Invitees

 

Councillor HJ David - Leader

Councillor HM Williams - Deputy Leader

Darren Mepham, Chief Executive

Gill Lewis, Interim Head of Finance

Cllr Andrew Morgan, Chair of Cardiff Capital Region City Deal

The Chief Executive submitted a report outlining aspects of the Cardiff Capital Region City Deal, specifically with regard to information on the following:-

 

·         An overview of the City Deal & what will Bridgend gain from it ?

·         What is Bridgend getting from the City Deal ? (what are we getting as the percentage of financial input ?)

·         Is there a business plan that members can see ?

·         What projects have been identified so far ?

 

He then gave an introduction to the report, following which Members and Invitees went into a question and answer session.

 

A Member referred to paragraphs 3.5 and 3.6 of the report, and noted that there were a lot of different components comprising the project, which included possibly 10 different visions (from the different organisations involved in the scheme) led on by 10 different Chief Executives. He wondered due to this, if there would be a loss of vision on key initiatives moving forward.

 

The Leader advised that there was only one vision with regard to the aspirations of the Cardiff Capital Region City Deal (CCRCD), ie that which was contained in the Business Plan supporting the scheme. This vision had been supported unanimously by the authorities involved in the City Deal, which was a long term project covering 20 years, that had been signed by all 10 participating organisations with the UK and Welsh Governments. The City Deal was financially supported by £375m, and would deliver employment, regeneration opportunities and improved transport links throughout the region covered by the project.

 

A Member enquired how much in the way of costs, ie of an administration and commissioning etc, had been incurred with regard to supporting the City Deal.

 

The Chief Executive advised, that certain support requirements put in place regarding the above were mandatory and these largely related to governance issues, for example the scheme would be subject to being scrutinised through one source, as opposed to each participating Authority scrutinising separately by way of 10 different methods. A Project team had also been put in place to support the CCRCD he added. Compared with other City Deals in operation throughout the UK support mechanisms such as the Project team were ‘lean’ the Chief Executive further added. The CCRCD also needed to be audited which came at a further extra cost he explained. He advised the Member that he could give an approximate cost of the total for the likes of the above, outside of the meeting.

 

The Chair of the CCRCD added that the cost for the above and certain other mandatory elements of the City Deal amounted to a centralised cost of £1m between each of the participating authorities.

 

A Member asked, of the £1m cost in terms of the support and monitoring of the CCRCD, did this include the cost of the project being audited, to which the Leader replied that it did.

 

A Member asked if the CCRCD was being supported by private sector or public sector employees/staff.

 

The Chair of the CCRCD confirmed that it was supported by the public service including employees from the participating authorities for the one project up and running to date, the Semi-Conductor project, Newport. Though as alluded to above, external bodies such as KPMG and other key agencies had to be external for reasons of monitoring, auditing and due diligence etc.

 

A Member asked what the rationale was behind introducing the Semi-Conductor project in the Newport area.

 

The Chair of the CCRCD advised that the reasons for this were due to the fact that the LG factory that existed there was of a suitable size to accommodate the Semi-Conductor project (so therefore there were no costs to be borne for a new build premises), and that there was sufficient land around the factory to accommodate any future further development there as an extension of the existing site. This build also accommodated effective methods of technology, and given the large area that surrounded it, this would help the economy of the area including the creation of jobs.

 

A Member asked of the process that was followed in terms of projects comprising the CCRCD being identified and then subsequently ratified.

 

The Chair of the CCRCD confirmed that all projects put forward, such as from the likes of private business companies, Universities or the local authorities involved in the CCRCD would put in appropriate bids that would be considered if they met all the necessary criteria as outlined in the Business Plan. Officer Working groups would then analyse each of the projects to see if they merited further consideration and if they were value for money. Key Members from each of the supporting authorities would then be given certain recommendations, following which, they would decide if any project put forward should be strongly considered. A total of 25,000 new jobs were being targeted as part of the CCRCD.

 

The Leader added that there was a very vigorous process in place regarding suggested projects for the CCRCD, and as the Chair had just confirmed, there were set criteria that had to be satisfied before these were strongly considered. Such projects needed to secure employment opportunities and attract private sector investment if they were to succeed as part of the CCRCD. He added that projects were welcomed in areas other than in the capital (of Wales), and furthermore be cross area to some degree or another.

 

The Chairperson asked if any projects in the County Borough of Bridgend had yet been decided upon.

 

The Chief Executive advised that certain projects were being considered, but at present these were the subject of ongoing dialogue.

 

A Member asked Invitees who sat on the CCRCD Project Board.

