Wrthi'n llwytho
Does dim crynodeb o'r cyfarfod hwn eto. Caiff un ei ysgrifennu pan fydd y cyngor yn cyhoeddi'r cofnodion. Mae'r agenda a'r papurau isod.
Apologies were received from Councillors Anwen J. Davies, Kim Jones, Beth Lawton and Gareth Roberts.
The Chair signed the minutes of the previous meeting of the Council, held on 7 December 2023 as a true record.
1. The Monitoring Officer, on behalf of the chief officers who were present, as the report related to their salaries. He was of the opinion that the officers had a substantial interest and, along with the two Corporate Directors, the Head of Finance and the Head of Democracy Services, the Monitoring Officer withdrew from the meeting during the discussion on the item, as they did not need to be in attendance to advise. The Chief Executive remained in the meeting to advise. 2. Members had received a guidance note from the Monitoring Officer in advance regarding item 19(a) on the agenda - Notice of Motion from Councillor Gruffydd Williams and item 19(b) - Notice of Motion from Councillor Dewi Jones. The following members declared a personal interest in item 19(a) and 19(b) on the agenda - Notices of Motion:- Councillors Dafydd Davies, Elfed Wyn ap Elwyn, Anwen Hughes, Anne Lloyd Jones, Elwyn Jones, Dewi Owen and Richard Glyn Roberts as they were farmers. The members were of the opinion that they were prejudicial interests, and they withdrew from the meeting during the discussion on the item.
Condolences were extended to the following:- · Councillor Dewi Owen and the family following the loss of his mother; · Councillor Dylan Fernley on the loss of his father. · The family of Dylan Jones, Housing and Property Department who had died recently, particularly his brother, Steffan Jones, the Head of Highways, Engineering and YGC, and the Chief Executive paid tribute to him. It was noted that several other families in Gwynedd had lost loved ones recently and the Council wished to express its sincerest condolences to these families. The Council stood in silence as a mark of respect and remembrance. · Congratulations were extended to the new Councillor, Sian Williams, from the Cricieth ward, and she was welcomed to her first meeting of the Council today. · The work of Bangor University in the field of public health was acknowledged after the university was recently awarded the Queen's medal and certificate.
None to note.
(The Cabinet Members' written responses to the questions had been published in advance.) (1) Question by Councillor Gruff Williams How did this Council's Cabinet reach a joint-agreement with Cyngor Môn not to make the Welsh language an objective in the new Joint Well-being Plan? Reply – Leader of the Council – Councillor Dyfrig Siencyn Firstly, it should be noted that the Welsh language has been a permanent priority for the Board since its establishment back in 2015. As noted in the Board's terms of reference...'The main administrative language of the Public Services Board, orally and in writing, will be Welsh. Every member will prepare bilingual reports.' There is a statutory requirement for the Board to publish a Well-being Plan and establish well-being objectives every 5 years. This means that the new Well-being Plan (2023-28) for Gwynedd and Ynys Môn sets objectives for the next 5 years only. You will recall that this Plan was approved by this Council on 4 May last year. Three objectives were identified for the period in question, based on the outcomes of the well-being assessments completed in 2022. Whilst Well-being Objectives change over time, the Board's commitment to the prioritisation of the Welsh language is unwavering. The objectives were developed jointly with all members of the Board, and the Well-being Plan has been formally approved by all statutory members, namely Cyngor Gwynedd, Cyngor Sir Ynys Môn, Betsi Cadwaladr Health Board, Natural Resources Wales and the North Wales Fire and Rescue Authority. Here is a quote from the Board's 2023/24 Delivery Plan which sets out the priority for the Welsh language and the objectives for the five years in question: Here is our permanent priority: The Welsh language is a permanent priority for the Board and we will promote it in all aspects of our work Here are our Well-being Objectives for the 2023-28 period: · We want to work together to mitigate the impact of poverty on the well-being of our communities · We want to work together to prioritise the well-being and success of our children and young people to enable them to realise their full potential. · We want to work together to support our services and communities to shift towards Zero Net Carbon. We as a Board have agreed to follow the Whole System and Healthy Weight/Healthy Wales methodology as a golden thread throughout this work. Reference was made to the image published in the written response which set out the above with the Welsh language in the centre, filtering through all of the Board's work. Supplementary Question by Councillor Gruff Williams Considering what you have noted, can you therefore confirm whether the Welsh language is too important to be a well-being objective, or not important enough to be a well-being objective? Reply – Leader of the Council – Councillor Dyfrig Siencyn The Welsh language is at the centre of everything we do in the Council and it does not fit into one specific box. I do not believe that this is a question that can be answered with a yes or a no, I will just note that the Welsh language filters through the entire Council. (2) Question from Councillor Angela Russell The late-night bus service from Pwllheli to rural areas of Llŷn has been a blessing for many people here in Dwyfor over the decades and a way for lonely people to go and socialise in town once a week. Since lockdown, this service has not been re-started. I would like to ask the cabinet member what steps have been taken by the Transport Department to persuade the bus companies to re-start the late-night service from Pwllheli to Aberdaron / from Pwllheli to Nefyn? Reply - Cabinet Member for the Environment, Councillor Dafydd Meurig Thank you for the question and I sympathise, I also miss seeing such arrangements. On a national basis, it is a very challenging time for the bus industry for many reasons. The costs of providing services have risen significantly, there is a premium on resources and it is difficult to generate sufficient and continuous use to make some services viable. Unfortunately, but inevitably, this means that providing services, especially outside of core times, including at night, has become increasingly difficult which in some cases, is due to a lack of drivers to undertake the work. The Transport Unit works closely with providers, together with other key stakeholders such as Transport for Wales and the Welsh Government, with the intention of maximizing travel opportunities and providing services that are financially and environmentally sustainable. An extended review of the local bus services provided on behalf of the Council has been carried out. Following this work and despite the challenges and significant increase in costs, services in their new form have been commissioned and are now operating in the Caernarfon, Dyffryn Nantlle and Meirionnydd areas. A procurement process for services in the Dwyfor area is ongoing and the focus, in the first place, is to maintain a level of provision for core purposes and at core times. Unfortunately, in some areas of Wales, there has been a significant and general reduction and rationalisation of bus services with more likely to come. The hope is that we will be able to continue to withstand this from happening in Gwynedd. The Council has no direct influence on the operation of services that bus companies choose to provide on a commercial basis. The timetables of the services that the Council commissions are based on optimising resources in order to meet core needs, in the first place, whilst taking into account the constraints and budgetary challenges. Bus networks are dynamic and subject to change. Officers will continue in their efforts to maximise travel opportunities for Gwynedd residents with the budgets and resources available. Although very unlikely in the current climate, if there was an opportunity to restore an evening service between Pwllheli and areas in Pen Llŷn then we would look positively at this. The reasons for maintaining as many travel opportunities for as many different reasons as possible are