Loading
The Economy & Culture Scrutiny Committee looked at three Cabinet-related items: the Regeneration Strategy 2025-2030, an Investment Zone update, and progress on its Filming in Cardiff inquiry. For each, it resolved that the Chair would write to the Cabinet Member with the Committee's observations and recommendations. It also noted a correspondence update.
Apologies were received from Cllr Brown-Reckless.
There were none.
The minutes of the 21st April meeting were approved and signed as a correct record by the Chair.
Decision as recorded
RESOLVED: That the Chairperson, on behalf of the Committee, writes to the Cabinet Member conveying the observations and recommendations of the Committee when discussing the way forward.
The report provided background information and an overview of the structure of the report titled ‘Regeneration Strategy 2025-2030’, due to be considered by Cabinet on 28th May. For this item, the Chair welcomed Cllr Lee Bridgeman (Cabinet Member for Housing and Communities), Rebecca Hooper (Operational Manager, Neighbourhood Regeneration) and Jon Day (Operational Manager, Tourism and Investment). The Cabinet Member gave an opening statement, in which he thanked officers for the work that had gone into the report, highlighted the attention given to consultation feedback throughout. Officers gave a presentation, advising that there was a commitment in the Corporate Plan regarding a single cohesive regeneration and placemaking strategy, seeking to enhance the vitality and viability of Cardiff’s district and local centres, and supporting the creation of sustainable communities. The strategy identified areas of need, gaps and opportunities for regeneration to be maximised, and provided a strong basis for securing funding. It met Welsh Government requirements under Transforming Towns and acted as a tool to help access initiatives like the UK Government’s Pride in Place programme. Officers outlined the process to date, with the draft strategy presented to Cabinet in December 2025, and an online survey undertaken to gather views. The Committee had previously advocated targeted engagement with young people, which had been undertaken, with workshops with a number of youth groups as well as a wide range of external stakeholders. 780 responses to the consultation had been gathered, with 85% of respondents agreeing with the key themes, and three-quarters agreeing with the proposed Placemaking Principles. Respondents had emphasised the importance of funding, delivery and accountability, parking and access for motorists, and public transport and connectivity. The public also cited the need for realistic implementation, area-specific priorities and the importance of engagement and trust. Specific engagement with young people had also found broad support for area-based interventions, and the placemaking plan process would seek to work closely with youth services, local youth action groups, the Child Friendly City team, schools and youth clubs. Officers noted that there had been some changes to the draft strategy, notably the restructuring into two parts to improve readability, as well as better accessibility and more focus on inclusive design. Recognition of heritage assets had been improved, as had guidance on designing for safety and security, community engagement processes and updated community asset maps. The strategy should be approved later in the week, and Placemaking Plans were already being put together for Adamsdown and Splott, Butetown and Cardiff Bay, and Plasnewydd. The Chair invited questions and comments from Committee members. Members welcomed the focus on targeted youth engagement and queried whether the 148 respondents through various youth groups were counted separately to the consultation responses from under 35s. Officers confirmed that they were. Members queried how many of the 780 responses were received in paper form, which officers agreed to provide after the meeting. Members asked whether the change of government in Wales was considered to pose any risk to towns regeneration funding down the line, for instance due to a greater focus on rural areas, and heard that the Welsh Government had not indicated any change to the wider strategy at this point. Officers added that any funding strategy would be heavily data-led, and urban areas tended to be those with the highest deprivation, so they would operate under business as usual at the moment and continue to state the case. Members explored the consultation further and asked whether the negative example comments included in the presentation were reflective of the general tone of feedback. Officers explained that longer comments tended to be left by those who strongly disagreed with something, and while the general picture was positive, they felt it was important to be transparent about feedback. The consultation had sought to draw together a lot of different strands, and many comments concerned issues that weren’t directly within the Regeneration team’s area of influence, but they had committed to an open discussion about placemaking. Members commented that it would be useful to encourage positive, supportive comments as well in order to ensure that the comments sections reflected the overall tone of feedback received. The Committee discussed measures of success and heard that individual placemaking plans would be easier to judge than the strategy as a whole. One key measure would be the ability to draw in different funding streams and align various programs. Members noted the importance of funding and asked how accountability and progress monitoring would be built in. Officers explained that governance was based around regular updates to the council’s Asset Management Board to ensure alignment of staff and funding, while robust KPIs were reported back through the Corporate Plan. Individual satisfaction with regeneration projects was another measure reported via the Corporate Plan KPI process. Members asked for more detail about the Asset Management Board, and heard that this was chaired by the Chief Executive and included senior representatives from a wide range of departments to ensure alignment, such as economic development and schools. It enabled a clearer pathway for directorates to focus on key strategic projects. Members discussed the wider purpose of the strategy and advocated ensuring sustainable impact and high standards of maintenance in the long term.. The Cabinet Member emphasised the need to be ambitious at the same time as homing in on priority areas to maximise impact. Funding and capacity were key, and the strategy’s main purpose was to help them manage these. It provided a basis for funding and sought to ensure that regeneration projects across the city worked together rather than in isolation, setting out principles and priorities in order to deliver quickly. Schemes would be designed with durability and longevity in mind, with communities and businesses able to take ownership over time to maintain high standards. Members asked whether the Committee’s Task & Finish group would have an opportunity to feed into the city centre strategy, and heard that it would. Members asked about a timeline for that strategy, which officers were unable to give at this point, but would provide in writing in response to the letter following the committee. RESOLVED: That the Chairperson, on behalf of the Committee, writes to the Cabinet Member conveying the observations and recommendations of the Committee when discussing the way forward.
