Agenda item

Following scrutiny, the committee noted the report

The chair reminded members that the comments in the meeting will form part of the formal consultation response for the budget and members are encouraged to put forward any alternative proposals during the meeting, which could be considered once the consultation periods ended.

Nicola Pearce, Director of Environment, Regeneration, and Streetscene Services, summarised the items removed since the last report and any changes made. Members were informed that the Environment Directorate aims to save £2.35 million to meet the 5% target for all departments.

Scrutiny of the budget lines for the directorate are divided between the Environment, Regeneration, and Streetscene Services Scrutiny Committee and the Education, Lifelong Learning, and Leisure Scrutiny Committee. Public protection services fall under the latter. Since the November meeting, some budget proposals have been removed.

Members were informed that the following savings have been removed from the Environment and Regeneration budget proposals:

Three weekly waste collections: £539,00.

Green waste charges: £200,000.

Neighbourhood savings (including job reductions): £379,000.

Drainage gang reduction: £310,000.

In total, £1.438 million in savings have been removed to address previous concerns and discussions.

The director noted that significant savings are still needed, and cuts will have impacts. The Chair thanked the director, acknowledging that committee feedback was valuable for decision-making.

ENV-A

Members were disappointed that they didn’t have the figures provided relating to the increase in the charges as requested in the previous meeting and noted that when there's been increases in charges, the figures always used to be included in the papers.

David Griffiths, Head of Service for Engineering and Transport, confirmed that he had provided the figures and assumed there had been an administrative error. He requested the Democratic Services officer to recirculate the information.

Officers explained that for ENV-A, the proposal is to increase fees and charges by £11,000 across four areas:

Highway Record Enquiries: The current standard fee is £50, with a proposed increase of £20. This change is expected to generate £5,380 based on 260 to 270 enquiries per year.

Solicitor Inquiries and Searches: Previously free, officers propose charging solicitors £70 per letter. With approximately 20 letters per year, this would generate an additional £1,400.

Technical Approvals for Section 38 and 278 Works:

 

For construction works under £7,000, the current fee is £300, with a proposed increase of £200, generating an estimated £400.

For works under £15,000, the current fee is £600, with a proposed increase of £250, generating an additional £750.

For works over £15,000, the current fee is £1,500, with a proposed increase of £300, generating an additional £1,800.

Minimum Inspection Fees for Site Visits: For works up to £15,000, the current fee is £1,125, with a proposed increase of £450, generating an additional £1,350.

Members appreciated the detailed breakdown of these changes.

 

ENV-B related to transport support and the reduction in revenue support for bus services. Members expressed concern as they had recently reviewed bus routes and worked with bus companies to improve them. They were worried about the impact of this reduction in revenue support on the planned improvements.

Members inquired if officers knew how this reduction would affect the planned improvements. They also highlighted a perception problem: on one hand, they are working to improve bus routes, while on the other, they are reducing funding.

Officers explained that they had conducted an extensive consultation on bus subsidies following the end of the bus emergency fund. They now have a funded base network in place. Officers received reassurances from the Welsh Government that the current funding will continue into the next financial year, significantly reducing the risk.

Members were informed that the council has benefited from increased services, which will be retained. Additionally, the Welsh Government has allocated a further £11,000,000 across Wales to sustain bus services next financial year, further mitigating the risk.

Officers believe that all current services will be retained. They are not cutting the entire budget but only a part of it, which will provide some resilience, albeit slightly less than before. The council's share of the additional £11,000,000 funding means the authority is in a good position and will not see any reductions in the network during the next financial year.

Members requested to be informed immediately if circumstances change so they can respond to residents' inquiries promptly. Officers agreed.

The Chair noted that the current funding arrangements are interim and a precursor to bus franchising. He mentioned that the timelines for franchising have shifted slightly, and the entire funding structure will change over time. Officers agreed and advised that secondary legislative changes will be put through the Senedd and Parliament this autumn, with the franchising arrangement expected to come into place in Southwest Wales in 2026/27. They explained that significant work is ongoing in the background on this matter.

ENV-C

There were no questions.

ENV-D

There were no questions.

