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 to: • Consider responding as consultees upon the proposals detailed below in paragraph 4. • Consider as a committee, to provide further comments, observations or recommendations in respect of these proposals prior to Cabinet consideration. Request the Service Director for Democratic Services & Communications to provide Cabinet with the feedback of the Education and Inclusion Scrutiny Committee.
RESOLVED to: • Consider responding as consultees upon the proposals detailed below in paragraph 4. • Consider as a committee, to provide further comments, observations or recommendations in respect of these proposals prior to Cabinet consideration. • Request the Service Director for Democratic Services & Communications to provide Cabinet with the feedback of the Education and Inclusion Scrutiny Committee.
Apologies of absence were received from County Borough Councillors Cook, Smith, and Warren and Co-opted Members Mr S Jones, and Mr M Thomas, from the Service Director for 21st Century Schools and Transformation Andrea Richards and the Service Director, Democratic Services and Communications Christian Hanagan.
In accordance with the code of conduct, the following declarations were made: Ø County Borough Councillor S Evans – Personal Interest item 2 – “My son attends Tonyrefail Community School.” Ø County Borough Councillor S Hickman – Personal Interest item 2 – “My children’s schools are both mentioned very briefly in the report.” Ø County Borough Councillor J Brencher – Personal Interest item 3 – “I’m a governor of Ysgol Bro Taf which has been referenced in the report.” County Borough Councillor C Lisles – Personal Interest item 2 – “A fellow Town Cllr is one of the speakers and I am a Governor of Ysgol Afon Wen as has been mentioned in the discussion.”
Y penderfyniad fel y'i cofnodwyd
RESOLVED to: • Consider responding as consultees upon the proposals detailed below in paragraph 4. • Consider as a committee, to provide further comments, observations or recommendations in respect of these proposals prior to Cabinet consideration. Request the Service Director for Democratic Services & Communications to provide Cabinet with the feedback of the Education and Inclusion Scrutiny Committee.
The Chair began by thanking Members, Officers and Members of the public for attending the meeting and welcomed their attendance and contributions. She then provided context to the meeting, explaining that at the meeting of Cabinet held on 23rd September 2024, approval was given to begin a process of formal consultation on two school closure proposals in relation to Tref-Y-Rhyg Primary School and Trallwng Infants school. These consultations were being undertaken between 30th September and 15th November 2024 under the arrangements outlined in the Welsh Government’s School Organisation Code. As discussed by the committee when setting out its work programme, it would always look to consider and act as a consultee on any school organisation proposals put forward by Cabinet, hence the reason for the special meeting today. The Chair emphasised, for the benefit of Members of the public, that the committee’s role today, in scrutiny, was to act as a consultee and to put forward a collective response to the consultation to the Cabinet, acknowledging that the committee was not a decision-making body, also reminding all that they were able to complete the consultation in their own individual capacity. The Chair then handed over to the Director of Education and Inclusion Services who provided a brief summary of the report. The Chair then explained, that before moving to speakers she would make reference to a letter than had been circulated to Members of the Committee, from County Borough Councillor D Owen-Jones, who was unable to attend the meeting due to Mayoral Duties, and was opposed to the proposal, outlining his concerns and in particular the consequences of increased capacity due to new housing in the Tonyrefail area, and queried the Council’s pupil number projections. With the agreement of the Chair, the following Non-Committee Member, County Borough Councillor D Grehan, addressed the Committee, and elucidated he was opposed to the proposal. With the agreement of the Chair, the following members of the public, Mr S Burgess and Mrs J Freeman addressed the Committee, and elucidated that they were opposed to the proposal. The Chair thanked the speakers for their representations and opened up the floor for Members questions and comments. A Member stated that any decision that was taken post-consultation, should be in the best interest of everyone, and any decision should take into account all aspects including transport and pupil numbers. Members sought reassurance around the capacity at Tonyrefail CS, with an increase of places, for the learners of Tref-Y-Rhyg, noting that a large percentage of children already attending Tonyrefail CS, instead of their catchment school e.g., Hendreforgan Primary School and Cwmlai Primary School, and asked that early consideration be given in respect of siblings, whilst acknowledging the Schools Admissions Code. A Member sought clarification in respect of the backlog maintenance figure listed within the report, in respect of accessibility. The Member sought clarification around home to school transport, and safe routes to school. A Member, also acknowledging there were several tables within the report which outlined those pupils that attended Tref-Y-Rhyg outside of catchment, raised concerns on the implications and impact on those pupils on home to school transport who perhaps already travel to Tref-Y-Rhyg, who would have further distances to travel. The Director of Education and Inclusion