Agenda item

Update on Leicester and Leicestershire Business and Skills Partnership

The Director of Tourism, Culture and Economy submits a report updating the Scrutiny Commission on the development and delivery of the Business and Skills Partnership for Leicester and Leicestershire.

 

Minutes:

The Director of Tourism, Culture and Economy submitted a report to update the Commission on the development and delivery of the Business and Skills Partnership for Leicester and Leicestershire. It was noted that:

 

  • The role of the Business and Skills Partnership and its corresponding Business Board was to work with businesses and stakeholders to drive economic growth and deliver relevant business support initiatives at a regional level across Leicester, Leicestershire and Rutland.
  • The partnership’s role included a focus on dedicated enterprise zones across Leicester, Leicestershire and Rutland, including MIRA Technology Park near Hinckley, Loughborough University Science and Enterprise Park (LUSEP) and Charnwood Campus in Loughborough.
  • As well as delivering skills and apprenticeship support through the Leicester and Leicestershire Careers Hub, delivering the government funded business support service (Growth Hub) alongside the locally funded Create Growth programme, and supporting local economic growth planning.
  • The work was aligned with the emerging government plan, which set out a focus on priority growth sectors, national policy and ideas on infrastructure, environment and places. School places and national business growth priorities were highlighted alongside local growth hub support.
  • A business board had been formed to provide a business voice into local decision making, with a private sector chair and representation from different sectors.
  • Innovation and collaboration with university partners on employment and business skills were highlighted, with sub-groups being established to focus on different areas and programmes as they developed.
  • Funding was in place to support elements of employment and business skills as national policy developed following the closure of the Local Enterprise Partnerships including the LLEP in 2024.

 

In discussions with Members, the following was noted:

 

  • Concern was raised that several successful local businesses were not represented on the board, despite their national recognition and the valuable insight they could provide on running successful businesses.
  • It was acknowledged that it was not possible to include every business, as some national and global companies did not always wish to engage, but there were opportunities to review this and reach out to additional representatives and business organisations across the city and county if there were any obvious omissions.
  • Suggestions were made for other businesses that could be approached, including large retailers and employers that originated in Leicester, and it was agreed that the team would review who had been contacted so far and consider further representation.
  • Leicester was highlighted as having a distinct economy compared with the county, with many smaller businesses and a diverse workforce, some of whom did not have English as their first language. Members emphasised the importance of reflecting this in board representation if possible.
  • It was suggested that the business board should not seek to create a parallel structure to the existing business representative bodies such as the East Midlands Chamber or the Federation of Small Businesses. Their involvement in the board would help to address the challenge of how to maximise representation from a broad range of diverse businesses and sectors.
  • Members stressed the importance of the board making a positive difference and delivering tangible benefits for local people, and assurance was given that the board aimed to support programmes of work in transition, business support and small business development, with a focus on ensuring growth translated into meaningful outcomes for local businesses.

 

AGREED:

1) That the Commission note the report.

2) That comments made by members of this commission to be taken into account.

Supporting documents: