that the Partnerships could
provide strategic leadership on economic growth within their area.
In developing proposals for a new mechanism for strategic planning,
however, we believe that it is important to ensure that equal
weight is placed on environmental, social and economic considerations.
The emphasis should not be on economic growth with little or no
regard for its wider impacts.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
3. CPRE recognises the need for local authorities
and other stakeholders to work collaboratively on strategic issues
that cannot be adequately considered at a solely local level.
But achieving sustainable economic growth should not be considered
in isolation. Other issues that should be taken into consideration
in developing a strategy include mitigating and adapting to climate
change, protecting the landscape, restoring and enhancing the
natural environment, securing urban regeneration and providing
good services for rural settlements.
4. To achieve the best quality of decision-making,
stakeholders with experience and expertise from both the social
voluntary and the environmental sectors need to be involved at
the heart of Local Enterprise Partnerships. This will have the
added benefit of providing direct connections back to the local
communities and organisations that will be delivering the "Big
Society", as well as improving transparency and accountability.
THE FUNCTIONS
OF THE
NEW LOCAL
ENTERPRISE PARTNERSHIPS
5. CPRE supports developing a strategic
approach to, and maintaining an overview of, economic development
at an appropriate level. The focus of the new LEPs should, however,
be on delivering "sustainable growth", defined as economic
growth that can be "sustained and is within environmental
limits, but also enhances the environment and social welfare,
and avoids greater extremes in future economic cycles".[16]
As part of this LEPs will need to develop strategies in the context
of reducing carbon emissions, take full account of the fundamental
role of an attractive landscape and a healthy natural environment
in underpinning a healthy economy and address the social needs
of communities, particularly in rural areas.
6. The need to take account of the role
of the natural environment in underpinning a healthy economy has
been highlighted in a number of studies, including the work of
Natural Economy North West. Between 2006 and 2009 the Natural
Economy North West partnership worked to identify, demonstrate
and promote the economic value of the region's natural environment.
The work found that the environmental economy already generates
£2.6 billion Gross Value Added within the regional economy
every year, and employs 109,000 people. In addition, it contributes
towards economic security, the conditions for sustainable growth,
and provides the natural services that are fundamental for economic
and environmental sustainability. The partnership concluded that
a well-managed natural economy underpins the social, cultural
and economic prosperity of the region.
7. While we recognise the usefulness of
work by partnerships such as Natural Economy North West, we do
not believe that this should mean that LEPs should only consider
the countryside within their area that they can place an economic
value on. We welcomed the policy presumption in Planning Policy
Statement 4: Planning for Sustainable Economic Growth that
the countryside should be protected for its intrinsic character.
We believe that this policy should be retained in the forthcoming
National Planning Framework and underpin the work of LEPs and
local planning authorities.
THE REGIONAL
GROWTH FUND
AND FUNDING
ARRANGEMENTS
8. There will always be a balance between
attempting to maximise short-term economic growth and directing
investment to the most sustainable options that will provide the
greatest public benefit over the longer term. It is clear, however,
that achieving balanced growth, and particularly ensuring deprived
areas do not continue to lag behind, requires a certain amount
of intervention in the wider social interest.
9. From the current consultation on the
Regional Growth Fund we are aware that the Government intends
to use it to encourage private sector enterprise and, in particular,
to support "those areas and communities that are currently
dependent on the public sector [to] make a transition to sustainable
private sector led growth". We believe that LEPs, using funding
from the Growth Fund if appropriate, should support growth in
areas of deprivation, which would otherwise struggle to compete
to attract investment. The Regional Development Agencies (RDAs)
have targeted investment in this way in the past, for example,
pump-priming the development of strategic sites on previously
developed land.
10. The Black Country Study is also an example
of what should be supported in the future. Work on the Study began
when the Black Country's political and business leaders recognised
the need to consider radical change in the sub-region to counter
the process of decline over the last 30 years. The Study supported
a sub-regional strategy for the Black Country, outlining the priorities
for regenerating its physical, environmental, social and economic
fabric. The strategy set out why the area needs to change, what
change is necessary and where it should take place, and how that
change will be delivered. This study has fed in to the Black Country
Joint Core Strategy.
11. When submitting applications to the
Growth Fund LEPs should be required to demonstrate how they have
considered, and if necessary minimised, the impact of their proposals
on the environment and, in particular, the open countryside. The
Independent Approval Panel, which will consider proposals, should
have adequate expertise to ensure that environmental and social
impacts have been properly considered. The Panel should also ensure
that the views of local communities and local experts have been
sought as the proposals have been developed.
12. It will be important that decisions
on funding projects are open and transparent. The Panel should
also ensure that if funds are to be managed by LEPs they have
adequate staff, with sufficient expertise, to deliver projects.
