Transcript

Okay, no, it's gone. Right, good afternoon and welcome to the meeting of the Cabinet of Surrey County Council at Woodhatch Place on the 28th of January, 2025. We have got actually quite a packed agenda today, not least of all because we will be considering the budget, budget for 25-26 with a recommendation to go to full council in a couple of weeks' time, or maybe next week, but we will set out the proposed, you know, the proposals around how we balance the budget in the light of significant challenges in terms of demand and cost of delivery and so on, but I'll expand on that in more detail when we get to that item. And we also have a referred item from full council as well to debate amongst other things. So, I can't see there are any members of the public. Yeah, no, I was just going to read the fire alarm for the fire test, which I don't think will apply to online. So, but can I just welcome those that are here officers and indeed members, as I said, there are no fire drills expected, so if the alarm does go off, please exit in the usual way to the top car park. Social media you can use, provided it doesn't interfere with the smooth running, hopefully, of the meeting. It is being webcast live, and it is indeed open to the public to view. So, I think that we will go, I don't know if there's anything else from a housekeeping perspective. So, I'll first of all just do a roll call, and perhaps if you can just, when responding, just explain your portfolio, starting with Claire Cutler. Thank you. Hello, good afternoon. I'm Claire Curran. I'm the Cabinet Member for Children, Families, and Lifelong Learning. David Lewis. Thank you, Leader. Good afternoon. David Lewis, Cabinet Member for Finance and Resources. Thank you. Denise Turner-Stuart. Good afternoon. Denise Turner-Stuart, Cabinet Member for Customer Communities and Deputy Leader. And Jonathan Hulley. Good afternoon. Jonathan Hulley, Deputy Cabinet Member of Strategic Highways. Thank you. Kevin Dieners. Yes, good afternoon. Kevin Dieners, Cabinet Member for Fire and Rescue and Resilience. And I'm looking forward to Mark's latest update, which I believe is Lego and Kazoo Day. It's not National Groundhog Day. Mark, what day are we celebrating? Good afternoon, everyone. Well, I was going to do Blueberry Pancake Day, or National Daycation Day, but I'm not. And he's right, it is Lego Day, and I thought about how we could work that into building blocks and building bricks and our way forward. But I thought, no, no, no, there's a much better one than that. So today is Speak Up and Succeed Day. So I thought it was more apps for us as councillors. And I thought just on this day in 1939, W.B. Yeats died. But he did say something which I think we could all take away today, and that is, think like a wise man, but communicate in the language of the people. If nothing else, we should take that away today. My name's Mark Newsy. I'm cabinet member for health. I'm here all day. And just to be fair, there are other games available other than Lego, if you wish to indulge in them. Thank you, Mark. Marissa Heath. Thank you. I cannot follow on from that, so I'll simply say Marissa Heath, cabinet member for environment. Thank you, Matt Furness. Thank you, Lisa. Matt Furness, cabinet member for highways, transport and economic growth. And Maureen Atterwell. Good afternoon, everyone. Maureen Atterwell, deputy cabinet member for children and families and lifelong learning. Thank you, Natalie Bramhall. Thank you, Leader. Good afternoon. Natalie Bramhall, cabinet member for property, waste and infrastructure. And Paul Deitch. Good afternoon. I'm Paul Deitch, deputy cabinet member to the leader of the council. Sinead Mooney. Good afternoon. Sinead Mooney, cabinet member for adult social care. Thank you. And lastly, Steve Bax. Thank you, Leader. Steve Bax, deputy cabinet member for highways. I should point out that where there is a vote on an item, as in accordance with our constitution, the deputy cabinet members do not have a vote. So they perhaps remind you at the time. So when they don't put their hand up, it is for that reason and none other. Okay. Thank you, then. Item two, minutes of the previous meeting, which were meetings, which were held on the 17th of December, 2024, and the 8th of January, 2025. Are those minutes agreed? Thank you. Does any member of the cabinet have any particular interest to declare in relation to the items on today's agenda? No, thank you very much. Item four, then, starting with members' questions. There's one question here from Trevor Hulke, chair of the select committee. Trevor. Thank you, Leader. With regards to the question, I'd like to thank the cabinet member for his very complete and thorough answer as to the future of Cambly Fire Station. I do have a supplementary question. In the event that Cambly Fire Station is not fully staffed due to issues such as illness or other staff absence, can you confirm that there is sufficient coverage to maintain the planned response times to emergencies? Thank you, thank you for that supplementary. And, I mean, Surrey Fire and Rescue is dedicating to serving the entire county of Surrey and provides a response service based on that principle. The approach ensures that all emergencies receive an appropriate response to incidents based on risk, regardless of their location within the county. The target is to have 16 fire engines available at night and 20 available during the day. This provides us with sufficient coverage to meet our response time average or within 10 minutes to a critical incident. So, Frontline Appliances, fire engines in old terms, has a base fire station where the vehicle and equipment are stored. The firefighters start and then their shift from. There are no station grounds, which is an old term. When we respond to an emergency incident, we send the nearest and the quickest Frontline Appliance based upon the needs of that incident. Frontline Appliances are moving around the county throughout any given shift. The expert control room staff who answer the 999 calls and duty commanders and officers utilise specialist software. And, I think you've seen this before, it's a dynamic cover tool. This allows the service to move staff and Frontline Appliances around the county to meet the risks. And that's throughout Surrey. This is how Surrey Fire and Rescue has operated for many years. When delivering prevention and protection activities in their local area, this is generally undertaken by the local firefighters or central specialist teams. And it's targeted using local population and premise intelligence, prioritising those most vulnerable to fire and other emergencies. I'm pleased to say that we are developing a gamification version of the dynamic cover tool, which will allow us to better show members and residents how Surrey Fire and Rescue service operates. And I'll be happy to bring this tool to some colleagues from the Surrey Fire and Rescue to a members development session. And they can then take part in how do we crew our vehicles. So, it would be a bit of an exercise for you. This tool will be used during the implementation and understanding and trusting the service through this community risk management plan process that we're going through. So, hopefully, that's quite a long answer, but it does show you, you know, the bits that you, I think, you're trying to probe. Thank you for an incredibly comprehensive answer. And hopefully, that will now put the rumours and misinformation that's been going around to rest. And can I just finish off? The rumours and the scaremongering that's being done by certain people on Facebook, which is totally inappropriate to wiring in members of the public unnecessarily. Thank you. Okay. Thank you. And, of course, at item 9, we will be talking about the community risk management plan for 2025-30. So, we'll probably touch on some of those sorts of issues then. So, thank you very much. We'll then move to the public questions. And the first question was from Ellen Nicholson, who I can see online. So, Ms Nicholson, do you have any supplementary question? Thank you. Yes, I do. And thank you. Thank you to the portfolio holders, both of them, who gave me such a comprehensive answer. My supplementary question is specific. It's around Heathside Care Home, which is in Coley Avenue in Woking. And really, I'm looking for an answer to the situation for the care home. And it's been closed for a number of years. I believe it's about three years now. And I've been looking for an answer as to what will be happening with the site. I'm not sure whether that can actually specifically be answered in this meeting today. But I'd be happy if I had a follow-up answer to that as well. Thank you. Okay. Thank you very much. Natalie Bramble, this is in your area, well, and Sinead. So, are you able to give any indication today? Yes, of course, Leader. Thank you. In regard to the Heathside Care Home in Woking, our Land and Property Department continue to undertake a strategic review of the County Council's assets to identify sites that may be used to deliver services. The Heathside site is part of this review. And a decision on its future use with business case will be presented to Cabinet at an appropriate time in the future. Thank you. Thank you, Leader. In addition to that as well, if I could just add that from the adult social care perspective, there is the exploration of opportunities for developing sites, potentially including this site, for alternative adult social care services. And it has been agreed that any alternative use of site will be prioritized in the context of our adult social care accommodation with care and support strategy, now known as Right Homes and Right Support Strategy. I'm happy to offer the questioner an opportunity to catch up and to keep her updated on the progress of this site. I know that she has a keen eye on this location and it's right for that as well. And so I'm happy to extend that off outside the Cabinet. And thank you. And it will be good to get to a landing, you know, as soon as we can in terms of the future. So is that satisfactory that Sinead Mooney will stay in touch and say we'll do what we can to try and get an early resolution of the future purpose of the site? Yes, thank you. Thank you. Thank you very much, Councillor Mooney. I will kind of email you and I appreciate the response to stay in touch as well. Thank you for that. OK, thank you very much. The next question actually was submitted by Lee and David Chambers, but I think there's a supplementary question, which I think Anna Sutherland, you're going to ask on their behalf. Thank you. That's correct. Hi, everyone. Thank you, Claire, for your response to Dr. Chambers' question. Her supplementary question is if it is obvious that due consideration has not been given to all the evidence submitted in cases where a family wish to bring a judicial review, at what stage will Surrey consider alternative dispute resolution? Yes, thank you, Anna, for your supplementary question. So the process for a family, clearly, who don't agree with a decision taken by the local authority lies in pursuing this through the SEND tribunal system. But before families get to that stage, we always seek to engage in mediation formally and informally. You know that there is a formal route for that. There is also a more informal route that we have been working through with our dispute resolution officers, which are a more informal route, but do not prevent a family pursuing their tribunal process. As I said, our tribunal resolution team have been tremendously successful in working in a relational way with families, and they will always take into consideration additional information that the family wishes to present. I hope that's helpful and answers the question. Claire, I'm sorry, that doesn't answer the question, because this is not about a tribunal decision. This is about a process where a family feel that the correct procedures haven't been followed. So judicial review is the correct legal route for this family, not tribunal. I'm sorry, Leader, I don't, obviously, judicial review is a legal process. It involves courts and legal representation, and I'm not qualified to comment on that. Okay, well, we'll pick that up outside of this meeting and see if we can give you a further answer. Thank you very much. Thank you. Okay, that's the end of the questions. Item four, then, there were no petitions for D, there were no representations received on reports to be considered in private. Item five were reports from select committees, et cetera, and there were a number of reports from the select committees in relation to the draft budget and median term financial strategy, which the Cabinet have had, and officers have had a good opportunity to review and, indeed, to respond to, and I'm sure any further points arising from that will come out when the matter is debated at full Council on the 4th of February. So, can we move, then, to item B, which is a referral of a County Council motion to Cabinet? I believe that we've got Paul Follows online, who's going to second the motion, and I believe, Fiona Davison, you wish to speak on it as well. You could put your hand up if that's right. Yes, please. Okay, so what I'm going to do is take all three of you together. There's a slightly different structure to how it will be debated at full Council, but it reaches the same end. So, I'll start with Liz. Liz Townsend has six minutes. Paul