Agenda item

Purpose of report: Policy Development and Review

This report informs and seeks the views of the Select Committee on the proposals that will be presented to Cabinet on 23^rd July 2013 outlining the plans for improvement to the Egham area and a programme of events to celebrate the Magna Carta in 2015. The aim of the recommendations is to celebrate our heritage, raise the profile of the area, increase economic growth and enhance existing facilities to encourage healthier lifestyles.

Declarations of interest:

None.

Witnesses:

Peter Milton, Head Of Cultural Services

Paul Turrell, Chief Executive of Runnymede Borough Council

Nic Durston, Assistant Director of Operations, National Trust

Simon Higman, Registrar and Director of Operations, Royal Holloway University

Key points raised during the discussion:

1.    A member of the Committee stated that no financial information relating to the proposals was included in the report and a number of key officers responsible for the report were not present. It was questioned whether the proposals could be adequately scrutinised on the basis of the information available.

11.45am- The meeting was adjourned to decide whether financial information relating to the proposals was part 2. The Committee decided to proceed to the next Item and return to this Item later on.

12.30pm- The Senior Manager for Scrutiny and Appeals explained that the financial figures relating to the paper were part of a report going to Cabinet and had been seen by the relevant Cabinet Member. It was therefore possible to have an open discussion about the financial information which would have a bearing on the overall discussion about the report.

2.    Members of the Committee noted the international significance of the anniversary of the sealing of the Magna Carta and the potential to create a legacy for Surrey by marking this historical occasion.

3.    A member of the Committee commented on the financial information regarding the highways budget linked to the proposals. It was questioned whether there was capacity for the highways department to cover the proposed costs required for the programme. The Head of Cultural Services stated that there was enough money available from the highways department and these costs were necessary in respect of road crossings and dealing with the impact of increased travel.

4.    A member of the Committee commented on the Runnymede roundabout scheme and whether there would be money available to fund a park and ride in the area. The Head of Cultural Services stated that at the present moment, work relating to car parking and traffic management was being undertaken by the master planners and this was still being developed. The Head of Cultural Services commented that 4 million for the roundabout had been included in the budget arrangements for over two years. The budget for the roundabout was not specifically in place for the Magna Carta programme but was an initiative which had been in the pipeline for some time. It was important to get the work relating to the roundabout done in coordination with the Magna Carta programme so disruption could be limited.  In respect of a park and ride, this would need to be further discussed with transport planners.

5.    A member of the Committee asked the Head of Cultural Services to confirm that £1.2M would be the total contribution to the programme from Surrey CC. The Head of Cultural Services confirmed this was the amount being contributed aside from the highways costs. Clarification was sought with regards to the definition of ‘resourcing costs’. The Head of Cultural Services stated that this would be the costs required to cover staffing for the programme. Some members expressed concerns over this financial commitment at a time when there was already considerable pressure on the Council’s resources.

6.    A question was asked as to how Runnymede Borough Council would celebrate the anniversary of the Magna Carta. The Chief Executive of Runnymede Borough Council explained that an activity programme for the Magna Carta was being prepared which would work alongside the event plans of Surrey County Council. 

7.    Members of the Committee raised concerns over incomplete statistics and why statistics (page 27 of the report) on the wider surrounding areas had not been included in the report for benchmarking purposes. The Head of Cultural Services commented that when the report was drafted neighbouring areas requiring extra support from the County Council were highlighted. This was additional information that would be included in the Cabinet report, and showed how the proposals went beyond the immediate objectives of the Magna Carta celebrations.

8.    A member of the Committee asked if there were details relating to the expected increase in visitor numbers to the area to justify the business case for these proposals. The Chief Executive of Runnymede Borough Council commented that expected visitor numbers were available but that these related to the previous proposal for the Magna Carta visitor centre. He added that visitor numbers would be available in due course. Nic Durston, Assistant Director of Operations, National Trust commented that he was confident that as awareness of the Magna Carta increased so would visitor numbers.

9.    A member of the Committee commented that it would be useful to have a copy of the various masterplans for the area once these were available. The Chief Executive of Runnymede Borough Council stated that a Masterplan for the regeneration of Egham town centre was underway and that phase one of the plan would be completed by next year.

