Agenda and minutes
PDF 64 KBVenue: Council Chamber, County Hall, Kingston upon Thames, Surrey KT1 2DN. View directions
Contact: Anne Gowing 020 8541 9938
Media
| No. | Item |
|---|---|
|
APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE
The Chairman to report apologies for absence. Additional documents: Minutes: Apologies for absence were received from Mr Cooper, Mr Elias, Dr Grant-Duff, Mrs Lay, Mr MacLeod, Mrs Nichols, Mr Pitt and Mr Colin Taylor. |
|
To confirm the minutes of the meeting of the Council held on 12 February 2013.
(Note: the Minutes, including the appendices, will be laid on the table half an hour before the start of the meeting).
Additional documents: Minutes: The Minutes of the meeting of the County Council held on 12 February 2013, were submitted, confirmed and signed.
|
|
|
CHAIRMAN'S ANNOUNCEMENTS
The Chairman to report. Additional documents: Minutes: The Chairman made the following announcements:
· That the County Council had been named local authority of the year at the recent Improvement and Efficiency Awards and she presented the award to the Chief Executive.
· That the lunchtime speaker was His Honour Judge Christopher Critchlow DL, Senior Judge at Guildford.
· Finally, she invited Members to visit the Surrey Save Credit Union stand, which would be in the Ashcombe corridor during the lunchtime break.
|
|
|
DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST
To receive any declarations of disclosable pecuniary interests from Members in respect of any item to be considered at the meeting.
NOTES:
· Each Member must declare any interest that is disclosable under the Relevant Authorities (Disclosable Pecuniary Interests) Regulations 2012, unless it is already listed for that Member in the Council’s Register of Disclosable Pecuniary Interests. · 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). · If the interest has not yet been disclosed in that Register, the Member must, as well as disclosing it at the meeting, notify the Monitoring Officer of it within 28 days. · If a Member has a disclosable interest, the Member must not vote or speak on the agenda item in which it arises, or do anything to influence other Members in regard to that item.
Additional documents: Minutes: 1. Mr Butcher declared a personal interest relating to item 7 (Statement by Members), and his statement on Cedar Road, Cobham because he was a member of Elmbridge Borough Council’s Planning Committee and its relevant sub-committee.
2. Mrs Hammond declared a disclosable interest relation to item 11 (Elected Member Development Strategy) because she was an assessor for South East Employers. |
|
|
LEADER'S STATEMENT
The Leader to make a statement.
There will be an opportunity for Members to ask questions.
Additional documents: Minutes: The Leader made a statement. A detailed copy of his statement is attached as Appendix A.
Members were invited to make comments, ask questions and made the following points:
· That the contribution to Surrey Save was welcomed. · That the Leader comment on the Administration’s plans for vulnerable communities. · Whether the County Council would be learning lessons from the demise of the North Yorkshire initiative on Super Fast Broadband · The commitment and investment from the County Council for Children’s Centres. · The success of the apprenticeship scheme. |
|
|
MEMBERS' QUESTION TIME
The Leader of the Council or the appropriate Member of the Cabinet or the Chairman of a Committee to answer any questions on any matter relating to the powers and duties of the County Council, or which affects the county.
(Note: Notice of questions in respect of the above item on the agenda must be given in writing, preferably by e-mail, to Anne Gowing in Democratic Services by 12 noon on Wednesday 14 March 2013).
Additional documents: Minutes: Notice of six questions had been received. The questions and replies are attached as Appendix B.
A number of supplementary questions were asked and a summary of the main points is set out below.
(Q1) Dr Povey said that he was disappointed with the reply and asked the Leader of the Council who would be on the review panel, when the outcomes would be published and when Members of this council would have the opportunity to scrutinise it. The Leader said that he had nothing further to add and referred to his tabled answer.
(Q2) Mr Hall considered that his question had not been answered and asked the Cabinet Member for Community Safety for consideration of a countywide scheme and its cost. She responded by stating that the authority would look at any new initiatives, including the London travel discount scheme for apprentices and that any proposals would be costed.
(Q3) Mr Orrick asked the Cabinet Member for Transport and Environment whether the failure of a sub-base was common amongst other resurfacing failures and whether Surrey Highways were developing a strategy to prevent future issues with the sub-base. The Cabinet Member confirmed that lessons had been learnt and that going forward the design process had been improved.
(Q4) Mrs Watson expressed her surprise at the response because she had received a different answer recently. The Cabinet Member for Transport and the Environment responded by stating that it was his intention that no Surrey roads would deteriorate to ‘poor’ in the next 5 years. The aim was to achieve best practice through improved highways maintenance and the investment from Project Horizon.
