Wrthi'n llwytho
Y penderfyniadau fel y mae cofnodion y cyngor yn eu cofnodi. Bydd crynodeb mewn iaith glir yn dilyn pan fydd wedi'i ysgrifennu.
AGREED: 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.
AGREED: 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.
AGREED: 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.
Apologies had been received from Cllrs Chowdhury and Carter.
None received.
The minutes of the meeting held on 10 December 2025 were agreed as a correct record and signed by the Chairperson.
Y penderfyniad fel y'i cofnodwyd
AGREED: 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 Chairperson advised Members thay the first substantive item was a briefing on budget preparations for 2026/27, which provided an opportunity for Members to contribute to the consultation as stakeholders in the budget preparations. For this item, the Chairperson welcomed Cllr Chris Weaver, Cabinet Member, Finance, Modernisation & Performance; Chris Lee, Corporate Director, Resources; Dylan Owen, Operational Manager Policy & Improvement; and Claire Owens, Principal Research & Consultation Officer. The Cabinet Member was invited to make an opening statement after which Members were provided with a presentation from Officers. The Chairperson invited questions and comments from Members. The Committee welcomed the news that the local government settlement was better than the provisional indication, and that budget modelling was underway based on an anticipated 4.2% increase and the closing of a £22.7m budget gap. Members noted that this would prevent cuts to frontline services, and therefore this year’s budget consultation was shorter than usual. The Committee was encouraged by the rising response rates to the Council’s Ask Cardiff and Budget consultations in recent years, particularly from wards that had previously been underrepresented. Members noted that respondent numbers in each ward continued to be influenced by socio-economic factors, with Ely and Cathays remaining the only underrepresented wards in 2024. Members acknowledged the significant efforts made to target these areas, including outreach through the students’ union, student liaison officers, and local libraries in Cathays. However, concerns remained that many residents continued to feel disengaged, making it especially valuable that researchers were present and active within communities. Members felt that building trust within communities was essential and strengthened engagement with the Council, and they endorsed this approach. The Committee also expressed interest in whether intersectionality (socio?economic and geographic factors) and high levels of deprivation affected the respondent profile. Members noted that officers had the ability to break down results by deprivation levels, and that this analysis would be included in the final budget consultation report. Members noted that this was a relatively short 3.5?week consultation, and their support in providing contact details for the communities they represented was welcomed, particularly in the hope of achieving at least 400 responses from each underrepresented group. Committee also noted that the short consultation period resulted from delayed National and Welsh Government budget announcements. The Committee expressed a preference for longer consultation periods in future years. Members noted that this report suggested that the budget position was stronger than in previous years, with a 4.2% increase and no cuts to frontline services. Committee therefore highlighted the point that Education remained both a community and Council priority. Members understood that no savings were required from delegated school budgets, yet despite this, some schools were still setting deficit budgets. Members heard that UK?wide Additional Learning Needs (ALN) funding was exempt from savings. This remained a national challenge, with a significant proportion of the Council’s budget allocated to ALN provision. The Committee recognised the quality of the presentation and the work of the research team, but, given the Gunning principle requiring sufficient time for consultation, sought clarification on why the process would run for only 3.5 weeks. Members were advised of the constraints created by the timing of budget settlement announcements and Cabinet meeting schedules. Given the considerable work undertaken to improve response rates and representativeness, Members questioned whether levels of trust between community groups and the Council had improved. Committee noted that trust had not increased universally and that maintaining strong relationships with community groups remained an ongoing task. Members observed that, of the thirty questions included in the budget consultation, twenty?three related to respondent demographics. Members’ concern was that the consultation appeared to focus more on who the respondents were, rather than on gathering the information the Council required. Committee noted that frontline service cuts had historically been at the centre of consultations, and that it was important for the Council to understand who was responding in order to demonstrate compliance with its public sector equality duty by securing a representative sample across all wards. The Committee noted that the Ask Cardiff survey identified One Planet as the lowest priority for residents in terms of spending. Members were concerned that this budget consultation had not used this feedback to test the issue further. Including additional questions on this topic would have acknowledged the validity of the previous findings and enabled more detailed exploration of residents’ views on re?distributing budget allocations. AGREED: 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.
