Transcript

I will now run through some housekeeping rules. Social media, in line with our guidance on the use of social media, I'm happy for anyone attending today's meeting, including members of the council, to use social media, provided that this does not disturb the business of the meeting. Mobile phones, please turn mobile phones on silent. Webcast members, please may I remind you that this meeting is being webcast live, although I have the right to suspend filming if the need arises, and it is open to the public. Microphones, members will have to indicate that they wish to speak through the chair, and when called, use your microphones to speak. Please remember to turn this off after you have spoken. Fire drill, well, we've had this morning, bit of practice, but I don't think there's any more planned. There are no fire drills expected, so in the event of fire alarm sounding, everyone present is asked to leave by the nearest exit and assemble at the top car park, reporting to a member of the building management's team. Staff will be on hand to guide you to your nearest exit, and I must say they did a good job this morning. Those can speak, please stand when addressing the chair and council. Speeches will be time limited as you will be using the timer light system. The clock will appear in the corner of the screen. When a member has 30 seconds remaining, the clock will change to amber. When a member's time is up, the clock will flash red. Voting will be by raising your hands or by verbal assent. I will confirm how voting will be done for each item as we go through the agenda. Item one is Apologies for Absence. I ask Assistant Director for Governors and Democratic Service Vicki Herbert to report Apologies for Absence.

• Thank you, Chair. Apologies for Absence have been received from John Beckett, Amanda Boot, Stephen Cooksey, Chris Barr, Will Forster, John Fury, Jonathan Holly, Cameron McIntosh, Rebecca Poole, and Chris Townsend. We do have members attending remotely. Amanda Boot, Cameron McIntosh, and Chris Barr are attending remotely and will have speaking rights, but no voting rights. We have also experienced a major incident on the motorway today, so there will be several members that will be here, but will be late. Thank you.
• Any other apologies? Please note that Annex A, Approval of County Council Absence was published yesterday in the fourth supplementary agenda. The purpose of this report is to request that the County Council considers whether to agree that County Councillor John Fury be absent from Council meetings by reason of ill health. Agreed? Thank you. I don't respect this recommendation, do I? You're agreed. Minutes, pages nine to 44 of the agenda. May I assign the minutes of the Council meeting held on 21st of May as a correct record of the meeting?
• Agreed. - Agreed. Declaration of Interest, are there any declarations of disclosable pecuniary interest, significant personal interest, or predictive interest that members wish to make at this point? Thank you. Item four is the Chair's Announcement. His Majesty, the King's Award for Sir Residence, Birthday Honour 2024. I would like to congratulate service recipients of HM, the King's Birthday Honours 2024. 21 residents across county were recognised for their significant contribution across a range of services in our county and country, including Tim Oliver, the leader of the Council. (audience applauds) And Rachel Wardell, Executive Director for Children, Family Life Learning. (audience applauds) They both have been awarded Orders of the British Empire OBE. Well, we already congratulated them. My full announcements can be found in the Council Agenda front sheet. I would like to offer my congratulations to Rebecca and Will Foster, newly elected MPs for Rygate-Voking, respectively. I'm sure you will all... (audience applauds) I would also like to pay homage to a number of our councillors who stood in last week's general election, but were unsuccessful on this occasion. As we all know, it is not always easy to put yourself forward for public service. We do, however, need people to stand up for the rights of others, and not only support, but fight for those who need it most. Please be assured that your efforts are recognised and hugely appreciated. If any members are in touch with former members of Surrey County Council who would like to be kept updated of Council news, please do ask them to contact my office, chairs.office@serviceec.gov.uk. Thank you. Leader statement. I call Tim Oliver OBE, the leader of Council, to make his statement. May I remind you that members can make comments, as well as ask questions in a leader statement, and the leader will may respond at the end. Leader. (no audio)
• Mr. Chairman, members, no one can deny that we are entering a new phase of political leadership in this country. One that may be of a different political colour to the administration of this Council, but a new government that I congratulate and am hopeful of working constructively with for the benefit of Surrey residents. I'd also like to take this opportunity, as you have, chair, to congratulate our successful Surrey County Councillors, Rebecca Paul, the newly elected Member of Parliament for Rygate, and Will Foster, the newly elected Member of Parliament for Woking, as well as the other Surrey MPs. Some new, some returning, who I am sure will be working hard on behalf of our residents over the coming Parliament. It's not surprising that this country has produced, sorry, this county has produced a multitude of ministers, secretaries of state, foreign secretaries and chancellors, and we now have a local Surrey boy as Prime Minister. What a county. The new government campaigned on an agenda of change, and I trust that it has entered office with its eyes and its mind open. Open to all of the strong avenues of growth and progress that this country holds, whatever the political makeup. Surrey is one such place. We are a county that delivers great benefit to the UK, financially, environmentally, socially, and if it's growth that we want to deliver, Surrey is the place the new government should champion. We will continue to innovate to help tackle the challenges our society faces, and we stand ready to grasp any opportunity to deliver better outcomes for our people. Mr. Chairman, national and global politics over recent weeks, months, and perhaps years has demonstrated one very clear thing. Instability simply does not deliver those better outcomes. I'm proud that in this council our strategic and direction and leadership is strong. Our progress is demonstrable. Our vision is clear. We will continue to improve, continue to ensure we're fit for the future, continue to look up and embrace challenge and opportunity head on. We will stick to our purpose and our ambition that no one in Surrey deserves to be left behind. I hope the new government will recognise the strength of counties like Surrey, and not just the metro mayors, and will work with us to tackle the fundamental challenges local governments, local communities, and local people are facing. Some of those challenges are stark and require engagement from the new government urgently. I want to touch briefly on those issues that need to be at the top of the entry for new government ministers as they get their feet under the table, issues that I lobbied heavily the previous government on. Firstly, special education needs and disabilities. I know we have again seen frustrated and understandably angry parents and carers here at Woodhatch today. They are angry because the system is not working. They're angry because they feel injustice and having to fight to give their children the opportunities they feel they deserve. They are angry because they care about their children's future. The system doesn't work for children and it doesn't work for schools or councils either. While reforms expanding eligibility for education, health and care plans were made with the best of intention some years ago, it has led to a huge increase in unfunded demand. The number of EHCPs has more than doubled nationally since 2015, with an over-reliance on specialist school provision. The cost to councils has also doubled to over £10 billion this year, leading to deficits across the country of around £3 billion. This is clearly not sustainable and is clearly not working. Mr Chairman, we must see the new government address this challenge immediately. In Surrey, we can be part of that solution. We have invested a huge amount of money to address legitimate frustrations from Surrey parents and carers. We have developed a deep understanding of the systemic issues that need to be fixed and we have established better practices ourselves to go some way to improving experiences. However, we know that this is not enough. Councils like us cannot fix this alone and we need government to take this opportunity to fundamentally grip this issue, enabling a more inclusive school system, more sense support in schools and more levers for councils to pull to shape provision in our local area. Mr Chairman, another core issue that needs solving is the charging system for adult social care, the biggest single area of spend for us as a council. We support reform of the charging system to make it fairer for people in need without hardworking people having to give up their life savings and assets to fund care. However, both the workforce challenge and the cost implications for councils under current proposals must be resolved properly and realistically. In its current form, the changes suggested, whilst noble in their aims, are simply not deliverable. This government must further delay any implementation and take stock. Any reform in this area must be fully funded. A fairer distribution formula must be established and it must be piloted through Trailblazer councils with proper support provided. Again, here in Surrey, we want to be part of the solution to this complex issue. We urge the new government to engage with it, face up to the challenge and work with councils like us to create a better system for everyone. A further area of huge unsustainable spend is high-cost placements for children in care. Young people in need of social care, in need of a safe and loving home, are some of the most vulnerable people we have responsibility for as a council. It's a responsibility we take with the utmost seriousness. Being a corporate parent to these young people is in many ways the epitome of public service. Preventing them being left is our guiding mission as an organisation, as an administration, as councillors, as officers, as compassionate human beings. The number of children referred to children's services has spiked post-pandemic. Consequently, more children are in local authority care than ever before and it is one of the biggest areas of overspend for county councils like us. It has therefore never been more urgent to ensure children's services are financially sustainable and deliver the best possible outcomes that can be achieved for our children. The new government must keep momentum with the strategy for children's social care as set out by the previous administration. Take it further with appropriate funding, better regulation of the market, so our public duty is not taken advantage of and a system that enables us to more effectively deliver the services that protect children and give young people the best possible start in life. Mr Chairman, another area that I sincerely hope the government picks up and keeps progressing is that of devolution. We have made strides, perhaps not huge strides, but certainly significant ones, in the argument for more power to be devolved from Westminster to local areas. Local councils and communities know our areas better than central government ever can. We know what's needed, what works and what doesn't. We know our people, what they want and where the greatest need lies. We know the specific challenges we must face up to and the opportunities we are equipped to grasp. The previous government understood this and through the levelling up white paper moved in the right direction with a framework that enabled more effective collaboration between county and district authorities and ultimately a clearer path to devolving more powers to local areas. By recognising the importance of whole county geographies as the building blocks for devolution outside our major cities, it celebrated counties like Surrey and embraced our potential to provide growth and opportunity. I strongly urge the new government to build on this. Keep moving forward and keep momentum. Keep expanding the scope of powers of devolution and the funding levers available. Use devolution and use counties like Surrey to help address local government funding challenges, strategic planning, house building and boosting growth and opportunity for the whole county. Mr Chairman, there is no place for naivety or partisan political ideology at this moment in time. The challenges this country has been through over the last few years - pandemic, war in Europe, global inflation - have been monumental. On entering office, this new government has inherited an extremely precarious situation with finances stretched and the challenges I've outlined above coming to a head. Local government is at the coalface. There are fundamental questions to be addressed about what we should be and can be delivering. Any upcoming spending