Families were pushed to using food banks and suffered an impact on their mental health when Surrey County Council-funded school transport was not provided for their children.
Surrey County Council carried out a review into the school transport “failure” after nearly 150 families, many with children with additional needs, were left without a way to get their children to school at the start of term.
Alongside the authority’s internal review, Family Voice Surrey carried out its own, including a survey which heard from 290 families about the impacts of children not being provided with transport to and from school.
The survey showed that 71 per cent of those who responded had experienced challenges with home to school transport during the autumn term and that 19 per cent of children and young people were unable to attend school or college on the first day.
Leanne Henderson, the organisation’s participation manager, said they heard from “desperate” families every year about issues with school transport, often right at the end of August, when transport had not been confirmed for the start of the school term.
She also raised concerns about the communication that came from the authority, with many families waiting a long time for contact from the council.
The approach of the council had been “very inconsistent” she told a meeting of the authority’s children, families, lifelong learning and culture select committee on Thursday (December 15).
Ms Henderson said: “We had some families that told us they had to use food banks because they were so financially disadvantaged due to not being able to transport their child to school, and that was really quite worrying.”
She also told the meeting that the organisation was “shocked” that 86 per cent of respondents said the situation had adverse effects on their mental health and well being, and increased anxiety.
More than a third of respondents reported financial issues.
She said: “They were the two elements that really hit home and made us wonder: ‘Why has this happened? What is going on?’”
The meeting heard that at least six factors had led to a backlog of cases at the start of the school year, including an increase in applications, a policy change earlier in the year and a lack of resources.
Ms Henderson said she could see council staff were “totally overwhelmed”, saying she could see from both sides in talking to the families affected and those working at the council.
She said: “I could see the team and I really felt for them.
“They were doing the absolute best that they could do under really difficult circumstances.”
The council’s report listed 50 recommendations to ensure the issues would not be repeated next year, and there were recommendations in the Family Voice Surrey report.
Councillor Clare Curran (Conservative, Bookham and Fetcham West), the authority’s cabinet member for education and learning said she had also been “swamped” by emails on the matter.
She said the review that had been carried out was a “substantial piece of work” and not a “five-minute fix”.
The council spends more than £50m a year on helping children and families get to school, which Cllr Curran told the meeting is a fifth of the entire net budget for children and families.
Cllr Curran added: “I don’t underestimate the task at hand, I don’t underestimate the work that needs to be done.
“But I’m confident that we are going to get it done and next September families, children and young people won’t suffer the failure that there was in September this year.”
ENDS

A Surrey council has paused its plan for 6,000 homes after central government changes which could mean lower housing targets. Mole Valley District Council has paused its local plan saying it would be “unwise” to carry on with the process in the face of potential changes at a national level.

The authority released some green belt sites in the district for new homes, in a plan that was examined by government inspectors between January and October.

Image: Councillors-and-residents-concerned-about-Mole-Valley-Local-Plan. Emily Coady-Stemp

A local plan sets out a council’s policies and sites for homes and infrastructure, with Mole Valley’s setting out plans until 2037. Changes from central government are expected to be announced before Christmas, with Secretary of State for Levelling Up, Housing & Communities and Surrey Heath Michael Gove outlining in a letter earlier this month (December 5) that more control should be given to councils and local communities.

Councillor Margaret Cooksey, cabinet member for planning on the district council, said the council would pause its local plan process until it had a better understanding of what government was saying. Cllr Cooksey (Lib Dem, Dorking South) said in a statement the decision had not been taken lightly and given the progress made during an “exhaustive” examination of the plan, that pausing the plan is not what the council wanted to do. She added: “However, it would be unwise to carry on when we are not sure what the wider national planning policy situation is so we have committed to wait until such time that the Inspector can advise us on what should be done next. We had been due to consult with stakeholders on the modifications proposed by us and the Inspector in January. We remain hopeful that clarity will be provided and we will take the best course of action for our residents.”

Mole Valley’s only Green councillor, Lisa Scott (Charlwood) said she wanted clarification on what “pause” actually meant, calling for the plan to be “fully reviewed” when national policy had been revised. She said: “We wholeheartedly welcome the change in housing numbers required by government, which was leading to huge green areas being sacrificed to questionable house building targets and are very pleased to see that the local plan has been paused.” But she raised concerns about areas of green belt still being included in the submitted plan, claiming some had been been “significantly expanded” from the public consultation stage, so residents could not have their comments considered by the council.

She said possible changes also meant more brown field sites could be included and the types of homes could be reassessed, with terraces and town houses being more efficient to heat and cool than detached homes.

A letter from Michael Gove sent on December 5 said the changes would mean communities would “have a much more powerful incentive to get involved in drawing up local plans”. While he said planning would always start with a number of homes required in an area, though it should be and “advisory starting point” and not a mandatory figure. He added: “It will be up to local authorities, working with their communities, to determine how many homes can actually be built, taking into account what should be protected in each area – be that our precious green belt or national parks, the character or an area, or heritage assets.”

The majority of homes in the local plan as it stands would be built in Leatherhead and Dorking but there was also concern about communities in rural areas being “ruined” in areas such as Hookwood where more than 550 homes were planned over four sites.

At the February meeting of the council where members voted to submit the plan, the administration promoted its maintaining of 99.3 per cent of the district’s green belt in the local plan.

Related reports:

Epsom and Ewell last in Local Planning

MP’s housing solution for Epsom and Ewell

Labour Councillor moves on housing

Local Plan Battle: early skirmishes on Downs Farm

A senior Surrey councillor admits it is “not good enough” that nearly 1,000 children with special educational needs in Surrey are waiting for an education plan. Nearly a third of those have been waiting more than the statutory 20-week limit for a Education Health and Care Plan (EHCP), with a shortage in educational psychologists among the reasons the council put forward for the backlog.

Surrey County Council’s cabinet member for education and learning said nationally for 60 per cent of children being assessed for an EHCP it was being done within the 20-week period. Clare Curran (Conservative, Bookham and Fetcham West) added: “Clearly it is not only a situation that prevails here in Surrey. Notwithstanding the national situation, I admit that it’s not good enough and not one that we would expect or want for our young people.”

