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.
1.1 The Chair welcomed Members and Officers to the meeting. Apologies were received from Councillors Ronald Burnett, Nick Byrne, Jon James, Mark Jones, Nicholas Simons and Chris Tew.
2.1 Councillor Steven Evans declared a personal, non-prejudicial interest as a Council appointed member of the South Wales Fire and Rescue Authority. 2.2 Councillor Rose Seabourne declared a personal, non-prejudicial interest as a Trustee of CoStar Cwmbran. 2.3 No other interests were declared.
3.1 The minutes of the meeting held on 21 July 2022 were confirmed as an accurate record.
4.1 The action sheet was noted.
5.1 The Chair introduced the item and after, the Leader gave a brief overview of the report and thanked Officers for putting the Plan together and translating it into Members’ thoughts. The CE explained that the Plan was a framework for change and would be further developed as time went on, taking direction from local, regional and national drivers. He referred to the nine objectives and timeline for monitoring and delivery. The CE reported that the Plan wasn’t its latest iteration but wanted to seek out Members’ views. 5.2 The Leader left the meeting. 5.3 The ACER, HoC, CON, COE, COSC&H, HoPSSU and CE responded to Members’ questions and comments in relation to each section as follows:- Delivery of the Plan • CE – The introduction to the Plan required some improvement in order to highlight other attractions within the borough. The initial introduction was taken from a recruitment advert. • CE – The Plan wasn’t starting from ground zero and so reflecting ongoing work was important. Benchmark data would be used in order to develop a better picture of what was going on and to look at improvements. Some data production needed developing as there were restrictions involved, such as being limited by legislation. The second part of the plan was reflective on what had taken place over the last year and what promises had been delivered; accountability was a big part of it. Parts of the Objectives were interlinked and this was intentional. The nine priorities and themes were deliberately written so that directorates were delivering towards the same objectives together. • CE – Processes around engaging with Members had been set out but as yet, they hadn’t started to look at how best to communicate with Community Councils. • CE – In terms of the physical plan, it had not been consulted on with the community yet. They had taken into account the ongoing dialogue across service areas and policy setting, as well as what communities chose at the last elections. There were lots of ways the local authority (LA) listened, there were annual planning processes and delivery processes that the officers went through, but if there were areas where residents were perhaps not so supported, then Members could make recommendations. • CE – The Plan was very much a blueprint where they had to be able to read a baseline on priorities. The objectives had not been created in isolation; there had to be resilience and there had to be a focus. Some priorities and work programmes that sat underneath the Plan could change but the overall aspiration of it wouldn’t. • CE – It was important to keep a baseline of the fantastic work the Council did. There were thousands of services delivered across the county that were being provided well, so it was inevitable that some things would go wrong. The good heavily outweighed the bad and so it was important to shout about it. They would be taking forward a new edition of Torfaen Talks, which would hopefully go out before Christmas. 5.4 Wellbeing Objective 1: • COE – The LA were looking to bring in more apprentices through various schemes. Flying start provided lots of opportunities for looked after children, and other young people. COSC&H – With looked after children and people leaving care, it was a cross-departmental approach that was taken to provide the right outcomes. COE – They were in discussions with schools about work experience and developing other practical opportunities, but they were in very early talks. COSC&H – At the Future Torfaen event the Youth Service were talking about young people who had developed skills in order to be qualified for various roles and so they were keeping every door open. • COE – The new ALN legislation outlined that individuals with autism wouldn’t be entitled to education beyond the age of 25. Schools were improving their support around it. One of the things they needed to do was to work with post 16 providers and other external providers in putting together forward work programmes. There was also more to look at with employers. • ACER – There was an Emerging Workforce Strategy that would be picking up on apprenticeships and the ability of the Council to “grow its own” workforce, but there were currently major issues with apprenticeships and recruitment. It was important to get into schools and setting pupils on the path to develop. • COSC&H – The Plan could be strengthened to make it more specific around the work that was being done with vulnerable groups, other than those with autism. The ALN Strategy was an umbrella strategy that covered all vulnerable groups and so it was important to reflect this. • COE – They needed to understand what the detail was and to keep things manageable in the Plan before making it specific in terms of what was going to be delivered and when. CE – Some targets would be output heavy and others wouldn’t be, but everything would be clear when reporting and monitoring. • CE – The entirety of the Wellbeing Objectives were important in tackling everything across the Council, including vulnerable people, winter fuel payments etc. It would be a targeted approach in order to tackle the right areas and to create a better place for the community so it could thrive. For example, targeting better education for people to have better future job prospects. 5.5 Wellbeing Objective 2: • HoPSSU – There were 3000 people on the housing register and it was increasing by the day; it was a key issue. They had supported housing, some were temporary and others were permanent, but were both in short supply. They were looking to redevelop some housing in Pontypool and to get some wider provision. There was a hot property market in buying and rented accommodation; a lot were above affordability, so there were issues. They needed to develop strategies and work with partners in getting more affordable homes. It would take time as there were a lot of elements involved. The Executive Member was passionate about the subject and so they were working to form a session for Cabinet and have a housing summit with partners in order to discuss the issues. • HoPSSU – The Council had a well-established Community Safety Team who provided different interventions in terms of antisocial behaviour. There were multi-agency pupil interventions going into schools to stop young people entering the criminal justice system. Most of the activity was around prevention with the Police. COSC&H – The Youth Offending Service had taken a massive shift in moving from its statutory focus to prevention. There were positive links between them and the Youth Service. CE – It was important to strike the right balance in how much could be to invested and how much could be done so it wouldn’t escalate. It needed to be looked at holistically and to prevent it at source; providing a pride of place, offering opportunities etc. It was hoped that these things would have a positive impact and for young people to achieve their potential. 