LEPs and High Tech

 LEPs, Growth Policy and High Tech sector info

1) information on all LEPs with links to their websites can be found here http://www.lepnetwork.org.uk/leps.html

2) Look up the Wilson Review.  Also this document section 4: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/32399/12-903-following-up-wilson-business-university-collaboration-next-steps.pdf

3) Look at catapult centres https://catapult.innovateuk.org/ and here is a press release about them http://www.innovateuk.org/content/catapult/catapult-centres-key-to-business-innovation-says-c.ashx

4) Innovation Vouchers key features: a) TSB programme launched in September 2012 b) offers vouchers of up to £5000  c)Eligibility limited to SMEs d) can use to pay for knowledge transfer/tech transfer from external expert provider - envisage universities have a key role e) aim to offer 100 vouchers every 3 months f) targeting on sectors where innovation capability low - initially built environment and agri food g) will extend to other sectors - water, waste and energy in second round h) can be used to support skills development

5) KTP are a good option for some businesses http://www.ktponline.org.uk/

6) LEP which may provide you with case study material are: a) Greater Cambridge Greater Peterborough http://www.yourlocalenterprisepartnership.co.uk/autumn-statement/ b) Oxfordshire https://connect.innovateuk.org/web/iaingray/blogs/-/blogs/oxfordshire-50-high-tech-and-innovation-businesses-with-oxfordshire-lep?ns_33_redirect=/web/iaingray/blogs c) West of England http://www.westofenglandlep.co.uk/business/sector-groups/ (high tech and creative sector groups)

Heseltine

Here are my initial thoughts on the Heseltine report. I wrote them as soon as I read it. I just haven't been brave enough to publish them until now... I decided not to reread...please excuse any typos / contradictions... as ever, I may change my mind!


No stone unturned.


INTRO


My first impression is that I very much like the cartoon on the front of the report.


Within the 'so what now?' s.28 'how many MPs have considered the impact on the behaviour of civil servant s on their insistence that every detail of every decision is recorded so that it can be scrutinised in a parliamentary question? such a discipline would bring the private sector to its knees' has got me thinking about the public sector more widely. We often speak of regulatory burden and red tape for business but never of the burden on the public sector. To make the public sector the most innovative and exciting business in the country, which attracts the brightest minds perhaps it should be run more like the private sector. It is the largest employer nationally and affects all our lives. Why isn't it the most exciting employment option and how can we make it so? What changes need to be made to the public sector to help enable growth?


'A blueprint for the future' s.30. I like the idea of a National Growth Council which joins up government departments around the growth agenda. Perhaps this could be replicated more locally in Councils. There could be a 'growth' department in which all services from across the council which have anything to do with business or the future of LAs sit. This could help make councils more customer focussed. If you are a business you deal with one contact in one team. In addition these 'growth' teams could be directly linked to LEPs and provide local delivery for LEP priorities. This could go one step further and the growth team or part of it could have a trading arm to provide LAs with additional revenue.


Devolution of funds to LEPs is a good idea. They know how to have the greatest impact locally. LEPs would need to be trusted to deliver. No one would want onerous monitoring and evaluation rounds.


LEPs rightly need to have a statement of strategic priorities and plans. Equally government needs to stop being shy about saying what exactly they are looking for from LEPs. The "do what you want, if we don't like it we will tell you to stop" would be good if it were actually true. Continuous bidding rounds where some areas have no chance of success needs to stop. It is waste of resource and not all areas were created equal. The second wave of city deals is an opportunity for central government to be upfront so informed decisions can be made as to if all 20 areas should put resources into the bidding process otherwise some areas which haven't been successful in any round of bidding thus far may start to question central government support of their area.


