Councillors and committees

Agenda and minutes

Venue: REMOTE

Contact: Amelia Christopher  020 8213 2838

Media

Items
No. Item

41/20

APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE

    • Share this item

    The Chairman to report apologies for absence.

    Additional documents:

    Minutes:

    Apologies were received from Mrs Angell, Mr Ellwood, Mr Kemp, Mrs Lay and Mr Witham.

     

    The Chairman wished Colin Kemp well, wishing him a swift and full recovery.

     

42/20

MINUTES pdf icon PDF 364 KB

43/20

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:

    Rachael I Lake declared a non-pecuniary interest noting that her son was an employee of Surrey County Council. 

     

44/20

CHAIRMAN'S ANNOUNCEMENTS pdf icon PDF 94 KB

    • Share this item

    Welcome everyone to today’s Council Meeting – I hope you and your loved ones are all safe and well. 

     

    John Pincham

     

    It is with great sadness that, since we last met, we said goodbye to former County Councillor John Pincham, who passed away in his home in August, aged 88.

     

    John was a County Councillor from 1993-2005 and I had the pleasure of running against him for election in Cobham & Oxshott in 1993. He was a lovely man, a real character, and his passing is a great loss to many.

     

    I am sure that Members will join me in expressing our sadness at this news and passing on our sincere condolences to John’s family.

     

    Black History Month

     

    October is Black History Month and I had the honour of launching Surrey County Council’s celebrations, as we recognise and celebrate the culture and contributions the people of African and Caribbean descent have made to our county and country.

     

    Across October and beyond, we aim to promote knowledge of Black culture, history and heritage, through numerous activities and events, which have been kindly organised and led by our new staff network – Surrey MEGA (Minority Ethnic Group and Allies). We hope in doing this, we will all come to a renewed knowledge of the invaluable contributions individuals from this community and culture have made to British society.

     

    Events and activities are announced on and available through the MEGA Network page on Jive. Please do visit the page and join in as many activities and events that you can.

     

    Thank You

     

    Once again, I would like to offer my heartfelt thanks to the fantastic people of this Council as they continue to do their utmost to serve and protect the residents of our county.

     

    It has been a tough few months – and the difficulties look set to continue at least into the winter, which always brings its own set of challenges. Nevertheless, our staff continue to put our residents at the heart and soul of all that they do.

     

    A huge and sincere ‘thank you’ to all our staff for the immeasurable difference you are making to so many lives. Please keep up the tremendous work.

     

     

    Additional documents:

    Minutes:

    The Chairman:

     

    ·         Highlighted to Members that the Chairman’s Announcements were located in the agenda front sheet.

    ·         Drew attention to the Queen’s Birthday Honours List 2020, noting that it had been postponed from June due to the current pandemic and it celebrated the selfless service and good deeds of ordinary people and famous names during that difficult time.

    ·         Congratulated Mrs Julie Iles who had been awarded the rank of Officer of the Most Excellent Order of the British Empire (OBE).

     

45/20

LEADER'S STATEMENT pdf icon PDF 303 KB

    • Share this item

    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:

     

    ·      That working together for the benefit of Surrey’s residents and those that work in the county should be a continued priority and not just during the current COVID-19 surge.

    ·      That for Members to be critical friends, it was vital that they had briefings and information to enable scrutiny on key issues including but not limited to unitarisation.

    ·      That mental health remained an issue and was exacerbated by COVID-19 and similarly to equality impact assessments, mental health impact assessments should be included in all of the Council’s reports.

    ·      Recommended that Members and officers read the report of theMental Health Task Group due to be considered on Thursday at the Adults and Health Select Committee. The report recommended mental health training for all and recommendations to improve the situation of those with mental health issues. Going forward, it was also important to ensure the right contract to cover children’s mental health.

    ·      Welcomed any Surrey-wide initiative to encourage the early uptake of the annual flu jab, through working with General Practice (GP) surgeries.

    ·      Highlighted the serious funding gap from central Government, which would lead to further cuts and continued austerity.