ENV-E

There were no questions.

ENV-F

There were no questions.

 

ENV-G pertained to the reduction of the bridge maintenance budget. Members expressed concern that the £28,000 saving could be quickly negated by a single major bridge repair.

 

Members felt that if inspections take longer and bridge deterioration worsens, it would be a false economy. They were also worried that inflation could erode the savings, posing a threat to local economies in the event of a major bridge closure.

Officers acknowledged that this was one of the most challenging service cuts they had to propose and provided a breakdown of the budget. The overall budget amounts to £564,000, divided into two areas:

• Site Inspections and Supervision of Works: £230,000 is allocated for technical inspection surveys, including general and principal inspections.
• Preventative Work: £334,000 is allocated for removing and de-vegetating trees growing out of structures and undertaking minor repairs.

Officers suggested that the £28,000 savings cut will come from the preventative work budget. They assured members that the statutory duty for inspecting structures would still be fulfilled. However, officers agreed that this cut might be a false economy, as delayed repairs could lead to more significant damage and increased costs.

Members were informed that the cut represents an 8% reduction in that part of the budget. Officers noted that the impact of the cut would depend on next year's budget and any inflationary adjustments. They reiterated that this is one of the budget cuts they are most anxious about, as delays could result in higher costs later.

Officers explained that these budget cuts are unfortunate but necessary due to limited areas where savings can be made. While it is a concern, officers believe it is manageable, though it could lead to increased capital costs in the future.

Members acknowledged the tough budget situation but felt that minor repairs on bridges can prevent much larger expenses later. They noted that this approach had been tried before and ended up costing the council more in the long run.

Members expressed regret that years of austerity are impacting residents. The chair observed that some cuts affect service levels, while others, like this proposal, seem to be poor value for money in the long term. The chair asked if the budget had been reviewed across directorates to ensure that small amounts of money, which could save the council in the long run, were not cut here. He inquired if officers had considered cutting less valuable items in other directorates instead.

The director confirmed that a thorough review had been conducted, and every area was given a target to achieve. Officers had to remove £1,000,000 worth of savings from the target due to the impact of some proposed budget savings and feedback received. Members were informed that nothing was off the table, and some proposals were unpalatable to both officers and councillors, but this is the financial reality for the council and all local authorities.

Officers explained that similar discussions had taken place in other directorates, and strategic savings had been considered in previous years, including cuts in energy, home-to-school transport, and accommodation. However, these cuts were insufficient, necessitating this year's exercise. Officers advised that if some savings are not acceptable, there are no other suggestions, and services would have to be cut if these are not accepted.

Members were informed that the council does not want to be in this position, but it may remain so if the Welsh Government does not provide more funding for local authorities. The chair noted the difficulty of making unpalatable and poor value-for-money decisions. He emphasized the need for members to be assured that the full impact of each decision had been understood and weighed against others. If the work across directorates had been done, members would be comfortable knowing everything possible had been done.

The chair invited members to ask questions on budget line ENV-I, a similar proposal regarding the asset service budget reduction. He highlighted that it relates to reducing the survey inspection budget, which members previously felt would lead to poor value for money in future highway maintenance spending.

 

ENV-H

There were no questions.

ENV-K related to the reduction in the works budget for highways and increases in fees and charges. Members provided an example of a car's underside being damaged by a disintegrating speed cushion and questioned how long it would be before the savings are offset by the costs of vehicle damage claims due to deteriorating speed cushions.

Members expressed concern that if such incidents become more frequent and surveys are reduced, the likelihood of further damage increases.

Officers clarified that there are two distinct types of surveys: the main asset surveys and the routine safety surveys conducted on the highway. The routine inspections carried out by highway inspectors will continue as usual and are separate from the condition surveys for safety fences and cattle grids.

Regarding the budget, officers explained there is both a revenue budget and a capital budget. When the revenue budget is reduced, the council become more dependent on the capital budget. Officers highlighted that when road maintenance funds in the revenue budget were cut previously it led to increased reliance on capital funds for maintenance. That meant less capital available for new projects, such as traffic calming measures or verge conversions.

