Enterprise and Lifelong Learning Committee, 12 Jun 2002

Meeting date: Wednesday, June 12, 2002

Official Report 66KB pdf

---

Local Economic Forums

The second item is a draft letter to Iain Gray on our response to the evidence from the lowland local economic forums. Are there any comments on the letter?

I do not like it.

Do you want to tell us why?

As you know, I am sceptical about the forums and have been all along. The evidence that we received did not lead me to form a different view. We are back at the situation where we must question the rationale behind LEFs. What are they attempting to achieve? If it is simply the limited objective of rationalising services to businesses, then some LEFs have succeeded and some have not. If the objective is something wider, we need a wider debate about how we are going to deal with local economic development.

The letter—without any disrespect to the person who drafted it—is wishy-washy.

The committee will not be surprised to hear that I totally disagree with David Mundell—perhaps for the first time. The Enterprise and Lifelong Learning Committee recommended that local economic forums be set up. I realise that some forums are working better than others, but that is to be expected. We should not give up on local economic forums just because one or two are not working as well as the others. In my area and in other areas the LEF is working well. The LEFs are encouraging partnership and collaboration and we are seeing the benefits of that.

It is important that the LEFs link into the community planning process. That is highlighted in the letter. I support the draft letter and I propose that we send it as it is.

I have a brief point about the second bullet point in the letter. I do not think that taking a minimalist approach is necessarily a disadvantage. For a variety of reasons, in some areas the bodies that are now formally represented on local economic forums already have close working relationships. Diversity of approach is not a bad thing and we should not be down on those who have chosen a minimalist approach. Perhaps the sentence could be more elegantly phrased to suggest that a minimalist approach is appropriate in circumstances where the partners consider it necessary.

I support that.

I do not want us to rehearse all the arguments about local economic forums. I am happy to dissent formally from the letter.

I, too, dissent from the letter.

We must also stress in the letter that this is our response to the lowland local economic forums because we have not yet had a review of the Highlands and Islands local economic forums. Do members agree to send the letter with those changes?

Members indicated agreement.

The Official Report will record the dissent of Mr Mundell and Mr Davidson.

We now move into private to consider two items: the preparation of a report and the shortlist of candidates for the post of committee adviser for the tourism inquiry.

Meeting continued in private until 12:40.