Glasgow City Region Update
Renfrewshire Council · 29 April 2026
Back to Leadership Board — 29 April 2026 and its agenda
Text extracted from the council's PDF. Layout and reading order may differ from the original.
Page 1
PUBLIC _________________________________________________________________________ To: Leadership Board On: 29 April 2026 _________________________________________________________________________ Report by: Chief Executive _________________________________________________________________________ Heading: Glasgow City Region Update _________________________________________________________________________ 1. Summary 1.1 This report provides and update on the Glasgow City Region activities including the infrastructure programme, an update on the Clyde Metro project development specifically covering recently agreed changes to the governance arrangements associated with the project and lastly and update on the developing regional devolution agenda in Scotland which the City Region Cabinet has in the recent past progressed engagement with both the UK and Scottish Governments. 2. Recommendations 2.1 The Leadership Board is asked to: i) Note the report and the range of updates provided in relation to the Glasgow City Region activity; ii) Note the projects currently identified to be promoted for potential funding through the Local Growth Fund programme being led by the City Region via the UK Government and that future reports will confirm to the Board the outcome of this process once concluded. iii) Agree to nominate the Council’s Head of Economy and Development as the Renfrewshire representative on the Clyde Metro Programme Steering Group. _________________________________________________________________________ 3. Infrastructure Programme Delivery 3.1 Since the Glasgow City Region City Deal was approved in 2014, Renfrewshire Council has successfully delivered an ambitious investment and regeneration agenda, focused on creating the infrastructure and business environment to generate sustainable long term economic growth and jobs, while promoting active travel and green opportunities to ensure the area is a fairer, more inclusive place where all our people, communities, visitors and businesses thrive. As reported to the Board in February, the GAIA (AMIDS)
Page 2
PUBLIC and CWRR (Renfrew Bridge) projects have now delivered their core infrastructure elements as envisaged in the original City Deal Investment Programme and the Council has at the same time continued to deliver significant and wide ranging complimentary regeneration investment through the cultural led regeneration programme in Paisley, the AMIDS South connectivity project and the new Paisley Grammar project. 3.2 More recently Renfrewshire Council has received a further allocation of City Region infrastructure funds following the GCR Cabinet approval in February linked to a decision to progress the Case for Investment for the Glasgow City Region Metro. The £8.5m funding allocation to Renfrewshire Council will support the delivery of enabling infrastructure for new commercial floorspace at AMIDS. A business case is currently being prepared to provide funding to support the ongoing developments at AMIDS, expanding internal roads and DHN connections and supporting the development of a second phase of the new Tech Terrace development which is designed to attract new and developing start-up companies to locate to the AMIDS and access the wider innovation eco-system that will be developed and established. This business case is nearing completion and will be brought to a future Leadership Board for approval prior to submission to the City Region Cabinet. 3.3 In addition, included on the Board agenda is the final business case for the AMIDS / Glasgow Airport tax site designated as part of the GCR Investment Zone. As outlined in the accompanying report and business case, the tax site status will deliver up to £25m of tax related incentives for new occupiers locating in the AMIDS/Airport tax site zone over a 10-year period, increasing the international competitiveness and attractiveness of AMIDS which is intended to support an acceleration in the overall pace of new occupier led development. The model will also allow for newly generated non-domestic business rates income from new occupiers to be retained at a city-region level for a period of 25 years to support investment within the region. The retained NDR funding will be available to finance reinvestment into the overall Investment Zone objectives linked to advanced manufacturing and innovation. 3.4 There will be a requirement for the GCR Cabinet to develop a proposed pipeline of intended investment priorities across the region for discussion with national governments. In this context, working with the AMIDS JV Partner a strong case will be developed for a range of investment requirements at AMIDS to be promoted as priority projects for investment from this new regional level funding source – a significant proportion of which is contingent upon the successful and accelerated build out at the AMIDS site. As the GCR’s premier location for attracting inward investment in advanced manufacturing and innovation AMIDS will be exceptionally well placed to put forward a strong case for prioritised investment. 3.5 As reported to the Economy and Regeneration Policy Board in March 2026, the UK Government’s new Local Growth Fund (LGF) will run from April 2026 for three years. Of the £61 million earmarked for GCR over three years, 70% of this is capital funding (circa £43m). For this capital allocation, UKG have emphasised the requirement for spend on regional activity at scale and impact and there will be a requirement for the City Region to identify priority investment projects that will be deliverable within the funding timeframe. 3.6 This latest capital investment programme, although not substantial in the context of the scale of the full city region, nevertheless offers the potential opportunity for Renfrewshire based project(s) to secure a level of funding. As with several previous funding streams, timelines established by the UK government for response from the GCR are tight and are likely to limit the opportunity for board reporting prior to submission of expressions of interest for potential projects to the City Region. There is
Page 3
