3,726 eitem
RESOLVED – T H A T the minutes of the meeting held on 11th November, 2025 be approved as a correct record.
RESOLVED – T H A T under Section 100A(4) of the Local Government Act 1972, the press and public be excluded from the meeting for the following item of business on the grounds that it involves the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined in Part 4 of Schedule 12A (as amended) of the Act, the relevant paragraphs of the Schedule being referred to in brackets after the minute heading.
RESOLVED – T H A T the minutes of the meeting held on 2nd December, 2025 be approved as a correct record.
RESOLVED – (1) T H A T interviews be undertaken under Part II of the agenda in relation to the post of Head of Corporate Landlord and for Elected Members of the Committee to make a final determination to appoint a suitable candidate. December 9 Minutes and DN (JLT) (2) T H A T residual appointment details be delegated, as appropriate, to the Director of Corporate Resources, in consultation with the Head of Finance/Section 151 Officer, should a suitable applicant be confirmed by Elected Members of the Committee. Reasons for decisions (1) To ensure an appointment to the post was conducted in accordance with the Council's Constitution. (2) To ensure that all Council functions were met within this area.
RESOLVED: That the public be excluded during the discussion on the following item of business on the grounds that, if members of the public were present during the discussion, because of the nature of the business to be transacted there would be disclosure to then of except information as defined in Part 4 of Schedule 12A of the Local Government Act 1972 and as described below: Paragraph 12 – Information relating to an applicant to become an employee of the Authority; and Paragraph 13 – Information which was likely to reveal the identity of an individual.
RESOLVED: 1. That candidate 81718 be invited for interview. 2. That the candidate be advised of the choice of presentation topic and that a maximum of 10 minutes will be allocated for the presentation.
RESOLVED – That the Sub Committee, having considered the application on its individual merits, the committee papers, the statutory guidance made under Section 182 of the Licensing Act 2003, the council’s Statement of Licensing Policy, submissions made by the applicant (South Wales Police), representations made by the respondent, and all other oral and written representations: 1. Accepted that there had been some failings at the venue, but on this occasion did not resolve to remove the DPS they were satisfied that these matters were being adequately addressed through the measures outlined by the business; 2. Recognised that the business had moved away from using standard glass vessels, and did not consider it proportionate to attach the police condition in relation to non-glass vessels; 3. Did not consider it proportionate to mandate the use of ID scanners through a licensing condition at this time; 4. Felt that the police’s suggested condition around designated walkways would be impracticable and not appropriate. The wording of the 16 conditions that had been accepted by the licensee were accepted, with the added amendment to condition 10 (bullet point D) to state: ‘All incidents of disorder which the premises is aware, including sexual assault’. The Sub Committee also accepted the premises plan as detailed on page 240 of the bundle.
RESOLVED: To note the content of the report.
RESOLVED: a. To note the 2025/26 projected outturn forecast including the projected year-end balance for the Joint Committee Reserve Account. b. To recommend the 2026/27 budget, including the proposed drawdown and closing balance of the Reserve Account, to the Partnering Councils for approval as part of their respective budget planning frameworks for 2026/27. c. To ask the Partnering Councils to note the indicative budgets, and associated partner contributions, outlined for the financial years 2027/28 to 2029/30.
RESOLVED – That the Sub Committee, having considered the application on its individual merits, the committee papers, the statutory guidance made under section 182 of the Licensing Act 2003 and the Council’s Statement of Licensing Policy, submissions made by the applicant and all other parties, and the oral evidence given by the applicant and objectors during the hearing in its determination of the matter, GRANTED the application, subject to the agreed conditions with South Wales Police and Environmental Health / Pollution Control. The Sub Committee noted that the applicant has agreed conditions with South Wales Police and Environmental Health Pollution Control, leading to the withdrawal of their objections. It felt that while local residents and the Ward Member raised valid concerns, the agreed reduction in operating hours sufficiently addressed potential late evening public nuisance.
RESOLVED – That the Sub Committee, having considered the application on its individual merits, the committee papers, the statutory guidance made under section 182 of the Licensing Act 2003 and the Council’s Statement of Licensing Policy, submissions made by the applicant and all other parties, and the oral evidence given by the applicant and objectors during the hearing in its determination of the matter, GRANTED the application subject to the conditions agreed with South Wales Police, and with an additional condition reducing the hours when alcohol could be sold to 7am-11pm. The Sub Committee noted that the applicant had agreed to the conditions proposed by South Wales Police, leading to the withdrawal of their objection. The Sub Committee accepted the concerns raised by the local resident and ward member, particularly in relation to the late night sale of alcohol. Members felt that the sale of alcohol after 11pm in this case was likely to cause an increase in crime and disorder and public nuisance, and noted that the applicant was willing to reduce the hours accordingly.