Sector policy is useful but there are always new and emerging sectors. SIC codes don't keep up and how do you have a policy for the next big thing? A policy doesn't go far enough, we should work to continuously improve business sector engagement and local and national government relationships.


s.1.28 refers to 'no boom in growth can be achieved without a significant rethink as to how we develop skills in this country - both funding training and its delivery. I may be reading too much into this but perhaps this refers to the skills funding agency...


s1.38 states 'it is not the relative difference between the contributions of different regions that matters most but the ability of all regions to grow their wealth and prosperity'. I'm intrigued. Are we now just trying to help everywhere to grow and accept regional disparity. This policy may indicate that areas of disadvantage are no longer advantaged in funding bids. Areas that demonstrate growth potential may be the new focus. Interesting when thought about in terms of LEPs and bidding rounds. Not all LEPs were born equal.


LOCALISM


s.2.5 LEPs are well placed to have the holistic overview of a place that is missing centrally.


s.2.11 would suggest that district councils and county councils should be merged. This should happen everywhere. We will be left with a system of unitary's. The next stage of this is to develop 'super unitary's' that match LEP geographies which are based on FEMA (although clearly some LEPs boundaries need to be revised).


2.15 anyone who watched 'Heroes' knows that with great power comes great responsibility. while incentives and competition do have their role to play in places I'm not convinced that this need to be applied in every situation. People who work in the 'Places' really do want the best for their areas. there is a danger that playing to your natural strengths also limits ambition for places. Perhaps 'natural strength' is a more fluid concept.


2.19 Regional Growth Fund isn't an example of efficient government process. RGF would have been more effectively delivered via a process more similar to Growing Places Fund. While RGF was focussed on those areas most effected by public sector cuts areas with more diverse sectoral employment were penalised for being resilient. Perhaps a future round could be focussed on business growth and job creation rather than job protection and damage limitation.


2.21 £300 million of RGF may have been allocated to LEPs to help them support SMEs but this resource hasn't been allocated to all LEPs hence only some LEPs are able to support their SMEs grow. A national programme would be welcome. Only 22 LEP areas have an enterprise zone. This makes the job of those without much more difficult.


2.21 Business rate retention isn't what it first appears. Local Authorities will only be able to keep a percentage of any growth achieved once a base line has been set. The percentage of the growth each LA can keep is different. In addition some areas don't have many empty business premises further reducing the opportunity this 'incentive' appears to provide.


2.21 reform of the planning system could be a good thing. In addition competing LA services could also be examined. For example when an enforcement officer suggests a chimney/flue to a business to stop neighbours complaining of bad smells and then planning deny this due to the business being in a conservation area doesn't help business. I'm sure there are many similar examples.


2.23 In light of these comments all areas that request a city deal (invited or not) should have this wish granted? How can Whitehall know what will and won't work locally...


2.27 I like Annex C.


2.29 I agree that a single pot would be a good approach. my only concern is the potential increased role of LEPs. Everything is related to jobs and growth but if the single pot is to go to the LEP do they want housing to be part of this?


2.31 Could we work to the assumption that all areas asked to bid for a city deal could be given a 'basic' version. Some may opt to only take this basic version whilst some will want a more deluxe model which include a focus on a indentified challenge/opportunity?


2.33 The problem with the completion element is that Whitehall judge bids based on their criteria and perceived knowledge about an area. Not all areas have the same starting point. The competition won't always be fair. This doesn't incentivise anyone and in fact is a little insulting that volunteers on LEPs Boards or Local Authority employees need to be incentivised to do their best? RGF criteria and application forms changed round on round, it want only the projects that changed. section 2.23 states that "no one in Whitehall can know how to solve the specific challenges facing a particular local area" yet Whitehall will be setting criteria and judging bits to achieve exactly this?!? In order to raise ones game one has to be given the same tools as all the other competitors in advance of being branded 'in need of help'?


2.45 resource will need to follow a plan... there is little point having a strategy if you have no way of implementing it... I would suggest that most LEPs do in fact already have a strategy / plan / framework or similar which they developed using start up funding.


2.47 are bidding rounds to government to be based on need or opportunity?


