Wrthi'n llwytho
Y penderfyniadau fel y mae cofnodion y cyngor yn eu cofnodi. Bydd crynodeb mewn iaith glir yn dilyn pan fydd wedi'i ysgrifennu.
RESOLVED That the petition be noted and no further action taken.
RESOLVED That the petition be referred to the Services Overview and Scrutiny Committee for adding to its Forward Work Programme for the June meeting. [At this juncture, the meeting adjourned for a short break at 11:35 am and reconvened at 11:48 am]
RESOLVED That the petition be noted and considered alongside the substantive item on the agenda in relation to this matter.
RESOLVED That the decision of 12 December 2025 be reaffirmed as follows: That the Director for Education be authorised to commence statutory consultation to: (a) discontinue Saundersfoot School; (b) discontinue Stepaside School; and (c) establish a new 3-11 primary school on the Saundersfoot School site that encompasses the catchment of Saundersfoot and the catchment of Stepaside and Kilgetty.
RESOLVED That the Director of Education be authorised to publish a Statutory Notice to discontinue Ysgol Clydau.
RESOLVED That the Director of Education be authorised to publish a Statutory Notice to discontinue Manorbier Church in Wales Voluntary Controlled School. [The meeting adjourned at 16:48 pm and reconvened at 17:02 pm. Councillors Tony Wilcox, Michele Wiggins, Maureen Bowen, Phil Kidney, David Howlett and Iwan Ward left the meeting at this juncture.]
RESOLVED That an extension to the existing Liaison Group membership be approved, to include the Local Members of Local Authority run Gypsy Traveller sites; and that terms of reference be developed to reflect this membership.
RESOLVED (a) That delegated authority be granted to the Head of Planning to approve the application following publicity of the application as a Departure, the consideration of any representation received as part of that publicity, the completion of an appropriate section 106 legal agreement to tie the businesses together and subject to the conditions set out in paragraph 11.11 of the report, on the grounds of established and sustainable economic benefits and the exceptional nature of the business that outweighs any policy breaches. (b) In the event that the section 106 agreement be not completed within three months of the foregoing recommendation, then delegated authority be given to the Head of Planning to exercise discretion to refuse the application due to failure to comply with policy GN.10 of the Local Development Plan.
RESOLVED That the scope of the Section 31 Review of Community Electoral Arrangements, undertaken under the Democracy and Boundary Commission Cymru Act 2013 and approved by Council at its meeting on 12 December 2025, be extended to include the communities of Nolton and Roch, Martletwy, Stackpole and Castlemartin, and Pencaer.
RESOLVED That the Pay Policy statement for 2026-27 be approved for publication. [Councillor Anji Tinley rejoined the meeting at this juncture.]
RESOLVED That the response and action plan to the Panel’s report and recommendations, as attached at Appendix B, be approved.
RESOLVED (a) That the revised Allocation of Committee Seats and Outside Bodies to political groups under the requirements of Section 15 of the Local Government and Housing Act 1989 as set out in Appendix 1 be approved, subject to the Plaid Cymru Group being allocated an additional seat on the Social Care Overview and Scrutiny Committee. (b) That the following appointments of Members not in a Political Group be approved: (i) Urgency Committee – Councillor Pat Davies (ii) Governance and Audit Committee – Councillor Steve Alderman (iii) Housing Revenue Account Working Group – Councillor Bethan Price (iv) School Modernisation Working Group – Councillor Viv Stoddart (v) Net Zero Working Group – Councillor Michele Wiggins (vi) South West Wales Corporate Joint Overview and Scrutiny Committee – Councillor David Simpson (vii) Celtic Freeport Joint Scrutiny Committee – Councillor Steve Alderman (c) That the following changes be noted: (i) Licensing Committee – Councillor Bethan Price to step down. (ii) National Park Authority – Councillor Steve Alderman to step down. (iii) Social Care Overview and Scrutiny Committee – Councillor Steve Alderman to step down. (d) That the appointment of Members to Committees and other bodies, as set out in Appendix 3, be approved subject to the above amendments.
RESOLVED That the Notice of Motion be referred to Cabinet. [Councillors Tessa Hodgson, Thomas Tudor and Pat Davies left the meeting at this juncture.]
RESOLVED (a) That the Notice of Motion be adopted. (b) That this Council requests that the Labour Welsh Government intervenes in Hywel Dda University Health Board’s recent decision to cease emergency general surgery at Withybush hospital and immediately reverses their decision. We believe removing this service critically undermines the sustainability of Withybush hospital’s A&E department. Also, the decision by the Health Board does not take into account the impact and potential serious risks it will have on Pembrokeshire residents. (c) That the Hywel Dda University Health Board be requested to attend a future meeting of Pembrokeshire County Council to outline their future strategy for health provision in Pembrokeshire.
In welcoming everyone to the meeting, the Presiding Member advised that he had consented to allow the Notice of Motion from Councillor Di Clements on Emergency General Surgery at Withybush Hospital (Agenda item no. 17) as it was considered essential and conducive to the despatch of business to allow the Notice of Motion to be dealt with at the meeting. It was noted that the written supporting statement is contained on pages 699-701 of the Agenda pack. The Presiding Member then invited the Chair of Council/Deputy Presiding Member to make her announcements. The Chair began her announcements by stating that she had been honoured to represent the Council at two citizenship ceremonies at the Archives building. She had also given the introduction to the presentation of a King’s Award for Sustainability to Bluestone. The Award was presented on behalf of His Majesty the King by the Lord Lieutenant of Dyfed. The Chair offered her congratulations to Mr William McNamara and his team at Bluestone once again and stated how fantastic it is to see a thriving Pembrokeshire business receive such a prestigious award. On 6 February, the Chair stated it had been a pleasure to attend the Spotlight Awards which celebrate children and young people who achieve remarkable things and make a real difference. The event gives much hope that the future is in the hands of these wonderful young people. She then paid thanks to Pembrokeshire Youth, the Children and Young People’s Rights Officer and Children’s Services for organising the event and spotlighting these young people. And this weekend, to mark St David’s Day, she had been honoured to be asked by the Lord Mayor of Cardiff to attend a service and a dinner later that day hosted by St Davids City Council to commemorate St David. The Chair then highlighted some great news for learners and staff at Portfield School in Haverfordwest. At the end of last month phase one of the new Portfield School building was successfully completed in time for learners to return after half-term. She expressed her congratulations to the Council teams and Morgan Sindall for delivering these fantastic state-of-the-art facilities which will benefit Portfield learners and staff for generations to come. She then concluded her announcements by taking the opportunity to publicly congratulate the rowers of Team Merched Y Mor who completed their incredible Atlantic rowing challenge last month. The team comprising of Denise Leonard, Helen Heaton, Heledd Williams and Liz Collyer rowed for 50 days, 14 hours and 43 minutes to become the first all-Wales women’s team to cross the Atlantic. Helen and Liz are both Pembrokeshire County Council employees and, on behalf of Council, she sent her congratulations to the team on their epic achievement. A round of applause was then given for the achievement at the invitation of the Presiding Member.
The following declarations of interest were made: (a) Agenda Item No. 5 - Petition relating to the Dyfed Pension Fund Divesting from companies profiting from genocide Councillors Steve Alderman, Michelle Bateman, David Bryan, Alistair Cameron, Aaron Carey, Mark Carter, Alec Cormack, Terry Davies, Alan Dennison, Tim Evans, Claire George, Jonathan Grimes, Nicola Gwynn, Simon Hancock, Jon Harvey, Tessa Hodgson, David Howlett, Michael John, Elwyn Morse, Huw Murphy, Nick Neumann, David Simpson, Sam Skyrme-Blackhall, Vanessa Thomas, Thomas Tudor, Iwan Ward, Michele Wiggins, Michael Williams, Alun Wills, Guy Woodham, Simon Wright and Steve Yelland each declared a personal interest by virtue of being Members of the Dyfed Pension Fund. (b) Agenda Item No. 5 - Petition relating to the saving of Stepaside School Councillor Michelle Bateman declared a personal interest by virtue of a family member being Deputy Head of Saundersfoot School. Councillor Alistair Cameron declared a personal interest by virtue of being a non-voting Governor at Stepaside School. Councillor Alec Cormack declared a personal interest by virtue of being a Governor of Saundersfoot School, appointed by the Authority. (c) Agenda Item No. 7 – Stepaside and Saundersfoot School Supplementary Information Councillor Alistair Cameron declared a personal interest by virtue of being a non-voting Governor at Stepaside School, appointed by the Authority. Councillor Alec Cormack declared a personal interest by virtue of being a Governor of Saundersfoot School, appointed by the Authority. Councillor Chris Williams declared a personal interest by virtue of a family member being the Headmaster of Golden Grove School, Pembroke. (d) Agenda Item No. 8 – Consultation Report relating to the discontinuation of Manorbier School Councillor Steve Alderman declared a personal interest by virtue of being a federated Governor of St Florence and Penrhyn VC Schools, appointed by the Authority. Councillor Phil Kidney declared a personal interest by virtue of being a Governor of St Florence School. (e) Agenda Item No. 11 - Development Management Policy Issue: Planning Application Reference 25/0404/PA – Relocation and Expansion of Existing Farm Diversification Business to Existing Agricultural Building – Castle Villa, Hayscastle, Pembrokeshire, SA62 5AA Councillor Steve Alderman declared a personal interest by virtue of being Chair of Council when he handed a King’s Award to FRIO. (f) Agenda Item No. 12 - Review of Community Electoral Arrangements Councillor Steve Alderman declared a personal interest by virtue of being the Chair of Stackpole and Castlemartin Community Council. Councillor Claire George declared a personal interest by virtue of being the Chair of One Voice Wales’ Pembrokeshire Area Committee. Councillor Nick Neumann declared a personal interest by virtue of being the Clerk to Nolton and Roch Community Council. (g) Agenda Item No. 13 - Pay Policy Statement Councillor Di Clements declared a personal interest by virtue of a close family member being employed by the Authority. (h) Agenda Item No. 17 - Notice of Motion relating to Emergency General Surgery at Withybush Hospital Councillor Michelle Bateman declared a personal interest by virtue of being employed by a company that has a contract with Hywel Dda University Health Board which is not in relation to their clinical services plan. Councillor Thomas Tudor declared a personal and prejudicial interest by virtue of being employed by Hywel Dda University Health Board. Councillor Marc Tierney declared a personal interest by virtue of being employed by a Senedd Member who is also a Member of the Welsh Government and any other items where the Welsh Government may be mentioned during the meeting. Councillor Bethan Price declared a personal interest by virtue of a close family member being employed at Withybush Hospital.
Council considered the Minutes of the Meeting held on 12 December 2025 and the Extraordinary Meeting held on 21 January 2026 for approval as a correct record. The vote, undertaken by way of a show of hands, was carried. Moved by the Presiding Member; Seconded by Councillor Brian Hall RESOLVED That the Minutes of the Meeting held on 12 December 2025 be approved as a correct record. Moved by the Presiding Member; Seconded by Councillor Alec Cormack RESOLVED That the Minutes of the Extraordinary Meeting held on 21 January 2026 be approved as a correct record.
Y penderfyniad fel y'i cofnodwyd
RESOLVED That the petition be noted and no further action taken.
