Agenda and minutes
PDF 600 KBVenue: Woodhatch Place, 11 Cockshot Hill, Reigate, Surrey, RH2 8EF
Contact: Amelia Christopher
Media
| No. | Item |
|---|---|
|
APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE
The Chair to report apologies for absence. Additional documents: Minutes: Apologies for absence were received from Colin Cross, Fiona Davidson, Paul Follows, John Furey, Trefor Hogg, Scott Lewis, Julia McShane, Penny Rivers, Hazel Watson.
Members who attended remotely and had no voting rights were Robert Hughes, Mark Sugden.
|
|
To confirm the minutes of the meeting of the Council held on 12 July 2022.
Additional documents: Minutes: The minutes of the meeting of the County Council held on 12 July 2022 were submitted, confirmed and signed.
|
|
|
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: There were none.
|
|
|
CHAIR'S ANNOUNCEMENTS
HM Queen Elizabeth II
At this first County Council meeting since the decease of Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II, I ask, those who can, stand and join me in a minute’s silence of respect and reflection.
On 12 September, I read a copy of the Proclamation of the Accession of His Majesty King Charles III on behalf of Surrey County Council. I would like to take this opportunity to thank those Members, officers and staff that attended, whether in person or virtually.
God Save the King! (Members repeat: God Save the King!)
My thanks to my Office, all those staff of the County Council and the emergency services for all their hard work and extra hours in making sure the Council showed proper respect and observances during the period of mourning of Her Majesty, Queen Elizabeth II and the proclamation of King Charles III across the county's services.
David Ivison - former County Councillor
During the summer break we heard about the death of a former colleague, David Ivison. David served as a county councillor from 2005 to 2017 for the division of Heatherside and Parkside, amongst other posts held during his tenure, David was Chair of the Surrey County Council Transport Select Committee. Our condolences to his family and friends.
For those that can, please stand for a moment's reflection in respect of our past colleague.
Rosemary Scott - former County Councillor
Former county councillor Rosemary Scott has also very sadly passed away. Rosemary was a local and long serving county councillor for the old Ashford East division. Her family were by her side when she passed. Rosemary will be fondly remembered.
For those that can, please stand for a moment's reflection in respect of our past colleague.
Alison Todd (née Griffiths) - County Councillor
It is with great sadness to have to inform you of the recent death of Surrey County Council Councillor Alison Todd. Alison had been ill for quite some time and many of us knew this but it has still come as a shock to many colleagues and friends. Alison was a hardworking, amazing and giving colleague and a good friend to many. Our hearts go out to her family and to all her colleagues and staff who will be deeply saddened that we have lost such a kind and talented person.
Alison joined Surrey County Council in 2017. During her time as a councillor, she served as Deputy Cabinet Member for Health between May 2019 and May 2021; prior to that she was the Deputy Cabinet Member for All-Age learning from May 2018 to April 2019.
Alison was a dedicated Councillor for several years. She was a staunch advocate for the residents of Sunbury & Ashford Common and her death will come as a bitter blow to her community. Her passion for doing the right thing by her residents and getting things done shone through. Tributes have poured in from colleagues across the council, describing Alison as a ‘wonderful woman, liked by colleagues from across ... view the full agenda text for item 64/22 Additional documents: Minutes: The Chair:
· Led the Council in a minute’s silence of respect and reflection regarding the death of Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II. · Led Members in announcing ‘God Save the King!’. · Led the Council in moments of reflection for former Surrey County Councillors David Ivison and Rosemary Scott. · Led the Council in a minute’s silence in respect of Surrey County Councillor Alison Todd (née Griffiths) who recently passed. · Noted that in a change to normal protocol, she had been asked by Surrey County Council’s Chief Executive if she may speak in tribute to Alison on behalf of the Council’s officers.
· Noted that may Alison Todd rest in peace and on behalf of Members, sent love and best wishes to her family. · Noted that the rest of her announcements could be found in the Council agenda front sheet.
|
|
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 of the Council made a detailed statement.
