Loading
The decisions as the council's minutes record them. A plain-language summary follows once it has been written.
RESOLVED – That: (1) the Committee notes the report and recommendations of the Panel Performance Assessment; (2) the Chairperson and officers collaborate on draft the Committee’s response capturing comments made during the debate.
RESOLVED – The report be noted.
RESOLVED – That the report be noted.
RESOLVED – That: (1) The report be noted; (2) The Audit Manager provide and update on completions of Modules Part 1 and Part 2 in the Investigation Team Progress in November.
RESOLVED – That the report be noted and that the Audit Manager provide further information in respect of where responsibility lies for tracking each recommendation.
RESOLVED – That the report be noted.
RESOLVED – That the report be noted.
RESOLVED – That the report be noted.
RESOLVED – That the report be noted.
RESOLVED – That the report be noted.
RESOLVED – That the report be noted.
RESOLVED – That the report be noted.
Apologies were received from Councillor McGarry.
No declarations of interest.
The minutes of the meeting held on 8 July 2025 were approved by the Committee as a correct record and were signed by the Deputy Chairperson.
Decision as recorded
RESOLVED – That: (1) the Committee notes the report and recommendations of the Panel Performance Assessment; (2) the Chairperson and officers collaborate on draft the Committee’s response capturing comments made during the debate.
The Committee received a report providing Members with an opportunity to review the Council’s draft response to the Panel Performance Assessment Report and make any appropriate recommendations for changes. Members were advised that Part 6, Chapter 1 of the Local Government and Elections (Wales) Act 2021 requires principal councils in Wales to arrange for an independent panel to undertake, and respond to, a corporate, organisational level assessment on the extent to which it is meeting its ‘performance requirements’. This is known as a Panel Performance Assessment (PPA) and should take place at least once during each five-year electoral cycle for principal councils in Wales. ‘Performance requirements’ are defined as the extent to which a council is exercising its functions effectively; is using its resources economically, efficiently, and effectively; and has effective governance in place for securing the above. The assessment was undertaken based on the Council’s agreed scoping document and the WLGA’s PPA methodology, and was informed by the results of the Council’s most recent self-evaluation exercise, as well as the assessments of external regulators. The scoping document provided background information on Cardiff and the Council to panel members in advance of the PPA. In addition, the panel was provided with a range of other supporting information, including corporate policies and performance information. A copy of the panel’s final report was received by the Council on 1 September 2025 and includes a total of three recommendations for the Council. A copy of the PPA report was attached as Appendix A. In accordance with Section 93 of the Local Government and Elections (Wales) Act 2021, the Council must prepare a response to the PPA report and its recommendations. The Council must provide a draft of the response to the PPA report available to the Governance and Audit Committee for review. The Committee may make recommendations for changes to the Council’s draft response. The Deputy Chairperson welcomed Paul Orders, Chief Executive and Dylan Owen, Head of Cabinet to the meeting. The officers were invited to present the Council draft response to the recommendations of the Panel Performance Assessment. Following a statement from the Chief Executive, the Deputy Chairperson invited Members of the Committee to comment, raise questions or seek clarification on the information received. Those discussions are summarised as follows: · A Member welcomed the results of the assessment, particularly in respect of the Governance and Audit Committee. In respect of the recommendation regarding scrutiny activity, the Member sought to explore how the proposed review will evaluate the risks and challenges faced by transitioning to a more thematic approach to scrutiny inquiries and the extent to which engagement will maximise input from those best placed to respond. The Chief Executive stated that from his perspective a balance was to be found between pre-decision scrutiny, and the need to continue it and the need to undertake more thematic work. That will require thought being given to ensuring the Cabinet Forward Plan is robust and clear in terms of risk appraisal. A Panel Member highlighted the community role of scrutiny and the opportunity was there to do more in this area. The Participation Strategy is moving the authority forward in terms of how it engages with communities and there was a need to ensure that this was effectively linked to the scrutiny review. · A Member considered that the scrutiny function in Cardiff was working well and accepted that there has been an upturn in pre-decision scrutiny since the Covid-19 pandemic. The Member felt that there is an opportunity for Members to feed into scrutiny committee work programmes which are also reviewed as various stages throughout the year. The work programmes therefore reflect the balance that the Members of the Committee want to see in terms of the balance between pre-decision and thematic work. The Member requested that the views of Members on each scrutiny committee are considered when the review is undertaken. · A Member asked that in respect of the recommendation relating to the interaction between the Medium Term Financial Plan, the Change Programme and the Workforce Strategy, whether the authority could consider the increased