Agenda, decisions and minutes
PDF 176 KBVenue: 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
Media
| No. | Item |
|---|---|
|
Apologies for Absence
Additional documents: Decision: An apology was received from Mrs Natalie Bramhall. Minutes: An apology was received from Mrs Natalie Bramhall. |
|
|
Minutes of Previous Meeting: 17 December 2019
Additional documents: Decision: The Minutes of the meeting held on 17 December 2019 were agreed as a correct record and signed by the Chairman. Minutes: The Minutes of the meeting held on 17 December 2019 were agreed as a correct record and signed by the Chairman. |
|
|
Declarations of Interest
Additional documents: Decision: There were none. Minutes: There were none. |
|
Additional documents: Decision: There was one question from Mr Will Forster. This and the response were published as a supplement to the agenda. Minutes: There was one question from Mr Will Forster who did not attend the meeting. This and the response were published as a supplement to the agenda. |
|
|
Public Questions
Additional documents: Minutes: There were none. |
|
|
Petitions
Additional documents: Minutes: There were none. |
|
|
Representations received on reports to be considered in private
Additional documents: Minutes: There were none. |
|
Additional documents: Decision: One report was received from Resources & Performance Committee in relation to Item 7 on the agenda. This and the Cabinet response is attached as an annex.
Minutes: One report was received from Resources & Performance Committee in relation to Item 7 on the agenda. This and the Cabinet response is attached as an annex.
Mr Bill Chapman, Chairman of the Adults & Health Select Committee and Mr Nick Harrison, Chairman of the Performance & Resources Select Committee addressed the meeting in relation to the report.
Mr Chapman explained that the Equalities Impact Assessment (EIA) had not been available to the select committee which affected its ability to properly scrutinise the budget. He said that the main lines of enquiry for the Adults & Health Select Committee over the coming year would be around the impact on residents of programmes put in place. Lastly, he stated that each part of the budget, especially for public health, should be dealt with differently and each part say what service was needed alongside resources needed to deliver the need.
The Cabinet Member for Adults & Public Health responded that there was a need to redesign priorities, apologised for the EIA not being available and thanked Mr Chapman for the feedback and points raised.
Mr Harrison stated that all select committees received a good set of papers on their respective budgets and requested that scrutiny be involved in the budget process much earlier. He thanked Cabinet for the response to the select committees recommendations but also continued to disagree with the principle that RAG (Red-Amber-Green) ratings could not be added at this stage of the budget cycle.
The Leader responded that he wanted select committees to own the transformation programmes as much as Cabinet Members and that he hoped to address issues raised by select committees. He also thought that more may be spent on public transport.
|
|
Additional documents: Decision: RESOLVED:
That two delegated decisions taken by the Committees-in-Common since the last meeting of the Cabinet be noted.
Reason for decision:
To inform the Cabinet of decisions taken by Cabinet Members, Strategic Investment Board and the Committee in Common subcommittee under delegated authority. Minutes: RESOLVED:
That two delegated decisions taken by the Committees-in-Common since the last meeting of the Cabinet be noted.
Reason for decision:
To inform the Cabinet of decisions taken by Cabinet Members, Strategic Investment Board and the Committee in Common subcommittee under delegated authority. |
|
|
2020/21 Final Budget and Medium Term Financial Strategy
Additional documents: Decision: RESOLVED:
That Cabinet makes the following recommendations to Council on 4 February 2020.
Cabinet recommends that Council:
Cabinet recommends that the Audit & Governance Committee: 13. Approve the Treasury Management Strategy and Prudential Indicators (Annex J to the submitted report) which set a framework for the Council’s treasury function to manage risks, source borrowing and invest surplus cash.