RESOLVED – That the Sub Committee, having considered the application on its individual merits, the committee papers, the statutory guidance made under section 182 of the Licensing Act 2003 and the Council’s Statement of Licensing Policy, submissions made by the applicant and all other parties, and the oral evidence given by the applicant and objectors during the hearing in its determination of the matter, REFUSED the application The Sub Committee noted that the application was for a premises located in an area that covered by a cumulative impact assessment, and fell within the red category. There were issues of crime and disorder in the area linked to off-licences, as outlined in the cumulative impact policy and South Wales Police’s representations. The Sub Committee also gave sufficient weight to the Licensing Authority’s representation in respect of the applicant not being sufficiently aware their own application or the cumulative impact assessment, which raised significant concerns. The Sub Committee considered that the granting of the licence would undermine the licensing objectives and add to the negative cumulative impact within the area.
RESOLVED – T H A T the content of the report be noted and that the post of Director of Environment and Housing be advertised internally on an interim basis of 18 months. Reason for decision To allow for recruitment to the vacant post. December 2 Minutes and DN (JLT)
RESOLVED – T H A T the minutes of the meeting held on 27th October, 2025 be approved as a correct record.
RESOLVED – T H A T the Annual Report be endorsed. Reason for decision To update Council and wider stakeholders surrounding the work of Governance and Audit Committee.
RESOLVED – T H A T the use of the Urgent Decision Procedure (Cabinet Minute No. C84, 4th September, 2025 (as set out in Section 15.14.2(ii) of the Council’s Constitution) be noted. Reason for decision The reporting of the use of the Urgent Decision Procedure is a requirement of the Council’s Constitution.
RESOLVED – T H A T the Statement of Licensing Principles for 2025- 2028, as detailed be approved. Reason for decision Having regard to there having been no consultation responses received, and to ensure that the Council fulfilled its statutory duty as a Licensing Authority. FINAL DRAFT VALE OF GLAMORGAN ANNUAL SELF-ASSESSMENT REPORT 2024/25 (REF) The Leader presented the report, and highlighted that Members would be aware of this as it had been shared in draft in a number of areas including a joint Scrutiny session in July, where recommendations were made, and Governance and Audit Committee, which recommended the evidence and insight assessment changed from “Good” to “Fair”, and that it was the role of Council to approve the final report. Councillor Carroll reflected that considerable improvement needed to be made within the Council as demonstrated by the change in approach to car parking, and the change in decision based upon its impact which had generated media attention, alongside an impact to residents. He believed this was not an isolated incident and that there needed to be more honesty over performance and believed the report did not reflect residents’ experiences. Councillor Dr. Johnson noted that the process had been different this year due to changes in Scrutiny arrangements, which would need longer to consider its impact, but reflected that during the Joint Scrutiny session, it was difficult to get into the detail of approximately 500 RAG ratings. He also shared that during the session, he had questioned the methodology and moderation, as the achievement was exactly the same as the target for “Good”, and that despite several indicators being Red, the assessment remained the same, which supported the feeling of this report being the Council marking its own homework. He felt that external statistics, such as Welsh Index of Multiple Deprivation, proved the impact of working, and noted an increased in the number of LSOAs in the most deprived areas. A recorded vote was undertaken as below: Member For Against Abstain Anne Asbrey √ Julie Aviet √ Gareth Ball √ Rhiannon Birch √ Bronwen Brooks √ Gillian Bruce √ Ian Buckley √ Lis Burnett √ Samantha Campbell √ George Carroll √ Christine Cave √ Charles Champion √ Amelia Collins √ Marianne Cowpe √ Pamela Drake √ Vincent Driscoll √ Anthony Ernest √ Robert Fisher Christopher Franks √ Wendy Gilligan √ Russell Godfrey √ Emma Goodjohn √ Member For Against Abstain Ewan Goodjohn √ Stephen Haines √ Sally Hanks √ William Hennessy √ Nic Hodges √ Mark Hooper √ Catherine Iannucci-Williams √ Gwyn John √ Ian Johnson √ Belinda Loveluck-Edwards √ Julie Lynch-Wilson √ Kevin Mahoney √ Naomi Marshallsea √ Michael Morgan √ Jayne Norman √ Helen Payne √ Elliot Penn √ Sandra Perkes √ Ian Perry √ Joanna Protheroe √ Ruba Sivagnanam √ Carys Stallard √ Neil Thomas √ Member For Against Abstain Rhys Thomas √ Steffan Wiliam √ Margaret Wilkinson √ Eddie Williams √ Mark Wilson √ Nicholas Wood √ Total 29 20 1 RESOLVED – T H A T the Final Draft Vale of Glamorgan Annual Self-Assessment 2024/25 be approved. Reason