numerous and strong but unfortunately, despite the best efforts and endeavours, it will not be possible to meet every need, want and desire. Supplementary Question by Councillor Angela Russell Thank you for the response. Today, we are discussing the importance of keeping the people of Gwynedd at the centre of everything we do. I wish to note that this bus used to be full. I am pleading with you to revisit this issue since we are talking here about people's mental health due to their inability to socialise. There is a duty on us to help people. If you compare the situation of Pen Llŷn with Bangor or Caernarfon, you will see that much fewer buses run here. I ask Dafydd Meurig to revisit this. Reply - Cabinet Member for the Environment, Councillor Dafydd Meurig I sympathise. The Dwyfor services are currently out to tender, we will see what emerges from that process. (3) Question by Councillor Rhys Tudur I have recently come to understand that a Cemetery Committee has received notice from the Council setting out regulations for commercial waste to divide waste within the bins. Given that members of such committees operate on an unpaid basis and with elderly members/trustees and that there is a big difference between the nature of a cemetery committee activity and high street business, I wonder if this Council has a plan in place to facilitate or mitigate these requirements for them? Reply - Cabinet Member for the Environment, Councillor Dafydd Meurig Thank you for the question, which is a fair enough question following a change in legislation. From April 2024, the Welsh Government's new Workplace Recycling Regulations will come into force. All non-domestic properties will need to separate recyclables from other waste. These new rules apply to all businesses and both the public and charitable sectors. We have received confirmation that cemeteries fall under these Regulations as well. The purpose of the Regulations is to improve the quality and quantity of commercial recyclable waste collected and separated across Wales. The property owner will be responsible for all waste on site; this includes waste produced by visitors. The Council will have the right to refuse to collect the general waste if it contains recyclable waste. The new legislation is being enforced by Natural Resources Wales, and we as a Council could be fined £500 if we are caught collecting waste containing recyclable materials. We have raised this issue with Natural Resources Wales, but they did not anticipate that the different types of the items that are mandatory for recycling would end up in these bins. However, there is an expectation for the bin owner to make an effort to ensure that recyclable items, such as paper, plastics and metal cans are not disposed of in the general bin. It would be sufficient and reasonable to place a sign on the bin stating that only general waste from the cemetery should be disposed of in the bin. Supplementary Question by Councillor Rhys Tudur Considering that the Cemetery Committee which is local to me was shocked to receive a set of regulations without any explanation, I ask whether it is possible for the Council to correspond further with Cemetery Committees and recommend what they can do to satisfy the new rules, e.g. installation of signage. Reply - Cabinet Member for the Environment, Councillor Dafydd Meurig I agree with what you note and I acknowledge that technical language may not be suitable in some cases. I am happy to ask the Department to write again to the Cemetery Committees explaining exactly what they need to do and how. (4) Question by Councillor Jina Gwyrfai How many posts are currently vacant in Cyngor Gwynedd Departments, and what measures are in place to ensure · That the public does not receive a poorer service due to a shortage of staff; · That current staff do not have to bear an additional burden to meet Department staffing shortfalls, creating personal stress and low morale; · That a strategy is in place to reduce staff turnover (including possibly looking at employment scales and job descriptions)? Reply – Cabinet Member for Corporate Support, Councillor Menna Trenholme Overall, the level of staff turnover in this Council has been stable and relatively low for many years, and lower than other sectors of the economy. For example, the level was 8.5% in 2021/22 and then 8.1% in 2022/23. That said, there are variations within departments, which means that some parts of the Council are experiencing retention issues. It is no easy task to reach a conclusion on the number of vacancies in such a large and complex organisation as the Council, but we do know about the main areas of work that have been experiencing problems over the past year. For example, there have been challenges in social work and caring more broadly, administration, finance and engineering. It is a matter of fact that other local authorities across Wales are experiencing the same kind of problems, and in addition to that we of course want all our staff to be able to carry out their work through the medium of Welsh. All of this poses a major challenge for the local government sector at the moment. We as a Council are already taking steps to understand more about the situation and to respond. We have introduced a process of giving staff the opportunity to complete exit questionnaires and interviews, when they resign from their post. A number of departments have also taken the opportunity to review structures and job descriptions. In some situations, this has led to pay scales being changed to ensure that what is being paid reflects the level of responsibilities. For example, last year this Council approved a financial package which led to increasing the salaries of those staff who work as carers in our residential homes and in the community. We must remember of course that we have pay systems that protect us in relation to equal pay legislation, but changes can be introduced within that system. It is also important to remember of course that there are all sorts of possible reasons why staff choose the Council as their employer, or otherwise leave. Those factors include the salary, but also the wider benefits package; the number of leave days for example, the robust and attractive pension scheme that is available, and the flexible working arrangements that are potential options. The responsibilities of the job, workload and work pressures can also influence individuals' decisions. We also believe that the well-being of our staff is important and this is reflected in the emphasis we as an employer have placed on that for years now. There are many factors at play within this picture, and in that regard there has recently been a survey of the views of staff on the Council as their employer, titled 'Staff Voice Questionnaire'. The results have already been published among the departments, and overall it is clear that the majority of our staff see the Council as a caring employer that provides opportunities for staff to develop and puts well-being at the forefront of the agenda. That said, there are in the results a number of important messages for us to consider going forward. Any recruitment and retention problems can inevitably lead to disruption to service delivery for a period of time. The financial pressures, and the potential impact on jobs, contribute to this too, of course. We are also fully aware that the goodwill of staff who give their best to deliver services cannot be taken advantage of; that is why there is such an emphasis on supporting the well-being of our staff and why it is also more important than ever to strike the right balance between doing so but also delivering the essential services to the highest possible standard for the residents of the county. Supplementary Question from Councillor Jina Gwyrfai Thank you for an honest answer, acknowledging that there are staffing problems and that work needs to be done. I note that 8.1% was the average job turnover rate last year. I would like to know which Department currently has the highest staff turnover and ask what is being done to improve the situation in that Department, whilst ensuring staff well-being and services for the public? Reply – Cabinet Member for Corporate Support, Councillor Menna Trenholme As noted in the response to the first question, the turnover level varies from department to department. Up to the end of February, the departments with the highest levels were Economy and Regeneration, Corporate