Agenda item

Councillor Paul Roper, Cabinet Member for Economic and Cultural Sustainable Development, introduced the report. He stated that this was an exciting moment as the last economic strategy was 10 years old. He stated that it is refreshingly compact in size and reflects many of the aspirations of this administration. It has been developed with stakeholders and informed by principles of doughnut economics. He further explained that it looks beyond purely economic indicators and has three themes: infrastructure, innovation and opportunity. The Cabinet Member explained that this would be considered by Cabinet in January 2024.

Panel members made the following points and asked the following questions:

Councillor Henman asked how doughnut framing allows BANES to set the economy for the future. The Cabinet Member explained that it allows us to set out our stall as to what we want to achieve.

Councillor MacFie referenced the GVA figures regarding the 3.8% local growth compared to the national figure of 21.8% and asked about the plan to bring up the local growth rate. The Cabinet Member stated that the strategy does not focus specifically on GVA. There is a unique set of circumstances such as – a high portion of (wealthy) residents who do not work; high dependence on hospitality and tourism and lost industrial players (MOD). He stated that the success of the strategy is not based on GVA alone.

Councillor Simon asked if the document was amendable and gave some comments for potential inclusion:

·  Electricity supply, maybe include grid connection issues

·  Affordable housing – sometimes market price housing is more affordable. Build the right size housing and bear down construction cost growth

·  Skills – the role of WECA and the Mayor. The Further Education (FE) sector.

·  Riverside innovation corridor

The Cabinet Member noted the above comments. The Director of Sustainable Communities commented that the document is a draft and can be amended.

Councillor Hodge stated that it is a useful document, she stated that the 10 metrics at the end are things we were going to do anyway. She suggested 2 sections are boxed so they are not lost in the narrative.

Councillor Blackburn stated that on first impression the document is a wish list but the ‘how’ and ‘why’ are not always answered. He gave some examples:

·  Affordable housing is mentioned but no explanation of how this will happen.

·  It is stated that BANES is number 1 for micro businesses but does not say why (which could then be learned from).

·  South Quays is mentioned but it does not say how effective this has been – there are still empty floors.

·  5G is lacking and is not addressed

·  Somer Valley Enterprise Zone (SVEZ) is mentioned but the transportation side of it is not explained.

He stated that he is pleased that there is a plan.

Councillor Treby stated that it was great to have some KPI’s (Key Performance Indicators) but only Net Zero is qualitative. He stated that we already have a Climate Emergency Strategy and Ecological Emergency Strategy so the Economic Strategy should primarily focus on growing the economy.

Councillor Saini asked how the strategy incorporates practice for long term economic sustainability. The Director stated that economic sustainability is the aim of the strategy.

Councillor Saini asked about human capital in terms of education and skills programmes. The Cabinet Member explained ‘Project Forward’ which is a collaboration with Bath Spa and Bath University and developing a syllabus in 4 areas: sustainability/digital/health and employability skills.

Councillor Moss thanked the Cabinet Member, he stated that the strategy is an aspirational wish list. He reiterated the point regarding GVA and being significantly behind the national growth figure and added that it might be useful to include other areas in England and Wales (outside of London). He also suggested that it would be useful to mention that BANES is unusual as it contains an urban hub and rural hinterland. Councillor Moss stated that deprivation is mentioned regarding Twerton and Whiteway but other pockets of deprivation should also be considered such as areas in Keynsham, Radstock and Westfield.

Councillor Moss stated that Tourism is a sustainability and economic issue – many people visit Bath for the day which increases traffic and does not fully support hospitality (hotels). We need to sell Bath and North East Somerset as a 2/3 day destination. Regarding the Somer Valley Enterprise Zone, he stated that he was not convinced that it is the answer to a lot of problems, could it take business away from the high street and is there a more suitable brownfield site.

The Cabinet Member addressed the points raised above – he commented that ‘wish list’ is a fair statement but that is not a reason not to set out the strategy. He acknowledged that financial flexibility is low but that there still needs to be a plan. He explained that having a strategy gives greater access to success with grant funding. He hoped for a future refinancing of local government. Regarding Bath Quays, he explained that it was close to having the vast majority of units let. He pointed to the 10-point delivery plan and explained that some things were being done already and more can be done with funding. He acknowledged that there were differing opinions on the SVEZ but highlighted the fact that this would bring jobs which helps to address some issues of deprivation. He added that the delivery of the SVEZ is not yet determined in terms of how many units are developed. He also explained that the delay in the decision was due to the consultation being extended.

Councillor Moss stated that some areas of deprivation in the Somer Valley are not solely a consequence of joblessness.

The Chair thanked the Cabinet Member.