Follows, you have three minutes. And Fiona, you have three minutes, and then I'll move to the Cabinet. So, Liz, would you like to introduce your motion? Thank you. Thank you, and thank you for giving me the opportunity to speak about an issue which I know deeply affects families and children with additional needs. I have received many heartbreaking stories on this subject, and I want to highlight the damaging consequences of excluding parents and children from Governance Board decision meetings, which we refer to as the panel. And this is the substantive matter concerning my motion. Imagine being a parent of a child with additional needs. You know your child better than anyone else. Their strengths, their challenges, their potential. You are their advocate, their voice, and their biggest supporter. Yet when critical decisions are being made about their education and their future, you find yourself shut out of the room. The doors are closed. The discussions take place in isolation, and amongst people you may have no knowledge of whatsoever. Not even the family's case officer is automatically invited to panel meetings. And they are the person most connected to the family. This is the one point, this is one of the points I have asked to be considered in my motion and could be quickly implemented. Parents and carers often tell me that vital information is not adequately covered in panel meetings, and in some cases is out of date or not present at all. You received a question on this earlier, which I note you answered just a moment ago. And I've asked parents about the answer to that question online. And overall, the response has been, whilst you may set that out, it simply is not happening. Instead, parents are left confused about decisions on panel meetings. They never receive the promised summary advice, or one parent said, I got one small sentence, or copies of the evidence submitted. They are also faced with contradictory statements about their child's needs and solutions, some of which have already been tried and have failed. One parent said, it's soul-destroying. This compounds the feeling of despair and fosters mistrust. If the parents had a role in the panel, these matters could be explained fully, or items discounted at an earlier stage, avoiding unnecessary confusion, stress, and significant delays of waiting for tribunal dates, which approximately 98% overwhelmingly decide in favour of parents anyway. The format of the panel is not set by legislation. It is a choice to maintain the current arrangement. I'm asking Cabinet to consider providing the opportunity for parents and carers and the children themselves to be more involved in the panel decision, making the panel decision process within a clearly defined role. Parents should be seen as equal partners in decision-making, not as outsiders to the process. They have vital knowledge to share about their child's needs, preferences, and aspirations. When parents are excluded, decisions are made without this critical context. And the result? Plans and provisions are misaligned with the child's true needs, ultimately wasting valuable time and resources. This lack of transparency in turn breeds suspicion and erodes the partnership that should exist between families and education professionals. Instead of working together towards a shared goal, parents find themselves in constant battles, facing one hurdle after another, locked in an endless spiral of despair that drains their energy and impacts their mental health. Navigating the SEND system is notoriously complex and unsurprisingly faced with one conflict after another, with no one apparently listening to them and shut out of decision-making. Parents often feel they have no option but to engage a legal professional. And this can result in costs that they may struggle to cover, often using credit cards and borrowing money from family members. This can be on top of the financial impacts of one parent already having to reduce hours or even give up work completely to look after their child. The stress on these families I know is unbearable, and the child can often feel a sense of guilt that it is because of them that this is happening, instead of blaming a system which is not fit for purpose. The recent Select Committee task group, which looked into the experience of parents and carers and reported back in September 2024, came up with criticisms of the panel process as well and the lack of transparency in communication of decisions. One parent said the panel could be Mickey Mouse and friends, for all we know. Another referred to the panel as a black box that no one knows anything about. Generally, parents felt ignored and felt that outcomes were not communicated to them. Whilst I welcome that the panel decision-making process is now being reviewed, I would ask that the points that I have requested form a specific part of this review, that a clearly defined role for parents and children in the panel process is thoroughly investigated and fully considered in consultation with parents and children. Families have a right to know what is being discussed, how decisions are being made and why certain choices are being recommended. Transparency is key to building trust and fostering a sense of partnership and achieving the best outcomes for the child. Their interests must always come first, and I would ask you to please support my motion. Thank you. OK, thank you very much, Liz, and obviously you'll have a right to sum up at the end. But I will now go to Paul Follows as your seconder. Thank you. Thank you, everyone. Thank you, Leader. Good afternoon. I've said most of my piece on this, on the matter, when seconding the motion to Council, and I certainly cannot add anything to what Council Townsend has eloquently covered. As I believe is common to all members of this Council, of all parties, casework from residents on the subject are numerous, they're increasing, and they're some of the most heartbreaking and difficult matters that any of us see as councillors. I cannot imagine the strain that is on parents, the hardship that is on parents and carers that they have to go through through this process. It is extreme. And as Council Townsend has also highlighted, it is often avoidable. And the trust that needs to be built up through this process is often lost or squandered very quickly. And other parents seeing this process, for other parents going through it, they know that it is opaque and difficult for them to engage with, often a lot of their own cost and energy and time going into the process to make it work at all. I was extremely disappointed, of course, that this motion was referred, as I think there were choices here that Council could have implemented. And more importantly, we lost the opportunity for all members. And I think all members have an insight into this particular debate. We lost that opportunity for all members to properly contribute to the process. And I do think that was a mistake. There are opportunities here that we can, I think, support as a council, and I hope you support the cabinet, that will make this process more accessible to residents and make this complex and difficult process more transparent and more true to its actual function. I wish to just reiterate the concluding points of the proposer, that any review properly into this start to incorporate parents and their rights and what their role in this process is, and try to rebuild that trust, both in the process itself and also in the outcomes. And on that note, I'll stop there and just urge you to support the intent, as well as the specifics of this motion, cabinet. Thank you, Leader, and good afternoon, everyone. Thank you very much, Paul. Thank you. I'll go to Fiona Davison as the Chair of the Select Committee. Thank you, Fiona. Thank you very much, Leader. Good afternoon, everyone. I support this motion. As a council, we say we have an aspiration of no one left behind, and we advertise the council's commitment to our residents being excellent, being open, working together and respecting others. Yet we fall down on these commitments in the decision-making element of the HCP process, that is the governance panel, where decisions are made about whether children with additional needs and disabilities meet the criteria for an HCP, as well as what additional educational support they need, what type of school meets their needs, etc. As I'm sure members will appreciate, for the parent or carer of a child with sand, these are fundamental decisions with potentially long-reaching consequences. And yet all these decisions are made in private by an unknown group of people. The governance panel process is secret, and this is Surrey's decision. The local authority has a right to make a decision on all these matters, but how it makes these decisions is down to the individual authority. Like all counsellors, I hear stories of parents and carers' desperation around the panel process. Parents lose sleep worrying about the outcome. They may have been waiting many months to have their child's case discussed. They worry about whether the information that will be discussed is up to date and complete. They worry about whether the people making the decision on the day are the right people. They wait on tenderhooks to hear the outcome. I often hear that parents discover after the panel the right information wasn't reviewed or that key information was missing. If they find out, and they don't always, they have to go round the cycle again. Months go by and children are without the right education or support. Imagine if this was you. If you were that parent or carer desperate to ensure the best future for your child. A child, by the way, who was already disadvantaged and for whom life is not going to be straightforward. In lieu of transparency, as Councillor Townsend has said, parents and carers often believe that Surrey has something to hide. The lack of transparency leads to a lack of trust. It also leads to an exceptional level of inefficiency and unnecessary effort on the part of all concerned, as well as unnecessary delays and cost. It leads to cases going back to panel multiple times. It leads to multiple unsatisfactory communications between case officers and parents. It leads to children not having the right support, not being in school. It leads to an exceptional number of cases going to tribunal. And after all of this, the children most likely to be left behind by this process are those whose parents are least able to cope with its complexity. I support Councillor Townsend's motion because what she proposes would enable us to demonstrate our commitment to the principles we advertise. I've spoken before about the gap between what we say as a council and what we do resulting in a lack of trust. In the case of the EHCP governance panel, this gap is a gulf, and it shouldn't be. Thank you. Thank you very much, Fiona. I'm just going to make a few opening comments before I hand over to Claire Curran, who will respond in more detail. And I think we all accept that this is a very challenging area and a challenging process. And indeed, it does need reform at a national level. But I would like to reiterate that the improvement of services for children and young people is for this council a very high priority. And as part of this, work is focused on the transformation of services for children with additional needs and disabilities. And we have spent many, many meetings discussing what that transformation looks like. Following the 2023 Ofsted and CQC local area inspection, we published a detailed improvement plan with progress against that plan closely overseen by the Department of Education. And we've also been consistently delivering the required service improvement conditions of our safety valve agreement, despite, in fact, actually, there being financial challenges to that, which we weren't aware of at the time that that safety valve agreement was entered into, and in particular, the exponentially increase in interest rates. And as members know, we did invest, have invested an additional 15 million for the recovery plan, which has been in place since September 2023. And that has delivered clear performance improvement. I'm aware that in previous years, our compliance with the 20-week assessment for EHCPs was woefully low. But we are now, I believe, in excess of 70 percent. And indeed, the most recent data shows that there are no EHCP applications outstanding over 30 weeks. So we have made considerable progress on clearing that backlog. But, of course, that is against a background of growing demand for SCN and services, and a system which is under extraordinary pressure across the whole country. The 98 percent figure that Councillor Townsend refers to is a national statistic, as well in terms of those people that are successful in whole or in part at a tribunal. And so, in Surrey, the actual number of EHCPs, in fact, has more than doubled since – or between 2017 and 2024, and that in part, I think, was due to the 2014 reforms. Alongside our own extensive improvement work in this area, we are consistently lobbying the government for wider, urgent system changes, additional funding and reform. And, in fact, the Local Government Association and the County Council's network commissioned an independent report, which is with the Secretary of State and has been now for some months. And, indeed, there has been very good engagement through the Department on the proposed reforms