Loading
The decisions as the council's minutes record them. A plain-language summary follows once it has been written.
RESOLVED That the report be noted.
RESOLVED That the Forward Work Programme be approved, subject to the following additions: a) Celtic Freeport Update b) Enforced Sales Procedure and Protocol for Dealing with Long term problematic Empty Properties
RESOLVED That the updates to the Policy be noted.
RESOLVED That the report be noted. Due to the nature of her personal interest, Councillor Michele Wiggins abstained from voting.
RESOLVED That the report be endorsed.
The Chair thanked Councillor Jordan Ryan for this work with chairing the Committee in the last meeting cycle.
Councillor Simon Hancock Moved that Councillor Aled Thomas be duly elected; Seconded by Councillor Claire George. The vote, undertaken by way of a show of hands, was carried. RESOLVED That Councillor Aled Thomas be elected Vice-Chair for the ensuing Municipal Year.
There were no non-committee members wishing to speak.
Councillor Michele Wiggins declared a personal interest in respect of Agenda Item No.11 - Draft School Transport Policy 2026-2027 by virtue of the fact that her daughter received bus transportation to Pembrokeshire College.
Councillor Aled Thomas Moved that the Minutes of the Meeting held on the 20 March 2025 be approved as a correct record; Seconded by Councillor Brian Hall. The vote, undertaken by way of a show of hands, was carried. RESOLVED That the Minutes of the Meeting held on 20 March 2025 be approved as a correct record.
Decision as recorded
RESOLVED That the report be noted.
Regarding the Action Log, Councillor Mike James confirmed that he had received the information he requested from the Head of Planning. The Democratic Services and Scrutiny Officer clarified that she was awaiting an update on the two outstanding actions from the relevant officer. In response to this, the Chair expressed his disappointment with the lack of response from the relevant officer as they had over two months to provide an update. Councillor Alan Dennison concurred with this, and he suggested that this be escalated to more senior officers. In response, the Chair agreed to raise the issue himself with senior officers after the meeting. The Recommendation was Moved by Councillor Claire George; Seconded by Councillor Brian Hall. The votes, undertaken by way of a show of hands, were carried. RESOLVED That the report be noted.
There was no public correspondence.
Decision as recorded
RESOLVED That the Forward Work Programme be approved, subject to the following additions: a) Celtic Freeport Update b) Enforced Sales Procedure and Protocol for Dealing with Long term problematic Empty Properties
Following a request from officers, it was agreed by the Committee that the Celtic Freeport would be added to the agenda for September’s meeting. As the item was withdrawn from this meeting, the Chair confirmed that the ‘Enforced Sales Procedure and Protocol for Dealing with Long term problematic Empty Properties’ item would be added onto the work programme for September’s meeting and be presented there. In response to a question from Councillor Thomas on why the ‘Enforced Sales Procedure and Protocol for Dealing with Long term problematic Empty Properties’ item was withdrawn, the Chair clarified that more work needed to be done on the report, and this was why it was withdrawn. He reiterated that it would be presented at September’s meeting. It was clarified that the ‘Rights of Way Improvement Plan’ at September’s meeting would be looking at the rights of way policy and not the delivery plan. In response to a question from Councillor Huw Murphy regarding the Council’s translation facilities, the Chair said that this would be part of Corporate OSCs remit. Regarding the Poverty Strategy planned for September’s meeting Councillor Dennison queried who was on the Poverty Strategy Working Group. It was agreed that the Head of Children’s Services would be contacted regarding this. Moved by Councillor Simon Hancock; Seconded by Councillor Brian Hall. The vote, undertaken by way of a show of hands, was carried. RESOLVED That the Forward Work Programme be approved, subject to the following additions: a) Celtic Freeport Update b) Enforced Sales Procedure and Protocol for Dealing with Long term problematic Empty Properties
This item was withdrawn and will be presented at September’s meeting.
Decision as recorded
RESOLVED That the updates to the Policy be noted.
