Agenda, decisions and minutes
PDF 81 KBVenue: Ashcombe Suite, County Hall, Kingston upon Thames, Surrey KT1 2DN
Contact: Vicky Hibbert or Anne Gowing 020 8541 9938 Email: anne.gowing@surreycc.gov.uk
Media
| No. | Item |
|---|---|
|
APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE
Additional documents: Minutes: Apologies were received from Mrs Hammond. |
|
|
MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING: 21 October 2014
Additional documents: Minutes: The minutes of the meeting held on 21 October 2014 were confirmed and signed by the Chairman. |
|
|
DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST
Additional documents: |
|
|
PROCEDURAL MATTERS
Additional documents: |
|
|
Members' Questions
Additional documents: Minutes: No questions from Members were received. |
|
|
Public Questions
Additional documents: Minutes: No questions from members of the public were received. |
|
|
Petitions
Additional documents: Minutes: No petitions were received. |
|
|
Representations received on reports to be considered in private
Additional documents: Minutes: No representations were received. |
|
Additional documents: Decision: Environment and Transport Select Committee’s Flooding Task Group
The response from the Cabinet Member for Highways, Transport and Flooding is attached as Appendix 1.
Minutes: Environment and Transport Select Committee’s Flooding Task Group
The response from the Cabinet Member for Highways, Transport and Flooding is attached as Appendix 1.
The Chairman of the Environment and Transport Select Committee thanked the Cabinet Member for his response. He made the following points:
· An explanation for including the table setting out the outline capital costs of flood alleviation schemes in Surrey, in the task group report · Pleased that the Cabinet Member for Highways, Transport and Flooding would write to the Secretary of State asking her to address the concerns of Surrey County Council, in relation to changing the powers of the Water Company Regulators relating to drainage works · The importance of submitting planning permission as soon as possible for flood alleviation schemes.
The Cabinet Member for Highways, Transport and Flooding expressed his thanks to the Environment and Transport Select Committee’s Flooding Task Group for the huge amount of work that they had undertaken and for their in-depth report. He referred to his table response and also addressed the points made by the Chairman of the Environment and Transport Select Committee. He also said that the County Council was working with six other Borough and Districts to try and progress the Lower Thames Flood Alleviation Scheme.
Both the Leader of the Council and the Cabinet Member expressed concern about funding issues and hoped for more clarity in the forthcoming Autumn Statement.
|
|
|
Managing Surrey's Waste: Progress and Next Steps
Additional documents: Decision: 1. That a further report on the Eco Park be brought back to the Cabinet in February 2015 with an updated value for money and affordability assessment.
2. That the need to reduce costs at Community Recycling Centres, by rationalising the service offering be endorsed and that officers be requested to provide a detailed proposal in February 2015.
3. That the proposal to develop a new model of working with district and borough councils to deliver waste services across Surrey be supported.
Reasons for Decisions:
Changes in Surrey County Council’s (SCC) approach to managing Surrey’s waste, including joint working arrangements between the Waste Disposal Authority (WDA) and Waste Collection Authorities (WCA) have the potential to make savings which will help address a funding gap that arises from increasing costs and reducing funding, in addition to contributing to other savings that will be required across SCC in the coming years.
Changes to the management of Community Recycling Centres will optimise their use and has the potential to deliver further savings.
The Cabinet previously requested that in the event that all necessary consents to develop the Eco Park were not secured by 1 November 2014, it should receive a further report. In view of the continued delay it would be appropriate to report again when the position is clear.
[The decisions on this item can be called in by the Environment and Transport Select Committee] Minutes: The Cabinet Member for Environment and Planning introduced the report and said that it was one of a series of reports to update the Cabinet on managing Surrey’s waste. He said that the Council continued to make improvements to help residents minimise the amount of waste they produced and to re-use and re-cycle as much as possible. Surrey’s recycling rate was nearly 60%, and nearly 20% higher than in 2006 – it was one of the best in the country.
He updated Cabinet in relation to the progress with the delivery of the Eco Park since its last report in June 2014. He informed them that a local resident had recently applied to the High Court for permission to seek a judicial review of the decision taken by the Planning and Regulatory Committee on 24 September 2014. He said that a further report would be presented to Cabinet, which would include an update on the value for money analysis, in February 2015.
Referring to the Community Recycling Centres, he said that a number of performance improvement and efficiency savings activities had already commenced but in order to make further savings, more changes needed to be considered, including charging for certain materials and rationalising opening times.
