Apologies were received from Councillors Bartholomew, Constance, Lindsay-Gale and Stratford.

To approve the minutes of the meeting held on  20 March 2018 (CA3 (to be circulated separately)) and to receive information arising from them.

The Minutes of the meeting held on 20 March 2018 were approved and signed as a correct record.

Councillor Howson had given notice of the following question to Councillor Constance:

“Why was the Proposed Amendments to Parking Restrictions in Frenchay Road, Oxford that first appeared in the forward Plan in September 2016, withdrawn in March 2018 leaving residents to wait until after 2021 for any consultation on a possible CPZ (Controlled Parking Zone) before they can expect any relief from commuter and other parking in their street and also making access for emergency vehicles very difficult.”

Councillor Hudspeth (in the absence of Councillor Constance) replied:

“Following consultation it was clear that further work was needed on the Frenchay Road area parking restrictions and the item was removed from the forward plan to allow the scheme to be reviewed.  The fact that you were not updated about this is an oversight for which officers and I apologise.

As you know the city and county councils are working together to agree a programme of Controlled Parking Zones in the city over the next few years.  It will not be possible to implement every zone with the funding available so some prioritisation is necessary.  Local members are being asked for their input into this process and this will be taken into account before the programme is finalised. 

Completely new parking schemes included in the final programme are expected to be implemented during 2020/21.  However, schemes for which design work and consultation have been previously completed could be implemented sooner than this. 

Schemes not included in the final programme are not ruled out if additional funding can be found to pay for them.  Again, if they are schemes where previous design work and consultation has already been completed then they could potentially be implemented well before 2021.”

Councillor Webber had given notice of the following question to Councillor Hudspeth:

“How much money in total has been collected from maintained schools in 2017-18 from the Apprenticeship Levy and how much of this money has been spent on apprenticeships?”

Councillor Hudspeth replied:

“SAP shows a total of £451,200.57 charged against schools for the Apprenticeship Levy during 2017-18 financial year. Once I have the details of the amount spent I will let Cllr Webber have these.”

Councillor Webber had given notice of the following question to Councillor Hudspeth:

“What steps have been taken to discuss use of a Level 7 Senior Leader Master's Degree Apprenticeship with the Chartered Institute of Management or any other similar body?”

Councillor Hudspeth replied:

“This is an interesting idea that I will raise with the Local Enterprise Partnership who work with businesses and young people across Oxfordshire to help meet our county's 'skills agenda' including through apprenticeships.”

Councillor Emily Smith had given notice of the following question to Councillor Hibbert Biles:

What are the current reserves recorded for each maintained primary school in Oxfordshire?

Councillor Hibbert-Biles replied:

The Finance team are in the process of closing the annual accounts for Schools.

All figures provided here are PROVISIONAL.

Confirmed School Reserves will be circulated to schools after  ...  view the full minutes text for item 36/18

The Leader of the Council had agreed the following requests to address the meeting:-

Cabinet Member: Public Health & Education

Forward Plan Ref: 2018/039

Contact: Lauren Rushen, Policy Officer Tel: 07990 367851

Report by Asistant Chief Executive (CA6).

The Education Scrutiny Committee working group completed an investigation into school exclusions in March 2018.

A working group of Education Scrutiny Committee members has investigated the increased use of exclusion across schools in Oxfordshire with the aim of identifying the underlying reasons for this and to make recommendations to help reduce the number of fixed term and permanent exclusions in the future.

The working group report and recommendations were considered and endorsed by the Education Scrutiny Committee on 14 March 2018. The report contains a number of recommendations for the Council, which the Cabinet is asked to consider and respond to within six weeks, as per the requirements in the Council’s constitution.

The Cabinet is RECOMMENDED to:

(a)          consider the recommendations of the Education Scrutiny Committee Exclusions working group for the Council;

(b)         agree which recommendations the Cabinet will accept; and

(c)          ask the Director for Children’s Services, in consultation with the Cabinet Member for Public Health and Education, to prepare a response for the next meeting of the Education Scrutiny Committee.

The Education Scrutiny Committee working group completed an investigation into school exclusions in March 2018.

A working group of Education Scrutiny Committee members had investigated the increased use of exclusion across schools in Oxfordshire with the aim of identifying the underlying reasons for this and to make recommendations to help reduce the number of fixed term and permanent exclusions in the future.

