Agenda, decisions and minutes

Apologies for absence were received from Councillor Carla Morson.

In accordance with the local Code of Conduct, a councillor is required to disclose at the meeting any disclosable pecuniary interest (DPI) that they may have in respect of any matter for consideration on this agenda.  Any councillor with a DPI must notparticipate in any discussion or vote regarding that matter and they must also withdraw from the meeting immediately before consideration of the matter.

If that DPI has not been registered, the councillor must notify the Monitoring Officer of the details of the DPI within 28 days of the date of the meeting.

Councillors are further invited to disclose any non-pecuniary interest which may be relevant to any matter on this agenda, in the interests of transparency, and to confirm that it will not affect their objectivity in relation to that matter.

There were no declarations of interest.

To confirm the minutes of the meeting of the Executive held on 20 July 2023.

The minutes of the meeting held on 20 July 2023 were confirmed as a correct record. The Chairman signed the minutes.

The minutes of the meeting held on 20 July 2023 were confirmed as a correct record. The Chairman signed the minutes.

The Leader announced that the annual Heritage Open Days would take place between Friday 8 and Sunday 10 September which would allow free access to heritage assets that would, in some cases, usually be closed to the public.

Decision:

1.     That the programme of replacement vehicles for 2024-25 be approved, and that the sum of £2.15m be moved from the provisional capital programme to the approved capital programme.

2.     That authority be delegated to the Executive Head of Environmental Services to carry out a compliant procurement process, award the contracts to the successful tenderers, and, in consultation with the Executive Head of Legal & Democratic Services and the Lead Councillor, enter into the relevant contracts.

Reason:

To allow for the replacement of the waste and garden waste vehicles in 2024.

Other options considered and rejected by the Executive:

To further delay replacement or further investigate viable alternative propulsion, such as EV or hydrogen; however, this would result in delays and increased service reliability risks.

Any conflicts of interest declared:

None.

The Executive considered a report setting out the anticipated vehicle replacements for 2024/25.

It was proposed that in consideration of the Council’s financial position only the waste vehicle fleet should be replaced at this point in time, which was 11 vehicles in total including the entire garden waste fleet.  The existing waste vehicles were of an age and use where they were presenting increasing reliability issues which in turn would affect service quality and cost and were in need of replacement at the earliest opportunity in 2024.

The new vehicles would be a ‘like for like’ replacement. Electric Vehicle (EV) dustcarts had been considered but were still an emerging technology which suggested service and cost risks. Additionally, the Council did not currently have the infrastructure to support an EV fleet without significant investment in the depot was planned to be closed within a year of the vehicles arriving. Finally, the capital cost of EV vehicles was approximately twice that of standard vehicles, approximately £160,000 per vehicle more expensive on an 8 year life than the equivalent diesel vehicle, after taking into account potential operating savings. Given the fluctuations in interest rates currently, it was argued that borrowing to fund the extra expenditure required to provide an EV fleet would not be prudent.  It was hoped that in the future when economic and financial matters were stable, the council would look again at running an EV fleet. Hydrogen fuel cell technology was being increasingly used within buses but was further behind EV for other uses such as dustcarts and may be an option to consider in the future.

The Executive noted that waste household waste disposal was a statutory obligation for the council and there was a duty to maintain a serviceable fleet at best value to residents. Consequently, the Executive,

RESOLVED:

1.     That the programme of replacement vehicles for 2024-25 be approved, and that the sum of £2.15m be moved from the provisional capital programme to the approved capital programme.

2.     That authority be delegated to the Executive Head of Environmental Services to carry out a compliant procurement process, award the contracts to the successful tenderers, and, in consultation with the Executive Head of Legal & Democratic Services and the Lead Councillor, enter into the relevant contracts.

Reason:

To allow for the replacement of the waste and garden waste vehicles in 2024.

Decision:

That the draft Covert Investigative Powers Policy, as set out in Appendix 1 to the report submitted to the Executive be adopted, subject to the same policy being adopted by Waverley Borough Council.

Reasons:

1.     To align the policies of Guildford and Waverley and to improve consistency in reporting, monitoring and approval of covert surveillance and acquisition of communications data.

2.     To ensure the integrity of the processes in place for the use of directed surveillance, covert human intelligence sources (CHIS) and acquiring communications data.

3.     To maintain compliance with the Legislation and Codes of Practice that govern Investigatory powers and Human Rights

4.     To ensure collaborative engagement with the IPCO and their inspectors

5.     To ensure staff are fully trained and aware of their powers, duties and the authorisation process.

Other options considered and rejected by the Executive:

1.     To adopt the new aligned policy with such amendments as the Executive saw fit. However, the Executive was mindful that any such amendments might not be adopted by Waverley Borough Council which would negate the benefits of having an aligned and identical policy.

2.     To not adopt the new policy and retain a separate and different policy framework for each council. Along with not aligning to two authorities, there was also a risk that the policies would not be compliant with the current guidance.

