Agenda and minutes
PDF 63 KBVenue: Council Chamber, County Hall, Kingston upon Thames, Surrey KT1 2DN
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 Mrs Angell, Mr Bennison, Mr Brett-Warburton, Mrs Hammond, Mr Harmer, Miss Heath, Mrs Moseley, Mrs Ross-Tomlin, Mrs White and Mrs Windsor. |
|
To confirm the minutes of the meeting of the Council held on 14 October 2014.
(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 14 October 2014 were submitted, confirmed and signed. |
|
|
CHAIRMAN'S ANNOUNCEMENTS
The Chairman to report. Additional documents: Minutes: The Chairman made the following announcements:
(i) That the County Council had received the Best Website Award 2014 from the Society of Information Technology Management.
(ii) He reminded Members that their Christmas lunch was on Thursday 18 December 2014 and was preceded by the Member and staff carol service.
(iii) He invited Members to view the exhibition in the Grand Hall today in relation to ‘Thursley goes to War’.
(iv) Finally, he said that the lunchtime speaker today would be the Rt. Hon, the Baroness Bottomley of Nettlestone, Virginia Bottomley.
|
|
|
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 raised the following topics:
· Support for greater local devolution to Surrey. · That the additional funding to support Children in Need in Surrey was welcomed. · Fairer funding for school places in Surrey was critical - the potential shortfall was a huge challenge for Surrey. · Disappointment that junction 9 was not included as one of the major improvements to junctions on the M25, in the Chancellor’s Autumn Statement. · Long term issues, such as provision for increasing numbers of school places and Adult Social Care, would not be solved in the forthcoming budget round. · That Local Government in this area still needed to find £40m for flood defence schemes. · Stamp Duty reforms, introduced in the Chancellor’s Autumn Statement would be welcomed by Surrey residents, as would the reduction in National Insurance for apprentices. · A request that the newly introduced Cabinet Member updates could be circulated a minimum of five working days before the Council meetings.
|
|
|
Surrey County Council Progress Report: July - December 2014
To consider the report and the matters to which the Chief Executive draws attention. Additional documents: Minutes: The Leader presented the Surrey County Council Progress Report – July – December 2014, the eleventh of the Chief Executive’s six monthly reports to Members. He considered that this regular report, including the case studies, was invaluable for keeping Members informed and expressed his appreciation to the Chief Executive for it.
Members made the following comments:
· Mr Witham thanked the Chief Executive for visiting his Worplesdon division. He also referred to paragraph 42 of the Chief Executive’s Six Month Progress Report, which related to the affect of the Introduction of the Care Act from April 2015 and requested that there should be a single comprehensive database, available to every work practitioner in Surrey’s Adult Social Care Service, detailing up to date information regarding voluntary organisations and the services provided, by area. Also, that an update re. this request is provided in the next Chief Executive’s progress report in July 2015. · Mr Walsh, who was the Mental Health Champion, welcomed the inclusion of a case study which tackled the mental health stigma in Surrey.
RESOLVED:
(1) That the report of the Chief Executive be noted.
(2) That the staff of the Council be thanked for the progress made during the last six months.
(3) That the support for the direction of travel be confirmed.
|
|
|
MEMBERS' QUESTION TIME
(1) 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 3 December 2014).
(2) Cabinet Member Briefings on their portfolios
These will be circulated by email to all Members on the day before the County Council meeting, together with the Members’ questions and responses.
There will be an opportunity for Members to ask questions.
Additional documents: Minutes: Notice of 14 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) Mr Robert Evans asked the Cabinet Member for Environment and Planning if he shared his concern that the change to the 441 bus route was an accident waiting to happen and that the County Council should act now. The Cabinet Member referred him to his written response, which stated that private operators could alter routes without consulting the County Council. He also said that he had attended a meeting in Spelthorne in July where this issue had been discussed and said that further work and cost estimates would be presented to the Spelthorne local committee in due course for their consideration.
(Q2) Mr Jenkins queried the responses to his questions (a) and (d).