    ·      Welcomed Mr Edward Hawkins as Deputy Cabinet Member for Property and stressed the need for the Council to use its property assets efficiently.

    ·      Questioned whether the Council had the right resources and could harness the momentum gained through the property review - Surrey Asset and Place Strategy - undertaken more than eighteen months ago.

    ·      Requested that the Leader provide reassurance on the financial situation concerning Surrey’s commercial property investments with regard to the annual valuation and the latest on rent collection from our tenants.

    ·      Queried how the Council could work with the borough and district councils on the Surrey 2050 Place Ambition, in order to provide the necessary infrastructure to deliver a Surrey-wide vision and strategy.

    ·      Thanked officers, staff and partners for the work they had done and were continuing to do during the COVID-19 pandemic.

    ·      Sent best wishes and support to the Deputy Leader of the Council.

    ·      Noted the need for caution and sensitivity in how the Council approaches complex challenges.

    ·      Expressed concern over Local Community Networks (LCNs) as they could be seen by borough and district councils as a way to take over the established community relationships and local structures.

    ·      Welcomed the focus on economic growth which must be delivered in partnership with borough and district councils, to address concerns such as affordable housing and ensuring a sustainable workforce.

    ·      Praised the significant strengthening and refocus of the Council on scrutiny and the work of the Select Committee Chairmen and Vice Chairmen's Group.

    ·      That there had been a large change in the way services were delivered due to the pandemic, praising the work of teachers delivering content digitally and on the safe reopening of schools.

    ·      Agreed with the Leader that the Council should embrace change and take the lead not  ...  view the full minutes text for item 45/20

46/20

MEMBERS' QUESTION TIME pdf icon PDF 484 KB

    • Share this item

    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 7 October 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:

    Member Questions:

     

    Notice of twenty-two questions had been received. The questions and replies were published in a supplementary agenda on 12 October 2020.

     

    A number of supplementary questions were asked and a summary of the main points is set out below:

     

    (Q1) Mr RobertEvans noted disappointment in the response as it did not set a high target or was ambitious in the levels of recycling that Surrey should be doing and the variations between different boroughs and districts.

     

    In response, the Cabinet Member for Environment and Climate Change emphasised that Surrey was doing well as a county in terms of recycling, noting the most recent figures in which the county reused, recycled or composted fifty-six percent of all of its rubbish - putting the Surrey third in the country.

     

    (Q2) DrAndrew Povey was pleased to see that Cranleigh High Street was to be included in the lane rental scheme. Concerning local consultation and engagement. He asked for the Cabinet Member’s assurance that local Members would be kept better informed and involved in discussions on works on the highways.

     

    (Q4) Mr MikeGoodman thanked the Cabinet Member for her excellent answer and Cabinet Member Briefing which demonstrated the work on delivering Surrey County Council’s Climate Change Strategy. He queried the grant that had been secured for LoCASE (Low Carbon across the South East), how the system would work and what the benefits would be for residents and businesses.

     

    Mr Jonathan Essex congratulated the Cabinet Member on the successful bid for the Government’s Green Homes Local Authority Delivery programme, asking how many of Surrey’s 600,000 homes would be retrofitted as a result of the funding and if there would be funding to retrain Surrey residents who were out of work, to do that task.

     

    In response, the Cabinet Member for Environment and Climate Change explained that Surrey County Council secured European Union investment though LoCASE worth approximately £6 million. The contract documents would be signed in early November, to be launched soon after and would run until June 2023. The programme would be promoted to small and medium-sized enterprises (SME) across the county, working in collaboration with borough and district councils and Surrey Chambers of Commerce. SME businesses were eligible for a grant of up to fifty percent for either energy efficiency or low carbon measures, or alternatively could sign up to ten hours of support to reduce their negative environmental impacts. The carbon saved and financial benefits to SME businesses from reduced energy and fuel bills would be monitored throughout the programme.

     

    The Cabinet Member for Environment and Climate Change would provide a written answer to Mr Essex.