for decision Having regard to the contents of the reference and discussions at the meeting. VALE OF GLAMORGAN REPLACEMENT LOCAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN (RLDP) 2021-2026 – HOUSING GROWTH IN BARRY CONSULTATION REPORT (REF) Councillor Sivagnanam presented the report and noted this was a critical stage in ensuring there was an up-to-date planning framework which met the needs of communities. She advised that Members would be aware that the strategy for the Replacement Local Development Plan was agreed by Full Council in September last year, and that due to concerns around deliverability, sites at Northwest Barry, land at Neptune Road and Hayes Lane were being consulted upon. She shared that there had been 159 individuals and organisations who had made representations, less than the number when consulting upon Northeast Barry, but still valid concerns. She reflected that at Place Scrutiny previously residents made powerful and relevant objections about these sites, and that she recognised concerns surrounding infrastructure, with specific concerns around increased traffic at Weycock Cross, but that developers would be required to fund highways improvements to deal with traffic issues, and that this would be part of the planning process moving forward. She also noted that there would need to be an increase in school places, and access to health care, which they were working on the Health Board to explore. She noted that Barry was the largest and most sustainable settlement in the Vale, identified as a key settlement in in the RLDP hierarchy and that it was a national growth area, alongside the need for affordable housing was critical, as there were around 7,000 households on the Council's housing register with 4,000 expressing a preference to live in Barry alongside nearly 900 people living in inappropriate housing in Barry. Councillor Dr. Johnson indicated that they were not present during the Scrutiny meeting, but upon review, agreed with Councillor Hooper’s assessments during the meeting, in supporting the scheme for Neptune Road and noting the lack of facilities and public transport in the Bendricks. He reflected upon the Weycock Cross proposal, which he believed to be the most controversial, and shared that the Conservative Party had previously built around 700 houses into the prospective Local Development Plan in this area in 2012, and that the Labour Group opposed this in local media and sought to redistribute this across the Vale. He shared that the Plaid Cymru Group had concerns about the site for a number of reasons, including the loss of the green belt, traffic problems, the lack of public transport and likely over- reliance on cars, so would propose an amendment to remove this scheme from the proposals. He further noted that the number of people on the housing list was not a core evidence basis, queried how this would address the 900 individuals in unsuitable housing in Barry, and why other areas where planning already existed such as the college site on Colcot Road or Western Gateway were not part of this proposed scheme. Councillor Collins shared that they acknowledged the need for housing, there was a concern over the lack of community facilities, such as shops, doctors and dentists as a remote part of Barry which was not as well connected, with no buses on a Sunday or between 7.30am and 4.30pm, meaning people would need to use cars. Councillor Campbell noted the Cabinet Member’s comments around developers funding infrastructure improvement, and how Section 106 monies as part of the development of Golwg Y Mor in Rhoose had been put forward for infrastructure improvements had been used but were not enough and the Council needed to also do more to improve this moving forward. She further expressed that Council needed to take a role in improving active travel and public transport, particularly in the Western Vale area, as there needed to be consideration as to how these proposals would impact upon these residents. Councillor Carroll agreed that the proposed development at Weycock Cross was problematic and would have an impact upon traffic, which was at capacity, busy all day and worsened by increasing the number of dwellings. He commented that of 129 representations, all bar 3 signalled opposition to the plan, which he felt they were right to do so as it was clearly unsuitable for development, and that despite being less than other sites representations, this still represented a considerable number of people who the Council should listen to. Councillor Franks shared that he felt this was being considered due to the failure to properly assess the Northeast Barry proposal, which included 900 houses, which failed and had to be withdrawn. He noted that the Labour Party had previously opposed this site, whilst the Conservative Party had supported it, and believed this reflected chaos by Cabinet, and that the proposal should be withdrawn. Councillor Perry raised that at Place Scrutiny Committee, a resident raised concern about flood water at Weycock Cross and expressed