Agenda, decisions and minutes

Cabinet
Tuesday, 17 July 2018 2.00 pm

Venue: Ashcombe Suite, County Hall, Kingston upon Thames, Surrey KT1 2DN

Contact: Vicky Hibbert or Angela Guest  020 8541 9075 Email: angela.guest@surreycc.gov.uk

Webcast: View the webcast

Items
No. Item

116/18

Apologies for Absence

117/18

Minutes of Previous Meeting:

118/18

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:

    Minutes:

    Mr Jeff Harris declared a non pecuniary interest for Item 11, Annual Report of the Shareholder Board, in that he was the elected representative on the South East Services Business Board.

     

119/18

Procedural Matters

119/181

Members' Questions pdf icon PDF 49 KB

    (i)    The deadline for Member’s questions is 12pm four working days before the meeting (11 July 2018).

     

    Additional documents:

    Decision:

    One question was received from a Member. The question and response were published as a supplement to the agenda.

     

    Minutes:

    One question was received from a Member. This and a supplementary question were taken with the item to which it referred. See Minute 126/18.

     

120/18

Public Questions pdf icon PDF 51 KB

    The deadline for public questions is seven days before the meeting (10 July 2018).

     

    Additional documents:

    Decision:

    One question was received from Mr Graham Fletcher. The question and response were published as a supplement to the agenda.

     

    Minutes:

    One question was received from Mr Graham Fletcher. The question and response were published as a supplement to the agenda.

     

121/18

Petitions

122/18

Representations received on reports to be considered in private

123/18

Reports from Select Committees, Task Groups, Local Committees and other Committees of the Council

124/18

Leader / Deputy Leader / Cabinet Member Decisions/ Investment Board Taken Since the Last Cabinet Meeting pdf icon PDF 102 KB

    To note any delegated decisions taken by the Leader, Deputy Leader, Cabinet Members and Investment Board since the last meeting of the Cabinet.

    Additional documents:

    Decision:

    RESOLVED:

     

    That the decisions taken by the Leader of the Council and Cabinet Members under delegated authority be noted.

     

    Reason for Decision:

     

    To inform the Cabinet of decisions taken under delegated authority.

     

    Minutes:

    The Leader reported that it was with great sadness that he had made the decision this morning, to close Ripley CofE School.  No appropriate realistic options for the future of the school had been identified. The full decision had been published and would formally be reported to the next meeting of Cabinet.

     

    RESOLVED:

     

    That the decisions taken by the Leader of the Council and Cabinet Members under delegated authority be noted.

     

    Reason for Decision:

     

    To inform the Cabinet of decisions taken under delegated authority.

     

125/18

Surrey Safeguarding Adults Board Annual Report 2017/18 pdf icon PDF 84 KB

    Safeguarding Adults Boards have a statutory duty to publish an annual report.  To support the transparency of the work of the Board, the Annual Report (Annex 1) is presented to Cabinet. The recommendations of this report support the Council’s Strategic priority of Wellbeing.

     

    [The decisions on this item can be called in by the Adults and Lifelong Learning Select Committee]

     

    Additional documents:

    Decision:

    RESOLVED:

     

    1.    That the Surrey Safeguarding Adults Board Annual Report be noted prior to it being published.

     

    2.    That the next steps for the publication of the Annual report were agreed.

     

    Reason for Decisions:

     

    These decisions demonstrate that the Council is well placed to fulfil its obligations under the Care Act to have an established Safeguarding Adults Board (SSAB) in its area.

     

    It will support the SSAB to be transparent by providing information to the public on the performance of the Board in the delivery of its strategic plan.

     

    [The decisions on this item can be called in by the Adults and Lifelong Learning Select Committee]

     

    Minutes:

    This report was presented to Cabinet by Mr Simon Turpitt, Independent Chair of the Surrey Safeguarding Adults Board (SSAB) which was a statutory Board with responsibilities set out in the Care Act 2014.  One of the Board’s statutory duties was to publish an Annual Report.  He explained how the appointment of a new Head of Safeguarding in Adult Social Care had given much positive confidence to both the SSAB and the service itself.  He explained how the client/person was always at the centre of the work of the SSAB. 

     

    He described how the Board was working in cooperation with other Safeguarding Boards but particularly the Children’s Safeguarding Board (SSCB) to reduce duplication where this was possible.  He pointed out that each Safeguarding Board had its own statutory duties so they could not rule out duplication completely and that many of the people attending SSAB also attended others. There was to be joint platform on the web, shared by the SSAB and the Children’s’ Board, by December 2018.

     

    He went on to say that a new action plan, to run from 2019-2022, was being drawn up and would be presented to a future meeting.

     

    Members spoke about raising safeguarding awareness and Mr Turpitt explained how partner agencies and partner board were working on joint campaigns and urged Members to keep talking about safeguarding issues.  He would inform Members when the new joint web platform was in operation.

