Agenda and draft minutes

To approve the minutes of the meeting held on 10 February 2026 (CC1) and to receive information arising from them.

The Chair welcomed Members and stated that Item 11 would be considered before Item 10.

RESOLVED:
That the minutes of the meeting held on 10 February 2026 be approved and signed as an accurate record of the proceedings.

Apologies were received from Councillors Creed, Edwards and Heritage.

There were no declarations of interest.

The Chair noted that on 11 March, Oxfordshire County Council recognised outstanding members of the Oxfordshire Fire and Rescue Service through the annual Fire and Community Safety Service Awards. He extended congratulations to all those awarded medals for their service.

The Chair was honoured to attend annual community Ramadan Iftar events at Mansfield College, Blenheim Palace, and the Oxford Academy. At the Oxford Academy, he spoke to a diverse audience on their chosen theme, ‘Building Community Trust’. He thanked the Dialogue Society for hosting these events.

The Chair reminded Members of The Chair’s Birthday Charity Quiz, to be held on Friday, 17 April at OXSRAD Sports Centre, Court Place Farm, Oxford OX3 0NQ, raising funds for the Chair’s chosen charities, OXSRAD, Abingdon RDA, and Oxford United in the Community.  Tickets are priced at £20 per person – which includes a welcome drink, cheese and biscuits platter.

The Chair also congratulated and expressed sincere thanks to County Hall Facilities Manager Tim Stimpson MBE on his 32 years of service to the Council including his valuable support for Chairs’ fundraising events down the years.  The Chair wished Tim Stimpson well for his retirement.

To make any changes to the membership of scrutiny and other committees on the nomination of political groups and to note any changes to the Cabinet made by the Leader of the Council.

RESOLVED:

That on Oxfordshire County Council Joint Consultative Committee for Uniformed Members of the Fire Service - Councillor Fawcett replaces Councillor Hannaby.

Members of the public who wish to speak on an item on the agenda at this meeting, or present a petition, can attend the meeting in person or ‘virtually’ through an online connection.

Requests to present a petition must be submitted no later than 9am ten working days before the meeting.

Requests to speak must be submitted no later than 9am three working days before the meeting.

Requests should be submitted to committeesdemocraticservices@oxfordshire.gov.uk

If you are speaking ‘virtually’, you may submit a written statement of your presentation to ensure that if the technology fails, then your views can still be taken into account. A written copy of your statement can be provided no later than 9am on the day of the meeting. Written submissions should be no longer than 1 A4 sheet.

Thame and Haddenham Greenway

Sarah Green presented a petition calling for a greenway to link the communities of Thame and Haddenham.  Currently the only safe option was for people to use their cars.  The petition gained nearly 4000 signatures, with around 1000 from Oxfordshire alone.  The route crosses local authorities and there were colleagues campaigning on the same issue with Buckinghamshire Council. 

Councillor Gant, Cabinet Member for Transport Management, responded that the Council was continuing to work in partnership with Buckinghamshire Council to investigate an active travel link connecting Haddenham and Thame.  Both authorities have committed funding and resources towards the development of the scheme and are working towards conducting public engagement in 2026.  The petition will be referred to the Director of Economy and Place for follow up.

Broughton Road, Banbury

Wendy Wilkinson presented a petition requesting speed restrictions and a safe pedestrian crossing on the north end of Broughton Road.  Council was informed that Wendy Wilkinson had been hit by a car and sustained a broken neck and ankle.  The petition was signed by 70 residents of Broughton Road. It was felt that residents in the estates off that road would support the request.

Councillor Gant, Cabinet Member for Transport Management, responded that whilst funding was available through the Vision Zero road safety programme, the financial allocation for the forthcoming financial year 2026-27 had already been allocated to other projects. However, Councillor Gant advised, that the Council will consider measures for Broughton Road, including a pedestrian crossing, for inclusion in a future programme and also as part of the planned monitoring of the 20 mile an hour programme.  The petition will be referred to the Director of Environment and Highways for follow-up.

Roundham Crossing, Kidlington

Lisa Smith presented a petition to save Roundham Crossing in Kidlington from the closure requested in the developer's agreement for the PR8 site at Begbrook Science Park.  It was stated that the crossing provides a vital link for residents in Kidlington, with access to green space and connection to important local routes, including the Oxford Canal towpath, the Begbrook Bridleway, and the new footpath and cycleway.  The petition, with 638 signatures, called on Oxfordshire County Council, as a statutory consultee on transport, to oppose the closure of the crossing.

