Venue: Council Chamber, Woodhatch Place, 11 Cockshot Hill, Reigate, Surrey ,RH2 8EF
Contact: Vicky Hibbert or Huma Younis Email: huma.younis@surreycc.gov.uk
No. | Item |
---|---|
Apologies for Absence
Additional documents: Decision: There were none. Minutes: There were none. |
|
Minutes of Previous Meeting: 25 January 2022 PDF 527 KB
To agree the minutes of the last meeting as a correct record of the meeting. Additional documents: Decision: The Minutes of the Cabinet meeting held on 27 January 2022 were approved as a correct record of the meeting.
Minutes: The Minutes of the Cabinet meeting held on 27 January 2022 were approved as a correct record of the meeting.
|
|
Declarations of Interest
All Members present are required to declare, at this point in the meeting or as soon as possible thereafter:
(i) Any disclosable pecuniary interests and / or (ii) Other interests arising under the Code of Conduct in respect of any item(s) of business being considered at this meeting NOTES:
· Members are reminded that they must not participate in any item where they have a disclosable pecuniary interest · As well as an interest of the Member, this includes any interest, of which the Member is aware, that relates to the Member’s spouse or civil partner (or any person with whom the Member is living as a spouse or civil partner) · Members with a significant personal interest may participate in the discussion and vote on that matter unless that interest could be reasonably regarded as prejudicial. Additional documents: Decision: There were none. Minutes: There were none. |
|
Procedural Matters
Additional documents: |
|
The deadline for Member’s questions is 12pm four working days before the meeting (16 February 2022).
Additional documents: Decision: There were six members questions. The questions and response were published as a supplement to the agenda. Minutes: There were six members questions. The questions and response were published as a supplement to the agenda.
Jeffrey Gray asked a supplementary question and asked that the Cabinet Member for Adults and Health inform herself of the real world impact of unfair social care costs on disabled people and particularly on working age people, especially those with lifelong disabilities. He asked that the Cabinet Member intensify her lobbying of government on implementing recommendations from the Dilnot report and asked her to ensure that Surrey uses all the discretion at its disposal to minimise the impacts on disabled people of unfair social care charges. The Cabinet Member for Adults and Health offered to meet with Jeffrey Gray to consider the points that had been made.
Will Forster asked a supplementary question in relation to his second question and asked the Cabinet Member for Adults and Health to outline what extra pay and bonuses would be given to care work staff within the council and partner organisations. The Cabinet Member for Adults and Health explained that discussions would commence shortly and would feedback to the member on progress of these.
Catherine Baart asked a supplementary question in relation to her second member question asking if the shuttle bus to Woodhatch would be open to the public. The Leader responded explaining that he did not think the bus would be open to the public but just staff and members. The Leader would confirm the arrangements in due course. |
|
Public Questions
The deadline for public questions is seven days before the meeting (17 February 2022).
Additional documents: Decision: There were no public questions.
Minutes: There were no public questions.
|
|
Petitions
The deadline for petitions was 14 days before the meeting, and no petitions have been received.
Additional documents: Decision: There were none. Minutes: There were none. |
|
Representations received on reports to be considered in private
To consider any representations received in relation why part of the meeting relating to a report circulated in Part 2 of the agenda should be open to the public. Additional documents: Decision: There were none. Minutes: There were none. |
|
To consider any reports from Select Committees, Task Groups, Local Committees and any other Committees of the Council.
A. Economy and Growth: Programme for Growth (including Levelling Up White Paper and County Deals)(Community, Environment and Highways Select Committee)
Additional documents: Decision: RESOLVED:
That the Select Committee reports and recommendations regarding the Economy and Growth: Programme for Growth and Local and Joint Committee Highway Function be noted. The response from the Cabinet was published as a supplement to the agenda.
