Minutes of a meeting held on 19th October, 2011.


Present:  Councillor G.C. Kemp (Chairman); Councillor T.H. Jarvie (Vice-Chairman); Councillors Mrs. J.E. Charles, P. Church, G.A. Cox, A.M. Ernest, A.D. Hampton, H.J.W. James, R.L. Traherne and Mrs. D.M. Turner.



C1462                        MINUTES -


RESOLVED - T H A T the minutes of the meeting held on 5th October, 2011 be approved as a correct record subject to Councillor P. Church being included under Minute No. C1448 in declaring an interest as a member of Penarth Town Council.



C1463                        DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST -


The following Members declared an interest in Agenda Item No. 9, Schools Management of Attendance Policy, and vacated the room during the consideration thereof: Councillors P. Church and H.J.W. James.



C1464                        CARDIFF BAY ADVISORY COMMITTEE -


The following minutes of a meeting held on 21st September, 2011 were submitted:




CouncillorP. Church(Chairman)

Vale of Glamorgan Council

Mrs. C. Dimond (Vice-Chairman)

CardiffFlood Action Committee

Councillor A.M. Ernest

PenarthTown Council

Mr. J. Harrison

Environment Agency

Mr. A. Parker

Independent Representative

Dr. S. Howard

Countryside Council for Wales

Councillor N. Howells

CardiffCity Council.


Also present:


Mr. S. Howell


Mr. P. Barry

CardiffYacht Club / RYH

Mrs. K. Bowen

Vale of Glamorgan Council.






(a)       Apologies for Absence -


These were received from Mr. S. Jones (Penarth Marina), Mr. T. Rees (Glamorgan Anglers), Mr. M. Chidlow (Harbour Master), Mrs. S. Newbold (British Marine Federation/CBYC/RYA) and Mr. R. Harvey (Canoe Wales).



(b)       Minutes -


AGREED - T H A T the minutes of the Annual meeting held on 22nd June, 2011 be accepted as a correct record.



(c)        Progress Update - Cardiff Harbour Authority - Mr. Simon Howell -


Mr. Howell, the Operational Manager for the Harbour Authority, apprised the Committee on the following matters.


·                    there had been very little oxygen issues over the summer months. 

·                    midge larvae numbers had decreased and remained low throughout the year.

·                    the Environment Agency had recently offered a number of fish (Bream) for the Bay which had been considered a good opportunity to stock the Bay.  

·                    on 16th October for a few days the barrage would be closed to the public in order for maintenance work to be undertaken.

·                    the Harbour Authority was currently looking at plans for events for the forthcoming year, particularly in relation to the Olympics.

·                    the BBC development at the Bay was due to open in October.  There would be some changes to the access road and pedestrian access.

·                    a planning application had recently been submitted for an indoor surf facility

·                    and the sky flyer balloon had recently received planning consent.  However there were currently on going negotiations taking place regarding the terms of the lease, Members would be updated in due course. 


In considering the report Members’ concerns related to parking for the skyflyer. The Operational Manager advised that there was to be some on site parking for disabled users and for staff operating the balloon, but for other the existing parking provision around the Bay would be available.  The Chairman advised the Committee that he was aware that a number of local residents on the Penarth side were possibly going to make an appeal to the Welsh Government in respect of the attraction.


AGREED - T H A T Mr. Howell be thanked for his informative report.





(d)       Progress Update - Environment Agency - Mr. J. Harrison -


Mr. Harrison advised of the good working relationship that continued to exist between the Environment Agency and the Cardiff Harbour Authority.


At the last meeting of the Committee Mr. Harrison had referred to the Welsh Government reviewing the Environment Bodies in Wales with the detail for the options being reported to be announced in September.  However, he had been advised that there was likely to be delayed until later in the year.


Mr Harrison was pleased to inform Members that the River Taff had been noted as one of the most improved rivers in the United Kingdom which could be attributed to a number of initiatives that had been undertaken by a range of partner organisations.  The main challenge for the river would be in identifying future activities and ensuring they are balanced in respect of all users.  Members referred to a company that could possibly be discharging substances into the Bay on the River Ely / Penarth Road Bridge side and were urged to notify the Environment Agency if there were any concerns.  Mr. Harrison advised that a notice had already been served on the company in question to improve their infrastructure and improve waste storage.  All Members were pleased to note that the Environment Agency were monitoring the matter.


With regard to salmon in the Bay, Members were advised that it had been a good year for reproduction but that the current year had not been as encouraging as in previous years. 


AGREED - T H A T Mr. Harrison be thanked for his informative report.



(e)       Information Only Report - Groundwater Code of Practice -


The report had been presented to the Executive of Cardiff Council on 15th September 2011 with approval being sought on the revised Groundwater Code of Practice.  Mr. Howell confirmed that the Committee had been consulted on the original document and that it was before the meeting for information.


AGREED - T H A T the contents of the report be noted.



(f)         Any Other Business -


A letter received from Penarth Town Council was tabled at the meeting for Committee consideration.  The letter referred to the fact that local residents had made complaints that the land at Penarth Marina on the Barrage side of the Pont y Werin Bridge looked “unkempt and projects a poor reflection on the Penarth Marina”.  The Council were asking whether the Cardiff Harbour Authority had any plans to landscape the land or improve its appearance in any way.  Mr. Howell advised that photographs had been received from local residents in relation to the land and these were also tabled for Members at the meeting. In considering the letter and the photographs Members agreed that the land looked unfinished although Mr. Howell could advise that the land remained the same as it had prior to the building working being undertaken.  There were also insufficient funds available to landscape the land. However, Members considered that some sort of planting, small shrubs, etc. could make the site look better than it was.  Mr. Howell agreed to consider the matter again and report back to the Committee. 