Councillor Roberts, Cabinet Member for Place, Environment and Climate Action, confirmed that East-West connectivity in the Kidlington area was a key consideration in the County Council's place planning.  At the same time, safety concerns were likely to lead to the crossing itself being closed to achieve the objective of more frequent train services across the Oxfordshire network.  Councillor Roberts added that Oxfordshire County Council will look at what is feasible to mitigate a closure and work with local Councillors, the community, Network Rail and other stakeholders in an attempt to identify a solution.  This petition will be referred to the Director of Economy and Place for follow-up.

Travel pass limit

Nathan Stanton presented a petition requesting the removal of the 9am limit on free  ...  view the full minutes text for item 14/26

The deadline to submit questions is 9am, five working days before the meeting i.e. 9am Tuesday 17 March 2026.

Ten questions were submitted. The questions, responses and supplementary questions are recorded in an Annex below.

Sixty seven questions were asked. The questions, responses and supplementary questions are recorded in an Annex below.

Report by the Leader of the Council.

The report, for noting, includes items at the Cabinet meetings on 9 December 2025, 16 December 2025, 27 January 2026 and 24 February 2026.

Council received the Cabinet report covering the 9 December 2025, 16 December 2025, 27 January 2026 and 24 February 2026 Cabinet meetings.

On item 1 (Devolution), Councillor Baines asked what steps the Council was taking with authorities across the proposed geography to ensure the earliest possible development of a spatial development strategy and the establishment of a foundation strategic authority. Councillor Leffman responded that there was a consultation underway on the development of a spatial development strategy and that a letter of interest had been sent to government on a proposed foundation strategic authority last week.

Councillor Epps asked why the government decided to include Swindon in the proposed area for a foundation strategic authority. Councillor Leffman stated that discussions had taken place across the proposed area and highlighted that it was for the government to finalise geographical arrangements. Councillor Epps also highlighted that Swindon was in different policing and health authorities.

Councillor Smith asked for reassurance that engagement with parishes and neighbourhood meetings would continue during devolution for Oxfordshire. Councillor Leffman gave that reassurance and noted the engagement with Oxfordshire Association of Local Councils through local government reorganisation.

Councillor Gordon asked about the recent government announcement for a Greater Oxford Development Corporation (GODC) and how that would fit in with ongoing devolution in Oxfordshire, which would highlight that the One Oxfordshire proposal would be the best way forward. Councillor Leffman concurred with those points and stated that the proposed GODC should incorporate a wider area to include some of Oxfordshire’s science and business parks.

Councillor Middleton asked if Councillor Leffman agreed with the need for clarity from government regarding the recent announcement on a GODC. Councillor Leffman agreed that clarity would be welcomed and that the government’s approach to the GODC needed to include the whole of Oxfordshire and not just Greater Oxford.

Councillor Barlow asked why the Council did not use devolution to reframe the relationship between climate change and economic growth. Councillor Leffman stated that it was clear that growth needed to be sustainable, with efficient transport networks to link up the Thames Valley whilst being mindful of climate change.

Councillor Walker noted that devolution has been discussed at previous Council meetings and asked why local government reorganisation proposals were not afforded the same opportunity. Councillor Leffman stated that there had been plenty of opportunities to discuss LGR through All-Member Briefings and at Place Overview and Scrutiny meetings, noting there were different views across the chamber but that ultimately the final decision was for the government.

On item 2 (HR & Cultural Change – Quarterly Employee Data Report – Quarter 3 2025/26), Councillor Phillips noted the shortfall in expected savings from organisational redesign and asked for information to be included in future reports. The Deputy Leader was happy to look at where that would be possible and highlighted that organisational staff changes needed to be managed carefully.

On item 3 (Oxfordshire Learning Disability Plan 2025-2035), Councillor Edosomwan asked what measures would be taken within the plan to ensure  ...  view the full minutes text for item 17/26

Report by the Director of Law & Governance and Monitoring Officer

A comprehensive review of the Code was undertaken by the Director of Law & Governance and Monitoring Officer, taking into consideration best practice, and benchmarking against other authorities. The review identified and recommended substantial amendments to ensure the Code reflects current council values, working practices and organisational requirements.

