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.
There were no declarations of interest received.
Members considered items from the Cabinet Forward Work Programme.
Members considered the report as circulated within the supplement pack. Rhiannon Crowhurst, Head of Support Services and Transformation, introduced the report. The policy followed consultation undertaken between June 2026 and July 2026. The consultation report was appended to the back of the document. The recommendation to Cabinet would be that the policy be adopted in October 2026 for implementation in September 2027. Members queried ongoing checks where a child had a Motability vehicle while the Council was also funding taxis or minibuses. Officers confirmed that this issue likely still existed. Welsh Government guidance and regulations did not provide powers to prevent a family already receiving an allowance from also receiving transport assistance. The authority could not ask parents whether they had a mobility car and could not refuse travel assistance on that basis because this was not covered by Welsh Government regulations. Gregor Burns Project Manager – Transformation and Support Services confirmed that anecdotal evidence still showed this was the case but there was nothing within the learner travel measure Wales policy that the authority could act upon. Members felt that the matter represented a significant cost to local authorities and taxpayers and should be addressed. Members urged that the cabinet write to Welsh Government in the first instance, and if necessary to Members of Parliament, to seek change so that the issue did not continue unresolved. The Chair proposed writing to the leader Councillor Hunt to set out the Committee’s concerns and to ask him to write to the relevant Cabinet Member in Welsh Government. Members indicated support for that course of action. Members placed on record thanks to Rhiannon Crowhurst and the team. Members said the policy had been before the Committee several times, had now gone as far as it could go, had taken account of previous discussions, and was now a good policy. Members also felt that more policy work of this quality would be welcomed. The vice chair questioned the consultation report. The report recorded 14 written responses and consultation drop-in centres. confirmed that a response received via the democratic services officer that morning identified the drop-in centre locations as Pontardawe, Briton Ferry and Neath town, with attendance figures of 0, 0 and 0. The vice chair said that 4,449 children were using assisted travel and that percentages were being used in the consultation report to show levels of agreement. In those circumstances, the vice chair considered the consultation worthless and said it created a public perception that the authority did not genuinely want consultation. Members also criticised the consultation times of 09:30 to 11:30, 10:00 to 12:00 and 09:30 to 11:30 as inaccessible for many users of the service. Rhiannon Crowhurst advised that the authority had not intended to exclude anyone. Learner travel assistance was used by a wide range of people from different backgrounds and there was no basis for saying the arrangements deliberately excluded anyone. Members were advised that the consultation was available online and that schools advertised it. Officers stated that pupils were spoken to and the Youth Council was consulted and governors were engaged. Officers had also been in drop-in centres and nobody attended them. It was also noted that no one had written to say they had been unable to access the consultation or unable to attend a meeting. Officers stated that they would have gone over and above to facilitate that if such issues had been raised. Officers added that officers were disappointed by the low response, particularly Gregor Burns, who had attended the venues in poor weather, but the authority still had to publish the document because of its strategy obligation. Members felt that the concern needed to be placed on record and was not directed only at Education. Members suggested the authority needed to review how consultations were undertaken across the board so that they were more valid and inviting for the public. Members also reiterated support for the quality of the report itself and for the policy review. The Chair then asked whether a database of email addresses was held for people using assisted travel and whether the consultation had been sent directly to those individuals. Officers confirmed that home addresses were held and email addresses where provided, but the authority had not sent the consultation directly to parents by email. The Chair suggested that direct electronic circulation might help parents respond in the evening. Officers accepted that this could be considered in future consultations, although it would involve additional work. Members stated that a tremendous amount of work had clearly gone into the report and considered it to be in a strong position and felt that a better model for public consultation had been used for the integrated impact assessment relating to the rugby club fence in Baglan, where a long day session in Baglan Library had made the process accessible and generated a good response. Following scrutiny, the recommendation was supported to Cabinet.
Members scrutinised the scrutiny forward work programme item.