Reasons for decision:
Council will meet on 4 February 2020 to agree a budget and to set the Council Tax Precept for 2020/21. Cabinet is required to recommend a budget to Council for consideration at this meeting. ... view the full decision text for item 10/20 Minutes: Cabinet considered the budget report that set out the financial framework within which the Council’s refreshed Organisation Strategy and the next phase of transformation would be delivered. Both the Leader and Cabinet Member for Finance highlighted several areas of the final budget and Medium Term Financial Strategy (MTFS) for recommendation to the Council meeting on 4 February. It was stated that for the first time in 10 years, Central Government funding for the County Council has increased. It was noted that the Council had no confirmation on the funding for future years and the Medium Term Financial Plan had been done on the basis of the current level of funding reducing over the time period. It was also the first time in over 10 years that a balanced budget without the use of reserves could be presented. It was proposed to increase Council Tax by 1.99%, together with the recommended increase from central government of a further 2% to support the funding of the Adult Social Care service.
The Leader highlighted several areas where investment was to be made, for example, roads and pavements, flood alleviation and tackling the climate emergency.
A Member highlighted the listed budget efficiencies and that going forward select committees would be able to scrutinise their delivery through the transformation programmes. Several Members gave thanks to officers and the Cabinet Member for Finance for his and the finance team’s hard work.
RESOLVED:
That Cabinet makes the following recommendations to Council on 4 February 2020.
Cabinet recommends that Council:
|
|
|
Transformation Programme 2020: Next Phase
Additional documents: Decision: RESOLVED:
1. That the council’s refreshed transformation programme be agreed.
2. That the investment required to deliver improved outcomes and financial benefits through transformation will be considered as part of the Medium Term Financial Strategy (MTFS) report to Cabinet (28/01/20) and Council (04/02/20) be noted.
Reason for decision:
The transformation programme, stretching across all aspects of the council’s work, will help to ensure we are enabling better lives and a better place, improving the quality of residents’ lives and reducing the inequality in life expectancy that exists across the county. It will enable the council to respond proactively and effectively to the complex and rapidly changing context we are working in. The programme will also make a significant contribution to achieving the financial sustainability required so that the council can deliver priorities for residents within available resources.
[The decisions on this item can be called in by the Resources and Performance Select Committee]
Minutes: The Leader introduced a report
that set out the reshaped set of transformation portfolios and
programmes that will be delivered to achieve the council’s
strategic ambitions and priorities for residents. Over the last year the council had made good
progress to deliver far reaching and ambitious transformation
across a wide range of services. He
highlighted the eight core themes guiding the strategic priorities
and welcomed scrutiny of these areas over the coming
year. Further to Minute 215/19 (Surrey Schools & Early Years Funding 2020-21) the Cabinet Member for All-Age Learning reported that the Secretary of State had rejected the Council’s request to transfer budget into the High Needs Block.
The Leader went on to say that there were to be 11 public meetings across the county to engage with the public on transformation plans. Dates and venues would be published shortly.
RESOLVED:
1. That the council’s refreshed transformation programme be agreed.
2. That the investment required to deliver improved outcomes and financial benefits through transformation will be considered as part of the Medium Term Financial Strategy (MTFS) report to Cabinet (28/01/20) and Council (04/02/20) be noted.
Reason for decision:
The transformation programme, stretching across all aspects of the council’s work, will help to ensure we are enabling better lives and a better place, improving the quality of residents’ lives and reducing the inequality in life expectancy that exists across the county. It will enable the council to respond proactively and effectively to the complex and rapidly changing context we are working in. The programme will also make a significant contribution to achieving the financial sustainability required so that the council can deliver priorities for residents within available resources.
[The decisions on this item can be called in by the Resources and Performance Select Committee]
|
|
|
Children's Improvement Update
Additional documents: Decision: RESOLVED:
1. That the progress made delivering the Children’s Improvement programme and the findings from the recent Children’s Commissioner Visit and the fourth Ofsted Monitoring Visit be noted.
2.
That the on-going scrutiny arrangements of the
improvement programme for the next 6-12 months as described in
paragraphs 16-24 of the submitted report be reviewed and
agreed.