level of borrowing year on year as this subsequently has an impact of revenue spend and whether these factors are properly aligned. · A Member noted point 14.3 – The Council is actively exploring transformative technologies to enable service redesign with improved productivity and efficiency. The Member welcomed that this recognition was captured in the Performance Panel Assessment. Furthermore, point 14.8 that the strength the preventative workstream in the authority indicated that the Council is taking the Wellbeing of Future Generations Act seriously. The Member considered that this two issues highlighted the fact that the authority is gaining Value for Money on its expenditure. The Deputy Chair suggested that any response to the PPA report should highlight comments made by Members during the debate and capture the conclusion that scrutiny is on the whole working well in Cardiff and that only a minor change is required to the balance between pre-decision and thematic reviews to be reflected in the scrutiny committee work programmes. The Deputy Chair also suggested that the increased speed in the delivery of the authority’s change programme and the authority’s decision to move towards increased borrowing to fund some strategic projects should also be reflected in the response. RESOLVED – That: (1) the Committee notes the report and recommendations of the Panel Performance Assessment; (2) the Chairperson and officers collaborate on draft the Committee’s response capturing comments made during the debate.
Decision as recorded
RESOLVED – The report be noted.
The Committee received a report enabling Members to review and assess the authority’s ability to handle complaints effectively and make any associated recommendations. The report provided a summary of the implementation of the Halo Complaint Management System over the past 18 month and details of the complaints handling procedures in place across all directorates. The Deputy Chairperson welcomed Isabelle Bignall, Chief Digital Officer and Rory Williams, Complaints and Correspondence Manager to the meeting. The officers were invited to deliver a presentation following which the Deputy Chairperson opened the debate on this item. The Committee’s comments are summarised as follows: · A Member asked whether the dip sampling process referred to in paragraph 6 of the report had worked well and had helped to identify any areas of improvement. The Chief Digital Officer stated that dip sampling has two priorities – firstly, to assess the quality of the response, and secondly, to ensure that there are no repeat complaints. Officers advised that resourcing issues have meant that less dip sampling has taken place that they would like. However, service areas have been provided with feedback on areas of improvement in respect of their replies. · A Member considered that whilst the Committee’s remit was to address how well complaints are being responded to and how well system was functioning, Members also have a responsibility to take account of the increasing number of complaints overall and whether there were any problems centred around the way that the Council is delivering it services. Over 60% of all complaints received were valid and the top three categories of complaints all increased during the year. It was suggested that the authority is not learning from complaints because they are continuing to increase. The Council’s new segregated recycling collection system and missed lift collections were given as an examples. The Member asked whether the Committee should look into why the root causes of these complaints are not being addressed. The Deputy Chairperson stated that the data presented in the report confirmed an increase in complaints in the service area referred to. It was considered that, whilst it was not the Committee’s role to look into those issues in detail, it was within the Committee’s remit to satisfy itself that those issues are being addressed by those responsible. · Responding to comments made the Chief Digital Officer stated that the authority has recognised the problems highlighted with assisted lifts within Waste Management. Changes have been implemented and there has not been an increase in complaints around assisted lifts since. Members were asked to note that the Waste Management Service provides 2.3 million collections a year. The officers were satisfied that the service area takes complaints seriously. The Committee was assured that effective processes are in place to handle complaints, scrutinise the data and monitor trends by utilising the Halo system. · A Member asked what transferrable lessons had been learned by Council during the Halo commissioning process and the subsequent embedding of the Halo system within the authority that can be used to inform other transformational change programmes. The Chief Digital Officer advised that Halo was already being used within the authority as a ticketing system for the ICT Helpdesk. When a system for handling complaints and complements was being considered, Halo provided an opportunity to expand its use without significant cost to the authority. Halo have been very supporting in terms of their system development and for any service areas that are considering bringing in new system that has similar system requirements Halo would be recommended. · A Member considered that complements were a useful tool to improve the motivation of an organisation. The Members asked how complements were recognised. The Chief Digital Officer stated that complements are often received via C2C. Notwithstanding the comments made previously, Waste Management also receive a high number of complements. These are relayed to management within the service area which are then passed directly on to front line staff. RESOLVED – The report be noted.