Officers explained that the proposed budget reductions were in part reversing previous increases in 2022/23, which was previously at an even lower budget level. Officers noted the increase had unfortunately proved unsustainable, and to meet financial targets, they have had to propose reductions and will continue to rely heavily on the capital budget for planned maintenance, similar to bridges.

Members stated that officers will become more reliant on councillors to report damage to speed bumps. They shared their experience in manufacturing, noting that consistently cutting maintenance, because it's the easiest saving, eventually leads to higher costs.

Members felt that without increased funding from the governments in Cardiff or London, these types of cutbacks will have a lasting effect on everyone.

Officers advised that the Welsh Government is considering reintroducing the local government borrowing initiative for next year. This would provide funds for additional borrowing for highway maintenance, specifically for dealing with potholes and pot hole prevention. If confirmed, the council could receive more money next year, allowing for increased maintenance efforts despite budget reductions.

Members were informed that this initiative is only for one year and has yet to be confirmed, but officers are optimistic about the potential extra funding.

The chair noted the positive news.

Members expressed concern about the drainage feasibility cut and its impact on accessing grant funding for drainage infrastructure, especially given flooding concerns across the authority.

Officers advised that the council must live within its budget, meaning some work would have to wait. While they would like to explore more solutions, they will need to wait until additional funding is available.

ENV-L related to lighting Services and the proposals around Street Lighting. Members noted that there was a partial light trial that took place at the end of last year and the roll out of it is not listed in the table.

Members noted that they haven't received the report back to the committee with the detail and the impacts of the trial and asked for confirmation whether it's something that'll be revised and added at a later date, for example, outside of the budget or is it no longer deemed viable?

Officers confirmed that they had run the pilots and are collating all the feedback from them, they are waiting for feedback from the police and the lighting engineer and officers are finalising the report and will speak to democratic services about when that's going to come to the committee and will need to be considered by the committee and then Cabinet for any decision..

Officers explained that there is an existing shortfall in the energy budget and the energy budget is very difficult to predict because of fluctuations every three months. This is the deficit which the part night funding would plug.

Members were advised that the part night lighting scheme if it went ahead, wouldn't provide an additional saving to what is on the budget report but would solve an underlying issue in the energy budget.

Officers confirmed that the report will come back to members in due course.

Members asked to clarify what was meant in the report where it says ‘with a higher public profile on the risk.’

Officers explained that it would have a higher profile because it would be more visible because they would be dimming at 10:00pm when a lot more people are going to see it than if it's dimmed at 1:00am.

The chair asked about the part night trial in terms of the timing of a decision on that. And asked if it is anticipated to take place before the end of this financial year or for the next financial year.

Officers explained that they aim to present the report to members in March. However, any outcomes would need to be considered by the cabinet, potentially leading to a larger trial before final decision.

Officers noted that as summer approaches, the urgency decreases due to reduced lighting use, with the main savings expected in autumn and winter. Therefore, the decision is unlikely to be made by the end of this financial year.

Members noted that the highest number of road fatalities in the UK occurred in 1941, partly due to the lack of road lights. Since the introduction of road lights, fatalities have decreased.

Members asked if the decision would be reversed if the budget position improves next year.

Officers explained that the pilots are currently underway, and the assessment is not yet finalized. Therefore, it is too early to make a decision until the success of the pilots is understood. Officers mentioned that extending the scale of the pilots is one of the options that could be considered.

Members felt that if the budget improves in the future, restoring the lights to previous levels should be a priority. However, officers stated that they could not assure that additional funding from the Welsh Government would reverse this proposal, as other pressures might arise at that time.

Members were advised that there are ongoing structural pressures within the overall budget and the Environment Directorate. Officers cited the example of rising employer National Insurance costs and its potential impact on the council's commissioned services, which is still uncertain.

The Chair reminded members that cabinet members, including the council leader, were present and listening to the discussions. Future budget priorities will be their decision if there is a better settlement. He noted that some proposals have already been removed from the last budget and expressed hope that future conversations will focus on what to reverse, what not to cut, and what to reinstate.

The Chair stated that if the council is considering reinstating items, it indicates a much better financial position than in a long time, which is a positive sign.