(Q6) Mrs Watson asked the Cabinet Member for Community Services and the 2012 Games for the criteria for setting up a micro library, which was given by the Cabinet Member, who also referred to the success of the micro library at Shere, staffed by volunteers. She said that the County Council had not closed any libraries but had opened an additional one.
|
|
|
STATEMENTS BY MEMBERS
Any Member may make a statement at the meeting on a local issue of current or future concern.
(Note: Notice of statements must be given in writing, preferably by e-mail, to Anne Gowing in Democratic Services by 12 noon on Monday 18 March 2013).
Additional documents: Minutes: There was one local Member statement from Mr John Butcher relating to Cedar Road, Cobham.
|
|
|
ORIGINAL MOTION
Mr Ian Beardsmore (Sunbury Common and Ashford Common) to move under Standing Order 11 as follows:
Council notes: 1. Surrey County Council has a proud history as the creator of the Green Belt. The County’s Countryside Estate founded by the Surrey County Council Act of 1931 was the basis of the London County Council's Green Belt Act of 1938.
2. The Coalition Agreement states:
‘We will maintain the Green Belt, Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSIs) and other environmental protections, and create a new designation – similar to SSSIs – to protect green areas of particular importance to local communities.’
3. The Chancellor of the Exchequer has signalled that he would support building on Green Belt land.
Council believes:
Surrey’s Green Belt, Countryside Estate, SSSIs and other green spaces are vital, not only for the county’s environment but also for maintaining a “green lung” around London.
Council resolves:
1. To do everything in its power to protect Surrey’s Green Belt. 2. To oppose any moves by government to weaken Green Belt legislation. 3. To make Surrey’s MPs and the County’s Districts and Boroughs aware of this resolution.
Additional documents: Minutes: Under Standing Order 12.3, the Council agreed to debate this motion.
Under Standing Order 12.1, Mr Ian Beardsmore moved the updated motion, which had been tabled at the meeting, which was:
‘Council notes: 1. Surrey County Council has a proud history as the creator of the Green Belt. The County’s Countryside Estate founded by the Surrey County Council Act of 1931 was the basis of the London County Council's Green Belt Act of 1938.
2. The Coalition Agreement states:
We will maintain the Green Belt, Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSIs) and other environmental protections, and create a new designation – similar to SSSIs – to protect green areas of particular importance to local communities.
3. The Chancellor of the Exchequer has signalled that he would support building on Green Belt land.
Council believes:
Surrey’s Green Belt, Countryside Estate, SSSIs and other green spaces are vital, not only for the county’s environment but also for maintaining a “green lung” around London.
Council resolves:
1. To do everything in its power to protect Surrey’s Green Belt. 2. To oppose any moves by government to weaken Green Belt legislation. 3. To make Surrey’s MPs and the County’s Districts and Boroughs aware of this resolution. 4. That any Green Belt development in the County is in line with the needs and wishes of Surrey residents.
Mr Beardsmore made the following points:
· The background to the founding of the Green Belt · That it was essential to protect Surrey’s Green Belt · The need to support the County’s Boroughs and Districts in this area because the new Planning Guidelines had put these councils under pressure · A reference to the number of empty houses in Surrey and also MOD property · That any ‘creep’ on Green Belt can never be reversed.
The motion was formally seconded by Mrs Hazel Watson, who referred to the Green Belt in the metropolitan areas of London. She also said that without the Green Belt, Surrey’s unique character would disappear and she pressed for the development of brownfield sites. Finally, she said that any decision on Green Belt land should be made at local level by democratically elected representatives.
Mr John Furey tabled an amendment at the meeting (formally seconded by Mr Martin) which was:
‘Council notes: 1. Surrey County Council has a proud history as the creator of the Green Belt. The County’s Countryside Estate founded by the Surrey County Council Act of 1931 was the basis of the London County Council's Green Belt Act of 1938.
2. The Coalition Agreement states:
‘We will maintain the Green Belt, Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSIs) and other environmental protections, and create a new designation – similar to SSSIs – to protect green areas of particular importance to local communities.’
Council believes:
Surrey’s Green Belt, Countryside Estate, SSSIs and other green spaces are vital, not only for the county’s environment but also for maintaining a “green lung” around London.
Council resolves:
1. To use its power to protect Surrey’s Green Belt. 2. To support ... view the full minutes text for item 21/13 |
|
|
REPORT OF THE CABINET
To receive the report of the meeting of the Cabinet held on 26 February 2013 and to agree two recommendations in respect of:
(i) The Consultation on Surrey’s Admission Arrangements for September 2014 for Community and Voluntary Controlled Schools and co-ordinated Schemes
(ii) The Implementation of the Public Value Review of Community Partnership – Constitutional Changes
Additional documents: Minutes: The Leader presented the reports of the Cabinet meetings held on 5 and 26 February 2013.
