Loading
There is no summary of this meeting yet. Summaries are written once the council publishes the minutes, which are its official record of what a meeting decided. They usually appear a few weeks after the meeting.
The Chair welcomed everyone to the meeting. The Chair confirmed that Democratic Services have received apologies from Cllr J. Curtice, Cllr G. Morgan and Cllr D. Cundy.
Jon Burnes, Peter Austin and Steven Aldred - Jones declared an interest in Item 8 The Future Role of the SBCD PoMO. As they are staff of the Portfolio Management Office.
Stephen Aldred Jones gave members an overview of the report as published in the agenda pack. Members were concerned about the significant difference between the allocated funds (£69,000,738) and the actual spend (£601,000) from the total capital of £242 million. They felt that the discrepancy suggests that a large portion of the allocated funds has not been utilised yet and they were concerned about the efficiency and progress of the projects and investments planned. Officers explained that the actual money spent to date is £71.5 million and there are additional committed expenses that haven't been invoiced yet. There are forecasts for future spending. Officers explained that the commitments column in the report represents expenses that have been incurred but not yet invoiced. This means that these are amounts that will be paid once the invoices are received. Members were advised that timing of when these invoices are received can vary, which is why the actual spend might appear lower until those invoices are processed. This can create a lag between when the expense is committed and when it is officially recorded as spent. Officers stated that they will check the wording in the report to see if they can provide better clarity in future reports on this. Members asked if the grant money being drawn down from the Welsh or UK Government will be at the project's start or at specific waypoints, or on a set date? Officers explained that the UK Government provides funding over 10 years, while the Welsh Government does it over 15 years up to 2033. The UK Government front-loaded its funding, so it is received quicker. For Swansea Arena, the eligible spend is spread over 8 years, with annual drawdowns based on progress. There are waypoints set by the governments, and once those are met funds are released. Officers explained that they provide an annual portfolio business case update, scheduled for the next quarter, and are subject to scrutiny by a joint implementation board. Officers will present the progress update to release the next tranche of funding. Following Scrutiny the report was noted.
Jonathan Burnes gave a summary of the dashboard information and project specifics: Starting with the RAG Status (Red, Amber, Green): Skills: Apprenticeship figures are lower than anticipated, moving the status from green to amber. Efforts are underway to improve these figures with all partners involved. Red Risks: • Increased Construction Costs. • Projects Not Delivering on Outputs/Outcomes. • Flood Risk Management Mapping: Officers awaiting feedback from Welsh Government and Natural Resource Wales for mitigation. Red Issues: • Slippage/Reforecasting: Projects and programmes are addressing slippage, with improvements seen in Quarter 3 compared to Quarter 2. They are continuing their efforts to catch up by Quarter 4. • Delivery Against Project Milestones: Driven by financials and deliverables of outputs like buildings and course delivery which is impacting the wider infrastructure. Benefits: • Jobs: Increase of 119 jobs between Quarter 2 and Quarter 3, now totalling 742 jobs, mainly due to the waterfront project. • Investment: Increased by £64 million between Quarter 2 & Quarter 3, now totalling £459 million of the £1.3 billion investment. • Procurement Schedule: • Minimal changes noted from Quarter 2 to Quarter 3. Members noted an increase in jobs to 742, but felt it was concerning that the total projected number was approximately 9,700. They asked what the current job projection is and given the job losses in the region, is the programme on track to create more employment, or is it falling short? Officers initially set a target of 9,000 jobs, now forecasting 9,700. This forecast mainly includes direct jobs in construction, with wider impacts yet to be recorded. They advised that significant job increases will be seen once evaluations are complete. Currently, 7 out of 36 projects are completed, with 17 infrastructure projects in the pipeline. Officers explained that as these projects progress, job numbers should increase. Officers monitor and mitigate delivery risks, providing annual updates and evaluations to release funding. Members were informed that there are evaluation profiles and benefit definitions used to track progress and detailed reporting on each project is extensive, covering over 100 deliverables, including job creation. Members understood the officers' points but had concerns about job projections at 71/72 Kingsway. They noted that a flexible office space provider occupies 20,000 Ft2. and noted that they could house anywhere from 10 to 100 people. Members accept the uncertainty of how many people will occupy the space but emphasised the importance of other jobs being created as well. Members noted that significant job increases won't be visible until businesses are fully operational, and contracts are in place. Members asked for a breakdown of the 742 jobs by area, particularly focusing on Pembroke Dock Marine as it is a low-income area. Officers explained that the dashboard benefits summary shows how the 742 jobs are distributed across projects. Pembroke Dock Marine it has 77 jobs logged but more have been created and not yet reported due to pending evaluations. Since the