Decision as recorded
RESOLVED – That the report be noted.
The Committee received a financial update from Chris Lee (Corporate Director of Resources and Section 151 Officer) covering the Month 4 position and the budget preparation including the Medium Term Financial Plan. RESOLVED – That the report be noted.
Part of an issue followed across 7 meetings
Decision as recorded
RESOLVED – That: (1) The report be noted; (2) The Audit Manager provide and update on completions of Modules Part 1 and Part 2 in the Investigation Team Progress in November.
Members received a report providing a Council-wide appraisal of counter-fraud issues, developments and outcomes in accordance with the Council’s Counter Fraud, Bribery and Corruption Strategy. Members were advised that focus was given to maintaining a combination of effective preventative and detective controls and participating in counter-fraud networks, forums, initiatives and activities, in order to continue to effectively tackle fraud. The Audit Manager introduced the report. Members were asked to note that: · A recently formed Counter-Fraud Oversight Group has started to meet. The Group comprising members of the Council’s Senior Management Team (SMT) provides strategic management direction, oversight and review of the counter-fraud arrangements, approach and governance. · Refreshed mandatory Fraud Awareness Training has been delivered to staff through a combination of face-to-face and eLearning sessions. The Deputy Chairperson invited comments and questions on the report from the Committee. Those discussions are summarised below: · A Member considered that the report demonstrated a proactive approach to fraud and corruption in the Council. The Member asked whether any tangible benefits have arising from the Fraud Oversight Group and whether any were anticipated in the future. The Audit Manager stated that the Oversight Group provided an opportunity to explore a number of discrete areas and risk assessments in greater detail than would be afforded at SMT. The Section 151 Officer summarised a number of the actions arising from the Oversight Group to date. · A Member noted the refreshed mandatory Fraud Awareness Training referred to in the report and requested details around the level of uptake for that training. The Audit Manager advised that training is comprised of Module Part 1 and Module Part 2. Part 1 was due to be completed last year and although several thousand staff have completed Part 1 this is still far short of 100%. Part 2 is due to be completed by the end of the current year. The Audit Manager agreed to provide an update on completion figures in the Investigation Team Progress report due to be considered by the Committee in November. RESOLVED – That: (1) The report be noted; (2) The Audit Manager provide and update on completions of Modules Part 1 and Part 2 in the Investigation Team Progress in November.
Decision as recorded
RESOLVED – That the report be noted and that the Audit Manager provide further information in respect of where responsibility lies for tracking each recommendation.
The Committee received a report on the findings of a local report by Audit Wales, entitled “Planning Service Review: Cardiff Council”. Members were advised that between March and May 2025, Audit Wales undertook an audit of Cardiff Council, which focused on: the extent to which the Planning Service supports the Council in the delivery of its well-being objectives; has arrangements to support delivery of its objectives; has clearly defined roles and responsibilities, including the Planning Committee, and adherence to them; and reviews and monitors the effectiveness of its arrangements. The Auditors also reviewed the performance of the Planning Service and made comparisons across Wales. The report made the following key findings: “We found that the Planning Service is a key service in supporting the Council deliver its well-being objectives but there are opportunities to demonstrate its value to the Council by improving service planning, reporting and its governance arrangements: · The Planning Service is a pivotal service in supporting the Council to deliver its priorities. · The Planning Service is strengthening its resilience and capacity, but there are weaknesses in its budget setting arrangements. · There are gaps in the Planning Service’s service planning arrangements and communication is siloed. · The Planning Service’s arrangements do not always support it to be efficient. · There is a supportive learning and development culture within the Planning Service, but the service does not provide a structured induction process or have an arrangement for officers to share learning. · The Planning Service lacked formal opportunities for officers and stakeholders to provide feedback to inform future service design, but the service is now formalising its review arrangements. · The Planning Service reports its performance to meet statutory and corporate requirements, but this does not fully demonstrate the value of the service to the Council and public. · Planning Committee members understand their role and responsibilities. However, the Council has not reviewed its Planning Committee governance arrangements to ensure efficient use of resources that support this committee.” The Management Response to the key findings were appended to the report at Appendix B. The Deputy Chairperson welcomed Andrew Gregory, Director of Planning, Transport and Environment and Simon Gilbert, Head of Planning to the meeting. The officers were invited to present the report and a brief presentation. Allison Rees from Audit Wales was also invited to make a statement on the report. The debate is summarised as follows: · A Member raised concerns regarding staff training and induction referred to in the report. The Member also raised concerns regarding a perceived disconnect between the Planning Department and elected members. The Director accepted the point made regarding engagement with members. · Another Member also raised concerns regarding