Agenda and minutes
PDF 61 KBVenue: Ashcombe Suite, County Hall, Kingston upon Thames, Surrey KT1 2DN. View directions
Contact: Jisa Prasannan or Huma Younis
Media
| No. | Item |
|---|---|
|
APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE AND SUBSTITUTIONS
Additional documents: Minutes: Apologies were received from Chris Pitt, Rachael I Lake and Christian Mahne.
Richard Wilson substituted for Rachael I Lake, Denis Fuller for Christian Mahne and Colin Kemp for Chris Pitt.
|
|
|
MINUTES OF THE PREVIOUS MEETING: 21 March 2013
To agree the minutes as a true record of the meeting. Additional documents: Minutes: The minutes were agreed as an accurate record of the meeting.
|
|
|
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: · In line with the Relevant Authorities (Disclosable Pecuniary Interests) Regulations 2012, declarations may relate to the interest of the member, or the member’s spouse or civil partner, or a person with whom the member is living as husband or wife, or a person with whom the member is living as if they were civil partners and the member is aware they have the interest. · Members need only disclose interests not currently listed on the Register of Disclosable Pecuniary Interests. · Members must notify the Monitoring Officer of any interests disclosed at the meeting so they may be added to the Register. · Members are reminded that they must not participate in any item where they have a disclosable pecuniary interest. Additional documents: Minutes: There were no declarations of interests.
|
|
|
QUESTIONS AND PETITIONS
To receive any questions or petitions.
Notes: 1. The deadline for Member’s questions is 12.00pm four working days before the meeting (5 July 2013). 2. The deadline for public questions is seven days before the meeting (4 July 2013). 3. The deadline for petitions was 14 days before the meeting, and no petitions have been received. Additional documents: Minutes: There were no questions or petitions.
|
|
|
RECOMMENDATION TRACKER AND FORWARD WORK PROGRAMME
The Committee is asked to monitor progress on the implementation of recommendations from previous meetings, and to review its Forward Work Programme. Additional documents: Minutes: Declarations of interest: None.
Witnesses: None.
Key points raised during the discussion:
1. Members were made aware that further to publishing, there were some slight changes to the scheduling in the Forward Work Plan. The Chairman informed the Committee that scrutiny of Surreys Tourism Strategy had been moved from September to November’s meeting to allow for more time to scrutinise this item. The Chairman also informed the Committee that scrutiny of the Joint Committee model had been moved from September to November due to a change in timescales.
2. A member of the Committee asked for the detailed income generation plans for Surrey Fire and Rescue Service, being prepared for Cabinet be included with the papers on the contingency crewing item for the September meeting.
3. A member of the Committee suggested that stakeholders be invited for the Scrutiny of community partnered libraries.
Recommendations: None
Actions/further information to be provided: None.
Committee Next Steps: None.
|
|
|
RESPONSES FROM THE CABINET TO ISSUES REFERRED BY THE SELECT COMMITTEE
A response is included following recommendations made to Cabinet on 26 March 2013. Additional documents: Minutes: Declarations of interest: None.
Witnesses: None.
Key points raised during the discussion:
1. It was noted that a Cabinet response to the Select Committee’s recommendations on the changes to the emergency response cover locations for Epsom & Ewell and Reigate and Banstead had been received.
2. The Committee agreed to note this response. Mrs Jan Mason asked for it to be minuted, that she had voted against approving the proposed changes to the emergency response cover locations at the Select Committee meeting on 21 March 2013. This had previously not been minuted because a recorded vote had not been requested by any Committee member.
Recommendations: None.
Actions/further information to be provided: None.
Committee Next Steps: None.
|
|
|
SCRUTINY OF SURREY FIRE AND RESCUE SERVICE INCOME STRATEGY
Purpose of report: Scrutiny of Services and Budgets This report is presented in order to keep the Committee appraised of the Service’s approach to income generation and to ensure that the Select Committee has the opportunity to scrutinise the development of proposals ahead of the Cabinet meeting in September 2013. Additional documents: Minutes: Declarations of interest: None.
Witnesses:
Kay Hammond, Cabinet Associate for Police and Fire Services Liz Mills, Chief of Staff, Surrey Fire and Rescue Service (SFRS)
Key points raised during the discussion:
1. The report was introduced to members of the Committee by Mrs Kay Hammond, Cabinet Associate for Police and Fire Services and Liz Mills, Chief of Staff, SFRS. Mrs Hammond provided the Committee with some context to the report in terms of the aims of the Public Safety Plan.
2. The Cabinet Associate stated the importance of Committee members having sight of the Public Safety Plan 2011-2020, if they haven’t already. The Chairman of the Committee asked for a copy of this to be circulated to all members on the Committee.
3. The Chief of Staff explained how the Service was already generating income and their plans to expand this and plough this back into the Service.
4. The Chief of Staff referred to different income operating models such as a Local Authority Trading company and a Surrey Fire Service independent charity. The Chief of Staff also stressed the importance of understanding and learning different ways of working from other Local Authorities.
5. A member of the Committee questioned whether achieving an additional income target of £660k by the end of 2017/18 was realistic. The Chief of Staff stated that they had built in the realism factor when preparing the business model for this income target, to ensure the target was realistic. The Chief of Staff explained that resources planning would also ensure the target was realistic. Both the Chief of Staff and Cabinet Associate felt confident this target could be achieved.
6. A member of the Committee sought clarification on which services SFRS would be charging for. The Chief of Staff explained that it was services which SFRS were not required to provide e.g. occupational health, but which SFRS could use their expertise creatively in order to generate income.