Support and Adults, Health and Well-being. Those department are proactively seeking to understand the reasons for the turnover percentages, and are using various techniques to attract and appoint staff. This includes making use of the Apprenticeships and Trainee Schemes in order to plan ahead to fill the gaps in key posts. We know that people move on for various personal reasons, including career development, returning to education, retirements and work contracts ending, either because the contracts are grant-funded or because they are seasonal posts. Furthermore, we are reviewing the types of long-term risks that are facing our services in relation to the staffing issues. This analysis will form the basis to our staffing plans for years to come. The need to establish long-term staffing plans are more important than ever, in light of the financial squeeze and the impact of that on jobs. This is why the Workforce Planning Project is a priority for this Council. As a part of that project, the work of developing and raising awareness of the complete employment package is ongoing, in order to ensure that we continue to be an attractive employer for prospective candidates but also to those staff who have remained loyal to the Council for years. Although it is essential in the current climate, it appears from the recent Voice of Staff Questionnaire that the salary alone is not what matters, having a happy and caring work environment with opportunities for job and career development are also as important. Our plans encompass all of these areas. (5) Question by Councillor Gareth Williams The unannounced cuts to provision for apprenticeships are a concern for many year eleven pupils in Llŷn and Eifionydd. Given that this chipping away at the provision is far from consistent with the aspirations in the Cyngor Gwynedd Plan about giving our children and young people the best start, did Grŵp Llandrillo-Menai consult with the Council before making this change to the provision and what discussions are currently ongoing between the Council and Grŵp Llandrillo-Menai to rectify the situation? Reply - Cabinet Member for Education, Councillor Beca Brown Grŵp Llandrillo Menai did not consult with the Council regarding a change to the provision for apprenticeships. Nevertheless, talks have recently been held to enable the Council to understand the background and context behind the cuts. In order to provide a complete answer to the question, I now refer to a response received from Aled Jones-Griffiths, Head of Coleg Meirion Dwyfor and Coleg Menai. I will not read the entire response. The first paragraph refers to the large number of apprenticeships available, which is over 1300. It was noted that the second paragraph details the decision made between Qualifications Wales and Welsh Government and the changes that the Councillor refers to in his question. I will read the rest of the response. "We recognize that the above model does not work for all learners, especially some from rural areas. To respond to this, we intend to offer a part-time route (one day a week) in the Construction field using Further Education funding rather than apprenticeship funding for those who have already had a place with an employer. This means that a part-time route to Construction will be available in September alongside the full-time route and both routes lead towards the new level 3 apprenticeship. The Welsh Government's final budget was announced on 27 February and therefore we did not want to make statements on our curriculum proposal until we were clear on our financial situation. It is unfortunate that a misinterpretation of changes has taken place in the meantime and incorrect information is being put on social media without understanding the full picture. There is no requirement to consult the Council as the provision that is offered above reflects the provision that has historically been available to 16-year-old pupils. It would also be useful if we were members of the Gwynedd Secondary Heads' Group so that we could keep them up to date with changes in further education. In all other areas that have an apprenticeship at level 2 as an entry point, those who leave school will be able to gain entry directly from school as has always been the case. Engineering is in this category. I hope this allays the fears of the young people and parents of Llŷn. A number of parents have been discussing with us during this week and we have calmed their fears by fully explaining the situation to them. Anyone is welcome to contact Grŵp Llandrillo Menai if they want to discuss further." That is the College's response. I wish to add a response to the clause about not being a member of the Secondary Headteachers' Group. The College does receive an invitation to the Secondary Strategic Planning Group as required and there is an opportunity for them to contact us to request to present to the Headteachers as they wish. The Department and the Schools work in partnership with the College through the Education consortium. Supplementary Question by Councillor Gareth Williams Thanks to the Councillor for the response. It is good to hear that this matter has been resolved in the short-term. It would be nice to obtain assurances regarding the situation next year and the following year. Will the Education Department press for these apprenticeships to be available after this year? Reply - Cabinet Member for Education, Councillor Beca Brown I am happy to be involved in any talks about this and I am aware that the Education Department is very willing to discuss with the College in terms of planning for the future. Obviously, the financial element is a discussion between the Government and the College.
The Chair of the Chief Officer Appointment Committee, Councillor Menna Trenholme, presented a report recommending that the Council approve the recommendation of the Chief Officer Appointment Committee to adopt the Pay Policy Statement for 2024/25. Reference was made to the substantial delay in 2023 before reaching an agreement on the increase in the salaries of all Council staff as a result of the current bargaining process. This process had contributed to the discussions on setting budgets and sought to give Councils assurances on salary levels. Lengthy discussions had been held between the Unions and the Council regarding how much the Council could afford, which had led to a delay before a decision was made. It was added that the discussions for 2024/25 salaries had not yet commenced and that months would pass again before a decision would be made on this. Members were given an opportunity to make observations and ask questions. The following matters were raised:- · It was noted that page 30 of the report referred to the Hutton Review of Fair Pay in the Public Sector and recommended a ratio of no more than 1:20 between the highest and lowest salary (full-time). It was reiterated that the report noted that this ratio in Cyngor Gwynedd was 1:5.6. It was added that many posts at the lowest level were not full-time posts and that it would be good to ascertain what the ratio would be if part-time posts were considered, e.g. 23 hour-a-week contracts or a School Classroom Assistant who worked during term-time only. · Reference was made to part 5 of the table (Appendix 1) on page 34, noting that the table would be clearer if every post was noted there one under the other, despite the fact that they were on the same scale. It was believed that the use of punctuation did not make it clear in its current format. · It was noted that the Cabinet Member for Corporate Support, in response to a member's question earlier on, had noted that staff turnover levels were low in this Authority, noting that there were exceptions such as in Social Services and Engineering. An enquiry was made about the scenarios where a market supplement to the salary level would be justified. In response, the Chief Executive noted:- · That this was a pro-rata ratio in order to provide a fair comparison of both salary levels. It was proposed to provide the figure based on staff who did not work full-time hours to the member after the meeting, if he was interested to receive this information. · He accepted the member's comment on the table in the report, and noted that the punctuation would be amended in the future in order to make it neater. · It was noted that market supplements were rarely used as this was not customary in any fixed circumstances.
