Agenda item

(1)       The Chairman welcomed Mr Moys to the meeting and invited him to give the Committee background information on the work of the International Affairs team operated in the County Council, before answering questions from Members of the Committee.

(2)       Mr Moys referred to the paper previously circulated to the Committee on the European Funding opportunities over the period 2014 – 20.   Mr Moys explained that the Team had overall responsibility for international activities in KCC which included influencing European and Government policy.  Recently there had been an increased focus on trying to support Kent’s export activity especially that of small and medium enterprises (SME’s).  This included the Kent International Business (KIB) initiative which helped to fund trade visits etc to assist SME’s in accessing European markets. There was a need to work with partners especially the southeast LEP and European partners to make sure that Kent accesses its fair share of European funding.  All the Team’s activities supported the County Council’s core objectives e.g. Bold Steps for Kent, Unlocking the Potential or the Environmental Strategy.  Mr Moys confirmed that before any funding project was submitted for European funding it went through a Member approval process to make sure that the outputs were what the County Council wanted.

(3)       Mr Moys set out 4 priorities for IAG’s work:

·        Securing European funding for projects across the County Council’s business activities - this included influencing the development of new funding streams up to 2020 to enable Kent to bid for work closely linked to the work of KCC’s directorates and other partner organisations, such as Visit Kent or District Councils, and securing KCC representation on EU decision- making bodies.

·        Supporting Kent businesses to trade and export with Europe, especially SME’s, including with support from European Funding such as the Interreg ‘2-SeasTrade’ project.   

·        Policy Development and influencing – KCC had, for example, influenced the government to secure a good percentage of European funding (coming to the county via the South East Local Enterprise Partnership) to spend in the County. In 2014 – 2020 this would be £165m (compared to £20 million under the current South East ERDF programme).  Dafydd Pugh would also, for example, outline the successful lobbying activity with our Brussels networks and European partners to ensure that Eurostar continued to stop in Kent.

·        Partnership working – This was a key priority as new programme came on stream it was important to develop European (e.g. Nord-Pas de Calais) and UK partners (e.g. Essex via the LEP) to support EU funding bids.  A recent delegation to KCC from the Province of West Flanders would be followed-up by a ‘match-making’ meeting between their respective Directorates to develop ideas for future joint projects in areas of mutual interest.

(4)       In response to comments from Members Mr Moys stated that he was pleased that the amount of work, often unseen, that went into securing European funding was recognised. .For example, successful lobbying for inclusion of North Kent in the previous URBAN II programme, had taken two years from the Commission’s initial proposal to securing eligibility.

Question – Is there any possibility of European Funding such as Interreg funding being secured for road schemes in Kent?

(5)       Mr Moys stated that accessing funding for infrastructure works, especially under Interreg, was difficult given the relatively limited funding available.  Most funding for infrastructure is directed by the EU to less developed areas. However the ‘thematic programmes for 2014-20 such as the ‘Connecting Europe Facility’ might be explored in this regard.

Question – How successful is Medway Council in securing funding? 

(6)       Mr Moys explained that Kent and Medway were effectively rivals for Interreg funding.  However, Medway had been very successful in securing European funding and punched above their weight.  They had a dedicated resource allocated to securing European funding/project facilitation.   He confirmed that Kent had worked on joint European funding projects with Medway.  The Southeast LEP had £165m, the funding for Kent and Medway was expected to be £80m which would be run via the Kent and Medway Economic Partnership.  The southeast LEP would be allocating 15% of funding for ‘pan-LEP’  Kent, Sussex and Essex projects.

Question – Why is Medway Council so relatively successful in attracting European funding?

(7)       Mr Moys explained that Medway Council employed a person specifically to develop European projects for the Council.

Question – What feedback have you had from SMEs regarding improved access to European Markets?

(8)       Mr Moys stated that SMEs in Kent had had experienced increased turnover following attendance at Trade Fairs in Europe as part of their participation in the Interreg ‘2-Seas Trade’ project by giving them access to new markets.  Part of the unit’s role through the KIB initiative was to overcome SMEs’ fear of the unknown in relation to European markets.

Question – Will Eurostar be making a contribution to the funding shortfall for improved signalling at Ashford International?

(9)       Mr Moys stated that funding has come from the RoCK project but that Dafydd Pugh would be able to provide more detail on this.

Question – The public are generally unaware of the work of KCC and specifically the International Affairs office in levering in European funding for Kent, what can or is being done to improve this?

(10)     Mr Moys agreed that the people of Kent were not generally aware of the role that European Funding plays. He stated that at project level publicity measures should be written into the outputs for particular projects to raise the profile of this funding and the work done by the County Council.  He agreed that more could be done in this area.

Question – One of the main things that Kent needs to get out of European Funding is assistance with road infrastructure works as a lot of European traffic uses Kent’s roads, what can be done to achieve this?

(11)     In relation to the issues of European funding for infrastructure works, Mr Moys explained that this was currently allocated depending upon the category of the Member State, the “poorer” Member states such as Portugal, Greece and South Italy (Sicily) have received a lot of funding to bring their road infrastructure up to the standard of other Member States.  KCC Members and Officers had fought hard to retain funding for the more prosperous Members States such as the UK, but there has not been European funding available to the UK for infrastructure works per se.  Officers could look at thematic funding programmes, to which all Member states can apply, to see how this might be used for infrastructure works.

Question – How has Kent County Council built the reputation that it has in Europe?

(12)     Mr Moys explained that because of Kent’s geographical location and it being an outward-looking local authority it recognised the benefits to be gained for the people of Kent in exploiting links with Europe, e.g. for trade and export.  Other local authorities tend to think that KCC has a larger International Team than it actually does; the team punches above its weight.  The Team is strongly supported by Members.  There is recognition of KCC’s good reputation in Europe and amongst other local authorities and in fact KCC was, for example, representing all of the southeast local authorities on the Programme Preparation Committee (PPG) that was preparing the new Interreg programme.

(13)     Mr Moys explained that Kent had an outward looking approach to European work and recognised at an early stage that the EU was a major source of potential funding for local authorities and therefore it was important to have good links to the European Commission to make sure that Kent’s points of view are taken into account.

(14)     Mr Moys emphasised the importance of KCC Directorates being clear about their priorities in order to be able to take advantage of European funding. He explained that all European funded projects required match funding and one of the upsides was that Kent could provide staff time rather than cash match funding.  There were a number of posts in Directorates which were funded via European projects.   In relation to resources he stated that even if resources for this activity were not increased, there was the opportunity to prioritise existing resources within the Directorates to concentrate more on accessing funding.

Question – Do you think that negative attitudes to Europe make your job harder?

(15)     Mr Moys replied that having worked in this area for such a long time he was used to this attitude, he and his colleagues just carried on regardless of the negativity.  They do not think about this and concentrate on bringing in millions of pounds worth of funding for Kent. 

Question – How can we get Directorates to work with you to maximise the benefits of European funding for Kent?

(16)     Mr Moys said the Leader was giving out a clear message about the importance of maximising European funding for the work of the Directorates.   Mr Moys confirmed that he was attending Departmental Management Team meetings to get the message out to the Directorates especially in terms of the LEP programme.

 (17)    It was agreed that a short survey be sent to Directorates regarding accessing European funding.

ACTION (SUE FRAMPTON - completed)

Question – how much does it cost per £1 to release funding from Europe?

(18)     Mr Moys was asked if it was possible to estimate the cost to release funding and though this is not easy to calculate it may come from various pieces of evidence to the review.

(19)     The Chairman thanked Mr Moys for assisting the Committee with their work.