Agenda and minutes

To confirm as a correct record the Minutes of the previous meeting.

The Minutes of the previous meeting on 9 December 2021 were approved.

To receive any apologies for absence and notification of any substitute Members in accordance with the Constitution.

Apologies for absence were received from Councillor A. King who was substituted by Councillor Baker.

To receive any Declarations of Interest (including the existence and nature of any Party Whip).

There were no Declarations of Interests.

To receive a briefing from Executive Members of the People Portfolio areas of work: Housing & Support, Leisure & Culture and Community Partnerships and to consider any issues that arise.

The Committee received presentations and briefings from the three Portfolio Holders responsible for the following areas of the Council’s services: Housing & Support, Leisure & Culture and Community Partnerships.

Portfolio Holder for Housing & Support, Councillor Neame, gave the first presentation and overview of work over the past year and challenges to come. There had been an increase in homeless approaches but there was a high percentage of positive outcomes for homeless people. A number of government grants had been secured including a £190k grant from Homes England to support the capital build ringfenced for single homeless applicants in Lee Street. Six homes in Pitwood Park, Tadworth development were sold using Help to Buy Scheme and 11 houses to Raven Housing Trust for shared ownership. Many of the 32 flats on Cromwell Road were to be let at sub-market rents and the remainder at market rent via a RBBC wholly owned company. All this had been achieved during a difficult and unprecedented year.

Committee Members asked questions in the following areas:

Use of private sector – Members asked how many homeless households were assisted into private sector accommodation and what the proportion was in the Borough compared to using social housing. It was noted that due to the lack of social housing, the Council had to use the private rented sector and assist tenants applying for help with housing benefits and to secure deposits and rents in advance. The Head of Housing would follow-up the numbers in the private sector with a written answer. The Council placed more people in the private rental sector than the social rental sector.

Asylum Seekers and Refugees – Members asked for further information on the legal definitions and differences between Asylum Seekers and Refugees. The Head of Housing would provide more details in a follow-up written response.

Afghan refugees resettlement – Members questioned if Afghan refugees were in temporary accommodation locally while they waited for appropriate housing or if they would need to move into other areas once accommodation was found which could disrupt children’s education. Councillor Neame confirmed that until the properties were available, the Home Office was responsible for the refugees who were housed away in bridging hotels. This was an ongoing challenge. The locations were arranged by the Home Office. In response to Member questions, it was confirmed that there were no bridging hotels for Afghan refugees in Reigate and Banstead although there were three hotels providing initial accommodation in Horley and Reigate for 341 asylum seekers. There was one bridging hotel in Mole Valley and one in Tandridge (within East Surrey). It was confirmed that private rented properties were being sought so this would not necessarily affect local residents or homeless applicants.

Maternity health for pregnant refugees was discussed. There was a lot of pressure on health colleagues, but they were supporting all the pregnant women and looking after the general health of refugees such as providing vaccinations.

The work with Syrian refugees was highlighted and successes achieved such as the well-attended Syrian  ...  view the full minutes text for item 60.

To receive a six-monthly update from the Leader of the Council, Mark Brunt.

The Leader, Councillor Mark Brunt, gave his six-monthly update to the Committee. He continued to work with Portfolio Holders and reach out to the community and partner organisations such as meeting the new Chief Executive at East Surrey Hospital recently. The health service recognised that district and borough councils had valuable local networks and residents wanted joined up services.

This time last year the Harlequin was shut and there was no pantomime with a lot of services still focusing on dealing with the pandemic. The focus now was learning to live with Covid while continuing to support those who had been affected by it.

Highlights from last year included the Marketfield Way development in Redhill with the topping out ceremony last September and the units now being fitted out. Contracts had been signed with a new cinema operator which will be announced in due course. There was still a way to go to market the Harlequin. It was an excellent business meeting venue.

The transformation of the Community Centres was ongoing, with activities for all ages and bringing the communities together. The local walking and cycling infrastructure plan with Surrey County Council was being adopted to encourage people to look differently at the way they travel and to use the train and bicycles more often.

The Council was keeping a close eye on the consultation plans to expand Gatwick Airport and working with other districts and borough councils to make sure concerns were properly considered and not just dismissed.

Commercial activities included making better use of the assets already owned by the Council. Using assets to deliver the different types of housing needed such as emergency or short-term accommodation was being considered. The Council tax or government grants did not cover all the Council’s costs so additional revenue was needed.

Members asked the Leader questions on the following area:

20 mph speed limits – Members asked about the proposal to bring in 20 mph speed limits which had been rejected by Surrey County Council at a recent meeting. The Leader said there was a need to reduced speeding in communities and increasing levels of enforcement and improved education was also important to make speeding socially unacceptable. CIL funding was also useful to help with engineering changes to reduce speeding.