The Leader, Councillor Dyfrig Siencyn, submitted the report, inviting the Council to approve the review of the Council Plan 2024/25. It was noted that a year had passed since the Cyngor Gwynedd Plan 2023-2028 had been adopted, noting that this was a soft review but that important changes had been made to the Plan. Attention was drawn to some matters such as Priority Area: Tomorrow’s Gwynedd, noting that the Free School Meals project had now been introduced to all Cyngor Gwynedd Schools, ahead of the Government's schedule. It was added that the Education Strategy was now outdated, therefore a new Strategy would be drawn up to ensure that the best Education was offered to the children of the County. It was noted that a current and robust Strategy was needed to attempt to attract grant money to invest in School buildings. The inclusion provision would also be reviewed to look at the increase in emotional behavioural needs among children, which was a side-effect of the pandemic. It was noted under Priority Area: A Welsh Gwynedd, that a review of the Education Language Policy would be carried out, as well as an appraisal of the immersion system. It was expressed that this confirmed the Authority's desire to address both fields and they would be involved in the Council Plan for the year to come. It was shared that Meirion Prys Jones, one of the most experienced linguistic planners in Wales, was being commissioned to lead on the work of revisiting the Gwynedd Education Language Policy. Everyone was encouraged to participate in this important conversation when the engagement period commenced. It was added that other minor changes had been included in the report and pride was expressed in the ability to propose to the Council to adopt these changes. Members were given an opportunity to make observations and ask questions. The following matters were raised by individual members:- Reassurances were sought that Ysgol Tywyn would not fall off the waiting list for improvements, noting that the report referred to modernising buildings and learning environments specifically in the Bangor and Cricieth areas. It was noted that Ysgol Tywyn was one of the oldest schools in the county and that refurbishment works were needed. Concern was expressed that Tywyn was being neglected geographically. · In response, the Leader noted that the Dysynni area was not being neglected and that the representatives in the ward were doing a good job in drawing the Council's attention to the area's issues. It was reported that the Education Department were pleased to hear the comments. · The Chief Executive added that the report was referring to School buildings and not School maintenance, but he hoped that there would be a new phase in the programme, should the financial situation allow for that. It was expressed that this Plan and the Well-being Act were based on the United Nations' sustainable development goals and that this is the subject and root of all the conflict in Europe and in Wales between the farmers and the Authorities. It was also noted that there had been conflict between trying to realise net zero and poverty due to the costs associated with net zero. The member expressed that he could not vote in favour of the Plan because of this. It was noted that the report referred to A Green Gwynedd, which included public transport. It was reported that the people in the County wanted convenient, reliable and reasonably priced transport, which reiterated why having a night bus service was essential to rural areas. The Council was asked to revisit the bus situation in the Llŷn area urgently, particularly due to mental health problems due to loneliness. Reference was made to a part of the report which referred to improving the County's existing walking and cycling paths and pride was expressed for this since the member had been asking for a cycle path from Llanbedrog to Pwllheli for years. It was believed that now was the time to act. · In response to a comment, the Leader noted that internal discussions had been held recently on the difficulties in obtaining sufficient money from Welsh Government for rural areas. It was reported that the issue had been raised at the Rural Forum very recently and that the message was being forwarded to the Welsh Government. · It was added that the entire plan was subject to receiving sufficient money and it was believed that the Welsh Government provided grants on its own terms, which made it difficult for the Council to be able to plan in the long-term. Sympathy was expressed along with reassurances that he would continue to press for the situation to be improved. It was noted that according to the Census, the population of Gwynedd had reduced by 5,400. It was asked whether this had been included in the report. · In response, the Leader noted that he was unsure whether this matter had been included in the Plan. It was agreed that it was a matter of concern as fewer people living in the County had an impact on funding and services from many directions. Reference was made to the numbers in small rural Schools, which were disastrous, and had seen a marked reduction over the past years. The Leader reported that he had asked for birth figures for Gwynedd, but that it was difficult to obtain the actual figure. He believed that it was essential to try and increase the population in Gwynedd. Members expressed pride since the review of the Gwynedd Education Language Policy and an appraisal of the immersion system were included in the report. Enquiries were made on the time-scale for this. Also, enquiries were made as to whether a formal consultation would be held on the review of the Schools Language Policy or whether it would be discussed with prominent stake-holders only. · It was noted that the work of reviewing the Gwynedd Education Language Policy had already commenced and that the Department hoped to be in a position to complete the work by the Autumn term. It was noted that this was subject to how many would participate in the discussion and how much input would be given, but the Autumn term was the aim. · It was believed that work on the immersion system would also be completed in October/November and would commence very soon. · It was explained that engagement was the intention and that the steps to hold the conversations and obtain information were currently being planned. It was noted that the intention was for everyone to have an opportunity to have their say in various ways. It was added that the engagement would be as extensive as they would wish for it to be, subject to how prepared people would be to participate in it. Anyone with an interest in the field were invited to contribute. A member expressed pride at the comments to improve Schools, particularly adaptations for children with physical or visual disabilities. There was concern that some of the County's buildings were not good enough to meet needs and that there was a need to consider what buildings needed to be improved and what could be done. It was believed that this was a historical problem which needed to be addressed at all of the County's Schools and that it was essential not to differentiate. The importance of ensuring an opportunity for all children in the County to remain at their chosen school was emphasised. Reference was made to autism and that Schools needed to adapt to meet the needs of the children by offering quiet places and other relevant adjustments. It was also believed that there was a need to improve the training of School staff in order to raise awareness since the number of autistic children was increasing. It was asked for more consideration to be given to such needs in Schools. · The Leader agreed with the member, noting that he did not wish for any child in the County to be left behind. It was noted that the Plan in question mainly referred to new buildings. It was believed that it would be a good idea to visit the new school in Cricieth so that everyone could see the standard expected within the County's Schools when the School would be completed. · The Chief Executive gave thanks for the member's comments. He asked the member or anyone else who was aware of a situation where a child could not gain access to School to bring the example to the attention of the Education Department. · Reference was made to Additional Learning Needs grants which had reached the Council in the past two years. It was noted that the money, which currently total £1 million, was being targeted for Schools to meet the needs of children currently at those Schools. · The Chief Executive noted that the Council had a team of specialist autism teachers who go out to train School staff. It was noted that a broad range of training was available to School staff. In addition, reference was made to the fact that a Scrutiny investigation was being conducted to the autism field at present and it was hoped that very positive conclusions would emerge from the investigation.
