Agenda item

Item 10 (i)

 

Paul Follows (Godalming South, Milford & Witley) to move under standing order 11 as follows:

 

This Council notes:

 

• The disruption to potable water supply across large parts of the boroughs of Guildford and Waverley that commenced on Saturday 4 November, the ongoing water supply issues in Cranleigh and surrounding villages, and the repeated discharge of raw sewage into the river network; 

 

• All efforts from across the community to support people, and in particular those who are vulnerable, in accessing alternative supplies of water during the period of disruption; 

 

• The legitimate concerns of residents about raw sewage being regularly discharged into our river network from Sewage Treatment Works and from Combined Sewer Overflows (CSOs) and from raw sewage back flowing onto their private property and highway network;

 

• Concerning elements of Thames Water’s response to the disruption, including but not limited to:

 

(a)  poor communication with those impacted in the community, and 

 

(b)  limited actions to ensure the vulnerable or those unable to queue for water, were able to access alternative supplies. 

 

(c)   delayed environmental cleanup operations.

 

• The chronic underinvestment from the government towards the water industry which risks the possibility of future water shortages and increased raw sewage discharges and notes the three lead executives at Thames Water during the previous financial year were estimated to have been paid a total of £1.52 million, exclusive of bonuses, benefits, pensions and other incentives. 

 

This Council resolves to:

 

1. Ensure the Leader of the Council writes to the leadership of Thames Water, to request:

 

a.      a detailed report of the cause of the disruption to water supply and the steps taken to resolve the matter; 

b.      a detailed report on the instances and quantity of raw sewage discharges into the river network and Combined Sewer Overflow (CSO) assurances over the past four years and the investment plans to resolve this;

c.      that residents and businesses receive timely and full compensation for the disruption to water supply and sewage spills; 

d.      an improved communications plan for informing the local community should a similar disruption to water supply occur again and/or raw sewage incidents; and 

e.      a reassessment of its processes, procedures, and criteria for ensuring the vulnerable or those unable to queue are able to access alternative supplies of water in the event of a disruption. 

 

2. Ask the Leader of the Council to write to the Secretary of State for the Department of Environment, Food and Rural Affairs to commission an investigation into the most recent water supply incident and the agency response, in addition to the requirement for water companies’ to record and report raw sewage spills onto private property and the public highway through their assets.

 

3. Task the Communities, Environment and Highways Select Committee with:

 

a.    reviewing the Council’s emergency response measures regarding water and sewerage infrastructure.

b.    reviewing how and when the Council determined the need to enter into emergency response measures.

 

 

Item 10 (ii)

 

Jonathan Essex (Redhill East) to move under standing order 11 as follows:

 

This Council notes:

 

·         Surrey County Council spends around £80 million per year on travel assistance and transport, across three key directorates (Children, Families and Lifelong Learning; Adult Social Care; and Environment, Transport and Infrastructure), the majority of which (£55 million) is for Home to School Transport Assistance (H2STA). 

 

·         To deliver on the Surrey Climate Strategy transport targets there is a need to increase overall bus use, both fixed bus routes as well as Digital Demand Responsive Transport (DDRT). Surrey County Council is already extending its rollout of DDRT with an aspiration for a Surrey-wide service. 

 

·         At the same time the NHS procures non-emergency transport services and also there are workplace transport providers plus community and voluntary sector transport provision.

 

This Council further notes:

 

·         Surrey County Council has a Freedom to Travel (F2T) transformation programme. Phase 1 is to improve Home to School Transport Assistance up until 2025. Phase 2 will then explore the benefits of pooling of transport provision across Surrey County Council directorates. 

 

·         Bringing forward Phase 2 and extending it to include the NHS and borough and district councils would increase bus use, helping deliver on our Local Transport Plan and improving the viability of fixed bus routes and DDRT.

 

 

This Council resolves to request that Cabinet:

 

a.    Brings forward and extends Phase 2 of the Freedom to Travel transformation programme across Surrey County Council in collaboration with other partners.

 

b.    Works with Surrey Heartlands and NHS Frimley to explore pooling the funding of non-emergency patient transport for the NHS across Surrey.

 

c.     Works with all district and boroughs to pool community transport provision (including taxi vouchers) to deliver DDRT across Surrey.

 

d.    Works with key workplaces (e.g. hospitals and large businesses) to strengthen incentives for travel to work by public transport.

 

 

Item 10 (iii)

 

Matt Furniss (Shalford) to move under standing order 11 as follows:

 

This Council notes:

 

• Surrey County Council has been leading in its strong commitment to promoting skills development and education for all residents of Surrey to support the Surrey Local Economy. This meets this Council’s strategic priority of Growing a Sustainable Economy So Everyone Can Benefit and its guiding mission to make sure No One is Left Behind through providing skills training to enable residents of all ages access the jobs they want.

 

• Last year, this Council launched the Surrey Skills Plan: The Skills Plan sets out a vision for a dynamic, demand-led skills system that meets the needs of businesses and individuals in Surrey.

 

• In 2023, SCC has delivered on a number of key priorities of the plan including:

 

-       Establishing the Surrey Careers Hub to work with 95 schools and colleges across the county to improve their performance against the Gatsby benchmarks and help them deliver world-class careers advice, information and guidance. This single service covering all of Surrey was formally launched. The Careers Hub will work with all the county’s secondary schools, special schools and colleges with the aim of ensuring every young person can find their best next step.