[During the debate on this item of business, Councillor Paul Miller declared a personal interest by virtue of being a member of the Dyfed Pension Fund.] The Presiding Member welcomed Mr Ian Hicks to the meeting to speak on the petition relating to the divestment in companies profiting grom genocide from the Dyfed Pension Fund which had met the threshold for a debate at Council. He then outlined the process for consideration of the petition. The terms of the petition called upon Pembrokeshire County Council to pass a resolution calling on the Dyfed Pension Fund to divest our pension money from companies profiting from genocide which had been started by Sarah Davies of Solidarity with Palestine Pembrokeshire. Mr Hicks addressed the meeting on behalf of contributors and recipients of the Dyfed Pension Scheme and members of Palestine Solidarity Pembrokeshire. He highlighted two concerns often raised by opponents of divestment: questions over the legality of divesting from Israeli?linked funds and the suggestion that doing so would expose the Pension Fund to financial risk. The speaker referred to a 2020 UK Supreme Court ruling which upheld the right of local councils to pursue divestment policies, arguing this decision directly contradicts claims that councils could face legal action or damages for doing so. Mr Hicks also referenced international legal findings, including those of the International Court of Justice, relating to Israel’s actions in Gaza, the West Bank and East Jerusalem. He stated that several governments and companies continue to support Israel through military and logistical means. Against this backdrop, he called on the Dyfed Pension Fund to divest from companies operating not only in the occupied Palestinian territories but also within Israel more broadly. Addressing fiduciary duty, he noted that numerous companies in which the Dyfed Pension Fund may invest—such as armaments, technology, financial, and aerospace firms—operate in areas they described as being in breach of international law. He cited a letter from the Fund’s Treasurer and Pensions Manager (dated 29 June 2024), acknowledging the importance of human rights but stating that global disinvestment was not considered viable due to the need for diversification and the avoidance of unnecessary financial risk. Mr Hicks argued that if the Fund’s performance is so dependent on investments in Israeli?linked companies that divestment poses significant risk, then the Fund’s investment strategy may be unbalanced and in need of reassessment. He stated that the Fund’s own policies emphasise responsible investment and avoiding reputational and financial harm. He then concluded by asking the Fund to progress divestment from Israeli?linked firms, asserting that divestment, sanctions and boycotts have historically served as lawful, collective tools to challenge injustices, citing examples such as South Africa and Russia. The Presiding Member then invited Councillor Alistair Cameron, the Cabinet Member for Corporate Finance and Efficiencies to provide a response. Councillor Alistair Cameron Moved the following: firstly, that Pembrokeshire County Council reaffirms its commitment to ethical governance and global justice, aligning local decision?making with principles of sustainability and respect for international law; secondly, that the Council expresses in the strongest terms that it does not wish to be associated with companies potentially complicit in war crimes or human rights violations; and thirdly, that the Council notes the Dyfed Pension Fund is currently reviewing its ethical investment policies. He explained that he had drafted the Motion with the intention of achieving consensus across the Chamber. Councillor Cameron emphasised that the ongoing review of the Pension Fund’s policies was a key element, as it aimed to ensure that its approach to ethical investment remains up to date. He stated his belief that this process is appropriate and deserving of cross?party support. In offering personal reflections, he expressed deep sympathy for civilians in Gaza in light of current events, as well as for civilians in Israel who have suffered previously. He concluded by expressing a shared desire for peace in the region. Councillor Billy Shaw Seconded the Motion. Council discussed the petition and the following key points were noted: Councillor Tessa Hodgson expressed concern for all those affected by the ongoing conflict in the Middle East. She stated that the petitioners were asking the Council to act as moral arbiters in a distant and highly complex situation, noting that the issues involved were contentious and subject to legal debate. She emphasised that Members were not pension experts and that the Dyfed Pension Fund trustees had a statutory duty to invest prudently and in accordance with UK law. Councillor Hodgson stated that she would not support any action that fettered the trustees’ discretion and Moved an Amendment that no further action be taken. Seconded by Councillor Alan Dennison. Council then discussed the Amendment. Councillor Alan Dennison noted that 560 Pembrokeshire residents had signed the petition and questioned how many of them were members of the pension scheme. He observed that this number represented less than 0.5% of the county’s population, indicating limited engagement, and suggested that only a small proportion of scheme members were likely to have participated. Councillor Dennison reiterated that the Dyfed Pension Fund trustees have a fiduciary duty to review Environmental, Social and Governance (ESG) matters for all investments and are, therefore, best placed to make decisions on such issues. He agreed with Councillor Hodgson that Councillors generally do not have the specialist knowledge required to determine pension investment matters or the wider historical and contextual issues surrounding the conflict referenced in the petition. Councillor Alec Cormack noted that taking no further action might amount to a negating motion. He observed that, if the first two paragraphs of the original Motion were removed, the remaining wording was broadly consistent with the point raised by Councillor Hodgson regarding the Dyfed Pension Fund’s ongoing review of its ethical investment policies. Councillor Cormack expressed personal sympathy for the petitioners and acknowledged the importance of the issues they had raised. He stated that he wished to understand what influence Pembrokeshire County Council could have within the review of the Fund’s ethical investment policy and felt that the Council should do more than take no action. In response, the Director of Resources clarified that the Dyfed Pension Fund Committee was composed of councillors from Carmarthenshire. If Pembrokeshire councillors wished to express a view on the matter, the most appropriate approach would be to write to the Pension Committee of the Dyfed Pension Fund. Councillor Hodgson pointed out that the report set out four options for responding to the petition and confirmed that she wished to proceed with Option 2: take no further action. She stated that the Council did not have a role in influencing the Dyfed Pension Fund, emphasising that its purpose was to deliver local services rather than direct the activities of a pension fund with thousands of members. She cautioned that attempting to influence the Fund would be overreach and repeated her view that no further action should be taken. The Presiding Member acknowledged the distinction between formal responsibility and influence but noted that the Council was permitted to express opinions on matters of concern. Councillor Michael John agreed with Councillor Cormack that, while the Council could not direct the Pension Fund, it could express a view. He reported receiving correspondence from residents with differing perspectives on various international conflicts and felt the Council should not single out one situation over others. He stated that, in principle, investments should avoid companies associated with genocide anywhere. Councillor John expressed sympathy with Councillor Cameron’s proposal to issue a general statement, noting that changing pension arrangements would be inappropriate, but that taking no action did not fully reflect his views. Councillor Jamie Adams stated that, while he had sympathy with the views expressed by Councillor Hodgson, a possible compromise—reflecting comments from several Members—would be to refer the matter to the Dyfed Pension Fund Management Committee. He noted that this corresponded to Option 4 in the list of possible outcomes and suggested it as an approach for consideration. Councillor Paul Miller cautioned against writing to the Pension Fund Committee, as doing so could imply the Council wished to influence its ethical investment strategy without fully understanding the financial implications. He noted that any impact on investment returns could affect the Council’s employer contributions. Councillor Miller stated that the Pension Fund Committee is responsible for managing the Fund within UK law, and he was not comfortable signalling any direction to them. Councillor Marc Tierney spoke as Cabinet Member for Well?being and Future Generations, noting that the Well?being of Future Generations Act includes a goal of creating a “globally responsible Wales,” to which the Council is committed. He felt elements of Councillor Cameron’s Motion relating to ethical governance and global justice aligned with that goal. Councillor Tierney acknowledged the complexity of the issues raised and associated himself with comments made by Councillors Alec Cormack and Michael John. He concluded that Councillors are elected to express political views and affirmed his support for ethical practice and global justice. The Presiding Member then invited the public speaker to sum up. Accordingly, Mr Hicks stated that, in his view, the situation in Gaza constituted genocide and referred to several organisations he said supported that position. He suggested that members of the Dyfed Pension Fund should be directly consulted on the issue, proposing that the Fund’s managers could email all contributors and recipients to seek their views. He argued that local authorities were legally permitted to consider ethical factors in investment decisions and maintained that asking the Pension Fund to divest would be consistent with those powers. Mr Hicks also stated that some ethical and sustainable funds, managed by firms such as Schroders and BlackRock, had performed better than the funds currently used by the Pension Fund. He concluded by thanking Members for their contributions and expressed hope that a process of divestment would begin, noting that other councils had taken similar steps. The vote on the Amendment, undertaken by way of a roll-call, was carried. The votes were recorded as follows: For the Motion: Councillors Jamie Adams, Michelle Bateman, David Bryan, Aaron Carey, Mark Carter, Di Clements, Terry Davies, Alan Dennison, Tim Evans, Claire George, Jonathan Grimes, Delme Harries, Jon Harvey, Tessa Hodgson, David Howlett, Mike James, Rhys Jordan, Paul Miller, Elwyn Morse, Huw Murphy, Nick Neumann, David Simpson, Sam Skyrme-Blackhall, Viv Stoddart, Aled Thomas, Vanessa Thomas, Jacob Williams, Alun Wills, Guy Woodham, Steve Yelland and Danny Young [31] Against the Motion: Councillors Steve Alderman, Joshua Beynon, Maureen Bowen, Alistair Cameron, Alec Cormack, Pat Davies, Nicola Gwynn, Brian Hall, Simon Hancock, Mike John, Phil Kidney, Mel Phillips, Bethan Price, Billy Shaw, Rhys Sinnett, Marc Tierney, Anji Tinley, Iwan Ward, Michele Wiggins, Chris Williams, Michael Williams and Simon Wright [22] Abstentions: Councillors John Cole, Thomas Tudor and Tony Wilcox [3] RESOLVED That the petition be noted and no further action taken.
Y penderfyniad fel y'i cofnodwyd
RESOLVED That the petition be referred to the Services Overview and Scrutiny Committee for adding to its Forward Work Programme for the June meeting. [At this juncture, the meeting adjourned for a short break at 11:35 am and reconvened at 11:48 am]
[Councillor David Simpson declared a personal interest by virtue of being a member of Teifi Trout Association.] The Presiding Member welcomed Mr James Harrison-Allen to the meeting to speak on the petition relating saving the Cleddau which had met the threshold for a debate at Council. He then outlined the process for consideration of the petition. The terms of the petition called upon Pembrokeshire County Council to create and enact a Clean Rivers Policy to restore the Cleddau to good health after decades of neglect and degradation. Mr Harrison-Allen began his presentation by stating that the petition had received approximately 2,400 signatures, which he believed to be the highest recorded by the Council. He described long?term and significant deterioration in the health of the River Cleddau, noting declining fish populations, sections of river becoming devoid of life, and increasing public concern over pollution. He referred to Special Area of Conservation (SAC) rivers and asserted that the Eastern Cleddau was among the most polluted, attributing ecological impacts to excessive nutrient levels. He highlighted health risks arising from poor water quality, citing examples of serious illness following swimming in local waters, and reported high levels of E. coli detected at some Pembrokeshire sites. Mr Allen?Harrison expressed concern about repeated pollution incidents, including raw sewage discharges into the estuary, and argued that these posed risks to wildlife, public health and tourism. He welcomed recent research aimed at better understanding estuary conditions, explaining that nutrient accumulation in soils was now contributing to pollution entering watercourses. He noted that development had been affected due to nutrient limits and stated that the Council had a legal responsibility to act under the Well?being of Future Generations framework. He suggested that other local authorities had secured funding and deployed sensors to monitor river pollution more effectively, and he urged Pembrokeshire County Council to do more. He argued that all Council departments could contribute to improvements, including through changes to land management practices. Mr Allen?Harrison concluded by calling for greater urgency in addressing the situation, warning that continued inaction risked further environmental and public health harm. The Presiding Member then invited Councillor Paul Miller, the Deputy Leader and Cabinet Member with responsibility for Place, the Region, Climate Change and Rural Affairs to provide a response. Councillor Paul Miller thanked the petition organiser and signatories and confirmed that the Council was committed to playing its full part in improving the health of the River Cleddau. He emphasised that primary responsibility lay with Natural Resources Wales but acknowledged the Council’s significant role. He outlined ongoing work, including participation in the West Wales Nutrient Management Board, adoption of the Cleddau Nutrient Management Plan, targeted monitoring, engagement with the agricultural sector, and joint initiatives with Carmarthenshire. He noted forthcoming measures such as sensor installation, nature?based solutions, enhancements to land and wastewater management, and expanded citizen?science activity. Councillor Miller welcomed the suggestion of scrutiny involvement and reiterated the Council’s commitment to contributing fully to efforts to restore river health. Council discussed the petition and the following key points were noted: Councillor Di Clements thanked the petitioners and noted the Cleddau’s importance to Pembrokeshire’s landscape, heritage and economy. She acknowledged significant public concern and her own personal interest as a resident living alongside the river. Councillor Clements commended the work of the Cleddau project in raising awareness and noted that, while Natural Resources Wales held primary responsibility for monitoring and enforcement, the Council also had a role. Having sought clarification from officers prior to the meeting, she stated that the extent of ongoing Council work on water quality was greater than many Members may realise. Given the complexity of the issues and the number of organisations involved, she Moved that the matter be referred to the Services Overview and Scrutiny Committee and requested that it be added to the Committee’s forward work programme for the June meeting, alongside the planned review of nitrate and water?quality matters. Seconded by the Presiding Member. Councillor Michael John thanked officers and fellow Members for the information provided and said he had also appreciated the awareness raised by the Cleddau Project. He noted the river’s importance to the county’s environment, economy and communities, and expressed concern about the consequences of continued pollution, including extensive sewage spills reported at the Llangwm Pumping Station and Treatment Works. He emphasised that major incidents were occurring despite regulatory assurances and argued that the Council should give greater weight to these issues in planning decisions. Councillor John supported the Motion and agreed that the Council should work collaboratively with partners, including Natural Resources Wales, the Nutrient Management Board, and the agricultural sector, to address water?quality concerns. Councillor Vanessa Thomas thanked Mr Allen?Harrison for presenting the petition and highlighted the seriousness of the issues raised regarding the condition of the River Cleddau. She also shared a statement on behalf of a local resident describing the severe illness suffered by her daughter in 2022 after swimming at Amroth. Councillor Thomas noted that similar risks may exist within local rivers, where people continue to swim and use the water without awareness of potential contamination. She emphasised that such incidents demonstrated a need for action to protect public health and asked what more the Council could do to help ensure local rivers and coastal waters are safe. Councillor Alan Dennison thanked the petitioners and welcomed the recovery of individuals affected by recent incidents highlighted during the debate. He expressed shock at the scale of sewage discharges reported and concern about water quality at locations such as Broad Haven and Little Haven, citing personal connections to the area. Councillor Dennison noted that many Members had been unaware of the extent of work already undertaken by the Council until outlined earlier in the meeting. He stated that he had lost confidence in Natural Resources Wales’ handling of these issues and suggested that the Council should consider writing to express this concern, although the Presiding Member advised that any such recommendation should follow formal scrutiny. Councillor Nick Neumann thanked Mr Allen?Harrison for coordinating the petition and raising awareness of the issue. He emphasised the importance of the Eastern and Western Cleddau to Pembrokeshire’s identity and noted that declining water quality was already impacting planning, housing, farming, tourism, and the county’s long?term financial resilience. Referring to his own ward, he highlighted that Broad Haven Beach had experienced more than 60 sewage spills in January and February alone, with projections of up to 300 incidents over the coming year, which he described as unacceptable. He stressed the damage such spills cause to public confidence, local businesses, and wastewater infrastructure, as well as to Pembrokeshire’s reputation as a clean and safe place to live and visit. Councillor Neumann concluded that Councillors were not bystanders and had influence through planning, land use and partnership work, and that the situation required responsible and proactive action. Councillor David Bryan stated that, following a recent discussion with a member of the Cleddau Project, he had been shocked by the information shared regarding pollution in the river. He recalled attending a well?attended public meeting on the issue and noted the level of concern expressed. Councillor Bryan said it would be wrong for the Council to ignore what was happening so close to County Hall and emphasised the need to take the matter seriously. Councillor Thomas Tudor welcomed the work of the Cleddau Project in highlighting issues affecting the waterway and expressed strong support for the Motion. He noted that residents in his ward had raised concerns with him about visible pollution, including froth on the river surface near the pumping station. Councillor Jacob Williams thanked the Cleddau Project, its members and volunteer citizen scientists for their work. He acknowledged their frustration but noted that the Council was undertaking substantial activity in this area, as outlined earlier by Councillor Miller. He emphasised that Natural Resources Wales is the statutory environmental regulator and observed that the Council had, on numerous occasions, been dissatisfied with NRW’s performance. Councillor Williams welcomed the number of Members engaging in the debate and supported referring the matter to scrutiny. He also raised concerns about the effectiveness and balance of NRW’s regulatory approach, particularly in relation to agricultural pollution, and suggested that improved enforcement in that sector could significantly benefit river quality. He concluded that a change in national policy may follow the forthcoming Senedd elections. Councillor David Simpson expressed his support for the petition and thanked the petitioner for bringing the matter to Council. He highlighted the significant decline in salmon and trout stocks experienced over many years and noted that similar issues were occurring elsewhere in the UK. Councillor Tony Wilcox suggested that Natural Resources Wales should be invited to attend the forthcoming Services Overview and Scrutiny Committee meeting to contribute to the discussion. The Presiding Member then invited the public speaker to sum up. Accordingly, Mr Allen?Harrison thanked Members for their contributions and asked for greater transparency from the Council regarding ongoing work relating to the Cleddau. He noted that the area had narrowly avoided national publicity in a recent Channel 4 programme on water pollution, which he said illustrated the seriousness of the situation. He warned that pollution levels in the river were at their worst and likely to deteriorate further before improving, even with immediate action. While acknowledging that Natural Resources Wales is the statutory regulator, he expressed the view that the organisation was not taking sufficient action and that the Council, therefore, needed to play a more active role. He thanked Members and the volunteers of the Cleddau Project for their work and expressed hope that meaningful progress could be made. The vote, undertaken by way of an electronic vote, was carried. The votes were recorded as follows: For the Motion: Councillors Jamie Adams, Steve Alderman, Michelle Bateman, Joshua Beynon, Maureen Bowen, David Bryan, Alistair Cameron, Aaron Carey, Mark Carter, Di Clements, John Cole, Alec Cormack, Pat Davies, Terry Davies, Alan Dennison, Tim Evans, Claire George, Jonathan Grimes, Nicola Gwynn, Brian Hall, Simon Hancock, Delme Harries, Jon Harvey, Tessa Hodgson, David Howlett, Mike James, Mike John, Rhys Jordan, Phil Kidney, Paul Miller, Elwyn Morse, Huw Murphy, Nick Neumann, Mel Phillips, Bethan Price, Billy Shaw, David Simpson, Rhys Sinnett, Sam Skyrme-Blackhall, Viv Stoddart, Aled Thomas, Vanessa Thomas, Marc Tierney, Anji Tinley, Thomas Tudor, Iwan Ward, Michele Wiggins, Tony Wilcox, Chris Williams, Jacob Williams, Michael Williams, Alun Wills, Guy Woodham, Simon Wright, Steve Yelland and Danny Young [56] There were no votes against or abstentions. RESOLVED That the petition be referred to the Services Overview and Scrutiny Committee for adding to its Forward Work Programme for the June meeting. [At this juncture, the meeting adjourned for a short break at 11:35 am and reconvened at 11:48 am]
Y penderfyniad fel y'i cofnodwyd
RESOLVED That the petition be noted and considered alongside the substantive item on the agenda in relation to this matter.
