Agenda item

To consider any questions the appropriate notice for which have been given under Section 4.18 of the Constitution.

 

(The Cabinet Members' written responses to the questions had been published in advance.)

 

It was expressed that the questions had been late arriving the members today and they asked for an explanation regarding why they were received so late. Apologies were expressed for this, noting that a large number of questions had been submitted and that responding to them took time. It was noted that they would arrive earlier for the next meeting.

 

1. Question from Councillor Dawn Lynne Jones 

 

I am aware that a full review was initiated on Derwen services back in 2024 due to concerns about the increasing number of children waiting for access to or for the services of Derwen. I wonder if the cabinet member can give an update on the results of the review by now, and indeed, on Derwen's situation. 

 

Response from the Cabinet Member for Children and Supporting Families, Councillor Menna Trenholme

 

The decision to hold a review of the Derwen Service was made at the Management Board on 7 November 2024. As it was a joint Management Board with Anglesey, and as the Health Board was an integrated part of the services in both authorities, the review run concurrently across both counties. 

 

Following the decision to carry out the review, a request was made for regional money to commission external support to lead on this. Money had been attracted for the purpose and a tendering process was followed in order to commission the work. An external adviser was appointed at the end of February 2025, with a work programme to run from May until September 2025. For reasons beyond the control of both services, the work programme had slipped and it was now expected for the review to be completed by the end of December 2025. 

 

The scope of the review included considering the existing access criteria, analysing the service's current arrangements, understanding the needs of children and their parents, understanding the expectations of stakeholders and considering the design of the service for the future. 

 

The final report will be submitted to the Management Board initially, and the work will be included on the agenda of the Care Scrutiny Committee. 

 

It should also be noted that internal research was being carried out to look at Gwynedd population trends, including the number of births, the existing child population, as well as the number of disabled and neurodiverse children. The purpose of this work will be to discover whether the number of disabled children and young people is increasing, even as the number of births in Gwynedd reduced since 2012, and understand the reasons for this. 

 

The work will also consider the ability of social services and the Education Department (Additional Learning Needs), to meet the needs over the coming twenty years. The work will follow the pattern of the Llechen Lân report on older people's social services in the future, which was published in autumn 2024. 

 

 

Supplementary Question from Councillor Dawn Lynne Jones

 

She gave thanks for the response and for the reference to the Derwen service in Social Service's annual report, and that she was aware that the schedule had slipped. Is it possible to obtain clarity on the service's criteria and how the various needs of the children in the county can be evaluated against the increasing demands on services, how can we secure robust criteria which are flexible enough to ensure a service for every child who needs it, but also protect this scarce resource?

 

Response from the Cabinet Member for Children and Supporting Families, Councillor Menna Trenholme

 

            Thank you for the supplementary question. These questions are ones raising from the review, and she will share the report with the Member as it is released.

 

2. Question from Councillor Rhys Tudur 

 

Given that during this year the Council has abandoned the procedure of numbering areas on waiting list application forms which has resulted in the loss of important data, to what extent were consultations, impact assessments, notices to councillors and public reports carried out to justify the decision so that it is transparent, balanced and democratic? 

 

Response from the Cabinet Member for Housing and Property, Councillor Paul Rowlinson 

 

I would like to refer you to the responses I gave to the similar questions asked at the Full Council meetings in July and March, when I explained that we have not lost any important data whatsoever. On the old application form, applicants for social housing were asked to note the areas they would like to live, noting them in priority order. As many applicants filled in the form without prioritising the areas, and as this prioritisation did not take any part in the housing allocation process, it was decided that there was no point continuing to ask people to prioritise areas. The application form was amended in line with that. This was an operational issue only, it was not political, and the public had not been affected in any way, except for the process being simplified for them. 

 

Supplementary Question from Councillor Rhys Tudur

 

Considering that the Council should operate in a transparent and fair way, and based on robust evidence when making changes, and considering that the Council should have consulted appropriately in line with the requirements of good Governance, and that there was not, it seemed, any single public report to justify the decision. And considering the change disrupting the quality of data and making it less detailed and useful to assess local need and to give clear evidence for planning purposes. Isn't it obvious that the change is undemocratic, unfavourable to vulnerable individuals who need to note where they wish to live and cause housing developers to profiteer hugely, by enabling them to use vague data, with no detail, to support the construction of a high number of housing in unsuitable places.

