This week in Surrey:

• The Strategic Investment Board approved the sale of Ranger House to Surrey Property Group (SPG) and a loan to SPG for its refurbishment.
• The Surrey-Wide Commissioning Committees in Common meeting was held, but no video or transcript was provided.

Strategic Investment Board - Monday 14 April 2025

The Strategic Investment Board (SIB) approved the sale of Ranger House in Guildford to Surrey Property Group (SPG), along with a loan to SPG for its purchase and redevelopment. The board also approved the Strategic Investment Board Annual Report for 2023/24.

Ranger House Sale and Refurbishment

The council is selling Ranger House to its wholly-owned subsidiary, Surrey Property Group (SPG), to reduce its reliance on third-party rental income. SPG plans to refurbish the property to increase its capital value and attract new business. The Managing Director of SPG, Charles Maxlow-Tomlinson, stated that the SPG Board had independently reviewed and approved the property transfer. The Interim Executive Director Environment, Property & Growth, Simon Crowther, supported the disposal of Ranger House as a strategic fit for both the council and SPG.

The board approved the sale of Ranger House to SPG, delegating authority to the s.151 Officer¹ to agree on the final amount, and approved a loan from the council to SPG, secured against Ranger House, to partially fund the purchase and redevelopment, delegating authority to the s.151 Officer to finalise loan details. The SPG Board was granted delegated authority to proceed with refurbishment works to maximise income and capital value.

The reasons for the decisions included the fact that the largest tenant at Ranger House had a break option in November 2025, and the council was incurring void service charges, business rates, and insurance costs. A business plan, informed by advice from MAC Consulting, Oktra, Colliers and Owen Isherwood, focused on necessary building improvements to maximise rental income. Transferring the asset to SPG shifted the short-term risk of income fluctuations from the council to its subsidiary. A positive net present value (NPV) was forecast, benefiting both the council and SPG.

This decision is similar to the one made by the Resources and Performance Select Committee on Wednesday 02 April 2025, where they agreed to exclude the press and public to discuss a report relating to Ranger House.

Strategic Investment Board Annual Report 2023/24

The Strategic Investment Board Annual Report for 2023/24 was presented to the board for approval. The report provides an overview of the council's investments in various companies and their performance.

The council wholly owns four trading companies: Halsey Garton Property (which owns Surrey Property Group Ltd), Halsey Garton Residential Ltd, Hendeca Group Ltd, and Surrey Choices Ltd. It also owns 50% of Surrey and Kent Commercial Services LLP, and minority shareholdings in TRIC Consortium Ltd and UK Municipal Bonds Agency Ltd.

Combined pre-tax net profits (unaudited) of £1.3 million were achieved, compared to £2.4 million in 2022/23. Interest of £14.8 million was paid to the council on loans to subsidiaries. Dividends of £22,000 were paid to the council during the year, compared to £430,000 in 2022/23.

The Strategic Investment Board resolved to approve the Strategic Investment Board Annual Report 2023/24.

Surrey-Wide Commissioning Committees in Common - Thursday 17 April 2025

The Surrey-Wide Commissioning Committees in Common meeting was held, but no video or transcript was provided.

This week in Surrey:

• The People, Performance and Development Committee endorsed an updated Officer Code of Conduct and approved changes to redundancy payments.
• The Communities, Environment and Highways Select Committee discussed utility company engagement and highway maintenance, making recommendations for improvements.

People, Performance and Development Committee - Monday 07 April 2025

The People, Performance and Development Committee (PPDC) met on Monday 7 April 2025, to discuss the officer code of conduct, career development, redundancy payments and the pay policy statement. The committee endorsed the updated Officer Code of Conduct, approved changes to the council’s redundancy payments scheme, and approved the Pay Policy Statement for 2025/26. They also discussed staffing implications arising from local government reorganisation¹.

