Agenda item

Hedd Vaughan-Evans (Head of Operation) to present the report.

To note the Quarter 4 Performance Report and updated Portfolio Risk Register.

 

To approve the submission of the Quarter 4 Performance Report to the Welsh Government and UK Government as well as the local authority scrutiny committees.

 

The report was submitted by the Head of Operations and the Programme Managers elaborated on the highlights of individual programmes.

 

RESOLVED

 

To note the Quarter 4 Performance Report and updated Portfolio Risk Register.

 

To approve the submission of the Quarter 4 Performance Report to Welsh Government and UK Government as well as the local authority scrutiny committees,

 

REASONS FOR THE DECISION

 

To submit the Growth Deal’s Quarter 4 Report (January to March) and updated Portfolio Risk Register. ⁠

 

Quarterly reporting on progress against the North Wales Growth Deal is one of the requirements of the Final Growth Deal Agreement. Following the North Wales Economic Ambition Board's consideration, the reports are shared with the Welsh Government, UK Government as well as the local authority scrutiny committees.

 

DISCUSSION

 

⁠The Growth Deal's Quarter 4 Performance and Risk Report was outlined and a presentation was given by the programme managers who provided a summary of the progress in relation to their individual programmes. An update was provided on the Digital Programme where it was noted that the outline business case for the 4G Connected Key Sites and Corridors had now been approved by the Economic Ambition Board. There was reference to the LPWAN project noting the need to carry out more work on the economic case before mentioning the appointment of Annog Cyf. by the Economic Ambition Board.

·        ⁠Members asked about the appointment of Annog Cyf. and whether there was an announcement or a launch in the pipeline. It was confirmed that the company would hold a public launch the following week and that they were working on the messages and regional balance. ⁠It was reported that social media would publicise it and there would be direct contact with the rural communities. It was noted that the Project Management Office would update the Board on any developments.

 

An update was provided on the Low Carbon Energy Programme which explained the position of each project such as the Hydrogen Hub and Cydnerth amongst others up to the end of quarter 4. It was noted that the Trawsfynydd project had not been included as there was not much to report on up to the end of Quarter 4. It was added that this project remained under red status due to the uncertainty whether the project would be realised within the Growth Deal period. It was noted that the Project Management Office was in discussions with Cwmni Egino and would ask for an explanation from the Government as it began mapping potential options for the Board to consider should the project be withdrawn from the Growth Deal.

·        Disappointment was expressed in relation to the Trawsfynydd project and there was concern that the Government was making political decisions rather than decisions based on fact or technology. It was noted there would be further considerations on what would replace the Trawsfynydd project should it be withdrawn.

 

A report was provided on the Land and Property Programme and an update was provided on projects such as Parc Bryn Cegin, Bangor and Kinmel Studio. It was noted that the Ambition Board was still waiting for a face-to-face meeting with Kinmel Studio since the company had been placed in the hands of administrators at the beginning of April, they had been in contact via e-mail with the Company after the announcement was made to ascertain what the next steps would be.

 

The following observations were made:

·        A desire to meet with Kinmel Studio as soon as possible was expressed in order to obtain an explanation of their position and to find a way forward. It was emphasised that the situation regarding the company's dissolution needed to be clarified.

·        It was confirmed that the Project Management Office was pressing for a meeting and it would update the Board on any developments.

·        An update on Wrexham Gateway was requested, specifically regarding the traffic assessment and the details relating to this project. It was expressed that it would be good to receive the latest information as board members had not been updated.

·        It was believed that the WelTAG 0 report had been completed and the funding had been provided by Welsh Government through Transport for Wales. It was noted that the initial assessments had been completed but there was no further update for the time being.

·        Confusion was expressed as to whether or not the work had been completed. It was believed there was a lack of understanding of what was happening exactly. It was acknowledged that it was a matter that involved Wrexham Council, the Ambition Board and Welsh Government.

·        It was asked that if the work had been completed, that it be sent to the Leader of Wrexham Council. It was emphasised that it was important for the Board to be briefed and to receive information. The Board was assured that work was ongoing and that David Fitzsimon ⁠would update the Leader of Wrexham Council after the meeting.

·        A request was made for a written update on the Kinmel Studio situation. It was believed that it was important for members to receive timely information on any developments and actions rather than waiting until the next meeting of the Economic Ambition Board to receive an update.

·        It was confirmed that the Board would be updated before the next meeting and information would be provided on e-mail should a meeting be held with Kinmel Studios.

·        It was asked what the process was with such projects when there was uncertainty about their future and at what point would the Board be notified of the situation.

·        It was noted that the Project Management Office was trying to ascertain what the implications would be to the project in moving forward. It was reiterated that should the original proposal that the Board had committed to changed, then it would be a matter for the Board to determine whether or not the amended proposal should be supported. It was added that the Project Management Office was currently trying to ascertain the issues and how they could affect the project.

           

An update was provided on the Agri-food and Tourism Programme and the Innovation in High Value Manufacturing Programme which included an update on the Enterprise Engineering and Optics Centre which was now on track and under construction. To close, an update was provided by the Digital Programme Manager on the Portfolio's risk register which referred to three risks. The first risk related to capacity and it was reported that this risk had reduced since the last Quarter after recruiting staff to the Project Management Office team.

 

It was noted that the next two risks, namely Subsidy Control and moving to the Corporate Joint Committee, were new risks that had been identified for the risk register. It was elaborated that the Moving to the CJC was a potential risk which could affect resources. It was noted that the Project Management Office was keeping an eye on this risk which was relatively low at present.

 

A member observed that the move from the Economic Ambition Board to the CJC was not clear to some Bodies that were part of the Board. A request was made to arrange a presentation for the Partners who were outside Local Government to receive more information on the CJC and the implications to partners involved with the Growth Deal. It was suggested that a presentation be given to a meeting of the Economic Ambition Board to provide an update on the move and the implications of establishing the Corporate Joint Committee. This suggestion was welcomed and it was agreed for the Portfolio Director to schedule it.

 

Concern was expressed by the representative for Bangor University regarding the governance process for renewing contracts that took several months and there was concern that the governance requirements would hinder the transfer process. The Monitoring Officer reported that a request had been sent to the partners asking for information on their decision-making processes. It was highlighted that the project group was planning how to communicate CJC matters and the process of transferring and the possible implications. It was noted that there was work afoot to brief and consult on the process and that there was detailed work on communication and engagement taking place at the moment. It was acknowledged that the level of awareness about the CJC varied across the sectors and there was a need to address this.