PUBLIC likely therefore to be a requirement for details of project submissions to be reported to board at the earliest opportunity thereafter. 3.7 Clarity is currently being established with the City Region team as to the financial scale of project submissions sought from member authorities and greater detail in respect to the key outcome criteria that will be used to assess expression of interest that will assist and inform the identification of suitable projects. At this stage indicative guidance suggests that UK government have emphasised the requirement for regional activity at scale and of impact, particularly where the intermediate outcomes are considered: • Increased development-ready land and sites • Increased housing supply • Improved utilities and energy upgrades • Increased physical connectivity • Increased digital connectivity 3.8 Notwithstanding this and given the potential pace the UK government may request this is progressed, officers are actively identifying potential expressions of interest projects. As referred to above, the three year funding stream is of relatively modest proportions at c£43m and therefore in order to respond to potential limitations of funding availability early work by officers is focusing on identifying a portfolio of potential project options to present both a strong bid for resources, but also one that can be flexibly adjusted in scale and scope either individually in respect to the larger projects or collectively in respect to a range of smaller projects. Given the requirement to spend funding within annual allocations and within the overall three-year period, there is a critical requirement for projects to have been under active development and or consideration by the Council to provide confidence of the ability to move forward quickly and be deliverable over the relatively short three-year time horizon. 3.9 The projects outlined below have been under active consideration for several years by the Council to varying degrees and are likely to align well with what is currently known about the overall LGF objectives and will form the core basis potential projects that are will be presented through the City Region arrangements. It should be noted that for the larger projects outlined below, Paisley Gateway and Paisley Centre, the LGF given its restricted scale, is likely to provide only a partial potential funding solution for an element of the overall project, therefore other additional national funding routes would continue to be pursued. 3.10 Paisley Regional Gateway The Board will recall a previous Expression of Interest was submitted to the City Region’s call in 2024 for projects linked to the redirection of resources set aside for the Glasgow airport rail link project. The outcome of that process was reported to Board in June 2024, confirming the submission for a ‘Paisley Regional Gateway’ project, which promoted a phased vision to transform the area around Paisley Gilmour Street and County Square into a mixed-use transport, residential and innovation quarter, was ultimately unsuccessful in securing funding despite being recognised as a strong proposal of regional significance. The ambitions set out and the work progressed to develop the proposal remain relevant today and officers have continued to maintain the project as a potential proposal pending any new funding opportunities that may arise. The Paisley Regional Gateway project was recognised as being an important strategic location for the Glasgow City Region. The project continues to have the opportunity to develop the area as a major public transport interchange, connecting Glasgow
Page 4
PUBLIC International Airport, Paisley Gilmour Street Station, and the City Region’s key strategic manufacturing site, the Advanced Manufacturing Innovation District (AMIDS) ahead of a long-term strategic connectivity solution being delivered by the Metro programme. The proposal lies at the heart of Paisley and would be the first and the final urban location that visitors to the City Region see when travelling to and from Paisley, the airport, AMIDS and other locations linked by public transport. The project also presents a phased vision that could enable/stimulate a further follow-on phase of market led private sector investments. The project as previously developed, promoted a first phase of Paisley Regional Gateway, costed in 2024 at circa £32 million, that could deliver a range of related investment interventions. This expression of interest was made up of a programmed range of integrated but distinctly individual projects. This elemental investment programme provides the opportunity to flexibly adjust the scale the scope of a project submission to the LGF to ensure it can align within any specified funding limits for any bid requirements from the City Region. 3.11 Paisley Centre Redevelopment The Board will be aware that the Council has been progressing discussions with the current owners of the Paisley Centre for several years in respect to potential routes to support the ambition to deliver a mixed use, hotel, retail and residential redevelopment of the shopping centre site. Following a report presented to the Economy & Regeneration Board in November in which officers outlined the significant financial viability gap associated with the proposal and the long term financial risks that would be borne by the Council, it was agreed that an external consultancy, with expertise in commercial redevelopment, be appointed to provide an independent financial appraisal of the current “Income Strip” redevelopment proposal promoted by the current Paisley Centre owners. Math Real Estate Partners were commissioned in December and jointly appointed by the Council and the Scottish Futures Trust (SFT) to carry out this commission. Their report will provide an independent financial and commercial appraisal of the proposed redevelopment of the Paisley Centre, with particular focus on the viability of delivering the scheme through an income strip (self-amortising lease) structure promoted by the current shopping centre owners. This work has concluded and the first draft of the report from MATH Real Estate Partners has recently been submitted to officers as the initial stage of their quality assurance sign off process. Following submission of a finalised report, detailed review of the report by officers and engagement with the SFT, a follow up report is due to be presented to the next cycle of the Economy & Regeneration Board in May. Notwithstanding completion of the final sign off, report publication stage and detailed reporting to the Economy & Regeneration Board, the consultants have established several key conclusions following completion of their programme of work that are outlined below: - • The proposals, purely from an economic redevelopment perspective, represent a significant opportunity to unlock a strategically important but underperforming town centre site, delivering a mixed-use scheme comprising hotel, residential and commercial uses, it aligns with several key economic objectives of Renfrewshire Council and has the potential to generate long term economic and fiscal benefits.
