Proceeding contribution from Mark Prisk (Conservative) in the House of Commons on Wednesday, 24 November 2010. It occurred during Adjournment debate on Pennine Lancashire Local Enterprise Partnership.
Pennine Lancashire Local Enterprise Partnership
I totally understand the right hon. Gentleman's point, and I respect the fact that where one is seeking secure evidence, it is inevitably often easier and quicker for larger organisations to respond. We have been mindful of the fact that there may be smaller businesses, about which we do not have evidence, that may support one bid or the other. I am mindful of the danger of assuming that familiar names on a particular bid's proposal somehow mean that the whole of the business community is unanimous. I am sensitive to that—it is an excellent point. That is why we try to make sure that once we receive bids, we dig beneath the proposals and get a better understanding of the genuine nature of the support or otherwise, so that we can make a value judgment. That allows me to turn to the Pennine Lancashire bid. On the first criterion—the question of a functional economic area—it has a plausible claim. I understand that economic geography changes. One of the points about changing the regional development agencies is that, in many ways, some of their boundaries simply do not reflect the economies that we have today, which have changed dramatically in the past 10 or 12 years. We think that the Pennine Lancashire bid has a plausible claim to being a functional economic area. However, its links with other parts of Lancashire and Greater Manchester mean that its economic self-containment is not quite as strong as Lancashire's as a whole. There are pros and cons. The hon. Member for Hyndburn rightly made the point that a high proportion of people work in the area, but we also need to look at the potential long-term success of a partnership—we need to think about its connectivity. The debate is two-sided; nevertheless, it is true to say that there is a plausible argument and a plausible element to the first question on whether there is a functional economic area. On the second issue, on the evidence that we have to date—I will come to how we might solve this in a moment—the Pennine Lancashire bid's claim, in terms of business support, seems to be smaller than that of the pan-county bid.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 519 c148-9WH
- Session
- 2010-12
- Chamber / Committee
- Westminster Hall
- Subjects
- Exports Government assistance Economic growth Small businesses Lancashire Local enterprise partnerships Pennines
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2023-12-15 21:41:13 +0000
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_685659
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_685659
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_685659