Agenda item

To consider a draft of the Oxfordshire Strategic Economic Plan prior to consideration by the Future Oxfordshire Partnership on 26 September 2023. The full document and a covering report will be published as soon as it is available, expected on 12 September 2023.

A presentation is attached giving a summary of the draft and the process followed to date in the development of the Oxfordshire Strategic Economic Plan and giving further information.

The Panel considered a summary of the Strategic Economic Plan, (SEP) v1 as included in the original agenda and a full copy of the revised 2^nd draft of the Plan and cover report circulated to the Panel and published on the 12 September. Nigel Tipple, Chief Executive of the Oxfordshire Local Enterprise Partnership, (OxLEP) introduced the draft plan and responded to questions from members.

The Chair clarified that the Strategic Economic Plan was an OxLEP document and the final decision on its agreement would be taken by the OxLEP board. The latest draft was being brought to the Future Oxfordshire Partnership to note and for comment and the Panel had the opportunity to put forward its own comments and recommendations. 

Nigel Tipple confirmed that the latest version of the draft Plan was being brought to the September Future Oxfordshire Partnership, (FOP) meeting cycle for comment not approval. He apologised that it had not been possible to make the draft available earlier but stressed that the Plan had been made available to all parties at the same point including the Board of OxLEP and was now in wide circulation. Points made to the Panel by way of introduction were in summary:

·           An explanation was given of the Plan’s development and approval timeline as set out in paragraph nine of the covering report. Feedback on the 2^nd draft could be made to 6 October and OxLEP Board sign off the final version of the Plan and Action Plan was expected in December 2023.

·           Comments made by the Scrutiny Panel and others previously had been carefully considered and despite the challenging deadlines for FOP reports, many of the comments had been taken on board and reflected in the revised draft.

·           The Plan’s evidence base was in the process of being collated into a single document which would be published on the OxLEP website and which accompany the next draft of the Plan.

·           The Plan was looking to a ten year event horizon, but it fully recognised that there had been seismic changes over that last ten years and were likely to be further seismic changes over the next ten years and it would be necessary to monitor the impacts, refreshing the Plan over time.

At this point, the Chair invited members of the Panel to ask detailed questions of clarification followed by an exchange of views leading into a discussion of recommendations to the Future Oxfordshire Partnership. Nigel Tipple indicated that further direct feedback from the Panel was welcomed and the Chair thanked him for the detail answers and clarifications he provided.

A detailed discussion followed around the following themes:

·           Democratic oversight of the SEP process. Concerns were expressed by a number of members around what was felt to be a lack of democratic oversight, particularly in light of decision of HM Government to cease funding for local enterprise partnerships and to transfer functions to upper tier authorities from March 2024.

·           Recognition of agriculture. The Panel felt that the draft document did not sufficiently reflect the importance of agriculture to the Oxfordshire’s foundational economy.

·           Performance monitoring. Measurements metrics and key performance indicators, (KPIs) within the document needed to be linked to and be consistent with the delivery of each of the nine Oxfordshire Strategic Vision objectives and defined within a range of possible outcomes to achieve truly system wide effects. There needed to a measure for each Strategic Vision priority.

·           Sustainable economic development required inclusivity and therefore there was a need for the collection of disaggregated data based on gender, ethnicity, age, and disability status, to ensure inclusion of different groups of people.

·           Achieving sustainability would require an element of adjustment that needed to be measured, for instance through a negative feedback monitoring feedback loop. 

·           Economic development. The Panel felt there was still an over focus within the Plan on fast growth which was felt to be unsustainable and that an approach consistent with the principles of Doughnut Economics should be reflected. In addition, models of the application of Doughnut Economic theory to economic strategy already existed.

·           Productivity, housing, and employment projections.  A range of different views were expressed by members of the Panel regarding how this should be considered within the Plan with some members advocating a Gross Value Added, (GVA) per capita approach to existing jobs rather than through new jobs growth. 

·           The wider need for a balance between the location of employment and homes, perhaps on the basis of a ratio although it was acknowledged that this was a matter for local authorities to specifically determine through Local Plans and not a Strategic Economic Plan matter.

·           Infrastructure. The Panel felt that the Plan did not show how the effect of economic growth on infrastructure including electricity, education, health, and water supplied would be measured and mitigated. It was felt that any plan arising would need to address these issues which were already underfunded and impacted on Oxfordshire’s communities.

·           There was a need for a review of terminology within the Plan to ensure it was consistent and did not inadvertently give the impression that the Plan was encroaching on matters within the remit of local authorities.

·           The view was expressed that the Future Oxfordshire Partnership should definitely indicate whether it agreed or disagreed with the Plan and that the Partnership should suggest that the local authorities should consider it individually. This would incentivise OxLEP to draft a document that represented a consensus position.

Nigel Tipple indicated he would speak to relevant organisations and local authorities about how they had applied the principles of Doughnut Economics. He also indicated he remained open to a discussion with Kate Raworth and the Doughnut Economics Action Lab which he would also follow up.

The Panel also wished to place on record that it had welcomed the opportunity to comment on the Strategic Economic Plan, (SEP) draft v2. However, whilst acknowledging the timetabling constraints faced by OxLEP, the Panel had been disappointed to have received the draft only approximately two days before the meeting.

RESOLVED:

1.     That the Future Oxfordshire Partnership be recommended to not endorse or note the Strategic Economic Plan document, recognising that it is an OxLEP document not one with local authority ownership.

2.    That the Future Oxfordshire Partnership include the following feedback to OxLEP if it is minded to note the draft Strategic Economic Plan:

a.    Measurements metrics and key performance indicators, (KPIs) within the document need to be linked to and be consistent with the delivery of the nine Oxfordshire Strategic Vision objectives and defined within a range of possible outcomes to achieve truly system wide effects. There is also the need for the collection of disaggregated data where relevant based on gender, ethnicity, age and disability status, to ensure inclusion of different groups of people.

b.    That the Strategic Economic Plan should prioritise sustainable growth, the environment and the health and wellbeing of residents. The metrics and measures the SEP uses to determine its own success should broadly reflect these areas.  In practice this lends itself to a wider set of measurements than are currently represented in the current draft.

c.    That the document needs to strike a balance between job creation and provision of homes in a way that is environmentally sustainable.

d.    That communication about the plan needs to be framed in the context of economic growth that is sustainable. This could be linked to an approach based on the principles of Doughnut Economics.

e.    That the language within the document be double checked to ensure that it is consistent, (use of ‘we’ defined etc) and to ensure it does not give the impression that the Plan was encroaching on matters within the purview of the democratically determined Local Plan process or matters within the scope of the Future Oxfordshire Partnership.