Agenda item

For Committee Members to scrutinise performance matters within the Department.

1.         To accept the report and note the observations.

2.         To ask the Economy and Community Department to share data on numbers using Arosfan (motorhome) sites and information relating to enforcement issues with Committee members.

The Cabinet Member for Economy and Community presented the report noting that it looked back on the department's performance over the previous year, with specific attention to the progress made against the Council's priority projects. It was acknowledged that many of the department's services had faced financial uncertainty because of changes to the Government's funding programmes, but pride was expressed in the performance of the department’s teams and the progress made in achieving the Council's commitments.

It was noted that 69 organisations across the county had received support through the Government grant in the last year. It was reported that 55 community councils across Gwynedd had been supported and that £8.9 million had been invested to improve town centre infrastructure. It was noted that a request had been made for the department to further research the additional actions the Council could take by using local authority powers, including options that did not necessarily align with existing guidelines. It was confirmed that work had already started on this.

It was reported that 118 Gwynedd businesses had received support over the previous year, with a £1.3 million investment. It was noted that 255 Gwynedd residents who faced barriers to employment had received support, as well as 130 additional individuals who had received support to ensure a better or full salary.

Satisfaction was expressed with the progress made with the Trawsfynydd science park. It was noted that members had received an invitation to visit the site and receive a presentation on the latest information regarding the plan, and it was confirmed that a further update would be presented to the Committee in due course.

It was noted that work had commenced over the previous year to develop a more sustainable model to support communities. It was explained that pilot arrangements were being considered in Tywyn, Abermaw and Blaenau Ffestiniog. It was reported that grants to the value of £217,000 had been allocated to community groups and food banks across Gwynedd to strengthen the local support available to residents.

It was noted that the number of visits to Byw'n Iach leisure centres during the previous year had been lower than the previous year. It was explained that the reduction stemmed mainly from a change in the method of gathering data, although there was also a small reduction in the number of primary children who received swimming lessons at the centres.  It was noted that the number of visitors remained slightly lower than pre-covid levels, and it was emphasised that there was a need to agree on new systems, improve the performance and encourage more people to use the swimming pools.

It was reported that the previous year had been challenging for maritime services, with winter storms causing damage and a large number of visitors arriving on weekends when the weather was fine, creating traffic problems and additional pressure. It was noted that waste and safety were matters that needed to be considered, as well as several other matters. It was acknowledged that the services' ability to respond to the quick increase in the population on busy days was limited, which caused frustration for local communities and visitors. It was confirmed that these matters would be part of the Destination Management Plan in the future.

During the discussion, the following observations were made:-

Reference was made to the archives service and the fact that the opening hours had been reduced to the lowest level since 2016. It was noted that over a thousand individuals had responded to a questionnaire, and insufficient opening hours had become prominent as the main concern. It was acknowledged that more material was available online, but it was emphasised that not everyone wished to access services from their homes. It was asked whether there was any intention to extend the opening hours as a result of the Government's investment in public places and the public's responses.

In response, it was explained that opening hours had been a cause for concern to users for many years, and the reduction derived from the need to reduce the service's operating costs. It was noted that the opening hours between Dolgellau and Caernarfon had reached the lowest level possible. It was reported that there had been significant investment in windows, sustainability measures within the premises and the reading rooms, but it was confirmed that there was no additional funding available to extend the opening hours.

Reference was made to the work to encourage businesses to increase their use of the Welsh language, and it was asked how compliance was being monitored. In response, it was explained that promoting the Welsh language was included as a condition when allocating grants, and that evidence was gathered to show that the condition had been fulfilled. It was noted that businesses were expected to do more than just translate sheets, promoting the Welsh language as part of their activities. It was explained that the method of implementation varied between businesses, but checks were being undertaken. However, it was acknowledged that there was a weakness in the monitoring arrangements because staff who managed the grants were often funded through the grant itself. It was noted that the resource would not necessarily continue after the scheme came to an end. It was explained that the three-year plan would be evaluated and that information and evidence were being gathered, but it would not be possible to monitor the businesses after the scheme ended.

