Purpose: To agree the minutes of
the previous meeting of the Communities, Environment and Highways
Select Committee as a true and accurate record of
proceedings.
The
public retain their right to submit questions for written response,
with such answers recorded in the minutes of the meeting;
questioners may participate in meetings to ask a supplementary
question. Petitioners may address the Committee on their petition
for up to three minutes. Guidance will be made available to any
member of the public wishing to speak at a meeting.
Notes:
1.The deadline for Member’s questions is 12.00pm
four working days before the meeting (28 November 2023
).
2.The deadline for public questions is seven days
before the meeting(27 November 2023)
3.The deadline for petitions was 14 days before the
meeting, and no petitions have been received.
Nicola
O’Conner - Strategic Finance Business
Partner
Rachel Wigley
– Director Finance Insight and Performance
Nicola
Kilvington – Director of
Corporate Strategy and Policy
Tony
Orzieri – Strategic Finance
Business Partner
Louise Lawson
– Strategic Finance Business Partner
Denise Turner
Stewart, Cabinet Member for Customers and
communities
Natalie
Bramhall, Cabinet Member for Property and Waste
(Remote)
Kevin
Deanus – Cabinet Member for Fire
and Rescue, and Resilience
Matt Furniss,Cabinet Member
forHighways, Transport & Economic
Growth
Key Discussions:
A Member asked how the Council’s financial
position compared to other Councils and if transformation
activities were on track to achieve savings. TheCabinet Member for Finance and Resources answered
that the Council was on a sound financial footing and that
transformational activities would take place over a 5-year period
but faced variable challenges such as a new government and changes
in grants and funding. The Director Finance Insight and Performance
noted that compared to other County Councils, Surrey was fairing a
lot better, and the Council had worked diligently over the last
five years to improve their financial position. The Member asked
for clarification on a comparative league table, the Director of
Finance agreed to send information on borrowing requirements
compared to the revenue budget.
A Member asked what potential deterioration of
services that fell under the remit of the Committee could be
expected considering the year-on-year deterioration in budget.
TheExecutive Director of Environment,
Infrastructure & Growthnoted that the
focus was on finding efficiencies in the budget and driving more
value out of existing contracts such as Waste contracts, not
service cuts. The Executive Director emphasised that there
wasn’t an area that fell in the remit of the Committee that
would see a service reduction. The Member asked if the Council was
still trying to lobby Government for a better funding formula for
road maintenance. The Executive Director noted that the Leader of
the Council was chairing the County Council Network, and the
Council was exploring a host of solutions to improve funding.
The Cabinet Member
forHighways, Transport & Economic Growth
noted that the funding formula criteria had been raised with the
Secretary of State for Transport, who was open to the idea of
changing the formula and offered to report the outcomes of meetings
with Department for Transport officials.
A Member asked if the Council was confident in the
assumptions that had been made around non-pay inflation. The
Strategic Finance Business Partner noted that the level of
inflation had a huge impact on budget pressures and that the impact
had been significant. The corporate non-pay assumption was 5% in
the draft budget and would be reviewed ahead of the Final Budget
proposals which were due to be presented to Council in February.
It was noted that the corporate
inflation assumptions were only used where there was no other
insight. Inflation on food, fuel and in specific markets such as
children’s social care where rates exceeded the corporate
assumption. In ...
view the full minutes text for item 39/22
Purpose of
report:For members to consider and comment
on the services performance and report on the outcomes from the
most recent Inspection carried out by His Majesty’s
Inspectorate of Constabulary and Fire & Rescue Services
(HMIC).
Kevin
Deanus - Cabinet Member for Fire and
Rescue, and Resilience
Dan Quin
– Chief Fire Officer
Sally Wilson – Assistant Chief Fire
Officer
Elizabeth Lacey – Head of Change
Key Discussions:
The Chairman asked if
the Chief Fire Officer was surprised by the outcome of the
inspection, specifically that seven out of eleven areas were graded
by the inspectorate as requiring improvement. The Chief Fire
Officer expressed disappointment but conceded that it was a fair
reflection of the service. The Service had been very open and
honest in briefings with the inspectorate about issues and areas
for improvement and these issues were reflected back in the HMICFRS
report. The Cause of Concern in protection had come as a surprise.