An EHCP is put together by a council for children to outline what help they may need at school to support them with their special education needs and disabilities. There are 988 active EHCP requests at the council, of which 284 were known to be over the 20-week period, according to meeting documents.

Cllr Curran explained to a meeting of Surrey’s council on Tuesday (December 13) that a shortage of educational psychologists meant a mandatory part of the EHCPs could not be completed, which was contributing to delays. She said recruiting and training up caseworkers had been a focus, and the workforce was now around 80 per cent staffed across the county.

Her answers came in response to a question put forward by Lance Spencer (Liberal Democrat, Goldsworth East and Horsell Village) who said families were being “left behind” by the council and asked what was being done to reduce the “excessive delays”. Cllr Curran said that the council’s ambition was to achieve “better timeliness” by the end of the year in completing EHCP plans. She added: “I know the situation is not good. I know we are not achieving the level of service that we would want to for our children and young people. We are doing our very best to address that and make sure that things improve.”

In a written response, the council denied that parents threatening legal action sped up the time scales for getting an EHCP in place. Cllr Spencer’s written question read: “It would appear that where the parents threaten legal action that the EHCP timescales are reduced” and asked for the number of parents who had written threatening legal proceedings.

A written response said data was not collected at the council in that way, adding: “This process is not influenced by the threat of legal proceedings.”

The meeting heard that the issues impacting the outstanding EHCPs were also a factor in nearly a fifth of annual reviews not being carried out within six months of their due date.

A question put forward by Catherine Baart (Green, Earlswood and Reigate South) asked for an update on annual EHCP reviews at the authority. The response in meeting documents showed that at the start of term, 59 per cent of plans had an up-to-date annual review in place or were due within the next month, being 6,445 of the 10,963 plans in place. There were also 4,517 plans that were overdue a review, of which 1,849 were more than six months overdue.

Documents said the availability of staff over the summer had played a part in fewer annual reviews being completed on time, and that an improvement should be seen by the end of the autumn term. Cllr Curran said she did not know if there was a target within the department for completing reviews on time, but that the service was prioritising reviews for children who were vulnerable, including those looked after by the county council or on child protection plans.

Councillors also raised the issue of home to school transport in Surrey, described as “the biggest concern of many of our residents” by the Green Party Group leader on the council.

The council’s leader, Cllr Tim Oliver (Conservative, Weybridge) apologised in October for a backlog in sorting school transport for some of the county’s most vulnerable children, when more than 150 families were left in limbo at the start of term.

Jonathan Essex (Redhill East) called on the council to look in its review at the views put forward Family Voice Surrey which had spoken to 290 families as part of its own review.

Cllr Nick Darby (Dittons and Weston Green Residents, The Dittons) told the meeting the internal review listed more than 50 recommendations for the council, which he described as “a terrible indictment of the situation”. He said the school transport was “best described as a shambles” and questioned the creation of a new board to oversee progress being made up of officers and cabinet members, many of them previously involved in the process.

On Thursday (December 15) a meeting of the council’s children, families, lifelong learning and culture select committee will consider the council’s review of what happened at the start of the school year.

Epsom & Ewell Borough Council has launched its Homelessness and Rough Sleeping Strategy, setting out how it intends to meet the needs of residents who are homeless or at risk of homelessness over the next five years.

The Strategy details the Council’s strategic vision and key objectives to address homelessness within the borough. It focuses on a commitment to preventing homelessness at an earlier stage, and the importance of working with partners across all sectors to develop an integrated approach to tackling homelessness and rough sleeping.

A detailed review of homelessness in Epsom & Ewell was undertaken to inform the strategy, which helped to establish the extent of homelessness in the area, identify future trends and any gaps in the service currently being provided.

The Strategy identifies six key objectives which emphasise the importance of early intervention and prevention, as well as the development of new affordable housing in helping to meet the need of homeless people:

1. The early identification, intervention & prevention of homelessness
2. Reduce Rough Sleeping
3. Increase accommodation options including social rented, private rented, supported and move on accommodation and in-borough temporary accommodation
4. Improve the Health & Wellbeing of homeless people
5. Ensuring sufficient support is available for homeless people
6. Partnership working

Cllr Alex Coley, (Residents Association – Ruxley Ward) Chair of the Community and Wellbeing Committee, said: “The impact of homelessness cannot be underestimated. A home keeps you warm and safe, but it is so much more than just a roof. Homelessness leads to a significant reduction in emotional wellbeing, self-identity, social inclusion and life opportunities. Reducing homelessness in Epsom & Ewell will benefit everyone who lives in the borough.

“Over the past year we have expanded the Private Sector Leasing scheme, acquired an additional 14 emergency accommodation placements, and secured additional funding to enhance the East Surrey Outreach Service, who work with rough sleepers, but there is much more to be done. This Strategy will allow us to build on this progress to fully address the challenges local homeless people are facing, and ensure better outcomes for all.”

Commenting on the strategy Cllr Julie Morris (LibDem College Ward) said “We are particularly concerned with the increase in single people with mental health issues who require homes, so the integrated approach is really key here.  There’s a shortage of homes for families with children and private landlords can help here. There are some incredibly dedicated council officers who are charged with implementing this strategy and councillors will support them as much as they can.”

• The Homelessness Act 2002 places a duty on every local authority to develop and publish a Homelessness Strategy, setting out how the local authority intends to tackle and prevent homelessness in their area.

• The strategy must be based on a review of all forms of homelessness within that local authority’s area and should be reviewed at least every five years. The Council carried out six weeks consultation between 12 July and 23 August 2022 with a range of stakeholders, service users, staff and residents.

• Central to reducing homelessness within the borough is increasing the amount of affordable housing available. The Council is currently developing a Draft Local Plan which is due to go out for public consultation on 1 February 2023, and proposals for affordable housing in the borough will form part of the Plan.

• In Epsom & Ewell and nationally the 3 main causes of homelessness are:
  • Asked to leave by family and friends
  • Termination of Assured Shorthold tenancies
  • Domestic Abuse

• The full strategy can be found here:

https://epsom-ewell.gov.uk/residents/housing/homelessness

Information provided by Epsom and Ewell Council. Cllr Morris quote obtained by Epsom and Ewell Times. Other parties were invited to comment.