3.
That Cabinet would review progress in May 2020 on
the delivery of the Children’s improvement programme and the
findings from the April 2020 Ofsted Monitoring Visit be
agreed. Reason for decision:
The next Ofsted Monitoring Visit will take place on 7 and 8 April 2020 with publication of the inspector’s findings in late-April 2020. At this point the service is expected to have greater certainty on whether the Surrey’s children’s services will be ready for a full re-inspection from Ofsted this year.
As outlined in the main section of the report, the improvement programme is progressing well with Surrey’s children’s services successfully delivering the actions from the improvement plan to address Ofsted recommendations from the 2018 full inspection. There are comprehensive scrutiny arrangements already in place for 2020 with involvement from council officers, Members, partner agencies, the Department for Education and other key stakeholders.
[The decisions on this item can be called in by the Children, Families, Lifelong Learning & Culture Select Committee]
Minutes: The Cabinet Member for Children, Young people & Families highlighted several areas of the latest Commissioner’s report and the Ofsted inspection letter. The Commissioner’s view was that “sustainable improvement is underway in the Authority and that an alternative delivery model no longer needs to be a consideration”. Agreement from the Minister on the Commissioner’s recommendation and the publication of the Commissioner’s report was awaited. She also explained that there was still much work to do and keeping up the pace would be a challenge. The Commissioner would become an advisory role to Surrey.
In response to a question about the ‘alternative delivery model’ the Cabinet Member explained that this meant if the Commissioner had found that there was no capacity in the council to take forward improvements then the service could be given over to a charity trust for example. It was also recognised that improvements needed to be made in the experience of those accessing our Special Education Needs & Disabilities services for children and young people and that there was a focus on that improvement also taking place.
Several Member spoke in praise of the work undertaken by the Chief Executive, the Strategic Director and officers in getting this progress.
RESOLVED:
1. That the progress made delivering the Children’s Improvement programme and the findings from the recent Children’s Commissioner Visit and the fourth Ofsted Monitoring Visit be noted.
2.
That the on-going scrutiny arrangements of the
improvement programme for the next 6-12 months as described in
paragraphs 16-24 of the submitted report be reviewed and
agreed.
3.
That Cabinet would review progress in May 2020 on
the delivery of the Children’s improvement programme and the
findings from the April 2020 Ofsted Monitoring Visit be
agreed. Reason for decision:
The next Ofsted Monitoring Visit will take place on 7 and 8 April 2020 with publication of the inspector’s findings in late-April 2020. At this point the service is expected to have greater certainty on whether the Surrey’s children’s services will be ready for a full re-inspection from Ofsted this year.
As outlined in the main section of the report, the improvement programme is progressing well with Surrey’s children’s services successfully delivering the actions from the improvement plan to address Ofsted recommendations from the 2018 full inspection. There are comprehensive scrutiny arrangements already in place for 2020 with involvement from council officers, Members, partner agencies, the Department for Education and other key stakeholders.
[The decisions on this item can be called in by the Children, Families, Lifelong Learning & Culture Select Committee]
|
|
Additional documents: Decision: RESOLVED:
That Cabinet make the following recommendations to the Council on 4 February 2020.
Recommendation 1 That priority is introduced for children of staff for September 2021.
Reasons for decision · there was overwhelming support for this proposal · it will help community and voluntary controlled schools with staff recruitment and retention · it is permitted under the School Admissions Code · the definition of children of staff is compliant with the Code · it will put community and voluntary controlled schools on an equal footing with those academies, foundation, free, trust and voluntary aided schools which already give priority for children of staff
Recommendation 2 That the Published Admission Number (PAN) for Reception at Worplesdon Primary School is decreased from 60 to 57 for September 2021.
