The Cabinet of Surrey County Council met on 26 March 2024 and made a number of decisions on subjects ranging from school building works to advertising policy. Notably, the Cabinet approved, in principle, the latest phase of the Surrey Infrastructure Plan, including new flood alleviation schemes. The Cabinet also discussed the future of advertising on Surrey's roads, and decided to write to the Advertising Standards Agency (ASA) to understand how they are considering the environmental impact of advertising high-carbon products and services.

Advertising policy

Councillor Lance Spencer, Chair of the Greener Futures Reference Group, spoke about the potential conflict between the Council's climate emergency declaration and the advertising of high carbon products and services like flights. Councillor Spencer said:

Clearly the Greener Futures reference group was unanimous in its view that proceeding with the advertising on the highways would not be commensurate with supporting the Greener Futures activity, and I did point out in the meeting that it was clearly a conflict between the Greener Futures view of what should be happening here, and the financial view where obviously a significant amount of money is involved with potential revenues from the advertising activity.

Councillor Matt Furniss, the Cabinet Member for Highways, Transport and Economic Growth, argued that while he understood the Greener Futures Group's position, there were limits to what could be considered 'high-carbon' for the purpose of an advertising ban.

I think we were sort of looking and saying where would this stop on sort of assessing the carbon? And whilst looking at it from a very sort of focused readiness of the Greener Futures Task Group, I can understand the recommendations that you put forward. I think we do need to look a little bit wider, as if we did accept this, it wasn't just a financial point, it would actually prevent us of doing anything ourselves, maybe even around buses, because they are carbon intensive, they're not all hydrogen or electric at this point, or even the construction of them is fairly carbon intensive.

Councillor Furniss argued that the advertising standards authority (ASA) already provided guidance on what was acceptable to advertise. He also said that he was happy to support green businesses in Surrey by using advertising space to promote them.

Councillor Baart, a local member for Earlswood and Reigate South, asked Councillor Furniss:

are you saying, Councillor Furniss, that you don't see any problem at all with, say, an easyJet flight to Leeds being advertised on Surrey County Council's electronic billboard, you don't see any point at where that's at odds with our declaration of a climate emergency and our net zero targets.

Councillor Furniss responded by saying that while he wouldn't personally take a flight to Leeds, this was an individual choice and the Council shouldn't be restricting people's freedom by choosing what can and cannot be advertised.

Councillor Marissa Heath, the Cabinet Member for Environment, said that she would be happy to write to the ASA, and to the relevant minister, to understand how the environmental impact of advertising is being considered by the ASA, and whether there were any plans to change the regulations on advertising.

The Cabinet agreed that Councillor Heath would write to the ASA and the government, but they did not agree to change the Council's approach to advertising on its roads.

Surrey's water and sewerage systems.

Councillor Jonathan Hally, the Chair of the Communities, Environment and Highways select committee, updated the Cabinet on the Committee's work engaging with Surrey's water and sewerage companies, including Thames Water, which is responsible for the water supply and sewerage system in the majority of Surrey.

Councillor Hally argued that the meeting had been constructive, and that the water companies were:

...very much up for collaboration with the Council on the development of their next water plan, their regional water plan which was a key task ahead of them in the short term...

Councillor Hally said that the Committee would be seeking a seat on the Water Research South East Strategic Advisory Board to provide input into the regional water plan. He said that the water companies had also recognised the need to improve their performance, and to reduce the disruption they cause to residents.

Councillor Heath praised the work of the Committee and Councillor Hally, arguing that it was a good example of the Council showing leadership in Surrey. She also said that she was:

...very excited to continue to work on this review...

The Cabinet noted the Committee's recommendations.

The Surrey Infrastructure Plan

Councillor Natalie Bramhall, the Cabinet Member for Property, Waste and Infrastructure, introduced the fifth phase of the Surrey Infrastructure Plan, which sets out the Council's priorities for investment in infrastructure projects around the County.

Councillor Bramhall explained that the fifth phase of the plan included four projects:

• The Godalming to Guildford Cycle and Walking Corridor Phase 1
• The Street Compton Highway and Public Realm Improvements
• The Kings Road, Shalford Improvements
• The Surrey Flood Alleviation Programme.

Councillor Bramhall explained that these projects had been chosen because of the availability of funding, support from the relevant local councils, their feasibility, and their assessment against the Surrey Infrastructure Plan's prioritisation framework.

Councillor Furniss endorsed the plans, arguing that they would benefit his division. He explained that the Godalming to Guildford Cycleway had received a 66% positive response rate during public engagement. Councillor Furniss also said that the Street Compton improvements were necessary because the road was a busy B-road to the A3.

Councillor Heath praised the flood alleviation plan, reminding the Cabinet that £33m had been allocated to flood risk management.

Councillor Turner-Stewart, the Cabinet Member for Customer and Communities, argued that the plan showed that the Council had been delivering a solid four year programme of improvements. She pointed to a number of safety, regeneration, and flood-risk management schemes that had been completed. She said:

...we've really taken the opportunity to bring together all of our partners and capitalise on the opportunities that are there...

The Cabinet voted to approve the fifth phase of the Surrey Infrastructure Plan.

Chennestone Primary School

Councillor Bramhall asked the Cabinet to approve funding to replace the roof at Chennestone Primary School in Sunbury-on-Thames. Councillor Bramhall explained that the works were necessary to safeguard the health and safety of pupils and staff. She said that the new roof would improve the building's energy efficiency.

The Leader of the Council asked Councillor Bramhall whether the school contained reinforced autoclaved aerated concrete (RAAC) ¹.

Councillor Bramhall said that the school did not contain RAAC and that an investigation into the presence of RAAC in Surrey's school buildings had found that only one primary school had RAAC.

The Cabinet voted to approve the funding for the roof replacement.

The Council's Finances

Councillor David Lewis, the Cabinet Member for Finance and Resources, updated the Cabinet on the Council's financial position. He explained that the Council was forecasting an overspend of £4m for the 2023/24 financial year. He said that the main reason for the overspend was the rising cost of care for adults and children, as well as the rising cost of home to school transport. Councillor Lewis also said that the Council was forecasting a slight overspend on its capital budget, which was mostly due to the purchase of the Victoria Gate office in Woking.

Councillor Lewis went on to explain that, despite the overspends, the Council's finances were robust. He said that the Council had healthy reserves and was in a good position to meet its financial obligations. He also said that the Council had recently received a positive Annual Audit Report from Grant Thornton, who had praised the Council for its strong financial management.

The Leader of the Council agreed that the Council's finances were in a good position. He said that the £4m overspend should be seen in the context of the Council's overall budget, which is over £1bn. He also said that the Council would be implementing a number of measures to bring its spending under control and reduce the overspend.

The Cabinet noted the report.