AGREED - T H A T a response be forwarded to Penarth Town Council by the Chairman in light of the comments as detailed above.



(g)       Date of Next Meeting -


AGREED - T H A T the next meeting be held on Wednesday, 23rd November 2011 at 5.15 p.m. at the Cardiff Harbour Authority Offices.


- - - - - - - - - -


RESOLVED - T H A T the minutes be noted.


Reason for decision


To have regard to the views of the Cardiff Bay Advisory Committee.



C1465                        ANTI-FRAUD AND BRIBERY POLICY (REF - MINUTE NO. 379) -


The Audit Committee had, on 19th September, 2011, considered the above.  The Audit Committee had endorsed the revised Anti-Fraud and Bribery Policy as appended to the report and referred the same to Cabinet for adoption.  The revised Policy summarised the Council’s position with regard to fraud and corruption, building on the content of a number of corporate policy statements incorporated in the Council’s Constitution.  Members recognised it was imperative that Anti-Fraud Policies reflected the “tone at the top” of an organisation making it clear that fraud and corruption would not be tolerated.  Attention was drawn to specific elements of the Policy, in particular relating to the following areas:


·                    culture

·                    prevention

·                    detection and investigation

·                    awareness and training.


RESOLVED - T H A T the revised Anti-Fraud and Bribery Policy as appended to the report be endorsed and adopted.




Reason for decision


To adopt the Policy.





The Licensing Committee had, on 4th October 2011, considered the above,


(i)         recommending the Council to adopt the provisions of Part VIII of the Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1982 across the Vale of Glamorgan and that the provisions come into force on 1st February, 2012

(ii)        endorsing the new consolidated byelaws for the control of acupuncture, tattooing, semi-permanent skin-colouring, cosmetic piercing and electrolysis as appended to the report and recommending Council to adopt the same

(iii)       recommending the Council to revoke all current byelaws relating to acupuncture, tattooing, ear piercing and electrolysis

(iv)       resolving that the Director of Legal, Public Protection and Housing Services be authorised to carry out the necessary procedure and apply to the appropriate Minister at the Welsh Government for approval and confirmation of the new byelaws

(v)        requesting the Council to authorise the Director of Legal, Public Protection and Housing Services to seal and date the byelaws on behalf of the Council

(vi)       referring the report to Cabinet for information.


The Committee had been made aware of new model byelaws published by the Welsh Government in relation to the above.  The need had been identified to update the current byelaws for the reasons set out within the report. 


RESOLVED - T H A T since the issue was a matter for determination by the Council, the reference from the Licensing Committee as set out above be noted.


Reason for decision


To have regard to the views of the Licensing Committee.





Consideration was given to the application from Peterston-Super-Ely Community Council for CASH grant funding towards a scheme to address serious flooding and drainage issues on the Wyndham Park Estate in the sum of £4,175 plus VAT.  Members noted that the sewer in question was a private sewer, the maintenance of which was not a responsibility of this Council.  Notwithstanding the above, it was noted that the Council had recently expended approximately £1k. on CCTV surveying, jetting works and procurement and supervisory costs in an abortive attempt to improve the situation.  Appended to the application were a background information site plan, an audited financial statement and a statement in support from the local Member.  The estimated cost of the works based on the lowest of three contractors’ estimates was £5,250 (£4,375 plus VAT).  It was noted also that the application submitted did not include full engineering details and as such it was not possible to comment in relation to the adequacy or otherwise of the works envisaged or the costs thereof.  Members’ attention was also drawn to the fact that CASH grants, when approved, were normally 75% of the estimated costs which, in this instance, would equate to £3,938.


This was a matter for Executive decision.


Having considered the position, it was


RESOLVED - T H A T the application be approved in the sum of £3,938.


Reason for decision


To assist in the funding of storm water drainage improvements.



C1468                        TIMETABLE OF MEETINGS: MAY 2012 - MAY 2013 (L) (SCRUTINY - CORPORATE RESOURCES) -


This was a matter for Executive decision.


RESOLVED - T H A T the timetable of meetings for May 2012 to May 2013, as appended to the report, be approved subject to any future changes in arrangements for meetings deemed appropriate by the Mayor of the Council or the relevant Committee Chairman.


Reason for decision


To approve / publish a calendar of meetings for the 2012/13 municipal year.





Consultation on the proposed new Schools Policy commenced in September 2009 and had continued to be the subject of lengthy discussions with trade unions, headteacher groups, Legal Services and the Corporate Management Team.  During the consultation, a number of changes had been made in response to issues raised by the trade unions.  Despite the changes, a number of areas remained where it had not been possible to obtain consensus as outlined within the letter from the trade unions as appended to the report.  In brief, the key areas referred to in that letter had been addressed as follows:


·                    entitlement to Teacher and NJC Sick Pay Schemes – as shown at section 1.7 of the Policy, provisions for contractual sick pay allowance were contained in the Burgundy Book for teachers and the Green Book for support staff

·                    Headteacher Absence Procedure – the process for managing Headteacher absence was contained within the Policy, Appendix 3 of which dealt with the management responsibilities in that respect

·                    Training – to be undertaken as part of the implementation plan.


It had not however proven possible to reach agreement on the undermentioned:


·                    nature and timing of trigger points

·                    representation at first formal meeting

·                    appeal only applicable against dismissal notices.


The Corporate Management Team supported the Directorate’s view that concessions on those points would weaken the procedures at school level and undermine the corporate policy.