The working group report and recommendations were considered and endorsed by the Education Scrutiny Committee on 14 March 2018. Cabinet considered a report that contained a number of recommendations which the Cabinet was asked to consider and respond to within six weeks, as per the requirements in the Council’s constitution.

Councillor John Howson, thanked councillors and officers involved in the first deep dive investigation undertaken by the Education Scrutiny Committee. Councillor Howson paid tribute to the work carried out by the Head of the Virtual School and by staff at Meadowbrook. The challenge was how to develop the experience of pupils here to all pupils and this was the responsibility of all partners. He welcomed the collaboration between schools and fully endorsed the recommendations of the working group report.

Councillor Gill Sanders, Chairman of the Working Group on School Exclusions explained the context for the decision to investigate school exclusions and the particular concern over the exclusion of pupils with Special Educational Needs, the numbers of primary and children in transition to secondary school and pupils in Years 10 and 11 being excluded. Councillor Sanders detailed the work of the Group, emphasising the range of people they had spoken to and visits to several schools. Councillor Sanders in commending the recommendations to cabinet highlighted the generally good collaborative working between schools, the merit in pre-exclusion panels, the importance of continuing to support the work of the The Virtual School and Meadowbrook, the delays in the CAMHS process and the Didcot initiative. Councillor Sanders thanked officers particularly Katie Read, Senior Policy Officer, for their work and also thanked Councillor Howson, who though not a member of the Working Group, had joined them and made a valuable contribution to the work of the Group.

Councillor Michael Waine, Chairman of the Education Scrutiny Committee, noted that this was the first of three planned deep dive investigations and thanked Councillor Gill Sanders for leading the Group and thanked officers for the excellent support received. Councillor Waine in detailing the recommendations noted that it was a cause for celebration that schools were not excluding children who are looked after. Councillor Waine highlighted the important support and challenge role of governors in the exclusions process. He referred to schools that were exemplars of good practice and the need for that to be shared. The timeliness of Education Health and Care Plans was seen as a major issue. Councillor Waine also highlighted the importance of robustly challenging schools on the use of reduced timetables as this had safeguarding implications.

Councillor Hibbert-Biles, Cabinet Member for Public Health & Education, thanked the Education Scrutiny  ...  view the full minutes text for item 38/18

Cabinet Member: Environment

Forward Plan Ref: 2018/040

Contact: John Disley, Policy Strategy Manager Tel: 07767 006742/Amanda Jacobs, Principal Transport Planner Tel: 07825 314772

Report by Director for Planning & Place (CA7).

Thames Water are currently consulting on their Draft Water Resources Management Plan 2019 which looks ahead over the next 80 years to 2100.

The consultation documents outline the proposed demand management and water supply options that Thames Water are considering.

The key issues raised in this response to the consultation are: The need for a reservoir in Abingon, Thames Water's population forecasting on which they are basing their preferred programme for water supply, the need to maximise their current infrastructure through prevention of leakages, and water trading.

Cabinet is to note that the report has been compiled by non-technical specialists. Thames Water has submitted a large body of evidence that would require significant resource including technical specialists to fully summarise and assess.

The Cabinet is RECOMMENDED to endorse the key issues raised within this report as the response to this consultation, including the request for immediate and regular discussion with Thames Water on the proposed reservoir in terms of its catchment and location.

Thames Water are currently consulting on their Draft Water Resources Management Plan 2019 which looks ahead over the next 80 years to 2100.

The consultation documents outline the proposed demand management and water supply options that Thames Water are considering.

Cabinet considered a report setting out the key issues and seeking approval to the draft response  to the consultation.

Councillor Webber, Leader of the Liberal Democrat Group and councillor for Sutton Courtenay & Marcham, stated that he had been heavily involved from a district perspective during the previous iteration and he was aware that this was the third or fourth iteration. It affected not only his Division but everyone in Oxfordshire. It was estimated that the reservoir could attract 1million visitors per year and this would add to the pressure on infrastructure. The process was funded by public money and previously cost up to £45m and then opponents had had to fund the opposition to public enquiry stage. This found in favour of the opponents of the reservoir and he found it difficult to see what new arguments were being brought forward other than the population figure being higher. Councillor Webber highlighted the arguments on population forecasting whilst noting that this was a regional facility. In relation to the science he noted that so far the only voice being heard was Thames Water and he urged Cabinet to ensure that Group Against Reservoir Development (GARD) were given an opportunity to present their arguments. Councillor Hudspeth, Leader of the Council replied that he had no objections to the proposal that GARD provide a briefing to councillors but that the same offer should be made to Thames Water. He proposed that officers investigate the opportunities for briefings for all members from GARD and Thames Water.

