Agenda and minutes

            Apologies for inability to attend were reported from Councillors Ekin, Kirkpatrick, Mac Giolla Mhín and Mhic Giolla Mhín.

            The minutes of the meetings of 12th and 24th May were taken as read and signed as correct.  It was reported that those minutes had been adopted by the Council at its meeting on 1st June.

(In pursuance of the Committee’s decision of 12^th May, to receive from representatives of Millward Brown Ulster a presentation in relation to the Belfast Tourism Monitor 2009.)

            The Committee was reminded that, at its meeting on 12th May, it had agreed to receive from representatives of Millward Brown Ulster Limited a presentation in respect of the findings of the Belfast Tourism Monitor 2009.  It was reported that Ms. C. Toner and Mr. R. McGimpsey were in attendance and they were admitted to the meeting and welcomed by the Chairman.

            Ms. Toner stated that in 2009 9.25 million people had visited the City, an increase of 30% from the previous year with the number of out-of-state visitors increasing by 50%.  She indicated that those visitors had spent £451 million, an increase of 3% on 2008.  She pointed out that the increase in visitors and spend was due largely to residents from the Republic of Ireland visiting Belfast to shop because of the beneficial exchange rate between the Euro and the Pound Sterling.  Conversely, the number of overnight visitors from England, Scotland and Wales had declined by 27%.  She reviewed the frequency of visitors to Belfast, the main reason for visiting attractions, the other activities undertaken and the type of accommodation which visitors had stayed in.  She concluded by explaining that the questionnaires which had been completed by visitors had indicated that, with the exception for the need for more banners and signs indicating what was on in Belfast, there were few major changes which Belfast could undertake to make it a more attractive tourist destination.

            Ms. Toner and Mr. McGimpsey then answered a number of questions from the Members and retired from the meeting.

            After discussion, the Committee noted the findings of the Belfast Tourism Monitor for 2009 and that the Tourism Facts and Figures booklet would be circulated to Members in due course.

            The Committee noted the contents of a report which provided a quarterly update on the Development Departmental Plan 2009/10.

            The Head of City Events and Venues submitted for the Committee’s approval the Development Departmental Plan for 2010/11.  He explained that the Plan identified the actions, initiatives and events planned for the Department during that period and its main purpose was to gain Committee approval for key projects, initiatives and resources required for the year.  It would be supplemented by a series of more detailed service plans and separate Unit level plans.  In addition, an update report regarding the Plan would be submitted to the Committee on a quarterly basis and, since many involved key issues, specific reports concerning those matters would be submitted to the Committee for approval.

            The Committee approved the Departmental Plan for the Development Department.  A copy of the key achievements for 2009/2010 and the key actions and performance indicators for 2010/2011 as detailed in the plan, together with the Departmental Action Plan is set out hereunder:

“6.         Key Achievements 2009-2010

            The last year has seen progress in a number of areas. Some of the most important achievements are considered in the following sections.

6.1.      City Leadership

·         Profiled Belfast at the OpenCities Global City Conference.

·         Secured over £10 million of European and UK funding across multiple projects supporting environmental work, community benefits and sporting activity.

·         Led the six Council greater Belfast Comet partnership delivering city regional projects and promoting the region throughout Belfast. This also enabled us to engage in cross-border Interreg funded activity for the first time.

·         The department continued to be an active member of British Urban Regeneration Association (BURA) and the Core Cities Group.

·         Further implemented a Belfast Brand strategy and marketing process.

6.2.      Better care for Belfast’s environment

·         Completed the Transport Policy review to inform the Council’s position in respect of transport policy development for the city and wider region.

·         Engaged with the review of the Regional Transport Policy and physical infrastructure projects including the proposals for transport system changes such as the Rapid Transit initiative.

·         Worked in partnership with the Department for Regional Development (DRD) on the implementation of the Belfast Metropolitan Transport Plan & other transport initiatives. Participated in the City Centre Change Working Group & other transport groups.

·         Delivered a range of programmes to support environmental work, many in partnership with European partners. These included support for the environmental industries sector, the Interreg Carbon Footprint project, the Irish Sea Carbon Card project, the BRAVO – Eco Regions and showcasing the North Foreshore environmental regeneration initiative as best practice.

·         Continued to implement the Environmental Management System in the Department with various initiatives ongoing throughout the year.

·         Supported local environmental projects including neighbourhood clean ups, recycling, and waste week activities, at all 22 community centres.