Reasons for decision · It will enable children admitted to the Special Education Needs & Disabilities (SEND) specialist centre to be educated in the mainstream class more than 50% of the time · It will reduce the likelihood of the school having to take qualifying measures to meet infant class size legislation · It is supported by the Headteacher and Governing Body of the school · There will still be sufficient places for local children if the PAN is decreased · It will have no impact on children who are currently on roll at the school
Recommendation 3 That no changes are made to the assessment of nearest school for 2021 admission.
Reasons for decision · It will allow time for a wider review of the use and definition of nearest school ahead of consultation for 2022 admission · It will enable parents to have some historical benchmark by which to make informed decisions about their school preferences for 2021 admission
Recommendation 4 That the Published Admission Numbers (PANs) for September 2021 for all other community and voluntary controlled schools (excluding Worplesdon Primary School which is covered by Recommendation 2) are determined as they are set out in Appendix 1 of Enclosure 1.
Reasons for decision · Most other PANs remain as they were determined for 2020 which enables parents to have some historical benchmark by which to make informed decisions about their school preferences for 2021 admission · The PAN for Ash Manor School has been increased from 210 to 240 as part of a planned expansion · The School Commissioning team supports the PANs
Recommendation 5 That the aspects of Surrey’s admission arrangements for community and voluntary controlled schools for September 2021 for which no change has been consulted on, are agreed as set out in Enclosure 1 and its appendices.
Reasons for decision · The existing arrangements are working well · This will ensure stability and consistency for the majority of Surrey’s parents, pupils and schools · The arrangements enable parents to have some historical benchmark by which to make informed decisions about their school preferences · The arrangements enable the majority of pupils to attend their nearest schools and in doing so reduce travel and support Surrey’s sustainability policies · The changes highlighted in bold in sections 14 and 15 of Enclosure 1, which have not otherwise been referenced in ... view the full decision text for item 13/20 Minutes: The Cabinet Member for All-Age Learning explained this annual report and highlighted the changes that were contained in the recommendations.
The Cabinet Member for Children, Young People & Families asked a question about what the council was able to do in relation to infant class size in relation to children under Special Guardianship Orders (SGO). The Cabinet Member for All-Age Learning responded that the council were not allowed to change infant class size limits for SGO children unless they came under the definition of Looked After Children (LAC) or had left LAC to become SGO.
RESOLVED:
That Cabinet make the following recommendations to the Council on 4 February 2020.
Recommendation 1 That priority is introduced for children of staff for September 2021.
Reasons for decision · there was overwhelming support for this proposal · it will help community and voluntary controlled schools with staff recruitment and retention · it is permitted under the School Admissions Code · the definition of children of staff is compliant with the Code · it will put community and voluntary controlled schools on an equal footing with those academies, foundation, free, trust and voluntary aided schools which already give priority for children of staff
Recommendation 2 That the Published Admission Number (PAN) for Reception at Worplesdon Primary School is decreased from 60 to 57 for September 2021.
Reasons for decision · It will enable children admitted to the Special Education Needs & Disabilities (SEND) specialist centre to be educated in the mainstream class more than 50% of the time · It will reduce the likelihood of the school having to take qualifying measures to meet infant class size legislation · It is supported by the Headteacher and Governing Body of the school · There will still be sufficient places for local children if the PAN is decreased · It will have no impact on children who are currently on roll at the school
Recommendation 3 That no changes are made to the assessment of nearest school for 2021 admission.
Reasons for decision · It will allow time for a wider review of the use and definition of nearest school ahead of consultation for 2022 admission · It will enable parents to have some historical benchmark by which to make informed decisions about their school preferences for 2021 admission
Recommendation 4 That the Published Admission Numbers (PANs) for September 2021 for all other community and voluntary controlled schools (excluding Worplesdon Primary School which is covered by Recommendation 2) are determined as they are set out in Appendix 1 of Enclosure 1.