     

    (Q7) Mrs Bernie Muir did not have a supplementary question.

     

    Mrs Clare Curran noted that she was delighted to welcome the Deputy Cabinet Member - Support for the Leader recently to Bookham to discuss a potential community project which was being supported by a major VCFS partner and could transform service delivery in the area. She asked if the Deputy  ...  view the full minutes text for item 46/20

47/20

STATEMENTS BY MEMBERS

    • Share this item

    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 12 October 2020).

     

    Additional documents:

    Minutes:

     There were none.

48/20

ORIGINAL MOTIONS pdf icon PDF 8 KB

    • Share this item

    Item 8 (i)

    Mr Nick Darby (The Dittons) to move under standing order 11 asfollows:

     

    This council notes:

     

    The unsuccessful attempt by the Leader of the Council and Cabinet to submit a case to the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government (MHCLG) to create a Surrey Single Unitary Council.

    That the potential bid has caused reputational damage to Surrey County Council.

     

    Therefore resolves that:

     

    In order to understand the reasons behind the bid, the decision not to consult from the start with Borough and District Councils, and the cost to the council taxpayer, this Council calls upon the Leader and Cabinet to provide a full public written Report on this unsuccessful bid, to include the following:

                          I.        The process used to launch the bid and authorise expenditure on the bid.

     

                        II.        The rationale for developing a bid before the Government’s White Paper has been published.

     

                       III.        The full costs of the bid including the costs of the initial research and financial analysis, preparation of a comprehensive business case, consultants fees, Public Affairs support, the Telephone and Focus Group Survey, any Surrey-wide leaflets which included material in support of a bid for a Single Surrey Unitary, and officer time.

     

                      IV.        Other relevant information.

     

    Item 8 (ii)

    Mr Chris Botten (Caterham Hill) to move under standing order 11 asfollows:

     

    This council notes:

     

    This council recognises that the future of Surrey's local government may well be with appropriately sized and proportioned unitary authorities.

     

    Therefore resolves that:

     

    1. In future to ensure it works inclusively with Boroughs and Districts and their communities to establish a consensus on the way forward, including ensuring that funding can be devolved to elected bodies as close to communities as possible.

     

    1. It minimises the use of public funds and resources in exploring and developing future models to put to Surrey residents, mindful of the fact that ALL councils in Surrey have very limited resources and that any move to Unitary bodies would be predicated on the need for greater efficiency and stewardship of public funds.

     

    Item 8 (iii)

    Mr Will Forster (Woking South) to move under standing order 11 asfollows:

     

    This council notes:

     

    • As people are being instructed to return to school, the national Government is encouraging everyone to walk or cycle where possible instead of taking public transport or returning to their cars.
    • The Government has announced a £250 million “Emergency Active Travel Fund” for temporary infrastructure to enable safe cycling and walking – of which, Surrey County Council received £848,000 (and provided match funding) as part of phase 1. It has subsequently submitted a £7.8m bid for phase 2.
    • The Transport Secretary issued new Statutory Guidance on 9 May to all Highways Authorities, requiring them to deliver “transformative change” within an urgent timeframe.
    • Measures listed under the Statutory Guidance include (but are not limited to) ‘pop-up’ cycle facilities, widening footways, “school streets” schemes, and reducing speed limits.
    • The guidance further states that “measures should  ...  view the full agenda text for item 48/20

    Additional documents:

    Minutes:

    Item 8 (i)

     

    Under Standing Order 12.3 the Council agreed to debate this motion.

     

    Under Standing Order 12.1 Mr Nick Darby moved:

     

    This Council notes:

     

    The unsuccessful attempt by the Leader of the Council and Cabinet to submit a case to the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government (MHCLG) to create a Surrey Single Unitary Council.

     

    That the potential bid has caused reputational damage to Surrey County Council.

