Y cyfansoddiad, ymddygiad cynghorwyr, archwilio, perfformiad a chwynion.
Beth mae cynghorau'n ei wneud
Sut mae'r cyngor ei hun yn cael ei redeg: ei gyfansoddiad, staff, adeiladau, TG, cwynion, a sut mae cynghorwyr yn ymddwyn.
Pwy sy'n penderfynu
Mae'r Cyngor llawn yn cytuno ar y cyfansoddiad. Mae pwyllgor safonau'n delio ag ymddygiad cynghorwyr; mae Ombwdsmon Gwasanaethau Cyhoeddus Cymru yn ymchwilio i gwynion.
Dweud eich dweud
Cwynwch i'r cyngor yn gyntaf; os nad ydych yn fodlon, gallwch fynd at yr Ombwdsmon. Mae cyfarfodydd y cyngor yn gyhoeddus, ac mae llawer yn cael eu darlledu.
Mewn rhifau
Mae cynghorau Cymru yn bwriadu gwario £67 y pen ar hyn yn 2026-27.
Mae'n amrywio o -£4 yn Sir Fynwy i £167 yn Blaenau Gwent.
Treth gyngor a gasglwyd: 95% ar draws Cymru (2025-26).
Treth gyngor heb ei thalu ar ddiwedd y flwyddyn: £119 miliwn ar draws Cymru (2025-26).
Treth gyngor sy'n dal yn ddyledus o flynyddoedd cynt: £199.3 miliwn ar draws Cymru (2025-26).
Treth gyngor a ddilëwyd: £9 miliwn ar draws Cymru (2025-26).
RESOLVED – That the following matters be dealt with as indicated:
(1)
Application 1
The Sub Committee were asked to consider an application for the grant of a Private Hire Operator’s License given that one of the directors had been prosecuted by the local authority for his involvement in a case that resulted in an unlicensed driver undertaking a journey in a private hire vehicle for a school transport service.
Addressing the Sub Committee, the applicant stated that his former business partner had given a vehicle to an unlicensed driver without consulting him and stopped paying insurance, and this was what led to the prosecution. He highlighted that he held a clean operator’s licence in the Vale of Glamorgan and had driven taxis for more than 20 years without any issues.
Responding to questions from the Sub Committee, the applicant confirmed that he had an operator’s licence in the Vale of Glamorgan and was seeking a Cardiff one too so he could seek contracts for school and airport runs in the city. At the moment the company could only use drivers licensed in the Vale.
The Sub Committee asked how he would ensure that the previous issue with the unlicensed driver would not happen again. The applicant assured them that he would have a safeguarding system in place, with each vehicle and driver registered internally. He owned the vehicles himself and would be responsible for insuring them.
RESOLVED – application refused
(2)
Application 2
The Sub Committee were asked to determine if a driver remained a fit and proper person to continue to hold a Hackney Carriage/Private Hire Driver’s License following a complaint received alleging the refusal of a fare and questioning driver conduct.
Addressing the Sub Committee, the driver stated that he did not recognise the details in the witnesses’ statements, as he only ever drove with a meter. He did not recall the incident in question and did not recognise the witnesses.
Responding to questions from the Sub Committee, the driver confirmed that he would have been working in his taxi at the time of the incident and that the badge number the witnesses had reported was his. Nobody else had access to his vehicle or badge, so the wrong number might have been written down.
The Sub Committee queried a previous complaint against the driver alleging refusal of a fare. The driver recalled that he only ever refused a fare when the passenger was particularly drunk or aggressive.
The witnesses addressed the Sub Committee, stating that they were going to a show at the Millennium Centre and got into a taxi on St Mary’s Street, which normally cost £8-£9, but the driver asked them for £16.50. They settled on £10 which was still above the usual fare for this journey. The witnesses noted down the badge number and contacted the local authority. They were certain that it was the same driver.
The witnesses did not recall seeing a meter in the vehicle but had not queried this at the time. They suggested that if the fare had been legitimate and the meter running, the driver would have just shown it to them when they challenged the fare. The Sub Committee discussed where the meter would normally be in a taxi, and heard that in Cardiff it was generally attached to the dashboard above the radio but could also be attached to the rear-view mirror. The driver confirmed that his meter was attached to the rear-view mirror, and added that if a passenger ever asked where the meter was then he was obligated to show it to them.