and suggested areas of review that are contained within that report. So I am hopeful that we will start to see some progress in addressing what has become an absolutely critical issue for all councils, not least of all the financial costs in supporting the system and, in particular, home-to-school transport. So I think it is fair to say, and I have certainly said it on a very regular basis, that the system, the current system, doesn't work for local authorities. It doesn't work for schools. It doesn't work for children or, indeed, their families. So it does need reform and review. I accept that the basis of this motion is more locally focused, and Claire will give some views as to whether or not we are able to take forward all three of those suggestions. But, Claire, do you want to pick up from there? Thank you. I wasn't sure. Did you have a question? Mr. Leader, I'm concerned about what the level of detail in this motion regarding SEND operations. While I have confidence in the lead members' expertise, I admit I lack the knowledge to effectively scrutinise such specifics. We have qualified professionals managing these areas, and I believe our role as elected members is to focus on the broader strategy and policy. Therefore, I question whether it is appropriate for us to dictate practice and operations at this level of detail. Would it be more beneficial for us to focus on overarching goals and leave the operational details to the professionals? Thank you. Claire, can you pick that up as you go through your... Yes, I certainly can. But I think you've spelt out, Leader, some of the more strategic work that we're doing across the whole SEND piece. And I would like to say that, you know, I'm lead member for Children's Services, and I have statutory guidance in my role, which does say explicitly that I should not get drawn into detailed day-to-day operational management, but provide strong strategic leadership and support and challenge to relevant members of the senior leadership team. And I do endeavour to do that, to challenge support, be an advocate for the service, and also, importantly, be a champion for children and their families. And I think that's the role here today. But in preparing a response today to Councillor Townsend, obviously I've liaised closely with senior officers and taken advice in what I'm saying today. And, you know, I completely accept that the SEND service needs to strengthen the way that the views of parents, children, and young people are captured and presented at panels. And the service is seeking to improve the way that panel discussion and decisions taken are communicated and fed back to families. And I think that was part of the question we had this morning, this afternoon. And I understand from what Councillor Townsend and others have said, and from what I myself have heard from families, that it is a major area of concern. I've heard loud and clear criticism about discussions being held behind closed doors and the transparency of decision-making. And it's clear this is putting up barriers, creating mistrust in the system, and tensions between families and the authority have eroded trust and created an adversarial culture. But to reassure Councillor Townsend, as part of the SEND transformation and the end-to-end review, there is already Task and Finish groups working on this issue. They're working with Family Voice Surrey to capture the views of families, with ATLAS, which is our Young People's User Voice and Participation Forum, to capture the views of young people, working with schools and other partners. The service is committed to strategic co-production of improved processes, and this is a complex SEND system, and we're not the only partner. Let me explain that the SEND Code of Practice sets out that decisions in relation to plans are made by the local authority. At this Council, decision-making is delegated to officers. No decisions are made by members or by members of Parliament. Decisions are made by specific identified officers, and it's important to clarify that the role of the panel is advisory only and supports the decision-making process. I appreciate this isn't necessarily clear, and there is more we can do to explain the process and ensure transparency for families. Panel input ensures that the Council officer is fully informed, and that the panel has the most important function of moderation of decisions, and to ensure that all decision-making and the use of funding is consistent across teams and county-wide. The panels are multidisciplinary, attended by a wide range of representatives from inside and outside the Council. They consider and advise on decisions to assess, to issue plans, advise on the type of school placement, and to ratify changes to plans after annual reviews. I want to give you an idea of the scale of the work of the panels. In an average week, the number of CEN decisions made that's considered by a panel is 240, and this only relates to children and young people under 16. Parents and carers and young people aren't part of the multi-agency panel. Views are presented to panels through their input in a document called the Summary of the Assessment. This includes their views and also summarises professional reports. And I acknowledge that sometimes families don't agree with decisions and exercise their right to mediation and or to follow an appeal route through independent tribunals. I accept the criticism of a decision-making process, but I do not accept that the answer to the criticism is for parents and children to attend panels, or that it would ever be appropriate for them to do so. The Service is striving to make sound, impartial, consistent and evidence-based decisions for all children and young people, and these decisions must be equitable with the needs of children at their heart. Not all families wish to attend panels or have the capacity to advocate for their cause, and we are all collectively committed to the principle of no-one left behind. I said earlier there is a task and finish group working on these issues. Feedback from parents and young people has already been captured, and that is that they don't want to be in the decisions or the meetings. What they do want is to know who's representing them, and for that to be somebody who understands their views, their case officer. More case officers have been recruited, they are trained in relational working, have more time and opportunity to work closely alongside families, to develop closer relationships with them, and to understand their needs more thoroughly, to communicate more regularly and meaningfully. Very positive feedback is now being heard from individual families and from Family Voice Surrey. We have a commitment to making a wide range of changes that will go live in September 2025. Case officers now work in schools. There's work with Family Voice and Atlas to improve the way that information is gathered at the start of the process from families. We're working to better include the voice of children and young people. The summary of assessment document is going to be agreed and shared with families before their cases are considered, so that families know well what information is being put forward and have confidence in it. Panel representation is to be expanded to include other school representatives, parent governors, trustees, and involve them to bring in a wider range of experience and different voices to look at the decisions. Case officers will also be invited to attend all panels. And once decisions have been reached, decisions will be shared promptly, consistently, and clearly with families at every decision point. We understand and are committed to offering support where it's needed. Leader panels do need to operate in a way that's understood to be in the interests of parents and young people, which is why the improvement work being driven through with schools and advice givers is so important. My ambition is for a more respectful, supportive, and productive relationship between families, caseworkers, and the SEND system. Turning to the recommendations of the motion leader, I am comfortable to agree to Part C, as I've outlined that caseworkers will be invited to all panels. It's business as usual. The business as usual. However, I'm not minded to accept recommendations A and B on the advice of officers. Work is already underway in the SEND service to make major improvements in the process to enable the views of families and of young people to be heard more clearly. And it's not accepted that it would be appropriate for them to attend. Okay. Thank you very much. Perhaps I have to talk to the other speakers. More enough to help. Thank you. Thank you, Lida. I feel I must say, particularly on one point that my colleague has mentioned, about not all families wishing, not all families would wish to be able to attend panels, or may not indeed have the capacity to advocate their case well. As I have personal experience of this, my work in life, I worked as a complaints manager for children's services and worked with families on a day-to-day basis. So very much appreciate the difficulties that would present for some. We should guard, we should actually guard against hearing only from our more articulate parents, often with loud voices, or access to additional resources such as expensive legal representation. We must consider the many disadvantaged families, those parents with learning disabilities themselves, those for whom English is not their first language, or indeed looked after children who do not have their own families to advocate for them. For those children, their case workers are so important, and the relationships between them and the families they represent is developing and becoming stronger all the time that they work together. And is it the case that then families would be actually disadvantaged if some parents were attending panels and able to speak up more for their own children? And would they have priorities on others? Surely we can't allow that. And that's all I wanted to say, really. Thank you. Okay, thank you very much, Maureen. So I've got David Lewis, then Sinead Mooney. Thank you. Yeah, thank you, Leader. I mean, this is clearly a sensitive and difficult topic. And I have to say I was very encouraged by the explanation that Claire gave us about how the whole process works. And, you know, I'm aware from my responsibilities, my portfolio holder responsibilities about the work that's taking place in terms of transformation in this area. You know, we've got a number of transformation programs across the whole council. But particularly, you know, in terms of the SEND transformation program, we can see that, you know, we are making good progress. And all areas have been rated either green or amber in terms of the progress. We also know that the DAV keep pretty close watch over what we're doing and the work that the SEND team is driving through as part of its published improvement plan and the transformation work that's underway. And we know that the DAV liaises closely with our officers and also with individual schools and leaders. I'm directly involved in signing off the reports that go in, I think it's three times a year, on the progress that's being made with regards to the safety valve work. And that work has a wide range of conditions. And, again, the data is showing that we're making good progress in this space. We also know that Ofsted keep a watching brief over the work that we're doing. And, you know, our expectation and the expectation of our officers is that we will be having a visit from Ofsted probably next month. I think that this raises a whole question, this motion, really, about our role. And, you know, I believe strongly that, you know, our role as members is very much a strategic role. It's not our job to actually directly manage the transformation program, but it is our role to support and challenge where necessary. And I think we all do that robustly. We ensure that the performance indicators are challenged, they're scrutinized. And, you know, I think at the end of the day, by seeing the progress that's being made, it enables us as a cabinet and as members of this council to have confidence in the professionalism of our officers and the work they're doing, ultimately with the aim of delivering really outstanding services for our children and young people in order to meet their needs. So I think it was said earlier on, you know, I think this is the role of the officers. It's not our role. And if they advise that we shouldn't go down this route, that's something that I'm prepared to accept their advice and would encourage everyone else to do likewise. So thank you. Okay, thank you very much. In fact, she doesn't wish to speak now. So I'll go back to Councillor Sounds then, please, and to... Thank you. Thank you, Leader. I would like to thank you for discussing the matter. I would like to say and draw attention to the wording of my motion because I'm very specific. I do not say that parents must attend panel or that they have to attend. I just said that we should have a clearly defined role for parents within the panel. If that was deemed that they should attend panel, that may be, you know, maybe what was decided. And this isn't necessarily an operational matter. It is actually a policy matter. It's a strategic matter whether or not panels and the make-up of panels and how panel decisions are made is up to this Cabinet, I think, to try and