Minutes: There was a discussion regarding the report on local and joint committee highways functions. The Chairman of the Community, Environment & Highways Select explained that the Select Committee had been divided on the report. The Chairman welcomed the response but raised some queries regarding recommendation four. Specifically the ability to present petitions and ask questions at Local Committee which was valued by members and the public. If this was taken away, the Cabinet Member for Transport and Infrastructure was asked to explain how this would work in practice. The Cabinet Member for Transport and Infrastructure explained that the service would be aiming to take all highways, executive functions out of the local and joint committees so to leave the questions and petitions element here would be odd. Petitions and questions could still be submitted but would be heard via a more appropriate committee or person. It was explained that 87% of the petitions received could have actually just been dealt with as a normal course of business, and it didn't require going through a whole committee cycle. The Leader agreed that the Cabinet Member for Transport and Infrastructure would send around a process note for how petitions and questions would be dealt with after being removed from Local and Joint Committee functions.
RESOLVED:
That the Select Committee reports and recommendations regarding the Economy and Growth: Programme for Growth and Local and Joint Committee Highway Function be noted. The response from the Cabinet was published as a supplement to the agenda.
|
|
To note any delegated decisions taken by the Leader, Deputy Leader, Cabinet Members, Strategic Investment Board and Committees in Common Sub-Committee since the last meeting of the Cabinet. Additional documents: Decision: There were two decisions for noting. Minutes: There were two decisions for noting. |
|
COVID-19 Delegated and Urgent Decisions Taken PDF 211 KB
To ensure transparency of decisions taken in response to Covid-19, Cabinet are asked to note the attached decisions taken since the last meeting.
Additional documents: Decision: There were two delegated decisions for noting. Minutes: There were two delegated decisions for noting. |
|
Cabinet Member of the Month PDF 212 KB
To receive an update from Tim Oliver, Leader of the Council. Additional documents: Decision: RESOLVED:
That the Cabinet Member of the Month report be noted. Minutes: The Leader introduced his Cabinet Member of the Month update and made the following points:
· On the 8th February the budget was agreed and passed by Council. · There had been a council tax increase of 4.994%, 4% of this would go directly to frontline services and the delivery of adult social care. 1% will go to support mental health initiatives where there had been an exponential increase. · There is a significant capital programme in place which would focus on building or creating independent living accommodations so people can live in their own homes for longer and also a building specialist facilities for children with additional needs. · Funding had been given to Citizens Advice and Surrey Crisis Fund totalling over £500,000. · Ofsted had undertaken a full visit of the council in January 2022 and a report would be available in March this year. · A new piece of work on a refreshed 2050 community vision was being undertaken. · The council would continue conversations on ‘Levelling Up’ with the government. The Leader was of the view that a county deal would be in the best interest for Surrey and would give greater autonomy over key areas.
RESOLVED:
That the Cabinet Member of the Month report be noted. |
|
Eight care homes were built by Surrey County Council in the 1970s and early 1980s. Since taking back the eight care homes it became apparent that the condition of the buildings has become a concern. Cabinet is asked to consider the report and supporting information and confirm agreement with the recommendations made in respect of each care home, on a home by home basis.
NB: There is a Part 2 annex at item 16.
(The decisions on this item can be called-in by the Adults & Health Select Committee) Additional documents: Decision: RESOLVED:
1. Cabinet agreed that the council continue to operate Abbeywood while options are explored regarding development of the site for alternative adult social care services or a joint development with NHS/partners, accept that the building may need to close if large scale essential maintenance or development is required, and if no alternative developments are identified, Option 3 – support residents to move to an alternative care home and close Abbeywood. 2. It was agreed by Cabinet that residents are supported to move to new care homes, Barnfield is closed and further investigation is undertaken to confirm if the site can be redeveloped for alternative adult social care services. 3. It was agreed by Cabinet that residents are supported to move to new care homes, Birchlands is closed and further investigation is undertaken to confirm if the site can be redeveloped for alternative adult social care services. 4. It was agreed by Cabinet that residents are supported to move to new care homes, Chalkmead is closed and further investigation is undertaken to confirm if the site can be redeveloped for alternative adult social care services. 