     

    RESOLVED:

     

    1. That the Surrey Safeguarding Adults Board Annual Report be noted prior to it being published.

     

    1. That the next steps for the publication of the Annual report were agreed.

     

    Reason for Decisions:

     

    These decisions demonstrate that the Council is well placed to fulfil its obligations under the Care Act to have an established Safeguarding Adults Board (SSAB) in its area.

     

    It will support the SSAB to be transparent by providing information to the public on the performance of the Board in the delivery of its strategic plan.

     

126/18

Regional Framework for Children's Residential Provision (2018 - 2024) pdf icon PDF 243 KB

    As Corporate Parents, Surrey County Council has a responsibility to ensure that we have sufficient placements available to meet the needs of our looked after children. Where the needs of a child cannot be met through in-house accommodation (foster care or residential children’s homes managed by SCC), we purchase/utilise services delivered by external providers.

     

    In order to effectively manage the market, achieve good outcomes for children and be compliant with Public Contract Regulations, Surrey has been an active member of a regional framework which is due to expire on 30 September 2018. In 2017 and early 2018 a total of 18 local authorities, including Surrey and our Orbis partners East Sussex and Brighton & Hove, came together to develop and tender for a revised framework. This framework is due to commence 1 September 2018. The initial contract term is three years, with the option to extend for a further three years (or part thereof). The framework does not commit the council to any given level of expenditure, although there is a contribution to shared management of the framework.

     

    NB There is a Part 2 annex at item 18.

     

    [The decisions on this item can be called in by the Children and Education Select Committee]

     

    Additional documents:

    Decision:

    RESOLVED:

     

    1.    That following consideration of the available options, the results of the procurement process, and commercially sensitive information provided in Part 2 of the report, approval was given for the Council to enter into a regional Framework Partnership Agreement for children’s residential provision (led by Southampton City Council) for the period 1 September 2018 – 31 August 2024.

     

    2.    That delegated authority be given to the Assistant Director(s) of Children’s Services to ‘call off’ this framework in order to place looked after children in external children’s homes, where this is deemed to be the most appropriate placement for the child or young person.

     

    3.    That delegated authority be given to Executive Director – Children, Families and Learning, in consultation with the Leader of the Council and Cabinet Member for Children, to add new providers to the framework for Surrey, in consultation with other local authorities, during the life of the framework.

     

    Reasons for decisions:

     

    The existing regional framework (of which Surrey is a member) would expire on 30 September 2018. If the Council did not participate in a Framework or similar procurement arrangement, it would only be able to spot purchase children’s residential provision, or enter into Block Contracts. Due to the level of spend, exclusive spot purchasing would place Council in breach of procurement law. Having only block contract arrangements in place would limit placement choice for children and their needs may not be met.

               

    Additionally, if we did not join the Local Authorities of the Southern Region (LASR) Flexible Framework, more staff would need to be recruited by Surrey to undertake the increase in workload associated with negotiating individual contracts and monitoring the performance of a large number of providers. In the regional collaborative, these tasks would be shared across all the local authorities and coordinated centrally by a small Framework Coordination Team.

     

    The LASR Flexible Framework would allow Councils across the region to manage the market, control expenditure and ensure value for money over the next six years. Prices were fixed for the first three years of the framework, and there was the potential for further savings through block contracts and voluntary discounts. 

     

    Framework Agreements were technically £0 value contracts as they include no obligation to undertake any set minimum level of expenditure through them. It is, however, envisaged that this contract would act as the Council’s primary route to the external children’s residential care market going forward. The only financial commitment was a small contribution towards framework coordination and contract management costs (approximately £15k per annum for Surrey).

     

    A similar arrangement for the commissioning of Independent Fostering Agencies had been in place for over 12 months, and the experience of partnership working and having a regional perspective of demand, sufficiency and provider performance had been very positive.

     

    [The decisions on this item can be called in by the Children and Education Select Committee]

     

    Minutes:

    The Cabinet Member for Children introduced the report and pointed out that there had been an update since the report was published.  The number of homes now in the framework were 366 rather than 382 as stated in various sections of the report and its annexes. 

     

    She explained that for most children and young people the best place to live was with their family of origin and where appropriate would support parents to provide an environment in which their child could grow and thrive. Unfortunately, in some circumstances the safest and most appropriate option was for a child to be taken into care. As Corporate Parents, Surrey County Council had a responsibility to ensure that sufficient placements were available to meet the needs of our looked after children. For the majority of looked after children, foster care was the most suitable placement option, however in some cases, young people required the type of care offered in a children’s home. 

     

    She went on to say that Surrey had been an active member of a regional framework which was due to expire on 30 September 2018.  In 2017 and early 2018 a total of 18 local authorities, including Surrey and our Orbis partners East Sussex and Brighton & Hove, came together to develop and tender for a revised framework. This new Flexible Framework was due to commence on 1 September 2018. The initial contract term was three years, with the option to extend for a further three years (or part thereof). The framework did not commit the Council to any given level of expenditure, although there was a contribution to shared management of the framework.  The framework was dynamic and interactive in that providers could join or leave as required and dependent on Care Quality Commission inspections.