Finally, he considered that partnership workingwith Surrey districts and boroughs was critical to make a step change in performance and efficiency.
Other Members made the following points:
· The variance between Boroughs / Districts in recycling rates, ranging from 41% to 58% · The issue of recycling leaves · The percentage of waste recycled, re-used and composted in Surrey per annum · The need to work constructively with Boroughs and Districts · Food waste – the issue of the bags used · Examine the options for increasing recycling rates in flats
RESOLVED:
1. That a further report on the Eco Park be brought back to the Cabinet in February 2015 with an updated value for money and affordability assessment.
2. That the need to reduce costs at Community Recycling Centres, by rationalising the service offering be endorsed and that officers be requested to provide a detailed proposal in February 2015.
3. That the proposal to develop a new model of working with district and borough councils to deliver waste services across Surrey be supported.
Reasons for Decisions:
Changes in Surrey County Council’s (SCC) approach to managing Surrey’s waste, including joint working arrangements between the Waste Disposal Authority (WDA) and Waste Collection Authorities (WCA) have the potential to make savings which will help address a funding gap that arises from increasing costs and reducing funding, in addition to contributing to other savings that will be required across SCC in the coming years.
Changes to the management of Community Recycling Centres will optimise their use and has the potential to deliver further savings.
The Cabinet previously requested that in the event that all necessary consents to develop the Eco Park were not secured by 1 November 2014, it should receive a further report. In view of the continued delay it would be ... view the full minutes text for item 231/14 |
|
|
Endorsement of the Surrey Hills Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB)
Additional documents: Decision: That the review of the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB) Management Plan be adopted as the statutory AONB Management Plan for the Surrey Hills for the period 2014 to 2019.
Reasons for Decision:
The Countryside and Rights of Way Act (2000) places a statutory duty on local authorities to prepare a Management Plan for any Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty within their authority, and to review this every five years.
[The decisions on this item can be called in by the Environment and Transport Select Committee]
Minutes: Under section 89 of the Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000 (CRoW Act), the County Council along with the other local authorities administering the area of an Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB) had a duty to produce an AONB Management Plan.
Surrey County Council have delegated the duty of producing the Surrey Hills AONB Management to the Surrey Hills Partnership, known as the Surrey Hills AONB Board. The Surrey Hills AONB Management Plan for the period 2009-2014 was adopted by Surrey County Council on 17 February 2009. Under the CRoW Act there was a requirement to review the Management Plan every 5 years and the current plan had now been reviewed through the Board.
The Cabinet Member for Environment and Planning drew attention to the Surrey Hills AONB Management Plan and also the Surrey Hills Family Delivery Plan, appended to the submitted report. He confirmed that the Boroughs and Districts were concurrently taking reports to their Members for adoption, following the satisfactory conclusion with the statutory ‘consultation bodies’ on Strategic Environmental Assessment and Appropriate Assessment and said that the County Council was now being asked to adopt the reviewed plan for the period of 2014 – 2019.
He also confirmed that an Equalities Impact Assessment had been undertaken and was included as an attachment to the report. Finally, he thanked Mr Michael Sydney, who had previously been Chairman of Surrey Hills ANOB.
RESOLVED:
That the review of the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB) Management Plan be adopted as the statutory AONB Management Plan for the Surrey Hills for the period 2014 to 2019.
Reasons for Decision:
The Countryside and Rights of Way Act (2000) places a statutory duty on local authorities to prepare a Management Plan for any Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty within their authority, and to review this every five years.
|
|
|
Prudential Ride London - Surrey 100 and Classic
Additional documents: Decision: 1. That the Prudential RideLondon-Surrey 100 and Classic routes for 2015, 2016 and 2017 be approved and that the final detail of the route be determined by the Assistant Chief Executive or Strategic Director for Environment and Infrastructure, in consultation with the Leader of the Council, the Cabinet Member for Community Services and the Cabinet Member for Highways, Transport and Flooding. 2. That a further decision be brought back to the Cabinet for cycling events from 2018 onwards.
Reasons for Decisions:
The Prudential RideLondon-Surrey 100 and Classic have become recognised as world class events. They are organised by the London & Surrey Cycling Partnership, a joint venture between London Marathon Limited and SweetSpot Group. The events are delivered on a not for profit basis with a charitable trust overseeing the allocation of grants to sporting and recreational charities in Surrey and London.