Reasons for decision · Most other PANs remain as they were determined for 2020 which enables parents to have some historical benchmark by which to make informed decisions about their school preferences for 2021 admission · The PAN for Ash Manor School has been increased from 210 to 240 as part of a planned expansion · The School Commissioning team supports the PANs
Recommendation 5 That the aspects of Surrey’s admission arrangements for community and voluntary controlled schools for September 2021 for which no change has been consulted on, are agreed as ... view the full minutes text for item 13/20 |
|
|
2019/20 Month 8 (November) Financial Report
Additional documents: Decision: RESOLVED:
1. That the amended capital budget of £122.1m which includes additional works in Epsom Town Centre funded by Epsom & Ewell Borough Council (£1.1m); be noted and approved.
2. That the Council’s forecast revenue and capital budget positions for the year be noted.
Reason for decision
This report is to comply with the agreed policy of providing a monthly budget monitoring report to Cabinet for approval of any necessary actions.
[The decisions on this item can be called in by the Resources and Performance Select Committee]
Minutes: The Cabinet Member for Finance gave a brief overview of the report which reflected progress to achieving a balanced budget without the use of reserves by the end of the financial year. He did however draw attention to two main areas which need continued attention: Special Education Needs & Disabilities and the growing number of residents requiring Adult Social Care services.
RESOLVED:
1. That the amended capital budget of £122.1m which includes additional works in Epsom Town Centre funded by Epsom & Ewell Borough Council (£1.1m); be noted and approved.
2. That the Council’s forecast revenue and capital budget positions for the year be noted.
Reason for decision
This report is to comply with the agreed policy of providing a monthly budget monitoring report to Cabinet for approval of any necessary actions.
[The decisions on this item can be called in by the Resources and Performance Select Committee]
|
|
|
On Street Parking Strategy Review
Additional documents: Decision: RESOLVED:
Cabinet agreed that: 1. That Local and Joint Committees should consider, as part of the parking review process, the introduction of on-street parking charges where appropriate to help improve access to retail areas or other facilities be agreed.
2. That where there is no parking surplus or other funding source to contribute towards a parking review, proposals in the review will be limited to dealing with road safety and obstruction problems rather than parking schemes be agreed.
3. That the council’s intention be advertised, in accordance with the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984 be agreed to make the following changes to on street parking permits:
a. Amend the charge for the first resident permit issued to a household from £50 to £80.
b. Amend the charge for 2nd and subsequent resident permits issued to a household from £75 currently to: · 2nd permit charge £100 · 3rd and subsequent permit charge £130
c. The maximum charge for visitor permits can be set at £3 per day where it is considered appropriate by local or joint committees. (Note: the £2 daily charge remains the default)
d. We introduce a 2 hour visitor permit, to be available in all permit schemes, costing £1 (see recommendation e. for annual eligibility limits)
e. Greater discretion is given to district and borough enforcement teams (and local/joint committees) to set annual visitor permit limits as particular circumstances allow. The maximum however should be set at 150 for daily permits or 250 for 2 hour permits per household per year.
f. Carers permits (as described in annex 1) will be issued for free (currently £10 per year, permits for medical and care professionals remain free)
g. There is no change to our current policy of assessing and providing disabled bays free of charge.
h. We introduce a child care permit (as described in annex 1) at the same rate as a resident permit, the charge dependent on how many resident permits had been issued to the property.
i. The statutory notice includes the intention of the council to increase the charge for annual resident parking permits by £4 every 2 years for 6 years.
4. That following the statutory advertisement of changes described above, the decision to implement the changes be delegated to the Head of Highways & Transport in consultation with the Cabinet Member for Highways.
5. That paper permits be phased out by 2021 with a shift to ‘virtual permits’ to reduce waste and improve convenience be agreed.
6. That new residential developments built within the boundaries of existing permit parking schemes (or CPZ’s) should not automatically qualify for resident permits be agreed and eligibility be determined by a local/joint committee in a parking review or by the Cabinet Member for Highways.