     

    Mr Jonathan Essex had submitted a written question relating to this report and this and the written response were published as a supplement to the agenda.  Mr Essex also asked if it was the ambition to try to get as many placements in the County and that this should be a priority for the framework even though it may be more expensive.  The Cabinet Member responded that it was the Council’s ambition to reduce out of county placements where this was appropriate.  Where this may not be appropriate was for those that lived on the borders.  It was therefore more about being closer to home.  There was also a campaign to greatly increase the number of foster care provision across the county.

     

    RESOLVED:

     

    1. That following consideration of the available options, the results of the procurement process, and commercially sensitive information provided in Part 2 of the report, approval was given for the Council to enter into a regional Framework Partnership Agreement for children’s residential provision (led by Southampton City Council) for the period 1 September 2018 – 31 August 2024.

     

    1. That delegated authority be given to the Assistant Director(s) of Children’s Services to ‘call off’ this framework in order to place looked after children in external  ...  view the full minutes text for item 126/18

127/18

Provision of Soft Facilities Management Services for Orbis Property pdf icon PDF 112 KB

    The Council has a number of contracts (13) expiring between October 2018 and March 2019 all related to the provision of Soft Facilities Management services. These contracts are required to allow the Council to safely and compliantly operate its property assets, such as corporate offices, libraries, adult and children’s social care facilities and Surrey Fire & Rescue properties.

     

    This report sets out the options that have been considered after analysis of current arrangements and market intelligence, sets out the current procurement procedure underway to support the strategy and seeks approval through delegation to the Executive Director and Leader of the Council to award contracts for these services once the procurement and evaluation process is complete and allow for a smooth transition of services to new providers.

     

    [The decisions on this item can be called in by the Corporate Overview Select Committee]

     

    Additional documents:

    Decision:

    RESOLVED:

     

    1.    That the approach outlined in the report was approved.

     

    2.    That authority be delegated the Executive Director of Economy, Growth & Commercial , in consultation with the Leader of the Council, to award contracts for Surrey County Council and appoint Service Providers (suppliers) to provide a range of Soft Facilities Management Services to Orbis Property Services internal and external customers.

     

    Reason for decision:

     

    The current arrangements for the services expire at intervals between 31 October 2018 and 31 March 2019.  The contracts which expire first are:

     

    ·         Pest Control – 30 September 2018

    ·         Building and Washroom Cleaning – 31 October 2018

    ·         Window Cleaning – 31 October 2018

    ·         Manned & Patrol Security – 31 October 2018

     

    Of the above contracts Building and Washroom Cleaning has potential for significant transfer of staff from more than one contractor to another and therefore requires a well-planned mobilisation and transition period.  Manned and Patrol Security also has some staff transfer implications.  The minimum time considered desirable for this would be two months. This means that the above contracts needed to be awarded by the end of August 2018.

     

    [The decisions on this item can be called in by the Corporate Overview Select Committee]

     

    Minutes:

    The Cabinet Lead Member for Corporate Support introduced this report that described how the Council had a number of contracts (13) expiring between October 2018 and March 2019 all related to the provision of Soft Facilities Management services. These contracts provided the following services:

     

    a)         Grounds Maintenance & Arboriculture Services

    b)         Cleaning – Building and Washrooms

    c)         Cleaning – Windows

    d)         Pest Control

    e)         Waste Collection

    f)          Waste Collection – Confidential

    g)         Security – Manned Guarding and Patrols

    h)         CCTV & Access Control Servicing and Maintenance

     

    These services were required to allow the Council to safely and compliantly operate its property assets, such as corporate offices, libraries, adult and children’s social care facilities and Surrey Fire & Rescue properties.

     

    In September 2015, Surrey County Council Cabinet approved the business plan for to establish a public sector partnership to create an integrated business services organisation called Orbis delivering business and support services to each authority.

     

    Officers from each of the three partner Councils had redesigned the specifications and performance standards currently in place to create consistent output based requirements.  This would drive these services to be delivered with optimum use of resources and allow suppliers to determine innovative solutions which would be flexible to meet the standards required and customers who received the service.  In response to a Member query she reported that each of the three councils involved would maintain their sovereignty and Orbis would monitor quality control more closely in order to maintain confidence.

     

    Three options were considered for the procurement of these contracts based on analysis and the intelligence received from the market and public sector partners:

     

    ·         Option 1: Procurement of a Total Facilities Management (TFM) service provider. (This would entail offering all of the services and others currently not in scope (such as helpdesk, porterage and caretaking) under a single provider across all partners.)

    ·         Option 2: Procurement of single service provider for each, or a combination of the services (For example procure a single cleaning provider for all three partner Councils, or procure a single combined waste collection, confidential waste and pest control provider for all three Councils)

    ·         Option 3: (The approved option) Design a flexible procurement process which allowed suppliers to bid for any combination of the services, and for any sovereign authority (for example Grounds Maintenance in Surrey and / or East Sussex, or Cleaning and Pest Control in Surrey only etc.)

