Agenda item

1.      The Leader of the Council, the Deputy Leader or the appropriate Member of the Cabinet or the chairman of a committee to answer any questions on any matter relating to the powers and duties of the County Council, or which affects the county.

 

(Note: Notice of questions in respect of the above item on the agenda must be given in writing, preferably by e-mail, to Democratic Services by 12 noon on Wednesday 4 December 2024).

 

2.      Cabinet Member and Deputy Cabinet Member Briefings on their portfolios.

 

These will be circulated by email to all Members prior to the County Council meeting, together with the Members’ questions and responses.

 

There will be an opportunity for Members to ask questions.

 

Questions:

 

Notice of twenty-six questions had been received. The questions and replies were published in the second supplementary agenda (items 9 and 11) on 9 December 2024.

 

A number of supplementary questions were asked and a summary of the main points is set out below:

 

(Q1) Mark Sugden asked the Cabinet Member whether funds were being set aside in the draft budget to enable a second weed spray should it be necessary.

 

The Cabinet Member for Highways, Transport and Economic Growth confirmed that there was sufficient budget available for a second weed spray if required.

 

(Q2) Tim Hall thanked the Cabinet Member, and various transport teams for their help regarding matters in his division. He askedhow Members could engage with the future bus delivery grant and other money available.

The Cabinet Member for Highways, Transport and Economic Growth noted that the Council was lucky to receive the amount of money allocated by the Government for bus improvement, he requested that Members let himself or the team know about any improvements they would like to see. He noted that the Council was launching its next generation of electric vehicle (EV) buses with Falcon Buses, the Government supported the acceleration of further EV and hydrogen buses and the Council sought to increase funding. Regarding the £50 million funded by the Council, the Government was looking to provide funding and recognised that the Council was leading on decarbonising its bus network. It was disappointing that the bus cap would rise to £3 from £2, that would add around £500 or more to a regular commuter’s journey annually. Over 75% of bus trips in Surrey were made with the bus cap.

(Q3) Robert Evans OBE asked whether the Cabinet Member could review the form’s wording as it was insensitive to people with disabilities and have a bay outside their home. More appropriate wording would be whether there was any change in their circumstances.

 

The Cabinet Member for Highways, Transport and Economic Growth confirmed that the wording would be reviewed.

 

(Q4) Catherine Powell noted that if the Multi-Disciplinary Team Panel database was operated by the Council but did not record panel attendees or the information shared at the panel, she asked whether that information was stored elsewhere. Queried that to be transparent and ensure high-quality decision-making, the experts involved and what information they used to make their decisions should be known.

 

The Cabinet Member for Children, Families and Lifelong Learning noted that she did not have the details of the operational arrangements regarding the panels but would liaise with officers and would provide a written response.

(Q5) Hazel Watson asked the Cabinet Member how long individual properties had been held vacant for.

 

Jonathan Essex asked whether the revenue costs included the business rates incurred on the empty property and to confirm how much that was.

George Potter asked what the total book value of the sixty sites planned for disposal was.

 

The Cabinet Member for Property, Waste and Infrastructure confirmed that she would provide the list of those vacant properties, that the revenue costs included business rates, and noted that the total Red Book valuation was different from what the Council could achieve on the open market and she would arrange for that confidential information to be provided.

 

(Q6) Lance Spencer noted that the Care Quality Commission found that families felt stressed and angry due to inconsistent support and noted the system was difficult to navigate. Considering the budget reductions in the area, he asked whether the Cabinet Member could provide hope to families of a better future.

The Cabinet Member for Children, Families and Lifelong Learning welcomed the Government Minister's announcement that there would be more money for schools and councils and for the SEND system; however the implications were unknown. She noted that the SEND Transformation Programme aimed to deliver better services for families and children with Additional Needs and Disabilities. She noted the systemic challenge of parents finding it difficult to navigate the system, the Council was committed to providing better communications with families, ensuring that they are clearer about the process and are engaged throughout their child's journey.

 

(Q7) Stephen Cooksey asked the Cabinet Member to explain why the project’s development costs were not estimated more accurately before the scheme was agreed and planning permission sought, and what costs had been accrued in developing the now abandoned scheme. He asked why local Members were not notified of such major changes or why those decisions were not discussed with them.

