The Communities, Environment and Highways Select Committee met on Thursday 15 October 2026 to discuss a range of issues including performance assurance, the coroner's service, climate change progress, and waste management procurement. Key decisions included noting the progress of the digital post-mortem facility project and supporting the development of a handover plan for waste disposal services to the new unitary authorities.

Performance Assurance Report (Q1 2026/27)

The committee received a quarterly performance assurance report for the first quarter of 2026/27. Six indicators were rated as RED: Surrey Fire and Rescue Service staff establishment vs headcount, percentage of gullies cleaned compared to programme, percentage of planning approvals for Surrey County Council developments processed within statutory timescales, average days for a death registration appointment, percentage of deaths registered within statutory timeframe, and average days from a post-mortem decision to completion. One indicator, the percentage of births registered within the statutory 42-day timeframe, was rated AMBER. The majority of indicators (25) were rated GREEN.

Councillor Jeremy Webster raised concerns about roadworks delays, particularly regarding the discovery of unexpected underground services. Councillor Furness, Cabinet Member for Highways, Transport and Economic Growth, explained that while efforts are made to identify all services, unexpected discoveries can occur, leading to delays. He assured that the Streetworks team coordinates with utility companies to expedite necessary relocations. Councillor Webster also questioned the effectiveness and depth limitations of Cable Avoidance Tools (CATs) and the standard use of Ground Penetration Radar (GPR). Lloyd Allen, Assistant Director of Network Management, clarified that CATs are digging aids, while GPR is used in conjunction with other techniques and can be slow and inaccurate at greater depths. He confirmed that GPR is used on major works. Councillor Webster further raised concerns about diversion routes and signage, suggesting local members should have input. Councillor Furness agreed to consider member feedback and noted that while advisory routes are provided, enforcement is difficult due to satellite navigation. Councillor Catherine Baart inquired about the Vision Zero strategy and gritting, and Councillor Powell asked about the A31 corridor scheme information transfer to West Surrey.

Coroner's Service Update on the Digital Post-Mortem Project

The committee received an update on the implementation of Surrey's new digital post-mortem and mortuary facility at Bagshot. Councillor Kevin Deanus, Cabinet Member for Fire and Rescue and Resilience, highlighted that the £1.15 million project aims to improve the service for bereaved families by utilising CT imaging for less invasive examinations, preserving dignity and supporting faith requirements. The facility will also enhance service resilience and reduce reliance on external providers. Planning permission had been granted, and procurement for the capital build and CT scanning unit was underway, with contractor appointment expected by early November 2026. Construction is scheduled to begin then, with the facility anticipated to be operational in spring 2027. Councillor Stephen Cooksey questioned the timeline, while Councillor Lance Spencer inquired about the operating workforce model and specialist skills required. Councillor Catherine Powell raised concerns about the licensing duration and contingency plans. The project team assured the committee that detailed design work, early engagement with regulators, and robust project governance were in place to manage risks and ensure timely delivery. Contingency plans include extending existing contracts for mortuary provision and pathologists. The Coroner's service will remain countywide and is not directly impacted by Local Government Reorganisation (LGR). The committee noted the project's progress and the planned handover to new unitary authorities.

Climate Change Progress Report

Kat Holter, Head of Climate and Energy, presented the fifth Climate Change Progress Report, marking the end of the 2021-2026 Climate Change Delivery Plan. The report indicated a 22% reduction in Surrey's county-wide emissions and a 60% reduction in Surrey County Council's operational emissions. Key achievements included significant progress in home retrofit, transport decarbonisation (EV charge points, low-emission buses), community engagement (Warm Welcome Services, climate hubs), and embedding climate thinking into council services. Projects delivered under the plan were estimated to have saved approximately £4 million in council bills and £5 million in resident and business bills in 2025/26.