The Committee considered a report by the Director of Resources with an update on the current Corporate Debt Policy. The Finance Manager and relevant Cabinet Member for Finance and Corporate Efficiencies, Councillor Alistair Cameron highlighted key points from the report including that the policy had not been updated since 2021 and the Council’s auditors highlighted that I needed to be updated. The Council legally had to collect the money it was owed for services provided and all the amendments were highlighted in the report. Regarding vulnerable service users, the Chair queried if a quality impact assessment (QIA) had been carried out for them. In response, Finance Manager confirmed that a QIA was done when the policy was introduced. As QIAs should be reviewed regularly, the Chair said that it would be good to provide an updated one as the current QIA was seven years old. In response to a question from Councillor Dennison regarding the charging order against assets after securing the debt, the Finance Manager stated that there was a charging order previously against social care debts and this change allowed for it to be against all debts i.e. every service area could now have charging orders, if appropriate. As the report mentioned that a monthly scorecard would be provided for social care debts, Councillor Dennison queried if members could see the scorecard. He added that metrics had to be acted upon. In response, the Finance Manager agreed to share this if members requested it. The Debt Policy itself was updated after a request from Audit to enable more detailed monitoring of Social Care’s debt. He continued that after the Policy was first introduced, funding recovery rates for Social Care had improved significantly. [Councillor Bethan Price left the meeting at this juncture at 10:24] Regarding time scales, Councillor George questioned why some areas had time scales on them for action, but others did not for debt recovery. In response, the Revenues & Benefits Manager stated that not every area had time scales as a statutory process was followed but this varied monthly. Timetables are done for the year, and they need to incorporate statutory timetables and court dates. As a supplementary, Councillor George queried if there was a priority with resolving specific debts in certain orders. In response, the Revenues & Benefits Manager said that debts in rent arrears and council tax, tenant support officers would be brought in to see how much was owed from both; however, this was only applicable for council tenants. They were included in the statutory reminders and outstanding debts in these two areas were referred to the Citizen’s Advice Bureau for guidance. With regards to page 96 of the agenda pack, Councillor George expressed her concern with the terminology used for letters and accruing debts. Additionally, on page 97 it referenced how the customer could be supported; she said that the Council should define what was meant by support and that assurances should be put in to support service users. Regarding these concerns, the Finance Manager agreed to look at the wording and amend it prior to the report being presented to Cabinet. Councillor George questioned the difference between ‘notice of possession’ and ‘notice to quit’ and what was the decision-making process regarding this in house rentals. With house rentals, the Revenues & Benefits Manager said that they would normally go for possession first, but this would be determined by a court judge. She agreed to look at why both were referenced but it was likely because ‘notice to quit’ would be served by housing instead of revenues on cases that are abandoned. Regarding vulnerable people, Councillor Viv Stoddart requested more information on how the Council ‘will support [vulnerable people] in securing an appointee-ship or deputyship to manage their finances.’ In response, the Finance Manager confirmed that they would help them get the power of attorney, but he would check this with the Chief Officer for Social Care Business Operations and Migration. [Councillor Bethan Price rejoined the meeting at this juncture at 10:32] In terms of evictions, Councillor Stoddart asked for the number of evictions for the last couple of years to be shared with the committee to see if they increased or decreased. In response, the Revenues & Benefits Manager confirmed that there had been no evictions for several years, but some possession proceedings were planned over the next few months and the cases for this were being prepared. Court proceeding for this was a lot of work and there was a protocol that had to be followed. She continued that eviction proceedings were done if tenants did not engage with the Council. It was confirmed that evictions happened rarely and were a last report. Records of