    The Cabinet Member reiterated that it was the management of services to be brought back in-house and that direct provision would be undertaken locally.  The contracts were to be let on an initial 3 year period, with the option to extend for up to 2 further years. This would allow Property Services to review the delivery of the integrated services model in the medium term and whether further opportunities to deliver financial and non-financial benefits emerge.

     

    RESOLVED:

     

    1.    That Option 3: Design a flexible procurement process which allowed suppliers to bid for any combination of the services, and for any sovereign authority was approved as  ...  view the full minutes text for item 127/18

128/18

Surrey Heartlands Sustainability and Transformation Partnership pdf icon PDF 113 KB

    Surrey County Council is playing an important role in the three Sustainability and

    Transformation Partnerships across Surrey.  On 31 October 2017 the Cabinet considered a report regarding the Sustainability and Transformation Partnerships in Surrey with a focus on the work that had begun to implement the devolution agreement for Surrey Heartlands.

     

    This report provides a further update on the progress that has been made in implementing the Surrey Heartlands devolution agreement and asks the Cabinet to endorse the next steps, including the pooling of budgets with NHS partners in an agreement under s75 of the National Health Service Act 2006 (s75 agreement) as part of a more joined up and integrated health and social care system.

     

    [The decisions on this item can be called in by the Health Integration & Commissioning Select Committee]

     

    Additional documents:

    Decision:

    RESOLVED:

     

    1. That the progress made between the Council and health partners in Surrey Heartlands be noted and the direction of travel towards a devolved health and care system noted.

     

    1. That the following Council budgets be pooled with the Surrey Heartlands CCG budgets under a 3 years.75 agreement:

    ·         The Surrey Heartlands proportion of the Council’s budget for adult social care and public health

    ·         The Surrey Heartlands proportion of the Council’s budgets relating to children’s community health services and Child and Adolescent Mental Health Services.

     

    1. That the phased approach being proposed to creating a devolved health and care system by entering in to a s75 agreement but with appropriate safeguards in year one of the agreement including no transfer of additional financial risk to (or from) the Council and with the Council hosting the pooled budgets was noted.

     

    1. That the intention to delegate within the agreement authority to the Surrey Heartlands Joint Committee to take commissioning decisions in relation to the functional areas included was noted, and that the Leader of the Council approve the final detailed delegations before the agreement was completed.

     

    1. That authority be delegated to the Executive Director for Children, Families and Learning and Executive Director for Health, Wellbeing and Social Care, in consultation with the Cabinet Members for People, Adults and Children, to approve a ‘section 75’ agreement with the Surrey Heartlands Clinical Commissioning Groups.

     

    1. To continue to develop plans with local government being at the centre of the delivery model which would ensure the wider determinants of health and wellbeing were met, truly changing the life outcomes of some of our most vulnerable residents and to call upon the Secretary of State to devolve all necessary powers to this Council to ensure that ambition was delivered.

     

    Reason for decisions:

     

    Sustainability and Transformation Partnerships played a pivotal role in shaping the future health and care priorities and landscape. In the eight months since the last Surrey Heartlands update to the Cabinet, significant progress has been made in the development of the devolution arrangements for Surrey Heartlands.

     

    Devolution and the integration of health and social care were key mechanisms for enabling the Surrey Heartlands Health and Care Partnership to achieve its aims and ambitions, and were aligned to the draft vision for Surrey in 2030 endorsed by the County Council at its meeting on 22 May 2018.

     

    [The decisions on this item can be called in by the Health Integration & Commissioning Select Committee]

     

    Minutes:

    The Cabinet Lead Member for People presented this report that described how the Council was playing an important role in the three Sustainability and

    Transformation Partnerships (STPs) across Surrey.  It also provided a further update on the progress that had been made in implementing the Surrey Heartlands (SH) devolution agreement and asked the Cabinet to endorse the next steps, including the pooling of budgets with NHS partners in an agreement under s75 of the National Health Service Act 2006 (section 75 agreement) as part of a more joined up and integrated health and social care system.

     

    He stated that the Secretary of State was to consider devolving responsibility and resources in order that there could be greater freedom on how services were delivered.  He also pointed out that the finer detail of the S75 agreements would be reported at a future meeting.

     

    Mr Jonathan Essex, Member for Redhill East sought assurances and an update for the other STPs that were not part of Surrey Heartlands.  The Leader and Cabinet Members gave brief updates on the position in relation to the STPs and how they were progressing.  The Leader also reported that he and the Chief Executive met with Jeremy Hunt MP, before he changed roles, who was enthusiastic about Surrey Heartlands becoming a joint commissioning authority and he had been asked to bring back a plan to the new Health Secretary.

     

    RESOLVED:

     

    1. That the progress made between the Council and health partners in Surrey Heartlands and the direction of travel towards a devolved health and care system be noted.

     

    1. That the following Council budgets be pooled with the Surrey Heartlands CCG budgets under a 3 years.75 agreement:

    ·         The Surrey Heartlands proportion of the Council’s budget for adult social care and public health

    ·         The Surrey Heartlands proportion of the Council’s budgets relating to children’s community health services and Child and Adolescent Mental Health Services.

