Decisions

RESOLVED:

To note the decision taken by the Cabinet Member for Environment & Transport.

Reason for decision:

To inform the Cabinet of decisions taken by the Cabinet Member under delegated authority.

Cabinet to note the Improvement Plan and the governance arrangements that have been setup.

RESOLVED:

1.    That the significant improvement required across children’s services in Surrey was acknowledged and the delivery of improvement work wherever it was needed fully supported.

2.    That the development of the Children’s Improvement Plan, in response to the 2018 inspection of children’s services was noted and the governance arrangements that have been put in place to oversee its delivery endorsed.

3.    That the progress made on the delivery of the Children’s Improvement Plan be reviewed by Cabinet prior to the Commissioner visit. The Commissioner will visit Surrey and reviewing progress in April 2019 – an update to Cabinet will follow this visit and publication of the Commissioner’s report to the Secretary of State.

4.    That Children’s Services performance data be shared with the Children and Education Select Committee.

Reason for decision:

The Children’s Improvement Plan outlined the work needed in key operational areas that were reviewed during statutory inspections from Ofsted. Improving practice in these areas was essential to ensure the needs of children and families in Surrey were being met with the right services being provided in the right way and at the right time.

The Department for Education (DfE) appointed Children’s Commissioner would review progress and report to the Secretary of State in April 2019. 

[The decisions on this item can be called in by the Children & Education Select Committee]

To confirm the council’s approach to the setting of fees & charges, to ensure that there are no unintentional subsidies in the provision of discretionary services unless there is a policy decision to do so.

RESOLVED:

1.    That the proposed fees and charges policy be adopted.

2.    That any discretionary services, whether currently provided free of charge or with some element of subsidy, will be subject to a full review including appropriate consultation before a decision is taken on whether the subsidy was to continue.

Reason for decision:

The Council was facing a serious financial situation which meant that its approach to the delivery of discretionary services, for which a charge is permissible, needed to be appropriate. The fees and charges policy ensured that a consistent, transparent and policy based approach was adopted by the Council in order to eliminate unintentional subsidies or reconsider subsidies that may no longer be supportable within the current financial context. 

[The decisions on this item can be called in by the Corporate Overview Select Committee]

Cabinet is asked to note the work that has been done reviewing and implementing the new Code of Practice for Well Managed Highway Infrastructure and approve the steps being taken to ensure a risk based approach is being taken for all Highway activities.

Cabinet is also asked to approve new and revised policies that have been updated following the review:

• Capital Highway Scheme Prioritisation Policy
• Highway Skid Policy
• Highway Hierarchy Policy
• Highway Safety Inspection Policy

Cabinet is asked to approve delegation to Lead Member for Place to approve future changes to these policies

Cabinet is advised of the updated Highway Asset Strategy

RESOLVED:

1.    That the following policies and strategy be approved:

a)    the Capital Scheme Prioritisation Policy.

b)    the Skid Resistance Policy.

c)    the Hierarchy Definition Policy.

d)    the Highway Safety Inspection Policy.

e)    the revised Highway Asset Management Strategy

2.    That delegated authority be given to the Cabinet Member for Highways to review and update Policies as set out in a) to e) in response to changes in legislation, guidance or practice in the future.

Reason for decision:

To ensure that these policy documents were updated to accurately and clearly explain to elected Members and the public how Surrey County Council Highways:

·         Prioritises its capital highway works,

·         Monitors and reviews skid resistance of the highway

·         Defines its network hierarchy

·         Undertakes Highway Safety Inspections, and

·         Manages its Highway Assets with consideration to risk and value for money.

[The decisions on this item can be called in by the Highways & Growth Select Committee]

This is a report for noting. 

RESOLVED:

1.    That the Ombudsman’s report and the steps taken by the service to address the findings was noted.

2.    That no further action should be taken.

3.    That the Monitoring Officer would bring her report to the attention of all councillors was noted.

4.    That all future complaints raised with the Ombudsman be notified to the relevant Cabinet Member.

Reason for decision:

There was a statutory requirement for the Monitoring Office to bring to Members’ attention any Ombudsman report on the Council that identified it is at fault and has caused injustice as a result.

Decision required to award a new contract for the provision ofWater and Waste billing services to Surrey County Council.