5. It was agreed by Cabinet that residents are supported to move to new care homes, Heathside is closed and further investigation is undertaken to confirm if the site can be redeveloped for alternative adult social care services. 6. It was agreed by Cabinet that residents are supported to move to new care homes, Keswick is closed and further investigation is undertaken to confirm if the site can be redeveloped for alternative adult social care, community or NHS services. 7. It was agreed by Cabinet that residents are supported to move to new care homes, Meadowside is closed and further investigation is undertaken to confirm if the site can be redeveloped for alternative adult social care services. 8. It was agreed by Cabinet that residents are supported to move to an alternative care home and close Orchard Court and explore opportunities for developing the site for alternative adult social care services or a joint development in partnership with the NHS or other organisations. 9. That the responsibility for implementing the decisions agreed are delegated to the Cabinet Member for Adult Social Care and Health in consultation with the Executive Director of Adult Social Care and Integrated Commissioning. 10. That after considering all aspects of each recommendation and if it is decided that more than one care home should close, a phased approach to care home closures will take place with a view for care home closures to be concluded by the end of 2024. Planning will recognise the need for a staff consultation and be supportive of resident and staff needs. Please note that the council will follow the good practice principles detailed below in the ‘What Happens Next’ section of this report and ensure comprehensive support is provided to residents, their families, advocates and staff. Minutes: The report was introduced by the Cabinet Member for Adults and Health who explained that the proposals being discussed impacted eight care homes managed and run by the County Council, following their transfer back from the Anchor Trust in 2019. The following key points were made:
· The homes provided good quality services, and the residents were supported by trained, dedicated and excellent staff who worked tirelessly and had been heroes throughout the pandemic. · All eight care homes provide residential care and short-term respite care. Two homes also provide day services. · The homes were built in the 1970s and 1980s and were initially run by the council until they were contracted out to Anchor Trust in 1999. In 2019 they returned to the council and it was only on their return that the council aware of issues with the infrastructure including with the water systems, heating, drainage, roofs, lifts etc. It also became evident that the design of the buildings did not meet current expectations and that they were inappropriate for individuals with certain conditions, for example severe dementia, as six of the eight homes have open staircases and units on different levels. And vitally, there is a risk that infrastructure could fail at any time which could result in residents having to be relocated at short notice. · Only 25 out of the 433 rooms have en-suite facilities. The council’s aim is to provide an environment where people living in a care home live in comfort and in a home where the design of the building, with support from staff, ensures privacy and dignity is maintained. Shared facilities have proved to be challenging, in terms of infection control for illnesses such as norovirus, flu and Covid. · A consultation took place between 11 October 2021 and 5 January 2022 and was a listening exercise. During the consultation one-to-one conversations with residents were conducted by staff in the care homes, residents were also invited to complete on-line or paper questionnaires. Meetings also took place both, virtually and face to face, on a one-to one basis and for groups of residents, staff and relatives. Where relatives were unable to attend in person meetings were held on-line. · Although most people indicated a preference for the council to modernise and refurbish the care homes. It seems that the homes will, unfortunately, no longer be fit for the future and it is uneconomic to make the changes that would be required in order to make them sustainable for the future. · It was being recommended that the care home residents are supported to move to new homes and all eight care homes are closed, using a phased approach, before the end of 2024. There are currently 406 registered care and nursing homes in Surrey, offering a total of 11,599 registered beds so plenty of sufficient care choices for older people in Surrey. · Dedicated support would be put in place for residents, their families, staff and all other relevant stakeholders.
Members commented that they felt reassured that ... view the full minutes text for item 34/22 |
|
Working with the Big Fostering Partnership PDF 507 KB
That Cabinet endorses Surrey County Council joining the Big Fostering Partnership from 1 April 2021, to work in collaboration with other Local Authorities to enable more children who are looked after to move from living in residential children’s homes to living with foster families and authorises spend of up to £4 million via this partnership for the period from 1 April 2022 through to September 2024.
NB: There is a Part 2 annex at item 17.