The Chair noted, according to the Council Constitution, that the Head of Finance must accept any amendment to this item in writing in advance, and this amendment must lead to a balanced budget, if it was to be discussed. All Council members had been reminded of this last week, and the Head of Finance did not receive any notice of an amendment before the allocated closing date. Consequently, no notice of amendment to the budget could be considered. The Cabinet Member for Finance, Councillor Ioan Thomas submitted the following:- · A report and presentation recommending the budget to the Council for approval for 2024/25; · The draft decision on the Council Tax based on the Cabinet's recommendation to the Council (based on an increase of 9.54%), along with tables showing the Council Tax level and the increase per community. The officers of the Finance Department were thanked for all their work in preparing the budget. He added that it did not give him any pleasure whatsoever to propose raising the Council Tax at a time when so many of the County's residents were battling against substantially increased costs-of-living. He emphasised that if anyone was experiencing problems to pay their Council Tax or needed support with the costs-of-living, that it was important for them to contact the Council. It was noted that Councillors needed to convey this information to their electors. The relevant contact details which included the telephone number for Galw Gwynedd and the e-mail address as well as the e-mail address for the Council Tax service. The Head of Finance reminded the members of some of the main risks in Appendix 10 of the report, and he confirmed, having considered all risks and mitigation steps, that he was of the opinion that the Council Budget for 2024/25 was sound, sufficient and deliverable. Members were given an opportunity to make observations and ask questions. The following matters were raised by individual members:- · It was expressed that Cyngor Gwynedd's expenditure was being led by the needs of the people of Gwynedd and that the members were here to respond to those needs. It was noted that the existing financial situation was already serious. They asked how much of the overspend derived from the lack of intentional financing and the lack of acknowledgement of the basic need by the British Government. · In response, it was noted that the problem was substantial underfunding by the Labour Government in Cardiff. It was acknowledged that the situation was problematic because Councils received their money via Cardiff only, as well as through Council Tax payments. It was emphasised that the Council was in a situation of being underfunded. · One member noted that he would vote in favour of the budget, but that he would be doing so with a heavy heart. He expressed that we had been pushed and forced into this position over a period of 10 years under the Westminster Government's austerity policy. It was noted that Westminster were cutting national insurance payments but were underfunding public services, which forced Councils to increase Council Tax. · It was believed that it was important to express discontent at the situation that the Council had been forced into. It was reiterated that the well-being of future generations of children would ultimately suffer. · Reference was made to individual heartbreaking cases which members had come across, e.g. a homeless family living in a hotel without any cooking facilities and the resulting uncertainty and the impact this had on the child. It was noted that this case was no exception and that over 300 people in Gwynedd were living in emergency accommodation, which included 55 children. Reference was made to the numbers who were homeless, living in poverty, facing an increase in their bills and relying on food bank parcels. It was expressed that nobody could have imagined such a situation 10 years ago. · It was reported that the Conservatives had generated very high inflation which led to expensive goods and services. It was believed that 15 years of austerity and hardship had been forced on us. This led to less money for Councils at a time when there is a greater demand on public services. · It was believed that the choice of either increasing Council Tax of cutting services, which would affect people, was a difficult and unfair one. · Clarity was sought on page 98 of the Agenda and the reference to £50,000 of money to improve the Dinas Dinlle car park. The Head of Finance Department explained that the report referred to bids and had come from capital funding which had been earmarked to improve and upgrade the car park. · A member remarked that this was the most difficult budget decision that he had been asked to make in his 29 years as a Councillor where a decision had to be made between cutting services for the most vulnerable in the County or increase Council Tax by almost 10%. He added that there was a risk of creating a new tier of poverty in Gwynedd. He felt that he was being forced to vote for the budget with a gun pointed at his head as he was not prepared to cut services for vulnerable people. He reiterated that this was not a criticism of the Council's work. · The Westminster Government and those in power there were criticised. · Attention was drawn to the Prime Minister's personal wealth, which was allegedly approximately £700 million. · It was questioned whether the Council had been too good at making efficiency savings and cuts and whether this had led to it receiving the worst percentage of the settlement in the whole of Wales. The member believed that the more realistic answer to that was because we were a rural County. · It was believed that there was a duty on the Council to try and retain young people in our communities and in the County and it was questioned whether more of an effort should be made to achieve this. · The Cabinet Member for Finance and the Head of Finance were thanked for their presentations. A member took the opportunity to send an important message to the residents of the County and to reiterate what was said by the Cabinet Member for Finance. It was hoped that everyone was aware of their rights and claimed what they were owed. It was reiterated that eligibility for Council Tax benefit or credit made people eligible for further financial support. Those who found it difficult to cope financially were encouraged to contact the Council by calling the Galw Gwynedd number or visit the Council's website. Reference was made to community Hubs and Cost-of-living events being held across the County. It was reiterated that the public could also contact organisations such as Citizens Advice or contact their local Councillor for advice. The member noted that she was aware of people who found it difficult across the County, which included people working two jobs, but that advice was available. It was questioned why Gwynedd had received the worst settlement in Wales, and whether there was an opportunity to ask for more money. Concern was expressed for those who worked and were paid minimum wage, but still fell into poverty as a result of all these costs. Pride was expressed that there was now a phone number for people to call for further advice; it was asked whether this number was open from 9:00 until 17:00 every day of the week. It was also asked whether money would be available to the Council as a result of the reduction in national insurance payments. In response to the above, the Leader noted: · That the money is being distributed to Local Authorities on the grounds of a formula which is based on 160 factors. It was noted that parts of the formula were reviewed annually. · That Gwynedd had received the lowest settlement in Wales, mainly because of the drop in the County's population. · The formula may be changed and other ways to distribute the money found, but this could lead to other substantial changes of which we are unaware. · That it would take around 10 years to completely overhaul the system because there would be a need to design a new procedure and follow a statutory process. · That the original settlement was 1.8%; however, a message had been sent to the Local Government Association, asking for a minimum of 2.0%. Some benefit had derived from this effort. · It was believed that some Councils in London were in a worse position. · It was reiterated that there was a need to protect services for the vulnerable as much as possible and that this was a responsibility on everyone. The Head of Finance Department added: · That the Galw Gwynedd phone number that would provide information on the advice available would be open from 9:00 until 17:00 during weekdays, as well as the Council Tax phone number. · That the employee national insurance contributions were being reduced, and not the employer's contributions, therefore there would be no financial benefit to the Council. A request was made for a registered vote. In accordance with Procedural Rules, the following vote on the motion was recorded:- In favour (46) Councillors:- Craig ab Iago, Menna Baines, Beca Brown, Stephen Churchman, Dafydd Owen Davies, Elwyn Edwards, Elfed Wyn ap Elwyn, Alan Jones Evans, Delyth Lloyd Griffiths, Jina Gwyrfai, Annwen Hughes, R. Medwyn Hughes, Iwan Huws, Elin Hywel, Nia Wyn Jeffreys, Berwyn Parry Jones, Dawn Lynne Jones, Dewi Jones, Elin Walker Jones, Gwilym Jones, Gareth Tudor Jones, Huw Wyn Jones, Linda Ann Jones, June Jones, Cai Larsen, Dafydd Meurig, Dilwyn Morgan, Linda Morgan, Edgar Wyn Owen, Llio Elenid Owen, John Pughe, Rheinallt Puw, Arwyn Herald Roberts, Beca Roberts, Elfed P Roberts, Meryl Roberts, Richard Glyn Roberts, Huw Llwyd Rowlands, Paul Rowlinson, Dyfrig Siencyn, Ioan Thomas, Menna Trenholme, Einir Wyn Williams, Elfed Williams, Sasha Williams and Sian Williams. Against (13) - Councillors:- Dylan Fernley, John Brynmor Hughes, Louise Hughes, Anne Lloyd Jones, Elwyn Jones, Eryl Jones-Williams, John Pughe Roberts, Angela Russell, Peter Thomas, Rob Triggs, Hefin Underwood, Gareth Williams and Gruffydd Williams. Abstentions (3) – Councillors:- Glyn Daniels, Dewi Owen and Nigel Pickavance. The Chair noted that the motion had been carried.
