Agenda and minutes
PDF 317 KBVenue: REMOTE, public webcast link: https://www.surreycc.gov.uk/council-and-democracy/councillors-and-committees/webcasts
Contact: Amelia Christopher 020 8213 2838
Media
| No. | Item |
|---|---|
|
APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE
The Chairman to report apologies for absence. Additional documents: Minutes: Apologies were received from Mr Ellwood, Mr Kemp and Mr Mansfield. |
|
To confirm the minutes of the meeting of the Council held on 13 October 2020.
Additional documents: Minutes: The minutes of the meeting of the County Council held on 13 October 2020 were submitted and confirmed. |
|
|
DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST
All Members present are required to declare, at this point in the meeting or as soon as possible thereafter (i) Any disclosable pecuniary interests and / or (ii) Other interests arising under the Code of Conduct in respect of any item(s) of business being considered at this meeting NOTES: · Members are reminded that they must not participate in any item where they have a disclosable pecuniary interest · As well as an interest of the Member, this includes any interest, of which the Member is aware, that relates to the Member’s spouse or civil partner (or any person with whom the Member is living as a spouse or civil partner) · Members with a significant personal interest may participate in the discussion and vote on that matter unless that interest could be reasonably regarded as prejudicial. Additional documents: Minutes: Dr Andrew Povey declared a non-pecuniary interest as he was a trustee for the Surrey Hills Society. |
|
|
CHAIRMAN'S ANNOUNCEMENTS
Welcome everyone to today’s Council Meeting – I hope you and your loved ones are all safe and well.
Farewell to 2020
Today sees the last of our Council meetings for 2020 – and what a year it has been. This time last year, who could have predicted what 2020 had in store for us all? I think ‘unprecedented’ is certainly one of the words I heard most of in 2020.
There has of course been tremendous loss and sadness this year and almost everyone has been affected by the pandemic in some way. The virus, the fallout and associated restrictions have touched all our lives.
I am, however, exceptionally proud of the way in which the council, staff and Members have coped in the most difficult of circumstances. Not only have our services continued to serve our residents, but new ones have been added and tremendous achievements have been made.
I have been extremely impressed by the way in which Surrey has pulled together, protected and served not only our most vulnerable residents but all those in our communities. Our response to the pandemic has shown our true colours and strength and has demonstrated why Surrey is such a great county.
Members also supported the Surrey Young Mayor’s Youth Project Fund, which is particularly important at this most difficult of times.
A big thank you to you all.
Farewell to County Hall
We are also saying another ‘farewell’ today – to County Hall. Today is the last Council meeting to be held in the building we have called ‘home’ since 1893 as, on 31 December 2020, the doors will close for the last time.
County Hall has been a truly wonderful place in which to work, particularly for me as I have been here, on and off for over 27 years – not only just because of its beauty and grandeur, the iconic Grand Hall and Council Chamber and the history the building holds, but because of the great work that has been done here by Members and staff – we will all remember the fun and dedication we had doing it.
Whilst it is always sad to say goodbye and move on, now is absolutely the right time to do so. It is right that the Council headquarters moves into Surrey to be amongst our residents and sit within the communities we serve.
We will all take with us very fond memories of County Hall and I am sure we will look forward to making new memories at our new home at Woodhatch, Reigate, in the heart of our county.
Goodbye County Hall – and thank you.
Additional documents: Minutes: The Chairman:
· Highlighted to Members that the Chairman’s Announcements were located in the agenda front sheet. · Invited Mr Chris Botten to say a few words regarding a former County Councillor, John Orrick, who sadly passed away last month.
Mr Chris Botten paid tribute to John Orrick, noting that:
· He served as the County Councillor for Caterham Hill for the previous two terms of office and he was a role model on how to be a local councillor truly dedicated to serving his residents and he would be missed.
|
|
The Leader to make a statement.
There will be an opportunity for Members to ask questions and/or make comments.