guide and to discuss with officers and with professionals. And I know through speaking to some of our officers, I know that they find the panel system, you know, perhaps not as good as it could be, and it could be a lot better. I've had one officer in tears about a panel meeting that they were not invited to. So I do come from a point of understanding about the panel process and the friction that it causes. I do think that whilst I, you know, talking about the most able parents coming forward, let's not please blame parents that are able to perhaps voice their opinion about their children. Please let's not say that those are the loudest voices. My voice would be loud, you know, my voice would be very loud. My child and my child's education, it is a very emotive subject, and I can appreciate and totally understand why parents should be loud and why support should be given and offered for those parents that perhaps, you know, aren't able perhaps to come forward so much. And I think there should be more support there. I've got a parent yesterday who desperately needs more support. But equally, I don't think that the panel's decision-making process should be so closed. And I really feel that the communication that comes from the panel, the information that is given to parents, the documentation, whilst I applaud what was said in Claire Curran's response to the public question earlier, it simply is not happening. And there needs to be recognition that things need to change. And whilst I probably very much am very glad that you're going to take forward the caseworker being present, because I think that's really important. They work closest with the families. They should know the family history as well. But we have to have an awareness that caseworkers are changing all too often. And that, you know, and that is detrimental to families as well. But I do think that having them at the panel will be a positive thing. And I think that having a clearly defined role for parents and children, so they know exactly what to expect from the panel, perhaps they know who is on the panel, perhaps that they do get the documentation in advance and have a meeting in advance with some professional people to discuss what is going forward at the panel. That would be a clearly defined role in my head. And I think that that would be really appreciated by parents and carers. I want to make this system better because I'm getting too many emails about this in my mailbox, really upsetting emails about people feeling literally disempowered, feeling that what they know about their child and what they need for their child's education is not being considered. And whilst I know that, you know, it's not easy and I don't expect a magic wand, that we can present good news all of the time, I know that that's not possible. But if we set clear expectations, we have clear roles, I think it will really help. And I think it will really help everybody, not only the parents and the children, but also the officers involved and everybody involved here. So I would ask you, if you're not going to accept the motion in total, I would ask you to put forward the ideas in the review of having a more clearly defined role for parents and those children who must be at the heart of all of our decision-making. Thank you. Okay. Thank you. Yes, Quirley, you want to... Please, may I come back? Can I implore the councillor, please do not refer to panel decision-making. The panels are not decision-making bodies. It is designated officers who take decisions. And it would be really helpful in this misunderstanding with parents and going forward on a clearer basis. Okay. And I just, I think, to clarify, I don't think it was suggested or any criticism of those families that have a strong voice. I think the concern was how we would make sure that those, that everybody has a strong voice, you know, accepting, you know, that people can't be left behind in that sort of context. I think just a couple of things. I think it may be that as part of your review that this is happening. And it would be interesting to see what other authorities, local authorities do, and whether it is standard practice for... I have to have personal concerns about children being, you know, attending those sorts of panels. I think there's some real risks around that. But I think it would be helpful as part of the review, please, to get some data or information, either through the LGA or directly from other authorities in terms of what they're doing. It seems to me that what is absolutely key, though, is that the information before the panel is accurate and of good quality. And to that extent, I completely agree that the presence of the case officer, I would go further, actually, and say not only that they're invited, I would say that they should be required to attend, unless perhaps the chair of the panel thinks that that's not necessary for whatever reason, and there may be reasons why it isn't necessary. But again, I think that, you know, the case... I'm accepting that the case officer changes, but, you know, the case officer is the advocate for the panel in terms of what all of those with greater expertise than us are saying should happen in relation to that application. So perhaps, again, if you could just look at that, but clearly happy to go with the wording of the motion, which is that they are automatically invited, but perhaps a little bit further. Okay, so I think what we'll do is take... There are three recommendations, and I'm going to take them separately, and I would ask, in the circumstances, for members to... Academy members to raise your hands in relation to each. So the first is provide the opportunity for parent carers and children with additional needs to be involved in the panel decision process with a clearly defined role. Yes, I agree. All those in favour, all those against. So I think, you know, with the caveat that we've said about in terms of looking at that, I won't read the second, but that relates to children or young persons being involved, all those against. And then the third one, ensure that the relevant case officers are automatically invited to attend panel decision meetings. All those in favour? Okay. So hopefully that takes the conversation a little bit further forward. So thank you for bringing that to Cabinet, and I'm sure we'll have some further discussions about this in due course. Thank you. Okay, thank you very much then. So we'll move to Item 6, which were the Cabinet members' decisions. There was one decision which related to disposal of land at Swittleheath Deep Dean Avenue Dorking, seen by Nassie Bramhall. Anything you want to add to that, or is that just for noting? Thank you. Item 7 then, our monthly Cabinet Member of the Month, and this month it is Sinead Mooney. Thank you. Thank you, Chair. I'm sure that everybody's read the report, so I'll just go through some highlights if I can. So the first item, and we've got some really good pictures here. I mean, this is very much about delivery, so I'm very excited to be talking on this, in regards to our Right Home Right support. So you'll see from this update that we're in the final stages of construction for our new short breaks accommodation in Woking called Emily Lodge, and this service will be opening, we anticipate, very soon, in the spring 2025. We're also due to start construction on a further new short break service in Banstead this year. In addition to that, we have construction underway for support independent living sites at three locations, in Hawley, Woking, and Cobham. And again, we anticipate the first of these sites will open in autumn of this year. So very pleased also to touch on extra care housing. This Cabinet's been speaking about this in particular for some time. So I'm really pleased to say that we will have our first development construction starting in Guildford, and we look forward to that opening, hopefully, towards the end of 2025, early 2026. We've also got outline planning secured for a further seven sites for extra care housing. So there is an awful lot going on in this particular area, Chair, and we've got some really good pictures here. Action shots, these are being delivered, so very pleased. Planning for your future day, these events are going really well, actually. There's been quite a few held so far already. And members of this Cabinet may be interested to know, and I'm not being tongue-in-cheek when I say this, but there will be a webinar available for members as well as Council staff. So do come along and attend. It really is about planning for the future, planning for care, potential costs, also about the importance of having conversations with family members and loved ones around preferences and wishes, so you can be supported around decision-making should that need arise in the future. Transformation as well. Well, there's a lot of talk around this transformation programme, and I know we'll be hearing from the Chair, the Select Committee, a bit later on in this agenda, but there's real opportunities here to really take head-on the financial challenges that we have, but the opportunities as well that transformation will give us to improve the lives of our residents. So we're talking about being innovative, we're talking about providing high-quality care to people with complex social care needs, and we're also looking at having quality time to undertake assessments and seeing people far sooner. So this transformation programme is incredibly important to us, and there is really lots of focus around improving lives and opportunities. Our Carers' Fair, so there was a Carers' Rights Day held on the 21st of November, and I did pop along to attend that, and I have to say I was so impressed. What a wonderful event that was organised there. It was very welcoming, very heartwarming, lots of information and displays from many of the organisations across the county that are out there supporting our carers. And, of course, many unpaid carers were in attendance and had great benefits from those sessions. The atmosphere was really buzzing, actually. You know, sometimes you go to these things and they're good, but this one was really good. Lots of high energy. And it was actually on the day that our CQC assessment result was announced. And that may have had an impact on the buzz in the room because there were some social workers there as I attended. And you'll see here in the report the last picture on this item is, in fact, myself with the social workers. And I did promise them I'd give Mel, Diana, Holly, and Tracy from the Spellform Locality team a shout-out. So there you go. Technology-enabled care and homes as well. There is a paper on the agenda in today's meeting. So I won't talk about that one too much here in the Cabinet member update. And I'll end my update, if I may, Chair, by talking about housing. So there's rapidly changing policy positions coming from central government on this issue, setting out very ambitious approaches to housing delivery. And officers within Surrey County Council are working hard with colleagues across Boroughan District to understand the implications of these policy positions and fast changes for Surrey. So a lot of work going on there. We had, at the end of 2024, our first affordable housing roundtable session. It was really well organised and really well attended by a plethora of partners, really, registered social landlords, housing developers, senior local government officers, or looking around what the current barriers are to delivering affordable housing in Surrey. And what we can do collectively is a strong, powerful voice to support with that. So we're going to have a second session and we're going to update our existing call to government to reflect on the discussions that we've had at the housing roundtable and feed that back in. That's probably all I'd like to say, Chair. Other than, if I could finally add, I am going round meeting the teams with our DAS, Claire Edgar, to speak to our social care staff and to acknowledge their input into the CQC assessment and to look at next steps and things that we need to do to get the service to the next level. But those events are going very well, really well attended. Things feel very positive and very enthusiastic in adult social care. Thank you. Excellent. Thank you very much and it is really important that we do say thank you to those frontline staff. You know, it is a very challenging role whether that's social care, a social worker role in adults or in children. So, you know, recognizing absolutely what they do to support those most vulnerable families in our county. So, please do pass on our thanks and gratitude from the Cabinet as well. Thank you very much. Okay. David. Just very quickly, Tim, I'd just like to say Sinead referred to the supported independent living projects and just say how delighted I am that the project in Cobham, which is my division, is now well underway. I think it's scheduled to be finished later in the summer and that's really good news. We also have a new children's home being built in Cobham and later on we'll be next item we'll be talking about our capital budgets and it's really good, I think, to see sort of rather than just look at numbers to actually see what it actually leads to. So, we've got two really good projects within my division so thank you for that and we look forward to it being completed. Okay, yes, Denise. Thank you. Just quickly, I just wanted to commend the