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 – T H A T the Amendment be carried: Reason for decision Following discussions at the meeting and a recorded vote.
RESOLVED – T H A T the Amendment be carried. Reason for decision Following discussions at the meeting and a recorded vote.
RESOLVED – (1) T H A T the amendments to the Multi-Location Meetings Policy as set out in paragraphs 2.1 and 2.2 of the report be included in the Council’s Constitution. (2) T H A T Section 18 of the Constitution Contract Procedure Rules be replaced with a revised Section 18 (revised Appendix A) to the report as set out in paragraph 2.5 of the report. (3) T H A T amendments to Sections 14.10 Functions not to be the responsibility of an Authority’s Cabinet / Executive, 14.16 (f) Terms of Reference of the Public Protection Licensing Committee and Section 26 Officer Delegations – Director of Environment and Housing and Head of Shared Regulatory Services be, approved for inclusion in the Council’s Constitution as contained within paragraphs 2.7 to 2.11 of the report. Reasons for decisions (1) To update the Multi-Location Meetings Policy within the current Constitution as agreed by Cabinet on 18th July, 2024. (2) Having regard to the latest legislation. (3) To update the relevant sections having regard to the implementation of some regulations by the end of November 2024 within the Public Health (Wales) Act 2017. No.
RESOLVED – T H A T the Scrutiny Committees’ Annual Report for the Municipal Year 2023/24 be received. Reason for decision To receive the Scrutiny Committees’ Annual Report as required under the Council’s Constitution.
RESOLVED – (1) T H A T the actions set out in the Initial Consultation Report be endorsed. No. (2) T H A T the Replacement Local Development Plan (RLDP) Preferred Strategy be approved as a basis for the ongoing preparation of the Deposit RLDP. (3) T H A T the supplementary information provided in the report be endorsed as an update to Agenda Item 10 on the Vale of Glamorgan Replacement Local Development Plan (RLDP) 2021-2036 Preferred Strategy Initial Consultation Report. (4) T H A T delegated authority be granted to the Director of Place and the Head of Sustainable Development to make any further typographical or other minor amendments to the Initial Consultation Report. Reasons for decisions (1) Having regard to the contents of the reference, report and discussions at the meeting. (2) To allow officers to progress with preparation of the Deposit RLDP in accordance with the Council’s approved Delivery Agreement. (3) Having regard to the contents of the report and discussions at the meeting. (4) To make typographical or minor changes as necessary without the need to seek Cabinet or Full Council approval.
RESOLVED – T H A T the use of the Urgent Decision Procedure (Cabinet Minute No. C111, 5th September, 2024 (as set out in Section 15.14.2(ii) of the Council’s Constitution) be noted. Reason for decision The reporting of the use of the Urgent Decision Procedure is a requirement of the Council’s Constitution.
These were received from Councillors R.M. Birch, R. Fisher, S.D. Perkes and R.R. Thomas.
Councillor N.P. Hodges declared an interest in Agenda Item No. 6 – Notice of Motion – Long Term Plan for Towns, in that his wife was a Member of the Heritage Board. The interest was a personal interest at this stage and not prejudicial as no agreements had as yet been forthcoming.
RESOLVED – T H A T the minutes of the meeting held on 15th July, 2024 be approved as a correct record. No.
The Mayor informed Council of a number of engagements that he had attended since the last meeting, thanking all for making him feel welcome at the events. He advised that he had attended an event to mark the opening of the new Barry Docks Lifeboat Station, the Pioneer Hall’s 25th anniversary, a Merchant Navy Day Service at the Civic Offices, the Onam celebrations by the Malayali Welfare Association, opened the first Photographic Exhibition by Malcolm Downs, RAFA Battle of Britain commemoration in Alexandra Park Penarth, Lord Mayor of Cardiff’s Scouts Awards evening, Baruc Arts Group 50th Exhibition, the opening of Ty Hafan’s Precious Memories Memorial Garden at the Knap in Barry, at the Tabernacle Church in Penarth for the Vale of Glamorgan Brass Band’s 50th Anniversary Celebration and the Mayor of Penarth Town and Chair of Dinas Powys Community Councils’ Civic celebrations.
The following question was submitted in accordance with the protocol agreed by Council on 5th May, 2010. (i) Question from Mr. M. Wallis Does the Council have any regret or apologies for closing Ogmore as bathing beach for almost 3 weeks in June because of NRW declaring an "abnormal situation", yet no abnormal bacteria/virus levels were found? Did the Council complain to NRW at the slowness to accept their error, when tourist trade was suffering from their prolonged and unnecessary 'abnormal' declaration? Reply from the Cabinet Member for Neighbourhood and Building Services The Council has no regrets for erecting warning notices when Natural Resources Wales (NRW) declared an abnormal situation at Ogmore Beach, and we will offer no apologies for seeking to protect public health. The sample results provided to our officers immediately following the declaration of the Abnormal Situation did show exceptionally high levels of E.coli, more than 1,000 colony-forming units per millilitre. Based on this information and to reduce public health risks to any potential bathers, signage was erected on Friday, 25th May, warning bathers not to swim in the sea, owing to the ongoing declared pollution incident, and to ensure that we complied with our duties under Regulation 12 (5 c) of the Bathing Water Regulations 2013. In addition, Regulation 12 (5c), allows for the Local Authority to take such measures as it considers appropriate to prevent exposing bathers to identified or presumed health risks. The information available to the Council at the time was that this was not a minor incident at the Pen-y-bont Treatment Works, and the sampling results made available at that time support this. The decision made by the Council, which was fully in line with the Bathing Water Regulations, was taken purely to protect public health and reduce the risk of any bathers becoming seriously ill. It must be noted that at no time was any physical access to the beach prevented and No. as soon as the abnormal situation was lifted by NRW, the additional signage was removed. I would remind you that owing to the poor classification of the bathing water at Ogmore by Sea, resulting from the 2023 samples, we had already erected signage advising against bathing during the 2024 bathing season at Ogmore, to comply with our duties under the Bathing Water Regulations. During the declaration officers from the Council remained in dialogue with colleagues from NRW, and concerns were raised with them regarding the length of time that the investigations were taking; though our technical officers did appreciate the complexity of the issues being investigated. There remain ongoing investigations into pollution sources in the catchment due to the poor classification of Ogmore by Sea and we will await the results of these investigations.
Y penderfyniad fel y'i cofnodwyd
RESOLVED – T H A T the Amendment be carried: Reason for decision Following discussions at the meeting and a recorded vote.