staff training and in particular the lack of training provided when a new IT system was introduced. The Member requested that awareness be raised across the Council that adequate training must be provided under these circumstances in order to get a return on the investment being made. The Head of Planning stated that in respect of the training on software referred to, the frustration expressed related to training from a third-party software provider rather than any in-house training. The third-party is contractually required to provide training and discussions are on-going in respect of the provision of training modules. An internal officer is also engaged to offer bespoke training to existing staff and new starters on the software. · A Member noted that not all the recommendations made during previous audits have been addressed. · A Member asked officers to explain why Recommendation 8 has only partially been accepted. The Head of Planning stated that Recommendation 8 requires that all planning applications submitted by officers or people associated with officers of the Council should be considered by the Planning Committee by default. Having discussed the matter with colleagues it was considered that the current scheme of delegations, requiring all applications by elected members and senior officers to be considered by the Planning Committee, was appropriate and this was set out in the Management Response to Audit Wales. Allison Rees of Audit Wales stated that Audit Wales are satisfied with the actions set out in the Management Response. · A Member asked for confirmation that the Planning Committee will be formally tracking progress made against the recommendations. The Head of Planning stated that it was his understanding that the Planning Committee are not formally seeking to be engaged in the process as it was a management response. The Audit Manager stated that the Governance and Audit Committee will receive details of the progress against these recommendations made as part of its external review body recommendation tracker. The Head of Planning reminded Members that Planning Committee Procedure Rules and Scheme of Delegations are enshrined within the Council’s Constitution and any changes to those documents arising from actions undertaken in respect of the recommendations will need to be reported to Constitution Committee and approved by the Council. · A request was made that the Audit Manager provide further information in respect of where responsibility lies for tracking each recommendation. RESOLVED – That the report be noted and that the Audit Manager provide further information in respect of where responsibility lies for tracking each recommendation.
Decision as recorded
RESOLVED – That the report be noted.
The Deputy Chairperson invited Julie Rees and Sam Clements of Audit Wales to present the Audit Wales Work Programme and Timetable Update report. Members were given assurances that, in respect of financial audit, the core audit and the four associated audits were underway and on target to meet the deadline. The Pension Fund audit was also underway subject to receipt of the annual report and similarly the Teachers’ Pension Fund and NNDR audit were also underway and on track to meet the November deadline. The Housing Benefit audit would commence shortly. Members also received summary of the changes to performance audit work since the last update provided to the Committee. RESOLVED – That the report be noted.
Decision as recorded
RESOLVED – That the report be noted.
The Head of Finance presented a report on the Draft Annual Governance Statement 2024/25 for the Committee to review and comments. The Head of Finance stated that the 2023/24 Action Plan contained four key action points. These were: · Extend the assurance on the quality of performance reviews through evidence gathering at Directorate level · Strengthen arrangements to ensure the systematic completion of high-quality Equality Impact Assessments (EIAs) and ensuring due regard for EIAs within the decision-making process · Enhance arrangements to ensure that consultation and engagement is undertaken with relevant stakeholders at the appropriate time, where this is identified through the Equality Impact Assessment process · Ensure that all affected directorates undertaken the subsidiary questionnaire and having reflected on the findings update their annual assessment Members were advised that the four key actions were closed and a summary of how each had been addressed was provided in the report. SMT have identified three actions for the action plan moving forward. These were: · Building on existing measures in place to ensure there is a proportionate level of application of assurance in respect of the control environment throughout each directorate and to ensure that high-risk areas are prioritised · Building on existing measures in place to ensure there is a proportionate level of application of assurance in respect of the compliance environment throughout each directorate and to ensure that high-risk areas are prioritised · Taking the opportunity provided by new management structures to reinforce key messages and to build clarity and depth to the assurance environment in new directorates covering areas of risk Members were asked to note that CIPFA have issued an addendum to the Delivering Good Governance in Local Government: Framework which applied to any Annual Governance Statements from 2025/26. Some elements have been introduced during 2024/25 and a report will be presented to the Committee in late Autumn detailing the changes. A Member asked officers to consider including the new Counter-Fraud Oversight Group when referencing arrangements for anti-fraud and corruption and the improved Equality Impact Assessment process in the section on Ensuring Openness and Stakeholder Engagement. The Head of Finance stated that both points were considered and agreed to reflect upon the 2024/25 AGS pointing towards those arrangements happening during 2025/26. RESOLVED – That the report be noted.
