Agenda item

On 21 July 2020, Surrey County Council’s Cabinet received a report entitled ‘Recovery and Devolution White Paper: Opportunities and Benefits for Surrey’.  A letter from Cllr Tim Oliver, Leader of Surrey County Council, to Rt Hon Robert Jenrick MP, Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government, was included as an annexe to that report.  This report recommends that Waverley Borough Council’s Executive Committee notes both documents. 

Recommendation

It is recommended that the Executive notes the Surrey County Council Cabinet report and the letter from Surrey County Councillor Tim Oliver to Rt Hon Robert Jenrick MP attached as Annexes 1 and 2 to this report.

18.1    The Leader introduced the item by proposing a revised recommendation, which was seconded by Cllr Follows and agreed by the Executive Members. The revision proposed that the Waverley Borough Council motion agreed on 22 July, and the letter of the Surrey district and borough council leaders to the Secretary of State of 23 July, which had been circulated as annexes to the agenda, be noted; and that a budget of £10,000 be established to support preparatory work for a unitary council proposal.

18.2    The Leader reminded Members of recent events that began with the Government announcement at the beginning of the month of the publication in the autumn of the long-awaited Recovery and Devolution White Paper. On 10 July, the Leader of Surrey County Council had written to the Minister asking that Surrey be allowed to present a proposal for a single unitary covering the whole of Surrey. At the Surrey Leaders’ Group meeting on 17 July, the District and Borough Leaders had expressed their great disappointment at the lack of engagement or consultation prior to the letter being sent. The Surrey Leader’s letter had been presented to his Cabinet on 21 July.

18.3    On 22 July, Waverley’s Full Council met and passed a Motion opposing a single Surrey-wide unitary authority, recognising principles of localism, and instructing the Executive of urgently investigate alternative forms of unitary authority that might be more advantageous to Waverley and its residents, including opportunities with neighbouring councils. On 23 July, the Leaders of all eleven Districts and Boroughs had signed a letter to the Secretary of State asking that they also be invited to present a case for more unitary authorities. This was a firm expression of the dislike of the Surrey proposals from across the county.

18.4    Cllr Robert Knowles thanked the Leader for clarifying the timeline of events, and the fact that there had been no engagement with District and Borough Leaders prior to the Surrey Leader writing to the Secretary of State. Cllr Knowles noted that the report to the Surrey Cabinet referred to a single unitary covering an area that would provide a ‘credible geography’ for new structure, and highlighted that in Haslemere the natural geography and connections were to Midhurst, Alton and Aldershot, and to the south coast. He also drew attention to the examples in Cllr Oliver’s letter that evidenced the divide in services between the north and the south of the county, and concluded that in his opinion a single Surrey unitary would be a disaster for Waverley residents.

18.5    Cllr John Robini thanked the Leader and the Leaders of the other Districts and Boroughs for their united and prompt response to the Surrey Leader’s letter. He did not agree that Waverley would be best-served by a single Surrey unitary, and he encouraged Waverley and the towns and villages to start thinking about the future. Cllr Robini commended the revised proposal before the Executive and echoed Cllr Knowles’ view that options should include consideration of joining with rural areas to the south of Waverley to protect the rural voice of the borough.

18.6    Cllrs Follows, Palmer and Clark all spoke to highlight the feat of uniting the Districts and Boroughs in a joint response to the Secretary of State; the absence of any detail about what powers might be devolved to towns and parishes, which in itself seemed contrary to the government’s trend to centralise control; the importance of proportional representation for a larger electoral area; and the hope that Waverley’s allocation of a budget would prompt similar action from the other Districts and Boroughs, in order to develop an alternative business case to what the County Council was proposing.

18.7    In concluding, the Leader emphasised again the lack of consultation prior to Cllr Oliver’s letter being sent, and the urgency of sending a clear message from the Districts and Boroughs of the lack of support for a Surrey-wide unitary.

18.8    The Executive RESOLVED

1) To note: the Surrey County Council Cabinet report; the letter from the Surrey County Council Leader, Cllr Tim Oliver, to the Secretary of State for Housing, Communities & Local Government, the Rt Hon Robert Jenrick MP; the Waverley Borough Council motion of 22 July 2020; and the letter of the Surrey district and borough council leaders to the Secretary of State of 23 July, attached as annexes to this report.

2) To allocate a budget of £10,000 to support preparatory work for a unitary council proposal.

3) To note that:

a) Officers have identified an existing budget where there is a high degree of certainty that an underspend will occur this financial year (mileage and subsistence costs during lockdown period), and

b) under paragraphs 4.23-4.26 and annexe 1 of the Financial Regulations, this amount can be vired with officer approval, so a supplementary estimate is not required.