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)

Cllr Nicole Burnett declared a personal interest as she was chair of Evergreen Hall.

To receive for approval the minutes of 4/11/19 and 24/1/20

RESOLVED:          The Minutes of the meeting of 4 November 2019 were approved subject to the following change: Cllr Blundell declared a personal interest due to being a non-playing member of the Cardiff Saracens who were in the same league as Brackla RFC.

                              The Minutes of the meeting of 24 January 2020 were approved.

The Chairperson of the Cross-Party Recovery Panel took the Committee through the report. The purpose of the report was to present the Committee with the Phase 1 Findings and Recommendations of the Cross-Party Recovery Panel. Section 2 noted the connection to corporate well-being objectives and other corporate priorities. Section 3 provided the background in relation to the Covid-19 pandemic and lockdown, and the establishment of the Cross-Party Recovery Panel and membership plus additional Members and invited guest speakers from the selected areas that the Panel wished to investigate further. Phase 1 of the Cross-Party Recovery Panel had taken a structured approach to the selection of key areas from those identified for priority to feed into the recovery process and had identified key issues following examination. The report also included the Well-being of Future Generations (Wales) Act 2015 implications. There were no financial implications directly associated with this report. The Chairperson of the Cross-Party Recovery Panel wished to thank all Members involved for what he considered to be a well-structured and attended participatory approach and hoped that it would continue.

The Vice-Chairperson of the Cross-Party Recovery Panel wished to echo the words of the Chairperson of the Recovery Panel. He pointed to Recommendation 8 as needing to be more explicit by recommending a Housing First Scheme that provided vulnerable people with housing before tackling any further needs as he did not believe there was such a scheme in Bridgend. The Chairperson of the Cross-Party Recovery Panel confirmed that V2C operated a Housing First Scheme in Bridgend.

The Chairperson took the Member’s point but felt it would be unfair to do anything further with the recommendations given that these were the recommendations put forward by the Panel and the point was not raised at the Cross-Party Recovery Panel Meeting.

The Member then pointed to Recommendation 16. While he agreed in principle that it was important for the Authority to collaborate with other Authorities, he was concerned that Bridgend did not fit with the characteristics of the city councils that formed the cooperative. He felt it was better for Bridgend to collaborate with neighbouring authorities. Furthermore, he noted that Wales had different laws and principles to its English counterparts and that Welsh devolution needed to be respected.

The Chairperson reminded the Member that the recommendations were now for Cabinet to consider, who would respond appropriately should it be obvious that Bridgend did not fit with a cooperative. The Chairperson noted that the Committee could ask Cabinet to keep them informed of their findings should they take the recommendation forward. The Member agreed to this.

A Member noted that the Cross-Party Recovery Panel had been useful in its frequency and content. The work undertaken by the Panel showed what could be achieved by Task and Finish Groups and he was very happy with how it had worked to date and wished it to continue. He fully supported the recommendations, in particular Recommendation 1. He felt that the future sustainability and value of culture, leisure  ...  view the full minutes text for item 178.

The Chairperson was concerned that the report had been sent as an information report containing red status items, and it would have been beneficial to ask questions on those items. She apologised for there being no officer in attendance. She asked if there were any comments on the report.

The Chief Executive suggested that as a Committee item going forward that Directors be present to provide an overview of their area and to go through red and amber status items. It was his personal view that this would create stronger scrutiny and greater opportunity for Member involvement and to understand the reasons why targets had not been met or, in some cases, been exceeded. The Chief Executive, with the Chairperson’s permission, noted that if this was a recommendation that Members wished to make, the Directors and the Chief Executive could attend the Committee annually in order to answer the detailed questions.

The Chairperson thanked the Chief Executive. She said there should be an opportunity for Members of the Committee to ask questions of the Directors/most appropriate representative to explain what was being done and what targets were being met. Red status items required more scrutiny, and without asking questions scrutiny was not being done as it should. Green status items, i.e. where targets were being met, required no further explanation.

Members indicated that they would want the Directors/most appropriate representative to answer questions on report items that were not progressing going forward. The Chief Executive agreed to take this forward.

RESOLVED:          The Committee noted the performance report, and agreed that Directors/most appropriate person should attend to answer questions regarding those areas that were not achieving in future performance reports.

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.