Local Government Reorganisation

Shelley Smith, Director – People and Change, provided an update on the staffing implications of the local government reorganisation and devolution. She said that an all-staff webinar and Q&A session had taken place on 28 March, with 2,600 staff attending online and in person. A page has also been set up on the council's intranet, SharePoint, where staff can find information, including the interim proposal submitted to the government.

The heads of HR from across the other Surrey councils met on 17 April to discuss how they will work together on issues such as TUPE² transfers. A workshop on TUPE legislation was hosted at Woodhatch Place for HR colleagues across the 12 councils.

The committee discussed the transformation programmes currently underway and whether they should be paused, stopped or continued, given the upcoming changes. Shelley Smith, Director – People and Change, said that all of the transformation programmes are being reviewed, and a number of them will not go ahead.

Officer Code of Conduct

Bella Smith, Head of Insights, Systems & Governance, presented the updated Officer Code of Conduct, which forms part of the constitution of the council, for endorsement. The code of conduct is reviewed annually to ensure it aligns with policy amendments and reflects current working practices.

Changes to the code of conduct for 2025 include: a review of section four to ensure that the statements within the introduction are qualified by a statement to facilitate officers’ understanding of the purpose of the code of conduct; updated language to make it more readable and understandable; a section on the duty of candour³ has been included in section seven to ensure that those officers whose roles are regulated by the Care Quality Commission understand the requirement for registered care providers and workers to act in an open and transparent way, particularly when a notifiable safety incident has occurred; and reference to the ending bullying and harassment policy, which was approved by this committee in 2024, has been included.

Councillor Denise Turner-Stewart, Deputy Leader and Cabinet Member for Customer and Communities, asked if the council publishes any statistics on disciplinaries, including instances where somebody has left or been compromised out. Bella Smith, Head of Insights, Systems & Governance, said that if somebody has left the organisation through a mutual agreement, then they have not been found in breach of the conduct code.

Councillor Turner-Stewart asked if the duty of candour section goes far enough to show the responsibility on adult social care and children's services. Bella Smith, Head of Insights, Systems & Governance, said that it does in terms of linking the regulations to the policy, and that people within those care roles would have a very clear idea about what their duties and responsibilities are. She added that the application of duty of candour in a wider sense is something that they are looking at for next year, as they review it going through this year.

Eber Kington raised the point that the member officer protocol is not listed in the document. He said that there are two key issues there, which he has personally had to deal with: officers should not pass on questions from one member to any other member, and they should keep members informed of any policy development within their division before it's announced in their division. Bella Smith, Head of Insights, Systems & Governance, said that they can include it.

The committee endorsed the updated Officer Code of Conduct with those slight amendments and recommended its approval to the council.

Career Development Update

Peter Little, Organisational Development Transformation Consultant, gave an overview of the career development programme, its purpose, key achievements, ongoing developments, and context in relation to local government reorganisation.

The programme aims to tackle issues such as reducing the voluntary turnover rate, increasing retention of high-performing employees, and addressing the perceived lack of career progression opportunities within the council.

Achievements over the past year include: the launch of a career development portal; weekly spotlights on career development through Top Minds Brief; and revamped recruitment practices to focus more on internal candidates.

These efforts have supported an increase in pool survey results, increased retention for disabled and ethnically diverse colleagues, and a reduction in turnover from 12% to 9.7%.

Ongoing developments include: revamping the internal work shadowing scheme; creating a digital access portal for coaching and mentoring; and introducing a job-sharing programme.

Councillor Mark Nuti, Cabinet Member for Health and Wellbeing, and Public Health, asked if there are any departments within the County Council that draw the stats out in one particular direction or another beyond the average. Bella Smith, Head of Insights, Systems & Governance, said that the area that is particularly challenging is for social workers' retention, but even that area has improved significantly in the last year or so as well.

Eber Kington asked if getting all these people enthused about career development and then telling them at the same time they haven't got a career in Surrey County Council in two years' time, is impacting the recipients. Peter Little, Organisational Development Transformation Consultant, said that people are absolutely enthused, and that there is opportunity for the future. He said that Surrey County Council might not exist in two years' time, but certainly the work for councils will.