Related reports:

Council targeting the homeless

Simone Pellegrino 31 July 2022

In a vote dominated by abstentionism, a service-specific savings target of £243k to offset this year’s potential overspending for homelessness, was approved by Epsom and Ewell Borough Council last Tuesday. … READ MORE

Cllr Eber Kington, long serving Residents Association Borough Councillor and former Epsom and Ewell Mayor has served as a County Councillor since 2009. He has long campaigned against waste on staffing and councillor expenses. For example when standing in 2017 he stated he had “..called for a review of the County Council’s senior management structure to reduce the then £42 million salary bill [that] was voted down by the Conservatives. He opposed the Conservatives’ 2015 decision to increase their council allowances by over 60%. He has argued for the need to cut the use and cost of agency staff, which [then] stood at over £13 million.”

Today he has focussed on Surrey County Council‘s public consultation on the 2023/2024 draft budget. He describes “as biased and meaningless”. He goes on to claim “The questions are deliberately designed to lead residents towards those responses that support the draft budget.  Negative responses are discouraged by additional and unsupported commentary warning of the consequences of choosing the response.

In addition, the final question invites residents to give details of “any benefits” they can see if the budget was implemented.  Quite clearly SCC is not interested to learn of residents’ views on any disbenefits of the budget, as that question is not even asked.

A truly impartial survey would have also encouraged residents to state what they felt was unnecessary expenditure, perhaps on high level salaries, or what for them is a higher priority, for example night-time safer streets.”

In addition, Councillor Kington was critical of information gathering on the respondents’ personal circumstances.

“There are 24 questions, but only the last three are on the draft budget.  The first 21 questions are on the status, background, salary, and other personal details of the respondent.  You have to ask why any Council requires its residents to provide so much personal detail before they can even start to give an opinion.  Maybe one cost saving would be for SCC to reduce its spend on such biased and meaningless surveys”.

It is believed that a similar survey in 2022 produced about 100 responses out of a Surrey population of 1.2 million.

Epsom and Ewell Times has verified Cllr Kington’s claim. The consultation questionnaire indeed has just 4 questions directed at the issue with the first 21 directed at profiling respondents.

Surrey County Council state: “The council is setting its budget for 2023/24 and has set out plans for £1,095.6m (just over £1bn) of spending. The council faces a budget gap of £83m for next year, largely due to inflation pushing up the cost of delivering services, but also due to increasing demand for services, policy changes from government, workforce shortages and continuing impact from the Coronavirus pandemic. Having worked to identify £68.6m of efficiencies within the budget, the draft budget is currently facing a £14.4m overspend.”

You can find more information and a link to the survey HERE

Related reports:

Great expectations on Surrey’s tax?

December 3, 2022

Surrey County Council’s leader says he has “no expectation at all” that council tax will be put up by the full amount allowed despite a £14.4million budget gap at the … READ MORE

Surrey County Council sets out its vision for the care and living of the older generation by 2030. In 2021/2022 Adult Social Care in Surrey spent £506 million to support older people. This money helped over 5,600 older people and their unpaid carers. Money was also spent with voluntary organisations that support people in their community too. Adult Social Care also ensures services for information, advice and guidance are available to help people understand their care options and to make good care-related decisions.

The county of Surrey has a population which is getting older with people living longer than in other parts of the country. These changes mean that many more people are likely to be living alone, without support from their family. By 2030, the number of people aged 75+ predicted to be living alone will have increased by 27%. National reporting states that the number of unpaid carers 65 years old and over will increase by 17% from 2016 to 2025.

Dementia is most common amongst older people and in Surrey it is estimated that between 2020 and 2030 the overall number of people with dementia could increase by 28%, from 17,700 to 22,672.

In building the 2030 strategy SCC stated “We spoke to over 750 people living in Surrey. We worked with many diverse groups of Surrey residents of all ages including unpaid carers, care providers, partners, and colleagues. This took seven months and included workshops and surveys. We wanted to know what works well, what does not work well, what could be improved and what is important to our residents.”

The plan sets out all the ways SCC, working with its partners in the NHS, care sector and districts and boroughs, will support people to live and age well in Surrey over the next decade. At the heart of the plan is a commitment to improving opportunities and care choices in local communities so that older people can be as active and independent as they wish.

The council engaged with residents and their families, as well as staff and partners, to draw up the strategy – and is now seeking input to help shape how it’s put into practice.

The plan is centred around three priorities. They are:

• Prevention – supporting people to lead healthy and independent lives in their local communities for as long as possible
• Living independently – enabling people to live in their own homes with care and support tailored to their strengths, including through planned new extra care housing
• Care homes – making sure that Surrey can offer the right mix of high quality care homes for those who need them

Further details can be found in the summary version of the plan at surreycc.gov.uk/livingwellinlaterlife.

Working with partners, including the NHS in Surrey Heartlands and Frimley, as well as care providers and voluntary organisations across the county, the council has already achieved some key milestones in its plan.

These include:

• signing a new contract for home care services so that people receive even better care in their own homes
• enhancing its reablement service for people needing short-term care, such as after a hospital stay, through linking with specialist care workers
• carrying out in-depth planning to help SCC and its partners meet the growing need for care home places catering for complex and challenging needs

The council’s keen to continue to gather residents’ and partners’ input as it works towards meeting the commitments in the plan. There will be opportunities to take part in workshops and surveys.

Anyone who has an interest in shaping services for older people can sign up via the web page or by calling 0300 200 1005, SMS (for the deaf or hard of hearing) 07527 182 861, text relay 18001 0300 200 1005 or BSL video relay.

Mark Nuti, Surrey County Council’s Cabinet Member for Adults and Health, said: “Our ambition here in Surrey is that no one is left behind – we’re committed to helping those who need us most, and improving quality of life for everyone. We want older people to be able to lead independent and active lives for as long as possible in their own homes and communities and, if they need extra support, to receive tailored and dedicated care. Our Living Well in Later Life plan sets out how we will continue to modernise our services and work with our partners over the rest of the decade to enhance the lives of older people in Surrey. If you have an interest in shaping services for older people, please come forward and help us put our plan into practice.”