(The decisions on this item can be called-in by the Children’s, Families, Lifelong Learning & Culture Select Committee)
Additional documents: Decision: RESOLVED:
1. That Cabinet endorses Surrey County Council joining the Big Fostering Partnership from 1 April 2022, to work in collaboration with other Local Authorities to enable more looked after children who are living in residential children’s homes to move to living with foster families. 2. That Cabinet authorises spend of up to £4 million via this partnership for the period from 1 April 2022 through to September 2024. This is a repurposing of budgeted funds within the existing Children’s Services Placement budget envelope for placements. Reasons for Decisions: These recommendations will: enable better outcomes for looked after children; support more looked after children to live in or closer to Surrey; and improve value for money. Firstly, evidence shows that when looked after children live in families rather than children’s homes this leads to better long-term outcomes, where this is done at an appropriate point in their care journey. Secondly, foster placements are more likely to be made in or closer to Surrey than residential placements, supporting Surrey County Council’s ambitious Sufficiency Strategy and statutory duties as corporate parents. Thirdly, successful step-down placements offer improved value for money to Surrey residents - for comparison, Surrey’s average weekly cost of children’s residential provision is more than 3 times the price of a supportive and high-quality step-down foster placement. Our modelling suggests that this approach could reduce the spend from our Children’s Services placement budget by some £5 million between 2022/23 and 2025/26. (The decisions on this item can be called-in by the Children, Families, Lifelong Learning & Culture Select Committee)
Minutes: The report was introduced by the Cabinet Member for Children and Families who explained that the proposal was for the council to join the Big Fostering Partnership from April 2022. The model had support through the national life chances fund. This would enable more looked after children who are living in residential children’s homes to move to living with foster families. This was known as ‘stepping down’. The big Fostering partnership had been established in collaboration with Staffordshire County Council and enabled looked after children to move from residential homes to foster placements and sustain those placements for two years.
RESOLVED:
1. That Cabinet endorses Surrey County Council joining the Big Fostering Partnership from 1 April 2022, to work in collaboration with other Local Authorities to enable more looked after children who are living in residential children’s homes to move to living with foster families. 2. That Cabinet authorises spend of up to £4 million via this partnership for the period from 1 April 2022 through to September 2024. This is a repurposing of budgeted funds within the existing Children’s Services Placement budget envelope for placements. Reasons for Decisions: These recommendations will: enable better outcomes for looked after children; support more looked after children to live in or closer to Surrey; and improve value for money. Firstly, evidence shows that when looked after children live in families rather than children’s homes this leads to better long-term outcomes, where this is done at an appropriate point in their care journey. Secondly, foster placements are more likely to be made in or closer to Surrey than residential placements, supporting Surrey County Council’s ambitious Sufficiency Strategy and statutory duties as corporate parents. Thirdly, successful step-down placements offer improved value for money to Surrey residents - for comparison, Surrey’s average weekly cost of children’s residential provision is more than 3 times the price of a supportive and high-quality step-down foster placement. Our modelling suggests that this approach could reduce the spend from our Children’s Services placement budget by some £5 million between 2022/23 and 2025/26. (The decisions on this item can be called-in by the Children, Families, Lifelong Learning & Culture Select Committee)
|
|
Cabinet are requested to approve the procurement of 34 Hydrogen Fuel Cell Buses.
(The decisions on this item can be called-in by the Communities, Environment and Highways Select Committee)
Additional documents: Decision: RESOLVED:
Reasons for Decisions:
Procuring the 34 hydrogen fuel cell buses enables the Council to accelerate the introduction of ultra-low and zero emission buses into Surrey, whilst retaining ownership of the capital asset, i.e. the buses. This will help create more carbon neutral transport options and assist in achieving climate change targets by providing residents with greener and more sustainable travel choices. (The decisions on this item can be called-in by the Communities, Environment and Highways Select Committee)
Minutes: The report was introduced by the Cabinet Member for Transport and Infrastructure who requested Cabinet to approve to Procure for 34 Hydrogen Fuel Cell buses enabling the council to proceed with the previously agreed introduction of ultra-low and zero emission vehicles. It was planned to place an order for the Hydrogen Fuel Cell buses in quarter one of 2022/23, with the buses coming into service during the fourth quarter of 2022/23 and the first quarter of 2023/24. Procurement costs are forecast at £16.4m, the Council investment compliments a £10m investment being made by Metrobus, UK Government and the EU Jive 2 Project that combined is purchasing a further 20 hydrogen fuel cell buses, plus fuelling infrastructure for use on the Fastway network of services operating in Surrey and Sussex. The Cabinet Member for Environment welcomed the report stating that this would support the greener futures delivery plan and providing a broader combination of travel.
