Minutes:
The Committee considered the undernoted report:
“1.0 Relevant Background Information
1.1 Members are aware that the Council has established a City Investment Fund (BIF) which has been designed to enable the Council to take a lead role and work in partnership to deliver key investment projects which:
Promote the image of Belfast as a place to visit
Enable and/or promote the city as a place in which to do business
Bring financial or other economic returns to the city which help to build the city’s rate base
Promote Belfast as a city in which its citizens have pride and belief in a brighter future.
Enhance the city’s strategic, social, cultural and environmental infrastructure.
Provide a lasting legacy for future generations.
1.2 The objectives for the City Investment Fund were agreed in December 2007:
create a focal point for the Council to play a leading role in the development of the city;
create a ‘can do’ attitude amongst its citizens and create a sense of place and pride;
encourage investment from and engagement of public, private and voluntary sectors, in the achievement of that aim; and
to contribute to the Council’s priorities and vision for the city.
To date, approx£12million has been allocated to a number of iconic projects (Titanic; Lyric, the MAC) which has levered in over £120 million. Members are asked to note that the Connswater Community Greenway project, which was previously funded under the City Investment Fund, has now been capitalised as part of the Council’s capital programme and will become a Council asset once completed.
1.3 At its meeting on 23 March 2012, SP&R Committee reviewed and confirmed the objectives for the next phase of the City Investment Fund now renamed Belfast Investment Fund (BIF). Given both the changed needs of the city as well as the broader economic context, it was agreed that BIF support should be extended to include programmes of capital investment (or clusters) as well as single iconic projects, which can demonstrate a cumulative iconic or transformational impact.
1.4 It was further noted at this meeting by the SP&R Committee that in order to ensure a balanced investment across the city, and given the scale of investments, that the time horizon for BIF is over three terms of Council, from 2007 when BIF was initiated through to 2019/20. This balance will need to be considered in the context of investments which have already been made and the money available for allocation under this phase of BIF. Currently it is anticipated that there will be £20million available by 2015.
1.5 One of the key objectives of BIF is to lever investment from the private and public sectors, as it did on the 4 previous BIF investments. Members further agreed in November 2012 that projects must secure at least 50% match funding from other sources. It was also agreed that there should be no ongoing revenue cost implications for the Council.
1.6 Members are asked to note that NO decisions have been taken yet in relation to funding for projects under the current phase of BIF.
2.0Key Issues
2.1 There are a number of key issues for discussion in relation to BIF which are outlined below for Members’ consideration.
Role of the Area Working Groups
2.2 Members are aware that the Area Working Groups (AWGs) were established last year as a means of connecting Members to their local areas in preparation for their formal role in community planning under the Reform of Local Government. The interim terms of reference for the AWGs were agreed as to:
· act as community advocates to identify local priorities and support effective ‘place-shaping’;
· make recommendations to SP&R Committee on investment decisions for the local area;
· offer advice and guidance to SP&R Committee and officers in the development and implementation of local projects;
· participate in and facilitate community engagement and communications activities with a wide range of groups on investment in local areas;
· consider other area-based issues as referred by SP&R Committee;
· monitor progress and produce an annual report on performance.
In governance terms, the AWGs were established to have an advisory role, informing the implementation of the Investment Programme. It was agreed that the AWGs would have no delegated authority and no budget.
2.3 Since this time, Members have embraced the opportunities afforded by area working. The Area Working Groups have played an integral role in making investment decisions for their areas in terms of the Local Investment Fund, the Feasibility Fund and local interventions. Given this and Members knowledge of local areas and projects, it was agreed at SP&R in November that the AWGs would also play a central part in the decisions related to the BIF.
2.4 Members are aware that as part of the consultation process on the Investment Programme, the Council published a long-list of ‘Emerging Partnership Projects’ which could potentially be funded under BIF. It was previously agreed at Committee that this list would be provided to the Area Working Groups (AWGs) again to allow them to engage locally on priorities for investment with key stakeholder groups in their area. In addition to this, the long-list of suggested projects was published on the Council’s website and groups were asked for any further suggestions to add to this list. No additional ideas for projects were received via this route.
2.5 Each of the Area Working Groups has now been presented with the long-list of suggested BIF projects for their area and have had varying levels of conversation around these. Discussions in some AWGs are at a more advanced stage than others and there may be further additions to this list. Individual AWGs have also received presentations from emerging projects and been able to question groups on proposals. At this stage, the South AWG has identified three priority BIF projects while a number of the other AWGs have indicated that they would like further time to consider emerging proposals before agreeing priority projects.
2.6 A weakness of the AWGs to date is that they generally have failed to agree on a coherent plan for each area that will make a substantive difference to the quality of life of local people. There are logistical reasons for this failure as Members time is limited and planning workshops have been knocked off course to some degree due to the proposed Social Investment Fund (SIF) intervention which remains a somewhat unknown quantity.
2.7 Without a clear area plan aimed at addressing particular identified needs and thus arriving at coherent outcomes, there is a risk that BIF funding will be spent on a series of projects without any particular end in mind. It may be useful therefore to provide a ‘critical’ friend in the form of some regeneration expertise to work alongside the AWGs as they work through their BIF proposals with a view to prioritising what schemes will make the biggest impact.
