Agenda and minutes
PDF 70 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 Witham. |
|||||
To confirm the minutes of the meeting of the Council held on 16 July 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: Mr Essex requested the deletion of the last two bullet points, in relation to Item 9(ii) – the amendment moved by him to the original motion standing in the name of Mr Martin.
The minutes of the County Council held on 16 July 2013, as amended, were submitted, confirmed and signed. |
|||||
|
CHAIRMAN'S ANNOUNCEMENTS
The Chairman to report. Additional documents: Minutes: The Chairman made the following announcements:
· On 18 July, he was proud to attend the summer party at the Runnymede Centre for Surrey’s Looked after Children, their carers, foster parents and Surrey staff. · On 3 September, he had met with the Walton Bridge ‘workers’. Also, he was pleased to announce that, at this year’s Annual Highway Award Ceremony, Walton Bridge had won the UK Major Project of the Year. · Congratulations to Linda Kemeny who had recently got married. · The lunchtime speaker was Simon Morris, Headteacher of Esher High School. |
|||||
|
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: There were none. |
|||||
|
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 copy of his statement is attached as Appendix A.
Members were invited to make comments, ask questions and made the following points:
· The resurfacing of many roads across Surrey was welcomed but he was asked what steps were in place to improve Surrey’s pavements for pedestrians. · Praise for the work of the Environment and Transport Select Committee’s Winter Service Task Group which was on-going and an excellent example of cross party working. · Congratulations to Lucie Glenday and her team and also to BT, for achieving 30 September 2013 targets in relation to Superfast Broadband. |
|||||
|
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 9 October 2013).
Additional documents: Minutes: Notice of 18 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.
(Q2) Mrs White asked the Cabinet Member for Adult Social Care if he agreed that there had been too many occasions where the Budget agreed for Adult Social Care had not been realistic and then relied on one-off savings to keep the expenditure within budget. The Cabinet Member responded by stating that this year, three Rapid Improvement Events had taken place in the Adult Social Care service and they have make a substantial contribution to the current year’s savings and contributed to the overall savings of approximately £105m, which would be achieved by the end of this financial year. He confirmed that a realistic budget had been set for 2013/14 and that the service continued to focus on being efficient.
(Q3) Mr Cooksey asked the Cabinet Member for Transport, Highways and Environment when the 72 Vehicle Activated Signs (VAS) currently out of action would be working. Mrs Frost also asked the Cabinet Member what was the length of time, from when a broken sign was reported, to repair it and Dr Grant-Duff asked him to comment on how the repairs to VAS were prioritised. The Cabinet Member confirmed that the signs were being repaired but it was the decision of local committees to prioritise them. Referring to the query about the time taken, he said that he would respond outside the meeting.
(Q4) Mr Ellwood was concerned that the new measures were ‘voluntary’ and sought reassurance from the Cabinet Member for Transport, Highways and Environment that the new tenants would not be permitted to work outside working hours. The Cabinet Member said that the county was not in a position to influence Guildford Borough Council’s decision, however, the county council had consulted with residents and he hoped that good working practices would prevail.
(Q5) Mr Robert Evans referred to the proposal to reduce the number of fire engines in Spelthorne from two to one and asked the Cabinet Member for Community Services what were the positives for his residents. Mrs Saliagopoulos said that there was cross border cover available in the Spelthorne area. She also asked the Cabinet Member to confirm that the proposals for fire cover in this area were still out for consultation. The Cabinet Associate for Fire and Police Services responded and confirmed that the proposals were still out for consultation and local communities had contributed to it. She also stressed the importance of looking at the fire cover for the whole county and that, should the proposals be agreed, the response time would still be within the agreed standard for the whole county. She reiterated the importance of working within budget and that Surrey Fire and Rescue Service had invested heavily in the right equipment for any future changes.
(Q6) Several Members expressed concern about the road closures in place for the ... view the full minutes text for item 68/13 |
|||||
|
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 14 October 2013).