ARRANGEMENTS FOR
COORDINATING REGIONAL
ECONOMIC STRATEGY
13. LEPs will need to communicate with neighbouring
bodies to coordinate their activity. A key aspect of both the
Regional Spatial Strategy and Regional Economic Strategy was ensuring
investment, regeneration and business support were directed to
the areas where they were most needed. We would not want to see,
for example, development on a greenfield site in one area being
promoted by a LEP when there are alternative viable opportunities
for development on previously developed land across the boundary.
This would both needlessly damage the countryside and divert limited
investment out of urban areas where the wider social and economic
returns would be significantly higher.
14. To ensure this communication happens
there needs to be a requirement that Partnerships take account
of the work of adjoining Partnerships, but also the local development
plans in adjoining areas. It may be possible to use the proposed
"duty to cooperate", which Open Source Planning
has suggested would be placed on local authorities, to require
LEPs to work across their boundaries. The Government has not yet
published details on how this duty might work and we would want
to ensure that LEPs are required to do more than merely consult
neighbouring bodies on draft strategies.
15. Due to the scale of the areas they covered
RDAs have been able to take a strategic approach to supporting
projects which have implications across the region. An example
would be the redevelopment of Longbridge in Birmingham following
the collapse of MG Rover, which has implications for the whole
of the West Midlands. The new system will need to include appropriate
mechanisms for dealing with such strategically important sites.
Equally, development agencies can hold considerable landbanks
of regeneration sites, which we would expect would continue to
be used to pump-prime urban regeneration. These may not be the
same as landbanks held by local authorities and yet may be of
equal or more value in achieving urban and rural regeneration.
16. Following the abolition of the Leaders'
Boards some regions are intending to retain a smaller regional
body. These bodies will have no statutory role, however, and so
their authority and their inclusiveness is likely to vary. They
could, however, play a useful role in maintaining an overview
of a number of LEPs.
17. If individual LEPs are narrowly focused
on their own economic advantage this could be a recipe for greater
disjointedness between economic development and social and environmental
outcomes. All LEPs that cover a certain area, for example within
a region, could, therefore, be required to meet on a regular basis.
This would help them maintain a strategic overview of the proposals
of LEPs in the area, but also the likely impacts of those proposals.
If these meetings are inclusive and have a strong sustainable
development agenda this could strengthen the outcomes delivered
by the new bodies.
STRUCTURE AND
ACCOUNTABILITY OF
LEPS
18. We support the Government's ambition
to release the potential of individuals and communities to shape
their own futures through the "Big Society" programme.
The creation of LEPs should not contradict the Government's attempts
to get more people to engage in local decision-making processes.
For the "Big Society" to be effective, it will be vital
for members of the community to be able to feed into, if not be
involved in, the Partnerships' strategic-level discussions and
decision-making. This will improve the quality of the work of
the LEPs by ensuring decisions are informed by experience and
expertise and based on a wide range of evidence.
19. We welcomed the acknowledgement in the
recent consultation on Draft Statutory Guidance on Economic Prosperity
Boards and Combined Authorities that there was a need to engage
environmental and rural interests. As well as engaging with local
people we believe that it remains important for LEPs to draw on
the knowledge and expertise of relevant members of both the social
voluntary and environmental sectors, not just that of the business
community. The new bodies will be most successful if they develop
strong partnerships with all elements of civil society and act
in an open and transparent manner.
20. CPRE was concerned, therefore, that
the invitation to begin to develop proposals for LEPs was sent
to business leaders and local authorities, but not to other interested
parties. We hope that this does not mean wider interests will
not be fully engaged in this important process.
21. We understand that the Government will
want to ensure as much flexibility as possible in how LEPs emerge
to reflect different local circumstances. Our experience, however,
is that without some formal requirement in sub-regional and local
arrangements the engagement of wider interests, and the commitment
to wider objectives, tends to be inconsistent. To ensure that
the new bodies help, rather than hinder, the delivery of the new
localism agenda we believe it is essential that Government gives
clear guidance on the role and involvement of local people and
civil society. This should include representation on Partnership
Boards both from the voluntary social and from the environmental
sector.
22. A requirement for standards of transparency
and accountability should be set out by the Government at the
national level. The transparency of LEPs will be crucial. If local
people do not understand what LEPs do, and how decisions that
affect their local areas are being made, the new bodies could
compromise the achievement of the Government's broader "Big
Society" aims. To ensure transparency and accountability,
meetings and agendas should be publicised in advance and open
to the public where possible. Minutes should be published, and
decision-making should be open to genuine community participation
at appropriate times and levels.
CONVERTING RDAS
TO LEPS
AND TRANSITIONAL
ARRANGEMENTS
23. RDAs have commissioned and accumulated
substantial amounts of information, research and evidence that
will continue to be of use to local authorities, business and
other stakeholders. Arrangements should be put in place to ensure
that this store of evidence is not lost and remains readily accessible.
11 August 2010
16 Definition from CLG and BERR (March 2008) Prosperous
Places: taking forward the Review of Sub-National Economic Growth
and Regeneration Back
| 