 

Hazel Watson noted that in line with the Council’s new responsibility for Adult Education, sheasked whether the Council would consider reopening the former Adult Education Centre to meet the lack of provision in Dorking. 

 

The Cabinet Member for Property, Waste and Infrastructure explained that Land and Propertyoperated on behalf of the services, concerns regarding service provision would be better directed to the Cabinet Member for Adult Social Care.

 

(Q8) Liz Townsend noted that the building in Cranleigh had been empty for nearly ten years, for the past four years she had asked about its future and was told that the plans were confidential. She asked the Cabinet Member to confirm why residents could not now be told what the Council was proposing on the site.

Edward Hawkins asked whether demolition should be considered pending further investigations and approval on the site.

The Cabinet Member for Property, Waste and Infrastructure requested that Liz Townsend address her question directly to the service. She noted that she would liaise with the relevant Executive Director to consider the demolition suggestion.

 

(Q9) Steven McCormick noted that he had tabled a similar motion to the Council meeting at Epsom and Ewell Borough Council, and had made good progress locally engaging with the Epsom Business Improvement District. He asked the Cabinet Member whether meetings could be set up in the new year to review progress and produce actions on the motion agreed at October’s Council meeting.

The Cabinet Member for Highways, Transport and Economic Growth explained that further details would be provided in the new year, he would ensure that a meeting would be set up in January.

 

(Q10) Catherine Baart asked the Cabinet Member why those six pilot zones were selected and what basis those were selected, what questions were hoped to be answered through those pilots and what the timescale was.

Tim Hall lobbied the Cabinet Member for Fetcham to Leatherhead to be added, it had been around eighteen months since his site visit.

 

The Cabinet Member for Highways, Transport and Economic Growth noted that he was happy to consider additional areas. He noted that funding was from the Government’s Active Travel department or the Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL), it would be good if Mole Valley District Council could release some CIL funding. He explained that the six zones had local political support, and there were plans in place to implement those. The pilots sought to demonstrate that the concept works and for the teams to learn about how to implement the schemes, and to see what works and what does not. He was happy to arrange a meeting with the team if Catherine Baart sought further analysis and lessons learned.

(Q11)Jonathan Essex thanked the Cabinet Member for recognising the need for capacity improvements to Redhill Bus Station. Asked whether he would agree to meet with him, Network Rail and Reigate and Banstead Borough Council to see what could be done.

 

The Cabinet Member for Highways, Transport and Economic Growthresponded yes.

 

(Q12) Robert Evans OBE referred to the 27,000 young people between 16 and 18 years old in Surrey for which their activity was not known, noting that if the age range was increased to 21 or 25 years it could be more. He asked what the Cabinet Member would do to address the situation and improve young people’s life chances.

The Cabinet Member for Children, Families and Lifelong Learning noted that she had been in contact with the service about the relatively high numbers of those young people, after Christmas that number would decrease. Figures had been provided for young people aged 16 and 17 as they were classed as children. However, regarding Looked After Children and children with EHCPs, their destinations were monitored through the Virtual School or via the pathway into adulthood. She noted that the Council had a duty to prevent young people becoming Not in Education, Employment or Training (NEET). There was a Year 11 transition service which provides targeted support for those at risk of becoming NEET. Post-16 years, support was offered to Care Experienced young people. She noted the Government Minister’s announcement of a new National Youth Strategy which includes additional money for additional youth facilities and buildings, and the creation of a Youth Guarantee. She noted the Council’s Skills Strategy and Lifetime of Learning Strategy.

(Q13) Catherine Powell asked the Cabinet Member to advise when the review would be completed next year and whether there had been an allowance in the budget to address the requirements to change services and facilities to adapt for climate change, and whether it would need to be taken out of contingency or reserves.

The Cabinet Member for Environment noted the work underway looking at the risk the Council faces from climate adaptation, that included reviewing the anticipated financial impact and prioritising it - flooding was a priority. Regarding trees, she noted that the Council has a legal duty to keep people safe and asked the Member to inform her of danger areas; addressing Ash dieback had been resource intensive. She acknowledged that wetter weather would cause trees to be more unstable and that needed to be a focus. The approach would be outlined in April or May 2025.