7. Members of the Committee referred to the opportunities available for SFRS to sell technical services to private companies, for example events safety management. The Cabinet Associate for Police and Fire Services explained how the Fire and Rescue Service already works alongside the Local Resilience Forum, looking at possible risks with events and how best to manage these with both the police and ambulance services. The Cabinet Associate for Police and Fire Services commented that the Fire and Rescue Service were already supporting large events, for example, the recent Epsom Derby.
8. Some members of the Committee raised concerns over selling services to companies that would have previously received these services free of charge. The concern was that these businesses may now be putting themselves at risk by opting out of receiving these services. The Chief of Staff explained that the SFRS intended to apply charges to new companies they planned to go into business with rather than companies they already provided services for free of charge. Furthermore, operating as a trading company provided SFRS with more flexibility to ... view the full minutes text for item 7/13 |
|
|
MAGNA CARTA PROGRAMME
Purpose of report: Policy Development and Review
This report informs and seeks the views of the Select Committee on the proposals that will be presented to Cabinet on 23rd July 2013 outlining the plans for improvement to the Egham area and a programme of events to celebrate the Magna Carta in 2015. The aim of the recommendations is to celebrate our heritage, raise the profile of the area, increase economic growth and enhance existing facilities to encourage healthier lifestyles.
Additional documents: Minutes: Declarations of interest: None.
Witnesses:
Peter Milton, Head Of Cultural Services Paul Turrell, Chief Executive of Runnymede Borough Council Nic Durston, Assistant Director of Operations, National Trust Simon Higman, Registrar and Director of Operations, Royal Holloway University
Key points raised during the discussion:
1. A member of the Committee stated that no financial information relating to the proposals was included in the report and a number of key officers responsible for the report were not present. It was questioned whether the proposals could be adequately scrutinised on the basis of the information available. 11.45am- The meeting was adjourned to decide whether financial information relating to the proposals was part 2. The Committee decided to proceed to the next Item and return to this Item later on.
12.30pm- The Senior Manager for Scrutiny and Appeals explained that the financial figures relating to the paper were part of a report going to Cabinet and had been seen by the relevant Cabinet Member. It was therefore possible to have an open discussion about the financial information which would have a bearing on the overall discussion about the report.
2. Members of the Committee noted the international significance of the anniversary of the sealing of the Magna Carta and the potential to create a legacy for Surrey by marking this historical occasion.
3. A member of the Committee commented on the financial information regarding the highways budget linked to the proposals. It was questioned whether there was capacity for the highways department to cover the proposed costs required for the programme. The Head of Cultural Services stated that there was enough money available from the highways department and these costs were necessary in respect of road crossings and dealing with the impact of increased travel.
4. A member of the Committee commented on the Runnymede roundabout scheme and whether there would be money available to fund a park and ride in the area. The Head of Cultural Services stated that at the present moment, work relating to car parking and traffic management was being undertaken by the master planners and this was still being developed. The Head of Cultural Services commented that 4 million for the roundabout had been included in the budget arrangements for over two years. The budget for the roundabout was not specifically in place for the Magna Carta programme but was an initiative which had been in the pipeline for some time. It was important to get the work relating to the roundabout done in coordination with the Magna Carta programme so disruption could be limited. In respect of a park and ride, this would need to be further discussed with transport planners.
5. A member of the Committee asked the Head of Cultural Services to confirm that £1.2M would be the total contribution to the programme from Surrey CC. The Head of Cultural Services confirmed this was the amount being contributed aside from the highways costs. Clarification was sought with regards to the definition of ‘resourcing costs’. The ... view the full minutes text for item 8/13 |
|
|
SCRUTINY OF THE USE OF REGULATION OF INVESTIGATORY POWERS ACT 2000 (RIPA)
Additional documents: Minutes: Declarations of interest: None.
Witnesses:
Steve Ruddy, Community Protection Manager
Key points raised during the discussion:
1. The report was introduced to members of the Committee by the Community Protection Manager. The Community Protection Manager explained the report provided details on how the Council makes use of RIPA and how it had been utilised over the previous financial year. RIPA protects the most vulnerable in the community and can be used to monitor and investigate a wide range of serious crime. Including consumer frauds and scams.
2. A member of the Committee questioned whether the changes to staffing had an impact on the number of surveillance activities undertaken as outlined in paragraph 11 of the report. The Community Protection Manager stated that the reduction in surveillance activity was due to the overall number of investigations being reduced, changes to how RIPA applications were authorised and an increased focus on larger investigations. Furthermore, the Proceeds of Crime Act (2002) makes more information on individuals available to Trading Standards Accredited Financial Investigators which has helped reduce the need to use RIPA in some other investigations.
3. Members of the Committee raised concerns over using officer names when referring to the Authorising Officer for covert human intelligence source authorisation (CHIS) as shown in the report. Members were concerned that this could possibly endanger the named officers. The Community Protection Manager stated that information relating to the Authorising Officers was in the public domain and that it was important the service made as much information as they had, available to the public.
4. A member of the Committee questioned which services other than Trading Standards, could make use of RIPA. The Community Protection Manager explained that RIPA had only been used by Trading Standards over recent years but that other services could also potentially use RIPA. The ability to use RIPA is available to other services but only if there is an investigation into a serious crime (a crime carrying a sentence of 6 months imprisonment or more), under very tight control and authorisation, hence the need to update the corporate RIPA policy and framework on a regular basis.
5. Members of the Committee were happy to endorse the report and supported the Council’s use of RIPA.
Recommendations:
Communities Select Committee endorse the report and support the Council’s use of RIPA.
Actions/further information to be provided: None.
Committee Next Steps: None.
|
|
|
DATE OF NEXT MEETING
The next meeting of the Committee will be held at 10.00am on Thursday 26 September. Additional documents: Minutes: The date of the next meeting is 26 September. |