2.48 there is a danger that public consultation will be necessary for every LEP bid. I hope this isn't the case. A side effect of competition is that it limits the willingness to share best practice. Presumably a LEP business plan will have to be aligned to national growth priorities to make the LEP eligible for economic growth funds? How does this empower LEPs?


2.49 I'm starting to think about Regional Economic Strategies and RDA monitoring frameworks - do we really want LEPs to have to go down this route? I hoped we had moved into a time when delivery is king not appraisal and monitoring and evaluation.


2.52 Plans Plans Plans. I would hope that LEPs don't just plan and chase money for the next 3 years. LEPs have a role in helping the public sector work better. The Leicester and Leicestershire and, Greater Birmingham and Solihull regulatory pathfinder demonstrate how LEPs can make a difference to Business and LAs and cost very little more than officer and LEP time. This is the sort of thing that should be encouraged.


2.53 it is right that as the role of LEPs increases so will their need for additional resource - including bid writers!


2.54 The private sector are already on the LEP Board. Do we really need to hire private planners to develop strategic plans? So LEPS are to get more money to buy in consultants? it should be an option to LEPs but for them to decide. It is also a little insulting to the public sector that it is felt that the experience / expertise isn't present there.


2.58 currently some LAs have chosen to be in more than one LEP. It makes sense to me that overlaps are removed. To take this a step further perhaps some LEPs need to be joined up too.


2.59 we should not forget that in many cases LAs delivery the LEP priorities. In fact the value of having a forum where LA leaders agree on a common approach to issues with this business community should not be underestimated.


2.84 perhaps all city regions should have a combined authority.



 

LEP approval dates

After the first 24 the order of approval is:


New Anglia (13th December 2010)
Black Country (13th December)
Worcestershire (13th December)
North Eastern LEP (13th Jan 2011)
York, North Yorkshire and East Riding (10th Feb)
Enterprise M3 (10th Feb)
London (17th Feb)
Heart of the SW (31st March)
Lancashire (14th April)
Gloucestershire (18th May)
Humber (8th June)
Dorset (7th July)
Swindon and Wiltshire (21st July)
Northamptonshire (23rd September)

Shared LA Chief Execs

Here is a  list of shared LA chief Execs.  It is over a year old but might still be of interest, I assume some are out of date and there are probably more... but it is a start!

Charlie Adan is Chief Executive at both Babergh DC and Mid Suffolk DC.


David Buckle is Chief Executive at South Oxfordshire DC and Vale of White Horse DC.

David McIntosh is Chief Executive at Christchurch DC and East Dorset DC.

David Neudegg is Chief Executive at Cotswold DC and West Oxfordshire DC.

Joanna Killian is Chief Executive at Brentwood BC and Essex CC.

Kevin Dicks is Chief Executive at Bromsgrove DC and Acting Chief Executive at Redditch BC. I can't say if this arrangement is to be made permanent.

Mark Williams is Chief Executive at East Devon DC and South Somerset DC (I'm not sure if this is the same individual).

Nicola Bulbeck at Teignbridge BC and Torridge DC

There is a Paul Walker as Chief Executive at Copeland BC in Cumbria, and a Paul Walker as Chief Executive at Hartlepool BC in Cleveland, although those authorities are on opposite sides of the country, so I can't say if these councils are in co-operation at if it is the same Paul Walker.

Peter Latham is Chief Executive at Adur DC and Worthing BC.

Peter Simpson is Chief Executive at Hambleton DC and Richmondshire DC.

Richard Sheard is Chief Executive at South Hams DC and West Devon BC.

Sandy Hopkins is Chief Executive at East Hampshire DC and Havant BC.

Simon Baker is Chief Executive at High Peak BC and Staffordshire Moorlands DC.

Stephen Baker is Chief Executive at Suffolk Coastal DC and Waveney DC.

Sue Smith is Chief Executive at Cherwell DC and South Northamptonshire DC

Terry Huggins is Chief Executive at Breckland and South Holland DC.