evictions were kept so these could be shared with the Committee. In response to a question from the Chair regarding evictions during the pandemic, the Finance Manager confirmed that there was a moratorium on debtors during the pandemic, but this had been lifted. Regarding the Policy in general, Councillor Thomas noted that it did not reference how much debt the Council was ‘holding back’. He queried if the previous Policy worked with debt recovery and what the debt levels were at present. During the moratorium, the Finance Manager confirmed that debts rose significantly and overall, this trend had reduced. To add to this, the Revenues & Benefits Manager said that all the procedures in the Policy were required by law. There were monthly reminders for arrears and court action was done as often as possible and court cases for debt collection were nearly every month. Enforcement agencies were being informed a lot quicker when they were previously. She continued that payment plans were set up to collect debt owed to the Council and all this progress showed that the Policy was working. Regarding figures on rent arrears, the Finance Manager said that accurate figures on this will be presented to July’s Cabinet meeting. The Chair asked for all officers to provide the figures for the questions asked in the meeting. With regards to rent arrears and enforcement, Councillor Thomas noted that he had a resident who received a court summons from the Council, even though they had paid their rent and council tax. After a freedom of information request, they were told that the Council issued 7578 court summons in 2022-23, 6801 summons in 2023-24 and 6617 summons for 2024-25. He requested clarity on the amount of court summons given and whether there was a fundamental issue with the system. The Revenues & Benefits Manager concurred that the figures were high and more court summons would be issued imminently as 2000 individuals were in arrears to the Council, so this was why there were a high number of reminders and summons sent annually. Summons would be sent if payments were paid late and she was not aware of any major issues in the current system. Regarding court summons, Councillor Dennison questioned what would happen with the court. For example, would the court get payments made over a set amount of time and would there be any late fees issued. Additionally, he asked if properties were given to people who had previously rent arrears in private properties or with council tax. In terms of court cases, the Finance Manager confirmed that court costs would be added to the amount of money that the person taken to court owes the Council. To add to this, the Revenues & Benefits Manager stated that at court, the Council was given a Liability Order which enables them to have powers to take further actions like attach the person’s earnings/benefits and do a charging order to get the debt paid. She noted that payment agreements would be made with the customer and enforcement agents would be administered if attachment was not possible and there was no engagement. Regarding people who were previously in arrears, she said that she could not confirm this because it was not her department. However, she did not expect a council tax debt to stop someone being housed. In response to this, Councillor Dennison questioned what the outcome was as it would be difficult to get someone to pay court costs when they would not pay rent. He queried if all the court costs were recovered and whether there was a cut off for this. Regarding rental arrears, the Revenues & Benefits Manager said that they would have to be eight weeks behind on their rent before legal action was taken and it was the court’s decision on how much of the court cost would be given back to the Council. This was the same for council tax collection. It was clarified that the Council could legally charge £70 for cases being taken to court. To add to this, the Finance Manager confirmed that each case was reviewed individually. If there were concerns that cost would not be obtained then this would be discussed with the Director of Resources. A Motion was Moved by Councillor Aled Thomas to the effect: That the updates to the Policy be noted. Seconded by Councillor Claire George. The vote, undertaken by way of a roll-call, was carried. The votes were recorded as follows: For the Motion – Councillors Simon Hancock, Brian Hall, Claire George, Aled Thomas, Alan Dennison, Michele Wiggins, Viv Stoddart, Huw Murphy, Nicola Gwynn and Mike James [10] Abstaining – Councillor Bethan Price [1] There were no votes against. RESOLVED That the updates to the Policy be noted.
Decision as recorded
RESOLVED That the report be noted. Due to the nature of her personal interest, Councillor Michele Wiggins abstained from voting.