·         Developed Place, Position and Ownership project with the University of Ulster.

·         Delivered heritage community programmes including training in Heritage as a Social and Cultural Developmental Tool, providing access to heritage resources such as the Ulster Hall, and creating awareness with young people to engage with heritage.

6.3.      Better opportunities for success across the city

·         Developed  ...  view the full minutes text for item 4.

            The Committee considered the undernoted report:

“Relevant Background Information

      The purpose of the report is to outline the: proposed methodology for the longer term prioritisation of future Renewing the Routes local regeneration activity across the City; the suggested approach to the short term continuation of implementation works; and the potential for extending the scope of future local regeneration activity.

      The proposals outlined below are required to provide the short, medium and long term structures for the continuation of the successful local regeneration activity carried out under the current Renewing the Routes initiative. The detail of the report and appendices seeks to clarify the suggested approach to the prioritisation of ongoing local regeneration activity and provide a framework to support the ability of the Council to respond to any unique opportunities for collaborative activity that may fall outside of an approved schedule of prioritised areas. 

      The recommendation has been developed to retain the general principles for the work established during the development of the Brighter Belfast / Integrated Development Fund (IDF) and supported by the external review reported to January Committee.  The direct partnership project delivery approach was highlighted as an important element of the continuity and a vital component for the successful implementation of package local regeneration work.  The emphasis will remain focused on non-traditional activity whereby the priority will be the potential projects that are not addressed by mainstream of other statutory providers.

Key Issues

      Prioritisation process

      The report and recommendations have been developed in the context of the potential future resource availability rolling forward the commitments set out in the current estimates (£300,000pa). The proposals also recognise that a mechanism is required to prioritise phased longer term activity based on the development of a local action plan approach that reflects both the need for regeneration and the opportunities to achieve the transformation of local environments.

      The pilot local regeneration and prioritisation activity, supported through the Council’s previous Brighter Belfast Initiative, provided the context for the review of the approach and the detailed recommendations.  The matrix approach, previously endorsed by Committee for the identification of the original target areas, formed the basis for the suggested framework for the prioritisation process. 

      The approach to the matrix and the information sources incorporated into the evaluation support the previously agreed criteria for area prioritisation: Physical Environment, Social Factors, Economic Circumstances and Strategic Influences.

      The focus for the assessments are the identified nodes (between 0.5 and 1Km) along the main arterial routes within Belfast, as identified in draft Belfast Metropolitan Area Plan (dBMAP). The linear distance covered by the 18 routes identified in dBMAP extends to over 60Km within the Belfast administrative boundary.

      It is proposed that the evaluation is carried out using the criteria and methodology as part of a two stage process. The emphasis of the initial activity would be on the evaluation process to support the empirical identification of target areas across the city. The evaluation results would be considered by a future Committee and inform the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 5.

            The Committee was reminded that the Council over the previous twenty-five years had developed the annual Christmas Lights Switch-on event.  The event had originally involved a number of school choirs and had taken place in the middle of November, with a small audience in attendance.  However, it was now an extremely popular event, with last year’s audience having been estimated at 8,000, and involved a range of high profile national and local celebrities.

            The Head of City Events and Venues reported that correspondence had been received from Belfast City Centre Management, which was supported by the Belfast Chamber of Trade and Commerce, requesting that the Council give consideration to moving the day of the event from a Tuesday evening to a Saturday evening in 2010.

            After discussion, the Committee agreed, due to the success experienced by holding the event in mid-week and the potential disruption which could be caused by hosting the event on a Saturday, not to accede to the request and accordingly agreed that the event continue to take place on a Tuesday evening.

            The Committee was reminded that, at its meeting on 9th March, it had approved a response to the Department of Culture, Arts and Leisure in relation to its proposals for the transfer of local arts funding to the new Councils under the Review of Public Administration.  In addition, the Committee had agreed that the Minister for Culture, Arts and Leisure be requested to attend a future meeting of the Committee to discuss the matter.

            The Committee was advised that correspondence had been received from the Departmental Private Secretary to the Minister indicating that, due to diary commitments, he would be unable to attend a meeting.  However, it had been suggested that the Head of Arts and Creativity Branch in the Department of Culture, Arts and Leisure could meet the Committee on the Minister’s behalf.

            After discussion, during which the Members expressed disappointment at the Minister’s response, the Committee agreed that a further letter be forwarded to the Minister requesting that he review his decision and accede to the request to meet with the Committee.