Decision as recorded
RESOLVED – That the report be noted.
The Committee received a report providing Members with an overview of the risk management activities and outcomes during 2024/25. Dean Thomas, Operational Manager - Information Governance, Transactional Finance and Programme Management was invited to present the report. The report provided details of the risks currently on the Council’s corporate risk register together with summary assurances describing the key controls in place to manage those risks alongside details of where any further actions are planned. A Member commented that the annual report may provide an opportunity to consider trends throughout the year and the progress towards meeting the risk appetites across the authority. The Member asked whether this could be considered as an area for further development in the future. A Member welcomed the report and considered that any member of the public reading the report would appreciate the number of complex problems the authority contends with. Referring to the Climate Change – Flooding Risk, the Member sought assurance that when contending with staff shortages actions were being taken to nullify any gaps in the system. The Head of Finance stated that the authority has recognised that it is difficult to recruit experienced staff in the drainage engineering field. At present junior employees are being supplemented by external organisations. A Member asked whether budget allocations were correct. The Member noted that actions taken to balance budgets are generally reactive. The Head of Finance stated that the authority has financial resilience challenges and demand pressures. Budgets are managed through the risk lens. Each directorate has a risk register and these can be escalated through the risk process. This can feed into budget allocation calculations. RESOLVED – That the report be noted.
Decision as recorded
RESOLVED – That the report be noted.
The Committee received the Treasury Management Annual Report. The report was prepared to provide Committee Members with the Draft Treasury Management Annual Report prior to submission to Council on 25 September 2025 in accordance with the Council’s Treasury Management Policy. Members were advised that at 31 March 2025, investments stood at £10.9 million. The annual report included charts indicating who the investments are placed with and for how long. All investments are deemed recoverable and so no losses are required to be recognised in the Council’s Statement of Accounts for activities during 2024/25. Interest receivable for the general fund from treasury investments totalled £2.6 million during the year. At 31 March 2025, the Council had £980 million of external borrowing, with £100.9 million of new borrowing and £14.7 million of scheduled repayments during 2024/25. Interest payable during the year from its revenue budget on this debt was £37.5 million of which £16.1 million was paid for by the Housing Revenue Account. At the start of the financial year, the Council is required to set a number of prudential indicators for capital expenditure and its treasury management activities. During 2024/25, there was no breach of indicators requiring a separate report to Council. Responding to a question, it was confirmed that the 2023/24 accounts for the Corporate Joint Committee were nearing completion by Audit Wales. The 2024/25 accounts were due to be approved in October 2025 in line with the normal timescales. RESOLVED – That the report be noted.
Decision as recorded
RESOLVED – That the report be noted.
RESOLVED – That the report be noted.
Part of an issue followed across 6 meetings
Decision as recorded
RESOLVED – That the report be noted.
RESOLVED – That the report be noted.
Decision as recorded
RESOLVED – That the report be noted.
RESOLVED – That the report be noted.
No urgent items.
The next meeting is scheduled for 21 October 2025 (Special Committee Meeting).
Councillors must say when they have a personal link to something being discussed, such as a job, a property or a family member. A prejudicial interest is one strong enough that the councillor usually leaves the room and takes no part.
Declarations are read from the minutes once they are published.
Lists the council's current councillors only. Co-opted members, officers and former councillors aren't shown.