The Committee considered a report by the Interim Head of Infrastructure and Environment with the Draft School Transport Policy for 2026-2027. Councillor Rhys Sinnet, the relevant Cabinet Member for Resident’s Services introduced the report stating that the consultation enabled them to make changes to the Policy and Welsh Government’s revised guidance on school transport will be implemented in 2027. To add to this, the Integrated Transport Unit Manager highlighted key points from the report including that the budget for school transport had increased to £9 million in recent years and that the consultation had respondents from every secondary school in Pembrokeshire and 40 primary schools. He presented the results of the consultation to the Committee and welcomed questions. Regarding the school appeal process, the Chair highlighted that there were a lot of different reasons why parents chose to send their children to schools of catchment; therefore, he asked how many appeals were upheld or rejected. Additionally, he queried if data was available for all students who travelled on each individual bus and what measures were in place to encourage new bus drivers to the profession. In response, the Integrated Transport Unit Manager stated that he did not have the specific data for school appeals, but a lot were not upheld and went to the Inclusion Panel and the appealers would need to argue why they required free school transport. If successfully appealed, it goes to the Integrated Transport Unit to review, and the Director of Education could review it too. He continued that the two-stage process with school transport appeals did not work because it was always appealed and it should be a decision made with one appeal granted. It would be decided whether an appeal panel with this should be an officer, member or mixed group. Due to the school appeals that some of his residents had progressed through, the Chair said that he was in favour of an appeal board being independent with external individuals being involved. In response, the Integrated Transport Unit Manager said that school, transport and if needed, medical specialists should be included in the process too. Regarding the other questions raised, the Integrated Transport Unit Manager said that there were 280 school bus routes provided by the Council and they relied on the bus drivers and operators to provide details of their route’s capacity. There had been suggestions of card readers or phone apps to scan onto and off their bus route, but this would cost £45,000 to run annually and would cost £135,000 to implement. This system would also be difficult regarding bus drivers as they were an aging work population. In response, the Chair said that having this live data would provide reassurance to parents. Regarding the driver’s situation, the Integrated Transport Unit Manager stated that Council applied to have a bus examiner centre which would accommodate bus drivers and HGV drivers. However, this was rejected as Pembrokeshire’s bus drivers had different permits compared to more generic commercial ones. He continued that the Council then tried to get an in-house bus examiner as this would enable them to hire bus drivers quicker as they were unable to hire qualified bus drivers previously. They were utilising apprenticeships to hire bus drivers too. As Pembrokeshire College students received subsidised school transport, Councillor Dennison queried if the College should be paying for part of this cost as free transport was not currently available for sixth form students. He also questioned when the planned review would take place. In response, the Integrated Transport Unit Manager said that all sixth forms will close so Pembrokeshire College would become the only place for post-16 education, and they were able to cater for all students. The College itself contributed £600,000 annually towards school transport provision. In terms of the planned review, he stated that the process started a year before implementation so they could resolve any issues ahead of implementation. Following a school visit to Narberth CP School, Councillor Huw Murphy highlighted that 336 pupils went to Ysgol Dyffryn Taf in Carmarthenshire, 60 received transport to Cardigan, and 20 to Newcastle Emlyn. This meant that a lot of budgets was spent on out of county transport which also led to schools in Pembrokeshire being earmarked for closure. Therefore, he queried why free school transport was given to schools out of Pembrokeshire but not for in county sixth forms, especially as it was not a service provided by neighbouring authorities. In response, the Integrated Transport Unit Manager said that legislation dictated that they had to provide transport to the child’s nearest school which could be out of county. 50 pupils in Cardigan went to Ysgol Bro Preseli which should be paid for by Ceredigion and Carmarthenshire provided transport for some pupils to go there too. Keeping pupils who lived near the border in county could end up costing more as there would be longer journeys to pay for. He agreed that this could be looked into. Councillor Murphy concurred that keeping pupils in county may cost more but Welsh government paid the Council £8000 for school transport per pupil, £6400 went to the school and the rest to the Council. Therefore, funding for Pembrokeshire pupils were going to other counties. In response to a question from Councillor Hall regarding the number of buses that the Council still owned, the Integrated Transport Unit Manager said that they had 45 coaches, and they operated 30 bus routes in-house. As the budget for school transport had increased recently, Councillor George queried its purpose and where it came from. In response, the Integrated Transport Unit Manager said that the contracts for school transport had increased, and more funding