The below Notice of Motion, moved by Councillor Dr. Johnson and seconded by Councillor Hooper at the meeting, was debated. “Long-Term Plan for Towns Council notes with concern the delays regarding confirmation of £20m improvement funding for Barry by UK Government. Council agrees to write to the UK Government Chancellor and relevant Government Ministers requesting a quick and positive decision to confirm this funding so that it can be allocated and used for the improvement of Barry, as originally intended.” Councillor Dr. Johnson, in presenting his Motion, said that Welsh Government had pledged £20m for the regeneration of Barry Town, the Vale submission had been submitted but no response had as yet been received. The Motion was therefore asking that the Minister review and address the issue as Councillor Dr. Johnson would like to see the investment come into the County, referring to the recessions of 2008 and 2009 when Barry Town Centre lost many of its shops. In recent years he said banks and building societies had also increased their running costs and domestic rates had increased and it was important for the town to receive the investment which it deserved. Councillor Cowpe commented that in her view things were getting worse not better. The number of shops that had closed in Holton Road had increased for a number of reasons, with the main one being as a result of cuts from Welsh Government. The increase in online shopping had impacted on provision within town centres and it was important that Barry received the investment it deserved. In accepting that money was scarce she said the money had to therefore come externally. The Leader, in response, advised that the announcement had been made by the UK Government, Barry was to receive £2m for the next 10 years. A fundamental principle of the scheme was to determine priorities and improve connectivity. There was currently no decision, nothing had been rejected and she advised that she had No. been the only person who had been present at the meeting following the announcement, with the newspapers misquoting what had been said. Both the Leader and Deputy Leader had received a letter regarding the issue and together with local MPs and the MS, they would continue to promote the partnership work. As a result of some of the leaks in the media which had been misquotes, she had also received a number of calls from some UK towns regarding the matter advising that it was important that accurate information was published not misinformation and she took the opportunity to reassure Members that the Council would continue to provide the secretariatship for the Independent Barry Partnership. The Leader subsequently submitted an Amendment to the Motion, seconded by Councillor Brooks as below: “This Council notes the suspension of submissions for the Long-Term Plan for Towns and awaits confirmation of revised timelines for receipt of Long Term Plans bids. The Council resolves to continue its role as Secretariat to the independent Chair and Partnership Board and in the interim to take every opportunity to promote the work of the Partnership to policy officials and elected representatives at all levels.” Councillor Franks, in response, said it was always difficult to fully grasp an Amendment and wondered whether it was an addition or a deletion. Councillor Dr. Johnson said he could not see the practical difference in the Amendment to the Motion and Councillor Carroll said in speaking to the Amendment he considered the only effect the Amendment may have would be to detract attention from the new Labour Government who may pull the plug on the scheme. He felt that Councillor Dr. Johnson’s Motion was clear and he could not see why this needed to be supplemented. Councillor Hooper also commented that he did not understand the rationale for the Amendment, in his view it missed the point as to who was making the decision on the funding and that, in his opinion, a whole number of people should be contacted, for example Rachel Reeves, should be written to at Westminster. Councillor Hodges said that if the UK Government decided not to give the money that would be their choice and again, in his view, the Motion was clear and concurred with the suggestion that a letter be sent to the Chancellor and the Ministers. He did not want to wait any longer, he wanted the money and as a Council said we should be showing our concern. Councillor Lloyd-Selby said that she welcomed the Amendment which re- emphasised the Council’s commitment to work with the Partnership Board and that the Amendment was important because it was a positive commitment to work together. Councillor Champion said that Councillor Dr. Johnson’s Motion did not refer to the fact that the Council would not want to work with the Board, it referred to the delay and he did not see why the amendment was required. No. Councillor Perry said that he would have liked to have seen the Amendment before it was considered as that would have assisted the debate rather than being sprung on the Council at the meeting. The Chief Executive however, informed Council of the procedures within the Constitution that anyone could make an amendment at any time, and that the Constitution allowed for this provision. Councillor Cowpe also thought it would have been helpful to have the Amendment written down, however the Amendment was read out a few times prior to being put to the vote. The Chief Executive reiterated the fact that the Council’s Constitution allowed for amendments to be made at the meeting and as such recorded vote on the above Amendment took place as follows: Members For Against Abstain Anne Asbrey x Julie Aviet x Gareth Ball x Bronwen Brooks x Gillian Bruce x Ian Buckley x Lis Burnett x Samantha Campbell x George Carroll x Christine Cave x Charles Champion x Janice Charles x Millie Collins x Marianne Cowpe x Pamela Drake x No. Anthony Ernest x Christopher Franks x Wendy Gilligan x Russell Godfrey x Emma Goodjohn x Ewan Goodjohn x Stephen Haines x Howard Hamilton x Sally Hanks x William Hennessy x Nic Hodges x Mark Hooper x Catherine Iannucci-Williams x Gwyn John x Dr. Ian Johnson x Susan Lloyd-Selby x Belinda Loveluck-Edwards Julie Lynch-Wilson x Kevin Mahoney x Naomi Marshallsea x Michael Morgan x Jayne Norman x Helen Payne x Elliot Penn x No. Ian Perry x Joanna Protheroe x Ruba Sivagnanam x Carys Stallard x Neil Thomas x Steffan Wiliam x Margaret Wilkinson x Eddie Williams x Mark Wilson x Nicholas Wood x TOTAL 27 20 1 The amendment being carried, the debate on the Amendment then took place with Councillor Godfrey commenting in the first instance that the Council had lost the market in Barry which had been as a result of it being too expensive for stall holders to remain and that further consideration should be given to the costs in order for people to sustain a presence in the town. Councillor Hooper said although the original Motion had been lost he would be supporting the Amendment but the discussion would not have taken place if Councillor Dr. Johnson had not put the original Motion forward, but it was important that the town received the funding. Councillor Hodges also said his party had not been whipped but that he would also support the Amendment. Councillor Carroll, although saying that the Motion was clear, said strong representations should be made to the UK Government. The money was needed for Barry to make improvements to the town and to make it a better place for everyone. He said that the funding had been brought forward by the previous Government and it was disappointing the Council was not building on this, but that he would still support the Amendment. Councillor Payne referred to the 14 years of Tory austerity and Councillor Dr. Johnson stated that with regard to the Leader’s comments regarding information that she and the Deputy Leader had received, he asked whether all Members could be provided with that information, following which the Amendment became the Substantive Motion and was then voted upon as below: No. Members For Against Abstain Anne Asbrey x Julie Aviet x Gareth Ball x Bronwen Brooks x Gillian Bruce x Ian Buckley x Lis Burnett x Samantha Campbell x George Carroll x Christine Cave x Charles Champion x Janice Charles x Millie Collins x Marianne Cowpe x Pamela Drake x Anthony Ernest x Christopher Franks x Wendy Gilligan x Russell Godfrey x Emma Goodjohn Ewan Goodjohn x Stephen Haines x Howard Hamilton x No. Sally Hanks x William Hennessy x Nic Hodges x Mark Hooper x Catherine Iannucci-Williams x Gwyn John x Dr. Ian Johnson x Susan Lloyd-Selby x Belinda Loveluck-Edwards x Julie Lynch-Wilson x Kevin Mahoney x Naomi Marshallsea x Michael Morgan x Jayne Norman x Helen Payne x Elliot Penn x Ian Perry x Joanna Protheroe x Ruba Sivagnanam x Carys Stallard x Neil Thomas x Steffan Wiliam x Margaret Wilkinson x Eddie Williams x No. Mark Wilson x Nicholas Wood x TOTAL 47 0 1 RESOLVED – T H A T the Amendment be carried: Reason for decision Following discussions at the meeting and a recorded vote.
Y penderfyniad fel y'i cofnodwyd
RESOLVED – T H A T the Amendment be carried. Reason for decision Following discussions at the meeting and a recorded vote.