The continuation of the Prudential RideLondon-Surrey 100 and Classic events supports the Surrey Cycling Strategy, maintains Surrey’s position as a centre for cycling and provides significant benefits in terms of worldwide exposure to potential tourists. It also presents residents with the opportunity to take part in a world class event and to watch world class cycling teams racing in the County.
The event is structured to ensure that all event costs are borne by the event organiser. Surrey County Council and other Surrey partners are not required to provide financial support to the event, with input limited to officer time in reviewing event arrangements to ensure that they meet regulatory and safety requirements.
Extensive work has already been undertaken to reduce the impact of road closures on local communities and liaison with them will continue to ensure this is kept to the minimum possible for events of this size and scale. Some work has already been undertaken to help local businesses to see a positive impact from the events but this can and will be increased in 2015.
[The decisions on this item can be called in by the Communities Select Committee]
Minutes: The Cabinet Member for Community Services referred to the Cabinet meeting in December 2013, where the Prudential RideLondon-Surrey 100 and Classic Cycling Events as the County’s 2012 Olympic Legacy cycling events until 2017 had been approved. At that meeting, the Cabinet further approved the route for the 2014 Prudential RideLondon-Surrey 100 and Classic, which were held successfully on 10 August 2014, with 20,000 riders taking part and also agreed to take a further decision in respect of future events. This report was now seeking approval to agree the route for the 2015 event (Annex 1 to the submitted report) and also to agree the routes for the 2016 and 2017 events.
She said that Ride London-Surrey was an important event for the County, which had raised millions of pounds for good causes nationally and had led to community groups being given more than £620,000. She also said that, despite the bad weather on 10 August 2014, thousands of visitors had turned out to watch the race. However, she acknowledged the concerns of some Surrey residents and businesses and confirmed that she would ask the event organisers to look at the objections – in particular, she referred to a letter circulated to all Members of the Cabinet from the clerk to Abinger Parish Council concerning the impact of the event on their local businesses, which was agreed that she would respond to.
She confirmed that the Equalities Impact Assessment, appended to the submitted report had been thorough and had considered the issues and outcomes from these cycle events.
The Cabinet Member for Highways, Transport and Flooding informed Members that extensive consultation had been undertaken following the first event and lessons learnt, which meant that this year, organisers had introduced rolling road closures and better access for residents to limit the impact of the event. He also expressed his support for using the same route each year.
Finally, the Deputy Leader referred to paragraph 11 and 12 of the report, citing that businesses did have good awareness of this event and he considered that overall it had a beneficial long term impact on tourism and was good for the economy of Surrey.
RESOLVED:
1. That the Prudential RideLondon-Surrey 100 and Classic routes for 2015, 2016 and 2017 be approved and that the final detail of the route be determined by the Assistant Chief Executive or Strategic Director for Environment and Infrastructure, in consultation with the Leader of the Council, the Cabinet Member for Community Services and the Cabinet Member for Highways, Transport and Flooding. 2. That a further decision be brought back to the Cabinet for cycling events from 2018 onwards.
Reasons for Decisions:
The Prudential RideLondon-Surrey 100 and Classic have become recognised as world class events. They are organised by the London & Surrey Cycling Partnership, a joint venture between London Marathon Limited and SweetSpot Group. The events are delivered on a not for profit basis with a charitable trust overseeing the allocation of grants to sporting and ... view the full minutes text for item 233/14 |
|
|
Finance and Budget Monitoring Report for October 2014
Additional documents: Decision: 1. That the Council forecasts an improved revenue position for 2014/15 of £0.5m underspend, as set out in Annex1, paragraph 2 of the submitted report.
2. That services forecast achieving an improved position on efficiencies and service reductions by year end of £69.4m, as set out in Annex1, paragraph 54 of the submitted report.
3. That the council forecasts investing £207m through its capital programme in 2014/15, as set out in Annex1, paragraph 59 of the submitted report.
4. That services’ management actions to mitigate overspends, as set out throughout Annex1 of the submitted report, be noted.
5. The new fee for amendments to the common land register, as set out in Annex1, paragraph 8 of the submitted report, be noted.
Reasons for Decisions:
This report is presented to comply with the agreed policy of providing a monthly budget monitoring report to Cabinet for approval and action as necessary.
