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 G. Morgan Cllr M. Lewis
There were none.
A member requested clarity on the timescale for the Corporate Governance Committee (CGC) taking over the scrutiny function of Swansea Bay City Deal and asked for a formal letter from either the Chief Executive or the CGC Chair (Councillor Rod Stewart) to confirm when the panel’s responsibility for the process will end. Other members agreed with the concern but noted that the Chief Executive’s letter already assures members that all necessary steps have been taken and that updates will continue to be provided to relevant committees and cautioned against repeating requests unnecessarily. The Chair concluded that guidance would be sought from Craig Griffiths the Chief Monitoring Officer, and members would be informed of the next steps. Following Scrutiny the letter was noted.
Stephen Aldred Jones Regional Finance Manager informed members that the Auditor General’s report provides an unqualified, true and fair opinion on the City Deal accounts as of 31 March 2025. The audit found no significant issues, no uncorrected misstatements, and confirmed compliance with legislative requirements. The Auditor General signed off the report on 29 October. Stephen clarified that this represents a clean audit report, consistent with previous years. No questions were raised by members. Following Scrutiny the report was noted.
Stephen Aldred Jones noted that, as the Auditor General’s report confirmed no issues and required no amendments, he would not revisit the report in detail. He reminded members that the report had already been considered by the committee last month and was signed off by the Chair and SRO on 17 October. Following Scrutiny the report was noted.
Stephen Aldred Jones presented the Quarter 1 report, noting it is a standard update and referred members to Appendix A. He highlighted the following key points: Expenditure & Income Estimated joint committee and council expenditure: £1.725m. Accrued interest on balances: £1.605m, to be distributed to four local authorities. Portfolio Management Office (POMO) projected spend: £538k, including staffing costs of £422k (slight underspend of £11k due to payroll variance). Projected income: £2.202m (interest £1.605m and a grant top-slice £596,000). Top-slice is £225,000 lower than forecast due to timing of grant expenditure. Forecast year-end deficit: £179k, combined with brought-forward deficit of £255,000 = £434,000 reserve deficit (This was down to a timing issue, expected to balance in future years). Portfolio Investment Fund Total 15-year investment now £1.39billion (up from £1.374 billion). Increases due to: Digital Infrastructure: £1.1m private investment. Pembroke Dock Marine: £1.3m private investment. Low Carbon Growth: £10.2m (mainly as the result of the Tata Transition Fund). Swansea Waterfront Digital Village: +£3.5m (previously omitted commitments). Current Year Forecast Annual projected investment: £171.7m (public, private, grant). Under-investment of £67.3m mainly due to HAPS project (£57m delayed reimbursement to RSLs). City Deal grant underspend: £6.3m; private sector funding delay: £50.3m (allocated for future years). Pembroke Dock Marine shows £3.5m underspend (this is down to a timing issue). Pentre Awel Zone 1 fit-out costs (£3m) moved to 2026/27. Error in H2 Stimulus project corrected for Q2 (no reduction in £2m value). Overall Position £67m variance will be re-profiled to years 9–11 (2026/27–2028/29). No impact on total outputs, investments, or benefits. Private sector funding achieved to date: £133m ( which is 25% of total target). Private sector contributions expected later in delivery; some projects (e.g., Digital Infrastructure) already overachieving. Members queried the £52 million variance in private sector investment and whether it relates to housing projects, asking if the shortfall will persist or if significant increases are expected in the next two years. Officers confirmed that most private sector funding is linked to the HAPS project, which accounts for roughly half of the total projected private investment of £719 million. They advised that HAPS is structured to deliver substantial funding towards the end of the programme and is on track to achieve at least £375 million. Other major contributions include Pentre Awel (£110 million for later phases) and Digital Infrastructure (£97.8 million), which is already overachieving. Officers expressed confidence that overall private sector targets will be met. Following Scrutiny the report was noted.