RESOLVED – that the Committee:

1.     Noted the Leader’s update and made observations for consideration by the Leader.

To consider the updated elements of the Budget 2022/23 and Capital Programme 2022 to 2027 proposals before Executive on 27 January.

Members received a briefing on the updated elements of the Budget 2022/23 and Capital Programme 2022 to 2027 proposals which was published as an Addendum to the agenda pack on the Council’s website.

Councillor Schofield, Portfolio Holder for Finance and Governance, gave an update to the Committee. A great deal of work had been carried out since November to close the budget gap for 2022/23 of £700k. The update report showed the extent of the changes. The result was a balanced budget for 2022/23.

Chair of the Committee, Councillor Harrison, said the Committee had asked the Executive to reconsider some of the savings proposed, for example, to retain the taxi voucher scheme. He was pleased to note that £10k that is spent each year within the taxi voucher scheme would be retained. He noted the ongoing work on commercial ventures to aim to bring in additional revenue.

Councillor Schofield confirmed that the work on the financial sustainability plan was ongoing and on track. The finance team and Executive Members were working to develop the priorities and would share these with Overview & Scrutiny Committee when ready.

Members had questions and made observations on the following:

Inflation and impact on Council services – Members asked about rising inflation costs and the impact on services. Assumptions in the budget had been made that forecast inflation to continue as 2 per cent. Councillor Schofield confirmed that the Council would manage its costs as closely as possible throughout the year.

Income expectation – Members questioned if the Council had been too pessimistic about the economy and as a result expectation of predicted income. Now the economy was recovering how would this be reflected in financial planning? Could Members have quarterly forward-looking updates that set out any revised forecasts/year to date comparisons? It was noted that the Committee already received quarterly budget monitoring reports that include forecasts of the year-end position. Councillor Schofield said they would look to increase income in some areas such as parking and the Harlequin. 

Public consultation – Members asked for more details about the responses to the public consultation on the budget and to share these. It was confirmed that the full outcome would be shared with the budget papers once analysis had been completed as the consultation had only just closed. The responses made up less than 0.5 per cent of the borough’s residents.

Fuel prices – Members questioned what the impact of rising fuel prices may have on the Council’s own utility costs and the pressure on those paying council tax who may default on their bills in response to rising fuel costs. Councillor Schofield said the finance team was looking at the potential impact on fuel bills and the costs of running the Council’s buildings and offices. An update would be provided to the Committee.

Parking income loss – it was confirmed that the reduction in parking income loss was £200k.

Business rates and Council Tax – the Council’s share of the National Non Domestic Rates (NNDR) was  ...  view the full minutes text for item 62.

To consider the Calendar of Meetings 2022/23 and make any observations before Executive on 27 January 2022 and approval at Council on 10 February 2022.

The Committee received the Calendar of Meetings 2022/23 and cover report. This would go to the Executive for approval by Full Council on 10 February 2022.

Members made no comments or observations.

RESOLVED that the Committee –

1.     Noted the Calendar of Meetings 2022/23 for approval by Full Council on 10 February 2022 and made no observations.

To consider and agree any changes to the schedule for Overview and Scrutiny Committee’s Forward Work Programme 2021/22 (Annex 1) and note the Action Tracker (Annex 2).

The Committee received the Overview and Scrutiny Committee Forward Work Programme.

It was noted that the IT Strategy would come to the Committee for its March meeting.

Following a request from Members, Officers would find out the timeline for the Horley Business Park Supplementary Planning Document and use the Local Plan Scrutiny Panel to scrutinise this document when it was ready.

Members asked if the work of the Banstead Commons Conservators could be scrutinised by the Committee in the next Municipal Year. A review of how greenspaces across the Borough were managed, such as the SSSI on Reigate Heath was requested. It was noted that the Place Portfolio Holder presentations in March would include an update on greenspaces work.

O&S Chair, Councillor Harrison, said the Committee would be considering the future work programme at the meeting in March and to send suggestions for items that could be included for 2022/23.

RESOLVED – that the Committee –

1.     Noted the Overview and Scrutiny Committee Forward Work Programme 2021/22 and the Action Tracker.

To consider any items arising from the Executive which might be subject to the ‘call-in’ procedure in accordance with the provisions of the Overview and Scrutiny Procedure Rules set out in the Constitution.

It was reported that there were no items arising from the Executive that might be subject to the ‘call-in’ procedure in accordance with the provisions of the Overview and Scrutiny Procedure Rules.

To consider any item(s) which, in the opinion of the Chairman, should be considered as a matter of urgency - Local Government Act 1972, Section 100B(4)(b).

(NOTE: Under the Committee and Sub-Committee Procedure Rules set out in the Constitution, items of urgent business must be submitted in writing but may be supplemented by an oral report.)

There were no items of urgent business.