infrastructure was only completed last summer, job numbers are expected to increase as the area becomes occupied and operational. Members asked if after the works to improve the slipways were completed in Pembroke Dock, does the 77 jobs created include those who completed the work, and if so, are these workers still employed. Members asked if these are long-term and sustainable jobs. Officers advised that the jobs are defined and monitored as full-time equivalents (FTE). Fractional appointments (short-term jobs) e.g., six months, a week etc. are pro-rated to full-time equivalents (FTE) and are then monitored. Individuals or combined roles must be employed for at least 12 months to be considered a full-time job. Officers feel that sustainable jobs are expected post-construction, as businesses occupy the infrastructure. These jobs will be detailed in impact reports rather than direct construction jobs. Currently, most reported jobs are from the construction phase, including roles like project and finance managers. Johnathan Burnes continued doing the project update. Support and Innovation - Low Carbon Growth: • Bay Technology Centre: Occupancy rates have increased from 65% to around 80%. Securing tenants is taking longer due to legal documents and contracts, but efforts are focused on ensuring the right type of tenants. • Switch Project: Focused on decarbonisation of steel. Planning approval has been granted, and the project received extra funding through the Tata steel transition board allowing it to proceed. • Property Development Fund: Oversubscribed with more private sector companies wanting to access the fund than available. Projected to overachieve in terms of private sector leveraged investment. Skills and Talent: • Increase in the number of pilot projects from 24 to 29. • Efforts to maximize apprenticeship skills development projects. Pentre Awel: • The first phase is underway, with a site visit planned for scrutiny members in April. Delivery is on track, with fit-out and tenant arrangements progressing. Digital Projects: • This is overachieving on several targets, including private sector funding. The programme is seen as a trailblazer in digital connectivity and collaboration among partners. Waterfront and Kingsway: • Swansea Council took possession of the 71-72 building in December. Progress is being made with tenants, and they are aiming for 100% occupancy by the launch in June. • Innovation Matrix: Is open and operational with around 80-90% tenancy agreements. Official launch with ministers is scheduled this month. • Precinct Project: Currently in discussion for a delivery model and location within the city. Yr Egin Phase Two: • Phase one is at 100% occupancy. Phase two delivery is under review. Homes as Power Stations: • Progress has been made in supply chain management and demonstration houses in Port Talbot. Rolling out incentive funds to housing associations, local authorities, and private sector housing. Pembroke Dock Marine: • Currently progressing their infrastructure including the demonstration zone, training facilities, and university-business collaborations. Seeking funds from government and private sector for activities like birthing and testing technologies. Campus Project: • Main contractor appointed, demolition and build of Singleton phase one starting soon. Working with the hospital for phase one refurbishment and business incubation centre in Morriston. Progressing the 5G Vodafone bid and phase two plans for both sites. Following Scrutiny the report was noted.
Peter Austin gave members an update on the report. The focus was on future business case development. City Deal Programme Board had asked officers to focus on future elements of business case development that are construction dependent. Out of 23 projects, seven have been completed or are about to complete. There are two main assessments: 1) likely increase in costs due to inflation and 2) risk assessment on how cost increases might affect business case delivery. Previously, cost assessments were done on a project basis, and the risk/issue assessment at a Business Case level but now they will include forecasted risks and issues for future elements at project level as well. Officers mentioned Pentre Awel as an example as it has multiple stages which are flexible in delivery timescale and market dependent. Officers want to ensure all stakeholders are aware of deliverability. There is an anticipated shortfall of £42.6 million for projects yet to be delivered, these are conservative estimates due to some costs yet to be determined. Members were advised that future iterations of the report will provide more detailed assessments for upcoming projects. In terms of risk management, officers are breaking down ‘risks’ and ‘issues’ into manageable pieces to address them early in the process and the recent reassessment of risks has led to a reduction in red risks and high amber risks for completed projects. There are no construction cost concerns for the seven completed projects, but a gap exists for the next set of projects to start being delivered. Following Scrutiny the report was noted.
Peter Austin gave members an overview and explained that the forecast from projects remains positive, with a projection of £32 million over the original target of £637 million. Several projects are overachieving, contributing to the positive outlook. The risk status has been reduced from red to amber due to increased confidence from the projects in achieving their targets. Digital projects are particularly timely and in high demand, leading to significant progress beyond initial business case expectations. Officers felt that the report continues to be very positive, reflecting the strong performance and potential of the projects. Following Scrutiny the report was noted.
