Local Government and Housing Committee

Good morning, everyone. Is the interpretation equipment working this morning? Yes, it is. Thank you very much for the invitation to attend today. I am chair of the mid Wales CJC since May of this year, because that's when I became leader of Ceredigion County Council. It was a bit of rude awakening, if truth be told—there were many things that I didn't quite understand at the beginning, but we have had the second meeting now. I see an element of frustration in terms of the questions that we've already asked for the short term—things such as VAT and corporation tax in terms of the grant funding that we'll be asking for.

As chair, the meeting on—. There is a timetable of meetings. The next meeting is in November now, and I feel that if we don't have answers on VAT and corporation tax, then what point is there in us meeting? So, if there was anything that we could get out of this committee today, Chair, it would be to have an answer to the questions that we've already asked. I think it's difficult for us to move ahead with other projects and rubber stamp projects until we have answers to those questions. Sorry to be negative about it, but I think, because it is a public forum in terms of the CJC, it would be a poor reflection on us if we were to ask the same questions time and time again and if we didn't receive the answers to those questions. So, in terms of the objectives for the short term, that is something that we will have to overcome before we move ahead.

Bryan, so, are you in a position at the moment then to set out—notwithstanding those difficulties with VAT and corporation tax—what you'd like to do in the short and medium-term?

Yes. The mid Wales growth board has started looking at the projects that we have, and the projects are now proceeding to the next stage, and they will come before the CJC, so we are ready to move ahead to the next stage. But, in the meantime, we do need to have the answers to those other issues that I raised. But, in terms of the plans, they are going ahead. So, the work that the board is doing, be that in terms of elected members or officials from Powys and Ceredigion, that collaboration is happening very well and successfully. So, it would be a shame if the questions that I asked would stymie those plans in the short term.

Yes. Are there any headlines you could share with us in terms of those projects then, Bryan? What is the nature of those projects, the ones that are most important to you?

One of the plans in the Powys area is the Centre for Alternative Technology in Machynlleth. There is a project in terms of the educational element there that is moving ahead. With regard to Ceredigion, there are two projects there: looking at the Aberaeron harbour, creating a new marina there. Another scheme in Ceredigion is the university in Lampeter, looking at an ambitious centre looking at food, for example. There is an innovative plan there called Tir Glas, where they're looking at a from field to fork type of scheme. And as a result of that, they hope to have a centre of excellence in the area with regard to those issues. There are also plans for a food centre in Horeb, Llandysul—again, an innovative project. The emphasis on producing food with a low-carbon footprint is vitally important, and that will happen in collaboration with the university in Lampeter, and is a very innovative project. There are some other projects in Powys that perhaps haven't quite hit the target yet in terms of the information that we need to proceed, so we need to look again at those plans—things such as a plan for a canal, for example. So, hopefully, they will come back with more information so that they can proceed to the next stage.

Diolch yn fawr. Anthony.

Yes. To answer the two parts of your question, in the short term, we're keen to overcome the technical matters that are currently standing in the way of us moving to proper operational mode, and we're keen to do that in the south-east as quick as we possibly can, so that we can—

Anthony, is that corporation tax and VAT?

VAT, yes. I think there are seven separate issues in total that we're corresponding with both Governments about at the moment. We welcome Rebecca and Vaughan's input in that, and also the Wales Office, to try and move those things along. So, that's very welcome. I'm very conscious I'm speaking to a committee here, rather than Welsh Government, but any input you can give into that will be welcome too, because that's currently standing in the way of our medium-term ambitions, which are very much to keep the impact and partnership work up at a regional level and keep bureaucracy down. This is why we're seeking to roll the CJC into the Cardiff capital region in south-east Wales, rather than having separate organisations, and also roll other bits of work around the Valleys, for example, that we've done, to harness that together, rather than having the same people meet in several different forums—more partnership and fewer meetings is my ambition, certainly. That's why I'm here as a CJC chair jointly with the CCR, rather than having separate chairs; we're keen to very much keep that up. We're keen to work on strategic transport and planning things and things that will really have an impact in the region, and also to build on the partnership of the 10 local authorities and the work we're doing to try and take economic development forward as a city region. So, those are the medium-term plans, but it all depends on overcoming that short-term hurdle of the technical issues.

Anthony, could I just ask you a little bit about that rolling in, as it were, of the CJC into the Cardiff capital region? Because I think there have been concerns on the committee, and elsewhere, in terms of the various footprints around and how it can get very unwieldy and confusing at times, and simplicity and a small number of beyond the local authority boundary organisations I think is quite preferable, if possible. So, is there a need for a CJC at all then, if it's being rolled into the Cardiff capital region?

The powers it can give us, the emphasis on the principle of subsidiarity is what I think should govern us—what works best at the right level. But I think the alternative is—. We've already got CJCs, we've got CCR, we've got regional partnership boards, we've got public services boards. If we're not careful—it's the same people, at the end of the day—we'll get drowned in so many meetings that we won't be able to push things forward between the meetings. So, there is a need to be sensitive, I think, when dealing with footprint, for example. I've done some work on the Valleys regional park; we need to make sure we involve the western authorities in that, involve the national parks, for example, in the CJC work as an equal partner. But I think if we're sensitive and genuinely collaborative in how we work, I don't think that's beyond us, and I think it's better than the alternative, really, of inventing another set of bureaucracy that will just need feeding in its own right as opposed to getting the outcomes for our residents.

Okay. Thanks very much. Okay. Dyfrig, could we call on you next, os gwelwch yn dda?

Okay. Thank you very much, Chair. I share, by the way, some of Anthony's comments there. I would say, to answer the first question, that our short-term aim is to establish the CJC on a robust basis. And I have to say that Gwynedd Council is the lead council on this, as it happens, and the work of producing a constitution and so forth has been very substantial. It's as if we're reinventing the wheel here; we're having to go through so much bureaucracy—I find it very heavy. However, we have established a constitution. We have four sub-committees that haven't met yet. In the medium term, again, to share Anthony's comments, our main concern is that the work of the North Wales Economic Ambition Board is being diluted, and we have invested energy over the years to establish that successful partnership, and it is already implementing some of the projects from the growth deal. And we have a programme office that's quite strong there, and we're very keen to see the profile of that body continuing to be as high and influential as it is now. In that regard, currently we have seconded the director of that office programme, Alwen Williams, to be the chief executive of the CJC in an interim capacity. She will work two days a week on that work.