            (Mr. C. Quigley, Town Solicitor, attended in connection with this item.)

            The Committee was advised that the Council held the right to hold and operate markets under legislation which dated back to 1845.  The Council exercised those rights principally through the markets operated at St. George’s, but hosted also externally contracted market style events such as the Continental Market, which was held a number of times throughout the year in the grounds of the City Hall, and the Maritime Festival.

            The Head of Economic Initiatives reported that the Council had received two requests by third parties to hold markets in Belfast.  The first application was for a market in the Boucher Road area of which the Committee had been informed and updated over the previous year.  The second had been received recently from a community interest company seeking to operate a market in Bank Square.  Both applicants were anxious for their applications to be processed at the earliest opportunity, with one applicant hoping to operate a market during August, 2010.  Officers had been working closely with the Legal Services Department over the previous number of months to review the applications in the context of the existing legislation and to consider any issues arising.

            The Town Solicitor advised that the market rights held by the Council were a valuable corporate asset and that careful consideration should be given on the way to proceed.  Fundamentally, in the first instance, the Council would have to consider whether it wished to grant market rights, followed by decisions on which locations and for which types of markets, if appropriate.  In order to advance such an area of work, it was recommended that the Council establish a Markets Policy which would take due account of all issues as outlined and form a clear platform from which the Council could take decisions on individual applications in the future.

            After discussion, the Committee agreed to the formulation of a Belfast City Council Markets Policy and that the applicants be advised that a decision on their applications could not be made until such a policy was in place but that, in the mean time, officers continue to work with the applicants so that they would be able to submit completed applications once the Policy had been established.

            (Councillor Stoker declared an interest in this item in that he was affiliated to organisations which were being recommended for funding and took no part in the discussion on the item.)

            The Committee was reminded that, at its meeting on 14th October, 2009, it had agreed that the Capacity Grant should continue as a multi-annual grant for a one year interim period as part of the transition to the final multi-annual programme.  The grant would open again to applications for years two and three.  The Committee was advised that, following the closing date, a total of nineteen applications had been received.  These had been assessed by an external consultant in accordance with the previously agreed assessment criteria, scoring threshold and “banded” funding, with groups having to meet the threshold score of 130 marks (65%) to be recommended for funding.  Accordingly, it was recommended that the Committee approve the following recommendations for applications for the Capacity Building Grant 2010/11:

                                                                        Cumulative total                       £620,326.72

Recommendations for Rejection of Funding

            The Committee adopted the recommendations.

            The Committee was reminded that, at its meeting on 10th February, it had agreed to extend the Community Services Revenue Grant for one year, with no less than 90% of the budget being allocated to the groups which were currently funded and up to 10% being held for new groups who wished to access the funds.  The Committee was advised that twenty applications for funding had been received by the closing date of 15th April.  The cumulative total amount which had been requested was £202,728, however, the total budget available was £81,858.  It was pointed out that, if the previous funding bands were applied to the groups which were recommended for grant-aid, there would be overspend of £57,176.  Therefore, in order to meet the required budget it was proposed to award an equal amount of £7,231.20 to the higher graded applicants and under £5,000 to the lower graded applicants.  It was pointed out also that applicants which had their applications rejected would be offered the right to appeal the decision, although no budget had been withheld to address the outcome of any potential appeals.

            Accordingly, it was recommended that the Committee adopt the recommendations set out hereunder for revenue grants:

BCC Revenue Grants May 2010

Table 1: Recommendation for Grant Approval

Table 2: Recommendations for Rejection

            The Committee adopted the recommendations.

            The Committee was reminded that the Community Revenue grant was available to eligible organisations which delivered wide-ranging community development programmes at neighbourhood and area level.  While the assessment process focused on the range and content of the local service, the grants specifically assisted groups with general building costs, for example, utilities, insurance, administration and equipment.  At its meeting on 10th February, the Committee, as part of the departmental grants review, had agreed to extend the Community Revenue grants stream for one year to enable it to be synchronised with the Capacity-Building and Advice grant streams.  The Committee had agreed also that an options paper, which would consider the provision of the grant on either an annual or multi-annual basis, be submitted to the Committee within two months.  That had been in response to feedback on consultation as to whether or not to move the stream to annual funding.