In response to questions from the driver’s representative, the witnesses stated that they had made a note of the badge number as the taxi was driving off. They added that the vehicle was a black and white Prius, and the driver confirmed that he drove one of these. The driver’s representative suggested that this was a common vehicle for taxis in Cardiff, and the witnesses may have confused it with another one with a similar badge number.
RESOLVED – suspended for 7 days
(3)
Application 3
The Sub Committee were asked to determine if a driver remained a fit and proper person to continue to hold a Hackney Carriage/Private Hire Driver’s License following a complaint received alleging dangerous driving and aggressive behaviour, including making rude and abusive hand gestures.
Addressing the Sub Committee, the driver highlighted his clean record. He had driven taxis for many years and conducted school transport for special needs children for 14 years. He did not recall the incident itself but strongly refuted the allegation that he had made offensive gestures.
The driver added that he was unaware that the complainants had followed him into the car park afterwards, and suggested that this indicated they were hoping to have an altercation. As a taxi driver he understood that he had to negotiate a number of potentially stressful situations every day and maintain professionalism. He suggested that the complainants were not qualified to judge what constituted good driving.
Addressing the Sub Committee, the witnesses stated that the taxi had cut across them on Cogan Spur without indicating and nearly caused an accident, before braking hard without warning. The sudden stop caused one of the witnesses’ back pain to get worse. The witnesses contested the driver’s claim that he did not make any gestures towards them, and emphasised that they were not following him around the car park, but rather looking for a disabled bay which could be difficult to find when it was busy.
The witnesses stressed that taxi drivers were meant to set an example, as they were representing Cardiff Council and had the logo on the back of their vehicle. One of the witnesses added that he was a former driving instructor qualified to Grade 6 and also a former Special Constable, so he understood the definition of dangerous driving. He had known the driver personally for many years and would not have made this complaint unless he felt that it was very serious. The incident had been entirely unnecessary and put people in danger.
RESOLVED – written warning
(4)
Application 4
The Sub Committee were asked to determine if a driver remained a fit and proper person to continue to hold a Hackney Carriage/Private Hire Driver’s License following a complaint received alleging the refusal of a fare and questioning driver conduct.
Addressing the Sub Committee, the driver stated that a customer had entered his taxi upon leaving the Motorpoint Arena at about 11pm and asked to go to an address in Gwaelod Y Garth. He put in the wrong postcode by mistake and thought the destination was outside Cardiff, so he suggested a fare of £50. He then realised his error and tried to let the customer know but they had already left and got into another taxi.
Responding to questions from the Sub Committee, the driver confirmed that he had misheard the address as CF35 when he asked the passenger where they wanted to go. The actual postcode in Gwaelod Y Garth was CF15. The CF35 address was 24 miles away so he estimated that this would cost about £50, going by his usual £2 per mile price for trips out of Cardiff.
The Licensing Officer confirmed that while any in-district fare had to be calculated using the meter, there was no standard procedure for calculating fares outside of Cardiff as long as the fare was agreed with the customer before the journey began.
RESOLVED – written warning
(5)
Application 5
The Sub Committee were asked to determine if a driver remained a fit and proper person to continue to hold a Hackney Carriage/Private Hire Driver’s License given that upon renewal of his licence his DBS returned a recent conviction from August 2022.
Addressing the Sub Committee, the driver acknowledged that he had been convicted of domestic violence in 2022 and had since undertaken all of the community service and rehabilitation programs required by the court. He had been a taxi driver for more than a decade and had a very high Uber rating. He hoped he could prove to the Sub Committee that he was a professional and reliable individual who could be trusted to drive a taxi. He was trying to be a positive role model for his son and had learned a lot from the rehabilitation program.
The driver’s representative added that the driver had intended to appeal the conviction but had been unable to do so for financial reasons. He had been licensed in Cardiff for 15 years with an exemplary record, had participated in a rehabilitation course and had declared his conviction to the licensing authority at the earliest opportunity. He had no other source of income and was a single parent, so he depended on his license for his livelihood.
RESOLVED – license revoked
Application 6
The Sub Committee were asked to determine if a driver remained a fit and proper person to continue to hold a Hackney Carriage/Private Hire Driver’s License given that he disclosed a conviction for plying for hire without a licence to do so, and received 8 points on his licence for driving without insurance.