Reference was made to areas where broadband was not always available for businesses and homes. It was emphasised that a reliable connection was essential, particularly as analogue services ended, and it was asked what support the Council could provide to areas without coverage. In response, it was noted:-

·       The Digital Gwynedd plan had been part of the Council's previous plan, but the work was now being done in partnership with Ambition North Wales through a regional team.

·       A plan was underway to target areas where there were gaps in the provision, but the UK Government had published a similar plan, creating two initiatives with the same aim.

·       The regional programme had been postponed to see what the UK Government scheme could provide. It was noted that this scheme would provide subsidies and support for providers to encourage them to serve areas where there were specific gaps.

·       The UK Government change had created uncertainty in terms of the status of the scheme, and there was a need to confirm how far it had developed.

·       Members were encouraged to submit practical examples and the postcodes of areas where problems continued. It was confirmed that the information would be shared with the regional digital team and raised with the relevant officers.

Reference was made to the £1.3 million distributed between 118 local businesses, and it was asked whether there was evidence that the investment had created new jobs. In response, it was confirmed that such data was being gathered.  It was explained that the purpose of the grants was not solely to create new jobs, as they were used to protect existing businesses and posts and increase long-term sustainability. It was noted that information about the number of jobs created had been included in an appendix, and they committed to share the actual figure with the members.

Reference was made to cultural regeneration projects and their reliance on external funding. It was asked whether it was possible to ensure that some projects could continue should the external funding come to an end. In response, it was acknowledged that the department relied heavily on external grants as there was no internal capital budget available. It was explained that Government funding was attracted to support business in Gwynedd, but grant conditions could limit the type of activities that could be achieved.

It was noted that there had been a request for the department to consider what needed to be achieved instead of only focusing on what was eligible under grant conditions. It was explained that there had been a significant change in the funding over previous years, with the Shared Prosperity Fund having been fairly flexible, whilst the new Local Growth Fund placed more emphasis on growth and capital expenditure and was less flexible. It was reported that an effort was made to ensure a fair geographical allocation of the funding across the county. Reference was made to regeneration plans for 13 catchment areas in Gwynedd, with the hope that those plans would reflect most local priorities.

Reference was made to the workstream for town centres. It was noted that Welsh Government funding and the Shared Prosperity Fund tended to focus on improving town centre facilities, but this did not always address the use patterns of town centres, empty properties, parking or softer matters that influenced people's perceptions. It was acknowledged that there was a need to extend the scope of the work, and it was confirmed that a specific report on town centre work would be submitted to the Scrutiny Committee in July.

It was asked whether there was evidence that the World Heritage Site designation and the associated investment brought economic benefit to Gwynedd communities. In response, it was explained that the designation had been in place for four years and that many schemes and projects had been developed in the communities of the slate areas. It was acknowledged that all the results of the work had not become clear yet.

It was noted that close work was happening with communities on economic projects, tourism, regeneration, pride in place and heritage interpretation. Reference was made to a project to the value of approximately £36 million which included redeveloping the Wales Slate Museum in Llanberis. Neuadd Ogwen in Bethesda was given as an example of investment that had made a practical difference. It was reported that basic infrastructure had been improved, including lighting, sound and insulation, and the improvements had enabled the hall to hold events and late night gigs without adversely affecting the local area.

Reference was made to completing work on buildings in Church Street in Blaenau Ffestiniog, in partnership with Antur Stiniog, to regenerate shops on the high street for housing and commercial use. It was reported that work had happened in Parc Padarn, Llanberis, and that local companies were being supported through the regeneration and construction work.