[The decisions on this item can be called in by the Council Overview and Scrutiny Committee]
Minutes: The Leader of the Council presented the budget monitoring report for month seven of 2014/15, the period up to 31 October 2014 and said that the forecast revenue position was currently an underspend of £500,000 at year end, an improvement of £900,000. He asked Cabinet to note that the Planning and Regulatory Committee had set a reasonable fee for applications to amend the commons register. He also said that the Council continued to face demand growth and funding reductions as austerity continued and that the council’s financial strategy had four key drivers to ensure sound governance to manage the finances and provide value for money. These were: (1) To keep any additional call on the council taxpayer to a minimum
Currently, the end of year revenue forecast was for services to underspend by £0.5m. Also, that the Chief Executive and Director of Finance had held support sessions with Heads of Service and concluded that the key efficiency strategies were valid but in order to maintain progress with the rigour of services’ savings plans, these support sessions would continue and they would continue to report progress at the Council’s regular briefings to all Members.
(2) To continuously drive the efficiency agenda He considered that this was critical for the long term survival of the County Council and informed Cabinet that, at the end of October, services forecast delivering efficiencies of £69.4m against a target of £72.3m, which was a £400,000 improvement on the position last month. (3) To develop a funding strategy to reduce the council’s reliance on council tax and government grant income
He said that reducing reliance on government grants and council tax was key to balancing the Council’s budgets over the longer term and the Revolving Infrastructure and Investment Fund had already invested £5.5m this year and forecast delivering £0.5m net income.
(4) To continue to maximise the Council’s investment in Surrey
Finally, he said that the Council’s capital programme not only improved and maintained the Council’s services, it was also a way of investing in Surrey and generating income for the Council and that the reprofiled capital programme planned £780m investment for 2014-19, including £200m in 2014/15. The current forecast was to overspend by £2.7m, including long term investments.
Other Cabinet Members were invited to highlight the key points and issues from their portfolios, as set out in the Annex to the report.
RESOLVED: 1. That the Council forecasts an improved revenue position for 2014/15 of £0.5m underspend, as set out in Annex1, paragraph 2 of the submitted report.
2. That services forecast achieving an improved position on efficiencies and service reductions by year end of £69.4m, as set out in Annex1, paragraph 54 of the submitted report.
3. That the Council forecasts investing £207m through its capital programme in 2014/15, as set out in Annex1, paragraph 59 of the submitted report.
4. That services’ management actions to mitigate overspends, as set out throughout Annex1 of the submitted report, be noted.
5. The new fee for amendments ... view the full minutes text for item 234/14 |
|
|
Leadership Risk Register
Additional documents: Decision: That the amendments to the layout and content of the Leadership Risk Register, Annex 1 to the submitted report, be noted and the control actions put in place by the Statutory Responsibilities Network (SRN) be endorsed.
Reasons for Decisions:
To enable the Cabinet to keep the Council’s strategic risks under review and to ensure that appropriate action is being taken to mitigate risks in the most effective way.
[The decisions on this item can be called in by the Council Overview and Scrutiny Committee]
Minutes: The Cabinet Member for Business Services said that the quarterly Leadership Risk Register was a ‘living document’, which the Audit and Governance Committee reviewed on a monthly basis, at their meetings. She considered that the risks for the County Council were escalating, due to capped funding from Central Government and the increased demand for Council services. The Cabinet recognised the importance of the risk register and acknowledged that some of the risks were outside the control of the Council. However, it was important to recognise them and take appropriate action to mitigate them. Members due attention to the following risks:
· Safeguarding in Children’s Services and Adult Social Care · Medium Term Financial Plan 2014 – 2019 · Comprehensive Spending Assessment 2015 · Staff Resilience to change and demand pressure Finally, the Cabinet Member for Business Services thanked the Cabinet Member for Environment and Planning for his input in compiling the data for the risk register, and its format and she also highlighted the table on movement of risks appended to the report.
RESOLVED:
That the amendments to the layout and content of the Leadership Risk Register, Annex 1 to the submitted report, be noted and the control actions put in place by the Statutory Responsibilities Network (SRN) be endorsed.
Reasons for Decisions:
To enable the Cabinet to keep the Council’s strategic risks under review and to ensure that appropriate action is being taken to mitigate risks in the most effective way. |
|
|
Implementing the Care Act - Charging Policy Proposals
Additional documents: Decision: That the following recommendations be agreed:
1. The Council will consult, over a seven week period, on these proposals as part of a revised charging policy for adult social care services:
· The Council exercises the power to charge for residential and nursing care and non-residential services in every case, unless it is prohibited from doing so by law or determines not to do under Council policy. · The Council will charge an administration fee in any case where the person is able to pay the full cost of their care and support for a residential or nursing home placement but nevertheless the person asks the Council to make the arrangements for the placement under the Council’s usual terms and conditions. · The Council will increase the percentage of available income taken in charges for non-residential services by 10% with effect from 1 April 2015. · The Council will consult widely on the discretionary elements of the new deferred payment scheme. 2. That a further report be received by Cabinet at its meeting on 24 February 2015, detailing the response to the consultation and proposed Charging Policy.