Additional reporting from Surrey County Council news service.

Epsom & Ewell Borough Council (EEBC) is raising awareness of the range of support available to residents struggling with the cost of living crisis. The Council have created a dedicated page on the EEBC website, which pulls together information on what the Council and other local and national organisations can do to help in one place at www.epsom-ewell.gov.uk/cost-of-living .

Residents will find advice in a wide range of areas, including energy and housing payments, health costs, food, applying for benefits, employment support and local places to go to keep warm. There are also specific areas for families with children and older residents.

The Council will also be sharing information and money-saving tips through social media and other material out in the Borough to reach as many people as possible with the help available. 

Councillor Alex Coley, (Residents Association- Ruxley Ward) Chair of the Community and Wellbeing Committee, “We are aware of the significant effects rising costs in all areas are having on people’s everyday lives in the Borough. We want to ensure that those who need help are aware of what support is available and are able to access it.”

“This campaign is an opportunity for the residents, charities, the Council and Councillors to work together to help each other through the current crisis. If you are affected by the cost of living crisis, please visit the Council’s webpage, look out for and engage with the advice on its social media and across the Borough or contact your ward Councillor to share your concerns. We’re all here to help.”

Ward councillors’ details can be found here – https://democracy.epsom-
ewell.gov.uk/mgMemberIndex.aspx

The webpage covers the following:

• What we’re doing in Epsom & Ewell
• Applying for benefits and paying your council tax
• Difficulty paying your rent or mortgage
• Employments, skills and training support
• Help for families with children
• Help with food
• Help with health costs
• Help for older residents
• Help with your broadband and phone packages 
• Independent advice
• Paying for your gas, electricity and water
• Warm Hubs

Epsom and Ewell Borough Council Communications.

As Epsom and Ewell Borough Council is expected to publish a draft Local Plan in February 2023 Epsom and Ewell Times carries below an opinion piece authored by the Keep Epsom & Ewell Green Belt Group. We cannot confirm these campaigners’ contentions but we are happy to stimulate public discussion and interest through our pages. The Local Plan will shape for several years to come the decisions on new housing development locations in the Borough.

Opinion Piece:

Alarmed by well-sourced leaks, residents have decided to come out fighting early against joint landowner and developer discussions with Epsom & Ewell Borough Council (EEBC) to build hundreds of homes on the 110-acre Downs Farm, destroying forever one of the closest Green Belt sites to London.

Other Green Belt sites near Epsom’s Hook Arena and Horton Farm are also believed to be earmarked housing in the Local Plan process, and it is even feared that other areas within  Epsom’s 42% of Green Belt land could also have been offered up and included.

Residents in Surrey’s already highest populated borough are so concerned that they are not waiting for what they say could be a flawed consultation process, expected in February.

Under Government pressure to deliver nearly 700 homes for each of the next 20 years, planning officers and councillors should instead be prioritising developer partnerships for an imaginative alternative “brownfield” core scheme, claims the residents’ campaign group.

However, following much-publicized Government climbdown guidelines announced this week by Secretary of State, Michael Gove, that top-down housing targets were to be “advisory only” and could be challenged by local authorities if the character of their area would be irrevocably changed, EEBC should be in no doubt, say residents, that Green Belt sites should be now removed from its Draft Local Plan.

By redeveloping the Kiln Lane/Longmead area closer to town centre facilities, “more starter and lower cost young family homes could be built – and bring much needed rejuvenation and job opportunity benefits. Yet there is little sign that the planners are engaging with developers on this opportunity, preferring the easier, but devastating, option of

building higher end housing on Green Belt fields.”

The borough-wide residents’ campaign, “Keep Epsom and Ewell Green Belt” involves social media, mass leaflet drops, a new petition (https://www.change.org/EpsomGreenBelt) and its own website(https://epsomgreenbelt.org/). Some residents may well stand as independent Green Belt candidates in the May elections.

‘Our advice is that once a site has been publicly designated as suitable by the Council in the Local Plan, public consultations rarely change what are perceived as “done deals” – and we are not simply prepared to stand by and let that happen. In 2019, EEBC listed Downs Farm as a Green Belt site not suitable for development, yet it now appears to conveniently ignore this just because the site has been offered up to them’ said Yufan Si, campaigner of Keep Epsom and Ewell Green Belt.

Downs Farm is a rare chalk grassland habitat for protected species such as skylarks and bats, with regular sightings of deer, redkite and pheasant.

“Destroying forever high quality Green Belt sites will result in mainly luxury houses. We are deeply disappointed that the Residents Association controlled EEBC appear set to prefer Green Belt desecration over redeveloping a core brownfield scheme in central Epsom. Properly phased, this could be promoted as a creative industries hub, focussed on the town’s University of Creative Arts centre for excellence. As well as a much better mix of around 5,000 affordable starter and rented homes for young families, this would provide job opportunities in a much-needed Epsom rejuvenation.”

The campaign group also points out keeping Green Belt spaces also helps sustainability and the UK commitment to net zero by 2030.

The Elmbridge Council Local Plan is cited as an example where the council and residents challenged unrealistic top-down government housing targets. It proposes redeveloped brownfield sites without any Green Belt destruction – despite having a greater proportion of Green Belt land (57%) than Epsom.