5.6 Wellbeing Objective 3: • CE – The Council worked hard to ensure vulnerable people were getting access to the relevant benefits and support. The LA had been recognised by Welsh Government (WG) for ensuring people had the discretionary funds in their bank accounts. There were areas for improvement around communication and consistent messaging etc. Although the Council could ensure payments were made quickly, it was impossible to tell people how to spend their money. They could do the right messaging and offer support to the right people, but it was up to individuals to choose how it was being spent. • COSC&H – Bringing more services in-house was not off the table. There was a well-known crisis in the care sector which was in the main a private market, so it was something that could be part of the next review of social care. • CE – The Council and Bron Afon were considering support to groups who provide hot coffee etc. during the winter. Scrutiny Members were encouraged to engage with the Chief Officer for Communities, Customer Service and Digital to determine priorities and concerns as they needed to be responsive to the challenges Members highlighted. Budgets had been set but they were distributing funds to vulnerable groups whilst continuing to lobby WG. • COSC&H – Targeted support for young carers and the possibility of providing them with unique I.D. cards to ensure they were accessing the right level of benefits could be considered by the Corporate Carers Board. 5.7 Wellbeing Objective 4: • CON – The LA was recognised as a facilitator rather than a deliver when it came to public transport as it was not in the gift of the Council to control it. Work had taken place in Pontypool to increase bus accessibility. They were able to apply to WG for capital grants and then work with operators to ensure they were able to offer the right vehicles. Projects were underway for the future of Cwmbran Train Station. • CON – Electrical vehicle charging stations were not currently being looked at, but would be some time in the future. An advert had gone out for a Zero Emissions Officer. They were unable to put charging points everywhere; they needed to look at the market and the UK Government needed to come into it. More charging points were coming through the Regional Strategy. However, there were constraints on the grid so could only go so far. The Council wasn’t able to convert to an electric fleet as the grid wasn’t there to support it. Work with the WG was ongoing to try to overcome some of these hurdles. • COE – They had been asked to think about plans should another pandemic hit. There were less digitally excluded homes than originally thought. MiFi dongles would be made available to bring people online. Part of the post of the new Head of Learning would be to look at the ICT strategy for schools going forward. This had not been flagged in the Plan, but featured in strategies that sat underneath it. • CON – There were ongoing activities and schemes for Active Travel which they had got funding for. They were hoping to beef up the Active Travel map and to turn it into a delivery plan. A Members’ Seminar had taken place in relation to the map. It was an aspiration to be done by 2027. 5.8 Members did not raise specific questions on Wellbeing Objectives 5, 6, 7 and 8. 5.9 The HoC commented that the Plan was changing daily and that it was an ongoing piece of work. He asked that Members email him with any further comments or questions in order for him to take them forward. He said that the Plan wasn’t going to include everything that was included in each team and service plan as it would be too big a document and would be inaccessible. 5.10 Councillor Stuart Ashley left the room and so Councillor Rose Seabourne took the Chair. 5.11 Wellbeing Objective 9: • CE – The strategy was referred to as a Digital-First Customer Strategy, but this did not mean it was digital-only. It was important that people were able to get the right information and advice in the right place. • CE – The Plan didn’t make mention of all partners, but the approach to it was very much a partnership; but with everyone including the community. None of it could be achieved if a partnership approach wasn’t taken. It was a Plan for all people and all partners. 5.12 Councillor Ashley entered the room and re-took the Chair. 5.13 The CE thanked Members for their views and input, and said that an open dialogue would continue as there would be opportunities for change going forward. The ACER, HoC, CON, COE, COSC&H, HoPSSU and CE left the meeting. 5.14 Recommendations On completion of their scrutiny activity, the Committee concluded by offering the following recommendations and comments for consideration:- Recommendation 1 In addition to scrutiny members maintaining an oversight of progress against delivering the County Plan 2022-27, members recommended Community Councils, Youth forums and older person forums be consulted on action plans at appropriate stages during the delivery processes. Recommendation 2 It was recommended that in addition to knowing our baseline data for each objective, that mid-term and end term outcomes be clear and well defined to ensure members can measure progress. Recommendation 3 The section titled ‘The Place’ on page 3 of the draft plan should be expanded on, giving a more comprehensive overview of the whole borough to be more inclusive and representative of all communities within Torfaen. Recommendation 4 Greater emphasis needs to be given throughout the plan, to how we will build/ develop robust, connected communities and maintain sustainable community assets that support the work of community groups, such as community halls. Recommendation 5 Members felt grant funding was an element that was missing throughout the plan, and recommended that it be indicated where projects/ activities require an element of grant funding. Recommendation 6 Further consideration and reference should be given under all objectives, to support for people with disabilities. Recommendation 7 Greater articulation at relevant points throughout the plan, to the work that is undertaken to prevent people engaging in anti-social behaviour. Recommendation 8 Objective 2 specific – ‘play provision’ should be expanded and be scoped as ‘play and youth activity’. Recommendation 9 Objective 3 specific – expand on the term ‘equalities’. Recommendation 10 Objective 4 specific – further information is required under the section ‘What will be done by 2027’ in relation to active travel. 5.15 Members supported the draft plan subject to their recommendations as set out above and commended Officers for developing a detailed and considerate County Plan for Torfaen.
6.1 The date of the next meeting was confirmed to take place on Wednesday, 12 October 2022. 6.2 The meeting ended at 4.25pm
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.