planning your future day. I mean, this is a fantastic initiative and what can often be a very bewildering and difficult environment to navigate for people that have care needs and can sometimes follow a period of ill health so they might not be in the best position to have those conversations and the fact that you've got so many different opportunities to have those conversations, Sinead, I think this is a really fantastic initiative and I'm really looking forward to seeing that promoted and to more awareness being out there for our residents. Thank you. Yes, Sinead. Thank you. Chair, thank you, David and Denise for the feedback and comments. I'd just like to say to you, I think it was remiss of me actually not to mention land and property colleagues. The Councillor Bramhall sat next to me and the director there sat opposite so I feel I must thank them and the reason why I must do that is because of the stage that we're in around real delivery with regards to our right home, right support strategy and I think the reason why we're delivering now at such pace and such volume is because of the really close positive working between land and property and adult social care and if I was to be asked by any peers outside of Surrey County Council I would hold that relationship actually as a professional exemplar in how to move these schemes and projects forward. So thank you both. Good, okay. Thank you very much Sinead and Natalie. Right, we will move on then to item 8 which is the budget for medium term financial strategy for 29 to 29.30. So, and I present this budget as the leader of the council for the municipal year 25-26 and as I've said earlier this will go to full council on the 4th of February. So, I'm afraid every year for the last six years or so that I've presented this budget I have started with a pretty sort of dire warning in terms of the challenges that this council faces against a challenging national background as well. we have seen higher levels of inflation than predicted an increase in or likely to see an increase in the national insurance contributions as we don't have clarity at the moment in terms of reimbursement from government directly to us or indeed to any provider. There has been an increase in the national living wage the cost of borrowing for capital investment has continued to rise as interest rates remain high. an increased demand for our services particularly in relation to mental health. Pressures on the health system has had impacts on our services as well. There is a new government with its own agenda for change and of course the prospect of a funding review in 2026 a multi-year settlement which will either be two years or three years but that inevitably will have an impact on our funding when I look at the way in which the current review was carried out the budget review was carried out and so on which I'll touch on a little bit later. Surrey County Council does and has of course been on a programme of improvement over the past few years and we have seen many benefits indeed in many areas so more investment in highways significant capital programme to support children with additional needs a closer working relationship with the health system to get people back into their homes on discharge from hospital etc. and also we've heard about the extra care living the right homes for people. The progress that we have made generally across children's services and adult services has been recognised by both OSTED and more recently by the CQC as our independent regulators but we do know there is more to do. All of those reports have highlighted the good practice that exists across this organisation but also recognition that in part the delivery of that high quality service is not always entirely consistent and that is what we must focus on. We have achieved financial stability and indeed we're not in the same position as many other authorities across the country. We have not asked the government for extra financial support. We are not proposing to seek a referendum on increasing our council tax above the permitted 4.99% and so on and we have a level of reserves that is appropriate for an organisation of this size. We are investing in preventative activity and early intervention because we know that we will never be able to fund adequately the demand for the services and nor indeed will the health service so it's absolutely imperative that our focus is on those areas where we can have a control. We know that a growing and healthy economy also results in healthy life expectancy as well. So that is all interrelated and we do want to make sure that we have which we are building homes for looked after children more homes for more specialist schools accommodation to enable people to live independently and indeed we have supported many communities with the projects that they have wanted through Your Fund Surrey. But we have to push on at pace with our own transformation programmes programmes that will modernise the way in which we actually deliver our services to residents and indeed as well as streamlining our own internal structures. There are of course broader external factors that impact on our budget as I mentioned the funding review I think it would not be a surprise for anybody to expect that there will be no new money coming into the system and that that funding review will largely be a redistribution of funds across the country. We have the devolution agenda and local government reorganisation on the horizon. As we mentioned earlier an absolute critical need for reform of the SEND system to make it fairer and more responsive as the current system really doesn't work as effectively as it needs to. And of course a long-term ambition and it seems to be a long-term ambition of the government to reform adult social care. I have argued in many forums that alongside the NHS 10-year plan which is due to be published in April that there should be a 10-year adult social care plan to accompany. You cannot sort the NHS out without also sorting out adult social care and it is disappointing that the Casey review won't report until I think later this year or next year and the final report in a couple of years' time. You know, I know that the cost of those reforms that were previously proposed and the deal-not reforms would be financially difficult for councils to, you know, to support but there are things that can be done around reform that would be helpful and not necessarily prohibitively expensive. So we will continue to push government to genuinely look at the way in which we can get people to support the three left shifts of the NHS from deaths from illness to prevention from effectively acute hospital settings into community settings and from analogue to digital and that move from acutes to, i.e. from A&E into community settings will put huge pressure on this organisation almost certainly so we need to have those conversations to make sure that that's done in an appropriate way. We will continue to lobby in relation to the cost of children's placements and it's good to see that the children's bill is looking to cap the costs that independent organisations can charge us. We need to address as a national issue the cost of home-to-school transport and indeed we need to recognise in relation to adult social care that something in the order of 60% for this council and indeed nationally is actually being spent on working-age adults with learning disabilities. There's a sort of a misnomer I think that many believe that adult social care is entirely around supporting older residents. It isn't and those working-age adults with learning disabilities that is a lifelong support and cost that we must find. we do need to support the government's agenda for growth. We know that in this county there is a significant shortage of skills. We have some highly skilled businesses from the automotive industry from pharmaceutical to the gaming industry and we are really struggling to recruit and retain people into this county partly driven by the cost of housing but the work that Mass is doing through the growth board and the skills board and the skills board is really, really important and joining up the schools, the sixth form colleges, the FE colleges, the universities and really driving apprenticeships as a genuine opportunity for the children in this county in the hope that they will then get into gainful employment and indeed remain within the county. that I accept that there is never going to be complete unanimity in terms of how we stretch the limited resources that we have to best effect. It will always, always be a balance but this budget shows increased investments in adults and health of 20 million pounds so a total spend of 526 million and an increase of 20 million for children and families taking us up to 314 million and indeed our community facing services of a further 7 million with a spend of 197 million so the total budget of 1.264 billion that is a 55 million pound increase in frontline services for this coming year and indeed that increase will be delivered by a mixture of savings and efficiencies and I'm afraid inevitably an increase in council tax it has to be said that the government's financial settlement indicative financial settlement we won't get the final settlement before the 4th of February but assuming that it doesn't change last year is the only year that I'm aware that it has changed for many years before but assuming it doesn't then we have the ability to raise council tax by 2.99% and also as an upper tier authority to levy a 2% precept for social care we do need to see what the final settlement looks like and there are a couple of other variables that may become clearer over the next week or so but at the moment to balance our budget and to ensure that we can continue to deliver improved and increased services meeting the demand that we know we will experience we are proposing in this budget a 4.99% increase in council tax in reality other than 2.9 million the total increase in funding comes from council tax as I mentioned earlier the government the 1.4 billion or so that they put into local government financing in the budget only 680 million of that or so was distributed according to the adult social care formula which is the one that benefits this council the most and the balance was distributed to those areas that had the lowest council tax base and perceived to have the highest levels of deprivation the part of the funding review conversation must be that deprivation and the ability to raise council tax locally are two considerations but equally as important is the need and demand and indeed in more rural areas like Surrey the cost of delivery which we know is more expensive than in the metropolitan areas so we will fight hard to set out our stall with evidence as to why we do need to receive more funding in this county from central sources I absolutely recognize the pressure that any increase in council tax puts on households and we really do look long and hard and I'm very grateful to the deputy chief executive in section 151 officer and his team for the work that they have done modeling this budget and we will continue to find ways to drive down costs which we have taken out tens of millions of pounds over the last few years but to ensure that we can continue to deliver the frontline services in the best way that we possibly can the consequence of a 4.99% increase will be £1.69 for a band band D sorry band D rather than band A which I appreciate sounds a small number but every pound you know is a pound that residents can't spend on other matters more of their choice so of the £1.264 billion gross budget it's made up of £977.7 million from council tax collection £148 million from business rate retention and £138 million from grant funding one of the things that we again engage in with government over in terms of further devolution devolved powers from government to mayoral strategic authorities and we're in those conversations both locally and nationally in terms of what that would look like for Surrey but part part of those conversations needs to be around fiscal devolution as well so you know I think local authorities need to be incentivised to be innovative in the way in which they can grow their local economy and if they do that that there is an ability to retain some of that growth and that's something that we will explore with them further as we go along and in particular the retention of business rates would be one way easy way of starting that conversation I'm not going to say much on the capital programme we have revisited that in terms of affordability the 10 top schemes make up 70% of the budget and that budget is a billion over the next five years but you know there's some significant capital spend here 238 million highways maintenance roads and footways 111 million to increase provision for special education needs and disabilities 106 million to increase school places and building schools across the county and so on and indeed over 60 million to maintain county service buildings and to invest in our libraries and I think there's been a really positive response to the rollout of the library hubs and the sort of 24 hour access and so on so there is a capital budget for 2526 of 344 million as I said on those items I've listed above so in conclusion this budget delivers investment continues to deliver investment in our services it continues to drive out efficiencies wherever we possibly can it recognises the priorities of our residents and we do do an annual survey and indeed we do have a residence intelligence unit that listens carefully to our residents I know that we can't always necessarily meet those expectations and I know that for most residents who don't access or have a family member accessing social care or education that the maintenance of highways and the smooth running of traffic around this county is an absolute priority inevitably inevitably we are in part weather dependent and yet again we've had a fairly mild but wet winter which does cause real damage to our highway highways network but we will continue to put as much money as we possibly can into that service and we will again lobby this government to look at the funding formula because we get we do not get sufficient funding per mile to reflect the level and the volume of traffic that goes through Surrey into the capital so that's something that we will continue to push for I believe that the budget supports innovation as we are moving into a very changing world the global dynamics are very different than even they were last year and indeed certainly as they were before the pandemic we continue to build on a strong financial base but indeed we're going to recognize the need for change and innovation this is a budget that will ensure that this county council is fit for the future and that uncertain future whatever that may look like and indeed is in my view a budget that supports and protects first and foremost our most vulnerable residents in this county and indeed a budget that will help us deliver our ambition that no one in this county is left behind I'll move on to the recommendations when we get to that point but is there anybody else who would like to speak at this stage David yeah thank you Tim I won't repeat all the points you've made I think it's a very comprehensive summary of where we've got to I think just two or three additional points I'd like to make I mean this proposed budget is the culmination of something like a year's work we started working on producing the budget almost as soon as we approved back in February last year the budget for this year and it's a constantly changing scene and as we have worked through it there's been various iterations and various versions until we finally got to to this point where as you say we do require to we are required to produce a balanced budget and that's what we've done with this proposal just to pick up on a couple of points which I don't think you covered specifically one is that as part of that process we have been through a very extensive consultation and engagement process and that's both externally and internally so we've had two engagement processes with our residents and other interested parties across the county and have had their feedback both in terms of what their priorities were and then secondly when we published the draft budget in terms of whether they supported or not our proposals at that stage there was still a budget gap and something like 50% getting on for 50% of the respondents actually said that they supported the proposals that we had put in place for closing that gap which has ultimately led to the proposed increase in council tax of 4.99% in the council tax and adult social care precept also internally there's been probably more consultation over the past 12 months than we've had in previous years all of the political groups have been offered briefings on the budget we've had three member development sessions and in fact yesterday we had what I thought was a very productive member development session on this final budget proposal which we certainly didn't do last year and I'm hoping that that was an opportunity for members to really seek clarification on the proposal so that when we have the debate next week at full council on this proposed budget that everyone has a clear understanding in terms of exactly what's being proposed the select committees have been heavily involved in the production of the budget as well earlier on in this meeting we noted the feedback to the select committee's proposals on the budget and I think it's probably fair to say that I mean they did do some deep dive work but when they looked at the sort of the totality of the budget a lot of the areas that they suggested we should look at and prioritise really reflected things that we were already doing to a certain extent so you know that's encouraging when you see that and realise that we're all sort of really aligned in terms of in terms of the approach you mentioned the challenge challenging financial situation we're in the local the provisional local government finance settlement didn't really provide us with any significant increases in funding certainly not compared with our assumptions I think it was only about three million pounds in terms of the assumptions that we had used for the draft budget and as you say looking ahead looking forward you know we have got this fair funding review ahead of us the I think the welcome thing is the fact that the government have committed to a multi-year settlement and I think that's something that you know we've been lobbying for and if that actually happens I think that will certainly enable us to plan in a better way going forward but against that you know the expectation is that the amount of funding which are made available will probably be less than we receive at the moment so we have to bear that in mind in terms of thinking ahead and thinking about sort of ensuring that we put in place some really solid foundations in terms of moving forward as well as proposing a budget for next year and it's worth just highlighting again two or three key things when this budget you know it represents overall a 4.6% increase across the council you know and you know although we have been faced with significant increases in terms of inflation you know that there's still a fairly significant uplift in terms of our revenue budget and just sort of looking at the individual directorates you know 3.95% increase in adults 6.48% increase in children and 3.6% increase in place so some significant uplifts in terms of our proposed expenditure but as we know you know the cost of delivering the demand led services that we have to deliver in this council in many ways far outstrips the rate of inflation so it's a constant challenge and balancing act in order to live within our means and as part of that and we in the previous discussion to a certain extent we've touched on it you know we have got our transformation programme which will certainly help us to deliver a number of the efficiencies that we need to deliver in terms of ensuring that we live within the budget in terms of the medium term you know the budget does cover the next five years at a higher level obviously up to 29.30 and you know we're assuming in terms of that work a 1.99% increase in council tax but at the moment looking forward using the assumptions that we've got about the funding you know we're still projecting that over that five year period there'd be a gap of 172 million pounds so I think that that again is indicative of the challenge that we face going forward you covered the capital programme I don't think there's much more to say on that other than the fact that it you know we have ensured as far as we can that it's both affordable and deliverable which I think is important and we do monitor that during the year but you know it is delivering on the key commitments that we've made in terms of our programme going forward and then we and I think again you touched on this I won't get into detail but the reserves have been looked at and I think we are in a you know a reasonably good position when it comes to our reserves and we do have money there to cover a number of contingencies and as part of this budget we are proposing that we would make a 20 million pound contribution into the reserves going forward so I don't think there's much more to say as you say I think the budget is pretty comprehensive it addresses the immediate needs of our residents but tries to deal with the longer term issues and I think you know we are putting in place you know a sustainable set of plans to enable us to build on that for the future and I'd just finally just like to thank all the finance officers and everyone else within all the other parts of the council who have worked so hard to get the budget to this stage so thank you all very much indeed okay thank you davis we'll go to kevin and denise who will make a couple of short points thank you chair I'm just going to try and bring it down probably to my portfolio and some of the things if I may so I'll be a little bit quicker so we're talking about sorry fine rescue we expect our firefighters to run towards danger whilst others run away they put their lives on the line for us and I think they expect and they should demand that we support them and that's with the best equipment the best training we can give them and the facilities that we can provide and I think that support is shown within this plan if you look at some of the things that we're doing we've got capital builds we've got Lingfield Chobham and Rygate we've done a tremendous amount of work in other stations for maintenance and greener future improvements from Chertsey Dorkin Farnham Cambly the list goes on replacement of fire appliances for the modern fire appliances vehicles and equipment and then you go look at Ray Park the improvements to the firehouse training facilities and the vehicle workshop so I was trying to put David's sort of strategic view of it actually to what does it mean to firefighters on the ground it means they can do their job and protect Surrey and just finally in previous meetings we've talked about digital postmortems which is providing dignity and respect to deceased and families and that's obviously part of this so it's just showing over and how it affects my portfolio and I'll fully support it thank you thank you Kevin Denise thank you leader on the same theme of equipping and providing as Kevin has just said in terms of our communities the community benefit that comes from this budget with your fund Surrey with our registration service with our libraries and our community hubs that we're developing and certainly with the support of our land and property colleagues because the delivery the pace of delivery and the quality of the delivery is exemplary for residents that live in Staines and Weybridge they'll see the wraps around our Weybridge and Staines hubs which are really exciting and really generating a lot of anticipation ready for them to be open very shortly but particularly on your fund Surrey again it's been running for four years this was Surrey County Council absolutely fully recognising the capabilities and resources within our communities in our residents recognising the thousands of volunteer hours that our residents provide in sometimes substandard accommodation with poor equipment you know having all sorts of dreams of delivering projects but not really knowing how to do that and we have enabled our communities to benefit to such an amazing scale 20 million invested 48 large projects across the county we've had 522 applications with our small projects fund which meant that 100,000 was allocated to each of our members to make sure that every single division benefited and I think this is really appreciation and recognition for what our communities can deliver so I'm just really grateful through the capital programme that we've been able to deliver so much and we will continue to deliver so much in partnership with our communities and absolutely deliver against their needs thank you thank you Denise I mean we're going to have an opportunity to full council to set out in a bit more detail specific project areas does anybody want to raise anything specifically now though thank you thank you I've spoken already you know I've said enough I think around our right home right support but I just wanted to just reflect on that a bit more in response to this budget item because you know within adult social care we have the increase in demand for services particularly mental health area loan disability and autism and increasing costs around providing services a significant challenge there but against that backdrop we have made this really significant investment into our supported independent living for people with loan disabilities our extra care housing supported independent living mental health will be coming forward to cabinet in the next couple of months and we also have our short break schemes as well so I just wanted just to reflect on that because I think that despite the daily challenges and that significant financial backdrop delivery is moving forwards and delivering those positive improved outcomes thank you yeah thank you very much well made okay in that case I can't see any other hands up so we'll move to the recommendations I'll just read a little bit of one and two but the first recommendation is that we approve the net revenue budget requirement to be set at 1.264.1 million and that's the net cost of services after service specific government grants and that's the number for 2526 and set out in detail annex B and of course that is subject to confirmation of the final local government financial settlement and then secondly it approves the total council tax funding requirement to be set 972.3 million for 2526 and then there are a total