review must provide sustainable long-term funding and solutions for councils. Don't rely on short-sighted sticking plasters or burden some restricted bidding processes. We can be a huge help to the new government, provided they engage with us and understand these issues. Here in Surrey, we are part of the solution. We are already taking action to be fit for the future. We are determined and clear in our ambition for the people of Surrey. And we will not let up in our endeavour, hopefully with the new government as an active and constructive partner. Thank you. I call Catherine Powell. I will start by sharing my personal congratulations to the leader for his OBE and to the two councillors who have been elected to Parliament and to all those who stood for election. With the general election behind us, a new government in place and hard-fought campaigns by all parties, there is a lot to reflect on. One thing is for sure - change is coming. I am hopeful for positive change at Westminster, change that will address some of the current issues this council is struggling with and some mentioned by the leader. Children and young people with SEND, the current processes for assessing and meeting need is failing too many. Schools are left struggling to support children whose needs they cannot meet for too long. We must intervene earlier, more effectively, truly provide the right support at the right time in the right place, recognising the number of children needing support is increasing, as is the complexity of that need. Current funding from central government is insufficient. I completely acknowledge that many of our staff are working extremely hard, but the system is broken, placing them, children, families and schools in the middle of a vicious circle. Adult social care. We have an ageing population. We also have more children with SEND transitioning into adulthood. A secure funding system needs to be put in place that will allow the building of the right accommodation and support attracting the required staff. Climate change. We need strategies for not just reducing climate change by decreasing our use of fossil fuels, by increasing the generation of green energy and creating more energy and water efficient homes, but also by improving our resilience to climate change. For example, we need to create more flood resilience and stop building on our floodplains. We will rely on our Labour colleagues and those councillors who have been elected as MPs to push for these issues to be addressed by the new government quickly and efficiently. Most of all, I hope we will find a way to simplify systems and processes to become more efficient and more effective and remove unnecessary bureaucracy. I was horrified when renewing my DBS check recently. I was asked for four forms of identification and then to be told that the council would be notified online when my DBS had been renewed that that wasn't enough. The officer would also need to see the certificate physically. There have been lots of change during my time in this council, despite it being very limited compared to many. Removing the local committees, taking verge cutting and on-street parking enforcement back in house, restructuring the highways teams. To me, these changes have been negative. It seems to me we are becoming increasingly reactive as a council. I find myself increasingly saying to residents, Please report that here, here's the link. And sometimes success, but far too often they come back saying officers have advised everything is okay when it clearly isn't. Looking at grass cutting website this weekend, it says the verges in my division were cut on the 31st of May. I drove in today on the 9th of July and they still haven't been cut. The last time they were done, they were done so badly I was left wondering whether the workers had any sense of pride in what they did and why we paid them at all. What else? Adding to the number of educational psychologist has reduced the bottleneck in the EHC process, a definite positive. But correspondence with parents, carers, schools and the actual delivery and support for places for children and young people is simply not good enough. As I have said before, we are failing them. And very sadly, I personally believe that we have a significant number of cases where we are traumatizing children and young people and their parents and carers, creating new issues that we in the NHS will need to deal with, a lose-lose situation. One more area of concern for me, we have a significant capital investment program including building new children's homes, extra care housing for older residents and those with ASD, and we are building more SEND schools and increasing provision in others, all of which is positive. However, the level of scrutiny that is being allowed on whether we are building what we need, where we need it, is extremely disappointing, particularly for the SEND capital program. There is a lack of strong effective scoping, local councilor engagement and project management. In my view, which is formed for many years as a successful project director for concept designs and major construction projects, this is leading to ineffective delivery coupled with cost and schedule overruns, as well as delays in the revenue savings they could deliver. We are not using the skills that exist within this council. We need to streamline, not just transform in my perspective. Please, can we all be engaged going forward? Use the skills that exist in this room to truly address the issues we are all aware of, from grass cutting to supporting our children and young people with SEND, to providing appropriate support for adults with additional support in their later years, as well as addressing the dreaded pothole. Thank you. (audience applauding)
• I now call Fiona White as Lib Dem acting group leader.
• Thank you very much, Chairman. And to my fellow members, I'm sorry that you have the understudy this morning, but the start turn is elsewhere, I'm afraid. First of all, I would like to congratulate both my colleague Will Forster and Rebecca Paul on their election to Westminster. It's good that there are two more people in Parliament with real experience of local government, who hopefully will be able to keep reminding the government the difficulties that local councils are struggling with. Can I also please congratulate the council leader, Tim Oliver, and Rachel Wardell, who have both recently received an OBE, in both cases very well-deserved for many years of public service. So, and my congratulations to them. So, the election activity is over, and we've moved into a new era for our country with a new government. We are still yet to know what the real impact will be on the local government sector, and specifically on this council. It is now time for us to refocus our energy on our remit as county councillors. A new government is not going to be able to solve today the problems that we have been facing for many years, and in the short term at least, the issues remain the same, and as a council, we need to work together to find ways of tackling the most pressing challenges, while watching to see if a national solution will be forthcoming to help, in particular, adult social care and children's services, including for those with additional needs. But there are still some areas where, as a council, we need to do better for our residents, as some high-profile cases have shown. Just recently, it was reported that the council had been instructed to pay compensation to the family of a boy with complex medical needs, who had lost 27 days of education and special needs provision after his school transport was cancelled. The Ombudsman found that the council had defaulted on its legal duty to provide same transport to and from school. Like many of my colleagues, I've sat on home-to-school transport panels, and have been horrified at some of the decisions that we've had to make. That's a problem that needs to be addressed, because it's not fair on our young people that they have to bear the brunt of those problems. While it's recognized that there are many councils across the country which are racking up large deficits through having to spend more on home-to-school transport, we need to make sure that we are maximizing our resources, and doing the best with what we have, ensuring our processes are as efficient as possible, so that other young people with additional needs are not further disadvantaged in this way. In fact, we know that Surrey has had to pay out more than 540,000 pounds of compensation in the last year to families who had complained about the county council's children's services in the last year. There is clearly more work to be done in this area to prevent any more children and young people being left behind. The council has worked hard over the last five years to get to a relatively stable position, but we know there are even sterner tests ahead with in-year budgets already under pressure. And in the next two to three years, there are a number of funding streams that are set to come to an end, potentially putting an end to some much-valued services. In his speech, the leader referred to the cost of adult social care. Can I suggest that perhaps it's time to update Andrew Dilnut's recommendations of a few years ago, but can I also suggest that this is a topic that needs cross-party agreement at all levels of government? It really cannot continue to be a political football. I was very pleased to hear yesterday that the new government recognizes the need for infrastructure as a precursor to development. And I hope that this council will be willing to play its part and be a positive partner in that endeavor. Another major concern is commissioning social care services through our partners in the voluntary sector. It's something we rely on quite a lot, but I'm concerned that planned future reductions in spending in this area will adversely affect our relationship with organizations, many of whom are long-term partners and relying on council funding to maintain the services they deliver to our most vulnerable residents. We need to make sure that sufficient support is provided to prevent gaps in our services. And finally, we've had a lot of major changes in the officer leadership and directorships of this council. I'm very pleased that that looks as if it's coming to an end and Lib Dems as a group are looking forward to welcoming Terrence Herbert as the new chief executive during the summer and to working with him on tackling some of these issues. Thank you very much, Chairman.
• We'll now call Robert Evans, OBE.
• Thank you very much, Chair, and may I add my congratulations to the leader and Rachel Wardell on their rise to honors. Can I thank the leader for his heartwarming speech and for his kind words to the new government. He pointed out that Keir Starmer is from Surrey and he is the first prime minister of this country to come from Surrey on its present boundaries, although both Clem Attlee and John Major came from Surrey on its older historic boundaries. The leader outlined in his speech a long list of issues and challenges that the new government will face and I share those, but it is a pretty sad indictment or a sorry legacy of 14 years of conservative and conservative Lib Dem administrations that there are so many challenges that the new government has on its books. The leader highlighted several areas where progress needs to be made, as did other members here and I thank other members for highlighting a whole range of issues which I don't intend to repeat, but I am sure that special educational needs and education in general will be at the forefront of the new government. Labor has always been progressive governments on education and Surrey has a track record of joining and supporting that agenda. Surrey was, if not at the forefront, very close to it on the introduction of comprehensive schools and worked with labor administration to make certain that Surrey kept its good reputation on education and I hope very much that members here and the administration will do so in future. We all recognize in Surrey, not least those who sit on the committee, that adult social care is a massive challenge, it's a massive challenge in Surrey, perhaps more so than some other counties because we have a larger aging population. But we will need to work as a nation for the fact that people live longer, they have more needs as they grow older and the number of people, increasing number with dementia and other age-related illnesses will present a challenge. And some government, this government will have to address the financing of that as the leader. I don't necessarily share all his views on this but I think he and I would recognize that a new and better system of funding for adult social care has to be brought in. On devolution, we will share some ideas. I think we've got to be careful on the devolution and recognize that what might work in one county does not work everywhere in the country. Local government finance will certainly need to be reviewed. We're fortunate colleagues that we live in a country where the voters can oust a government at the ballot box and long may it remain that we have that situation. Change is certainly coming and I hope all members here will embrace it and I thank those, not just the leader but others for their kind words this morning, thank you.
• We'll now call Jonathan Essex.
