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.
Executive Members (with Portfolios): Councillors: Anthony Hunt – Leader and Executive Member for Strategic Leadership Richard Clark – Deputy Leader and Executive Member for Children, Families and Education Fiona Cross – Executive Member for Communities David Daniels – Executive Member for Adult Services and Housing Peter Jones – Executive Member for Corporate Governance and Resources Sue Morgan – Executive Member for Waste and Sustainability Officers: Helen Beale - Head of Property Rachel Beale – Personal Assistant to Leader and Deputy Leader Gareth Beer - Head of Economy and Place Niall Flack - Apprentice Democratic Services Officer Christina Harrhy - Joint Director of Economy and Place Delyth Harries – Monitoring Officer Dave Leech – Deputy Chief Executive and Strategic Director for Adults and Communities Jason Lewis - Director, Corporate Services Andrew Lovegrove - Strategic Director Resources Daniel Morris - Group Leader – Property & Asset Management Jason O’Brien – Strategic Director, Children and Family Services Mark Thomas - Director Neighbourhoods and Environment Stephen Vickers – Chief Executive Peter Williams – Head of Internal Audit
2.1 Apologies were received by Councillors Jo Gauden and Mandy Owen.
3.1 There were no declarations of interest.
4.1 The minutes of the Cabinet meeting held on 27th May 2025 were agreed as a true and accurate record.
5.1 The update on actions were noted.
6.1 The Deputy Leader and Executive Member for Children, Families and Education introduced the report and highlighted the following points: · Cabinet would be aware of the adverse financial position in Children’s Services which was unsustainable. · This was the second update report to advise Cabinet of the approach to turn around the deficit with the principal of managing demand and spend. · An Accelerated Improvement Group was established to oversee the process and had three aims, preventing, enabling and providing a high quality service. · The number of Looked After Children had plateaued, in the last report to Cabinet the number of children had come down to 355, and at the time of this report being published had further reduced to 316, which was high but showed a significant improvement. · Another saving which had been made was the in-house provision, Greenhill Bungalow and a second property had been identified for this use too, which would save on out of county placements and more importantly give better opportunities to those individuals keeping them local and allow them to remain in their schools and social circles. · There had also been a restructure of Children’s Services which was due to go live on 4th August, which he looked forward to seeing bed in. · The report also outlines the workstreams to ensure a whole systems approach. 6.2 The Strategic Director, Children and Family Services highlighted the key areas of the report which included: · Upon receiving the report in January 2025, Cabinet agreed to support the funding for a transition plan to manage demand and associated spend in Children’s Services. · Since the report in January, the number of Children Looked After had reduced and as on today was 315, the confirmed overspend position for 2024/25 had reduced, the Children’s Services Social Care Team had been restructured to support more focussed care planning and de-escalation of need and the broader Children’s Services system was being reviewed to ensure a “road map” in line with the Marmot principles and longer-term vision of the Council. 6.3 The Leader: · Thanked the Executive Member and the Officers for their hard work on this. · The work was undertaken to a get a more sustainable approach and he was glad to see it had been done with a focus on people not figures. · The Council was a public services and a provider of last resort to some of the most vulnerable children and families in the community and the Council had a duty to support those and not to just support the bottom line financially. · The focus was on better outcomes for young people and not just sustainability. · He welcomed the in-house provision and the plan to expand that provision and it made financial sense but would also provide better outcomes for those individuals to keep vulnerable people local and around their support networks. 6.4 Members of the Cabinet asked a number of question around prevention work within Children’s Services and the Strategic Director, Children and Family Services gave the following replies: · Through the structures within Children’s Services there was consistency in decision making and there was a clear threshold of need. It was key that those thresholds were understood both within the service area and outside the service so that the appropriate people were aware of when preventative services need to be activated and when statutory services need to be activated. · The Early Intervention Prevention Hub had recently been developed; however, it was still in its infancy, but he was confident that it would have a positive impact. · The preventive agenda sat within the Children and Families directorate but also outside of it as well. Work was ongoing on a bigger systems approach, with the development of community resilience and expectation of when services would be activated both by the community and members of the public but by professionals as well. A part of bigger systems approach was to use the preventative services outside of Children’s Services to prevent people coming to the front door. · The Early Intervention Prevention Hub would have a range of designated workers who would look at the needs of the family and see what services were required and help the family to solve their own issues but depending on the level of need, workers within in the hub could pull in a multi-agency approach. · There were gaps within preventative arena rather than the statutory arena, but the work of the newly established Early Intervention Prevention Hub would help to tackle that. 6.5 Cabinet agreed to: · Acknowledge the work that had been carried out and continues to be carried out within the service, and via the auspices of AIG, to achieve a reduction of demand and financial recovery in the short, medium and long term. · Accept further update reports outlining ongoing work and impact relating to longer term demand management and the development of the transition planning.