 

The Leader confirmed that this comprised of the elected Leader of each of the participating authorities/organisations who were ultimately the decision makers, with the Chief Executive or lead Officers from these bodies also attending in order to provide appropriate advice and expertise.

 

A Member asked if there were any restrictions as to who could recommend projects to be considered as part of the CCRCD.

 

The Leader advised that there were no restrictions as to where suggested projects originated from, adding that the Semi-Conductor project originated from the private sector that was successfully assessed and cleared through the CCRCD Business Plan.

 

 A Member hoped that the proposal for a Park and Ride in the Brackla area could form part of a scheme covering a wider region under the CCRCD. He also referred to paragraph 4.7 of the report and a 5 year Gateway Review that was due in 2021, and asked if this would realise further funding of the project.

 

The Chair of the CCRCD advised that this was something that would be monitored in years 10 and 15 of the project, and it would also be gauged against the Gross Value Added (GVA) economic indicators formula. The situation regarding the Gateway Review was progressing satisfactorily he added.

 

A Member advised that she had concerns in relation to the problems of traffic congestion on the M4 in the immediate vicinity of Newport. She asked if this could be addressed under the CCRCD as part of any proposed project.

 

The Leader confirmed that this was a possibility, however, this was something that strictly should be addressed by the different transport providers and Welsh Government, particularly as this was a pre-existing issue that had been problematic for some time.

 

A Member sought assurance that any Contracts drawn-up for staff as part of the CCRCD, would be suitable for new employees, in that they would be compliant with Welsh Government guidelines and have suitable terms and conditions similar to other local government and civil service staff terms and conditions.

 

The Chair of the CCRCD assured the Member that this would be the case, and that the terms and conditions of employment of staff would be compliant with the appropriate ethical procurement rules.

 

A Member stated that he hoped that some of the projects earmarked as part of the CCRCD, would include valley areas such as the three situate in the County Borough of Bridgend.

 

The Chair of the CCRCD confirmed that the CCRCD would look to develop jobs in all valley areas across the region, and that the Hubs that had been developed in certain valley locations to date supported through Welsh Government funding, would look to be expanded further not just in the more areas of deprivation, but also in rural areas and towns also.

 

A Member referred to page 38 of the report, and some proposals for the CCRCD over the next 5 years with regards to the Housing Investment Fund. In conjunction with this, he also referred Members to page 59 of the report entitled Regional Housing Fund and housing growth areas in the valley areas together with housing projection figures. He made the point that site developers preferred to develop housing in areas other than the valleys, due to the fact that land value was higher in more rural or town locations. He asked if this would discourage developers building new housing developments in the valleys.

 

The Chair of the CCRCD confirmed that the Working Group of the CCRCD were making the effort of encouraging site developers to build new housing in all areas across the region where this was suitable to do so, including valley areas. There was a fund that was available to assist developers building on land where there was some sort of a problem there, ie land instability for example, amongst others.

 

The Leader added that there was a demand for housing provision in the valleys and there were sites there that were suitable in terms of accommodating new developments in such areas. He further added that ways could be looked at to encourage smaller site developers to build at these locations, and not just the larger developers such as Barratt and Wimpey, etc.       

 

A Member referred to Priority 7 of the Business Plan, Improving Connectivity Globally, Regionally and Locally, and noted from the narrative on this, that there was no mention of works that were urgently needed at the Pencoed Rail Crossing.

 

The Chair of the CCRCD confirmed that any works undertaken at this location were strictly the responsibility of Network Rail, though discussions were ongoing regarding works at this location between them, BCBC and both the UK and Welsh Government, as had been touched upon earlier in the meeting. If such works were completed including to the bridge, then this would allow for trains to operate more frequently than was currently the case, particular feeder trains from Maesteg to Cardiff.

 

As this concluded debate on this item, the Chairperson thanked the Invitees for attending and giving their contributions, following which the Chair of the CCRCD retired from the meeting.

 

Conclusions:

 

The Committee understand that the Cardiff Capital Region City Deal is an incremental process but Members are concerned that since the 10 Local Authorities signed the regional investment fund in 2016, there has been only one project that has been capitalised by the partnership.

 

The Committee highlighted the fact that the cover report and business plan lacked any localised information and recommend that an update report be prepared for Members in the future to provide detail of how each project will benefit Bridgend specifically as well as the rest of the region.  The Committee have also asked the report detail what administration costs accrued to date.

Additional information

The Committee have requested to receive information on how citizens and local businesses are able to propose ideas and details for potential regional investment proposals.

 

Members have also asked to be provided with detail of what projects have been proposed so far and from what area within the region.