Written evidence from the Manufacturing
Technologies Association
ABOUT THE
MTA
1. The Manufacturing Technologies Association
is the UK's Trade Association for companies in the manufacturing
technology sector—the core of engineering based manufacturing.
2. Our members design, create and supply
the major machinery, technology and equipment essential to enable
the manufacture of everything from everyday items such as mobile
phones, computers and family cars through to high-tech precision
items like F1 racing cars, planes and space shuttles. The world
as we know it would be un-imaginable without the contribution
of manufacturing technologies and the engineering of most modern
metal items would be impossible.
THE STRUCTURE
OF LOCAL
ENTERPRISE PARTNERSHIPS
3. We welcome the Committee's decision to
inquire into the establishment of the Local Enterprise Partnerships
at this early stage in their development. We hope the evidence
that the Committee receives reflects the views of business and
that the Government maintains a focus on ensuring that the new
arrangements are as business friendly as possible.
4. We welcome innovation in the UK's sub-national
infrastructure. The Regional Development Agencies accrued a substantial
track record of achievement but were bedevilled by a chequered
pattern of delivery and were sometimes over ambitious in terms
of their ambit. Their perceived lack of accountability to stakeholders
(including sometimes in matters of disbursement of funds) must
also be noted.
5. If LEP's can avoid these traps, then
they could make a substantial contribution to economic development
in their areas. Although it is likely that the reform will result
in substantially more sub regional bodies than the current nine,
we believe that engineering based manufacturing—and business
more generally—will be keen to avoid duplication in their
interactions with LEP's.
6. We shall confine our further comments
to the business support functions and strategic coordination role
that is to be apportioned to the LEP's.
SUMMARY OF
RECOMMENDATIONS
7. LEPs should have no role in export promotion.
8. LEPs should have only a limited, subsidiary
(to UKTI), role in promoting inward investment.
9. The Manufacturing Advisory Service has
been successful. It's remit should be widened and it should be
delivered centrally and sectorally rather than transferred directly
from RDAs to LEPs.
10. There should be national sectoral points
of contact for nationwide bodies (such as Trade Associations and
Sectoral Groups) to interact with.
11. LEPs must collaborate with each other—any
funding mechanisms should reflect this and not reward spurious
competition.
12. LEPs must have scope to continue to
broker transformative investment projects. It is likely that they
will need to do this in partnership with one another.
BUSINESS SUPPORT
13. We welcome the Government's decision
to concentrate aspects of trade promotion within UKTI—provided
that this is properly funded. In our experience the Regional Development
Agencies did not deliver this part of their remit efficiently
and, by dint of their confusing of the UK's message, hindered
the effective promotion of the UK's national manufacturing strengths.
UKTI's greater sectoral focus lends itself to more targeted support
and a better understanding of business needs.
14. Poor coordination between RDA and UKTI
missions persists and this must result in wasteful duplication.
For example; at last year's CIMT (China International Machine
Tool) exhibition in Beijing, MTA contracted with UKTI to host
a UK Pavillion. The initiative was highly successful, and will
repeated at the next event, in 2011, but we were disconcerted
to see a number of RDA's who had taken exhibition space without
informing, still less coordinating with, either ourselves or UKTI.
At a sector specific show, like CIMT, it should be sectoral bodies
which take the lead in promoting the UK.
15. Manufacturing is a truly global industry
with supply chains that cut across continents let alone regions.
When attracting investment the key drivers are national (supplier
base, tax regime, skilled workforce etc) not local. UKTI should
be responsible for securing inward investment, with any role for
LEPs only at a later stage.
16. The Manufacturing Advisory Service has
proven to be a successful innovation and we strongly urge that
its function be retained with a national infrastructure. Indeed
such an infrastructure should enable a better approach to spreading
best practice than has been evident in the past. We would like
to see the emphasis change to that of Manufacturers Advisory
Service with help available in relation to marketing, sales planning,
design and distribution. While MAS had some level of engagement
with these topics, in truth its focus has been on promoting "lean
manufacturing". That has been a valuable role, which it has
performed very successfully, but that focus needs to be widened
to enable MAS to take a more holistic view of business support
and manufacturers to improve their businesses not just their production
processes.
17. As a nationally constituted body the
Manufacturing Technology Association would welcome a structure
of support set ups where there are as few points of contact as
possible. One of the drawbacks of the regional system has been
the difficulty in engaging with nine specific bodies. We believe
that initiatives have stalled because of this. Such a streamlining
would be beneficial to Government too as it would enable the national
body to get a clear picture of industry and market developments
more quickly than is possible if the information is filtered through
nine different prisms.
STRATEGIC COORDINATION
18. Any duplication of functions must be
avoided. Even worse is the spectre of competition between Local
Authority areas. Significant progress has been made in recent
years to alleviate some of the most atavistic tendencies that
have been evident in the past—neighbouring cities are now
used to thinking of themselves as potential collaborators. It
would be a significant step backwards if that were to change.
19. The United Kingdom, still less England,
is not a geographically large country. Furthermore while clusters
do exist, British industry has not tended to develop in exclusive
regional silos. In truth no single region can claim primacy in
the aerospace or automotive industries. OEMs exist across the
country and the supply chains are even more diffused. It would
be a substantial step backwards if the new structure were to allow
old rivalries to reassert themselves or worse to actively encourage
them by adopting an overtly competitive funding structure.
20. SMEs and other UK businesses in our
sector are often part of global supply chains. It is important
to deliver a UK message, both externally and internally to prospective
entrants to the industry, on the capability of our key engineering
sectors.
21. The RDA's played a useful, and in some
case pivotal, catalytic role in encouraging substantial investment
in infrastructure and research facilities across the country.
In our industry sector the AMRC in Sheffield/Rotherhamm, supported
by Yorkshire Forward, is the outstanding example. It is important
that LEPs, bearing in mind the resource implications of their
likely smaller size, are able to do the same in the future. Again
collaboration must be ingrained in them from the outset. Few LEP
areas are likely to be large enough to foster such centres on
their own. Collaboration must be built into their structures.
There must be an expectation that they will work together.
20 August 2010
| 