Reasons for Decisions:
The Council has previously consulted on the policy of charging for care and support. The recommendations made in this report do not significantly change charging for the majority of people currently receiving care and support but it is right that we consult people who may be adversely affected by the revised proposals. A clear and transparent policy on charging enables people to make advanced decisions about their care and support arrangements.
[The decisions on this item can be called in by the Adult Social Care Select Committee]
Minutes: From 1 April 2015, local authorities must implement part 1 of the Care Act 2014. Fundamental reforms to the way in which people pay for their care will become law from April 2016. The Act provided the opportunity to introduce some relatively minor adjustments to the way that the charging system for care and support operated from April 2015.
The Cabinet Member for Adult Social Care said that, under the Care Act, new rules for charging would apply when a local authority arranged care and support to meet a person’s support needs and this report provided an overview of the key changes to the charging arrangements from April 2015 that would require consultation to implement.
These were:
· The power to make a charge for residential and nursing care · The power to make a charge for putting arrangements in place · The percentage of available income taken in charges · The Universal Deferred Payment Scheme
He also said that, as the consultation period included the Christmas period, he proposed to extend the consultation period from six to seven weeks and amended recommendation (1) to reflect this change. He also confirmed that personalised letters would be sent to all people affected by the changes and that the outcome of the consultation would be reported back to Cabinet on 24 February 2015.
Finally, he referred to the Equalities Impact Assessment, which he said would be updated and included with the follow-up report to Cabinet in February 2015.
RESOLVED:
That the following recommendations be agreed:
1. The Council will consult, over a seven week period, on these proposals as part of a revised charging policy for adult social care services:
· The Council exercises the power to charge for residential and nursing care and non-residential services in every case, unless it is prohibited from doing so by law or determines not to do under Council policy. · The Council will charge an administration fee in any case where the person is able to pay the full cost of their care and support for a residential or nursing home placement but nevertheless the person asks the Council to make the arrangements for the placement under the Council’s usual terms and conditions. · The Council will increase the percentage of available income taken in charges for non-residential services by 10% with effect from 1 April 2015. · The Council will consult widely on the discretionary elements of the new deferred payment scheme. 2. That a further report be received by Cabinet at its meeting on 24 February 2015, detailing the response to the consultation and proposed Charging Policy.
Reasons for Decisions:
The Council has previously consulted on the policy of charging for care and support. The recommendations made in this report do not significantly change charging for the majority of people currently receiving care and support but it is right that we consult people who may be adversely affected by the revised proposals. A clear and transparent policy on charging enables people to make advanced decisions about their care and support ... view the full minutes text for item 236/14 |
|
|
Rydens Enterprise School and 6th form College, Hersham - proposed expansion
Additional documents: Decision: That, subject to agreement of the detailed financial information, as set out in the submitted part 2 report, expenditure for the provision of an additional form of entry (150 places in Years 7 - 11) at Rydens Enterprise School be approved.
Reasons for Decisions:
The proposal supports the Authority’s statutory obligation to provide sufficient school places to meet the needs of the population in Elmbridge borough.
[The decisions on this item can be called in by either the Council Overview and Scrutiny Committee or the Children and Education Select Committee]
Minutes: The Cabinet Member for Schools and Learning said that there was an unprecedented demand for school places across Surrey and that an additional 13,000 school places would be required over the next five years. She informed Members that the County Council was continuing to lobby Central Government for additional funding because the Council was facing a potential £125m funding gap.
She said that Rydens was a secondary school and an Academy that was planning to build a new school to replace the existing school on the same site and that outline planning permission for this new build had been approved by Elmbridge Borough Council’s Planning and Regulatory Committee on 18 November 2014. She advised the Cabinet that the Local Authority would be working closely with the school thorough the project to ensure that it obtained value for money for the 150 additional 11-16 places at this school in Hersham to help meet basic need requirements in the Elmbridge area.
RESOLVED:
That, subject to the agreement of the detailed financial information for the school as set out in the submitted Part 2 report, the business case for the provision of an additional one form of entry (150 places in Years 7 to 11, excluding any sixth form expansion), be approved.