The below Notice of Motion, moved by Councillor Dr. Johnson and seconded by Councillor Hooper at the meeting, was debated. “Winter Fuel Allowance Council notes with concern the decision by UK Government to restrict Winter Fuel Allowance to only those pensioners in receipt of Pension Credit, and the impact that this will have upon many vulnerable older people in the Vale who are eligible but not in receipt of Pension Credit or are narrowly above the threshold. Council condemns these proposals and agrees to write to the UK Government Chancellor, demanding that she stop the cuts to Winter Fuel Allowance.” Labour won the majority to restrict the Winter Fuel Allowance but they did not explain what kind of change and what the plans were in detail to take the Winter Fuel Allowance away. 400,000 households in the Vale of Glamorgan would miss out, yes difficult decisions had to be made but why should they affect ordinary people – they should also affect the rich. The Council had heard recently about the good work undertaken by community groups regarding warm spaces, but the Labour Government now intended to make things worse. The Labour Government should understand that this was a mistake. This was not a change people wanted or expected. The Deputy Leader submitted a proposed Amendment to the Motion, seconded by the Leader, as below: “Council notes that the disastrous financial position they have inherited, has forced the new UK government to take immediate action including cancelling capital schemes, and changing the winter fuel payment from a universal payment to a targeted payment. The change means many pensioners will not receive winter fuel payments this winter. No. This Council urges the new UK Government to reinstate the winter fuel payments in full to support our older residents or to take other actions such as those previously outlined once the UK’s financial situation allows. ‘Previously outlined • Commit to a local campaign to encourage Vale residents to apply for pension credit and other available support. • Call upon all other levels of government to undertake a national campaign to encourage uptake of Pension credit. • Write to the Chancellor to seek reassurance that those pensioners whose income falls close to the threshold will receive support as needed through the coming winter period.” The Deputy Leader said that the economic and catastrophic mismanagement of the previous UK Government had left the UK with a black hole of over £22 billion, reckless actions taken by the Tory Government via Prime Ministers Boris Johnson and Liz Truss contributed to the cost of living crisis and the previous Governments did not assist people to claim pension credits. The Council would be committing to a local campaign to encourage residents to apply for pension credits calling upon a national campaign of awareness to assist those apply for pension credits and to work with Ministers through this. Councillor Carroll considered that the Amendment was based upon lies the Labour Government had been spouting. Councillor Cowpe said that it was important to suggest a sliding scale for people who had missed a pension benefit. Following discussions during the meeting regarding whether the Amendment actually negated the Motion, Councillor Burnett commented it did not negate it, it added to it. The continued freeze on tax thresholds taken by the Tory Government had been very difficult for everyone with it being important that a passport to other benefits was made. Councillor Mahoney said he took note of the state of the UK finances by the Conservatives but that both the Labour and Conservative Governments were in favour of giving billions to foreign countries when the country’s own people struggled. As a result somewhere in the region of 10 million pensioners had been affected by the restriction of the Winter Fuel Allowance. If people were entitled to claim money it should automatically be given not having to be applied for because he was sure the information required to submit applications was already available. He said that he had been speaking to a number of residents and everyone he had spoken to were in contempt of the proposal to restrict Winter Fuel Allowance. Councillor Perry felt that the Amendment should have been circulated in advance to provide Members with the information earlier in the process to make an informed decision. Councillor Morgan said that too much time was spent on political point scoring commenting that it was important to help those who were on pension credits to get No. them with a proper procedure developed to target people. He further advised that he would be abstaining when it came to the vote. Councillor Hooper said the Labour Government should have taxed the wealthiest not hurt pensioners. Councillor Godfrey said that if pensioners were not on the minimum wage then there would not be the discussion. A recorded vote on the above Amendment took place as follows: Members For Against Abstain Anne Asbrey x Julie Aviet x Gareth Ball x Bronwen Brooks x Gillian Bruce x Ian Buckley x Lis Burnett x Samantha Campbell x George Carroll x Christine Cave x Charles Champion x Janice Charles x Millie Collins x Marianne Cowpe x Pamela Drake x Anthony Ernest x Christopher Franks x Wendy Gilligan x Russell Godfrey x No. Emma Goodjohn x Ewan Goodjohn x Stephen Haines x Howard Hamilton Sally Hanks x William Hennessy x Nic Hodges x Mark Hooper x Catherine Iannucci-Williams x Gwyn John x Dr. Ian Johnson x Susan Lloyd-Selby x Belinda Loveluck-Edwards x Julie Lynch-Wilson x Kevin Mahoney x Naomi Marshallsea x Michael Morgan x Jayne Norman x Helen Payne x Elliot Penn x Ian Perry x Joanna Protheroe x Ruba Sivagnanam x Carys Stallard x No. Neil Thomas x Steffan Wiliam x Margaret Wilkinson x Eddie Williams x Mark Wilson x Nicholas Wood x TOTAL 24 20 4 The vote being carried, the Amendment became the Substantive Motion and was then voted upon as below: Members For Against Abstain Anne Asbrey x Julie Aviet x Gareth Ball x Bronwen Brooks x Gillian Bruce x Ian Buckley x Lis Burnett x Samantha Campbell x George Carroll x Christine Cave x Charles Champion x Janice Charles x Millie Collins x Marianne Cowpe x No. Pamela Drake x Anthony Ernest x Christopher Franks x Wendy Gilligan x Russell Godfrey x Emma Goodjohn Ewan Goodjohn x Stephen Haines x Howard Hamilton x Sally Hanks x William Hennessy x Nic Hodges x Mark Hooper x Catherine Iannucci-Williams x Gwyn John x Dr. Ian Johnson x Susan Lloyd-Selby x Belinda Loveluck-Edwards x Julie Lynch-Wilson x Kevin Mahoney x Naomi Marshallsea x Michael Morgan x Jayne Norman x Helen Payne x No. Elliot Penn x Ian Perry x Joanna Protheroe x Ruba Sivagnanam x Carys Stallard x Neil Thomas x Steffan Wiliam x Margaret Wilkinson x Eddie Williams x Mark Wilson x Nicholas Wood x TOTAL 24 19 5 RESOLVED – T H A T the Amendment be carried. Reason for decision Following discussions at the meeting and a recorded vote.
Y penderfyniad fel y'i cofnodwyd
RESOLVED – (1) T H A T the amendments to the Multi-Location Meetings Policy as set out in paragraphs 2.1 and 2.2 of the report be included in the Council’s Constitution. (2) T H A T Section 18 of the Constitution Contract Procedure Rules be replaced with a revised Section 18 (revised Appendix A) to the report as set out in paragraph 2.5 of the report. (3) T H A T amendments to Sections 14.10 Functions not to be the responsibility of an Authority’s Cabinet / Executive, 14.16 (f) Terms of Reference of the Public Protection Licensing Committee and Section 26 Officer Delegations – Director of Environment and Housing and Head of Shared Regulatory Services be, approved for inclusion in the Council’s Constitution as contained within paragraphs 2.7 to 2.11 of the report. Reasons for decisions (1) To update the Multi-Location Meetings Policy within the current Constitution as agreed by Cabinet on 18th July, 2024. (2) Having regard to the latest legislation. (3) To update the relevant sections having regard to the implementation of some regulations by the end of November 2024 within the Public Health (Wales) Act 2017. No.