The Head of Democracy Services submitted the report which asked the Council to adopt Option 1 following the review of Scrutiny arrangements. He reported that he was submitting the report on behalf of the Governance and Audit Committee, which had approved this option at its meeting in January, subject to work being done to improve the efficiency and operations of the Scrutiny Committees. The members were thanked for their attendance and their contribution at the workshops held last year and reference was made to the report which summarised the messages deriving from the workshops before the Scrutiny Forum had met. Councillor Paul Rowlinson, on behalf of the Scrutiny Forum, was invited to elaborate on the considerations of the Scrutiny Forum. Councillor Paul Rowlinson reported that there was no clear consensus at the workshops or at the Scrutiny Forum, with different members favouring different options. He also noted that the input of Audit Wales had been positive on the whole; reference was made to examples where Scrutiny input had improved the Cabinet's decisions. He expressed that Audit Wales did not suggest changing the current structure or the workload of the Scrutiny Committees. Nevertheless, it was noted that some members had referred to the workload of the Education and Economy Scrutiny Committee, noting that it was excessive. After summarising the comments, a proposal was made on behalf of the Scrutiny Forum to adopt option 1. Members were given an opportunity to make observations and ask questions. The following matters were raised by individual members:- Reference was made to the last action in the appendix where it referred to reporting back. It was asked whether this would mean that a report was created which showed members how Scrutiny observations relating to wording changes in reports were considered and accepted or refused. The member wished to see a process of reporting on this in existence so that members were informed as to whether observations were accepted or not. · In response, the Head of the Democracy Services noted that attention should be drawn to this provision regularly. One member noted that he had been a member of the Communities Scrutiny Committee for 12 years and of the 13 items that he had submitted, he did not believe that any of the items had been resolved. He questioned whether the Scrutiny Committees were needed at all since they scrutinised the work of the Cabinet members and it was believed that there was no point to that because Plaid Cymru members had the majority of seats on the Scrutiny Committees. · In response Councillor Paul Rowlinson noted that the members did not act as a party or specific political group when scrutinising. He noted that it was a statutory requirement on every Council to have a Scrutiny system and that the purpose of Scrutiny was to seek to improve the decisions of the executive. He believed that there were many examples where the decision of the Scrutiny Committee had had a positive effect on the Cabinet's decision. He added that it was illegal to operate based on a political group. A member and former chair of the Care Scrutiny Committee for four years commented; he wished to express that Scrutiny worked. He reported that he had worked very closely with a member of a different political group as vice-chair of the Care Scrutiny Committee and that this working relationship had been successful. He wished to take the opportunity to thank the members of the Care Scrutiny Committee for their work and expressed a desire to continue with the existing Scrutiny procedure. He believed that the system worked and referred to a positive relationship with the Cabinet Member for Adults, Health and Well-being and the Cabinet Member for Children and Families, who were supportive of the work of the Care Scrutiny Committee and the Committee were supportive of them. He believed that many good things were being done as a result of the Care Scrutiny Committee and that it was a good example of cross-party collaboration.
The Cabinet Member for Corporate Support, Councillor Menna Trenholme, submitted the report which provided a concept of the arrangement to commence a process which could lead to the adoption of a single transferable vote system for Cyngor Gwynedd elections. It was reported that there would be a need to approve the consultation process and the decision-making timetable and then after the consultation a meeting of the Full Council would need to be called for this decision alone. There were no observations or questions.
The Cabinet Member for Finance, Councillor Ioan Thomas, submitted the report which addressed the statutory requirement on Councils and provided a long-term context to capital expenditure and investment decisions by Councils. It was noted that the report also provided an overview of how the associated risks were managed and the implications for future financial sustainability. The Head of Finance added that the report referred to 3 appendices but unfortunately the appendices had not been included in the Agenda papers. It was noted that these appendices provided further details but that sufficient information had been included in the report. A table entitled "Approved Investment Counterparties and limitations" was shown to members and it was reported that the table being shown provided the information that was missing in the appendices. Apologies were expressed for the failure to include the appendices and it was added that they had been included in the Agenda papers of the Governance and Audit Committee and that they had been considered there in full. Please find enclosed a copy of the table. The Monitoring Officer gave assurance that the report in the Agenda papers was comprehensive, along with the above table that was shown and that it placed members in a position where they were able to vote and adopt the strategy. Members were given an opportunity to make observations and ask questions. The following matters were raised by individual members:- Members expressed gratitude for the report as well as to Arlingclose for their presentation to Council members back in February. It was noted that the field was very technical but that Arlingclose had made it easier to understand. Appreciation was expressed that this presentation had been available to every Councillor and not just to members of the Governance and Audit Committee as usually was the case. It was confirmed that the members were in a position to make a decision since the report was comprehensive.