Reasons for Decisions:
The proposal supports the Authority’s statutory obligation to provide sufficient school places to meet the needs of the population in Elmbridge borough.
|
|
|
Supply and Distribution of Fresh Produce for Commercial Services
Additional documents: Decision: That a contract, for two years with an option to extend for one further year, be awarded to these three suppliers; Cheesman Bros Ltd, AG Axtons and Bidvest 3663, subject to the agreement of the detailed financial information, as set out in the submitted Part 2 report.
Reasons for Decisions:
The proposal supports Commercial Services ability to provide school and civic meals across Surrey and helps Commercial Services to comply with their legal duty, including The Children’s and Families Act 2014, to offer all state-funded schools, including academies and free schools, a free school lunch to all pupils in reception, year 1 and year 2 from September 2014.
These three suppliers will provide a good mix between local small and medium sized enterprises (SME) and large scale national providers, all of which have demonstrated the ability to deliver the required produce through a competitive procurement process.
[The decisions on this item can be called in by the Council Overview and Scrutiny Committee]
Minutes: The Cabinet Member for Schools and Learning praised the excellent job that Commercial Services did in providing catering facilities for schools and civic functions across Surrey. She said that this report sought approval to award contracts, to three suppliers, for the supply of fresh produce for this service. The detailed financial information which includes commercially sensitive information, was set out Part 2 of this agenda (item 18), and demonstrated why the recommended contracts offered best value for money.
She drew Cabinet’s attention to the legal duty to offer a free lunch to all Key Stage 1 pupils, who attended state funded schools, including academies and free schools, from September 2014.
The Cabinet Member for Highways, Transport and Flooding commended the importance that the County Council attached to encouraging local small and medium sized enterprises (SMEs) to participate in bidding for County Council contracts.
RESOLVED:
That a contract, for two years with an option to extend for one further year, be awarded to these three suppliers; Cheesman Bros Ltd, AG Axtons and Bidvest 3663, subject to the agreement of the detailed financial information, as set out in the submitted Part 2 report.
Reasons for Decisions:
The proposal supports Commercial Services ability to provide school and civic meals across Surrey and helps Commercial Services to comply with their legal duty, including The Children’s and Families Act 2014, to offer all state-funded schools, including academies and free schools, a free school lunch to all pupils in reception, year 1 and year 2 from September 2014.
These three suppliers will provide a good mix between local small and medium sized enterprises (SME) and large scale national providers, all of which have demonstrated the ability to deliver the required produce through a competitive procurement process.
|
|
|
LEADER / DEPUTY LEADER / CABINET MEMBER DECISIONS TAKEN SINCE THE LAST CABINET MEETING
Additional documents: Minutes: To note the delegated decisions taken by Cabinet Members since the last meeting of the Cabinet.
Also, to note that the decision relating to the item on the Asbestos Removal Services Framework was taken by the Cabinet Member for Environment and Planning, on behalf of the Cabinet Member for Business Services.
RESOLVED:
That the decisions taken by Cabinet Members since the last meeting, as set out in Annex 1 of the submitted report, be noted.
Reasons for Decisions:
To inform the Cabinet of decisions taken by Cabinet Members under delegated authority. |
|
|
Youth Engagement Fund Application
Additional documents: Decision: That the investment of £0.25m to support the delivery of a three year £2.36m youth engagement programme in Surrey.
Reasons for Decisions:
An investment of £0.25m is requested to secure a further £2.11m of funding to support the Council’s priority to create opportunities for young people.
[Note: This report was presented as an urgent item, under Special Urgency Arrangements, with the approval of the Chairman of the County Council and therefore is not subject to call in.]
Minutes: In accordance with Access to Information Rule 6.06(f) (Special Urgency), and in the absence of the Chairman of Children and Education Select Committee, the Chairman of the County Council has agreed that the decision cannot be reasonably deferred because the deadline for submission of the bid to the Department for Work and Pensions was 28 November 2014
The Cabinet Member for Schools and Learning expanded on the reasons for this urgent report stating that the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) was seeking applications from local partnerships for the Youth Engagement Fund (YEF). YEF was a national programme that aimed to re-engage young people aged 14-17 years old in education, training and employment. YEF was funded through by an investor external to Government and the work would be delivered by a charity sector delivery agent, Catch 22, in the local authority area.
Cabinet expressed their support for this initiative and hoped that this particular programme would further reduce the number of NEETs (Not in Education, Employment or Training) to zero.
RESOLVED:
That the investment of £0.25m to support the delivery of a three year £2.36m youth engagement programme in Surrey be approved.