Councillor Lance Spencer asked about future milestones and the achievability of 2030 and 2050 targets. Marissa Heath, Cabinet Member for Environment and Planning, explained that future milestones would be determined by the new East and West Surrey authorities, but strategic recommendations had been provided. She acknowledged that achieving the 2030 target would be challenging, particularly regarding buildings and fleets, and that grid capacity remained a significant issue. Councillor Spencer also inquired about who benefited from the programme and the measurable differences made. Ms Heath stated that the programme primarily targeted vulnerable residents, with over 1,400 fuel-poor households receiving retrofit measures and over 30,000 residents benefiting from community resilience projects. Councillor Catherine Baart questioned the breakdown of the 15% carbon emission reduction for the council estate, asking how much was attributable to council actions versus national grid decarbonisation. Kat Holter clarified that while electricity emissions had fallen significantly due to grid decarbonisation, gas emissions had fallen due to improved energy efficiency and a move away from gas heating. Councillor Ayesha Azad asked about the value for money of the climate change initiatives. Ms Heath and Ms Holter affirmed that the initiatives represented good value for money, considering not only financial savings but also carbon reduction, quality of life improvements, and social benefits. They also highlighted the significant cost of inaction on climate change. Councillor Baart raised concerns about incomplete actions and risks, particularly in transport and buildings. Ms Holter outlined the risks associated with these high-emitting sectors and the reliance on national policy and investment. Councillor Catherine Powell requested more detailed information on schemes that had progressed but not been fully delivered, to aid the transition to new authorities. Lyndon Mendes, Head of Place Policy and Strategy, explained the challenges and progress related to 20-minute neighbourhoods, delivery hubs, and EV charging infrastructure. Councillor Andy MacLeod asked for more details on the analysis estimating the cost of climate change inaction.

Procurement of Waste Service

The committee received an update on the procurement of waste services. Jade Ashley Cox-Rawling, Assistant Director, Waste and Circular Economy, explained that as the Waste Disposal Authority, Surrey County Council is responsible for bulking, transport, treatment, and disposal of waste, and operates community recycling centres (CRCs). The current contracts expire in 2029, necessitating a reprocurement process. The new arrangements will be managed by the two new unitary authorities.

Councillor Catherine Powell expressed relief that waste disposal services would be hosted by West Surrey, but inquired about reassurance for residents and how East and West Surrey would continue to work together. Ms Cox-Rawling stated that residents would see no immediate changes to CRCs and that the current waste service would remain the same until 2029. Councillor Stephen Cooksey recommended that CRCs and waste transfer stations operate on a countywide basis, and that contract management treat both East and West Surrey equally, regardless of tonnage. Councillor Catherine Baart sought clarification on the meaning of managed on an equal basis, which was explained as equal governance and contract management, not necessarily equal cost sharing. Councillor Lance Spencer asked about the lifetime cost of the programme and potential cost increases if plans faltered, particularly concerning Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) and the Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS). Ms Cox-Rawling explained that EPR funding is declining and cannot be relied upon to prop up waste budgets, while Stephen Foster detailed the significant potential cost of the ETS levy on residual waste, emphasizing the need to reduce plastic content. Councillor Powell asked about confidence in meeting the October 2029 deadline and key risks. Ms Cox-Rawling identified timely decisions from current and future cabinets, attractive procurement to the market, understanding of future contract structures by new unitary authorities, retaining experienced staff, and managing contract expiry as key factors. Councillor Powell also inquired about the percentage reduction in waste assumed through reuse and repair activities and the impact of the ETS. Ms Cox-Rawling stated that no specific percentage reduction had been assumed, but that the new procurement would aim to maximise reuse. She also noted the difficulty in communicating the ETS impact to residents. The committee discussed TUPE arrangements for the waste disposal team, confirming they would transfer to West Surrey.

Recommendations and Action Tracker, and Forward Work Programme

The committee reviewed the recommendations and action tracker, and forward work programme. An addition was made to the recommendations to include updates on resolving the backlog of broken gullies, unable to lift gullies, and non-functioning soak-aways. A suggestion was also made to include a report on blue badges in the forward work programme, which is being explored.

The committee agreed the recommendations, including those related to waste disposal services, emphasizing the need for a countywide approach to CRCs and waste transfer stations, and equal contract management for East and West Surrey.

The meeting concluded with thanks to the witnesses and a reminder of the next meeting date.