Eber Kington referred to paragraph 4.7 of the report, which states that the separately maintained levy fund for Surrey County Council education settings only is currently underspent, with £409,000 having been returned to central government during 2024. He said that we need to find a way to stop any money going back to central government. Peter Little, Organisational Development Transformation Consultant, said that one of the things they're doing is addressing the bigger communication challenge within schools, and a lot of reticence within schools around embarking on apprenticeship programmes because of the restriction around having 20% off the job.

The committee noted the activities undertaken and planned.

Voluntary Redundancy Payments and Severance Pay Approvals

Emma Lucas, Assistant Director, Employment Practice, presented a report seeking approval from the committee to make changes to the council’s redundancy payments scheme to simplify the payments in respect of voluntary redundancy, and to amend the severance policy with regards to approvals of severance payments to bring them in line with legal requirements.

Currently, there are three redundancy payment schemes for council employees: compulsory, voluntary (employer led), and voluntary (employee led). The proposal is to remove the employee led voluntary redundancy payment scheme, as it is seldom used and can be confused with employer led voluntary redundancy.

The report also highlighted an issue with how severance payments are approved. The current wording is that payments of £150,000+ need PPDC approval. However, the requirement for approval by PPDC, where the payment is over £150,000, could put the council in conflict with the Local Authorities (Standing Orders) (England) Regulations 2001, which preclude members from making decisions regarding appointment or dismissal of employees below Deputy Chief Officer level.

It was proposed to remove the requirement for PPDC to approve severance payments from the Redundancy and Severance Policy, to ensure compliance with legal requirements. Any severance case with a total cost of £150,000 or over would need to be approved by the Chief Executive, Director of People and Change and s151 Officer, in consultation with the Leader of the Council.

Councillor Paul Follows, Liberal Democrats Group Leader, asked for clarification on SSPs⁴. He said that if the SSPs comply with best value, then politicians get involved at the council level, but if it doesn't meet best value, then the politicians are struck out of having any say. He asked if a scheme that doesn't comply with best value should not be run past the councillors to see if it's justifiable.

The committee approved a change to the council’s Redundancy Payments scheme whereby the “employee led” voluntary redundancy payment scheme is removed, and noted the changes required to the Redundancy and Severance Policy to ensure compliance with legal requirements.

Pay Policy Statement 2025/26

Shella Smith, Director – People and Change, presented the Pay Policy Statement for 2025/26 for approval. Local authorities are required under section 38(1) of the Localism Act 2011 to prepare a Pay Policy Statement. The statement must articulate the council’s policy towards the pay of the workforce, particularly senior staff and its lowest-paid employees.

Updates within the 2025/26 Pay Policy Statement include: removal of section 8iii due to the outstanding Trading Standards staff on Buckinghamshire County Council terms and conditions transferring to Surrey Pay terms and conditions in August 2024; and the annual pay review effective date for Tutors in Surrey Arts and Surry Adult Learning has been amended to 1 April following collective agreement.

Following the annual local pay negotiations, the council has agreed to mirror the National Employers pay award for 2025/26 and has entered into a collective agreement with its recognised Trade Unions.

The committee approved the Pay Policy Statement for 2025/26 and authorised the Director of People and Change, in consultation with the Chair of the Committee, to amend the Pay Policy Statement with updated pay scales and pay ratios, when the National Employers Pay agreement for 2025/26 is agreed and implemented.

Communities, Environment and Highways Select Committee - Thursday 10 April 2025

The Communities, Environment and Highways Select Committee met to discuss utility company engagement, highway maintenance, and future work programmes, making several recommendations including continuing to pursue fairer government funding based on road usage and improving gully maintenance. The committee acknowledged progress made by Ringway and the council to improve highway maintenance and outcomes for residents. They also agreed to note the recommendations to the tracker and forward work programme.

Utilities Engagement Programme

The committee reviewed the utilities engagement programme, which stemmed from scrutiny sessions with water, energy, and digital utility providers in January and April 2024. The aim of these sessions was to identify areas for improvement and establish collaborative strategic planning.