Debbie Smith monitoring officer for the city deal presented the joint report compiled by herself, Paul Thomas, the deputy chief executive in Carmarthenshire Council and Craig Griffiths head of legal and democratic services in Neath Port Talbot Council. Members advised that the review has been endorsed by the joint committee on February 13th. Officers explained that the purpose of reviewing the PoMo support to the joint committee was driven primarily by funding issues. Members were advised that initially PoMo funding is running out and was funded by a 1.5% government top slicing and by partner contributions. Partner contributions stopped in 2023, making current funding insufficient. Officers are reviewing objectives to assess the support provided by PoMo as well as exploring efficiencies and better use of support services. Officers will explore potential alignment of PoMo with the Corporate Joint Committee (CJC) for broader regional impact. Members were advised that the terms of reference for the review have been endorsed by the Swansea Bay City Region Joint Committee and involve a representative group of officers from the four councils. Key members include: Debbie Smith, Paul Thomas, Craig Griffiths and Chris Moore (151 officer for both City Deal and the CJC) and the Directors of Economic Development from each of the four councils. These officers are crucial for understanding the support needed to deliver the functions of both the City Deal and the CJC. The terms of reference also explain what the review will cover including looking at the governance framework, the decision-making structures, accountability, affordability, transparency and mechanisms of the city deal and consider alignment with the CJC, the regional transport planning, economic regeneration. The review will look to identify overlaps, gaps and opportunities for alignment and provide recommendations to enhance collaboration, enhanced governance and enhanced delivery. Members were advised that the review will identify which staff members are within its scope, including those directly funded by PoMo and those on SLA arrangements funded by city deal grants. Officers feel that it is important to consult these staff members to understand their perspectives on the future support needed for delivery of both the City Deal and the CJC. Officers need to consider the requirements and expectations of Welsh and UK Governments. Members stated that most projects are in the delivery phase, their timelines vary. There will be an ongoing requirement to report outputs to both governments to satisfy funding arrangements. Officers will review CJC functions and governance arrangements, considering different PoMo delivery models in Wales and alignment possibilities. They will also assess the internal resources available in each of the four councils, as officers are involved in project delivery. Officers need to assess their role within the support mechanism and engage with the government. The joint committee approved the report last month and meetings have started, with more planned. Dialogue with key personnel is ongoing and Audit Wales has been consulted. Officers can't provide a timeline for completion and reporting yet. Members are concerned about linking up with other organisations. They felt that the City Deal initiative is unique compared to Corporate Joint Committees. Members feel that it is crucial for the city deal to focus on infrastructure and job creation. Members felt that while cost concerns are valid, they fear of disrupting the system which works well. Members felt there is a need to carefully consider any changes, even if it means higher costs from grants. The chair felt it was important to be very careful moving forward. Members noted the success of the Swansea Bay City Deal and its ongoing projects, like Pentre Awel in Carmarthenshire. They highlighted significant overlaps with the CJC, leading to costly dual structures. A review to explore possible amalgamation was welcomed by some members because of the similarities in strategic development and project delivery between the two. Members felt that despite the effectiveness of both organisations they felt that examining any overlaps could optimise resources, especially after recent budget challenges for every council. The Chair highlighted the challenge of being both the Chair of this committee and Vice Chair of one of the CJC committees. He mentioned that the Welsh government expects a lot from the councils in terms of funding for the CJC, which is limited. He emphasised the need to be cautious to avoid burdening residents with the costs. The chair noted the validity of both perspectives and chose not to get too involved in the debate. Members emphasised the importance of identifying similarities and overlaps. They stated that it was crucial to receive feedback on these areas to understand them better and welcomed the open debate as healthy and necessary for transparency. Officers acknowledged members' comments and will explore all options, including maintaining the current structure. They noted overlaps between the city deal and CJC work but emphasized the importance of fulfilling city deal responsibilities. As projects progress, the focus will shift from implementation to reporting outputs. Discussions will address whether to maintain full resources for the city deal or use them more efficiently. Officers confirmed that they will be keeping an open mind on everything. Officers apologised for not being able to give the timescale but assured members that there is a pressing need to report swiftly and want to complete an options paper with, with some outcomes. Members agreed that Welsh Government funding is crucial for supporting the CJC and City Deal. Members also welcomed the group's membership, ensuring all councils are represented. They felt it is beneficial that familiar officers hold roles in both organisations, aiding accurate reporting and scrutiny. Recognising overlaps, members look forward to reviewing the options once the work is completed. Following Scrutiny the report was noted.
The forward work Programme was noted.
There were none.
Councillors must say when they have a personal link to something being discussed, such as a job, a property or a family member. A prejudicial interest is one strong enough that the councillor usually leaves the room and takes no part.
Declarations are read from the minutes once they are published.
Lists the council's current councillors only. Co-opted members, officers and former councillors aren't shown.