     

    Therefore resolves that:

     

         In order to understand the reasons behind the bid, the decision not to consult from the start with Borough and District Councils, and the cost to the council taxpayer, this Council calls upon the Leader and Cabinet to provide a full public written Report on this unsuccessful bid, to include the following:

     

        I.       The process used to launch the bid and authorise expenditure on the bid.

     

       II.       The rationale for developing a bid before the Government’s White Paper has been published.

     

     III.       The full costs of the bid including the costs of the initial research and financial analysis, preparation of a comprehensive business case, consultants fees, Public Affairs support, the Telephone and Focus Group Survey, any Surrey-wide leaflets which included material in support of a bid for a Single Surrey Unitary, and officer time.

     

     IV.       Other relevant information.

     

    Mr Darby made the following points:

     

    ·           He sought a full public written report on the unitary bid, to include the process used to launch the bid and authorise its expenditure, the rationale for developing the bid at the current time and to understand the full costs of the bid so far and any other relevant information.

    ·           Noted disappointment as the bid caused reputational damage with borough and district councils who had not been closely consulted on the options for Surrey and the bid sought their removal. Such a relationship was vital to achieve joint strategies such as the Surrey Place Ambition 2050 and dismisses their joint role in the county’s response to Covid-19.

    ·           He noted that residents should have been consulted on the proposal from the beginning, not through the belated Telephone and Focus Group Survey and not when the option chosen was expressed as a done deal, such as the leaflet to residents which promoted a single Surrey unitary.

    ·           That the bid was rushed without a detailed business case or briefings involving Member and resident consultation. Surrey’s encouragement by the Government to prepare a bid early to get in quick despite Covid-19, Brexit and the need to allow recovery was ill-judged. 

    ·           That the bid was a waste of taxpayers’ money as it was confirmed the previous day that Surrey was not being invited to make a bid at present. He asked what the Council had spent so far on the intended bid and noted an approximate figure of just under £350,000 composing of initial research and financial analysis, preparation of the comprehensive business case, a Telephone and Focus Group Survey, Surrey-wide leaflets, public affairs support and expenditure on a senior policy lead and officer time.

    ·           Highlighted  ...  view the full minutes text for item 48/20

49/20

SURREY COUNTY COUNCIL - CIVIC HEART MOVE TO WOODHATCH pdf icon PDF 183 KB

    • Share this item

    For Council to consider the move of the Civic Heart from County Hall to the Canon site, Woodhatch, Reigate, Surrey from 1 January 2021.

     

    Additional documents:

    Minutes:

    The Leader of the Council introduced the report noting that he responded previously to a couple of questions asked earlier regarding accessible transport to Woodhatch.

     

    As Chairman of the County Hall move and Agile Programme (CHAP) Task Group, Mr Forster noted the informal report by the Task Group on the Civic Heart move to Woodhatch circulated to Members yesterday. The Task Group established by the Resources and Performance Select Committee, scrutinised the County Council’s plans to move County Hall out of Kingston and find a new Civic Heart in Surrey, noting that the Canon site in Woodhatch, Reigate, had been identified. The Task Group agreed that Woodhatch would be a suitable location in principle regarding the buildings and surroundings, however the transport connections were currently unsuitable. Surrey County Council needed a headquarters that was accessible to staff, Members and the public. After declaring a climate emergency and complaining that Surrey’s roads were congested the Council cannot move to Woodhatch knowing that the move would encourage people to use their cars. The Task Group wanted the poor transport connections to Woodhatch to be addressed before the final decision was taken on designating Woodhatch as the Council’s Civic Heart. The decision should only be taken once there was a sustainable transport plan, comprehensive office estate strategy and the costs involved were shared with Members.

     

    Eight Members made the following comments:

     

    ·      Supported the recommendations put forward by the CHAP Task Group to Council and asked if the Leader could comment on whether the recommendations could be accepted and that they would be followed through.

    ·      That two earlier Member questions highlighted the need for a sustainable travel plan which should have been finalised before the Council committed to move and there must be sufficient budget allocated to that travel plan to ensure that the new Council headquarters would be in a sustainable location.

    ·      That Woodhatch was in an attractive location but it was revealing that there were four hundred and seventy-five parking spaces. There was insufficient detail on the costs needed to improve the building and transport sustainability.