Key outcomes and actions agreed upon with water utilities included: greater collaboration on demand management and demand reduction, such as leakage reduction, customer metering, and education; exploring the replication of the Greater London Authority (GLA) Infrastructure Mapping Tool in Surrey to cover planned, reactive, and emergency works; encouraging improvement in the quality and availability of information to customers on planned works through signage and targeted communications; closer working between Thames Water and Surrey County Council on the development of the next Drainage and Wastewater Management Plans (DWMPs); greater collaborative working on the development of the next regional plan with Water Resources South East (WRSE) with the proposal to include Surrey County Council in representation on relevant boards; input to the national regulator, Ofwat, regarding the key performance indicators (KPIs) that matter to local communities as part of the next five-year plans; exploring a Surrey-wide plan, with Surrey County Council and WRSE investigating a single geographic plan for water and better linkage between local and regional plans; closer collaboration with Surrey County Council to understand what major developments are coming forward, the implications for the capacity of the network, and how to prioritise and encourage green infrastructure solutions; and more dialogue with the Surrey County Council Flood Risk Management Team to address flooding issues and delivery of priorities in drainage and wastewater management plans.

Councillor David Harmer raised concerns about water quality, reporting that several parish councils had raised concerns about the quality of water in the River Wey, with sections having to be closed to the public. Councillor Marisa Heath, Cabinet Member for Environment, responded that this was high on her agenda, and that the council was working with community organisations like River Mole Watch to monitor water quality.

Regarding energy utilities, the agreed outcomes and actions included: improved process and engagement on grid connections; greater collaboration between the local authority and Distribution Network Operator (DNO) on strategic energy planning and street works; and more effective and resilient strategic planning and support to vulnerable residents.

Councillor Andy MacLeod asked about challenges with connections to the transmission network for organisations such as solar farms. He was told that the current transmission connection timelines are very long, typically between 2031 and 2037, which is a significant barrier to progressing new projects.

It was agreed that a session with digital utilities was not needed due to existing constructive engagement and digital utility providers already participating in the Streetworks Taskforce sessions.

The committee discussed the Streetworks Taskforce and congestion management, which included representatives from 14 utility companies. Jonathan Hulley, Deputy Cabinet Member for Strategic Highways, said that the task force was established in July 2024 to encourage greater collaboration between the council and utility providers, improved communication, better signage, and digitisation of information.

Councillor Helyn Clack asked how the council could further coordinate road closures for utility works and highways works, and whether the council was negotiating with boroughs and districts regarding bin collection and street cleansing.

The committee made the following recommendations: acknowledge progress to date on improved engagement with utilities and recommends this work to continue as business as usual within services in the Place Directorate; written updates on objectives will be provided to the committee at agreed intervals; and Surrey County Council itself has its own highways communications, and should mention the One Network¹ and Surrey's own communications in order to make it as easy as possible for residents to find information.

Highways Term Maintenance Contract Performance

The committee reviewed the Highways Term Maintenance Contract delivered through Ringway over the past two years. Matt Furniss, Cabinet Member for Highways, Transport and Economic Growth, said that the contract focused on quality, collaboration, social value, carbon reduction, and innovation.

The contract delivers reactive, routine, and planned works, including fixing potholes, winter gritting, gully cleaning, road resurfacing, and pavement works. The budget has been £120 million per annum over the past two years.

Councillor John Beckett said that he had received feedback that seemed to indicate a difference in the quality of works between borough to borough, and asked what inspection process was in place. Matt Furniss responded that the council has a series of timestamp data, including photos, which is captured before, during, and after the work is carried out. He said that the council also has its own laboratory, and they go out and do checks on the material as well to make sure it is the correct material and is laid in the correct way.

Mark Sugden asked what the key risk areas were with Ringway's performance and what steps the council was taking to mitigate these. He was told that two key areas were the quality of schemes and the outcome of routine drainage work.

