Loading
The decisions as the council's minutes record them. A plain-language summary follows once it has been written.
Resolved: to exclude the public for the following item(s) pursuant to Section 100A(4) and (5) of the Local Government Act 1972 and the relevant exempt paragraphs of Part 4 of Schedule 12A to the above Act.
The Chair welcomed everyone to the meeting.
There were no declarations of interest received.
The minutes of the meeting held on 8th September 2025 were approved as a true and accurate record.
Members considered the items from the Cabinet Forward Work Programme.
Members considered the report as circulated within the agenda pack. Members queried if there is a place for a lower level requirement so that buildings can be identified in each of the wards that would be useful, in the event of a storm. It was identified during the feedback from Storm Darragh that members had difficulty in contacting Community and Town Councils, and determining where people could go within their local communities for tea, coffee etc. Officers noted that objective number 4 within the Resilience Strategy focuses on community resilience and is looking at developing those plans with members. Officers will be discussing with elected members in order to try and implement a plan in relation to this. However, it was noted that it is important that details around resourcing are kept sensitive. Individual ward members will be made aware of resourcing within their specific wards. With regards to local community assistance it would typically not be a facility that is within control of the local authority. For example. community buildings that elected members might be key holders of that could be implemented directly by elected members and the authority can be notified that they are being used. The authority can also be notified if something more advanced is required, to perhaps enhance it into a rest centre. Members queried the details of the Impact Assessments that have been completed and the level of consideration that has been given to them. Officers confirmed that the strategies that have been developed are quite high level and were never intended to provide all the detail of what will happen should a major incident occur. The detailed plans will sit under the strategies and those plans themselves will be subject to Impact Assessments too. The Director of Strategy & Corporate Services agreed that it was a fair point to raise in general about the quality of the integrated impact assessments and that they do vary quite significantly across the authority, depending who the report authors are. Members were informed that there is a piece of work to be carried out to ensure that there is good quality and best practice in place for all reports. This is a piece of work that will be taken forward. Members queried how the authority is measuring its readiness to maintain critical services during major incidents? Officers confirmed in terms of performance, each service lead is being asked to provide a business impact assessment or analysis work, along with business continuity plans. Workshops are being delivered specifically to service leads, which should encourage the uptake of delivering plans and the impact analysis pieces of work. Quarterly monitoring will be set up with each of the service leads to assess the maturity of business continuity amongst all the services. A recent audit as part of Digital Services recently identified that there is a need to focus on business continuity, particularly in response to cyber and cyber resilience. Officers confirmed that they would be looking for facilities suitable to deal with a local response, to form a community hub that people will be able to access during an emergency but not coordinated by the Council. However, it was noted that, depending on the nature and scale of the incident, the responsibility reverts back to the local authority to provide rest centre facilities to respond as required, using larger local authority designated sites. Following scrutiny, members noted the report.
Members considered the report as circulated within the agenda pack. Members referred to the Neighbourhood Improvement Plan, which has an identified budget of £2.5million. The comment identifies that the proposal is currently being developed. Further, in relation to Milland Road Footbridge, it indicates that discussions are ongoing, and a budget of £100k. Officers were asked if they had any updates in relation to either of these items. Officers advised with regards to the Neighbourhood Improvement Plan, Cabinet have already approved half a million of the funding to be used to refurbish play parks across the county. Officers are currently looking at projects for the remaining funds. The programme will be delivered over three years and reports will be coming back for prioritisation and timescale. In terms of Milland Road footbridge, discussions are ongoing with Network Rail about the ownership of the footbridge and the future ownership. The intention for the Neighbourhood Imrpovement Programme is to have a schedule from the Environment Directorate around what they consider potential projects and then this will be discussed with members. Officer advised that they are constantly learning lessons around the delivery of projects and programmes. Members sought clarity with regards to the Share Prosperity Fund and what happens to funding if projects are not delivered. It was confirmed that currently there is not expected to be any loss of the share prosperity fund. Officers advised there is likely to be slippage on some projects, so the grant money has been effectively over committed. This ensures that there is balance of delivery against grants. However, if there is an underspend, this grant funding is returned. Following scrutiny, the report was noted.
Members considered the report as circulated within the agenda pack. No questions were raised. The report was noted.
