Your browser is no longer supported

For the best possible experience using our website we recommend you upgrade to a newer version or another browser.

Your browser appears to have cookies disabled. For the best experience of this website, please enable cookies in your browser

We'll assume we have your consent to use cookies, for example so you won't need to log in each time you visit our site.
Learn more

Call for LEP boundary change post election

  • 2 Comments

Proposals to break up the South East Local Enterprise Partnership could be put forward to ministers after the general election, according to leading figures in the organisation.

The South East LEP’s Essex vice chair George Kieffer told LGC that any incoming minister would be “very foolish” to maintain the status quo without questioning whether the LEP was “delivering for government what government expected of it”.

The South East LEP, which covers East Sussex, Essex, Kent, Medway, Southend, and Thurrock, is the “biggest non-metropolitan LEP in the country”, said Mr Kieffer, and while he had not seen “a formal proposal to disband or break [it] up” he was “not ruling it out”.

Last September Lord Adonis called for the number of LEPs – there are 39 across the country – to be reduced, while in July communities secretary EricPickles indicated he would be open to the idea of changing LEP boundaries.

Mr Kieffer said although an in-depth review of the LEP would have to wait “until we see the colour of the next administration and the priorities that they have got”, he could foresee the way it could be broken up.

“I suspect Kent and Medway will go together,” he said, and added there was “perhaps a case for East Sussex being together with the Coast to Capital LEP” which covers Brighton and Hove, Croydon, East Surrey, Lewes, and West Sussex. Mr Kieffer added a Greater Essex LEP, including Southend and Thurrock, could also work.

Talks are already under way about forming a Greater Essex combined authority. David Finch (Con), leader of Essex CC, told LGC that having a coterminous LEP “would be a positive”. However, he said he was not sure any new government “would entertain smaller, more discrete” LEPs as he got the impression both the Conservatives and Labour would prefer fewer, larger-scale LEPs across the country.

“We are looking at all of the options available to us,” he said.

Kent CC leader Paul Carter (Con), who has long complained about the size of the South East LEP, told LGC that even if it was broken up any potential breakaway LEPs would “still be among the biggest LEPs in the country”.

He said the current set -p and way leaders made decisions on projects in areas they knew little about was “nothing short of madness”. As a result he said he would be “very much” behind any proposals to break up the South East LEP.

  • 2 Comments

Readers' comments (2)

  • From what I work out, SELEP's federated model allows for local determination on a county basis as well as a governance process which is fit for government's purposes. Surely Mr Carter's comments are therefore false? Things are only going one way; and fragmenting LEPs is not it.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • It would make far more sense to stop moving deck chairs and let us get down to delivering economic growth, whatever the merits or demerits of the existing size of SELEP. As Joanna Killian says, the federated model of four more local areas allows for the local determination that Paul Carter seeks.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

Have your say

You must sign in to make a comment

Please remember that the submission of any material is governed by our Terms and Conditions and by submitting material you confirm your agreement to these Terms and Conditions.

Links may be included in your comments but HTML is not permitted.