Members considered the report as circulated within the agenda pack. Rhiannon Crowhurst introduced the report as a combined report on current Pathways to Progression work and the future Trefelin Pathways to Progression Centre. Pathways to Progression had been funded through SPF until that funding ended, and alternative funding had now been secured to continue the work until March 2027. The two elements had been brought together because both related to pathways. Officers explained that that funding had been secured only in recent weeks after a lengthy process with Welsh Government, which had supported the concept but had initially struggled to align it with existing funding programmes. Work on the building should begin soon. The project was regarded as important and innovative, and other local authorities were already asking about developing something similar. Karen Thomas 14- 19 Lead Practitioner gave a presentation on the centre. Karen Thomas confirmed that the building image previously published in the media displayed the name Skills Hub, but the facility had now been named Trefelin Pathways to Progression. Members were advised that National qualifications would change from September 2027 under Welsh Government’s vocational education strategy, which was intended to create parity of esteem between academic and vocational pathways. There would be nearly 30 new qualifications, including VCSE and Foundation for Work qualifications, as well as the new Skills for Work and Life qualification replacing the Welsh Baccalaureate. That qualification contained 47 units. Detailed specifications were not due until September 2026. Although parity existed on paper, equity did not yet exist in practice because not all pupils would be able to access all qualifications and many schools were limited to classroom-based vocational provision rather than workshop environments. Karen Thomas outlined the intended layout of the building. The centre would provide childcare, animal care, a computer room, engineering, construction, plastering, tiling, outdoor learning, horticulture, hospitality and catering on the lower floor. The upper floor would provide careers, esports, travel and tourism, retail, creative media, beauty and hair. Sports were not planned because schools already had sports facilities. Motor vehicles would be supported through the engineering space and the garage at Ysgol Bae Baglan. Provision for nature and the environment and public services would depend on final qualification specifications. A small interview room near the learner entrance would also function as a podcast studio following recommendations from learners. The external area would provide a separate materials delivery entrance and an outdoor learning and construction skills area. A covered atrium with bleacher seating would enable larger workshops, careers fairs and showcase events. Members were advised that the centre would replicate real workplace settings. The childcare room would resemble a working nursery, the animal care room a working veterinary practice, and the aim across all vocational areas was to familiarise learners with equipment, working conditions and employer engagement. Officers explained that vocational education needed to be delivered properly in workshop environments. Pathways to Progression currently operated in schools but was constrained by the available rooms and facilities. Recent vocational taster activity for Year 9 pupils had reached around 160 pupils across three or four schools over the previous three weeks, and support had also been given to work experience and internship programmes. The centre was intended not only for school-time use but also for wider community use throughout the year. The Chair thanked Rhiannon Crowhurst and Karen Thomas for their work and said the project was exceptional and would benefit generations to come. A local councillor expressed strong support for the proposal and said expanded vocational opportunities were long overdue in Port Talbot. The member asked for clarification about the intended cohort of pupils. The report referred to learners with additional learning needs, pupils with persistent low attendance linked to disengagement, and those at risk of permanent exclusion. Members asked what disengagement meant in this context and said there should be no perception that Trefelin was mainly for pupils with behavioural difficulties or exclusion risk. Members also asked for clarification on community use, saying that because of the scale of investment and the location of the centre, local people should see it as a community asset as well as an educational facility. Rhiannon Crowhurst explained that Trefelin was not a dumping ground and not a place for pupils whom schools could not manage. The centre was focused on vocational education and was intended to be open to any Year 10 or Year 11 pupil across the borough. It was not only for lower-level learners and not for children with behavioural difficulties. Places would be limited and criteria would be necessary. Priority would go in the first instance to pupils who were disengaged from the academic curriculum and at risk of leaving Year 11 with no qualifications. Since Covid, attendance had reduced and had not returned to pre-pandemic levels, and schools were saying that some pupils were switched off by the academic curriculum. Those pupils might still attend some lessons or might only attend one or two practical lessons each week. Trefelin was intended to stop such pupils leaving with no qualifications. Pupils at risk of exclusion would only be considered where the school curriculum was not the right fit and a vocational route might keep them engaged. Karen Thomas added that the centre should be understood as a specialist vocational qualification and pathways centre. Vocational pathways could also lead to careers such as law and medicine, and the centre was intended to enhance vocational opportunities and demonstrate the full range of progression routes. A local councillor welcomed the clearer emphasis on vocational education but referred to wording on page 13 of the report that gave priority to pupils linked to disengagement and at risk of exclusion. The member said that this wording did not fully align with the assurances just given and asked that the wording be reviewed so that places appeared focused on pupils who wanted vocational pathways rather than on exclusion risk. The member also asked for more detail on how places vacated at Ysgol