 

Answer - Response from the Cabinet Member for Housing and Property, Councillor Paul Rowlinson 

 

Initially, there was robust evidence that people were not filling the form correctly, and so there was no need to consult as there was no change to the housing process. The change did not disrupt data at all. Changes to forms were not something that required political input, and so there was no need for all the consultation you refer to. In terms of planning processes, the processes being used are recognised processes on a national level, and those ones seen in Councils across Wales.

3. Question from Councillor Gruffydd Williams 

Following the housing department receiving advice via Cyfeillion Llŷn from the Welsh Language Commissioner noting the ability to use the Welsh language as an allocations policy consideration and following recent attempts to build a large number of social housing in Welsh-speaking areas such as Nefyn, how enthusiastically and quickly will this Council be including the Welsh language as one of the considerations of the allocations policy?

Response from the Cabinet Member for Housing and Property, Councillor Paul Rowlinson 

Cyngor Gwynedd’s Common Housing Allocations Policy and our Housing Action Plan plays a key part in the battle to keep the Welsh language alive in our communities. Both the influx of non-Welsh speakers and the outward migration of Welsh speakers threaten its prosperity as a community language. The strong emphasis given to a local connection in the Allocations Policy ensures that the vast majority of homes are allocated to local people.

But the outward migration of Welsh-speakers is much more of a threat to the language.  It is a sad fact that over half of us here in Gwynedd cannot afford to purchase a home, and even higher in some areas. Private rent levels are also high, therefore there is a need for social housing for those who cannot purchase or rent on the market. I strongly believe that we have a right to live at home. This is a core matter to us. Some choose to move away, but no-one should be forced to leave as a result of not being able to afford to live in their habitat. And there are over 4,400 people and families (over 2,200 applications) on the waiting list.

Therefore, as we are all aware, more social housing need to be built in all parts of Gwynedd. The Housing Action Plan sets the aim of building 700 by 2029, through collaboration with our housing partners, and I’m pleased to say that we are on track to achieve this goal. 

The Allocations Policy places a strong emphasis (the strongest in Wales) on a local connection, with two levels –a Gwynedd level and a community level. As a result, 97% of homes are allocated to local people with a Gwynedd connection and 60% to people in the same community. The criteria in the policy safeguards individuals who are local to Gwynedd as far as reasonably possible.

You are correct to note that the allocations policy does not specifically include the language as one of the considerations. You refer to the legal advice commissioned by the Welsh Language Commissioner. But the Council and its partners must attend to wider legal matters in regards to practical execution of the provision in a way which meets other requirements and duties.

 
The Housing Act 1996 places a legal duty on the Council to give reasonable priority to the applicants in most need and it defines these. We must also give “due regard” to Welsh ministers’ guidance. One part of the Guidance (3.69) allows “sustaining Welsh-speaking communities by giving priority to those in housing need with a local connection to the area.” That is exactly what we are doing, and the emphasis we place on the local connection is one of strongest that can be seen in Wales and goes as far as possible in what can be included.

The Allocations Policy places social housing applicants in bands and then within that band a priority is given to applicants (or family members) who have lived for five years or more in the Community Council area in question. This means that an applicant who has the same level of housing need but also has a community connection would be given higher priority than an applicant without a community connection. Should any priority be given to an applicant’s ability to speak Welsh, this would have to be given after these priorities, namely the level of need, Gwynedd connection and community connection. Because of this, it is unlikely that it would make much of a difference.

The percentage of Welsh-speakers who live on social housing estates is high. Recently, we have asked housing associations to conduct language surveys on their new social housing developments. They found that 90% of residents could speak Welsh, in wards where the average percentage of Welsh-speakers is 76%, which is 14% higher. Social housing can help to strengthen the language by providing affordable homes to local people, a high percentage of whom speak Welsh, and help them stay in their area.    

Furthermore, there are a number of good reasons for not changing our current policy.

As a Council we have a duty to serve everyone in Gwynedd, the non-Welsh speaking minority as well as the Welsh-speaking majority. Giving preference to Welsh speakers would risk alienating residents who have lived all their lives in Gwynedd but cannot speak Welsh, and in doing do, creating a ‘second class of residents based on language only.

We have consulted with our partners, the housing associations, those who build and manage the homes. And the answer is clear: all support the policy as it is, a policy which prioritises the people of Gwynedd and opposes the principle of discrimination on the basis of the language people speak. If we were to follow that path, there is a risk that some would refuse to operate in Gwynedd anymore.

