To
select appropriate items from the Cabinet Board agenda for pre-decision
scrutiny (reports enclosed for Scrutiny Members)
Minutes:
The Committee chose to
scrutinise the following Cabinet Board items:
Tourism Update Report
2022
Members were provided
with an update report on Tourism within Neath Port Talbot County Borough.
Reference was made to the
engagement, reach and likes on social media. Members were interested to see the
reach the marketing campaign had outside of the County Borough, and asked if
there was a breakdown, geographically, of some of that data, in particular in
relation to social media followers. Officers confirmed that they would look
into what data could be pulled together; however, Members were asked to keep in
mind that the campaign had only been running for four months during the winter
period. Officers would circulate the data once it had been collated.
The circulated report detailed
that Members and stakeholders would be invited to take part in workshops as
part of the process, to devise the new Destination Management Plan; and subject
to procurement, the new plan should be in place by summer 2022. Members asked
when the workshops would be taking place. It was highlighted that the
contractor for the workshops had yet to be appointed; once appointed the
arrangements would be put in place in terms of timescales. Officers explained
that if restrictions were still in place, the workshops would be held online;
if possible, they will be held face to face.
The Committee asked if
Officers could monitor the use of the electrical hook ups that were in place
across the County Borough; and if it was identified that they were used
frequently, asked if it would be possible to look into other places across the
County Borough, which could benefit from electrical hook ups.
In regards to the public
transport links to tourism, it was asked how the Council was encouraging
visitors to get to Neath Port Talbot (NPT) via public transport, and how the
Council was engaging with the various transport operators. Officers highlighted
that public transport both to travel to, and around, the destination was a key
consideration for visitors, however there were various issues with availability
and frequency of services for a lot of Councils. It was stated that there were
significant costs involved in subsidising services, and difficulties in persuading
people to use the public transport network, as sometimes it provided difficult
to get to places and/or it would take a very long time; the provision needed to
meet the needs of visitors and be convenient for them to use. Despite the
issues, Members were informed that the Council had worked with Bay Trans who
had put together a series of 'Walks by Bus' using public transport within NPT;
the Council was also currently working with Great Western Railway, and the area
was to be included in their forthcoming campaign, both with posters at train
stations/on trains and on social media. It was highlighted that these issues
were not unique to NPT; a lot of other areas in Wales were in a similar
positon, especially where Authorities have a mix of various rural landscapes.
Officers were asked to
provide information regarding the responses to the Destination Marketing
Campaign, from journalists in and outside Wales; it was also queried if there
were any plans to extend the promotion to other online publications/services.
It was confirmed that the Team was currently working on obtaining national
press coverage. However, Members were informed that the campaign was aimed at
engaging directly with audiences; it was difficult to track progress on this by
releasing articles in papers, instead Officers were tracking and measuring
success by using social media and website analytics etc. Some examples of the
paid for advertising included Bristol Live and Birmingham Live with Reach PLC;
Officers had also been engaging with publications such as Active Traveller
Magazine who appeal to a key target market. Officers reassured Members that
they would take every opportunity to market the campaign, and were in
discussions with various outlets who send out press releases; Golwg recently
published an article on the campaign after showing interest in the work that
was being undertaken. It was mentioned that the campaign was in the early
stages, and Officers planned to market this work up until the end of 2022; a
lot more take up was expected in the upcoming months.
Members asked if the
Council was marketing the campaign within Wales, as well as outside Wales; as
some people in the area, and surrounding areas, may not know what NPT had to
offer in terms of tourist destinations. It was noted that although Wales residents were part of the target market, there wasn’t
an allocated budget to actively target local media as the purpose of the
campaign was to encourage short breaks/ overnight stays; local media would
assist in targeting day visitors but this wasn’t currently an objective of the
campaign. Officers mentioned that encouraging short breaks and overnight stays
were a key objective, and the reason why the Tourism Team was re-established;
91% of NPT’s visitors were already day visitors, and it was known from research
that, although day visitors were welcome and will be encouraged, the overnight
visitors make a significant contribution to the local economy. Although
Officers were not actively targeting local press, it was highlighted that they
would be aware of the press releases and news that was published regarding this
work; if any opportunity was to arise, Officers would proceed with it, although
it wouldn’t necessarily be paid for marketing by the Council.
A discussion took place
regarding camping provisions and electric hook up facilities across the County
Borough.
Following mention of
Gnoll Country Park, Officers stated that there was sensitive planning
conditions associated with the area due to it being a listed landscape; this
meant that there were limited accommodation options that were permissible. The
Committee was informed that the work around the Gnoll Masterplan included
looking at various accommodation options for the Gnoll; it was concluded that
the provision of pods/self-catering accommodation was suitable and would meet
visitor demand. Officers mentioned that they were looking into funding options
to take this forward.
In regards to the
provision of camping and caravanning, it was highlighted that the Council had
received a number of enquiries from individuals with land, looking to set up
sites for this; the process included Officers taking these enquiries to their
fullest potential, and supporting them through the financial aid that was
available. However, it was explained that there was various planning criteria
that these sites would need to meet, which wasn’t always appealing to the land
owner. Officers were aware of the demand for camping and caravanning
facilities, and would help to facilitate them where possible; however, this was
only achievable if the private sector come forward with the land in order to
deliver on it.
Members asked if it was
possible to put these provisions in place on Council owned land, and if so,
could a feasibility study be undertaken for this. Officers explained that
infrastructure would need to be put in place in order to facilitate camping and
caravanning; it was also important to ensure that the provision was in the
right place and accessible for visitors. It was noted that the Council had
previously looked at Margam Park as a potential area to cater for this type of
accommodation, which could be looked into again in the future once the current
proposals for the park were completed.