Council is RECOMMENDED to amend the Constitution at Part 9.6 Officers’ Code of Conduct.

The Chair took Item 11 ahead of Item 10.

Council considered the report which summarised the comprehensive review of the Code that was undertaken by the Director of Law & Governance and Monitoring Officer, taking into consideration best practice, and benchmarking against other authorities.  Council was asked to approve the revised code.

The recommendation was moved by Councillor Smith, Chair of the Audit & Governance Committee and seconded by Councillor Shiri, Deputy Chair.  Following discussion, the recommendation was approved unanimously with 62 votes in favour, none against and no abstentions.

RESOLVED:

that the Constitution be amended at Part 9.6 Officers’ Code of Conduct with the text in the Annex.

Report by the Director of Public Health

The Director of Public Health Annual Report 2025/26 offers a comprehensive and accessible review of Oxfordshire’s progress in addressing health inequalities since the 2019/20 report, Some Are More Equal Than Others. 

Council is RECOMMENDED to

a)        consider the 2025/26 Director of Public Health Annual Report and specifically note the progress made to address health inequalities in Oxfordshire following the publication of the Director of Public Health Annual Report in 2019/2020, which marked a pivotal moment in Oxfordshire.

b)        support the interactive format of the Director of Public Health Annual Report 2025/26 and note the insights that can be used for informing future service delivery plans.

The Chair accepted two requests to speak on this item before Members considered it.

Laura Price, Chief Executive of Oxfordshire Community & Voluntary Action (OCVA), addressed Council on the importance of the Director of Public Health Annual Report and the progress made since the 2019/20 “Some Are More Equal Than Others” report. Laura Price reflected on how COVID‑19 exposed deep inequalities in Oxfordshire but also demonstrated the strength of community action when statutory partners and the voluntary sector work flexibly, share power and build trust.

The success of initiatives such as the Connected Communities Fund, Community Capacity Grants and Well Together, were highlighted, which have enabled grassroots groups not only to deliver services but to shape local solutions based on lived experience.  Council was warned that the voluntary and community sector faced increasing financial pressure, rising demand and limited resilience, coinciding with the uncertainties of local government reorganisation.

Professor Sir Michael Marmot addressed Council via a recorded contribution, expressing strong support for Oxfordshire’s work on health equity. Oxfordshire’s unique position among Marmot Communities was highlighted, given it combined areas of significant affluence and academic excellence with deep pockets of rural poverty. The County’s progress since the earlier public health report was praised, which had identified these inequalities and stated that this progress contributed to his “evidence‑based hope.”

Sir Michael stressed that significant challenges remained, particularly around rural deprivation, but noted that Oxfordshire’s work had national and international relevance. Sir Michael felt the County’s Marmot advisory board meetings was exceptionally strong while also firmly rooted in action. Sir Michael concluded by reaffirming his commitment to supporting Oxfordshire as a Marmot County and emphasised that the work being undertaken locally had the potential to improve outcomes for Oxfordshire residents while serving as a guiding example to other regions.

Council had before it the Director of Public Health Annual Report 2025/26 which offered a comprehensive and accessible review of Oxfordshire’s progress in addressing health inequalities since the 2019/20 report, Some Are More Equal Than Others. 

The report was presented by Councillor Gregory, Cabinet Member for Public Health and Inequalities, who also moved the recommendations.  Councillor Leffman, Leader of the Council, seconded the recommendations.

Following discussion, the recommendations were approved with 58 votes in favour, no votes against and seven abstentions.

RESOLVED:

a)    That the 2025/26 Director of Public Health Annual Report be noted and specifically the progress made to address health inequalities in Oxfordshire following the publication of the Director of Public Health Annual Report in 2019/2020, which marked a pivotal moment in Oxfordshire.

b)    That the interactive format of the Director of Public Health Annual Report 2025/26 be supported and the insights that can be used for informing future service delivery plans, be noted.

Pride in the appearance of the public realm is important to our residents. Clean and well-maintained pavements make people feel good about their neighbourhood, reduce accidents, and prevent more costly problems later. Neglect leads to uneven footways, hazards for those with mobility difficulties, and higher long-term repair bills.

Routine weed clearance on county pavements was part of highways maintenance until 2007/08, when budget cuts removed the programme. Some parishes now commission their own weed spraying and may be using glyphosate, increasingly opposed by residents because of its risks to health, pets, rivers, and biodiversity. Other parishes are now beginning to trial alternative approaches.