RESOLVED:

That the award of a 2 Year plus 1 Year optional contract to Castle Water Limited for the provision of water and waste water services to Surrey County Council be approved.

Reason for decision:

Water and waste water services were essential in order for the Council to continue operating its premises in a way which was compliant to relevant standards of health and safety.

The award of this contract would enable uninterrupted provision of the service while reducing the current number of providers and the processing of multiple invoices. It would also generate pricing reductions of an estimated £26,000 per annum for the Council against current costs.

A mini-competition and e-auction process in compliance with the requirements of Public Contract Regulations and Procurement Standing Orders had been completed. The recommended supplier offered overall best value for money in the procurement process which was carried out by Crown Commercial Services on behalf of Orbis partners: Surrey County Council, East Sussex County Council and Brighton and Hove City Council.

[The decisions on this item can be called in by the Environment Select Committee]

Decision required to award framework agreements and call off contracts to various legal firms for the provision of external Legal Services.

RESOLVED:

That Surrey County Council award the external legal services framework for 3 years, plus a 3 year optional extension period (total 6 year term) and any respective call off contracts, in conjunction with the Orbis Public Law authorities.

Reason for decision:

The Council had a framework agreement in place for the provision of external legal services (Surrey Provision of External Legal Services (SPELS) Framework), which was due to expire on 28 February 2019.

The new framework agreement brought together the requirements of the OPL authorities and Surrey and Sussex District and Borough Councils. The potential value of spend across all the authorities (approximately £60m) meant that the tender offered an attractive opportunity for the market and greater economies of scale.

The framework agreement would enable the OPL authorities to:

     a.          cover the provision of external legal services advice and support across Surrey, East Sussex, West Sussex and the city of Brighton & Hove;

     b.          ensure an up to date specification that meets OPL’s requirements;

     c.          deliver a cost effective service and enable instructions to be issued to external legal providers much faster than if no framework existed;

     d.          obtain up to date competitive rates;

     e.          achieve savings through efficiencies and monitoring usage more closely;

      f.          offer OPL staff more flexibility and access to a wider range of specialist expertise.

The new framework agreement had been procured through a full tender procedure with a thorough evaluation process, which had identified that to award framework agreement and call off contracts to a number of providers would provide Surrey County Council with the best value for money.

[The decisions on this item can be called in by the Corporate Overview Select Committee]

To seek Cabinet approval to form a Dynamic Purchasing System (DPS) for the provision of Personal Support services so spot placements can be called off under this made from 1 April 2019.

A Dynamic Purchasing System is similar to a framework however it is a completely online system. Unlike a framework, suppliers can apply to join a DPS at any point during the lifetime of the DPS.

The Dynamic Purchasing System will run for three years with the potential to be extended up to a further 24 months.

Providers will be admitted to the DPS once they are evaluated following a competitive procurement process to be the most suitable to meet the specification and quality requirements but also offer value for money.

RESOLVED:

That the setup of a Light Touch Dynamic Purchasing System (DPS) for the commissioning of Personal Support for Children, Young People and their Families be approved. This would enable call-off placements to be made under the Light Touch DPS from 1 April 2019 – 31 March 2022. (If both extension years are used the Light Touch DPS end date will be 31 March 2024.)

Reason for decision:

The current arrangements end on 31 March 2019 and the Council had statutory duties to provide these services.  The Council needed to ensure spend on personal support was compliant with Procurement regulations and addressed current overspend.

Feedback from professionals and families had indicated that there were limitations to the previous framework in terms of choice, flexibility and overall availability. Therefore a different approach was required. The new specifications would support improved outcomes for children and families.

The Light Touch DPS provided the opportunity to improve choice and flexibility for families through a dynamic list of approved suppliers. Support will be called off through the lifetime of the Light Touch DPS, therefore limiting spot-purchases, and as a result the new approach should offer better value for money.

[The decisions on this item can be called in by the Children & Education Select Committee]

1.     Cabinet to agree ongoing investment into young people’s substance misuse commissioning from April 2019 (£450k per annum plus office accommodation aligned with the Family Places model); the new contract is for 3 years with the option to extend for an additional 3 years

2.     Cabinet to award the contract to the preferred supplier following a competitive tender process

RESOLVED:

That the award of contract for the provision of Surrey’s Young People’s Substance Misuse Service to Catch 22 be approved.  The contract will be for a period of three years from 1 April 2019, with an option to extend for a further three years in one year intervals.