7. That the following changes to charges made for suspensions and waivers be introduced from April 2020: a. The initial charge for a suspension (valid for up to 3 days) be changed from £65 to £75 b. The charge for each additional day that the ... view the full decision text for item 15/20 Minutes: The Cabinet Member for Highways introduced a report that set out changes to the council’s on- street parking strategy that had taken account of changes to national legislation, new technology, environmental considerations and to reduce dangerous parking and help keep traffic moving on Surrey roads. He explained the update of fees and charges for parking permits and on-street parking related services and that whilst it may seem like a big hike in charges, the strategy had not been reviewed for nine years. He also described some of the many benefits of the new strategy.
Mrs Hazel Watson spoke to this item and objected to recommendations 1 and 2 in relation to Mole Valley and described the detrimental impacts this would have to Dorking town centre. The Mole Valley Local Committee had voted unanimously against introducing on-street parking charges. She explained that parking was limited in small clusters over seven sites and the cost of parking machines was prohibitive.
The Cabinet Member for Highways responded that it was for local and joint committees to consider this and no proposals were being made for specific areas. He also stated that Mole Valley operated up to £90K deficit in civil parking enforcement and that it wasn’t appropriate to continue these amounts of deficits going forward without looking at all other options. He and parking officers were happy to talk to local committees.
Several other members spoke in support of the recommendations.
RESOLVED:
Cabinet agreed that:
a. Amend the charge for the first resident permit issued to a household from £50 to £80. b. Amend the charge for 2nd and subsequent resident permits issued to a household from £75 currently to: · 2nd permit charge £100 · 3rd and subsequent permit charge £130 c. The maximum charge for visitor permits can be set at £3 per day where it is considered appropriate by local or joint committees. (Note: the £2 daily charge remains the default) d. We introduce a 2 hour visitor permit, to be available in all permit schemes, costing £1 (see recommendation e. for annual eligibility limits) e. Greater discretion is given to district and borough enforcement teams (and local/joint committees) to set annual visitor permit limits as particular circumstances allow. The maximum however should be set at 150 for daily permits or 250 for 2 hour permits per household per year. f. Carers permits (as described in annex 1) will be issued for free ... view the full minutes text for item 15/20 |
|
|
Mental Health Review Programme
Additional documents: Decision: RESOLVED:
That the priorities and work programme for phase 2 of the Mental Health Programme Review be approved.
Reason for decision:
Meeting our requirements under the Care Act and delivering the transformation programme for Mental Health requires significant work to reshape commissioning and operational practice as the service has not established a clear professional identity within the previous arrangements. This needs to be managed whilst also undertaking and embedding the organisational development required so that ASC Mental Health can be viewed as a key partner and contributor to the fast developing landscape of Health and social care. The phase 2 programme will enable us to achieve this.
[The decisions on this item can be called in by the Adults & Health Select Committee]
Minutes: The Cabinet Member for Adults & Public Health introduced this report that set out how Following a review of Mental Health arrangements for the commissioning and delivery of Adult Social Care (ASC) Mental Health services phase 2 of the Mental Health Programme Review could now take place. This work was designed to bring about the strategic and operational changes needed to deliver services that were consistent with our obligations under the Care Act and achieve our ambition to be at the forefront of best practice and to establish a clear Mental Health professional identity. This report described the ambitions and timetable for phase 2.
Mr Chris Botten spoke to this item and stated that it was one of the most significant pieces of transformation and was pleased with the report. He believed there was a S75 steering group that was monitoring the progress of this work and suggested that it might be helpful if there was Member representation on it. He would be willing to undertake the role, if Cabinet thought it would be helpful. The Cabinet Member for Adults & Public Health said she would contact Mr Botten to develop this idea.
RESOLVED:
That the priorities and work programme for phase 2 of the Mental Health Programme Review be approved.
