Agenda item

The Director for Tourism, Culture and Inward Investment submits a report updating the Commission on the successful applications to the Community Renewal Fund.

Members of the Commission are recommended to note the report and pass any comments to the Director for Tourism, Culture and Inward Investment.

The Director for Tourism, Culture and Inward Investment submitted a report which updated the Commission on the successful application to the Community Renewal Fund. Members of the Commission were recommended to note the report and make any comments to the Director for Tourism, Culture and Inward Investment should they wish to.

Councillor Myers, Assistant City Mayor for Jobs, Skills, Policy Delivery and Communications, introduced the report and drew Members’ attention to the following information:

·         Para 3.12 – 3.14 gave a wider context to how brilliantly Leicester had done in securing all five bids and the amount of money it had attracted. It was testimony to the good work done by the Council to turn around a very complicated process quickly, and to exercise good judgement across the 29 projects submitted.

·         He thanked the City of Leicester and the organisations that had contributed to that process and come up with compelling projects.

·         The projects will benefit the city with some vitally important work.

Mike Dalzell, Director Tourism, Culture and Inward Investment noted the range of projects supported allowed for a focus on businesses, communities and individuals. He noted feedback from East Midlands Chamber of Commerce, one of the project partners, that the city was by far the most advanced of the local authority areas in the region. The council had agreed contracts with the government, individual contracts with each project, had agreed payment mechanisms and first payments had been sent.

It was reported that Government had been looking for innovative projects and they could help guide what the future UK Shared Prosperity Fund was going to look like. Given the good collaboration between the various projects, there was real enthusiasm for lessons to be learned and new approaches to be tried. There was an important evaluation thread throughout, and it was hoped that by the end of the projects in June there would be concrete suggestions and ideas on what could happen next.

Zinthiya Ganeshpanchan, CEO for Zinthiya Trust, who is leading the She Inspires Business Playbox partnership, was invited to address the meeting and noted:

·         Their project partnership consisted of five not for profit organisations, providing business start-up support as well as employment support to women primarily from ethnic minority communities who had been impacted by the pandemic and post-pandemic.

·         Carbon emissions were an important focus for the start-up business support being delivered as part of the project.

Members were given the opportunity to ask questions and were responded to as follows:

·         It was noted that in paragraph 5.1 in the report that £59,000 would be used to cover the cost of the council acting as accountable body for the CRF programme to ensure the five projects were adhering to the regulations of the funding, progress reports were made to government, evaluations were being undertaken etc. The money would come into the Council’s Economic Regeneration service budget to fund contract officers working on the programme.

·         It was asked how success would be measured. It was noted the council team would work with each project to demonstrate and evidence that outputs had been achieved. Output targets had been set for each project by government, and there was a requirement for a formal evaluation of each project to be undertaken.

·         Ms Ganeshpanchan further noted that Zinthiya Trust has a robust monitoring system as part of the project, that could record every individual assisted and their ‘distance travelled’.

It was noted that the Leicester Textiles Renewal project would be delivered by the city council. Members suggested that although a lot of support was being targeted at workers to deliver garment skills and training, the management of those businesses needed support too, for example, with Health and Safety. It was noted that workers could be working in a badly managed environment.

In response Councillor Clarke, Deputy City Mayor for Environment and Transportation, informed the meeting that over the past few years European Regional Development Funding (ERDF) had been used to engage with over 200 textile businesses, supporting them to grow, including with free impartial advice and access to grants. Textile businesses had received webinars and events training online, particularly during Covid, which included support for ethical and legal compliance, alongside general business growth and support topics.

Peter Chandler, Head of Economic Regeneration Tourism, Culture and Inward Investment also noted the project complemented other general programmes of support to businesses being delivered through the Growth Hub and that support for businesses was central to the new Community Renewal Fund project. As part of the programme the Council was recruiting a cohort of initially 20 businesses to join a development programme, working closely with partners Fashion Enter and De Montfort University to help the businesses to develop. Small grants would be made available to those businesses to help them to implement innovations to develop and grow their business, including specific support from the Fashion Technology Academy.

A capacity register was being established for retail buyers, to determine capability and manufacturing volumes for the various businesses.

Officers were in contact with retailers and e-retailers who had their own auditing systems, as well as audit providers to ensure consistency on those compliance and audit regimes. Also noted there had been a whole series of workshop programmes via the Growth Hub to show what ‘good’ looked like and this project could offer support and practical assistance to companies on compliance.

Members found the feedback encouraging but noted some workplaces may not be compliant with HSE, and that some landlords and business owners did not understand the legal requirements.

Councillor Clarke informed the meeting the council’s work covered these areas and that it had been well documented in the Leicester Labour Market Partnership annual review. This included what the City Council was doing but were also working with those other agencies that had powers to enforce on labour market and modern-day slavery issues, including the GLAA, HSE, HMRC and Leicestershire Police. It was noted the Council has established the Leicester Labour Market Partnership and funded a coordinator role. Members were encouraged to report any issues they encountered to the Leicester Labour Market Partnership and the relevant agencies.

Councillor Clarke informed the meeting that the annual review report for the past year was currently being compiled and would be brought to a future meeting of the Committee. At the request of the Chair, the report for the previous year would be circulated to Members as a refresher of information.

Councillor Porter raised the following concerns over the textile industry in Leicester:

·         The typical business model within the textile industry was to focus on price, with retailers being forced to produce fabric at cheaper and cheaper prices, creating a downward spiral.

·         Businesses should be encouraged to produce higher quality garments, made from sustainable fabrics.

·         The Council should inspect dye house businesses to ensure they were not producing noxious fumes or emitting discharges into the sewage system or waterways.

Councillor Clarke responded that the Council did not absolve itself from responsibility in terms of pollution but was the responsibility of the Environment Agency. He acknowledged that what had been described quite rightly was an entangled regulatory system that was very difficult to unpick, and a legal framework and policy environment that was not working for the country. He added he had been pushing Government to bring forward its own stated manifesto pledge to develop a single enforcement body for the labour market and would continue to lobby MPs to do so.

In addition, Councillor Clarke supported a campaign to establish a garment trade adjudicator or ‘watchdog’ who could be appointed to ensure that manufacturers did not become victims of supply chain pricing pressures. He agreed that change was needed both for the issues of workplace exploitation, and on the environmental concerns, so the best possible garments were made in Leicester in the best possible working environments.

Members suggested that when working with auditors, environmental issues were considered alongside other factors such as health and safety, pay and rights of workers.

The Chair asked how best practice regarding CRF programmes could be identified and how the city compared with other authorities and how often evaluation updates would be brought to the Commission. It was noted that the city council was already in contact with other local authority Economic Regeneration teams elsewhere in the region and were exchanging information about recording information, outputs etc. In terms of evaluation, a group including representatives from all projects was already working together on evaluation. It was suggested that here be a further report to the Commission after the interim review which will take place just after the end of March and then towards the end of July following the end of the programme.

The Chair thanked the officers, Councillors and community group presenting the report. The Commission was asked to note the report.

AGREED:

1.    That the report be noted.

2.    The current Leicester Labour Market Partnership report be circulated to Members of the Committee.

3.    Community Renewal Fund evaluation updates be brought as soon as feasible following the March 2022 interim review and at the end of July 2022 after the programme concludes and final evaluation reports have been prepared.