Additional documents: Minutes: The Leader made a detailed statement. A copy of the statement is attached as Appendix A.
Members raised the following topics:
· Paid tribute to staff for their extraordinary efforts in spite of the challenging circumstances of the pandemic and that local solutions worked best. · Noted that the announcement of the Spending Review 2020 came too late in the year for local government, it was a short-term one-year settlement which made future planning difficult. · That local government was unloved and underfunded by central government, highlighting that there was no funding to address the issue of adult social care on a permanent basis and the Green Paper remained delayed. · Noted that councils could increase Council Tax by 5% composed of 2% for general funds and a further 3% ring-fenced for adult social care; despite the difficulty for some in affording the current level of Council Tax and the public sector pay freeze. · Queried how the shelving of plans to build Crossrail 2 due to the withdrawal of the Treasury’s funding, would affect Surrey in the future. · Asked the Leader to provide reassurance that the £42 million write-down of the Eco Park Shepperton investment was not a real loss and whether that cost would be recouped in full. · Welcomed the Report of the Mental Health Task Group and the Mental Health Summit, that enthusiasm must be translated into real action with early intervention a priority. · Noted the end of an era with the closure of County Hall and wished all a Happy Christmas and best wishes for 2021. · Stressed major concerns including the challenging national funding picture, the large shortfall in adult social care and the effect of a no-deal Brexit on workforce sustainability. · Paid tribute to teachers and headteachers in the county who were on the Covid-19 frontline. · Emphasised the importance of the All-Age Autism Strategy rollout and called for a joint approach between Cabinet Members and the Adults and Health Select Committee, with input from Members; noting the positive collaboration with the London South Bank University. · Noted disappointment that the recent consultation on Special Educational Needs and Disabilities (SEND) funding for 2021/22 was difficult to find. · Welcomed the Leader’s focus on addressing the challenges of poverty and the failure of Universal Credit to meet the needs of many families, urging that more needed to be done to address child poverty and engage with families to ensure that children would not go hungry over Christmas. · Asked the Leader to confirm whether the Council had full sign-up from the health sector and schools on the Climate Change Strategy and if those partners were included in the delivery plan. · Thanked the Leader for his wide-ranging statement on key focus areas and responsibilities that the Council continued to undertake despite Covid-19. · That 2020 had been dominated by the challenges of Covid-19 and asked whether the Leader agreed that the vaccine rollout from Pfizer-BioNTech was a huge matter of national pride as the UK was the first in western world to have developed, fully ... view the full minutes text for item 59/20 |
|
|
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 Democratic Services by 12 noon on 2 December 2020).
2. Cabinet Member Briefings on their portfolios.
These will be circulated by email to all Members prior to the County Council meeting, together with the Members’ questions and responses.
There will be an opportunity for Members to ask questions.
Additional documents: Minutes:
Questions:
Notice of sixteen questions had been received. The questions and replies were published in a supplementary agenda on 7 December 2020.
A number of supplementary questions were asked and a summary of the main points is set out below:
(Q3) Mrs Tina Mountain noted the positive additional provision of Extra Care Housing in Epsom and Ewell by Surrey County Council, noting the inadequacy of local community provision and closure of the Wells Centre by the Borough Council. She asked the Cabinet Member for Adults and Health whether she agreed that the new provisions showed that the Council listened to its residents by providing for its elderly and vulnerable.
In response, the Cabinet Member for Adults and Health agreed with the importance of raising the profile of the work that Surrey County Council was doing on providing accommodation for the most vulnerable residents across the county. She would continue to ensure the delivery of a substantial amount of supported accommodation in Epsom and Ewell as it was an area of high demand.
(Q4) Mrs Clare Curran noted that the Community Impact Assessment (CIA) was a remarkable piece of work. One significant insight of the report was the impact of the pandemic on mental health and she asked whether the Leader could expand upon the way in which all providers were preparing to meet the inevitable surge in accessing mental health services.