RESOLVED:
Reasons for Decisions:
Procuring the 34 hydrogen fuel cell buses enables the Council to accelerate the introduction of ultra-low and zero emission buses into Surrey, whilst retaining ownership of the capital asset, i.e. the buses. This will help create more carbon neutral transport options and assist in achieving climate change targets by providing residents with greener and more sustainable travel choices. (The decisions on this item can be called-in by the Communities, Environment and Highways Select Committee)
|
|
Local and Joint Committee Highway Functions PDF 560 KB
This report seeks Cabinet approval to a change in the way that executive highway functions are taken, transferring them from Local and Joint Committees (LC/JCs) to enable officers to take such decisions in more direct consultation with the relevant members.
(The decisions on this item can be called-in by the Communities, Environment and Highways Select Committee)
Additional documents: Decision: RESOLVED:
1. That Cabinet agree to the transfer of all executive highway functions from Local and Joint Committees with effect from the 1st of April 2022. 2. That Cabinet agree that all executive functions previously delegated to Local and Joint Committees relating to highways are delegated to Officers in consultation with the relevant Divisional Member with effect from the 1st of April 2022. 3. That Cabinet agree the proposed changes to the Integrated Transport Scheme (ITS) within the Local Highway Schemes budget and the Individual Member Highways Allocations (Capital and Revenue budgets) from April 2022 as set out in this report.
4. That Cabinet note the proposed involvement of the Communities, Environment & Highways Select Committee in the development of the criteria that will be used to assess projects coming forward for funding from the countywide ITS budget, ahead of the Cabinet Member agreeing such criteria.
5. That Cabinet agree to delegate authority to the Executive Director of Environment, Transport and Infrastructure and the Director for Highways and Transport in consultation with the Cabinet Member for Transport and Infrastructure to make all necessary changes to existing highway budgets, criteria, and relevant policies to support the effective transition to these new arrangements. 6. That Cabinet agree that the Director of Legal and Governance works in conjunction with democratic service officers from Guildford, Runnymede, Woking, and Spelthorne Borough Councils to update their respective Joint Committee constitutions which are in place with the County Council. 7. That Cabinet agree the Director of Legal and Governance in consultation with the Leader of the Council makes the relevant changes to the Council’s Executive and Officer Scheme of delegation as set out within this report.
Reasons for Decisions:
The recommendations within this report will support more efficient local decision making, whilst ensuring that there is transparency and proper scrutiny. These proposals will enable more people to be heard and participate in decision making, leading to better outcomes for our residents.
This is a joint initiative coming from Communities and ETI Directorates consistent with residents’ expressed desires to be more involved in what the Council is doing but through events and conversations and not through boards and meetings. This proposal directly supports the commitment the Council made in 2020 to Empowering Communities: ‘Reinvigorate our relationship with residents, empowering communities to tackle local issues and support one another, whilst making it easier for everyone to play an active role in the decisions that will shape Surrey’s future.’ Research in the past year has shown that far more residents have been able to communicate with the Council through a wider range of mechanisms than has been the case historically using traditional local and joint committee processes. For instance, in 2021/22, 11 online engagement sessions reached over 50,000 members of the public, whilst in comparison only 650 residents attended LC/JCs between 2019 and 2021 which included councillors from Parish, Districts and Boroughs if they attended to hear proceedings. (The decisions on this item can be called-in by the Communities, Environment ... view the full decision text for item 37/22 Minutes: The report was introduced by the Cabinet Member for Transport and Infrastructure who explained that Cabinet were being asked to change amend executive highway functions, transferring them away from a local and joint committees and delegating them down so that officers can make the decisions in direct consultation with the relevant divisional councillor. The proposed changes would come into force from April 2022 and would sit alongside new engagement methods which were being developed. The proposals would empower divisional councillors by giving them the delegated highways functions that currently sit with local and joint committees. The budget allocation for each county councillor will be raised from £23,000 capital up to £50,000 capital and the revenue will remain at £7,500.
