Loading
The decisions as the council's minutes record them. A plain-language summary follows once it has been written.
RESOLVED: To approve the minutes of the meeting of the CJC JOSC held on the 10 October 2024.
RESOLVED to: • Consider the enhanced Responsible Investment Policy and a new Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) Scorecard
RESOLVED: “That the press and public be excluded from the meeting under Section 100A(4) of the Local Government Act (as amended) for the following items of business on the grounds that it involves the likely disclosure of the exempt information as defined in paragraph 14 of Part 4 of the Schedule 12A of the Act”.
The Chair welcomed all officers and Members to the meeting. Apologies were received from: Councillor B Proctor – Cardiff Councillor N Yeowell – Torfaen
In accordance with the code of conduct, no declarations were made pertaining to the agenda.
Decision as recorded
RESOLVED: To approve the minutes of the meeting of the CJC JOSC held on the 10 October 2024.
RESOLVED: To approve the minutes of the meeting of the CJC JOSC held on the 10 October 2024.
Decision as recorded
RESOLVED to: • Consider the enhanced Responsible Investment Policy and a new Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) Scorecard
The Chief Executive Cardiff Capital Region presented the report which provided information on the enhanced Responsible Investment Policy and a new Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) Scorecard for the South East Wales Corporate Joint Committee (SEWCJC). A Member requested further information to gain a broader understanding as to how the position outlined in the report has been reached. The Policy and Impact Lead shared that a horizon scanning exercise was undertaken to identify the gold standard. The exercise also involved detailed research being undertaken as the ESG area is always evolving. The Officer explained that CCR have tried to rationalise what is needed from a compliance element but also what else they would like to see included, sharing the example of gender pay gap reporting. There was discussion about not having the legal requirements in private sector partners but how to encourage the right behaviours and thinking to evolve. Officers have tried to think from an investor perspective how CCR can evolve some private sector thinking around this. The Chief Executive added that some work has been done around the real living wage, CCR are accredited, but the aim is to work with other employers in the region to get them to adopt the same standard. They added that the Investment Board are conscious to not treat this as a checklist but are trying to be pragmatic and create conditions. There was further discussion around grey areas such as in life sciences and cyber and the need to tackle moral and ethical understanding. The Chief Executive shared that CCR need to take as responsible approach as possible and be transparent and committed to continuous improvement. The Member also asked about total risk scores and queried how these are determined and referenced the comparison of risk scores to determine what is positive or not. The Policy and Impact Lead responded that the risk element is part of the wider due diligence process. She explained that the ESG scorecard isn’t to replace this, it’s to sit alongside it and give a balanced view. She further added that it allows CCR to have a broader understanding of the impact of the investments. The Chief Executive shared that it is important to consider that different companies, especially SMEs, won’t have HR departments so it is about how CCR works with these in a pragmatic way to not exclude these businesses. Another Member enquired if there has been any comparison with the practices adopted by local government pension schemes in terms of developing and updating responsible investment strategies, and furthermore, whether there is an opportunity to gain insights from this that could be advantageous for CCR. The Chief Executive shared that pension funds were raised by the Investment Board and that these have come a long way in terms of their own impact investing frameworks which is somewhere that CCR would like to get to. A Member commented that it is pleasing to see this policy and receive the presentation of the report from Officers. The Member was supportive of the aims of the report to enable the creation of fair jobs. The Member commented that, where there is poor practice, it is often Local Authorities who have to provide support as a result. The Member requested further detail regarding proactive support that will be offered to smaller organisations for whom this is new, or they may lack the knowledge they need to move towards the direction we want to see. The Policy and Impact Lead mentioned that the potential adverse impacts were considered when setting benchmarks. Moving forward, the focus will be on identifying gaps where SMEs are not scoring as desired, and determining what additional support packages, beyond the core funding being requested from CCR, could be provided to assist them. These support packages would vary on a case-by-case basis. However, it is crucial that this policy facilitates early conversations to address these needs. The Member noted that the policy would be reviewed every year and commented that it would be helpful to review the impact of this. The Chief Executive confirmed the intention for annual review through the Investment Board and shared examples of where there has been impact to date but emphasised that CCR are trying to take it from sporadic examples to something that can be repeated. RESOLVED to: • Consider the enhanced Responsible Investment Policy and a new Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) Scorecard
Decision as recorded
RESOLVED: “That the press and public be excluded from the meeting under Section 100A(4) of the Local Government Act (as amended) for the following items of business on the grounds that it involves the likely disclosure of the exempt information as defined in paragraph 14 of Part 4 of the Schedule 12A of the Act”.
It was RESOLVED: “That the press and public be excluded from the meeting under Section 100A(4) of the Local Government Act (as amended) for the following items of business on the grounds that it involves the likely disclosure of the exempt information as defined in paragraph 14 of Part 4 of the Schedule 12A of the Act”.
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.