The report referred to corporate absence levels having significantly improved since the introduction of the corporate policy.  Absence management in schools was less robust that corporately, particularly with regards short term absence triggers / action.  It was noted that the current school policy was not specific about trigger points in long term sick cases although schools were now managing cases more proactively.  It was also noted that, based on latest sickness information (April to June 2011), school absence was 2.9% as opposed to the corporate absence of 3%.  Attention was drawn to the fact that, as part of the consultation process, the trade unions had said they considered it unnecessary to introduce a new policy.  If it were introduced in its current form, NASUWT in particular had indicated that they would be in dispute with the Council and any school that implemented the policy, threatening potential industrial action in any school which managed employees in line with the policy.


As regards resource implications, it was accepted that a reduction in absence levels would likely result in significant savings for schools and the Council.  The policy fully recognised the implications of the Equality Act when dealing with sickness absence, its intention being to offer support to individuals covered by the Act and to other staff in order to help them remain in work.  It was also noted that there had been significant consultation and a number of changes applied to the policy as part of that process.  At a Directorate level and, more recently, at the Council’s Joint Consultative Forum the matter had been raised and the trade unions had continued to register their concerns. 


Attention was drawn to the need to proofread the Policy prior to its dissemination to Governing Bodies.  The Director of Learning and Development undertook to ensure that the Policy was placed on the agenda for Governing Bodies expeditiously.


This was a matter for Executive decision.




(1)       T H A T the Policy as appended to the report be agreed and corrected for typographical errors and recommended to Governing Bodies for adoption within their establishments.


(2)       T H A T a further report on the progress of adoption by the Governing Bodies be submitted to Cabinet in due course.


Reasons for decisions


(1)       The Schools Management of Attendance Policy is based on the Corporate Policy which, since its implementation, had resulted in reduced absence levels and ensured consistent treatment of staff.


(2)       To monitor implementation.





The Council’s 21st Century Schools Strategic Outline Programme (SOP), as appended to the report, had been submitted in December 2010.


The report updated Members on the 21st Century Schools Programme and the position in relation to the Penarth Learning Community.  Key messages from the statement on capital and the 21st Century Schools Programme issued by the Minister for Education and Skills on 13th July, 2011 were shown in paragraph 6 of the report as outlined below:


·                    all projects approved under the transitional stage of the Programme would go ahead until they were completed

·                    forward programmes outlined in Local Authorities Strategic Outline Programmes to be reviewed against a sharper prioritisation based on the rationalisation of the school estate together with cost effectiveness of delivery and condition with alignment to All Age Transformation

·                    Local Authorities to be given the opportunity to review the timing and content of their planned investments to ensure funding went into the delivery of excellence in education not the maintenance of buildings

·                    feedback to be provided on Local Authorities’ plans

·                    the rate of capital grant support would move to 50%

·                    where revenue funded partnership approaches were deemed appropriate, Welsh Government was prepared to provide expert assistance.


The Head of the Infrastructure Unit at the WG had confirmed, on 9th August 2011, that the SOPs had been assessed and there was no need for Local Authorities to resubmit them.  Feedback would be provided to Local Authorities in due course.  Local Authorities would be asked to resubmit the forward outlook programme of investment which “should be based on your strategy together with the cost effectiveness of delivery and the rationalisation of school estate (Including the reduction of surplus places) and school condition”.  Detailed guidance to assist that process was currently awaited. 


The following timetable had been received from the newly appointed 21st Century Schools Programme Director on 16th September:


            Approval of guidance                       27th September

            Publication of guidance                    end of September

            Local Authorities submission          7th November

            Approval of programme                   5th - 9th December.


The required guidance had now been received but it was noted that, given the limited timeframe for the revision of the forward outlook programme, it might be necessary to submit an urgent report to Cabinet. 


Penarth Learning Community was a Tranche 3 (T3) scheme with a funding contribution requirement of 30%.  That funding had been included in the indicative five year Capital Programme.  The total cost of the scheme was being revised to reflect a slight reduction in the size of the Special School and residential provision.  A new funding profile was being developed to reflect the reduced cost of the scheme as well as funding contributions from other Local Authorities.  That would be factored into a revised Schools Investment Programme which would also incorporate revised investment priorities in the light of reduced capital funding.  It was noted that the revised Schools Investment Programme was anticipated to be reported to Cabinet in November.  The WG had advised that the Council could now commence the statutory process in relation to the Penarth Learning Community, the process and the timescales involved being appended to the report.  Irrespective of securing the necessary grant funding for the scheme, however, attention was drawn to the fact that building work could not commence until statutory approval for reorganisation of the schools concerned had been received from the WG.  Following publication of the Statutory Notice Members noted that if just one objection was received, the matter would be referred to the WG for determination which could be a lengthy process.  Should no objections be received the length of the statutory process would consequently be much reduced. 


Congratulations were offered to those officers involved in the process which had resulted in this Council receiving the single largest grant awarded to this Authority.


This was a matter for Executive decision.




(1)       T H A T the changes to the 21st Century Schools Programme and arrangements for the review of forward outlook programmes of capital investment contained in Local Authority Strategic Outline Programmes be noted.


(2)       T H A T the position in relation to Penarth Learning Community and the timescale for the associated statutory process be noted.


Reasons for decisions


(1)       To be aware of the need to review the Vale’s Programme against the backdrop of the WG’s reduced capital funding and the need for Local Authorities to contribute 50% funding to schemes in the future.


(2)       To be aware of the statutory process to be followed in respect of Penarth Learning Community.





Endorsement was sought of the multi-agency proposals to develop the Families First Service in the Vale of Glamorgan.  From April 2012, the Welsh Government Cymorth Grant would be replaced by the Families First fund, the funding criteria having been revised to targeted services aimed at tiers 2 and 3.  The tiered model of needs and service provision was well recognised and the model for Children and Young People Services in the Vale was appended to the report.  In responding to the funding changes and revised criteria, the Children and Young People’s Partnership (CYPP) had established a multi-agency Project Management Board consisting of Cardiff and the Vale University Health Board (UHB), Vale Centre for Voluntary Services (VCVS), the CYPP Manager, Education and Social Services, the purpose of which was to draft the service model for Families First and to plan the implementation of the service in readiness for April 2012.