Councillor John Sanders highlighted Thames Water’s poor service record with his constituents. Councillor Sanders also referred to the lack of ambition in the target of reducing water leakage by 15% over seven years and to the fact that they intended to sell water. He was concerned that there would be insufficient consultation with local people and asked Cabinet to note the proposals with concern. Councillor Hudspeth stressed that Cabinet were not endorsing Thames Water proposals but were asked to endorse the key issues raised by officers.

During discussion Cabinet heard from officers on the population figures and that Thames Water accepted that the figures were moving all the time. Cabinet endorsed the key issues and commented on the need to update the creaking water infrastructure, with water treatment plants not being updated and some areas having supplies turned off to address sediment issues. It was suggested that the Council continue to challenge Thames Water robustly over the need to consider other areas in the region.

RESOLVED:              to:

(a)          endorse the key issues raised within this report as the response to this consultation, including the request for immediate and regular discussion with Thames Water on the proposed reservoir in terms of its catchment and  ...  view the full minutes text for item 39/18

Cabinet Member: Local Communities

Forward Plan Ref: 2017/151

Contact: Sarah Jelley, Senior Policy & Performance Officer Tel: 07554 103437

Report by Assistant Chief Executive (CA8).

In February 2016 the council agreed to set aside £1m for creating a 'one off' fund to provide pump priming to support the provision of open access children's services. 

In September 2017 Cabinet agreed the proposed use of the underspend of £232,674 for further rounds of grant funding and a cross party group of councillors bringing proposals back to cabinet for decsion.

The working group have considered the applications under the seventh round of bids against the criteria outlined in the guidance notes with recommendations to Cabinet. 

The Cabinet is RECOMMENDED to:

(a)          approve for funding the following bids:

a.    Benson Little Acorns

b.    Didcot APUK

c.    East Oxford Primary School (reduced award)

d.    St Edburgs Church with Kingsmere (reduced award)

e.    The Comfort Trust;

(b)         approve changes/variations to the following previously awarded projects:

a.    Abingdon Carousel

b.    Cutteslowe Community Association

c.    Faringdon Town Council

(c)          approve delegated authority to Cabinet Member for Local Communities delegated decisions for minor changes and variations to projects.

In February 2016 the council agreed to set aside £1m for creating a 'one off' fund to provide pump priming to support the provision of open access children's services. 

In September 2017 Cabinet agreed the proposed use of the underspend of £232,674 for further rounds of grant funding and a cross party group of councillors bringing proposals back to cabinet for decision.

The working group have considered the applications under the seventh round of bids against the criteria outlined in the guidance notes and Cabinet considered a report setting out their recommendations.

Kathy Peto, for East Oxford Primary School, thanked Cabinet for considering giving part of the grant requested but asked that consideration be given to funding more fully. Ms Peto, clarified that they were not asking for rent for use of the school. The school was unable to accommodate the stay and play sessions and would need to rent space in the former children’s centre. She noted that any rent would come back to the County Council but also queried whether the rent could be waived as had happened for other groups. Ms Peto explained the nature of the outreach work referred to in the bid application.

The Chairman referred to the statement included in the addenda from Don Anderson on behalf of Cuttesloe Community Association.

Councillor Paul Buckley, local councillor for Wolvercote & Summertown, declared a non-pecuniary interest as his wife was a trustee of Cuttesloe Community Association. Councillor Buckley spoke in support of the statement from Don Anderson requesting a deferral of the decision in respect of the bid by Cuttesloe Community Association. He highlighted the success of the activities and the impact the loss of £3k would make to their finances in 2018/19. He explained that the recommendation was based on out of date data and that most of the money carried over related to money raised by trustees themselves. He added that only £2k of Council funded money was being carried over and this was going to new work. He expressed concern with the way that the matter had been handled and hoped that in future there would be greater communication with groups at an earlier stage.

