Decision details

Matter for Decision: To consider the Greater Cambridge-Greater Peterborough Local Enterprise Partnership proposal.

Decision of Executive Councillor:

The Leader of the Council resolved to  

i)                   To endorse the outline proposal made to government on the 3^rd September for the establishment of a Local Enterprise Partnership, and that a final decision on participation would be subject to the involvement being consistent with the councils partnership protocol.

ii)                 To receive the views of scrutiny members on issues, which need to be considered and / or addressed, should the proposal be accepted.

Reason for the Decision:  As set out in the officer’s report. 

Any alternative options considered and rejected: N/A

Scrutiny Considerations:

The committee received a report regarding the proposed Greater Cambridge-Greater Peterborough Local Enterprise Partnership.

Clarification was sought on proposed boundaries and whether it represented natural economic boundaries. The Leader responded that the proposal was designed to fit with the guidance offered by central government. It was agreed that “travel to work” areas were not a representative definition of economic areas.

It was suggested that Cambridge and Peterborough lacked a common identity.

Concern was expressed that the proposal were a “fig leaf” to cover the removal of funding. It was also suggested that the regional growth fund would be focussed on the areas of greater deprivation elsewhere in the country.

Advice was sought from the Chief Executive on the implications of the proposal not being endorsed. The Chief Executive advised that withdrawal would not be in the best interests of the City and its businesses, and that the Council should continue to be involved and seek to address the issues raised through negotiation with partners. The Leader endorsed the response from the Chief Executive.

Cllr Ward proposed an amendment to make involvement in the LEP conditional on the involvement being in accordance with the principle of partnership working. The committee resolved by 5 votes to 0 to recommend the amendment to the leader. The Leader accepted the recommendation.

Clarification was requested on the status of the recommendation 2.1 if the submission had altered since September 3^rd. It was confirmed that a further decision would be required, as the proposal submitted on 3^rd September was only an initial submission.

An explanation was requested on the likely membership and governance format, and whether there was any flexibility. The committee were advised that no decisions had yet been made and the details of membership could be defined in the White Paper.

The Scrutiny Committee considered and endorsed the recommendations by 5 votes to 2.

The Leader of the Council agreed the recommendations.