Page 5
PUBLIC • However, the financial, commercial and risk appraisal of the proposed delivery arrangements presents a range of significant issues as currently presented: • The scheme is currently not viable without substantial public subsidy. • The viability gap has widened due to the prevailing economic and financial environment which highlights the potential risks of the Council paying a long term, fixed indexed linked rent intended to be funded by future cyclical, commercial operational income. • The financial model of the current proposal is extremely sensitive to movement in key assumptions. • Although the future value of the properties - which would represent an asset to the Council when they are returned to Council ownership for £1 after expiry of the long term lease - should be included in any full financial appraisal, equally so should the long-term lifecycle costs to protect the condition of those assets – which is the Council’s long term responsibility - and these will have a significant negative impact on value. • The proposed income strip structure promoted by the current owners is not deliverable in its current form. There is an inherent misalignment of long-term financial risk for the Council, with lease obligations (to be paid by the Council) growing by a guaranteed inflation + 1% each year, while income the Council would generate from the operational assets would remain exposed to cyclical and operational risk and uncertainty. • This results in a structurally negative long-term financial profile, subject to long term risk and increasing financial pressure on the Council. • A revised delivery approach, most likely based on a blended funding model and improved risk alignment, is required to progress the scheme. Subject to the full analysis of the Math Real Estate Partners report being presented to the Economy and Regeneration Board and the next steps, it is clear at this stage that the Consultants concur with the previous officer report of a requirement for a significant level of public subsidy being required to deliver a redevelopment scheme, that the current proposal would expose the Council to significant long term financial risk and that alternative models to the “income strip” approach should be examined to achieve the redevelopment objectives. It is intended that early discussions at an officer level with the SFT will be progressed immediately to explore potential national funding routes to address the public subsidy requirement as well as potential delivery and funding models that could explored, which could underpin early discussion following the next Scottish Government administration being in place following the elections in May. Although the LGF is likely to be directed to support projects that can be delivered over its three year funding horizon, there remains the opportunity that it could play roll in funding early work linked to the development of a revised masterplan, deliverable business case and initial phases of redevelopment which would not close out opportunities for more substantial funding models to be explored with the SFT and national government and this will be explored with the City Region as part of this LGF process.