     

    1. That the phased approach being proposed to creating a devolved health and care system by entering in to a s75 agreement but with appropriate safeguards in year one of the agreement including no transfer of additional financial risk to (or from) the Council and with the Council hosting the pooled budgets was noted.

     

    1. That the intention to delegate within the agreement authority to the Surrey Heartlands Joint Committee to take commissioning decisions in relation to the functional areas included was noted, and that the Leader of the Council approve the final detailed delegations before the agreement was completed.

     

    1. That authority be delegated to the Executive Director for Children, Families and Learning and Executive Director for Health, Wellbeing and Social Care, in consultation with the Cabinet Members for People, Adults and Children, to approve a ‘section 75’ agreement with the Surrey Heartlands Clinical Commissioning Groups.

     

    1. To continue to develop plans with local government being at the centre of the delivery model which would ensure the wider determinants of health and wellbeing were met, truly changing the life outcomes of some of our most vulnerable residents and to  ...  view the full minutes text for item 128/18

129/18

Annual Report of the Shareholder Board pdf icon PDF 80 KB

    As part of its strategy to innovate in developing new models of delivery and to benefit from the freedoms introduced by the Localism Act, Surrey County Council has made investments and created trading companies to deliver income and efficiencies and in doing so has established a Shareholder Board, which reports annually to the Council.   The purpose of the Board is to safeguard the council’s interest as shareholder and to take decisions in matters that require the approval of the Council as owner of a company. 

     

     [The decisions on this item can be called in by the Highways & Growth Select Committee]

     

    Additional documents:

    Decision:

    RESOLVED:

     

    That the Annual Report of the Shareholder Board, attached as Annex A to the submitted report, be endorsed and that the Cabinet present the report to Council at its meeting on 9 October 2018.

     

    Reasons for Decision:

     

    To inform the Council about the activities of the Shareholder Board. 

     

    The Shareholder Board has been established in accordance with best practice governance to ensure effective oversight and alignment with the strategic objectives and values of the Council.

     

    [The decisions on this item can be called in by the Highways & Growth Select Committee]

     

    Minutes:

    The Leader noted the report submitted with the agenda and that as part of its strategy to innovate in developing new models of delivery, and to benefit from the freedoms introduced by the Localism Act, the Council had made investments and created trading companies to deliver income and efficiencies and in doing so had established a Shareholder Board, which reported annually to the Council.   The purpose of the Board was to safeguard the Council’s interest as shareholder and to take decisions in matters that require the approval of the Council as owner of a company. 

     

    In response to a Cabinet Member query about measurement of outcomes being part of the governance role it was explained that the Shareholder Board was not responsible for the running of day to day affairs and that achievements were on target which the Board were pleased with.  It was also stated that by increased outcome targets also meant increasing the risks.

     

    RESOLVED:

     

    That the Annual Report of the Shareholder Board be endorsed and that Cabinet present the report to Council at its meeting on 9 October 2018.

     

    Reasons for Decision:

     

    To inform the Council about the activities of the Shareholder Board. 

     

    The Shareholder Board has been established in accordance with best practice governance to ensure effective oversight and alignment with the strategic objectives and values of the Council.

     

130/18

Monthly Budget Monitoring Report pdf icon PDF 86 KB

    This report presents the council’s financial position for 2018/19 at the end of June 2018. The context for the report is the Annual County Council report on Developing a Vision for Surrey in 2030.

     

    Annex 1 to this report details the overall and directorate financial position for: revenue budget, savings, pressures and capital programme; balance sheet, reserves, debt and treasury management.  Annex 2 shows the progress of the MTFP savings projects for 2018/19.

     

    [The decisions on this item can be called in by the Corporate Overview Select Committee]

     

    Additional documents:

    Decision:

    RESOLVED:

     

    1.    That the Council’s overall budget position as at 30 June 2018 was noted:

    ·         £11.8m forecast revenue year end overspend,

    ·         £65.5m forecast planned MTFP savings, against £66.0m target,

    ·         £15m increase in pressures against £108m anticipated, and

    ·         £31.4m forecast service capital programme year end underspend.

     

    2.    That officers be requested to report the next Cabinet meeting on plans to bring the 2018/19 budget back into balance.

     

    3.    That the measures to achieve £15m additional in-year savings outlined in Annex 1, paragraphs 6 to 8 of the submitted report was approved.

     

    Reason 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 Corporate Overview Select Committee]

     

    Minutes:

    The Leader of the Council introduced the monthly budget monitoring report and explained how the Council was facing considerable continuing budget pressures, both from cuts to funding but most significantly because of increases in demand for services, especially in social care.

     

    He further explained that this year’s budget was balanced through the significant use of one-off sources of funding, including taking £21m from reserves and that this could not continue.  To make the Council’s finances sustainable he had requested the Chief Executive to lead a programme to transform the Council to deliver sustainable services to residents from next year.