The Leader of the Council recognised that there would be significant growth in the demand for mental health services over the coming months and years. He explained that early intervention was vital, the Council would be re-procuring the Child and Adolescent Mental Health Services (CAMHS) contract from next April which would bring greater capacity into the system and there would be a further rollout of mental health advisers in schools.
He noted the significant piece of work being undertaken by the mental health improvement board on mental health provision across the system and the further resources allocated to resolve the waiting list for mental health services, particularly on CAMHS. The Council and the system needed to continue to work together closely to address the provision of mental health services by ensuring adequate funding and capacity.
(Q5) Dr Peter Szanto asked the Cabinet Member for Transport on what else the Council was doing to support sustainable travel in addition to walking and cycling initiatives.
In response, the Cabinet Member for Transport explained that Cabinet in November had approved £49 million to accelerate the introduction of the Surrey Ultra-Low and Zero Emission Scheme, of that £32 million would be allocated to removing around eighty of the most polluting buses off Surrey’s network, £6.3 million would be allocated to community transport and £9 million for bus priority measures which were essential to reduce private vehicle use and increase sustainable transport.
(Q6) Mr Mike Goodman asked if the Cabinet Member for Environment and Climate Change could explain how residents could apply for the grants listed in the response.
In response, the Cabinet Member ... view the full minutes text for item 60/20 |
|
|
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 Democratic Services by 12 noon on 7 December 2020).
Additional documents: Minutes: Mr Eber Kington made a statement on a leaflet issued across Epsom and Ewell which angered residents as it attempted to deflect responsibility away from Surrey County Council and onto the Borough Council and local residents regarding the queues to the Epsom CRC. It was a shame as that error of judgement diverted positive comments away from the new booking system to the CRC which had reduced queuing.
|
|
Item 8 (i)
Mrs Fiona White (Guildford West) to move under standing order 11 asfollows:
This Council notes:
That it recognises that child poverty, especially child food poverty, is a systemic problem, not a temporary one which can be solved with short term measures.
It further recognises that the key objective that no-one is left behind must start with our youngest children.
It recognises too that breakfast clubs and other on-site initiatives delivered through schools make a huge difference not just to pupil wellbeing but also to the quality of learning and other outcomes.
Therefore resolves to:
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:
This Council notes:
That it recognises that child poverty, especially child food poverty, is a systemic problem, not a temporary one which can be solved with short term measures.
It further recognises that the key objective that no-one is left behind must start with our youngest children.
It recognises too that breakfast clubs and other on-site initiatives delivered through schools make a huge difference not just to pupil wellbeing but also to the quality of learning and other outcomes.
Therefore resolves to:
1. Encourage all schools to set up breakfast clubs by making a one-off capital allocation to those schools which require it to amend premises or provide equipment, to enable schools to make breakfast provision 2. Ask officers to produce a report on child poverty in Surrey, so Council can fully understand the impact and scale of the problem 3. Consider setting aside in the next revenue budget sums to enable an action plan falling out of that report which could meaningfully address the impact of child poverty on learning and wellbeing and 4. Lobby government to consider reforms to the welfare system which address the fundamental causes of child poverty, such as the failures of the Universal Credit system and the inadequacy of the minimum wage.
Mrs White made the following points:
· That the purpose of her motion was clear, it was for the Council to recognise the issue of child poverty in Surrey and resolve to do something about it. · That although Covid-19 had brought the issue of child poverty and free school meals into focus, child poverty had been a growing problem for a long time. · That the numbers of people in Surrey claiming Universal Credit was rising. · That the children’s vision for Surrey was to deliver better opportunities of outcome for children and young people. Hungry children could not make the most of their education, so targeted action was needed to address the matter through the provision of breakfast clubs. · That it was vital to accurately record the extent of child poverty in Surrey but to also provide action on the issue, unlike the amendment the motion was proactive through putting sums aside for an action plan before the next revenue budget was set. · Recognised that the Council could not solve the issue of child poverty alone, the motion proposed that it lobby the government to consider reforms to the welfare system which did not adequately support families, noting the failings of the Universal Credit system and insufficient minimum wage. · Supported the addition in the amendment to lobby government to continue to fund local government appropriately to mitigate the social effects of Covid-19. · That overall, the amendment did not add much substance to the motion, it contained a lot of self-congratulatory wording and lost sight of the motion’s simplicity which resolved to take positive action to address the issue.