The residents’ campaign urges EEBC planners to quickly engage with brownfield developers using a £75,000 grant recently announced by the Government. Given its overriding remit to only prefer Green Belt development in “exceptional circumstances”, and the recent Government policy rethink on housing, this should be done before the draft Epsom Local Plan is issued in February, say residents.                                                            

“Keep Epsom and Ewell Green Belt” Campaign Group – for further information contact epsomgreenbelt@gmail.com

Related articles:

MP’s housing solution for Epsom and Ewell

November 30, 2022

Epsom and Ewell and indeed the whole country has a real shortage of homes. We cannot go on with a generation of young people who aspire to home ownership but … READ MORE

^{Epsom and Ewell last in Local Planning}

Ellie Ames November 26, 2022

Epsom and Ewell Borough Council (EEBC) has approved a delayed timeframe for the development of its new Local Plan, putting it behind both government targets and other Surrey councils, amid … READ MORE

Local Planning Matters

Tim Murphy November 4, 2022

Tim Murphy’s opinion piece on Epsom and Ewell’s Local Plan. An up-to-date Local Plan is a necessity. It indicates to those proposing new developments or conversions to properties just what … READ MORE

The Local Plan to plan The Local Plan

Special Correspondent June 7, 2022

Epsom and Ewell Borough Council’s Licensing and Planning Policy Committee (LLPC) met on the 26th of May 2022 to agree on a timetable for consultation on drafting “The Local Plan”. … READ MORE

In March 2019 Epsom and Ewell Council agreed to phase out its use of single-use plastics. How is it getting along? Judge for yourself from the reply of Councillor John Beckett (Residents Association – Auriol Ward) to a progress report demanded by Councillor Julie Morris (Liberal Democrat – College Ward) at the Council meeting 6th December.

The Chairman of the Environment and Safe Communities Committee reported:

“Since adopting the Single use Plastics Policy as part of the Climate Change Action
Plan, the Council has been working to support the reduction in the use of single use
plastics within its own operations and across the Borough. We have utilised our
communications channels and public events to improve awareness and to support
wider behaviour change of our residents and businesses. We installed refillable
water stations in 6 of our parks and opens spaces and in our Market place, to
encourage use of reusable water bottles,. We have also supported all non-food stall
and dry food greengrocers at Epsom Market to stop using single use plastic carrier
bags, run a reusable Tote bag giveaway event, and committed to making the Market
place Single use Plastic free by April 2024.
We have also reviewed the Council’s own operations to understand where we can
reduce single use plastics. We have removed all plastic cups from our operational
buildings, encouraging staff to use reusable bottles and cups. We replaced the
depot’s old container-based water cooler with a plumbed-in version. We have also
introduced segregated office recycling bins to enable improved recycling of plastics
in our buildings.
We have stopped buying plastic-based refreshment supplies where possible but
where it hasn’t been possible to find a viable alternative, we are unfortunately having
to continue to use that option. This does not mean that we will just accept the
products but will continue to look at alternative options now and in the future.
As the Climate Change Action Plan is a living document and with changes to
industry constantly evolving, we will continue to review our operations for further
opportunities to reduce the need for Single use Plastics. This work will also involve
partnership working with Surrey County Council, through the Surrey Environment
Partnership, to support the delivery of the Single-use Plastics Strategy for the whole
of Surrey.
Regarding the small milk pots which are currently used at the hot drink’s machines in
the members room, council chamber and committee rooms, alternative options are
being looked at with the intention for these to be discussed at the January Climate
Change Working Group meeting. After an initial conversation with the councils
recycling officer, it is believed that the material used in the pods might be the same
as yogurt pots and the solution might be as simple as removing the foil lid and
having a separate container for these to be recycled at these locations.
Whilst we acknowledge it wasn’t called an audit a review has taken place of Single
use Plastic use and subsequent action taken as highlighted in this reply. Since then,
the issue of SuP and the 5 pledges have been incorporated into the climate change
action plan and will continue to be picked up through delivery of the plan. These actions are also now robustly supported by incorporating SuP consideration into all our procurement processes. The climate change action plan has member oversight and officer resource attributed to secure its delivery and continuous review.”

An affordable housing commitment was put off at yesterday’s meeting of Epsom and Ewell Borough Council. A motion proposed by Labour’s Court Ward Councillor Kate Chinn read: “We as the Labour Group move that in the Local Plan Epsom and Ewell Borough Council will specify a minimum requirement of 40% of affordable housing in each new housing development of 10 or more units (Use Class C3) of which at least 25% will be reserved for social rent and comply with the vacant building credit.”

The matter was referred back for further consideration by the Council’s Licensing, Planning and Policy Committee that next meets 19th January 2023.

Cllr Chinn writes to The Epsom and Ewell Times – see our letters page.

Auriol School sports field in Cuddington is earmarked by Surrey County Council for 50 elderly care housing units. According to SCC: “The Cuddington site is ideally situated for Extra Care Housing and has been selected specifically for its location. The site will provide new homes in the form of 1-bedroom self-contained apartments. All of the homes will be accessible, with features designed for wheelchair users.

The accommodation has been designed around the constraints of the site and its neighbours but is still able to offer residents ready access to safe external space including landscaped gardens designed expressly to address the needs of older people; encouraging activity and promoting exercise, healthy living and wellbeing.

The design focuses on ensuring residents have sufficient space, both private and communal, and key to this have been considerations around accessibility. The development has been designed to ensure residents can remain in their homes as they grow older and/or as their needs change.”

SCC have plans for three other sites in the County. Mark Nuti, Surrey County Council’s Cabinet Member for Adults and Health, said: “Our ambition is to bring affordable extra care housing to locations around Surrey and these four sets of proposals bring us a step closer. Not only would the schemes help older people live life to the full, they would also breathe new life into four community sites.”

SCC is holding a consultation exercise and if you want more information and to participate go to:

Cuddington Extra Care Housing (communityuk.site)

The Liberal Democrats have taken two seats off the Conservatives in Surrey County Council by-elections. Winning by just 15 votes, a vote in the Sunbury Common and Ashford Common division took place on Wednesday November 30), with the Liberal Democrats beating four other candidates to be elected.

Harry Boparai got 735 votes, with the Conservative candidate Naz Islam in second place with 720 votes. The by-election was held following the death of Councillor Alison Todd, which was announced in September. With a turnout of 17.5 per cent, the votes for each party broke down as below:

Harry Boparai, Liberal Democrats 735 (elected)
Naz Islam, Conservative 720
Khalid Mustafa, Labour Party 383
Rory O’Brien, Reform UK 144
Helen Couchman Trade Unionist and Socialist Coalition 63

Councillor Todd’s death following a terminal lung cancer diagnosis in 2021 was announced in September. Colleagues on the council described the county and former Spelthorne borough councillor as a “strong and determined” councillor who wanted to use her own experiences to “make the world a better place”.