The Vice Chairman of the Communities, Environment and Highways Select Committee spoke on the item and was of the view that the local and joint committees worked well and gave residents the opportunity to voice concerns they had. The changes being made were unclear and nobody wanted to travel to Reigate to ask a question or present a petition. There had been no consultation with the leaders group and the local and joint committees would fade away as highways decisions was a core part of the work they covered. The Leader explained that the matter had been raised with the Surrey leaders group but the budget being discussed sat within the county councils remit and therefore the county council was responsible for accounting how this was spent. The Cabinet Member for Transport and Infrastructure would set out how the questions and petitions process would work and would provide support to members. He added that since 2018, 87% of the petitions received were requests or items that members of the public could just log online or towards their county councillor rather than having to go through the committee cycle.
Some Members commented that the public did not engage fully with the local and joint committees and the number of residents attending the meetings were low. The way the committees functioned needed to be reformed.
RESOLVED:
1. That Cabinet agree to the transfer of all executive highway functions from Local and Joint Committees with effect from the 1st of April 2022. 2. That Cabinet agree that all executive functions previously delegated to Local and Joint Committees relating to highways are delegated to Officers in consultation with the relevant Divisional Member with effect from the 1st of April 2022. 3. That Cabinet agree the proposed changes to the Integrated Transport Scheme (ITS) within the Local Highway Schemes budget and the Individual Member Highways Allocations (Capital and Revenue budgets) from April 2022 as set out in this report.
4. That Cabinet note the proposed involvement of the Communities, Environment & Highways Select Committee in the development of the criteria that will be used to assess projects coming forward for funding from the countywide ITS budget, ahead of the Cabinet Member agreeing such criteria.
5. That Cabinet agree to delegate authority to the Executive Director of ... view the full minutes text for item 37/22 |
|
Harnessing the Power of Data PDF 464 KB
Cabinet are requested to endorse the SCC Data Strategy and the work being taken forward help the organisation become truly data enabled. The report also provides an update on work with partners to develop a Surrey-wide strategy which improves data sharing in order deliver better services to Surrey residents.
(The decisions on this item can be called-in by the Resources & Performance Select Committee)
Additional documents: Decision: RESOLVED:
Reasons for Decisions:
Data is recognised in the Government’s National Data Strategy as a strategic asset and the ‘great opportunity of our time, offering the possibility of a more informed and better-connected future.’ Surrey County Council also fully recognise the potential data brings and have big ambitions for how data is managed, governed, and used in the future. The Council aspires to be truly data-enabled; using data to not just understand the performance of services and monitor what has happened, but also to help plan and prepare for the future, predicting issues before they arise. To meet this ambition and harness the power of data for the Council, its partners and residents, the organisation needs to address the ‘gap’ in capabilities, skills and behaviours highlighted by a data review undertaken last year. Delivering the SCC Data Strategy and building a sustainable data capability will enable the Council to fill the gap and tackle the root causes of the issues highlighted by the data review. It will build a data literate and data empowered workforce. Focusing on this work will be essential to enabling the Council to contribute fully to a wider partnership data and insight ecosystem, that the Surrey-wide Data Strategy is aiming to define and establish.
(The decisions on this item can be called in by the Resources and Performance Select Committee)
Minutes: The report was introduced by the Leader who explained that the report provided an overview of the Surrey County Council Data Strategy, its ambition and purpose, and the progress made to date. The report set out the governance around how data would be collected, how it will be stored and how it would be used to make sure interventions are both effective and measurable. Delivering the Data Strategy and building a sustainable data capability will enable the Council to fill the gap and tackle the root causes of the issues highlighted by the data review. The report was welcomed by the Deputy Cabinet Member for Levelling Up who commented that quality data underpinned everything we did so by ensuring we have access to the right data at the right time, better decisions could be made more effectively. Reliable data was the bedrock of effective decision making and helped ensure fact and evidence based policymaking.