The Presiding Member welcomed Ms Laura Burnett to the meeting to speak on the petition relating to saving Stepaside School which had met the threshold for a debate at Council. He then outlined the process for consideration of the petition. The terms of the petition called upon Pembrokeshire County Council to save Stepaside School and work with local communities to look at alternative solutions started by Angela Robinson. Ms Burnett addressed Council on behalf of nearly 2,000 signatories opposing the proposed closure of Stepaside School. She stated that the School Organisation Code requires decisions to benefit learners, reduce inequality, support vulnerable pupils and be based on accurate evidence, and argued that the proposal met none of these tests. She described Stepaside as a successful and safe school with stable pupil numbers, strong additional learning needs provision and positive outcomes for children, including those from Gypsy, Roma and Traveller communities. She contended that the capacity data used by the Council was flawed and recently revised, and that closing a performing school could not be justified as school improvement. Ms Burnett maintained that alternatives required by the Code—such as adjusting capacity, developing recovery plans, or increasing community use—had not been fully explored. She further argued that closure would negatively affect travel, safeguarding and community cohesion, replacing safe local access with transport arrangements that reduced contact with staff. She also stated that the school operated within budget and held a surplus, and that closure would not deliver financial benefits. Ms Burnett urged Members to pause the proposal, gather accurate data and support measures to strengthen the school, concluding that the proposal did not meet statutory requirements and should be rejected. Following Ms Burnett’s address, the Presiding Member invited Councillor Guy Woodham, the Cabinet Member for Education and Welsh Language, to provide a response. Councillor Woodham thanked Ms Burnett for her presentation and acknowledged the importance of hearing directly from those connected with the school. He reminded Members that the Council had agreed in December to proceed to consultation on the proposal, with consultation scheduled for September, and noted that a later agenda item would consider whether that decision should be revisited. He indicated that the School Modernisation Working Group continued to recommend proceeding to consultation. Councillor Woodham stressed that, should consultation go ahead, it would be vital for all interested parties— including those who signed the petition— to participate so that a full range of views and evidence could be considered when the matter returned to Council for decision. He thanked the speaker for attending and contributing. The Presiding Member then invited Councillor Alistair Cameron, local Member, to speak to the petition. Councillor Cameron challenged the assumptions underpinning the proposal to close Stepaside School. He questioned the stated capacity of 200 pupils, noting that Officers had recently undertaken a capacity review and that Members had not yet received the results. He also disputed projections of falling pupil numbers, highlighting that enrolment had remained stable at around 110–115 for several years and that future housing growth was expected in the area. He emphasised that Stepaside was a successful school, citing positive Estyn findings and strong support for pupils, including those from the Gypsy and Traveller community, who could be disproportionately affected by relocation. Councillor Cameron further questioned the financial case, pointing out that projected savings were modest and that additional costs—such as transport and potential works at Saundersfoot—were not fully reflected. He concluded that insufficient and inaccurate data made it inappropriate to proceed and indicated he would oppose starting statutory consultation. Council discussed the petition and the following key points were noted: Councillor Alec Cormack thanked the speaker and noted that, as a resident of the Stepaside School catchment area, he looked forward to contributing further to the discussion when the main agenda item was considered. Councillor Phil Kidney commented on the potential impact of the proposal on pupils from the Gypsy and Traveller community. He noted that many families value Stepaside School’s ethos and proximity, and expressed concern that relocating pupils could negatively affect their attendance. Councillor Aled Thomas, Chair of the School Modernisation Working Group, stated that the Group had fully considered all issues raised regarding Stepaside School. He expressed concern at suggestions that matters had only recently been examined, noting that capacity review opportunities had existed for some time. He emphasised the need to view the proposal in the wider context of education across the county, including matters relating to Saundersfoot. Councillor Thomas also noted that documentation supplied to the Working Group was intended to support open and confidential discussion and queried the reference made earlier to a “significant risk” for Gypsy and Traveller pupils, stating that this wording did not appear in the report before Council. He highlighted the potential financial implications of the proposal, including possible revenue savings over three years and future capital receipts that could support housing delivery. Concluding, Councillor Thomas Moved that Council thank the petitioner and note the petition, with its content to be considered alongside Agenda Item 7 (relating to Stepaside and Saundersfoot Schools); Seconded by Councillor Rhys Jordan. The Presiding Member then invited the public speaker to sum up. Accordingly, Ms Burnett thanked the Members who had visited Stepaside School and said she hoped seeing the school firsthand had been helpful. Ms Burnett emphasised that Stepaside was a successful, high?performing school serving a unique community and that there was no problem to solve. She stated that the issues under discussion related to inaccurate information and low parental preference rather than educational performance. She expressed concern that proceeding to consultation could undermine efforts to improve parental preference in the area. The petitioner also highlighted that the school housed a business reliant on the site, which would be adversely affected by closure, and suggested that alternative options to strengthen the school and its role in the community should be explored before any proposal progressed. Finally, she thanked Members and asked them to keep these points in mind when considering the forthcoming agenda item. The vote, undertaken by way of a show of hands, was carried. RESOLVED That the petition be noted and considered alongside the substantive item on the agenda in relation to this matter.
Councillor Alistair Cameron, the relevant Cabinet Member, responded to a question submitted by Paul Haywood-Dowson prior to the meeting in accordance with the provisions of Council Procedure Rule 4.17 as follows: • The Dyfed Pension Fund exists to provide secure, long-term retirement benefits for local authority employees, and those responsible for its governance are subject to a fiduciary duty to act in the best financial interests of scheme members. Can the Council clarify how debating or adopting a position on a highly contested international political conflict falls within the proper remit of a local authority, and how councillors are expected to reconcile such a debate with their responsibilities regarding pension governance? In particular: (a) what safeguards are in place to ensure that decisions relating to the Dyfed Pension Fund are based on professional investment advice and the interests of scheme members, rather than external political or activist pressure; and (b) how the Council intends to avoid setting a precedent whereby pension policy becomes subject to future campaigns unrelated to the Council’s statutory functions? • How will the Council ensure that the governance of the Dyfed Pension Fund remains evidence-led, apolitical, and compliant with its fiduciary and legal obligations? The Cabinet Member responded that, although Pembrokeshire County Council is not the administering Authority for the Dyfed Local Government Pension Scheme and cannot direct or override its regulatory responsibilities, the Council’s petition scheme allows it to express a view on matters where there is a local connection and where Members consider it appropriate to do so. The Cabinet Member then proceeded to respond to each of the specific points as follows: 1(a) The Dyfed Pension Fund retains the services of an Independent Investment Adviser, Apex Investments Advisers Limited. Apex Investment Advisers have considerable expertise and resources available to them and advise many Pension Funds in the Local Government Pension Scheme (LGPS) throughout the UK. Our nominated Independent Investment Adviser is regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA). The majority of the Fund’s assets are pooled through the Wales Pension Partnership (WPP) and from 1 April 2026, the Wales Pension Partnership Investment Management Company (WPP IMCo) will take over responsibility for all the Fund’s assets. WPP IMCo will also be fully regulated by the FCA to manage the Fund’s investments and provide investment advice. The WPP utilises the services of an Oversight Adviser (Hymans Robertson) and they also bring considerable expertise and resources in relation to governance and investments. The Pension Committee is responsible for the strategic oversight and performance monitoring of the Pension Fund’s investments. A key governance arrangement to support these objectives is the advice of the Independent Investment Adviser. Decisions on individual specific investments are delegated to FCA regulated investment managers which have considerable expertise in terms of due diligence to make these decisions. The Fund also benefits from highly experienced officers and highly experienced individuals on the Pension Committee and Pension Board. All individuals undertake training to ensure that the Pension Committee have the requisite knowledge and skills to carry out its duties effectively and for the Pension Board to appropriately scrutinise any decisions made. The exclusion framework is not designed to take a stance on any particular conflict but has been designed so that it can be consistently and transparently implemented in accordance with the updated WPP Responsible Investment Policy, which will be considered by the JGC on 10 March. 1(b) The WPP, along with the eight Pension Funds in Wales have worked with the WPP’s Oversight Advisor (Hymans Robertson) to update the WPP Responsible Investment Policy. The WPP’s Officer Working Group (OWG), which is comprised of Practitioners and Section 151 Officers and the JGC which is comprised of the eight Pension Committee Chairs and an independent member representative have actively engaged in this process to ensure a full range of views have been expressed and considered. As well as Hymans Robertson, the WPP has also engaged with Russell Investments (Investment Management Solutions Provider) and Waystone (Operator) to ensure that the exclusion policy is robust and can be implemented effectively should it be approved by the JGC on 10 March. Compliance with all requirements including fiduciary duty has been considered as part of these detailed discussions. 2. The Dyfed Pension Fund has clear and transparent governance arrangements, which includes a detailed Governance Policy which sets out the Pension Committee’s responsibilities and decision-making procedures. From 1 April 2026, the Wales Pension Partnership Investment Management Company will take over investment management responsibilities and will be fully regulated by the FCA to undertake these activities. The Pension Committee will set a strategic asset allocation (SAA) for the Fund’s investments at a high-level and it will be WPP IM Co’s role to implement investment decisions as the regulated investment manager. The Fund, as it has done so previously, will seek advice from qualified and regulated companies in determining its investment strategy and SAA to ensure that any review is evidence-led and compliant with its fiduciary and legal obligations.
Y penderfyniad fel y'i cofnodwyd
RESOLVED That the decision of 12 December 2025 be reaffirmed as follows: That the Director for Education be authorised to commence statutory consultation to: (a) discontinue Saundersfoot School; (b) discontinue Stepaside School; and (c) establish a new 3-11 primary school on the Saundersfoot School site that encompasses the catchment of Saundersfoot and the catchment of Stepaside and Kilgetty.
Council considered a report of the School Modernisation Working Group relating to its previous recommendation for the Director for Education to commence statutory consultation on proposals relating to Saundersfoot and Stepaside Schools. Councillor Aled Thomas, Chair of the School Modernisation Working Group, introduced the report and outlined the Working Group’s reconsideration of the options for Stepaside and Saundersfoot Schools following concerns raised about the decision that Council made in December 2025. He stated that Statutory Officers had advised that additional information was needed before Council could reaffirm or revise that decision. Consequently, the Working Group re?evaluated all four options—status quo, federation, a new single 3–11 school at Saundersfoot, and a multi?site model—against educational, equality, financial, and operational criteria. Updated analysis included refreshed financial modelling, assessment of Gypsy and Traveller impacts, and revised transport and site information. The Working Group concluded that establishing a single school at Saundersfoot remained the most viable and sustainable option and recommended proceeding to statutory consultation. The Recommendation was Moved by Councillor Aled Thomas; Seconded by Councillor Guy Woodham. Also as a Member of the Working Group, Councillor Woodham concurred with the points made by Councillor Thomas. Council discussed the report and the following key points were noted: Councillor Alec Cormack sought clarification from Councillor Aled Thomas regarding an apparent omission from the Council report, noting that a Working Group paper had previously stated there was a “significant risk” that amalgamating provision at Saundersfoot could negatively impact Gypsy and Traveller pupils. He expressed concern that this wording did not appear in the report before Members. Councillor Thomas responded that the Working Group had extensively considered the needs of the Gypsy and Traveller community throughout its deliberations and rejected any suggestion that this aspect had been overlooked. He stated that the Working Group had reviewed all available options in detail, both before and after December’s decision, and continued to recommend proceeding to consultation based on the refreshed information. Councillor Michelle Bateman asked whether the Working Group had received all relevant and accurate information. Councillor Thomas confirmed that in his view they had, and that all recommendations had been fully assessed. Councillor Bateman then asked the Director of Education to confirm that appropriate, tailored consultation methods would be used to ensure meaningful engagement with Gypsy and Traveller families. The Director provided that reassurance, stating that all suitable consultation approaches would be considered. Councillor Alec Cormack asked for clarification about a recent capacity review at Stepaside School, referred to by the Chair of Governors. The Director of Education confirmed that a formal request for a capacity review was received on 23 February, following the Council’s December decision. Officers completed the review two days prior to the meeting, at the school’s request. He advised that the findings can be shared with Members and highlighted that any reduction in capacity—currently assessed at 200 pupils—would result in a corresponding reduction in the school’s admission number. He also clarified that all pupil number data used by the Authority comes directly from the school through established reporting systems (PLASC and My Local School). The Chief Executive addressed concerns regarding references to a “significant risk” for Gypsy and Traveller pupils should provision be amalgamated. He explained that Statutory Officers had reviewed the December report against the requirements of the School Organisation Code and identified that further detail was needed on federation and equality impacts, prompting the Working Group’s additional work. He summarised key sections of the Code, which require local authorities to prioritise learners’ interests, pay particular attention to vulnerable groups, minimise disruption, and fully consider alternatives to closure such as collaboration or federation. In assessing the potential impact on Gypsy and Traveller pupils who make up around 30% of Stepaside School’s roll, he stated that Officers had examined attendance data over several years. Attendance improved from 81% in 2012 to 93% pre?COVID, narrowing the gap with other pupils, but then fell to 79% in 2023 before beginning to recover to 85%. On this basis, Officers judged that relocation posed a significant risk of negative impact, particularly regarding attendance and continuity. The Chief Executive confirmed this was the basis of the earlier Officer advice. Councillor Pat Davies explained that the School Modernisation Working Group had extensively discussed the future of Stepaside and Saundersfoot Schools over multiple meetings, and had carefully examined all available options, including the impact on Gypsy and Traveller pupils and other vulnerable learners, and had reached its recommendations by majority. She emphasised that the Working Group considered the proposal an amalgamation rather than a simple closure and noted that both schools were identified as having high levels of surplus places. Acknowledging the difficulty of transporting very young children, she nonetheless affirmed her support for the Working Group’s original recommendation to proceed to consultation on the amalgamation, stating that the Working Group had thoroughly explored all issues and she would stand by its conclusion. Councillor Jacob Williams questioned the relevance of comparing COVID?related attendance impacts with potential changes arising from school reorganisation but acknowledged that the effect on Gypsy and Traveller pupils was one of several important factors. He then asked for clarification on the actual capacity of Stepaside School, noting differing views between the Authority and the school. In response, the Director of Education confirmed that the school’s current official capacity remains 200 pupils, based on the original 1999 building design. He noted that the school is querying this figure due to rooms now being used for other purposes, and a revised capacity review—conducted at the school’s request—will be shared with Members once completed. He also clarified that all pupil number data used by the Council is provided directly by the school through statutory reporting systems. Councillor Alec Cormack asked for an indication of how many classrooms the recent capacity review had identified at Stepaside School, noting that capacity is calculated on the number of teaching rooms. The Director of Education responded that Officers did not expect a significant change in the number of classrooms and anticipated that any adjustment would be limited to one room, but confirmation was still awaited from Building Maintenance. Councillor Aled Thomas emphasised that the discussion should consider both Stepaside and Saundersfoot Schools, not Stepaside in isolation. He noted that amending Stepaside’s capacity figure would not change the number of pupils currently on roll, nor the broader need to assess provision across the whole catchment. He cautioned against reducing the school’s capacity too far, as this could limit its ability to accommodate future pupils if local housing growth occurred. Councillor Thomas suggested that focusing narrowly on capacity risked diverting attention from the overall objective of evaluating sustainable education provision for both schools. Councillor Phil Kidney expressed concern that the previous consultation report on Manorbier School had felt one?sided and that the school community had little opportunity to comment before it was issued. He asked whether future consultation documents could be shared with schools, governors and local members in draft form to allow input before publication. In response, the Director of Education confirmed that consultation reports are prepared by officers using information already supplied by the school—such as PLASC data, improvement adviser reports and financial information. He explained that the Authority does not generate new data for these reports, and schools already have access to the information used in their preparation. Councillor Alan Dennison asked whether sufficient outdoor green space would be available if a new school was established on the Saundersfoot site, noting that outdoor space is an important consideration under the Curriculum for Wales. It was clarified that no new building was proposed and that the existing Saundersfoot School building and grounds