Reasons for Decisions:
An investment of £0.25m is requested to secure a further £2.11m of funding to support the Council’s priority to create opportunities for young people.
[Note: This report was presented as an urgent item, under Special Urgency Arrangements, with the approval of the Chairman of the County Council and therefore is not subject to call in.]
|
|
|
EXCLUSION OF THE PUBLIC
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 paragraph 3 of Part 1 of Schedule 12A of the Act.
PART TWO – IN PRIVATE
THE FOLLOWING ITEMS OF BUSINESS WERE CONSIDERED IN PRIVATE BY THE CABINET. SET OUT BELOW IS A PUBLIC SUMMARY OF THE DECISIONS TAKEN.
|
|
|
Surrey Fire & Rescue: to approve the continued arrangements for contingency crewing and the provision of special rescue capabilities
Decision: That approval for the contract to be utilised for the full extension period to allow further consideration of the options available for the future delivery of this and other capabilities, from 31 March 2015 to 30 November 2015, be agreed.
Reasons for Decisions:
To ensure that:
· Surrey Fire and Rescue Authority complies with its statutory duties under the Fire and Rescue Services Act 2004, Civil Contingencies Act 2004 and the Fire and Rescue National Framework for England 2012.
· To allow more time for various Public Service Transformation Network (PSTN) work strands to be developed which with the objective of improving inter and intra operable resilience.
· A national independent review of firefighters terms and conditions began in October 2014 commissioned by Department for Communities and Local Government, the outcome of which may change contingency requirements as it looks at all of the current Grey Book (nationally agreed) terms and conditions of all fire-fighters. The review could make very significant recommendations i.e. in terms of the right to strike. [Adrian Thomas has been appointed as the Governments Independent Reviewer and will report back in February 2015.]
· An opportunity to review the specification and term of a new contract is pursued.
[The decisions on this item can be called in by the Communities Select Committee]
Minutes: Surrey Fire and Rescue Authority (SFRA) has a statutory duty to provide fire and rescue services in Surrey in accordance with the Fire and Rescue Services Act 2004 and business continuity arrangements insofar as is reasonably practicable in accordance with the Civil Contingencies Act 2004 and the Fire and Rescue National Framework for England 2012.
In order to comply with these duties, following a Cabinet decision on 23 October 2012, SFRA entered into a one-year pilot contract commencing December 2012 with Specialist Group International who provide specialist rescue capability on a day-to-day basis, and contingency crewing as required on a continuous basis. This contract was extended until 31 March 2015. The pilot contract was successful and in June 2014 the Cabinet approved going to the market to procure a 5 year contract.
However, the Cabinet Member for Community Services explained that there were a number of external developments which may change the requirements of the contract, so the Cabinet were now being asked to give approval to allow a further extension to the current contract until 30 November 2015 which is the maximum period of extension provided under the contract in place.
RESOLVED:
That approval for the contract to be utilised for the full extension period to allow further consideration of the options available for the future delivery of this and other capabilities, from 31 March 2015 to 30 November 2015, be agreed.
Reasons for Decisions:
To ensure that:
· Surrey Fire and Rescue Authority complies with its statutory duties under the Fire and Rescue Services Act 2004, Civil Contingencies Act 2004 and the Fire and Rescue National Framework for England 2012.
· To allow more time for various Public Service Transformation Network (PSTN) work strands to be developed which with the objective of improving inter and intra operable resilience.
· A national independent review of firefighters terms and conditions began in October 2014 commissioned by Department for Communities and Local Government, the outcome of which may change contingency requirements as it looks at all of the current Grey Book (nationally agreed) terms and conditions of all fire-fighters. The review could make very significant recommendations i.e. in terms of the right to strike. [Adrian Thomas has been appointed as the Governments Independent Reviewer and will report back in February 2015.]
· An opportunity to review the specification and term of a new contract is pursued.
|
|
|
Rydens Enterprise School and 6th form college - proposed expansion
Decision: 1. That the expenditure of £3,250,000 to support the expansion of Rydens Enterprise School to provide 150 places be approved. 2. That the requirement to agree an inflationary element for the project be noted and officers be asked to ensure a rigorous professional assessment is carried out in order to quantify this and the decision to agree a reasonable sum be delegated to the Strategic Director for Business Services after consultation with the Leader, the Cabinet Member for Schools and Learning and the Cabinet Member for Business Services. 3. That if planning permission for the new school is not agreed, an alternative scheme will be provided at the same agreed total cost to the Council.