Services acknowledged in relation to siblings, outside of the catchment, that parents did run the risk of not securing places in the event of the school reaching capacity. The data for Tonyrefail CS, showed that only 35% of children currently in the primary phase, were in catchment learners. If the proposal was to proceed, then children who live in Tref-Y-Rhyg would be within catchment and would be prioritised for placement in the school. Members were provided with an explanation around the admissions criteria. The Director confirmed there were sufficient spaces in Tonyrefail CS for the learners of Tref-Y-Rhyg and gave assurances based on the data. The Director provided details around the maintenance figure but acknowledged that it was recognised that works were ongoing in schools, with a cyclical process, but at the point of the last condition survey, there were significant issues. In terms of the transport requirement, the Director recognised that the transport policy in RCT was a generous one, but acknowledged the concerns that families had, where children didn’t meet the 1.5 miles eligibility for school based transport, whilst recognising there were existing safe routes, with Tref-Y-Rhyg feeding into Tonyrefail for secondary education, used on a daily basis for children in the community at present. The Business and School Organisation Manager explained, with regards to the implications on those pupils on home to school transport who perhaps already travel to Tref-Y-Rhyg, who would have further distances to travel, none of them would be eligible for transport as they were choosing to travel from out of catchment. She confirmed that none of the addresses within the Tref-Y-Rhyg catchment area, would qualify for home to school transport, as the walk was 1.5 miles, which was the outer limit for that eligibility. The Director explained it was important to note that the data for Tonyrefail CS showed there were a number of learners from the Tref-Y-Rhyg catchment area that were already making that journey. Members expressed concerns in respect of the robustness of data provided within the report, commenting on the confusing format with several data sets contained within and acknowledging the data provided by local Members, highlighting reference to projection numbers in terms of housing and pupils, which was not reflected in the report. It was requested that a robust analysis of all data was provided in the report to be presented back to Cabinet. A Member sought reassurances that children would be at the heart of the decision made, and was concerned that some may struggle financially, as a result of the proposal. The Director of Education and Inclusion Services advised that children were included as statutory consultees in any school organisation proposals so adopting a very child-centred approach to any process of change, although acknowledging this was very emotive, and that change was difficult and unsettling for children, especially if there were vulnerabilities, so the planning and the transition, particularly around children with ALN or other vulnerabilities, was key. The Director provided assurances to the Committee that their views would be captured as part of that feedback, along with all stakeholder feedback, for Cabinet Members to consider in full. The Director of Education and Inclusion Services, acknowledged that the data in terms of the housing developments, could be shared with Cabinet Members. The LA adopted a clear formula, in line with WG requirements, of how requirements were projected, in terms of pupil places, with a good track record in terms of ensuring sufficiency of school places, acknowledging a number of areas in RCT had quite high levels of housing association properties, with the LA successfully able to manage school places. Members were advised with regard to any ambiguity or questions around the data, to provide explicit feedback on which aspects they didn’t agree with, which would be picked up in the report, when it went back to Cabinet. The Head of Service Transformation and Data Systems added that pupil numbers were monitored daily, along with live births from registrars, at the end of every 2 months, which are mapped against catchment areas, to monitor how projections work. Work was done in conjunction with the planning department to look at housing developments, where there had been approved permission to build houses, and over the last 20 odd years, projections had been fairly accurate. Members acknowledging that property prices had escalated enormously and taking into consideration the dueling of the A4119, questioned if Tonyrefail CS would have enough capacity for future growth in the area, if there was a ripple effect up the valley. The Director of Education and Inclusion Services explained that based on the figures of 308 out of the 415 pupil places, related to children that lived outside of the catchment, so a significant proportion who currently attended, should perhaps be attending their local schools, whilst acknowledging that there was surplus capacity in neighbouring schools. There was a statutory responsibility to keep all school places under review and to plan strategically to ensure there was sufficient supply to meet demand. The Development Services Manager (Planning Policy) explained that they worked closely with Education with regards to analysing the likely future housing growth in Tonyrefail and had tried to give a level of certainty to the proposals in terms of the current planning permissions and those sites already under construction and the housing numbers that could come forward for development over the next 5 years, although beyond that there was less certainty. In terms of