• Firstly let me share our congratulations on the election of Rebecca Paul and Will Forsford to become MPs and for the honors awarded to yourself and Rebecca, sorry, and Rachel Wardell. I personally look forward to working with Rebecca as the new MP for Rygate and wish Will the best in representing Woking. And I hope that both help to strengthen the links between Surrey and our new government. And leader, we support your plans to lobby for increased funding for special education needs to provide sufficient funding to match increased demand for both school places and school send provision as well as to grasp the challenges around children and adult social care. But leader, can we lobby governments on things that are also beyond that agreed collectively? So we suggest that should also include increased overall funding for local governments in line with the LGA white paper and power devolution as the best way to solve some of our biggest national challenges including on transport and to retrofit homes. For the Department of Transport to stop requiring network rail to sell off its assets, a directive which limits the potential for racial stations to be a public and active travel hub completely at odds with Surrey's own local transport plan. And for the Department of Education to publicly confirm it will provide the money to refurbish and improve Rygate Priory School on its current site. Finally, I would like to share my congratulations to my good friend Sarah Finch in her successful legal challenge to Surrey County Council to the Supreme Court last month. For those who are not familiar with the case, this challenged the County Council's planning decision to permit drilling for oil at Horse Hill shortly after this council voted to declare a climate emergency. The Supreme Court quashed that planning decision and changed planning law. A planning application to extract oil must now consider the climate impact of burning it as part of its environmental assessment. This means that the downstream climate impact of oil drilling is now made significant in planning terms. Now the government's planning inspectors have asked us to comment on how this judgment impacts on plans for the second runway proposed at Gatwick. So leader, will the council submit that just as oil wells should consider the climate impact of burning the oil extracted now, the full climate impact of Gatwick Airport Limited's plans for a second runway through increased flights and increased road traffic should also be considered and that will be our position. Thank you. (audience applauds)
• I'll now open it to the members for debate. John O'Reilly.
• Thank you, Chairman. A great deal of consensus has been already expressed from Tim Oliver right through to Robert Evans about the priorities and our hopes for the new government and all the issues that have been raised are very important, very serious. They affect arguably the most vulnerable in our communities and I support those. But Chairman, there's one other area that I think Robert Evans has raised in the past in this chamber. That does affect a large number of our residents. All of us have post bags or the electronic equivalent of those and a source of frustration is the inability of this council and other county councils to enforce the blocking of pavements by vehicles. Time and time again, people are frustrated. They cannot pass their pram or whatever it is because there's a great lorry or cast blocking the pavement. This is a source of great irritation. It is inexplicable to me, I can be a little bit more critical of the outgoing government, that the transport department under the previous government did absolutely nothing about this despite there being reports for four or five years recommending a simple change to allow us to have that enforcement powers. Robert Evans, I think only about six months ago, I think raised this in council. So I'm sure Tim Oliver as leader may be appoint Robert as an ambassador plenipotentiary to the Department of Transport and Louise Haig to get this item. Seems trivial, it costs nothing, but it will actually improve or at least take away some of the stuff that we as councilors have to contend with and our residents. So it's a small item in the great scheme of things, but if whether it's Tim Oliver or Robert Evans or all of us can impress on Louise Haig, the new Secretary of State for Transport, let's get this thing done now.
• Andy McLeod.
• Thank you, Chairman. Like Catherine and others, I would like to particularly congratulate Tim Oliver on his OBE award. I think this is very well deserved. In my view, Tim is an exceptional council leader and he demonstrated that yet again in the speech that he gave, which was very generous and carefully thought out. The thing about Tim, as far as I'm concerned, he runs this council from the center right of the Conservative Party. He's a moderate one nation type conservative and with dedication to public service and he tries to run his administration that way. It's been very difficult for him because of the chaos above him at national level in the government and the Conservative Party. And also I would observe there's been chaos below him at the butter councils and town councils and so on run by the Conservatives. But Tim has actually managed to run a administration here, hold it together and so on and so forth. So that's my view. I have one complaint about this in terms of my conservative colleagues. I think they've let Tim down a little bit. I think he deserved at least a knighthood for what he's actually done. (audience laughing) And hopefully that will come at some stage in the future when the Conservative Party reformed itself nationally to a moderate central right government. In the short remaining time I've got, I'd like to also thank again, thank Tim for the tremendous work he's done in terms of locally in Farnham, in terms of both Brightwell's and the Farnham Infrastructure Project, which is now coming, both are coming to delivery and hopefully success in the next 18 months or so. Tim hasn't done this alone of course. This project was started actually by Jeremy Hunt in 2017 when he asked the Farnham residents if they would work together with him. And we attempted to do that. There was a lot of obstruction, to be honest, from the local Waverley and time council conservatives, but the electorate actually solved that problem by getting rid of them in the 2017 elections. And since then we've worked well together. And I have to also thank Paul Fallows actually, who despite being a fierce political opponent of Jeremy and almost having beaten at the latest election, and Paul himself is an exceptional council leader at Waverley and the only silver lining for us is that Paul will still be available to run Waverley and help get the Waverley-Gilford partnership going. I'd like to say more about this and the other people who have contributed including Catherine, Michaela, all my colleagues in Waverley and Farnham time council have contributed. There's been enormous multi-party success and Tim picking it up from Jeremy Hunt is what's making it happen and made it happen. Thank you, thank you, Chairman.
• I have no more speakers. Leader.
• Thank you very much, Chairman. And thank you all very much for your very kind words on behalf of Rachel Waddell and myself. I'm not really going to say a great deal in response because I think today is about looking to the future. It is about now building on new relationships. You know, the issues that we face as a county council are well known and indeed are shared across many other authorities around the country. SCN is a significant issue for all authorities at the cost to own to school transport. It is about in earlier intervention, it is about investing in prevention. But I think we also do need to look at the whole system and indeed whether there are reforms that would actually be helpful for all parties. I absolutely recognize and agree with Catherine Powell's view that we need to simplify systems and processes. It is inordinately difficult. Inordinately difficult to navigate your way around the system, particularly not just relating to parents with children with SCN, but generally. We have a significant program now in terms of redesigning the customer front end, the point of access into this council being led by Liz Mills. And I'm hoping that through that piece of work, we will address those issues. We will promote the use of AI as I think the former Labour Prime Minister Tony Blair was talking about this morning. AI is an important piece of work that I think will help make things smoother and easier for people to engage with. I think just on the SEND funding and so on, which has been raised a few times, and I know that we had a report from the Select Committee from Fiona Davidson's Select Committee to cabinet the other day. And I think and I'm hoping that Fiona will set up a task and finish group to look at the capital funding. There is no easy answer to this. I mean, I know that the people have, you know, that there are areas where have been identified where there is a shortage even with the investment that we're making in capital programs. But the shortage of places in the right area, right job, it isn't as easy just to simply say that's where we're going to put them. So there needs to be some discussion, some negotiation, you know, and I do think and I said before the election that we kind of need now need to reflect on what the new government is going to do and what changes that may be coming. You know, there was a suggestion from Philip, from Bridget Phillips and that they may give local councils more powers over the placement of children with additional needs into academy settings and so on. So we'll see what comes of that. But it is something we just have to get right and it needs that detailed analysis. And to pull on the skills as Catherine has said of those in this chamber. I think just on adult social care, I think the recommendations from Sir Andrew Dilnot some 10 years ago I think were largely adopted as part of the, by the previous Conservative government. And I think that was reaffirmed by the former Prime Minister and I think I heard that Sir Keir Starmer also said that the Labour Party would take forward those recommendations. Of course, those to implement those which were delayed two years ago will cost something in the region of two to 2.5 billion pounds. So there's going to be a major funding challenge if they were to be implemented in the way in which they were formally being proposed. Just on Fiona White's point, you know, which is accurate around the compensation that has been paid by this council. I would just make one small caveat to that. And that is that the Ombudsman decided to introduce a fine for all councils where there was a delay in the 20 week assessment for EHCPs. And we were being fined 100 pounds a month, which has been painful. And that's been quite a significant sum of money included in that 540. As of the end of June, we were around the top 60% of cases now in EHCPs were being assessed within the statutory time limits with an ambition to get that to, well, to get that to 100%, but certainly to get that into the 70 or 80% by the end of the year. And there's been some very positive feedback from schools around that. But of course, what that has meant is that there are now hundreds, in fact, thousands more children with EHCPs, and now the challenge is delivering those EHCPs on time. So, yeah, we are making progress on that, but accepting from what was a very low bar. And just on the commissioning social care in the voluntary sector, there's a significant piece of work being led by Michael Coughlin and Denise Turner-Schuerts. Just looking at our whole relationship with the voluntary sector. That we have a VCSE alliance and they are creating a membership organization. Our aim from this piece of work is to absolutely identify those organizations, VCSE organizations that this council works with, wants to work with, needs to work with, and to make sure that there is then sustainable funding in place for those organizations. So it is a very pressing piece of work, and one I hope will start to reach some landing or some conclusions on over the next few months. And I think, just to Robert Evans' point, just on the devolution, I mean, I know that Scear Starmer and the deputy prime minister are meeting with the metro mayors today. You might have seen that the county council's network in my name put out something at the weekend saying don't forget about rural areas. 48% of the population live in county areas. I think the Labor Party now have 129 MPs in counties. So this is, you cannot deliver what the government needs to deliver and wants to deliver without engaging with county councils, with rural areas. So I would encourage Robert Evans as our now emissary to take back to Scear Starmer the little message that the metro mayors, ring him now, yeah, the metro mayors can't actually, don't have the power to deliver really anything that the key agenda points around housing, they don't have the power to deliver planning and so on. But it is important that the county councils, the upper tier authorities are also actively engaged in that conversation. And then to Jonathan Essex, yes, of course. I mean, I think we will see what the policy priorities are for the government around climate change. But we do need to see long-term sustainable funding. We argue for that. There's nothing that I have said this morning in my speech that I haven't already argued for against with the previous governments. These are not new issues. I'm not standing here and saying actually, I recognize that these are, they've inherited these issues. All I'm asking is that we continue to keep those in the forefront of the mind of the government. And then finally to, and just on your point on Gatwick second runway, I mean, I think there's a, this council has been very active in raising the concerns and issues and conditions that would need to be applied to any approval for a second runway under the development consent order. I mean, I think it's interesting that reading the judgment of the Supreme Court, which was a three, two decision actually, if you read Lord Kitchen's dissenting judgment, then I think that the challenge is gonna be how you actually, how you monitor that, how you monitor what's happening 100 miles away and so on. So I think that there needs to be nuance, the arguments around it. But I think at the moment, this council has concerns about the expansion of Gatwick Airport with another runway. And then to John O'Reilly, you're absolutely right. The previous government had said some months ago that they were going to give us the same powers as the Mayor of London has around blocking pavements, but that didn't come to fruition. And can I put in a pitch for my favorite topic, which is control of the utility companies and giving us more power to control what the utility companies get up to. I mean, today is a classic example where you've had a, you know, the A25 is being closed because SGN are doing works. And then we have a diesel spillage, which has now caused gridlock on the A24 as well. So we really do need to be able to stop utility companies simply digging up our roads at will. But anyway, I won't bang on too much about that, but I'm grateful to Jonathan Hully, who's set up a working group with the representative utility companies. And I hope we can make some progress with that conversation. Then finally to Andy McLeod. I mean, I think Andy, you know, thank you for your kind words. I think what we've done in Farnham collectively absolutely shows the power of local governments when all tiers of government come together and all politics are put to one side. And there's just an absolute laser light focus on what is in the best interest of the residents. That isn't to say it's been easy. And indeed, you know, we have many, many discussions about it, but at the end of the day, you know, it's a project that has been complicated. But I think we are getting there. And I hope that at the end of the day, we achieve what actually Jeremy Hunt set out to achieve, which was to reduce pollution in the town center, but also to have done that sympathetically bearing in mind. It is a beautiful town and there is a limit to what you can actually do around the traffic movement. But it's been, you know, I've enjoyed the conversations and I will continue to enjoy them over the coming months I'm sure. So thank you very much.