Reasons for decision:

The existing contract will expire on 31 March 2019. A competitive tender process, in compliance with the requirements of Public Contract Regulations and Procurement Standing Orders, had been completed. The recommended suppliers offered overall best value for money in the procurement process.

The Council’s statutory responsibilities for public health services were set out in the Health and Social Care Act 2012 in which the provision of substance misuse services was mandated. This service had been funded via the ring-fenced Public Health Grant and supported the Council’s duty to improve public health and provide facilities for the prevention or treatment of illness.

The award of this contract would enable uninterrupted provision of the service and would contribute towards the Council’s Vision for Surrey in 2030 by supporting young people to have a positive start in life and addressing issues affected by their substance misuse as early as possible, in order for them to lead healthy and fulfilling lives.

Each of Surrey’s ambitions for people are supported within this contract:

·        children and young people are safe and feel safe and confident;

·        everyone benefits from education, skills and employment opportunities that help them succeed in life;

·        everyone lives healthy, active and fulfilling lives, and makes good choices about their wellbeing;

·        everyone gets the health and social care support and information they need at the right time and place; and

·        communities are welcoming and supportive, especially of those most in need, and people feel able to contribute to community life

In addition, this service would fulfil key priorities within Surrey’s Health and Wellbeing Strategy, including:

·        improving children’s health and wellbeing

·        developing a preventative approach

·        promoting emotional wellbeing and mental health

·        safeguarding the population

This service would generate a number of benefits for Surrey’s residents by supporting the Early Help and Family Resilience models, resulting in anticipated financial savings for Surrey. Based on Public Health England’s Return on Investment Tool in which ‘for every £1 spent on young people’s drug and alcohol interventions brings a [cost avoidance] benefit of £1.93 within two years and up to £8.38 in the long term’, there could be cost avoidance savings made of approximately £3.7million in the long term and £211,392 in Social Value.

[The decisions on this item can be called in by the Health, Integration & Commissioning Select Committee]

To consider the month end budget report and make any recommendations as appropriate.

RESOLVED:

That the Council’s overall revenue and capital budget positions as at 31 October 2018 be noted:-

·      -£8m forecast reduction in the need to use reserves; 

·      £63m savings forecast against the £66m MTFP target;

·      £29m completed actions towards achieving £40m in year cost reductions;

·      The additional in-year government grant funding for winter pressures in adult social care (Annex 2 para 13), and

·      £133m forecast service capital programme outturn against £135m budget.

Reason for decision:

This report was presented to comply with the agreed policy to provide a monthly budget monitoring report to Cabinet for approval and action as necessary.

[The decisions on this item can be called in by the Corporate Overview Select Committee]

To agree that:

1.      The Surrey Waste Local Plan (Submission Draft) be submitted to the Secretary of State following the gathering of representations under Regulation 19 of the Town and Country Planning (Local Planning) (England) Regulations 2012.

2.      An updated Minerals and Waste Development Scheme is endorsed and recommended to Council for adoption.

3.     A consultation is carried out on an updated Statement of Community Involvement.

RESOLVED:

1.    That the Council submits the Surrey Waste Local Plan (Submission Plan) to the Secretary of State following its publication for representations under Regulation 19 of the Town and Country Planning (Local Planning) (England) Regulations 2012.

2.    That delegated authority be given to the Executive Director of Highways, Transport & Environment to approve any non-material changes to the Plan in consultation with the Cabinet Member for Environment & Waste prior to its publication and during its Examination.

3.    That the Council’s revised Minerals and Waste Development Scheme December 2018 was agreed.

4.    That the Council publishes an updated draft Statement of Community Involvement for consultation in Spring 2019 was agreed.

Reasons for decision:

It was a statutory requirement for Surrey County Council to have a Waste Local Plan and the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) emphasised that Local Plans should be kept up to date. A new Surrey Waste Local Plan (the Plan) was being prepared that would replace the 2008 Surrey Waste Plan (SWP) and would cover the period from 2018 to 2033. The Plan wwould ensure that planning policy for the management of waste reflected a more recent assessment of the need for waste management in Surrey as well as the current and likely future opportunities and constraints for such development. Regulations governing the plan-making process require that such plans are submitted to the Secretary of State following a period for representations on soundness and compliance with relevant legislation.