The motion ... view the full minutes text for item 62/20 |
|
|
ORGANISATION STRATEGY 2021 - 2026
Council is asked to approve the Surrey County Council Organisation Strategy 2021 - 2026, which sets out how the Council will work with residents and partners to contribute to the achievement of the Community Vision for Surrey in 2030. It sets out priority areas the Council will focus on over the next five years.
Additional documents: Minutes: The Leader of the Council introduced the report. He noted that it built upon the Council’s Community Vision for Surrey 2030 through the guiding principle of tackling inequality and ensuring no-one is left behind. He explained that the refreshed Organisation Strategy was a framework for all key initiatives and workstreams in the county, such as the Community Impact Assessment (CIA) and the Surrey 2030 Economic Strategy Statement. He encouraged all to read the CIA which included a wealth of data on communities and highlighted the disproportionate impact of Covid-19 on different communities in Surrey. He noted the work of the Surrey Future Economic Commission which looked at the state of Surrey’s economy and how to support it going forward, which fed into the Surrey 2030 Economic Strategy Statement. He noted that there were four key priorities in the refreshed Organisation Strategy, underpinned by six key enablers to continue to transform the Council.
A Member noted that many of the initiatives and priorities within the refreshed Organisational Strategy were commendable but aspirational and hoped they could be achieved in the near future in order to make a real difference to Surrey’s residents. He noted that the CIA was an excellent comprehensive assessment with a real focus on mental health. He highlighted that he had a dilemma on the overall Strategy and its focus on efficiencies, as to whether they would transform residents’ experiences or whether they were cuts. He stressed the need for the Strategy to address and focus on: inadequate government funding, the growing demand for services for children and young people with SEND, ensuring affordable housing, reducing homelessness and rough sleeping, facilitating the planting of 1.2 million trees by 2030, improving Children’s Services, Adult Social Care and the fire service (SFRS) despite the major reforms achieved a few years ago, the maintenance of Surrey’s highway network, working more effectively with partners to develop existing infrastructure such as community facilities and delivering services together.
In response, the Leader of the Council noted that the Council was focussed on transforming the way in which its services were delivered through measurable outcomes. The CIA would provide an effective evidence base to measure those outcomes and the refreshed Organisation Strategy was not aspirational but underpinned the work that the Council was continuing to do.
RESOLVED:
That Council approved the Surrey County Council Organisation Strategy 2021 – 2026, which sets out how the council will work with residents and partners to contribute to the achievement of the Community Vision for Surrey in 2030. It sets out priority areas the council will focus on over the next five years.
|
|
|
ADOPTION OF THE SURREY WASTE LOCAL PLAN
For the Council to consider the adoption of the Surrey Waste Local Plan. Additional documents: Minutes: The Leader of the Council introduced the report.
The Cabinet Member for Environment and Climate Change provided a summary of the Surrey Waste Local Plan. She noted thatthe Council had a statutory requirement to produce local plans for minerals and waste to ensure there was sufficient capacity and to review and update those plans where necessary every five years. The existing Plan was last adopted in 2008, if the Council did not adopt the updated Plan, she noted that it would be increasingly difficult to defend planning decisions and enforcement action taken on the basis of the policies in the existing Plan, potentially resulting in unwanted speculative waste development and the regularisation of unauthorised waste activity.