would be used. The Director of Education confirmed that Saundersfoot School has a capacity of 297 pupils and has sufficient external space to accommodate that number. In response to a follow?up question, the Director explained that there is no regulatory requirement for schools in Wales to provide green space, noting that many schools do not have any. Councillor Elwyn Morse reported visiting Stepaside School and expressed concern that rooms counted as classrooms in the capacity data appeared, in practice, to function as circulation areas or multi?use spaces rather than suitable teaching rooms. He queried whether the Working Group had visited the school to assess these issues directly. Councillor Aled Thomas confirmed that the Working Group had not visited Stepaside School and stated that decisions were made on an objective, county?wide basis using the evidence available. He explained that visiting individual schools could compromise the Group’s impartiality, as its role is to consider all affected schools consistently. Councillor Elwyn Morse sought clarification on whether the central space currently used as a library/atrium at Stepaside School—listed as a classroom for capacity purposes—was considered a suitable teaching room. The Director of Education confirmed that this area was originally built as a classroom and is included in the current capacity figure of 200, and that it is one of the spaces under review as part of the updated capacity assessment. Councillor Tessa Hodgson highlighted projections from the December report showing that, by 2030, Saundersfoot School was expected to have around 179 spare places (approximately 64%), and Stepaside School around 115 (57%) spare capacity. She noted falling birth rates and stated that surplus places were likely to increase, requiring the Council to address difficult decisions rather than postpone them. She confirmed her support for proceeding with the recommendation agreed by Council in December. Councillor Michael John explained that although he is a member of the School Organisation Working Group, he had missed the November meeting where Stepaside and Saundersfoot were discussed in detail. He supported the December recommendation at the time but raised concerns then, and continues to have reservations. He noted the stated aims of the process—placing learners first and considering the impact on vulnerable groups—and highlighted that significant impacts on vulnerable learners had been referenced earlier in the meeting. He also expressed discomfort with variation in wording between documents: where “significant impacts” described potential effects last week, the current report referred only to “potential impacts.” Councillor John stated he was not comfortable with the proposal and indicated he could not support it. Councillor Viv Stoddart referred to the risks identified for Gypsy and Traveller pupils and shared an example from past school reorganisation in Hakin and Hubberston. She explained that parents in the smaller Hubberston VC School had been worried about transitioning to the much larger new school at Gelliswick, particularly given the vulnerabilities in that community. However, following comprehensive consultation and the eventual amalgamation, the new school had proved highly successful, with pupils thriving. Councillor Stoddart suggested that while concerns about vulnerable groups must be taken seriously, previous experience showed that difficult decisions can lead to positive outcomes, and she expressed confidence that Saundersfoot School would support all pupils effectively should reorganisation proceed. Councillor Michelle Bateman emphasised the importance of good attendance for pupil outcomes and commended Stepaside School for its strong attendance record among Gypsy and Traveller pupils. She questioned whether there was any evidence to suggest that similar attendance levels could not be achieved at Saundersfoot School, noting that Saundersfoot currently has an overall attendance rate of 93%. She expressed confidence that professional staff at Saundersfoot would work to support a smooth transition and maintain attendance levels for Gypsy and Traveller pupils, cautioning against assuming that high attendance achieved at Stepaside could not be replicated in another setting. Councillor Jamie Adams raised several practical considerations regarding the proposal. He noted that traffic management around schools can significantly affect both engagement and the surrounding community, and he felt this issue was under?represented in the report. He also referred to the importance of outdoor space for play, particularly for Gypsy and Traveller children, linking to earlier comments on the subject. On capacity, he indicated that he was satisfied either school could accommodate the required numbers. However, he queried the building condition scores, expressing concern that these might have influenced the comparison between the two schools. He noted that Stepaside’s condition rating had moved from A to B, but questioned how Saundersfoot’s rating had improved from C to B without obvious major investment. In response, the Director of Education confirmed that Saundersfoot School had received significant maintenance work, including roofing, which contributed to the improved condition assessment. Councillor Rhys Jordan noted that concerns about the Gypsy and Traveller community not engaging with a new school were based on assumptions, and there was no certainty that attendance or engagement would decline if provision moved to Saundersfoot. He pointed out that the distance between the two schools was small—approximately a mile and a half—and that the close proximity should not be overstated. He also suggested that pupils could benefit from access to the beach and wider environment if educated at the Saundersfoot site. Councillor Jordan emphasised the need to take a long?term view, ensuring that schools are properly funded and have sustainable pupil numbers, and stated that maintaining low?roll schools was not viable for the future. Councillor Phil Kidney clarified that visits to schools were not intended to influence or pressure the outcome but to ensure Members had full and accurate information. He emphasised that those visits allowed Members to understand the experiences of staff and pupils and were not designed to sway votes. Councillor Alec Cormack explained that he had been unable to attend the Working Group meeting on 24 February but wished to clarify concerns raised about his earlier comments. He stated that, in his view, the December report did not fully comply with the requirements of the School Organisation Code—particularly paragraphs 1.3 to 1.7—and that he had raised these concerns privately through the Council’s Whistleblowing Policy. He noted that initial officer advice had suggested no issue, but subsequent review had acknowledged that further information and clarification were needed before Council could take a lawful decision to consult. Councillor Cormack stressed that consultation cannot be approved on the basis of incomplete or inaccurate information, citing the Code’s requirement for high?quality and reliable evidence before any proposal is put forward. He argued that key information—including the revised capacity of Stepaside School—was still pending, despite being central to discussions on surplus places. He highlighted that a change from seven to six classrooms would materially alter the school’s capacity and, therefore, the surplus?place calculation. He also questioned the reliance on projections and noted that Stepaside’s pupil numbers had remained stable, while Saundersfoot’s had recently increased. He further expressed concerns about transport impacts, the walking distance for Gypsy and Traveller families, and the potential additional costs of busing pupils from a large service village that he felt warranted its own school. Councillor Cormack concluded that, while change may be needed, he did not believe the current proposal was the right one and urged Members to reject the recommendation. The Director of Education responded that the Authority is required to act when surplus places reach unsustainable levels, and both schools have been affected by declining rolls over time. He outlined the considerations behind each option and explained that federation, while strengthening leadership, would not resolve underlying issues such as duplicated premises and ongoing operational pressures. He acknowledged the equality impacts on Gypsy and Traveller pupils but noted that a larger school could also offer broader curriculum and specialist support opportunities. The Director highlighted that multi?site arrangements are challenging and costly, and that long?term demographic trends in the area indicate falling pupil numbers. He confirmed that the proposal was brought forward on this basis. Councillor Alec Cormack asked why the Working Group report stated that it “might be premature” to decide on a preferred outcome, given that Council was now being asked to vote on a specific recommendation. The Director of Education responded that the Working Group had discussed all options in full and made its determinations based on the information available to it at the time, and that today’s report and recommendation reflected that position. Councillor Aled Thomas clarified the voting outcomes at the meeting. He explained that an initial proposal—encouraging the two schools to work more closely together—had been rejected (7–5 with one abstention), as it did not fall within the Group’s remit. The substantive recommendation to proceed with consultation had then been agreed by 11 votes to 1, with one abstention. He emphasised that the Group’s role ends once recommendations are presented to Council, and that Members must now consider the wider demographic and strategic context. Councillor Thomas urged Members to allow consultation to proceed so that stakeholders can provide further evidence before a final decision is made. Councillor John Cole asked what would happen if Gypsy and Traveller families chose not to send their children to Saundersfoot. The Director of Education responded that this would present a risk, as with any school reorganisation, but schools and governing bodies would work with families to support attendance. He confirmed that the Council has statutory powers under the Education Act 1996 to address non?attendance if required. Councillor Alistair Cameron indicated that, if the recommendation to proceed to consultation was rejected, he intended to propose an alternative Motion to request a reworked paper focused on increased collaboration between Stepaside and Saundersfoot Schools, while recognising the long?term viability challenges in the area. He reiterated concerns from his earlier speech, stating that the Council lacked essential information needed before consulting. These included: • Accurate capacity figures for Stepaside School, with the updated review not yet available; • Reliable pupil?number projections, noting that Stepaside’s numbers had remained stable for several years; and • Assessment of traffic impacts, which he said was missing from the current report. Councillor Cameron also questioned the financial case, highlighting that the most likely scenario suggested savings of only around £200,000 over three years, and argued that closing a well?maintained, successful school was not justified on that basis. He urged Members to vote against the Recommendation and stated he was prepared to move his alternative motion if required. The vote to approve the Recommendation, undertaken by way of an electronic vote, was carried. The votes were recorded as follows: For the Motion: Councillors Michelle Batemen, Joshua Beynon, Maureen Boween, Aaron Carey, Mark Carter, Di Clements, Pat Davies, Claire George, Jonathan Grimes, Nicola Gwynn, Simon Hancock, Delme Harries, Jon Harvey, Tessa Hodgson, David Howlett, Rhys Jordan, Paul Miller, Nick Neumann, Bethan Price, Rhys Sinnett, Sam Skyrme-Blackhall, Viv Stoddart, Aled Thomas, Marc Tierney, Thomas Tudor, Michelle Wiggins, Tony Wilcox, Jacob Williams, Michael Williams, Guy Woodham, Steve Yelland, and Danny Young [32] Against the Motion: Councillors Jamie Adams, Steve Alderman, Alistair Cameron, John Cole, Alec Cormack, Terry Davies, Alan Dennison, Tim Evans, Brian Hall, Michael John, Phil Kidney, Elwyn Morse, Huw Murphy, Mel Phillips, David Simpson, Anji Tinley, Vanessa Thomas, Iwan Ward, Chris Williams, Alun Wills, Simon Wright [21] Abstentions: Councillors David Bryan and Billy Shaw [2] RESOLVED That the decision of 12 December 2025 be reaffirmed as follows: That the Director for Education be authorised to commence statutory consultation to: (a) discontinue Saundersfoot School; (b) discontinue Stepaside School; and (c) establish a new 3-11 primary school on the Saundersfoot School site that encompasses the catchment of Saundersfoot and the catchment of Stepaside and Kilgetty.
The meeting adjourned at 13:40 pm and reconvened at 14:28 pm. The Chair announced that the order of business would be changed to take the item relating to Clydau School before the item relating to Manorbier School as Councillor Iwan Ward, the local Member for Clydau, had to leave the meeting for an urgent appointment. Council agreed to the change of order. Apologies for absence were received from Councillor Alun Wills for the afternoon session.
Y penderfyniad fel y'i cofnodwyd
RESOLVED That the Director of Education be authorised to publish a Statutory Notice to discontinue Ysgol Clydau.
Council considered a report by the Director for Education on the consultation feedback received in response to the proposal to discontinue Ysgol Clydau. Councillor Guy Woodham, Cabinet Member for Education and Welsh Language, presented the consultation findings on the proposal to discontinue the school and outlined that Council must decide whether to proceed by publishing a statutory notice, abandon the proposal, or significantly amend and re?consult. Of the 176 responses received, five supported the proposal, two were neutral, and 169 (96%) opposed it. He thanked all respondents and noted the concerns raised. He summarised the key issues raised during consultation, including the impact on the Welsh language, loss of a community hub, ALN provision, travel distances, consideration of alternatives, housing development, financial transparency and consultation process. Officers’ responses to each issue were highlighted, including statutory assessments and sufficiency, financial and educational considerations. Estyn’s full response and additional representations were noted. Councillor Woodham concluded that officers remain of the view that publishing a statutory notice is the most appropriate option for sustainable educational provision and Moved the recommendation to authorise the Director of Education to publish the statutory notice; Seconded by Councillor Maureen Bowen. Council discussed the report and the following key points were noted: Councillor Iwan Ward, speaking as the local Member, expressed deep concern about the proposal to close the school, emphasising its importance as the heart of the community and a vital part of local identity. He highlighted the value of small rural schools in providing individualised support, strong community links and a nurturing environment for children. He argued that closure would weaken the Welsh language, undermine community life and send a negative message about the value placed on rural areas. Councillor Ward stressed that 96% of consultation responses opposed closure and urged the Council to listen to parents, governors, staff and pupils. He called on Members to recognise that the value of the school extends beyond financial considerations and to prioritise the future of children, the Welsh language and rural communities—particularly in the north of the county. Councillor Phil Kidney referred to the damaging impact school closures have on village life, noting that children often form friendships elsewhere and no longer play locally. He said closing the school would take the “soul” from the community and confirmed his support for keeping it open. Councillor Michael James expressed support for the points raised by the local Member, emphasising the importance of protecting the Welsh language and supporting rural communities. He highlighted concerns about the wider implications for other schools if this closure was approved and stressed the need to support teachers, governors and communities in keeping rural schools vibrant. Councillor Huw Murphy stated his support for Councillor Ward and the Tegryn community, emphasising the cultural importance of the Welsh language and the area’s strong Welsh?speaking identity. He noted that closing the school would remove children from their community and take “the heart” from it. He added that he could not support closure. Councillor Michael John paid tribute to the comprehensive consultation feedback and emphasised the importance of listening to community views. He highlighted comments from pupils and noted strong concern about closing a rural Welsh?medium school. He questioned the shift toward centralised provision and suggested that lack of investment in larger schools over many years complicates any move to consolidate provision. He expressed support for exploring federation and stated that he would vote against the recommendation to close the school. Councillor Tessa Hodgson focused on the financial disparity, noting the school’s cost per pupil was significantly higher than the county average. She stated that the Council had a duty to fund all schools fairly and that maintaining such a small school was financially inequitable. For this reason, she could not support keeping the school open. Councillor Delme Harries stressed the importance of taking consultation responses seriously. He noted that 95% of feedback supported keeping the school open and said this should be given significant weight when considering the future of a rural Welsh?medium school. Councillor Elwyn Morse expressed concern that financial pressures placed a “price” on rural schools and questioned whether Welsh?medium provision was being spread too thinly, potentially disadvantaging smaller rural communities and weakening the language. He regretted the impact of these pressures on rural Welsh?speaking areas. Councillor Alan Dennison rejected the suggestion that his group was collectively opposed, stating that Members were not whipped and formed their own views. He challenged the financial rationale for closure, stating that the additional cost was relatively modest compared with other Council spending. He argued that closing the school over what he described as a small saving was unjustified. Councillor Bethan Price expressed concern about the impact of closing a rural Welsh?medium school on the Welsh language. She said the cultural cost would outweigh the financial considerations and confirmed her support for Councillor Ward and for keeping the school open to protect the language and community. Councillor Jamie Adams highlighted the inconsistency between national efforts to expand Welsh?medium education and proposals to close schools in traditional Welsh?speaking heartlands. He warned against treating rural schools purely on a cost?per?pupil basis and argued that closing this school risked undermining the language and cultural identity. He confirmed his support for the community and the local Member. Councillor Aled Thomas acknowledged the passion of the local Member but emphasised that pupils would continue to receive Welsh?medium education at Ysgol Bro Preseli. He believed Welsh?medium provision was not being overstretched and that larger schools can offer broader educational opportunities. He supported the view that the language would continue to grow through the receiving school. Councillor Iwan Ward responded that the main threat was not Welsh?medium education within schools, but the loss of Welsh in the community if children were moved away. He warned that closure could accelerate demographic change in Tegryn, with fewer young families and greater risk to the language’s presence locally. The Head of Culture, Leisure and School Modernisation referred Members to the revised Community Impact Assessment, noting that available evidence from similar rural school closures did not show a negative impact on Welsh language use in the community. The vote to approve the Recommendation, undertaken by way of an electronic vote, was carried. The votes were recorded as follows: For the Motion: Councillors Michelle Batemen, Joshua Beynon, Maureen Bowen, Alistair Cameron, Mark Carter, Di Clements, Alec Cormack, Claire George, Jonathan Grimes, Nicola Gwynn, Simon Hancock, Jon Harvey, Tessa Hodgson, David Howlett, Rhys Jordan, Paul Miller, Nick Neumann, David Simpson, Viv Stoddart, Aled Thomas, Marc Tierney, Thomas Tudor, Tony Wilcox, Jacob Williams, Guy Woodham and Danny Young [26] Against the Motion: Councillors Jamie Adams, Steve Alderman, Aaron Carey, John Cole, Terry Davies, Alan Dennison, Tim Evans, Brian Hall, Delme Harries, Mike James, Michael John, Phil Kidney, Elwyn Morse, Huw Murphy, Mel Phillips, Bethan Price, Billy Shaw, Sam Skyrme-Blackhall, Vanessa Thomas, Anji Tinley, Iwan Ward, Michele Wiggins, Chris Williams, Michael Williams and Simon Wright [25] Abstention: Councillor David Bryan [1] RESOLVED That the Director of Education be authorised to publish a Statutory Notice to discontinue Ysgol Clydau.
