Agenda item

The Leader to make a statement.

There will be an opportunity for Members to ask questions and/or make comments.

The Leader of the Council made a detailed statement. A copy of the statement is attached as Appendix B.

Members raised the following topics:

·         Congratulated Catherine Powell on her appointment as the new Group Leader for the Residents’ Association/Independent Group, and thanked Nick Darby as the former Group Leader for all his hard work over the past four years.

·         Noted that as well as being ambitious, the Council should be caring and collaborative making a positive difference for all, using Members’ diverse knowledge and experience to be the voice of the most vulnerable and for them to be at the core of decision-making and treated as the highest priority.

·         Noted that the potential impacts of decisions must be reviewed before they are made, it was vital to understand who was being left behind and why, listening to those affected and implementing policies and strategies that help them.

·         Stressed that the Council must focus on prevention, noting that the loss of preventative services was costly to the Council in terms of negative impacts to residents and money saving, such as the closure of family centres in 2019.

·         Noted that many families were significantly impacted by the Education, Health and Care Plans (EHCPs) delays and the recent loss of Special Educational Needs and Disabilities (SEND) respite care services.

·         Regarding highways, noted that the proposed measures and changes were appreciated, however the recent lack of consultation and engagement with all councillors Surrey-wide was a missed opportunity to address issues arising from the changes to verges and on-street parking.

·         Noted that Members could be most effective by being informed, reports received should be concise, accurate, timely and identify areas of concern as well as positives; problems could only be solved if acknowledged.

Julia McShane left the meeting at 10.57 am.

·         Noted that many residents were angry about the state of the county’s roads and they wanted action; despite the Leader’s focus on the issue, the Medium Term Financial Strategy would cut next year's road budget by nearly £52 million.

·         Noted the results of May’s local elections, whereby the Liberal Democrats now run four of Surrey's district and borough councils, with one controlled by the Conservative Party. It was also noted that two new Liberal Democrat Members were elected at the most recent county by-elections.

·         Welcomed the commitment to improve cross-party collaboration with the district and borough councils, and asked how that would be achieved politically in terms of delivery and lobbying the Government for the funding and policy changes needed to deliver huge long-standing challenges.

·         Noting that the Council’s waste contract was coming to an end, sought better collaboration on waste and recycling to realise the Council’s climate and wider greener future ambitions.

·         Asked for the details to be shared publicly of how the Council’s resources could be used to better enable a more joined up delivery on areas that are the responsibilities of district and borough councils.

·         Noted that the aims of the Surrey-wide Housing Strategy were at odds with the district and borough councils which were pressured to meet the Government's unfair Green Belt housing targets which serve London's housing market need; London needed to collaborate with Surrey's leaders.

·         Noted the chance of aligning the opportunities provided by the Ultra Low Emission Zone (ULEZ) with the Surrey Local Transport Plan (LTP4) in terms of more investment in walking, cycling and public transport, conversely ULEZ negatively impacted Surrey through the scrappage scheme and failure to improve bus and train travel between Surrey and London.

·         Asked what engagement the Leader has had with the Government to secure support and funding to areas around ULEZ in ways that would help Surrey achieve its own climate ambition and LTP4.

·         Thanked the Leader for his recent visit to Stanwell and Stanwell Moor, however noted many residents in the county felt left behind concerning ULEZ, the lack of public transport and blight of anti-social behaviour - asked the Leader to prioritise this - exacerbated by the lack of response from the police; noted the refusal by the Police and Crime Commissioner for Surrey to engage.

·         Welcomed the overdue resurfacing of Town Lane that links Ashford to Stanwell, however other roads were in an appalling state and the Council needed to continue to prioritise roads, potholes and high quality repairs. 

·         Welcomed the Leader’s positive contributions towards the investment in Surrey’s roads, particularly roads in north west Surrey.

·         Referred to a Liberal Democrat local election leaflet, claiming that it contained misinformation about the Council’s cuts to future highway spending and that Individual Member Highways Allocations of £100,000 would be ‘completely abolished’ from 2024/25; sought an apology from the Liberal Democrat Group’s Leader.

·         Requested that the Leader’s commitment in examining every intervention available to address the problems regarding potholes, could be applied to the Council’s performance in improving the woeful EHCP statistics.

·         Sought clarity on whether the Individual Member Highways Allocations would continue at £100,000 for future years or would be reverting to £50,000 or £0. 