 

-       Establishing an annual skills and careers festival (the Festival of Skills), which hosted 80 exhibitors and over 1300 students and teachers to showcase a wide range of career pathways and opportunities.

 

-       Enabled more businesses, both large and small, to inform skills provision planning through the delivery of Skills Bootcamps – short training courses to upskill and reskill Surrey’s adults.

 

-       Worked in collaboration to successfully win a number of significant funding bids, including £6m for the Local Skills Improvement Fund, £1.8m for Skills Bootcamps and over £6m for Individual Placement Support in Primary Care (funding to support those with both mental and physical disabilities move into the workforce).

 

• In addition, this Council has made significant investments in skills training and education programs, including the Surrey Adult Learning service, which provides a wide range of free and subsidised courses to help residents develop the skills they need to succeed in the workplace and with the Level 2 Devolution Deal now agreed by the Government this Council can look to enhance the offering to Businesses and residents on vocational skills through SAL.

 

• Surrey is a strategically important economic powerhouse which contains a productive and highly skilled workforce. We have a large, highly productive economy which contributes £48bn in GVA and with a high employment rate.

 

• Lastly, a partnership team, led by Royal Holloway, University of London (RHUL), and involving Pinewood Studios, disguise, BT, Buckinghamshire Local Enterprise Partnership, University of Surrey, Abertay University and National Film and Television School, alongside the County Council, has been announced as the winner of the ‘Convergent Screen Technologies and performance in Realtime (CoSTAR)’ national lab.

 

• The successful bid will create hundreds of new jobs and add tens of millions of pounds to Surrey’s economy. The £51m funding application was submitted in February 2022 by StoryFutures at RHUL on behalf of the wider bid team. The application focused on establishing a CoSTAR national lab at Pinewood Studios, alongside associated facilities and programmes to drive innovation and creativity in the UK’s screen and performance industries.

 

• Surrey County Council’s proposed contribution includes a capital commitment of £3m to fund the establishment of a CoSTAR satellite studio and incubator space on the RHUL campus in Surrey. It’s hoped these facilities will provide a sizeable boost to Surrey-based creative industry businesses, with over 200 expected to benefit.

 

• The Surrey-based Satellite Studio Facility is also projected to create 350 jobs over six years, and make a net contribution of c£35m gross value added to Surrey’s economy. Both facilities aim to open in early 2026.

 

 This Council resolves to:

 

1. Express its strong support for Surrey County Council's work on promoting skills to support residents and the local economy in Surrey.

 

2. Commend the Council for its development and implementation of the Surrey Skills Plan.

 

3. Welcome the new Single Surrey-wide Careers Hub to provide career pathway advice for Surrey residents.

 

4. Encourage the Council to continue its efforts to promote skills development and education for all Surrey residents.

 

 

 

 

Item 10 (i)

 

Under Standing Order 12.3 the Council agreed to debate this motion.

 

Under Standing Order 20.3 (a) Paul Follows moved a proposed alteration to the original motion standing in his own name, which had been published in the supplementary agenda (item 10) on 11 December 2023.

 

The proposed alteration to the motion was as follows (with additional words in bold/underlined and deletions crossed through):

 

This Council notes:

 

·         The disruption to potable water supply across large parts of the boroughs of Guildford and Waverley that commenced on Saturday 4 November, the ongoing water supply issues in Cranleigh and surrounding villages, and the repeated discharge of raw sewage into the river network; 

 

·         All efforts from across the community to support people, and in particular those who are vulnerable, in accessing alternative supplies of water during the period of disruption; 

 

·         The legitimate concerns of residents about raw sewage being regularly discharged into our river network from Sewage Treatment Works and from Combined Sewer Overflows (CSOs) and from raw sewage back flowing onto their private property and highway network;

 

·         Concerning elements of Thames Water’s response to the disruption, including but not limited to:

 

(a)  poor communication with those impacted in the community, and 

 

(b)  limited actions to ensure the vulnerable or those unable to queue for water, were able to access alternative supplies. 

 

(c)   delayed environmental cleanup operations.

 

·         The chronic underinvestment from the government towards the water industry which risks the possibility of future water shortages and increased raw sewage discharges and notes the three lead executives at Thames Water during the previous financial year were estimated to have been paid a total of £1.52 million, exclusive of bonuses, benefits, pensions and other incentives. 

 

This Council resolves to:

 

  I.        Ensure the Leader of the Council writes to the leadership of Thames Water, to request:

 

a.      a detailed report of the cause of the disruption to water supply and the steps taken to resolve the matter; 

b.      a detailed report on the instances and quantity of raw sewage discharges into the river network and Combined Sewer Overflow (CSO) assurances over the past four years and the investment plans to resolve this;

c.      that residents and businesses receive timely and full compensation for the disruption to water supply and sewage spills; 

d.      an improved communications plan for informing the local community should a similar disruption to water supply occur again and/or raw sewage incidents; and 

e.      a reassessment of its processes, procedures, and criteria for ensuring the vulnerable or those unable to queue are able to access alternative supplies of water in the event of a disruption. 

 

 II.        Ask the Leader of the Council to write to the Secretary of State for the Department of Environment, Food and Rural Affairs to commission an investigation into the most recent water supply incident and the agency response, in addition to the requirement for water companies’ to record and report raw sewage spills onto private property and the public highway through their assets.