Additional documents: Minutes: There were no statements by Members. |
|||||
|
ORIGINAL MOTIONS
Item 8(i)
Mrs Fiona White (Guildford West) to move under Standing Order 11 as follows: National figures announced by the Coalition Government have bought welcome news on the large number of “Troubled Families” being turned around by councils across the country. Troubled families are those that have problems and cause problems to the community around them, putting high costs on the public sector. Government funding is provided to help turn round troubled families. The scheme, aims to: •
get children back into school This is achieved by: •
joining up local services Nationally, out of 118,000 families, 14,000 had been turned around by the end of July 2013, a 12% success rate. Council notes that the Leader announced on his taking office that the County’s children are his number one priority. Council further notes that in Surrey, out of 1,000 families, only 12 had been turned around in the same period, a success rate of only 1.2%. Council requests the Chairmen of the Adult Social Care and Children & Education Select Committees to convene a joint meeting to scrutinise reports from officers as to why Surrey is underachieving by a factor of 10 below the national average and to make recommendations to Cabinet as to how a rapid turnaround in performance in this crucial area of the Council’s business can be achieved. Item 8(ii) Mrs Hazel Watson (Dorking Hills) to move under Standing Order 11 as follows: Council notes that: 1. The County Council appears to be implementing policies on the use of social media and filming in Council, Cabinet, Select Committees and Local Committees even though no policies have been approved by Members. Policies which should be promoting openness and transparency have not been set in an open and transparent way. 2. Legislation [S.I 2012 No. 2089 The Local Authorities (Executive Arrangements) (Meetings and Access to Information) (England) Regulations 2012] and guidance by the DCLG have been issued on the role of social media and filming to promote openness and transparency in decision making. 3. The policies being applied by Surrey County Council place unnecessary obstructions to the use of social media and filming. For example, limiting the use of social media in meetings to breaks in business at the end of items and requiring written applications to film meetings. Council agrees that: a) the use of social media and the filming of meetings shall be permitted at all times, without written permission, in the public part ... view the full agenda text for item 70/13 Additional documents: Minutes: ITEM 8(i)
Under Standing Order 12.3, the Council agreed to debate this motion.
Under Standing Order 12.1, Mrs Fiona White moved the motion which was: ‘National figures announced by the Coalition Government have bought welcome news on the large number of “Troubled Families” being turned around by councils across the country. Troubled families are those that have problems and cause problems to the community around them, putting high costs on the public sector. Government funding is provided to help turn round troubled families. The scheme, aims to: · get children back into school · reduce youth crime and anti-social behaviour · put adults on a path back to work · reduce the high costs these families place on the public sector each year. This is achieved by: · joining up local services · dealing with each family’s problems as a whole rather than responding to each problem, or person, separately · appointing a single key worker to get to grips with the family’s problems and work intensively with them to change their lives for the better for the long term · using a mix of methods that support families and challenge poor behaviour Nationally, out of 118,000 families, 14,000 had been turned around by the end of July 2013, a 12% success rate. Council notes that the Leader announced on his taking office that the County’s children are his number one priority. Council further notes that in Surrey, out of 1,000 families, only 12 had been turned around in the same period, a success rate of only 1.2%. Council requests the Chairmen of the Adult Social Care and Children & Education Select Committees to convene a joint meeting to scrutinise reports from officers as to why Surrey is underachieving by a factor of 10 below the national average and to make recommendations to Cabinet as to how a rapid turnaround in performance in this crucial area of the Council’s business can be achieved.’ The motion was formally seconded by Mrs Lallement.