We're also very keen to keep our costs down, and that is going to be a significant challenge for us. In our last meeting last week, there was a discussion on our budget, and many council leaders expressed that they would have trouble in contributing their levy at the current level, and that level is very small. That is, our budget at this moment is about £360,000, but it will have to be £640,000 in time so that we can stand still, and I see that discussion being a very, very difficult one. Our councils are facing a genuine crisis situation this year and next year and in the years to come, and if there is to be a list of cuts, the CJC will be at the top of that list, I think.

In general, I do question the purpose of the CJC. We have committed, in north Wales, to implementing it and to making it a robust body, but I do feel that there is duplication, certainly—duplication of bureaucracy, duplication of work—and Anthony Hunt is perfectly right, leaders now spend half their time meeting in some partnership or another, and it is difficult to see what the added value is for our taxpayers in terms of a number of those partnerships. And again, I can't see what the additional value is in our CJC.

Okay, Dyfrig, diolch.

Diolch.

Okay, diolch yn fawr. Rob Stuart then.

Thank you, Chair. To answer your question directly, the key projects for us and priorities for us, now that we've established the CJC, are to progress as quickly as we can the south-west Wales transport initiatives, specifically the metro. That's a key objective for us. It was a key objective that we would have liked to have included in our city deal, but, of course, at the time, we were in negotiations with the UK Government on electrification and other stuff, which subsequently were removed as options. So, the delivery of the metro is hugely important to our region, not just for improving transport options, both by bus and rail across the south-west Wales region, but also helping to improve journey times between the south-west of Wales and the rest of the UK. So, that's a key objective for us.

Outside of that, energy remains a major priority, as it is within the city deal. We are progressing a bid, being led by Neath Port Talbot and Pembrokeshire councils, for a free port in Swansea. We, obviously, are progressing the revised tidal lagoon proposal, which is now entirely privately funded, called Blue Eden, and that's making significant progress in terms of land assembly. So, these are complementary projects that were priorities for us anyway under the city deal and under other initiatives, but the CJC helps us to co-ordinate more formally the arrangements between the parties there.

Whilst I absolutely agree with the comments made by Anthony and others around the technical aspects that we need to resolve quickly with Welsh Government and UK Government to ensure we've got a firm basis on which to plan and that we have answers to some of the key financial questions, we see the evolution of CJCs building on what we've already achieved around our city deal. So, for us, we’ve taken a very similar approach to the Cardiff capital region. I'm chair of the city deal and I'm also chair of the CJC. The membership and the constitution are largely duplication, in that we haven't reinvented the wheel for the CJCs, because, as everybody has alluded to, the last thing we want is new structures invented where we've already got ones that are working perfectly well. So, we've tried to be pragmatic and guide Welsh Government where we can to make sure that we’re sensible about how we organise, and the city deal for us becomes a major strand of the work of the new CJCs.

Outside of that, we're beginning the work on the strategic planning work and, obviously, economic development, in terms of delivery of the city deal projects, is core to that. Nine of them are now live and in delivery, so it's making sure that they deliver on the aims that were set out when we agreed the deal. So, for us, yes, it's evolution, not revolution.

Rob, are you on the same footing then as Anthony in terms of bringing the CJC into the city deal, or, as you described it, is the city deal sitting within the CJC?

Yes, so the structure's slightly different, as I understand it, in the Cardiff capital region, in that they have essentially a cabinet of 10 authorities. We obviously have a committee of four members, and what we've done is to move our city deal delivery and the central office as a strand underneath the wider work of the CJCs. So, it remains a separate body in essence, but to make sure that it's co-ordinated and aligned, we've included that. So, we've done it slightly the other way, but exactly the same principle.

Yes, I see. Rob, could you just give us a flavour of the advantages that CJCs bring, in terms of that co-ordination that you mentioned?

One of the ones that's key for us is that we haven't had transport, as I said, as part of our city deal delivery. The South West Wales Integrated Transport Consortium, which obviously was a predecessor collaboration, was dissolved and, as such, we've continued to meet informally between the partners in the region to try and plan across the region in terms of our transport initiatives. But the re-establishment, essentially, of a formal transport committee now will really help us to co-ordinate those better and plan for the delivery of big projects like the metro. So, for us, that is a real advantage of having the CJC arrangements formalised.

Thanks very much, Rob, that's very useful. Could I just ask generally then to all of our witnesses if there's anything that you'd like to highlight to committee in terms of the challenges that you're likely to face with the CJCs over the next six to 12 months, beyond what you've already set out? Yes, Bryan.

I don't know whether Dyfrig is facing the same frustrations, but in a rural area, I think, in general, the costs of creating these projects tend to be higher. In terms of the plans that we have, you'll all be aware that the costs of commodities have increased a great deal over the past few months. I'm not sure, but the analogy that I use very often is steering an oil tanker, when it takes so much time to turn in a certain direction, and in the meantime, the prices have risen so much, so you need to look again at the costs associated with the project.

I don't want to be overly negative, but I just feel that the CJC is an additional layer of bureaucracy. But, having said that, in terms of the positives, it is another layer of scrutiny too, because you do have to have that scrutiny function, particularly with regard to the sums of money that we're asking for. And I accept that; I accept that fully. But, during the time it takes to get the projects through, the costs have increased a great deal, and that's an element that we see in a more rural area particularly.

Okay. Thanks, Bryan, and Chris. Chris Llewelyn.

Thanks, Chair. I just wanted to emphasise that it's still very early in the development of CJCs, and it's maybe a recognition that, when any kind of new tier of governance or regional arrangement is put in place, it does take time. I think, inevitably, these things take longer than would have been anticipated at the start. Very often, they cost more, and when it comes to the delivery and setting up arrangements, there are often challenges that couldn't have been anticipated in advance. And then, as other colleagues have mentioned as well, I think, at every level of government, we need to take account of the challenging circumstances we face. Bryan mentioned the cost-of-living crisis. There is such an array of unprecedented pressures facing local government at the moment; I think we need to take account of those as well.