the marketability, a lot of candidate sites had come forward for consideration for housing in the Revised LDP, which may be relating to the fact that it is more of a marketable area for development because of things like improvement to the A4119, but it still remained in terms of specifically allocated sites, there would be less in the future than had been in the past, in relation to the LDP, although acknowledged it may encourage an increase and perhaps more windfall sites. The Member sought clarification around the classroom repurposing in Tonyrefail CS, which was currently used as an ancillary space, and asked if this put even more pressure in terms of storage space or whatever the space was currently used for. The Director explained in terms of the ancillary spaces, they were already classroom sized, so would be fit for purpose in terms of what would be needed for learners moving across. The 21st Century School Organisation and Business Manager reiterated that the ancillary space, was a classroom, with a CTOUCH interactive touchscreen there, a teaching wall and furniture. If additional furniture was needed, there was surplus from the Pontypridd amalgamations, so it was not envisaged any sort of capital spend needed to accommodate any additional pupils in the school. The Member referencing a recent visit to Tonyrefail CS by the Task & Finish Group, noted that the traffic management around the school was challenging, particularly on the primary side, and sought reassurance around the impact of additional footfall from parents and carers, along with potential additional vehicle usage, acknowledging the knock on effect in terms of sustainability and the carbon footprint. The Director acknowledged that traffic management, could be challenging on all school sites, with further approved plans at Tonyrefail CS, to ensure that the arrangements were fit for purpose, as there were statutory responsibilities to ensure that traffic management plans were robust and effective, as part of any new arrangements. In terms of the footfall and the carbon footprint, there were certain things that happened once proposals were approved. The Business and School Organisation Manager added that colleagues from traffic, transport, health & safety and compliance had been working with the new headteacher, recently, looking at the existing car park, pedestrian and vehicle transport arrangements, on site and had come up with some options in terms of optimising traffic movements and creating safer routes for pedestrians on site as well, which would be rolled out regardless of the proposals. A Member asked if the local community had been consulted in respect of potential increased traffic implications and footfall noting that it wasn’t referenced specifically in the impact assessment. The Business and School Organisation Manager acknowledged there would be a public drop-in session at both schools, the week after half-term and it was expected a large number of people would attend, with their views recorded in the feedback. The Member sought assurance that there wouldn’t be restrictions on breakfast club numbers for Tonyrefail CS, with the potential increased numbers going there. The Director advised in respect of breakfast club provision, waiting lists had been cleared. It was recognised that the digitalisation of applications had strengthened and improved the intelligence, but as a consequence of the new processes, there had been an over application, but gave assurances that provision would be available for learners that transitioned across. A Member raised concern around formal allocation of additional teaching staff, acknowledging the potential excess of 30 pupils moving across to Tonyrefail CS, whilst recognising that the school was in a deficit budget. The Director explained, in terms of the budget position in the school, this would depend on how many families applied for school places, the age of the children, and whether there was space in existing classes, so it was too early to discuss that at this point. The Head of Service Transformation and Data Systems explained with regards to the budget, if a decision was made to proceed with the proposals, and children were moved to new schools, then the money followed the children, as had been done in a closure last academic year, where the formulas increased in other schools to account for additional pupils and additional staff required at those schools to accommodate those additional children. A Member noting on page 33 of the report that it stated that Tref-Y-Rhyg Primary School would continue to have classes of mixed year groups and having to organise classes in such a way could pose significant challenges for teaching and learning, queried if any guarantee could be given that if children moved to Tonyrefail CS, they would never be put in a mixed class. The Director provided a comprehensive response, acknowledging it became increasingly challenging where there were 3 different year groups in a class, and perhaps where there were children with ALN on top of that, although classroom practitioners were expected to be differentiating and ensuring that the curriculum offer was appropriate for the needs of the children, but explained that she couldn’t give that assurance, as lots of schools did have 2 year groups in one class. The Member asked for further clarification if it was detrimental to have mixed classes, as stated in the report. The Director felt that detrimental was a very strong word, reiterating that with appropriate differentiation, the needs of all learners could be met effectively, but acknowledged it was not without its challenges, whilst acknowledging the socially benefits. A Member, acknowledging