The Council must execute the policy fairly and consistently and the legal advice we
received stated that the practicality of its introduction would be extremely complex. Certainly, it would create difficulties in terms of how to define and objectively assess an applicant’s and their families’ language ability and conduct a review every year as is needed.

Those are the reasons why I believe the Common Housing Allocations Policy is fit for purpose and does not need to be changed for now. That being said, the Homelessness and Social Housing Allocation (Wales) Bill is currently making its way through the Senedd. If it becomes law, Welsh Government will publish new guidance and we will certainly be reviewing our policy at that time.  

Supplementary Question from Councillor Gruffydd Williams

Considering my experience in Nefyn and nearby villages, and having spoken with my fellow members in Dwyfor, the numbers who speak Welsh in new and old social housing has seen a marked decline, as there is a high and regular turnover in the tenancy of social housing and as no allocation consideration is given to Welsh than adequate local demand. Isn't it obvious that we need to stop being so unwise and surrender to the power we have according to the Welsh Language Commissioner to use the Welsh language as an allocation policy consideration in those areas.

Response from the Cabinet Member for Housing and Property, Councillor Paul Rowlinson

I have provided an extensive report and I have covered the points. Any such change would have to be in parallel with the 1996 Housing Act considerations, and there are also practical problems as well as a matter of principle, and this is why there will be no reform at present.

 

4. Question by Councillor Huw Llwyd Rowlands 

 

Does Cyngor Gwynedd consider that the culture of Ffordd Gwynedd, which is to provide the best possible service to the residents of Gwynedd, is operating efficiently and successfully in all parts of the Council? My experiences suggest that it is not.

 

Reply – Cabinet Member for Corporate Services, Councillor Llio Elenid Owen 

 

The annual report presented to the Cabinet meeting on 8 July 2025 shows that Gwynedd Council recognises that the Ffordd Gwynedd culture and the “way of working” are moving in the right direction, with several examples where departments are taking proactive steps to promote the plan’s objectives.

However, the report is also honest about the fact that progress and efforts to embed the culture remain mixed, and there are variations between individual departments and across the Council as a whole.

The report emphasises that the role of technology, training, and continuous evaluation is key to the success of this culture, but there are some areas where best practices have not yet been fully embedded. For example, there is a need to extend basic training on the “way of working”, embed the practice of continuous evaluation, and promote ownership of performance among all Council staff.

 

There is a specific plan within the work programme regarding customer care, and the Cabinet also approved a new Customer Service Strategy at its meeting on 8 July 2025. The work programme of this strategy will place particular emphasis on responding to enquiries and correspondence from residents and members, with the aim of seeing improvement in the Council’s performance.

 

If anyone receives a substandard service, they are encouraged to bring it to our attention through the relevant processes so that we can identify exactly where those weaknesses are and address them.   

 

 

Supplementary Question by Councillor Huw Llwyd Rowlands

 

Bearing in mind that the Ffordd Gwynedd culture had been in progress for over 10 years, are you confident that Cyngor Gwynedd is sufficiently prioritising this matter, in order to ensure improvement and a marked change in the Council's culture within a specific period, e.g., 12 months?

 

Response of the Cabinet Member for Corporate Services, Councillor Llio Elenid Owen 

 

Ffordd Gwynedd's principles are to put the people of Gwynedd at the centre of everything, listening to their needs, and establishing the best possible way to respond and ensuring that this happens well and in a timely way. Committing to this culture in the Council is a priority for me and the Cabinet, and they are tireless in their commitment. Culture changes take time, and over the last 10 years, I believe that the vast majority of the Council's staff are buying into the culture.

 

It is unfortunate that those 10 years have been 10 years of financial cuts, and that this has affected the progress. However, we cannot merely hide behind financial cuts, and there is no doubt that some aspects of the culture still need to be improved, and responding to member enquiries is one of those. I am aware that the Chief Executive and Members of the Management Team share this view and that plans are already afoot to improve that aspect specifically, and that there are plans for members to scrutinise and assist with the work and that they are in contact with you and ready to start that conversation.

 

5. Question by Councillor Linda Morgan 

 

In view of the decision of the North Wales Safeguarding Boards to delay the publication of the CPR report last week, can the Leader give an update on the current situation with regard to the CPR please. 

 

Response from the Leader of the Council, Councillor Nia Jeffreys 

 

Thank you to the Councillor for the timely question and for giving me the opportunity to
share the available information with the Council.   

 

I was disappointed that the Regional Safeguarding Board was unable to proceed with publishing the report on 24 September, as we had hoped and expected. Of course, the disappointment and pain were even greater for the victims and survivors. I cannot imagine how challenging the wait for publication must have been for them, and I am truly sorry that this delay has prolonged their pain and anxiety.