Councillor David Harmer said that the performance of Ringway was dramatically superior to where it was a number of years ago, but asked who was responsible for managing the diversion signage. He was told that Ringway was responsible for diversion signage for the council's works.

Lance Spencer said that the expenditure on the contract had increased significantly, from £80 million a year to £120 million a year, and asked how much of that was inflation-linked and how much was incremental expenditure to catch up on poor maintenance. Matt Furniss responded that the increased spend solely relates to the council's additional budgeting.

Councillor Helyn Clack said that Surrey's roads are much more congested than roads in other counties in England, and asked how the council was lobbying government for a fairer formula for funding more congestion. Matt Furniss responded that a majority of highway authorities across the UK like the current funding formula, and that the council's main lobbying to government is to increase the base rate of funding rather than just doing a pothole fund.

Councillor Andy MacLeod said that the word pothole did not appear anywhere in the Ringway contract performance report, and asked why there was not specific reporting about potholes. He was told that the council was repairing about 45,000 potholes a year, compared to 75,000 on previous contracts.

Stephen Cooksey said that there were quite a lot of examples of contractors leaving signs and equipment behind, and asked if there was a follow-up system for this. He was told that Ringway has a daily report on traffic management which has not been checked back in or is overdue.

The committee made the following recommendations: acknowledge the progress made by Ringway and Surrey County Council to improve performance of the contract and the outcomes for residents; the committee recommends that the Cabinet Member continues to pursue with government the issue of the money government gives to councils, and that this should be based on the vehicle miles usage of highways, not just the mileage, through both the County Council Network and through Surrey members of parliament; and the committee requests an updated member briefing on Ringway's approach to gully improvements.

Recommendations Tracker and Forward Work Programme

The committee reviewed the actions and recommendations tracker and forward work programme, and agreed to note it.

This week in Surrey:

• The Resources and Performance Select Committee discussed the impact of local government reform, the forward work programme, and cabinet responses to select committee recommendations.

Resources and Performance Select Committee - Wednesday 02 April 2025

The Resources and Performance Select Committee met to discuss cabinet responses to select committee recommendations, performance monitoring, and the committee's forward work programme. The committee agreed to exclude the press and public to discuss a report relating to Ranger House, Guildford. They also discussed the impact of local government reform on the council's activities.

Local Government Reform

The committee discussed the potential impact of the upcoming local government reform (LGR) on the council's activities. Councillor Nick Darby, Chair of the Council, noted the need to be aware of what the council can productively do with a council that has a maximum of two years of life. He suggested a two-phased approach: first, preparing the council for the changes, and second, adapting the approach to scrutiny based on the views of those elected to the new unitary authorities. Councillor Darby stressed the importance of ensuring services are transferred effectively to maintain the best possible services.

Steven McCormick, Vice-Chairman of the Council, called LGR the elephant in the room and suggested that the committee should add LGR to its forward work programme to allow for scrutiny of the reform.

Forward Work Programme and Recommendation Tracker

The committee reviewed the forward work programme and recommendation tracker, considering additions and amendments.

Steven McCormick, Vice-Chairman of the Council, noted that the draft Equalities, Diversity & Inclusion (EDI) framework had not been consulted on via the political groups, despite the report stating that it had.

The forward work programme lists a number of items for future scrutiny, including:

• The land and property maintenance contract with Macro
• The Equalities, Diversity and Inclusion Framework
• A review of procurement and contract management policies and practices
• A land and property update report
• The draft budget for 2026/27

The recommendations and action tracker was also reviewed, which monitors the progress of actions and recommendations made by the committee.

Cabinet Response to Select Committee Recommendations

The committee noted the Cabinet's response to previous recommendations. The Cabinet accepted the recommendations regarding the Customer Transformation Programme and the Unit4/MySurrey Stabilisation Board Report.

The Cabinet response to the Customer Transformation Programme acknowledged the challenges in delivering robust benefits, particularly in the context of LGR. The Cabinet agreed to revisit the funding for the programme to ensure future spending benefits Surrey residents and/or any new future authorities.

