North development chiefs have warned of the “critical” need to ensure a new scheme is “seamlessly” created to replace billions of pounds in EU investment after Brexit.
Carroll Buxton, regional development director at Highlands and Islands Enterprise (HIE), told MSPs that there must be no “hiatus” in the cash flow to vital projects.
Hundreds of initiatives in the Highlands and across Scotland benefit from EU structural money, including the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF), which is invested in small business projects and research, and the European Social Fund (ESF), which backs schemes to help less affluent people and communities.
More than £150million was earmarked for the Highlands in the last spending round from those two funds alone, but the future of the cash was thrown into doubt after the Brexit vote.
The Conservative government at Westminster has promised to establish a “UK shared prosperity fund” to replace the money, but MSPs said at Holyrood yesterday that a consultation on the plan is not due to start until later this year, despite it being needed to be in place by the end of 2020.
Asked about the timescales while giving evidence to the Scottish Parliament’s economy committee yesterday, Ms Buxton said: “We have the government guarantees in place, which gives some comfort.
“But really what we would be aiming for is a seamless transition so that there is no gap between the programmes that we have guaranteed, and the beginning of the next one.
“We don’t have an awful lot of detail on the shared prosperity fund, as yet. I know there is a consultation starting in the autumn time, and obviously we’re very keen to be involved in that and how that develops.
“But I think it is about there being no hiatus – about being able to develop programmes and interventions which move seamlessly from the current period with the government guarantees into the next phase of funding would be critical.”
Martin Fairbairn, chief operating officer at the Scottish Funding Council, told the committee that the tight timescale was “not helpful”, as it could mean missing the “opportunity” to improve the way the funding is distributed.
“The consultation and the shared prosperity fund are potentially very useful. But it’s not just about continuation of existing stuff, rolling that forward would actually be bad,” he said.
“Therefore the closer it gets to the wire that makes it even more difficult to rethink the sorts of things we want to do to have most impact. So it is difficult.”