     

    He also said that after the first three months of this financial year, the Council had forecasted a significant £12m overspend.  This was largely due to significant budget pressures faced in services for children with special educational needs and disabilities and Surrey was not alone in this.  Nationally, demand for these services continued to be exceptional and Surrey’s increase in demand was similar to the South East average.    However, due to the volumes, the estimated impact on this year’s budget was a £30m increase in costs. The service has identified measures to reduce this by £15m, and was developing mitigating plans as part of its sustainability business case but this currently left a £15m gap, which was driving the forecast overspend.

     

    He went on to say that because of the continued budget pressures faced next year he wanted to ensure that the Council start it in the best financial shape that it could. Following a request, officers had proposed an additional £15m in-year savings that will reduce spending this year, and also in future years.  The Council were also extending the programme of deep dive reviews to increase the confidence from Council plans.  This month the Council would review further progress with this year’s savings programme, next year’s overall savings programme and the capital programme.  Reports on progress and findings would be received at the next Cabinet meeting.

     

    He finished by stating that residents deserved services from this Council that met their needs and provided value for money, and that is what he and fellow Cabinet Members were focused on achieving.

     

    Other Cabinet Members were given the opportunity to highlight key points and issues from their portfolios.

     

    RESOLVED:

     

    1. That the Council’s overall budget position as at 30 June 2018 was noted:

    ·         £11.8m forecast revenue year end overspend,

    ·         £65.5m forecast planned MTFP savings, against £66.0m target,

    ·         £15m increase in pressures against £108m anticipated, and

    ·         £31.4m forecast service capital programme year end underspend.

     

    1. That officers be requested to report the next Cabinet meeting on plans to bring the 2018/19 budget back into balance.

     

    1. That the measures to achieve £15m additional in-year savings as set out below (outlined in Annex 1, paragraphs 6 to 8 of the submitted report) was approved:

     

     

    ‘This report has already highlighted the financial risks faced by the Council this year, and the continuing budget challenges for next year and for the future. To mitigate these risks the Council has  ...  view the full minutes text for item 130/18

131/18

Cross Party Review of Local and Joint Committees pdf icon PDF 90 KB

    Cabinet is invited to consider and respond to the conclusions and recommendations contained within the report of the Cross-Party Review of Local and Joint Committees.

     

    [The decisions on this item can be called in by the Environment Select Committee]

     

    Additional documents:

    Decision:

    RESOLVED:

     

    1. That following full consideration of the findings and their implications, to respond and take forward any changes as part of the wider transformation programme.

    ·         As part of this, Cabinet agreed to work with the Community Partnership Team, the Cross-Party Review Group and Legal and Democratic Services to take forward the recommendations.

    ·         Work continued to create joint committees across Surrey.

     

    1. Cabinet thanked the members of the Cross-Party Review Group, and staff, for the diligent work they have undertaken in completing the review.

     

    Reason for decisions:

     

    A cross-party review of local and joint committees (LCs/JCs) was established at the direction of the Leader, under the Chairmanship of County Councillor Mary Angell, to review the current model of LCs/JCs, and to make recommendations to Cabinet as to how it can improve joint working and engagement with residents.

     

    The Review Group, consisting of County Councillors Mary Angell (Lead), Will Forster, Tim Hall, Jeff Harris and Ernest Mallett had now completed its review and made a number of recommendations for Cabinet consideration.

     

    The Review Group had undertaken a wide-reaching and detailed review, and the findings highlighted a number of areas where the County Council could be proud of its local engagement and devolved decision making structures, which represented best practice nationally.

     

    The review had also identified areas for improvement and the report made a number of recommendations for Cabinet to consider.

     

    The Council was embarking on a wholesale transformation programme to address the unprecedented demand and financial challenges it faced. In light of this, it was important that Cabinet gave careful and thorough consideration to the report and its findings, before determining how to address them.

     

    [The decisions on this item can be called in by the Environment Select Committee]

     

    Minutes:

    The Cabinet Member for Community Services introduced this report that detailed a thorough and in-depth review of local and joint committees and set a number of recommendations for consideration.  She explained the historical context in the lead up to this review which was requested by the Leader of the Council.  Thanks was extended to members of the Review Group and staff for the diligent work and support in undertaking this work.

     

    The Leader stated that it was a good report, open and honest and sometimes hard-hitting.

     

    The Chair of the Review Group, Mrs Mary Angell, supported by Mr Tim Hall explained the support the Group had received from staff, Members and the Leader in this process.  She stated that Surrey had a good framework currently but improvements could be made.  She also said that all comments in the report were each given by at least three different people.

     

    There was much support for the review from many Cabinet Members who spoke of things such as local committees becoming joint committees giving ownership and responsibility to those committees and not just being ‘talking shops’.  They also looked forward to the follow up work and working with districts and boroughs.

     

    The Cabinet Member for Community Services tabled a revision to the published recommendations which was accepted by the Cabinet.

     

    RESOLVED:

     

    1. That following full consideration of the findings and their implications, to respond and take forward any changes as part of the wider transformation programme.

    ·         As part of this, Cabinet agreed to work with the Community Partnership Team, the Cross-Party Review Group and Legal and Democratic Services to take forward the recommendations.