• Item six is member question time. They're on pages five to 48 of the third supplementary agenda. Notice has been received of 23 questions. There will be a five minutes per question for supplementary questions. Please be brief as these must be framed as questions, not statements, and must be relevant to the original question. Question time will be limited to 45 minutes. At this point, I will finish the question. We're on and close the item. Any question not covered during the 45 minutes, a written answer has been tabled. Members can of course follow up with the relevant cabinet member outside the meeting. There will be an additional 15 minutes for members to ask questions of the cabinet members and deputy cabinet members based on the cabinet member, deputy cabinet member briefings from pages 33 of the third supplementary agenda. There will be, these will be taken on first come, first serve basis and there will be no supplementaries. Moving on to questions. First question is from John Sexton to Matt Furness. Do you have a supplementary?
• Yes, please, Chair. Thank you, Chair. Thank you for your response. Just to be clear, is the message that you are asking me to deliver to residents the following? Be thankful that SCC will meet its climate change target in 2050 by reducing the number of cuts per annum. Two, you expect too much and only some of your complaints have merit. Three, you have higher expectations than Surrey County Council can accommodate and it won't be as good as how you treat your private garden or as good as Spelthorpe Barrack Council used to cut your grass verges. Is this what the cabinet member thinks will go down well with our residents? Thank you.
• Robert King.
• Thank you very much. I notice in the answer that the cabinet member says that the contract in Spelthorn has been given to, the new contract's been given to Ringway. Can I ask the cabinet member, did he personally meet with this company? If so, what discussions took place? What was the content of the discussion with them and what assurances did he seek from them and what assurances did he gain?
• Any other supplementary? I ask Deputy Cabinet Member for High Vasty Backs to respond.
• Thank you, Mr. Chairman and thank you for those supplementary questions. I think it's important to remember that previously the boroughs will have also joined us in cutting the verges which then resulted in a much better service for residents. And now that the boroughs are no longer taking part in that, the onus is now on us alone. Therefore, inevitably there are going to be fewer cuts that we're able to do. Now, we had committed to doing four cuts per annum. The administration has increased this to six, so we're already making improvements there and we have made further improvements since last year in terms of recognising feedback that came up from the task and finish. We've got better at identifying the patches of grass that we are responsible for as opposed to things that are with other authorities or housing associations or private, et cetera. And we've got technology solutions in place that allow us to monitor what is being done. In terms of sort of two high expectations, I mean, I completely understand that the public will expect to see a high standard of service. That's what I expect as well. And that is what we're working towards. Regretfully, we probably will not get to the same level of cuts as we had before because we are one organisation, whereas before we had the borough resources too, but we're certainly trying to do the best we can within the resources we've got. I do recognise it's not currently where we would like the service to be. To Robert Evans, I would need to go back to our offices and check what actually happened with regards to that. I've certainly spoken to the assistant director who's informed me that we were bringing Ringway in as an additional resource to supplement. I think going forward, we would like to have that flexibility to be able to send in an additional contractor like Ringway into areas where we're falling behind. I hope that answers the question.
• Take us to the meeting, please. Take us to the meeting. Second question is from Bernie Muir to Claire Curran. Bernie, do you have a supplementary?
• No, thank you for the reply, but I don't have a supplementary.
• Any other supplementary? Third question is from Tim Hall to Claire Curran. Vice Chair, do you have a supplementary?
• Yes. Can I thank the cabinet member for her answer, which is extremely helpful. Does she agree with me that actually we need to actually make sure that not just the networks they have at the moment, but also other networks and other partners are remembered in this moving feast of moving forward. Particularly in districts like our own. The family center is set in North Holmwood, which is great and is a serious place where it needs to be, but making sure that it has all the links in all the other communities, whether it be Box Hill or Leatherhead North, is a serious thing. And what can be done to actually make sure all those links are put into place in the future. Thank you.
• George Onastics.
• Thank you. The answer says that in the first course of the contract, the 11 family centers supported 1,282 families. How does this compare to the number of families supported when we had 58 family centers across Surrey, not just the current 11?
• Cameron, remember Claire, Cameron?
• Thank you, Chairman. And thank you, thank you, Councillor Hall, for asking this question about our early help system. And I absolutely agree with what he says, that we need to have a really close community-based network of early help across the whole county, not just in Mulvally, but across the whole county. Because it's these early help networks that so help to keep families safe, and in particular, to stop problems escalating and families needing to tip over into the statutory social care system. And I don't think any families want to really choose to have a social worker working with them. We have worked very, very hard over the last few years to strengthen the early help offer to families with children of all ages. When we used to have the children's center, they were very much focused, the 58 children's centers, were very much focused on families who had very young children, pre-school children. But what is absolutely defining our family centers is that they work with children and young people of all ages. They are linked in very closely with our new Intensive Family Support Service, which is an extension and expansion of the former Surrey Family Support Service, which was our version of the Troubled Families program. We are also bringing in our new Integrated Supporting Adolescents team, which recognize the particular challenges that are faced by young people, adolescents, and we knew that we had a disproportionate number of teenagers coming into the social care system, and we need to support them in more relevant and appropriate and better ways, actually. So this is what our early help offer is about. It's underpinned by also a whole network of community connectors who work out in all our communities across all districts and boroughs, bringing together what is strong in particular areas, reaching out into the voluntary sector, and we know that has such an important part to play, because not all early help services are delivered by this council. We work very closely together with a whole range of partners, and all the partners are working together under the new branding of Families First, Chairman, and I recommend this to all members if they have a look at Families First on our website to see what our new early help, well, it's not a new early help offer, what our early help offer really reaches. In answer to Jonathan Essex's question, I don't have specific figures. This is going back really now very many years as to how many families used to interact when we had 58. My estimate, I can try to find some of those comparable figures, but as I said, those children's centres were dealing with a much smaller range of children and had a different outreach. I will do my best to find figures for him. Thank you, Chairman.
• Fourth question is from Helen Clack to Claire Curran. Helen, do you have a supplementary?
• Thank you, Chairman, yes. Can I thank the cabinet member for her reply? And I'm very pleased that the interventions that have been put in place by the leader and herself and along with the officers are resulting in improvements in timeliness. I wonder, though, on my second question, whether it's possible for the cabinet member to share the information regarding outstanding payments to schools, academies, trusts, et cetera, with us so that we can be assured and also advise our local providers that this is being addressed.
• Lorne Spencer.
• Thank you, Mr. Chair. So I fully appreciate how difficult it is to create an EHCP for some of the children involved. My question, though, and I understand the ambition is to get 100% completed within the legal 20 weeks, but my question is whether the 60% target is really the right target, which means 40% of children will not get their EHCPs in a timely manner. And also on the annual reviews, a great improvement from this time last year when only 25% of annual reviews were completed in a timely manner. My question on that one is, what are the targets? Is the target 100% completed within the year? Thank you.
• Claire.
• Thank you very much, Chairman. And thank you very much for the two questions. And we are pleased that we have been able to make the very significant improvement in the timeliness of the education, health and care needs assessments. And I think this is much better for families and much better for children. I'm recognizing, too, that we have achieved that 60% target, and the last figures I saw were that the timeliness was in the region 72, 73%. But again, I take the Councillor Spencer's point that this is meaning that between 20 and 30% of children are still not on time. And I personally hope that we will get to an even higher timeliness rate for the needs assessments. If it could be 100%, and I know some authorities do achieve that, then it should be 100%. But as close to 100% as is reasonably practicable at any time. Annual reviews, I know we are not yet on target on that. 75%, even for vulnerable children, in my mind, is not good enough, particularly vulnerable children, with that should definitely be running at 100%. And I will definitely be expecting officers to work really hard to lift that figure up again to as close as 100% as we can absolutely achieve, because where we are now is still not good enough. One of the impacts of having accelerated so many education, health, and care plans over the last few months has led to an unintended consequence of a backlog of payments in the system to schools. We acknowledge that, and it's a really unfortunate combination of circumstances that has led to this problem coming forward. I've been, the leader has made an undertaking to schools that all outstanding payments will be cleared by the end of term, and I'm confident that that will be done and that schools will not be left out of pocket. And I, and the cabinet member for finance, have been working with respective teams to make sure that processes are changed so that this situation will not arise again, and that schools will not be disadvantaged in the way that they have been. But, and, again, I am sorry that this has happened. It was an unintended, unexpected consequence, but it should not have happened in this way, and people should not have been disadvantaged. Thank you, Chairman.