7.1 The Leader presented the report of behalf of the Executive Member and made the following points: • Both Torfaen and Blaenau Gwent Councils had ambition to address the inequalities in their communities. Regeneration projects that delivered the well-being objectives in the County Plan and deliver economic growth were a central part of the solution. • Whilst work was underway to develop a joint Economy and Place Strategy, it was clear neither Council had the commercial skills or the capacity to deliver ambitious regeneration of the scale needed. The report proposed the appointment of a Development Partner, a commercial sector partner that was able to support ambitious regeneration delivery. • A Development Partner would work with both Councils to develop a suite of potential projects, including detail of business cases and costings, engaging with stakeholders, seeking investment, identifying external funding and detail of how assets would be managed following delivery. • If approved, Officers would commence the procurement process for a Joint Delivery Partner to support the implementation of the Council’s emerging Economy & Place Strategy. A strategic partnership would act as a key delivery mechanism to translate ambition into action, accelerating regeneration, maximising complex development, making full use of external funding and unlocking opportunities to provide quality housing and high-end jobs. • If approved and subject to a procurement process, a partnership would not commit either Council to any regeneration program or project costs. The appropriate governance process within each Council would be followed for each project, with decision making to progress regeneration plans remaining in the gift of each Council. 7.2 The Joint Director of Economy and Place and Strategic Director Resources presented the report to Cabinet and highlighted the key areas: • The Council was currently developing an innovative Economy and Place strategy which aimed to support the delivery of the County Plan Wellbeing Objectives. An integral element of the emerging strategy was to maximise development and lever significant investment into both areas, providing economic and social growth opportunities. • Both Councils were finalising investment prospectus that if realised would make significant contributions to improving the wellbeing of their communities. • Both Councils currently did not have the capacity or capability to deliver those ambitions. It was proposed to commission a Development Partner to work with both Council’s, key stakeholders, potential investors, funders and developers to realise the successful delivery of infrastructure projects including those within the investment prospectus. • The selected Development Partner would be expected to have experience of successful delivery of complex infrastructure projects along with an understanding of the issues affecting the eastern Valleys communities. • The length of the contract was expected to be for 10 years, with a break clause at 5 years to allow long term projects to be successfully delivered. 7.3 Members of the Cabinet asked a number of questions and Officers gave the following responses: • Across the two Councils there were areas that were more attractive for developing than others but one of the first tasks that would be undertaken with the Development Partner would be to agree a list of projects which would include, big, small, hard and easy projects. A process would then be agreed, and some projects could be paired together, for example a challenging project could be paired with a not so challenging project, as it was important that it was not just the easier projects being undertaken. • There were many benefits of taking a wider approach to regeneration ambitions across both Councils. Employment land was a great example, as both Local Authorities were strategically positioned in the region and had great connectivity to both the Heads of the Valley and the M4 corridor. However in terms of employment land, Torfaen did not have a large bank of employment land and when employers either wanted to expand or come in to the borough it was difficult to locate those companies, but over in Blaenau Gwent they had a plentiful bank of significant employment sites which were readily available and rather than potentially losing those companies elsewhere in Wales or the UK it would be far better to be placing them in Blaenau Gwent. • The snow line was a real issue, and it had been a problem with getting investment above Pontypool, but with having more of a weight of working with Blaenau Gwent, conversations with prospective housing developers took on a different emphasis as they were able to look over a much wider land area. Social housing was another area that could be looked at in a much wider perspective when looking over both county boroughs so working across the two boroughs did offer a number of significant benefits. 7.4 Cabinet agreed to: • Enter a partnership arrangement with Blaenau Gwent to initiate the procurement of a development partner as a long-term partner providing the breadth of services as detailed in Appendix A. • Adopt a governance model to underpin the relationship in accordance with the structure set out in Appendix A • Authorise the Strategic Director Resources (in consultation with the Leader and Executive Member for Economy, Skills & Regeneration) to take all necessary steps to procure the development partner and conclude the appropriate agreements. • Receive a further report once the procurement process has been completed to determine whether to enter a contract.
8.1 The Housing Safety and Environmental Protection Manager presented the report and highlighted the following key points: · The Public Spaces Protection Order for dog controls in Torfaen, was reviewed in 2024, in accordance with statutory requirements and the decision was made to extend the Order for a further 3 years. · Since that decision and the signing of the new Order, four new children’s play areas have been identified, which would benefit from being included in the Order including: § Southville Park Children's Play Area in Llantarnam § Cwmavon Village Children's Play Area in Abersychan § Thornhill Multi-Games Area in Upper Cwmbran § Blenheim Road Children's Play Area in Fairwater · By being included in the Order it would impose dog exclusion on these play areas. 8.2 The Leader welcomed the additions to the current orders and gave thanks to the responsible dog owners who picked up after their pets. The Leader also thanked those who got involved in the Council’s dog fouling campaign which had received a good response. 8.3 Cabinet agreed to: • Approve the inclusion of four new children’s play areas not currently covered by the existing Public Spaces Protection Order (PSPO) for dog controls in Torfaen to exclude dogs from any children’s play areas on public land that have been developed since November 2021. • A further report which will give consideration for more enforcement measures.
