Agenda and draft minutes

Paul Pavia sent his apologies and arranged a substitute who themselves was subsequently unable to attend the meeting.Rachel Buckler sent her apologies. 

None. 

None. 

Cabinet Member Ben Callard and Jonathan Davies introduced the report and answered the members’ questions with Peter Davies, Matthew Gatehouse, Deb Hill-Howells, Craig O’ Connor, Will McLean and Jane Rodgers: 

• Can a simplified version of council spending charts (like pie charts) be included with council tax bills, so residents can better understand where the money goes? 

Officers responded that while bills currently link to detailed information online, they will consider producing a simpler hard copy version for future billing cycles. 

• Have there been any improvements regarding the £90K overspend at Castlegate since the report was compiled? 

Officers explained that while there are still some vacancies affecting income, recent new tenancies (especially in flexible office space) are positive, and active marketing continues. The remaining vacant space is more challenging to let, but overall tenancy levels are close to targets and existing tenants are expanding. 

• Are the staff vacancies structural/planned or due to normal turnover and recruitment delays? 

It was clarified that there are currently 733 vacant posts, but not all have associated budgets due to career development structures. Teams have vacancy factors built into budgets, and all vacancies outside schools require senior sign-off to ensure careful management. The council employs around 4,100 staff (headcount), with fewer full-time equivalents. 

• Have solar panels been installed or considered at Castlegate or Newport Leisure Park? 

Castlegate’s roof structure is suitable and such installations are considered during maintenance, but at Newport Leisure Park, tenants are responsible for their own energy costs, so solar panels would not benefit the council directly. 

• Regarding the £109k car parks overspend, are we predicting a further budget cost with the 2 new enforcement officers? 

Officers clarified that the overspend is mainly due to reduced penalty notice income, not pay-and-display, and recruitment is underway to restore enforcement capacity, aiming to resolve the issue. The total number of enforcement officers will be six after recruitment. 

• Has there been any analysis of the Tour Of Britain’s value to local businesses? 

The Tour of Britain provides an economic impact report, which will be shared when available, though it might not detail impacts by specific area within Monmouthshire. 

• Can we have an update on Innovation House? Is there the possibility for it to be used by the training department? 

It was clarified that training uses part of the ground floor for courses, reducing costs by avoiding external venue hire, but the building still has other tenants and this is an interim solution. 

• Is Innovation House included in resources reporting and are underspends due to vacancies or other factors? 

The Cabinet Member and officers confirmed that assets like Innovation House are managed corporately within landlord services and reported under the broader resources portfolio. 

• Can tenants at Spytty Park and Newport Leisure Park be encouraged to install solar panels? 

Tenants are responsible for their own buildings and would need to weigh the lease length against installation costs, but the council can support tenants interested in renewables. Previous attempts to install and sell energy to tenants were not financially  ...  view the full minutes text for item 4.

Jane Rodgers introduced the report and answered the members’ questions with Cabinet Member Ian Chandler, Diane Corrister and Jenny Jenkins:

• 74% of care leavers in employment, education, or training, means there are 26% who are not – is this typical or a cause for concern? 

Officers explained that the actual numbers are small, percentages can be skewed, and there are legitimate reasons (such as parenting or health issues) for some not being engaged. They emphasised ongoing support and tracking for all care leavers, with some entering employment or education later.

• Why is the number of adults using direct payments not increasing, given their perceived benefits? 

While direct payments are encouraged, they are not suitable for everyone due to the responsibilities involved. Some people explore the option but decide against it, and there is expected to be an increase in uptake due to recent changes in domiciliary care commissioning. 

• Where is “staff churn” greatest, is it among professionally qualified staff or other roles? 

Most turnover occurs in direct services (domiciliary care, reablement, residential), while professionally qualified and leadership roles are harder to recruit for but have less “churn”. Each area faces different recruitment and retention challenges. 

• How are people supported in managing direct payments, and how do we mitigate against potential risks such as coercive control or fraud? What about monitoring, payroll, and safeguarding for vulnerable recipients? 

