To confirm and sign, as a correct record, the Minutes of the meeting of the Committee held on 15 September 2022 (Appendix ‘A’).

The Minutes of the meeting of the Committee held on 15 September 2022, were confirmed and signed as a correct record.

No Apologies for absence were received.  Those Members absent were substituted at the meeting.

Members are invited to declare any disclosable pecuniary interests or other registrable and non-registrable interests in items on the agenda.

There were no declarations of interest to record, as Cllr Jenkins’ non-registerable interest as a Trustee of Egham Museum was already on the main register of interests.

The Committee received for information the annual report on all aspects of Community Safety.  This was primarily produced for the Community Safety Partnership, a statutory function under the Crime and Disorder Act 1998 and the Crime and Disorder Committee.

The report described the various Community Safety bodies and their relationship with each other, reporting lines, activities and responsibilities to fulfil Surrey’s vision to protect and empower communities and residents.

Officers gave a summary of each activity area; including Funding, the Community Safety Partnership, Prevent, Domestic Abuse, Child Exploitation, Serious Organised Crime, Domestic Burglary, Anti-Social Behaviour, Community Harm and Risk Management Meeting (CHARMM), the Joint Action Group (JAG), Fly-tipping, Public Space Protection Orders (PSPOs), the Community Trigger, Junior Citizen and Respect the Water – Water Safety.

Officers focussed on anti-social behaviour; the three most prevalent in the borough being fly-tipping, noise complaints and litter/rubbish.  Members asked whether it was possible to have a breakdown by ward of noise complaints, further to show the types of noise complaint.  It was reported that the recording system showed towns rather than wards and not necessarily by type of noise without further interrogation of the records.

Members were pleased that the Council actively participated in Junior Citizen; it was considered invaluable to promote engagement with young people.  The Community Trigger was explained in more detail including the process to be followed to have anti-social behaviour cases reviewed.  The free mediation service was promoted and Officers agreed to provide a link to the Committee.  The Community Trigger was not the route for requesting new PSPOs which had to go through a specific referral and evidence based process, determined by several organisations working together with the community.  Officers agreed to supply the Committee with a copy of the PSPO Enforcement statistics produced by the police.

Members discussed the merits of the two types of deployable CCTV/camera; those from Safer Runnymede represented a significant outlay to supply as well as suitable infrastructure and a recommendation for use by the JAG.  It was asked whether the Environmental Health deployable camera could be used at a specific location in the borough that experienced fly-tipping. [Environmental Health Officers since confirmed that it was used at this location.]  Anti-social behaviour would continue to be monitored, noting the peak during Covid and subsequent fluctuations in incidents.

In the context of community engagement, Members requested that Councillors be invited to the next Surrey Towers Day of Action which had proved a success and an example of positive partnership working.

Officers were thanked for an informative and detailed report.

The Committee’s approval was sought of Chertsey Museum’s renewal of its Accreditation with the Arts Council England.  This was undertaken every three years and involved a significant amount of preparatory work on a number of key policy documents including; the Forward Plan 2022-2025, Collections Development Plan, Access Policy, Documentation Plan and the Conservation and Collection Care Policy and Plan.  These were appended to the report and reviewed by the Committee.

Officers provided Members with a brief history of Chertsey Museum, the Borough Museum, which opened to the public in 1965.  In 1969 the Olive Matthews Trust was founded to care for a nationally significant (as described also by the V&A Museum), collection of costumes created by the late Olive Matthews who lived in Virginia Water.  A partnership was established with the Council (the then Runnymede District Council) to run the museum in 1970 and the Trust bought ‘The Cedars’ in London Street, Chertsey, where the museum was currently housed.

The relationship with the Olive Matthews Trust was noted, including the vital annual grant of £80,000 towards the museum’s running costs and the Costume Assistant’s salary and additional hours for the Keeper of Costumes, annual exhibition, costume related events and other items relating to the fashion collection.  The Trust’s agreement with the Council also set out how the museum ran, its staffing requirements, opening hours, and rent on the main museum building and one of the collection stores.

The Curator described some of the artefacts in the collection; including the high profile enjoyed by the Costume Collection, items from which had been loaned to places such as the Historic Royal Palaces.  The collection was also a valuable resource for researchers and costumiers from film and television.

