Source · Select Committees · Welsh Affairs Committee
Recommendation 9
9
Paragraph: 68
If the Shared Prosperity Fund is to offer a more open and responsive system of...
Conclusion
If the Shared Prosperity Fund is to offer a more open and responsive system of funding, the UK Government and Welsh Governments should learn the lessons from how EU funds have been administered under the ESI schemes, including the criticisms we have heard about the current system’s levels of accessibility and bureaucracy. In their plans for the Fund, the UK Government should explain how they intend to overcome these problems and detail the work they have undertaken to review the existing system of ESI funding.
Paragraph Reference:
68
Government Response
Acknowledged
HM Government
Acknowledged
The Government recognises the bureaucratic burden that EU structural funds have placed on local partners, including local authorities, businesses and community organisations. During the engagement we have held across the UK, including meetings with all local authorities in Wales, stakeholders have been clear that the current landscape is complex and overly bureaucratic. They communicated the chance to develop a new, simplified and integrated approach to local growth funding whilst ensuring that the good practices from previous programmes are captured. There was also a desire for investment to go directly to the local communities that need them. The bureaucratic burden of EU programmes also means that places often have a long wait before they receive any funding. Places typically do not see any investment in their communities until at least a year after the programmes have started. The provision of additional funding in 2021/22, by contrast, will be quick and responsive. The Government will set out further details on the operation of the UKSPF in a UK-wide investment framework published in the spring.