Y penderfyniad fel y'i cofnodwyd
AGREED: 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 Chairperson advised Members that item provided them with insight into the role of the Councils Information Governance service, and how its work mitigates the risk of a corporate incident. For this item, the Chairperson welcomed Cllr Chris Weaver, Cabinet Member, Finance, Modernisation & Performance; Chris Lee, Corporate Director, Resources; Ian Allwood, Chief Finance & Deputy s151Officer and Katie Weaver, Deputy Information Governance Manager and Data Protection Officer. The Cabinet Member was invited to make an opening statement after which Members were provided with a presentation from Officers. The Chairperson invited questions and comments from Members. The Committee was advised that the Information Governance team oversaw data protection, information requests, and records management, and it noted a projected 44.5% increase in FOI requests by the end of 2025/26. Members examined whether the Council’s internal target of responding to 90% of Freedom of Information requests within 20 working days met statutory expectations, given that the legal requirement was 100%. Members noted officers’ view that the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) adopted a practical stance and took reassurance from the Council’s commitment to meeting its targets, with both performance aims and actual outcomes having improved over time. The Committee was reassured to hear that when an FOI deadline was missed, responsibility was shared through an established escalation process that ensured Directors and Operational Managers were informed of the request. The Information Governance Board—made up of senior leaders and the Senior Management Team—met quarterly to review trends across service areas. The escalation process triggered alerts at set points and involved senior officers, demonstrating that accountability was collective. Information Governance staff worked collaboratively with the relevant service area, making the process a joint responsibility. Members were particularly mindful that improved performance depended on service areas engaging more effectively with the team. Members heard that the Information Governance team consisted of a small but dedicated group of professionals, and heard that staffing had reduced by seven full?time equivalents over the previous four years. Given ongoing changes in this field, Members explored whether expectations on the team had increased and whether current staffing levels were sufficient to mitigate risks. Members noted officers’ comments that although the team was experienced and took a proactive approach, the need for additional resources was ongoing—while also recognising organisational limitations. The introduction of GDPR had created significant new regulatory demands. As Information Governance remained a statutory function, it was essential for the Senior Information Governance Officer (SIGO) to ensure the team was appropriately resourced, particularly as the scale of this work continued to grow. Members considered the service critical to the Council’s reputation and to maintaining public confidence. While the Council could face penalties from the ICO for non?compliance, reputational harm was also a key concern. Members were reassured that the team monitored ICO decisions closely in order to remain proactive. The Committee heard that information governance training was mandatory for Members and staff because non?compliance carried consequences for the Council. Members questioned whether the target of 85% compliance was too low, given that current completion rates stood at around 65%, and asked what measures were being taken to improve uptake. Members heard that staff were required to complete the training module every two years and that fulfilling this requirement was linked to the Performance Development Review framework for staff aiming to score ‘achieving’ or above. Managers had full oversight of who had completed the training and who had not, and cyber?security modules complemented the programme. During the discussion, it was suggested that the Council had now set a compliance target of 85% for all mandatory training modules. AGREED: 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.
Y penderfyniad fel y'i cofnodwyd
AGREED: 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 Chairperson advised Members that this item provided them with an opportunity for pre-decision scrutiny of a replacement framework for the Council’s existing non-domestic building maintenance framework. For this item, the Chairperson welcomed Councillor Russell Goodway, Cabinet Member for Investment and Development; Donna Jones, Assistant Director County Estates; Mian Saleem, Head of Design, Construction & Maintenance and Matt Seymour, Asset Manager. The Cabinet Member was invited to make an opening statement after which Members were provided with a presentation from Officers. The Chairperson invited questions and comments from Members. Members were advised that Cardiff would lead a joint procurement exercise with the Vale of Glamorgan Council to establish a new framework for maintaining commercial buildings, due to commence in April 2027. The value of Cardiff’s portion of the contract was £80 million over a four?year period. The procurement process aimed to appoint a pool of approved and competent principal contractors while strengthening engagement with SMEs. The new framework would include multiple providers, bring gas maintenance in?house, extend the operational life of existing systems, and provide quicker responses to winter emergencies. It would also enhance statutory testing arrangements, generating substantial savings and giving the Council far greater oversight of contractor performance. Members were keen to understand the advantages of collaborating with another Council on this new framework. Committee noted that Cardiff was better resourced to lead on the procurement specification, and that close working with the Vale of Glamorgan would increase the size and scale of contracts, making them more appealing to the market. The Committee noted that having a pre?established contractor base would remove the need for schools to run their own tender processes for building maintenance. Contractors on the framework would already have been assessed for financial stability and competence. Members also emphasised the value of schools being able to draw on parental support and encouraged that the framework did not restrict this flexibility. Members heard that, although schools held delegated budgets for maintenance, the Council would maintain an approved list of contractors. Members discussed the use of volunteers in schools and were advised that while volunteering was encouraged, health and safety obligations meant the Council had to ensure proper risk assessments were in place. Members noted that the new framework approach would generate significant savings, particularly for statutory maintenance, an area where value for money had not been sufficiently examined in past years. Committee heard that statutory maintenance contracts had the potential to achieve savings of around £360k per year. Framework Lots would be structured by contract value and contractor size, improving SME accessibility and removing the cost uplift associated with a principal contractor acting as an intermediary. The Committee clarified that the Council would need to increase capacity within the Design & Management Teams—especially the gas team—to ensure in?house staff could meet increased demand as more work returned to internal delivery. Members understood that the necessary budget provisions were already in place. Members recognised that longer contract periods supported business planning and strengthened resilience for SMEs, and therefore endorsed this approach. However, Members also wanted assurance that larger, higher?value contracts would not prevent SMEs from bidding. Officers confirmed that principal contractors would form the main database for large projects and liaise directly with the Council, but those contractors would subcontract to SMEs. For certain Lots, SMEs would be able to deliver services directly as part of the framework. The Committee confirmed that a 10% weighting would apply to quantitative and qualitative social value within the evaluation process. Members stressed the importance of tailoring social value expectations to the size of the business, and officers acknowledged that for some SMEs this would involve qualitative, in?kind, or non?financial contributions. The procurement team was developing a clearer understanding of community benefits that aligned with social value requirements and would outline these opportunities for prospective contractors. The Committee wished to emphasise that principal contractors must recognise that SMEs already contributed significantly to social value by supporting the local economy as local employers. AGREED: 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.
None received.
10am on Wednesday 25 February 2026 – Budget Scrutiny meeting.
Rhaid i gynghorwyr ddweud pan fydd ganddyn nhw gysylltiad personol â rhywbeth sy'n cael ei drafod, fel swydd, eiddo neu aelod o'r teulu. Mae buddiant sy'n rhagfarnu yn ddigon cryf i'r cynghorydd adael yr ystafell fel arfer a pheidio â chymryd rhan.
Caiff datganiadau eu darllen o'r cofnodion unwaith y byddan nhw wedi'u cyhoeddi.
Yn rhestru cynghorwyr presennol y cyngor yn unig. Nid yw aelodau cyfetholedig, swyddogion a chyn-gynghorwyr yn cael eu dangos.