Page 6
PUBLIC 3.12 Smaller Scale Projects At this stage range of smaller scale projects are being identified which are intended to provide significant variability in both scale and timing of delivery to maximise the opportunity to provide the Council with a highly adaptable set of proposals. This will ensure officers are able to deploy a highly flexible approach during discussions with the City Region team in order to maximise the opportunity to achieve funding commitments across Renfrewshire. 4.0 The Clyde Metro Project – Revised Governance Arrangements 4.1 In April 2020, Glasgow City Region (GCR) Cabinet paused the work on the Airport Access Project (AAP) and work began to develop a “Case for Investment” (CFI) for a wider City Region Metro project which would subsume the AAP link into the overall Metro network plans. To provide governance of the project, in October 2023 the Clyde Metro Programme Steering Group (consisting of Transport Scotland, SPT and Glasgow City Council Chief Executives) agreed that the lead role for the development for the CFI would be undertaken by SPT, working alongside GCC (on behalf of Glasgow City Region) and Transport Scotland. 4.2 In December 2023 the GCR agreed to allocate £12.155M of City Deal funding to support the Metro project development, including entering into agreements with SPT in their lead role and as a procuring organisation for consultancy commissions. The GCR Cabinet’s key role in respect to the governance of the project was at that stage principally aligned to oversight of the use of the city region funds. 4.3 In September 2025, as part of ongoing programme assurance, a CFI Stage 2 Readiness Review was completed by the Clyde Metro Project Team. This review process identified several areas in where the existing Clyde Metro CFI governance arrangements required to be strengthened. 4.4 In response the City Region Cabinet has subsequently agreed to a range of changes to the Metro governance arrangements that are supporting the planned delivery of the CFI. These revised arrangements are a positive step that significantly broaden and deepen the eight-member authority’s direct role and decision making in all aspects of the Metro CFI stage at both political cabinet level and senior officer levels. These revised governance arrangements will continue to support the planned timescale for the CFI completion during 2027. 4.5 As referred to above, under previous governance arrangements, the GCR Cabinet role was restricted to overseeing the City Deal funding allocation to SPT and had no explicit decision-making role in the project development. The new governance arrangements have now established the Cabinet as Clyde Metro Project Sponsors for the CFI and the principal governance for approving the key elements of the CFI business case. 4.6 The Chief Executives Group will provide support to the Cabinet members in their role as Sponsors and will ensure their Member Authority provides adequate resource and input to the Clyde Metro CFI development, with representation from their MA on a new Programme Steering Group (PSG) and relevant technical Support Groups. In addition to supporting Cabinet, the eight Chief Executives will be the initial point of escalation from the Programme Steering Group. 4.7 Previously the PSG only included membership from GCC (who represented all eight Member Authorities), SPT and Transport Scotland. Going forward, PSG membership will be widened and strengthened and will now include SPT Chief Executive Officer (Chair); Transport Scotland (Assurance role) and senior officers from all eight Member
Page 7
PUBLIC Authorities with responsibility for regeneration/growth/place making etc. It is proposed that attendance at PSG falls to Renfrewshire Council’s Head of Economy and Development. 4.8 The new PSG also includes representatives of both UK and Scottish Governments. This will help to manage the risks associated with integrating Clyde Metro with the wider public transport system and the responsibilities of Network Rail/Scotrail; engaging with the National Wealth Fund (NWF) following HM Treasury’s announcement in Nov 2025 of the Clyde Metro’s status as a ‘Focus Project’ for the NWF as part of the GCR Strategic Partnership Agreement; engaging with senior officials involved with wider regional economic development/regional empowerment in both governments; and engaging with Transport Scotland on the post-CFI arrangements for funding this STPR2 project 4.9 Going forward, SPT will act as the lead for all workstreams including: Metro PMO (Programme Management Office); Transformation and Set-Up and Delivery. It should be noted that these new governance arrangements relate only to the next stage of the Clyde Metro project (the CFI through to 2027). The Set-Up and Delivery workstream will develop proposals for the governance arrangements for the stages beyond the CFI in relation to future delivery and will be approved at a future relevant time. 4.10 The new governance approach will help to strengthen the overall focus of decision making to support the successful delivery of the CFI by 2027. It will ensure the PSG, Chief Executive’s Group and Cabinet operate together on a quarterly governance cycle to enable key decisions to be sequentially progressed through each tier of governance across the quarter. In tandem and as the project progresses there will continue to be regular reporting on the development of the project through the Leadership Board moving toward the planned delivery of the CFI during 2027. 