 

(Q15) Lance Spencer asked whether the Cabinet Member was disappointed by the decision to reduce the resources and whether she would agree that would threaten the delivery of net zero by 2050.

The Cabinet Member for Environmentnoted that she did not want budget cuts but that was the reality. She acknowledged that reaching net zero would be difficult for the Council, and the district and borough councils; there were large challenges ahead and she committed to undertake a piece of work to address those. The biggest challenge was government funding and she welcomed future funding. 

(Q17) Liz Townsend welcomed the approach taken regarding small cell networks using public assets and hoped that the Council would provide support for the pilot in Godalming and Cranleigh. She noted that the response overlooked the fact that digital connectivity included wider mobile phone coverage, there was a lack of understanding of the issues experienced in rural areas and the infrastructure required. She asked whether the response implied that residents in her division were facing a future of no or very limited coverage; and why the £4.5 million in Local Enterprise Partnership funding had not been used to improve the necessary service.

The Cabinet Member for Highways, Transport and Economic Growth noted that Rt Hon Jeremy Hunt MP was undertaking work in the division regarding mobile phone signal coverage, he suggested that the Member liaise with the MP.

 

(Q18) Steven McCormick had no supplementary question.

 

John O’Reilly asked whether the Cabinet Member and Leader would lobby the Government to take action to allow councils to enforce against vehicles blocking and obstructing pavements.

 

The Cabinet Member for Highways, Transport and Economic Growth noted that he would re-circulate the letter he wrote to the Government following the October Council meeting. He explained that the Government was still considering the matter. He noted that the Council would continue to press them for those enforcement powers.

 

(Q21) Catherine Powell welcomed that the gap in data was being collected and mapped on Surrey's Geographic Information System (GIS) system. She asked the Cabinet Member whether the Council could request data on sustainable drainage systems (SuDS) associated with new developments in a GIS compatible format. She asked whether officers could capture culverts and soakaways that were not currently mapped on the Surrey GIS system. She asked whether a dedicated email could be set up for local Members to provide information on lost infrastructure.

The Cabinet Member for Environment would ask the team to pick up on reporting the wet spots regarding the SuDS, she would liaise with the team regarding local Member information and check whether they could do that.

 

(Q22) Steven McCormick referred to those impacted teaching assistants and residents, and sought assurance from the Cabinet Member that no one would be out of pocket from the global system update implemented by Unit4, which caused the system-wide outage in November.

The Cabinet Member for Finance and Resources noted that the problems experienced due to November’s upgrade were regrettable, the team had thoroughly tested the changes in advance, the issues were down to Unit4. He noted that there was some disruption at the start of the week after the upgrade, work was underway to stabilise the system. He was not aware that residents would be out of pocket as a result, there were robust processes in place and compensation available.

(Q23) Catherine Baart asked the Cabinet Member why there were two systems for measuring distance to schools, as the Stage Two Home to School Transport Panels received cases from parents who thought their child was going to the nearest school but could not have transport because it was not their nearest school under the Council’s policy. She asked the Cabinet Member to review the information on the website to make sure it was clear to help such parents.

The Cabinet Member for Children, Families and Lifelong Learning explained that there were two systems because school admissions was governed by the School Admissions Code, and Home to School Transport eligibility was set out in home to school transport legislation. She noted that the Council tried to make the explanation as clear as possible on its website. She reminded Members that they agreed that Stage Two appeals panels would always have Member representation on them. She noted that there were not enough available Members to ensure those take place within the statutory timescales, she encouraged Members to be available to attend.

 

(Q25) Catherine Baart asked the Cabinet Memberwhether more detailed guidance was provided to the Council’s contractors taking into consideration Natural England’s guidance on hedges.

The Cabinet Member for Highways, Transport and Economic Growth noted that he would provide a written response.

 

Cabinet Member and Deputy Cabinet Member Briefings:

 

These were also published in the second supplementary agenda on 9 December 2024.

 

Members made the following comments:

 

Deputy Leader and Cabinet Member for Customer and Communities: on the transformation of the Council’s libraries, John O’Reilly asked whether she would agree that had been exceptional and he welcomed the upgrade of Hersham Library.