(1) Statements / Updates from Cabinet Members
The Cabinet Member for Children and Families introduced her statement in relation to the Celebration and Bursary Fund for Surrey’s Looked After Children which had been included in the agenda.
(2) Recommendations on Policy Framework Documents
A The Consultation on Surrey’s Admission Arrangements for September 2014 for Community and Voluntary Controlled Schools and Co-ordinated schemes
The Cabinet Member for Children and Learning was invited to present the report.
RESOLVED:
(1) A feeder link is introduced for Banstead Community Junior School for children from Banstead Infant School for September 2014, as follows:
a) Looked after and previously looked after children b) Exceptional social/medical need c) Children attending Banstead Infant School d) Siblings not admitted under c) above e) Any other children
(2) The introduction of a feeder link for Reigate Priory for children from Holmesdale and Reigate Parish is deferred until alternative options are considered.
(3) The admission criteria for Southfield Park are changed so that, for September 2014, children who have Southfield Park Primary School as their nearest school would receive a higher priority when allocating places outside the catchment area, as follows:
a) Looked after and previously looked after children b) Exceptional social/medical need c) Siblings d) Children living in the defined catchment of the school with priority being given to children living furthest away from the school e) Other children for whom the school is their nearest school f) Any other children
(4) That a feeder link is introduced for St Ann’s Heath Junior School for children from Trumps Green Infant School for September 2014, as follows:
a) Looked after and previously looked after children b) Exceptional social/medical need c) Siblings d) Children attending Trumps Green Infant School e) Children for whom St Ann’s Heath Junior School is the nearest school with a Junior PAN f) Any other children
(5) A reciprocal sibling link between St Ann’s Heath Junior School and Trumps Green Infant School is introduced for September 2014 so that the schools would be described as being on a shared or adjoining site for applying sibling criteria.
(6) A catchment area based on the Parish of Tatsfield and a phased tiered sibling priority based on the catchment is introduced for Tatsfield Primary School for September 2014, as follows:
a) Looked after and previously looked after children b) Exceptional social/medical need c) Children who will have a sibling on roll at the school at the end of the 2013/14 academic year and that sibling will still be expected to be on roll at the school on the date of the child’s admission d) Siblings who live within the catchment area e) Other children who live within the catchment area f) Siblings who live outside the catchment area g) Other children who live outside the catchment area
(7) Tiered arrangements are introduced for Thames Ditton Junior School for September 2014 so that siblings, children at ... view the full minutes text for item 22/13 |
|
|
Surrey Pay Policy Statement 2013 - 2014
To approve a pay policy statement for publication on the Council’s external website. Additional documents: Minutes: The Leader of the Council introduced the report by stating that, in line with the Localism Act, the County Council was required to approve a Pay Policy Statement for publication on the Council’s website.
RESOLVED:
That the Pay Policy Statement, Annex A to the submitted report, to be published on Surrey County Council’s external website with effect from 1 April 2013.
|
|
|
Elected Member Development Strategy
To approve the revised Elected Member Development Strategy and to agree one amended role profile and two additional ones for inclusion in the Constitution. Additional documents: Minutes: Mrs Hammond declared a disclosable interest because she was an assessor for South East Employers and left the room for this item.
The Cabinet Member for Change and Efficiency said that an Elected Member Development Strategy had been approved by the County Council in March 2011 and it had been agreed that it would be reviewed every other year.
The Member Development Steering Group had revised the Strategy and had also drafted additional role profiles for inclusion in the strategy.
Members made the following points:
· That the proposed protocol for elected Members attendance at external courses and conferences (Appendix D to the submitted report) could discourage Members from attending them. · Access to the Members Portal could be easier. · It was a good report. · Recognition of the progress made by the County Council in this area. · Acknowledgement of the excellent officer support. · That the County Council was engaged in the whole training process. However, there was a need to examine the relevance of training and its Value for Money.
RESOLVED:
(1) That the Elected Member Development Strategy, attached at Appendix 1 to the submitted report, be approved. (2) That the role profiles for the Surrey County Councillor, the Vice-Chairman of the Planning and Regulatory Committee and the Vice-Chairman of the Audit and Governance Committee, as set out in Appendix B of the Strategy, be agreed for publication in the County Council’s Constitution.
|
|
|
Amendments to the Constitution (Health and Wellbeing Board and Health Scrutiny)
To ensure the Constitution is in line with recent legislation and regulations, the Council is asked to agree a new article introducing a Health and Wellbeing Board and revisions to the arrangements for the scrutiny of health services.
Additional documents: Minutes: The Cabinet Member for Adult Social Care and Health introduced the report and said that the Health and Social Care Act 2012 required the County Council to establish a Health and Wellbeing Board from 1 April 2013. He confirmed that the Board would be subject to scrutiny, as detailed in the report.