of 15 I think recommendations and indeed the annexes to the median term financial strategy which gives more of the detail around that but I'll take them as a whole unless anybody particularly wants to talk about any one of those so in which case I can't see any hands up so do you agree all 15 recommendations good thank you very much right so the next substantive item important item is item nine which is the community risk management plan Kevin thank you leader and you'll see from your papers I think it was about 225 pages of information I'm sure you won't want me to read through all of those so I will try and just give the main points so the so fire and rescue service community risk management plan for 2025 to 2030 has been meticulously developed following an extensive and robust consultation process engaging staff partners and the public the consultation spanned from May to September 2024 with a pause for the general election ensuring a comprehensive collection of feedback and insights so during the consultation period there were 38 roadshow events with the public and other stakeholders took place throughout all 11 districts and boroughs with specialist sessions held in the areas named within the proposals two additional engagement events took place in Cambly following feedback from the local member 86 organic social media posts via Facebook Instagram LinkedIn and X and eight targeted social media adverts via Facebook Instagram and Snapchat the top areas for responses were Guildford Banstead Kingston Redhill and Rygate Tadworth and Cambly this is not the total list but illustrates the level of time and resources dedicated to promoting the CRMP and consultation I believe that this inclusive approach has resulted in a strategic plan that addresses current and emerging risks before detailing the proposals for change I'd like to emphasise that the seven proposals do not make up all of the CRMP they are the key changes needed for the 2025 2030 community risk management plan that required public consultation our fire and rescue service delivers much more including preventing the emergencies protecting businesses developing staff and embracing technology it is a statutory requirement to have a CRMP with a minimum duration of three years our current one the making Surrey safer plan ended as of 2024 and therefore we must start a new one for 2025 this five year strategy replaces the making Surrey safer plan which focused on realigning resources into prevention and protection the new plan moves on from that and it supports the council vision of no one left behind it will be delivered in stages to ensure that we can monitor and review these changes I would like to thank the residents staff and stakeholders who participated in the three month consultation I now like to take the opportunity to clarify some of the key feedback themes suggestions that the plan is for cost saving this is not the case it's based on the managing of risk appropriately within our county and how we utilise our resources to manage that risk over the last three financial years our fire and rescue service budget has received a significant increase of 8.7 million which has been invested in prevention protection response and support services saving lives across Surrey support for data driven decisions Surrey Fire and Rescue reviews their risk assessment of Surrey the community risk profile every year this is so they can keep on top of the risk facing communities and react to them if needed this means that should a risk change again the service will act to keep people safe even if that means coming back through this process within this time frame a major focus for consultation and subsequent engagement was the closure of Banstead Fire Station and the relocation of some resources from Canby Fire Station to the station north of the county I understand the concern and assure you that if approved a thorough review of alternative locations in Whiteleaf will be undertaken in relation to the Canby proposal there is still appropriate fire and rescue cover for the risk in that area and this fire station is not closing irrespective of the outcome of any review or changes our 10 minute survey wide response target to critical incidents and our fire engine availability requirements of 16 fire engines in the night and 20 in the day remain unchanged the way in which sorry fire and rescue operates provides a service wide response balancing resources and assets across the county to ensure we can attend all emergencies these resources fire engines and crews can also be moved around to meet the risk at any given time this approach ensures that all emergencies receive an appropriate response to incidents regardless of their location within the county this is the way the service has operated for many years now and there is no change to that within this plan so the two key changes that have been suggested following analysis of the consultation responses these are firstly proposal 1.1 is now to relocate the current banstead fire engine and crew to Godstone fire station in 2026 that's following an updated and extensive review of any options within the white leaf area the key change here being that another thorough review will take place by our land and property colleagues to ensure nothing has now become available in the white leaf area if not the closure ban station will continue as is not fit for purpose or located at the optimum area for fire cover secondly proposal 1.3 is now to review current resources at Canby Fire Station and consider relocation options within the borough of Spellthorne Elmbridge and Runnymede this follows both consultation feedback urging Surrey Fire and Rescue to consider Runnymede for inclusion and also an updated risk profile which shows two pockets of increased risk in that area further detail on the feedback and outcome of the consultation and subsequent analysis can be found in the annexes provided within the papers the robust process and expert knowledge that has gone into the preparation and delivery of this draft plan and consultation should not be underestimated not only our own fire and rescue services professionals but also external verification from the likes of Nottingham Trent University who are leaders in public research and who led the National Fire Chiefs Council National Risk Methodologies Project they said and I quote Surrey Fire and Rescue Service has undertaken a robust process to develop the CRMP for Surrey that was Rowena Hill MBE who was the lead author for the NTU's report is a professor of resilience emergencies and disaster science with over 20 years researching along the UK emergency and resilience structures our goal is to keep people safe from emergencies and to be fully trained and equipped to respond when needed I just like to finally just end to thank the staff who have done a tremendous job I think you cannot underestimate how much work has gone into preparing the risk assessments looking at all the documentation and everything so my sincere thanks to the team that have done that thank you leader a little bit of help from the chief fire officer good I mean this is a really important document there's been a lot of conversation a lot of discussion I think those two points you've highlighted around Banstead and Camberley have been the ones that have generated the most interest but just to point out that we don't own the site of Banstead which is one of the reasons why we are having to look we have had many conversations around this so but let's take a few views let's start with you Sinead thank you leader yes I just wanted to say I really enjoyed actually reading the report and the summary that went with the plan and the plan of course itself so I acknowledge a lot of what Kevin Deans said particularly to the staff involved in this the bit I was really pleased to see and recognise was the three pillars of activity and particularly the third one I wanted to focus on which is identify and develop more opportunities to keep our communities safe through prevention protection and partnership activities and I just wanted to acknowledge the support with the high approval score this particular section obtained which was really good to see but I think really I just wanted to make reference to that commitment to ongoing and improving combined partnership work and just highlight a couple of key areas particularly around tackling prevention and supporting people to remain living independently in their home it's very linked to our adult social care and health partners agenda and it's really great to see the fire service looking to work in continued collaboration and actually strengthen that and I just wanted to highlight the hospital discharge piece of work you've referred to I think that is incredibly important for social care and our health partners to have that commitment and also with regards to supporting people to remain in their homes for longer independently so I think there's real scope and opportunity and I think it's great to see that reflected in the plan so congratulations I think I have to say as cabinet member for adult social care to Dan and to Kevin Dean of bringing this piece of work forward and strengthening that thank you thank you very much thank you leader could I also associate myself with the very positive comments made by Councillor Mooney and also Councillor Dean just to pick up on the consultation point the extensive consultation that took place between May and September the results of that consultation the public feedback received indicated a positive approval rating in relation to the six proposals subject to recommendations so it's worthwhile recognising that the public have spoken as well in relation to what is being proposed also this plan has been subject to scrutiny we take scrutiny seriously in this council and the communities environment and select committee considered this plan on the 5th of December and made three key recommendations but for me the most important was that they welcomed the robust process undertaken to develop the community risk plan including the validation by the university you mentioned earlier Kevin so I'm certainly very supportive of your endeavour and the contents of this plan thank you thank you gentlemen and Denise thank you I too wanted to recognise the extent of the resident engagement I absolutely commend the lengths that have been gone to I know that's always been the case as a theme within the service to make sure that everybody is able to have those conversations and you've mentioned Kevin that there were a couple of extra sessions put on just to make sure those residents were accommodated but particularly I think something of great concern within our communities is climate change population change density the built environment human behaviour there are so many rapid changes in our communities and we can see very densely populated areas developing within a couple of years so that risk profile is really changing very rapidly so it's really assuring to see the references to the review of specialist vehicles where they're located the evidence base that that will generate for investment and also looking at the seasonal demand and the changing risks that we can see in the very erratic weather we're having and constantly have in Surrey now so it's clearly responded to that so yeah very sound plan thank you thank you very much right so I can't see any other hands up so as I say we've are grateful thanks to Dan Quinn and to the whole team for producing what I think is an excellent and comprehensive document so it's a living document in that we are facing unknown challenges but also I think it is a good example of what Sinead has talked about in terms of the collaboration between Farm Rescue Service and Adult Social Care when you're in and out of their houses it's just another sort of team to support those residents so I don't think we need to do anything other than to consider the recommendation which is that we approve the CRMP for 2530 ensuring the Surrey Farm Rescue Service can begin implementing the service wide strategy from April 2025 in a staged approach is that agreed good thank you very much okay I'm just slightly conscious of time so we'll crack on with item 10 admission arrangements in our schools Claire thank you leader the purpose of this report is to ask cabinet to make recommendations to full council on admissions arrangements that will apply for Surrey's community and voluntary controlled infant junior primary and secondary schools for admission in September 2026 that's the year after next and in particular to look at three specific changes as a local authority we're responsible for setting admissions arrangements for 68 community and voluntary controlled schools for 2026 and the remaining schools across the county are academies or foundation free schools trusts or voluntary aided schools who are responsible for setting their own admissions arrangements this council is obliged to determine admission arrangements for 2026 by 28th of February this year and all the arrangements that are being put forward in this report are fully compliant with the school's admissions code we're asked to consider three particular schools for change the first is Rygate Priory Junior School and to consider a reduction of their published admissions numbers at year three from 150 to 120 children the head teacher and the governing body support this change and it is accordingly recommended