West Lumley is Chief Executive at Bolsover DC and North East Derbyshire DC.

LEPs and Planning

If considering planning a few things to be aware of:

Black Country LEP http://www.the-blackcountry.com/default.asp?PageID=336&n=Planning

Greater Birmingham and Solihull http://centreofenterprise.com/what-we-are-doing/place/

Leeds City region http://www.leedscityregion.gov.uk/LCR-Corporate/media/Media/Research%20and%20publications/planning/Leeds-City-Region-Planning-Charter.doc?ext=.doc

 

Leicestershire Rural partnership Planning toolkit http://www.oakleaves.org.uk/planningtoolkit1.html

Plymouth City Council Market recovery scheme http://www.plymouth.gov.uk/homepage/environmentandplanning/planning/aboutplanningservices/pccmarketrecoveryactionplan.htm

Bristol CC accreditation scheme for householder applications http://www.bristol.gov.uk/page/planning-and-building-regulations/planning-agents-accreditation-scheme

Entrepreneurship in curriculum based education through regional networks 17th October

Background on the Finnish education system.

 

There is one year of voluntary pre-primary education followed by nine years basic education. Following this upper secondary education, comprising vocational and general education; and higher education, provided by universities and polytechnics. Adult education is available at all levels.

 

The welfare if Finnish society is built on education, culture and knowledge. All children are guaranteed opportunities for study and self development according to their abilities, irrespective of their place of residence, language or financial status. All education is free.

 

Keuda Vocational college

 

Keuda is a consortium owned by 7 municipalities. The population of the area is 200,000. There are 7000 students, 600 staff and a turnover of 56m Euro in 2012.

 

The colleges are given a bonus depending upon exam results. This bonus is passed on to staff as well as kept for the college itself.

 

The College also delivers entrepreneurship training to primary teachers, upper secondary and polytechnic to help them to train their students.


It takes about 3 years to complete a vocational course. There is a minimum 5 credits of entrepreneurship in every vocational qualification. A credit equals 40 hours so 5 credits =200 hours!

There is a model of five things to be taken into account with entrepreneurship education.


1) Social skills
2) Teamwork skills
3 )Have to take responsibility for setting your own targets
4 )Taking own power (teachers have to give it)
5 )Students need to take the responsibility

All students take part in 24 hour camps
Credits awarded for attending and for different roles e.g. manager role is associated with more credit. Here entrepreneurship is part of the curriculum.




A year as an entrepreneur course is optional for students and is equal to 10 credits. Here students have to run a business and do book keeping, taxes, accounts, insurance etc. A practical experience.

Entrepreneurship in curriculum-based education through regional networks 16th October

Today was the first day of the study visit: entrepreneurship education at primary, secondary and senior secondary school.
We were picked up at 8.30 from the hotel. There are 10 of us taking part from all over Europe. What a friendly and interesting bunch.

Bus trip to the primary school
To accompany us to the secondary school was a teacher and three 9th graders (aged 15). I learnt that some of the most popular hobbies for teenagers here include horse riding, kickboxing and LOTs of ice hockey. Saara (aged 15), I hope that is the correct spelling, was recording the events of the day and will be making a short film about the trip.
It was explained that the Finnish education system is very good. An explanation might be that the language is easy to read and write and that teachers are well educated (5 years at university to qualify). In return teachers are rewarded with a good salary and a 10 week summer holiday.

Primary School
Lukko school is in Lukko in a small village in Mantsala. At this school there are 31 pupils of grades 1-6 (aged 7-12) in two mixed classes. The students don't wear any kind of uniform. There is a very relaxed atmosphere and shoes are removed by all students and staff and all walk around in only socks. The school had a feeling of being a home from home. Older children look out for younger children. All lunches are cooked on site and free to all students. Free preschool is provided for a year at aged 6.