The beauty of what's being proposed is that there's the capacity to respond in different circumstances. We've seen already the different interpretations of the four regions here today because their circumstances are different, their challenges are different, and they've responded in different ways. We know that this kind of approach is contestable. People often look at the same evidence and come to different conclusions based on the needs of their areas. So, I think that needs to be taken account of as well. At all times, authorities will be trying to streamline the bureaucracy around the development of CJCs, because inevitably, again with any tier of government, the tendency is for bureaucracy to grow, but the intention here is to streamline, rationalise, and bring coherence to arrangements. Within local government, again we've heard this morning arguments for subsidiarity, devolution, decentralising, and the approaches that have been adopted so far by the four different regions, in their different ways, emphasise that point.

Okay, Chris. Thank you very much. Dyfrig.

One practical point that hasn't been raised at all is the right to borrow. We, of course, are operating the growth deal, with a spend over the next 15 years of £240 million. Currently, we don't need those rights to borrow, but it will be necessary, I'm sure, as we face the variations in the spend and receipt profiles. Without those rights and the loans for corporate tax, VAT and others, we won't be able to implement our growth deal through the CJC. It won't be possible for us to do that.

We already know, in our last budget, which is a very, very small one, with no implementation really, except for the establishment of the body, that there will be an additional cost of £40,000, out of a spend of £360,000, that will be lost to VAT. So, you can see the extent of the problem in that context. Thank you.

Okay. Diolch yn fawr, Dyfrig. And Daniel—Daniel Hurford.

Thank you, Chair. I just wanted to extend on a couple of the points that Members had already made, and Chris likewise, around costs and tax, and obviously that's been made quite clearly, but it's the wider governance and capacity demands on the constituent authorities, who are generally loaning staff to the CJCs to establish what are, in effect, regional authorities. Councillor Siencyn has mentioned the constitution et cetera; quite significant governance arrangements have been set up. Audit, performance duties apply. Equalities, Welsh language, and future generations duties apply as well. So, it's important that the CJCs manage that in a proportionate fashion and that regulators, as well, understand that. We've had some very constructive discussions between ourselves, the CJCs, and the relevant regulators around what's expected and when, but I think that's a critical point as well, around expectation management.

There has been an awful lot of interest, inevitably, in the establishment of CJCs throughout the passage of the legislation, and prior to that, a lot of political interest within local government within the Senedd, regulators and stakeholders. It's important to recognise that, actually, these are very, very new bodies that have just been established, and have just had their core functions around planning and transport conferred upon them. As we've heard, there's likely to be a medium-term transition of some of the growth and city deal arrangements, so there is a lot of interest and expectation, but actually whilst the corporate bodies are there, working increasingly in parallel with city and growth arrangements, the delivery of the core functions around regional transport and regional planning are some years away and some years in development. So, they've hit the ground running as far as they can, but some of the core functions, as I say, will not be delivered for some time yet. So, I think it's just around expectations around what's going to be delivered and when.

Yes, okay, thank you very much, Daniel. Okay, thank you, all. We will move on, then, to Mabon. Mabon ap Gwynfor.

Thank you very much, Chair. Good morning, everyone, and thank you all for joining us this morning. You've touched a little bit on the central part of what's expected from these CJCs, so I want to go into that in more detail. If we look at, for example, the local and regional planning, what advantages do you see in developing the CJC when it comes to planning and decision making, and how is that going to duplicate or impact on the development work that is already being done by your local authorities? If we can start, perhaps, with Anthony.

Yes, sure. I very much see this as the start of us recognising more when we do our planning that people exist beyond the boundaries of our authorities. Too much, I think, when we develop regional plans, we act as if people never step foot outside of it. Take Torfaen, in my area; people live and work oblivious to those borders that we create as institutions, and I think the strategic plan can be a part of us in south-east Wales moving beyond that. So, there can be that regional framework and then we can, beneath that, set lighter local plans that take into account these things properly—how people move, where people live and work—so that it can be something that more reflects the realities of our region, as opposed to just having separate local development plans that sit beyond things.

There are examples, I think, where that can be of great benefit, where some areas have more available land for development than others, for example. We're next door to other areas. We're very light on land in Torfaen, developable land is very hard to come by. We've seen examples of companies looking for sites, and we want to work with our partners to make sure we keep them in south-east Wales, even if we can't keep them in Torfaen, because I'd rather have an employer expand in south-east Wales than see them move to England, quite frankly. So, I think there are those different areas where we can work together. I think the SDPs will get us doing that and help us to shape the places that we govern better.

I think it can also help—. Our planning departments have been, in many cases, decimated by the last 10 years of austerity and cutbacks. Any collaboration between those to give us a bit more resilience and a bit more partnership working I think will be useful, too.

Thank you very much. We'll go to Bryan in Ceredigion.

Good morning, Mabon. Yes, I think perhaps there's some frustration. In terms of the area I represent, we have a local development plan for Ceredigion and Powys, and it's a good thing that we are collaborating with the SDP also. In Ceredigion, we don't have a national park, whereas you do have that in Powys, so there are different planning guidelines, perhaps, for those areas. So, it's just a matter of collaborating and finding a solution and learning something from Powys and Powys learning something from us, and I would hope that the SDP would be able to co-ordinate everything in terms of that.

As the previous speaker said, it's important for us to try to keep our people and to attract the private sector in as well. There is a role, perhaps, for the regional skills partnership to be important there in recognising the skills gap that we have in the hope, then, that we can attract more businesses to the area and boost the economy. That's what we want, and perhaps to look at sites within our areas where we can develop.

I think this also weaves into the transport network as well. I'm sorry, I'm always talking about the frustrations in rural areas, in particular regarding transport and travel. In terms of Ceredigion, we have the railway in Aberystwyth and we are developing that at the moment in terms of freight. So, the collaboration between Powys and Ceredigion, perhaps through the SDP, will be very important in that regard, in terms of how we can increase the freight on our railways to decrease the numbers of lorries on our roads. But then Powys is unique, compared to Ceredigion, because they're on the border with England as well. And so we in Ceredigion would want to know what's going on in terms of the partnership between Powys and those areas in England that they partner with as well.

Thank you very much, Bryan. Rob.