The Deputy Leader and Cabinet Member for Customer and Communities acknowledged the positive feedback on the library service, a briefing had been circulated to highlight the work to Members of the exceptional work underway in transforming the fifty-two libraries. She noted that the Council had previously considered rationalising its libraries and had fiercely defended those, the Council was now creating central hubs in every borough and district, investing across localities. She commended Land and Property and the Cabinet Member for Property, Waste and Infrastructure for their work.

 

The Chair highlighted the success of the libraries’ extended opening hours and other offerings, there had been a good uptake on using library spaces.

 

Edward Hawkins on Your Fund Surrey, he asked the Deputy Leader and Cabinet Member whether she was aware of how pleased residents in his division were regarding those contributions to help create a safe environment for school children and the works on the community centre. He thanked the officers for their work.

The Deputy Leader and Cabinet Member thanked the Member for his determination in recognising a local situation that affected many children and families and using that funding and working closely with the officers to find a solution. She noted the importance of creating that additional funding to ensure that each division benefits from the opportunity to work with the communities and to address their needs.

 

Chris Townsend thanked the senior manager in libraries for her work.

 

Deputy Cabinet Member for Children, Families and Lifelong Learning: on youth centres, Chris Townsend asked when the meeting would take place with youth centres to understand those that were working well and those that were not.

The Deputy Cabinet Member for Children, Families and Lifelong Learning noted that the Director - Family Resilience and Safeguarding was planning to meet all the providers of the youth centres and she would follow that up and look for a date.

 

Cabinet Member for Highways, Transport and Economic Growth: on the implementation of the School Street on Bullers Road, Catherine Powell asked him to confirm whether the planned in person meeting and briefing with residents to show them the software at least a month before it is implemented, would take place.

 

The Cabinet Member noted that he would talk to the team and set a date.

Catherine Baart on Local Transport Plan (LTP4) and Vision Zero, she asked whether an update could be provided in his next Cabinet Member Briefing.

 

The Cabinet Member noted that he was happy to provide that update. He noted that Vision Zero was launched last week as a partnership with Surrey Highways, Surrey Police, Surrey Fire and Rescue Service, and National Highways; Surrey Police was supportive and demonstrated the new equipment they would use including the average speed camera.

Fiona Davidson on the Guildford E-Bike Share Scheme, she noted that the Council had invested over £1 million in the scheme and asked the Cabinet Member to explain why the Council allowed a new E-Bike model which the supplier acknowledged was less secure than the older model. She asked who was holding the supplier to account for the inadequate security of the new model, the issue was down to vandalism.

The Cabinet Member noted that the issue was being addressed with the contractor, it was unfortunate that the model had a flaw. He noted that the bikes were being upgraded at no cost to the Council, the Council provided capital to fund it through the winter, it was not paying revenue contribution. One journey per bike was expected, currently there were three or four journeys a day per bike which was a success.

Cabinet Member for Property, Waste and Infrastructure: the progress made on SEND provision was welcomed, Edward Hawkins on acquisitions and disposals and the targeting of £26 million of capital receipts, asked whether the Council was on track with those by 31 March 2025. He asked to be kept informed of the transfer of land concerning Lakeside Frimley.

The Cabinet Member would ask the Cabinet Member for Children, Families and Lifelong Learning to provide the Member with a written update on Lakeside Frimley. She noted that regarding disposals, the Council was on track and had £150 million of capital receipts, recent decisions had been taken on £9.1 million of capital receipts.

Deputy Cabinet Member for Highways: he thanked Ringway for its hard work over the weekend as there was exceptional weather and it had dealt with numerous emergencies, 230 fallen trees were cleared and 37 jobs were outstanding.

Deputy Cabinet Member for Strategic Highways: on signs, Robert Evans OBE asked whether that included road signs cleaning, there were many signs across Surrey which were dirty and were affected by overgrown vegetation.

The Deputy Cabinet Member confirmed that was included in his portfolio, he outlined the work underway in implementing the Task and Finish recommendations. In 2023/24 the Council provided £3.5 million in revenue, that included removing signs and cleaning those. In 2024/25 the Council provided £5.5 million in revenue to do that work plus refreshing the road lines and to implement FixMyStreet.