Agenda item

The Deputy Leader of Cabinet and Cabinet Member for Economic Development, Councillor Eadie, gave a verbal report on Lichfield District Council’s Investment Plan for the Council’s UK Shared Prosperity Fund conditional allocation as a briefing note had been circulated to all in advance of the meeting.

Councillor Eadie said this funding was coming from Central Government to put in to communities – place, skills and in terms of supporting active lives.  He said the projects to be invested were listed at Appendix 1, the measure of outcomes which had been identified were at Appendix 2 and Appendix 3 were things which had been considered but not requested this time.  Councillor Eadie said the wording used by officers did give a little wriggle room and some small variances may be achieved but the proposals had been written as open and transparent as possible to be able to achieve the funding.   He highlighted that the first thing in terms of the proposals to be delivered was a Community Hub in Burntwood as it was recognised that an investment in Burntwood was a pressing need within the district.  He assured members that the project was not “Lichfield centric” and the proposals were across the whole of the district with only some financial support for the cinema development in the Lichfield area.  Councillor Eadie said money was proposed to support active lives for Us Girls and Play Streets and it was evident we had also listened to businesses and there was a proposal for transport assistance to enable workforces to travel to businesses outside the local transport times on offer at the moment.

The following questions were asked:

·         What is the degree of risk – is the funding ring-fenced? When is it to come and is it in jeopardy because of the current turmoil?

·         Incubator space – As we do not own premises in Burntwood (other than the depot), what is plan delivering incubator space there?

·         Localities work – having cash set aside is positive, but the current budget per project is £5,000 – what do we do if there is an overspend or underspend – has this got to go back to Central Government or can it be used for another project?

·         How have the projects been identified?

·         How are we going to involve members in the communities?

·         As there are 45 projects across 22 wards and we have 47 members, how will this work?

·         It was noted that £45k was due to be spent in this financial year – is this not optimistic – can we roll over or has it got to go back to Central Government?

·         Can we offer Play Streets project long-term?

·         Is there an opportunity to marketing in the district to talk about the manufacturing sector given the obvious strengths in the district?

·         Transport assistance – Can we include the industrial estates in Fazeley as well as Fradley and Burntwood? This would serve our residents in the south and east of Lichfield.

·         Workforce development – positive to upskill but can this lead to improved employment, improved economic activity and improved wages?

·         Some of the projects that did not go in to the proposal – why were these decisions made not to explore and what was the criteria?

The following views were given:-

·         Pleased to hear Burntwood Community Hub is a project as it has been promised for years.

·         Incubator spaces – could we talk to Staffordshire County Council and partners about their premises elsewhere i.e. Chasewater Innovation Centre was used in the past.

·         Pleased not Lichfield Centric as transport problems for workforce accessing industrial estates in Burntwood also.

·         Project of Us Girls is fully supported.

·         Delighted there had been discussion with landowners as not been able to do things we want to because of land banking, mainly in the Chasetown Ward.

RESOLVED:- That the views of the committee be considered by Cabinet.