To receive declarations of personal and prejudicial interest (if any) from Members/Officers in accordance with the provisions of the Members Code of Conduct adopted by Council from 1 September 2008 (including whipping declarations)

None

To receive for approval the minutes of the meeting of the 26/04/2021

RESOLVED:                      That the Minutes of a Combined meeting of Subject Overview and Scrutiny Committee 3 and Corporate Overview and Scrutiny Committee dated 26 April 2021 be approved as a true and accurate record, subject the following amendments:

Page 6, last paragraph, last sentence:

“It was about active travel routes and ensuring that well lit connectivity and a nice route through, as well as bringing them past retail and shops, for the increased footfall and spending.”

Page 8, the penultimate paragraph, second line:

“Planning regulations would dictate how many parking  planning spaces, particular residential developments would be permitted to have in place.”

Invitees

Councillor Huw David – Leader

Councillor Stuart Baldwin - Cabinet Member Communities

Councillor Richard Young – Chair - Bridgend 2030 Decarbonisation Programme Board

Janine Nightingale - Corporate Director, Communities

Zak Shell - Head of Operations - Community Services

Ieuan Sherwood - Group Manager - Economy, Natural Resources & Sustainability

Gareth Clubb - Climate Change Response Manager

Sam Wright-Green - Associate - Carbon Trust

David Powlesland - Senior Manager - Carbon Trust

The Corporate Director – Communities began by providing Members with some narrative in respect of the 2030 Agenda before introducing colleagues from the Carbon Trust to deliver a presentation. Following the presentation the Corporate Director explained that she was aware that the Committee had sent some questions regarding the report but that it had been too late for colleagues from the Carbon Trust to incorporate into their presentation but these would be picked up. The Group Manager - Planning and Development Services updated Members on the Authority’s Ultra Low Emissions Vehicle work at the depots.

Following the presentation of the report, Members of the Committee asked the following:

A Member was concerned that discussions had centred on the Local Authority and focussed on how the public could play their part again, but what part would industry play as huge producers of carbon.  He asked for the views of the Carbon Trust on the long term view of big industry and the military emitting carbon.

The Senior Manager - Carbon Trust explained that the Welsh Government (WG) had set the target of 2030 on the public sector because they would like the sector to lead by example. Public Sector emissions in Wales were only around between 1% and 3%, so what the Member had said about the public and industry and influencing those and putting targets on them, rang true because 90% of emissions were attributed to that.  However, the Council was publicly funded and there was a responsibility to try and lead by example including the influence on the Council’s supply chain which would drive industry, as procurement was around 75% of the Council’s emissions and they would be the ones that would have to invest, taking up the challenge to demonstrate to the Council this was being addressed.

Heavy industry had previously fallen under the EU energy efficiency directive and had to spend quite a lot of money undertaking energy saving audits.  Larger public sector bodies had been in the previous CRC Energy Efficiency Scheme, but the UK Government had decided not to include public sector bodies in the Streamlined Energy and Carbon Reporting Scheme that followed. However, heavy industry and large SMEs did have to report their emissions under that scheme. So recently there was a lot of regulation trying to drive activity in industry, but obviously there was a need for a requirement for the public sector with targets very much seen as Local Authorities’ responsibility through the leadership role in influencing them.

A Member commented that the report had not mentioned the impact of manufacturing in and around the county borough, but had identified that 75% of savings should come from procurement. He asked whether the Authority should be buying from local providers that were emitters of carbon gases and how such procurement would operate.

The Corporate Director – Communities explained that a review of the procurement strategy was currently being undertaken, working with WRAP Cymru and the Procurement Section.  They were trying to advise how  ...  view the full minutes text for item 9.

Invitees:

Councillor Hywel Williams - Deputy Leader

Councillor Stuart Baldwin - Cabinet Member Communities

Janine Nightingale - Corporate Director, Communities

Gill Lewis - Interim Chief Officer Finance, Performance and Change

Zak Shell - Head of Operations - Community Services

Sian Hooper - Cleaner Streets & Waste Contract Manager

The Corporate Director - Communities introduced the report regarding arrangements for the waste service post 2024, as a result of the current waste collection recycling contract ending in March 2024.  She advised that while the current contract had performed well against national standards, the difficulty being faced was the number of uncertainties linked to a future waste service contract, which she summarised from the report.  The Head of Operations - Community Services presented the report.

The Deputy Leader advised that it had been known that this stage was coming and discussions had taken place as a Cabinet.  Welsh Government (WG) position had changed, and maybe the targets would also change but it was clear there were a number of uncertainties, so it would be unwise to proceed to a procurement stage at that point in time.

A Member advised that he was slightly disappointed to have not heard about the option of in-sourcing / bringing back in house and wanted to have the debate. He accepted there was lots of good data and performance but the comparison data was not always accurate because this was an externalised contract, compared to other Local Authorities. A big thank you needed to be given to the public, who had taken part and had made the figures work. In terms of the costs the Member was concerned whether some of the low costs could be due to staff not getting the best terms and conditions, that they could get if directly employed. The Member advised that he would like to hear the debate and have the figures, costs, analysis and cost benefits of bringing things back in-house, because having direct control, was he felt the best way to deal with the with all the uncertainties.

The Cabinet Member Communities replied that it wasn’t to say that those discussions were not going to happen; it was just at the moment the report was about the potential to seek an extension of the current contract to allow the Local Authority to look at what is going to be the best options going forward.  In terms of the figures, 85% of people considered the service to be average and above and he would accept an average over a poor or a very poor, considering it was a service that was often criticised by the public.  He advised that the idea of the report today was about extending the contract and not to look at the wider issues at the moment, but when those wider implications were looked at this could come back to Scrutiny.

The Head of Operations – Community Services explained in relation to the options this would be about future discussions around how the Local Authority could provide the service long term. Meanwhile, this report was looking to explore all of the reasons there was so much uncertainty, that for now the best and most straightforward solution was to have a short extension, given that all the data showed things were okay at the moment  ...  view the full minutes text for item 10.

The Committee made the following recommendation:

     That a report on the introduction of the WG Pavement Parking  

     Enforcement be added to the Committee’s Forward Work Programme,

     following the surveying of streets and collation of information for potential

     Traffic Parking Orders, but before implementation.

There were no requests to include specific information in the item for the next meeting.

RESOLVED:          That the Committee approved the Forward Work Programme in Appendix A, subject to the above addition, noted that the Forward Work Programme and any updates from the Committee would be reported to the next meeting of COSC and noted the Recommendation Monitoring Action Sheet in Appendix B.

To consider any item(s) of business in respect of which notice has been given in

accordance with Part 4 (paragraph 4) of the Council Procedure Rules and which the person presiding at the meeting is of the opinion should by reason of special circumstances be transacted at the meeting as a matter of urgency.

None