RESOLVED:
Reasons for Decisions:
Data is recognised in the Government’s National Data Strategy as a strategic asset and the ‘great opportunity of our time, offering the possibility of a more informed and better-connected future.’ Surrey County Council also fully recognise the potential data brings and have big ambitions for how data is managed, governed, and used in the future. The Council aspires to be truly data-enabled; using data to not just understand the performance of services and monitor what has happened, but also to help plan and prepare for the future, predicting issues before they arise. To meet this ambition and harness the power of data for the Council, its partners and residents, the organisation needs to address the ‘gap’ in capabilities, skills and behaviours highlighted by a data review undertaken last year. Delivering the SCC Data Strategy and building a sustainable data capability will enable the Council to fill the gap and tackle the root causes of the issues highlighted by the data review. It will build a data literate and data empowered workforce. Focusing on this work will be essential to enabling the Council to contribute fully to a wider partnership data and insight ecosystem, that the Surrey-wide Data Strategy is aiming to define and establish.
(The decisions on this item can be called in by the Resources and Performance Select Committee)
|
|
2021/22 Month 9 (December) Financial Report PDF 485 KB
This report provides details of the County Council’s 2021/22 financial position as at 31st December 2021 (M9) for revenue and capital budgets, and the expected outlook for the remainder of the financial year. (The decisions on this item can be called-in by the Resources & Performance Select Committee)
Additional documents: Decision: RESOLVED:
1. That Cabinet note the Council’s forecast revenue and capital budget positions.
2. That Cabinet approve the use of £6.2m Covid-19 reserve to offset the forecast impact of Covid-19 on the budget (paragraph 5 to 7). 3. That Cabinet approve that M9 Capital forecasts be used as a baseline to reset the Capital Programme for 2021/22 to provide a stable and deliverable budget for the remainder of the year. Reasons for Decisions: This report is to comply with the agreed policy of providing a monthly budget monitoring report to Cabinet for approval of any necessary actions. (The decisions on this item can be called in by the Resources and Performance Select Committee)
Minutes: The report was introduced by the Deputy Leader and Cabinet Member for Finance and Resources who explained that the report provided details of the County Council’s 2021/22 financial position as at 31st December 2021 (M9) for revenue and capital budgets, and the expected outlook for the remainder of the financial year. At month 9 the Council was forecasting a £4m deficit which is a £4m improvement for month 8. This was due to the release of £6.2m of centrally held COVID-19 funding to offset further COVID related costs and pressures incurred by services. The release of £6.2m for COVID-19 is offset by £2.2m, being a deterioration in children's in high needs block offset by under spends elsewhere. Directorates continue to work hard to bring their forecasts back in line with budget by the year end. The capital budget is reporting a total slippage of £31.5m against a budget of £202m. The slippage from the key schemes has been reprofiled into 2022-2023.
RESOLVED:
1. That Cabinet note the Council’s forecast revenue and capital budget positions.
2. That Cabinet approve the use of £6.2m Covid-19 reserve to offset the forecast impact of Covid-19 on the budget (paragraph 5 to 7). 3. That Cabinet approve that M9 Capital forecasts be used as a baseline to reset the Capital Programme for 2021/22 to provide a stable and deliverable budget for the remainder of the year. Reasons for Decisions: This report is to comply with the agreed policy of providing a monthly budget monitoring report to Cabinet for approval of any necessary actions. (The decisions on this item can be called in by the Resources and Performance Select Committee)
|
|
EXCLUSION OF THE PUBLIC
That under Section 100(A) of the Local Government Act 1972, the public be excluded from the meeting during consideration of the following items of business on the grounds that they involve the likely disclosure of exempt information under the relevant paragraphs of Part 1 of Schedule 12A of the Act. Additional documents: Minutes: RESOLVED: That under Section 100(A) of the Local Government Act 1972, the public be excluded from the meeting during consideration of the following items of business on the grounds that they involve the likely disclosure of exempt information under the relevant paragraphs of Part 1 of Schedule 12A of the Act.
|
|
The Future of Residential Care Homes for Older People Owned and Operated by Surrey County Council
This Part 2 report contains information which is exempt from Access to Information requirements by virtue of Paragraph 3: information relating to the financial or business affairs of any particular person (including the authority holding that information).
(The decisions on this item can be called-in by the Adults and Health Select Committee) Decision: RESOLVED:
1. That Cabinet note the information provided in this report when considering recommendations made in the Part 1 report entitled Future of the Eight Residential Care Homes for Older People Run by Surrey County Council. Reasons for Decisions:
See Minute 34/22.