Thank you. The key advantage that we see is obviously better co-ordination across the region in terms of delivery of major schemes. I think one of the challenges, previously, has been, if you look at things like Transforming Towns, where we're trying to support our town and city centres, you may have local authorities nearby that will make decisions that have a huge impact on your own local authority, but you'll have no control over that decision making. And I think the establishment of those strategic plans and a regional view of planning will help us better plan our communities that may be close to one another, but in different local authorities. The connectivity, the travel-to-work areas, the impact on how people live and the impact on businesses can be better planned where we've got that strategic arrangement in place, and I think that's one of the advantages I see.

I think the key thing that we need to guard against is, of course, making sure that things are determined at the right level and that we continue to have the local planning authorities making appropriate decisions on local matters and making sure that there is that subsidiarity approach so that local populations are not disenfranchised. But I think a strategic approach, well planned across a region, can only give us some benefits.

Thank you very much, Rob. Dyfrig.

Thank you, Mabon. When I say that the question is an interesting one, it means that I don't really know what the answer is, doesn't it? I mean, I'm waiting to see what the direction of the strategic planning will be. It's quite interesting that, in Gwynedd, we have developed a local development plan on a joint basis with Anglesey, but we have now both decided to pursue our own paths, because our aspirations are, perhaps, different.

So, it comes back to the question: what is the appropriate level at which to make those decisions? And in terms of the north Wales region, there are huge differences between the eastern counties and the western counties. That is, we have counties with a strong industrial base, and in the west, we are in deeply rural areas that have very, very different issues that need different solutions. So, I question whether it is on a north Wales-wide basis we should be making these strategic plans. But, ultimately, whatever the questions that arise with regards to planning, I'm not sure what the CJC adds to these issues—what additional value the CJC adds to the development of our functions. Yes, it is a collaborative body, but we could do that work in other ways without having to create another layer of Government, to be honest, and I question that. Thank you.

Thank you, Dyfrig. And Daniel.

I don't have much more to add than what the members have pointed out, but I think the key points are really the integration of the regional planning and some of the regional economic development and transport planning. It is a key point in terms of the regional dimension and travel-to-work flows et cetera. So, it's the key point of integration. That was one of the main rationales for the Welsh Government when they introduced the CJCs—ensuring that those relevant functions were on the same geographical footprint. In doing so, the attempt was to streamline some of the planned bodies that were likely to be established—so, regional transport authorities and regional strategic planning bodies as well—so that they were wrapped up into one. But it's key around the integration of planning, transport and well-being on the same footprint.

And likewise, Chris.

Thank you. The truth is that many of these ideas are controversial. When one looks at any sort of city region developments across the world and the way that they create benefit and economic growth, some of those elements are present—so, some sort of spatial planning, an integrated transport system, some sort of digital infrastructure and collaborative working. So, there is evidence that working in this method creates benefit, creates growth on an economic level. But of course, you have to consider as well the context and the circumstances. And what we've heard this morning in reality is that the regions and areas in Wales have interpreted the benefit that arises from being part of this sort of collaborative arrangement completely differently, and that is quite valid. The committees will be likely to develop in different ways, according to demand. The importance, I think, is that we always deputise or devolve to a level that's suitable for the local circumstances and the circumstances that exist at the time. Thank you.

The other core element that you've touched on, of course, is transport—Daniel spoke about transport in his response there. I note that Rob mentioned that at least in the south-west, this is going to be beneficial in terms of developing the metro. But does anybody else want to contribute to that transport element? Are these CJCs going to be beneficial with regard to ensuring co-ordination of transport in your regions? Bryan had his hand up there.

Thank you, Mabon. In the initial meeting of the CJC, we could see the frustrations once again with regard to a rural area where you're reliant on small businesses to create the bus services. Because of austerity, and the cost of fuel, companies are finding it difficult. Because of our location in west Wales, for example, it's difficult to attract these large companies to be part of that service, so that is a frustration.

One point, perhaps—and this weaves everything together—in terms of the SDP and the CJCs as a whole is perhaps the input from officers, are the correct resources there, do we need more resources so that the CJCs officers can do their work. Because they are doing a lot of work in the background.

In terms of the SDP, you're reliant on planning expertise there. I'm aware that there is a shortage of planning expertise across Wales, so do we need more resource just in terms of that planning element? But definitely, in terms of the transport, we have targeted that, and we do see it, really, as a problem. I'm not sure how we can provide a solution to it.

Thank you, Bryan. I saw Dyfrig's hand up.

Thank you. Again, on transport, there are very effective partnerships that have been in place in the past in terms of planning transport across regions, and of course, a sub-committee of the CJC will be doing that work—hopefully as effectively, if not more effectively.

One problem that I have specifically in Gwynedd—and Mabon ap Gwynfor will be aware of this—is that in the south of the county, the old Meirionnydd, it's very important for us to be part of regional discussions in mid Wales. I am concerned that we could be losing that element of collaboration. There has been excellent collaboration in the past in mid Wales between Gwynedd and Powys and Ceredigion, and it is vital that we retain those links.

The same old story from me, Mabon, is that the A55 isn't relevant to us in central Meirionnydd. The roads to Shrewsbury and the A470 are far more important. I don't know how much attention they receive. I am concerned that the footprint with regard to transport is incorrect, to be honest with you. Thank you.

Thank you, Dyfrig. Does anyone else want to contribute? Anthony.

Yes, happy to. Transport and how people move is key in this to me, and it's one of the key reasons why planning needs to be within the fold as well. It's because, given all that we know about the climate, how we can effect modal shift is vital. We can't do that on our own as local authorities within south-east Wales—I'm firmly of that belief. We need to work together to do it.

Subsidiarity is key, some decisions, as Dyfrig and others have said, are best made locally, but, in transport as in planning, there are things that, I believe, we can't do on our own and need to be addressed regionally. But that does mean that different areas will have different answers. Bryan or Dyfrig's areas are very different from Rob's or mine, and that will mean that there are differences in how we take this forward, quite rightly.

Thank you, Anthony. Are there other contributions on the transport element? Bryan.

Thank you for coming back to me. There has already been mention there of bus routes, for example. In terms of planning applications now, particularly with affordable homes, it's essential that those applications come before us where there is a bus route. So, if we're finding it difficult to maintain that bus service in rural areas, that has a knock-on effect, then, on planning applications in the future and also the local development plan. So, this is such an important element in terms of where transport weaves into planning.