Jonathan Burnes Director of the Portfolio Management Office presented the report on behalf of Deb Smith, who sent apologies. He explained the role of the Senior Responsible Owner (SRO), accountable to the Swansea Bay City Deal Joint Committee for governance and delivery. Wendy Walters has held the SRO role since June 2020 alongside her position as Chief Executive of Carmarthenshire County Council. As all projects and business cases are now approved and in delivery, it is proposed that Wendy steps down and the SRO role rotates annually among directors responsible for economic development in the four councils. The first appointment will be Richard Brown, Assistant Chief Executive of Pembrokeshire County Council, with a handover from Wendy expected by January. This change aligns with the governance convergence between the City Deal and the Southwest Wales Corporate Joint Committee (CJC), approved by the Joint Committee in July 2025. Officers assured members that governance and resources will remain robust to support delivery and benefit realisation as the merger progresses. Members welcomed the update and expressed support for the collaborative approach between the two organisations, noting that the progress behind the scenes is positive and encouraging. Following Scrutiny the report was noted.
Jonathan Burnes reported on the July portfolio gateway review, which assessed delivery confidence and alignment of outcomes with overall strategy. The review, held from 17–19 July, involved 16 stakeholders and resulted in an Amber/Green rating, which officers noted is the highest achievable before full delivery. Two recommendations were made: Develop a Benefit Management Strategy and Plan – an overarching document to complement existing benefit maps, registers, and profiles, with greater visibility of private sector leverage for stakeholders and scrutiny. Profile skills and staffing for benefit management – ensuring resources across the Portfolio Management Office and delivery organisations to monitor and report outcomes beyond construction. The next review is expected in 12–18 months (around October 2026), subject to discussion. Officers skipped last year’s review due to stable governance and cost considerations (approx. £6,000 per review). An action plan is in place, and work is already underway to address the recommendations. Members observed that gateway reviews provide only a snapshot in time and raised concerns about a statement in the report suggesting £536 million of Swansea Bay funding compared to £1.3 million spent to date, which they felt was misleading. Officers explained that the figure represents total investment reported and defrayed, currently around £542 million, and agreed to recheck the factual accuracy, though they cannot alter the narrative unless incorrect. Members also noted references in the report to regeneration opportunities and office space, commenting that much of the content was already known and offered little new information. They asked if there were any updates since the review. Officers clarified that assurance reviews focus on forward-looking actions to unblock issues, not retrospective evaluation, and reiterated that the key recommendations relate to benefit management and resourcing. Officers will review the highlighted sections for accuracy but believe the report is factually correct, though its positioning may have caused confusion. Following Scrutiny the report was noted.
Jonathan Burnes presented a report on the introduction of a project closure template requested by project teams. The template will apply to the 39 deliverables across the City Deal, including infrastructure, apprenticeships, and pilot projects. Developed by the Portfolio Management Office (PMO) in collaboration with project managers, it incorporates best practice from sources such as WEFO and Levelling Up Fund. The template includes 14 sections (not all mandatory) and covers lessons learned, evaluation of outcomes, performance, risks, and outstanding issues. Guidance notes have been issued, and PMO will support completion. Some projects, such as the Technology Centre, Arena, and Pembroke Dock infrastructure, will complete templates retrospectively. Completed reports will be submitted to governance, providing scrutiny with assurance that each project achieved its objectives and captured learning. Officers described this as good practice and confirmed implementation is underway. Members commended Jonathan Burned and the team for their progress, describing the delivery as a remarkable achievement, particularly for projects that will create a lasting legacy beyond construction. Officers acknowledged the complexity of the portfolio and noted that efforts are focused not only on building infrastructure but also on driving wider benefits, with further developments expected in the pipeline. Following Scrutiny the report was noted.
The Democratic Services officer confirmed there were no current updates but noted that, as discussed in Item 3 guidance would be sought from officers regarding the recent letter. This will be done in conjunction with the Chair, and the committee will be informed of any next steps or additional information following the meeting. 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.