The Chief Fire Officer offered to send the Committee a link to a
BBC Surrey radio interview relating to the inspection
report.
A Member asked what
organisational or structural changes would take place following the
inspection. TheHead of Changenoted that there no big organisational or structural
changes were needed to deliver the improvements. Project management
resources had been allocated to deliver the Inspection Improvement
Plan. An area commander had been allocated to both protection and
prevention areas, to provide enhanced strategic leadership
(previously one area commander covered both protection and
prevention). The Service was looking to cultivate a shared
understanding and collectively work to deliver improvements. The
Service was also looking to align individual performance goals with
corporate performance goals.
A Member asked of the
24 areas identified as areas of improvement, to what extent had
they been addressed. TheHead of
Changenoted many of those actions had been
identified for months and some actions even completed. Following
feedback, monthly leadership forums and weekly engagement sessions
to regularly discuss the outcomes of the inspection report had
taken place. The Senior Leadership Team had also conducted weekly
site visits to listen to feedback. The Chief Fire Officer noted
that many things had been addressed and completed but that culture
changes would be a long-term journey.
The Chairman asked if
improvements on culture had come at the expense of other areas
highlighted in the report. The Chief Fire Officer answered that
commitment to improving culture would always remain a top priority
for the service. It was critical to
retaining staff and making the Service somewhere people wanted to
stay. The Service was now experiencing a lower turnover rate
compared to 2020. This was a success. The Chief Fire Officer
outlined improvements in the majority of KPIs in 2023 compared to
previous years and noted that the Inspection Improvement Plan had
had a galvanising effect on the force.
Cause of
Concern
A Member asked if there was a mechanism to reduce
buildings in the high-risk category and if there was a national
policy to reduce the level of risk. The Chief Fire Officer noted
that there was not an intent to build buildings that would be
classified as high risk. Risk was sometimes raised due to the level
...
view the full minutes text for item 40/22
Purpose of report: To inform and
seek the views of the Select Committee on the new draft Surrey
RoadSafe Partnership Road Safety Strategy based on the principles
of a ‘Vision Zero’ Safe System approach, including a
new policy for 20 mph speed limits.
Matt Furniss,Cabinet Member forHighways, Transport and Economic Growth
Key Discussions:
The
Cabinet Member
forHighways, Transport and Economic Growth
noted that in Surrey 80% of fatal road incidents took place on 30
mph roads and that reducing speed would reduce
fatalities.
A Member commended
the excellent report and the efforts to reduce deaths by 2050 and
efforts to introduce 20mph areas. TheCabinet Member forHighways,
Transport and Economic Growth noted that decision making regarding
20mph areas should be as local as possible and Members had the
delegated powers to implement 20mph zones, however resident support
must be demonstrated and a blanket 20mph policy was not appropriate
in Surrey. The Assistant Director, Strategic Transport emphasised
that it was important for residents to back plans for any new 20mph
zones in their areas. The Road Safety & Sustainable School
Travel Manager noted that the mid-point target of reducing the
number of road deaths by half had a target date of 2035 to reflect
the fact that the new Surrey RoadSafe
strategy would likely be adopted in 2024.
The Vice-Chair raised
concerns that each road related fatality cost was estimated to cost
£2.1m to the community. Delaying the target for reducing road
deaths by 5 years (to 2035) would cost Surrey approximately
£1 billion. In addition, the new policy required local
consultation prior to approval and implementation with the risk
that the process was now more complex and difficult to achieve than
under the current system. More detail was required on how the
consultations would work and what funding was available for
introducing 20mph schemes in local areas.
TheChairman noted that this topic was an area of
interest for the public and asked for an overview from the existing
policy and the proposed new policy. The Road Safety &
Sustainable School Travel Manager noted that the new policy would
make it easier to introduce 20mph speed limits if there were
supported by the local Member and their local community.
Previously, 20mph limits could only be introduced where the mean
speeds were 24mph or less. Under the
new approach 20mph could be introduced with speeds of between 24
and 28mph with ‘light touch’ measures only. Where mean
speeds were above 28mph physical traffic calming measures (e.g.
speed bumps, road tables, gateway measures, etc) would be
required.
AMember asked if there were enough resources to meet the demand
for new 20mph speed limits. The Assistant Director, Strategic
Transport noted that they were waiting for the results from the new
road safety strategy and consultation although, intuitively, it is
believed that demand might be high.