    ·      That the Council would not get anything achieved if it focussed on the detail around transport holding up the major decision to move, whereby a shuttle service or local bus provision from the railway stations for example could be arranged in due course.

    ·      That the Council made a commitment to move out of Kingston-upon-Thames and back into Surrey, staff needed certainty on that; the move would support the local economy of east Surrey.

    ·      That it was only recently that the Council passed a motion regarding climate change and a commitment to it was needed throughout decision-making.

    ·      That the recommendation of the Task Group was to proceed with the move but only when the transport arrangements were resolved and made sustainable, welcomed an amendment on the matter.

    ·      That people were not aware that Redhill was a transport hub, it was the only area outside of London that had rail connectivity across the four cardinal directions  ...  view the full minutes text for item 49/20

50/20

REVIEW OF COVID RELATED CONSTITUTIONAL CHANGES pdf icon PDF 190 KB

    • Share this item

    Council is asked to review the recommendations made and to remove the previous delegations agreed at its meeting on 17 March 2020, due to the Remote Meeting Regulations legislation.

     

    Additional documents:

    Minutes:

    The Leader of the Council introduced the report.

     

    RESOLVED:

     

    1.      To redefine the definition within the Council’s Constitution to define Cabinet as a formal meeting of Cabinet.

    2.      To remove the delegation for all non-executive decision making to be delegated to the Proper Officer in consultation with the relevant committee chairman and for any non-executive decision making to be undertaken in line with the Council’s Scheme of Delegation.

    3.      To remove the dispensation for virus-related non-attendance at meetings in relation to the six-month rule as set out in section 85(1) of the Local Government Act 1972. 

    4.      To note that the Council has a Remote Meetings Protocol in place and that this will continue to be in operation for all formal remote committee meetings. 

    5.      To note that the Audit and Governance Committee reviewed the use of original delegations that Council made on 17 March 2020 and the use of the Remote Meetings Protocol to ensure that Members remained informed in relation to council decision making. 

     

     

51/20

MEMBERS ALLOWANCES - FOLLOW UP FROM INDEPENDENT REMUNERATION PANEL REPORT pdf icon PDF 282 KB

52/20

CHANGES TO CABINET PORTFOLIOS AND APPOINTMENT OF COMMITTEES pdf icon PDF 271 KB

53/20

REPORT OF THE CABINET pdf icon PDF 372 KB

    • Share this item

    To receive the report of the meetings of the Cabinet held on 21 July 2020 and 29 September 2020.

     

    Report to follow.

     

    Additional documents:

    Minutes:

    The Leader presented the report of the Cabinet meetings held on 21 July 2020 and 29 September 2020.

     

    Reports for Information/Discussion:

     

    21 July 2020:

     

    A.     Decision on the Change of Route to Market for Two Extra Care Housing Sites 

    B.     Looked After Children Property Projects - New Children's Homes and Shaw Family Centre

    C.     Recovery and Devolution White Paper: Opportunities and Benefits for Surrey

     

    29 September 2020:

     

    D.     Surrey County Council Strategic Reset 

    E.     Developing Local Special Educational Needs and Disability (SEND) Provision in Surrey to Meet Demand in 2021/2022 

    F.     Community Projects Fund

    G.    Quarterly Report on Decisions Taken Under Special Urgency Arrangements: 8 July – 12 October 2020

                      

    At its meeting on 21 July 2020 Cabinet considered:

     

    a)     Urgent Item – Recovery and Devolution White Paper: Opportunities and Benefits for Surrey

     

    RESOLVED:

     

    1.      That Council noted that there had been one urgent decision in that quarter.

    2.      That the reports of the meetings of the Cabinet held on 21 July 2020 and 29 September 2020 be adopted.

     

54/20

MINUTES OF CABINET MEETINGS pdf icon PDF 324 KB

    • Share this item

    Any matters within the minutes of the Cabinet 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 12 October 2020.

     

    Report to follow - minutes of the Cabinet meeting held on 29 September 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.