Agenda item

The Chief Officer for Enterprise advised Members that Matt Lewis, Director at SRS had given apologies as he was unable to attend the meeting today.  It was noted that an SRS update report would be received at the next meeting.

Members received a report from the Chief Officer for Enterprise outlining the draft Income Generation Strategy.  Members were recommended to consider any comments or changes on the draft Income Generation Strategy before Cabinet considers the strategy on 7^th October 2015.

The report outlined the following key issues:

·         The Income Generation strategy provides an overview of opportunities to secure new and additional resources and to sustain current income flows, over and above the level of financial allocation or ‘settlement’ received by the Council.

·         As public funding becomes increasingly constrained and under more intense scrutiny, greater emphasis has to be placed upon self-generated income and developing and packaging products and services that will resonate with paying customers. We have opportunities to make more use of what we have – property, skills, ideas, assets, staff, knowledge and ways of working – and to think carefully about the kinds of new markets and opportunities we may be uniquely placed to enter, for social-commercial advantage.

·         This strategy aims to set out an ambitious and wide-ranging approach that will package-up services and products in a coherent and commercial way which ensures market appeal whilst addressing the needs and priorities of our county. Income generation requires entrepreneurial activity. In certain contexts this may require a shift in position, from partner or recipient of grant, to a supplier or contractor. It must enable us to more accurately reflect the assets we have in our organisation, whether these are physical or involve Intellectual Property. As a local authority we have a number of skills and capabilities that are directly transferrable to business and through offering a more varied and flexible range of ways through which to offer our products and services – it widens the volume of potential relationships and commercial offerings and partners.

Following presentation of the report Members were invited to comment, during which time the following points were noted:

Members commended the initiative and thought processes.  Questions were raised if suitable resources were in place to carry through the initiative.  In response the Chief Officer explained that it was important for people to have the correct mind-set, being a leadership challenge to empower people in their service.  Where gaps in the skillsets were identified, people within the organisation had access to training and coaching packages. 

It was noted that we should be aware that processes were morally correct and if it would benefit in an appropriate way.  News of quick wins would be welcomed.  In terms of morality, we heard there would be a due diligence process around anything major to be undertaken, which would determine if processes were right and proper, legal, accountability mechanisms and identify risks.

It was queried if the process would be appropriately scrutinised.

It was explained that the Council had relied on Leisure to provide income for many years.  The service had now reached a point where it could go no further, without needing investment.  The budget mandates sets out that the Council could use its existing community interest company or set up its own arms-length vehicle as a way of a community benefit society.  Attached to that would be a trading capacity, and the benefits would be unique to the Council.  In terms of capital, we would need investment to be a feature of the model going forward. 

There was a suggestion that in the long term it may be recommended to have stand-alone companies feeding into the Authority.  The Chief Officer agreed with the comment, citing SRS as an example.

There were concerns surrounding two distinct opportunities being blurred into one issue.  Income generation could be obtained by ‘sweating the assets’ or investing money into new investments.  The suggestion was that the Authority did not have the skills and should be an enabling authority.  We should work with businesses, using our skills eg. provision of land, planning etc. and let their expertise make the money.  There were concerns that we would be working in competition with local businesses.

In response the Chief Officer commented that the Authority had many able, qualified and highly skilled employees.  There was a need to consider what the future of the council should look like, and should we, in order to support local services, look to be more socially entrepreneurial.

The Cabinet Member noted that the Chief Officer was suggesting that we take forward what we were already doing and to build and expand on it.

The Committee resolved to note the report.