• Question five is from Catherine Powell, to my earnest. Do you have a supplementary, Catherine?
• Yes, please, Chair. I'd like to thank the cabinet member for his response and the update on the motion that secured cross-party support last year. A couple of supplementary questions, if I may. Would the cabinet member be agreeable to a meeting to discuss the outcome of the data analysis work that is expected to be completed next month regarding the update of the Surrey Highway hierarchy definition before the recommendations go to cabinet? Regarding vegetation adjacent to the highway, is it possible for the cabinet member to share the primary routes that are automatically being managed so that local members can identify those that might be missing, particularly in relation to schools? In relation to resolution three, I very much appreciate the cabinet member reminding inspectors to consider the risk of vegetation left behind signs, et cetera, on pavements and cycle path users. But I am concerned that the system is still so dependent on residents reporting. Would the cabinet member consider a campaign on social media to encourage residents to report these issues? Regarding resolution four, it is great to hear that there are self-guided walking routes around the countryside and that work is being done on resources for cycling. However, the original resolution also suggested that local members could be engaged to help to create local walking and cycling maps for schools, businesses, health, and leisure facilities using their own plans and strategies. Is this something that the cabinet member is still willing to consider? If so, perhaps this could be trialed in an area I would be more than happy to offer for them. Thank you, Chair.
• Edward Hawkins.
• Thank you, Chairman. Is the cabinet, it's very interesting, that last point, is the cabinet member aware that I'm supporting two of local schools in my area on the Feet First program, which is to encourage young children to be able to walk safely on our roads? And I've been using the Your Councillor Community Fund for that support, so a double thank you on that one. And also a thank you to the cabinet member, and is he aware of the progress being made on the signalized school crossings, one of which has now been running for at least a year and has proved to be very popular, and the second one is under construction and is very much looked forward to by the school and in fact by Frimley Park Hospital, where it still is and may be for some time. And this is work that's been carried out by the County Streets team and has proved to be very popular with the way that they've carried that out. Thank you, Chairman.
• Catherine Bart.
• Thank you, Catherine Powell has covered much of what I was about to say, but I think the emphasis is on the word was proactive approach to vegetation rather than reactive approach, and seeing those key routes that are being managed proactively would be really helpful. Thank you.
• George Potter.
• Yes, just to add very briefly to what has been said as a question, do I not as a statement. The cabinet, I've been trying to help residents with a particular road for a number of, for two years now in terms of an overgrown private hedge. Is the cabinet member aware that when contacting, for when residents and councillors contact highways, far too often response is simply that, the fact that even if the pavement has shrunk by a foot over the years, the response of highways is, well, it's not completely obstructing the footpath, so no action is required. And can we have a renewed look at this area to actually make sure that there is, as mentioned, that proactive monitoring of edges and actual action to ensure that footpaths are maintained at their original width, not one foot or two feet fewer than they originally were, due to vegetation being allowed to overgrow over the years.
• Cabinet member.
• Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you, all councillors, for your supplementaries. Councillor Powell, I think very simply I can say yes to pretty much everything that you have said there. Very happy to have a meeting on the data analysis. It will also be going to the select committee prior to cabinet as well, because it is a change to our policy. I'm very happy to supply all councillors with the key routes that regularly get checked and cleared. That's absolutely not a problem. And it's as if you were in the room yesterday as we were talking about a social media campaign, just about reminding residents on how they can do this reporting. So you will be seeing something on that shortly. Councillor Hawkins, I'm delighted that you're supporting the Feet First programme. It's hugely important, along with our bikeability about sort of educating young people about how to get to school safely. And I'm really pleased, and we're literally just about to announce it, that any child who's on free school meals will get free Feet First and bikeability training also. So that is a really important thing to allow that make sure that no one's left behind and that we're able to get every child to school safely. And Councillor Potter, you'll be pleased to hear that we do actually have new cards going out. At the moment, it's quite an old letter that goes out reminding people to cut their vegetation back. Clear, very easy to understand cards, educating people to say that they must cut it right back to their boundary. It can't overhang the pavement in any way. And that is a renewed effort that is being put out as we speak. Thank you.
• Question six is from Lance Spencer to Claire Curran. Lance, do you have any supplementary? Any other supplementary? Question seven is from Ebo Kinton to Matt Furness. Do you have a supplementary?
• Yes, Chair. I thank the cabinet member for his reply. And can I ask if he will arrange for his office to set up the site meeting, inviting divisional member, County Councillor Stephen McCormack, and any county and borough offices and business organisations that he thinks he might be able to assist with solutions.
• Any other supplementary? Can we remember?
• Yes.
• Question eight is from Nick Darby to David Lewis, Finance Resources. Do you have a supplementary?
• Thank you, Chair. Yes, I do. I have two supplementaries. In respect of assessment of claims, could the member please confirm that Ringway are not involved directly or indirectly in this assessment? And the second supplementary is in respect of payment of claims. The answer appears to indicate that this is split somehow between Surrey County Council and Ringway. Could the cabinet member please confirm what criteria are used to assess that? Thank you.
• Any other supplementary? Cabinet member?
• Yeah, thank you, Chair. I'm sorry, I have to take further advice from officers in terms of the involvement of Ringway in actually making the assessment of the claims. My understanding is that the split between Surrey and Ringway is to do with whether or not the pothole or whatever has previously been reported. I can tell you that in terms of the last financial year, there were 2,640 claims received. Of those claims, 118 were actually referred to Ringway, and 270 of those claims were settled by Surrey County Council. And in that financial year, the total compensation paid was 83,638 pounds. So that basically indicates that there is a split, and Ringway are picking up some of the costs. In terms of the exact involvement of Ringway in that assessment, as I say, I'll have to take further advice and get back to Councillor Darby. Thank you.
• Question nine from Robert Evans to Matt Furness. Do you have a supplementary?
• Thank you, Chair, and I seriously thank the cabinet member for engaging with me on this and for his thoughts. However, this puts the County Council in such a poor light where it's happened, where a new bit of pavement or road is laid, and very soon afterwards, it's dug up. It really does get a lot of negative feedback. Does he agree with me that, I mean, obviously, everyone accepts that emergencies happen, but where there are new connections, so these are exempt from the regulations about not digging up the new works. Does he agree with me that the utility companies ought to do more to find out what new connections ought to be in the pipeline? Well, that's probably not the best way to describe it, the pipeline, but in what new connections are planned or thought or anticipated, because I cannot overestimate, and colleagues are nodding at me as I'm speaking, to how awful it looks when a fortune has been spent on resurfacing something, and then with a matter of days, it's dug up. I wonder if there's more you can do on this. Thank you.
• Bob.
• Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Obviously, when there are utility works, very often, emergency ones happen. It's a nuisance for local people, but that is just the way life is, because the work needs to be done, and indeed, recently in Send, there was a sewer collapse, and Thames Water did the work very quickly, and indeed made the road good. However, just down the road from there, at the main junction in the middle of Send, Send Barnes Lane and Send Hill, frankly, the making good some two years ago by Thames Water resembles rather more rough terrain, and it's been like that, and indeed, I was told this was up to standard, at least until I drove a highways engineer over it, who did accept it was very rough as he juggled about in my car. Can the council do more to ensure that the utility companies make good, and did ask them, perhaps, to go back to the one at the junction of Send Hill and make that good after two years of terrible service and a great nuisance to the people of Send.
• Helen Clark.
• Thank you, Chair. I feel a bit boxed in, and so do my residents in Dorking Rule with the A24 diesel spinach, and also the SGN gas works on the A25, so we're quite boxed in, but my question is around utility works, and particularly regarding the point made about emergency works, and when something occurs like it has done this last week in my area on the A25, when the gas works have meant an emergency closure following finding a leak on the main infrastructure on the A25, my frustration and my residents' frustration is how we react to that with protecting our rural roads and country roads from huge HDVs who literally come off the main roads and try to use rural roads and get stuck, and our inability to get the contractor, in this case SGN, to put out appropriate, this is not suitable for HDV notices along those rural areas and stop this happening. I have got stories about HDVs being stuck, about residents not being able to get out of their homes. Our rural roads are small and winding, and they need to be protected, and I think we need to support Jonathan Hully's task group in making sure they understand, the utility companies understand that they cannot divert huge amounts of traffic onto rural roads, and they must be ready when they take emergency procedures to protect those. Thank you.
• Liz Bose.
• Thank you. Supporting Councillor Clack's comments just now, I would like to give you an update on the A25, a major road which is used by an awful lot of vehicles every day, and unfortunately the road was still closed this morning because they didn't have enough tarmac. The road was due to be reopened yesterday, but because unfortunately they had not estimated correctly to fill into small areas, the road continued to be closed, and that is obviously giving a lot of annoyance to a lot of people and making their lives very difficult to get to places such as the Surrey County Council meeting. Thank you.
• Cameron Member.
• Thank you, Chair. Councillor Evans, I think we all share your frustration, to be honest, around utility companies and their sweeping powers, I would say, under emergency and exemptions in order to do this. We are continuing to lobby, the County Council network is doing a lot, and we are, with Jonathan Hully, chairing the task force onto the utilities, really trying to get the utilities to understand what's not only the cost to the local economy, but also to the taxpayer for their works. It always depresses me when we resurface something, we put in the protections, and yet there is still an exemption for them to come in and dig it straight up. So I think we all just need to be seeking to our MPs, to the government, to say this legislation needs to change so that utilities don't get carte blanche on our highway. Councillor Hughes, I will pick it up with the team about Sendhil. That's absolutely, about the reinstatement. We do do a huge number of inspections. We've rapidly increased, almost doubled the number of inspections that we do against utilities, making sure that they are reinstated. As probably the officers have told you, it's a low bar for what they have to do. It has to be like for like, so we need to make sure the roads is in the best condition before they dig us up again. And Councillor Clark, I'm pleased to say that they have been out twice to check all the signed diversions. I'm afraid it's out of our control, anyone choosing not to follow the official diversion route. We will ask SGN or any other company again, just consider additional signage. We did get the business as open as usual signage up, which they neglected to put up at the beginning, but we will continue to look at rural areas. I've got ones in my own area as well where they continually ignore it and drive over wheat bridges. So it's an issue across the county. Thank you, Chair.