Viewed in the context of the tiers of need, Families First aimed to achieve improvements in the interface between service provision and levels of need to ensure that services worked better together and improved outcomes for service users.  It was, therefore, essential that partner agencies worked together to offer the most appropriate support at the earliest opportunity to help minimise the escalation of difficulties and subsequent demand on higher level interventions.  The Cardiff and Vale Consortium bid for Welsh Government funding for Phase II of the Integrated Family Support Service had been successful and both services being developed needed to be complementary and add value to existing service provision.  It was anticipated that the provision of integrated services at tiers 2 and 3 should reduce the numbers of families requiring higher level, more intensive and very often more costly services from all statutory agencies.  The aspiration was to provide an holistic and wrap around service to children, young people and families who did not meet the threshold for statutory services at the point of referral but who could be predicted to meet that threshold if early support was not provided. 


The proposed service model for the Families First Team was appended to the report as was a flow chart explaining the service pathway.  All existing Cymorth funded services had been reviewed and those which would continue were in the process of realignment to fit the Families First criteria.  The position regarding projects currently funded was detailed in Appendix 4 to the report.  It was noted that the proposed service model had been ratified by the CYPP and, subject to approval by Cabinet, it was anticipated that recruitment would be completed by January 2012 with the team being fully operational by April 2012.  As regards resource implications, it was noted that the current transition year funding level for the Vale of Glamorgan was £1.26m. of which £1.06m. was currently committed.  Given the nature of the grant funding, appointments would be offered on fixed term contracts and secondment arrangements positively encouraged.  In the longer term, it was hoped that the Families First service would achieve cost savings for statutory agencies through reduction in the demand for higher tier specialist services. 


This was a matter for Executive decision.




(1)       T H A T the proposals for the development of the Families First Service be endorsed.


(2)       T H A T the contractual / SLA arrangements with the following providers be extended and renewed:


·                    Vale of Glamorgan Council Learning and Development Directorate

·                    Social Services Directorate

·                    Leisure and Tourism

·                    Flying Start

·                    Gibbonsdown Children Centre

·                    Action for Children.


(3)       T H A T the establishment of new posts in the Families First Team, to be hosted by Social Services, be approved.


Reasons for decisions


(1)       To ensure Cabinet is aware of the delivery of Families First in the context of providing early intervention and prevention services to children, young people and families to minimise the need for higher level support and intervention from statutory services.


(2)       To gain Cabinet approval for contracts / SLAs to be extended and renewed to support the proposed developments taking account of the changes to existing Cymorth funded services.


(3)       To support the recruitment of staff to deliver the Families First Service.





Approval was sought for the purchase of a new Care Alarm Service for Council tenants.  By way of background, the disadvantages of the current VCAS alarm service were outlined in paragraphs 2 to 6.  It was noted that the Council currently provided two modern alarm services for private residents, namely TeleV and TeleV+.  TeleV provided as part of a standard package an emergency alarm service, radio smoke detectors and extreme temperature sensors, along with a wireless alarm worn by the tenant.  To qualify for TeleV+ a resident would need to undertake a Social Care Assessment or self fund.  Monitoring of both the systems was through OneVale on a 24/7 basis.  It was proposed that for consistency and equality of service provision the Council extend the TeleV service to Council tenants.  TeleV operated from an individual tenant’s BT telephone line and, since there were likely to be tenants who did not have a current BT line, the necessary arrangements would need to be put in place;  the cost estimates of installation were currently unknown.  The cost of purchasing and installing the new TeleV system was approximately £430k. including a five year maintenance agreement.  It was proposed that the costs of migrating to the TeleV system would be met through the Housing Capital Reserve.  Attention was drawn to the fact that shared monthly monitoring charges for tenants at £4.50 per week would be slightly higher than the current VCAS charge and, that for those tenants wishing to take advantage of the Council paying for the installation cost of a BT line, there would be a requirement to pay an increased monitoring charge of an additional 50p per week. 


This was a matter for Executive decision.




(1)       T H A T the purchase of the TeleV alarm service for Council tenants be approved.


(2)       T H A T Housing Capital Reserves be used to pay for the purchase of this new facility.


(3)       T H A T current users of the VCAS service without a BT telephone line be offered the opportunity of the line installation costs being paid by the Council up front and repaid through the monthly monitoring charge, line rental to be met by the individual tenant.


(4)       T H A T tenants not living within a Sheltered Scheme complex be given the opportunity to opt out of the TeleV service.


(5)       T H A T the Council’s Contract Standing Orders be waived in this instance due to the value of the contract and there being only one potential provider.


Reasons for decisions


(1)       The current VCAS system is no longer fit for purpose and requires replacement.


(2)       To allow for the immediate replacement of the redundant alarm system.


(3)       The new system works off individual telephone lines rather than the current arrangements of a hard wired system.


(4)       This will provide the opportunity for tenants’ choice.


(5)       The goods and equipment are proprietary articles and Tunstall, as the supplier of the Council’s TeleV monitoring equipment, will not indemnify against third party alarm equipment.





Whilst approval to give Public Notice of the Council’s intention to produce a Traffic Regulation Order (TRO) had historically been sought from the Planning Committee, legal advice provided that it was in fact an Executive function which could be delegated.  It was consequently proposed that, if delegated authority were given, the Director of Environmental and Economic Regeneration would prepare a draft scheme and undertake initial consultation as appropriate, that consultation to include the Police and local Members.  Following further consultation with the Cabinet Member, the Director of Environmental and Economic Regeneration would then instruct the Director of Legal, Public Protection and Housing Services to prepare and publish the appropriate statutory Notices.  Where no objections were received following publication of the statutory Notices, the Director of Environmental and Economic Regeneration would instruct the Director of Legal, Public Protection and Housing Services to make the TROs.  Where objections were  received, those objections would be presented to Cabinet for determination. 