    ·         Work continued to create joint committees across Surrey.

     

    1. Cabinet thanked the members of the Cross-Party Review Group, and staff, for the diligent work they have undertaken in completing the review.

     

    Reason for decisions:

     

    A cross-party review of local and joint committees (LCs/JCs) was established at the direction of the Leader, under the Chairmanship of County Councillor Mary Angell, to review the current model of LCs/JCs, and to make recommendations to Cabinet as to how it could improve joint working and engagement with residents.

     

    The Review Group, consisted of County Councillors Mary Angell (Lead), Will Forster, Tim Hall, Jeff Harris and Ernest Mallett had completed its review and made a number of recommendations for Cabinet consideration.

     

    The Review Group had undertaken a wide-reaching and detailed review, and the findings highlighted a number of areas where the County Council could be proud of its local engagement and devolved decision making structures, which represented best practice nationally.

     

    The review had also identified areas for improvement and the report made a number of recommendations for Cabinet to consider.

     

    The Council had embarked on a wholesale transformation programme to address the unprecedented demand and financial challenges it faced. In light of this, it was important that Cabinet gave careful and thorough consideration to the report and its findings, before determining how to address them.

     

132/18

Economic Growth Through Investment in Infrastructure: EM3 Area - Project A) Woking Sustainable Transport Package Phase 1, Project B) A30 London Road, Camberley, Project C) Blackwater Valley (Gold Grid) Quality Bus Corridor Improvements pdf icon PDF 116 KB

    A key strategic goal in Surrey County Council’s (SCC) Corporate Strategy is the commitment to promoting Economic Prosperity to ensure Surrey’s economy remains strong and sustainable, whilst delivering on Wellbeing and Resident Experience.  Securing funding to support an infrastructure investment programme is a key part of this goal.

     

    As part of this investment programme SCC has been working in partnership with Woking Borough Council (WBC) to support the development and delivery of the Woking Sustainable Transport Package (Phase 1), Surrey Heath Borough Council (SHBC) to support the development and delivery of the A30 London Road / Camberley Town Centre Highway Improvements and Hampshire County Council and bus operator Stagecoach in developing the business case for the Blackwater Valley (Gold Grid) Quality Bus Corridor Improvements.

     

    Surrey County Council are preparing and leading on these three business cases for submission to the Enterprise M3 Local Enterprise Partnership (EM3 LEP) during August 2018, in respect of the following projects:

     

    A.    Woking Sustainable Transport Package Phase 1

    B.    A30 London Road / Camberley Town Centre: Highway Improvements

    C.   Blackwater Valley (Gold Grid) Quality Bus Corridor Improvements

     

    [The decisions on this item can be called in by the Highways & Growth Select Committee]

     

    Additional documents:

    Decision:

    RESOLVED:

     

    1.    That the submission of business case to the EM3 LEP for Project A) Woking Sustainable Transport Package Phase 1 (all Local Contribution being provided by Woking Borough Council) was approved.

     

    2.    That the submission of business case to the EM3 LEP for Project B) A30 London Road / Camberley Town Centre: Highway Improvements was approved.

     

    3.    That £0.480m of local contribution from Surrey County Council, where Surrey Heath Borough Council has already committed £0.770m towards this project was approved.

     

    4.    That the proposed change to the A30 bus lane, subject to the Traffic Regulation Order process, was approved.

     

    5.    That the submission of business case to the EM3 LEP for Project C) Blackwater Valley (Gold Grid) Quality Bus Corridor Improvements (all Local Contribution being provided by the bus operator Stagecoach) was approved.

     

    Reason for decision:

     

    Inadequate transport infrastructure was identified as the biggest barrier to economic growth in the county. If these bids were successful, the EM3 LEP would contribute up to 75% of the capital scheme cost, with the remainder to be provided as match funding from Woking Borough Council (Project A), Surrey Heath Borough Council and Surrey County Council (Project B) and Bus operator Stagecoach (Project C). 

     

    [The decisions on this item can be called in by the Highways & Growth Select Committee]

     

    Minutes:

    The Cabinet Member for Environment and Transport presented this report to Members and highlighted details of each of the three projects described for approval.  He explained that a key strategic goal in Surrey County Council’s Corporate Strategy is the commitment to promote economic prosperity to ensure Surrey’s economy remains strong and sustainable, whilst delivering on wellbeing and resident experience.  Securing funding to support an infrastructure investment programme was a key part of this goal.

     

    As part of this investment programme Surrey County Council had been working in partnership with Woking Borough Council to support the development and delivery of the Woking Sustainable Transport Package (Phase 1), Surrey Heath Borough Council to support the development and delivery of the A30 London Road / Camberley Town Centre Highway Improvements and Hampshire County Council and bus operator Stagecoach in developing the business case for the Blackwater Valley (Gold Grid) Quality Bus Corridor Improvements.