 

III.        Task the Communities, Environment and Highways Select Committee with:

 

a.    reviewing the Council’s emergency response measures regarding water and sewerage infrastructure.

b.    reviewing how and when the Council determined the need to enter into emergency response measures.

III.        Work with Guildford Borough Council, Thames Water and Waverley Borough Council to collectively learn lessons from this incident and the emergency response measures taken.

 

Under Standing Order 20.3, the proposed alteration to the original motion was put to the vote and Council agreed to the proposed alteration and it was therefore open for debate.

 

Paul Follows made the following points:

 

·         Noted that the recent Thames Water outage just over a month ago impacted around 13,000 residents in Waverley and Guildford, that figure could have increased to 40,000 households if a third reservoir was affected. 

·         Highlighted the poor communications from Thames Water throughout the outage and thanked the Council officers and officers from Waverley and Guildford Borough Councils that stepped in.

·         Noted that water stations were not equipped to meet the demand or geographic spread, Thames Water did not take up offers of support from the councils to set up more leading to traffic gridlock in some parts.

·         Noted that local councillors made water deliveries to vulnerable residents missed by Thames Water, that was Thames Water’s legal duty and in some cases it claimed to make such deliveries but had not or left a few bottles.

·         Noted that the situation was manageable only through partnership working, Farncombe Day Centre had used its vehicles and staff to help others.

·         Noted that the cause of the outage at Shalford Water Treatment Works was Storm Ciaran, a mild storm, which raised questions about the resilience of the local water infrastructure.

·         Noted that Godalming Town Council and Waverley Borough Council held sessions to collate residents’ views and questions for Thames Water.

·         Welcomed the meeting later in the week between Guildford and Waverley local MPs with the University of Surrey and Thames Water, and its outcomes.

·         Noted the resolutions empowering the Leader to write to Thames Water to request formal answers to the questions listed; and to write to the Secretary of State for the Department of Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA) requesting further investigation.

·         Noted that Thames Water had pledged upgrades and spending to the local water infrastructure, however past promises had not been met and external auditors had questioned the company’s short-term financial stability.

·         Noted that Thames Water was concluding its internal review of the outage, there was a history of local authorities trying to engage with Thames Water and similar companies and so there was value with Surrey adding its input via the different local government levels and MPs.

·         Welcomed further joint working going forward concerning incident response.

 

The motion was formally seconded by Liz Townsend, who made the following comments:

 

·         Noted that for too long water supply security and the impact of raw sewage spillages had been ignored.

·         Noted that for the last ten years her division had faced such issues with frequent pipe bursts, supply interruptions and poor sewage infrastructure and spillages, without fixes for months or years in some cases; was not confident that the separate pollution issues were being accurately recorded.

·         Noted that Thames Water loses a quarter of drinking water to leaks, equivalent to 600 million litres daily.

·         Noted the unsustainable removal of water from rivers and aquifers and worsening water quality, treatment works were unable to cope in heavy rain or hot weather.

·         Stressed that water companies had not invested enough, as a result Thames Water faced spiralling debt, yet it funded bonuses.

·         Noted that last year her division suffered three major outages, the last one coincided with a heatwave and residents queued for hours in high heat for a few litres of bottled water, residents on the priority list were overlooked, schools and businesses shut, there was not enough bottled water or people to distribute that, and communication was poor.

·         Requested that the Council uses its powers behalf of residents to find out what went wrong and how it could be prevented in the future.

 

Six Members made the following comments:

 

·         Noted that the major water supply outage in parts of Guildford and Waverley lasted for days and in some cases almost a fortnight, in the past week some parts of Guildford experienced intermittent water supplies.

·         Welcomed the Council’s declaration of a major incident.

·         Noted Thames Water’s poor response, large vehicles pumped water supplies into hospitals without any thought to the impact of the noise on residents.

·         Noted that it had been discovered that the register of vulnerable people held by Thames Water was wiped daily from their system.

·         Noted that where residents experienced no water or polluted water, Thames Water repeatedly reported that the problems had been addressed when they had not been, there was nowhere to report issues on their website, information was incomplete and inaccurate and calls went unanswered.

·         Noted that in some cases water distribution points were far away from many residents.

·         Stressed that Thames Water had a lot of work to do to improve its services, apologised that residents were let down and noted the importance of collectively putting that pressure on.

·         Noted that the Council had seen the letter sent to the MP for South West Surrey from Thames Water’s Interim Co-Chief Executive Officer and hoped that it would set out its plans at the upcoming meeting.

·         Noted that the Communities, Environment and Highways Select Committee had set up focused Special Sessions on Utilitiesto work with the utility companies to ensure ongoing water security and better communication links.

·         Noted that raw sewage overflow data was publicly available.

·         Noted that Thames Water was providing reports to the Council and had set out its investment plan.

·         Welcomed the unlimited penalties introduced to those that pollute the environment.

·         Recognised the awful situation faced by residents, had raised the issue last week with the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of Statein DEFRA who promised that there would be a follow up meeting; would chase that.

·         Suggested that the Council should also write to Ofwat.

·         Noted regular news reports mentioning sewage spills into rivers in the South Eastand the poor excuses given around rainfall; noted the new reservoir being built in Hampshire.