We have formally contacted the Safeguarding Board to request an explanation, but unfortunately, we still have no information regarding the reasons for the delay. I can assure the Council that Cyngor Gwynedd had no role in the decision and we are eager to see the report published as soon as possible.

I anticipate that the report will highlight failures to prevent the paedophile, Neil Foden, and that many of these failures will fall under the responsibility of this Council. It breaks my heart to think that our safeguarding systems at the time failed to protect children who should have been safe in their school.

 

Receiving the report will give us the opportunity to fully understand what happened, what lessons need to be learned and which systems need to be strengthened to ensure our children are as safe as possible in Gwynedd and across Wales. It will give us the chance to acknowledge our shortcomings and to apologise again to the victims, to the many others affected, and to the people of Gwynedd for letting them down.⁠ ⁠   

 

Following the adoption of the Response Plan earlier this year, a Response Plan Programme Board was established to monitor and measure the progress of the Plan and to implement the recommendations. There are now seven main objectives for this Plan: ‘Acknowledge’, ‘Apologise’, ‘Support’, ‘Establish’, ‘Learn’, ‘Improve’, and ‘Accountability’.  

 

The Response Plan Board is chaired by Professor Sally Holland, with representatives from several external agencies acting as observers to ensure independent challenge of the Board’s work. Four Cabinet Members sit on the Board, along with Council officers and representation from Ysgol Friars and the Secondary sector in Gwynedd.

 

I must emphasise that the adoption of the Response Plan and the establishment of the
Response Plan Programme Board were not the beginning of the work. Several actions had already taken place beforehand, and much more remains to be done.

 

In her quarterly report to the Cabinet in July, Professor Sally Holland noted that positive progress was being made across the workstreams. That being said, there is still much more to do, and further recommendations are expected following the publication of the Child Practice Review (CPR) – we will accept all of them and implement them immediately. We will not shy away from our responsibility; everything must be done to safeguard the children of Gwynedd.

 

My thoughts remain with the victims, their families, and the entire community who have waited a long time to see this vitally important report.

 

 

6. Question by Councillor Louise Hughes 

 

Following the announcement last week that the report into Foden’s repulsive, predatory behaviour will not yet be released, it raises the question of how effective this Council’s whistleblowing procedures are. We are all tainted by this appalling state of affairs. Parents sending their children to our schools place their trust in Cyngor Gwynedd to make sure they are safe. Withholding the findings of the report shuts down the rights of the victims, their parents and ordinary people who are justifiably angry at how this was allowed to happen over such a long period of time.  

 

Why weren’t the concerns raised in the past followed up and investigated under the Education Act 2002 for Safeguarding Children in Education - what reassurances can Cyngor Gwynedd give that future safeguarding concerns will be treated seriously and actioned robustly?    

 

Response from the Cabinet Member for Education, Councillor Dewi Jones  

 

Thank you for raising this serious matter. First of all, I would like to apologise sincerely to all those who have suffered as a result of the horrific acts of paedophile, Neil Foden, and emphasise that the safety and well-being of every child in Gwynedd are always our main priority. 

  

You specifically ask why concerns raised in the past were not followed up under the Education Act 2002. An independent investigation was commissioned by the North Wales Regional Safeguarding Board to examine not only why systems that should have protected children did not work as they should but also the culture and arrangements that allowed such behaviour to continue unchallenged. Like many, I am also disappointed with the Regional Safeguarding Board's decision to delay the publication of the report.  According to the Board, they need to consider their "legal obligations". I'm sure this has been a terrible experience for the children who suffered at the hands of the offender. I have not received any further information since being informed of this at the end of the day last Tuesday. 

  

In terms of ensuring confidence for the future: 

• Gwynedd school staff receive regular training on safeguarding, with clear routes to share concerns as a key part of it. The Education Department has established a new Safeguarding and Well-being Team which has enhanced our ability to respond in a timely manner to safeguarding concerns. 

• The Education Department has new arrangements in place to log and trace cases that are brought to its attention. Our Whistleblowing policy has been updated and procedures strengthened so that staff, parents and pupils themselves can raise concerns in confidence. 

• Governors and heads are accountable through annual safeguarding audits, despite the national practice being every three years. These visits include: checking safeguarding policies, checking dates and levels of training, checking practical safeguarding arrangements, questioning the designated safeguarding person, staff and pupils about confidence levels and knowledge relating to safeguarding, checking the contents of the school's Safeguarding Arrangements Annual Audit and offering general support and guidance. 