Okay, Mabon? I think we'd probably better move on at this stage. Carolyn Thomas.

Thank you, Chair. Can I just touch on something that's been said already? Dyfrig and Bryan, I'm getting the feeling that rural areas are differently impacted. Dyfrig, what you're saying—. It needs to be right at the beginning, so, do you think that your region, north Wales, is maybe too large as one region, one CJC? I'm just asking for your views on it. It seems to me that you're saying that north Wales and north-east are very different in character and that you feel that there is a strong connection with west Wales and Ceredigion and that area. And the transport of north-east Wales goes cross-border quite a lot and there is that connection with the Mersey Dee Alliance as well. Is this going to be an issue all the way through, because it needs to be right at the beginning, I think? Is this something that needs to be raised? And regarding transport, you're getting help from Transport for Wales, and then also—.

My question is supposed to be on administration and staffing, and, originally, when these were set up, the idea was that it would be cost saving, because it would save duplication of staffing in 22 different authorities, and then there would be a cost saving and that would help to fund these CJCs. But it sounds to me that you're struggling with staffing after we've had 10 years of austerity, et cetera, especially with planning and transport officers, et cetera. So, would you say that there isn't a cost-saving element any more, because you haven't got duplication in each authority, and you might be struggling—? Would you be struggling to be able to deliver at CJC level and local level and afford duplicate staff as well? There are lots of questions there, very general, just thrown at you, so—

There is quite a lot there, Carolyn—

Sorry, but it's been very interesting, this conversation. Thank you.

Okay. Over to Dyfrig, then.

Thank you very much, Carolyn, for the questions. I think that the north Wales region—well, truth be told, the six counties in north Wales have decided to come together across north Wales to implement our economic development plans through the growth plan and other plans, hopefully. We also believed that operating across north Wales on the skills level is also important, and also with regard to business support. We collaborate on those issues. We were eager at the beginning to have control of those two areas in particular. So, there are areas where we are all agreed as six counties that are better to be implemented across north Wales. I'm very aware, with regard to the economy, that route across the border to north-west England is a very, very important one. In the same way as the route over to Ireland from Holyhead is also important to us. So, I am entirely content that we are agreed in several areas, that we should be working on a north Wales basis.

I have questions in terms of strategic planning. I don't know; we'll see how that particular aspect develops. But, with regard to staffing, there is an element, when we do the strategic work, particularly in terms on planning, where we could have expertise across north Wales that the six councils may not have individually. I don't know whether that is going to save money. We do have to do work on the strategic plans anyway, which is additional to what we used to do, so I don't know whether that's a cost saving there.

At the moment, and as has already been said, we are in the very, very early days here. We're still working on establishing the CJC and ensuring that it works effectively and cost effectively. The other questions with regard to what impact the establishment of the CJC is going to have on economic development, on planning, on transport—we will do our very best to ensure that they operate effectively. But, I repeat, I'm very unsure as to what is the added value that a CJC offers. I'm open-minded to being convinced otherwise. I don't know if I've answered all your questions. Do remind me of the others, if you will.

It was just if Transport for Wales have been helping as well, on the transport. Otherwise, thank you—yes, you have.

Okay. I think Bryan wanted to come in, Carolyn. Yes, Bryan.

Yes, thank you, Carolyn. In terms of mid Wales, looking at Ceredigion and Powys, two rural areas, but a very large area as well. There's a new leader in Powys, James Gibson-Watt, and I feel that there's good collaboration between both of us. He acknowledges perhaps that, in the last administration, there was more closeness with Powys towards England rather than Ceredigion, but I have been convinced that he wants to work more with Ceredigion than England.

In terms of geography, we have similar challenges to the coastal areas such as Anglesey and Gwynedd. We work with the Arfor project, for example, and we feel that we have the same frustrations and challenges, which are different to the challenges that we see in Powys, for example. But, that collaboration between officials and elected members is very good between Ceredigion and Powys anyway. But, as I said, I wouldn't want to run them down in terms of partnership, but I do think that personally, I'd wish to work more closely with that Arfor area as well, just because of things such as tourism and the impact that that has on our vulnerable rural communities.

Okay. And staffing as well, because I know that you had the choice of having a lead authority model, which you seem to be taking across all areas, or investing in extra staff as well, as its moves forward. So, just, really, how you're finding that with your staffing.

As I said earlier, many hours have gone into these committees, and I do feel—. We haven't had a meeting on the SDP yet—that's happening on Friday, and that will feed back. But I am aware that they are working very hard, and I think we need that additional resource in terms of staffing to enable them to put more hours into these developments. Because I'm not sure what's happening in Westminster from day to day, but I am very concerned that we will be losing money from these grants, and if I'm given something certain that we're receiving something, that would be great, but I think officials would be heartbroken if we missed out somehow on the money that we're supposed to be due.

Okay. Dyfrig, did you want to come back?

It is a very important point, isn't it? We could be employing a chief executive for the CJC at the same level as the chief executive of a county council, with a tenth of the responsibilities perhaps, or even less, and I see that as very wasteful. That's why we are going in the direction where we intend to have staff on secondment, particularly on the chief executive level. We do intend to employ two members of staff for transport plans, but it's likely that they'll be secondments from our councils, and not additional staff, I very much hope.

Okay. Thank you. Rob.

Thank you. Obviously, I'm not going to comment on mid Wales or north Wales—the decisions that those bodies will make are theirs to make. I want to touch on the general point, though. I think the question you posed around potentially some savings through the establishment of the CJCs, I think we've got to be very careful with that. It's clear that there aren't functions that are stopping in local authorities as a result of the CJCs; the CJCs add a new layer of co-ordination and collaboration and that doesn't stop us still having to discharge all of the responsibilities that we have as local authorities. So, there isn't—. By creating a CJC, stopping something happening that you then have a saving from in local authorities—that isn't the case.