     

    The Council had prepared and led on these three business cases for submission to the Enterprise M3 Local Enterprise Partnership (EM3 LEP) during August 2018, in respect of the following projects:

     

    A)   Woking Sustainable Transport Package Phase 1

    B)   A30 London Road / Camberley Town Centre: Highway Improvements

    C)   Blackwater Valley (Gold Grid) Quality Bus Corridor Improvements

     

    Cabinet were particularly pleased that Surrey would have Euro buses as part of a project which was good for sustainability and air pollution.

     

    RESOLVED:

     

    1. That the submission of business case to the EM3 LEP for Project A) Woking Sustainable Transport Package Phase 1 (all Local Contribution being provided by Woking Borough Council) was approved.

     

    1. That the submission of business case to the EM3 LEP for Project B) A30 London Road / Camberley Town Centre: Highway Improvements was approved.

     

    1. That £0.480m of local contribution from Surrey County Council, where Surrey Heath Borough Council has already committed £0.770m towards this project was approved.

     

    1. That the proposed change to the A30 bus lane, subject to the Traffic Regulation Order process, was approved.

     

    1. That the submission of business case to the EM3 LEP for Project C) Blackwater Valley (Gold Grid) Quality Bus Corridor Improvements (all Local Contribution being provided by the bus operator Stagecoach) was approved.

     

    Reason for decision:

     

    Inadequate transport infrastructure was identified as the biggest barrier to economic growth in the county. If these bids were successful, the EM3 LEP would contribute up to 75% of the capital scheme cost, with the remainder to be provided as match funding from Woking Borough Council (Project A), Surrey Heath Borough Council and Surrey County Council (Project B) and Bus operator Stagecoach (Project C). 

133/18

Annual Governance Statement 2017/18 pdf icon PDF 86 KB

    The Annual Governance Statement provides a comprehensive assessment of the council’s governance arrangements.  Once signed by the Leader of the Council and the Chief Executive, the Annual Governance Statement is incorporated in the Statement of Accounts.

     

    [The decisions on this item can be called in by the Corporate Overview Select Committee]

     

     

    Additional documents:

    Decision:

    RESOLVED:

     

    1.    That the 2017/18 Annual Governance Statement (Annex A to the submitted report) was approved and signed by the Leader of the Council and the Chief Executive for inclusion in the Statement of Accounts; and

     

    2.    That the Audit and Governance Committee continue to monitor the governance environment and report to the Cabinet, Cabinet Member or Select Committee as appropriate.

     

    Reason for decision:

     

    There was a statutory duty to annually review and report on governance through an Annual Governance Statement.  The identification of areas for focus and continuous improvement ensured high standards of governance.

     

    [The decisions on this item can be called in by the Corporate Overview Select Committee]

     

    Minutes:

    The Leader presented the Annual Governance Statement that provided a comprehensive assessment of the council’s governance arrangements.  The layout was now more succinct and accessible.  Members were urged to cut and paste relevant sections for use on social media.

     

    Once signed by the Leader of the Council and the Chief Executive, the Annual Governance Statement would be incorporated in the Statement of Accounts.

     

    RESOLVED:

     

    1. That the 2017/18 Annual Governance Statement (attached as Annex A to these minutes) was approved and signed by the Leader of the Council and the Chief Executive for inclusion in the Statement of Accounts; and

     

    1. That the Audit and Governance Committee continue to monitor the governance environment and report to the Cabinet, Cabinet Member or Select Committee as appropriate.

     

    Reason for decision:

     

    There was a statutory duty to annually review and report on governance through an Annual Governance Statement.  The identification of areas for focus and continuous improvement ensured high standards of governance.

     

134/18

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:

    Decision:

    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.

     

    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.

     

135/18

Full cost charge for older people services

    This is a stand-alone Part 2 report.

     

    Exempt: Not for publication under 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 Lifelong Learning Select Committee]

     

    Decision:

    RESOLVED:

     

    1.    To note that this Part 2 report was not for publication under Paragraph 3 - Information relating to the financial or business affairs of any particular person (including the authority holding that information)

     

    2.    See [Exempt Minute E-2-18]

     

    Reason for decision:

     

    See [Exempt Minute E-2-18]

     

    [The decisions on this item can be called in by the Adults and Lifelong Learning Select Committee]

     

    Minutes:

    Members considered a Part 2 report that 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 commercially sensitive information to the bidding companies).

     

    RESOLVED:

     

    See [Exempt Minute E-2-18]

     

    Reason for decision:

     

    See [Exempt Minute E-2-18]

     

136/18

Regional Framework for Children's Residential Provision (2018 - 2024)

    This is the Part 2 annex relating to item 8.

     

    Exempt: Not for publication under 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 and Education Select Committee]

     

    Decision:

    RESOLVED:

     

    See Minute 126/18.

     

    Reason for decision:

     

    See Minute 126/18.

    Minutes:

    This Part 2 annex 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 commercially sensitive information to the bidding companies).

     

    The information contained in this report may not be published or circulated beyond this report and will remain sensitive for the duration of the contract.

     

    RESOLVED:

     

    See Minute 126/18.

     

    Reason for decision:

     

    See Minute 126/18.

     

137/18

PUBLICITY FOR PART 2 ITEMS