The report sought Council’s approval to amend the Multi-Location Meetings (MLM) Policy in the Council Constitution as agreed by Cabinet at its meeting on 18th July, 2024 (Minute No. C75 refers) as detailed at paragraphs 2.1 to 2.3 of the report, to replace Section 18 Contracts Procedure Rules as referred to in paragraphs 2.4 and 2.5 of the report and to amend Sections 14.10 Functions not to be the responsibility of an Authority’s Cabinet / Executive, 14.16 (f) Terms of Reference of the Public Protection Licensing Committee and 26 Officer Delegations – Director of Environment and Housing and Head of Shared Regulatory Services, as contained within paragraphs 2.7 – 2.11 of this report. Councillor Carroll said that he could not support the amendment to the MLM Policy. He had been clear that Scrutiny Committees should be held on a hybrid basis to enable everyone to take part in person. No. Councillor Haines said the MLM Policy meant that Councillors could not attend in person as well as members of the public and, in his view, this was an erosion of the democratic process. Councillor Wilson commented on the number of Members who had chosen to do the meeting remotely. Councillor Ernest said he agreed with his colleagues that denying the rights of Members was not democratic. Councillor Dr. Johnson however commented that a number of Members who were making a fuss about hybrid meetings were actually not present in the Chamber. The report to the Democratic Services Committee in July this year to turn Scrutiny Committees back to being remote only meetings, which was accepted and driven forward. He however believed that Members should be entitled to turn up to meetings face to face and, in his view, better meetings took place. Councillor Sivagnanam said that as far as she was concerned the MLM Policy provided for wider participation from all backgrounds and aimed to be more inclusive and did not deter from that. Councillor Godfrey considered it should be his democratic right to attend a meeting in person, with Councillors Bruce and Haines stating they had a legitimate reason why they were not present in the Chamber. Councillor Hooper said he had put on record his resentment of fully remote meetings and that an audit was going to be undertaken shortly of the robustness of hybrid meetings, and that every Member should make their views known. Councillor Ewan Goodjohn advised that Chairs of Scrutiny Committees could choose to have a meeting on a hybrid basis following discussions with the Chief Executive and reiterated to the Conservative Party that if they were desperate to come in person, then they should come in person. Scrutiny could be undertaken in person or remotely. Councillor Mahoney however, recognised that there were times when Members, whether they were unwell or for example if a car broke down, that the remote facility was useful to be used and Councillor Perry commented that remote meetings did work, but often the choice of hybrid meetings was also important, stating that saying that proper scrutiny could not be done remotely was false. Councillor Cowpe also commented that the Chamber needed to be fit for purpose, noting that there was not enough room for all Members to be present in any event. Councillor Lloyd-Selby, as Chair of the Environment and Regeneration Scrutiny Committee, said that whether a meeting was to be held hybrid or remote would always form part of the discussion as to whether it was a matter of county wide interest for example, when she planned an agenda. However, she pointed out that it was important to note that remote attendance increased the voice. No. Councillor Wiliam considered the remote only meetings was an attempt to hamper good scrutiny and disagreed with Councillor Perry, saying he thought scrutiny was far more effective being face to face. Councillor Burnett, in conclusion, advised that the amendments to the MLM Policy had already been approved by Cabinet, the amendments were before Council for inclusion into the Constitution. A pilot had been undertaken on a six months trial period for hybrid meetings for Scrutiny Committees with the statistics showing that that there had been little Member presence in the Chamber when those meetings were taking place. On most occasions it was just three or two people who had attended. The Leader concluded by saying that said she would also personally like to protect her carbon footprint. A recorded vote as below, was requested in respect of the amendments to the Multi Location Meetings Policy as set out in paragraphs 2.1 and 2.2 of the report. Members For Against Abstain Anne Asbrey x Julie Aviet x Gareth Ball x Bronwen Brooks x Gillian Bruce x Ian Buckley x Lis Burnett x Samantha Campbell x George Carroll x Christine Cave x Charles Champion x Janice Charles x Millie Collins x Marianne Cowpe x Pamela Drake x No. Anthony Ernest x Christopher Franks x Wendy Gilligan x Russell Godfrey x Emma Goodjohn x Ewan Goodjohn x Stephen Haines x Howard Hamilton x Sally Hanks x William Hennessy x Nic Hodges x Mark Hooper x Catherine Iannucci-Williams x Gwyn John x Dr. Ian Johnson x Susan Lloyd-Selby x Belinda Loveluck-Edwards x Julie Lynch-Wilson x Kevin Mahoney x Naomi Marshallsea x Michael Morgan x Jayne Norman x Helen Payne x Elliot Penn x No. Ian Perry x Joanna Protheroe x Ruba Sivagnanam x Carys Stallard x Neil Thomas x Steffan Wiliam x Margaret Wilkinson x Eddie Williams x Mark Wilson x Nicholas Wood x TOTAL 28 20 1 The vote being carried, it was subsequently RESOLVED – (1) T H A T the amendments to the Multi-Location Meetings Policy as set out in paragraphs 2.1 and 2.2 of the report be included in the Council’s Constitution. (2) T H A T Section 18 of the Constitution Contract Procedure Rules be replaced with a revised Section 18 (revised Appendix A) to the report as set out in paragraph 2.5 of the report. (3) T H A T amendments to Sections 14.10 Functions not to be the responsibility of an Authority’s Cabinet / Executive, 14.16 (f) Terms of Reference of the Public Protection Licensing Committee and Section 26 Officer Delegations – Director of Environment and Housing and Head of Shared Regulatory Services be, approved for inclusion in the Council’s Constitution as contained within paragraphs 2.7 to 2.11 of the report. Reasons for decisions (1) To update the Multi-Location Meetings Policy within the current Constitution as agreed by Cabinet on 18th July, 2024. (2) Having regard to the latest legislation. (3) To update the relevant sections having regard to the implementation of some regulations by the end of November 2024 within the Public Health (Wales) Act 2017. No.
Y penderfyniad fel y'i cofnodwyd
RESOLVED – T H A T the Scrutiny Committees’ Annual Report for the Municipal Year 2023/24 be received. Reason for decision To receive the Scrutiny Committees’ Annual Report as required under the Council’s Constitution.
The Scrutiny Committees’ Annual Report had been produced in accordance with Section 7.4.4 of the Council's Constitution which stated that “Scrutiny Committees must report annually to Full Council on their workings, with recommendations for their future work programmes and amended working methods if appropriate”. The Chair of the Scrutiny Committee Chairs and Vice-Chairs Group, in presenting the report, said that the report detailed the role of Scrutiny, how Scrutiny was undertaken in the Vale of Glamorgan and highlighted key achievements from the work of each Scrutiny Committee, significant events during the Municipal years and future working, specifically in relation to the Council's agreement that the work of Scrutiny should be closely aligned to the four Wellbeing Outcomes of the Council's Corporate Plan 2020-25, and subsequently the four Wellbeing Objectives that formed the main basis of the Council's new Corporate Plan. RESOLVED – T H A T the Scrutiny Committees’ Annual Report for the Municipal Year 2023/24 be received. Reason for decision To receive the Scrutiny Committees’ Annual Report as required under the Council’s Constitution.