The Cabinet Member for Environment, Councillor Dafydd Meurig, submitted the report which asked for the Full Council's approval to the Delivery Agreement and an agreement to be submitted to the Welsh Government for approval. It was explained that the report related to the lengthy process of creating a Local Development Plan and that this was the first step in this process, i.e. adopting the Delivery Agreement. It was noted that the Delivery Agreement could be seen in full in the Agenda papers as well as the context and reference to the process of creating the contract, as well as a timetable and steps. Details were provided of the journey of the Delivery Agreement to date, which included a public consultation and reference was made to some of the observations received. It was noted that specific comments had been made about the impact and the robustness tests and the possibility of amending them to consider the impact on the Welsh language as a part of the tests. A summary was provided of the robustness steps relating to the suitability of the Plan, propriety of the Plan and the Plan's ability to deliver. Reference was made to the response to the comment which was included on page 169 of the Agenda. It was noted that the Planning Policy Working Group and the Cabinet had considered the observations from the consultation in full; concern was expressed at the low number of responses. It was reported that the work of creating the Local Development Plan would commence after it was approved by the Government; this could take around four weeks. Members were given an opportunity to make observations and ask questions. A member commented that no changes had been made to the Plan following the consultation observations and he believed that this tended to happen often after consultations. The explanation from the Cabinet Member for Environment regarding why the comments had not been accepted was appreciated, but it was believed that there was a need to consider the reliability of the Government's assessments when dealing with the impact on the Welsh language.
The Cabinet Member for Corporate Support, Councillor Menna Trenholme, submitted the Annual Report of the Strategic Safeguarding Panel 2022-23 and noted that the Department had already started to prepare the 2023-34 report. It was noted that the report provided an overview of the work that had taken place by the Strategic Safeguarding Panel. Advantage was taken of the opportunity to raise awareness of the amended Safeguarding Policy which had been adopted during the past fortnight. It was noted that the Policy was included in appendix 2 of the report and as a result of the amended Policy, there had also been a change in the Terms of Reference seen in appendix 3. Reference was made to one major change in the Policy, namely the difference between Protection and Safeguarding, whilst noting that the definitions could be seen in the Policy. There were no observations or questions.
The Monitoring Officer submitted the report which proposed amendments to the Internal Resolution Procedure and Scrutiny and to report on delegated amendments to the Constitution. It was reported that three elements to the report included how to deal with low-level complaints between members as a result of the statutory duty which was now on Group Leaders. It was noted that the second aspect derived from a decision in the Scrutiny review to amend the Constitution which encompassed minor changes and finally changes to the delegation schemes. There were no observations or questions.
The Cabinet Member for Corporate Support, Councillor Menna Trenholme, submitted the report which reported on the statutory duty on Cyngor Gwynedd, under the Local Government (Democracy) (Wales) Act 2013 to monitor communities in the County, and the electoral arrangements of those communities. It was reported that there were two types of community surveys that the Council should consider conducting, namely a Review of community boundaries (section 25 of the Act) and a Review of electoral arrangements (section 31 of the Act). It was emphasised that it was not intended to review every community, only those that highlighted a need for change due to specific circumstances. The four essential steps in the process were reported upon, i.e. Initial publicity, Initial investigation and consultation, Draft proposals and Final recommendations. The Council was asked to approve the outlined process. It was noted that this would allow for the consultation process to be conducted. Members were given an opportunity to make observations and ask questions. The following matters were raised by individual members:- A comment was made on the date included in the table on page 297 of the pack, which referred to Consultation 2, and the member asked whether the date of January/February 2024 was correct. The Monitoring Officer confirmed that January/February 2025 was the correct date and that the table would be corrected. It was noted that changes to the boundaries had already occurred where a reduction was seen in the number of Councillors in Gwynedd from 75 to 69. It was asked whether changes would be made to the Community Councils. The Propriety and Elections Manager confirmed that the County Council operated within the same role as the Boundary Commission did with us as a County Council. This meant that the Council was responsible for the Community Councils. The survey of community boundaries would be carried out to coincide with the Democracy Commission when they would come to look at County boundaries.
The Head of Democracy Services submitted the report which asked the Council to adopt the new seat allocation after one member changed their political group and following the recent by-election. He noted that this had led to changes to seat allocations on Committees, namely the Plaid Cymru group gaining one seat on the Communities Scrutiny Committee, Care Scrutiny Committee, Democratic Services Committee, Planning Committee and SACRE. Reference was made to the full details of the new seat allocations which could be seen in appendix A of the report. It was added that Councillor Elwyn Jones had now been nominated to represent the Council on the Police and Crime Panel for the Council term. The Full Council was asked to approve that nomination, as well as adopt the seat allocation as noted in the report. It was confirmed that a single vote would be held on both proposals. There were no observations or questions.
The Head of Democracy Services submitted the report which asked the Council to adopt the Committees Calendar for 2024/25 as a result of detailed work that had taken place in the background to choose dates and avoid clashes with other meetings. Members of the Democratic Services Committee were thanked for their comments and detailed work in discussing the Calendar and an agreement had been reached on improvements following that discussion. Attention was drawn to an extraordinary meeting of the Full Council that would be held in September. Members were given an opportunity to make observations and ask questions. A member expressed the desire of the independent group to establish a Shadow Cabinet and asked about how this could be done. The member elaborated that since the Board had been dissolved, that there was a strong feeling and desire amongst the independent group to establish a Shadow Cabinet to challenge the Cabinet's decisions since no independent group member served on the Cabinet. The member also expressed that many members of the Plaid Cymru group served on the Scrutiny Committees. The Monitoring Officer confirmed that this matter was not a matter to be discussed by the Full Council today. He suggested that the member should discuss with the Democracy Service as a starting point. A member took the opportunity to pay tribute to the Chair of the Council, praising the way that he had chaired the meeting today.