Reference was made to previous observations that funding for the bypass in Llanbedr would have to come through the North Wales Corporate Joint Committee. There was doubt that the body would allocate a significant proportion of its funding to one plan. It was noted that invites had been sent for Welsh Government members to visit the area and discuss the plan with the community. It was emphasised that the bypass was important to the economy, public safety and to create work opportunities, and it was asked whether the department would continue to press on the Welsh Government to fund the plan. In response, it was confirmed that a plan was ready to be implemented before the previous Government reconsidered the matter. It was noted that costs had increased since then, but a plan still existed and funding was the main barrier. It was confirmed that meetings would be arranged with the relevant Ministers, and the importance of the plan to the economy and the local community would be emphasised.

Reference was made to overnight sites for motor homes, and it was noted that approximately 2,000 vehicles had stayed on the sites in Cricieth, Caernarfon and Pwllheli for a two-year period. A member asked about the percentage use of the sites. Reference was made to an increasing problem with motor homes in other areas, noting that a significant number had been seen in one location whilst the Caernarfon official site was almost empty. It was asked for clarity regarding 96 enforcement cases in unofficial locations, including the nature of breaches and the reason for taking action. It was noted that motor homes caused problems in some areas. Reference was made to the fact that they would come under the visitor levy scope, but it was suggested that collecting the levy from motor home users would be difficult.

In response, it was confirmed that information could be provided about the percentage use of the sites. It was explained that the Environment Department was responsible for enforcement work, and they committed to ask for background information about the cases. It was acknowledged that the capacity of the enforcement team was limited and that it was difficult to prove in some cases that a vehicle had stayed overnight.

It was asked whether the Welsh Government had considered establishing a new development department, which could offer better grants, attract employers and create jobs in rural areas. In response, it was noted that a meeting would be held with the Minister for the Economy in the Welsh Government, and the question regarding a development department would be raised.

Reference was made to parking problems in communities, including vehicles parking on yellow lines, obstructing roads and creating danger and inconvenience for residents. It was asked whether it would be possible to invest in land to create new parking spaces. It was suggested that purchasing the land or sites of chapels that were closing could be considered, and to charge for parking to recover some of the cost.  In response, it was acknowledged that the matter was cross-departmental. It was confirmed that there were opportunities to create more parking spaces for residents and visitors, which could also create an income for the Council. It was explained that the matter could be discussed with the Environment Department. It was noted that community parking was one of the priorities that could be introduced through the Area Regeneration Framework, because different communities had different priorities.

Communities were encouraged to present ideas through the Area Regeneration Framework. It was noted, should an appropriate grant be available, that funding could be sought to purchase land. Should funding not be available immediately, it was suggested that the plan should be developed to a sufficient level of maturity to take advantage of any future funding opportunity. It was added that there would be a need to collaborate between services such as environment, highways, housing and economy. It was noted that the most successful companies were often led by active local groups, but it was acknowledged that management and maintenance costs would rise should the Council purchase and provide a car park. It was confirmed that there was an opportunity to work with community support officers to assess the options and develop a specific plan for a specific site.

Concern was raised regarding recent changes to car park arrangements. It was acknowledged that the Environment Department was responsible for parking, but it was emphasised that the decisions had a significant impact on the local economy.  Dissatisfaction was expressed with the consultation period held in November, noting that participants had to read many documents before finding the relevant information about the changes. It was suggested that this did not constitute a fair and accessible consultation.

The rationale for extending the charging hours so that payments began earlier in the morning and finished later at night was acknowledged. However, concern was expressed that some parking spaces had been re-designated from short-stay to long-stay. Llandanwg was given as an example, where it was noted that a visitor or a local individual who wished to spend half an hour on the beach could need to pay £4.50 for parking. Reference was made to a local business that had suffered significantly because of the change. It was suggested that the changes had led to more vehicles parking on the side of the road before the car park, creating additional traffic problems.

The Economy Department was asked to raise the matter with the Environment Department and ensure that the economic impact of changes to car parks were fully considered when conducting consultations in the future. In response, it was confirmed that the observations would be submitted to the Environment Department.

RESOLVED

1.     To accept the report and note the observations.

2.     To ask the Economy and Community Department to share data on numbers using Arosfan (motorhome) sites and information relating to enforcement issues with Committee members.