Agenda and minutes
PDF 70 KBVenue: Ashcombe Suite, County Hall, Kingston upon Thames, Surrey KT1 2DN. View directions
Contact: Helen Rankin or Victoria Lower Email: helen.rankin@surreycc.gov.uk or Email: victoria.lower@surreycc.gov.uk
Media
| No. | Item |
|---|---|
|
APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE AND SUBSTITUTIONS
Additional documents: Minutes: Apologies were received from Michael Bennison, Robert Evans and Barbara Thomson.
The Chairman welcomed new Members to the Committee; Yvonna Lay and Michael Bennison, and thanked the outgoing Members; Rachel I Lake and Christian Mahne for their work with the Committee in the last year. |
|
|
MINUTES OF THE PREVIOUS MEETINGS: 15 JANUARY 2014 and 20 MARCH 2014
To agree the minutes as a true record of the meeting. Additional documents: Minutes: The minutes of the meetings on 15 January 2014 and 20 March 2014 were agreed as true records of the meetings. |
|
|
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: None were received. |
|
|
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 (13 May 2014). 2. The deadline for public questions is seven days before the meeting (12 May 2014). 3. The deadline for petitions was 14 days before the meeting, and no petitions have been received. Additional documents: Minutes: Declarations of interest: None.
Witnesses: None
Key points raised during the discussion:
1. One public question was received from Dr I Mason. A copy of the question and response can be found attached to the minutes.
2. Councillor Alan Young provided clarification about a question he had asked during the Cycling Strategy scrutiny meeting on 28 November 2013. He had asked the Police representative at the meeting how many cyclists stopped in Surrey had English as their first language. This question was asked as he had been informed by the Police, at an earlier meeting of Surrey Hills Parish Councils, convened by Surrey County Council, that a significant number of cycling groups stopped by the Police in the Surrey Hills did not speak English and therefore had difficulty communicating with officers. Mr Young's intention in asking this question had been to highlight this and to raise the possibility that safety information for cyclists should be provided in more than one language. The Chairman thanked Councillor Young for his clarification.
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 25 March 2014. Additional documents: Minutes: The Committee noted the response to recommendations from the Cabinet Member. |
|
|
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. The Chairman informed the Committee that following a review of the work within the Chief Executive’s Office, Rachel Crossley had taken over responsibility for the Voluntary, Community and Faith Sector (VCFS) work, previously led by Policy & Performance. At the next meeting of the Committee Rachel Crossley and Saba Hussain were invited to attend for the VCFS item instead of Mary Burguieres and Liz Lawrence.
Recommendations: None.
Actions/further information to be provided: None.
Committee next steps: None. |
|
|
CABINET MEMBER (AND ASSOCIATE) PRIORITIES FOR YEAR AHEAD
Additional documents: Minutes: Declarations of interest: None
Witnesses:
Helyn Clack, Cabinet Member for Community Services Kay Hammond, Cabinet Associate for Fire and Police Services
Key points raised during the discussion:
1. The Cabinet Member and Cabinet Associate provided an overview of their priorities for the next year. The Cabinet Associate informed the Committee that it was a challenging time within the Fire Service as they were still in a period of strike action, and she continued to challenge the Chief Fire Officer to ensure contingency was in place. However, work was being done on putting a bid into government for the Blue Light Collaboration work, which they hoped would be successful to assist in the transformation of the emergency services collaborative work. On 10 June 2014 there would be a meeting with all agencies involved and politicians from across Surrey and Sussex to discuss further collaboration.
2. The Committee were informed that the Leader had agreed to put aside money for defibrillators on fire engines, as it was felt that it was appropriate that fire fighters would be able to respond if an ambulance was not present at the time.
3. The Cabinet Associate was leading on a project to map the locations of all the defibrillators in Surrey. It was felt this would take between three to six months and would enable the council to challenge local businesses to acquire one if gaps were identified. This work would be done alongside the ambulance trust, SECAmb, and would utilise the knowledge of the Local Committees.
4. The Cabinet Member outlined her responsibilities within the portfolio of Cabinet Member for Community Services and Cabinet Lead for Continuous Improvement. Her additional role involved looking at services across the council and ensuring services were continuing to improve.
5. The Committee congratulated the work being done with defibrillators as they felt that this was an excellent and important project. Members were informed that a joint agreement had been made with the Fire unions as there was an understanding of their use, but that they would probably not be introduced until the mapping project had been completed.
6. Members queried whether all Community Partnered Libraries (CPL) would be open by the end of 2014 or the financial year, and whether there had been any issues recruiting and retaining volunteers for these libraries. The Cabinet Member stated that the CPLs had been well received and supported. She had not heard of the volunteer recruitment issues, but would raise this with officers to ensure support was provided to the CPLs. There had been some legal issues with the remaining CPLs though they were hoping to overcome these and for them to be open as soon as possible.
7. The Cabinet Associate refuted claims that there was disproportionate fire cover in the county as response times were being met in rural areas. Furthermore current changes to cover in the county were trying to address any difficulties in response times.