• Question 10 is from Steve McCormick to Matt Furness, Steve Dieba.
• Yeah, thank you, Chair. Thank you for the reply and response. Could the member please provide the mention of action plan along with the date on which the system is planned to be live and confirmation of the date when reports on available section 106 funds will be provided to all divisional members, please. Thank you, Chair.
• Any other supplementary? Chairman, member.
• Thank you, Chair. Yes, quite happily, we'll send in writing what the proposed plan is. I can tell you that we do have over 40 million pounds in section 106 that we do need to spend across the county. This is being looked at by the teams in order to deliver other areas, such as local highway schemes, which members may want to put additional money towards as well. So as soon as we've got the information, we will share it with members.
• Question 11 is from Mark Sugden to Claire Curran. Mark Sugden, do you have a supplementary?
• Yes, please, Chairman. I thank the cabinet member for the response and I just had a supplementary question related to response A, where it notes that inquiries have been made to the school admissions team on this particular matter. Would it be possible for the cabinet member to outline how many queries have been made to the school admissions team at the moment? And if possible, any queries that have come in related to my County Council division. Thank you.
• Any other supplementary? Cabinet member.
• Thank you, Chairman. I can certainly ask the admissions team whether they would be able to divulge that information to reasons of confidentiality, I couldn't say. If it is helpful to the member who's asked the question, certainly I have received three inquiries from members of my own, from residents in my own division on this matter. I have referred them all to the admissions team. Obviously, I don't know how, whether the member has received any inquiries himself or whether they will have inquired directly to the admissions team. But I would recommend to any member who gets inquiries from residents that they should call the admissions team as a matter of urgency, who will be able to give them advice as to making an application for their child either now or for next September or in the next admissions round in the autumn. Thank you, Chairman.
• Question 12 is from the voice chair to Natalie Bramble, voice chair.
• Can I thank Councillor Bramble very much for a very helpful answer? And can I encourage her to put her well-known determination behind item C? It is quite striking, as Mr. Heath and I discovered when we went on the site visit with the executive director, that the edge of Norbury Park is very vulnerable and anything you can do to encourage the various agencies to coordinate and work on it, on preventing fly tipping in that area, CCTV on the road, I think that would be greatly appreciated.
• Any other supplementary? Cabinet member.
• Thank you, Chairman. I'd like to thank the vice chairman for his supplementary question. Yes, I do think actually that CCTV is probably the answer here. Bearing in mind the residents of the area, I don't know how long it might remain in situ, but I will, with my usual determination, try and get this done for you. Thank you.
• Question 13 is from Catherine Powell to Matt Furness. Do you have a supplementary?
• Yes, please, Chair. I'd like to thank the cabinet member for his response and for advising that no PCNs have so far been issued. Please can I ask that the cabinet member advises how many hours in June the HGV enforcement camera was actually in use on the Upper Hale Road, and if any warning letters were actually issued. Thank you, Chair.
• Yes, Robert.
• Thank you. I'm very interested in this question because it's an issue that blights part of my electoral division. If these cameras are going to be installed, who is going to monitor the cameras? And does the cabinet member accept that for many companies they just write off the odd 70 pound fine as collateral damage and don't really bother about it because the option of going around a longer way or a different route would be worse or more expensive to them?
• Any other supplementary? Can I ask Deputy Cabinet Member for high velocity back to respond, please?
• Thank you, Silly, both for those questions. Very good questions there. I will need to come back to you on that after consulting offices, particularly on the deterrent point as well. I mean, we can look at levels of fines and things like that, but as Councillor Evans says, that may not be the full picture. So I'll have a chat with officers and come back to you in writing. Thanks. And feel free to email me as well if you like.
• We've only got a limited time left, so can I ask members to be brief, please? Question 14 is from Eva Kinton to Claire Curran. Do you have a supplementary, sir?
• Yeah, I'm delighted with the cabinet member's response and thank her for agreeing to this change of policy. That said, I'd also like her plan to heighten the tension in her response by using 376 words to finally say yes. Thank you very much.
• Cabinet Member. Cabinet Member. Question 15 from Nick Darby to Matt Furness. Nick, do you have a?
• Thank you, I have one supplementary. If I, I may be mistaken on this, in which case I stand to be corrected, but my understanding looking at or being told about the list of those who were consulted is that for some extraordinary reason, it doesn't include members. Am I wrong?
• Can I ask the Deputy Cabinet Member for IFSD back to Martha to respond?
• Sorry, Mr. Chairman. Can I get back to the member on that, please? Thank you.
• Question 16 from Robert Evans to Claire Curran. Do you have a supplementary?
• Very briefly, thank you, Chair. I'm pleased there's only 20 schools that are having to close for polling stations. Can I ask the cabinet member, do those schools concerned then have to put an extra day on the end of the term to compensate for closing? And does she agree with me that weekend voting would get round this?
• Yes, again. (audience laughing) Maybe it's we, like the French. The answer is I don't know the answer to the first part of that question. I'd have to find out, which I will do.
• Question 17 from Steve Cormack. Do you have a supplementary? Oh, thank you. Any other supplementary? Question 18 from Mark Sugden to Matt Furness. Do you have a supplementary?
• Yes, I do. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I have a couple of supplementaries. I'm a little bit confused by the answer at the end of the response here. I would have thought that by now, given that residents have been complaining about this road since at least 2009, that we would have determined whether fine milling was an appropriate answer or not. And it comments that if fine milling is appropriate, it will be added to the provisional program. But the fact is, fine milling is down on the horizon sheet as the provisional program. Secondly, there is a further point about if fine milling is not appropriate, other options will be considered and a revised timescale for the works will be communicated. I find that interesting because there is no original timescale communicated in the first place. So that is my first question. I am confused by elements of that answer. Second thing, I would like to thank highways who have been to this road over the last three to four weeks to do some asphalt repairs. And I know in most instances that residents, sorry, that highways might not close the road, but this is causing significant problems given that the only entrance backs on to the A309 Kingston bypass and cars are actually because highways are turning up with no advance notice and cars are parked and parts of the road are combed up. Having to remain on a major dangerous highway. So I understand that highways are going back next week to do some more works. Could I ask that advance notice is given to residents in those roads so they can keep their cars off the road, the works can be done and to ensure there's no safety risks. Thank you.
• John Tennessy.
• Thank you and thank you Mark for your question too. I feel that on the concrete roads, it feels like something we haven't properly adjusted. I wonder if it's possible to feedback as to what best practice is in this area. Not in terms of what you do in terms of a future whole resurfacing or reconstruction, but the way in which you do the basic exercises before that, whether it's a pothole or a failed joint on a concrete road. 'Cause it doesn't feel that these roads are maintained as well as our tarmac roads in Surrey.
• Cameron member.
• Thank you chair and thank you for the supplementary questions, Councillor Sugden. Fine milling is actually a relatively new treatment. It's only been actually used for the past few years. Hence why nine years ago, it wouldn't have been put as a solution. Sadly, we were still applying asphalt to concrete nine years ago. That doesn't work and we have stopped doing that. So I will speak to the team about this particular road for you. As you can see, it is structurally sound. It might not look very good, but it is structurally sound. Hence why it has not been prioritized at this point in time. If fine milling because it is about three to four times the price is not suitable for the road, they will look at other options for you. We will communicate with you and the residents on that. On your second point, I will ask for, I will double check what advance notice has been given to residents. Before all works, we do ask residents with a letter or a leaflet to keep their cars parked on their drive if possible and not on the road or move it where we're doing the works. We will double check in advance of your works next week. Councillor Essex, as I said, concrete roads are actually pretty structurally sound. Hence they do not need a lot of work compared with tarmac ones, which are more flexible. A lot of the tarmac ones have also been built on sand in Surrey, not on a properly constructed base. Hence why we're having to go and reconstruct tarmac ones, particularly Waverley and Guildford, which when it was under the previous agency agreements were not built properly to standards as we would expect today. So concrete roads do get a lot of attention, just as much as the tarmac, but they do require less maintenance due to the composition of the material. Thank you, Chair.
• Question 19 from Catherine Powell to Claire Cameron. Catherine, do you have a?
• Yes, thank you, Chair. I'd like to thank the cabinet member for her response. Given that a quarter of children in Surrey's children's homes are not in school and are receiving alternative provision for an average of only nine hours a week at an average cost of in excess of 50 pounds per hour, I'm very glad that they are work, the staff in Surrey's children's homes are being involved in the development of a flexible model for alternative provision. Please can the cabinet member advise when she will be in a position to share the proposed flexible model?
• Any other supplementary?
• Thank you, Chairman. The member is probably aware that the following, following work done at select committee and recommendations made by select committee on the subject of alternative provision generally and a specific recommendation in the Ofsted CQC inspection report after the system inspection last year, there was a specific recommendation around the delivery of alternative provision. The service is working very hard at the moment, having developed the new dynamic purchasing system for alternative provision and now looking very closely at the delivery of that provision and the children who receive it. I know that select committee is due to receive an updated report on this item, I think in the autumn, and I would expect that we would be in a position to roll this piece of information into that report for the scrutiny by the select committee at that meeting, if that would be acceptable. Thank you, Chairman.
• Question 20 from Eva Kinton to Claire Curran. Do you have a supplement?