Y penderfyniad fel y'i cofnodwyd
RESOLVED That the Director of Education be authorised to publish a Statutory Notice to discontinue Manorbier Church in Wales Voluntary Controlled School. [The meeting adjourned at 16:48 pm and reconvened at 17:02 pm. Councillors Tony Wilcox, Michele Wiggins, Maureen Bowen, Phil Kidney, David Howlett and Iwan Ward left the meeting at this juncture.]
[Councillor Steve Alderman declared a personal and prejudicial interest in this item of business by virtue of being a Local Authority appointee on the newly federated governing body of St Florence and Penrhyn Schools. As the federation had recently held its first meeting, he considered this to constitute a prejudicial interest in the matter under discussion and had informed the Executive Head and Monitoring Officer in advance. He then withdrew from the meeting. Councillor Rhys Jordan declared a personal interest as a governor on the same federated governing body, appointed by the Authority.] Council considered a report by the Director for Education on the consultation feedback received in response to the proposal to discontinue Manorbier Church in Wales Voluntary Controlled School. Councillor Guy Woodham, Cabinet Member for Education and Welsh Language, presented the report on the proposal to discontinue Manorbier School, noting the additional complexity caused by the 2022 fire and the prolonged challenges that followed. He thanked the headteacher, staff, governors, families and the community for their resilience, and acknowledged the concerns presented during the consultation, including those by Mr Hughes at Council in December. He outlined that Council must now decide whether to publish a statutory notice to close the school, abandon the proposal, or significantly amend it and re?consult. Of the 252 consultation responses received, 20 supported closure and over 90% opposed it. Councillor Woodham summarised the main concerns raised as being: educational impact (especially ALN and Welsh language), financial data, community impact, transport issues and expectations around rebuilding the school following the fire. He highlighted officers’ responses, including the feasibility study on reinstatement, capacity considerations, statutory assessments and the constraints associated with the temporary site at Jameston Hall. He noted that officers, having reviewed all evidence and consultation responses, remain of the view that issuing a statutory notice to discontinue Manorbier School is the most appropriate option for long?term sustainability of educational provision. The Recommendations were Moved by Councillor Guy Woodham; Seconded by Councillor Paul Miller. Council discussed the report and the following key points were noted: As the local Member, Councillor Phil Kidney queried why the alternative consultation proposal to amalgamate St Florence and Manorbier on the Manorbier site had been described as “illogical.” Officers explained that this option would require rebuilding a school at Manorbier, whereas sufficient capacity already exists at St Florence, meaning no capital expenditure would be required. For this reason, the alternative was not considered a practical or proportionate option. He also asked why significant money had previously been spent on the Manorbier roof if the school had been assessed as a category C building. Officers confirmed that the roof required essential maintenance work, which did not alter the school’s overall condition category and was funded through capital maintenance budgets. Councillor Kidney further raised concern that attendance figures used in the consultation were incorrect. The Director of Education advised that published attendance data is taken directly from the school’s daily returns, and the most recent verified attendance figure was 94.4%. Councillor Kidney then delivered an impassioned speech outlining the significant trauma experienced by pupils, staff and parents following the fire at Manorbier School in October 2022. He described the event’s lasting emotional impact, including parents’ distress on the day and the continuing effect on the school community. He criticised the Council’s handling of the situation, citing poor communication, broken assurances regarding rebuilding, and delays over more than three years. He raised concerns about the consultation process, its tone, and the treatment of key stakeholders such as the Diocese and Jameston Community Hall Committee. Councillor Kidney expressed frustration over the perception that Manorbier had been left unsupported and felt that the school and community had been treated unfairly. He argued that Manorbier should never have been included in the area school reorganisation process following such a catastrophic event and called for an end to the prolonged uncertainty. He stated he would be recommending Option 2—to discontinue the consultation and return pupils to a rebuilt school. The Director of Education acknowledged the strength of Councillor Kidney’s concerns and praised the headteacher’s leadership. He clarified that support had been provided following the fire, including immediate attendance by the Maintenance team, activation of the Council’s Traumatic Events Protocol, and ongoing involvement from the Educational Psychology Service. He stated that officers had worked with the community to avoid relocating pupils away from Jameston, and that the Council had funded the school’s continued presence in Jameston Community Hall. He also referred to regular updates issued to the school leadership and confirmed engagement with the Community Council to provide reassurance about ongoing support. Councillor David Bryan reported visiting the temporary Jameston Village Hall site and the fire?damaged school, which he noted had remained scaffolded for over three years. He asked who was funding the scaffolding, whether the school had borne costs for replacing resources lost to damage or theft, and sought clarity on the unresolved insurance position, including whether the school had been underinsured. He also queried the impact of new housing developments on projected pupil numbers, the requirement to return the site to the Church in its original condition, and whether covenants would prevent future capital receipts. The Director of Education confirmed that the scaffolding had initially been rented but was later purchased by the Council. Lost resources were reclaimed through insurance and reimbursed to the school. He added that maintenance staff had accessed the site to recover items where possible. Detailed insurance and financial information had previously been shared with Councillors in a restricted appendix and advised that document could be recirculated. Councillor Alan Dennison raised concerns about the under?insurance of Manorbier School, arguing that if the contractor responsible for the fire had carried adequate insurance, the building would have been rebuilt and the current closure proposal would not be necessary. He questioned the Council’s procurement processes, asked whether under?insurance applied to other schools and Council properties, and stressed that pupils and staff should not bear the consequences of failures in insurance or contract management. In response, the Director of Resources confirmed that the school was not insured for full rebuild value. He explained that the potential insurance settlement had also been reduced because delays in addressing the damaged building had led to further deterioration. He advised that although contractors must hold insurance, the standard construction contracts used mean that, in events such as this, claims fall on the Council’s insurance rather than the contractor’s. He noted that the specific questions around contract wording would require a detailed response outside the meeting. Councillor Aaron Carey opposed the closure of Manorbier School, stressing its importance to children, families and the community. He argued that pupils deserve proper educational facilities rather than a long-term stay in a community hall. He highlighted that over 90% of consultees opposed closure and warned that shutting the school would harm community cohesion, Welsh language provision, and support for pupils with additional needs. He urged Councillors to prioritise children’s futures over financial considerations and supported Option 2 to keep and rebuild the school. Councillor Michelle Bateman stated that the decision should focus on school reorganisation and surplus places across the Tenby cluster, not the fire. She noted that declining pupil numbers and excess capacity would need addressing regardless of the fire and argued that all schools must be treated consistently. She emphasised the need for objective decision?making and financial responsibility across the county. Councillor Jamie Adams commended Councillor Kidney for his respectful and determined presentation and acknowledged the difficult circumstances facing the school and community. He explained that he had previously abstained on the matter and remained undecided, and he sought clarity on two key issues. First, he questioned whether statements reportedly made by former and current Council Leaders—that the school would be rebuilt—affected the Council’s ability to make a lawful decision on reorganisation. Second, he raised concerns about access to alternative faith?based education if Manorbier was to close, given current transport policy. In response, the Director of Education noted that transport to faith schools is governed by the Learner Travel (Wales) Policy and is generally available within an eight?mile radius. The Head of Law and Governance confirmed that any earlier statements about rebuilding the school did not legally bind the Council or fetter its discretion, and that Councillors could lawfully take a fresh decision. Councillor Anji Tinley stated that the past three years had highlighted a breakdown of trust between the Council, Members and the public. She stated that residents needed a clear explanation for why successive Council Leaders had publicly promised that Manorbier School would be rebuilt, only for this to appear reversed. She described her visit to the temporary school site and said she had never seen such a holistic and supportive educational environment, including successful work with older learners at risk of disengagement. She expressed concern that the debate had become focused on pupil numbers rather than educational quality and concluded that the Council must not make promises it cannot keep. Councillor Tony Wilcox stated that the situation had been handled poorly and repeated concerns about insurance and the promises previously made regarding rebuilding the school. He felt Manorbier had been treated unfairly and stressed the need to ensure such a situation never arose again. Councillor Michael John thanked consultees for their feedback and asked why Estyn had not provided a consultation response given the significance of the decision. The Director of Education explained that Estyn had experienced a technical failure and missed the consultation window. He said it would not have been fair to other statutory consultees to accept a late response, and therefore the process continued on the basis of the submissions received within the required period. Councillor Alistair Cameron asked what support would be provided for the wellbeing of pupils and staff. The Director of Education responded that support had already been offered to the school and staff, and that the most recent feedback from the headteacher indicated they did not require additional assistance at present. He confirmed that further support would be provided if needed. He also noted that the school has trauma?informed practitioners in place through the Council’s trauma?informed deployment approach. Councillor Rhys Jordan commended Councillor Kidney’s efforts for his community but stressed that the decision must be based on facts rather than emotion. He noted that pupil numbers at Manorbier had been falling long before the fire and that many children already attend other schools. While accepting that the fire response needs future review, he said the issue before Council was wider school reorganisation within the Tenby cluster. He warned that keeping Manorbier open would simply shift surplus?place pressures elsewhere and stated he would support discontinuing the school. Councillor Paul Miller acknowledged Councillor Kidney’s concerns and agreed that it was unacceptable for the school community to have faced more than three years of uncertainty following the fire. He said that the Council had not initially intended to close Manorbier and that, had the insurance covered the full rebuild cost as originally assumed, the school would already have been rebuilt. However, he stressed that the insurance settlement would not meet the rebuild costs, and this fundamentally changed the circumstances from when earlier assurances were made by political leaders. He argued that leadership requires adapting decisions when new information arises. Councillor Miller emphasised that the cross?party Working Group had carefully examined the Tenby cluster and had concluded that rebuilding Manorbier was not the right option for the area. He added that even if Council voted to stop the closure process, there was no realistic prospect of securing the multi?million?pound investment required to rebuild a school for such a small number of pupils. He concluded that, although difficult, the only deliverable way forward was to proceed with issuing the statutory notice to discontinue Manorbier School. Councillor Aled Thomas thanked Councillor Kidney for his commitment but said the key issue was ensuring pupils received education in suitable accommodation. He argued that delaying the decision would prolong uncertainty and that the reorganisation pressures would exist even if the fire had never happened. He noted that rebuilding Manorbier would require significant investment and that keeping it open would place other schools, particularly St Florence, at risk. He concluded that discontinuing Manorbier was necessary to provide clarity and secure long?term educational stability for the area. Councillor Viv Stoddart stated that although promises had previously been made about rebuilding the school, it would be wrong for Council not to support the recommendation before them, and she urged members to vote in favour of discontinuation. Councillor David Bryan then sought clarification on what conditions would apply if the school was closed and the site returned to the Church. The Director of Education explained that the Council would need to undertake a formal dilapidation process with the Diocese. This could involve returning the site in its current condition, returning it in the condition it was originally transferred, or agreeing alternative arrangements, with significant legal involvement expected. Councillor Huw Murphy said Manorbier had been treated unfairly, with broken promises and poor handling of the situation since the fire. He argued that the community should not bear the consequences of the Authority’s failings and urged Members to vote individually and reject closure. He called on the Council to “do the right thing” and explore alternative options so the school could be rebuilt. Councillor Jamie Adams sought further clarity on the financial implications of returning the Manorbier site to the Diocese if the school was to close. He noted that significant costs may arise from reparations or restoration obligations and queried how such costs would be funded. The Chief Executive responded that any liabilities would be subject to negotiation with the Diocese. He explained that while the Council might be required to restore or remediate the building, the exact outcome could vary, and it was not possible to give more detail at this stage. Councillor Phil Kidney said the core issue for the community was the broken promises made after the fire and the poor way the situation had been handled from the outset. He warned that the Diocese would not simply accept the site back without substantial negotiation and cost, and that leaving an empty, damaged building would be an unacceptable legacy. He highlighted the school’s high levels of additional learning needs and deprivation, noting that pupils who had already suffered trauma now faced further uncertainty not of their making. He urged Members to rebuild trust in politics by honouring earlier commitments and supporting the school rather than closing it, calling for pupils to be returned to a rebuilt Manorbier School. The vote to approve the Recommendation, undertaken by way of an electronic vote, was carried. The votes were recorded as follows: For the Motion: Councillors Jamie Adams, Michelle Bateman, Joshua Beynon, Maureen Bowen, Alistair Cameron, Mark Carter, Di Clements, Alec Cormack, Pat Davies, Claire George, Jonathan Grimes, Nicola Gwynn, Simon Hancock, Jon Harvey, Tessa Hodgson, David Howlett, Rhys Jordan, Paul Miller, Nick Neumann, Bethan Price, David Simpson, Viv Stoddart, Aled Thomas, Marc Tierney, Thomas Tudor, Tony Wilcox, Jacob Williams, Guy Woodham and Danny Young [29] Against the Motion: Councillors David Bryan, Aaron Carey, John Cole, Terry Davies, Alan Dennison, Tim Evans, Brian Hall, Mike James, Michael John, Phil Kidney, Elwyn Morse, Huw Murphy, Mel Phillips, Sam Skyrme-Blackhall, Vanessa Thomas, Anji Tinley, Iwan Ward, Michele Wiggins, Chris Williams, Simon Wright [20] Abstentions: Councillors Delme Harries, Billy Shaw and Michael Williams [3] RESOLVED That the Director of Education be authorised to publish a Statutory Notice to discontinue Manorbier Church in Wales Voluntary Controlled School. [The meeting adjourned at 16:48 pm and reconvened at 17:02 pm. Councillors Tony Wilcox, Michele Wiggins, Maureen Bowen, Phil Kidney, David Howlett and Iwan Ward left the meeting at this juncture.]
Y penderfyniad fel y'i cofnodwyd
RESOLVED That an extension to the existing Liaison Group membership be approved, to include the Local Members of Local Authority run Gypsy Traveller sites; and that terms of reference be developed to reflect this membership.
Council considered a report of the Services Overview and Scrutiny Committee on the Notice of Motion submitted by Councillor Aaron Carey in the following terms: That Council agrees to the establishment of a cross-departmental working group, comprised of relevant council representatives, stakeholders, and representatives of local Gypsy Traveller communities, with the objective of assessing, evaluating, and recommending sustainable, inclusive, and effective practices for the maintenance of local Gypsy Traveller sites within the county. The working group will: • Assess the current condition of Gypsy Traveller sites, including infrastructure, safety, sanitation, and accessibility. • Engage with Gypsy Traveller communities to understand their specific needs and concerns regarding site maintenance. • Review best practices from other local authorities and regions for managing and maintaining Gypsy Traveller sites. • Consider the financial and resource implications of maintenance proposals and develop a clear action plan. • Provide recommendations to the Council for improvements and sustainable management of the sites, with the aim of improving living conditions for residents. • The working group will present its findings and recommendations to full Council/Cabinet/O&S (where appropriate) within six months of the establishment of the group, following a series of consultations and site visits. The Presiding Member invited Councillor Aaron Carey to speak to his Notice of Motion. Councillor Carey spoke in support of the recommendations arising from the Services Overview and Scrutiny Committee. He welcomed the progress made following the appointment of the Gypsy Traveller Liaison Officer and Support Officer, noting improvements in site management, maintenance and engagement with residents. He endorsed the Committee’s proposal to extend the existing liaison group to include two local Members, describing this as a practical step that would strengthen ongoing communication and oversight. Councillor Carey also highlighted planned maintenance and improvement works, including upgrades to utility blocks and a Welsh Government capital grant application, which he said were essential for improving living conditions. He supported the proposal for a further update in six months’ time to ensure progress continued. He concluded by thanking officers and all those involved for their commitment to supporting the Gypsy and Traveller community. The Recommendations were Moved by Councillor Aaron Carey; Seconded by Councillor Anji Tinley. As Chair of the Services Overview and Scrutiny Committee, Councillor Anji Tinley presented the report and stated that the Committee had reviewed progress on the Council’s gypsy and traveller sites, noting improved engagement following the appointment of a dedicated site officer and successful Welsh Government grant funding of around £950,000. The Committee recommended extending the liaison group to include local Members and requested a further update in six months’ time. She asked Council to approve the Recommendation. The vote to approve the Recommendation, undertaken by way of an electronic vote, was carried. The votes were recorded as follows: For the Motion: Councillors Jamie Adams, Steve Alderman, Michelle Bateman, Joshua Beynon, David Bryan, Alistair Cameron, Aaron Carey, Mark Carter, Di Clements, John Cole, Alec Cormack, Pat Davies, Terry Davies, Alan Dennison, Tim Evans, Claire George, Jonathan Grimes, Nicola Gwynn, Brian Hall, Simon Hancock, Jon Harvey, Delme Harries, Tessa Hodgson, Mike James, Michael John, Rhys Jordan, Paul Miller, Elwyn Morse, Huw Murphy, Nick Neumann, Mel Phillips, Bethan Price, Billy Shaw, David Simpson, Sam Skyrme-Blackhall, Aled Thomas, Vanessa Thomas, Marc Tierney, Anji Tinley, Thomas Tudor, Chris Williams, Jacob Williams, Michael Williams, Guy Woodham, Simon Wright and Danny Young [46] There were no votes against or abstentions RESOLVED That an extension to the existing Liaison Group membership be approved, to include the Local Members of Local Authority run Gypsy Traveller sites; and that terms of reference be developed to reflect this membership.