Following on from above,
Officers stated that the provision of camping and caravanning would not necessarily
provide a financial return for the Council; these sites needed to be
efficiently managed, which would include having employees on site on a continual
basis to answer customer queries and resolve any issues. Members were informed
that the Council was not in a position to be able to do that at this current
time; however, Officers were able to help encourage the private sector to look
at the various opportunities available.
The Tourism Manager
stated that the provision for camping and caravanning could be a scoping
exercise to complete, however it would be beneficial as an action within the
new Destination Management Plan rather than a separate piece of work; the
Tourism Team was a small Team and this type of work would take up significant
resources if it were to be done separately. Officers highlighted the need to
look into this provision, and had included reference to it in the circulated
report
It was mentioned that
there were areas across the County Borough which could accommodate
self-contained caravans, which would require very little in terms of
infrastructure; this could be an option to explore. Officers confirmed that
electric hook ups weren’t always needed to cater for the camping and
caravanning market; this was an area of the market that the Team was keeping an
eye on. It was added that where funding opportunities arise, which would allow
the Council to facilitate this on its land, Officers would investigate further.
Members asked if land
near the Metal Box, Milland Road, Neath could be used
to facilitate camping and caravanning accommodation. Officers stated that this
land was a commercial area, and the vehicle movements over the bridge was
difficult; therefore, the Council would not be looking at using this site for
the purposes highlighted.
The Local Member for
Sandfields East confirmed that the Ward Members close to the Aberavon Seafront
area, had been liaising with Officers regarding the use of land around the
Seafront for camping and caravanning purposes; and they would continue to
discuss the various possibilities going forward.
Officers concluded that
they had been, and would continue to, explore various sites across the County
Borough to identify potential for camping and caravanning facilities; however,
it was important for Officers to understand the servicing of them, and what
commitment and infrastructure would be required. It was noted that any
proposals from Members could be included in the new Destination Management
Plan, as this would provide a coherent and strategic view of what the Council
was trying to achieve in the County Borough.
The potential
opportunities that could arise from the Global Centre for Rail Excellence was
raised. Officers confirmed that as plans developed further for this, the Team
would take advantage of any opportunities to engage and increase the tourism in
the County Borough.
A discussion took place
regarding the Levelling Up Fund and the future Shared
Prosperity Fund. Members mentioned that there was opportunities for transport
investment in the Levelling Up Fund, and that it would
be useful to undertake a feasibility study around the Shared Prosperity Fund,
in order to achieve the full potential from that round of funding. It was
highlighted that the Levelling Up Fund was a capital fund, and the Shared
Prosperity Fund will be revenue based; Officers didn’t have the full details
regarding the Shared Prosperity Fund, as they had yet to be released, but would
update Members when this information became available.
The Cabinet Member for
Regeneration and Sustainable Development encouraged all Members to lobby for
funding relating to Tourism, in order to better improve the resources within
the Council.
Following scrutiny, the
report was noted.
Western Bay Area
Planning Board - Governance Framework and Financial Governance, and Risk
Sharing Agreement
The Committee was
presented with a report which was proposing to endorse the Western Bay Area
Planning Board’s Governance framework and seek approval to enter into a
Financial Governance and Risk Sharing agreement with the responsible
authorities to the Area Planning Board (APB).
Members were informed of
an error included in the circulated report, which was that part of the standard
reporting writing template had been left in the report from pages 32 to 34.
Officers provided a
brief overview of the report, as requested by the Committee. It was noted that
the APB was not a legal entity in its own right, therefore could not carry out
certain work in the name of Western Bay Area Planning Board; this meant that one
of the responsible Authorities was required to take the role of banker for the
APB. Members were informed that NPT Council had taken on this role; the Council
would receive any funding, pay the funding to providers and would also be
responsible for any contracting or commissioning. It was highlighted that over
the years, on behalf of the APB, NPT Council had only been paying out on
historical and legacy contracts; which Officers had been able to amend, however
not change fundamentally. It was stated that if the Council was to go out to
tender or similar, currently it would bare all of the risk of challenge across
the Region.
It was stated that
Officers had continued to monitor and evaluate services, and ensure the quality
of the services that had been delivered; as well as working within the
legislative provision to create new services and mitigate risks for the
Council. However, it was explained that they had not been able to regularise or
formalise existing contracts; this wasn’t ideal for the Authority. The
Committee were informed that for a number of years, Officers had been trying to
work on various agreements whereby it was either agreed to share funding or
agree to risk sharing; it had taken a considerable amount of time to get to
this point in which a Governance Framework and Financial Governance and Risk
Sharing agreement had been adopted by the APB.
Officers explained that
the Governance Framework sets out how it will operate the decision making, to ensure
that it behaved in a business-like manner, it understands the remit in which it
can operate and the powers that it has. It was added that the Financial
Governance and Risk Sharing agreement ensured that existing contracts could be
regularised, services could be re-commissioned and the tender process could be
utilised going forward; this document will be signed by all responsible
organisations to the APB, who likewise will need to seek approval through their
respective governance structures. It was added that this will ensure that the
risk relating to contracting was shared across all partners, and not held
solely to NPT Council.
Members queried why it
took so long to establish the framework and agreement. Officers acknowledge the
length of time it took to get to this point, and highlighted that discussions
had been going on for a number of years, with various agreements having been
considered; some of these agreements had progressed to a certain point, and
then pulled, therefore the process had to start again.
Following scrutiny, the
Committee was supportive of the proposal to be considered by the Cabinet Board.