·         Sought information on the highways Task and Finish Groups so Members could provide input around any specific concerns.

·         Noted that pavement parking was banned in London but not in the surrounding counties; it would be helpful if the administration could find out when the Government would publish the results of its 2019 consultation on pavement parking and what actions it might take. 

·         Highlighted the qualities of the new leader of the Residents’ Association/Independent Group, noting that she had recently had her hair cut and recycled for charity, had a broad knowledge, a forensic attitude to getting to the crux of issues and an ability in debate to articulate complex issues simply.

·         Noted that the introduction of the verge parking regime was a disaster in Epsom and Ewell, many residents had complaints; hoped the review referenced by the Leader would be taken seriously, ensuring up to date information on the website and reviewing residents’ concerns and ensuring that future cuts would happen before the grass covers up street nameplates.

·         Welcomed the Leader’s focus on addressing the condition of Surrey's roads and asked the Leader to redouble his efforts to obtain more capital funding from the Government in recognition of Surrey's roads only being second to London's roads in terms of the volume of traffic.

·         Asked whether the Leader or the Cabinet Member for Highways and Community Resilience had information on water penetration resistant tarmac types which would reduce the problem of potholes.

·         Noted that back in 2017 the Individual Member Highways Allocations was around £20,000, thanks to the Leader and his administration that amount increased to £50,000 and then doubled to the current £100,000; that allocation was not under threat and the Cabinet Member for Highways and Community Resilience had given assurance to Members that due to inflation their projects would still be funded if they exceeded £100,000.

·         Welcomed that the 2024/25 highways budget was not being abolished and noted that it would be clearer if announcements were not made at Council meetings and the administration’s messages were consistent. 

·         Referred to a Conservative Party leaflet circulated in Guildford falsely claiming that the Liberal Democrats on Guildford Borough Council were planning to introduce a congestion charge; asked the Leader to confirm that the Council would not be introducing a congestion charge in Guildford.

·         Noted concern in a Surrey Liberal Democrats online article which used the Council’s headquarters as a background to spread untruths and misleading comments about the administration cutting services to vulnerable residents.

·         Regarding the volume of traffic carried on Surrey's roads, noted that a few years ago had launched a six-month petition on fairer funding for Surrey’s roads however that fell short of the signatures needed with the lowest amount in Epsom and Ewell, and Guildford; stressed the need to work together.

·         Had a road resurfaced recently in their division, however the residents were in uproar as they were given two days’ notice of the road being closed.

·         Referred to a recent email on the continuing lack of provision for children with additional needs and disabilities/SEND at a local school from the leaving Chairman of Governors, noting the non-existent support and funding by the Council for those children. An assistant teacher had been funded however they do not have the appropriate skills for the scenario; reiterated that the £750,000 spent on Community Liaison Officers would be better spent on children with additional needs and disabilities/SEND.

·         Welcomed the Leader’s comments on the extra funds that were being spent on both road and pavement resurfacing.

·         Asked the Leader and the Cabinet Member for Highways and Community Resilience to talk to the highways Works Communications Team to ensure that information circulated to residents is accurate and work is completed on time, avoiding constant changes and delays.

·         Stressed that the most recent elections concerned the district and borough councils, not the County Council, and noted dismay in past campaigning leaflets reporting misinformation about the County Council.

·         Praised the Individual Member Highways Allocations of £100,000 and urged Members to make use of that allocation to help their areas of highest need.

·         Noted that residents’ anger was reflected in the loss of over 1,000 Conservative Party seats nationally at the local elections, urged for action to happen prior to the 2025 County Council elections.

·         Emphasised that the delivery of the Council’s services was a constantly evolving process, allocating resources to need and balancing important agendas. For example, due to the climate emergency being declared the Council’s highways policies adapted to support Surrey’s ecosystems, to provide clean air for communities, manage risk on Surrey’s roads and undertake appropriate tree maintenance; highways resourcing was being reviewed to address the impact of seasonal and extreme weather conditions.

·         Noted that shaping the Council’s services relied on constructive contributions to the four select committees, informed by observations from all Members.

·         Noted that the Council meetings should be an opportunity to reflect on the hard work of the Council’s staff and Members, not a platform to undermine trust.

·         Asked the Leader to repeat that there is greater value in all working together collectively to get on and deliver for residents, rather than just criticising.