Wrthi'n llwytho
Does dim crynodeb o'r cyfarfod hwn eto. Caiff crynodebau eu hysgrifennu pan fydd y cyngor yn cyhoeddi'r cofnodion, sef ei gofnod swyddogol o'r hyn a benderfynodd cyfarfod. Maen nhw fel arfer yn ymddangos ychydig wythnosau ar ôl y cyfarfod.
1.1 Chair welcomed Members, Officers and representatives from the Citizens Assembly to the meeting. 1.2 Apologies were received from Councillors Colette Thomas & Nathan Yeowell
2.1 There were no declarations made.
3.1 All actions had been completed and Members agreed to note the action sheet.
4.1 The HoC&E detailed the report and the L&EMSL also gave a brief overview of the report. DT & EA also gave their thoughts on the report on behalf of the Citizen Assemblies. 4.2 Members questioned and officers responses were as follows: · In response to questions about litter, parking enforcement, anti‑social behaviour and street lighting, the CE explained that the Deal would be delivered with local neighbourhood groups and partners co‑setting priorities so that staff and resources were deployed where communities most needed them. He stressed that statutory duties remained with the Council however communities would collaborate on discretionary activities, while the heavy‑lifting functions stayed with officers. · When Members questioned how we measured intangible outcomes such as community spirit, collaboration and local pride, the DCE outlined a tiered evaluation model which included long‑term health‑inequality metrics (Marmot), medium‑term mission indicators, and short‑term engagement and service measures, blending perception with hard data. The HoC&E added that movement would be evidenced through the Wales National Residents’ Survey, volunteering levels/hours, listings on Connect Torfaen and social‑media sentiment analysis. · Following a line of enquiry about participation by more and less deprived areas, the HoC&E noted the survey showed a borough‑wide spread and that officers had targeted disability, older‑people and youth forums and worked via partners (e.g., Registered Social Landlords (RSLs)). On immediate, visible outcomes from the “what people most want fixed” list, the DCE confirmed a quick‑win pilot to place *QR codes on bins so residents could flag emptying frequency, with implementation being fast‑tracked. · On partner buy‑in, the DCE reported that partners had already begun the process of including elements of The Deal into service plans and cited the example of Halo Leisure, who had built dementia‑friendly and neurodiversity programmes into their service plans. · Addressing whether resident feedback could be mapped to specific places, the HoC&E indicated that while the data had not been separated by area, underlying data should allow sub‑ward analysis so place‑based work could be better targeted. · Following a question on whether any demographics had been missed, particularly older residents without digital access and people living in poverty, the HoC&E pointed to in‑person roadshows, broad forum engagement and the Citizens’ Assembly selection balanced with additional younger members to widen representation. · Following a suggestion to recreate a Public Services Board (PSB)‑style local partnership forum and questions on community capacity, the DCE said capacity‑builder roles formed part of a prevention infrastructure with performance frameworks in development, and that the Integrated Service Partnership Board (ISPB) already performed many PSB‑type functions—so duplication should be avoided. He offered a Member Seminar on the ISPB’s remit and attendance. · Following a question about whether the Deal was rebranding, the CE underlined how The Deal was a wholesale cultural shift across front‑line services. For example, sports development moving from 12‑week officer‑led classes to nurturing self‑sustaining, community‑led groups. He added that place‑based priority‑setting would progressively guide the deployment of staff and, where appropriate, budgets. · On the need to improve feedback loops, the HoC&E committed to strengthening “You said, we did” communications across all communication channels and reiterated the Leader’s pledge to reconvene the Citizens’ Assembly in twelve months to report progress. 4.3 The Chair thanked the Officers for their participation, and the HoC&E then left the meeting. The CE, DCE, SDR, TLS, SO & TDMSO remained.