2.8 The approach could line up with the agreement at the Voluntary Transition Committee of 5th April 2013 that the AWGs should begin the creation of local area plans in the months ahead in preparation for the Council’s new community planning role.
3.0 Role of Strategic Policy & Resources Committee
3.1 It is important to note that the Belfast Investment Fund is a citywide fund and that individual allocations of money are not being made against particular areas. As outlined the AWGs do not have any delegated authority and can only make recommendations to the SP&R Committee. The final decision on which BIF projects the Council will invest in will be determined by the SP&R Committee in its role as the Council’s investment decision maker. This approval process was previously agreed by Committee in November 2013.
3.2 Members will acknowledge that there is increasing demand on the Council to deliver projects within increasingly scarce financial resources. There is a limited amount of money available under BIF and there will be opportunity costs of approving one BIF project over another BIF project. With the finite amount of resources available it will not be possible for all the proposed BIF projects to be delivered. SP&R Members will therefore be required to use their civic leadership role and focus on agreeing those projects which can have maximum benefits and investment return on both city-level and area level outcomes in line with the investment principles that were agreed by Members that underpin the Council’s Investment Programme –
- Balanced investment across the city
- Good relations and equality
- Partnership and integration
- Value for money
- Sustainability
3.3 Due to the scale of investments which is likely under BIF, projects will be rigorously and independently tested in line with standard ‘Green Book’ economic appraisal requirements, to test the socio-economic and social benefits of projects to the city of Belfast, as well as financial returns to the city, in terms of the rate base and attracting further investment. Under this phase of BIF, SP&R has agreed that ‘clusters’ of
projects might be considered, that will have a cumulative iconic or transformational impact. Therefore, while projects will be appraised on an individual basis, the cumulative impact of a cluster to contribute to the city’s strategic, social, cultural and environmental infrastructure will also be examined.
3.4 It will be also be important that they deliver tangible outcomes for the city. It should be noted that any legal agreements with partners on projects will be aligned to the emerging corporate outcomes framework (linked to community planning) and include the use of social clauses, as well as contracting, measuring and monitoring secured community access in the benefits realisation period of the project.
3.5 The role of SP&R as the investment decision maker therefore does present the potential for the Committee to decide to over-rule the proposals or priority projects put forward by an AWG. While this situation has not emerged to date in relation to local investment decisions, there may inevitably be a tension between those decisions made on the basis of local needs and those made from a city perspective. Once again it may be helpful for Members to avail of independent expertise and challenge in coming to an agreement.
4.0 Prioritisation and the development of a prioritisation framework
4.1 Given the above it is important that Members can take informed decisions about which projects to invest in. However in order to allow to take an informed decision, it will be necessary for them to have a city-wide context with a prioritised list of projects and the same level of information on each project.
4.2 Members have previously agreed that all capital projects (capital programme, Belfast Investment Fund etc.) must go through this Stage process (as outlined in the Approvals Process where decisions on which projects progress are taken by SP&R Committee.
4.3 SP&R Committee have previously agreed that the 4 principles which are to guide all Council’s investments are: affordability inc. consideration of available match funding; deliverability; feasibility; and sustainability. A prioritisation framework based on the information contained within the appraisals will allow SP&R Committee to consider investments on a like-for-like basis across the city. This framework will be presented to SP&R for their consideration next month.
5.0 Match Funding – SIF
5.1 Members are asked to note that a key consideration of BIF funding is securing at least 50% match funding from alternative sources. One of the key strands of funding available is under the Social Investment Fund (SIF). Members are asked to note that these projects are currently being economically appraised by the Department of Finance and it is anticipated that first decisions regarding funding will be announced over the summer.
6.0 Next Steps
6.1 As outlined it is important that Members acknowledge that BIF is a city-wide fund and that decisions on which projects receive BIF investment will need to be taken at a city level. In order to allow Members to take an informed decision it is recommended that all AWGs forward a prioritised list of projects to SP&R Committee in August with clearly expressed outcomes that address identified needs in each area.
7.0 Resource Implications
· Financial: up to £20m by March 2015
· Human: Officer time in working with groups on developing their project proposals
· Assets: none at present
8.0 Equality Implications
As part of the Stage approval process, a screening will be carried out on each project to indicate potential equality and good relations impacts and any mitigating actions needed.
9.0 Recommendations
Committee is asked to –
- note that the Belfast Investment Fund is a city-wide fund and that the final investment decisions on projects will be taken by Strategic Policy & Resources Committee
- note that the AWGs have already considered the long-list of suggested projects for their areas. The South AWG have agreed three priority projects while
the other Groups have requested further time to consider proposals for their area
- agree that a prioritisation framework is brought to Committee next month
- agree that a prioritised list of BIF projects from each AWG is brought to Committee in August along with clearly expressed outcomes to address identified needs in each area. This will enable Members to take a city-wide view of potential investment decisions. At this stage it is also anticipated that the first decisions regarding SIF projects will also be available and this will help inform Members decision-making process
- consider the use of independent expertise to challenge and critique proposals from AWGs in terms of making a real difference to communities and to inform area planning.”
After discussion, during which the Committee agreed that an event based on the debate at the city conference which had been held earlier in the week be held for all Members of the Council, the Committee adopted the recommendations.
Supporting documents: