Agenda and minutes

Apologies were received from Councillor Mathew (Councillor Waine substituting) and Councillor John Sanders (Councillor Christie substituting).

Councillor Mills sought to declare an interest but the Chairman confirmed that he was speaking as an invited councillor and no declaration was required.

Councillor Constance indicated that she was a member of Vale of White Horse District Council. The County Director clarified that membership of a District Council did not constitute a disclosable pecuniary interest.

To approve the minutes of the meetings held on 12 May 2016 and 24 May 2016 (PSC3) and to receive information arising from them.

The Minutes of the meetings held on 12 and 24 May 2016 were approved and signed as a correct record.

The following request to address the Committee had been agreed by the Chairman:

* Did not speak

Report from the County Director (PSC5)

In early May Oxfordshire County Council appointed Grant Thornton UK LLP to consider how local government could be reorganised to reduce costs, improve service outcomes, support economic growth, enhance local engagement and empowerment, and provide strong and accountable leadership.

This followed the appointment of PwC to conduct a review commissioned by Oxford City Council on behalf of Oxfordshire's Districts into proposals launched by District Leaders in February to restructure local government in Oxfordshire.

This paper enables the Performance Scrutiny Committee to consider the outcome of the two reports, and make recommendations to Cabinet regarding the next steps in response to them.

The Committee is RECOMMENDED to consider the reports and make any such comments to Cabinet as they consider should be taken into account in responding to the reports.

Performance Scrutiny Committee had before them the outcome of the two reports into the future of local government in Oxfordshire, in order to make recommendations to Cabinet regarding the next steps in response to them. All members of the Council had been invited to speak.

In the light of comments from a number of County Councillors and following presentations from representatives of Grant Thornton and the County Director the Committee considered the two reports and discussed the following issues:

·       The importance of focusing on the needs of the residents of Oxfordshire and people who use Council services, not the needs of institutions.

·       The areas of agreement in the two reports; that the status quo is not acceptable and that unitary government is the way forward.

·       The need to have an open public debate around the best option in order to reach a position to put to Government.

·       The risk that a pattern of smaller unitaries would not deliver the same scale of savings, and that individual areas, in particular Oxford City, could be rendered financially unviable due to their high levels of need and low levels of income.

·       The need for joined-up planning of growth, land use, housing, and infrastructure for the county's functional economic area through a structure plan - noting for example that the Oxfordshire knowledge spine currently encompasses part of four separate district areas and therefore local plans.

·       The irrational situation and poor perception created when districts and counties are making conflicting budget decisions.

·       The importance of parishes and town councils as part of the local devolution offer.

·       What evidence of local agreement is required by the Government in order to give a proposal the 'green light' and what change the new Prime Minister and Cabinet have brought to this agenda.

·       The views of government on whether an elected Mayor was a requirement or not.

·       How the Boundary Committee would operate to determine the number and apportionment of Councillors in a new unitary.

·       How a multi-unitary option would function through a Combined Authority, including the lack of any clear precedent for delegating responsibilities for services to children, education, and families and schools.

·       The importance of working together with the other Councils for the benefit of residents and stakeholders to create that broad consensus required by government

·       The potential lack of visibility and accountability of a Combined Authority in a multi-unitary scenario.

·       The decisions to be made by any new authority in relation to council tax, reserves and assets.

·       Whether it is reasonable to argue that a unitary county would be too large given that the proposed Combined Authority in a multi-unitary scenario would cover just as large an area.

·       The benefits and risks of the options and how Option 6 could address the need for the single unitary option to demonstrate local working and empowerment. The committee recognised that more work would be needed on the detail of Option 6.

Following discussion it was proposed by Councillor Harrod, seconded by Councillor Greene and by a show  ...  view the full minutes text for item 39/16