Addressing the Sub Committee, the driver stated that he had been driving taxis for 23 years and otherwise had a clean record. He had always driven a hackney carriage but had taken it to the garage the day before and was driving a private hire vehicle instead. While driving along Mill Lane, he saw two young women who did not seem to be getting picked up by anyone else, and he didn’t want to leave them on their own.
As they got in, he realised that he was in the wrong vehicle, but he took them to their destination anyway. He accepted that this was an error and apologised to the Sub Committee. This was the first mistake he had made in a long career and it would not happen again.
In response to questions from the Sub Committee, he accepted that he took them to their destination despite knowing that he shouldn’t. He suggested that he thought they might cause trouble if he asked them to leave. He confirmed that he understood the consequences of taking them as he did not have the correct insurance for a trip that wasn’t pre-booked.
The Licensing Officer clarified that licensed drivers in Cardiff were dual-badge, meaning that they could drive both hackney carriages and private hire vehicles, and it was the vehicles themselves where the insurance varied. The insurance depended on the trip being pre-booked, and if it wasn’t pre-booked then it wasn’t insured. It was an offence to ply for hire without the required insurance.
The driver’s representative addressed the Sub Committee, asking the panel to consider the driver’s length of service and his spotless record. He had been a fit and proper person to drive a taxi for many years and this was a serious lapse of judgement which would never happen again. The representative added that the driver had already been punished for the offence with fines and points on his license.
RESOLVED – 28 day suspension
Bro Morgannwg, Licensing: Public Protection Committee,
RESOLVED –
(1) T H A T the contents of the report be noted.
(2) T H A T the report be referred to Cabinet for its oversight.
Reasons for decisions
(1) Having regard to the contents of the report and discussions at the meeting.
(2) To enable Cabinet’s oversight of the Audit Work Programme.
RESOLVED –
(1) T H A T the status of the high and medium recommendations as listed in
the report be noted.
(2) T H A T in relation to the outstanding recommendations for the audit of
Ysgol y Deri and St. Cyres building compliance, for the responsible officer to be
invited to attend the next meeting of the Governance and Audit Committee in
order to provide an update on progress and to outline reasons for slippage.
Minutes - GD
No.
(3) T H A T in relation to outstanding recommendations for the audit relating to
pot hole repairs, for the responsible officer to be invited to the next meeting of the
Governance and Audit Committee in order to provide an update on progress and
to outline reasons for slippage.
Reason for recommendations
(1-3) Having regard to the contents of the report and discussions at the meeting.
RESOLVED –
(1) T H A T the actions taken by the Internal Audit team following the further
work undertaken be agreed.
(2) T H A T a full and comprehensive report be presented to the Governance
and Audit Committee when appropriate to outline lessons learnt as a result of the
review undertaken.
Reason for decisions
(1&2) Having regard to the contents of the report and discussions at the meeting.
RESOLVED – T H A T the matter be deferred to next meeting of the Governance
and Audit Committee in order for a full report to be presented to outline all the
necessary financial and contractual arrangements prior to a formal decision.
Reason for decision
In order for the Governance and Audit Committee to have a full picture prior to any
recommendations to Cabinet requesting that the Vale of Glamorgan Council
continue to host the Shared Service.
Minutes - GD
No.
RESOLVED –
(1) T H A T the Quarter 2 position of Corporate Risks (April 2023 – September
2023) as outlined in the risk summary report (Annex A) be noted.
(2) T H A T the comments of the Governance and Audit Committee be referred
to Cabinet for their consideration. The comments of the Governance and Audit
Committee being:
• For Cabinet to clearly indicate the specific reasons why Brexit remains on
the Risk Register and what are the residual actions that remain.
• That Cabinet reconsider the inclusion of Covid and Brexit as risks on the
register with the view of the Governance and Audit Committee that both
risks should be removed.
Reasons for decisions
(1) Having regard to the contents of the report and discussions at the meeting.
Minutes - GD
No.
(2) To advise Cabinet of the views and comments of the Governance and Audit
Committee.
RESOLVED –
(1) T H A T the Forward Work Programme be endorsed.
(2) T H A T the schedule of items for the next meeting on 11th March, 2024 be
endorsed with the inclusion of invites to the responsible officers for the Ysgol y
Deri and St. Cyres Building Compliance Audit and the pot hole repairs audit.
Reasons for decisions
(1) Having regard to the contents of the report and discussions at the meeting.
(2) To confirm attendance and information requirements.