            Following consultation with representatives of community organisations who had direct experience of the grants scheme, the broad consensus was that it would be appropriate for the Council to move to multi-annual funding for the Revenue grants.  It had been agreed also that the necessary policy work was not yet in place in order to support such a move and therefore there was a high level of risk in moving to that approach without substantial preparatory work.  Accordingly, the Committee was being requested to consider two options:

(i)   re-designate the Revenue grant as multi-annual from 2011/12 onwards.  Whilst moving quickly to the desired final outcome that option had a high degree of risk as it left little or no time to put in place a necessary policy framework.  There was a concern also that the higher evaluation and monitoring requirements of multi-annual funding might mean that some groups could potentially be unsuccessful in their application for funding; or

(ii)  continue the Revenue grant as an annual stream for 2011/12 and thus allow the necessary time for the supporting policy development and risk management framework to be put in place.  Following the policy work, there would then be a carefully co-ordinated move to multi-annual funding after 2012.

            The Committee agreed to adopt option (ii).

            The Committee was reminded that Community Development Project Grants were awarded to organisations which initiated small-scale community projects that contributed to the overarching aim of building the capacity of local people.  The maximum amount which could be awarded to any one group under the scheme was £500.  It was pointed out also that the maximum amount which could be awarded to a Community group under the authority delegated currently to the Director of Development in any one financial year was £500.  In order to permit applications received under the Christmas Community Chest, which enabled organisations to hold events during the Christmas period for local residents, to be processed using that delegated authority, it was necessary to submit the Community Development Project grants to the Committee for approval.

            It was reported that eighty-five applications had been received, seventy-six of which had been recommended for grant-aid, with a total amount of £37,975 being allocated in this regard.

            The Committee considered the applications which had been received and agreed to adopt the recommendations as set out below:

Appendix 1:  Recommendation for Grant Approval

            The Committee was advised that a sports and health facility at Shaftesbury Community and Recreation Centre had been completed in January, 2010.  The Lower Ormeau Residents’ Action Group had opened the facility to the public and a programme of activities was now being delivered.  The Group were now planning an official opening of the facility and had issued an invitation to the members of the Development Committee to visit the venue prior to the official opening.

            The Committee agreed to accept the invitation from the Lower Ormeau Residents Action Group to visit the new sports and health facility at the Shaftesbury Community and Recreation Centre on a date to be determined in conjunction with the Chairman.

            The Committee was reminded that the Council was a major funder of Advice and Information Services through a consortium approach to funding and advice delivery which had been established in 2005/2006.  At its meeting on 10th February, the Committee had approved the 2010/2011 allocation of £366,400 to the consortiums as follows:

            North Belfast:           27.33%

            South Belfast:          13.51%

            East Belfast:            16.82%

            West Belfast:           32.34%

            City Centre:              10%

            In addition, the Council administered a programme for supplementary Advice Funding to enable the consortiums to expand the advice services in their areas.  That programme was agreed annually with the Department for Social Development, subject to the Council providing a level of additional match funding.  The grant offer by the Department for Social Development for 2010/2011 had been maintained at £469,902 and the Committee had agreed previously to allocate that funding to the consortium at the same percentages as the Council’s standard grant.

            The Committee noted the level of supplementary advice funding provided by the Department for Social Development.

            The Committee considered the undernoted report:

“Relevant Background Information

      Benview Community Centre is an independently owned and managed centre located in the Ballysillan area.  Currently, Council’s Play Service operates both pre-school and after-school programmes in the centre.  The pre-school programme is scheduled to end in June as the final part of Council’s withdrawal from pre-school provision following the adoption by Council of the recommendations of the Play Review in March 2009.

      A local Councillor has been approached by users of the centre and the centre committee to seek from the Development Committee an extension to the pre-school programme for a further year, that is, until June 2011.

      Previously, following Committee’s determination in March 2009 to exit from pre-school provision, officers had agreed the continuation of the programme on a time limited basis until 30 June 2010 as part of an exit strategy in Benview.  This extended time line for the locality took cognisance of the level of community capacity in the area.  It was therefore considered necessary in order to balance the imperative of encouraging local residents and centre users to take greater responsibility in regard to future provision, while at the same time offering support and practical assistance through the immediate transitional period. 

      For several reasons – some valid, others less convincing – demand for wider capacity building measures failed to materialise until recently when the reality of withdrawal of the pre-school programme was fully realised.  Since then, the centre committee and users have mobilised impressively and would appear to offer, albeit belatedly, an appropriate platform for such supportive capacity building measures as were originally proposed.

