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 A.

Members raised the following topics:

·         Wished all a Happy Christmas and all the best for 2025.

·         Asked what change Surrey would face regarding local government reorganisation, whether he had met with the Deputy Prime Minister and Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government.

·         Asked whether the Leader could confirm that the Surrey local elections would proceed in May 2025 as planned.

·         Noted that the draft budget highlights that vulnerable groups in Surrey would be most affected, the Council continued to leave them behind.

·         Stressed that the Council must work efficiently and effectively with partners, funding the necessities, supporting early intervention and prevention to prevent further escalation of demand on statutory services.

·         Noted that despite facing similar challenges, the narrative by officers at the Adults and Health Select Committee was on working in partnership, embracing technology, enabling and empowering people to live their best lives; whilst the narrative at the Children, Families, Lifelong Learning and Culture Select Committee was on Surrey’s statutory responsibilities.

·         Noted that having met a group of local secondary school pupils and parents suffering from anxiety, parents struggled to keep their children alive; was working on practical local support ideas.

·         Welcomed the increased focus on early intervention and prevention, however much of that was signposting, no additional funding was going to charities or voluntary sector organisations.

Ayesha Azad arrived at 10.21 am.

·         Noted that reception teachers faced difficulties around Covid-19 babies and developmental delays and behavioural challenges.

·         Noted that service users valued the Digital Demand Responsive Transport (DDRT) service; questioned the financial sustainability of its expansion and if it should be a priority when the Council removed some non-statutory transport.

·         Noted that the removal of the Local Committees was a mistake, services with the districts and boroughs needed to be properly integrated.

·         Noted the need to move to a mindset of continuous improvement, not transformation, errors must be reviewed and changes made quickly.

Maureen Attewell and Sinead Mooney arrived at 10.23 am.

·         Called for the Council to reset how it works with the voluntary, community and faith sector, they needed buildings and control over those.

·         Noted that some services would be lost through the Council’s strategy of taking control of Surrey-owned buildings being used successfully for Youth Services.

·         Commended the projects funded through Your Fund Surrey, however in the financially challenging times, capital spend must focus on the necessities.

·         Welcomed the re-signing of the Armed Forces Covenant, had seen first-hand the need to support serving armed forces personnel, veterans and their family.

·         Had taken part in a recent select committee call-in process, which voted to refer the decision and the questions regarding the lack of evidence in decision-making back to the Cabinet, where it was only considered briefly.

·         Noted that good decision-making must be evidence-based and original motions should be debated by all Members at Council meetings.

·         Noted that the leaders of Surrey’s councils had met and discussed the Council’s lack of consultation on the cuts to the Family Support Programme.

·         Noted that the worst outcome for Surrey from local government reorganisation would be to have a single unitary authority, collaborative working was needed to review the options, resisting further powers without financial support to deliver those and any changes must be alongside local government’s finance reform.

·         Welcomed that the new Government was taking the matter seriously, however it did not appear that it grasped the issue of local government funding, urged the Leader to continue to work with the borough and district councils on the matter.

·         Noted that ‘no one left behind’ was not the current reality, those vulnerable people required support more than ever.

·         Noted the increase from the Chancellor of the Exchequer in the budget of an extra £1.3 billion for local government, asked how much Surrey would receive.

·         Noted that the Government sought to fix the basics so that local government could focus on its priorities, deliver for its residents and provide high-quality and vital frontline services.

·         Noted that having the eleven borough and district councils, and the Council, and over 1,000 councillors including the town and parish councils was not necessarily the best way to deliver services; welcomed a review.

·         Asked whether there had been discussions regarding an elected mayor, would they cover just Surrey or neighbouring authorities; asked whether the Leader was in favour of having a single unitary authority or multiple.

·         Commended the Stars in Surrey Awards, which paid tribute to the hard work of those who deliver services in the county.

·         Welcomed the Leader’s desire for greater devolution and democratic accountability in health.

·         Noted that the English Devolution Bill was rumoured to impose mayoral authorities on large local council areas, devolution would weaken councils’ planning powers, blaming them for being blockers despite the lack of funding from the previous government holding back social housing development. 

·         Asked the Leader to confirm his support with the borough and district councils to keep democracy as local as possible; if unitaries are imposed queried what would the maximum size be for Surrey that the administration would support.

·         Asked for new bus routes, noting the extra money in the draft budget.

·         Asked how the new Family Support Programme compared in size to the former programme in terms of the number of families supported.

·         Understood that funding regarding climate change was planned to be reduced, asked whether the Council could instead continue to lead the way and direct those resources into other areas of carbon reduction.

·         Praised the team for undertaking the Redhill Library repair work and asked whether there had been any discussions with Reigate and Banstead Borough Council to collaborate on the matter.

·         Noted that the draft budget yet again notes that last year’s efficiencies had not been achieved in-year so larger savings were needed.

·         Noted that despite being determined to improve services, parents of young people with Special Educational Needs and Disabilities (SEND) were not adequately being supported and those young people were being failed, there were high successful appeal rates against the Council’s decisions.