was provided due to the large increase in ALN students needing school transport, which was significantly higher than non ALN students. Councillor George suggested that officers keep monitoring ALN school transport projections. She also noted that there was a Social Care Overview & Scrutiny Committee visit to Pembroke Dock Library and transport provision was discussed and she queried if any alignment between departments was possible. In terms of the overlap with social care, the Integrated Transport Unit Manager stated that previously they were able to double up usage with day care centres but since centres had closed, they are not able to share transport anymore as longer journeys were needed. However, they could look at staggered start times for resources to be shared. In terms of public vehicle safety regulations, this meant that certain regulations had to be met, including with vehicles. The Council’s vehicles were not compliant with these regulations yet so this meant that transport on these vehicles could not be charged. As Carmarthenshire County Council were currently doing work of this, he said that they would wait for the results from their research and determine what would work for Pembrokeshire. Following a supplementary from Councillor George regarding fleet replacement, the Integrated Transport Unit Manager said that there were 230 contracted vehicles covering bus routes in Pembrokeshire and the Council had limited control with them. If there was a pupil getting public transport to school an in a wheelchair, then the Council would buy that bus. He concluded that the Council did not have buses that were compliant with vehicle safety regulations as this was not required yet. Councillor Thomas thanked officers and the cabinet members for bringing this item to the Committee. Regarding the survey, he noted that a lot of respondents said that they did not find it easy to find out if they were eligible for free school transport and queried if communication could be better on this, either from the Council or schools. He added that catchment schools should have footpaths to houses in their catchment areas to encourage children to be more active. In response, the Integrated Transport Unit Manager said that they will introduce an eligibility checker with their postcodes so parents would be able to see which school they could get free transport to. If a school was not listed, then this meant school transport was not available. He noted that they were going to try and communicate this by the schools too. Councillor Mike James queried if Swansea City Region were aware with how remote Pembrokeshire was regarding school transport and whether more pressure needed to be put upon them to help Pembrokeshire with funding and travel routes. He also asked in Pembrokeshire was receiving the same amount of funding as other rural areas in Wales. In response, Councillor Sinnett confirmed that all authorities used to have individual funding streams from Welsh Government but for Pembrokeshire, this was now all put into an individual ‘pot’ managed by Swansea. In order to get funding, the authorities present their cases but the ‘pot’ was oversubscribed and covered a lot of things like economic regeneration, active travel and transport. Therefore, Carmarthenshire was in a similar position to Pembrokeshire and more urban areas like Neath Port Talbot asked for more funding for bigger projects. To add to this, the Integrated Transport Unit Manager said that Pembrokeshire historically performed well in terms of school transport with similarly populated rural counties Councillor Clare George thanked the Integrated Transport Unit Manager for his work with this and highlighted that his departure would be a loss for the Council. The Chair concurred with this. Regarding faith schools, Councillor Bethan Price noted that free transport to these school was limited to eight miles, and she queried if this would be extended. In response, the Integrated Transport Unit Manager said that they would need to asses the impact this would have and whether there was a demand for faith schools which would justify this. The Recommendation was Moved by Councillor Simon Hancock; Seconded by Councillor Claire George. The vote, undertaken by way of a show of hands, was carried. RESOLVED That the report be noted. Due to the nature of her personal interest, Councillor Michele Wiggins abstained from voting.
Decision as recorded
RESOLVED That the report be endorsed.
The Chair presented the Overview and Scrutiny Annual Report for 2024-25 and highlighted the key elements of the report, including the work of the Committee and the additions in the report this year, following requests from members. He highlighted that this committee received the highest number of public submissions and there had been an increase in viewing figures with the webcasts. Councillor James thanked the high quality of work that officers had presented to the overview & scrutiny committees as this enabled Members to do their jobs effectively. The Chair concurred with this and emphasised the hard work that the Democratic Services Team did with managing meetings. A historical challenge that the Committee had was noted by Councillor Thomas as the Committee would often receive items after they were approved by Cabinet. He noted that this had improved significantly in the last year, but improvement was needed with this still. He added that it was difficult when officers were unable to answer questions raised in meetings and queried if members could look at submitting questions prior to the meeting to resolve this. The Recommendation was Moved by Councillor Brian Hall; Seconded by Councillor Michele Wiggins. The vote, undertaken by way of a show of hands, was carried. RESOLVED That the report be endorsed.
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.