  

As Cabinet Member for Education, and a member of the Response Board, my role is to ensure that Cyngor Gwynedd acts appropriately and responds positively to any recommendations made during this process, and that lessons are learned so that safeguarding arrangements are strengthened. The Response Plan Board is chaired by Professor Sally Holland, and representatives from various external agencies attend as observers. In addition, four Cabinet Members, Council officers, and representatives from Ysgol Friars and the secondary sector in Gwynedd take part in the Board. In a report in July, Professor Holland said positive progress had been made so far with 32 of the 63
work tasks completed and a clear desire by the Council to deliver the remainder. 

  

I would like to assure parents and carers that any safeguarding concerns raised today are treated with the utmost seriousness, promptly investigated, and robust action taken thereafter. We will tolerate nothing less. 

  

The lessons of the past must shape the culture of the present. It is only by facing those lessons honestly, and by relentlessly strengthening our systems, that we can honour the trust that families place in us every day. 

 

Supplementary Question by Councillor Louise Hughes

 

Thank you for your response, although we are ignoring the fact that Foden is a bully, that workplace bullying is unacceptable, and this should have been flagged earlier. Therefore, the complete silence on this issue means that we as Elected Members have not received any explanation on procedural departmental failings, and it raises many further questions. How often did the Ysgol Friars governing body meet? And what was the input of the safeguarding children governor? Many people have asked me whether Foden will receive his pension?

 

Response from the Cabinet Member for Education, Councillor Dewi Jones

 

As noted in the original response, culture is something that the Independent Investigation are looking into; I agree with you that workplace bullying is unacceptable and is something that Cyngor Gwynedd, in all departments, is trying to eradicate. But obviously, Foden displayed bullying tendencies and the Judge in Court also referred to him as a bully.

 

There are suggestions in your address which suggest that Gwynedd in some way is trying to silence people, but this is not true. It was not Cyngor Gwynedd's decision to not publish the report last week; this was the decision of the regional safeguarding board. It is not us who is investigating the Council's failings; this is done by the Regional Safeguarding Board, which is stand-alone. Therefore, hopefully what this will provide moving forward is confidence for people that the investigations have been carried out independently, thoroughly and will strengthen our systems. I am very proud to be able to say that we welcome any recommendations and are already implementing several of the recommendations; we have learnt lessons and we continue to do so. Everyone in this room has a responsibility for this. Yes, we have a Cabinet which leads the Council, but all of us in our roles as Governors, as members of the Scrutiny Committee are to ensure that lessons are learnt, and that our systems are strengthened. Because we can see what can go wrong when systems are not robust enough. I cannot say that this will never happen again, but we can do our best to ensure that we have the best possible arrangements.

 

This is why I am a member of this Council, and that is why I take an interest in education, as it is the future of our children that is on the line. I will do everything within my ability to enable this to happen. I speak passionately about this because this has affected me deeply, and I cannot begin to imagine how the parents, the families of the abused children feel, let alone the children themselves.

 

The comments about the pension; Cyngor Gwynedd do not implement the Headteacher's pension - this is an issue for the British Government. I understand that the Local Member of Parliament has raised this with the Minister in Westminster.

 

 

7. Question by Councillor Richard Glyn Roberts 

 

Considering: 

1. That the cabinet member for finance, earlier this year, stated that the Finance Department was working on a policy on the use of discretionary powers to reduce council tax liability in relation to the premium (in the case of property used for self-catering accommodation which is not subject to a planning condition restricting its use for the purpose of an ordinary dwelling) and that it is therefore recognised that there are self-catering accommodation businesses in Gwynedd which would merit
   consideration under such a policy;

2. That the authority continues to operate without an exemption policy, contrary to Welsh Government guidance; and 

3. That the delay in introducing an exemption policy is attributable, it is said, to concern about creating loopholes and that implicit in that suggestion that continuing to raise a premium on property that merit being exempt is somehow better than the possibility that some might take advantage of an exclusion policy to avoid payment;

 

How does the Finance Department, in the absence of policy, deal with each case on its own merits (in line with Welsh Government guidance) and strive to act fairly and consistently and with the due measure of proportionality lest the Authority have to face a legal challenge in this matter in due course?

 

Response - Cabinet Member for Finance, Councillor Huw Wyn Jones  

 

Thank you for the question. 