Members inquired about the dimming of street lighting and the timing change from 12:50pm. They noted that this decision is not irreversible and can be adjusted if issues arise. Members asked if there will be formal monitoring or if it will be reactive.

Officers confirmed that the central management system allows them to easily adjust lighting levels as needed. They monitor highway conditions through the road safety team, which circulates reports on incidents. Additionally, members, as community representatives, provide feedback on any concerns. Officers will address issues as they arise.

Members asked if residents had noticed the dimmed lights and if the dimming was as extensive as intended. Officers clarified that they had implemented part-night lighting and would report back to members.

Officers confirmed receiving positive responses from residents who prefer the lights off for better sleep, and concerns from others. All feedback will be shared in due course.

Officers ensured that dimming avoided areas of vehicle-pedestrian conflict, such as crossings and junctions.

Councillor Jeremy Hurley, Cabinet Member for Climate Change and Economic Growth, emphasized the need for accurate data to make comparisons. He assured the committee that the council will monitor data and make changes if problems arise, based on accurate assessments and feedback.

Members highlighted concerns about the safety of women and girls traveling when lights are dimmed. They noted that some areas are walking routes from pubs and cited an example in Powys where lights were turned off on a road used by pub-goers, suggesting this should be considered.
Officers explained that on the budget proposals there is no proposal that members are being asked to consider for part nighttime lighting and is only relating to dimming only.

Officers stated that if they were to propose part nighttime lighting following the pilot then it would be brought before members for determination.

Members noted that concerns around safety of women and girls is worth considering during scrutiny of the proposals and the effect that even dimming will have as well on their safety.

ENV-P Related to cemeteries, members asked what the increase in fees and charges were per burial?

Officers explained that to achieve the £24,000 saving, they would need a 10% increase. Officers used the example of burial depth of two graves, which is currently £2100 and that would increase to £2310. This is £300 less than Bridgend currently charges.

ENV-S Related to development management, specifically the trimming of budget lines, the chair noted that this was discussed thoroughly in the last meeting and members were keen to lobby Welsh Government about the necessity of statutory advertisements if they felt they wanted to lobby on it.

 

ENV-T Members asked if the budget saving would affect the RLDP timeline, add extra pressure on officers, and impact members' ability to raise concerns about developments in their wards.

Officers do not anticipate it affecting the RLDP timeline, explaining that it is a detailed programme. However, they reminded members that continued budget cuts could impact the team's ability and cause timescale issues.

Members were advised that the team is under significant pressure with the RLDP programme, which is time-consuming with various formal and informal stages. Despite this, officers assured that they will remain responsive to members' queries and praised the team's excellent work.

ENV-U Members were concerned because the Wales costal path is closed in two sections. Members asked if the council was withdrawing from its obligations to the coastal path.

Members noted that there is under wash causing the path to come away but as the coastal path is a national project, it is something the authority should be proud of and invested in.

Members want to see work being done on the future of the coastal path and how it can be implemented better rather than constantly stepping back and having to close.

Members felt that Natural Resources Wales need to do more as well and repairs to the bank need to be done. Members felt that the path needs to be looked after, and more grants are needed.

Members noted that in the past the council has missed out on big grants because of a lack of people looking at these grants and asked if officers are looking for more grants now?

Ceri Morris the head of Planning and Public Protection reassured members that the council is not withdrawing from its obligations to the Wales Coast Path and that the team realised the roles and responsibilities that they have and has a proven track record in terms of sourcing grant monies and are consistently doing a lot of work in terms of reviewing and monitoring where grant monies can be sourced.

Officers agreed that it is as much a role for NRW the council and indeed the landowner (Welsh Government) to address the issue with the coastal path particularly the issue at the Quays. Officers advised that they are in dialogue with colleagues in Welsh Government and NRW to see what options there are in terms of resolving that problem once and for all.

Members were reminded from the last meeting that the team have utilised a lot of grant monies in the past to temporarily address the issue but because of the nature of the problem, the problem keeps coming back and a bigger project is required which likely will need capital investment to address it.