In May 2021, Cllr Todd was elected for the Conservatives with 1,509 with the second place Liberal Democrat getting 610 votes.

The result represents a 17 per cent swing to the Lib Dems, with no Green or Independent candidates standing, as there was in the 2021 election.

The Liberal Democrats took another Conservative council seat in Surrey after a by-election on Waverley Borough Council.

Dave Busby won the Chiddingfold and Dunsfold by-election on Thursday (December 1) with 652 votes, with the second place candidate getting 297 votes.

The Conservative candidate for Chiddingfold and Dunsfold, Ian Mitchell, was suspended on Monday (November 28) and stood as an independent, though ballot papers had already been issued listing him as a Conservative. A spokesperson for the South West Surrey Conservatives said an investigation was pending regarding a social post “that could be considered to be an inappropriate use of social media”.

The association said in a statement: “Given this, we have suspended Mr Mitchell from the Conservative Association pending an investigation into his conduct that may potentially lead to disciplinary proceedings being taken.”

No Green candidate stood in the Waverley by-election, and the result represents a 43 per cent swing to the Lib Dems since the 2019 election.

The borough council’s Lib Dem leader Cllr Paul Follows (Godalming Central and Ockford) said: “I am ecstatic by the result, further strengthening the progressive coalition at Waverley Borough Council that I have the honour of leading with the addition of a fantastic, local, and hard-working new councillor.
“This is also a huge win and swing in a part of our borough in which the Conservatives have long just assumed the vote was theirs.”

The election took place following the death of Cllr John Gray, who died in September, having been a councillor since 2015.

The full results were as follows:

Dave Busby, Liberal Democrat: 652 (66.6 per cent) Elected
Ian Mitchell, Independent: 297 (30.3 per cent)
Rebecca Aitken, Labour 30 (3.1 per cent)

There are now 16 Liberal Democrat councillors on the county council, of a total of 81 seats.

Surrey schools are being advised to plan for increases in gas prices of more than 129 per cent.
Along with this, council finance teams are telling schools to plan for a 73 per cent increase in electricity prices, according to a cabinet member on Surrey County Council.
Councillor Claire Curran (Conservative, Bookham and Fetcham West), the county council’s cabinet member for education and learning, described the rises as “very significant increases”.
At a meeting of the authority’s cabinet on Tuesday (November 29), Cllr Curran said the school finance team had been working with schools on budget planning and sharing recommendations.
She said utilities generally accounted for around two per cent of a school’s budget, while the largest part of their budget goes on staffing costs, adding: “Even though there’s enormous pressure, it is for a relatively small amount of their budget.”
Many schools are on annual fixed contracts, meaning they were likely protected from the immediate pressure of increasing prices, which Cllr Curran called “a comfort for some”.
She told the meeting: “I don’t think anybody or any organisation is immune from the pressures of gas and electricity costs.”
She said the council was “comfortable” that schools were “not in immediate danger of runaway electricity or energy prices”.
Cllr Curran also highlighted the pressures faced by the county’s smaller schools, which had fewer pupils and were seeing falling birth rates in their areas.
She said schools in rural areas in particular, mostly concentrated in the south of Surrey, were under “very significant pressure” because of the way school funding is allocated on a per pupil basis.
There are 29 schools across the county with fewer than 90 pupils and 73 schools with less than one form of entry.
Cllr Curran said: “That just goes to show that when schools are funded on a per pupil basis we can understand why they’re under pressure.”
The Department for Education is increasing schools funding nationally by £1.5billion in 2023/24 with minimum (average) per pupil funding levels being increased from £4,265 per primary pupil to £4,405 and from £5,525 per secondary pupil to £5,715.
ENDS

Surrey children on free school meals will receive food vouchers over Christmas in what one councillor described as “an absolute lifeline” for some families.
The scheme, which will give families a £30 voucher per child, was confirmed by the council’s cabinet member for education and learning on Tuesday (November 29).
Councillor Clare Curran (Conservative, Bookham and Fetcham West) said the vouchers would be issued to children who were eligible for free school meals to be used over the holiday, and that the “wheels were already in motion” on the scheme.
She said: “I know they are an absolute lifeline for very many families.”
The vouchers can be spent in certain supermarkets, and with some conditions in place on what they can be spent on – covering food and other essential items only.
England footballer Marcus Rashford piled pressure on the government during the coronavirus pandemic, forcing a u-turn on the policy not to provide help for struggling families during the school holiday.
The authority’s cabinet meeting also heard about measures being taken to help residents with the cost of living crisis, including a directory sent out to residents to signpost support organisations and funding available.
Meeting documents said: “Whilst the majority of Surrey residents are not in crisis situations at the moment, many are beginning to make cutbacks.
“It is also important to note that there are some residents in crisis already before the full effects of inflation and the winter months are felt.”
Council statistics showed that more than 500 new clients had registered with Surrey Citizens Advice between April and June with more than 1,600 issues being raised particularly around benefits, debt, housing and foodbanks.
Particular groups in the county accounted for the increased demand, with 66 per cent of claimants identifying as having a disability or long-term health condition, and two-thirds of clients identifying as female.
Figures also showed a 300 per cent increase in demand at some foodbanks across Surrey.
Council leader Tim Oliver (Conservative, Weybridge) said the authority would continue to lobby government over energy prices and support for households after April, when the energy price guarantee ends.
Cllr Oliver said: “I hope that residents see what this council is doing, and see that we are genuinely trying to do whatever we can, in whatever way we can, to help support them through what I know will be a difficult period for many people.”
ENDS