 

First, I think a misconception needs to be corrected. There is no guidance from the Welsh Government requiring the Council to have an exemption policy – what it does say is that there is encouragement to consider whether there is room for councils to use their discretionary powers to tailor a decision or to reduce council tax liability. The legislation itself sets out statutory exemptions, and no Council is required to have an additional exemption policy. 

  

Having said that, discussions have started over the summer regarding whether it is necessary to create a Council Tax Premium exemptions policy for Cyngor Gwynedd, and under what circumstances exemptions would be appropriate. There are several complex and technical considerations to be discussed, and we also need to fully understand what the impact of any policy would be to ensure that we do not create any undesired outcomes.

  

The real unfairness here is that our young people are unable to get a roof over their heads in large parts of the County. It is not clear from the question which properties "deserve" an exemption, or on what grounds.   

 

Supplementary Question by Councillor Richard Glyn Roberts

 

Given

1. That the Cabinet Member for Finance maintains that the Welsh Government guidance demand that Local Authorities have an exception policy in this matter.
2. That the Welsh Government guidance on council tax on empty homes and second homes March 2023 version, clearly states "for fairness and transparency, every Local Authority should have a policy", noting the potential circumstances where a property can be considered for an exemption from the premium.
3. That there are local Welsh people who have visitor lets, who are hit with a £15,000 Council Tax bill out of the blue, with no obvious process for an exemption.

The decision-makers with this matter should be more familiar with the exact wording of the guidance; I can send you a copy?

 

Response - Cabinet Member for Finance, Councillor Huw Wyn Jones

 

The use of "must" on page 18 of the guidance, and what I would note is that the Council's interpretation, from the beginning of the paragraph, is that it is an optional issue for Authorities as to whether they use powers in 13A to reduce the tax, or impose an exemption policy.  I am not a solicitor and so I am following the advice I get on this matter. Discussions have been held over the summer to identify a way to obtain an optional policy which ensures fairness and transparency and not being held open to allegations of discrimination or being left in a situation where an exemption has to be given to every empty property and second home in the county. We will introduce a section 13a policy over the summer months, but this will be broader than premium issues alone.

 

8. Question from Councillor Beca Brown 

 

It was International Day of Peace on September 21st – a day that gives the people of the world the opportunity to commit to creating a peaceful world and to reflect on how we could all contribute towards creating a culture of peace. 

 

With that in mind, I note that drone testing and development has been taking place at Llanbedr airfield in Gwynedd for over a decade, for a variety of purposes. Given the horrific effects of drones on civilians in wars, and given that we live in a world that feels increasingly unstable, can we be certain that the drones being developed at Llanbedr are not being used for military purposes? 

 

Response - Cabinet Member for the Economy, Councillor Medwyn Hughes  

 

Cyngor Gwynedd has been working with the leaseholders of the Snowdonia Aerospace Centre since the Site became part of the Snowdonia Enterprise Zone in 2011. The Centre offers a development space for different companies in the field of unmanned vehicles, satellites, and wider space technology. The Council has assisted them with projects that could lead to safeguarding and creating new employment opportunities in Llanbedr. They have recently received an £820,000 grant from the UK Space Agency to extend their research and testing facilities. Cyngor Gwynedd is not supporting any projects or activities on site at present.

 

The Council has contacted Snowdonia Aerospace LLP, the leaseholders of the Site, to obtain assurances that their customers are not developing drones for military purposes. Confirmation has been received from the Company that the site is only used by commercial companies, but as they have agreed to a non-disclosure agreement (NDA) with their customers, they are not in a position to provide details of the operations of these companies. Nevertheless, the Company has confirmed that they have no planned military drone operations with the Ministry of Defence at the site in Llanbedr.⁠  

 

Supplementary Question from Councillor Beca Brown

 

Thank you, I note from the response that there are no plans at the moment to develop or test drones for military purposes but bearing in mind that drones are easy to transfer from one use to another, how can Gwynedd residents be certain that the drones being developed in Llanbedr will never be used for war purposes? 

 

Response from the Cabinet Member for Economy and Community, Councillor Medwyn Hughes  

 

Although this is not the company's vision at present, there are no restrictions that would prevent military drones from operating from the site in the future. The company has a certificate of lawful use, which allows un-piloted vehicle operations on the estate, but this does not differentiate between technology which can be used for commercial or military purposes. Security licences or planning consent does not differentiate between what type of drone can operate on the site. And we can clearly state to the company that there are concerns about contracts with companies that may develop drones for military purposes in the future.