Councillor Jamila Begum Azad, Shadow Cabinet Member for Children & Family Services expressed concern at the reduced funding for East Oxford. It was an area with a high degree of transition and a high number of refugees. Many families experienced language barriers and the local primary school had a high number of pupils with English as an additional language. The former children’s centre was at risk of under use and Councillor Begum Azad supported the bid by the School and would wish to see funding increased as there was still money in the pot.

Councillor Gray, Cabinet Member for Local Communities responding to the points made confirmed that it had appeared to the Working Group that on the East Oxford Primary School bid space was to be rented from the school and they were not comfortable with  ...  view the full minutes text for item 40/18

Cabinet Member: Leader

Forward Plan Ref: 2018/038

Contact: Sarah Jelley, Senior Policy & Performance Officer Tel: 07554 103437

Report by Assistant Chief Executive (CA9).

The Councillor Priority Fund will run across two financial years, and will be at the discretion of individual councillors to award and officers will enact their decision under officers' delegated powers. This paper suggests a general criterion for eligible applicants, and two processes for administering the fund to either external organisations, or internal OCC services. It also sets out considerations for councillors in deciding which bids to fund.

The Cabinet is RECOMMENDED to:

(a)          approve the governance arrangements under officers’ delegated powers.

(b)         approve the Councillor Priority Fund Guidance Notes

(c)          approve the Councillor Priority Fund Funding Request Form

(d)         approve the process for Allocation of Funding to Internal Services.

The Councillor Priority Fund will run across two financial years, and will be at the discretion of individual councillors to award and officers will enact their decision under officers' delegated powers. This paper suggests a general criterion for eligible applicants, and two processes for administering the fund to either external organisations, or internal OCC services. It also sets out considerations for councillors in deciding which bids to fund.

Councillor Liz Brighouse, Opposition Leader, referred to the difficulty with individuals or small groups giving funding to Groups on the basis of forms. It was important that the process be equitable with councillors properly trained in relation to grant giving. She felt that without training the decisions would be open to challenge. Councillor Brighouse added that she personally did not support this proposal but if it was to be done then there needed to be greater clarity about what could be funded. More money was involved and greater risk. Councillor Brighouse proposed that the scheme be delayed for consideration by Political Group leaders. That a breathing space would allow consideration of the real problems she feared could ensue to ensure that it is done equitably and with clarity.

During discussion Cabinet supported the proposals and welcomed the greater flexibility provided by the scheme, noting that a previous scheme had been criticised by councillors as being too restrictive. Councillor Gray, Cabinet Member for Local Communities stressed that the money was delegated to councillors to spend in their localities and that he applauded and encouraged councillors to pool their budgets.  

RESOLVED:             to:

(a)          approve the governance arrangements under officers’ delegated powers;

(b)          approve the Councillor Priority Fund Guidance Notes;

(c)          approve the Councillor Priority Fund Funding Request Form; and

(d)          approve the process for Allocation of Funding to Internal Services.

Cabinet Member: Leader

Forward Plan Ref: 2017/147

Contact: Sue Whitehead, Principal Committee Officer Tel: 07393 001213

Schedule below reporting on a quarterly basis executive decisions taken under the specific powers and functions delegated under the terms of Part 7.2 of the Council’s Constitution.

Not for call in.

Cabinet noted the following schedule reporting on a quarterly basis executive decisions taken under the specific powers and functions delegated under the terms of Part 7.2 of the Council’s Constitution.

Not for call in.

Cabinet Member: All

Contact Officer: Sue Whitehead, Committee Services Manager Tel: 07393 001213

The Cabinet Procedure Rules provide that the business of each meeting at the Cabinet is to include “updating of the Forward Plan and proposals for business to be conducted at the following meeting”.   Items from the Forward Plan for the immediately forthcoming meetings of the Cabinet appear in the Schedule at CA11.  This includes any updated information relating to the business for those meetings that has already been identified for inclusion in the next Forward Plan update.

The Schedule is for noting, but Cabinet Members may also wish to take this opportunity to identify any further changes they would wish to be incorporated in the next Forward Plan update.

The Cabinet is RECOMMENDED to note the items currently identified for forthcoming meetings.

The Cabinet considered a list of items for the immediately forthcoming meetings of the Cabinet.

RESOLVED:                        to note the items currently identified for forthcoming meetings.