Officers also clarified that the path is closed for public health and safety grounds.

The chair observed that the responsibility for the coastal path lies with the countryside team but noted that the authority is promoting tourism and the coastal path is a key visitor attraction. The chair asked if officers are working cross-departmentally to leverage larger regeneration schemes.

The chair sought assurance that the council will consider the coastal path as a whole council opportunity, not just a countryside right of way issue.

Nicola Pearce advised that there is a tourism and leisure service under Chris Saunders, along with a tourism strategy, events policy, and events strategy. She emphasised the importance of all directorates and services working together to invest in infrastructure for both existing communities and visitors.

Members were informed that funding is limited. Officers have a working group reviewing lessons learned from volunteer-driven activities. However, using volunteers isn't free due to health and safety requirements, insurance indemnities, and the costs of supervision, which can sometimes outweigh the benefits.

Officers agreed that while there is a cross-council responsibility, the day-to-day maintenance of rights of way falls to the countryside team. They highlighted the issue of maintaining assets after receiving grants for new capital projects, noting that this has been a long-standing concern.

Officers stated that the Welsh Government often overlooks the need for ongoing maintenance funding, not just initial capital investment. This issue also affects active travel routes, which cannot be maintained without adequate revenue funding from the Welsh Government.

The director suggested that both officers and councillors should lobby the Welsh Government to ensure revenue funding is properly linked to capital allocations.

The chair noted that internal council arrangements can become muddled when heads of service manage visitor infrastructure, leading to inconsistent revenue spending. He felt that different directorates implementing ideas can sometimes conflict with the council's corporate priorities.

Members suggested that if the Crown Estate were devolved, substantial funds could be used to improve the path, boost tourism, and replace lost heavy industry.

 

ENV-V Members stated that further cuts could jeopardize the ability to work safely. They also asked about the impact of the budget proposal on future grant applications and whether the reduction in biodiversity projects would affect the council's climate change resilience.

Members noted several severe weather events in recent months and expressed concern that these cuts contradict the council's intended direction.

Ceri Morris explained that this was the first time that this budget line had been cut so there is no immediate issues with this proposal, however if it is revisited year on year then it will have an impact.

Members were advised that it won’t undermine the team's ability to go for grant money or to roll out project work that both deliver on nature and climate emergencies. Officers felt that the council need to be careful that they don't continue to raid this particular pot because it is often used for items such as PPE clothing for staff and the tools that are required to do the work on a day-to-day.

Members were given the example of what the budget has been used for recently explaining that the team needed to purchase a new infrared camera to carry out Bat surveys due to new regulations.

 

ENV-W related to the reduction in the works in default budget and the dangerous structures out of hours cover. The chair felt that he was surprised to still see this budget line in the proposals because it was of concern around what the council role is when a dangerous structure is identified.

The chair asked for more information around what the council’s role is in those scenarios.

The Chair noted that the report and the response in the last meeting referenced other emergency agencies attending. He asked officers to clarify the specific nature of the council's role during emergencies.

Members were concerned that, despite being a relatively small amount of money, this budget line represents a potentially significant public safety issue.

Officers apologised for not circling a briefing note which clarified the roles, responsibilities and any potential risks that would come with that, he confirmed that would be circulated via the democratic services officer.

Members were informed that there is no legal obligation for this work, and many local authorities in Wales also don't provide this service. In major incidents, emergency services would respond first and secure the site before council officers arrive. The proposal means officers would attend the next working day instead of out of hours. Officers noted potential reputational damage for the council from partner agencies.

Members were concerned that the emergency services who attend might not have the expertise of council staff in knowing whether a structure is dangerous or not.

Officers advised that things could still happen on an ad hoc basis but taking away the rota would remove the guarantee that an officer would be available to attend.

Members were provided with advice that some items considered would need to be scrutinised in private.

It was proposed and seconded and Resolved: to exclude the public for the following item(s) pursuant to Section 100A(4) and (5) of the Local Government Act 1972 and the relevant exempt paragraphs of Part 4 of Schedule 12A to the above Act.

Members considered the private items.

Members voted to go back into public.

 

Following scrutiny, the committee noted the report.