This was a matter for Executive decision.





(1)       T H A T the clarification of the procedure for dealing with TROs be noted.


(2)       T H A T delegated authority be given to the Director of Environmental and Economic Regeneration in consultation with the Cabinet Member for Visible and Building Services to prepare, approve, undertake statutory consultation and confirm TROs where no objections were received; where objections were received, the TRO to be determined by Cabinet.


(3)       T H A T delegated authority be given to the Director of Environmental and Economic Regeneration to instruct the Director of Legal, Public Protection and Housing Services to publish all Notices required by the appropriate legislation and subsequently to make the TROs.


Reasons for decisions


(1)       To clarify the procedure.


(2)       To provide the necessary authority to prepare, approve, undertake statutory consultation and confirm TROs where no objections are received.


(3)       To provide the necessary authority to instruct the Director of Legal, Public Protection and Housing Services to publish all statutory Notices and subsequently to make the TROs.





Authority was sought to demolish the existing Alexandra Gardens Community Centre and the report contained proposals to replace it with a new building. The Centre was believed to have been constructed circa 1947 and, in recent years, had had a number of improvements made to it.  Following a recent problem, an independent structural survey had been commissioned which confirmed that the building needed to be closed as it was structurally unsound with a high risk of collapse.  A further study had been undertaken to assess the feasibility of allowing the Centre to remain open but, following consideration of the same by the Community Centre Committee, that had not been deemed the best way forward.  Members noted that temporary accommodation for all of the existing users had been found either directly by the Council or by the groups themselves. 


Urgent action needed to be taken to demolish the building which had the support of the Community Centre Association.  An estimate to demolish the building had been obtained at £50k. which would include some of the recent improvements, notably the boiler and windows, being put into storage fur future use.  The Alexandra Gardens Community Association was committed to providing a new hall on the site and officers from the Directorate of Environmental and Economic Regeneration had been working with the Association to draw up suitable plans.  Contact had also been made with the Barry Regeneration Area scheme as well as other potential funding opportunities.  The estimated cost of a suitable replacement building was approximately £500k.  A capital bid had been submitted for £300k. for 2012/13 and the remaining £200k. would be requested from the Welsh Government Barry Regeneration Area grant. 


This was a matter for Executive decision.




(1)       T H A T the existing Alexandra Gardens Community Centre be demolished as soon as possible.


(2)       T H A T the estimated cost of £50k. for demolition be included in the current Capital Programme, funded from the Miscellaneous Buildings Fund.


(3)       T H A T the Director of Environmental and Economic Regeneration work in partnership to secure funding for a potential rebuild of Alexandra Gardens Community Centre.


Reasons for decisions


(1)       Due to potential health and safety issues arising from leaving a dangerous structure empty.


(2)       To provide funding for the demolition.


(3)       To replace the former community centre with a building fit for purpose.





Authority was sought for the Council to become part of a proposed regional adult placement procurement hub that was being established by the South East Wales Improvement Collaborative (SEWIC).  Such a service would typically deal with placements for adults with a learning disability, a physical disability, functional mental health issues or sensory loss, providing a single process and point of contact for local authorities when they needed to engage with the independent sector provider market to make placements.  Having developed a business case for the proposed procurement hub, SEWIC was now proposing that the ten local authorities agree, in brief, to:


·                    establish a regional procurement / brokerage service to deal with demand for new residential and nursing home placements in the independent sector

·                    co-locate the hub with the Children’s Commissioning Unit and explore the opportunities for sharing resources and costs

·                    seek to integrate the two services into a single regional high cost / low volume placement procurement hub under a single manager in two years

·                    approach the NHS to encourage Local Health Boards to join the new brokerage service.


It was noted that there was currently a lack of co-ordination across local authority commissioners in terms of negotiating with providers, controlling and co-ordinating costs and monitoring standards.  There was also relatively little contact with providers with regard to promoting the development of a range of services to meet service modernisation requirements and current and future demand.  It was considered that the development of a regional procurement hub would help address some of those identified shortcomings by:


·                    rationalising the different and separate purchasing processes across the local authorities into a single agreed purchasing point of contact with the provider market

·                    contributing to the management of the market by establishing a cost baseline for differing levels of need, minimising negative competition for placements and preventing inconsistent cost outcomes between purchasers and providers

·                    delivering a cost saving or cost avoidance for new placement activity

·                    feeding into and shaping the wider collaborative, partnership working and modernisation of commissioning approaches.


It was proposed that the brokerage hub would place all new high cost packages worth £600 or more per week and, based on predicted service usage, it was anticipated that the service would be used by this Council for five new placements per year.  It was noted that governance and financial arrangements for the unit would be set out in a detailed Service Level Agreement between all the participating authorities.  The staffing and day to day management of the brokerage hub would be undertaken by Rhondda Cynon Taff CT as indicated in paragraph 11 of the report.  The Cabinet Member indicated that the current arrangement in relation to the Children’s Commissioning Unit was very successful, representing good value for money whilst improving service quality.


This was a matter for Executive decision.




(1)       T H A T the proposal that the Vale of Glamorgan Council join the proposed SEWIC adult placement procurement hub be approved.


(2)       T H A T the Director of Social Services, the Director of Finance, ICT and Property and the Director of Legal, Public Protection and Housing Services, in consultation with the Cabinet Member for Social and Care Services, the Leader and Deputy Leader, be authorised to agree a formal collaborative agreement with the other local authorities in the SEWIC in respect of the procurement hub.