Y penderfyniad fel y'i cofnodwyd
RESOLVED – (1) T H A T the actions set out in the Initial Consultation Report be endorsed. No. (2) T H A T the Replacement Local Development Plan (RLDP) Preferred Strategy be approved as a basis for the ongoing preparation of the Deposit RLDP. (3) T H A T the supplementary information provided in the report be endorsed as an update to Agenda Item 10 on the Vale of Glamorgan Replacement Local Development Plan (RLDP) 2021-2036 Preferred Strategy Initial Consultation Report. (4) T H A T delegated authority be granted to the Director of Place and the Head of Sustainable Development to make any further typographical or other minor amendments to the Initial Consultation Report. Reasons for decisions (1) Having regard to the contents of the reference, report and discussions at the meeting. (2) To allow officers to progress with preparation of the Deposit RLDP in accordance with the Council’s approved Delivery Agreement. (3) Having regard to the contents of the report and discussions at the meeting. (4) To make typographical or minor changes as necessary without the need to seek Cabinet or Full Council approval.
SUPPLEMENTARY REPORT (DP) – ITEMS 10 AND 11 WERE CONSIDERED TOGETHER AT THE MEETING. The Cabinet Member for Community Engagement, Equalities and Regulatory Services, in presenting the reference from Cabinet and the report of the Director of Place said, as Members would know, the Replacement Local Development Plan (RLDP) was a key Council policy document that underpinned many of the Council’s corporate strategies. It had a robust evidence base and would allocate land for development, designate areas for protection and contain policies that would provide the basis for the determination of planning applications. The RLDP would be prepared in accordance with the Delivery Agreement (DA), which Council would recall set out the timetable for plan preparation. One of the key stages of the plan process was the preparation of a Preferred Strategy for the RLDP. The Preferred Strategy provided the strategic direction for the development and use of land in the Vale of Glamorgan over the RLDP period No. (2021 to 2036) and identified how much sustainable growth was needed and where this growth would broadly be located. The preparation of the Preferred Strategy had been guided by a framework of key inputs that included national legislation and policy, local and regional policies and strategies and an evidence base relating to key local issues that the Plan should seek to address. It provided the strategic context for the detailed Deposit Plan. At its meeting of 20th November, 2023, Full Council had endorsed the Preferred Strategy for public consultation for a 10-week period (Minute 531 refers). The public consultation was held between 6th December, 2023 and 14th February, 2024. Since consideration of the RLDP Preferred Strategy Initial Consultation Report by Cabinet on 11th July, 2024 and Environment and Regeneration Scrutiny Committee on 16th July, 2024, officers had become aware that due to an IT issue, two email submissions submitted by an individual representor had not been included within the Initial Consultation Report. The representor had evidenced that they were sent within the consultation period, and it had been agreed that they were duly made. The supplementary report considered these submissions. The Cabinet Member sought the approval of Full Council for the proposed changes to the Preferred Strategy as set out in the Initial Consultation Report to allow officers to progress with the preparation of the Deposit RLDP in accordance with the Council’s approved Delivery Agreement. Councillor Franks commented that in his view there was very little support that residents’ views would be taken into account. He understood that residents would be able to make comments but that there was a distinct feeling that comments would be disregarded. He referred to the North West of Dinas Powys and Eastbrook where he considered neither were blessed with good bus services with residents being disappointed with the lack of engagement. Councillor Haines said he agreed with Councillor Franks whether residents would be listened to advising that, in his view, residents of St. Athan had not been listened to. Yes, the area was getting housing but where was the public transport for these houses? He was deeply concerned about St. Athan under the RLDP advising that the Planning Department had refused to go down to the area to speak to residents, although he acknowledged that the Leader had. Councillor Carroll said he had long had significant concerns about the draft Plan as he felt it was fundamentally flawed and that the Authority did not give significant regard to consultation. He said sites in Dinas Powys would affect the community of Llandough and he was not convinced any concerns that he or his community had expressed had been included. Councillor Hooper said previously the Conservative Group had voted for the last RLDP, now they were changing their views. He said there had been good debate in Scrutiny but he could not support the current RLDP having regard to the points raised by Councillor Franks. No. Councillor Wiliam stated at the Environment and Regeneration Scrutiny Committee in July he had called for a holistic provision and considered that the current proposals were a “half-baked job.” He was not satisfied that concerns relating to the environment, transport and health had been considered and that, in his view, this was a major opportunity that was missed. Councillor Perry said he had a few concerns about the potential lack of geographical spread, noting that 857 people had made representations, but most of those were living near the new sites. He also wondered what the effect on the carbon and environmental footprint would be with the number of homes that were being proposed. Councillor Dr. Johnson said that there were several major sites that formed part of the Plan and in particular with regard to the Waterfront area there had been a number of problems that the development company had faced over the years. He asked if the Plan was really going to assist people in the Vale of Glamorgan and welcomed comments from the Leader. The Cabinet Member, in response, advised that in referring to whether residents had not been listened to, there were six annexes to the report showing the information that had been received. The process to be followed was a process that would inform the detail of the project plan and there would be a number of opportunities to listen and engage with residents and key players, for example Welsh Government, Welsh Water, etc. all of whom were important parts of the RLDP. The report also planned for growth which was needed to be planned for and she invited Members to read the report more thoroughly. Communication she said was essential and she had raised this within the teams to ensure that residents were made aware of the consultation process. This consultation was also made available on social media, on Participate Vale, was widespread and ran for 10 weeks and all partners had been spoken to. With regard to transport at St. Athan, this would be reviewed and conversations were currently taking place with the hope that a station would be available there. The further Strategy set out the Council’s vision, objectives and policies and cultural wellbeing for the Vale of Glamorgan, delivering jobs in the Vale and other cultural aspects. The Cabinet Member subsequently moved the recommendations as contained within the reference and the report which were seconded by the Leader. A recorded vote took place on Items 10 and 11 as below: Members For Against Abstain Anne Asbrey x Julie Aviet x Gareth Ball x Bronwen Brooks x Gillian Bruce x No. Ian Buckley x Lis Burnett x Samantha Campbell x George Carroll x Christine Cave x Charles Champion x Janice Charles x Millie Collins Marianne Cowpe x Pamela Drake x Anthony Ernest x Christopher Franks x Wendy Gilligan x Russell Godfrey x Emma Goodjohn x Ewan Goodjohn x Stephen Haines x Howard Hamilton x Sally Hanks x William Hennessy x Nic Hodges x Mark Hooper x Catherine Iannucci-Williams x Gwyn John x No. Dr. Ian Johnson x Susan Lloyd-Selby x Belinda Loveluck-Edwards x Julie Lynch-Wilson x Kevin Mahoney x Naomi Marshallsea x Michael Morgan x Jayne Norman x Helen Payne x Elliot Penn x Ian Perry x Joanna Protheroe x Ruba Sivagnanam x Carys Stallard x Neil Thomas x Steffan Wiliam x Margaret Wilkinson x Eddie Williams x Mark Wilson x Nicholas Wood x TOTAL 28 20 0 The vote being carried it was subsequently, RESOLVED – (1) T H A T the actions set out in the Initial Consultation Report be endorsed. No. (2) T H A T the Replacement Local Development Plan (RLDP) Preferred Strategy be approved as a basis for the ongoing preparation of the Deposit RLDP. (3) T H A T the supplementary information provided in the report be endorsed as an update to Agenda Item 10 on the Vale of Glamorgan Replacement Local Development Plan (RLDP) 2021-2036 Preferred Strategy Initial Consultation Report. (4) T H A T delegated authority be granted to the Director of Place and the Head of Sustainable Development to make any further typographical or other minor amendments to the Initial Consultation Report. Reasons for decisions (1) Having regard to the contents of the reference, report and discussions at the meeting. (2) To allow officers to progress with preparation of the Deposit RLDP in accordance with the Council’s approved Delivery Agreement. (3) Having regard to the contents of the report and discussions at the meeting. (4) To make typographical or minor changes as necessary without the need to seek Cabinet or Full Council approval.