Decision as recorded
RESOLVED: That the Chairperson, on behalf of the Committee, writes to the Cabinet Member conveying the observations and recommendations of the Committee when discussing the way forward.
The report provided background information and an overview of the structure of the report titled ‘Investment Zone Update, due to be considered by Cabinet on 28th May. For this item, the Chair welcomed Cllr Russell Goodway (Cabinet Member for Investment and Development) and Jon Day (Operational Manager, Tourism and Investment). The Cabinet Member was invited to give an opening statement, in which he highlighted the Corporate Plan commitment to secure Investment Zone status for Cardiff, with a particular focus on the east of the city. It was planned that Wales would host two Investment Zones focused on semiconductors and the application of these, with the CCR Corporate Joint Committee responsive for overseeing this. The report provided an update and identified sites where digital businesses could be most effectively supported. Officers gave a presentation providing further detail, advising that it was a growth-led programme, with zones announced by the UK Government focusing on key sectors, and £160m allocated to each. Each zone could propose up to three sites, over a maximum of 600 hectares, to be eligible for rates retention over a 25-year period, and the Cardiff Capital Region zone covered the Cardiff and Newport Travel to Work areas. The £160m funding was split 60-40 between capital and revenue, with rates retention at specific IZ sites, and focused spend. The three specific sites within the zone were Newport West (Imperial Park), Cardiff Parkway and Cardiff South (encompassing Central Quay, Callaghan Square and Atlantic Wharf). Rates were retained above a baseline and after displacement, with 50% retained, a lower figure than in England. The funding was collected by the local authority and spent by the CJC. Officers noted that the Committee had conducted an inquiry on Place Based Economic Interventions, and Cabinet had accepted all of its recommendations, although with the caveat that whilst some were not within the local authority’s gift, they would use the recommendations to inform the council’s dialogue and discussions with the Cardiff Capital Region. A weekly working group made up of the local authorities, higher education representatives from Cardiff University and the CJC would develop the proposals going forward. The Chair invited questions and comments from Committee members. Members asked about timelines, noting the importance of the Cardiff Parkway train station to that site. Officers explained that they were treating it as almost immediate if the UK and Welsh governments agreed the proposals, although implementation was dependent on understanding the full business case for each proposition and how investment would be utilised. Members discussed the Memorandum of Understanding and heard that while this was not legally enforceable, it set expectations and outlined how the local authority intended to operate with the CJC. Officers emphasised that no element of it left the council exposed by financial decisions taken elsewhere. Members asked whether there was any indication of a change in rates retention in Wales following the recent change of government. The Cabinet Member responded that they didn’t know yet but would ask the Welsh Government to revisit, as there was no justification for Wales to be treated less favourably than England, and looked forward to finding out how Cardiff could dovetail into the new government’s direction of travel. The Cabinet Member also welcomed the National Development Agency as an encouraging proposal. Members explored how the strategy fit with environmental targets such as carbon reduction, and heard that public transport interventions were key to the provision of accessible employment sites. Significant funding would be needed to ensure suitable public transport provision and accessibility, and energy use would have to align with the council’s and CJC’s ambitions. The Cabinet Member emphasised the importance of economic growth, with higher retention of business rates bringing wider benefits across the city region, and providing a self-reinforcing incentive for growth. Members asked how they could ensure fair allocation of NDR retained funds between the two cities at the heart of the programme. Officers explained that investment would be linked to the sites themselves and ringfenced for local purposes, and while the onus was on them to get a fair allocation for Cardiff, Newport would be in the same position, and the role of the governance arrangements was to ensure that everyone benefitted fairly. Members explored the relationship between Cardiff and Newport and asked whether there would be competition between the two cities to attract businesses. The Cabinet Member noted that while there was more employment land in Newport, the boundary was artificial, with many people travelling across it to work every day, and Cardiff Parkway bringing clear benefits to Newport too. Officers added that the sites were effectively seen as the same in an international sense, in the view of a lot of the businesses they spoke to. The goal was investment in southeast Wales, not to compete with Newport. Members discussed the governance arrangements, and in particular asked how the advisory board would be constituted. Officers explained that this would be for the Chief Executive to decide but would likely include representatives of businesses, education and the CJC. In terms of wider governance, officers emphasised that the CJC would ultimately make the final decisions, and as a core member Cardiff would have a strong influence. Members explored scrutiny of the CJC and asked that the Cardiff elements be made available for the Committee to scrutinise. The Cabinet Member stated that he was happy for this to happen, and suggested that the Chair’s position on the CJC scrutiny committee helped to enable more transparent access to the information discussed at those meetings, so it didn’t become a bubble. The Chair suggested that there was a gap in the process as there was no formal reporting procedure from CJC scrutiny, only summaries that he sent out. The Cabinet Member offered to advocate for transparency and accountability and the need for effective scrutiny of the CJC, stating he would raise this with Cabinet colleagues. RESOLVED: That the Chairperson, on behalf of the Committee, writes to the Cabinet Member conveying the observations and recommendations of the Committee when discussing the way forward.
