Agenda, decisions and minutes

To approve the minutes of the meeting held on 3 November 2015 (CC1) and to receive information arising from them.

The Minutes of the Meeting held on 3 November 2015 were approved and signed.

Apologies for absence were received from Councillors Neil Owen, Laura Price and Anne Purse.

The Chairman reported as follows:

Council sent its condolences to the family of Leonard White, former County Librarian from 1976 – 1990.  The Chairman reported that the funeral was taking place at St Peter’s Church in Wolvercote on 10 December.

Following on from the Motion by Councillor Harris, the Meeting with MP’s took place on 27^th November and a note of the outcome would be circulated to all members of the Council.

The Chairman clarified the process on voting.  Members were asked to wait until it was announced that the vote had started before voting (any votes prior to that would not be recorded) and that a 5 second warning would be given before the vote finished, with the Chairman asking members to indicate whether they were happy with their vote before closing the vote.  Once the vote had closed, the result would stand and no further amendment could be made.

The Chairmandrew member’s attention to the note on the front of the schedule of business inviting all members to the briefing on Oxfordshire Safeguarding Children's Board directly after Council.

The Chairman also invited members to view the exhibition in the Council Rooms corridor of a local artist’s maps.

The Council noted the Leader’s changes to portfolio responsibilities as set out in the Schedule of Business.

The Council received the following Petitions and Public address:

Ms Pratima Mitchell and Mr James Young presented a Petition requesting that Oxfordshire County Council re-design the crossing facility for bikes at Hythe Bridge Street and George Street.

Mr Charles Young presented a Petition urging the County Council to take all possible steps to promote the growth of car clubs, in particular by granting them dedicated parking spaces on public highway.  As many other councils had recognised, cars clubs played an important role in easing congestion and reducing competition for parking spaces.  The Council was asked to reverse a previous decision to request a car club operator to seek private spaces before reapplying for spaces on the public highway.

Miss Jessica Hall addressed the Council in support of the Motion by Councillor Jean Fooks seeking the Cabinet to amend procurement procedures to require all companies bidding for council contracts to self certify that they were fully tax-compliant in line with central government practice, using the standards in PPN 03/14, rather that the lower standards in the recently published regulations.

Mr Clive Hill to Councillor Judith Heathcoat

Following the Chipping Norton Hospital Action Group's survey, the results of which we would like to hand over to OCC for its own evaluation, will OCC now take the views expressed by over 1300 people in the community into account and give consideration to including Chipping Norton War Memorial Community Hospital in the countywide review to be conducted in 2016?

Answer

As with all consultations the Council undertakes, the views of all those in the community who respond will be conscientiously considered.

13 questions with notice were asked. Details of the questions and answers and the supplementary questions and answers (where asked) are set out in Annex 1 to the Minutes.

Report of the Cabinet Meeting held on 10 November 2015 (CC9).

The Council received the report of the Cabinet.

Report by the Chief Legal Officer and Monitoring Officer (CC10).

Under the Constitution, the Monitoring Officer is required to monitor and review the operation of the Constitution to ensure that its aims, principles and requirements are given full effect. This includes making recommendations to Council on any necessary amendments.  The Monitoring Officer is authorised to make any changes to the Constitution which are required to:

- Comply with the law

- Give effect to the decisions of Council (or Cabinet, Committees etc.)

- Correct errors and otherwise for accuracy or rectification

Other changes will only be made by Full Council, following a recommendation of the Monitoring Officer.

This report therefore updates Council on amendments to the Constitution that have been made consequential on previous decisions of the Council.  This is for information only. It also seeks approval of two minor changes, both of which effectively seek to clarify and update existing provisions within the Council Procedure Rules and the Protocol for Member-Officer Relations.

Council is RECOMMENDED to:

(a)          note that changes have been made to the Constitution to give effect to the Council’s previous decisions on:

(i)           senior management structures (Council Minute Reference 56/15; and

(ii)          senior officer dismissal procedures (Council Minute Reference 43/15);

(b)         agree the proposed change to the Council Procedure Rules outlined at paragraph 11 of this report; and

(c)          agree the proposed change to the Protocol on Member-Officer Relations outlined at paragraph 14 of this report.