The Cabinet response to the Unit4/MySurrey Stabilisation Board Report acknowledged the concerns about outstanding issues, costs, and the original specification used when procuring the system. The Cabinet agreed to provide an update to the select committee within three months on the progress in resolving issues with Unit4, the system's performance and capacity, and the effectiveness of the new governance arrangements. The Cabinet also agreed to review the likely impacts of LGR on the use of the Unit4 system. As you may recall from our previous emails, the Unit 4 system, which was implemented in July 2023, has been plagued with problems.

Performance Monitoring Session Notes

The committee reviewed the notes from the performance monitoring session held on 16 December 2024. Topics discussed included customer and communities, people and change, customer, digital and change projects, service performance (audit), finance, land and property, and health and safety.

Key points from the performance monitoring session included:

• Positive feedback on Surrey County Council's FixMyStreet service.
• Concerns about wait times for the blue badge service.
• Updates on the MySurrey stabilisation project.
• Discussion of budget accountability statements and the importance of timeliness.
• Updates on health and safety building compliance assurance.
• Discussion of mandatory health and safety training courses.

This week in Surrey:

• Councillor Matt Furniss approved the Bus Service Improvement Plan (BSIP) Phase 4 grant investment decisions, which includes funding for the Surrey LINK Card and zero-emission buses.
• Councillor Clare Curran approved the allocation of £5.3 million for Brooklands College's post-16 SEND unit, supporting autistic students aged 16-19.
• The Planning and Regulatory Committee approved the importation and re-injection of non-site derived produced water into Brockham Wellsite.
• The Farnham Board discussed the Farnham Infrastructure Programme, including town centre improvements and cycle schemes.

Cabinet Member for Highways, Transport and Economic Growth Decisions - Monday 24 March 2025

During the meeting, Surrey County Council's Cabinet Member for Highways, Transport and Economic Growth, Councillor Matt Furniss, approved the Bus Service Improvement Plan (BSIP) Phase 4 grant investment decisions, an update to the Highways and Transportation Asset Management Strategy, and changes to the Highway Hierarchy Policy, particularly concerning footways. The meeting also included a procedural item to exclude the public from a portion of the meeting to discuss exempt information.

Bus Service Improvement Plan Phase 4 Grant Investment Decisions

The council has been allocated BSIP Phase 4 grant funding from the Department for Transport (DfT), which includes both revenue and capital allocations, as well as funding for 'Capacity and Capability' support. The total funding amounts to £10.9 million. The DfT requires that BSIP4 funding should be spent or otherwise fully committed, ideally with contracts in place, in the 2025/26 financial year. The investment priorities align with the council’s objectives of growing a sustainable economy and enabling a greener future, and are based on the aspirations set out in their June 2024 BSIP.

Key initiatives to be funded include: the Surrey LINK Card, offering half-price travel for those aged 20 and under; expansion of the Surrey Connect Digital Demand Responsive Transport (DDRT); a bus priority investment programme; funding to increase the number of zero-emission buses; expansion of Real Time Passenger Information (RTPI); funding access to roadworks data for bus operators; enhancements to 15 bus services; making the Acorn multi-operator ticketing scheme smart-enabled; development of disability awareness training for bus operators and local transport authority staff; and development of a bus stop design guide.

The revenue interventions and BSIP aspirations, with estimated funding, are: promotional activity (£300,000); DDRT Phase 3 (£1,200,000); continued support for the Surrey LINK Card (£300,000); service enhancements & Reliability Improvements (£3,717,000); Aira Explorer App Support (£25,000); Initial Bus Franchising Study (£110,000); and Supporting Real Time Investment (£214,000).

The capital interventions and BSIP aspirations, with estimated funding, are: DDRT Phase 3 minibuses (£800,000); Zero Emission Bus scheme – ZEBRA 2 increased scope (£550,000); Bus Clearway Assessment & Expansion Programme (£375,000); Wider Elmbridge & NW Surrey Bus Priority Programme (£300,000); Bus Priority Programme West Surrey focused – Guildford & Blackwater Valley (£700,000); Redhill Bus Station Study Options Assessment (£255,000); Staines Bus Station Options Assessment (£500,000); Real Time Passenger Information improvements (£224,000); and Zero Emission Bus scheme – New scheme with Stagecoach (£1,254,000).