·         Called for the greater use of greywater, and water limitation methods and storage in building design at all levels of local government.

·         Noted disappointment in the deletion of the wording in resolution III around reviewing the Council’s emergency response, noted that emergency powers were needed on Sunday morning in Godalming North as there was only one water collection site which needed to be resupplied and traffic was gridlocked.

·         Noted that the communication from Thames Water was extremely poor, Shalford Water Treatment Works required constant repairs.

·         Noted that the Surrey Local Resilience Forum (SLRF) included the district and borough councils and other partners, anyone of which could have declared it as a major incident. The Council did so once it realised that Thames Water’s assurances were not credible.

·         Noted that the SLRF repeatedly offered help to Thames Water which refused, communications could have been set up through those channels early on.

·         Noted that the SLRF had invested in a new vulnerable people reporting system which was used successfully and would continue to be updated.

·         Hoped that at the upcoming meeting Thames Water would be held to account and would listen to the feedback on how poorly they performed, it would be interesting to hear what their internal audit had done.

 

The Chair asked Paul Follows, as proposer of the motion to conclude the debate, he made the following comments:

 

·         Agreed that it was an opportunity to work together, collectively putting forward one Surrey voice to ensure that it is heard.

·         Reiterated the comment that Thames Water was offered help from all levels of local government and refused it.

·         Agreed that including Ofwat in the letters by the Council would be useful.

 

The motion was put to the vote and was carried.

 

Therefore, it was RESOLVED that:

 

This Council notes:

 

·         The disruption to potable water supply across large parts of the boroughs of Guildford and Waverley that commenced on Saturday 4 November, the ongoing water supply issues in Cranleigh and surrounding villages, and the repeated discharge of raw sewage into the river network; 

 

·         All efforts from across the community to support people, and in particular those who are vulnerable, in accessing alternative supplies of water during the period of disruption; 

 

·         The legitimate concerns of residents about raw sewage being regularly discharged into our river network from Sewage Treatment Works and from Combined Sewer Overflows (CSOs) and from raw sewage back flowing onto their private property and highway network;

 

·         Concerning elements of Thames Water’s response to the disruption, including but not limited to:

 

(a)    poor communication with those impacted in the community, and 

 

(b)    limited actions to ensure the vulnerable or those unable to queue for water, were able to access alternative supplies. 

 

(c)    delayed environmental cleanup operations.

 

·         The chronic underinvestment from the water industry which risks the possibility of future water shortages and increased raw sewage discharges and notes the three lead executives at Thames Water during the previous financial year were estimated to have been paid a total of £1.52 million, exclusive of bonuses, benefits, pensions and other incentives. 

 

This Council resolves to:

 

  I.        Ensure the Leader of the Council writes to the leadership of Thames Water, to request:

 

a.      a detailed report of the cause of the disruption to water supply and the steps taken to resolve the matter; 

b.      a detailed report on the instances and quantity of raw sewage discharges into the river network and Combined Sewer Overflow (CSO) assurances over the past four years and the investment plans to resolve this;

c.      that residents and businesses receive timely and full compensation for the disruption to water supply and sewage spills; 

d.      an improved communications plan for informing the local community should a similar disruption to water supply occur again and/or raw sewage incidents; and 

e.      a reassessment of its processes, procedures, and criteria for ensuring the vulnerable or those unable to queue are able to access alternative supplies of water in the event of a disruption. 

 

 II.        Ask the Leader of the Council to write to the Secretary of State for the Department of Environment, Food and Rural Affairs to commission an investigation into the most recent water supply incident and the agency response, in addition to the requirement for water companies’ to record and report raw sewage spills onto private property and the public highway through their assets.

 

III.        Work with Guildford Borough Council, Thames Water and Waverley Borough Council to collectively learn lessons from this incident and the emergency response measures taken.

 

Item 10 (ii)

 

Under Standing Order 12.3 the Council agreed to debate this motion.

 

Under Standing Order 12.1 Jonathan Essex moved:

 

This Council notes:

 

·         Surrey County Council spends around £80 million per year on travel assistance and transport, across three key directorates (Children, Families and Lifelong Learning; Adult Social Care; and Environment, Transport and Infrastructure), the majority of which (£55 million) is for Home to School Transport Assistance (H2STA). 

 

·         To deliver on the Surrey Climate Strategy transport targets there is a need to increase overall bus use, both fixed bus routes as well as Digital Demand Responsive Transport (DDRT). Surrey County Council is already extending its rollout of DDRT with an aspiration for a Surrey-wide service. 

 

·         At the same time the NHS procures non-emergency transport services and also there are workplace transport providers plus community and voluntary sector transport provision.

 

This Council further notes:

 

·         Surrey County Council has a Freedom to Travel (F2T) transformation programme. Phase 1 is to improve Home to School Transport Assistance up until 2025. Phase 2 will then explore the benefits of pooling of transport provision across Surrey County Council directorates. 

 

·         Bringing forward Phase 2 and extending it to include the NHS and borough and district councils would increase bus use, helping deliver on our Local Transport Plan and improving the viability of fixed bus routes and DDRT.

 

This Council resolves to request that Cabinet:

 

a.    Brings forward and extends Phase 2 of the Freedom to Travel transformation programme across Surrey County Council in collaboration with other partners.