      The current appeal to extend the period of the exit strategy is based on the continued demand for the programme in the area and the recognition that its continuation would offer a focal point around which a much-needed, wider developmental and capacity building approach could be introduced in a planned manner. 

      This broader strategic and business planning support has been offered through the community development team and is available as soon as the group commit to a programme of support.

Key Issues

      The Play Service is in the early stages of implementing a planned programme of change in line with the Development Committee’s reaffirmation (February 2010) of the direction of that change.  Two salient issues apply. 

      Firstly, the move from a static facility-based approach to more flexible and needs-led approaches.  Early pilot programmes are showing encouraging outputs, with such programmes extending the geographic scope of the service, targeting new groups and introducing innovative play methodologies.  Secondly, it was agreed that Council should withdraw from pre-school provision on the basis of other bodies being better placed to lead on and resource such provision.  That analysis continues to hold.

      However, in seeking to devise an area-appropriate exit strategy in the Ballysillan area, there may be merit in exercising a degree of flexibility in regard to a different form of council led provision.

      Council’s objective, from a wider community development perspective, is to work  ...  view the full minutes text for item 15.

            The Committee considered the undernoted report:

“Relevant Background Information

      Members receive regular updates with respect to work within the EU unit.  The following report will provide detail relating to

1.   Quartiers En Crise

2.   Dublin civic study visit to Belfast/Comet region

Key Issues

1.   Quartiers En Crise:

      Members will be aware that the city of Belfast has been a member of the Brussels based network Quartiers En Crise (QEC) since it was formed in 1989.  The name of the network means ‘Neighbourhoods in Crisis’ and exists to bring European opportunities closer to cities by way of delivering European (EU) funded projects at a neighbourhood level.  The network is formed on a three pillar basis ensuring that elected members, citizens and statutory professionals work together on EU driven projects and policy, particularly around urban regeneration.  From 1989 to 2008, the city of Belfast was involved in the organisation as Treasurer through the Belfast Health Trust (formally North and West Health Trust). Traditionally cities are members of the network through their municipalities.

      Belfast City Council (BCC) was involved through the Development Department and attendance by the Director of Development and later the European Manager.  The network can be credited for playing a key role in securing the Urban pilot, the Urban programmes for Northern Ireland and over 30 projects for neighbourhoods in Belfast .

      Members will recall that BCC took over the responsibility of chairing the QEC network membership and the local branch of stakeholders in June 2008.  The local QEC grouping involves the Belfast Health Trust, BAPs, NIHE, DSD, Belfast Metropolitan College, DEL, DETI, BRO and HealthyCities.

      On 18 September 2009, QEC and its local partners re?launched the network local branch as ‘Belfast in Europe – QEC’, giving the group a more meaningful title.

      The cost of engaging as a member of QEC is €7800 per annum for each city partnership.  The cost for BCC has been £2500 per year, which is also contributed by each of the local partners.  The balance of this partner contribution provides funding for engagement in EU events in Brussels and also to match fund local projects that secure EU funding through QEC.

      BCC also contributes a significant amount of staff time to QEC centrally in the role as Treasurer on the Executive Bureau and also as local coordinator ensuring meetings are facilitated, information shared and project opportunities are followed up.

      In February 2010, The Internal Local Government Auditors undertook an audit of the European Unit.  One of the recommendations was to examine the current level of EU network engagement and in particular the “current level of commitment to QEC and the feasibility issues associated with acting as Treasurer to an organisation based in Brussels.

      A cost benefit analysis with respect to BCC’s involvement in QEC is attached as Appendix 1 of this report.

      Since taking on the role of chair of the local QEC network in June 2008 and attending the Executive Bureau meetings and  ...  view the full minutes text for item 16.

            The Committee considered the following requests for assistance which had been received under the Support for Sport Scheme:

            The Committee adopted the recommendations.

            The Committee considered the undernoted report:

“Relevant Background Information

      In the last ten years, Belfast has built a strong reputation for hosting major events. Prior to 1999, the visit of the Tall Ships was perhaps the one stand out major event to be hosted by the City.  However, with the changes in the political climate, the City has had a renaissance in major event management.  It began with the World Cross Country Championships in 1999 and gradually bids for major events became more ambitious. The next eight years saw Belfast host many significant major events such as the World Irish Dancing Championships, the World Amateur Boxing Championships, the U19 European football Championships, the Special Olympics Ireland Games, the U-19 Rugby World Cup and the return of the Tall Ships in 2009 – arguably the largest ever event on the island, with an estimated economic impact of £16m to the City

      An approach has now been made by USNI Sport, in mid May 2010, to request that Belfast City Council assist with the staging of a major basketball event with input from significant United States, Australian and English teams.  These would include the following: PittsburghUniversity, Melbourne Tigers, Georgia Tech University and the English National Team with tournament being staged 5-6 August 2010, at the Odyssey Arena.