The Council had before them a report (CC10) which updates Council on amendments to the Constitution that had been made consequential on previous decisions of the Council and sought approval of two minor changes, both of which effectively clarified and updated existing provisions within the Council Procedure Rules and the Protocol for Member-Officer Relations.

During debate, Council indicated that it would have liked Audit & Governance to have been given the opportunity to comment on the report prior to Council’s consideration.

RESOLVED: (on a motion by Councillor Mathew, seconded by Councillor Lovatt and carried by 53 votes to 2, with 1 abstention) to refer the report to the Audit & Governance Committee for consideration.

Report by the Chief Legal Officer and Monitoring Officer (CC11).

In law the County Council must appoint one or more Independent Persons whose views are to be sought, and taken into account, by the authority before it makes its decision on an allegation that a councillor has breached the Members’ Code of Conduct.

As such, Independent Persons perform a key role in the Council’s procedures for investigating any such complaints. Their role also includes forming part of a Panel of persons, established under statutory procedures, to advise or make recommendations to Council on the potential dismissal of a senior officer.

The Council currently has one such Independent Person but it is prudent for more than one to be appointed. This report therefore recommends Council to make a specific appointment to this role. 

Council is RECOMMENDED to appoint Dr Sadie Reynolds to the role of Independent Person under Section 28 of the Localism Act 2011.

In law the County Council must appoint one or more Independent Persons whose views are to be sought, and taken into account, by the authority before it makes its decision on an allegation that a councillor had breached the Members’ Code of Conduct.

As such, Independent Persons performed a key role in the Council’s procedures for investigating any such complaints. Their role also included forming part of a Panel of persons, established under statutory procedures, to advise or make recommendations to Council on the potential dismissal of a senior officer.

The Council currently had one such Independent Person but it was prudent for more than one to be appointed. This report (CC11) therefore recommended Council to make a specific appointment to this role.

Councillor John Sanders moved and Councillor Waine seconded the recommendations as set out in the report and on the face of the Agenda.

Following debate, the motion was put to the vote and was carried by 48 votes to 3, with 8 abstentions.

RESOLVED:  (48 votes to 3, with 8 abstentions) to appoint Dr Sadie Reynolds to the role of Independent Person under Section 28 of the Localism Act 2011.

Report by the Chief Finance Officer (CC12).

The report sets out the Treasury Management activity undertaken in the first half of the financial year 2015/16 in compliance with the CIPFA Code of Practice.  The report includes Debt and Investment activity, Prudential Indicator monitoring and forecast interest receivable and payable for the financial year.

Council is RECOMMENDED to note the report.

The Council had before it a report (CC12) which set out the Treasury Management Activity undertaken in the first half of the financial year 2015/16, including Debt and Investment activity, Prudential Indicator monitoring, changes in Strategy and forecast interest receivable and payable for the financial year.

Councillor Stratford moved and Councillor Hudspeth seconded the recommendations as set out in the report and on the face of the Agenda.

Following debate the motion was put to the vote and it was:

RESOLVED: (nem con) to note the report.

“This Council regrets the withdrawal of bus subsidies from rural areas recognising the impact on the most isolated elderly residents.  We note many responses to the bus subsidies consultation stated a willingness to pay for the Old Age Bus Pass. To raise important revenue for this most essential transport.

This Council urges Government to permit Councils to charge an annual flat-rate fee, in the same way as we purchase a Senior Rail Pass on those pensioners who can afford to pay.”

With the agreement of Council, Councillor Constance withdrew her Motion.

“Oxfordshire is one of the wealthiest counties in the UK. Unemployment is amongst the lowest; business growth, incomes and house prices are amongst the highest. Housing demand and future housing growth ensures that Oxfordshire will be a leader in driving the future of the UK economy.

The need for infrastructure to support this growth becomes ever more important. Much of the cost of that infrastructure falls to the County Council, and yet the Council finds itself increasingly cash-strapped with the lack of infrastructure ever more acute.