Surrey County Council’s leader says he has “no expectation at all” that council tax will be put up by the full amount allowed despite a £14.4million budget gap at the council.
Upper tier authorities, such as the county council, can increase council tax by up to five per cent without a referendum, since Jeremy Hunt’s autumn statement on November 17.
Presenting a draft budget for 2023/24 to his cabinet on Tuesday (November 29) Councillor Tim Oliver (Conservative, Weybridge) outlined that the council was required to produce a balanced budget each year, and that he was “confident” the gap could be closed before it came back to cabinet early next year.
The budget will then need to be signed off by full council in February, while all 11 districts and borough councils across the county will also confirm how much they expect to raise their part of council tax by as they approve their budgets.
The county council’s budget currently assumes a 1.99 per cent increase of the county council’s part of the council tax, less than the five per cent it could be increased by, made up of a three per cent raise plus a two per cent precept for adult social care.
Cllr Oliver said: “I have no expectation at all that we will need to increase by 5 per cent.”
He also said the budget would be dependent on the settlement payment given to councils by central government, due to be confirmed on December 21.
Speaking before the meeting he said that around 80 per cent of the council’s revenue funding came from council tax, and that the authority was not “blessed with considerable sums of money from government”.
As such Cllr Oliver did not think the draft budget would be “significantly impacted” by the settlement announced by central government, but did say the council may need to use one per cent of the possible raise for adult social care, which could take the total increase to 2.99 per cent.
Of a total budget of around £1billion, Cllr Oliver said in the meeting he was “confident” the council would have found a way to close the budget gap of £14.4m and said the authority was in a much better position than in 2018.
He said after two years of the coronavirus pandemic, a cost of living crisis and rising inflation the council was not in the “easiest of times” but had a strong financial base to work from.
He added; “It is fair to say that we haven’t had the most consistent of approaches from central government over the last few months, so we are hoping that in that context, things will settle down.”
The council’s cabinet member for finance and resources, David Lewis (Conservative, Cobham), also highlighted a forecasted full year deficit of £24.5m from figures released from the halfway mark in September.
The overspend is made up of a £32.5m forecast overspend, offset by £8m of savings identified at the council.
Cllr Lewis told the meeting two areas of largest impact were around children’s services, including a £15m overspend on home to school transport, and in adult social care.
The meeting agenda said: “The current level of projected overspend remains significant.
“It is imperative that this reduces before we reach the end of the year, otherwise there would be a material negative impact on the level of the council’s reserves at a time when the level of external financial risk is extremely high.”

Image: Tim Oliver – credit Surrey Live

The Woodland Trust is urging schools and community groups across the south east of England to get their free tree-pack applications in quickly with just over a month left until the spring delivery closes.

Applications for spring, for delivery in March 2023, are currently open, but only until 11 January.

The last round of the ever-popular free tree-packs scheme was the Woodland Trust’s biggest-ever single send-out, with 4,625 organisations across the UK taking advantage of the scheme.

A total of 643 schools and community groups in London, Greater London, Kent, Surrey and Sussex took delivery of their trees from the end of October to 11 November.

In the south east of England, 88,155 trees were sent out to 643 organisations:

• 16,380 Trees to 168 organisations in London
• 9,690 trees to 87 organisations in Greater London
• 26,535 trees to 157 organisations Kent
• 14,070 trees to 101 organisations in Surrey
• 21,480 trees to 130 organisations in Sussex

The figures for the south east of England were part of a bumper autumn delivery which saw 740,970 saplings finding homes the length and breadth of the UK, bringing the annual total to a record-breaking 1.3m trees for 2022.

Woodland Trust senior project lead Vicki Baddeley said there is no time like the present to sign up and take advantage of the scheme.

“With Christmas looming and National Tree Week upon us, now really is a good time to get those applications in and ensure you don’t miss out,” she added.

“We still have lots of trees available but with schools breaking up before you know it, and the hectic holiday period around the corner, it makes sense to get organised nice and early and avoid a last-minute rush in early January.

“Planting trees is such a simple action, but the collective impact can make a huge difference. It’s a great way for schoolchildren and community groups to learn about nature and the environment and, at the same time, embrace a “Green Christmas”.

“Planting trees has so many benefits, from combatting the effects of climate change, helping support wildlife, to greening up local spaces and boosting well-being.

“The desire to plant trees is growing all the time and I fully expect demand to reflect that in the coming weeks, so I would advise any interested groups to apply sooner rather than later.

“The application process to secure your saplings is quite straightforward, just visit https://www.woodlandtrust.org.uk/plant-trees/schools-and-communities/ to get started.”

The Trust’s tree packs have been generously funded by lead partners: Sainsbury’s, Lloyds Bank, OVO Energy, Bank of Scotland and Sofology.

Baddeley added: “As ever, the support and generosity of our funders is invaluable and we simply couldn’t do this without them.

“The help each and every one of them provides is hugely appreciated and helps to ensure we can provide and deliver our saplings in such huge numbers.”

The Woodland Trust’s autumn delivery:

• England: 615,720 trees to 3,982 schools and community groups
• Scotland: 77,940 trees to 428 schools and community groups
• Wales: 47,310 trees to 215 schools and community groups

NOTES TO EDITORS:

For more information please contact the Woodland Trust press office on 01476 602993, Owen Phillips on 07958 066 766, or email media@woodlandtrust.org.uk or owenphillips@woodlandtrust.org.uk

The Woodland Trust

The Woodland Trust is the largest woodland conservation charity in the UK with more than 500,000 supporters. It wants to see a UK rich in native woods and trees for people and wildlife.

The Trust has three key aims:

1. protect ancient woodland, which is rare, unique and irreplaceable
2. restoration of damaged ancient woodland, bringing precious pieces of our natural history back to life
3. establish native trees and woods with the aim of creating resilient landscapes for people and wildlife

Established in 1972, the Woodland Trust now has over 1,000 sites in its care covering approximately 29,000 hectares. Access to its woods is free so everyone can benefit from woods and trees.

www.woodlandtrust.org.uk

Free trees for schools and communities

The Woodland Trust is giving away hundreds of thousands of trees to schools and communities to make sure everybody in the UK has the chance to plant a tree. To apply, or see terms and conditions, visit: www.woodlandtrust.org.uk/freetrees

National Tree Week

National Tree Week takes place from 26 November to December 2022. It is the UK’s largest annual tree celebration. Each year, the country’s conservation sector, volunteer groups and tree-lovers come together to plant thousands of trees to mark the start of the annual tree planting season.

Courtesy: The Woodland Trust

Images:  The Woodland Trust | Flickr & People Planting | Flickr

Epsom and Ewell and indeed the whole country has a real shortage of homes. We cannot go on with a generation of young people who aspire to home ownership but have little hope of achieving this. And we must have more affordable homes locally.