Minutes: The Cabinet Member for Adults and Health introduced the Part 2 report which contained information which was exempt from Access to Information requirements by virtue of Paragraph 3: information relating to the financial or business affairs of any particular person (including the authority holding that information).
RESOLVED:
1. That Cabinet note the information provided in this report when considering recommendations made in the Part 1 report entitled Future of the Eight Residential Care Homes for Older People Run by Surrey County Council. Reasons for Decisions:
See Minute 34/22.
|
|
Working with the Big Fostering Partnership
This Part 2 report contains information which is exempt from Access to Information requirements by virtue of Paragraph 3: information relating to the financial or business affairs of any particular person (including the authority holding that information).
(The decisions on this item can be called-in by the Children’s, Families, Lifelong Learning & Culture Select Committee)
Decision: RESOLVED:
See Minute 35/22.
Reasons for Decisions:
See Minute 35/22.
Minutes: The Cabinet Member for Children and Families introduced the Part 2 report which contained information which was exempt from Access to Information requirements by virtue of Paragraph 3: information relating to the financial or business affairs of any particular person (including the authority holding that information). The Cabinet Member for Children and Families provided some information regarding the finances underpinning the decision.
RESOLVED:
See Minute 35/22.
Reasons for Decisions:
See Minute 35/22.
|
|
St Andrew's Catholic School, Ashtead
This Part 2 report contains information which is exempt from Access to Information requirements by virtue of Paragraph 3: information relating to the financial or business affairs of any particular person (including the authority holding that information).
(The decisions on this item can be called-in by the Resources and Performance Select Committee)
Additional documents: Decision: RESOLVED:
See Exempt Minute [E-05-22]
Reasons for Decisions:
See Exempt Minute [E-05-22]
(The decisions on this item can be called in by the Resources and Performance Select Committee)
Minutes: The Cabinet Member for Property and Waste introduced the Part 2 report which contained information which was exempt from Access to Information requirements by virtue of Paragraph 3: information relating to the financial or business affairs of any particular person (including the authority holding that information).
RESOLVED:
See Exempt Minute [E-05-22]
Reasons for Decisions:
See Exempt Minute [E-05-22]
(The decisions on this item can be called in by the Resources and Performance Select Committee)
|
|
Department For Education Safety Valve Agreement
This Part 2 report contains information which is exempt from Access to Information requirements by virtue of Paragraph 3: information relating to the financial or business affairs of any particular person (including the authority holding that information). The report relates to Department for Education funding of the Dedicated Schools Grant and funding negotiations that are confidential until any new funding arrangements are agreed.
(The decisions on this item can be called-in by the Children’s, Families, Lifelong Learning & Culture Select Committee)
Additional documents: Decision: RESOLVED:
1. That Cabinet adjourn the meeting and reconvene the meeting on 7 March 2022 to decide whether to enter a Safety Valve agreement when the value of any financial contributions (from the Department for Education, the Dedicated Schools Grant and Surrey County Council General Fund) and terms of agreement are known.
Reasons for Decisions:
See Exempt Minute [E-06-22]
(The decisions on this item can be called-in by the Children, Families, Lifelong Learning & Culture Select Committee)
Minutes: 1. The Cabinet Member for Education and Learning explained that discussions were on going between the DfE and council. The meeting would need to be adjourned for financial information to be obtained so a decision could be made.
RESOLVED:
1. That Cabinet adjourn the meeting and reconvene the meeting on 7 March 2022 to decide whether to enter a Safety Valve agreement when the value of any financial contributions (from the Department for Education, the Dedicated Schools Grant and Surrey County Council General Fund) and terms of agreement are known.
Reasons for Decisions:
See Exempt Minute [E-06-22]
(The decisions on this item can be called-in by the Children, Families, Lifelong Learning & Culture Select Committee)
|
|
PUBLICITY FOR PART 2 ITEMS
To consider whether the item considered under Part 2 of the agenda should be made available to the Press and public. Additional documents: Minutes: It was agreed that non-exempt information may be made available to the press and public, where appropriate. |