Agenda item

a          Members' Questions

The deadline for Member’s questions is 12pm four working days before the meeting (12 February 2021).

b          Public Questions

The deadline for public questions is seven days before the meeting (11 February 2021).

c          Petitions

The deadline for petitions was 14 days before the meeting. No petitions

have been received.

a          MEMBERS' QUESTIONS [Item 4a]

None received.

b         PUBLIC QUESTIONS [Item 4b]

Three questions were received from members of the public. The responses can be found attached to these minutes as Annex A.

A supplementary question was asked from one member of the public and the verbal response can be found below.

3.      Supplementary question asked by Philip Walker:

The questioner reiterated his question enquiring as to whether the Council considered the UK Influenza Pandemic Preparedness Strategy 2011 to be relevant with regards to Covid-19 and referred to point 2.20 from the Strategy which recommended preparing for a case fatality rate of 2.5% assuming no effective treatment was available. The response received suggested that a lack of antiviral treatments was a reason for deviating from the Strategy and he noted that the case fatality rates of Covid-19 across the vast majority of the population was much lower than the 2.5% fatality rate.

The questioner asked whether there was any intention of systematising the effects of the restrictions on vulnerable groups as well as all residents, in order to help people cope with the now almost a year of having in some cases, everything that they really had to live for away from them.

The questioner noted that the response in relation to Surrey’s Local Outbreak Control Plan did not mention an ethical framework as laid out by the Strategy and asked whether there was a cost-benefit analysis for the measures put in place as the Council had a duty to protect its residents and minimise disruption.

Response:

The Director of Public Health (SCC) recognised the importance recovery and that certain population groups had been disproportionately affected as highlighted in the Community Impact Assessment (CIA), which was fed into Surrey’s Local Outbreak Control Plan (LOCP) - which had been constantly updated since it was published. She noted that there was a health inequalities group that looked at Covid-19 recovery and going forward the findings across the recovery workstreams would be woven into the Health and Wellbeing Strategy. She explained that later in the agenda the Public Health Principal (SCC) would provide an update on the impact of Covid-19 on Black, Asian and Minority Ethnic (BAME) communities. She added that she chaired the recent Equalities, Engagement and Inclusion Group which looked at vaccination outreach to hard to reach groups that had been disproportionately affected.

She explained that cost-benefit analyses were undertaken for the different programmes carried out at the local level as it was vital that there was robust evaluation regarding value for money, the impact of national restrictions and ensuring constant engagement with the population groups.

The Public Health Consultant (SCC) added that within the CIA there were Rapid Needs Assessments (RNAs) that focussed on ten different population groups that had been disproportionately affected by Covid-19 and through that targeted work recommendations as well as actions from those had been shared with the health system.

The Chairman thanked those members of the public for submitting their questions as well as the supplementary question asked, welcoming their interest in the work of Surrey County Council regarding its response to Covid-19 and the Surrey LOCP.

c          PETITIONS [Item 4c]

There were none.