Witnesses:
Matt Furniss,
Cabinet Member for Transport
Katie Stewart,
Executive Director – ETI
Lee Parker, Director
- Infrastructure Planning & Major Projects
Dawn Redpath,
Director – Economy & Growth
Key points raised during the discussion:
- The Executive
Director stated that the Council was expanding its capital
investment in infrastructure and emphasised the importance of the
Surrey Infrastructure Plan (SIP) in achieving the council’s
ambition to deliver infrastructure to support sustainable growth.
The 2017 infrastructure study had identified the level of
investment needed to support intended growth and detected a
significant funding gap and deliverability challenges. The Council
had subsequently needed to develop a strategy that would bridge the
funding gap whilst investing in sustainable infrastructure and
adhering to the Council’s climate change strategy, local
transport plan and other organisation ambitions.
- The Director –
Infrastructure Planning and Major Projects stated that the proposed
Prioritisation Framework for infrastructure projects would be used
to assess proposed schemes. The plan proposed an innovative
approach to funding and financing and set out a number of
objectives, each with a series of outcomes. Proposed schemes were
to be scored against these outcomes using a simple scoring matrix.
This new planned approach would provide a strong focus on outcomes
and the deliverability of schemes.
- A Member asked
why and how each of the objectives were
chosen for inclusion in the plan and whether this methodology was
based on existing best practice.
The Executive Director explained that the objectives were based on
the prevailing Council strategies (for example, the climate change
strategy and local transport strategy) and the SIP was designed to
bring them together for development of an integrated framework,
alongside the development of the Directorate’s capital
programme. The objectives were established in collaboration with
the Cabinet, Surrey Future Steering Board, district and borough
councils and other partners.
- A Member
questioned how the Prioritisation Framework methodology ensured
that the scoring of schemes was evidence based. The Executive
Director responded that SIP was underpinned by the 2017 Surrey
Infrastructure Study which had examined a suite of objectives and
outcomes that the council was trying to achieve. This helped to
define the strategies and objectives of SIP. There was also a local
level, formal consultation process for the development of
infrastructure delivery plans.
- A Member asked how
the proposed schemes would be subject to democratic processes and
inspection. The Executive Director stated that cabinet set desired
outcomes from which officers developed the capital programme. The
Prioritisation Framework was not intended to create a finalised,
hierarchical list, rather was designed to highlight the schemes
that were most likely to be delivered based on their outcomes set
by the democratic process. This approach was intended to increase
the transparency around the reasons behind why certain projects
were on the capital programme. The
Cabinet Member for Transport added that the prioritised list would
form a recommendation to cabinet and elected members would be able
to suggest changes and express their views
thereafter.
- The Select Committee
inquired how SIP linked with the government’s National
Infrastructure Strategy and what was expected to be delivered in
Surrey as a result of this national strategy. Previously, the
Directorate was not in a position whereby it could respond in a
timely manner to national infrastructure plans and priorities and
the Executive Director was pleased that many of the council’s
strategies now reflected the direction of national strategy (such
as sustainable growth). Once SIP was in place, the Council would be
able to link up with the national priorities and make an evidence
base to Government that Surrey was a good position to invest in as
part of the national infrastructure strategy.
- Government strategies
were subject to change and the Member asked whether the SIP would
enable the Council to react quickly to national policy
changes. The Director explained that
the purpose of SIP was to avoid a clear ranking of schemes and to
enable a much timelier response to national policy changes and
Government funding opportunities with costed schemes that had
already been through the democratic process and gained community
support. The Director was confident that the new prioritisation
framework would put the Council in a much stronger position going
forward and indicate to government that it
could respond positively when opportunities arrived.
- A Member
requested further information regarding the availability of staff
to support the infrastructure project. The Executive Director
stated that additional capacity had been created within the Major
Projects and Infrastructure team to drive the infrastructure
programme. Within this team, the Directorate was looking to
establish a place-making function to focus on planning and
intelligence gathering around the schemes, and to start developing
the directorate’s pipeline. The team would also increase the
capacity to deliver the business cases and identify Government
priorities.
- A Member asked whether broadband coverage across
Surrey would be prioritised going forward to meet the pressure of
increased home schooling and working from home. The Executive
Director stated that Covid-19 made attaining 100% broadband
coverage for all Surrey residents increasingly important. A close
working relationship between the Infrastructure Planning &
Major Projects and the Economy & Growth teams would be critical
to achieving this. The latter was working on the development of an
additional infrastructure strategy and the Director – Economy
& Growth stated the importance of looking at a place strategically and ensuring that
digital infrastructure could be utilised to deliver against a
variety of outcomes.
- A Member asked what
the cost would be of delivering all the schemes in Appendix 1
(an initial list of schemes to be assessed using the SIP
Prioritisation Framework) over a 5-10-year period.The Executive
Director responded that these figures were developedand would be
provided with further detail in an update at a future meeting of
the Select Committee.
- A Member asked how
the Council might ensure that it did not invest in schemes that
contributed to its climate impact. The Executive Director stated
that the Prioritisation Framework would ensure that new
infrastructure was as green as possible. The Director –
Environment was working closely with the Director –
Infrastructure Planning & Major Projects, and others, to look
at how capital programmes should be assessed to ascertain their
likely carbon impact. The Director – Environment stated that
the development of the SIP was informed by other strategies and
linked closely with the new Local
Transport Plan 4, which would
have a significant focus on decarbonisation. The Executive Director
assured Members that the aims of the Surrey Climate Change Delivery
plan underpinned the SIP.
- The Chairman asked
whether the Council had looked at of other Local Authorities’
plans when developing the SIP. The Executive Director stated that the Council had taken a more
innovative and strategic approach than other Local Authorities to
put the council in the best position possible for future funding
announcements.
- A Member requested
that a more detailed explanation of the delivery timeline and
progress and better communication of expected achievements be
included in the report to Cabinet in February 2021.
Recommendations:
I.
The Select Committee ensures democratic oversight of
the surrey infrastructure plan by scrutinising the delivery of the
plan at a future meeting in the 2021/22 council year, assessing the
success of the 15 objectives; and
II.
The Select Committee seeks evidence of the council
working with partner agencies to secure funds and deliver projects
and how the surrey infrastructure plan and directorate’s
capital programme helps to realise the aims of the council’s
main strategies (e.g. Climate change strategy, local transport
plan, digital strategy)
III.
The Select Committee recommends that the report to
Cabinet in February 2021 includes a timeline for delivery of the
plan.