Reasons for decisions


(1)       To ensure that long term placements are procured in a cost effective way and meet service user needs.


(2)       To allow the unit to become operational as soon as possible.





A copy of the Charter, which described in one document the values, principles of service, rights and responsibilities underpinning the delivery of support to people with mental health problems, was appended to the report.  Members noted that the Vale was working closely with Cardiff City Council and the Cardiff and Vale University Health Board to improve access to and delivery of services for adults with mental health problems and that part of the programme involved creating integrated management arrangements for the service.  It was considered that the adoption of the Charter for Mental Health across the three organisations would ensure that all staff were working towards the same outcomes for service users and a clear direction.  Delivery of the Charter would involve:


·                    service users and carers

·                    local providers of services, both voluntary and statutory

·                    specialist services, including drug and alcohol services

·                    service commissioners.


As service commissioners, this Council would be expected to encourage mental health service provider organisations in the independent and third sectors to adopt the Charter if they had not done so already.  Accountability for ensuring that the Charter was operative across the three statutory organisations would rest initially with the Integrating Health and Social Care Services Programme Board which had an established place within the governance arrangements within each organisation.  Members were assured that the Director of Social Services would provide periodic updates to the Scrutiny Committee (Social Care and Health) regarding implementation of the Charter so that effective oversight of developments within that service area could be exercised.


This was a matter for Executive decision.




(1)       T H A T the Charter, developed in part by the relevant statutory agencies in the Vale of Glamorgan and Cardiff in consultation with key stakeholders (including service users and carers), be noted.


(2)       T H A T the Charter be implemented within the services provided by the Vale of Glamorgan Council to people with mental health problems.


Reasons for decisions


(1)       To ensure that Cabinet is aware of this initiative and its implications.


(2)       To ensure that the support services directly provided or commissioned by the Council adopt best practice in responding to the needs of people with mental health problems.





The Director of Social Services was required by the Welsh Government to report annually on the effectiveness of social care services in the Vale and plans for improvement and to make that report available to the public and the key partners of the Council.  The report was, consequently, written for a wide range of people.  A summary of the progress made by Social Services over the past year and an outline of the future direction which the Directorate needed to take in responding to the challenges facing the Council was shown on page 7 of that report.  It was noted that there was considerable evidence to show that, over the past year, the Directorate had become even better equipped to fill the Council’s high expectations of service and to meet the needs of service users and carers.  The report described the formidable challenges facing the Council (most obviously finding ways to bridge the gap between the reducing resources available and the year on year growth in social care costs), the only sustainable answer for Social Services in the longer term being for the Council and its partners to change the pattern of services, recognising at the same time that the independence of the clients needed to be promoted and services focused away from institutional settings and into people’s homes and local communities.  It was considered that the evidence in the report demonstrated that the Council had good foundations upon which to build in responding to those challenges and was well placed overall to continue improving because of the way the Council was managing programmes of change, with a new three year Change Plan designed to ensure that there was a clear direction for social services in the Vale.  Proposed new improvement actions for each service had been included in the Plan which, once endorsed, would be included in the Directorate’s Service Plans and incorporated where appropriate in the Social Services Change Plan. 


This was a matter for Executive decision.




(1)       T H A T the Director’s second Annual Report, attached at Appendix 1 to the report, be noted.


(2)       T H A T the improvement priorities set out in the report be endorsed.


Reasons for decisions


(1)       To ensure that Cabinet has been informed about the views expressed by the Director in his report regarding service effectiveness in 2010/11 and his plans for improvement.


(2)       To ensure that Cabinet approves the improvement priorities set out in the report.





Members were updated on the progress made by the formal Programme Board which was overseeing the operational integration of selected health and social care services across the Vale of Glamorgan and Cardiff.  The Board co-ordinated agreed projects, defined the outcomes expected and provided the overarching leadership required to manage significant programmes of change.  The Programme Board had met for the first time in June 2010 and now met every other month.  The minutes of Programme Board meetings demonstrated significant progress in some of the work streams whereas others were relatively new and still at an early stage of development.  It was recognised that, whilst the pace of change was increasing, it had not yet reached the level required given the need to consider re-organising radically the way in which some social care and health services were organised and delivered.  The need to respond quickly and effectively to the growing demand for services, increasing costs of care and decreasing resources was fully recognised as was the inherent differences within the health care and social care systems in relation to, for example, finance, administration and arrangements for providers.  As a consequence, the Programme Board had been working hard to reach agreement on shared values, strong sponsorship for integration at a high level with all three organisations and identification of common difficulties and mutually beneficial outcomes.  Members of the Board had acknowledged the need to become more purposeful and effective and had endorsed the collaborative agreement which made more explicit expectations of Board members and the work they oversaw.  The agreement specified expected outcomes, underpinned by more rigorous governance and performance management arrangements.  Each of the organisations had made a specific commitment to contribute more resources to the work.  It had also been agreed that this Council’s Director of Social Services would take on the Senior Responsible Officer role for the Programme Board as a whole. 


It was considered that the collaborative agreement would help to ensure the Programme Board was better equipped to fulfil the expectations of the three sponsoring organisations.  Whilst it was accepted that the benefits of collaboration and integrated services could be considerable, the Programme Board recognised that those benefits could be lost because of the possible costs of partnership working when not managed well enough.  One possible answer in the area of health and social services was to use more extensively the range of powers and arrangements which provided a statutory basis for integration and collaborative working as outlined in paragraph 13 of the report.   Further reports would be presented to Cabinet in due course.


This was a matter for Executive decision.




(1)       T H A T the contents of the report be noted.


(2)       T H A T minutes from meetings of the Programme Board continue to be reported to Cabinet.