Y penderfyniad fel y'i cofnodwyd
RESOLVED – T H A T the use of the Urgent Decision Procedure (Cabinet Minute No. C111, 5th September, 2024 (as set out in Section 15.14.2(ii) of the Council’s Constitution) be noted. Reason for decision The reporting of the use of the Urgent Decision Procedure is a requirement of the Council’s Constitution.
RESOLVED – T H A T the use of the Urgent Decision Procedure (Cabinet Minute No. C111, 5th September, 2024 (as set out in Section 15.14.2(ii) of the Council’s Constitution) be noted. Reason for decision The reporting of the use of the Urgent Decision Procedure is a requirement of the Council’s Constitution.
The following responses to Member questions as contained within the agenda were presented: (i) Question from Councillor B. Loveluck-Edwards Could the Cabinet Member give updated figures in relation to Housing demand in the Vale of Glamorgan, specifically: No. • Households registered on Homes4You; • Households homeless and placed in temporary accommodation; • Households homeless and placed in Hotel / B&B accommodation; • Homeless families with children currently placed in Hotel / B&B accommodation; • Homeless families with children placed in Hotel / B&B accommodation over the past twelve months. Reply from the Cabinet Member for Public Sector Housing and Tenant Engagement As of Monday 23rd September there were: • Applicants registered on Homes4U ------ 6,930 • Households homeless and placed in temporary accommodation ---- 204 • Households homeless and placed in Hotel / B&B accommodation ---- 71 • Homeless families with children currently placed in Hotel / B&B accommodation ------ 4 • Homeless families with children placed in Hotel / B&B accommodation over the past twelve months ------ 49 A number of years ago this Council was justifiably proud of having no residents placed in temporary accommodation and credit is paid to the Deputy Leader who delivered on that at the time. However, there is a current housing crisis in the UK caused by an acute shortage of affordable accommodation, meaning that this Council is facing its highest housing demand for many years. (ii) Question from Councillor J.E. Charles Will the Cabinet Member provide an update on what is being done to improve the state of Birdcage Walk? Reply from the Cabinet Member for Neighbourhood and Building Services The Walkway known as Birdcage Walk, has been closed for some time to protect public safety due to the defects and possible instability of the retaining wall structure forming the western boundary of the walkway. This is not a clear cut case as it appears that the instability of retaining walls is a third party liability. Any works may therefore further compromise the safety of users of the walkway, a situation we would be eager to avoid. I understand that this closure has the potential to inconvenience pedestrians, however it will not be safe to open the route until this complex matter is resolved and any necessary repair work completed. Supplemental Councillor Charles asked who the third party was, whether they were “dragging their heels “ and if the Cabinet Member had any idea how long it would take to put things No. right. The Cabinet Member advised that he would consult with officers and get back to Councillor Charles. (iii) Question from Councillor M.J. Hooper I listened with interest to the Welsh First Minister outline priorities for her Government recently. The FM told us of a 'summer of listening' that led her to refocus the efforts of her team. There was no direct reference to the issues that impact Local Authority budgets that, we know, are under considerable and increasing pressure. Did any Members of our Cabinet find the time to make any representations during the summer tour? Reply from the Executive Leader and Cabinet Member for Performance and Resources There is and always has been, regular and ongoing communication both with the Prif Weinidog and with the Welsh Government Cabinet. While there has been a recess during August that is only for the Council’s formal timetable. The Council’s Cabinet has continued to work throughout the recess. There have been a number of meetings during and since the recess in which Local Government finance has been raised at both Welsh and UK levels. Supplemental Councillor Hooper asked why when Eluned Morgan gave her priorities she gave no reference to Local Government in the Senedd and why has any representation been ineffective. The Leader in response although considering the question to be a statement said that Local Government featured high on the Prif Weinidog’s agenda, she also had a meeting shortly coming up with the Cabinet Secretary and that there was open access with WG and the UK Government and as such she didn’t recognise the statement being made. (iv) Question from Councillor H.M. Payne What steps is the Council taking to support the mental wellbeing and resilience of young people in the Vale of Glamorgan? Reply from the Cabinet Member for Education, Arts and the Welsh Language A strength of the Local Authority (LA), as evidenced in the recent successful Estyn inspection, is the strategic development of educational provision and practitioner skills to support the mental health and resilience of children and young people. Significant investment has been made in workforce development to enhance practitioner knowledge, competence and confidence in supporting the emotional, social and mental health needs of learners. Productive working with a commissioned provider to influence school improvement planning, coupled with very effective partnership with Primary Health Wales, CAMHS and the special school No. outreach service, has significantly impacted on the quality of provision in mainstream schools. The strategic, long-term approach taken to support well-being and address the growing complexity of social, emotional and mental health needs of learners has been exemplary. The current social, emotional, mental health and wellbeing strategy is a culmination of five years of work, and whilst recognising that there is further to go, is nevertheless, responding to these increasing and continuing demands. Extensive support has been provided to schools to work within an evidence based psychologically informed framework that incorporates an understanding of Developmental Trauma, ACES, Attachment and the neuroscience of mental health and ill-health. Excellent engagement from schools in the Whole School Approach to Mental Health and Wellbeing show that nearly all are engaged in improvement planning, having made effective use of a range of qualitative and quantitative data and information to address the needs of children and young people. The Council’s provision is further enhanced by an outstanding Youth Service, which was reflected in the recent Estyn inspection, which offers a range of effective and well-used activities to support the mental health and resilience of children and young people. As well as having a number of generic intended benefits, the strategy is also a concerted effort to enhance school attendance, tackle persistent absenteeism and reduce exclusions wherever possible. Delivery of the strategy is both influenced and promoted by reference groups including the Wellbeing Improvement Board, Schools’ Wellbeing Forum and the joint education and health Wellbeing and Mental Health Monitoring Group. Supplemental Councillor Payne asked about the partnership working between schools and the youth service with the Leader advising that the youth service work in partnership with all schools and they have also informed her of the support they receive from schools. The Leader also referred to the phrase from the Estyn Inspection report that the youth service have an ethos of no child left behind. (v) Question from Councillor C.E.A. Champion Will the Cabinet Member please update the Council on work the Authority is doing as part of the Welsh Government’s review into its 20mph policy on restricted roads? Reply from the Cabinet Member for Neighbourhood and Building Services In July 2024 every Council in Wales was asked to collect residents’ feedback on 20mph limits so that they could assess this against revised Welsh Government guidance on setting 30mph speed limits on restricted roads and other 20mph speed limit roads. This revised guidance was published in July. To facilitate feedback a dedicated email address was created and published on the Welsh Government’s website. The council has subsequently received some 284 emails with a request for over 50 roads or sections of road to be reviewed on 20mph and exception roads throughout the Vale’s local highway network. No. The Welsh Government listening phase has now ended and the Council’s Traffic team will now be reviewing all the comments we have received and assessing them against the revised guidance published by Welsh Government in July. When determining whether a road should have a higher speed limit, we must be certain that any such increase will not have a negative impact on road safety. We are currently revising the