She explained that the review of the Surrey Waste Local Plan commenced in 2016 with a consultation on issues and options between September-November 2016, there was a further consultation on the draft plan between November 2017-February 2018, during January-February 2019 there was another consultation on the submission of the plan and a final consultation on the main modifications in January-February 2020. Throughout those four rounds of public consultation, views on the Plan were sought from residents, businesses and other stakeholders. She noted that Members had been kept updated and engaged throughout the process via reports to the Cabinet, the Communities, Environment and Highways Select Committee, the Planning and Regulatory Committee, the member reference group, and an all Member briefing during the consultation on the submission of the plan. District and borough council officers and Members were engaged in the process through a round of workshops in 2018/19 and Statements of Common Ground were signed between Surrey County Council and all eleven district and borough councils in September 2019.
The Plan presented to Council for adoption included modifications and was found sound in May 2020 by an independent planning inspector following an examination in public in September 2019 and it met all the statutory requirements. She explained that the new Plan had fewer allocated sites than the existing Plan with some sites having been removed completely. She noted that there was only one new site which was at Lambs Business Park in South Godstone, that Trumps Farm was now allocated solely for a household waste Dry Mixed Recyclables (DMR) plant, that Weylands Treatment Works had additional protections for residents in respect of Heavy Goods Vehicles (HGV) routing that was absent from the existing Plan. She added that there were a number of existing industrial estates referred to in the Plan as Industrial Land Areas of Search (ILAS), those sites were not allocated in the new Plan but were identified as potential sites for small to medium scale waste uses subject to usual planning permission and that several of those sites already hosted a range of waste uses.
Looking to the future, she noted that the Council was progressing a joint Minerals and Waste Local Plan to address the increasing synergies between the two. She added that many other County Councils had joint plans ... view the full minutes text for item 64/20 |
|
|
SCRUTINY ANNUAL REPORT 2019/20
For Council to note the activity of the four Select Committees and the improvements in practice realised during the period shown in the Scrutiny Annual Report.
Additional documents: Minutes: The Leader of the Council introduced the report. He commended the hard work of the Council’s Select Committees, the various task and finish groups and extensive work outside of committee meetings with over one hundred meetings in the past year, as well as the work of officers. He noted that the restructuring of the Council’s scrutiny function through the establishment of the four Select Committees and task and finish groups had been effective in scrutinising Council policy before decisions were made by Cabinet. He encouraged Members to use the Select Committee process to provide constructive input into the formulation of Council policy.
The Chairman of the Select Committee Chairmen and Vice-Chairmen’s Group thanked the Leader for the work he had done to support the development of scrutiny and the work on restructuring the scrutiny process initiated by the Chairman of the Communities, Environment and Highways Select Committee. He thanked his fellow Select Committee Chairmen and Vice-Chairmen for their work and supported the Leader’s call for more Members to be engaged in the scrutiny process and particularly in the task and finish groups. He emphasised that scrutiny was the foundation of democracy and was delighted that Council had made advances on scrutiny, he hoped that the effective arrangements would be continued.
The Chairman of the Communities, Environment and Highways Select Committee hoped that the report would command cross-party support which had been a key feature of the Select Committees since they were revitalised. He noted that effective structures and arrangements could be established, but what mattered for success in the scrutiny process was the contributions of Members in those roles. One advantage of the new system was the cross-party representation including the positions of Select Committee Chairmen and Vice-Chairmen and non-partisan collaboration within the Select Committees to hold executive to account. There was more work to be done, but he noted the significant progress made since last year. He paid credit to the Leader for his support and the realisation of his commitment that no significant proposals would go to Cabinet until they went through the Select Committee system. He highlighted that a few years ago the activities of Select Committees focussed on noting actions and asking for periodic updates, since the restructure last year the change had been fundamental via the scrutiny of strategy, policy development and establishment of task and finish groups. The new scrutiny system had improved the governance of the Council by holding the Cabinet to account to the benefit of Surrey’s residents.