As a country we are already now building more homes than at any time for decades, but there is still more to do. Locally precious little has happened in recent years. Four years ago, just before the local elections, the Borough Council was due to publish its plan for housing and for the area for the future. It was postponed then, and only now is the Council in the process of publishing and developing its local plan for the area for the next 10-15 years.

Every local authority is obliged to do this, and to explain how it will meet housing need, look after its local economy and protect its local environment.

Each council has also prepared an assessment of local housing need, based on national guidance of how to do this. The housing assessment for Epsom and Ewell is though impossibly high – as it is in some other places. It would mean building more than 10,000 homes locally, and inevitably would mean much of our green belt disappearing.

That is why on a national level I have been saying to Ministers that there has to be more flexibility for Councils based on the reality in their areas.

But here we do need to do all we can to meet the housing need and not nearly enough has been done on this locally in recent years.  That’s why I have proposed a comprehensive redevelopment of the Kiln Lane and Longmead areas to achieve this without building all over our green belt.

My plan, which has been developed together with a leading firm of architects, involves the construction of a mixed use area of well-designed developments, with businesses on the lower floors and flats above, with some terraced housing on the site as well. This kind of mix is typical of what is being done elsewhere. The buildings would be no higher than those already in and around the town centre.

The scheme provides a similar amount of commercial space to the present plus nearly 5,000 homes. The plan would be to have car showrooms and parking areas built upwards rather than at ground level across large areas of land. But over time I would expect the commercial space to attract more creative businesses, given the presence in Epsom of the University of the Creative Arts which is now one of the country’s leading institutions of its kind. It would also aim to provide more homes for younger people, meaning more could afford to stay locally and work here, rather than simply building more executive homes for commuters on open land.

And being close to the town centre, I hope it would provide a much needed boost to the businesses there.

I hope that as the local plan develops the Council will adopt this plan. I think it’s the best way forward for our area.

Epsom and Ewell Borough Council (EEBC) has approved a delayed timeframe for the development of its new Local Plan, putting it behind both government targets and other Surrey councils, amid debate over greenbelt development.

On 21st November, EEBC’s Planning Policy and Licensing Committee unanimously approved a Local Development Scheme (LDS), which sets out a timeframe for the development of its new Local Plan that would see the planning authority miss a government target by more than a year. The Local Plan will set out planning policies and sites that may be developed in the borough up until 2040.

The LDS supersedes the version approved by the council in April, and delays the first stage in the development of the Local Plan by three months. It forecasts that the Local Plan will be adopted in Spring 2025. In an agenda paper, the council’s interim Chief Executive Jackie King pointed out that “the government will want to see progression against their target date of all Local Planning authorities having an up-to-date Local Plan by the end of 2023.”

In 2017, the Government made it a legal requirement for Local Plans to be updated, and if necessary updated, every five years. Epsom’s current planning framework consists of four documents dated between 2007 and 2015. The council has said that the national period of mourning following the death of Queen Elizabeth II caused delays because councillor briefings were rescheduled. Ms King also said that there were delays “to allow further member briefing sessions to be undertaken to enable members to fully engage with and help shape the Local Plan.”

At the committee meeting, Councillor Julie Morris (Liberal Democrats, College Ward) said: “The period of mourning was three weeks, and yet we have a three-month delay.” She added that it was “regrettable” that the committee’s chair, Councillor Steven McCormick (Residents Association, Woodcote Ward), had “put a lot of effort in trying to get councillors to attend briefing sessions” but that “at least one has had to be re-run because of lack of attendance.” She continued: “There is a communication failure. Councillors outside the committee do not realise the importance of the document, give it the deference it deserves, or give their views.”

The new LDS means that EEBC will be the last local council in Surrey to adopt a new Local Plan, with the exception of Woking Borough Council and Banstead and Reigate Borough Council, who said their plans did not need updating.

^{*Woking Borough Council declared that its plan was up to date in October 2018. Reigate and Banstead Borough Council declared its plan up to date in June 2019.}

There has also been debate about developing on greenbelt land in the borough. Greenbelt land includes areas of countryside that are protected from development in order to prevent urban sprawl and encourage development within existing built-up areas. A member of the public attending the committee asked what the council was doing to preserve greenbelt land, and if it would “pause greenbelt development and research brownfield development” as an alternative. Brownfield sites are areas of land that have previously been used for development but are not currently in use.

Councillor Steven McCormick said that the council “should follow government policy in its approach to greenbelt”. Government policy is that greenbelt land should not be altered except in exceptional circumstances. Councillor McCormick said: “If alternative options are considered, it is sufficient to release greenbelt land to meet housing needs”.

Councillor Morris said she wished to clarify that the council had “sympathy” with what the member of the public asked. She added: “But it’s too early. There is every intention of not overdeveloping the borough. It may be that we don’t go for these plans, but the evidence is needed. It’s too early to say what we’ll arrive at.”

No draft of a Local Plan has yet been made public. In a recent email to constituents, Epsom and Ewell MP Chris Grayling said that he expects “the Borough Council to publish its initial thinking about the plan shortly”. He wrote: “We clearly have a need for new homes locally. There are too many young people who grow up or are educated here but cannot afford to remain in the area. And we have a serious shortage of social housing.” He added: “My worry is that developing the green belt is an easy option for the Council. It is always more complicated to reorganise what has already been developed than to build on a green field, but in our area it is much better to take the more difficult approach.”

Gina Miller, leader of the True and Fair Party, who has announced that she will run against Grayling in the next general election, criticised his comments on Twitter. She wrote: “Not surprising but disappointing that Chris Grayling backed abolishing housing targets, making it nigh on impossible to help young people onto the property ladder nationally, whilst calling for new homes in Epsom & Ewell”.

The first stage in the development of the Local Plan, which includes consultation with residents, is now scheduled for February-March 2023.

See earlier reports on The Local Plan:

Local Planning Matters

The Local Plan to plan The Local Plan

BBC misreports Epsom and Ewell planning?

Another £1/4 m to plan planning