The Borough’s local history collection and the Museum’s Education Service were also described in detail, all contributing to how important accreditation status was, being the UK industry standard for museums and galleries.  The five key policy documents were all approved by the Committee.

The Curator described how the museum had operated pre, during, and post-pandemic and outlined the continuing recovery on visitor numbers as people were starting to become happier to go out into public spaces again.  The Service had adapted to more on-line provision, created apps and audio guides and planned to expand on these in the future, as well as maintaining the high standard of the physical items at the museum, which prided itself on being accessible and devising new ways to engage with all service users and visitors.  Funding for exhibitions and new projects was important and some recent successes were reported such as the Heritage Lottery Funding which had been used for the local literary figures exhibition and comic drawing workshops with schools.  The positive equalities implications in the report were also noted.

Future plans regarding the education service, creating a Heritage Strategy and establishing links which supported the health and wellbeing agenda were welcomed by the Committee, whose appreciation of the museum and its staff was expressed at the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 328.

The Committee was asked to approve an updated Safeguarding Policy, and consider the appointment of a Member of the Committee as a Safeguarding Champion.  In addition, Members were provided with a summary of work within Safeguarding since the amalgamation of Community Development with Community Services.

Officers advised that at the centre of the policy was the Council’s moral and legal obligation to ensure a duty of care for children and vulnerable adults and promote the basic human right of a life free from harm, abuse and neglect, and that it was everyone’s business.

The Committee was informed that in September 2021, acting on the recommendations of an earlier external audit of Safeguarding became a priority and a small project group was formed to take forward their implementation, including the updated policy.  Key elements of the policy were to have:

·         a robust safeguarding structure

·         comprehensive training

·         a clear and consistent safeguarding process

·         centralised record keeping for staff (within HR) and elected Members (Corporate Head of Law and Governance)

·         Representation at external safeguarding meetings regarding policy and participation in investigations and promotion of Safeguarding with partner organisations

Members agreed that putting these in place could create a best practice model that others could follow.

The Committee discussed the role of Safeguarding Champion.  It was agreed that Members would be in a better position to appoint one or more Members (if allowed) with some additional information on the training needed, time commitment and more understanding of the role in practical terms such as timing of meetings etc. The role of supporting and encouraging Members to participate in training, understand the corporate approach and to work with Officers when identifying concerns within the community was supported.  It was agreed that a period of 3 years would be appropriate.  The Committee agreed to defer the appointment of a Safeguarding Champion to the next scheduled meeting in January 2023 to allow Officers to prepare a briefing note on all aspects of the role.

The Committee was fully supportive of the policy and commended Officers on their work to bring it forward.  Officers were asked to circulate the policy to all Councillors and for it to be included in the induction packs for new Councillors.

RESOLVED that –

The New Safeguarding Policy November 2022, be approved and adopted as proposed.

The Committee received for information, an update on the delivery of Social Prescribing in Runnymede.

As a concept, the Committee noted that Social Prescribing worked to support residents/patients with non-medical needs that affected a person’s health and wellbeing, connecting them to statutory services and local community assets to receive support and connect with their community.  Members recalled that the Council had become involved with Social Prescribing in April 2018.  It was initially launched with each of the four north west Surrey boroughs with funding from the Better Care Fund which enabled the recruitment of one part time employee.

Over the years, the importance of Social Prescribing had become more apparent, and the Council had been able, with partners, to draw down more funding to expand the service and employ more staff to deliver it; the key objective being to empower residents and increase their confidence to make positive decisions about their lives.

Officers provided a detailed summary of the process of Social Prescribing, how and why referrals were made and what assistance individuals were given.  For example practical help with budgeting, housing options advice and signposting to activities and services to improve their lives.

Members noted that the service now employed three full time Social Prescribing Officers, and that Corporate Management Committee had recently approved an additional role for matters relating to the Cost of Living.

The Committee was advised that the number of referrals continued to rise.  The total number from October 2021 to September 2022 being 702.  The complexity of cases was illustrated by two case studies.

Officers outlined the next steps for the service in liaison with the North West Surrey Alliance and voluntary, community and faith sector partners who provided the necessary Community Assets.  These included the procurement of case management software and a submission to the Local Joint Commissioning Group regarding the remuneration of Social Prescribers along with plans for future training and career development opportunities and the ability to increase job security through permanent contracts being offered.