Mrs Salaigopoulos made reference to the Environment and Transport Select Committee’s flooding task group report and said that the situation had now moved on. She asked the Cabinet Member for Highways, Transport and Flooding to confirm that Surrey County Council, as the Lead Flood Authority had no powers to compel Thames Water to accept responsibilities for the aqueduct in Staines.
The Leader of the Council asked the Cabinet Member to confirm that Thames Water would shortly sign a Memorandum of Understanding with the Environment Agency which would benefit Surrey in the long term.
Mr Walsh asked the Cabinet Member to acknowledge the huge amount of work undertaken by officers to alleviate and come up with solutions since the flooding had occurred.
In response, the Cabinet Member for Highways, Transport and Flooding confirmed that Thames Water was the owner of the aqueduct. He also referred to the Section 19 investigation, which would be published on the Council’s website in due course. Finally, he confirmed that Thames Water were working with the County Council and that further meetings were planned in the New Year.
(Q3) Mr Fuller asked the Cabinet Member for Community Services if a league table, by Borough and District, showing the number of people penalised for dropping litter could be included on the County Council’s website. Whilst the Cabinet Member said that she was encouraged by the progress that Borough and Districts had made in this area, she did not consider that a league table would be beneficial.
(Q4) Mr Cooksey expressed concern about the length of time proposed to repair the county’s footways. He also asked the Cabinet Member for Highways, Transport and Flooding for details on the consultation process concerning the development of a number of models showing different outcomes for the condition of the footway asset. The Cabinet Member confirmed that this information would be circulated to all Members before Christmas.
(Q5) Mr Orrick said that details of the potential receipts from the sale of the residential home sites, if they were sold, and whether the information he requested could be put on the Council’s website, were not ... view the full minutes text for item 78/14 |
|
|
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 8 December 2014).
Additional documents: Minutes: There was one statement from Mr Sydney in relation to Young Epilepsy. |
|
|
ORIGINAL MOTIONS
Mrs Hazel Watson (Dorking Hills) to move under Standing Order 11 as follows:
Council notes that:
1. the County Council has set as an objective that 99% of Surrey households will receive fibre based broadband by the end of 2014 and that 94% of households would achieve Superfast Broadband speeds of 15Mbps or more;
2. the Superfast Surrey Broadband Programme was established to ensure that these targets were met and to address the situation of residents in the County that were excluded from any fibre broadband coverage roll-out plans by commercial operators – with the result that more than 75,000 premises out of 84,000 premises in the Intervention Area are now able to access download speeds of at least 15mbps;
3. to be able to connect to fibre-based broadband, the distance from the fibre-enabled cabinet to the individual premises can be no more than 1.8km; a significant number of properties included in the commercial roll-out are further than 1.8km from the fibre-enabled cabinet that serves the area and as a result residents living in these areas are not being provided with a Superfast broadband service from the commercial operator;
4. areas that are currently part of the commercial roll-out of Superfast broadband that are not being served by the commercial operators cannot be included in the Intervention Area and become part of the Superfast Surrey Broadband Programme and thus are unable to receive a Superfast broadband service at all.
Council calls for the Leader of the Council to review the contracts with the commercial operators providing Superfast broadband to Surrey residents and to identify the emerging gaps in Superfast broadband coverage (such as areas in the commercial roll-out that are further than 1.8km from the fibre-enabled box that covers their area) and to develop solutions to ensure that either the commercial operators provide Superfast broadband to residents living in these areas or that the Surrey Superfast Broadband programme is extended to cover residents living in these areas.
Additional documents: Minutes: Under Standing order 12.3, the Council agreed to debate this motion.