 

b.    Works with Surrey Heartlands and NHS Frimley to explore pooling the funding of non-emergency patient transport for the NHS across Surrey.

 

c.     Works with all district and boroughs to pool community transport provision (including taxi vouchers) to deliver DDRT across Surrey.

 

d.    Works with key workplaces (e.g. hospitals and large businesses) to strengthen incentives for travel to work by public transport.

 

Jonathan Essex made the following points:

 

·         Noted that the motion sought to improve bus travel, balancing the expansion of fixed route bus services with the planned expansion of community transport or Digital Demand Responsive Transport (DDRT).

·         Focused on how the Council might minimise the net subsidy to maximise DDRT and leverage new bus travel rather than funding holding back growth in bus patronage elsewhere.

·         Noted that the motion was based on the concept of total transport, whereby procuring transport together could increase viability.

·         Noted that a representative of East Surrey Rural Transport Partnership noted that if Surrey procured minibuses for DDRT on restricted hours and used the same vehicles for Home to School Transport Assistance (H2STA) and SEND routes the vehicles would be better used reducing the cost of DDRT roll out; that could include doubling up with mainstream school buses.

·         Noted that linking to existing community transport services could increase the extent to which DDRT roll out would be covered by existing budgets; £20,000 was spent on taxi vouchers in Reigate and Banstead yearly.

·         Queried why there could not also be joined up on transport, referring to the joint Better Care Fund between the Council and the NHS; door-to-door care contracts could be procured such as in Salford.

·         Queried why the Council could not via DDRT deliver the sharing of buses with the NHS as a better way to commission non-emergency patient transport, as called for by the Community Transport Association.

·         Queried why DDRT could not provide mini routes to workplaces and train and bus services with ticketing options, reducing DDRT journeys and making them more cost effective, linking villages to towns.

·         Noted that the Council’s Freedom to Travel (F2T) transformation programme aimed to do most of what was set out in the motion but only within the Council and expanding the current focus on H2STA from April 2025. The motion calls on that to be brought forward to 2024 and to join up transport with providers across Surrey, engaging with major workplaces like hospitals.

·         Noted that if the Council owns the vehicles there could be wider brokerage and usage such as for the community and voluntary sector.

·         Noted that less spending on DDRT would free up spending for new fixed bus routes from the Government’s Bus Service Improvement Plan funding, reducing the risk of DDRT being too expensive leading to future bus cuts.

·         Noted the challenge of moving away from individual solutions towards different providers working together towards a common goal in partnership.

 

The motion was formally seconded by Catherine Baart, who reserved the right to speak.

 

Three Members spoke on the motion and made the following comments:

 

·         Was committed to creating a more robust and sustainable public transport system.

·         Recognised the success of the Moley Valley Connect DDRT.

·         Could circulate more detail of the work underway and was happy to set up a Member Development Session on the matter.

·         Noted that the first six months of F2T was focused on H2STA, the cost of £55 million needed to be contained; the Council was looking at personalised travel budgets, safer routes, and reducing demand on single taxis.

·         Noted the many discussions with community transport providers such as East Surrey Dial-a-Ride, was working with Woking Community Transport through the Bustler service, collaborating with emergency patient transport; noted the review of technology that would support the commissioning of provision.

·         Noted confidence in a county-wide DDRT roll out in 2024 costing £13 million, 32,000 trips had been made, whilst it reduced the volume of vehicles on the road it also helped address social isolation in rural communities.

·         Hoped that the £10 million used to subsidise the main bus companies reduces, the £6 million Government grant had been crucial.

·         Noted the struggle to get NHS partners and hospitals to engage in the conversation, a new five-year contract been awarded for non-emergency patient transport starting in April 2024, discussions were underway to see how the community transport providers could be included in the roll out.

·         Noted that the working group would report back in March 2024, the findings would be reviewed.

·         Noted that in key workplaces there were discussions with local businesses on Active Travel and greener options.

·         Noted that DDRT services were well-received by residents.

·         Noted that Surrey was nearly back to pre-pandemic levels of bus patronage, there were 21 bus operators and all were engaging.

·         Supported the need to continue to link with hospitals and Dial-a-Ride.

·         Clarified that DDRT did not compete with commercial operators, the Council could provide more services working with community transport providers.

·         Noted that Surrey’s total carbon emissions in 2018 was 6.6 million tonnes, of that the anticipated reduction by 2025 was only 1.3 million tonnes.

·         Noted that the reduction of petrol and diesel cars on the roads anticipated by 2025 was 376,000, the average number of cars per household in Surrey was nearly a third greater than the national average. A recent review by the Greener Futures Reference Group reported that the reduction made was only tens of thousands of tonnes; ways needed to be found to increase that.

·         Noted the increase in emissions from motorised vehicles in 2021 was 41% of the total emissions, compared to 39% in 2019.

·         Recognised the challenge of encouraging people to take public transport but stressed the Council’s key role to make that happen.

 

Catherine Baart, the seconder of the motion, made the following comments:

 

·         Thanked Members for their support.

 

The Chair asked Jonathan Essex, as proposer of the motion to conclude the debate, he made the following comments:

 

·         Welcomed the supportive comments and hoped the motion would further the efforts to make Surrey’s transport more joined up and for it to make a contribution on carbon emissions reduction across Surrey while addressing issue of rural isolation, and reducing congestion.