Details of any conflict of interest declared by the Leader or lead councillors and any dispensation granted:

None.

Historically, Guildford and Waverley had separate polices in relation to covert surveillance. Both policies were somewhat out of date in respect of Communications Data terminology and procedure as implemented by the Investigatory Powers Act 2016.

The Executive considered a report that presented a new draft policy at combining the best parts of both councils’ documents into a coherent policy, covering practice, procedure, examples and social media guidance.

Waverley Borough Council would consider the same policy. Provided the same policy was adopted by Waverley Borough Council, there would be clarity and consistency of both councils having an identical policy for employees and others employed jointly by the two councils or working collaboratively on joint or shared services or projects. The two councils having an identical policy would put them in a strong position to support any future decisions to progress and extend the current collaborative working.

The Executive agreed that it was essential to have robust, up to date guidance and procedures in regard to the council’s duties concerning any covert surveillance undertaking and that the policies should be in-line with Waverley Borough Council given the increasing collaborative relationship between the two authorities. Therefore, the Executive,

RESOLVED:

That the draft Covert Investigative Powers Policy, as set out in Appendix 1 to the report submitted to the Executive be adopted, subject to the same policy being adopted by Waverley Borough Council.

Reasons:

1.     To align the policies of Guildford and Waverley and to improve consistency in reporting, monitoring and approval of covert surveillance and acquisition of communications data.

2.     To ensure the integrity of the processes in place for the use of directed surveillance, covert human intelligence sources (CHIS) and acquiring communications data.

3.     To maintain compliance with the Legislation and Codes of Practice that govern Investigatory powers and Human Rights

4.     To ensure collaborative engagement with the IPCO and their inspectors

5.     To ensure staff are fully trained and aware of their powers, duties and the authorisation process.

Decision:

1.     That the working groups recommended to continue as specified in Appendix 1 and listed in paragraph 2.1 of the report submitted to the Executive, be retained and that those working groups continue to operate under the terms of reference and membership as set out in Appendices 2 to 9.

2.     That, where membership of those working groups listed to continue do not have full membership, the appropriate lead councillor shall liaise with group leaders to fill those vacancies.

3.     That the Community Board be disbanded.

4.     That the draft terms of reference for the new Financial Recovery Executive Working Group, as set out in Appendix 9, be approved.

Reasons:

1.     To assist the Executive to select or set up appropriate, properly resourced groups to provide support or undertake work on its behalf.

2.     To comply with the requirement on the part of the Executive to periodically review the continuation of the various Working Groups in accordance with Council Procedure Rule 24 (k).

3.     The Community Board, this group has not met since being created and has made no contribution.

4.     To comply with the recommendations of the Council meeting on 25 July 2023.

Other options considered and rejected by the Executive:

None.

Details of any conflict of interest declared by the Leader or lead councillors and any dispensation granted:

None.

The Executive or individual lead councillors could convene working groups to undertake more detailed and extensive business than the Executive by itself would have time to undertake. Such working groups were non-decision making and would report back to the Executive as appropriate. The Council’s Constitution stated that the Executive should annually consider the continuation of such working groups.  Where there was a preference for certain working groups to continue, the Executive was asked to agree in respect of each group, the chairman, the terms of reference, and to appoint councillors to them.

The Executive considered the annual report that set out all of the existing working groups with a recommendation if they should continue or be disbanded.

This year, the Executive was asked to continue with all working groups except for one. The Community Board was recommended for deletion as it had never met and consequently had not made any contribution. The Executive was asked to agree to one new working group, which was referred to in the Budget Update report to Council on 25 July. This was the Financial Recovery Executive Working Group, and its draft terms of reference were set out in Appendix 9.

It was noted that although the membership of Executive working groups was at the discretion of the Executive, the Executive as a body and lead councillors strove to appoint membership of the groups across the political parties so as include the skills and experience available across the council member. The Executive was minded that political inclusion to best serve those working groups would be expected by residents. The Leader of the Council encouraged elected councillors of any political persuasion to come forward should they wish to be involved. Thereafter, the Executive,

RESOLVED:

1.     That the working groups recommended to continue as specified in Appendix 1 and listed in paragraph 2.1 of the report submitted to the Executive, be retained and that those working groups continue to operate under the terms of reference and membership as set out in Appendices 2 to 9.

2.     That, where membership of those working groups listed to continue do not have full membership, the appropriate lead councillor shall liaise with group leaders to fill those vacancies.

3.     That the Community Board be disbanded.

4.     That the draft terms of reference for the new Financial Recovery Executive Working Group, as set out in Appendix 9, be approved.

Reasons:

1.     To assist the Executive to select or set up appropriate, properly resourced groups to provide support or undertake work on its behalf.

2.     To comply with the requirement on the part of the Executive to periodically review the continuation of the various Working Groups in accordance with Council Procedure Rule 24 (k).

3.     The Community Board, this group has not met since being created and has made no contribution.

4.     To comply with the recommendations of the Council meeting on 25 July 2023.