Under Standing Order 12.1, Mrs Watson moved the motion which was:
‘Council notes that:
1. the County Council has set as an objective that 99% of Surrey households will receive fibre based broadband by the end of 2014 and that 94% of households would achieve Superfast Broadband speeds of 15Mbps or more;
2. the Superfast Surrey Broadband Programme was established to ensure that these targets were met and to address the situation of residents in the County that were excluded from any fibre broadband coverage roll-out plans by commercial operators – with the result that more than 75,000 premises out of 84,000 premises in the Intervention Area are now able to access download speeds of at least 15mbps;
3. to be able to connect to fibre-based broadband, the distance from the fibre-enabled cabinet to the individual premises can be no more than 1.8km; a significant number of properties included in the commercial roll-out are further than 1.8km from the fibre-enabled cabinet that serves the area and as a result residents living in these areas are not being provided with a Superfast broadband service from the commercial operator;
4. areas that are currently part of the commercial roll-out of Superfast broadband that are not being served by the commercial operators cannot be included in the Intervention Area and become part of the Superfast Surrey Broadband Programme and thus are unable to receive a Superfast broadband service at all.
Council calls for the Leader of the Council to review the contracts with the commercial operators providing Superfast broadband to Surrey residents and to identify the emerging gaps in Superfast broadband coverage (such as areas in the commercial roll-out that are further than 1.8km from the fibre-enabled box that covers their area) and to develop solutions to ensure that either the commercial operators provide Superfast broadband to residents living in these areas or that the Surrey Superfast Broadband programme is extended to cover residents living in these areas.’
Mrs Watson made the following points in support of her motion:
· Superfast Broadband was essential in today’s Digital Age but some households in parts of Surrey were unable to receive it. · The County Council had set objectives for the percentage of households receiving the fibre based Broadband and these had not been achieved. · The Intervention Area was supposed to fill the gap of the service provided by the commercial operator. However, there were still areas where the Superfast Broadband Service was not being provided. · She requested that the Leader of the Council acted now to identify the emerging gaps and develop solutions so that the Broadbandcover was extended to cover those households in the affected areas. The motion was formally seconded by Mr Orrick.
Mr Martin moved an amendment at the meeting, which was formally seconded by Mr Kemp. He proposed deleting the last paragraph of Mrs Watson’s motion and replacing it with the following paragraph:
‘Council congratulates the Superfast Surrey ... view the full minutes text for item 80/14 |
|
|
REPORT OF THE CABINET
To receive the report of the meeting of the Cabinet held on 21 October and 25 November 2014.
Additional documents: Minutes: The Leader presented the Report of the Cabinet meeting held on 21 October and 25 November 2014.
(1) Statements / Updates from Cabinet Members
There were none.
(2) Reports for Information / Discussion
The following reports were received and noted:
· Surrey Educational Trust · Creation of a Joint Trading Standards Service with Buckinghamshire County Council · Endorsement of the Surrey Hills Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB) Management Plan
RESOLVED:
That the report of the meetings of the Cabinet held on 21 October and 25 November 2014 be adopted.
|
|
|
Rights of Way Priority Statement and Improvement Plan
To adopt:
(i) The revised Public Rights of Way Priority Statement
(ii) The revised Rights of Way Improvement Plan for Surrey
Additional documents: Minutes: This report set out the revised Public Rights of Way Priority Statement and the Rights of Way Improvement Plan for Surrey.
The Cabinet Member for Environment and Planning agreed to check whether the local committees had been consulted on the Plan and would advise Members.
RESOLVED:
1. That the revised Public Rights of Way Priority Statement 7th Edition dated October 2014, be approved.
2. That the revised Rights of Way Improvement Plan for Surrey 2014 be approved.
|
|
|
Report of the Planning and Regulatory Committee
To approve an amendment to the Scheme of Delegation in relation to Commons Registration Additional documents: Minutes: The Chairman of the Planning and Regulatory Committee introduced the report.
RESOLVED:
That the Scheme of Delegation be amended so that: For applications, under section 19 and paragraphs 6 to 9 of Schedule 2 of the Commons Act 2006, where the County Council is the determining authority, if no significant objection has been received and the authority has no legal interest in the land, after consultation with the Chairman of the Planning & Regulatory Committee, the decision to determine an application be delegated to the Director of Legal and Democratic Services.
|
|
|
Minutes of the Meeting 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 Anne Gowing in Democratic Services by 12 noon on Monday 8 December 2014.
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.
|