·         Noted that it was an opportunity to engage with the NHS and join up transport with hospitals, which had a large workforce and number of journeys.

·         Noted that East Surrey Hospital was on the edge of Tandridge’s DDRT zone yet journeys to the hospital were unable to be made in that way, yet the hospital had built a new car park without planning permission.

 

The motion was put to the vote and was carried.

 

Therefore, it was RESOLVED that:

 

This Council notes:

 

·         Surrey County Council spends around £80 million per year on travel assistance and transport, across three key directorates (Children, Families and Lifelong Learning; Adult Social Care; and Environment, Transport and Infrastructure), the majority of which (£55 million) is for Home to School Transport Assistance (H2STA). 

 

·         To deliver on the Surrey Climate Strategy transport targets there is a need to increase overall bus use, both fixed bus routes as well as Digital Demand Responsive Transport (DDRT). Surrey County Council is already extending its rollout of DDRT with an aspiration for a Surrey-wide service. 

 

·         At the same time the NHS procures non-emergency transport services and also there are workplace transport providers plus community and voluntary sector transport provision.

 

This Council further notes:

 

·         Surrey County Council has a Freedom to Travel (F2T) transformation programme. Phase 1 is to improve Home to School Transport Assistance up until 2025. Phase 2 will then explore the benefits of pooling of transport provision across Surrey County Council directorates. 

 

·         Bringing forward Phase 2 and extending it to include the NHS and borough and district councils would increase bus use, helping deliver on our Local Transport Plan and improving the viability of fixed bus routes and DDRT.

 

This Council resolves to request that Cabinet:

 

a.    Brings forward and extends Phase 2 of the Freedom to Travel transformation programme across Surrey County Council in collaboration with other partners.

 

b.    Works with Surrey Heartlands and NHS Frimley to explore pooling the funding of non-emergency patient transport for the NHS across Surrey.

 

c.     Works with all district and boroughs to pool community transport provision (including taxi vouchers) to deliver DDRT across Surrey.

 

d.    Works with key workplaces (e.g. hospitals and large businesses) to strengthen incentives for travel to work by public transport.

 

Item 10 (iii)

 

Following a vote, under Standing Order 12.3 the Council agreed to debate this motion.

 

Under Standing Order 12.1 Matt Furniss moved:

 

This Council notes:

 

·         Surrey County Council has been leading in its strong commitment to promoting skills development and education for all residents of Surrey to support the Surrey Local Economy. This meets this Council’s strategic priority of Growing a Sustainable Economy So Everyone Can Benefit and its guiding mission to make sure No One is Left Behind through providing skills training to enable residents of all ages access the jobs they want.

 

·         Last year, this Council launched the Surrey Skills Plan: The Skills Plan sets out a vision for a dynamic, demand-led skills system that meets the needs of businesses and individuals in Surrey.

 

·         In 2023, SCC has delivered on a number of key priorities of the plan including:

 

-       Establishing the Surrey Careers Hub to work with 95 schools and colleges across the county to improve their performance against the Gatsby benchmarks and help them deliver world-class careers advice, information and guidance. This single service covering all of Surrey was formally launched. The Careers Hub will work with all the county’s secondary schools, special schools and colleges with the aim of ensuring every young person can find their best next step.

 

-       Establishing an annual skills and careers festival (the Festival of Skills), which hosted 80 exhibitors and over 1300 students and teachers to showcase a wide range of career pathways and opportunities.

 

-       Enabled more businesses, both large and small, to inform skills provision planning through the delivery of Skills Bootcamps – short training courses to upskill and reskill Surrey’s adults.

 

-       Worked in collaboration to successfully win a number of significant funding bids, including £6m for the Local Skills Improvement Fund, £1.8m for Skills Bootcamps and over £6m for Individual Placement Support in Primary Care (funding to support those with both mental and physical disabilities move into the workforce).

 

·         In addition, this Council has made significant investments in skills training and education programs, including the Surrey Adult Learning service, which provides a wide range of free and subsidised courses to help residents develop the skills they need to succeed in the workplace and with the Level 2 Devolution Deal now agreed by the Government this Council can look to enhance the offering to Businesses and residents on vocational skills through SAL.

 

·         Surrey is a strategically important economic powerhouse which contains a productive and highly skilled workforce. We have a large, highly productive economy which contributes £48bn in GVA and with a high employment rate.

 

·         Lastly, a partnership team, led by Royal Holloway, University of London (RHUL), and involving Pinewood Studios, disguise, BT, Buckinghamshire Local Enterprise Partnership, University of Surrey, Abertay University and National Film and Television School, alongside the County Council, has been announced as the winner of the ‘Convergent Screen Technologies and performance in Realtime (CoSTAR)’ national lab.

 

·         The successful bid will create hundreds of new jobs and add tens of millions of pounds to Surrey’s economy. The £51m funding application was submitted in February 2022 by StoryFutures at RHUL on behalf of the wider bid team. The application focused on establishing a CoSTAR national lab at Pinewood Studios, alongside associated facilities and programmes to drive innovation and creativity in the UK’s screen and performance industries.

 

·         Surrey County Council’s proposed contribution includes a capital commitment of £3m to fund the establishment of a CoSTAR satellite studio and incubator space on the RHUL campus in Surrey. It’s hoped these facilities will provide a sizeable boost to Surrey-based creative industry businesses, with over 200 expected to benefit.