5.0 The Regional Devolution Agenda 5.1 The devolution of powers and funding from national to regional level is significantly more progressed in England than Scotland. In this context, there is concern that the maturity of the devolution of powers and funding to major city regions south of the border, puts the GCR at increased risk of being left behind, becoming less competitive relative to peers and missing opportunities to build long term inclusive economic growth and social benefits not just for the city region but the Scottish economy given the scale and importance of the GCR to Scotland 5.2 In this context, the GCR Cabinet has been exploring the case for a devolution arrangement for the GCR and has during 2025 initiated discussions with both Scottish and UK Governments to explore the appetite to develop a devolution settlement for the GCR. The focus of these initial discussions was to promote the track record of the GCR, promote the case for a GCR devolution settlement and secure discussion on the economic opportunities which would position the GCR on a level playing field with other city regions across the UK which already operate within a devolution deal. A critical element of the GCR proposition, is to facilitate devolution without the need for any structural change to the existing GCR arrangements given the track record of delivery already demonstrated to date by the collaborative governance model operated by the GCR. The GCR have throughout the engagement process set out the following key areas of strengths, as demonstrated over the past 10+ years, to highlight the credibility and maturity of the GCR to transition into a devolution environment: -
Page 8
PUBLIC • Over the past decade, the Region has demonstrated that it has robust governance arrangements and highly functioning delivery mechanisms that works and creating Scotland’s first integrated devolution settlement will not require any legislative or organisational change. • This is highlighted by the proven track record via the £1.13bn City Deal, Scotland’s largest infrastructure programme, which is already unlocking 10,000 new homes, attracting £2.76bn of private investment, and creating 16,000 jobs. The DSIT-funded 5G project will improve public services while cutting costs for local authorities and the NHS. • With the £160m Investment Zone, the GCR is building on strengths in advanced manufacturing, space, maritime, and semiconductors. Glasgow City Region already produces more small satellites than anywhere in Europe and boasts a highly integrated defence supply chain. With greater local control, the region will use its technology capabilities to expand exports, close the productivity gap with Europe, and boost Scotland’s economy. • Despite a highly skilled workforce, the GCR has the highest economic inactivity due to ill-health among the UK’s Core Cities. Through partnerships with Public Health Scotland and academia, the GCR are driving Fair and Healthy Work programmes and Scotland’s first Foundational Economy pilot to get more people back into work. But existing multi-pot funding arrangements are holding the region back. • An integrated settlement would allow the GCR to scale what works, deliver meaningful benefits, and provide a model for regional devolution in Scotland. With Glasgow City Region making up one-third of Scotland’s economy, the growth will drive prosperity across the UK. And by focusing on enhancing existing regional activity, which complements local authority delivery, there are no structural or organisational barriers, and the opportunity exist to deliver locally evidenced based solutions that tackle systemic challenges, boost productivity, and drive nationwide growth. 5.3 More recently a series of significant announcements and publications has highlighted a collectively signal of a developing shift towards strategic engagement in relation to enhanced regional governance and a differentiated devolution agenda in Scotland, particularly for Glasgow City Region. The most significant development came at the end of November where speaking at the State of the City Economy conference in Glasgow, the First Minister confirmed an intention to introduce new enabling legislation in the next Parliament to allow Regional Partnerships to obtain legal status and access a menu of devolved powers and which he noted: - “Glasgow and Scotland are well placed to flourish in the years ahead. It is because we are so blessed that I am all the more determined to deliver on my government’s central economic mission: to increase the wealth and wellbeing our citizens by building a more productive, more dynamic, and more regionally balanced economy driven by innovation, investment, and inclusive growth. “I want our regional partnerships, like Glasgow City Region, to have the opportunity to expand their strategic capacities and role, with a package of additional devolved competencies available over time. On the table, powers such as skills, economic development and planning. That includes empowering Scotland’s regions because working in partnership with national government, it is our regions that are best placed to drive inclusive economic growth in a way that is both local and strategic.”