Outside of that, of course, it's then how you fund and organise to support your CJC activities. Like Anthony referenced—and we've done the same in the south-west, as I said—we've tried to make decisions whereby we're using existing structures and existing personnel to carry out the functions that we have. We are not intending to appoint a separate chief executive; I think that would be the wrong thing to do personally, not only because of the financial additional costs, but also, it would create a new chief executive who would then be, essentially, on parity with the existing chief executives in the local authorities, and that would create a whole host of administrative considerations.

The final point I'd make is, of course, when the CJC discussions were taking place before they were enacted in legislation, there were commitments given that there would be a push to try and ensure that governance, audit requirements, assurance, scrutiny, all those other things, would be proportionate and that there wouldn't be this huge new industry built around CJCs. I think the proportionality has to be looked at there, because, as has been said by colleagues, the responsibilities that we've inherited, or have been allocated to us as part of the CJCs, are similar to those for local authorities, despite the spend and the staffing elements being a lot less currently. So, I think proportionality has to be there, and I would hope that Welsh Government will deliver on its commitment to make sure that we aren't tied up in huge amounts of bureaucracy, which becomes expensive and time consuming for the new regional bodies.

Okay. Thanks.

Carolyn, I think Anthony wanted to come in briefly as well.

Thanks, Carolyn. Just to agree with a couple of things that Rob said on cost savings, there may well be long-term benefits, but I think it's very tempting at the moment, with the current economic climate, to present things as solutions to the funding gap that aren't solutions to the funding gap. I wish this was, but it's not.

I very much think these should be viewed as partnerships, not organisations in themselves. The evidence is that what works is strong partnerships, not creating organisations in and of themselves.

And, just lastly, the impact of geography is huge, as has been explained by our colleagues today. I think we have to look around the successful examples from elsewhere in the world. From what I've seen, the evidence there is that no one standard model works; it depends on the region and its nature. So, we shouldn't try and think that one standard model works. That's not the evidence from around the world. But what that evidence does show is there is something about scale, and there's something about the range of different things that we do and how they're best suited to different circumstances. It comes back to this point about subsidiarity and economic development. There is evidence that there's some value of scale that is different to the benefits of taking local decisions. So, how we work on that, I think, is important. But, yes, I think it's very important for us to look around at what's worked elsewhere in the world, and that certainly doesn't suggest that there's one model that fits, especially as none of our regions, actually—but some of our regions emphatically more than others—fits the model of a single, urban centre, and concentric circles from there out. Both Rob's and my region have valleys communities, have different settlements, so they're not like some city regions that are just a single centre and a periphery. And it's even more so if you look at mid and north Wales—they don't fit that straitjacket at all. So, I think we need to be sensitive to how we take forward different regions, because they will require different answers.

Okay, Carolyn? Chris Llewelyn, did you want to come in?

Yes, it's on Anthony's point, I suppose. We mentioned earlier the way that city regions generate prosperity, and the evidence around the world, but what we also know is that that approach doesn't always work in rural or sparsely populated areas, and in those circumstances it's more challenging. These are issues that everybody around the world struggles with.

Just in terms of some of Carolyn's questions, it is important to remember that a lot of the regional partnership arrangements that exist currently are bottom up, as it were—they have been generated by the regions and councils involved. As to the transport consortia, there were successful regional transport arrangements in place in the past—SWITCH, SEWTA, Trac and Taith operated very successfully. In north Wales, there is a coterminosity about a lot of the public services—health, police, local authorities, fire and rescue, and so on—which brings a coherence to their arrangements that isn't always obvious elsewhere. Then, in terms of the workforce issues, the reality is there are workforce challenges in every single area within local government at the moment, whether it's education, social care, housing. So, it's worth bearing that in mind as well. A lot of the issues that are being grappled with here prevail in other service areas as well.

Okay, thank you. We'd better move on to Joel James. Joel.

Thank you, Chair. I'm conscious that quite a few of the questions that I wanted to ask you about—so, funding and resources—have already been asked, but I wanted to pick your brains about the regional transport planning element of the CJCs. I'm conscious that, back in July this year, I think it was the south Wales west CJC mentioned that they wouldn't be able to deliver the work programmes based on existing levels of funding, and that there would be a need to lobby the UK and Welsh Governments for extra resources. I think that's been confirmed, then, by all the other CJCs, and I just wanted to get some idea of the level of resource or funding you would require more from the Welsh Government or the UK Government, really, just to tackle those planned work programmes that you have in mind. I don't know who wants to come in on that first.

Shall I start on that one, Chair, if that's okay, given the south-west was referenced? I think you're right to draw that item out. The position for us is we've written to the Welsh Government in terms of support for the work to bring together the transport plan. So, that's in the region of several hundred thousand pounds we're looking for in terms of a contribution from Welsh Government to help us undertake the work that's required for that. Obviously, delivery of things like a metro system with many elements to it, including the rail network, the creation of the stations, the transition to new bus services, potentially new vehicles, hydrogen vehicles, has multiple elements to it, and that's where were referencing that, clearly, that is beyond the remit of any council to deliver.

So, circa the first phase of our metro would be looking at around £250 million for the creation of stations through Neath Port Talbot, Swansea, Carmarthenshire and Pembrokeshire, and then, obviously, changes to some of the connections to make sure that we could run more services, as I said, to the rest of the UK. Outside of that, we're having separate discussions through Transport for Wales, although Transport for Wales obviously are heavily involved in the rail discussions, and Welsh Government around what we can do to trial and then implement hydrogen bus services in the region, which would be connected, obviously, to the rail services to create that holistic travel network. Obviously, outside of those modes of transport, there's the work that all of the authorities have been doing in terms of active travel, making sure that those also connect to the ambitions for stations and connectivity points. That work has multiple funding streams to it, but the point that you raised is one that is still there. So, there are two elements to the funding that we're after at the moment: one is the funding to create the plan to deliver, and then, secondly, the work that's going on separately, which is actually the Government funding the infrastructure works to create the actual network.

Okay. Would anyone else like to add anything to what Rob has just told us? Bryan.

I think in looking at transport, we have to look at the carbon footprint, and that's going to be a challenge for us, certainly, in a rural area. There is a reliance going to be on cars, anyway, and that then brings in the point of electric charging points. The networks in terms of electric aren't sufficient in rural areas in terms of the quick chargers, for example, because you need the three-phase chargers, and in many of our rural areas we don't have those. So, that is a challenge in itself, and it's not as easy as saying, 'Get rid of your car and use the bus'. I go back to the challenges that I mentioned earlier, where it's difficult to maintain a bus service because the small businesses that run the buses can't do it in terms of their budget, and then large companies won't come to rural areas. So, that is something that we need to look at.