 

·         The Surrey-based Satellite Studio Facility is also projected to create 350 jobs over six years, and make a net contribution of c£35m gross value added to Surrey’s economy. Both facilities aim to open in early 2026.

 

 This Council resolves to:

 

  I.        Express its strong support for Surrey County Council's work on promoting skills to support residents and the local economy in Surrey.

 

 II.        Commend the Council for its development and implementation of the Surrey Skills Plan.

 

III.        Welcome the new Single Surrey-wide Careers Hub to provide career pathway advice for Surrey residents.

 

IV.        Encourage the Council to continue its efforts to promote skills development and education for all Surrey residents.

 

 

Matt Furniss made the following points:

 

·         Highlighted that Surrey was a strategically important economic powerhouse with a productive and highly skilled workforce and economy contributing £48 billion of Gross Value Added, and a high employment rate.

·         Welcomed the Government’s decision to integrate LEPs functions into county councils, enabling them to provide leadership on priorities that support local sustainable growth.

·         Noted that the Council was in a stronger position compared to others, having over the last few years invested in economy and growth functions.

·         Noted that the Council was pressing the LEPs to complete the transfer of the functions before 1 April 2024, an update report to go to February’s Cabinet.

·         Noted that whilst 54% of residents in Surrey were educated to a degree level or higher, some areas were affected by a high cost of living and barriers to education and employment.

·         Noted that since the pandemic economic inactivity had increased and the numbers of people Not in Education, Employment or Training was higher compared to neighbouring counties.

·         Noted that last year the Council set out its vision of the skills agenda at the Surrey Skills Summit, the Surrey Skills Plan set out the aim of developing an agile system of skills delivery and the Council’s role was that of strategic system leadership work with the borough and district councils, and partners.

·         Noted the successful county-wide Careers Hub providing high quality advice, the annual Festival of Skills to showcase the range of career pathways, businesses informing skills provision via Skills Bootcamps, training courses to upskill and reskill adults, and bids won such as £6 million for the Local Skills Improvement Fund.

·         Noted that the Council had been partnering with education institutions led by Royal Holloway, University of London (RHUL) and other organisations, £51 million had been won for the CoSTAR satellite studio and incubator space based at RHUL; 350 jobs were expected over the next six years and an additional £35 million to Surrey’s economy. 

 

The motion was formally seconded by Clare Curran, who reserved the right to speak.

 

Ten Members spoke on the motion and made the following comments:

 

·         Noted that the motion was a misuse of the Council’s time, the Council as an entity had not and could not do anything, the Cabinet Member was tabling a party-political self-congratulatory motion on behalf of the Cabinet. Such information could have been provided via the Cabinet Member Briefing.

·         Disagreed that the motion was party-political, it set out an important function of the Council as the education authority, responsible for growing the skills base.

·         Noted that the motion sought to improve careers guidance given to young people, giving people opportunities was vital and the film-making industry was a huge industry.

·         Noted that the motion provided an opportunity to harness an untapped pool of labour which was people with disabilities, helping businesses and the Council to recruit those people who were willing and able to work.

·         Called on the Cabinet Member to work with businesses to understand opportunities and needs of people with disabilities so they could be employed.

·         Praised the collaborative work between the Council and RHUL, Surrey was becoming a hub for the creative arts and harnessing local talent was vital.

·         Welcomed the CoSTAR satellite studio and incubator space, RHUL having created an incubator hub back in the 2000s for IT companies and as a cofounder of such a company noted gratitude to RHUL for their support.

·         Stressed that skills development was a large enabler for change in priority areas, providing opportunities to the disadvantaged.

·         Noted that it was not just young people that needed help to develop their skills, vital too was supporting adults that missed out earlier in life.

·         Following the integration of the LEPs, welcomed that the Council would have control of adult learning.

·         Noted the work underway by the Council with the NHS and Department for Work and Pensions: retrofit programme tackling climate change and creating skills, the NHS anchor scheme to tackle unemployment and provide skills for caring professions, Individual Placement and Support in Primary Care Initiative (IPSPC) helping adults with disabilities into employment.

·         Noted that delivering the right skills for the right job was more than an economic good, it delivered across all areas of sustainable development.

·         Noted that the resolutions alluded to the Cabinet Member to take those forward rather than the Council.

·         Highlighted the appalling employment figures for those with learning disabilities and autism, had spoken to a group who were highly functioning whose goal was simply to have an opportunity to be a taxpayer.

·         Stressed the importance of upskilling and reskilling those with learning disabilities and autism - matching their skills to jobs - employers needed to understand the individual and county-wide benefits of their employment; which helped to address physical and mental health issues, leaving no one behind.

·         Asked the Cabinet Member for assurance on the Council’s stance around upskilling and that while much could be delivered online, there would be services delivered in person particularly by Surrey Adult Learning catering for the west of Surrey; levelling up needed to happen county-wide.

·         Noted disappointment in the negative comments, the motion sought to celebrate the positive work underway and recognise the work of officers and partnerships such as with RHUL.

·         Noted that young people reported skills and opportunities as key issues.

·         Noted that Council meetings were used by Conservative Party Members to pat themselves on the back, in this case simply for replicating the functions of the LEPs and reinventing the Connexions career advice service.

·         Welcomed the Festival of Skills, yet its location was not the most accessible for students from deprived schools.

