Loading
The decisions as the council's minutes record them. A plain-language summary follows once it has been written.
RESOLVED: That Councillor S.K.Hunt be appointed as Vice Chairperson.
RESOLVED: • That the Strategic Development Plan Draft Delivery Agreement, as presented in Appendices 1-7 of the circulated report, be approved and the formal consultation exercise to commence; • That a response in the form of a letter be drafted and circulated to the South West Wales Corporate Joint Committee - Overview and Scrutiny Sub-Committee detailing the points raised within the Committee.
The Chairperson welcomed everyone to the meeting.
There were no declarations of interest received.
Decision as recorded
RESOLVED: That Councillor S.K.Hunt be appointed as Vice Chairperson.
RESOLVED: That Councillor S.K.Hunt be appointed as Vice Chairperson.
The following sets of minutes were approved as a true and accurate record: • 18 November 2025 at 9.00am • 18 November 2025 at 10.00am • 27 November 2025
Decision as recorded
RESOLVED: • That the Strategic Development Plan Draft Delivery Agreement, as presented in Appendices 1-7 of the circulated report, be approved and the formal consultation exercise to commence; • That a response in the form of a letter be drafted and circulated to the South West Wales Corporate Joint Committee - Overview and Scrutiny Sub-Committee detailing the points raised within the Committee.
Members were presented with the draft Delivery Agreement for the South West Wales Strategic Development Plan (SDP), which constituted a statutory requirement for the South West Wales Corporate Joint Committee (SWWCJC) under the Town and Country Planning (Strategic Development Plan) (Wales) Regulations 2021. It was stated that the draft Delivery Agreement set out how the region would manage, resource, and timetable the preparation of the SDP, ensuring that the plan was developed in a transparent, inclusive, and well‑governed manner. Members were informed that it outlined the programme of work from initial evidence gathering through public consultation, examination, and eventual adoption; and identified the eight formal stages required to produce the SDP, from establishing the scope and calling for candidate strategic sites through to independent examination and adoption. Following on from the above, it was highlighted that the Delivery Agreement emphasised the importance of robust resourcing to enable effective and timely delivery of the programme, alongside meaningful community involvement; it also detailed how and when communities and stakeholders would be engaged throughout the process. The SDP was noted as providing a long‑term strategic land‑use framework to guide sustainable growth, coordinate regional priorities, and support future generations. The circulated report sought Members approval for the draft Delivery Agreement to go out to consultation and to formalise the programme underpinning development of the SDP. It was proposed that the consultation would be undertaken over a five‑week period, following which a further report would be brought back to the SWWCJC for consideration. The Committee were informed that the circulated report had previously been considered by the Overview and Scrutiny Sub Committee, who raised concerns regarding the availability of funding to deliver the SDP; a letter from the Overview and Scrutiny Sub Committee and the response to those concerns had been published as a supplementary agenda for this meeting. It was emphasised that the approach proposed followed that adopted in North Wales and the Cardiff Capital Region, which had been accepted in principle by the Welsh Government. Members were reminded of the statutory requirement to prepare the SDP and advised that failure to do so could expose the SWWCJC to legal challenge. Members noted the scrutiny observations requesting clarification on the funding profile, including contingencies and the timing of commitments, confirmation of the proposed staffing arrangements to discharge statutory functions, and assurance that identified inaccuracies would be corrected prior to proceeding to consultation. Officers confirmed that a full response would be provided to the Overview and Scrutiny Sub‑Committee. Further to the above, it was acknowledged that ideally full funding would be secured and confirmed for the duration of the programme; however, this was currently not the case. The Chairperson advised that progress must be based on the information available, and that not proceeding at this stage could place future funding at risk; this position had informed the proposal brought before the Committee. It was mentioned that no specific invitation had been issued for the Chairperson of the SWWCJC to attend the Overview and Scrutiny Sub Committee meeting to address concerns directly. It was agreed that the Monitoring Officer for the SWWCJC would feed this back to the Overview and Scrutiny Sub Committee and remind them of existing scrutiny procedures rules. Officers reiterated the statutory obligation placed on the SWWCJC to progress the SDP, with preparation of the Delivery Agreement forming the first stage. Members were advised that Officers had undertaken significant lobbying with Welsh Government to secure funding, recognising the financial and staffing resources required to prepare the SDP; similar representations had been made by other regions across Wales. It was reported that correspondence from Welsh Government had indicated the availability of two tranches of funding to incentivise progression of the SDP, with associated timescales; this had necessitated the early submission of the Delivery Agreement for Member consideration. Consultation was proposed with a view to submitting the Delivery Agreement to Welsh Government before the end of the financial year. Members were advised that successful completion of consultation and submission could enable eligibility for two funding tranches of £100,000 each, to support commencement of SDP preparation. Officers confirmed that work would then be undertaken with regional partners to incorporate SDP costs into the Medium‑Term Financial Plan for the SWWCJC, in line with approaches being followed in the other regions. While financial challenges were acknowledged, Officers advised that the risk of legal challenge and the strategic importance of the SDP in shaping transport, economic development, and housing outweighed the risks associated with progressing at this stage. Members expressed ongoing concerns regarding both financial and staffing resources, particularly given capacity pressures across organisations and within planning policy functions. In addition to the above, Members commented on the importance of meaningful consultation, noting that while the statutory minimum was five weeks, longer periods should be considered where possible to maximise engagement; the value of both virtual engagement and face‑to‑face opportunities was emphasised, given the significance of the SDP for communities across the region. Officers responded that the Delivery Agreement included a statutory Community Involvement Scheme and confirmed that flexibility would be applied where appropriate. It was noted that consultation periods had previously been extended in certain circumstances, such as holiday periods, to maximise participation; Officers agreed on the importance of securing wide‑ranging public and stakeholder input to strengthen the effectiveness of the SDP. Co‑opted Members representing the health sector offered the full support and engagement of the health boards during the consultation process. The contribution of health boards in relation to health infrastructure, service capacity, and wider health considerations was highlighted. Officers welcomed the offer of engagement and confirmed that health boards, as statutory stakeholders, would be fully involved throughout the SDP process, in line with existing engagement on Local Development Plans and future “lite” plans following adoption of the SDP; ensuring sufficient health infrastructure across the region was recognised as an important consideration. The Committee were also informed that the Leader of Neath Port Talbot Council had recently met with the Cabinet Secretary for Economy and Planning and had raised both the funding challenges and the concerns raised by Members. RESOLVED: • That the Strategic Development Plan Draft Delivery Agreement, as presented in Appendices 1-7 of the circulated report, be approved and the formal consultation exercise to commence; • That a response in the form of a letter be drafted and circulated to the South West Wales Corporate Joint Committee - Overview and Scrutiny Sub-Committee detailing the points raised within the Committee.
The Forward Work Programme was noted.
There were no urgent items received.
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.