doubt over the robustness of modelling in terms of flood risk assessment and drainage, and that he felt the planning system was flawed if the building of more houses resulted in increased flooding. He further reflected that there would be the need to own cars, and that there was a need to reduce the dependence on cars to support the climate emergency and that active travel needed to be properly considered. He finally commented that increasing developments were seeing more delays and congestion and that current approaches to mitigation do not work. Councillor Goodjohn emphasised the need to consider future generations who would need affordable housing. He reflected that this proposal did not address the need in the best way possible and that the original proposal did, but this was reduced based upon representations. He agreed around the need to increase active travel and public transport but reflected the plan could not address everything right now and that there was a desperate need for housing in Barry. Councillor Wilson stated the belief that no-one wanted new homes next to them, and that a lot of other homes in the area were modern, but that the Council need to evolve as households and their needs changed. He reflected upon changing attitudes to transport, including increased usage of electric cars and active travel, both of which needed to be considered. He shared that the Vale of Glamorgan was a popular place to live, with demand exceeding supply, and house prices increasing at rates greater than inflation, and that there was increasing deprivation, and a need to supply affordable housing. He felt that no viable alternatives had been proposed, so would support inclusion of this site. Councillor Sivagnanam responded that this proposal was about the delivery of affordable homes, with mitigations identified in the report and considered as part of the ongoing planning process. She reflected that there was a need to balance housing with the needs of the environment and transport, and felt this proposal achieved the right balance. She indicated that previous opposition from the Labour Party was due to the deliverability of the proposal, which she felt to be addressed in the report, and that whilst there had been representations, there would still be numerous in Barry who had not been heard who would support the development. A Recorded Vote was taken to consider the removal of the Weycock Cross site from the proposals as below: Member For Against Abstain Anne Asbrey √ Julie Aviet √ Gareth Ball √ Rhiannon Birch √ Bronwen Brooks √ Member For Against Abstain Gillian Bruce √ Ian Buckley √ Lis Burnett √ Samantha Campbell √ George Carroll √ Christine Cave √ Charles Champion √ Amelia Collins √ Marianne Cowpe √ Pamela Drake √ Vincent Driscoll √ Anthony Ernest √ Robert Fisher Christopher Franks √ Wendy Gilligan √ Russell Godfrey √ Emma Goodjohn √ Ewan Goodjohn √ Stephen Haines √ Sally Hanks √ William Hennessy √ Nic Hodges √ Mark Hooper √ Member For Against Abstain Catherine Iannucci-Williams √ Gwyn John √ Ian Johnson √ Belinda Loveluck-Edwards √ Julie Lynch-Wilson √ Kevin Mahoney √ Naomi Marshallsea √ Michael Morgan √ Jayne Norman √ Helen Payne √ Elliot Penn √ Sandra Perkes √ Ian Perry √ Joanna Protheroe √ Ruba Sivagnanam √ Carys Stallard √ Neil Thomas √ Rhys Thomas Steffan Wiliam √ Margaret Wilkinson √ Eddie Williams √ Mark Wilson √ Nicholas Wood √ Member For Against Abstain Total 23 24 2 The amendment was not carried and the debate returned to discussing the original proposals. Councillor Mahoney acknowledged the need for housing but felt that building housing in high density areas with no access to services such as Doctors and Schools, which had not increased in recent times. He shared that he had lived in the Bendricks area for 13 years, there were no facilities excluding a café, and a bus service subsidised by Section 106 monies and that Sully School had not been upgraded in several years, despite recently losing a significant part of its budget. He noted that the Bendricks area was cut off from the rest of the area and without transport apart from walking, which did not suit all situations and urged the Council to stop building housing in concentrated places without enough services and infrastructure. Councillor Ernest stated that very little had changed in Sully in a number of years apart from increased housing and noted that the development of Sully Hospital had been beneficial in providing several new homes, but that there was limited public transport, which tended to run infrequently. He added that building more housing on Hayes Road would not lead to the services needed such as medical facilities, doctors and shops, and that if residents did not own a car, they would struggle with everyday tasks. The Leader acknowledged that in relation to infrastructure, there were things that the Council was responsible for and things it was not responsible for, and that the role of Council was to often lobby and negotiate on behalf of people, as demonstrated by the Health hub at Western Gate and the lobbying