August 2010: The UK coalition government’s consultation paper on the new Regional Growth Fund is worth a read if you’re interested in how spending decisions will be made in future.
Anything which will move us towards investment spending again after this prolonged period of post-election purdah must be welcomed, but even the least politically minded among us must wonder how it is all going to work.
The idea, as we know, is for the Fund to “re-balance” the economy of England (the devolved governments and London will be funded separately) by funding projects which will “encourage private sector enterprise” and “create additional sustainable private sector employment”, which have been proposed by local enterprise partnerships (LEPs) or directly by private sector organisations.
What I hope this consultation exercise picks up is that any organisation responsible for setting local economic strategy and bidding for considerable sums of cash needs good quality information on which to base its decisions and justifications.
By definition, Lord Heseltine and his colleagues who will be assessing the LEPs’ proposals will also need to know whether the priorities set by business-led groups adequately reflect the overall needs of the community.
This isn’t to imply that local public-private groupings can’t do a better job than large and possibly less accountable regional development authorities: the freedom to operate within self-defined “economic geographies” and to prioritise what matters to them has clear potential to improve things.
But prioritisation, whoever does it, requires expertise and sound, reliable data. As we know from our work, the investment that’s urgently required in the east of a city may be entirely different to what’s needed in the west. Rural communities will need something else again. And new jobs need to be the right kind of jobs. We need to know before we decide.
The Fund is initially committed for only two years, though it may continue, which is more likely to encourage quick-win job creation schemes than building long-term resilience into our economy to meet challenges such as climate change.
I have great respect for anyone willing to work on a voluntary basis, presumably in addition to a demanding private sector job, to help manage a LEP. Time will tell whether the attractions of local participation tempt the brightest and best to do it: I hope so, since we will inevitably lose local knowledge and expertise with the disbanding of the RDAs and other quangoes.
For my money (and it is my money, as well as yours) I’d like to see some of the savings made in abolishing RDAs invested in the economic, social and environmental information made available to the public-spirited individuals who are expected to replace them. If we want accountable and transparent local development decisions from our LEPs, it’s a small price to pay.
Have your say on the Regional Growth Fund Consultation on the BIS website [external link] before 6 September 2010.
Ruth Keily