Submitted - the following notice of motion by Councillor Gruffydd Williams, under Section 4.19 of the Constitution, and it was seconded:- Given that Cyngor Gwynedd has already passed a notice of motion in September calling on the Welsh Government to re-consider demanding that 10% of agricultural land is given to woodland as part of the Sustainable Farming Scheme, I call on Cyngor Gwynedd:- To call on the Welsh Government to take a step back and re-consider (in light of the cumulative impact on the agricultural industry), before demanding under the Sustainable Farming Scheme (SFS), that 10% of farming land is given to Cynefin/Biodiversity land together with the changes to the statutory requirements and policies such as Nitrate Vulnerable Zones (NVZ). The member set out the context to his motion, noting that:- · Significant damage would be caused to the agriculture industry if Welsh Government adopts the SFS and NVZ. · That there were associated costs for farmers should they lose 20% of their land from giving 10% to biodiversity and 10% of their land to plant trees; this would lead to an unsustainable farming industry and many farmers would leave the industry. · That there was huge expenditure for the agriculture unit in order to comply with the new rules, which would squeeze small farms out of business. · The nitrogen going on the land would lead to a reduction in the crops, which would lead to less produce. He added that if there were food shortages for the public, then prices would rise. · That there was a need to stand with the farmers or people would leave the countryside and the population diminished. The proposal hoped to receive support from all members to ensure the prosperity of the agriculture industry and prosperity in the countryside. Strong support was expressed to the motion by several members on the grounds of:- · That there was a moral duty on us in Gwynedd to support the farmers in our communities, which represented the culture, history and language of our communities. The slogan, No Farmers, No Food, No Future, was quoted. · That the current prices of sheep was proof of the shortages and it was believed that there would be food shortages - growing trees would not resolve this. · That agriculture was very important in Pen Llŷn. He asked for the support of all members, emphasising that the Government's plans needed to be stopped. · That the problem of planting 10% trees was huge in Pen Llŷn, compared with Meirionnydd. It was believed that insufficient targeting had been undertaken by the Government and instead they had treated every area in the same way. · That there was a need to thank both agricultural Unions which had worked hard to support the farmers. It was expressed that the Council needed to support and strengthen their request. · It was noted that agriculture was the foundation of the countryside and it was at the core of our culture. It was noted that without agriculture there would be no Schools or young people in the countryside; it was believed that it was essential to support the proposal. · That what was proposed by the Government was harmful and inconsiderate of the mental health and emotional well-being of the industry, which in reality was a culture of individuals. It was believed to be a threat to agriculture and endangered agricultural succession. Consideration was given to amending the proposal but following a discussion between the member and the Monitoring Officer, it was decided not to propose an amendment as it affected the clarity of the original proposal and it did not coincide with the proposal. To close, the proposer expressed his gratitude for the support. He referred to the research of the Unions which supported farmers who noted that adopting the SFS and NVZ would mean that 5,500 jobs would be lost. He believed that major companies would be the only ones to benefit.
Submitted - the following notice of motion by Councillor Dewi Jones, under Section 4.19 of the Constitution, and it was seconded:- Cyngor Gwynedd declares its support to the agricultural sector and the farmers of Wales. The Council believes that Welsh farmers make an invaluable contribution to our country's economy, the Welsh language, our culture and heritage, and we need to support this important sector. The Council calls on the Welsh Government to listen to the views and concerns of farmers - and the farming unions - as they consult on new legislation. The member set the context to his proposal, and noted:- · That what was happening to the agriculture industry affected everyone. He noted that we were reliant on farmers every day for our milk, bread and meat. He believed that receiving quality food and local food was essential. · He referred to the largest ever protest that had reached the Senedd last week, with over 3,000 farmers travelling to Cardiff. He believed that the scheme in its current form was not accessible or sustainable. · That the Government needed to reconsider its intention to ask every farmer to give 10% of their land in order to grow trees on it. It was expressed that trees would not promote culture or the language. It was believed that flexibility was needed in the proposal and that Welsh Government needed to redesign the proposal. It was added that there was a need to amend the schemes to reflect the landscape, the weather and the environment in which the farmers worked. Members expressed strong support to the proposal and noted:- · That farmers had been farming for generations, which proved the sustainability of the industry. · That the Council had responded to the consultation and called on the Government to co-discuss with the industry and to draw up appropriate plans for Wales and the countryside. The Leader added that he had been involved in the discussions at the Rural Forum, Local Government Association and that they had also responded in the same way. The Leader expressed pride that the Council had already responded robustly. · That this was a lesson to the Welsh Government who did not understand the meaning of co-planning and co-production. · That farmers were prepared to contribute to the agenda to reduce carbon emissions and prepared to contribute to biodiversity and already did so to a great degree. · That farmers knew their lands better than anyone, and that the farmers had knowledge of what was happening on their own landscape. · That the Senedd had failed to mention the very strong possibility of losing 5,500 jobs in the agriculture industry. · He reminded members of the nightmare encountered during lockdown when some shelves were empty in supermarkets. It was noted that NFU Cymru had recently noted that there was a need to produce 25% more food by 2050. · That the agriculture industry had used only a little more land to produce food than what they had used in 1960. It was believed that this showed that farmers had done their best and had developed what they had. · That what had happened in the Senedd was good in comparison to what had happened in France - everyone was calm and respectful at the Senedd. · That families with small farms would suffer most. To close, the proposer took the opportunity to thank the farmers for the work they already did to support the environment. He emphasised that the role of farmers was essential as we continued to address the climate change emergency. It was believed essential for the Government to work with farmers when drawing up any new plans and the Welsh Government was called upon to slow down and listen to farmers. Criticism was expressed towards the Welsh Government under the leadership of the Labour Party who created these plans; these were not Senedd or devolution plans.
The proposer expressed his desire to withdraw the following proposal submitted under Section 4.19 of the Constitution:- We call on the Welsh Labour Government to do everything within its powers to demand assurance from its counterparts at the Labour Party's Headquarters in London that if they are victorious at the next General Election that they immediately stop the Conservative Government's austerity policies that have been so destructive to communities in Gwynedd and Wales over the past 13 years. The Monitoring Officer confirmed that if the proposer did not propose his motion that the motion fell and it would need to be reintroduced to a meeting in the future if that was the member's wish. The member confirmed that he would not be proposing his motion.
Submitted, for information - (a) A letter from the Welsh Government in response to Councillor Gruffydd Williams's notice of motion to the Council meeting on 28 September 2023 in respect of supporting the Welsh family farm and converting agricultural lands into forests. (b) A letter from the Welsh Government in response to Councillor John Pughe Roberts's notice of motion to the Council meeting on 7 December 2023 regarding their measures to control TB. (c) A letter from the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office in response to a notice of motion from Councillor Elin Hywel at the meeting of the Council on 7 December 2023, calling for a permanent ceasefire in Gaza. (d) A letter from the Welsh Government in response to Councillor Elin Hywel's notice of motion to the Council meeting on 7 December 2023, calling for a permanent ceasefire in Gaza.
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.