Y penderfyniad fel y'i cofnodwyd
RESOLVED (a) That delegated authority be granted to the Head of Planning to approve the application following publicity of the application as a Departure, the consideration of any representation received as part of that publicity, the completion of an appropriate section 106 legal agreement to tie the businesses together and subject to the conditions set out in paragraph 11.11 of the report, on the grounds of established and sustainable economic benefits and the exceptional nature of the business that outweighs any policy breaches. (b) In the event that the section 106 agreement be not completed within three months of the foregoing recommendation, then delegated authority be given to the Head of Planning to exercise discretion to refuse the application due to failure to comply with policy GN.10 of the Local Development Plan.
Council considered a report by the Head of Planning on an application which sought permission, in retrospect, for the relocation and expansion of an existing farm diversification business into an existing agricultural building. The application had been considered by the Planning Committee on 13 January 2026 and the Committee had Resolved to approve the application on the basis of financial reasons and the exceptional nature of the business, noting that a section 106 Agreement would be entered into; and that the application be reported to Council for final determination subject to the conditions outlined in the report. The Head of Planning explained that officers had recommended refusal because the proposed storage and distribution use is in open countryside, where such development is not justified, and no robust evidence was provided to show it qualifies as farm diversification. The proposal conflicts with national and local planning policies. However, the Planning Committee supported approval due to the economic benefits and the exceptional nature of the business, agreeing to proceed subject to a Section 106 agreement. As the scheme is a policy departure, the final decision must now be made by full Council. Council discussed the report and the following key points were noted: The Presiding Member asked the Head of Planning whether, in her professional opinion, the reasons given by the Planning Committee were strong enough to justify departing from planning policy. The Head of Planning replied that while the Committee’s reasons were recognised as material considerations, officers considered them to carry limited weight and not sufficient to outweigh the policy conflict. Councillor Mark Carter, speaking as the local member, explained that the application sought permission to use a former agricultural building for the distribution of locally made medical goods to European markets. He outlined the business’s development over 25 years from a small farm?based enterprise to its current operation, which runs alongside a working sheep farm and relies on both activities being located together. He stated the business operated discreetly, had strong community support, and contributed to the local economy without causing any issues for residents. As Chair of the Planning Committee, Councillor Carter stated that the Planning Committee had twice debated the application in detail and had voted on both occasions to approve it due to its economic benefits and its status as a successful farm diversification project. Councillor Carter Moved that Council delegate approval to the Head of Planning, with authority to secure an appropriate Section 106 agreement, on the grounds that the economic benefits and exceptional nature of the business outweighed policy conflicts; Seconded by Councillor Tim Evans. Councillor Michelle Bateman spoke in support of the Motion which she said would benefit not only the applicant but also FRIO, a successful neighbouring business in her ward. She noted that the business had strong community support, created local jobs, and represented meaningful farm diversification with no negative impact on residents. Councillor Dennison said he supported the points already made and questioned why the Council was still debating an application that had been approved by the Planning Committee. He asked how many officer hours had been spent on the case and queried the implications of Council approving the application. The Head of Planning responded that approving the application would undermine the Local Development Plan, set a precedent affecting consistency in future decisions, and expose the Council to potential legal challenge. She confirmed that the replacement Local Development Plan would include similar national policy requirements. She could not quantify officer time without further calculation. Councillor Nick Neumann, speaking as a member of the Planning Committee, said the Committee had twice supported the application and felt it met the spirit of farm diversification, noting that diversification can take many forms beyond traditional tourism activities. He stressed that the proposal would have no landscape impact as the building already exists, and he believed a Section 106 agreement would provide sufficient safeguards. For these reasons, he continued to support approval. Councillor Rhys Jordan added that while he respected planning policy and the professionalism of officers, planning decisions ultimately rested with elected Members. He questioned the level of risk to the Authority should Council approve the application and suggested that, unless challenged legally, the risk appeared low. The Head of Planning responded that the risk was significant, explaining that approving the application would conflict with both local and national policy, which define farm diversification as small?scale and proportionate to existing farm operations. She stated that in officers’ professional view, this proposal was a standalone commercial enterprise of a scale that could not reasonably be considered diversification. She warned that approving it would set a clear precedent, particularly as the Planning Committee was due to consider a similar application in March and would create inconsistency in decision?making. She also noted that a Welsh Government planning inspector had previously dismissed an appeal for this very use on the basis that it did not constitute genuine diversification, further increasing the risks to the Authority. Councillor Jamie Adams said he respected the professional advice but expressed concern that innovative rural businesses were not being enabled through the planning process and felt the Authority should adopt a more positive, solution?focused approach. He said this was an opportunity for the democratic side of the Council to support rural enterprise by approving the proposal. Councillor Alec Cormack said he did not usually vote against the Local Development Plan but felt this case was highly individual. He noted the business had operated for decades without complaint and that the current issue related only to the use of the building, not its structure. He believed Councillors were entitled to give weight to the economic benefits and intended to support the application. Councillor Elwyn Morse asked whether granting the application would convert the building from an agricultural site to an industrial one. The Head of Planning clarified that the building had permission only for agricultural use but had never been used for that purpose. It had instead been operating unlawfully as a storage and distribution (B8) use. Granting permission would, therefore, formally authorise it as a B8 industrial use. Councillor Di Clements then raised the need to consider including a time limit within any Section 106 agreement. The Head of Planning advised that any motion to approve should include a clause specifying a timeframe for completing the agreement and she suggested a three-month period within the date of the decision. Councillor John Cole noted that the business had operated for around 25 years without issue and had supported the viability of the family farm. He queried whether the business was already paying business rates on the unit. The Head of Planning confirmed she could not clarify that information during the meeting. Councillor Pat Davies expressed support for the application, stating she regarded it as genuine farm diversification with no visual impact on the landscape. She asked for clarification on how a Section 106 agreement would operate. The Head of Planning explained that a Section 106 agreement would be essential to legally tie the business to the farm operation; without it, the approval would amount to permitting an unrestricted industrial use in open countryside, contrary to planning policy. [Councillor Marc Tierney left the meeting at this juncture.] Councillor David Simpson said he was surprised the application was being considered for approval given that it clearly conflicted with planning policy and officer advice. He argued that financial benefits should not influence planning decisions and warned that granting permission could set an unmanageable precedent for similar requests in other areas. [Councillor Anji Tinley left the meeting at this juncture.] The Head of Planning clarified that any Section 106 agreement required as part of approving the application would not involve a financial contribution, but would instead legally tie the distribution business to the agricultural enterprise. This was necessary to prevent the building becoming an unrestricted industrial use in open countryside should the farm cease operating. Councillor Michael Williams urged Members to support the officers’ professional advice, emphasising that approving it would breach policy and create significant precedent risks. Councillor Carter then read out his revised Motion, proposing delegated approval to the Head of Planning on the basis of the economic benefits and exceptional nature of the business, with authority to negotiate and complete a Section 106 agreement within three months, and subject to required publicity for a policy departure. Councillor Jacob Williams clarified that the Motion must state that the Section 106 agreement is completed within three months, not just negotiated. This was noted. The vote to approve the application, undertaken by way of an electronic vote, was carried. The votes were recorded as follows: For the Motion: Councillors Jamie Adams, Michelle Bateman, David Bryan, Mark Carter, John Cole, Alec Cormack, Pat Davies, Terry Davies, Alan Dennison, Tim Evans, Claire George, Jonathan Grimes, Brian Hall, Delme Harries, Mike James, Rhys Jordan, Paul Miller, Huw Murphy, Nick Neumann, Mel Phillips, Bethan Price, Billy Shaw, Sam Skyrme-Blackhall, Viv Stoddart, Aled Thomas, Chris Williams, Steve Yelland and Danny Young [28] Against the Motion: Councillors Joshua Beynon, Alistair Cameron, Aaron Carey, Di Clements, Simon Hancock, Jon Harvey, Tessa Hodgson, Michael John, Elwyn Morse, David Simpson, Vanessa Thomas, Jacob Williams, Michael Williams, Guy Woodham and Simon Wright [15] Abstentions: Councillor Steve Alderman [1] RESOLVED (a) That delegated authority be granted to the Head of Planning to approve the application following publicity of the application as a Departure, the consideration of any representation received as part of that publicity, the completion of an appropriate section 106 legal agreement to tie the businesses together and subject to the conditions set out in paragraph 11.11 of the report, on the grounds of established and sustainable economic benefits and the exceptional nature of the business that outweighs any policy breaches. (b) In the event that the section 106 agreement be not completed within three months of the foregoing recommendation, then delegated authority be given to the Head of Planning to exercise discretion to refuse the application due to failure to comply with policy GN.10 of the Local Development Plan.
Y penderfyniad fel y'i cofnodwyd
RESOLVED That the scope of the Section 31 Review of Community Electoral Arrangements, undertaken under the Democracy and Boundary Commission Cymru Act 2013 and approved by Council at its meeting on 12 December 2025, be extended to include the communities of Nolton and Roch, Martletwy, Stackpole and Castlemartin, and Pencaer.
Council considered a report by the Assistant Chief Executive/Director of Place on proposals to extend the review of community electoral arrangements which had been approved by Council in December 2025 to include the communities of Nolton and Roch, Martletwy, Stackpole and Castlemartin, and Pencaer. The Presiding Member invited Councillor Paul Miller, on behalf of the relevant Cabinet Member, to introduce the report. Councillor Miller explained that some recommendations from the previous Section 25 community review undertaken by the Democracy and Boundary Commission Cymru could not be implemented because they related to areas where no boundary changes were proposed. A Section 31 electoral review is therefore needed he stated to reconsider those outstanding recommendations. He proposed extending the Section 31 review already agreed in December to include Nolton and Roch, Martletwy, Stackpole and Castlemartin, and Pencaer, covering changes to community wards, councillor numbers, and the proposed renaming of Pencaer. Councillor Miller Moved the Recommendation; Seconded by Councillor Aaron Carey. The vote to approve the Recommendation, undertaken by way of an electronic vote, was carried. The votes were recorded as follows: For the Motion: Councillors Jamies Adams, Steve Alderman, Michelle Batemen, Joshua Beynon, David Bryan, Alistair Cameron, Aaron Carey, Mark Carter, Di Clements, John Cole, Alec Cormack, Pat Davies, Terry Davies, Alan Dennison, Tim Evans, Claire George, Jonathan Grimes, Nicola Gwynn, Brian Hall, Simon Hancock, Delme Harries, Jon Harvey, Michael John, Paul Miller, Elwyn Morse, Huw Murphy, Nick Neumann, Mel Phillips, Bethan Price, Billy Shaw, David Simpson, Sam Skyrme-Blackhall, Viv Stoddart, Aled Thomas, Vanessa Thomas, Thomas Tudor, Chris Williams, Jacob Williams, Michael Williams, Guy Woodham, Simon Wright, Steve Yelland and Danny Young [43] There were no votes against or abstentions RESOLVED That the scope of the Section 31 Review of Community Electoral Arrangements, undertaken under the Democracy and Boundary Commission Cymru Act 2013 and approved by Council at its meeting on 12 December 2025, be extended to include the communities of Nolton and Roch, Martletwy, Stackpole and Castlemartin, and Pencaer.
Y penderfyniad fel y'i cofnodwyd
RESOLVED That the Pay Policy statement for 2026-27 be approved for publication. [Councillor Anji Tinley rejoined the meeting at this juncture.]
Council considered a report by the Head of Human Resources on the Pay Policy Statement 2026-27, a report published each financial year setting out the Council’s policies across a range of issues related to its workforce, particularly the pay of senior staff and its lowest paid employees but excluding teachers. The Presiding Member invited Councillor Alistair Cameron, the Cabinet Member with responsibility for Corporate Finance and Efficiencies, to present the report. The Cabinet Member presented the report and advised that the Council was required to prepare and publish a Pay Policy Statement annually, outlining workforce pay arrangements, and recommended its approval ahead of the statutory deadline. He reported that national pay negotiations for 2025 had concluded with a 3.2% increase to all spinal column points and allowances from 1 September 2025, and that the proposed amendments to the 2026-27 Statement reflected the National Joint Council (NJC) and Joint National Committee (JNC) settlements. He further noted the national deletion of spinal column point 2 from 1 April 2026, with anticipated removal of point 3 from April 2027, and therefore recommended the Council also remove point 3, resulting in spinal column point 4 becoming the lowest pay point. Due to these changes, spinal column points up to Grade 5 would be re?designated without altering grade structures, and these proposals had been discussed with trade union partners and Scrutiny. He confirmed that the associated budget pressure of approximately £1.1million had been included within the 2026-27 budget and emphasised that the proposals supported improved pay for lower?paid staff. Councillor Alistair Cameron Moved the Recommendation; Seconded by Councillor Aaron Carey. The vote to approve the Recommendation, undertaken by way of an electronic vote, was carried. The votes were recorded as follows: For the Motion: Councillors Jamie Adams, Steve Alderman, Michelle Bateman, Joshua Beynon, David Bryan, Alistair Cameron, Aaron Carey, Mark Carter, Di Clements, John Cole, Alec Cormack, Pat Davies, Terry Davies, Alan Dennison, Tim Evans, Claire George, Jonathan Grimes, Nicola Gwynn, Brian Hall, Simon Hancock, Delme Harries, Jon Harvey, Tessa Hodgson, Mike James, Michael John, Paul Miller, Elwyn Morse, Huw Murphy, Nick Neumann, Mel Phillips, Bethan Price, Billy Shaw, David Simpson, Viv Stoddart, Sam Skyrme-Blackhall, Aled Thomas, Vanessa Thomas, Thomas Tudor, Chris Williams, Jacob Williams, Guy Woodham, Simon Wright, Steve Yelland and Danny Young [44] There were no votes against or abstentions RESOLVED That the Pay Policy statement for 2026-27 be approved for publication. [Councillor Anji Tinley rejoined the meeting at this juncture.]
Y penderfyniad fel y'i cofnodwyd
RESOLVED That the response and action plan to the Panel’s report and recommendations, as attached at Appendix B, be approved.