A copy of the statement is attached as Appendix A. Members raised the following topics:
· Noted that there remained problems concerning Home to School Transport assistance, including communications issues experienced by parents seeking information on their applications for assistance; many unnecessary appeals as a result of the policy being too rigidly applied, and examples of parents experiencing delays and difficulties in arranging transport for their children. · Stressed that lessons needed to be learned quickly to avoid any repetition, and that sufficient resources were needed as well as regular communication. · The Leader’s apology was welcomed, and support was offered to finding solutions to address the problems. Surrey Live, BBC Radio Surrey and BBC South Today were thanked for publicising the issues raised above. · Clarified that there was no suggestion from the Residents' Association and Independents Group that Your Fund Surrey should be closed down - the motion asked for a pause. · Noted the challenging economic situation for the country and county. · Noted that Woking Borough Council held its cost-of-living summit a few weeks ago and contributions from the Council’s staff were welcomed; an action plan was being developed to help people in Woking and disappointment was expressed that the Council had decided not to do the same thing across Surrey. · Asked where the warm hubs would be located and when these would be available, in order to provide certainty to residents. · Whilst the Council still referred to ‘no one left behind’, the support on offer was not enough for people to make ends meet, more people were being left behind nationally and in Surrey. An example was given of a family without a car who challenged the mileage allowance that they had been given for the whole winter term for their child. · Queried why youth centres and thirty-five local childcare hubs had been closed whilst started investing in community centres elsewhere through the £100 million Your Fund Surrey programme. · The Children, Families, Lifelong Learning and Culture Select Committee had reviewed the new targeted family centre model without evidence to compare to what was there before, and it was instead suggested that there could be initiatives in all communities to help with education. · Asked whether all poorly heated and insulated homes within Surrey should be in an Investment Zone, as a result of the cost of living and climate crises. Asked where the proposed Investment Zone in Surrey would be located, and questioned whether the Government’s rush for local authorities to decide their location by the end of the week was to exclude residents from being consulted. · Asked the Leader to provide the Government with a plan and asked whether he agreed that the Council should be investing in better universal services and delivering a greener future for the whole county. · Quoted from the recent review of the Greener Futures Climate Change Delivery Plan about the need for the Council to lessen its funding gap which prevents the alignment of projects with what ... view the full minutes text for item 65/22 |
|
|
CHANGES TO CABINET PORTFOLIOS AND APPOINTMENT OF COMMITTEES
Council is asked to note the Leader's changes to Cabinet Portfolios.
Council is asked to note a number of further appointments to vacant committee seats.
Additional documents: Minutes: The Leader introduced the report and noted that the revised portfolios and portfolio holders were triggered by the resignation of Becky Rush as the Deputy Leader and Cabinet Member for Finance and Resources. He congratulated Becky Rush on her new job working with a multi-academy trust and thanked her for the detailed knowledge she provided during her time as a Cabinet Member. He welcomed Ayesha Azad as the new Cabinet Member for Finance and Resources, and reported the appointment of Denise Turner-Stewart as the new Deputy Leader and Cabinet Member for Communities and Community Safety. He thanked Steve Bax who stepped down as the Deputy Cabinet Member for Environment and welcomed Paul Deach into that role. He asked Members to familiarise themselves with the new portfolio holders.
Two Members made the following comments:
· Noted that the former Cabinet Member for Children and Families who presided over a series of failures had moved to the portfolio for Education and Learning, and the former Cabinet Member for Education and Learning who left a Home to School Transport service in disarray had been upgraded to become Deputy Leader. He asked whether those Members were really the Leader’s first choice and who came second. · Sought clarification on the correct portfolio title for the Cabinet Member for Children and Families, having recently received an email signed-off from the Cabinet Member for Children, Families and Housing.
The Leader responded noting that the Cabinet Member for Children and Families continued to have housing within her portfolio.
RESOLVED:
1. That the changes to Cabinet appointments and Portfolios set out in Annex 1 and 2 to this report be noted.
2. That Jonathan Hulley be appointed as a Select Committee Task Group Lead for the Communities, Environment and Highways Select Committee for the remainder of the 2022/23 Council Year.