that the consultation was still ongoing, asked what the flavour of the current responses were. The Business and School Organisation Manager acknowledged that this was still the consultation phase, having received lots of questions from local Members, MPs and Members of the Senedd. It was noted that the majority of people who had chosen to complete the online survey were against the proposals. No response had been given by Estyn, to date, who were a key statutory consultee, with the Officer advising that the local authority was obliged to include their full response as part of the consultation report to Cabinet. It was also noted that Cabinet would not just receive a summary report, but they would see every single response, which would be physically printed off. A Member sought reassurance that appropriate consultees were included in the consultation including, RhAG (Rhieni ar gyfer Addysg Gymraeg / Parents for Welsh Education), recognising the opportunity for Welsh Language Immersion, as referenced in the report, should the proposal go ahead. A Member sought clarification around to how much the refurbishment costs had been in the past 10 years, and what this was for. Members requested further detail be made available to Cabinet in respect of ‘safe walking routes’ in relation to the proposals. The Director of Education and inclusion Services acknowledged that RhAG were generally included as consultees and would make sure they were. In respect of sharing the route, she didn’t see an issue with this. In respect of the admissions element, Members were informed that when children applied, their application was processed in accordance with the Schools Admissions Code, so it was not possible to quantify how many children would be affected because it could not be anticipated where a parent may apply. The Business and School Organisation Manager explained that whilst she didn’t have the detail to hand, £300k had been invested in the school for various things, and as part of the service level agreement (SLA), the mantra was to make sure that the estate was kept safe, watertight and warm. Over the last couple of years, quite a lot of work had been done in collaboration with the headteacher and she would provide that information as part of the report to Cabinet. It was RESOLVED to: • Consider responding as consultees upon the proposals detailed below in paragraph 4. • Consider as a committee, to provide further comments, observations or recommendations in respect of these proposals prior to Cabinet consideration. Request the Service Director for Democratic Services & Communications to provide Cabinet with the feedback of the Education and Inclusion Scrutiny Committee.
Y penderfyniad fel y'i cofnodwyd
RESOLVED to: • Consider responding as consultees upon the proposals detailed below in paragraph 4. • Consider as a committee, to provide further comments, observations or recommendations in respect of these proposals prior to Cabinet consideration. • Request the Service Director for Democratic Services & Communications to provide Cabinet with the feedback of the Education and Inclusion Scrutiny Committee.
The Chair began by thanking Members, Officers and Members of the public for attending the meeting this evening and welcomed their attendance and contributions. The Chair emphasised, for the benefit of Members of the public, that the committee’s role today, in scrutiny, was to act as a consultee and to put forward a collective response to the consultation to the Cabinet, acknowledging that the committee was not a decision-making body, but was eager to here members of the public’s views and also to hear the view of Members to feed into the consultation response. The Chair then handed over to the Director of Education and Inclusion Services who provided a brief summary of the report. With the agreement of the Chair, the following members of the public, Mrs L Davies, Mr J Bowen and Mr P Southway addressed the Committee and elucidated that they were opposed to the proposal. With the agreement of the Chair, the following Non-Committee Member, County Borough Councillor M Powell, addressed the Committee and elucidated he was opposed to the proposal. The Chair thanked the speakers for their representations and opened up the floor for Members questions and comments. A Member raised concerns regarding the proposal to close Trallwng Infants’ School when there was very limited room for expansion in Coedpenmaen Primary School and was mindful of the limited amounts of open space around the areas of both schools in the proposal, for any future new school developments, despite indications that Pontypridd had been singled out as a prime area for expansion and development, in the LDP. Members sought clarification with the backlog maintenance figure and the recent investment and asked that further detail be provided when the report was presented back to Cabinet. The Business and School Organisation Manager confirmed that just over £240k had been injected into Trallwng Infants’ School in the last couple of years, although noted this was for the 2023/24 financial year. Members were advised that this was part of the Welsh Government (WG) statutory roll-out of the Universal Free School Meals (UFSMs), with significant money from the WG to increase kitchen space and upgrade equipment, to be able to facilitate feeding additional pupils. Additional work was done over the summer to provide a sensory room, as a result of the removal of an intervention space away, to make the kitchen adaptations, along with some work to the staff room. The Business and School Organisation Manager acknowledged the question around the decision to spend the money, given the proposal, explaining there