The Chairman of the Health Scrutiny Committee referred to paragraph 12 of the main report and requested that Appendix 2, paragraph 1.1(b) be amended from ‘the provision of such services to those inhabitants’ to ‘the provision of both private and NHS Services to inhabitants’. This was agreed.
After a short debate, in which Members received clarity on the new processes and procedures, it was:
RESOLVED:
(1) That the new Article 8A Health and Wellbeing Board be adopted as part of the Council’s Constitution as attached at Appendix 1, to the submitted report.
(2) That Article 7 Select Committees be amended to reflect the changes to Health Scrutiny as set out in Appendix 2 (as amended), to the submitted report.
(3) That the Council delegates responsibility for health scrutiny in Surrey to the Health Scrutiny Committee.
(4) That the Council delegates power of referral to the Secretary of State to the Health Scrutiny Committee.
|
|
|
Formation of a new Surrey County Council Pension Fund Board
In line with the Pension Fund Bill, to consider changes to the governance arrangements for the County Council Pension Fund. Additional documents: Minutes: The Cabinet Member for Change and Efficiency said that previously the Investment side of Surrey County Council’s Pension Fund had been managed separately, without any reference to liabilities, which was not good practice. Following publication of the draft Pension Fund Bill, this report set out the new requirements for each administering authority of a Local Government Pension Scheme to establish and maintain a Pension Fund Board.
In order to comply with statutory regulations, the Surrey Pension Fund required an authoritative decision making platform on which to resolve and implement decisions on (i) asset liability management, (ii) investment best practice, (iii) clear pathway to full funding status.
She commended the report and its recommendations to Members.
RESOLVED:
1. That the Surrey Pension Fund Board be established as a Committee of the County Council in accordance with section 101 of the Local Government Act 1972 with all matters delegated to it, as set out in Appendix A to the submitted report, as its terms of reference with effect from 21 May 2013.
2. That the Surrey Pension Fund Board shall also carry out any functions of a Scheme Pension Board that are required by legislation.
3. That the changes to the Audit and Governance Committee’s terms of reference, as set out in Appendix B to the submitted report, be approved and included within the Council’s Constitution.
4. That the changes to the Chief Finance Officer’s, Strategic Finance Manager’s (Pension Fund and Treasury) and Pensions Manager’s delegated powers, as set out in Appendix C to the submitted report, be approved and included within the Council’s Constitution.
5. That the Surrey Pension Fund Board receive committee support from the Council’s democratic services team.
6. That the Investment Advisory Group be disbanded with effect from 21 May 2013.
7. That any consequential amendments be made to the Council’s Constitution as required.
|
|
|
Code of Best Practice in Planning Procedures
Report of the Planning and Regulatory Committee.
To approve the Code of Best Practice in Planning Procedures. Additional documents: Minutes: The Chairman of the Planning & Regulatory Committee presented the report and drew Members attention to paragraph 2.2, relating to the role of Planning & Regulatory Committee Members, in the Surrey Code of Best Practice in Planning Procedures.
RESOLVED:
That the Code of Best Practice in Planning Procedures be approved and included in the Council’s Constitution.
|
|
|
Amendment to the Scheme of Delegation - the Exercise of Executive Functions
The Leader has agreed changes to the Council’s Scheme of Delegation. In accordance with Articles 5.02 and 6.04(d) (ii) of the Council’s Constitution, the changes made by the Leader are being reported to Council. Additional documents: Minutes: The Leader of the Council introduced the report.
Mrs White requested that the words ‘where appropriate’ be deleted from paragraph 6, bullet point 3 and this was agreed by the Leader. Mrs Watson requested that ‘local Members’ be included in paragraph 6, bullet point 2. The Leader of the Council said that he would consider this request outside the meeting.
RESOLVED (as amended):
That the amendments agreed by the Leader to the Highways and Youth functions for Local Committees and the related Officer delegations within the Scheme of Delegation be noted.
|
|
|
Minutes of the Meetings of the Cabinet
Any matters within the minutes of the Cabinet’s meetings, and not otherwise brought to the Council’s attention in the Cabinet’s report, may be the subject of questions and statements by Members upon notice being given to the Democratic Services Lead Manager by 12 noon on Monday 18 March 2013.
Additional documents: Minutes: No notification had been received from Members wishing to raise a question or make a statement on any of the matters in the minutes, by the deadline |
|
|
Chairman's Closing Remarks re. the Council Term
Additional documents: Minutes: The Chairman closed the meeting by stating that at least 17 Members would be standing down and that therefore this was their last meeting. She hoped that they had enjoyed their time at the County Council and made new friends. She expressed appreciation to the remaining Members and to officers who had helped Members with their work. |