Decision as recorded
RESOLVED: That the Chairperson, on behalf of the Committee, writes to the Cabinet Member conveying the observations and recommendations of the Committee when discussing the way forward.
The report updated Members on progress in implementing the Cabinet’s response to the recommendations made in the Economy & Culture Scrutiny Committee’s January 2025 inquiry report ‘Filming in Cardiff.’ For this item, the Chair welcomed Cllr Russell Goodway (Cabinet Member for Investment and Development), Jon Day (Operational Manager, Tourism and Investment) and Ruth Cayford (Operational Manager, Culture and Creative Industries). The Cabinet Member was invited to make an opening statement, in which he emphasised how it enhanced the city’s profile and supported thousands of jobs in a vibrant and growing industry. It was a rapidly evolving sector in which Cardiff was internationally competitive, and they had to respond to the industry’s needs and emerging trends. Officers gave a presentation, advising that several recommendations had been delivered while others were still in progress. Improvements had been made to the website, including additional information about filming and fees, live location pages and links to partners, although details on vacant buildings were not made public in case of vandalism and break-ins, and they were working with Strategic Estates on vacant office space. Officers noted the recommendation relating to the introduction of a rate card for council locations, and explained that while some location fees were detailed on the website, others depended on the duration and genre of the shoot, for example with there being no charge for students or charities filming. They were looking at a new permit system for long-term repeat productions, and an automatic flagging process for relevant words in the cost centre system. They were also exploring resources available in Network Management for film-related administration, and met regularly with Creative Wales, a new South Wales Film Offices group, to share best practice. The Chair invited questions and comments from Committee members. Members welcomed the responses provided to all the recommendations and the progress made, and suggested that while the location page was a good start it could do with more photos and hyperlinks to make it more accessible and connect it to the wider Film Office website. Members asked what more could be done as a city to capitalise on the benefits of being a filming location and get Cardiff on screen more. Officers noted that the new Head of Nations and Regions at the BBC was Welsh, the interim Director General was from Cardiff, and the new Director General had visited Cardiff recently, all of which would likely help the city’s visibility. The tourism potential of the industry would be presented to the Visitor Levy Partnership Forum, as there were clear marketing and promotional benefits to be found. Officers would also speak to Visit Wales regarding this. Members asked to be updated on that as it progressed, which officers agreed to. Members noted the long-term value of major films and TV shows turning filming locations into tourist hotspots, as seen with Game of Thrones in Northern Ireland, and asked what collaborative work the council could do with the Welsh Government to encourage this. Officers noted the tax incentives in Northern Ireland for filming and suggested exploring that. Cardiff had a good reputation within the industry and would continue to look after major studios like Bad Wolf and Seren Studios, and its relationship with Creative Wales would be key. Members asked about the possibility of injecting additional resources into the Film Office if increased funding was forthcoming in the future. The Cabinet Member responded that while the office felt it was well-funded at the moment, if further investment was needed in the future they would consider the business case. RESOLVED: That the Chairperson, on behalf of the Committee, writes to the Cabinet Member conveying the observations and recommendations of the Committee when discussing the way forward.
Decision as recorded
RESOLVED: To note the correspondence update.
The report provided an update on correspondence sent and received by the Committee. The Principal Scrutiny Officer added that they had received responses in the last week from letters sent after the April meeting to Cllrs Burke and Weaver, so April was now complete, though they were still awaiting a few responses from before then. RESOLVED: To note the correspondence update.
There were none.
16th June 2026.
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.
The minutes record no declarations of interest.
Lists the council's current councillors only. Co-opted members, officers and former councillors aren't shown.