The council retains responsibility for reviewing care and support needs, offers managed bank accounts and payroll services to handle tax and National Insurance, and provides dedicated direct payment advisors. Social workers continue oversight, and mechanisms are in place to minimise the administrative burden and protect recipients. 

• Why is positive feedback from adult social care surveys lower than during or before COVID, and is there any understanding of this trend? 

Officers explained that satisfaction can be influenced by various factors (e.g., waiting times, changes in workers, unmet expectations), and while disappointing, the service focusses on workforce training, communication, and quality assurance to address these issues. 

• Is learning from the recent changes in domiciliary care commissioning in the South being applied to the North and Central areas?

A full review with partners is pending, but interim lessons include improving communication with providers and residents, and adapting approaches to local provider landscapes. Officers emphasised the importance of engaging providers and supporting operational teams. 

• What is the general learning from the significant number of complaints, and have there been any resulting changes? 

Officers noted that complaints provide detailed insights, with communication being a recurring theme. The service is working to improve communication, especially around financial advice and legal processes, and ensures staff are trained to handle complex interactions. 

• A discrepancy in the reported numbers of looked after children was noted. 

The observation was acknowledged and officers committed to checking and correcting the figures. 

• A member suggested ensuring social worker support is in place before major changes and involving local councillors as advocates for isolated residents. 

The Chief Officer agreed to consider these points. 

• What will be the impact  ...  view the full minutes text for item 5.

Jane Rodgers introduced the report and answered the members’ questions with Diane Corrister, Jessica Scarisbrick and Cabinet Member Ian Chandler:

• Regarding the emergence of harmful sexual behaviour in schools, is the increase due to actual incidents or a greater awareness and reporting? Are influences like online content or post-COVID effects factors? Does the topic warrant further scrutiny?

Officers responded that there is both increased awareness and a real rise in incidents, with online influences and post-COVID complexities contributing. They explained that improved training and reporting have made the issue more visible, and that multi-agency groups are working to address it in schools.

Action: to ask for a specific update in the Chief Officer’s Director’s Report

• Can we have clarification on the "other" and "inappropriate conduct" categories in practitioner concerns, especially considering their significant proportion compared to specific abuse categories?

It was explained that "other" refers to concerns in a practitioner's personal life (e.g., substance misuse outside work), while "inappropriate conduct" covers behaviours not fitting other categories, such as verbal abuse. Officers agreed to consider further breakdowns.

• The improvement in sharing one-page profiles with transport staff is to be commended. How many cases has this change reduced from?

The team acknowledged the improvement in transport cases but did not have the previous case numbers on hand, offering to follow up if needed.

• Do the amber ratings in the action plan relate to actions not visible in the main report?

Some amber actions are ongoing or have moved into the next cycle; there is a separately linked action plan document for further details.

• Should the safeguarding report be explicitly called a "self-evaluation" report, given that it focusses more on strengths and less on weaknesses, and should it include more feedback from service users?

Officers acknowledged the point about self-evaluation, explaining that the report is benchmarked against regional and national frameworks and external inspection findings, and agreed to clarify this in future reports.

• There is an apparent link between rising permanent exclusions in schools and knife carrying – is this a genuine correlation or just a passing reference?

Knife carrying is a national and local issue but is not the sole factor in exclusions. Officers offered to consult education and youth offending colleagues for more detailed data to confirm any correlation – ACTION

Chair’s Summary:

Thank you to the Cabinet Member and officers for this report and their responses. The report was moved.

Councillor Bond reminded officers of her suggestion to add a ‘completed’ column to the Planner. Officers will follow up again with Democratic Services colleagues – ACTION

Councillor Bond requested clarification as to why the Economy, Employment and Skills Strategy action plan update is not on the Council and Cabinet Work Planner – ACTION

• 9a. Performance and Overview Scrutiny Committee – 9^th July 2025 (Special Meeting).

• 9b. Performance and Overview Scrutiny Committee – 15^th July 2025 (Ordinary Meeting).

The minutes were confirmed.

Tuesday 18th November 2025 at 10.00am.