Mrs White said that: · She was disappointed with the County Council’s performance in turning around such a small number of troubled families and gave the statistics for surrounding counties, which were all better than Surrey County Council. · The Lib Dems believed in creating a fairer society. · Children who did not have family support struggled to achieve. · The impact of ‘troubled families’ on local communities and their anti-social behaviour was an issue. · The adults often claimed unemployment benefit and the cost of troubled families mounted up. · Health issues were sometimes an issue. · The failure to recognise the issues was letting the troubled families down. · She was in contact with the family support unit in Guildford. · The Council should agree to her request for a joint meeting of the Adult Social Care and Children & Education Select Committees to consider these issues so that they could make recommendations to improve the outcomes for these families.
Mrs Angell responded and made the following points:
· That in Surrey, the word ‘troubled’ was not used, it was called the Family Support Programme. |
|||||
|
REPORT OF THE CABINET
To receive the report of the meeting of the Cabinet held on 23 July and 24 September 2013 and to agree a recommendation in respect of:
The Revision of Procurement Standing Orders
Additional documents: Minutes: The Leader presented the reports of the Cabinet meetings held on 23 July and 24 September 2013.
(1) Statements / Updates from Cabinet Members
Services for Young People transforms the lives of Surrey Young People – the Cabinet Member for Schools and Learning tabled a statement (Appendix C)
(2) Recommendations on Policy Framework Documents
A Revision of Procurement Standing Orders
An amended table 3.1.1, which included a footnote to explain the distinction between Cabinet and Cabinet Member decisions and replaced the table included in the agenda, was tabled.
RESOLVED:
That the proposed changes to Procurement Standing Orders, as amended, be agreed.
(3) Reports for Information / Discussion
The following reports were received and noted:
· Investment Strategy · Public Service Transformation · Surrey Rail Strategy · Quarterly Report on Decisions taken under Special Urgency Arrangements: 1 July 2013 – 30 September 2013
RESOLVED:
That the report of the meetings of the Cabinet held on 23 July and 24 September 2013 be adopted.
|
|||||
|
Report of the Audit and Governance Committee
To receive the report of the Audit and Governance Committee and to agree recommendations in respect of:
(i) Risk Management & Strategy (ii) Code of Corporate Governance Additional documents: Minutes: The Chairman of the Audit and Governance Committee introduced the report from the Audit and Governance Committee and highlighted the key points relating to the Risk Management Policy and the Code of Corporate Governance.
A RISK MANAGEMENT ANNUAL REPORT
RESOLVED:
That the Risk Management Policy, as set out in Annex A of the submitted report, be approved for inclusion in the Constitution.
B CODE OF CORPORATE GOVERNANCE
RESOLVED:
That the updated Code of Corporate Governance, as set out in Annex B of the submitted report, be approved for inclusion in the Constitution. |
|||||
|
Surrey Pay Policy Statement 2013 / 2014
(a) Report of the People, Performance and Development Committee.
(b) Report of the Head of Human Resources and Organisational Development in relation to the amendments to Surrey Pay Policy Statement 2013/14.
(c) Report of the Head of Legal and Democratic Services in relation to amendments to the Scheme of Delegation. Additional documents: Minutes: Mr Hodge, as Chairman of the People, Performance and Development Committee introduced this committee’s report and said that the purpose of the report was to give the committee flexibility to consider salary progression for individual senior members of staff exceptionally. It should be considered in conjunction with the report from the Head of Human Resources and Organisational Development recommending an amendment to the pay policy and the report from the Head of Legal and Democratic Services which set out the necessary changes to the Scheme of Delegation.
RESOLVED:
(1) That the following amendment to the Surrey Pay Policy Statement 2013-2014 be agreed (additional text in italics):
Surrey Pay
The council's total reward strategy is based on the local negotiation of "single status" Surrey Pay terms and conditions of service. This means that the majority of staff are on consistent terms and conditions of services, except for teachers and fire fighters. Pay, including terms and conditions, is reviewed annually with any changes agreed by the PPDC normally made with effect from 1 April. The council recognises two trades unions, the GMB and UNISON, for the purposes of negotiating Surrey Pay. Salary progression for individual members of staff may be awarded exceptionally during the current period of pay restraint and must be approved by the PPDC for all staff on senior pay or by the appropriate head of service and the Head of HR&OD for staff on salaries below senior pay.