Hendrefelin would be managed when pupils attended Trefelin, whether there would be any staffing implications there, and whether the transport arrangements discussed previously remained in place. The member said it had previously been proposed that a bus would collect pupils from around the borough and take them to the centre without parental drop-off. Members asked what budget would fund that transport and whether the same arrangements would apply during holiday periods. Members also referred to wording on page 15 suggesting that Trefelin may not be used as a community building and asked for clarification. Members also asked for reassurance that the project would not impede the search for a new additional learning needs school site. Officers accepted that the wording about pupils at risk of exclusion needed to be revised and said the report would be reworded to make clear that no pupil would attend simply because they were at risk of exclusion. Trefelin would only be appropriate where the curriculum offer in the school was not meeting the young person’s needs and where they wanted vocational education. Where wider behavioural or emotional difficulties were present, Trefelin would not be the right setting. On the new ALN specialist school, officers said the authority was very keen for that school to be built and the only barrier was identifying a suitable site in Neath Port Talbot. Welsh Government approval had been obtained, and the authority knew what it wanted to deliver, but appropriate land had not yet been found. Once the Felindre site at Trefelin could close, the empty building there could potentially offer opportunities to expand provision further. Officers confirmed that the reference suggesting the building may not be used by the community was a typographical error. The intention was for significant community use. Holiday provision, if developed, would be for small groups rather than large numbers, and transport arrangements for holiday periods had not yet been worked through. During school holidays, with Trefelin and local schools shut, there would be no major traffic issue, and it might be possible for parents to drop off if necessary. Rhiannon Crowhurst then addressed transport. A core staffing structure would be funded centrally or through grant funding. Schools had already committed to buying into the provision and Karen Thomas had developed a business plan intended to ensure the building’s running costs were covered rather than to generate profit. Transport was recognised as both a practical and financial barrier for schools. The current proposal was to add transport costs into the overall cost of the provision and to use the Council’s own fleet. An example was given of children already travelling to an ALN unit such as at Dwr-y-Felin. Those journeys could potentially be undertaken by the Council’s own fleet, with the same vehicle then taking pupils on to Trefelin. This would be a cost-effective way to support the project and also test greater in-house provision for home-to-school transport. The arrangement would likely involve minibuses or 16-seater vehicles with pupils grouped by cluster and by day. There would be no parental transport to the centre during normal school delivery. Pupils would remain registered at their own schools, which would prepare them for travelling to the centre and back. A local councillor then queried why those transport arrangements were not reflected in the learner travel assistance policy. Rhiannon Crowhurst replied that they could not be included because they were not funded from the statutory transport budget and therefore sat outside the policy. These would be separate internal arrangements of the type already used for school trips and similar activity. Members also returned to the issue of backfilling places at Ysgol Hendrefelin. Rhiannon Crowhurst clarified that pupils attending Trefelin would come from across the borough rather than en masse from Ysgol Hendrefelin. Hendrefelin pupils might access some provision, but only in small groups or as individuals. Where larger groups attended from any school, that school would be expected to send a member of staff on the bus and into the centre to support safeguarding and share practice. Attendance at Trefelin would not create vacant places for other pupils to fill at Ysgol Hendrefelin. Members said this differed from earlier understanding and asked to be kept updated, particularly because school budget pressures could affect whether transport remained available. In relation to community use, Rhiannon Crowhurst advised that detailed arrangements had not yet been finalised, but once the building was available there would be an opportunity for the community to view it through an open day or evening event. The childcare area was intended to involve real children and real parents from the community through sessions such as coffee mornings, parents’ mornings and mother and toddler groups, enabling students to interact with families in realistic settings. The catering area in the atrium would potentially host structured community coffee mornings, although it could not operate as a fully open public café because of safeguarding requirements. Community groups could potentially lease facilities in the evenings or during holidays, and discussions were already taking place with the Youth Service about youth club provision. Karen Thomas explained that the esports room, podcast studio and other spaces could also support community activity, but further conversations with the community were needed to identify what local provision was missing and how the building could best respond. Members stated the enthusiasm shown by Rhiannon Crowhurst and Karen Thomas gave confidence that the project would succeed. Members asked to see the internal layout plans, asked whether the building would be fully disability compliant including lift access between floors, and asked what had happened to the Grade II listed clock tower and chimney. Members also sought assurance on long-term funding, staffing and sustainability. Questions were raised about whether schools would buy back the service through a service level agreement type approach, where specialist tutors would come from, whether this would recreate some of the former college-style vocational offer, and whether reliance on short-term grant funding such as SPF could be avoided. Rhiannon Crowhurst confirmed that the building would be fully DDA compliant, including lift access, and that advice had