Agenda item

(1)     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 3 December 2014).

(2)        Cabinet Member Briefings on their portfolios

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

There will be an opportunity for Members to ask questions.

Notice of 14 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:

(Q1) Mr Robert Evans asked the Cabinet Member for Environment and Planning if he shared his concern that the change to the 441 bus route was an accident waiting to happen and that the County Council should act now. The Cabinet Member referred him to his written response, which stated that private operators could alter routes without consulting the County Council. He also said that he had attended a meeting in Spelthorne in July where this issue had been discussed and said that further work and cost estimates would be presented to the Spelthorne local committee in due course for their consideration.

(Q2) Mr Jenkins queried the responses to his questions (a) and (d).

Mrs Salaigopoulos made reference to the Environment and Transport Select Committee’s flooding task group report and said that the situation had now moved on. She asked the Cabinet Member for Highways, Transport and Flooding to confirm that Surrey County Council, as the Lead Flood Authority had no powers to compel Thames Water to accept responsibilities for the aqueduct in Staines.

The Leader of the Council asked the Cabinet Member to confirm that Thames Water would shortly sign a Memorandum of Understanding with the Environment Agency which would benefit Surrey in the long term.

Mr Walsh asked the Cabinet Member to acknowledge the huge amount of work undertaken by officers to alleviate and come up with solutions since the flooding had occurred.

In response, the Cabinet Member for Highways, Transport and Flooding confirmed that Thames Water was the owner of the aqueduct. He also referred to the Section 19 investigation, which would be published on the Council’s website in due course. Finally, he confirmed that Thames Water were working with the County Council and that further meetings were planned in the New Year.

(Q3) Mr Fuller asked the Cabinet Member for Community Services if a league table, by Borough and District, showing the number of people penalised for dropping litter could be included on the County Council’s website. Whilst the Cabinet Member said that she was encouraged by the progress that Borough and Districts had made in this area, she did not consider that a league table would be beneficial.

(Q4) Mr Cooksey expressed concern about the length of time proposed to repair the county’s footways. He also asked the Cabinet Member for Highways, Transport and Flooding for details on the consultation process concerning the development of a number of models showing different outcomes for the condition of the footway asset. The Cabinet Member confirmed that this information would be circulated to all Members before Christmas.

(Q5) Mr Orrick said that details of the potential receipts from the sale of the residential home sites, if they were sold, and whether the information he requested could be put on the Council’s website, were not set out in the response from the Cabinet Member for Adult Social Care. The Cabinet Member said that the results of the consultation process needed to be considered before any alternatives for the sites were explored. He would, however, discuss with officers whether the details set out in his written response could be placed on the Council’s website.

(Q6) Mrs Watson asked the Leader of the Council if the information about reserves and balances had changed since 30 September 2014. Mr Selleck asked about the minimum level of reserves going forward. The Leader of the Council said that budget information was public information presented regularly at Cabinet meetings but that he was not in a position to know was the current balances were today. Referring to the minimum level of reserves, he said that he took advice from the S151 officer but it was likely to be approximately £17m / £22m.

(Q7) Mr Forster asked the Cabinet Member for Environment and Planning if he would consider not excluding local roads from this funding source and if he would ensure that local committees were consulted at the appropriate time. The Cabinet Member agreed to both requests.

(Q8) Mr Beardsmore said that he would like a copy of the North West Surrey Minerals Local Plan 1985 but it was three decades out of date. He said that his question referred specifically to Spelthorne and the answers would be different if it applied just to Spelthorne rather than the cumulative impact across North West Surrey. He also requested responses to his supplementary questions asked at the previous Council meeting.

The Cabinet Member for Environment and Planning agreed to provide a written response to Mr Beardsmore’s questions by the end of the week.

(Q10) Mr Jenkins referred to the suffering of the residents in the Staines area who had been affected by the flooding earlier in the year and asked the Cabinet Member for Highways, Transport and Flooding if Surrey County council would be conducting a thorough investigation. The Cabinet Member responded by stating that Surrey County Council was the Lead Flood Authority and not the ‘supposed Lead Flood Authority’ as stated in Mr Jenkins question. He also considered that his response had fully answered the question and said that the topic had been fully discussed at the Environment and Transport Select Committee.

(Q11) Mr Essex asked the Cabinet Member for Business Services for details of the cost and the return on investment for the installation of solar panels of the three existing schemes and whether there were any plans to expand this pilot to other Surrey buildings / sites. The Cabinet Member agreed to provide a response outside the meeting.

(Q12) Mr Forster asked the Cabinet Member for Highways, Transport and Flooding, who agreed, to attend a site visit with him so that he could see the issues for himself.

Mr Townsend asked for the latest update on Pebble Hill, in his division, which the Cabinet Member agreed to provide outside the meeting and he also said that all local committees would be provided with an updated and revised report on Operation Horizon.

(Q13) Mr Robert Evans made reference to the Drive Smart / Make Roads Safer web pages and asked about the effect that the Cabinet Member for Highways, Transport and Flooding road traffic offences would have on Surrey residents. The Leader of the Council referred him to his written reply.

(Q14) Mr Jenkins said that his question had been about the future fire and rescue cover for Spelthorne.

Mrs Saliagopoulos asked the Cabinet Member for Community Services if she agreed that Surrey Fire and Rescue Service’s attendance at the incident on the Renshaw Industrial Estate was to be commended and that the reciprocal agreements had operated smoothly across boundaries.

The Cabinet Member for Community Services did not agree with Mr Jenkins suggestion. She did express her thanks and support to Surrey Fire and Rescue Service and other Fire and Rescue Services for the effective way that the fire had been dealt with and contained on the Renshaw Industrial Estate.

Cabinet Member Briefings on their portfolios are attached as Appendix C.

7 Members made the following comments:

·         Adult Social Care: Realignment of Senior Roles to ensure maximum joined up working with the six Clinical Commissioning Groups had saved £0.5m per year in senior management costs.

·         Schools and Learning: (1) School place planning – a request for the highways officers/ community transport team to meet with the Headteacher at the Greville School, Ashtead to discuss mitigating measures for their school transport plan. (2) Surrey Educational Trust – further details on how to apply was requested, together with the total funding available in the next round (this information is available via a link on the Council’s website).

·         Highways, Transport and Flooding – (1) flood mitigation and confirmation that the number of sandbags held this year was similar to last year’s numbers,

(2) a specific road / junction in the Horsleys division and how it was categorised for priority flooding work, (3) a request to comment on the County’s policy on roads that have been flooded and the effect on the planning applications for new developments being considered by Borough / District Planning committees.

·         Environment and Planning – Eco park: clarification on why a further report to Cabinet was required in February 2015.