(3)       T H A T the collaborative agreement as appended to the report, which would be used to guide the way in which all three partner organisations worked together in delivering a range of services for the local community, be endorsed.


Reasons for decisions


(1&2)  To ensure that Cabinet is aware of the progress made to date and supports implementation of the actions agreed by the Programme Board.


(3)       To ensure that the Council’s expectations of the Programme Board are set out clearly and explicitly.





In August 2011, the Welsh Government invited local authorities to bid for Safe Routes in Communities Grant for new or existing schemes.  Given uncertainty as to whether bids would in fact be invited for 2012/13 and, due to the high number of existing unfunded schemes, no new schemes had been considered for the forthcoming year.  Of the six bids submitted last year only three elements of one was in fact funded.  Details of the bids were shown in paragraph 9 of the report as outlined below:


(i)         Barry Comprehensive School -  The WG had funded part of the scheme in 2008/09, 2010/11 and 2011/12 and it is proposed for 2012/13 to expand this scheme further to include a cycleway (either shared or on road) for the length of Colcot Road and from the end of the existing shared route on Port Road to the roundabout on the Barry Docks Link Road.  It was estimated that the cost would amount to circa £400,000.  This is afforded Priority 1.


(ii)        Dinas Powys Compendium - the previous bid had been unsuccessful. The costs of the scheme were £490,000.  It was intended to re-submit this scheme for 2012/13 funding as a Priority 2.


(iii)       Llantwit Major Compendium – It was noted that a significant element of the scheme had been funded in 2010/11 but had been unsuccessful in 2010/11 and 2011/12.  The bid would be resubmitted for 2012/13 as a Priority 3.


(iv)       Fairfield Primary School - Cost approximately £169,000.  Priority 4.


(v)        St. Helen’s Primary School – Cost approximately £50,000.  Priority 5.


(vi)       Gwenfo Primary School – Some of the works identified would be funded by Local Road Safety Grant 2010/11, the remainder of the bid would be resubmitted as a Priority 6.


This was a matter for Executive decision.




(1)       T H A T the contents of the 2012/13 Safe Routes in Communities bids as submitted to the Welsh Government on 18th October 2011 be approved.


(2)       T H A T a further report be presented to Cabinet outlining the results of the 2012/13 Safe Routes in Communities bids process through the Capital Programme reporting mechanism.


(3)       T H A T the Director of Environmental and Economic Regeneration in consultation with the Cabinet Member for Planning and Transportation be authorised to accept any further funding offered through the grant within the year.


Reasons for decisions


(1)       To obtain Cabinet approval on the content of the 2012/13 SRiC bids to the WG.


(2)       To advise Members of the Council’s SRiC award for 2012/13.


(3)       To accept any funding offered by the WG at very short notice to enable the Council to deliver the scheme within the set timescale.





The Welsh Government required all local authorities who wished to retain their stock to submit annually an acceptable Housing Business Plan that included a detailed financial forecast in the form of a 30 year financial model.  The revised draft of the Housing Business Plan was appended to the report.  The following table summarised the major changes made to the base model assumptions within the Plan:





November 2010

October 2011

Minimum level of balances to be maintained


£450,000 in real terms

£600,000 in real terms


£68.50 per week (average) calculated on a 52 week basis for 2010/2011, and to increase by inflation target +1% from 2011/12 onwards in line with the notional rent guideline increase as per latest WAG determination.


£72.24 per week (average) calculated on a 52 week basis for 2011/2012, and to increase by inflation target +1% from 2012/13 onwards in line with the notional rent guideline increase as per latest WAG determination.

All other revenue income and expenditure

Based on 2010/11 budget

Based on 2011/12 budget including additional staff, consultancy fees and IT improvements and investments.


Penarth Heights HRA Useable Capital Receipts (UCRs)




Land Sales

£300,000 in total with 50% useable.

Assumed use in Year 4 2013/14


£200,000 in total with 50% useable.

Assumed use in Year 4 2013/14

Other Capital Spends

Disabled Adaptations

£280k (Yr 1) + £260k pa (Yr 2-30)


£600k (Yr 1) - Hostel

Disabled Adaptations

£240k pa + (8% fees)



£872k (Yr 1-30) - Hostel and Temporary Accommodation


Estate Safety Improvements



£50k pa (Year 2-6)


Further details in relation to the above were contained within the report.


The latest projections were shown at Appendix E(i) and E(ii) of the Plan and showed a reduction in the maximum amount of unsupported debt (Prudential Borrowing) at any time of £31.18m. (previously £35.12m.) and an increase in revenue surplus after 30 years to £104.68m. (previously £58.68m.).  Based on Prudential Borrowing of £32.02m. it was anticipated that the Council could make early repayments during the later years of the Plan and repay any outstanding debt by 2028/29 (previously 2034/35).  The following table indicated a summary of the movement in the financial position compared to the previous base:



November 2010




WHQS Target

Prudential Borrowing

Peak Debt

Repayment of Debt

Revenue Surplus in Year 30











No Change



-6 years



As regards sensitivity analysis and risk assessment, attention was drawn to the fact that one of the major risks to the Council was the impact of Prudential Borrowing which was required to ensure that the Welsh Housing Quality Standard (WHQS) was met in 2016/17.  Reference was also made within the Plan to other potential risks.  For sensitivities 5 and 6 (risks in the receipt of the Major Repairs Allowance) modelled in the Plan, whilst the Council’s Housing Business Plan was technically viable the level of peak debt could be potentially viewed by the Council as an unacceptable level of risk.  Additionally, the HRA reserve surplus at year 30 was considerably reduced.  Whilst the above table showed that there was capacity for the Council to absorb a degree of risk, significant changes to some assumptions could have a severe impact and potentially make the existing investment programme financially unviable.  Further details were contained within the report as to the level of risk and particular attention drawn to the need to consider whether the risk to the Council was deemed reasonable. 


