Cornwall and Scilly LEP, some thoughts a year in.

Ages ago I blogged about the new Cornwall LEP, arguing that it should learn from the mistakes of the RDA. That it should be more receptive to existing business and try not to solely focus on bringing business to Cornwall, instead building upon what we have already. However, I ought to have argued that the LEP should learn from the successes of the RDA. As much as there were bad investments and hostility to South Crofty mine from the RDA it did have a semblance of strategy and direction. I do not think it was the right strategy and direction but they had a plan and they implemented it. This is in complete contrast to the LEP, take for example their website, here we might expect to find who the LEP is, what they do, what they want to do and how they will achieve it. But alas no, it offers:

"It is anticipated that the Partnership will operate as a company limited by guarantee, with responsibility for understanding and articulating the requirements of business for Cornwall and the Isles of Scilly, and commissioning the delivery of world class economic development projects and programmes which will support sustainable economic growth."

(I think the site has not been updated since the bid was successful if anyone knows if this is the case and why, please comment below)
I have no problem with these laudable aims, everyone recognises the need for Cornwall and Scilly to have economic growth. But words are meaningless without a plan and a way to achieve that plan. Delving further into the website:

"with improved transport links such as Newquay airport and internationally renowned developments including the Eden Project in St Austell, the Tate Art Gallery in St Ives and the National Maritime Museum in Falmouth, the challenge is to further use these opportunities to diversify and transform the economy."

A real focus there on tourism, nothing about the retail, manufacturing, agriculture, food production, fishing, quarrying, construction and engineering. Don't get me wrong we need tourism but we must accept the fact that ONS figures demonstrate that 11% of spending in Cornwall is due to tourism, see here. Tourism is not a big sector either for employment or the Cornish economy, significant yes but it should not be the sole focus of our attention. Besides which the vast majority of the UK and Western Europe are aware that Kernow is a great place to come on holiday, attractions like the Eden Project are already well known. What I am trying to say is that people know of Cornwall's attraction, they know we have a great coastline, great surf, great food, great attractions and great people. Try as we might but "the Cornish riveira" could not have a greater profile. It is hard to imagine how tourism could grow in Cornwall, it is therefore hard to imagine how tourism could be used as a foundation in which to "diversify and transform the economy". Besides which there is the obvious logic that we have a great tourist sector at the moment, yet nowhere in England receives European Convergence Funding but Cornwall does, surely time to start thinking differently.

The website continues:

The private sector will lead the Partnership and, by working in partnership with the public sector, will harness the entrepreneurial spirit of the business community which has a world renowned history and reputation for innovation to lead a new ‘knowledge based’ and ‘green’ economic revolution, as it once led the first industrial revolution. This transformational agenda should focus on Cornwall and the Isles of Scilly becoming a dynamic leader in new technologies, and while building on existing strengths is important, there are huge opportunities for a step change in the profile of our economy. 

Again great buzzwords, great sentiment but an abject lack of substance and tangible plans. We all know that Cornwall led the Industrial Revolution, we all know Cornwall was the birthplace of high pressure steam and the steam engine/ train thanks to Trevithick. We know that Davy was the brilliant mind behind the Miner's Safety Lamp, Nitrous Oxide (laughing gas) and a huge amount of modern chemistry. We know of all these things and so much more. We know that the Cornish people are innovative, intelligent and adaptable, but what I want to know is how will the LEP tap into this potential.


Andrew Wallis did blog (a while ago) about the plans for the LEP see here, (as always well worth a read), if you look through the briefing note it has lots of buzzwords and waffle and no actual substance. Again and again we are told about rebranding, changing our image and thus being more competitive as the conclusion states:

Cornwall has changed considerably over the last two decades and is still changing, but this is not fully understood by external audiences. The adoption of a “competitive identity approach” will enable a focused and coherent series of mutually reinforcing, cost effective communications and promotions to be undertaken. This will raise the profile and build on the excellent reputation of the existing successful sectors to drive greater awareness and recognition of the emerging/hidden growth industries and thereby assist in its economic development and building on the real pride and self determination of those that live and work in Cornwall


Is rebranding the right approach for Cornwall? I do not think so, firstly it's an unimaginative and flimsy idea, secondly why is it needed? and what good will rebranding do? To my mind we have a good image, Cornwall's natural beauty is no secret, our food both prepared (clotted cream, pasties etc) and fresh (meat, fish & vegetables) is well known, our ales and ciders (St Austell Brewery, Sharps, Skinners, Healey's) also have a reputation for high quality. I am not saying we should neglect these things far from it, they should be supported, the LEP and Cornwall Council should look to help these businesses. But they don't need marketing, Cornwall has a great reputation for high quality fresh produce, we have a "competitive identity". We will make no leaps and bounds economically by rebranding Cornwall, we do not need marketing to solve our problems. We are happy with who we are and what we do, and our formidable export industry proves we do not need to improve our image.

Marketing is a great asset, it is a useful tool to promote a company and increase sales, but it is not a strategy alone. It is doubtful whether a sole focus on marketing ("rebranding" "competitive identity") would do Cornwall any good. Further more I have no idea how any of these ideas proposed above would provide a "transformation" in the Cornish economy, maybe the Coalition and Cornwall Council haven't realised but many Cornish companies already have effective marketing strategies. This is a symptom of the wishy washiness of the LEP and it's plans . Frankly I do not know what to suggest to the LEP, they have a website that hasn't been updated in months, I have no idea what their organisation is, what expertise and capability they have or what they want to do. I can not say any more of their plans, as far as I am concerned they have none. It's over 12 months since the government announced Cornwall and Scilly's successful LEP bid and so far they have no strategy, no public consultation and not even a working website, let alone actually doing anything, Cornwall deserves far better than this.