of the health board for Eagleswell in Llantwit Major. She also noted that whilst the Council had limited funding for bus services, there were two services which covered the Bendricks (88 and 94), and that when she used the bus, residents often commented positively on the Council housing which had been built in the area. She further stated that the area did not have an abundance of green fields to be built upon, so sites were invited to be considered as part of the LDP, with the Council considering most appropriate based upon the agreed strategy. The Leader emphasised that today’s proposals were about supporting people into the right accommodation, supporting people in looking towards their futures, and made no apologies in allocating these sites as they supported people with affordable housing. Councillor Perkes shared that they felt the Bendricks was becoming more of a community, with a development planned in partnership with Cardiff Council and Lovell Homes, containing affordable homes which were built to Welsh Housing Quality Standards. She noted concerns around lack of services but shared that services would grow as the population grew. Councillor Perry noted that increasing house prices were global issue, with housing becoming an investment which profited few people, and that the problem was not about the supply of housing, but the financing of housing. He reflected that building costs had increased alongside labour so there was inflation built into the system impacting upon their affordability. He sought clarification as to what was meant by inappropriate housing as he felt no definition was provided and would welcome similar detail surrounding the housing waiting list. He also challenged Members to further consider the environmental impacts upon the increased housing, as climate risks were increasing, and re-emphasised the point to invest in the transport network and subsidise public transport to be accessible and reduce the dependent on cars. Councillor Wilson stated that the Replacement Local Development Plan went through a detailed process with planning professionals, with sites tested upon their viability. He reflected that Transport for Wales were spending approximately £1 billion on electrification and new stations in Wales, and that the Council were bidding for stations. He noted that he felt the area was a great place to live, an amazing destination, and that he was a product of Council housing. He shared that the Council needed a legal basis to defend things which were outside of the RLDP, and that when it came to looking at the viability for these sites, it was essential that facilities were considered. Councillor John acknowledged the need for housing, particularly in the Western Vale, and welcomed the Leader’s work in lobbying the Health Board to improve medical services in the area which were oversubscribed, but suggested Welsh Government needed to intervene to push the development of health care provision, as the Council needed to consider facilities when trying to develop and build communities. Councillor Hodges indicated that the Weycock Cross development was not about social housing, but a commercial venture, and that when considering the Bendricks area, he did not believe the view that facilities would follow housing as services were reducing generally. He reflected on the Waterfront development, which was previously proposed as a potential hotel, and believed this to be a failure of the Council to promote Barry as a tourist destination, which would have a broader economic benefit. He also noted that he believed that developers had shafted the Council for a number of years and that it needed to be better in standing up to big business. Councillor Sivagnanam responded that the Housing Development team were holding pre-application consultations and invited Members and residents to participate in these moving forward to make their views clear. She emphasised that this was national growth area and there was a need for housing, particularly affordable homes in Barry, and failure to agree could leave the Council vulnerable to speculative applications. A further Recorded Vote took place on all three of the original recommendations as presented within the report: Member For Against Abstain Anne Asbrey √ Julie Aviet √ Gareth Ball √ Rhiannon Birch √ Bronwen Brooks √ Gillian Bruce √ Ian Buckley √ Lis Burnett √ Samantha Campbell √ George Carroll √ Christine Cave √ Charles Champion √ Amelia Collins √ Marianne Cowpe √ Pamela Drake √ Vincent Driscoll √ Anthony Ernest √ Robert Fisher Christopher Franks √ Wendy Gilligan √ Russell Godfrey √ Emma Goodjohn √ Ewan Goodjohn √ Member For Against Abstain Stephen Haines √ Sally Hanks √ William Hennessy √ Nic Hodges √ Mark Hooper √ Catherine Iannucci-Williams √ Gwyn John √ Ian Johnson √ Belinda Loveluck-Edwards √ Julie Lynch-Wilson √ Kevin Mahoney √ Naomi Marshallsea √ Michael Morgan √ Jayne Norman √ Helen Payne √ Elliot Penn √ Sandra Perkes √ Ian Perry √ Joanna Protheroe √ Ruba Sivagnanam √ Carys Stallard √ Neil Thomas √ Rhys Thomas Member For