Agenda item

The Leader of the Council 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 Anne Gowing in Democratic Services by 12 noon on Wednesday 9 October 2013).

Notice of 18 questions had been received. The questions and replies are attached as Appendix B.

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

(Q2) Mrs White asked the Cabinet Member for Adult Social Care if he agreed that there had been too many occasions where the Budget agreed for Adult Social Care had not been realistic and then relied on one-off savings to keep the expenditure within budget. The Cabinet Member responded by stating that this year, three Rapid Improvement Events had taken place in the Adult Social Care service and they have make a substantial contribution to the current year’s savings and contributed to the overall savings of approximately £105m, which would be achieved by the end of this financial year. He confirmed that a realistic budget had been set for 2013/14 and that the service continued to focus on being efficient.

(Q3) Mr Cooksey asked the Cabinet Member for Transport, Highways and Environment when the 72 Vehicle Activated Signs (VAS) currently out of action would be working. Mrs Frost also asked the Cabinet Member what was the length of time, from when a broken sign was reported, to repair it and Dr Grant-Duff asked him to comment on how the repairs to VAS were prioritised. The Cabinet Member confirmed that the signs were being repaired but it was the decision of local committees to prioritise them. Referring to the query about the time taken, he said that he would respond outside the meeting.

(Q4) Mr Ellwood was concerned that the new measures were ‘voluntary’ and sought reassurance from the Cabinet Member for Transport, Highways and Environment that the new tenants would not be permitted to work outside working hours. The Cabinet Member said that the county was not in a position to influence Guildford Borough Council’s decision, however, the county council had consulted with residents and he hoped that good working practices would prevail.

(Q5) Mr Robert Evans referred to the proposal to reduce the number of fire engines in Spelthorne from two to one and asked the Cabinet Member for Community Services what were the positives for his residents. Mrs Saliagopoulos said that there was cross border cover available in the Spelthorne area. She also asked the Cabinet Member to confirm that the proposals for fire cover in this area were still out for consultation. The Cabinet Associate for Fire and Police Services responded and confirmed that the proposals were still out for consultation and local communities had contributed to it. She also stressed the importance of looking at the fire cover for the whole county and that, should the proposals be agreed, the response time would still be within the agreed standard for the whole county. She reiterated the importance of working within budget and that Surrey Fire and Rescue Service had invested heavily in the right equipment for any future changes.

(Q6)  Several Members expressed concern about the road closures in place for the cycle race on 4 August. Mr Barker mentioned a specific case in his division whereby an ambulance had been stopped from attending an emergency call to an elderly lady. Mr Beardsmore expressed concern about the length of time that roads were closed. Mrs Watson referred to a resident in her area that needed urgent hospital treatment and asked what action would be taken at future events to ensure health and safety was paramount. Mrs Frost asked whether the lessons learnt from the cycle race would be taken into account as part of the Cycling Strategy consultation.

The Cabinet Member for Community Services agreed to investigate details of specific cases mentioned and asked Members to send her details. She said that the cycle race was a new event in which 2000 Surrey residents had taken part. She confirmed that the county council had worked together with the emergency services to ensure that they were placed appropriately. However, lessons learnt from this year’s event would be taken on board and used to improve next year’s cycle race.

(Also, Q6) Mr Young asked the Cabinet Member if she was aware that there had been extensive consultation with the parish councils and the Mayor of London’s office in relation to the RideLondon Surrey route and Mr Hodge asked her how many people had registered for next year’s event and from this year’s event, how much money had been raised for charity. The Cabinet Member confirmed to Mr Young that she was aware of the consultation and in response to Mr Hodge, she said that approximately £3.5m had been raised for charity and 80,000 people had registered for next year’s event.

(Q7) Mrs Watson did not consider that her question had been answered and asked the Cabinet Member for Community Services who at the county council had made the decision that the Prudential RideLondon Surrey classic event would take place in Surrey for 5 years from 2013. Mr Hall also considered that any evaluation of the event should be conducted independently and not by the event organisers. He also invited the Cabinet Member to view next year’s event in his division. The Cabinet Member said that she would respond to Mrs Watson outside the meeting and that she would raise the point made by Mr Hall with the event organisers. Finally, she said that many Members from all parties had supported the event and it was important to have a balanced view. However, she acknowledged that the County Council needed to work with its partners to minimise disruption.

(Q8) Mr Orrick asked the Cabinet Member for Community Services when the four remaining libraries would become Community Partnered Libraries (CPLs). Mr Hodge also asked the Cabinet Member to comment on the volunteers’ role and whether the Council had opened any other libraries. She confirmed that the transfer of the four remaining libraries was ‘work in progress’. In response to the other questions, she confirmed that there had been a positive response to the volunteers and that following the establishment of a micro library in Shere, a second one was about to open in Beare Green.

(Q9) Mr Mallett disagreed with some points of the response. The Cabinet Member for Adult Social Care requested that he put his queries in writing and he would provide a response outside the meeting.

(Q10) Mr Jenkins said that the response had not identified specific measures for improvement and posed his question again to the Cabinet Member for Community Services. Mrs Bowes asked the Cabinet Member if she agreed that, as had happened in her division, many residents had celebrated the event and thought it was a positive experience. Mr Martin also considered that the extensive press coverage was good publicity and beneficial for Surrey’s tourism. Mr Townsend asked the Cabinet Member to confirm whether the route for the RideLondon Surrey Cycle event would remain the same in future years. She informed him that consultation was ongoing and would finish at the end of October, however, she was keen to deliver future events safely and to consider the needs of communities and businesses. Finally, she said that it was the event organiser who applied for the route and that those Members whose divisions were on the proposed route were aware of it.

As set out in Standing Orders, question time was limited to 45 minutes. This time limit was reached after question 11 and Members were advised that written responses had been tabled for all questions and if they had any supplementary questions, they were invited to contact the relevant Cabinet Member outside the meeting.