Page 9
PUBLIC 5.4 In addition, influential academic publications - The Review of Regional Economies by Professor Sir Anton Muscatelli, academic analysis from the Universities of Glasgow and Strathclyde and publications from the Centre for Cities - have recently called upon the need for a strategic shift in the role city regions play in Scotland, adding to a developing consensus in respect to the importance regions play in the future economic prosperity of Scotland. 5.5 In parallel, the UK Government has confirmed that its successor to the UK Shared Prosperity Fund, the Local Growth Fund as referred to above, will now be channelled through Regional Economic Partnership structures. This reinforces the centrality of regional arrangements in future economic investment and delivery. Following GCR’s early engagement in relation to devolution within Scotland, these more developments collectively create a strategic opening for GCR to assert its role as Scotland’s largest economic region and to pursue a more autonomous, empowered regional settlement. 5.6 Implications for Glasgow City Region At the most recent GCR Cabinet meeting the Cabinet has considered this developing landscape and has agreed to proactively progress preparations for potential future engagement with national governments given the scale of opportunity this provides to the GCR. The objective of this pro-active programme of work is to establish a clear, evidence- based case for enhanced autonomy covering key policy areas which is broadly reflective of a range of devolution arrangements down south, including: • Innovation • Investment • Infrastructure • Housing • Planning • Transport • Skills • Economic Development 5.7 Membership of the workstreams will be drawn from across the region member authorities and will work with partners and utilise existing structures where appropriate to develop detailed proposals on the powers, responsibilities and delivery models GCR may seek to secure through forthcoming legislation and funding reforms. 5.8 In addition, recognising the shared interests of Scotland’s two largest city-regions, the GCR Cabinet agree to establish two joint workstreams with Edinburgh City Region, focused on: • Regional governance models • Regional finance and fiscal powers
Page 10
PUBLIC These joint workstreams will ensure both regions present coherent, aligned proposals to government where appropriate, while still reflecting their distinct local priorities. The workstreams will make recommendations for consideration and importantly will not bind any partners into these recommendations. Any approvals will require to be approved first by GCR Cabinet and thereafter each individual member authority’s own governance structures in due course, therefore no member authority will be affected without their specific consideration and approval of any change emerging from this agenda. Full details of what is ultimately proposed in relation to each of these potential workstreams will therefore be reported to the Board in due course. This need for local level governance approval is reflective of the current GCR arrangement which is underpinned by decision making powers and remit specifically delegated by each member authority. The GCR Cabinet can only make decisions on items of governance which have already been delegated to them by the 8 MAs as set out in the Assurance Framework which accompanied the 2014 City Deal with both governments. Any other decision not covered by such delegated authority requires to be referred to each member authority for their decision and so there is no ability to make decisions (outside the City Deal scope) on behalf of MAs. Therefore, any change to the City Region’s remit that may ultimately be recommended through this developing agenda would require approval by all member authorities collectively and individually within their own governance structures. In this context the GCR Cabinet have also agreed that each workstreams is tasked with developing proposals which bring additionality to the city region, focusing critically on devolution down from central government and not up from local authorities and which do not impact on other funding arrangements, including the local government finance settlement. Devolution Agenda in England 5.9 Improving the economic outputs and productivity in the largest regional UK cities is important for the UK economy. The UK is internationally unusual in that its largest cities outside the capital (Manchester, Birmingham, Glasgow and others) underperform relative to their international peers. For several decades these post-industrial conurbations have acted as a drag on the national economy instead of a driver. Addressing such long-standing issues would result in a stronger UK national economy prospect overall. 5.10 The UK Government (UKG) enabled directly elected mayors through new legislation for these core city-regions about 15 years ago. The model was based on the geography of the English metropolitan councils and is designed for directly elected mayors for these combined authorities to be accountable to the electorate of the metropolitan area, regardless of political affiliation. Although initial discussions promoted by the GCR Cabinet have focused on devolution without the need for any structural changes (so relying on the current GCR arrangements and no suggestion of a Mayoral arrangement), understanding what the position is in England is useful context to understand how the devolution agenda has developed and the scale of the potential threat to the competitiveness of the GCR. 5.12 (At 2025) 14 elected mayors exist to date in England, covering a population of about 30 million (approx. half the English population). This includes Greater London which has a slightly different model to all other mayoral combined authorities. In London the Mayor's powers sit separate from the London Borough local authorities. In the combined authorities like Manchester and West Midlands, the Mayor acts as the leader
Page 11