The report noted that some of the BSIP Phase 4 funding would be used to reduce the County Council’s need to borrow to fund capital investment. The council will provide quarterly updates to the DfT on BSIP Phase 4 spend.

Highways and Transportation Asset Management Strategy Update

The Highways and Transportation Asset Management Strategy sets out how Surrey County Council manages its highway infrastructure assets, considering whole-life costs, associated risks, and alignment with Surrey’s corporate objectives. The updated strategy was approved. The Highway Asset Strategy is a key part of the council's Asset Management Framework, including the Capital Prioritisation Policy, Safety Inspection Policy, Highway Hierarchy Policy, SKID Policy¹, Survey Strategy and Asset Data Strategy.

The changes to this version of the strategy since the 2022 version include: reference to the updated Highway Hierarchy Policy, in which the main changes are to the Footway Hierarchy; updates to the service wide alignment section referencing the groups that feed into the improvement programme; update to ‘How we plan investment’ section to reflect current processes and network condition; update to reflect progress on how we are using image recognition survey (Route Reports and Vaisala Road AI) to inspect our roads and collect condition data; reference to new PAS 2161 Condition Standard; update to include reference to the Asset Strategy Delivery Plan; updated reference to Performance Indicators (PIs) to reflect current number of metrics; update to ‘Future Opportunities & Demands’ section to reflect current status and include reference to Road Markings, Vegetation and Drainage and cycle asset management; update to ‘Considering the Environment and Sustainability’ section referencing the introduction of Climate Change Risk & Vulnerability Assessments; reference to ongoing work to improve management of Passenger Transport data; and updates to old URL links and references to outdated directorate, team and position titles.

Highway Hierarchy Policy Update

The report outlined improvements to the Footway Hierarchy section of the Surrey County Council Highway Hierarchy Definition Policy. The updated policy was approved. The Footway Hierarchy is a data-led method of categorising Surrey’s footways based on usage. The hierarchy dictates how frequently a footway is inspected, how often condition data is collected, and is a key component of the Capital Scheme Prioritisation Policy. It also informs snow clearance priority.

The changes include: increasing schools with more than 250 pupils from category three to category two, resulting in more frequent safety inspections (four times a year instead of twice yearly) and increased prioritisation for maintenance; and introducing a new category, splitting category four into four A and four B, to prioritise footways serving community facilities such as care homes and playgrounds.

Councillor Furniss said this was good news for inspecting more frequently around schools and key community facilities.

Exclusion of the Public

Under Section 100A of the Local Government Act 1972, the public was excluded from the meeting for consideration of items involving the likely disclosure of exempt information.

Cabinet Member for Children and Families, Lifelong learning Decisions - Monday 24 March 2025

This meeting of the Cabinet Member for Children, Families and Lifelong Learning approved the allocation of £5.3 million from the Special Educational Needs and Disabilities (SEND) Capital Funding for Brooklands College's post-16 SEND unit. This investment will support the construction of a new 60-place unit for autistic students aged 16-19. The decision aims to ensure that Surrey students with additional needs can be educated closer to home and included in their local communities.

Brooklands College SEND Capital Programme

The main item under consideration was the SEND Capital Programme at Brooklands College for the post-16 SEND unit. Councillor Clare Curran, Cabinet Member for Children, Families and Lifelong Learning, was asked to approve the use of £5.3 million from the council's approved SEND Capital funding for the college's mainstream post-16 SEND unit.

This funding, already committed under the Special Educational Needs and Disabilities (SEND) Capital Programme, will go towards a construction project delivered by Brooklands College Trust under a self-delivery agreement with the council. According to the report pack, the project aims to create a new 60-place post-16 mainstream SEND unit for autistic students aged 16-19, comprising 30 additional places and 30 re-provided places for students already in temporary accommodation since September 2023.