Members considered the report as circulated within the agenda pack. Members were informed that back in June there was a projected overspend of £3.6million, with the vast majority of it being within Social Services and Community Safety, where some of the transformation programme savings have slipped from the current year to next year. This means that there will be an overspend. However, officers are confident that the savings will be delivered in their entirety over the course of the next couple of years. Members referred to the chipper that was identified within the report. It was noted that it was stolen and there was a contribution of £31,500 from reserves used to replace the chipper. Members queried if the piece of equipment was insured? Officer advised that they would confirm this and provide a response following the meeting. With regards to the projected overspend from the Princess Royal Theatre during its closure, there is reference to reducing it by exploring temporary redeployment of staff. Members sought confirmation if this had progressed. It was confirmed that one member of staff has been moved to a grant funded programme, which has slightly reduced the overspend. Members referred to the unachieved vacancy factor identified on page 221. Officers outlined that the vacancy factor is applied to every directorate and then it gets allocated out to individuals within the service. The onus is on the corporate director to achieve the overall vacancy factor. It was noted that if there is a vacancy in Trem Y Mor, it has to be staffed. However, it was confirmed that Social Services as a directorate are achieving their 5% vacancy factor. The Trem Y Mor vacancy has been reported as it’s a significant variance against the budget. Page 222 references the Financial Assessments Team having issues and delays in their IT systems and outlining that there might not be enough comprehensive data available. Members were keen to understand what elements of the budget that data refers to in terms of that risk? Officers confirmed that it related to placement costs but indicated that they would provide a comprehensive answer following the meeting, as there were no officers from Social Services to outline the detail. Members referred to the overspend in relation to car parking. The comment relating to it outlines that it has never reached the required level. Members queried if the base budget is being reviewed. Officers confirmed that when the budget is set for the forthcoming year, consideration will be given to right-size the budget. Members also referred to the waste disposal budget, which has a significant overspend. Officers were asked if there was an indication if this is likely to be a long-term issue or whether it’s a temporary spike? In terms of forward planning with the budget, members queried if consideration would need to be given to changing the budget. Officers advised that they are monitoring this item as costs do vary significantly dependent upon supply and demand. It will need to be determined if the increase in costs is a temporary issue due to supply and demand. It was noted by members that whilst Education and Social Services have identified risks, there are no risks identified for Environment within the document. Members were informed that this was an oversight, and they would be included in future reports. The Working Group for Home to School Transport was raised by members. It was confirmed that the Director of Strategy & Corporate Services was leading the group, and it consists of representative from the Transport Team within the Environment Directorate, Heads of Service from Education, together with colleagues from Finance, Procurement and Legal. Key areas have been identified within the project, and a report will be shared with members following internal discussions. Members looked forward to receiving information on the outcome of those discussions. Members expressed their concern at the projected £8.7million projected deficit at the year end in relation to school budgets. It was noted that this was not mentioned as a risk within the report. Members queried what is being done to support schools overall? Officers outlined the gap between what the authority funds and what is provided by the authority for supporting identified Individual Development Plans. The authority recognises the difficulties for school in funding these plans and this is being taken into account for budget planning. Officers would circulate further information with regards to the review of the school funding formula. Members also asked for the risks identified to be included in the risk analysis. Following scrutiny, the report was noted.
Members considered the report as circulated within the agenda pack. Page 256 refers to recommendations from the service user perspective work done by Audit Wales and there are three recommendations which are identified as continuing to be progressed. Members sought further commentary around the work about understanding service user perspective for officers and senior leaders and what has been done to improve this? Officers outlined to members that the results from the WLGA survey that was carried out have been received and a report will be brought forward outlining the results. The survey will be carried out annually so that progress can continually be monitored. Members referred to the medium term financial plan, which is included on page 283 as part of the action plan. Members noted that it has been part of the self-assessment for a long period and queried if the MTFP was likely to be ready for March 2026. Officers confirmed that there will be a report going to Cabinet in March 2026. Following scrutiny, the recommendation was supported to Cabinet.
Members considered the report as circulated within the agenda pack. Members asked officers to advise what the changes are between this document and the previous version. Officers were keen to ensure that the compact builds upon the many years as a partnership working within the sector. It has been brought up to date in terms of the challenges that are now being faced, and these are set out in the revised document. Whilst there has always been a shared vision between the partnership, the document now also includes a set of shared objectives. Following scrutiny, the recommendation was supported to Cabinet.
There were no public items to consider.
Members considered the performance monitoring items.
Members considered the report as circulated within the agenda pack. There were no questions received. Members noted the report.
Members considered the report as outlined within the agenda pack. There were no questions raised in relation to the report. Members raised concerns about the size of the agenda and volume of documents to read. Officers advised that should any questions arise outside of the meeting, officers were happy to receive these and respond accordingly. Members supported the recommendation to Cabinet.
Members considered the report as circulated within the agenda pack. Members referred to the commentary outlined in the report around the recording of compliments and complaints accurately across all parts of the Council, and that the increase in figures is likely as a result of improved accuracy in recording. Members queried if officers are confident that departments across the Council are recording these things consistently and accurately? It was confirmed that Internal Audit had undertaken a review of the complaints and compliments process and how it was being adhered to by all directorates. There were some recommendations from the report, and an action plan has been put in place to address the recommendations. A recommendation raised was to ensure that there is better consistency and approach in how complaints are handled. Further there is a desire to look at more central triaging of complaints and ensuring that there is a clear recording of service requests and complaints. There is a focus on strengthening the process to ensure that there is greater openness and transparency. Members noted that this also relates to service user perspective and ensuring that complaints are captured appropriately so that accurate trends can be identified. It is important to be careful around vastly inflating figures, but it is correct to ensure that lessons are being learned and data is captured accurately. Following scrutiny, members noted the report.
Members considered the report as outlined in the agenda pack. Members noted the report.
The committee added the following reports to the Forward Work Programme: · Let’s Talk Living in Neath Port Talbot Residents Survey 2025 · Strategic Risk Register Quarter 2 update · Third Sector Grant Scheme – Outcome of Review and Interim Arrangements 2026/2027 The Forward Work Programme was noted.
There were no urgent items.
Decision as recorded
Resolved: to exclude the public for the following item(s) pursuant to Section 100A(4) and (5) of the Local Government Act 1972 and the relevant exempt paragraphs of Part 4 of Schedule 12A to the above Act.
Resolved: to exclude the public for the following item(s) pursuant to Section 100A(4) and (5) of the Local Government Act 1972 and the relevant exempt paragraphs of Part 4 of Schedule 12A to the above Act.
Members considered the private items.
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.