9.1 The Leader presented the report of behalf of the Executive Member and made the following points: · Both the Council’s current Asset Management Strategy and Asset Management Plan had expired and a new Asset Management Strategy was being presented for approval today. · The Asset Management Strategy was designed to set the direction for managing the Council’s portfolio of operational and non-operational assets over a five-year period. · Key principles and objectives from the expired plan were being carried forward into the proposed plan with additional key changes to ensure the Council delivered its statutory requirements and the objectives in the County Plan. · The additional changes would see a strong focus on data collection, categorising the asset portfolio into seven categories and development of the Corporate Landlord operating model. · With over 1000 assets, the diverse property portfolio included office buildings, schools, libraries, car parks, waste transfer sites, heritage assets, listed buildings and monuments, commercial buildings, local nature reserves and recreational areas. · A strong strategy was needed to address the significant back log of maintenance across the portfolio and to comply with Minimum Energy Efficiency Standards. · A strong asset management strategy would enable the Council to manage its assets effectively to support service delivery, community resilience, local businesses, biodiversity and climate change resilience. 9.2 The Head of Economy and Place presented the report and highlighted the areas: · The Council’s existing 2019-2023 Asset Management Strategy and 2021-2023 Asset Management Plan had expired and needed to be refreshed. · The new Asset Management Strategy would set the direction for managing the Council’s portfolio of operational and non-operational assets over a five-year period to 2030. · The proposed strategy was designed to allow the Council to deploy its assets in the most effective way to meet its statutory requirements and deliver corporate and strategic objectives, including the County Plan and Marmot Principles. · Key objectives and principles of the were being carried forward into the new draft strategy, but the proposed 2025-2030 strategy introduced several changes in approach. The changes included a stronger focus on data usage to inform future decision making, the segmentation of the Council’s overall portfolio into ‘asset classes’ or ‘categories’ and refinements to the Council’s current Corporate Landlord operating model. 9.3 The Cabinet asked a range of questions and the Head of Economy and Place gave the following responses: · The action plan that underpins the Asset Management Strategy would have a focus on sustainability and biodiversity. A Corporate Asset Management Working Group was being established and there would strong representation on the Council’s Corporate Priorities. · The corporate landlord model would allow the Council to take more control on how it managed its property portfolio and would also support the Council’s approach to community empowerment and the preventative agenda. · Through the segmentation of the portfolio into seven new ‘asset classes’ or ‘categories’, it would significantly enhance the Council’s ability to make better informed strategic management decisions. There would be a category in relation to disposals of assets and there would be a set of guidelines which would need to be followed. Part of the approach in relation to disposals was to make sure that where there may be a community use that it was investigated, and the appropriate consultation was undertake and that it fed into the decision-making process. · The maintenance bill for Council’s Assets was around the £19 million. The Council had made a commitment to allocate additional funding into the capital programme over a series of years which was really helpful because the core budget had not been enough to maintain progress and keep on top of the priorities. · The property maintenance backlog was assessed through individual asset conditions which were combined into one overall assessment which was then prioritised. The challenge was to make sure the highest priorities were capable of being addressed. · There was a perception that the Council owned the majority of buildings within town centres, which was not the case, and it was important to manage the messaging around that. The Council owned key assets in the town centre and investment in those assets was very important, but there was a regeneration element to town centre which was beyond just the asset management approach and was about working with businesses and communities to help them bring forward schemes for the town centres 9.4 Cabinet agreed to approve the Asset Management Strategy 2025 – 2030.
10.1 The Head of Internal Audit presented the report to Cabinet which sought approval of three existing strategies and policies that were a key part of the Councils governance arrangements which included the: · Anti-fraud strategy · Money Laundering Policy · Local Code of Corporate Governance 10.2 Members of the Cabinet thanked the Head of Internal Audit for the work by himself and the team on producing the documents and also implementing them. The Council had a strong reputation for good audit and governance and Members were reassured by all the checks and balances that the Council had in place. 10.3 In response to a question asked about training the Head of Internal Audit stated that he provided training on Money Laundering to Members of the Audit Committee, but he would be happy to roll it out to all Members. 10.4 Cabinet agreed to approve the revised and updated: • Anti-fraud strategy • Money laundering policy • The local code of corporate governance
11.1 Cabinet agreed to the exclusion of the press and public from the meeting as the report was not for publication because in accordance with paragraph 14 of Schedule 12a of the Local Government Act 1972 (As Amended By The Access To Information Variation Wales Order 2007) it contains information relating to the financial or business affairs of any particular person (including the authority holding that information) and the public interest in maintaining the exemptions outweighs the public interest in disclosing the information.
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.