(2) That the terms of reference for the People, Performance and Development Committee be amended, to include “To determine pay progression for individual staff on senior pay in accordance with the Pay Policy Statement.”
(3) That the scheme of delegation to officers be amended to include the following:
|
|||||
|
Interim Report of the Independent Remuneration Panel
To receive the interim report of the Independent Remuneration Panel and to agree the following recommendation:
That, without prejudice to any recommendations to be made by the Independent Remuneration Panel in its final report in March 2014, an exceptional one-off payment of £5,000 for the financial year 2013/2014 be made to Cabinet Associates with immediate effect.
Additional documents: Minutes: The Leader of the Council informed Members that this recommendation from the Independent Remuneration Panel was for an exceptional one-off payment for Cabinet Associates. He also requested that the word ‘each’ should be inserted prior to ‘Cabinet Associate with immediate effect’
Mrs Watson moved an amendment, which was to add an additional recommendation to that proposed by the Independent Remuneration Panel. This amendment was formally seconded by Mrs White.
The additional recommendation was:
‘As the appointment of Cabinet Associates is a redistribution of the workload of the relevant Cabinet Member, a deduction of £5,000 shall be made from the special Responsibility allowance of the relevant Cabinet Member; thus ensuring the Cabinet and Cabinet Associates remain cost neutral in the current period of pay restraint.’
Mrs Watson said that she considered that the creation of Cabinet Associate roles was unnecessary because, in her view, the workload of Cabinet Members had not increased. Also, there were a significant number of Conservative councillors with Special Responsibility Allowances, with Surrey council taxpayers footing the bill.
Nine Members spoke on the amendment, with the following points being made:
· That the balance of the Cabinet portfolios was unequal. · Concern about the budget and which budget would fund the immediate payments. · Merging the two children’s select committees from the previous council into one Children and Education Select Committee had given this select committee a very large workload. · Comparing with other local authorities, the allowances paid to Surrey’s Cabinet Members was at the lower end of the spectrum. · The workload of Cabinet Members was increasing and the role of the Cabinet Associates was to assist the Cabinet Member, it was not a job share. · Increases proposed by the Independent Remuneration Panel to Members’ Allowances over the last few years, had often been rejected. · Cabinet Members were ‘value for money’ – they had responsibility for large budgets. · Concern expressed that these additional posts would increase the cost of Members’ Allowances, at a time when some residents were finding it difficult to meet their bills. · It was the role of select committee chairmen to hold the Cabinet to account. · That this change increased the overall number of special responsibility posts for Cabinet and Cabinet Associates so that this now exceeds that for scrutiny of the Cabinet for the first time.
Mrs Watson requested a recorded vote on the amendment and 10 Members stood in support of this request.
The following Members voted for the amendment:
Mr Beardsmore, Mr Beckett, Mr Cooksey, Mr Essex, Mr Robert Evans, Mr Forster, Mr Goodwin, Mr Harrison, Mr Hickman, Mr Jenkins, Mr Johnson, Mr Kington, Mrs Mason, Mr Orrick, Mrs Searle, Mr Selleck, Mr Townsend, Mrs Watson, Mrs White, Mrs Windsor
The following Members voted against the amendment:
Mrs Angell, Ms Bowes, Mr Brett-Warburton, Mr Carasco, Mrs Clack, Mrs Curran, Mr Tim Evans, Mrs Frost, Mr Furey, Mr Gardner, Mr Goodman, Mr Gulati, Mrs Hammond, Mr Harmer, Miss Heath, Mr Hodge, Mr Kemp, Mrs Lake, Ms Le Gal, Mrs Lewis, Mr Mahne, Mr Mallett, Mrs ... view the full minutes text for item 74/13 |
|||||
|
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 14 October 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. |