also been taken regarding visually impaired learners. A figure of around £13 million was cited as the current estimate for refurbishment because of the age of the building and the issues being uncovered as work progressed. Rhiannon Crowhurst did not have information on the clock tower and said that point would need to be checked with colleagues in Environment. Rhiannon Crowhurst also confirmed that Neath Port Talbot College had been involved in discussions. The college had initially been concerned that the Council was moving into its area of work, but it had been reassured that Trefelin was only for Year 10 and Year 11 learners and would support transition into further education by making progression to college less daunting. In relation to staffing, Rhiannon Crowhurst said that the current Pathways to Progression tutors would form the core skeleton staff in the centre. A business case was being prepared to seek core funding for those posts because grants such as SPF were short term and the authority needed to retain good staff rather than risk losing them before the centre opened. Additional school buy-in would fund any extra courses requested. Officers explained that there were currently three full-time tutors, with one being part-time as childcare and IQA lead but able to teach full-time on the courses. Staff came from vocational industry backgrounds. Current delivery capacity already covered childcare, travel and tourism, hospitality, retail, customer service, business administration, construction, and health and safety in the construction industry. Schools had also asked for support with interview preparation and CV writing, which the tutors could provide because of their employment background. Councillors praised both the reuse of the building and the business case approach. Councillors asked how predicted income figures had been calculated. Rhiannon Crowhurst replied that estimates had been based on the known historic running costs of the building when it had been old and draughty, along with energy assumptions, comparisons, advice and common-sense judgement. Those figures had been revisited repeatedly and represented the most accurate estimates currently possible, although there could be no guarantees. The schools remained the key partners and if they withdrew the provision could not operate, although schools would still need to find some way of meeting pupils’ vocational needs. Karen Thomas added that the income projections in the report had been deliberately cautious. They were based on the number of courses that could be delivered each day by the available tutors, with class sizes capped at 12 learners and an assumed range of 8 to 10 learners to provide a buffer. Because the new VCSEs could only be introduced to Year 10 learners in 09/2027, year one income assumptions were based on only half-capacity delivery. External provider charges, staffing costs and possible building costs had all been considered. No substantial commercial income had yet been built into the projections, although some commercial use might later generate further income. Members welcomed the fact that discussions had already taken place with the colleges and said progression beyond the centre was important. Members remained concerned about transport for schools in the valleys, particularly given financial pressures. There was a risk that some schools might decide they could not make this a priority. Members asked whether there were plans to identify grants or other support to help schools meet transport costs. Rhiannon Crowhurst replied that schools already received 14 to 19 funding directly, whereas in earlier years this funding had first come to the local authority and then been delegated. Schools already used that funding to buy in external vocational provision, training and support from various providers, including the college and skills and training services. Transport and timetabling were major barriers, and Trefelin was designed to solve those. The authority would continue to pursue any available funding and ensure schools were aware of it. Support for the project existed across the Council, and any suitable central education funding would be directed towards it where possible. Members asked whether Key Stage 3 pupils could potentially benefit from the centre in the future, as disengagement often began earlier than Key Stage 4. Members also asked whether links with the Youth Service could allow youth clubs to use the specialist facilities outside school hours. Rhiannon Crowhurst replied that the authority did not want to run before it could walk but accepted that vocational education should begin much earlier and should form a continuum from nursery onward. Taster days for primary schools had already been discussed, particularly once Year 11 learners had left and capacity existed. Rhiannon Crowhurst also confirmed that the Youth Service sat within the same portfolio and that regular discussions were taking place with Jason. The top floor would include hot-desking office space for centre staff and for services such as the Youth Service and the School-Based Counselling Service. The aim was to make the building feel different from a school and to enable young people to access support there in a more appropriate setting. Any reasonable ideas for using the building to benefit young people would be considered. Members asked whether there would be any opportunity for local Members to be represented on the management board, given that the centre would not have a governing body like a school, and asked whether the committee could be sent the document governing the management structure, referred to as the Education Pupil Referral Units Regulation 2014. Rhiannon Crowhurst added that there would be one local authority representative on the management committee and that this could potentially be a local Member. One possibility suggested was an Education Scrutiny Member, but the matter remained open for discussion. Following scrutiny the report was noted.
There were no performance monitoring items selected.
The following were added to the Forward work Programme: • Scrutiny of appeals process in comprehensive schools. • Report on ESTYN outcomes and what needs to happen to support equality in Schools when resources are not available to them. Members also requested that they receive copies of the Estyn reports when they are made public. The Forward Work Programme was noted.
There was 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.