Interview: Ben Still & David Hewitt of the Sheffield City Region LEP

Ben Still is the chief executive of the Sheffield City Region Local Enterprise Partnership and David Hewitt is economic policy officer. The City Region comprises the nine local authority areas of Barnsley, Bassetlaw, Bolsover, Chesterfield, Derbyshire Dales, Doncaster, North East Derbyshire, Rotherham and Sheffield and has been working on plans for a combined Sheffield City Region authority. The area also has a City Deal. Consultation on the Combined Authority ends this Friday.

Room 151: How does the relationship work between the LEP, the City Region and the Combined Authority work?

David Hewitt: If you think of all the areas where the local authorities and the private sector work together, that is the Sheffield City Region.

A subset of those areas are under the direction of the Local Enterprise Partnership and the LEP board and soon the Combined Authority will provide the accountable body for those areas as well as the mechanisms for contract and the ability to hold public funds.

There are also areas outside the scope of the LEP where the nine local authorities look to work together on a more independent basis. Public transport in South Yorkshire would be an example where the Combined Authority will manage that function, so it wouldn’t be a LEP function.

Room 151: How is the Combined Authority the accountable body and who will provide the S151 role?

Ben Still: The key thing with the accountable body is that the Combined Authority itself is a statutory body, it has been established in statute and has many of the characteristics of a local authority.

The set-up is similar to the one in Manchester in that the Combined Authority will have its own S151, Larraine Manley, the S151 for Sheffield City Council. The chief executives and the Leaders sat down and decided who should be the S151.

The set-up has tried to ensure that the Combined Authority structures were light touch and efficient, drawing upon the partner bodies where it can.

Room 151: What was the genesis of the Combined Authority?

DH: It was initially driven through something called the Northern Way Agenda in 2007/8, which was about closing the gap between the North and the rest of the country. That evolved into the Sheffield City Region Forum, which was closer to the geography we have today and led to an informal Leader’s group and LEP. This is the next step, putting it into legislation.

BS: In the early years things ebbed and flowed. Derbyshire Dales were an associate member as was Bassetlaw. If all goes to plan the CA will be the accountable body from April 2014.

Room 151: How did things crystalise to where you are now?

BS: It has been a staged process which has been running for a year. The Leaders felt it was important that they understood each step in the decision process and took 6-9 months to provide themselves with enough comfort that this was a sensible thing to do. They’ve not entered into it lightly.

Now we’re working on things like how financial transactions, HR and legal will work to support the Combined Authority.

Room 151: Is the Combined Authority limited?

DH: It’s limited to economic development, regeneration and transport. It’s not a county council and so will be limited in its remit. Equally it’s limited in terms of local ambition, it won’t strip function and power away from local authorities but will lead on a small number of strategic issues.

BS: The way to think of it is that the Combined Authority will be the body that is responsible for our growth plan with the LEP setting the direction and key objectives for that plan. The CA will sit behind the LEP being the accountable body and making sure that contracting arrangements are in place and efficient.

Room 151: You have a consultation on the CA closing this week, are you expecting or hoping for anything in particular to come out of that?

BS: It is a statutory process that the Secretary of State needs to go through before laying down the order so we’re not expecting anything from that perspective not least because all nine authorities have already taken it through their own councils. I think what will be interesting is what the counties, Nottinghamshire and Derbyshire will say. They’ve both indicated that they will be supportive but cautious because potentially they might see this as setting a course that might be detrimental to them, although we don’t think that is the case.

We also have our issue with government over the name of the CA because we suggest it be called Sheffield City Region CA and the government wants to call it the South Yorkshire Authority. Our response to the consultation will suggest a compromise name. We can’t say just yet what that will be.

Room 151: How does the Sheffield City Region Investment Fund (SCRIF) work?

BS: The way to think about SCRIF, which is the capsule term for our investment fund, is that it is several things. At its heart it is a decision making framework, a mechanism to allow our Leaders Board, which will in the future become our Combined Authority, to prioritise their investments at a City Region level and ensure value for money in those decisions.

It can draw in any funding at a City Region level or below that the Leaders Board want to pitch in. At the moment it pretty much only comprises the devolved major scheme transport money from the Department of Transport.

We would look to put to the Leaders the option that they could put other capital funds alongside that into SCRIF if they wanted to.

Room 151: So the aim is to put other funds from the nine authorities in the Sheffield City Region into the structure?

BS: Kind of. Where the funds are allocated from government at a City Region level they’re either in or they’re not. Then local authorities are able to put in any additional funds (as local match funding) they want to. They’re also looking at raising money locally through borrowing.

The idea is that SCRIF allows you to maximise value for money spent because you can prioritise over the whole City Region and it also helps speed up delivery because a scheme promoter can come to SCRIF and get one decision at one time rather than have to go to various places to get funding.

As part of the City Deal we got flexibility to spend transport money on things other than transport. The majority of our current infrastructure schemes have got transport in them but some are packages and there are some with no transport at all in them.

Room 151: How much is in the fund at the moment?

BS: In the City Deal we got ten years of transport funding to go in there and that is £113m. We’re then looking at options through our Regional Growth Plan, through European funding and some other sources. There are 19 schemes on the list we have published and they should start at or around 2015.

There are no very major infrastructure schemes in there but there are things like Junction 36 of the M1 where we’ll develop the site by building units and putting in the infrastructure. We have the last kilometer of the link road between the M18 and the Doncaster/ Sheffield airport, a suite of measures around developing the Waverley housing development and an associated advanced manufacturing park in Rotherham.

Room 151: A number of combined authorities seem to be surfacing at the moment, with Manchester, Liverpool, Newcastle, Leeds and yourselves at various stages. Are they the solution to the local government resources problems?

BS: It is local authority’s response to the government wanting to engage with localities at a city region level. The government wants to use LEPs and devolve funds at a LEP level and we have seen that over the last couple of years. The challenge has always been that LEPs can’t spend public money. So creating combined authorities that mirror the geography of the LEPs is a sensible way for local authorities to crack the accountable body problem.