Recommendations:
1. The Committee supports the Cabinet Member and Associate priorities. ... view the full minutes text for item 28/14 |
|
|
UPDATE ON MAGNA CARTA ANNIVERSARY PROPOSALS
Additional documents: Minutes: Declarations of interest: None.
Witnesses:
Peter Milton, Head of Cultural Services Geri Silverstone, Project Manager National Trust Susie Kemp, Assistant Chief Executive Helyn Clack, Cabinet Member for Community Services
Key points raised during the discussion:
1. The Committee were provided with a presentation which showed the progress of organising Magna Carta celebrations in 2014, 2015 and beyond.
2. Members raised concerns that residents in Egham were upset with the plans as they felt that been ignored and their ideas had been disregarded by officers, and that the talent in Runnymede would not be showcased at the concert at the Royal Albert Hall. Officers stated that the £1 million fund from Surrey County Council was to be spent on all residents of Surrey, as there was a wish to raise awareness of the Magna Carta. It was important that the Runnymede site told the story of the signing of the Magna Carta which it currently did not do and the priority had been the completion of the HLF bid.
3. Officers assured Members that money had been put aside for events in Egham High Street for local residents and visitors, and the plans would be discussed with local Members in due course. The Cabinet Member stated that the concert at the Royal Albert Hall would showcase the talent of residents with a themed focus on the Magna Carta. Members requested that future similar events took place in Surrey as they were concerned that residents would not stay the full length of the concert due to travel concerns.
4. Members requested to see the Business Plan submitted to the Heritage Lottery Fund (HLF), however officers advised that this could not be circulated until the HLF had made a first round decision in July 2014. The partnership Masterplan had cost £50,000 to which Surrey County Council had contributed £12,500.
5. The Committee were concerned about plans if the HLF bid for £4.3 million was not successful. The Project Manager stated that the Surrey Partnership were committed to develop the site, and HLF funding would provide an enhanced legacy offer, if successful. Members were however concerned that there was not a viable alternative to not being successful at HLF funding.
6. Parking would be provided on the site, with current parking provision being developed.
7. Members were concerned that the highways improvements would not be completed in time as they were to go to the Local Committee on 9 June 2014 and works often took a long time to be completed. Officers assured the Committee that there was a fully specked and specified programme that Surrey Highways officers had been instructed to deliver by the Cabinet Member for Highways, Transport and Flooding Recovery, and this is due to be presented to the next Local Committee meeting.
8. The Committee queried whether the art installation would be ready in time for the June 2015 events and were informed that only artists and their proposals which could be delivered in time, and on budget at £700,000, ... view the full minutes text for item 29/14 |
|
Additional documents: Minutes: Declarations of interest: None.
Witnesses:
Yvonne Rees, Strategic Director for Customer and Communities Jane Last, Lead Manager for Community Safety and Partnerships Gordon Falconer, Community Safety Unit Senior Manager Louise Gibbons, Community Safety Manager Helyn Clack, Cabinet Member for Community Services Kay Hammond, Cabinet Associate for Fire and Police Services
Key points raised during the discussion:
1. Members queried progress against recommendation two as Tandridge had not been too happy with the approach being taken. Officers informed the Committee that it was an interesting proposal which was being led by the three Boroughs and Districts, with Surrey County Council being a partner. Significant conversations had taken place and the changes had gone through the relevant democratic services processes. Officers were not aware of any issues at present but would look into it further.
2. Officers felt that a benefit had been that there had been fewer meetings which enabled officers to put more resources into the Community Support Programme. The aim was to concentrate more on local delivery, however they would continue review and evolve the process to ensure it worked appropriately.
3. With the Woking Joint Committee the Community Safety Partnership (CSP) had a different role and officers suggested that a review of this should be brought to the Committee in six months.
4. Members were informed that anti social behaviour was often considered on the proportionality of the actions.
5. The Committee requested to see a breakdown of the HMIC report by Boroughs and Districts.
6. The Chairman thanked the officers for an excellent and clear report.
Recommendations:
1. The Committee to receive a further update on collaborative working between Community Safety Partnerships – including lessons learned from the east divisions CSPs.
Actions/further information to be provided:
Officers to provide a breakdown of HMIC report by Boroughs and Districts.
Committee next steps:
The Committee to complete the annual scrutiny of Community Safety Partnerships in October 2014. |
|
Purpose of report: Scrutiny of Services and Budgets; Policy Development and Review; or Performance Management
In 2012, Surrey Fire and Rescue Service (SFRS) entered into a pilot contract with a private contractor to secure the provision of specialist rescue and contingency crewing capacity. Communities Select Committee is asked to scrutinise the evaluation of the pilot contract, and consider the proposal to renew the contract with a broadened scope. Additional documents: Minutes: Declarations of interest: None.
Witnesses:
Russell Pearson, Chief Fire Officer Kay Hammond, Cabinet Associate for Fire and Rescue Services Helyn Clack, Cabinet Member for Community Services
Key points raised during the discussion:
1. The Chief Fire Officer explained that the Surrey Fire and Rescue Service (SFRS) did have a contract with a commercial provider for contingency crewing to fulfil their statutory requirement, however the contract went beyond the statutory requirements to provide specialist rescue also.