3. That Robert Hughes be appointed as a Select Committee Task Group Lead for the Resources and Performance Select Committee for the remainder of the 2022/23 Council Year.
4. That the following committee appointments be noted: · Steve Bax to Resources and Performance Select Committee · Becky Rush to Communities, Environment and Highways Select Committee · Mark Sugden to Audit and Governance Committee
[In addition to the above: · Tim Hall to the Children, Families, Lifelong Learning and Culture Select Committee · Clare Curran to the People, Performance and Development Committee in place of Becky Rush]
|
|
|
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 Wednesday 5 October 2022).
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 twenty-six questions had been received. The questions and replies were published in the second supplementary agenda (items 7 and 9) on 10 October 2022.
A number of supplementary questions were asked and a summary of the main points is set out below:
(Q2) Catherine Powell noted that on the response to part a) she asked the Cabinet Member to advise how many Education, Health and Care Plans (EHCPs) were actually performed within the twenty weeks and to advise whether children with social workers assigned were also included. Regarding part b) she queried whether the response noting ‘to strengthen a systemic approach’ entailed further paperwork as opposed to streamlining. Regarding c) she did not feel that the response answered her question, she sought a yes or no answer. Regarding part e) she asked what about previously Looked After Children and children with a social worker, those two issues had not been addressed.
In response, the Cabinet Member for Education and Learning noted that she did not have the details to hand to respond to the supplementary questions and would look to provide that information in writing. She was delighted to have received many questions relating to her portfolio and highlighted that there was a monthly drop-in session covering Children, Families and Learning which was open to all and she would be happy to cover detailed questions in that forum.
(Q3) Chris Townsend queried a sentence in the response which stated: ‘Where high demand exists between residential areas and places of learning, local bus services and coaches are already provided to meet the needs of entitled pupils.’ He sought an explanation as he was not aware of any local bus services that were already provided.
Jonathan Essex sought clarification on what the ‘exciting proposal’ mentioned in the response was.
In response, the Cabinet Member for Transport, Infrastructure and Growth responded to Chris Townsend noting that the Council did subsidise and put several bus services on to get children to schools; he would ask the team to provide the list concerning the Member’s area. Responding to Jonathan Essex, he noted that as stated further in the response the Council was providing a half fare bus scheme for everyone aged under twenty years old to encourage public transport use - irrelevant to whether they are in education or not - the Council from April 2023 would also be following the Government's £2.00 bus fare cap in January to March 2023.
(Q4) Michaela Martin requested more detail on the South East 19 and what it involved; she also asked what funding would there be to support schools that were struggling with high Special Educational Needs and Disabilities cross-border issues, low numbers and high costs which fall outside the remit.
Catherine Powell referred to the Leader’s Statement that abandoning Surrey’s communities was not something that the administration would ever do, however the response to the third paragraph seemed to indicate that the Council would be deliberately doing that, and she asked for the ... view the full minutes text for item 67/22 |
|
|
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 Monday 10 October 2022).
Additional documents: Minutes: There were none.
|
|
Item 9 (i)
Bernie Muir (Epsom West) to move under standing order 11 as follows: This Council notes:
This Council further notes: This Council resolves to:
Item 9 (ii)
John O’Reilly (Hersham) to move under standing order 11 as follows: This Council notes:
This Council further notes:
This Council resolves to:
Additional documents: Minutes: Under Standing Order 11.5 using her discretion the Chair took motion 9 (ii) first.
Item 9 (ii)
Under Standing Order 12.3 the Council agreed to debate this motion.
Under Standing Order 12.1 John O’Reilly moved: This Council notes: · That the Local Government Boundary Commission for England is currently undertaking a boundary review of Surrey, the recommendations of which will be implemented for the 2025 election. This Council further notes: · This Council’s strong support for the retention of single member electoral divisions, as a way of maintaining clear democratic accountability and community connectiveness, in a county where many divisions already cover large geographical areas. This Council resolves to: I. Write to the Local Government Boundary Commission for England to state its request to retain single member divisions in the forthcoming boundary review.