Council’s webpages for 20mph to reflect the next stages as explained above. I anticipate that it will take several months to complete the full review of all roads as requested in a robust manner, but once completed we will publish the results on our website. We will not be able to provide individual feedback to every comment we have received. If the revised guidance suggests that a road, we have received feedback on, is suitable for a 30mph speed limit, we will explain this when we publish the results of the review. Any changes to existing speed limits will require a Traffic Regulation Order (TRO) which will involve a public consultation prior to any changes being implemented. Any objections to a TRO will be considered as part of the Council’s normal decision-making processes. Supplemental Councillor Champion asked whether an app could be provided to Members detailing when work had been completed. The Cabinet Member referred to the TRO process that was to be undertaken advising that any Member could make comments and/ or call in a decision by request. (vi) Question from Councillor C.M. Cowpe Many constituents have complained to me about delays in receiving a response from the Council. Could you set out the Council’s policy on the response time for replying to e-mails, and the average, and longest, times for a reply by Contact One Vale by e-mail and by telephone? Reply from the Executive Leader and Cabinet Member for Performance and Resources The Council aims to respond to emails within 5 working days. The number of emails processed by Contact OneVale between April and August 2024 was 19,037, although many more emails would have been processed through other publicly facing email accounts over the same period. Unfortunately it is not currently possible to report on response times for email enquiries across the Council. In the same period, the total number of Phone calls handled by C1V was 42,666 and the average answer, delay was 656 seconds. This is a significant increase compared to 2023/24 performance where 134,354 calls were answered in an No. average of 342 seconds and reflects resource challenges experienced by the service with high levels of sickness absence and staff turnover. As sickness absence has been managed and improved, and new call handling staff have been recruited and trained, it is anticipated that average speed of answer and longest answer delay will again reduce. Supplemental Councillor Cowpe asked whether there were any plans to monitor the situation. The Leader advised that there some areas that could be monitored although there were a number of complex emails that may not be able to be answered in the time but she hoped that at least a holding email could be sent. (vii) Question from Councillor P. Drake Will the Leader join me in congratulating Holton Primary School on their recent success in being the first primary school in the Vale of Glamorgan to be awarded ‘School of Sanctuary’ status? Reply from the Executive Leader and Cabinet Member for Performance and Resources It is indeed a great pleasure to note that Holton Primary School was awarded ‘School of Sanctuary’ status, on Friday, 20th September, the first of its kind in the Vale and I know you are a Governor of the School. I was delighted to join the school for their celebration alongside Councillors Rhiannon Birch and Ruba Sivagnanam, as well as the new Vale of Glamorgan MP Kanishka Narayan. It is also, with a sense of pride, and worth acknowledging the strength and depth of such practice in the schools in the Vale as many others are in the process of preparing for the School of Sanctuary status. Supplemental Councillor Drake asked the Leader what other schools had applied or were also applying for the status. In response the Leader said that 22 other schools were in the process of working towards it and St Cyres had been the first Secondary School to be awarded the status and St Helens Primary the 2nd Primary School. The Leader also advised that she had recently visited St Cyres to hear more about the Young Carers Project which they had included within their status as a ‘School of Sanctuary for all’. (viii) Question from Councillor W.A. Hennessy What is the Council doing to maintain school transport provision for children in the Vale of Glamorgan? No. Reply from the Deputy Leader and Cabinet Member for Sustainable Places All pupils who are eligible for free school transport, in accordance with the Vale of Glamorgan Council’s Home to School / College Transport Policy are allocated to either a mainstream school transport services, a public bus service, a train service or an additional learning need transport service. Supplemental Councillor Hennessy asked the Cabinet Member if she would make a statement that no child would be left without school transport as had been the case in Bridgend County Borough Council recently. The Cabinet Member said she did not see the relevance of the supplemental to the Member question. (ix) Question from Councillor A. Asbrey With the increase in home-working and reduction in staff in-person attendance, what plans does the Vale Council have for office accommodation across the county? Reply from the Executive Leader and Cabinet Member for Performance and Resources The Council has been reviewing its office accommodation following the change to more hybrid working arrangements for office based staff. A corporate project called Eich Lle (Your Space) has been established for some time. The annual update to Cabinet in respect of the actions and targets from our Corporate Asset Management Plan was reported on 18th July, 2024. Supplemental Councillor Asbrey asked whether there was any data regarding how many officers worked from home and how many hours per week. The Leader in response advised that there was all sorts of data that informed the Council’s Management Plan, it being noted that only a percentage of staff were eligible for hybrid working and advised the Councillor to look at the Cabinet report of 18th July, 2024 which should provide the detail required. (x) Question from Councillor S. Lloyd-Selby What support is the Council providing to local people and families who continue to experience the impact of the Cost of living crisis? Reply from the Executive Leader and Cabinet Member for Performance and Resources Thank you for the question. No. The Council has been undertaking a range of work to support local people and families who continue to experience the impact of the cost of living crisis. We reported this activity most recently to the Homes and Safe Communities Scrutiny Committee in July. Specific to cost of living (rather than poverty more broadly), this work spans across all areas of the Council’s activity, including through schools. We have focused attention on food insecurity, supporting people who may be lonely or suffer from social isolation, working with partners on providing warm spaces and ensuring access to activities at no or low cost. Councillor Lloyd-Selby will know that the Council established a cost-of-living reserve to support this work. This has enabled contributions to be made to the Vale Foodbank, Citizens Advice, additional discretionary housing payments, additional payments towards the early roll-out of free school meals and a community grant fund. We have a dedicated section on the Council’s website which is updated regularly and information shared with Council staff to ensure they have the knowledge to share with residents in their interactions with them. We have put a real focus on tackling poverty in the forthcoming draft Corporate Plan which we will be consulting on from 14th October and looked forward to hearing everyone’s thoughts on it. This contains a specific section showing the work proposed to be taken forward by the Council to address poverty. Supplemental Councillor Lloyd-Selby, in referring to a previous discussion at the meeting regarding supporting people to obtain pension credits, asked the Leader that when more detail was available could this be shared with all Members. The Leader said she would of course share the information, there were currently some GDPR and legal issues to go through, but as soon as she had the information she would share it. (xi) Question from Councillor G.D.D. Carroll Will the Leader please update the Council on the Authority’s proposals for the Eagleswell School site in Llantwit Major? Reply from the Executive Leader and Cabinet Member for Performance and Resources Planning permission has now been approved for temporary housing on the site. This consent is for a maximum of 5 years. Accordingly, the longer term future for the site will be considered in due course over the next 18 months with a particular focus on permanent housing solutions and the possibility the site could be utilised as part of the Health Board’s longer term requirements. This element, namely the provision of a health centre facility for Llantwit Major, is an aspiration of ours and we have and continue to discuss this with the Health Board at a senior level. No. Supplemental