Councillor Curran stated that the council has a SEND Capital budget allocation of £143.6 million, which was reaffirmed by the cabinet in June 2024 and by the full council's budget setting meeting in February 2025. She also noted that the Capital Programme Panel met in February 2025 and their decision provides assurance of consistency with the council's relevant and appropriate strategies.

The report presented to the cabinet member outlined the business case for the project, and Councillor Curran confirmed that public consultation was undertaken in line with the Department for Education's policy for general further education colleges, as well as statutory planning consultations and the judicial review period for land and property developments.

Planning and Regulatory Committee - Wednesday 26 March 2025

The Planning and Regulatory Committee met on Wednesday 26 March 2025, and approved an application for the importation and re-injection of non-site derived produced water into Brockham Wellsite to support hydrocarbon production, subject to a legal agreement regarding HGV access. The committee also discussed two applications relating to Weydon Academy, but these were ultimately refused.

Brockham Wellsite Application

The committee considered an application, MO/2024/1975, for the importation and re-injection of non-site derived produced water into Portland Sandstone beds to support hydrocarbon production at Brockham Wellsite, located on land at Felton's Farm, Old School Lane, Brockham.

The committee agreed to the recommendation to permit the application, subject to the prior completion of a Legal Agreement to secure a routing agreement for HGVs accessing and egressing the site, with an added informative, the wording to be agreed with the officers, vice chairman and Councillor Catherine Powell, Residents' Association and Independent Group Leader. The vote was carried nine votes to one.

The application was required because the water to be imported is waste product derived from elsewhere. The process would involve: non-site derived waste water being brought to site by HGV tankers; storage in a brine tank; and injection into the well. This would require a maximum of two HGV tankers per day to deliver waste water to the site and that the importation of the water to the site would continue for the life of the minerals consent, which runs to December 2036.

Councillor Ernest Mallett MBE, supported the application, stating that he could not see the difference between the original extraction allowed and the present extraction if it's allowed, and that oil is needed for the national economy.

Councillor Catherine Powell, raised concerns about the lack of reference to the Horse Hill decision² in the papers, and the fact that the environmental agency permit was issued before the Horse Hill decision was made. She also raised concerns about the fact that by allowing this, the council are increasing the amount of oil that will come out of that site, and therefore when it's burnt, there is an environmental impact associated with that.

Councillor Geoffrey Gray, questioned whether very special circumstances exist for this proposal, given the concerns raised that the reasons cited for import are contrived, that there's insufficient evidence about water available on site, and that this is just a waste disposal scheme.

Weydon Academy Applications

The committee then considered two applications relating to Weydon Academy.

The committee voted to refuse both applications.

Farnham Board - Friday 28 March 2025

The Farnham Board met to discuss the Farnham Infrastructure Programme, including updates on town centre improvements, cycle schemes, and the A31 corridor. The board was also scheduled to discuss programme risks and review progress against key milestones. The meeting was scheduled to include updates on various projects and address questions from board members.

The board was scheduled to receive an update on the Farnham Infrastructure Programme, which aims to maintain Farnham as a thriving community and town. The discussion was to cover several key areas: Town Centre Improvement Scheme; Farnham A31 Corridor Update; Short and Medium-Term Interventions; Wider Network Management Update; and Programme and Risks.

The progress report outlined several projects completed since the last meeting: 20mph Limits/Zones and Speed Restrictions; Borelli/Riverside Cycle Improvement Scheme; Local Cycling and Walking Infrastructure Plan (LCWIP); Re-routing of Heavy Goods Vehicles (HGVs); and Town Centre Improvements.

The progress report also detailed activities planned up until the next Farnham Board meeting: Borelli/Riverside Cycle Improvement Scheme; Local Cycling and Walking Infrastructure Plan (LCWIP); Re-routing of Heavy Goods Vehicles (HGVs); and Town Centre Improvements.