John O’Reilly made the following points:
· Noted that the Council had begun the boundary review process which was being steered by a cross-party working group, the Council was considering whether to retain single Member divisions or to adopt multi-Member divisions. · Noted that the working group did not favour the introduction of multi-Member divisions. The first option of keeping the current divisions and adding a Member would double the total Members which would be preposterous, and the second option of keeping the number of Members to eighty-one but to widen the divisions to contain two or three Members would detract from the communities that Members individually represent. · Noted that on the basis that the above multi-Member options would not work, the Council was back to the system of single Member divisions that the Council had adopted for many years. It had its flaws but worked well and provided accountability and respected Members’ communities.
The motion was formally seconded by Nick Harrison, who made the following comments:
· Noted that currently some of the Council’s divisions were quite large, and making them even broader with multiple Members would create additional issues and conflicts between individual councillors. · He was unaware of any other upper tier authorities that had adopted the multi-Member arrangement and noted that the Council should not change the current single Member divisions.
No comments were made by Members.
The proposer of the motion, John O’Reilly, made no further comments to conclude the debate.
The motion was put to the vote and received unanimous support.
Therefore, it was RESOLVED that: This Council notes: · That the Local Government Boundary Commission for England is currently undertaking a boundary review of Surrey, the recommendations of which will be implemented for the 2025 election. This Council further notes: · This Council’s strong support for the retention of single member electoral divisions, as a way of maintaining clear democratic accountability and community connectiveness, in a county where many divisions already cover large geographical areas. This Council resolves to: II. Write to the Local Government Boundary Commission for England to state its request to retain single member divisions in the forthcoming boundary review.
Item 9 (i)
Under Standing Order 12.3 the Council agreed to debate this ... view the full minutes text for item 69/22 |
|
|
SELECT COMMITTEES' REPORT TO COUNCIL
For Members to note the headline activity of the Council’s overview and scrutiny function in the period April to September 2022 asking questions of Scrutiny Chairs as necessary.
Additional documents: Minutes: The Chair of the Select Committee Chairs and Vice-Chairs’ Group introduced the report and noted his thanks to the Vice-Chair of that Group and the Scrutiny Business Manager for their support. The report outlined what the Select Committees and the Budget Task Group had been up to between April and September 2022 and the key ask of the Council would be for Members to direct any questions to the four relevant Select Committee Chairs.
RESOLVED:
1. That Council reviewed the work summarised in the report providing feedback to Scrutiny Chairs as appropriate. 2. That the Select Committees report to Council once more this calendar year.
|
|
|
GOVERNANCE CHANGES - LOCAL AND JOINT COMMITTEES
That Council approves the transferring of non-executive functions of Public Rights of Way (PRoW) from the Local and Joint Committees, the ceasing of the Local Committees, and serving notice of Council’s intention to withdraw from the Joint Committees.
Additional documents: Minutes: The Deputy Leader introduced the report and recommendations. She noted that the proposed changes supported the Council's priority objective for empowering communities and were consistent with residents’ desires to be more involved in what the Council was doing through events and conversations rather than through boards and meetings. The proposed changes were borne out of evidence as in the past year far higher numbers of residents, over 50,000, had engaged with the Council online. The Council was committed to continue to work with its partners to ensure that local engagement and partnership arrangements enabling the Council to listen to local priorities and to deliver effectively for Surrey’s residents; exploring the use of a multi-agency approach to local delivery. The Council’s intention was to give divisional Members more accountability, responsibility and visibility, engaging with residents and officers to resolve local issues. The report also included detail on the Petitions Scheme, the chairmanship and the extensive consultation which had taken place.
The recommendations were not agreed by general assent therefore a vote was taken, with 39 Members voting For, 27 voting Against and no Abstentions.
Therefore, it was RESOLVED that:
That County Council:
1. Agreed that Local Committees will cease, with effect from 31 October 2022.
2. Agreed to serve six months’ notice of the Council’s intention to withdraw from the Joint Committee in each appropriate borough, to expire on or before 30 April 2023.