It was recognised that consultation was required prior to the Housing Business Plan being finalised.  It was consequently proposed that the draft Plan be referred to the Tenants Consultation Panel and to the Scrutiny Committee (Corporate Resources) and the Scrutiny Committee (Housing and Public Protection).  Thereafter the Plan would be brought back to Cabinet in November with a view to its being presented to Council for approval in December 2011.  The Cabinet Member drew attention to the fact that consultation would also be undertaken with the trade unions prior to the submission of the Plan to the Council.  It was noted that the Council could consider spending above the level currently assumed in the Plan.  Additional capital funding could be made available, for example, on environmental improvements and a further option could be for further revenue expenditure to support and improve service delivery - or a combination of both.  Leaseholders would be responsible for a proportion of costs of the improvement works and it was considered critical that a procedure was put in place to minimise any unrecoverable costs. 


This was a matter for endorsement by the Cabinet and approval by the Council.




(1)       T H A T the changes to the draft Housing Business Plan as outlined in the report be noted.


(2)       T H A T the draft Plan be referred to the Scrutiny Committee (Corporate Resources) and to the Scrutiny Committee (Housing and Public Protection).


(3)       T H A T the draft Plan be referred for consultation with the Tenants Panel.


(4)       T H A T the Housing Business Plan be brought back to Cabinet following consultation.


Reasons for decisions


(1)       To update the draft Business Plan with the latest available information.


(2)       To provide opportunity for comment from the Scrutiny Committees.


(3)       To seek the views of tenants.


(4)       To report the proposed final Housing Business Plan prior to its submission to Council.





As part of their individual care plan, adults with a learning disability could be provided with supported accommodation which enabled them to live within the community.  The Council had undertaken a tendering exercise in 2007 to appoint providers for the service for five years.  It was noted that the following organisations currently provided weekly support as follows:



Service Level

Lifeways Community Care Ltd.

21 houses*;  44 service users

Innovate Trust

3 houses;  10 service users


6 houses;  12 service users


*           In addition, one property is being refurbished and one new property should be operational from October 2011.



It was noted that over the three contracts there were approximately 3,000 hours of shared support and 1,950 hours of individual support provided each week. 


New contracts for the supported accommodation services would have to be in place by October 2012.  The re-tendering exercise would be undertaken in accordance with the Council’s Contract Standing Orders.  The services would be funded from within the Social Services budget and the Supporting People Grant, it being noted that the total cost of the current provision was £5m.


This was a matter for Executive decision.


RESOLVED - T H A T the Director of Social Services, the Director of Finance, ICT and Property and the Director of Legal, Public Protection and Housing Services (in consultation with the Cabinet Member for Social and Care Services, the Cabinet Member for Housing and Community Safety, the Leader and the Deputy Leader) be authorised to:


·                    commence tendering procedures for the services outlined in the report; and

·                    accept and award tenders for the service in accordance with the Council’s Contract Standing Orders.


Reason for decision


To ensure that the Council provides supported accommodation in a cost effective way and meets the assessed needs of service users; fulfils the responsibilities set out in the Welsh Government’s Learning Disability Strategy 2004 and the commitments made in the Community Strategy 2010-2020; and meets the requirements of its Financial Regulations and Contract Standing Orders.





RESOLVED - T H A T the following matter which the Chairman had decided was urgent for the reason given beneath the minute heading be considered.



C1483                        SENIOR MANAGEMENT REDUCTION (REF) -

Urgent by reason of the need to resolve the issue of the Senior Management Reduction


The Scrutiny Committee (Corporate Resources) had, on 11th October 2011, considered the above matter.  The Committee had subsequently endorsed resolutions (1) to (4) of Cabinet Minute C1446 and asked Cabinet to consider amending resolution (5) to read “That the proposals be amended to reflect the need for the Section 151 Officer to attend the Corporate Management Team in addition to the Monitoring Officer, both officers to attend to provide advice but not as part of the Council’s Director (First Tier) Management Structure”. 


Having considered the above and related matters, it was


RESOLVED - T H A T the recommendation of the Scrutiny Committee be accepted and resolution (5) of Cabinet Minute No. C1446 amended accordingly.


Reason for decision


To progress the matter.



C1484                        EXCLUSION OF PRESS AND PUBLIC -


RESOLVED - T H A T under Section 100A(4) of the Local Government Act 1972, the press and public be excluded from the meeting for the following item of business on the grounds that it involves the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined in Part 4 of Schedule 12A (as amended) of the Act, the relevant paragraphs of the Schedule being referred to in brackets after the minute heading.





Authority was sought to let the Watchtower, The Knap, Barry to the highest bidder through the informal tender process for a term of 25 years with the inclusion of an option to purchase.  The availability of the aforementioned property had been advertised by way of a two stage tender process.  Three responses had been received at the expiration of the deadline for initial expressions but, at the expiration of the Stage Two deadline, only one proposal had been received.  That expression of interest had been received from Mr. and Mrs. P. 


This was a matter for Executive decision.


Having considered the contents of the report, it was




(1)       T H A T the Director of Environmental and Economic Regeneration be authorised to instruct the Director of Finance, ICT and Property to proceed with the lease of the property to Mr. and Mrs. P.


(2)       T H A T the Director of Legal, Public Protection and Housing Services, in consultation with the Cabinet Members for Finance, ICT and Property and Tourism and Leisure, be authorised to complete all the necessary documentation to complete the lease.


Reasons for decisions


(1)       To accept Mr. and Mrs. P.’s offer which constitutes the best consideration.


(2)       In order to complete the lease.