      Background of USNI Sport

      USNI is an organisation that strives to grow the sport potential within Belfast and beyond by promoting the city in a progressive and positive manner.  USNI Sport hope to achieve this through a long-term strategy that utilizes its connections with the US collegiate system to develop a variety of initiatives.

USNI Sport has developed a USNI Sport Foundation providing a Graduate Development Scholarship Programme to create international educational opportunities for both student-athletes and students with an interest in the management and development of sport.  This programme called Victory Scholarships assists the very best US students in obtaining a scholarship package to study a Masters level programme in Belfast universities.  These graduates are seen as ‘future leaders of corporate America’ and will hopefully be influenced by their time in Belfast’s universities.  USNI Sport works through the US collegiate network and NCAA Athletic Departments to market the opportunity to travel to Belfast and study.  This in turn allows USNI Sport to reach out to alumni within the collegiate network thereby opening Belfast to an impressive network of businesses, which supports the NCAA sporting system. 

Key Issues

      Format for the Belfast Tournament

      USNI Sport proposes organising a basketball showcase called the ‘Belfast International Basketball Classic’ for high performance teams from USA, Melbourne, and Europe.  This will involve the following: 

-     using the Odyssey Arena, rather than a smaller venue, with the view of attracting 2500 spectators to the event and showcasing the Arena as a high performance sports facility.

-     hosting the event on 5 & 6 August 2010.

-     hosting a Belfast International Basketball Coaching Clinic at the Odyssey involving the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 18.

            The Committee was reminded that the Business Improvement Through Environmental Solutions Programme had been piloted in 2007 by the Economic Development Unit, in conjunction with the Waste Management Unit.  It had been designed to promote business sustainability and competitiveness by helping participating companies introduce environmental management policies, reduce environmental liabilities and enhance compliance with environmental regulations.  The cost savings which had been identified for the participating businesses averaged 1% of their turnover, with a maximum of £22,000 for one of the participating organisations.

            The Committee, at its meeting on 13th May, 2009, had approved the second phase of the Programme and the initiation of a competitive tendering process for its delivery.  Following that process, Mabbett and Associates Environmental Consultants had been commissioned to deliver one programme, with an option for an additional two phases, subject to satisfactory performance.  The Head of Economic Initiatives reported that, whilst the current programme was still at the delivery stage, initial feedback from the participants had been extremely positive.  They had confirmed that they had achieved significant benefit in their environmental performance and had identified cost savings which they were in the process of implementing.  The mentoring phase of the programme would conclude in August and final reports on the intermediate and longer?term outcome targets for each company on the programme would be presented to the Committee.

            She explained that there had already been a number of enquiries regarding a future phase of the programme.  Accordingly, it was proposed that, following a complete evaluation and subject to satisfactory performance, a further phase of the programme be undertaken.  The cost for each phase of the delivery of the programme was £40,000, with the Waste Management Unit providing a contribution of £10,000 per phase, whilst participant contributions in the last phase had amounted to approximately £3,000.  An application had also been made to the Department for Enterprise, Trade and Investment’s European Programmes Branch for up to 55% match funding for the programme.

            The Committee agreed to allocate funding of up to a maximum of £27,000 towards a further phase of the Business Improvement Through Environmental Solutions Programme.

            The Committee considered the undernoted report:

“Relevant Background Information

      Food Tourism is identified as a key area to be developed in the Belfast Integrated Strategic Tourism Framework and Northern Ireland’s Draft Tourism Strategy to 2020.  In 2008, the Northern Ireland Passenger Survey (NIPS) indicated that, of the £540 million spent by overseas and domestic tourists, 33% of this was spent on food and drink, equalling £178.2 million. This was the largest spend category– revealing the importance of food and drink to the visitor. 

      BCC’s Tourism Monitor (2008) also highlights the importance of food as a key tourism experience and was identified as one of the most popular activities for both overnight visitors and day trippers with 41% and 28% respectively stating that they enjoyed dining in one of Belfast’s eateries/restaurants. 