RESOLVED:
That Council noted the contents of the Scrutiny Annual Report.
|
|
|
AUDIT AND GOVERNANCE COMMITTEE - REPORT OF THE GOVERNANCE REVIEW TASK GROUP
That Council notes the Audit and Governance Committee’s report of the Governance Review Task Group.
Additional documents: Minutes: The Chairman of the Audit and Governance Committee introduced the report. He noted that the Governance Review Task Group took an open approach to interviewing a range of Members and officers to evaluate the effectiveness of the Council’s scrutiny function. He noted that significant progress had been made on the Council’s scrutiny function and welcomed the strong support from the Leader of the Council, Group Leaders and the Chief Executive.
He reported that scrutiny was now clearly valued by officers and Members than had been previously, in particular non-Cabinet Members realised that they had a significant opportunity to direct Council policy before final decisions were made by Cabinet.
He outlined one recommendation which was that there should be a standing agenda item on scrutiny at each Council meeting for Select Committee Chairmen to provide updates on the work of their Select Committees and for Members to ask questions.
RESOLVED:
That Council noted the report by the Audit and Governance Committee on 26 November 2020.
|
|
|
AUDIT AND GOVERNANCE COMMITTEE - REPORT OF THE MEMBER CODE OF CONDUCT WORKING GROUP
That Council approves the Audit and Governance Committee’s report of the Member Code of Conduct Working Group.
Additional documents: Minutes: The Chairman of the Audit and Governance Committee introduced the report. He noted that the report was to some extent an interim position as the Local Government Association (LGA) was expected to publish its revised recommendations following consultation on the LGA Model Member Code of Conduct, which was not known at the time of the review. He anticipated that minor amendments would be brought forward to Council following the publication of the LGA’s Model version.
RESOLVED:
That Council approved:
1. (a) The appointment of two Independent Persons. 1. (b) That Mr Akbar Khan and Philippa Harding be appointed as the two Independent Persons. 2. The revised Arrangements for Dealing with Allegations of Breaches of the Member Code of Conduct.
|
|
|
REPORT OF THE CABINET
To receive the report of the meetings of the Cabinet held on 27 October 2020 and 24 November 2020.
Additional documents: Minutes: The Leader presented the report of the Cabinet meetings held on 27 October 2020 and 24 November 2020.
Recommendations on Policy Framework Documents:
27 October 2020:
A. Organisation Strategy Refresh [Agenda Item 9] B. Surrey Waste Local Plan: Adoption [Agenda Item 10]
Reports for Information/Discussion:
27 October 2020:
C. Delivery of Care Leavers Accommodation, A Library and Family Centre in Caterham Hill D. Decision on the Route to Market for Two Extra Care Housing Schemes E. Prudential Ride London-Surrey
24 November 2020:
F. 2021/22 Draft Budget and Medium-Term Financial Strategy G. Accelerating the Introduction of Ultra Low / Zero Emissions Buses and Community Transport Vehicles into Surrey H. Transformation of Accommodation Based Care and Support for Working Age Adults: Delivering Supported Independent Living Options
I. Quarterly Report on Decisions Taken Under Special Urgency Arrangements: 13 October – 08 December 2020
RESOLVED:
1. That Council noted that there had been no urgent decisions in the last three months (quarter). 2. That the reports of the meetings of the Cabinet held on 27 October 2020 and 24 November 2020 be adopted.
|
|
|
MINUTES OF CABINET MEETINGS
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 Democratic Services by 12 noon on Monday 7 December 2020.
Additional documents: Minutes: No notification had been received by the deadline from Members wishing to raise a question or make a statement on any matters in the minutes.
The Chairman concluded the meeting with some closing remarks: he acknowledged the positive news of the Covid-19 vaccine rollout, wished farewell to County Hall and welcomed the move to the Council’s new headquarters in Woodhatch, Reigate and wished all a Happy Christmas and New Year.
|