Agenda item

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 1 July 2020).

Member Questions:

Notice of thirteen questions had been received. The questions and replies were published in a supplementary agenda on 6 July 2020.

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

(Q1) Mrs Hazel Watson asked if the Leader of the Council would formally write to the event organisers London Marathon Events, stating that the Council finds it unacceptable for them not to have addressed the serious accident and to discuss the measures going forward to protect local residents within one year of accident.

Rachael I. Lake asked if the Leader would organise a meeting with all Members whose division the Prudential RideLondon cycle event goes through.

The Leader of the Council responded that he was happy to write to London Marathon Events to ask them to confirm that there would be suitable safety measures in place, it was not however appropriate to involve the Council with an individual claim as the insurers of London Marathon Events were dealing with the matter. He encouraged Members with any specific issues to liaise with him and commented that the Cabinet Member for Communities was in discussion with the event organisers to discuss the event post 2021.

(Q2) Mr Robert Evans noted that the response was confusing and asked if the Cabinet Member for Adults and Health had received any indication from the Government that they would offer to reimburse schools or other organisations for the costs incurred from adhering to the two metre rule and the subsequent change to one metre plus.

The Cabinet Member for Adults and Health responded that she was not aware of any Government commitment to reimburse schools or other organisations at present.

(Q5) Mr Stephen Cooksey asked the Cabinet Member for Transport about the timetable for both the first tranche and second tranche of the Active Travel funding, particularly when there might be implementation on the first tranche and further detail provided on the second tranche.

Mr Jonathan Essex if the Council would confirm that plans were in place to employ a full-time cycle planner and that sufficient walking and cycling skills would be sought externally if needed to ensure that the full amount from the phase one bid could be secured. He also asked if the cost breakdown for the measures funded or not in phase one.

Mr David Harmer noted the money set aside for verge vegetation control in rural areas, explaining that allowing the vegetation to grow in certain areas was a good traffic calming measure, it protected endangered species and was less costly. He asked if local parish councils could be invited to nominate areas where verge vegetation could be left to grow.

Mr Will Forster commented that the answer noted that Sustrans and Create Streets were involved in the second tranche, asking if they were also involved in tranche one and if the relevant divisional councillors would be consulted before the second tranche bids were submitted.

Mr Nick Harrison asked if the Epsom Banstead Sustainable Transport Package (STP) could be reviewed.

In response, the Cabinet Member for Transport commented that the timeframe for implementation of the first phase was for completion as quickly as possible. His team were contacting all divisional councillors for their feedback before the submission of a bid for the second tranche. A project manager had been employed who was working on the prioritisation of the measures in tranche one. A cost breakdown could be provided for the measures funded in phase one. He noted that he was only proposing areas where vegetation was to be cut back in order to improve walking and cycling, not on rural roads unless there was a pavement. He explained that Sustrans and Create Streets were not involved in the bid, Create Streets were involved in the pilots to provide feedback on improvements and both partners were to be involved going forward. He noted if the Epsom Banstead Sustainable Transport Package (STP) was submitted as part of Active Travel funding proposals it would be considered as part of phase two.

(Q6) Mr Will Forster asked the Cabinet Member for Transport if the Woking Local Committee should have been consulted on Woking’s Local Walking and Cycling Infrastructure Plan before it was published.

The Cabinet Member for Transport replied that officers and councillors from Woking Borough Council, Surrey County Council and the and the Department of Transport were fully involved. He added that his aim was to have more Local Walking and Cycling Infrastructure Plans across the county.

(Q7) Mr Jonathan Essex asked the Cabinet Member for Transport if Members could join the briefing tomorrow of interest contractors on the procurement of the future highway maintenance contract. He asked what was planned for Members to enable them to review the 14 to 20 year contract period and if he would consider separating out routine maintenance so Members could scrutinise contracts before inviting contractors to express interest.

Mr John O’Reilly asked if the Cabinet would agree on the importance of reconvening the Member Reference Group which followed the highway maintenance contract process and if the whole Communities, Environment and Highways Select Committee could be given the opportunity to express its views on the matter before decisions were taken.

Dr Andrew Povey noted that it some cases it would be beneficial within the new contract to have a certain level below which permitted parish councils and local contractors to undertake small amounts of work on the highways, who were often more cost-effective.

The Cabinet Member for Transport noted that the briefing tomorrow was an expression of interest session with parties from the industry, with no Member involvement at present. Members would be fully involved in due course with the resumption of the Member Reference Group and feedback from the select committee. His team was looking to ensure the contract and approach to climate change and carbon zero was innovative and flexible, alongside the Rethinking Transport project. He would speak to the Member outside the meeting regarding better value for money through using smaller local contractors such as residents’ associations, community groups and parish councils to undertake work such as litter picking or verge trimming in some cases; whilst taking into consideration of who was properly insured to work on the highway.

(Q8) Mr Robert Evans commented that he hoped the Leader would provide Members with regular updates concerning the financial implications from Covid-19.

(Q10) Mr Jonathan Essex asked the Cabinet Member for Environment and Climate Change if the Air Quality Modelling report, the HIF Business case and the ecological screening review could be shared.

The Cabinet Member for Environment and Climate Change responded that the above reports would be shared.

(Q11) Mr Robert Evans asked if the Leader would considersetting up a working group to look at sharing best practice and experiences concerning incidents of traveller sites setting up on both public and private land in the county as well as unauthorised encampments (UEs), ensuring future preparedness.

The Leader of the Council responded that there was a working group within the Surrey Leader’s Group focusing on matters relating to travellers, he noted that the main issue was the need to identify a location for a transit site and stopover points to which he had offered up some land. He welcomed the support of the Member and would speak to him outside of the meeting.

(Q12) Mr Jonathan Essex asked the Cabinet Member for All-Age Learning if the work on identifying temporary classrooms or empty buildings spaces for schools by the Council’s Land and Property team, be continued in case of a second Covid-19 peak enabling schools with less on-site space in the county to remain open.

In response, the Cabinet Member for All-Age Learning noted that the Land and Property team were working closely with schools on identifying additional on-site premises where possible. The preferred option was to look at business as usual and continuity plans around home education and learning in response to a second peak, rather than schools managing across multiple sites.

(Q13) Mr Jonathan Essex asked the Cabinet Member for Environment and Climate Change to confirm the membership and the frequency of the Climate Change Strategic Board.

The Cabinet Member for Environment and Climate Change responded that the Board had been newly constituted and had met once so far. Additional detail including its membership would be provided to the Member outside of the meeting.

Declarations of interest:

None

Questions:

Notice of XX questions had been received. The questions and replies are attached as Appendix XX.

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