• Yes, I'm disappointed that the cabinet member sees Surrey County Council's role in the recruitment and retention of teachers as limited to developing strategies and providing professional development. Does she agree with me that the following responsibilities of children's services all impact on how challenging the role of the teacher can be and will likely impact on retention and potentially recruitment, and if we resolve them, then for many teachers, their daily work experience will greatly improve. I refer to delays in EHCPs resulting in delay in appropriate support being put in place in schools for children, a lack of specialist provision, meeting children are being left on the role of schools which cannot meet their needs, and again, placing first the pressures on teachers and teachers and support staff being physically attacked by children with severe dysregulation because they're not in the right setting.
• Mr. Natick.
• Thank you. The answers suggest that the reduction in teachers is due to teachers leaving the profession, but does that not just leave us with some empty classes with no teachers in? Is the reduction in teachers also connected to funding, and how does the number of teaching assistants compare? My concern is that it's all very well talked, saying teachers leaving the profession, but do we know what the situation with regard to funding for schools is and whether they have sufficient funding to employ the number of teachers and teaching assistants they need?
• The question time now ends because we're out of time. If you've got any supplementaries to do on the remaining questions, please take it up with a relevant cabinet member. Item seven is the statement by members. Sorry, for the cabinet. Yeah. Can you respond to that question?
• Thank you, Chairman. I agree, actually, with the statements made by both of the members who have raised supplementary questions. When I visit schools, I often hear that the financial challenge that schools are facing is making it difficult. They are particularly laying off learning and support assistance, which puts pressure on frontline teaching staff. And I also know from speaking to school leaders that recruitment and retention of school staff, including teaching and support staff, is one of the most acute challenges that they face. I've thoroughly recognized the scenario that Councillor Kington has outlined in the challenges that have come about from children whose needs have not correctly been met who are in mainstream schools. And I also accept from what Councillor Essex has said about the financial challenges making it difficult for schools to be fully staffed. However, I take great comfort in the fact that the new government is bringing in 6,500 or 65,000 new teachers, which will, of course, make the situation far better for our mainstream schools. And I only hope that they will be able to review funding for our schools, which is obviously not in the control of this council, to make schools, to give them the resources that they absolutely need to give our children and young people the very best start in life. Thank you, Chairman.
• I'm now moving on to the cabinet and deputy cabinet member briefings. Members, do you have any comments, questions on cabinet member and deputy cabinet member briefings? If you wish to speak, please make it clear which cabinet member or deputy cabinet member briefing you are responding to. Councillor Clack.
• Thank you, Chair. My question is for the cabinet member for environment. I'm pleased to see in her statement that she refers to 23 rural businesses receiving grants through the Rural Prosperity Fund, with a further 12 applications being assessed as a total of 604,000 pounds from the 1.2 million budget. And I wonder whether she would be able to let me know who those receivers were, please.
• Thank you, Chair. I would appreciate it if Councillor Deach could commit to providing a member development session on Hello Lamp Post, as his briefing was the first I'd heard of it, and all I've really been able to ascertain is it's an AI system. Thank you.
• Jonathan Essex.
• Thank you, just a question to Paul Deach on the new communication strategy. It's got a series of priorities, and it says they all feed into the cross-cutting themes which in the main strategy for Surrey County Council, including the greener future, but the bullet points don't seem to focus on climate or environment in their own right. Will he agree with me that it's concerning that this approach is being taken, and commit that in mainstreaming, if you like, climate, environment, greener futures within these bullet points, they won't be left behind?
• Can I ask the Cabinet Member for Environment, Risahe, could you please respond to the first?
• Yeah, I mean, we've had many conversations on this, Jonathan, and we intend to carry on sort of pursuing our goals, and making sure we do link all of it in, yes. There's no doubt about that.
• Oh, I thought I was answering his question.
• No, it was Helen, Helen.
• Remind me if your question happened.
• There was 23 rural businesses.
• The rural business point.
• Could you let me have a list of who received the Rural Business Awards?
• Oh yeah, easily, yeah. I could do that for you in literally five minutes. I've got it on my computer.
• Thank you.
• Mr. Paul Deach, you've got the two last two.
• So I think Marisa's answered your question. No? Well, I'll talk to Marisa about that. It is an environmental.
• May I just repeat the question? The question was about the 2024-25 communication strategy which has a series of targets which don't include any focused on climate and environment. And my concern is that that means that we aren't targeting that in our communications, and people won't get that coming through loud and clear if it's something that these targets are heading towards rather than actually promoting our work in these areas too. It's about the 2024-25 communication strategy, not the work for the environment department.
• Well, I mean, we've sort of put that communication stuff into the greener futures board, Jonathan, to look at over a kind of broader spectrum to look at and click it into the behaviour change work. So whilst it's not in there, it is a piece of work that's being done collaboratively through that section. It's certainly not forgotten about.
• Yeah, and to Catherine Powell's question, yes, absolutely. I received the briefing on that last week, actually. It's really innovative stuff. It's quite exciting. But yeah, absolutely, we can get a briefing to all members on the Hello Land post. Thank you.
• Item seven, statement by members on local issues. I received notice of three statements from members. There is a time limit of two minutes per statement, and these are put without discussion or reply. I'll call Nick Darby to make a short personal statement.
• Thank you, Chair. Highway markings, I will, because I need to be brief, I will mention a number of roads in or around the Dittons, which seem not to be included in any way on the list we've recently been given. In each case, I take the view that these are dangerous. They need immediate attention, and so here is my list. The Silly Isles roundabout, everyone, I'm sure, most members will know that. The lane markings have disappeared. Those cycling or going on motorbikes go very much sort of head in hands to even use it, and some, many don't at all. It needs urgent attention. The Imbercourt roundabout, which is down Hampton Court Way, it appears this is the only road where the Dittons appears to have work to be done, but there is also a roundabout there where the keep clear markings are missing, causing daily jams in both directions. By attempts, there is a short section marked no entry, or it should be marked no entry. In days gone by, there was a no entry sign painted on the road. It has disappeared. People ignore it, including not just private vehicles, but police cars. Again, it's dangerous. It's also a bus route. At the end of that road, the junction of Speer Road and Summer Road, there is a mini roundabout. The marking's completely gone. Again, it is a bus route, and people are tending to drive straight through without any consideration. And the last one, Effingham Road, on the boundaries of Long Ditton and Thames Ditton, a bus stop, yellow markings put in some years ago, those have now disappeared. I think it's reasonable that the Dittons should have equal treatment to other areas of the county, and I am astonished that this has not been done. I have reported via the usual channels, the email channels and to officers, all of these on several occasions. It seems we are being ignored. Thank you.
• Second statement is from Buddy Virgent, to make a short personal statement, Buddy.
• Thank you, Chairman. I'm delighted to stand before you today to acknowledge and commend the exceptional initiative led by the Lower Sombury Resident Association and Friends of Sombury Park. The Lower Sombury Hedgehog Project, launched by this year, is a remarkable example of a community-driven effort to address the impact of community-driven efforts to address the alarming decline in our local hedgehog population. This initiative, which I was proud to support through last year's funding for a hedgehog survey using my Surrey County Council's member allocation, aims to create a hedgehog-friendly community by improving their habitats and increasing their numbers. The project has already gained visibility through digital and printed media channels in Spelthorne. Hedgehog are facing severe threats across the UK due to habitat loss and fragmentation. We can make a significant impact by making small adjustments in our gardens. Simple actions, such as creating a small hole in fences and walls, can establish vital hedgehog highways that enable these creatures to forge and mate, thereby boasting their chances of survival. Our community is ideally positioned to support this project with many homes featuring large, interconnected gardens that can serve as extensive hedgehog habitats. By participating, lodging, siting, and making our gardens more hedgehog-friendly, we can contribute to a meaningful increase in their population. The project aims to spread this message through schools, neighbourhood watch groups, and local organisations. It is an excellent educational tool for residents and a fantastic opportunity for residents to unite for a common cause. The dedicated Facebook page and resources on the Lost Lab website provided all this necessary information to get involved. May I ask members in this chamber to join me in appreciating the efforts of the Lower Sump Resident Association and Friends of Sump Reap Park. Let's support this initiative and consider implementing similar projects in your division. Thank you. (audience applauding)
• I'll call Joanne Sexton to make a personal statement.
• Thank you, Chair. Parents in my division and Spelthorn with children and young people who have special educational needs and disabilities sent were appalled that Surrey received an honour in the King's Birthdays Honours List. Many have shared their struggles with me, particularly the fight for their children's education, despite clear legislation meant to support them. Surrey County Council often makes this process painful, costly, and heartbreaking. Parents should not have to pay for therapy and legal fees to secure a school place, especially when experience shows that parents win 97% of their cases, highlighting the council's systemic failure to comply within the law. Even after securing a school place, many parents still continue to fight for appropriate transport and to keep their children in school every three years. While Surrey blames national issues, over 350 councils in England have fewer than 50 complaints annually, whereas Surrey and Kent have the highest, with over 150 complaints each year. This year alone, Surrey have paid over 500,000 in compensation for its failures. The tragic deaths of Oscar Nash in 2020 and Jen Bridges in 2023, with coroners noting Surrey's failures in their care, underscore the severity of the issue. Parents and carers in my division in Spelfon are desperate for Surrey County Council to comply with legislation and support their children properly. They want their voices heard. Our children's futures should not depend on their parents and carers facing a continual fight against the council that fails to meet its legal and moral obligations. Thank you, Chair. (audience applauding)
• Item eight is the original motions. I have received no notice of original motions. We move on to item nine, scrutiny annual report 2023-24, pages 45 to 54 of the agenda. I call the chair of select committee, chair and vice chairs group, Hazel Watson, to introduce the report.