Councillor Carroll asked the Leader what she meant by the term embrace. The Leader stated that the people of Llantwit Major were warm and welcoming people who supported those in need irrespective of people’s differing views. (xii) Question from Councillor Dr. I.J. Johnson How many individuals and families left temporary accommodation in 2023-24 without securing permanent accommodation, and what percentage was this of the total number in temporary accommodation? Reply from the Leader on behalf of the Cabinet Member for Public Sector Housing and Tenant Engagement 69 households left temporary accommodation last year without alternative accommodation provided or sourced by the Council. This equates to 32% of all applicants considered under Section 75 of the Housing Act 2004. Supplemental Councillor Dr. Johnson asked if the Leader had details to hand about what could be done to reduce the numbers. The Leader in response advised that it had to be accepted that some of the cases had complex needs. The Council was also looking to expand its supply of temporary accommodation across the Vale of Glamorgan with its investment in refurbishment of the Olives and Cadoxton House with the modular accommodation being provided in Llantwit Major for Ukrainians to move away from expensive and unsuitable hotel and B&B use. (xiii) Question from Councillor G. Bruce Will the Cabinet Member outline support given to children who are forced to move school due to bullying, particularly regarding their school transport provision? Reply from the Leader on behalf of the Cabinet Member for Education, Arts and the Welsh Language Any allegations of bullying are always taken seriously, and schools respond swiftly to support the victim as much as possible in line with their anti-bullying policies. No pupil would be forced to move in these circumstances and a parent’s decision to move their child should be done in liaison with the school involved and should always be a last resort. Free school transport is provided in these cases if pupils meet the qualifying criteria, and it is a managed move between schools or is agreed by the Local Authority. In order to ensure full support is available, the Admissions Team immediately alert the relevant school and internal officers when applications for a school transfer are received that reference bullying as a reason. This allows for intervention when No. parents have not raised the issue with the school initially. The team provide advice and support to the family and liaise with the current school so that they can try and engage with the family to resolve the matter. If the move does take place, then the new school is also made fully aware of the circumstances to ensure they can manage the transfer appropriately and with sensitivity. If any patterns / trends within our schools are identified, then these are addressed by specialist officers. Supplemental Councillor Bruce, in referring to an individual case, asked if the Cabinet Member would work with the family. The Leader advised that as Councillor Bruce was referring to an individual case it would be inappropriate to discuss this case at the Council meeting and advised her to raise the issue with the Education department and / or the Cabinet Member directly. (xiv) Question from Councillor R.E. Godfrey With working from home being actively encouraged within the Council, what provision is being made to ensure staff members develop working relationships with their department members and also what provision is being made to ensure Managers and Team Leaders are able to monitor staff members level of ability and additional training needs? Reply from the Executive Leader and Cabinet Member for Performance and Resources The Council adopted a hybrid working policy and this provides a framework to support staff and the organisation works in this way. This covers aspects of performance and development and is contained within the People Strategy that was approved by Cabinet in July 2023 following a process of consultation with staff and trade unions and scrutiny via Corporate Performance and Resources Committee. Managers continue to have regular appraisals and touch points with staff throughout the year. This is focused around the outcomes the team, service and Council are looking to achieve and the support and development required to enable this. The Council’s Learning Café offers a regular set of all-staff development opportunities, and the management development programme is starting in early October which involves all line managers across the Council. Supplemental Councillor Godfrey enquired as to whether there had been any evaluations by departments with regard to customer service levels and productivity with working from home as opposed to working in the office. The Leader in response said the Council worked to objectives and the Corporate Plan and appraisals with staff focused on the Team Plans and Council objectives and where agreed objectives are not reached, these were investigated. No. (xv) Question from Councillor S.J. Haines A large percentage of St. Athan residents are subject to double taxation, due to the Council not fully adopting their estates. These include the residents of Eglwys Brewis, Eastvale and the houses built on St. Johns fields, of course not forgetting the estate under construction between Eastvale and Eglwys Brewis – can the Cabinet Member please supply me with a timeline as to when these properties will have all services adopted? Reply from the Cabinet Member for Neighbourhood and Building Services The Vale always encourages Developers to enter into formal agreement with the Council for the adoption of local roads and public open space created as part of new development sites within its local area wherever practicable, however, this does rely on the co-operation and agreement of the individual Developer concerned. Not all site Developers will offer new roads or open spaces for adoption and in these cases a management company is set up to maintain the estate roads and this should be clearly explained to homebuyers at the point of sale. The developments at Eglwys Brewis and Eastvale (presumed East camp) were originally constructed many years ago by developers on behalf of the Ministry of Defence (MOD) to house serving RAF staff and their families. The Council subsequently adopted the majority of the roads associated with each site, however, various elements of footways and verge areas were for whatever reason excluded from the adoption process and have historically been maintained by MOD until the housing stock and associated land was transferred as part of sale of the housing stock to a large private real estate owners named “Annington”. The maintenance and upkeep of unadopted elements of the estates are therefore the responsibility of “Annington” or any management company or co-operative that may be in place to do so on their behalf for which residents should have been made aware of any associated maintenance charges for these areas when entering into a Leasing / renting or purchasing a property along the affected streets. I regret it is not appropriate for public monies to be expended on their maintenance or repair at this time and the unadopted elements will need to be brought up to adoptable standards or proven to be to an adoptable standard by the existing management company should they wish the Council to consider any potential adoption of these footways, verges or other assets in the future via suitable legal agreement or process. The new development comprising Ffordd Y Spitfire and adjoining roads which was known formerly as the Northfields development off the main St Athan and Cowbridge Road is being constructed by Barratt David Wilson Homes off St Athan. It is understood that the development is being built-out in three separate phases and I am pleased to confirm that the Council currently has a signed Section 38 agreement in place (as explained above) with the Developers for the adoption of the internal highway layout for Phase 1. It is anticipated that similar Section 38 legal agreements will follow in due course for Phases 2 and 3. Negotiations are ongoing with the Developer regarding Phase 1 to ensure the road layout is constructed to the appropriate and agreed standards required by the Section 38 agreement prior to the No. formal adoption taking place at a suitable time in the future. The Council is aware that Phase 2 and 3 have commenced and subject to legal agreements with the Developer, the adoption will be progressed as the development is completed, again subject to achieving appropriate highway standards. As Cabinet Member the offer is there for any Member to contact me if they feel they have places that are not adopted to be considered. Supplemental Councillor Haines asked if the Cabinet Member would be happy to work with him and the management companies to get the pavements and greenspaces adopted. In response the Cabinet Member said he would consult with officers.
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.