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 No apologies were received. 1.2 The Chair welcomed Councillor Horler as a new member of the Committee.
2.1 Councillor Evans declared a personal interest in agenda item 5 as he was a member of South Wales Fire and Rescue Authority.
3.1 The minutes of the meeting held on 6th September 2022 were confirmed as an accurate record.
4.1 The Committee noted the action sheet.
5.1 The HoPSSU provided Cllr Horler with a brief update around the recent work of the Public Services Board (PSB) and the role of the PSB Overview and Scrutiny Committee. 5.2 The PP&EM gave a brief introduction to the report. 5.3 Following Members’ questions and comments, the HoPSSU, GM and PP&EM made the following main points: • The PSB’s objectives were already aligned with the Marmot principles around such things as health inequality, prior to becoming a Marmot region; however it was important to drive the work forward. The GM shared a presentation slide with members of the Committee, highlighting the close links. • It was important to view the Local Authority’s (LA) issues through a Marmot lens, in terms of internal wellbeing objectives. It was also important to avoid duplication between local objectives and the overarching regional objectives. • The LA’s County Plan was agile and could be amended to reflect changing priorities; however Marmot already fitted in well with it. More robust development would follow within service plans. • The LA and PSB had been operating within the Well-being of Future Generations framework for some time, and the draft Well-being Plan had been submitted to the Future Generations Commissioner for Wales, whose comments would have then been incorporated into the plan. The Future Generations Commissioner for Wales and the Welsh Government (WG) had a very keen interest regarding the PSB’s use of the Marmot principles, as it was the first region in Wales to become a Marmot region. • Becoming a Marmot region showed that the region was determined to make positive changes around health, well-being, etc and the LA had a further role to play in this, particularly around crime, community cohesion, etc. • With regards to evaluation, the PSB would succinctly link existing performance indicators and data with Marmot indicators. • Officers were keen to hear Members’ views around the three key objectives of the PSB and the proposed steps in order to address them, which would feed into the project plan. • The three overarching priorities would be undertaken on a regional level but would also link to local well-being assessments. The Local Delivery Group would undertake work around local partnership priorities, which would be fed upwards and avoid duplication between local and regional matters. Duplication would also be avoided in terms of performance structures and activities, as they would be aligned on a local and regional basis. Local data would need to be consistent and reliable. • Professor Marmot and his colleagues had been really pleased with the attendance level from PSB partners and the local commitment shown during their visit to Newport in November 2022. • The Well-being Plan was a five-year plan with a lot of work still to be conducted following the consultation and analysis stages. Large organisations were involved, and they all needed to look at filtering the objectives down internally. • All partners were on board with the draft plan and the scoping objectives, and a large public engagement process had been agreed at PSB level. • The Regional Partnership Board (RPB) was more aligned to the work of the PSB than any of the other regional boards, and the Gwent Local Resilience Forum only focussed on matters around civil contingencies and emergencies. • The whole rationale behind the PSB was partnership working, and all partners had agreed the three overarching objectives. The PSB was made up of statutory partners who could not leave the PSB and statutory invitees who could choose to leave. • Officers were able to access and analyse information regarding those who had already contributed to the online consultation, and target groups of people who had yet to contribute. On top of this, information from focussed group sessions, stakeholder events and the PSB Overview and Scrutiny Committee meeting would also be collated and analysed during December 2022 and January 2023. • The lessons learnt during the original local well-being plans had fed into the PSB draft Well-being Plan, and the HoPSSU praised the good quality of staff across Gwent who wanted to work collectively. The plan would need to be agile, like the LA’s County Plan, in order to adapt to changing needs. • The HoPSSU was confident that the plan reflected the PSB’s priorities, and he was also confident that local priorities would be identified. • The PSB was made up of the most senior individuals from each partner, and deputies could attend if required, which would reduce the possibility of issues around attendance. • The local partnership plan for Torfaen would have a mix of theme leads from across partners, as it was a plan for Torfaen, not just Torfaen County Borough Council. • Officers acknowledged the need for the Well-being Plan to be in a digestible format for members of the public and confirmed that an executive summary was available. Members commented that the LA and PSB needed more publicity around its good work. 5.4 The Chair praised officers for the quality and level of work regarding the report and the draft Well-being Plan. 5.5 The Chair thanked the HoPSSU, GM and PP&EM for their contributions to the meeting and they left the meeting. 5.6 On completion of their scrutiny activity, the Committee concluded by offering the following comments and recommendations for consideration: Recommendation 1 – The final Gwent PSB Wellbeing Plan should be clearly and succinctly written, easily accessible and widely promoted, including promoting the good work and initiatives that take place to achieve the overarching objectives. Recommendation 2 – The PSB Overview & Scrutiny Committee would welcome the opportunity to receive regular updates on the performance / outcomes of the plan once implemented, and the Head of PSB exploring routes for reporting back from the regional PSB scrutiny committee to the local committee. Recommendation 3 – Whilst the Committee appreciate the consultation deadline is imminent, they would welcome further face to face consultation events around the borough, noting the success of previous sessions that have taken place with members of the community who may not be able to take part in the online consultation. Recommendation 4 – The Committee stressed the importance of the final plan being reactive and adaptable to changes due to external factors and / or inadequate progress on certain steps taken to achieve an objective. 5.7 Whilst discussing the recommendations, members of the Committee also requested to know whether Citizens Advice had been consulted with as part of this process. An answer would be obtained from officers. 5.8 The meeting ended at 11.45am.
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.