I've already spoken about freight and the trains, and hopefully we can develop that in order to reduce the number of lorries on our roads. So, the collaboration between Powys and across the border in England is going to be vital in terms of establishing that link. It is a challenge—there's no point denying that. It all comes down to bums on seats in terms of public transport, and the demography of mid Wales is against us, in particular as the Ceredigion population is reducing also. So, that is an additional challenge to us, and different to the more urban areas.

Okay, Bryan. Thank you very much. I see Dyfrig's hand raised. Yes.

Thank you. I don't think that I can answer the question directly, but just to say generally—and, to some extent, echo what Bryan has said—the question of public transport in a rural area is very, very different to public transport in urban areas. There are very few bus journeys that are commercially viable in rural areas, so you have to have a subsidy to run these bus services. On the one hand, the Government is pulling back from the improvement of our roads infrastructure in rural areas, and, on the other hand, we don't have an adequate public transport system to serve our population. Bryan is right to say that cars will be important to rural areas regardless of what happens, but to have an effective public transport system in rural areas will mean very significant investment, and I don't know whether the Government understands that at the moment. Thank you.

Okay. Thank you, all, very much. We move again, then, to Sam Rowlands. Sam.

Thanks, Chair. Morning, everybody. I really appreciate your time this morning—I know it's precious. And that's probably my starting point, really. As council leaders, because of the proliferation of regional bodies—it was mentioned earlier that you've got regional partnership boards; you've got public services boards; I know, in north Wales, but I'm not sure about other places, you've got things like the regional leadership board, which is always a delight; and now the corporate joint committees, with sub-committees underneath; and you have your city and growth deals as well—just as council leaders, and the four of you, I suppose, as leaders of leaders, how do you see that time strain on you as leaders and your ability to make sure you're serving the councils that you're elected to lead? How do you see that? Happy for someone to kick off.

Bryan.

Can you hear us, Bryan?

I don't think Bryan's hearing me at the moment.

Sorry, Chair.

It is quite a challenge, to be honest with you. Again, to repeat myself, I'm a new leader since May—it's the first time for Ceredigion to have Plaid Cymru running the council. Our aspirations as a political party are on the back burner because there's so much of the daily work of running a council is being prioritised, as it should be. So, the challenges that we all face as leaders are massive. So, our aspirations perhaps as individuals and as political parties have to take a back seat while we're facing the financial challenges that we have—challenges that are hitting everybody in our areas. And if the other authorities have projects or plans, you have to question whether those can go forward given the financial challenges that we face.

But a lot of time just goes. When I signed up to be leader, I saw the work in front of me, in terms of the council work, but then the forum is so important, in terms of the WLGA, Chris; I'm so pleased that I can hear through that platform the frustrations that other leaders have. But there is time required to go to those meetings, and there is time required for Growing Mid Wales, and there is time required for Arfor too. It's important to be part of these things, but everything else has to take a back seat while we're discussing these other issues as well.

Okay. Anthony.

Yes, happy to come in next. This comes back to what I said at first—we just need to focus on impact, really, and we have to focus on what difference we're making, not just on how many meetings we're having. I think that's key, because we have to remember the difference is made in most things between meetings, not during them. And if all we're doing is servicing more and more meetings, then—. But partnerships are vital, whatever system you have, and I think that's one of our jobs as leaders, to make sure we're talking to other organisations, not just other councils but other public service organisations and other organisations in our communities. And we'd have to do that whatever. So, as much as I don't like all the acronyms, I don't see any individual organisation as creating more work, as leader, but we just have to make sure we're focused on what's making a difference.

I think, during the pandemic, the partnership working between different leaders and other levels of government gave us a model to work from. And that wasn't built around, necessarily, formal meetings and structures; it was built around us getting together and talking through things, and working together. And just as one last thing, I think we have to make sure in this that we're not just part of lots of partnerships at a leader and chief executive level that don't then filter down through to ways of working in our organisations. We can just say things as leaders, or say things as chief executives, and think that that magically means they happen. Unless we've got the operational level in our councils working in partnership in the right way, it's just hot air. So, I think the key is that we don't just let these things sit at the top level; we make sure that all levels of our organisation have bought into the principles of how we're going to work in partnership. So, I think that's key. So, it's impact, partnerships and making sure there's some throughput. And then I think all this is worthwhile. If it's just a case of creating more organisation for organisation's sake, it's not.

Okay, Anthony. Thank you very much. Yes, Sam.

Can I—?

Yes, Sam.

Can I, before we bring in—? I know others want to comment on this, Chair, but Anthony's raised some really important points that I just want to perhaps just dig a little further on. Because you mentioned it earlier, actually, Anthony, as well, viewing CJCs in particular as partnership and not—I think you said rather than organisations in of themselves. But I guess that's the point of CJCs, that they are organisations in of themselves, aren't they? They're not a voluntary partnership, which, often, as you say, probably works best. And as you said, in the pandemic, that was a great example where people came together voluntarily. So, just a point on that: I think that part of the frustration I'm hearing from members is CJCs were thrust upon, have been thrust upon, local authorities, rather than organically happening amongst local authorities. But, just going back to the point of others in the organisation understanding and feeling the effect of these partnership organisations, do you think, if we were sat here with a couple of ordinary members of the council, whether it's in Torfaen or wherever, do you think they would understand what this is about, corporate joint committees? Do you think someone who's been elected, even in previous terms, would feel that they're making a difference in the work of corporate joint committees?

That is a big challenge for us as leaders to get that understanding going, because, inevitably, there is some exchange of hard power for influence when you work in a partnership, because you're not doing things directly, and therefore, as a backbench councillor, you may think that your power is diminished. I think we need to show how that transfer of hard power to influencing a bigger whole is worth while. You ask about CJCs and their origins; I think this is more about attitude than origins. It's how we go into those CJCs and how we work them, I think, that matters most, and we can work them as partnerships, as opposed to—. And the other thing is, we just need to make sure, within that pattern of regional partnership, we know who does what best, so that we avoid duplication and we avoid things falling through the gaps. Our regional partnership board is largely focused on the health and social care issues. Our PSBs, our CJCs, we need to make sure that they're all doing what they do best and all understand what each other are doing, rather than getting very crowded on the stage.