PUBLIC of (a cabinet or similar of) the individual local authority leaders. The nine "metro" mayors (essentially the former boundaries of the English metropolitan authorities account for 42% of England's population and 48% of the country's economic output 5.13 Each combined authority is granted specific powers and budgets devolved from UKG. Specific powers vary by combined authority, but mostly include the remits listed in the table at Appendix 1 to this report 5.14 In all cases the individual local authorities within the combined mayoral areas all continue to exist and run local services. The premis is that by running "strategic" services at a city-region level that efficiencies are produced in delivering services that are cross boundaries (labour markets, public transport, large scale investment proposals, etc) 5.15 When the governance model first emerged mayors were initially offered direct UKG grants with specific limitations on what the funding could be spent on. As certain mayoral authorities have become more established, they have been granted "integrated settlements" which offer these authorities greater levels of devolved powers and flexibility in how the associated funding that accompanies that from Whitehall budgets can be deployed. To date only West Midlands and Manchester mayors have integrated settlements. Others are planned to follow in 2026. The integrated settlements have allowed those metro mayors to prioritise according to local needs, effectively allowing management and control of their own devolved budget. _________________________________________________________________________ Implications of the Report 1. Financial – none at present 2. HR & Organisational Development – none at present 3. Community/Council Planning – • Our Renfrewshire is thriving – These projects will link our communities and facilitate new development opportunities and business growth with both projects improving skills development, educational and health opportunities for people within the local communities as well as aiding employees to access these major existing and new employment centres. The projects align with and aid the outcomes of the Renfrewshire Economic Strategy 2020 -2030. • Our Renfrewshire is well - The new safer walking and cycling infrastructure incorporated within these projects, will help encourage active travel by children and young people, as well as adults. • Reshaping our place, our economy and our future – These infrastructure projects provided connectivity and access to new and existing jobs for people in our communities. As a result of new business creation it is estimated that thousands of additional new permanent jobs will be created. NMIS and MMIC are already up and running as a direct consequence of this enabling infrastructure. The combined projects investment in linking active travel infrastructure and education and will provide connectivity and access to new and existing jobs for people in our communities. • Tackling inequality, ensuring opportunities for all – CWRR provides access to development opportunities along Meadowside Street, increases the potential to reinvigorate Blythswood Retail Park and improves access for the communities on both sides of the River Clyde to facilities and employers on
Page 12
PUBLIC the other side such as the Queen Elizabeth University Hospital; NHS Golden Jubilee; West College Scotland’s Clydebank campus and Yoker train station. The project also increases the employee catchment area for businesses planning to locate at AMIDS, while improving links to suppliers and customers. • Creating a sustainable Renfrewshire for all to enjoy - The completed infrastructure includes segregated provision for walking and cycling and will also enable improved public transport links CWRR opens up development opportunities, which through the LDP will be managed as sustainable linked communities. • Working together to improve outcomes - Officers are working closely with local communities, neighbouring councils, private sector organisations, Scottish Government, Scottish Enterprise, and other partners to ensure the maximisation of positive outcomes from the projects noted within this report. 4. Legal – none at present 5. Property/Assets –none at present 6. Information Technology - none 7. Equality & Human Rights - (a) The Recommendations contained within this report have been assessed in relation to their impact on equalities and human rights. No negative impacts on equality groups or potential for infringement of individuals’ human rights have been identified arising from the recommendations contained in the report because it is for noting only. If required following implementation, the actual impact of the recommendations and the mitigating actions will be reviewed and monitored, and the results of the assessment will be published on the Council’s website. 8. Health & Safety - none 9. Procurement – all contracts are tendered in accordance with Council procurement procedures and where relevant taken to FRCS Board for approval. 10. Risk – Project specific and Programme level risk registers have been established for all projects. These are kept under regular review and reported to the Council’s internal City Deal and Infrastructure Programme Board. Should the Regional project funding bid be successful the project will be further scoped through the Glasgow City Region Business Case development process. 11. Privacy Impact - none 12. COSLA Policy Position – not applicable 13. Climate Risk – the project will provide sustainable active travel routes and encourage sustainable neighbourhoods and transport links including provision of blue green infrastructure 14. Children’s Rights – none. List of Background Papers None
Page 13
PUBLIC Appendix 1 Examples of English combined authority governance model Authority Date from # of L/As Governance Remit (most combined authorities) Mayoral powers Budget Manchester 2011 (Mayor since 2017) 10 Cabinet - made up of 10 Leaders and mayor Work with leaders of constituent local authorities to approve strategy for the combined area • police and fire services;• health and social care;• public transport - bus franchising;• strategic planning (subject to majority member authority approval); • "call in" powers for strategically important planning apps• economic devt;• social housing investment framework;• culture / digital;• adult education / training;• waste management;• flood protection;• Can make some decisions • independent of CAB; Some decisions need unanimous CAB • support - others just a majority; designation of Mayoral Strategic Development Zones • £2.6 billion West Midlands 2016 (Mayor since 2017) 18 Cabinet - made up of sevenLeaders and mayor. elevenother Councils have reduced voting rights* As above designation of Mayoral strategic development areas; • transfers of property etc to a Mayoral development corporation); • Acquire land (in consultation with relevant L/A); • Restrictions on disposal of land;• Discretionary relief from business rates;• Road traffic reduction (in conjunction with combined L/As) • £1.2 billion West Yorkshire 2014 (Mayor since 2020) 6 (includes City of York which is outside W.Yorks) Cabinet - made up of 6 L/A reps + Mayor. As above Mass transit vision 2040;• £0.86 billion