Reason for decision:
Meeting our requirements under the Care Act and delivering the transformation programme for Mental Health requires significant work to reshape commissioning and operational practice as the service has not established a clear professional identity within the previous arrangements. This needs to be managed whilst also undertaking and embedding the organisational development required so that ASC Mental Health can be viewed as a key partner and contributor to the fast developing landscape of Health and social care. The phase 2 programme will enable us to achieve this.
[The decisions on this item can be called in by the Adults & Health Select Committee]
Miss Alison Griffiths left the meeting at the close of discussion on this item.
|
|
|
ANNUAL PROCUREMENT FORWARD PLAN 2020/21
Additional documents: Decision: RESOLVED:
1. That approval to Procure for the projects listed in Annex 1 – “Annual Procurement Forward Plan for 2020/21” in accordance with the Council’s Procurement and Contract Standing Orders was approved.
2. That where the first ranked tender for any projects listed in Annex 1 is within the +/-5% budgetary tolerance level, the relevant Executive Director, Director or Head of Service (as appropriate) is authorised to award such contracts was agreed.
3. That the procurement activity that will be returned to Cabinet for review of the commissioning and procurement strategy prior to going out to market, and which is highlighted in grey in Annex 1 was agreed.
Reasons for decision: To comply with the Procurement and Contract Standing Orders agreed by Council in May 2019. To provide Cabinet with strategic oversight of planned procurement projects for 2020/21. To ensure Cabinet oversight is focussed on the most significant procurements. To avoid the need to submit multiple individual requests for Approval to Procure as well as individual contract award approvals for work taking place in 2020/21.
[The decisions on this item can be called in by the Resources and Performance Select Committee]
Minutes: The Cabinet Member for Corporate Support introduced this report which contained project details that, due to an administrative error, were missed off the report that went to Cabinet in December. Exempt financial information was contained within a Part 2 report.
RESOLVED:
1. That approval to Procure for the projects listed in Annex 1 – “Annual Procurement Forward Plan for 2020/21” in accordance with the Council’s Procurement and Contract Standing Orders was approved.
2. That where the first ranked tender for any projects listed in Annex 1 is within the +/-5% budgetary tolerance level, the relevant Executive Director, Director or Head of Service (as appropriate) is authorised to award such contracts was agreed.
3. That the procurement activity that will be returned to Cabinet for review of the commissioning and procurement strategy prior to going out to market, and which is highlighted in grey in Annex 1 was agreed.
Reasons for decision: To comply with the Procurement and Contract Standing Orders agreed by Council in May 2019. To provide Cabinet with strategic oversight of planned procurement projects for 2020/21. To ensure Cabinet oversight is focussed on the most significant procurements. To avoid the need to submit multiple individual requests for Approval to Procure as well as individual contract award approvals for work taking place in 2020/21.
[The decisions on this item can be called in by the Resources and Performance Select Committee]
|
|
|
EXCLUSION OF THE PUBLIC
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.
|
|
|
ANNUAL PROCUREMENT FORWARD PLAN 2020/21
Decision: This Part 2 annex contains information which is exempt from Access to Information requirements by virtue of paragraph 3 – Information relating to the financial or business affairs of any particular person (including commercially sensitive information to the bidding companies).
See Minute 21/20.
[The decisions on this item can be called in by the Resources & Performance Select Committee]
Minutes: This Part 2 annex contains information which is exempt from Access to Information requirements by virtue of paragraph 3 – Information relating to the financial or business affairs of any particular person (including commercially sensitive information to the bidding companies).
RESOLVED:
See Minute 17/20.
Reason for decision:
See Minute 17/20.
[The decisions on this item can be called in by the Resources & Performance Select Committee]
|
|
|
PUBLICITY FOR PART 2 ITEMS
Additional documents: Decision: To consider whether the item considered under Part 2 of the agenda should be made available to the Press and public.
Minutes: To consider whether the item considered under Part 2 of the agenda should be made available to the Press and public.
|