A parent of one of the children, a local business owner, he runs a farm, was teaching the children about his farm on the day of our visit. collaboration with parents, local entrepreneurs and the school seems innovative.

Riihenmaki Secondary School
Still no one wears shoes! Apparently known as a 'sock school'?!
This is a junior high school for 7th to 9th graders who are aged 13-15. The school is in Mantsala, in Southern Finland, about 60km north of Helsinki and build in 1998. About 350 students attend the school. Class sizes average 19. In addition to normal class rooms the school has a library, drama theatre, excellent home economics facilities (compulsory curriculum), as well as a computer dance game, a couple of table tennis tables and freely available cycle helmets to encourage students to use them.
This school offers entrepreneurship classes. Students have to apply and pass an entrance exam for this course. If accepted they will study for up to 5 hours a week for the school year.
Students are encouraged to learn by doing and experimenting and told that making mistakes is okay. Aims of the course include: attitude; commitment; co-operation, initiative, teamwork. Targets of the course from the point of view of entrepreneurship include: intrapreneurship (characterised by courage and employability); external entrepreneurship (laws, business planning, accounting etc); establishing and running a company; co-operative companies (realistic picture of entrepreneurship).
The course is linked to traditional subjects in these ways: Languages (in Finland business English and Swedish are compulsory, in addition students complete 'language dips' (e.g. basic Estonian, Italian, French, Russian, German, Spanish); Mother tongue (writing documents, job applications, job interviews, correspondence and expressing oneself - drama); Health education (you have to be healthy to work); Maths (percentages, stats); History and social science (history of Finnish industry, projects team work); Home economics (household economics, running a school cafe); Geography (economic geography, natural resources in different countries); Religion (the dialogue of religions, philosophy, "know yourself and listen to others")
Examples of projects from entrepreneurship class include: planning a golf tournament for young people, a tee-shirt enterprise, in chair exercise classes for older people, local cultural walks, when older people are vaccinated for flu the students set up a cafe in the local health centre, advertisement competition (students make adverts for local businesses and display them around the town, the town then vote for the best advert).
one other point of note. Students vacuum after break times as part of a rota as they are expected to clean up after themselves.

Senior Secondary School
Mantsala senior secondary school is only 5 years old and very modern. About 300 students attend the school although it is not at full capacity (350 students). In Finland there is a secondary system and a vocational system. The school is part of the secondary system. I observed that the students seem calm. The cafeteria wasn't at all a shouty environment (lunch is provided free to all students). After lunch all students cleaned up their trays without any fuss. All students coats, shoes and other belongings are left on freely hanging around the building. There is a lot of trust - presumably things don't go missing - this is refreshing!
There are a number of activities to encourage entrepreneurship:
a) practical training - one a year students organise a day shadowing a person whose job they think they might be interested in or they can work in an environment to give it a 'test drive'
b) 'a day for future plans' - businesses come into the school to present to help students make decisions on their future
c) occupational afternoon
d) study visits
e) visitors
f) practical training for teachers - (vallu project). This was funded by the government to enable 'teachers to go out to the real world of work' to help them advise students better. This is to rebalance the fact that vocational teachers often 'work' too.
g) cultural trip where students have to raise the money themselves and raise opportunities to raise the money to attend
h) La Geode - when studying natural science students visited companies within the sector to bring the subject to life
In addition each student has to be entrepreneurial due to the fact that each student has an individual study plan which includes a minimum of 75 courses. For most universities there is also an entrance exam. The school have offered an entrepreneurship course for the last couple of years but this hasn't been taken up by enough students to run it. This is explained as it is an extra course and not compulsory. Perhaps it should be part of the formal curriculum?

A few other points of note
Entrepreneurship: in the beginning you have friends, fools and family
Don't take a job, make a job.
Concept of laicite.

Evening programme
Dinner was provided in a fantastic venue by a lake and included an authentic Finnish sauna. What was most special about this venue is that is staffed by college students...more about this tomorrow...