10.  Members of the Committee raised concerns over how much investment would be committed by Runnymede Borough Council. The Chief Executive of Runnymede Borough Council confirmed that £125,000 had already been committed and more would be invested in due course. Simon Higman, Registrar and Director of Operations, Royal Holloway University stated that the university had committed £200,000 towards the programme and anticipated spending more in partnership with stakeholders.

11.  Members of the Committee raised concerns over the lack of detail around these proposals in terms of a business case and detailed financial information. Members felt that if details of the projected financial return on investment could be provided, then the programme was likely to receive more support. At the same time some Members recognised that plans were still in the development phase ahead of 2015 and that not all details would necessarily be available at present.

12.  Members questioned whether private sponsorship had been sought for the programme and if an environmental impact study had been undertaken. Nic Durston, Assistant Director of Operations, National Trust stated that CBA (Chris Blandford Associates) were experts in the field of environmental management and would ensure a full environmental study would be undertaken. He further commented that private sponsorship was essential and that a fundraising strategy would be developed in due course.

13.  The Chief Executive of Runnymede Borough Council explained that a pageant, planned to be held as part of the celebrations, would be supported through private and commercial sponsorship. With the international interest surrounding the Magna Carta, international sponsorship would also be sought.

14.  A member of the Committee asked whether any discussions had taken place with the surrounding areas such as Spelthorne and Windsor and Maidenhead. Simon Higman, Registrar and Director of Operations, Royal Holloway University stated that the Magna Carta programme would go beyond Runnymede and discussions would take place with neighbouring authorities. It was further stated that Windsor and Maidenhead were currently involved in discussions and that Wraysbury Parish Council also expressed interest in being involved in the programme.      

15.  Concerns over costs of using CBA group and the costs of officer time holding consultation meetings was raised by a member of the Committee. The Head of Cultural Services stated that CBA was funded through the National Trust and that consultation meetings were a necessary part of planning this project.

16.  Some members questioned the investment benefit to Surrey. The Chief Executive of Runnymede Borough Council commented that although historic projected numbers for the visitor centre were available, visitor numbers for the Magna Carta programme would require a holistic approach. It was further explained that these figures would not be available for the report going to Cabinet on 23 July.

17.  The Committee asked what the service would be asking Cabinet to decide on 23 July in relation to these proposals. The Head of Cultural Services stated that the report being taken to Cabinet would ask them to approve the concept, brand and partnership arrangement for the proposals, as well as a budget of £300,000 for the events programme and £700,000 for a new memorial commission. The Cabinet were also being asked to approve the delegation of the implementation of these plans for the Leader and Assistant Chief Executive.

18.  The Committee requested to see this report to Cabinet. It was confirmed that the report going to Cabinet would be shared with the Committee as soon as it was available.

19.  The Chairman asked members of the Committee if they agreed with marking the occasion in principle. The majority of the Committee agreed to marking the occasion in principle.

20.  However the majority of the Committee requested their concerns around these proposals be highlighted to Cabinet. Key concerns included the absence of a detailed business plan justifying the Council’s proposed commitment of £1.2m, the absence of detailed impact assessments of the proposals and the absence of detailed information on projected visitor numbers and the concept idea. The Committee requested the opportunity to add to their recommendations to Cabinet based on any further information contained in the report to Cabinet.

Recommendations

(a) Communities Select Committee’s concerns around these proposals be highlighted to Cabinet. Key concerns include the absence of a detailed business plan justifying the Council’s proposed commitment of £1.2m, the absence of detailed impact assessments of the proposals and the absence of detailed information on projected visitor numbers and the concept idea.

(b) The Committee have the opportunity to add to their recommendations to Cabinet based on any further information contained in the report to Cabinet.

Actions/further information to be provided

The report going to Cabinet on 23 July to be shared with the Committee.

Committee Next Steps:

Committee to send any further comments/recommendations, in light of further information contained in the report to Cabinet, to the Chairman of the Committee, to inform the Chairman’s report with recommendations to the Cabinet on this item.