In the swirl of activity following the birth of this new government, we have seen a number of significant policies emerge. To some extent, the concept of the Local Enterprise partnership can almost be viewed as a non-policy, in that very little guidance has been proffered by the Ministers behind it. With the baying for the death of the RDAs and the other Quangos we have to be very careful about babies and bathwater. The cost of those agencies has been significant, but getting rid of them does not necessarily mean we are making significant savings. With some recently leaked documents hitting the public domain, Sir Ian Magee of the Institute For Government has said that 75% of the money spent was tied up in just fifteen bodies and 75% of that was given in grants to other organisations. Bringing the functions back into Government might lead to long term efficiencies but there are risks that services will disappear entirely. Government “Has to make clear plans to ensure sure those savings are delivered and the expertise maintained”.

The recently documents were suggest that out of the 724 public bodies, around 180 face closure or moved into the private sector and maybe as many as 350 might be saved. The picture is not clear. There are so many services tied up in a myriad of delivery vehicles that it seems an impossibility that these can be quickly disposed of – if at all – without doing some damage to the economy or our ability to find alternatives. If all we are trying to do is save money, that has to be balanced with an impact assessment on the economy, and no doubt that is why this Government is so keen to bring in businesses as the route to repairing the return to the Exchequer.

The FSB nationally has written to the Communities Secretary, Eric Pickles MP, to encourage Government to ensure the partnerships have proper business representation as the deadline for local councils to submit plans for Local Enterprise Partnerships closed last month. The Government has received 59 proposals in total, some of which will be very strong. However, the FSB has deep concerns that in some areas, business engagement has not reflected the Government’s call that businesses be fully involved in developing the proposals. Small and micro businesses are the drivers of the local economy and it is imperative that their views are heard and properly represented on any LEP.  A short discussion with business looking at an entirely new direction and a concept that requires some very deep development can only give the outline of approval. Where the scope of the geography is of the size of Kent and Essex, we will have to be very wary of building an infrastructure that could at worst be described as a little brother of SEEDA.

We have urged the Government to ensure that where LEP proposals put forward, there must be a fundamental evidence bas that they have been truly endorsed by business and that there is a robust route to a true partnership, furthermore as a national organisation it stands firm and would not give the green light to continue until a clear vision for doing so is set out.

Having had the benefit of an analysis of several of the LEP bids that colleagues in FSB regions across the country have been – or not been engaged with, together with some interesting general comments on the quality of bids from Government officials coupled with an entirely bland response from Mark Prisk MP to a letter I wrote in my just completed term as Chairman of SEBUS,  I can only surmise that we truly have a long way to go.