Council considered a report by the Leader regarding the final report from the Panel Performance Assessment undertaken in October 2025. The Presiding Member invited the Leader to present the report. The Leader introduced the final report from the Panel Performance Assessment and explained that PPAs are now a statutory requirement for Welsh Councils, designed to support sector?led improvement through external peer insight. He advised that the Assessment Panel, chaired by Phil Roberts (former Chief Executive of Swansea Council), had concluded that the Authority is meeting its statutory performance duties under the Local Government and Elections (Wales) Act, and identified seven recommendations for strengthening scrutiny, corporate capacity, collaborative leadership, economic regeneration, resource prioritisation, communications, and transformation. He confirmed that the Council’s response and action plan, set out at Appendix B, accepted all recommendations in full and had been reviewed by the Governance and Audit Committee on 26 February, whose suggested clarifications had been incorporated. He highlighted ongoing work on the scrutiny review and the communications?focused actions, such as a new communications strategy, increased team capacity, enhanced senior leadership visibility, and a refreshed employee recognition scheme, as key steps to driving improvement. The Leader concluded by thanking the Panel, the WLGA, Members, staff and partners, and expressed confidence that implementing the action plan would further strengthen the Council’s performance. The Leader Moved the Recommendation; Seconded by Councillor Alistair Cameron. Council discussed the report and the following key points were noted: Councillor Di Clements sought clarification on the feasibility of the action plan timetable, noting that significant responsibilities fell to the Director of Resources and questioning whether the required capacity and resources were sufficient to deliver the actions within the stated timescales. In response, the Chief Executive acknowledged that the query was fair and confirmed that while individual Directors and Senior Officers had been designated as leads for various recommendations, delivery would ultimately be driven collectively by the Senior Leadership Team. He advised that several actions related to the Council’s operating model, particularly in communications, capacity, innovation and transformation, and recognised that one of the actions identified by Councillor Clements carried the tightest deadline. He noted that some work had already commenced in parallel, especially around communications, where an internal review had begun prior to the Panel Performance Assessment. Although he accepted that the May timeline was challenging, he expressed confidence that credible progress would be made across most areas by the autumn. Councillor Alan Dennison queried whether the members of the Panel had come from highly successful authorities and whether their own organisational experience would provide learning opportunities for Pembrokeshire, or whether their councils faced similar challenges. In response, the Leader confirmed that the Panel was composed of senior and well?established figures, including the former Chief Executive of Swansea Council, regarded as a successful Authority, the Leader of Torfaen, the Chief Executive of Powys, and an experienced private?sector representative. He emphasised that all Panel members possessed extensive leadership experience in local government and had been appointed with Council’s support. The Chief Executive added that each panellist had held significant professional roles within the sector and was well qualified to undertake the assessment. He explained that the Panel Performance Assessment (PPA) is distinct from statutory regulatory inspections undertaken by CIW, Audit Wales and Estyn; the PPA is a legally required, light?touch peer review conducted once every political cycle, intended to provide constructive advice rather than formal regulatory judgement. Councillor Viv Stoddart commented that the action plan was heavy in management jargon but sought clarification on the reference to residents listed as consultees, asking how many residents had participated and how they had been selected. In response, the Corporate Business and Policy Manager explained that the resident reference related to the Council’s recent resident survey, the findings of which had been provided to the Panel as part of its desktop review. He confirmed that participation in the survey had been open to all Pembrokeshire residents and was promoted through the Council’s general communication channels, including circulation by Members and community councils. Councillor Huw Murphy raised concerns regarding wording within the report, noting that the Panel had described the call?in mechanism as being “intended for exceptional circumstances”. He stated that this was inconsistent with the Council’s Constitution, which contains no such qualification and he questioned where this interpretation had originated and expressed the view that external reviewers should not insert subjective opinion into procedural matters governed by the Constitution. The Chief Executive confirmed that the wording was the Panel’s own interpretation as set out in their report, not language derived from the Council. He advised that Panel members drew on experience from authorities where scrutiny receives executive reports by default, which may have informed their perspective. He added that he was willing to seek clarification from the Panel. Councillor Murphy reiterated that, while the Panel may hold such an opinion, it does not reflect the Council’s constitutional position. Councillor Jamie Adams stated that, having attended one of the Panel’s focus groups, he was concerned that while many positive comments made during the session appeared in the final report, the more critical observations raised by participants had not been reflected. He questioned whether the report had been “whitewashed,” noting that the Panel highlighted the absence of schools in special measures, whereas three schools had since entered special measures, representing a significant proportion of the County’s secondary pupils. He further observed that the Council’s website continued to state that no schools were in special measures, despite this no longer being accurate, and stressed the importance of honest and timely communication to maintain public confidence. Councillor Adams also argued that the report’s positive assessment of senior leadership appeared inconsistent with the findings of the recent staff survey, which showed many staff expressing concerns about leadership within the organisation. He suggested that the PPA’s conclusions, based on a short visit by four reviewers, did not align with the perceptions of staff or the reality of visible leadership within Pembrokeshire. He highlighted comparisons made during the focus group, noting that other authorities, such as Swansea, demonstrated strong, prominent leadership, and expressed disappointment that this issue had not been captured in the PPA’s findings. In response, the Leader acknowledged the reference to schools in special measures but clarified that, at the time of the Panel’s visit, no Pembrokeshire schools were in that category. He rejected the suggestion of a “whitewash,” stating that he and the Chief Executive had met daily with the Panel during the assessment process, and no concerns had been raised about either political or officer leadership. He referred Members to the PPA report, which described Cabinet as cohesive and exercising an effective model of distributive leadership. The Leader emphasised that leadership was about effectiveness rather than visibility or prominence in the media and expressed confidence that the Administration’s team?based approach was delivering positive outcomes. He concluded that the PPA report was extremely positive overall, that many authorities had received less favourable assessments, and that the Council welcomed the Panel’s external perspective and was committed to implementing the recommendations. Councillor Huw Murphy stated that he had contributed to the Panel’s assessment as an opposition Member and reiterated concerns regarding inaccuracies within the Council’s published information. He noted that the Programme for Administration, which the Leader had referred to previously, still stated on the Council’s website that no schools were listed in an intervention category, despite three schools now being in special measures. He stressed the need for accuracy, transparency and honesty with the public, and suggested it was disingenuous to assume residents would know the current position while outdated information remained online. He further questioned whether the Programme for Administration had been reviewed recently, as the inaccuracy should have been identified and corrected. In response, the Deputy Leader, Councillor Paul Miller, explained that the Programme for Administration reflected the position at the time it was adopted by Cabinet and was not updated on a rolling basis. Addressing wider comments raised earlier in the debate, he observed that former leaders such as Councillor Adams had adopted a highly centralised leadership style, while the current Administration operated differently, with Cabinet Members actively empowered to lead within their portfolios. He suggested that some Members had hoped the peer review would deliver a negative assessment of the current Administration, but emphasised that the review had not done so, concluding instead that the Council was performing well and that the Authority was in a stronger position than during previous administrations. The vote to approve the Recommendation, undertaken by way of an electronic vote, was carried. The votes were recorded as follows: For the Motion: Councillors Steve Alderman, Michelle Bateman, Joshua Beynon, David Bryan, Alistair Cameron, Aaron Carey, Mark Carter, Di Clements, John Cole, Alec Cormack, Pat Davies, Tim Evans, Claire George, Jonathan Grimes, Simon Hancock, Delme Harries, Jon Harvey, Tessa Hodgson, Michael John, Paul Miller, Nick Neumann, Mel Phillips, Bethan Price, Billy Shaw, Sam Skyrme-Blackhall, Viv Stoddart, Aled Thomas, Thomas Tudor, Chris Williams, Jacob Williams, Michael Williams, Guy Woodham, Simon Wright, Steve Yelland and Danny Young [35] Against the Motion: Councillors Jamie Adams, Terry Davies, Alan Dennison, Vanessa Thomas and Anji Tinley [5] Abstentions: Councillors Brian Hall, Elwyn Morse and Huw Murphy [3] RESOLVED That the response and action plan to the Panel’s report and recommendations, as attached at Appendix B, be approved.
Y penderfyniad fel y'i cofnodwyd
RESOLVED (a) That the revised Allocation of Committee Seats and Outside Bodies to political groups under the requirements of Section 15 of the Local Government and Housing Act 1989 as set out in Appendix 1 be approved, subject to the Plaid Cymru Group being allocated an additional seat on the Social Care Overview and Scrutiny Committee. (b) That the following appointments of Members not in a Political Group be approved: (i) Urgency Committee – Councillor Pat Davies (ii) Governance and Audit Committee – Councillor Steve Alderman (iii) Housing Revenue Account Working Group – Councillor Bethan Price (iv) School Modernisation Working Group – Councillor Viv Stoddart (v) Net Zero Working Group – Councillor Michele Wiggins (vi) South West Wales Corporate Joint Overview and Scrutiny Committee – Councillor David Simpson (vii) Celtic Freeport Joint Scrutiny Committee – Councillor Steve Alderman (c) That the following changes be noted: (i) Licensing Committee – Councillor Bethan Price to step down. (ii) National Park Authority – Councillor Steve Alderman to step down. (iii) Social Care Overview and Scrutiny Committee – Councillor Steve Alderman to step down. (d) That the appointment of Members to Committees and other bodies, as set out in Appendix 3, be approved subject to the above amendments.
Council considered a report by the Head of Democratic Services on changes to the allocation of seats on Committees and Outside Bodies to political groups in accordance with Section 15 of the Local Government and Housing Act 1989 following the by?election for the Fishguard North East ward, which was won by the Plaid Cymru Group, and the recent death of Councillor Michael Stoddart. The Head of Democratic Services reported that a review of the political balance had been undertaken and consequently the Plaid Cymru Group is entitled to two additional seats on ordinary Committees (Licensing and Constitutional Review Committees); and a seat on the National Park Authority. They are also entitled to one additional seat on an Overview and Scrutiny Committee and it was noted that those seats will come from the unallocated seat quotas. In addition, it was noted that Councillor Mike Stoddart sat on many bodies as both a main member and a reserve Member so there were a number of vacant seats to be filled by Members not in a political group. Having been notified that Councillor Steve Alderman would step down from the Social Care Overview and Scrutiny Committee, the Plaid Cymru Group confirmed that they would take that vacant seat. The Presiding Member Moved that the Plaid Cymru Group be allocated an additional seat on the Social Care Overview and Scrutiny Committee; Seconded by Councillor Alan Dennison. The vote, undertaken by way of a show of hands, was carried. The Presiding Member then Moved Recommendation (a) the revised Allocation of Committee Seats and Outside Bodies, as set out in Appendix 1, with the Plaid Cymru Group being allocated an additional seat on the Social Care Overview and Scrutiny Committee; Seconded by Councillor Alec Cormack. The vote, undertaken by way of a show of hands, was carried. The Presiding Member then sought nominations for the vacant seats to be allocated to Unaffiliated Members as set out in Recommendation (b). It was Moved by the Presiding Member that Councillor Pat Davies be appointed to the Urgency Committee; Seconded by Councillor Billy Shaw. The vote, undertaken by way of a show of hands, was carried. It was Moved by Councillor David Simpson that Councillor Steve Alderman be appointed to the Governance and Audit Committee; Seconded by Councillor Aled Thomas. The vote, undertaken by way of a show of hands, was carried. It was Moved by Councillor David Simpson that Councillor Bethan Price be appointed to the Housing Revenue Account Working Group; Seconded by Councillor Sam Skyrme-Blackhall. The vote, undertaken by way of a show of hands, was carried. It was Moved by the Presiding Member that Councillor Viv Stoddart be appointed to the School Modernisation Working Group; Seconded by Councillor Chris Williams. The vote, undertaken by way of a show of hands, was carried. It was Moved by Councillor Billy Shaw that Councillor Michele Wiggins be appointed to the Net Zero Working Group; Seconded by Councillor Alec Cormack. The vote, undertaken by way of a show of hands, was carried. It was Moved by Councillor Michael Williams that Councillor David Simpson be appointed to the South West Wales Corporate Joint Overview and Scrutiny Committee; Seconded by the Leader. The vote, undertaken by way of a show of hands, was carried. It was Moved by Councillor Paul Miller that Councillor Steve Alderman be appointed to the Celtic Freeport Joint Scrutiny Committee; Seconded by Councillor Pat Davies. The vote, undertaken by way of a show of hands, was carried. With regard to Recommendation (c), the Presiding Member Moved that Councillor Bethan Price steps down from the Licensing Committee noting that Councillor Steve Alderman had already stepped down from the Social Care Overview and Scrutiny Committee; Seconded by Councillor Jacob Williams. The vote, undertaken by way of a show of hands, was carried. It was further noted that the four Unaffiliated Members who currently sit on the National Park Authority did not wish to step down and as such it was necessary to undertake a secret ballot to appoint only three of those four Members to the three Unaffiliated seats. In accordance with the Constitution, it was noted that a secret ballot was required for contested appointments using the exhaustive ballot voting process. Councillor Jacob Williams Moved that all four Unaffiliated Members who currently sit on the National Park Authority be reappointed; Seconded by the Presiding Member. Members were advised that they could vote for up to and including three Members. The current Members were noted as Councillors Steve Alderman, Bethan Price, Sam Skyrme-Blackhall and Chris Williams. A secret-ballot was conducted. Following the casting of votes, the votes were verified and counted; and the Presiding Member announced that Councillors Bethan Price, Sam Skyrme-Blackhall and Chris Williams were duly appointed. RESOLVED (a) That the revised Allocation of Committee Seats and Outside Bodies to political groups under the requirements of Section 15 of the Local Government and Housing Act 1989 as set out in Appendix 1 be approved, subject to the Plaid Cymru Group being allocated an additional seat on the Social Care Overview and Scrutiny Committee. (b) That the following appointments of Members not in a Political Group be approved: (i) Urgency Committee – Councillor Pat Davies (ii) Governance and Audit Committee – Councillor Steve Alderman (iii) Housing Revenue Account Working Group – Councillor Bethan Price (iv) School Modernisation Working Group – Councillor Viv Stoddart (v) Net Zero Working Group – Councillor Michele Wiggins (vi) South West Wales Corporate Joint Overview and Scrutiny Committee – Councillor David Simpson (vii) Celtic Freeport Joint Scrutiny Committee – Councillor Steve Alderman (c) That the following changes be noted: (i) Licensing Committee – Councillor Bethan Price to step down. (ii) National Park Authority – Councillor Steve Alderman to step down. (iii) Social Care Overview and Scrutiny Committee – Councillor Steve Alderman to step down. (d) That the appointment of Members to Committees and other bodies, as set out in Appendix 3, be approved subject to the above amendments.
Councillor Paul Miller, the relevant Cabinet Member, responded to a question submitted by Councillor John Cole prior to the meeting in accordance with the provisions of Council Procedure Rule 4.18 as follows: County Hall being the largest building in our portfolio, must surely consume a large amount energy. 1) How much of each type of energy in KW hours is used annually? 2) What is the annual Co2 produced figure for the building? 3) What is the cost of energy annually in running the building? The Cabinet Member provided the combined annual energy figures for County Hall and the North Wing, stating that gas consumption was 52,000 kWh, costing around £26,000 and producing 10,540 kg of CO?. Electricity consumption totalled 47,000 kWh, with a spend of approximately £103,000 and related emissions of 8,319 kg of CO?. He noted that usage and expenditure vary year by year but these figures give a reliable indication of the scale involved.