The Plan included a vision for Surrey to be sustainable in terms of waste management. This meant encouraging communities to prevent waste and to manage waste that was produced in the most sustainable way by provision of recycling and recovery facilities in the right locations at the right time. The Plan expected facilities to maximise the resource potential of waste by managing waste as high up on the waste hierarchy as possible.

Waste data was published annually in November and the published Plan would include the latest available 2017 data and any consequent non-material changes to the Plan. Such changes, and any other minor changes considered desirable, would be made by the Executive Director, in consultation with the Cabinet Member, prior to the Plan publication in mid-January 2019.

The associated timetable for preparing the Plan and statement on how communities were involved in the preparation of planning policy and consultation on planning applications also required updating to ensure they reflected the current programme for preparing the Plan and new legislative requirements.

[The decisions on this item can be called in by the Environment Select Committee]

It was agreed that non-exempt information may be made available to the press and public, where appropriate.

RESOLVED: That under Section 100(A) of the Local Government Act 1972, the public be excluded from the meeting during consideration of the following items of business on the grounds that they involve the likely disclosure of exempt information under the relevant paragraphs of Part 1 of Schedule 12A of the Act.

NOTICE OF A DECISION OF THE MEMBER CONDUCT PANEL

Date of Panel meeting:                30 November 2018

Allegation concerning:                  Mr Peter Martin

Chairman of Panel:                      Mr Ken Gulati

Members of Panel:                      Mrs Hazel Watson

Mr Tim Hall

Investigating Officer:                   Mr Richard Lingard

Independent Person:                   Mr Bernard Quoroll

Date of Final decision:                 14 December 2018

Constitutional Basis

1)    The Member Conduct Panel has been established as part of Surrey County Council’s arrangements for dealing with complaints made about the conduct of Surrey County Councillors and Co-opted Members. 

2)    Mr Martin is a Member of Surrey County Council.

3)    Mr Bernard Quorroll has been appointed by Surrey County Council as an Independent Person as defined by S28(7) of the Localism Act 2011

Consideration of Complaint

1.     The Member Conduct Panel met on 30 November 2018 to consider the report of an investigation into a complaint where the complainant had alleged that questions asked of them by Mr Martin during a meeting with him were ‘unlawful’ and ‘unjustified’ and that the line of questioning constituted harassment and discrimination.

2.     Prior to taking the decisions set out below the Panel sought and took into account the views of the Independent Person.

3.     The complaint was initially considered by the Monitoring Officer and the Independent Person and the matter was referred for an investigation into whether there had been a breach of paragraphs 3 and 9 of the Council’s Code of Conduct for Members (the Code).

4.     Paragraph 3 of the Code provides: ‘When carrying out your public duties you must make all choices (such as making public appointments, awarding contracts or recommending individuals for rewards or benefits) on merit, and must be impartial and be seen to be impartial.’ The Investigating Officer found that there had been no breach of this paragraph because, in his conversation with the complainant, Mr Martin was not taking part in a decision making process.

5.     The Investigating Officer found that Mr Martin’s conduct during the meeting with the complainant did amount to a breach of Paragraph 9 of the Code, which provides: You must promote and support high standards of conduct (characterised by the above requirements) by leadership and example when serving in your public post.

6.     The Member Conduct Panel met to consider whether Mr Martin did fail to comply with the Code, and what action to take.

7.     After hearing from the Investigating Officer and from Mr Martin, and consulting the Independent Person, the Panel asked the Investigating Officer to provide further information as to the feedback provided by Mr Martin following his meeting with the complainant. On receipt of this information, the Panel concluded that Mr Martin was not taking part in a decision making process in his conversation with them, and had therefore not failed to comply with Paragraph 3 of the Code.

8.     The Panel considered all the circumstances of the case, and concluded that Mr Martin had failed to comply with Paragraph 9 of the Code.

Reasons and Action

9.     The Panel noted that Mr Martin had fully co-operated with the investigation, and had voluntarily admitted his conduct. He subsequently resigned his position as Chairman of the Council and apologised to the complainant. After a full discussion, the Panel felt that no further action was necessary.

10. The Panel decided that its findings should be reported to the next meeting of the County Council.

Ken Gulati

Chairman of Member Conduct Panel