All right, Sam? I think Rob as well. Rob.

Yes. Thank you, Chair. I know, obviously, Sam was the leader of Conwy, so he knows the situation in local government very well, and I know a number of other members on the committee were councillors. I think, to answer Sam's most recent question, the same could be said, though, of all regional structures. I think the point is that the more broad the structure, probably the less there is in terms of visibility of some of the details of the working. But, certainly, for my own council, members understand what CJCs are, they do city deal arrangements, and they're aware of what we're doing there. I'd come back to the same point Anthony made, though, around impact, and it's one that shouldn't be lost, especially after the COVID pandemic, because the way in which local government responded in COVID was remarkable, and the closeness of working between ourselves and Welsh Government was really something we should all be really proud of in terms of how we delivered, making sure that we were really agile in making sure people were supported during the pandemic. Why I'm raising that in this context is because I came away from that experience, as I'm sure others did, thinking, 'Well, hang on a second, I didn't run to this structure or this structure or this structure to get stuff done', and I think that's the lens I now look at some of the way in which we work—to say, 'Well, actually, when we were in a crisis, if that wasn't what we used, why on earth are we persisting with it?' And I don't mean that in the context of CJCs, because I do think CJCs, as I said in my other comments, have a real role to play here, but I think there are some other structures in Wales that we need to take a look at that I don't think serve us very well. And I think, in terms of that impact and making sure we use our time wisely to get the most delivered for the people of Wales, looking at historic structures is something we should probably take a bit of time to do and see if we can streamline some of that.

Okay, thank you very much. And I think Dyfrig wanted to come in as well.

I have sympathy with Sam's question. From my experience, when I became chair of the the north Wales ambition board, I didn't realise how much work that entailed, and how much time that entailed. And I'm not complaining about that, it's a role that I chose to take on, but I do understand that there is a big difference between the work of a leader—and, as Sam says, the leader of leaders—and of backbench members. To answer the question, if I were to put two backbench members in front of you today and ask the question, 'What is the CJC going to do and contribute to our work as a council?', they wouldn't know, I don't think. And the question I'm often asked by my members, and it's fair that they should ask it, is, 'What exactly do you do, and how will that improve the lives of my constituents in my ward?' And that's not always an easy question to answer.

The point that Rob has made with regard to the relationship with the Government is a very important one, I think. That is a step change, to use that term, a significant step change. Before COVID there was never as much contact with the Government. There has never as much dialogue with Government Ministers, and that development is, of course, to be welcomed. We feel that we can express our views to Government directly is very valuable and sometimes we can influence Government decisions too.

But I'm also aware that leaders are in different situations. I happen to be in quite a strong political position. Yes, I am challenged by members of my own group, perhaps more so than opposition party members, but I am in a strong position, and I think that there is a role for the deputy leader and cabinet members to bring all of the backbench members together and to explain their work and what's happening on a regional and national level. I do believe that there is an important role for leaders to be sharing messages with Governments—both Governments. It's a privilege, isn't it, to be here today representing north Wales. I'm very proud of being able to do that. It does cause tensions, but we can deal with them. Thank you, Sam.

Okay. And Bryan.

Thank you, Chair. An additional point for you, Sam—in my role as the chair of the local PSB, I report back to one of the scrutiny committees in the council and also the chair of that committee sits in as an observer. But, in terms of CJCs, to be completely honest with you, I'm still learning about my role as chair of the CJC. But, in terms of backbench members, they wouldn't know anything about the CJC. So, I would welcome some sort of guidance in terms of the process of reporting back to scrutiny committees within Ceredigion County Council and what the arrangements should be in terms of that.

All right, Sam?

Yes, thank you, and thank you for those responses. I agree, this is certainly a challenge—ensuring that things filter down, appropriately, to people who are rightfully elected in their own right to represent residents in their ward at the same level as leaders are.

And then perhaps the final question from me is in relation to how you are seeking to co-opt members onto CJCs, and how that's working with other public bodies, whether it be in health, health services, or perhaps in the universities, and what the appetite is like from those other public bodies to really engage and be involved with the work of corporate joint committees. I appreciate things are still fairly early days, but just perhaps an initial observation as to the engagement of other public bodies with corporate joint committees.

Okay. I can see Bryan with his hand raised. Bryan.

Yes, once again, the make-up of the different CJCs is different according to regions. In mid Wales, you have Hywel Dda and Powys as health boards. So, I think it would be hard to co-ordinate that, although their input is so important. In terms of the PSB, we have Hywel Dda as a health board sitting on the PSB, but we don't often have full representation from the health board on that body because they are being pulled into three other PSBs, be that in Pembrokeshire or Carmarthenshire too. So, we do need to consider the commitment of different bodies because they are just as busy as we are. So, we'd have to look at every area individually in terms of the representation of those bodies on the different CJCs.

And Rob.

Yes, for us, as I said earlier, we've sort of duplicated our city region arrangements. So, we've co-opted the health boards—the two health boards in the area—and the universities onto the board. We've moved across our economic strategy board that advises the city deal on the economy, so those arrangements transfer across to the CJC, and we look to enhance the economic strategy board membership by adding sector leads to give us further, broader economic advice. Obviously, we've got the national parks as part of our arrangements, and we've allocated them voting rights as well in certain areas, particularly planning. So, again, we've moved as fast as we can to make sure that we have that full suite of both core and co-opted members.

Okay. Thank you all very much. Sorry, Dyfrig, did you want to add something?

Just to confirm that we have a partnership with the North Wales Economic Ambition Board that includes the colleges, and, very importantly, includes the private sector. And that partnership will have to continue; they are an integral part of our discussions even though they don't have a vote—we have to include them. There is no question about including them—on the sub-committee, of course.

Okay. Diolch yn fawr, and thank you all very much for coming in to give evidence today, either remotely or in person. You will be sent a transcript to check for factual accuracy in the usual way. Diolch yn fawr i bawb.

Goodbye.

Thank you.