·         Resented the criticism of the motion’s proposer on an important subject to young and vulnerable residents, by taking the control of skills and learning from the LEPs the Council would be directly accountable on the delivery.

 

Clare Curran, the seconder of the motion, made the following comments:

 

·         Disagreed that the motion was self-congratulatory, it highlighted the achievements and progress made by the Council and the difference it would make to Surrey residents.

·         Noted that residents were concerned about the opportunity for young people and others in acquiring new skills and finding good jobs.

·         Referred to the report by a Task Group of the Children, Families, Lifelong Learning and Culture Select Committee which made twenty recommendations focusing on ensuring that courses for adult education and training were relevant to businesses and learners, and were accessible.

·         Noted that it was important for young people that the Surrey Careers Hub now county-wide, offers meaningful career information and opportunities.

·         Noted that it was vital for the Council to know that its skills work was joined up with all the other work underway across the county, such as the work on community cohesion and towns; recognising the benefits of employment.

 

The Chair asked Matt Furniss, as proposer of the motion to conclude the debate, he made the following comments:

 

·         Noted disappointment that opposition Members chose to be personal in their comments.

·         Noted the need to highlight the work on skills and local economy underway in Surrey and to praise officers for their hard work.

·         Stressed that high quality careers advice for students and parents was crucial, at last year’s first Festival of Skills students reported that they thought university was the safe option over a paid vocational course.

·         Supported the levelling up of adult learning, and noted the focus on vocational skills and upskilling to get people back into the workforce.

 

The motion was put to the vote and was carried.

 

Therefore, it was RESOLVED that:

 

This Council notes:

 

·         Surrey County Council has been leading in its strong commitment to promoting skills development and education for all residents of Surrey to support the Surrey Local Economy. This meets this Council’s strategic priority of Growing a Sustainable Economy So Everyone Can Benefit and its guiding mission to make sure No One is Left Behind through providing skills training to enable residents of all ages access the jobs they want.

 

·         Last year, this Council launched the Surrey Skills Plan: The Skills Plan sets out a vision for a dynamic, demand-led skills system that meets the needs of businesses and individuals in Surrey.

 

·         In 2023, SCC has delivered on a number of key priorities of the plan including:

 

-       Establishing the Surrey Careers Hub to work with 95 schools and colleges across the county to improve their performance against the Gatsby benchmarks and help them deliver world-class careers advice, information and guidance. This single service covering all of Surrey was formally launched. The Careers Hub will work with all the county’s secondary schools, special schools and colleges with the aim of ensuring every young person can find their best next step.

 

-       Establishing an annual skills and careers festival (the Festival of Skills), which hosted 80 exhibitors and over 1300 students and teachers to showcase a wide range of career pathways and opportunities.

 

-       Enabled more businesses, both large and small, to inform skills provision planning through the delivery of Skills Bootcamps – short training courses to upskill and reskill Surrey’s adults.

 

-       Worked in collaboration to successfully win a number of significant funding bids, including £6m for the Local Skills Improvement Fund, £1.8m for Skills Bootcamps and over £6m for Individual Placement Support in Primary Care (funding to support those with both mental and physical disabilities move into the workforce).

 

·         In addition, this Council has made significant investments in skills training and education programs, including the Surrey Adult Learning service, which provides a wide range of free and subsidised courses to help residents develop the skills they need to succeed in the workplace and with the Level 2 Devolution Deal now agreed by the Government this Council can look to enhance the offering to Businesses and residents on vocational skills through SAL.

 

·         Surrey is a strategically important economic powerhouse which contains a productive and highly skilled workforce. We have a large, highly productive economy which contributes £48bn in GVA and with a high employment rate.

 

·         Lastly, a partnership team, led by Royal Holloway, University of London (RHUL), and involving Pinewood Studios, disguise, BT, Buckinghamshire Local Enterprise Partnership, University of Surrey, Abertay University and National Film and Television School, alongside the County Council, has been announced as the winner of the ‘Convergent Screen Technologies and performance in Realtime (CoSTAR)’ national lab.

 

·         The successful bid will create hundreds of new jobs and add tens of millions of pounds to Surrey’s economy. The £51m funding application was submitted in February 2022 by StoryFutures at RHUL on behalf of the wider bid team. The application focused on establishing a CoSTAR national lab at Pinewood Studios, alongside associated facilities and programmes to drive innovation and creativity in the UK’s screen and performance industries.

 

·         Surrey County Council’s proposed contribution includes a capital commitment of £3m to fund the establishment of a CoSTAR satellite studio and incubator space on the RHUL campus in Surrey. It’s hoped these facilities will provide a sizeable boost to Surrey-based creative industry businesses, with over 200 expected to benefit.

 

·         The Surrey-based Satellite Studio Facility is also projected to create 350 jobs over six years, and make a net contribution of c£35m gross value added to Surrey’s economy. Both facilities aim to open in early 2026.

 

 This Council resolves to:

 

  I.        Express its strong support for Surrey County Council's work on promoting skills to support residents and the local economy in Surrey.

 

 II.        Commend the Council for its development and implementation of the Surrey Skills Plan.

 

III.        Welcome the new Single Surrey-wide Careers Hub to provide career pathway advice for Surrey residents.

 

IV.        Encourage the Council to continue its efforts to promote skills development and education for all Surrey residents.