the change is to accommodate the falling role of schools across the area and to enable efficient management of the school's resources but the change is incident and unrelated to any other considerations about the future of this school in particular the second proposal coming forward is at orderly primary school which has asked to introduce a published admissions number at year three of two additional children we are not recommending the implementation of this proposal as it would be likely to impact the admissions numbers at other local schools and thirdly at Ellsworth Inference School which is also looking to reduce its reception published admissions numbers from 120 to 90 the head teacher and the governing body support this change and it is accordingly recommended and again it's to accommodate the falling number of children on roll at school in the area and to enable efficient management of the school's resources but it's proposed that the plans for all other community and voluntary controlled schools for 2026 will remain as determined for 2025 the recommendations leader is set out in full on pages 402 and 3 of our printed agenda and their recommendations of this cabinet to full council thank you thank you very much Claire there are six recommendations are those agreed thank you item 11 then everyday living opportunities Sinead thank you chair my throat struggling had a cold last week but I shall carry on soldier through again I'm really excited to be bringing this item forward it's a good cabinet meeting I think for adults today because this is seeking approval around the progression of a commissioning plan for supporting everyday living the report sets out the key drivers it's really around establishing clear quality metrics and performance indicators so we can measure and people can measure how they're progressing and doing establishing a benchmark pricing methodology and bringing in market sustainability and growth as well via this more varied provision alongside that we're also bringing forward the adult social care travel policy this is the first published policy that adult social care is producing and it ensures therefore that we bring a public facing forward document with transparency and setting out what the service has to offer to residents who may need to draw down on this so the reason why we're doing this and bringing this forward is really to look at with challenges within the service with demand growing within the service with an ageing population with greater numbers of people living with disabilities and financial constraints working alongside that we need to have more cost effective approaches to procuring high quality support for people with eligible needs and I'm very much of the view that this strategy sets that out quite clearly so that is the paper that I brought forward today there's four recommendations chair would you like me to go through those no not just in the moment I think Trevor Holger is going to speak as the committee and I'll come back to you thank you leader yeah I'm the adults and health select committee support the approach being taken which aims to help and encourage residents to remain in their own homes and live fulfilling good lives in the community we do have one or two remarks but I think that's more suitable for the part too okay okay thank you we'll go back to you then Sinead on the recommendations thank you chair so the first recommendation is to approve the commissioning strategy for supporting everyday living for adults and young people in transition with eligible needs through a light touch regime procurement process under the public contracts regulations 2015 or the procurement act 2023 is appropriate the second recommendation is to approve that the ELO tender be commenced in quarter four of the financial year 24 25 and the third recommendation is to approve delegated authority to the executive director for adults well being and health partnerships in consultation with the cabinet member of adult social care for awarding the contracts and the final recommendation is to note the outcome of the consultation on the travel policy and to approve and agree to publish the travel policy as an integral document that supports the aims and desired outcomes of the everyday living opportunities tender very well read thank you very much Sinead are those four recommendations agreed thank you right so we're going to stick with you Sinead now on technology enabled care thank you I've said way too much today it's not good so yes again bringing a paper here forward around technology enabled care and this paper really is an information item but it's very informative and it's very exciting again to be bringing this forward because this is building on previous initiatives within the tech arena and various pockets across the county and bringing this together as one item and looking to bringing a big shift and really rolling this out as an opportunity to residents so again as I say I'm pleased to be bringing this forward there's lots of benefits with tech there's real opportunities for growth in this area and real benefits as well to adult social care but to those people that we support this paper is ambitious it sets out a really strong delivery model with clear commissioning and procurement approaches that will maximise opportunities but also reduce risk to this council so this is a really robust item and I know that the select committee chair has been watching this with anticipation to see how this has gone so yeah thank you chair thank you thank you leader as chairman of the adults and the health security I'm really excited to see this paper come to cabinet making better use of technology across Surrey support residents and make them more able to stay in their own homes is something the committee have really wanted to see become a reality and that's ever since witnessing a demonstration in mole valley of what can be achieved we particularly welcome the recognition that the move will need significant effort to achieve culture change for both residents using the service and for our professionals who are making assessments or supporting residents that culture change should never be underestimated we also welcome that consideration is being given to opening the service up for self funding residents as well as those directly supported by Surrey it's paramount that we also help self funding residents remain in our homes as well as those that we are supporting directly yeah thank you Sinead how do you think residents of Surrey will perceive our use and effectiveness of technology enabled care and do you think some people may be concerned about their privacy or personal data for example thank you Paul that's a really good question and I think the chair will vouch actually for that question I know the committee raised something similar but technology is becoming more commonplace in society and I do think with that comes a growth in exception really of day-to-day technology recognising the benefits that it can have in keeping people safe and well and also enhancing their lives as well so our challenge really I think will actually be around ensuring that we continue to deliver high quality social care inclusive of the use of technology and this must be done safely and appropriately based on those individual needs and preferences so the paper really focuses on care and support outcomes first and technology almost second but we will support our staff to adopt and understand technology which will also improve how they communicate and share that with the residents that they support and will improve the experience of delivering social care in Surrey so I just want to give assurances in terms of privacy and data that individuals information will be kept safe and they will be fully understand how their data is being used to benefit them personally that will be part of the package as tech is rolled out to individuals so we really do want people to live the lives that they want to and ensure that no one is left behind and technology is really keen delivering that thank you thank you very much Maureen thank you Lisa thank you Sinead for bringing this report very detailed but I just have a couple of questions if I may just for reassurance should I give them to you both together my first question is how will we ensure tech would be bespoke and how it would complement face to face care and not replace it and the second question being how are we focusing on ensuring that tech is bespoke to the individual please I think sorry thank you Maureen another good question I think that the real strength in this paper and this tech offer is the agility that tech can be presented it's a very flexible offer and it's really embedding an approach focused on the needs of the individual so that individual comes first and that tech offer is built around them to help support them and be independent in their homes so it's almost like prescribing the technology that meets the individual's assessed needs and not having that person fit the technology I hope that makes sense and there's going to be diverse and robust routes to market to allow for choice there will be lots of opportunities to select particular items with clear expectations when we use pilots and assess them to see how those new solutions work so I hope that's answered the question thank you okay thank you I mean I think you know this yeah we've been very keen to progress this agenda now for some time I suppose my only comment is that looking at recommendation seven that we won't see a five year strategic plan until next year 2026 which feels quite a long way away and what is quite a fast moving area so you know what is important is that we do get on and roll out those things that we can do as quickly as possible because it's a the outcomes are better I think for residents you know and secondly you know it is a cost effective way of supporting residents in their properties so the sooner we can get on and push forward with that then clearly the better so but you know it's a great initiative and good to see sort of now getting a bit of life to it okay there are second recommendations are those all agreed thank you very much thank you Sinead Trevor item 13 then the disposal of quadrant court in Woking thank you leader this report seeks approval for the freehold disposal of quadrant court which is a 7,315 square meter operational office building which is now deemed surplus to operational requirements under our agile office program all staff working here will be relocating to Victoria Gate in Woking it's recommended that cabinet declare the asset surplus and we dispose of this building approve the sale of quadrant court to the party outlined in the part two report these details are obviously all commercially confidential and delegate authority to the executive director for environment property and growth consultation with the director of land and property to finalize the transaction and conclude all legal agreements the other thank you very much so again I mean it will be great news when we move into Victoria Gate which I think is April May yes that's good and we can leave a building which is not fit for purpose and hasn't been for some while so and again in accordance with our sort of policy of having a plan for buildings that we are vacating it's good to see that even before in this case we have vacated we have found a purchaser so and we can see more details of that in part two but there are three recommendations to formally declare the asset surplus to operational requirements and approve the sale those agreed thank you very much item 14 then I'm conscious that we're nearly at the end of the financial year anyway and of course we've just gone through our budget David was anything you wanted to highlight thank you Tim now just to say that this report represents the budget preposition at the end of November there's yet an increase of almost a million pounds in the forecast overspend against the budget taking us to 18.6 million which is a disappointment given as you say that we're coming getting closer to the year end of the financial year it becomes harder all the time to find mitigation measures that will enable us to close that budget gap but we must continue to focus our efforts on doing that the size of the gap is becoming perilously close to the 20 million contingency that we built into the budget so that's disappointing most of the increase this month in the forecast overspend relates to the place directorate and particularly to the facilities management contract and I know there's work taking place in that area to try and find ways of mitigating the overspend and hopefully for the future bringing it back into line the report also covers the capital budget there's a small overspend in the capital budget which is largely due to the acceleration of planned works and there has been some underspend around in the IT space particularly with the rollout of the new refresh WAN Wi-Fi system which came in significantly under budget there's anything more to say thank you thank you so yeah just to reinforce it's absolutely essential that we come in within 20 million contingency by the end of the year so okay so that report is for noting and I think that brings us to the end of the public part of this agenda so pursuant 100A local Act 1972 we will now exclude any members of the public either online or in the building and move into part two so thank you all very much