The Leader, on behalf of the relevant Cabinet Member, responded to a question submitted by Councillor Alan Dennison prior to the meeting in accordance with the provisions of Council Procedure Rule 4.18 as follows: At the last Full Council the Cabinet member for Residents’ Services stated ‘ The small-scale changes being made to Haverfordwest Library over the next couple of months have been predominantly funded by a grant from Welsh Government and are primarily focused on addressing significant antisocial behaviour issues that the library has faced’. The Cabinet Member also stated ‘ measures funded primarily through Welsh Government grants are being implemented to protect staff and users’. He stressed that Riverside Library is the only library in the County experiencing such problems. Subsequent officer confirmation clarified that the funding allocated for improvements was intended specifically for enhancements to the children's library, visitor information services, and Wi-Fi printing, rather than addressing antisocial behaviour. In light of this, could the Cabinet Member elucidate the rationale behind the decision to allocate approximately £20,000 this being PCC contribution for apparent non-essential improvements totalling around £130,000, while simultaneously requesting an £18,000 contribution from Milford ratepayers to maintain their library's current operations and advocating further cuts to library funding in Pembroke and Tenby as proposed in the budget modeller? The Leader provided the following response: In Councillor Rhys Sinnett’s statement that ‘The small-scale changes being made to Haverfordwest Library over the next couple of months have been predominantly funded by a grant from Welsh Government and are primarily focused on addressing significant antisocial behaviour issues that the library has faced’ was true. The project has been predominantly funded by Welsh Government (£100,000 funding from the total project cost of £138,646) and the primary focus of the project was on addressing antisocial behaviour (approximately £116,000 of the £138,646 total project was spent on this aspect). It is also true that the project was primarily implemented to protect staff and users. The officer confirmation clarified that in order to acquire the grant, the project could not solely seek funding to tackle antisocial behaviour. Welsh government advised officers that they would need to develop a wider scheme, for them to consider funding it. As such, in order to have the best chance of success to acquire the £100,000 grant, the scheme also included small additional elements related to improvements to the children's library, providing Wi-Fi printing and improvements to the visitor information service provided, all of which were based on known customer demand. That was a pragmatic way of acquiring external funding to cover the lion’s share of the costs associated with the security gates, without which the cost would have fallen to local taxpayers, as Pembrokeshire County Council (PCC) would have had to have funded 100% of the security gate costs. £25,646 of PCC funding, together with £13,000 Section 106 funding went into the scheme, and all of that funding was specifically focused on the security gates. The other, non-essential elements, formed part of the £100,000 Welsh government grant, with the rest of the grant covering the security gate costs, alongside the PCC and 106 funding. No PCC funding went into the non-essential elements of the scheme. If we had not applied for the grant, just implementing the security gates would have cost approximately £116,000. This approach has therefore saved PCC a significant amount of money. This was a capital project whereas the financial savings required by all services across the Authority outlined in the budget modeller, which included an element for Milford Haven Library, is revenue funding. As such, whether the project in Haverfordwest had been delivered or not, would have made no difference to the requirement to reduce costs at Milford Haven Library. Councillor Dennison asked a supplementary question, saying he was confused by the Leader’s earlier statement that the funding for the library gates was primarily linked to tackling antisocial behaviour. He cited an email from the Head of Culture and Leisure stating that the grant was a museum, archive and library?specific fund focused on refurbishments and improvements, and that it would not normally support projects aimed specifically at antisocial behaviour. He asked for clarification on the apparent contradiction. The Leader responded that he was happy to clarify and referred to an email he had already sent to Councillor Dennison on 20 February. He explained that, as advised by the Head of Culture and Leisure, in order to secure the grant to install the gates, the Council had to apply for a broader package of improvements to the library. If the Council had installed the gates without applying for the grant, it would have cost significantly more. The Leader added that the Head of Culture and Leisure had previously outlined this rationale in an email dated 9 January—the same email Councillor Dennison had quoted from—which also explained why such a grant would not apply to Milford Haven Library.
The Leader, on behalf of the relevant Cabinet Member, responded to a question submitted by Councillor Alan Dennison prior to the meeting in accordance with the provisions of Council Procedure Rule 4.18 as follows: I have observed at least three repaired potholes that have deteriorated rapidly, prompting me to report them. Could the Cabinet Member provide information on the number of similar reports received annually since 2022, including how many of these are for repeat repairs, the average time taken from when a report is received to when the pothole is repaired and the annual cost associated with repeat repairs. The Leader provided the following response: All potholes reported are referred to our Highway Maintenance teams for assessment, prioritisation and repair. We do not routinely record instances of repeat attendance for failed pothole repairs within our Highway Maintenance Management System; however, it is possible from the Contact Centre records to identify reports where failed repairs have been mentioned. For the past four years, the financial year figures are as follows: 2022/23 5 2023/24 4 2024/25 18 2025/26 to date 9 Based on these figures the additional costs incurred in carrying out repeat repairs are therefore relatively low. Over the corresponding timeframe the total numbers of potholes reported and repaired are as follows: Financial Year Cat 1 (Urgent) Cat 2/3 (Routine) 2022/23 956 1368 2023/24 952 1390 2024/25 1545 1584 2025/26 to date 1265 1205 Potholes are prioritised for repair on a risk-assessed basis depending on the severity of the defect and the road classification, meaning large potholes on a busy A-road will be repaired sooner than a shallow pothole on a minor road. The target time to attend to a Cat1 pothole varies between 24 hours and five days, and to attend a Cat2 pothole between one and three months. No target times are set for minor Cat3 pothole repairs. These targets are very similar to those of other Welsh Highway Authorities. The average time to repair a Cat1 pothole is three days, and 45 days for a Cat2. The increased number of pothole repairs over the past two years is primarily due to the extremely wet weather experienced. Whilst this wet weather has invariably resulted in more pothole formation it will also have, in some areas, caused early failures of repairs due to standing surface water causing wash-out of cold applied asphalt. The budgets for the service have been reduced over the past two years, reducing operational and supervisor staff. This has impacted on the ability to maintain the same level of service and you will be aware of the additional money allocated in the latest budget. Additional LGBI grant funding in 2025/26 has enabled us to carry out more preventative treatments (resurfacing and dressing) than revenue funding alone, which will longer term prevent pothole formation. Within the 2026/27 Financial Year LGBI programme, £300K has been earmarked for responsive works which will assist address any backlog of repairs. As a supplementary question, Councillor Dennison said he believed long call?centre waiting times were discouraging residents from reporting potholes and noted that many constituents had told him they now give up after being held for 30–40 minutes. He warned that this would worsen the existing backlog of pothole repairs. The Leader agreed that the current waiting times were unacceptable and confirmed that the issue had been raised previously at Council. He said the Chief Executive was reviewing the situation with a view to increasing resources in the Contact Centre. The Leader encouraged residents to report potholes via the online MyAccount interactive map where possible, noting that repairs reported through the app were generally addressed quickly, though he acknowledged that not everyone is able to report issues digitally.
The Leader, on behalf of the relevant Cabinet Member, responded to a question submitted by Councillor Alan Dennison prior to the meeting in accordance with the provisions of Council Procedure Rule 4.18 as follows: The Council has recently faced significant negative attention due to its involvement in the removal of a vehicle promoting Rib and Oyster, as well as allegedly aiding in the removal of inflatable goalposts at the entrance of The Ivy pub in Narberth. Could the Leader clarify whether the Pembrokeshire County Council played a role in either of these removals and if so, provide the rationale behind such actions? The Leader provided the following response: A complaint was received regarding a vehicle advertising a business on the Highway. An officer from our Highways team spoke to the business concerned and requested the vehicle was removed as it was a distraction on the Highway and the vehicle was moved by the business. In the case of the inflatable rugby posts, no officer from the Authority in any service has been identified as either giving instruction to the premises or assisting with removal. Officers are not in receipt of any complaints relating to this matter and the first the Authority was aware of this was via our Communications team who had an enquiry from the local press. The Communications team responded back to the press to this effect.
The Leader, on behalf of the relevant Cabinet Member, responded to a question submitted by Councillor Viv Stoddart prior to the meeting in accordance with the provisions of Council Procedure Rule 4.18 as follows: In view of the exceptional wet weather in the last two months, will the Cabinet member provide an update on the situation regarding the proposed mitigation project to alleviate the risk of potential flooding in Havens Head and Lower Priory? The Leader provided the following response: On 1 December 2025, Cabinet resolved that following the successful tender exercise, and the approval of the Full Business Case and Detailed Design by Welsh Government, that the scheme for the construction of the Lower Priory/Havens Head Flood Alleviation Scheme be added to the Capital Programme over the financial years 2025-26 and 2026-27. The contract was awarded by Director decision. This decision was to proceed to award the tender and formally enter into a contract with Walters UK Ltd for the construction of the Havens Head and Lower Priory Flood Alleviation Scheme, subject to approval of the Full Business Case by Welsh Government. On 19 December 2025, Welsh Government approved the Full Business Case and FCERM funding which, with the continued to support of Pembrokeshire County Council of the scheme delivery through providing the 15% match funding requirement over the two financial years, resulted in the award of the construction contract. Following Welsh Government confirmation of funding for the Havens Head and Lower Priory Flood Alleviation Scheme, Pembrokeshire County Council is continuing to work through a series of engagements with MHPA, land owners at Lower Priory, along with working on construction design options with Walters to develop a construction methodology and programme. Following completion of the programme it is proposed have a residents’ engagement meeting to outline the next delivery steps. The scheme is currently due for completion in December 2026. Councillor Viv Stoddart welcomed the good news that there was a timescale in place given that it has been eight years since the flooding.
Y penderfyniad fel y'i cofnodwyd
RESOLVED That the Notice of Motion be referred to Cabinet. [Councillors Tessa Hodgson, Thomas Tudor and Pat Davies left the meeting at this juncture.]
A Notice of Motion was submitted by Councillor John Cole in the following terms: Two untapped power sources, that would create 100% clean energy are within very close proximity of County Hall. Both sources would substantially compensate County Hall’s current use of power supplied via the grid. These sources are the western Cleddau and Cartlett Brook. The first running alongside, and the other under County Hall. My Notice of Motion is that the Council look at the feasibility of the installation of hydro electric turbines at these sources. This would contribute to the Council’s current net zero policy by off-setting Co2 production, and would also reduce the running costs of County Hall, by generating its own electricity, thereby reducing the amount provided by the grid network. Upon the terms of Council Procedure Rule 4.19, the Motion having been Moved by the Presiding Member; Seconded by Councillor David Simpson then stood referred to Cabinet. The vote, undertaken by way of a show of hands, was carried. RESOLVED That the Notice of Motion be referred to Cabinet. [Councillors Tessa Hodgson, Thomas Tudor and Pat Davies left the meeting at this juncture.]
Y penderfyniad fel y'i cofnodwyd
RESOLVED (a) That the Notice of Motion be adopted. (b) That this Council requests that the Labour Welsh Government intervenes in Hywel Dda University Health Board’s recent decision to cease emergency general surgery at Withybush hospital and immediately reverses their decision. We believe removing this service critically undermines the sustainability of Withybush hospital’s A&E department. Also, the decision by the Health Board does not take into account the impact and potential serious risks it will have on Pembrokeshire residents. (c) That the Hywel Dda University Health Board be requested to attend a future meeting of Pembrokeshire County Council to outline their future strategy for health provision in Pembrokeshire.
The Presiding Member reminded Council that earlier in the meeting he had consented to this Notice of Motion being debated at the meeting in accordance with procedural rule 4.19.6 (h) of the Constitution as it was considered essential and conducive to the despatch of business. Councillor Di Clements addressed Council in support of her Notice of Motion in the following terms: This Council requests that the Labour Welsh Government intervenes in Hywel Dda University Health Board’s recent decision to cease emergency general surgery at Withybush hospital and immediately reverses their decision. We believe removing this service critically undermines the sustainability of Withybush hospital’s A&E department. Also, the decision by the health board does not take into account the impact and potential serious risks it will have on Pembrokeshire residents. The written supporting statement, signed by all Members of the Conservatives Group, was included in the Agenda pack. Councillor Di Clements Moved the Notice of Motion; Seconded by Councillor Jonathan Grimes. Council discussed the report and the following key points were noted: Councillor Michelle Bateman stated that while Councillors are elected to make decisions on matters within the Authority’s control, they also have a wider leadership role in representing community concerns on issues beyond the Council’s direct remit. She noted that trust and confidence in local health service plans have been significantly eroded, with residents feeling let down by years of reassurances, shifting proposals, consultation fatigue and ongoing service failures. She highlighted delays, failed transfers and pressures on maternity and neonatal services, citing recent assessments showing they are operating at the limits of safety. She argued that further changes cannot be considered until transport issues are fully addressed. Although she might have preferred a broader Wales?wide approach to workforce and health service reform, she confirmed her support for the Notice of Motion before Council. The Presiding Member drew Members’ attention to the written statement which called on the Leader to write to the First Minister. Councillor Michael John said he could not disagree with the concerns raised about the long?term erosion of services at Withybush Hospital and warned that the potential loss of emergency surgery represented a “red line” for many residents. He noted that Councillors had previously challenged the removal of cardiac, stroke, maternity and children's services, but those changes had gone ahead despite local opposition. He informed Council that, at the recent Partnership Panel meeting, he had asked that the Health Board be invited to outline its future strategy for health provision in Pembrokeshire. He therefore proposed an Amendment requesting that the Health Board’s Chief Executive be invited to attend a future Council meeting to present this strategy, noting that previous CEOs had attended before and that residents expected Councillors to raise these concerns publicly. Councillor Clements advised that she would be in agreement with adding that invitation to her Notice of Motion. In his maiden speech, Councillor Billy Shaw provided a professional perspective as a former senior biomedical scientist at Withybush Hospital. He described how historic policy changes had shifted service focus away from Pembrokeshire and outlined clinical risks arising from long travel distances, multiple transfers and delays in diagnosis. Referring to the “golden hour” and increasing mortality risk with each hour’s delay, he warned against continued downgrading and expressed full support for the Motion. Councillor Claire George echoed concerns about loss of public confidence, pointing to contradictions between the Health Board’s stated values and recent decisions. She emphasised the importance of rapid diagnosis for major conditions, existing ambulance pressures, and the lack of capacity at Glangwili. She highlighted the disproportionate impact on older residents and carers and criticised the equality impact assessment, noting many residents now felt they faced a “health lottery”. Councillor David Bryan, drawing on his decade with the former Community Health Council, recalled repeated promises of investment and a new hospital that had not materialised. He criticised the Welsh Government for decades of failure in Pembrokeshire and asked that the Leader question how the decision aligned with the principles of the Wellbeing of Future Generations Act. He confirmed his support for the Motion. Councillor Rhys Jordan described the situation as a failure for the people of Pembrokeshire. He stressed that “miles and minutes matter”, arguing that removing emergency surgery created inequity and postcode?based outcomes for rural communities. He urged the Council to challenge and reverse the decision. The Leader expressed his full support for the Motion and shared a personal experience in which emergency surgery at Withybush had saved his life. He reflected on the gradual erosion of services and confirmed he would write the required letters, subject to the will of Council. The vote in support of the Notice of Motion was put to the vote, undertaken by way of an electronic vote, and was carried. The votes were recorded as follows: For the Motion: Councillors Steve Alderman, Michelle Bateman, Joshua Beynon, David Bryan, Alistair Cameron, Aaron Carey, Mark Carter, Di Clements, John Cole, Alec Cormack, Terry Davies, Alan Dennison, Tim Evans, Claire George, Jonathon Grimes, Brian Hall, Simon Hancock, Delme Harries, Jon Harvey, Mike James, Michael John, Rhys Jordan, Paul Miller, Elwyn Morse, Huw Murphy, Nick Neumann, Mel Phillips, Bethan Price, Billy Shaw, David Simpson, Sam Skyrme-Blackhall, Aled Thomas, Vanessa Thomas, Anji Tinley, Chris Williams, Jacob Williams, Michael Williams, Guy Woodham, Simon Wright, Steve Yelland and Danny Young [41] There were no votes against or abstentions. RESOLVED (a) That the Notice of Motion be adopted. (b) That this Council requests that the Labour Welsh Government intervenes in Hywel Dda University Health Board’s recent decision to cease emergency general surgery at Withybush hospital and immediately reverses their decision. We believe removing this service critically undermines the sustainability of Withybush hospital’s A&E department. Also, the decision by the Health Board does not take into account the impact and potential serious risks it will have on Pembrokeshire residents. (c) That the Hywel Dda University Health Board be requested to attend a future meeting of Pembrokeshire County Council to outline their future strategy for health provision in Pembrokeshire.
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.