• Thank you, Chairman. I'm delighted to present the annual report on scrutiny for 2023-24. I'm pleased to report that scrutiny has progressed from strength to strength over the last year. There are many examples of excellent work by all four of the select committees, of which we should all be proud. All four of the select committees have included a mix of pre-decision scrutiny, policy development and performance updates. The select committees have worked hard, including a total of 21 public meetings, to consider 72 substantive agenda items. In addition, three private witness sessions were held with external organizations and campaign groups, the outcomes of which were published and discussed in public by the cabinet. It is pleasing to note that the number of scrutiny in witness sessions increased by 14% on last year. The last annual scrutiny report set an objective to broaden the scope of scrutiny methods to include meetings in the community, increased use of data and novel ways of working. Select committees responded to this by holding various task and finish groups and member visits, which provided greater breadth and depth to their work. Select committees continue to provide meaningful and constructive scrutiny input. The committees have demonstrated that they provide added value by making numerous recommendations which have been implemented by the council. So what is the recipe for this success? Firstly, the select committees genuinely want to do the best for Surrey residents. They work in a cross-party way, they set their own agendas, and they have good questioning skills and research, commitment, enthusiasm, dedication, teamwork within the committees and working with officers. Great officer support, whether democratic services or by officers answering questions. And last but not least, the support of the leader of the council for scrutiny. The select committees want to perform even better by providing early input to the 2025/26 budget, starting now, and a finance and budget training session was run by Ed Hammond, who's the deputy chief executive of the Centre for Governance and Scrutiny, which was held yesterday and helped us move forward on that. He was impressed that select committees were being involved with the budget scrutiny at such an early stage compared with many other councils. We also plan to run a training session on how to run effective task and finish groups, and I anticipate that even more progress will be made in the coming year by these select committees. And finally, I request the council to support the recommendations contained in the report. Thank you, chairman.
• The item's open for debate. Any debate? Catherine Powell.
• I'd like to start by thanking all members of the select committees for their work, and I would particularly like to thank the members of the Children's Families Lifelong Learning Select Committee for the enormous amount of work and analysis they did to argue for the increase in the budget envelope of 30 million and for the leaders' support for this. Without their hard work and dedication, this would not have happened. I would also like to thank the members of the Children's Select Committee for joining me in the fight to get the community-based play and leisure schemes for children with special educational needs and disabilities that lost funding in '23-'24 budget reinstated, and to the leader and the cabinet members' support for this. It is, however, disappointing that despite reassurances that this would be the case, it is clear from the cabinet papers last month that whilst additional funding has gone into these services, the schemes that have been lost have not been reinstated as promised, and in fact, the funding has been allocated to completely different parts of these services. So whilst the hours have been broadly reinstated, those that lost their provision will not get it back, and there is nothing to address waiting lists. These schemes allow children and young people to relax and spend time in a safe place with friends and allow their families and carers to have some respite from their caring responsibilities and spend time with other children and relatives. I truly hope that critical initiatives such as the SEND capital programme and the roll-out of the foster carers' charter will be effectively scrutinised over the coming year, and there will be good support from officers for transparent and open sharing of information to support that scrutiny, leading to better outcomes from all perspectives. Thank you, Chair.
• I understand that the chairman of adults and social health select committee, Trevor Hogg, wishes to speak on recommendation to Trevor.
• Thank you very much, Chair. Yeah, NHS England have decided to move to the primary treatment centre for paediatric cancer care from the Royal Marsden, which currently works with the Institute for Cancer Research and St George's TUTI, and they're going to transfer the service to the Evelina Hospital in central London. The decision on primary treatment centre location was made between competing proposals from the Evelina and from St George's TUTI. This change risks damage to the level of care given. Families will be faced with travelling from all over Surrey into the centre of London with seriously ill children with less opportunity to support their children, significantly higher costs and lesser family accommodation than that proposed by St George's. From a medical point of view, the Evelina currently does not provide serious paediatric cancer care and will still require ambulance transfers between multiple centres when the principal reason given for the change was a reduction of the risk in ambulance transfers. The South West London and Surrey Joint Health Overview Select Committee, made up of representatives from Surrey, Merton, Kingston, Croydon, Sutton, Richmond and Wandsworth, are unanimously agreed that the decision NHS England made is damaging to our health services. And I therefore ask you to support recommendation two and the submission of the joint request from the Secretary of State to consider a call-in of the NHS England decision. David Harmer. Thank you, Chairman, yes. I'd just like to follow on from what Councillor Watson said about the meeting yesterday - it was a Teams meeting, by the way, so anybody could have joined in pretty well - on financial and specifically budget scrutiny, which I think ought to be built into the arrangements next year following the County Councillor elections of next year, should be built into the training programme so that advantage could be taken. Pretty well the same session, I would say, as we received yesterday. And, you know, you might be surprised that I would say that, having been involved in such things for many years at this council, I thought it was a brilliant session. Any more debate? The recommendations are on pages 45 of your agenda and are that the council, one, notes the summary of scrutiny activity provided and the key areas of impact highlighted in the report, paragraph 10 to 32. Number two, notes the work of the South-West London and Surrey Joint Health Overbeing Scrutiny Committee, paragraph 25, and endorses the report in 10 to 32. Number three, notes the work of the South-West London and Surrey Joint Health Overbeing Scrutiny Committee, paragraph 25, and endorses the decision to submit a joint request to the Secretary of State to consider a call-in. Three, further notes that the constitution will be updated to take account of changes to health, scrutiny legislation and updated statutory guidance, which removes local authority powers of referral to the Secretary of State, replacing them with the current system calling in a proposal via call-in request form. And four, supports the areas of improvement identified by the report, paragraph 33 to 34. Are we agreed, please? Agreed. Item 10 is the Member Development Strategy Review, 2024, pages 55 to 90 of your agenda. I call the chairman of the Member Development Strategy Group, David Lewis Cobham, to introduce the report. Thank you, Chair. I was appointed as chair of the Member Development Steering Group at the start of the new municipal year. And my predecessor was Councillor Mark Nuti, and I'm sure that you would all join me this morning in thanking Mark for the work that he did as chair of the Steering Group. It's a cross-party member group and it's been working with officers to review and update the existing Member Development Strategy. And this is to ensure that that strategy aligns with our organisational priorities and supports the needs of elected members for the next two years. So the updated strategy, which is before you today, will cover the remainder of the current term for existing members, as well as the first year of the new municipal year. The first year following the elections in May '25. The induction plan to '25, therefore, formed an important part of the updates that have been made to the strategy. Earlier this year, all members were offered an opportunity of a one-to-one meeting with a senior officer from Democratic Services, and the feedback that was received from these conversations has been fed into the work to update the strategy. Insights on what approaches work best for members and what training opportunities they would like to see this year, and as part of the '25 induction, were the result of these conversations and these meetings. Specific skills were identified as being key for members. For example, IT and digital skills, EDI, and member-officer relationships, and provision for these have been specifically included in the revised strategy. We also looked at the possibility of providing external support for members, for example, through the LGA, and that also has been included where relevant. Just before I finish, I'd just like to update members on a regional roundtable meeting that I attended with other county authorities in the southeast, also attended by the member services manager, to discuss member development. It was very useful to hear how the other authorities approach their member development, their peer counselor campaigns, and their plans for member inductions following the elections next year. Other authorities were very keen to hear about how we gather training feedback from members in Surrey, and we discovered that many of the challenges that we face are also, not surprisingly, faced by the other authorities. They weren't unique to us. It was also helpful to share best practice with each other, and there were several ideas that came out of that session, which we're going to take away, discuss as a member development group, and I'm sure will be considered for action in the future. So, Chair, I'd like to propose that the updated member development strategy 2024, and the various appendices attached to it, be approved by the council. Thank you.
• The item is open for debate. Any debate? Any members? The recommendations are on pages 56 of your agenda, and is that the revised member development strategy and its appendices are approved by the council. Are we agreed?
• Agreed.
• Item 11 is amendments to the constitution, pages 91 to 98 of the agenda. I note the proposed changes to part 3 and 4 of the constitution. The item is open for debate. No debate. Recommendations are on pages 92 of your agenda, and are that the amendments to part 3, section 3, part 3a of the constitution has set out in appendix 1 of this report be approved. B, that the amendments to part 4 of the constitution has set out in annex 2 of this report be approved. Are we agreed?
• Agreed.
• Report of the cabinet, pages 5 to 10 of the first supplementary agenda. I call the leader to present the report of the meeting of the cabinet held on the 25th, June 2024.
• Thank you, Chair. I beg to move the report of cabinet held, as you say, on the 20th of June, 2024.
• Recommendations on policy framework developments. Call paragraph A, youth justice plan. The cabinet recommends that county council approves the 2024-2425 youth justice plan. Are we agreed?
• Agreed.
• Call paragraph B, the school organisation plan 2024, that the cabinet recommend that the county council approves the school organisation plan 2024. Are we agreed?
• Agreed.
• Reports for information discussion, 25th of June, 2024, are called paragraph C and E. Call paragraph C, delivering for survey through strategic partnerships. Call paragraph D, special educational needs and disabilities sent an alternative provision AP capital programmes and specialist sufficiency to 2031-32. Call paragraph E, 2023-24, out turned financial report. I call paragraph F, quarterly report on decision taken under special urgency arrangements, 14th of May, 2024, 2nd of July, 2024. The cabinet recommends that the county council notes that there has been no urgent discussion, decision since the last cabinet reports to the council. Following discussion on the above, the motion is that the report of the meeting of the cabinet held on the 20th of June, 2024 be adopted. Are we agreed?
• Agreed.
• Item 13, minutes of the cabinet meeting, pages five to 20 of the second supplementary agenda. I now turn to the final item of the agenda today, and no notification to make statement question when the minute has been received. That concludes the meeting, thank you members. Members of your front team are in the council chamber at the end of the meeting, so please do speak with them to discuss any current or future applications. As always, lunch have been provided in the committee room For those of you who have ordered them, please follow staff instruction. Thank you.