Against Abstain Steffan Wiliam √ Margaret Wilkinson √ Eddie Williams √ Mark Wilson √ Nicholas Wood √ Total 26 22 1 RESOLVED – (1) T H A T the contents of the report be noted. (2) T H A T the actions set out in the Consultation Report be endorsed. (3) T H A T the inclusion of the three potential housing sites as allocations in the Deposit Replacement Local Development Plan (RLDP) be approved. Reasons for decisions (1&2) To outline to Members the issues raised during the public consultation exercise on Housing Growth in Barry. (3 ) To allow officers to progress with the preparation of the Deposit RLDP. TREASURY MANAGEMENT MID-YEAR REPORT 2025/26 (REF) The Leader presented the regular update of the Council’s Treasury Management approach and highlighted that the report noted economic factors driving the UK economy alongside forecasts, and that there were no policy changes as of 30th September, 2025. She further noted the Council’s capital expenditure and prudential indicators were included in Appendix A, and that the investment portfolio listed the investments as £51.775 million as of 30th September, 2025, up from £17.19 million in April 2025. She shared that there was an average interest rate of 4.22% this year, which meant there was approximately £1.19 million interest accrued that the new external borrowing was at £6 million at an average rate of 4.56%, and that this was borrowed at shorter terms of up to 7 years, so it could be reborrowed if rates were to decrease. She further noted that the Council were prudent in terms of borrowing and investments and had not considered any debt rescheduling opportunities this year to date due to current interest rates. RESOLVED – T H A T the Treasury Management Annual Report for the period 2025/26 be approved Reason for decision To update Council surrounding the Council’s approach to Treasury Management. REVIEW OF THE VALE OF GLAMORGAN COUNCIL’S PETITION SCHEME (REF) The Leader presented the report and advised that the previous Petition Scheme had been considered by Council in 2022, and that this was a requirement under the Local Government and Elections (Wales) Act 2021 to produce a scheme which considered how a petition could be submitted, who could submit a petition, how and by when the Council acknowledged receipt and how the Council responded. Councillor Dr. Johnson stated that he felt the petitions process was quite difficult for ordinary members of the public to use, and that awareness needed to be raised as only 3 petitions had been submitted in 3 years, with only 1 reaching the threshold, and shared how it had worked positively when looking at School crossings. He noted that the Council needed to ensure that that there was an need to promoted awareness of this process to the public as to how they could get involved, to which the Leader responded that there was a need to ensure Vale residents were signatories, and as outlined within the report, the platform for this was being reviewed to be more user friendly as it was important to engage more effectively and through the most appropriate means. RESOLVED – T H A T the revised Vale of Glamorgan Council’s Petition Scheme be approved. Reason for decision To update the Council’s approach to fulfilling statutory legislation relating to petitions from the public. VALE OF GLAMORGAN REPLACEMENT LOCAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN (RLDP) 2021-2026 – HOUSING GROWTH IN BARRY CONSULTATION REPORT (REF) RESOLVED – T H A T the use of the Urgent Decision Procedure (Cabinet Minute No. C69, 17th July, 2025 (as set out in Section 15.14.2(ii) of the Council’s Constitution) be noted. Reason for decision The reporting of the use of the Urgent Decision Procedure is a requirement of the Council’s Constitution.
RESOLVED – (1) T H A T the Final Statement of Accounts and Annual Governance Statement be approved. (2) T H A T delegated authority be granted to the Section 151 Officer in liaison with the Chair of the Governance and Audit Committee to make any final adjustments to the Final Statement of Accounts and Annual Governance Statement as necessary. (3) T H A T the response to the Audit Wales Audit Enquiries at Appendix B to the report be noted. (4) T H A T the Audit Wales Audit of Accounts Report at Appendix C to the report be noted. (5) T H A T the Letter of Representation attached at Appendix D to the report be approved. Reasons for decisions (1) Council is the body responsible for the final approval of the Statement of Accounts and Annual Governance Statement. (2) The Audit of the Statement of Accounts and Annual Governance Statement is complete. (3) Audit Wales had written to both offices and those charged with governance with a set of queries to provide assurance on fraud, legal and related parties. (4) The Audit of Accounts Report was for noting and any adjustments required had been made in the Statement of Accounts and Annual Governance Statement being put forward for approval. (5) To enable the submission of the Letter of Representation ahead of the sign off of the Accounts by the Auditor General.