The Committee was very supportive of the service and looked forward to future updates on its success in working with the community and individuals to achieve positive outcomes in health and wellbeing.

The Committee’s approval was sought for the proposed fees and charges under the remit of Community Services for 2023/2024.

With regard to Community Services, Officers had only increased charges where it was considered reasonable to reflect the fact that many of the services provided were to vulnerable residents, who in the current climate, often had to make difficult budgetary choices.  With regard to Meals at Home, the charges had been held at current rates for some time and a modest increase was recommended to reflect rising fuel and food costs.  Officers were asked to provide the Committee with the cost to the authority of not putting up fees for Meals at Home, including the level of subsidy in 2023/2024.

Officers advised that fee structures relating to Community Halls and Community Transport would be part of a wider comprehensive review.  Officers sought to match fees to the various user groups and were working with the North West Surrey Alliance on support to residents under the ‘Winter Pressures’ umbrella.  An example of the review with regard to Community Halls was consideration of a three tier structure which would benefit hirers providing services of community benefit but which were currently classed as commercial.  This was welcomed by the Committee.

The Committee was advised that fees and charges relating to operational parks and open spaces were now under the remit of the Corporate Head of Environmental Services following a restructure and would be transferring to the Environment and Sustainability Committee.  This required a re-alignment of budgets and an amendment to the Council’s Constitution, the latter Officers would be addressing as part of its annual review.

Officers advised that some benchmarking had taken place with other local authorities, resulting in the recommended increases.  For example the introduction of an annual fee for teams using the parks instead of an hourly rate.  Some Members were concerned by the new fees regarding community events and how they would affect several local and long established organisations such as Black Cherry Fair, Chertsey Agricultural Association and Egham Show.  There was also a new schedule of rates for the DSO for their services in supporting local events due to be considered by the Environment and Sustainability Committee.  However, Members were informed that community grants may be available to help offset the new fees and that a new scheme to support community events was being considered.  These would be administered by the Corporate Head of Community Services.  The increase in cemeteries related fees of 8% was noted.

RESOLVED that –

The proposed fees and charges as set out in Appendix A of the agenda, be approved, to be effective from the dates within the appendix, or as soon as practical thereafter.

The Minutes of the meeting of the Chertsey Meads Management Liaison Group held on 6 September 2022 were received and noted (Appendix ‘A).

OFFICERS' RECOMMENDATION that -

the press and public be excluded from the meeting during discussion of the following report under Section 100A(4) of the Local Government Act 1972 on the grounds that the report in question would be likely to involve disclosure exempt information of the description specified in paragraph 3 of Part 1 of Schedule 12A of the Act.

            (To resolve)

By resolution of the Committee, the press and public were excluded from the remainder of the meeting during the consideration of the remaining matters under Section 100A (4) of the Local Government Act 1972 on the grounds that the discussion would be likely to involve the disclosure of exempt information of the description specified in paragraph 3 of Schedule 12A to Part 1 of the Act

The Committee received a follow up report to one considered at a previous meeting regarding an opportunity for Safer Runnymede to provide CCTV monitoring and maintenance to another local authority in Surrey.  Officers were seeking approval to continue engagement with that local authority and when negotiations had progressed further, to sign Heads of Terms to secure the contract.

Members were aware that Safer Runnymede was one of only two CCTV monitoring centres in Surrey and was well placed to expand as a result of a direct approach by the local authority in question in March 2022.

Officers had been working through the summer to assess the feasibility of taking on this contract.  This included involvement with the current equipment supplier and maintenance contractor, site visits and various meetings with Officers at the other local authority.  These had all been very positive so far and also justified the increase in staffing resource that had been previously approved by Corporate Management Committee in June 2022 which could now accommodate additional cameras.

Members noted the legal and financial implications as set out in report.  The potential to generate additional income to offset and ultimately reduce the overall subsidy of the service were welcomed.

The Committee was very pleased to support the recommendation, noting the important role Safer Runnymede had with partners for the benefit of the community and commending the staff accordingly.

RESOLVED that –

Officers continue to engage with the Borough Council named in the report on a potential CCTV monitoring and maintenance service contract and once received, signing Heads of Terms.