A Member asked how
Surrey compared to other counties outside of London on road deaths.
The Road Safety & Sustainable School Travel Manager noted that
it was difficult to do direct comparisons due to different
variables. The Road Safety ...
view the full minutes text for item 41/22
1.The Chairman invited the Member who proposed the
Motion to Council on Vision Zero to speak. The Member noted broad
support for the new road safety strategy and 20mph policy which was
a move in the right direction but raised two concerns: firstly,
around the length of the consultationwhich
he considered sufficient; and secondly, the availability of funding
to meet the demand. The Cabinet Member reiterated that £2.5
million had been set aside for the 20mph zone initiative on top of
what is already spent on road safety. If demand outstripped funding
this could be explored further down the line
Purpose: This report provides a
progress update on the economic opportunities set out within
Surrey’s Economic Strategy. It explores how these will evolve
in the coming years through the “LEP integration”
process and provides a deep dive into the council’s
“Programme for housing” to help address one of the main
barriers to growth.
Sinead Mooney, Cabinet Member for Childrens and
Families (and Housing)
Natalie Bramhall, Cabinet Member for Property and
Waste (Remote)
Michael Coughlin, Executive Director, Partnerships,
Prosperity, and growth
Matt Furniss, Cabinet Member forHighways, Transport and Economic Growth
Key Discussions:
A Member asked what
the timeline was for unravelling existing LEP structures and
transferring responsibilities and assets to County Council.
TheCabinet Member
forHighways, Transport and Economic
Growthreported that LEP integration was
progressing well and offered to report back to the Committee once
the transfer had taken place.
A
member asked what further engagement was planned with stakeholders
to understand the local need and to shape the future service
offering. TheCabinet
Member forHighways, Transport and Economic
Growthnoted that a strategic business review
was recently conducted with local businesses and stakeholders. A
preferred model had not been identified yet but would be in place
by 1st April 2024. Further guidance was needed from
government around growth hubs and the level of funding that might
continue with those.
A Member asked what
governance arrangement would be put in place and how this would
relate to existing Institutions. TheCabinet Member forHighways,
Transport and Economic Growthanswered that
the One Surrey Growth Board and its sub-forums would be used to
provide the business voice and help shape the approach. Work was underway to look at how to refresh the
Growth Board and Business Leaders forum to get a greater range of
views on that.
A Member asked how
integration of LEP functions would support the Council’s
green agenda or boost the green economy. TheCabinet Member forHighways, Transport and Economic Growthanswered that the green agenda was a big priority for the
Council and growth in the green sector had a lot of potential in
Surrey. £2.3 million had been bid for Skills Bootcamp Funding
which had green skills education. There was also opportunities with
the Rural Prosperity Fund Partnership to encourage businesses to
switch to Electric Vehicle options.
A Member asked if
there was enough resources to carry out the Council’s
ambitions. TheCabinet
Member forHighways, Transport and Economic
Growthanswered financially yes but noted
that this was a new process and should be reviewed in a
year’s time.
Skills
The Cabinet Member
for Childrens and Families (and Housing) highlighted areas of the
strategy which identified housing for key workers as a priority.
Childrens homes and adults social housing had also been accelerated
due to this strategy.
A Member noted that
responsibility of delivering housing belonged with Districts and
Boroughs but asked if there was enough buy-in from them around for
the Housing strategy. Historically there were concerns. The
Executive Director for Partnerships, Prosperity, and growth noted
that a lot of work had been done to reassure Ds and Bs and many
concerns had been resolved.
A member noted
dependencies with the planning system and that many of the issues
raised in the Housing strategy stemmed from there. ...
view the full minutes text for item 43/22
Purpose of
report: for the Select Committee to review the attached
recommendations tracker and forward work programme, making
suggestions for additions or amendments as appropriate.
The Chairman noted
the opportunity to review and agree the Forward Work Programme and
to make suggestions for possible amendments or additions to the
programme. A request for the Committee to hold a special session on
Utilities was noted and the Committee gave its approval in
principle for a special session in the New Year on the performance
of Utility providers. The Chairman agreed to explore options to
scrutinise Ringway contract and performance as well
as parking enforcement. A review of the Library Service was also
raised.
PDF 182 KB