was a duty of care for the children and staff, whilst the school remained operational, whilst being mindful that they couldn’t determine the proposals, in terms of the consultation. In respect of the investment, this could be elaborated on in the report that would be go back to Cabinet. Members sought confirmation that the projected pupil numbers (looking at live birth data, and pupil numbers, which it was acknowledged was monitored daily) had been considered in consultation with planning colleagues in terms of the growth of population in and around the Pontypridd area, despite indications that Pontypridd had been singled out as a prime area for expansion and development, in the LDP. The Head of Service Transformation and Data Systems confirmed that the information was shared with planning colleagues but noted that all the evidence pointed to a falling birth rate in Pontypridd. The Business and School Organisation Manager, picking up on a point made by a member of the public, speaking earlier, around the ‘survey report and market conditions and, making sure we have the accurate estimates included’ advised Members that there was a Service Level Agreement (SLA) with Corporate Estates, the technical team, that looked after the schools. Part of the statutory responsibility was that condition surveys are carried out on a cyclical basis, within a 5 year period, so the information was accurate at that time based on market conditions. The Business and School Organisation Manager agreed that she would make sure that any further information on the market conditions and making sure there was accurate estimates would be included in the consultation report presented to Cabinet. Members asked that further detail in respect of the market conditions were provided in the report back to Cabinet. A Member, who had been brought up in Trallwn, so knew the geography of the area, felt quite emotional about the proposal. The Member was mindful that a great deal of emphasis was put on educational outcomes, recognising that parents had to make a choice, based on what was best for their children, and that it was important, as an Education Committee, that educational outcomes, were at the forefront. The Member acknowledged the clarification on the birth rate but felt there was contradiction in terms of the discussion around growth of the Pontypridd Community. Members asked that further exploration of the models and questions around the Federated model, be included in the proposals back to Cabinet. The Member raised concern around the knock on effect for siblings of those already attending Coedpenmaen PS, should the proposal to close Trallwng Infants’ School, go ahead. The Director of Education and Inclusion Services acknowledged in respect of Estyn outcomes, that they no longer made judgements, such as excellent or outstanding, but acknowledged that there were no follow-ups in the inspection in Trallwng Infant school and it was a positive report. Members were advised, in respect of, Coedpenmaen PS, that since being placed in special measures in May 2022, that the school had been removed from the list of schools and felt it was important for Members to note the sufficient progress made in relation to the recommendation, and so was important to judge the school on where it was now, rather than a report, from 2 years ago. The Director explained whilst she took onboard the point around Pontypridd being an attractive place to live, etc., the data wasn’t showing that growth in provision was needed, noting that the data from 2019 to 2023/24, there had been a 33% reduction, which was considerable, given that only 30 of the children currently going to the school were actually from the local community. She acknowledged that parents had a huge choice, including Welsh medium education, with those attending Coedpenmaen PS, stemming from far and wide, but some of the data suggesting that actually of the children that could potentially have been in Trallwng Infants school for their infant education, had chosen Coedpenmaen Primary school, so that element of choice was there for everyone. The Director explained in relation to the point around Federation, that there were a number of Federated schools, that were very successful. A number of factors were looked at, in terms of what was a sustainable number of pupils to attend this school and the concern was around the data and the view was the data was suggesting at this point in time that growth wasn’t there children could be accommodated in Coedpenmaen PS, although acknowledged that parents had a choice and may decide not to send their children to Coedpenmaen PS. The Director acknowledged that what needed to be done was to look at all of the elements, which there was a statutory duty to do, and to look at everything in an objective way, to be able to present the data on a range of different aspects to give to Cabinet, for them to give due consideration. The Head of Achievement RCT – primary sector, encouraged Members to go to the Estyn website and look for themselves at the report following the monitoring for Coedpenmaen Primary school, when it was taken out of special measures, with the data as it happened in April 2024. A Member recognising the often difficult decisions needed to be taken with any school reorganisation, regardless of the rationale, suggested a sharing of good practice from previous school mergers or closures, which would give Members and local residents confidence with regards to the success of previous school re-organisations. The Director of Education and Inclusion felt that this was a good point made, recognising the recent schools visits by Members of the task and finish group. An example of this, was