3. Agreed to the transfer of all Public Rights of Way (PRoW) functions from Local and Joint Committees with effect from 11 October 2022. Non-contentious, non-executive decisions which affect PRoW will be delegated to officers in consultation with the relevant local Divisional Member/s. All contentious issues such as decisions for Traffic Regulation Orders or PRoW on County Council owned land or land relating to a planning application will be referred to the Planning and Regulatory Committee (PRC) to be heard and a decision made.
4. Agreed that where the local Divisional Member(s) or Officer(s) do not agree, or where they feel a determination should be made by committee, the case can be referred to the PRC. In cases where one or more divisions are involved, then the delegated officer will work in consultation with all relevant Members.
5. Noted that a list of proposed changes to PRoW or modifications to the definitive map received by the Council will be maintained and accessible to all Members.
6. Agreed that the Director of Law and Governance makes the relevant changes to the Council’s Constitution to reflect the new arrangements.
7. Noted that the Director of Law and Governance will work in conjunction with democratic service officers from Guildford, Runnymede, Woking, and Spelthorne Borough Councils to update their respective constitutions.
8. Agreed the consequential amendments to the Council’s petition scheme as described above.
9. Noted that appointments of Chairs and Vice Chairs to Joint Committees will lapse on 31 October 2022 and Joint Committees will appoint a Chair as required if meeting in the six-month notice period.
|
|
|
AMENDMENTS TO THE CONSTITUTION
It is the Council’s responsibility to approve changes to the Council’s Constitution. This includes the Scheme of Delegation regarding non-executive functions, while amendments to executive functions are the responsibility of the Leader and are brought to County Council to note.
This report sets out proposed changes to the Constitution’s Standing Orders and also includes executive and non-executive functions set out in the Scheme of Delegation and these are brought to Council for information and formal approval.
These changes are brought to Council in accordance with Articles 4.09, 5.02 and 11.02 of the Council’s Constitution.
Additional documents: Minutes: The Leader introduced the report which outlined the changes approved by him on 27 September 2022 as set out in Annex 1.
A Member referred to Standing Order 30 of the Constitution that ‘Members will sign a register of attendance’, he noted that he was not aware of such a register and since the move to Woodhatch Place Members had not been signing in. He asked whether such a register had been deleted, or whether every meeting held at Woodhatch Place had been invalid.
The Chair noted that she had been advised that Democratic Services record the attendance of all those present and any apologies given. She noted that the Council meetings for example were recorded and streamed, there was not a method of signing in at Woodhatch Place and she would liaise further with Democratic Services.
RESOLVED:
That the executive function changes approved by the Leader on 27 September 2022 be noted.
|
|
|
REPORT OF THE CABINET
To receive the report of the meetings of the Cabinet held on 26 July 2022 and 27 September 2022.
Additional documents: Minutes: The Leader presented the report of the Cabinet meetings held on 26 July 2022 and 27 September 2022.
Recommendations on Policy Framework Documents:
There were no reports with recommendations for Council.
Reports for Information/Discussion:
26 July 2022:
A. Increasing Access to Library Buildings B. Sunbury Hub C. Outline Business Case for the Re-Procurement of Waste Treatment and Disposal Services
27 September 2022:
D. Environmentally Sustainable Procurement Policy E. Revision to Procurement and Contract Standing Orders
F. Quarterly Report on Decisions Taken Under Special Urgency Arrangements: 2 July 2022 – 30 September 2022
RESOLVED:
1. That Council noted that there had been no urgent decisions in the last three months. 2. That the report of the meetings of the Cabinet held on 26 July 2022 and 27 September 2022 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 10 October 2022.
(To follow: Minutes, Cabinet - 27 September 2022) 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 Chair informed Members that the Peacock Room in the Lodge had officially been designated as the Members’ Room and for Members to feel free to start using the room and to note that it was a work in progress - furniture and decorations to follow.
|