So if there is so much money flowing in the County’s economy and little of it is in the hands of the Council, in whose hands or pockets is it?

This Council has a great team of officers – experts in social care, in education, in roads and transport, in planning and so on, but it has few expert officers whose specific skills are in commerce.

In order to join and benefit from the thriving economy on its doorstep, Council requests that Cabinet, as part of the budget process, urgently considers investing in a small team of experts to oversee all the commercial activities of the Council. A team:

(i)            to help departments draw up, ensure best value and monitor contracts;

(ii)          to develop a trading arm of the Council;

(iii)         to sell the skills and services it already provides on the open market;

(iv)         and to seek out all opportunities for income generation.”

Councillor Webber moved and Councillor Smith seconded the following motion:

“Oxfordshire is one of the wealthiest counties in the UK. Unemployment is amongst the lowest; business growth, incomes and house prices are amongst the highest. Housing demand and future housing growth ensures that Oxfordshire will be a leader in driving the future of the UK economy.

The need for infrastructure to support this growth becomes ever more important. Much of the cost of that infrastructure falls to the County Council, and yet the Council finds itself increasingly cash-strapped with the lack of infrastructure ever more acute.

So if there is so much money flowing in the County’s economy and little of it is in the hands of the Council, in whose hands or pockets is it?

This Council has a great team of officers – experts in social care, in education, in roads and transport, in planning and so on, but it has few expert officers whose specific skills are in commerce.

In order to join and benefit from the thriving economy on its doorstep, Council requests that Cabinet, as part of the budget process, urgently considers investing in a small team of experts to oversee all the commercial activities of the Council. A team:

(i)            to help departments draw up, ensure best value and monitor contracts;

(ii)          to develop a trading arm of the Council;

(iii)         to sell the skills and services it already provides on the open market;

and to seek out all opportunities for income generation.”

Following debate, the motion was put to the vote and was lost by 47 votes to 8, with 4 abstentions.

“Council recognises that, with the severe financial pressures which Council faces over the next five years, it is important that we make best use of our property assets. To assist in making timely and appropriate changes to our office accommodation particularly in Oxford, Council calls on the Cabinet Member with responsibility for Property to appoint a Cabinet Advisory Group to:

(a)      review the buildings which the council currently owns or leases in Oxford;

(b)      consider the present and future requirements of our office based staff;

(c)      explore the options for making the most cost effective way of using these buildings which we own or lease; and

(d)      make recommendations to Cabinet as to savings which could be made and income which could be generated from our property.”

With the agreement of Council, Councillor Hards moved and Councillor Bartholomew seconded his motion as amended by Councillor Bartholomew below in bold italics and strikethrough:

“Council recognises that, with the severe financial pressures which Council faces over the next five years, it is important that we make best use of our property assets. To assist in making timely and appropriate changes to our office accommodation particularly in Oxford, Council calls on the Cabinet Member with responsibility for Property to appoint a Cabinet Advisory Group toCouncil calls on the Cabinet Advisory Group for Income Generation in conjunction with the Cabinet Member for Property to set up a task & finish group to produce an interim report by June 2016 which:

(a)      review the buildings which the council currently owns or leases in Oxford;

(b)      consider the present and future requirements of our office based staff;

(c)      explore the options for making the most cost effective way of using these buildings which we own or lease; and

(d)      make recommendations to Cabinet as to savings which could be made and income which could be generated from our property.”

Following debate, the motion as amended was put to the vote and was carried unanimously.

RESOLVED:  (unanimously)

“Council recognises that, with the severe financial pressures which Council faces over the next five years, it is important that we make best use of our property assets. To assist in making timely and appropriate changes to our office accommodation particularly in Oxford, Council calls on the Cabinet Advisory Group for Income Generation in conjunction with the Cabinet Member for Property to set up a task & finish group to produce an interim report by June 2016 which:

(a)      review the buildings which the council currently owns or leases in Oxford;

(b)      consider the present and future requirements of our office based staff;

(c)      explore the options for making the most cost effective way of using these buildings which we own or lease; and

(d)       make recommendations to Cabinet as to savings which could be made and income which could be generated from our property.”