children from Rhigos PS transferring to Penderyn PS and Hirwaun PS, and although a piece of work around this hadn’t been done, anecdotally, during a recent visit to one of the schools, the headteacher was really positive about the transition into the school and that children were settled really well and that children had been incredibly welcoming. A Member expressed concerns in respect of the robustness of data provided within the report, commenting on the confusing format with several data sets contained within and acknowledging the data provided by local Members which was not reflected in the report. It was requested that a robust analysis of all data was provided in the report to be presented back to Cabinet. A Member sought reassurance that appropriate consultees were included in the consultation including, RhAG (Rhieni ar gyfer Addysg Gymraeg / Parents for Welsh Education), recognising the opportunity for Welsh Language Immersion, as referenced in the report, should the proposal go ahead. A Member sought clarification that for those parents that wished their children to continue their education at YGG Awel Taf, whether those in the catchment qualified for school transport. A Member felt concerned that Coedpenmaen Primary school didn’t comply with the equality act and asked how this was being addressed and requested that it was included in any final report to Cabinet. A Member, acknowledging the complexity of the reports in front of Members, queried the figure quoted for out of catchment, e.g., several children who attend Trallwng Infant school, are out of catchment, but it was alluded to that the catchments of Coedpenmaen PS and Trallwng Infant school overlap, so the figure quoted for out of catchment should be amended, and asked that this should be made clear in the final report. A Member raised concerns about the potential issued for on-site parking for staff, as a result of the proposal. A Member sought clarification if the number of pre-school aged children joining the remaining schools, could be accommodated, as it was not clear from any of the tables in the report. The Member reiterated the point around the knock on effect for siblings of those already attending Coedpenmaen PS, should the proposal to close Trallwng Infants’ School, go ahead. The Director of Education and Inclusion acknowledged, in regard to the data issue, that it would be made crystal clear in the report to Cabinet. The Director acknowledged they could certainly ask for the views of RhAG. The Director explained, in relation to attendance at Welsh Medium school, e.g., YGG Awel Taf that this would depend on whether eligibility for home to school transport was met and would depend on the home addresses. The Director explained, in terms of the equality act, that the report referred to some remedial works that would be undertaken to the outside of the building. In terms of accessibility, there was an ongoing programme of works in all schools, so for example, if you had a child admitted to school that has specific needs, works would be undertaken. The Director couldn’t provide specific information in terms of what would be needed to improve the accessibility but agreed this could be reflected in the report back to Cabinet. In terms of the figure quoted for out of catchment, the Head of Service Transformation and Data Systems explained there was a different catchment area for the Infants and Junior age groups at Coedpenmaen Primary school. So for the Infants age at Coedpenmaen Primary school there was a smaller catchment that didn’t include the catchment of Trallwng. The Chair asked that this should be clear in the final report. The Director of Education and Inclusion acknowledged, with regards to parking for staff, that this was not a statutory requirement, but advised that the outside area around the school, would be looked and she would note the Members concerns. The Head of Service Transformation and Data Systems, explained, in relation to the pre-school, that there was a separate admissions numbers for nursery and that had been included, but could look at the projected numbers moving forward to ensure that the pre-nursery children currently in Trallwng Infants school would be accommodated and included in the Coedpenmaen Primary school numbers. The Director explained, around the point made about siblings, that the statutory responsibility was around ensuring there is sufficient space for in-catchment children, so there may not be places for out of catchment siblings, and this is made quite explicit to parents, that this is a risk parents take when they go out of area. Members sought clarification around the position regarding capacity of Trallwng children who may wish to transfer to Ysgol Afon Wen or Ysgol Bro Taf and felt any capacity pressures should be indicated in the report to Cabinet. The Business and School Organisation Manager noted that there wasn’t much capacity in Ysgol Afon Wen, but there was capacity in Ysgol Bro Taf and YGG Awel Taf. It was RESOLVED to: • Consider responding as consultees upon the proposals detailed below in paragraph 4. • Consider as a committee, to provide further comments, observations or recommendations in respect of these proposals prior to Cabinet consideration. • Request the Service Director for Democratic Services & Communications to provide Cabinet with the feedback of the Education and Inclusion Scrutiny Committee.
The Chair thanked Members for their attendance this evening and, allowing the items to be added to the busy schedule. The Chair then advised that the next meeting would take place on the 10th December 2024, and looked forward to seeing Members then.
None.
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.