      These statistics highlight the need to focus on developing the quality of our food tourism product, promote authentic food experiences and develop products that will communicate our rich food stories and heritage.  At the Development Committee on Wednesday, 9 December 2009 Members were made aware that BCC had been awarded £26,000 through the Northern Ireland Regional Food Development Programme administered by DARD.  This supported BCC to secure an additional £57,610 throughNITB’s Tourism Innovation Fund and £10,000 from the private sector helping to deliver projects specifically aimed at developing our food tourism product.

      The support from DARD helped to fast track this development.  The 2009-10 funding delivered a widely celebrated and extremely successful programme comprising:

1.   The Great Belfast Food Week 24 March–27 March 2010

2.   Launch of new food section in partnership with BVCB – www.gotobelfast.com

3.   Belfast Bred Walking Tour, 17 tours running every Friday and Saturday from 16 April 2010 to 12 June 2010

      (see Appendix 1 for more detail)

      BCC have forged a robust partnership with DARD and have subsequently been successful in applying for financial assistance under the NIRFP 2010-2011.

      Our proposal under this years NIRFP is to deliver “The Great Belfast Food Programme 2010-2011” which will be a continuation and further development of the previous project outlined above.  The programme benefits will be:

-     To raise the platform of Belfast’s food tourism product

-     Improve knowledge of NI regional food and bring to life with unique stories

-     Increase profits of our agri-food sector, bars & restaurants, food retail outlets

-     Help to maximise visitor spend through promoting artisan producers

-     Encourage more restaurants and food outlets to source local produce and promote in their venues through menus etc

-     Enhance our visitor experience

-     Attract more visitors

-     Drive improvement of skills and standards of the Northern Ireland food sector

-     Increase the attractiveness and visitor perceptions of the city

      DARD has offered a maximum grant of £21,630 on condition that BCC provide match funding of £54,075. 

Key Issues

      To draw down the full grant, Members are asked to approve a BCC contribution of £54,075 from existing departmental budgets. 

      Tourism, Culture & Arts Unit, Events Unit and the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 20.

            The Committee was reminded that, at its meeting on 14th April, it had agreed to provide £6,000 towards the purchase of the replica Titanic Anchor from Twenty Twenty Television.  Subsequent to that decision, officers had been advised that the Titanic Anchor had been purchased by Dudley Metropolitan Borough Council.  However, Twenty Twenty Television had extended its offer to Belfast to use the mould for the anchor to produce an additional copy, the cost of which might increase to between £20,000 and £40,000.

            The Committee noted the information which had been provided.

            The Committee agreed that a special meeting be held, on a date to be determined on conjunction with the Chairman, to consider reports on the Belfast Integrated Strategic Tourism Framework and the Local Economic Development Plan.

            The Head of Economic Initiatives reminded the Committee that the Council had participated in MIPIM, which was the largest real estate exhibition in Europe, since 2000.  The 2010 event had been the first time that a Northern Ireland stand had been used as opposed to a Belfast only exhibit, with the Council as the lead partner in association with Derry and Lisburn City Councils, ILEX and the Department for Social Development.  The introduction of the broader Northern Ireland Partnership had been in response to reduced resources and a recognition that a different financial environment existed.  The private sector partners needed to showcase their developments across the Northern Ireland region and the emerging trend at MIPIM was that local authorities were working collaboratively and more efficiently.  For the 2010 event the Council had contributed £20,000, with the other remaining partners having provided £10,000 each.

            The Head of Economic Initiatives reported that in 2010 the Council had, for the first time, received the support of the Strategic Investment Board.  She explained that the Board was proposing that substantially more investment should be put into the 2011 stand, similar to the hi-tec quality stand which had been built to showcase Manchester.  She pointed out that at MIPIM 2011 the United Kingdom was the Country of Honour, which would give it unprecedented opportunities to market across the regions.  The Strategic Investment Board had indicated formally that they were willing to lead on the arrangements for the 2011 event and would be requesting funding from its Investment Committee.  In addition, the Board was seeking a letter from the Council requesting formally that the Strategic Investment Board lead and support MIPIM 2011.

            The Committee:

(i)     approved the request from the Strategic Investment Board that they be formally supported by the Council to lead on MIPIM 2011; and

(ii)    approved the contribution of £20,000 towards the event.

            The Committee agreed further that officers investigate the financial implications of a Belfast-only stand at MIPIM 2011.