5.1 The Chair introduced the CE who then detailed the report. 5.2 Members questioned and officers responses were as follows: · The CE clarified what constituted as a “big‑ticket” deliverable, and stated that it denoted transformational projects rather than day‑to‑day business‑as‑usual activity. · Addressing scrutiny about in‑year financial pressures and governance, the SDR explained that Strategic Directors closely monitored budgets, used in‑year movements and, where necessary, reserves (with an expectation to rebuild them). The CE added how robust project management through delivery boards and a Corporate Portfolio Board and Cabinet/Council decisions where required also aided with these pressures. · On heritage and tourism, the DCE set out a blended model—leveraging existing cultural grants and a forthcoming Blueprint for Growth with an action plan to be developed and advised testing delivery via partners and modern approaches before defaulting to appointing a single council tourism/heritage officer. · Responding to queries on housing supply, the DCE said that the 30% affordable ambition had been achieved through a mix of developer contributions, higher percentages on public land, and 100% RSL windfall sites. He added that empty homes were tackled by resourced enforcement coupled with grants (including Welsh Government’s Transitional Accommodation Capital Programme (TACP)). The CE then added that biodiversity considerations were embedded through service and mission delivery plans and monitored through normal reporting cycles. · On balancing universal and targeted support for areas with the greatest socio‑economic need, the DCE described an area‑by‑area blend of universal, targeted and specialist offers and growing civic activity while focusing targeted prevention where gaps existed. · Following a point about upskilling low‑paid workers (including partner sectors) who could not attend education in the evening, the DCE agreed to expand daytime adult/community learning options and to clarify career pathways (e.g., reablement routes into therapies) within service plans. · On making community hubs more proactive for advice and referrals the DCE supported wrapping information, advice and signposting around hubs and community leaders to fill the gap left by the former resilience worker model. · Regarding fostering, the DCE stated coordinated campaigns such as roadshows, social media and hub‑based recruitment, had aimed to grow local authority foster carers and reduce reliance on Independent Fostering Agencies (IFAs). He noted that the Children & Families directorate would provide a detailed follow‑up on barriers to reaching 75% Free‑School‑Meal uptake. · Asked about the new recycling facility, the DCE confirmed it had been treated as a strategic project under Portfolio Management Office (PMO) oversight, with the business case and funding coming through the normal Cabinet/Council route (and suitable for scrutiny selection). On introducing AI into Call Torfaen, he emphasised an assistant model for triage/signposting within call queues (not AI‑only), with scope to be brought back for a Member Seminar or a Scrutiny session. · Following a question of “what success looked like” the following year, the DCE said delivery of planned activities and targets, improved public sentiment/engagement and early movement in mission metrics would constitute success, while recognising Marmot indicator shifts were inherently long‑term. · Explaining the reference to two community resilience groups, the DCE described community‑led preparedness arrangements such as flooding or other major incidents, with areas not yet fixed. Members were invited to flag interest via Members’ Enquiries, and the Economy & Environment Overview & Scrutiny Committee could take a deeper look. 5.3 The Chair thanked the Officers for their participation, and the CE, DCE & SDR then left the meeting. The TLS, SO & TDMSO remained. 5.4 Recommendations Recommendation 1:- With regard to Wellbeing Objective 1 - the upskilling of our low paid workforce and our partners low paid workforce should be a priority, with actions identified and implemented within the service plans that sit under the delivery plan 2026-27, to achieve this. Recommendation 2:- With regard to the service planning process being suitably shaped with consideration of The Deal, to strengthen this it was recommended a greater focus be referenced to building community resilience and support for existing community hubs. Additional Comments & Observations from the Committee: The Cross-Cutting Resources & Business O&S Committee commended the report and the service planning process. Conscious that a number of service specific questions were raised, members requested seminars on Place Making Plans (including the confirmation of defined town centre areas) and Housing (specifically addressing empty properties and targets for building new homes). There was also suggestion to consider a seminar on how AI is being utilised to support service delivery to residents. The clarification of ‘transformation’ and ‘business as usual’ items in the delivery plan was welcomed, as was explanation of the project management process.
6.1 The next meeting is 25 June 2026. 6.2 The meeting ended at 4.25pm
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.