“Council notes that 

·                     corporate tax evasion and avoidance are having a damaging impact on the world’s poorest countries, to such a level that it is costing them far more than they receive in aid

·                     this is costing the UK as much as £30bn a year

·                     this practice also has a negative effect on small and  medium-sized companies who pay more tax proportionately

 Council further notes

·                       that the UK Government has taken steps to tackle the issue of tax avoidance and evasion by issuing Procurement Policy Note 03/14, applying to all central government contracts worth more than £5m

·                       the availability of independent means of verifying tax compliance, such as the Fair Tax Mark

In early 2015 new regulations required public bodies, including councils, to ask procurement qualification questions of all companies for tenders over £173,000 for service contracts and £4m for works contracts. However, these questions are not as detailed as the PPN 03/14.

Oxfordshire County Council believes that bidders for Council contracts should be asked to account for their past tax record, using the standards in PPN 03/14, rather than the lower standards in the recent regulations.

Council therefore calls upon Cabinet to amendprocurement procedures  to require all companies bidding for council contracts to self-certify that they are fully tax-compliant in line with central government practice, using the standards in PPN 03/14, for service contracts over £173,000and works contracts over £4m.

Cabinet to publicise this policy and to report on its implementation annually for the next three years.”

With the agreement of Council, Councillor Fooks moved and Councillor Smith seconded her motion as amended in strikethrough and bold italics as follows:

“Council notes that: 

·                     corporate tax evasion and avoidance are having a damaging impact on the world’s poorest countries, to such a level that it is costing them far more than they receive in aid;

·                     this is costing the UK as much as £30bn a year;

·                     this practice also has a negative effect on small and medium-sized companies who pay more tax proportionately.

 Council further notes:

·                    that the UK Government has taken steps to tackle the issue of tax avoidance and evasion by issuing Procurement Policy Note 03/14, applying to all central government contracts worth more than £5m;

·                    the availability of independent means of verifying tax compliance, such as the Fair Tax Mark.

In early 2015 new regulations required public bodies, including councils, to ask procurement qualification questions of all companies for tenders over £173,000 for service contracts and £4m for works contracts. However, these questions are not as detailed as the PPN 03/14.

Oxfordshire County CouncilThis Council believes that bidders for Council contracts should be asked to account for their past tax record, using the standards in PPN 03/14, rather than the lower standards in the recent regulations.

Council therefore calls upon Cabinet to amendprocurement procedures to require all companies bidding for council contracts to self-certify that they are fully tax-compliant in line with central government practice, using the standards in PPN 03/14, for service contracts over £173,000 and works contracts over £4m.

Cabinet to publicise this policy and to report on its implementation annually for the next three years.”

Following debate the motion was put to the vote and was lost by 30 votes to

28, with 1 abstention.

RESOLVED:  accordingly.

“This Council is concerned at the proposed cuts in the grant aid to the Police Service that is being proposed by the Rt. Honourable George Osborne MP and the effect this will have on policing in the Thames Valley Authority and its corresponding impact on Oxfordshire County Council services. The County Council backs the legal bid being organised by 8 Police and Crime Commissioners to challenge the proposed reduction which it is estimated will mean cuts of at least £5million per year on the local force until 2020 and will probably mean the withdrawal of many non-statutory specialist services working in cooperation with the County Council such as the Child Sex Abuse Unit.

The County Council requests the Leader of the Council to write to the Home Secretary and the Chancellor of the Exchequer with the Councils views and to provide supportive letters to the Police and Crime Commissioners who have bravely opposed the government on this issue.”

With the agreement of Council, Councillor Williams withdrew his Motion.

“Oxfordshire County Council is concerned that in order to recruit and retain staff with the range of skills and experience required to maintain the quality of service that is expected there is a need to recognise that with the escalating cost of living in Oxfordshire, especially housing, it will be necessary to pay as a minimum wage the London Allowance accepted now as a minimum of £9.40 per hour.