Minutes - GD
RESOLVED –
(1) T H A T the contents of the report be noted.
(2) T H A T the Governance and Audit Committee continues to receive annual
reports in relation to policy implementation and incidents.
(3) T H A T the Governance and Audit Committee continues to receive annual
reports in relation to staff survey results.
(4) T H A T the recommendation of the Standards Committee for all staff to be
made aware of the Whistleblowing Policy and for the policy to be a part of the Staff
Induction and Refresh Programme be agreed.
(5) T H A T the Whistleblowing Policy be considered as part of the review of
mandatory training for staff, and for the matter to be referred to the Corporate
Performance and Resources Scrutiny Committee.
Reasons for decisions
(1,2&3) Having regard to the contents of the report and discussions at the
meeting.
(4) Following consideration of the recommendations of the Standards
Committee made on 2nd February, 2024.
(5) In order to consider the inclusion of Whistleblowing as mandatory training.
RESOLVED –
(1) T H A T the report and the feedback received in respect of observation visits
undertaken by Independent Members be noted with an amendment to paragraph
2.14 of the report to include further context relating to the two issues identified in the
current report having been less than those highlighted in the report of March 2022
and as mentioned in paragraph 2.10 of the report.
(2) T H A T having regard to a previous recommendation of the Committee that
for Town and Community Council meetings where no material considerations have
been raised, observation visits be undertaken on a biennial basis and that a
schedule of observation visits by Independent Members be arranged to commence
from April 2025.
(3) T H A T it be accepted that during the period i.e. January 2024 – April 2025
the Monitoring Officer may advise that additional meetings of Town and Community
Councils be observed as considered appropriate.
Reasons for decisions
(1) Having regard to the contents of the report and the discussions at the
meeting.
(2&3) Having regard to the observations undertaken, previous decisions and the
role of the Standards Committee.
RESOLVED –
(1) T H A T the recommendations of the Standards Committee Review Panel
Report be approved as below, that -
- DBS checks be applied for within two weeks of Elected Members (and
relevant Scrutiny Committee Co-opted Members with voting rights) being
appointed to office and/or within two weeks of any renewals being
required, and that the candidate handbook be amended accordingly.
- All Elected Members receive Code of Conduct refresher training midway
through their elected term of office and be part of the ongoing Member
Development.
- It should be a requirement that each Member should undertake any
mandatory training within one month of taking office.
- The training should specifically cover the risk of any behaviour occurring
in the future which would be in breach of the Code of Conduct,
- Efforts should be made to ensure that 100% of the workforce know of
the Whistleblowing Policy, possibly by including it in the induction and
refresher packs.
(2) T H A T the personal information contained within the Review Panel Report
be redacted prior to the report being placed in the public domain.
(3) T H A T the resolution above, for all staff to be made aware of the
Whistleblowing Policy and for the policy to be a part of the Staff Induction and
Refresh Programme, be referred to the Governance and Audit Committee.
(4) T H A T the above resolutions, together with the Review Panel Report, be
referred to Cabinet.
Reasons for decisions
(1) Following consideration of the report and the discussions at the meeting.
(2) Having regard to the personal information contained within the report.
(3&4) For consideration.
RESOLVED – T H A T the Standards Committee considers the Review Report under
the Part II report on the agenda.
Reason for decision
For the Standards Committee’s consideration and approval.
RESOLVED –
(1) T H A T the Agenda for the meeting of the National Standards Committee
Chairs Forum be noted.
(2) T H A T the verbal update provided by the Chair relating to the discussions
held at the forum meeting on 29th January, 2024 be noted.
Reasons for decisions
(1) To apprise Committee.
(2) Having regard to the contents of the report and the Chair’s verbal update in
respect of the Forum meeting held on 29th February, 2024.
RESOLVED –
(1) T H A T the report and the feedback received in respect of the observation
visit undertaken by an Independent Member of the Standards Committee to a Town
and Community Council meeting be noted.
(2) T H A T it be accepted that where matters following observation visits of Town
and Community Council meetings are highlighted by Independent Members as
issues requiring further attention or further visits and / or requests are made by the
Monitoring Officer / Head of Legal and Democratic Services for visits to be
undertaken these be arranged as and when required.
Reasons for decisions
(1) Having regard to the observations undertaken and the role of the Standards
Committee.
No.
(2) To maintain a watching brief having regard to the role of the Standards
Committee and the Monitoring Officer.