RESOLVED – (1) T H A T a zero-tolerance approach to gender-based violence across all policies and public spaces be adopted. (2) T H A T training be strengthened so staff can identify and respond to abusive behaviour and coercive control. (3) T H A T education on consent, healthy relationships and gender equality be supported, ensuring safe and accessible reporting routes. (4) T H A T the Council calls for sustainable national funding for VAWG support services. (5) T H A T the White Ribbon accreditation to demonstrate commitment to positive change, supporting gender equality and ending gender-based violence be renewed. Reason for decisions (1-5) Having regard to the vote being carried on the Motion.
RESOLVED – T H A T the minutes of the meeting held on 23rd October, 2025 be approved as a correct record.
RESOLVED – (1) T H A T a redundancy payment be approved from 31st March, 2026 as a result of the end of the temporary contract with the Council. A redundancy payment would be payable as S would have 14 years’ service on termination of the contract. (2) T H A T should alternative employment be found for S, Resolution (1) be revoked together with the redundancy payment should the trial period prove successful. Reasons for decisions (1) To determine the redundancy application within the regulations and to allow for eventualities that may not be known at this time. (2) To maintain compliance with the Council's Redeployment procedure. November 27 Minutes and DN (MS)
RESOLVED – T H A T the report and Appendix 1 be noted. Reason for decision To ensure Committee received an overview of all reports presented since April 2025. November 27 Minutes and DN (MS)
RESOLVED – T H A T under Section 100A(4) of the Local Government Act 1972, the press and public be excluded from the meeting for the following items of business on the grounds that they involve the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined in Part 4 of Schedule 12A (as amended) of the Act, the relevant paragraphs of the Schedule being referred to in brackets after the minute heading.
RESOLVED – (1) T H A T the flexible retirement of J be approved with effect from Monday, th 27 April, 2026. (2) T H A T the flexible retirement of J be agreed in accordance with the Council's policy subject to no other circumstances arising in the interim whereby the employment was to be terminated for a different reason. (3) T H A T the flexible retirement of J with an end date of April 2028, providing no other circumstances arose in the interim whereby the employment was to be terminated for a different reason, be agreed. Reasons for decisions (1) To support the employee’s request for flexible retirement whilst also securing the employee’s continued employment for a period of up to 24 months during which time the employee's skills and experience would be an asset to the Learning and Skills Directorate. That period allowed for planned succession building and sharing of knowledge and skills. (2-3) To determine the flexible retirement application within the regulations and to allow for eventualities that may not be known at the time.
RESOLVED: Council AGREED: 1. To approve the new appointments of Local Authority governors to the school governing bodies as set out in Appendix 1, each for a term of 4 years from the date of the appointment, in accordance with the recommendations of the Local Authority Governor Panel.
RESOLVED: Council AGREED: 1. To delegate authority to the Council’s Director of Planning, Transport and Environment, Head of Planning, Operational Manager for Major Development and Placemaking and the Group Leader for Planning Policy to permit effective dialogue between the independent Inspector and Council representatives subject to consultation with the Cabinet Member for Climate Change, Strategic Planning as detailed in paragraph 14 of this report, in accordance with Welsh Government guidance and in order to facilitate the efficient operation of the examination process.
RESOLVED: Council AGREED: 1. To note the Treasury Management Mid-Year Report 2025- 26 (Appendix 1).
RESOLVED: Council AGREED: 1. To note the annual report of the Governance & Audit Committee for 2024/25.
RESOLVED: Council AGREED: 1. To approve the revised Local Resolution Protocol (Appendix A), recommended by the Standards & Ethics Committee; 2. To note and confirm that the Monitoring Officer has delegated authority, in consultation with the Standards & Ethics Committee’s Chair, to make any minor amendments to the Local Resolution Protocol, which may be required to ensure that the Protocol operates effectively and lawfully; 3. Subject to approval of recommendation 1, to note that the Local Resolution Hearings Panel Procedure will be revoked; and the Hearings Procedure for Ombudsman Referrals will be amended, under delegated authority, as set out in paragraph 16 of the report.
RESOLVED: Council AGREED: 1. To resolve that the resolution of the Council that was passed at its meeting held on 24th July 25 which approved the submission of a Transport and Works Act Order on 22nd August 2025 is hereby confirmed by this resolution.