2. SFRS had been able to provide the highest level of contingency crewing, and had been awarded certificates after a review during the flooding incident found them to be completely compliant. The contract had been in action for 18 months, during which time it had been tested stringently due to a number of incidents, and the pilot scheme had been extended to March 2015 though a decision now needed to be made whether as to go out to tender for a new contract for these services. It was felt that the pilot scheme had performed well.
3. As many of the services provided by the commercial provider were outside statutory requirements previously it took a number of hours to rescue scenarios, which the Chief Officer stated was unsatisfactory as he considered rescue to be a large part of the Fire Services responsibility. It was believed that SFRS had one of the highest capabilities within the country with a small team providing a variety of services.
4. Due to the extended pilot scheme it was stated that they were in a position to know what was necessary for a new contract. There was now increased interest in the contract through soft testing and some Fire Authorities interested in the contract arrangements.
Recommendations:
1. The Committee endorses Option 3 of broadening of the contract scope.
Actions/further information to be provided: None.
Committee next steps: None. |
|
|
EXCLUSION OF THE PUBLIC
Recommendation: That under Section 100(A) of the Local Government Act 1972, the public be excluded from the meeting for the following items of business on the grounds that they involve the likely disclosure of exempt information under the relevant paragraphs of Part 1 of Schedule 12A of the Act.
Additional documents: Minutes: Resolved that under Section 100(A) of the Local Government Act 1972, the public be excluded from the meeting during consideration of the following items of business on the grounds that they involve the likely disclosure of exempt information under paragraph 3 of Part 1 of Schedule 12A of the Act. |
|
|
SCRUTINY OF EVALUATION OF PILOT SPECIALIST RESCUE AND CONTINGENCY CREWING CONTRACT AND PROPOSALS TO TENDER FOR A NEW CONTRACT TO PROVIDE CONTINGENCY CREWING AND SPECIALIST RESCUE
Purpose of report: Scrutiny of Services and Budgets; Policy Development and Review; or Performance Management
In 2012, Surrey Fire and Rescue Service (SFRS) entered into a pilot contract with a private contractor to secure the provision of specialist rescue and contingency crewing capacity. Communities Select Committee is asked to scrutinise the evaluation of the pilot contract, and consider the proposal to renew the contract with a broadened scope. Minutes: Declarations of interest: None.
Witnesses:
Russell Pearson, Chief Fire Officer Kay Hammond, Cabinet Associate for Fire and Police Services Helyn Clack, Cabinet Member for Community Services
Key points raised during the discussion:
1. The Chief Fire Officer expanded upon the discussion held within the public part of the meeting.
Recommendations:
1. That Members of Council Overview and Scrutiny Committee discuss procurement matters in relevant committees.
Actions/further information to be provided: None.
Committee next steps: None. |
|
|
PUBLICITY FOR PART 2 ITEMS
To consider whether the item considered under Part 2 of the agenda should be made available to the Press and public. Minutes: The Committee resolved not to publicise the minutes of the Part Two discussion. |
|
|
UPDATE FROM THE CHIEF FIRE OFFICER
Update from the Chief Fire Officer to the Communities Select Committee will focus on the Fire Transformation Programme which sets out how Surrey Fire and Rescue Service will transform services and their workforce to meet the changing demands on the Service, how the service will work with their blue light partners to improve services to the public and how the service will explore opportunities to generate income through income generation, cost recovery and cost avoidance. Additional documents: Minutes: Declarations of interest: None.
Witnesses:
Russell Pearson, Chief Fire Officer Mary Lewis, Chair of Public Safety Plan Update Member Reference Group
Key points raised during the discussion:
1. The Chief Fire Officer informed the Committee that union leaders had requested to speak at a future Communities Select Committee meeting on the Public Service Transformation Plan. This would provide the opportunity for Members to ask the unions for their opinions on plans and the reports could be jointly presented. The Chairman agreed in principle, though would consider further and requested the Member Reference Group (MRG) consider having union representatives at witnesses.
2. The Chair of the MRG informed the Committee that the group had been set up to focus on the Public Safety Plan with Councillors Mary Lewis, Jan Mason, Chris Norman and Barbara Thomson as Members. The Members have raised concerns with the service, including the consultation processes followed and would look closely at the key role of community risk modelling.
3. Members suggested that due to the popularity of the MRG that the Chair may wish to consider accepting substitutes at meetings.
Recommendations:
1. The Committee, through the Member Reference Group, have the opportunity to question local unions on the transformation programme.
Actions/further information to be provided: None.
Committee next steps:
The Committee to receive a verbal update from the Chief Fire Officer at future meetings. |
|
|
DATE OF NEXT MEETING
The next meeting of the Committee will be held at 10am on 23 July 2014. Additional documents: Minutes: The Committee noted the date of the next meeting of the Communities Select Committee would be on 23 July 2014. |