Will the Cornish LEP learn from the mistakes of the RDA?

The government plans to scrap the South West Regional Development Agency and create a Cornwall and Isles of Scilly Local Economic Partnership presents a great opportunity to rethink economic policy in Cornwall and the Isles of Scilly and to take charge of our own destinies. The RDA was geographically distant and democratically not accountable to the people of Cornwall, this resulted in the body being out of touch with public opinion. Economic solutions were delivered from above with little or no meaningful public consultation and regard for the communities involved. This approach must be resisted in creeping into the new LEP. Which hopefully will have a more bottom up approach to policy and planning and seek to foster stronger relations with the public and business communities.

There are many criticisms to be made of the RDA, bad investment decisions such as the Border Books distribution center in St Columb, which had attracted a 3.5 million investment to open. The folding of the South West Film Studios at St Agnes, which resulted in the director being imprisoned on fraud charges, for the 1.87 million of RDA funding.  Also the failed Gaia Energy Center at Delabole, a tourist attraction which had attracted 5 million in RDA funding. The Helston Business Park rounds off the failed ventures of Cornish Objective One money, attracting 2.6 million in RDA investment and has laid empty for three years. Whether the fault in these cases lies with the RDA, economic realities or other factors is beside the point. They are symptomatic of the RDA's insistence in bringing new business into Cornwall and the ignorance shown toward existing businesses and industry. Of course new business should always be sought, but there are often reasons why some businesses have grown organically and others have not. It should never have been the job of the RDA to invest Cornish Objective Money in such a reckless way. There were some successes of the RDA such as the Eden Project and the National Maritime Museum which both tapped into the existing industry of tourism. The University Campus at Tremough in Penryn which had tapped into a long term tangible need for degree level education in Cornwall. (We'll skip over the subsidy given to the Department of Transport for the A30 improvements).

It should be the job of the LEP not only to look to the new but also to foster and support the old. It is no good letting the perpetual Cornish industries of farming and fishing and mining fall by the wayside while bureaucrats experiment with introducing new business and industry. My point is that the RDA sought to impose solutions from above, this resulted in patchy performance and did little to support existing industry and business. Politically too the same approach prevailed in the RDA, far off in Bristol, Exeter and Plymouth, unelected bureaucrats (and a handful of token councillors) and the seemingly obligatory consultants envisaged grand schemes of redevelopment with no regard for the local area or existing tried and tested business and industry.
The prime example of this was South Crofty, closed in 1998 due to costs and regulation, rather than mineral exhaustion. Many hoped that the advent of Objective One money could be used to reopen the mine, to utilise the natural resources of Cornwall and the skills and ingenuity of the Cornish people to create decent jobs and bring money into the area. However this was not to be even when a new concern bought the mine the RDA for years and years spent what must have been a great deal of time and money, drafting plans to bulldoze the surface structures and to redevelop the land. Time and again Compulsory Purchase Orders, were threatened a multitude of plans were put forward including shops, houses a new road and even a leisure center all oblivious to attempts to rework the mine or even the danger and cost of building over mine workings and their associated shafts. After the best part of a decade and High Court Challenges by South Crofty's owners, the RDA finally reluctantly gave in and 'allowed' the old tin mine to be. The implications of acting like lord and master were completely out of tune with the idea of public sector bodies serving the people and encouraging business. It does occur that the fortune spent fighting this protracted battle could have been spent better by both the mine owners on reopening and the RDA on other regeneration projects. (For those interested in the long and winding battle between the mine owners and the RDA here's the Falmouth Packet archive.)




South Crofty Mine Pool, the graffiti reads the words of a folk song by Chris Bryant:
CORNISH LADS ARE FISHERMEN AND CORNISH LADS ARE MINERS TOO,
BUT WHEN THE FISH AND TIN ARE GONE WHAT ARE THE CORNISH BOYS TO DO?
A lament at the loss of the industry but also indicative of the despair felt at the RDAs solutions and methods.
Photo taken from: http://www.cornwallcam.co.uk/bestofinland/scrofty2.htm

 The real challenge for the new LEP is to learn from these mistakes. To not sit in offices and draw up good schemes on paper without any regard for anything else, but to develop organic schemes that work with not against communities. Perhaps this is a little idealistic and that any plan has the possibility of running into opposition, but it is imperative that this opposition is dealt with properly. The bulldozer approach of the RDA seen at South Crofty was not good in terms of public relations, public service or business relations. The people that work in the RDA never seemed to realise that in life problems are best resolved by negotiation and reasoning not threats and ultimatums. Most importantly of all the RDA never seemed to grasp the idea that in a democracy state workers are public servants, employed to work with the people not against them, to promote consensus not conflict. Further the new LEP needs to look at what Cornwall is strong at and nurture existing industries into bigger ones. Hopefully the new LEP will not gamble with Cornish public money in the way the RDA did and invest in strong cases not outside chances.

I sincerely hope that the approach taken by members of Cornwall Council toward the Route Partnership scheme in Penzance is not indicative of what we can expect from the LEP. For the activities there ranked alongside the RDA in terms of bulldozer diplomacy....