Agenda item

(i)        Report of the Interim Corporate Director of Regeneration, Economy and Growth.

(ii)       Presentation by the Spatial Policy Manager, Regeneration, Economy and Growth.

The Committee considered a report and presentation of the Interim Corporate Director of Regeneration, Economy & Growth which provided an overview of the comments received in response to the Big Econ-versation on the Council’s new Inclusive Economic Strategy which had been undertaken between the 31 January and 22 April 2022 (for copy of report and slides of presentation see file of Minutes)

The Spatial Policy Manager provided a detailed presentation which provided information on the focus of the strategy and the timeline for its development. In providing a summary of the Big Econ-versation, 1,455 surveys had been completed and over 1,500 people had engaged through the conversations held at the 86 workshops and events across the County during that period.

He outlined the main messages as follows:

·         County Durham needs more good quality jobs

·         These need to be accessible to local people, through improved transport, especially in rural areas and inclusive skills provision

·         More needs to be done to market and promote the county

·         Investment in places is needed county-wide, particularly in smaller towns and villages

·         Green economy and climate changes is seen by business to be an opportunity for growth, but caution this needs to not increase costs.

Regarding the Resident Survey, he explained that 1 in 3 respondents said they faced barriers to good skills training, jobs and career progression. Approximately one quarter of respondents with a disability worked full-time, compared to over half of non-disabled respondents. Further comments were received in relation to access to education, training and jobs, with the most common responses and reasons related to: poor transport connectivity; lack of well paid, highly skilled, secure jobs and career opportunities; lack of investment, town centre decline linked to reduction of local jobs and lack of investment in education and skills with limited provision.

Further to the comments received residents were asked to rate their priorities for the future. The following came out as the top thee, with over 90% of respondents rating them as either important or very important:

·        Improving town centres

·        Training the workforce

·        Supporting and ageing population

The Spatial Policy Manager went on to provide an overview of business responses specifically in relation to improving the productivity of their workforce, with ‘availability of a suitably skilled workforce’ coming out as the highest-ranking response. Improved transport infrastructure and access to finance were close behind.

Details were then provided regarding responses received from the Young People survey noting that 54% of respondents said they could not or were unsure they could pursue their chosen career or business idea in the county.

Moving on the Spatial Policy Manager explained that as part of the big Econ-versation, conversations were held with a diverse range of groups to ensure that the process was as inclusive as possible, the structure and format of the conversations varied and included attendance at meetings and events, presentations with Q&A, and workshops. A summary of the issues highlighted were included in the presentation but mirrored those already raised.

As a result of the Big Econ-versation the following potential areas of focus had been identified and would be worked on within the budget and funding available:

§    Supporting business growth and job creation, particularly in opportunity sectors

§    Improving public transport and access to facilities

§    Developing a lifelong learning offer for residents

§    Improving the health of residents and workers

§    Promoting County Durham

§    Building on recent investments to regenerate and reimagine town centres

§    Transitioning to net zero through a just, flexible, and innovative approach that creates new jobs and safeguards existing ones.

Councillor Surtees expressed her concern over the small number of respondents, given the population of County Durham, noting that the results would not be truly representative and robust enough to support the emerging strategy. She also suggested that the key priorities and issues identified did not appear to reflect the potential impact and detrimental effect that poverty has on the economy within the county and would have expected this to feature.  She continued that she felt that there was not enough representative evidence and data to move forward. In addition, she was concerned that the branding and marketing of the Econ-versation had not promoted or stimulated the levels of engagement from local communities in the process.  She therefore suggested that it should be rebranded and resurveyed with better explanations provided and the marketing pitched right.

The Spatial Policy Manager added that in his experience the level of return was not unusual for this type of survey, noting that many of the responses provided were  already known to the authority. He further noted that the Poverty Action Plan would sit alongside the strategy and picked up on those issues that Councillor Surtees referred too.

Councillor Sterling commented that she agreed that the response rates were poor and she also felt that this had been a failed marketing campaign.  She continued that she was surprised that there was not a bigger response from the older generation. She asked whether the committee could be informed of the total cost of the Econ-versation process and the cost per response and questioned as to whether the Econ-versation should be relaunched.

Councillor Sterling also commented that she was concerned that young people had identified that they would need to go out of the county to attend university, it was felt that a conversation needed to be undertaken with Durham University in relation to their entry requirements. It was also suggested that conversations need to take place within secondary and FE colleges to establish how they promote Durham University and children’s aspirations to attend Durham University.

Councillor Abley commented that there is a lot of good information in the report and presentation and highlighted the need to have a mechanism in place to manage delivery of the priorities coming out of the Econ-versation.  He continued that there is a need to continue to monitor and assess the effectiveness of those key actions to deliver the desired outcomes.

The Spatial Policy Manager confirmed that there will be a need to monitor delivery of the priorities and the actions in order to deliver the required outcomes.

Cllr McKeon agreed that a discussion needs to be held as to why it is difficult to get into Durham University and then asked as to how we engage with young people in care and also how do we get community ownership of the high street.

In response, the Spatial Policy Manager commented that in terms of community engagement as part of the Econ-versation engagement had taken place with Community Champions and community engagement is included as part of the future consultation process.

Cllr Kellett asked as to how we measure good quality jobs, as it is subjective.

The Spatial Policy Manager responded that the county needs to have a range of jobs and confirmed that it is a general principle and there is no specific definition of what constitutes a high-quality job.  He continued that in addition to the information provided by the consultation and the survey, information from the Economic Review will also be used to feed through into actions within the strategy.

Mrs R Morris, Co-optee added that in her opinion she wouldn’t want to see another survey undertaken and suggested that further views be sought when the strategy is shared.

Councillor Jackson commented that he would have expected all 126 members to respond and many of those may also have been able to provide business responses so would agree that the consultation had not been that successful.  However, he continued by suggesting that the second stage of consultation should focus on the key findings of the Econ-versation.

In response the Spatial Policy Manager confirmed that six workshops were held with members and that they were also encouraged to complete the survey.

Councillor Batey in agreeing that the return rate did raise concerns, suggested that the results gathered should be presented back to the public which may encourage further feedback. She also noted the low number of responses from young people whose views were extremely relevant and she asked whether a geographical breakdown of the respondents could be provided, to establish if any areas were underrepresented. She further asked whether the Economic Review would feed into these findings.

In response the Spatial Policy Manager advised that the IES would sit alongside this and other documents as previously explained. Councillor Batey commented that she felt census data when available would also be valuable to informing the strategy.

The Chair commented that the IES was a living document and members would continue to have the opportunity to feed into the development of the Inclusive Economic Strategy.

Resolved:

That the content of the report and presentation be noted and that members comment accordingly.