Reasons for Decisions:
The proposal delivers and supports the Authority’s statutory obligation to provide sufficient school places to meet the needs of the population in the Hersham area.
[The decisions on this item can be called in by either the Council Overview and Scrutiny Committee or the Children and Education Select Committee] Minutes: The Cabinet Member for Schools and Learning said that this Part 2 report contained the financial and value for money implications relating to item 12. She also drew Cabinet’s attention to the revised recommendations that had been tabled at the meeting and confirmed that the funding allocation was included within the schools basic need capital programme, as part of the Medium Term Financial Programme 2014 – 2019.
RESOLVED:
1. That the expenditure of £3,250,000 to support the expansion of Rydens Enterprise School to provide 150 places be approved. 2. That the requirement to agree an inflationary element for the project be noted and officers be asked to ensure a rigorous professional assessment is carried out in order to quantify this and the decision to agree a reasonable sum be delegated to the Strategic Director for Business Services after consultation with the Leader, the Cabinet Member for Schools and Learning and the Cabinet Member for Business Services. 3. That if planning permission for the new school is not agreed, an alternative scheme will be provided at the same agreed total cost to the Council.
Reasons for Decisions:
The proposal delivers and supports the Authority’s statutory obligation to provide sufficient school places to meet the needs of the population in the Hersham area. |
|
|
Supply and Distribution of Fresh Produce for Commercial Services
Decision: That a contract, for two years with the option to extend for one further year, be awarded to:-
· Cheesman Bros Ltd for three geographical lots · AG Axtons for five geographical lots · Bidvest 3663 for one geographical lot
Reasons for Decisions:
A full tender process, in compliance with the requirement of EU Procurement Legislation and Procurement Standing Orders has been completed, and the recommendations provide best value for money for the Council following a thorough evaluation process. The three suppliers will provide a good mix between local, small and medium sized enterprises (SME) and large scale national provider all of which have demonstrated the ability to deliver the required produce.
Minutes: This report was the confidential annex relating to item 13 on the agenda and set out the commercial and financial details of the competitive tendering process.
RESOLVED:
That a contract, for two years with the option to extend for one further year, be awarded to:-
· Cheesman Bros Ltd for three geographical lots · AG Axtons for five geographical lots · Bidvest 3663 are awarded a geographical lot
Reasons for Decisions:
A full tender process, in compliance with the requirement of EU Procurement Legislation and Procurement Standing Orders has been completed, and the recommendations provide best value for money for the Council following a thorough evaluation process. The three suppliers will provide a good mix between local, small and medium sized enterprises (SME) and large scale national provider all of which have demonstrated the ability to deliver the required produce.
|
|
|
Property Transactions
Decision: Disposal of land at The Hollies, Red Lane, Oxted
That the County Council enter into the Joint Sale Agreement on the basis of the terms that have been negotiated with Ashill.
Reasons for Decisions:
To ensure best value is obtained for the disposal of the County Council’s land.
The land is a ‘ransom strip’ and is not required for any Council service or other operational purposes.
The ‘ransom strip’ was retained, following an earlier disposal of Council land to George Wimpey (now Taylor Wimpey); specifically because it would control access to adjacent third party land with future residential development potential.
This third party land, which now has the benefit of planning consent for residential dwellings, is owned by Ashill who wish to sell their land in conjunction with the Council’s to a developer.
Joint marketing of the combined land has generated a developer as a potential purchaser.
[The decisions on this item can be called in by the Council Overview and Scrutiny Committee]
Minutes: Disposal of land at The Hollies, Red Lane, Oxted
RESOLVED:
That the County Council enter into the Joint Sale Agreement on the basis of the terms that have been negotiated with Ashill.
Reasons for Decisions:
To ensure best value is obtained for the disposal of the County Council’s land.
The land is a ‘ransom strip’ and is not required for any Council service or other operational purposes.
The ‘ransom strip’ was retained, following an earlier disposal of Council land to George Wimpey (now Taylor Wimpey); specifically because it would control access to adjacent third party land with future residential development potential.
This third party land, which now has the benefit of planning consent for residential dwellings, is owned by Ashill who wish to sell their land in conjunction with the Council’s to a developer.
Joint marketing of the combined land has generated a developer as a potential purchaser.
|
|
|
PUBLICITY FOR PART 2 ITEMS
Additional documents: Minutes: That non-exempt information relating to items considered in Part 2 of the meeting may be made available to the press and public, if appropriate.
|