The County Council with its Living Wage policy has established a basic rate per hour, but now is the time to accept that costs have been increasing at such a rate and public sector wage rises held down for so long that a London weighting is required if we are to retain the quality of our workforce. Although affecting only a small number of staff, taking the London Living wage minimum will be recognition that living in the County is on a par with living costs in the capital and will illustrate to Government that public services in Oxfordshire, economic powerhouse that it is, must be funded at wage levels that reflect London salaries. 

The Council asks the Cabinet that the small additional costs of this symbolic policy being adopted to be incorporated into the calculations at present being configured for the proposed budget for 2016 -2017.”  

With the agreement of Council, Councillor Sam Coates moved and Councillor Williams amended his own motion in strikethrough and bold italics as follows:

“Oxfordshire County Council is concerned that in order to recruit and retain staff with the range of skills and experience required to maintain the quality of service that is expected there is a need to recognise that with the escalating cost of living in Oxfordshire, especially housing, it will be necessary to pay as a minimum wage the London Allowance accepted now as a minimum of £9.40 per hour.

The County Council with its Living Wage policy has established a basic rate per hour, but now is the time to accept that costs have been increasing at such a rate and public sector wage rises held down for so long that a London weighting is required if we are to retain the quality of our workforcestaff and take their welfare seriously. Although affecting only a small number of staff, taking the London Living wage minimum will be recognition that living in the County is on a par with living costs in the capital and will illustrate to Government that public services in Oxfordshire, economic powerhouse that it is, must be funded at wage levels that reflect London saleries the cost of living.

The Council asks the Cabinet that the small additional costs of this symbolic policy being adopted to be incorporated into the calculations at present being configured for the proposed budget for 2016 -2017.”  

The Council also asks the Cabinet to investigate an Oxfordshire Living Wage Commission to encourage local businesses and Council contractors to pay at the London Living Wage level.

Following debate, the motion as amended was put to the vote and was lost by 33 votes to 2, with 24 abstentions.

RESOLVED:  accordingly.

“This Council is concerned that full weight is not being given during School Admission procedure and especially during Appeal Panels to the medical evidence presented at the hearing related to the physical and mental condition of the parents of the child who is the subject of the appeal. Clearly the present guidance is focused on the direct wellbeing of the child but domestic circumstances such as a registered disabled parents put under stress or unable to cope by the decision to refuse a place must be taken into account for that too can have an influence on the child’s future happiness.

The Cabinet Member for Children, Education and Families is requested to write on behalf of the Council to the Secretary of State for Education to seek a review of the Code of Practice on School Admissions considered by the Admission Authorities and Independent School Admission Appeal Panels and to make changes to the Code  which addresses the Council’s concern to ensure more emphasis is placed on parental disability”

With the agreement of Council, Councillor Williams moved and Councillor Howson seconded his motion as amended by Councillor Howson in strikethrough and bold italics as follows:

“This Council is concerned that full weight is not being given during School Admission procedure and especially during Appeal Panels to the medical evidence presented at the hearing related to the physical and mental condition of the parents of the child who is the subject of the appeal. Clearly the present guidance admission arrangements are is focused on the direct wellbeing of the child but domestic circumstances such as a registered disabled parents put under stress or unable to cope by the decision to refuse a place must be taken into account for that too can have an influence on the child’s future happiness.

The Cabinet Member for Children, Education and Families is requested to write on behalf of the Council to the Secretary of State for Education to seek a review of the Code of Practice on School Admissions considered by the Admission Authorities and Independent School Admission Appeal Panels and to make changes to the Code which addresses the Council’s concern to ensure more emphasis is placed on parental disability”

Council Calls on the Cabinet to ensure that within the criteria listed in any admission arrangements that are the responsibility of Oxfordshire, any disability of one or both parents be added as a new admissions criteria, to be considered before any distance related criteria are considered.”

Following debate, the Motion as amended was put to the vote and was lost by 37 votes to 1, with 19 abstentions.

RESOLVED:  accordingly.