Council resolves to:

1. Note the historic withdrawal of routine weed clearance and the resulting concerns about accessibility, safety, and neighbourhood appearance.

2. Recognise the Council’s statutory duty to keep pavements free of hazards, and that neglect increases both risks and costs.

3. Request Cabinet to seek an officer report with options for re-establishing pavement weed clearance and scheduled maintenance, including alternatives to glyphosate, and how the Council can support towns and parishes to reduce reliance on chemical spraying.

4. Request that the Cabinet Member for Finance, Property and Transformation give due consideration to the findings of this report as part of the next round of budget setting.

Note: The motion, if passed, would constitute the exercise of an executive function in which case it will be referred to the Cabinet together with any advice the Council may wish to give, in accordance with Rule 13.5.1 (i) of the Council Procedure Rules in the Constitution.

The motion was proposed by Councillor Greenaway and seconded by Councillor Epps.

“Pride in the appearance of the public realm is important to our residents. Clean and well-maintained pavements make people feel good about their neighbourhood, reduce accidents, and prevent more costly problems later. Neglect leads to uneven footways, hazards for those with mobility difficulties, and higher long-term repair bills.

Routine weed clearance on county pavements was part of highways maintenance until 2007/08, when budget cuts removed the programme. Some parishes now commission their own weed spraying and may be using glyphosate, increasingly opposed by residents because of its risks to health, pets, rivers, and biodiversity. Other parishes are now beginning to trial alternative approaches.

Council resolves to:

1. Note the historic withdrawal of routine weed clearance and the resulting concerns about accessibility, safety, and neighbourhood appearance.

2. Recognise the Council’s statutory duty to keep pavements free of hazards, and that neglect increases both risks and costs.

3. Request Cabinet to seek an officer report with options for re-establishing pavement weed clearance and scheduled maintenance, including alternatives to glyphosate, and how the Council can support towns and parishes to reduce reliance on chemical spraying.

4. Request that the Cabinet Member for Finance, Property and Transformation give due consideration to the findings of this report as part of the next round of budget setting.”

Following discussion, an electronic vote was taken. The motion was carried with 64 votes in favour, no abstentions and none against.

Oxfordshire is an expensive place to live and work. Oxfordshire County Council (OCC) staff need and deserve the Oxford Living Wage (OLW).

Paying the OLW helps tackle in-work poverty, improves staff wellbeing and retention, and supports local economic resilience. Extending to all suppliers, service-providers and contractors, via inclusion in all contracts, will multiply the impact.

From April 2026, the Oxford Living Wage, a voluntary rate set at 95% of the London Living Wage, will be £14.06 an hour. It recognises the high cost of living in Oxford, costs that OCC workers must meet.

This Council aims for a healthier, fairer and greener county, one that delivers real social value: Paying all staff a living wage is fundamental.

In 2025-6 OCC’s lowest paid staff earnt £980 less than if an Oxford Living Wage was in place.

OCC could also implement an Oxfordshire Living Wage, reflecting the real cost of living in Oxfordshire.

This Council therefore commits to an Oxfordshire Living Wage and asks Cabinet to

• Include sufficient capacity in the 2027/2028 budget to meet the cost of implementing the Oxford Living Wage for all staff 
• Ensure all new contracts negotiated after such decision has been made require contractors, suppliers and service providers to pay the Oxford Living Wage and existing providers as contracts get renewed
• Seek to work with Oxford City Council and Oxfordshire District Councils to explore expanding the Oxford Living Wage to be an Oxfordshire Living Wage
• Publicly promote OCC’s commitment to the Oxfordshire Living Wage

Note: The motion, if passed, would constitute the exercise of an executive function in which case it will be referred to the Cabinet together with any advice the Council may wish to give, in accordance with Rule 13.5.1 (i) of the Council Procedure Rules in the Constitution.

The motion was proposed by Councillor Phillips and seconded by Councillor Barlow.

“Oxfordshire is an expensive place to live and work. Oxfordshire County Council (OCC) staff need and deserve the Oxford Living Wage (OLW).

Paying the OLW helps tackle in-work poverty, improves staff wellbeing and retention, and supports local economic resilience. Extending to all suppliers, service-providers and contractors, via inclusion in all contracts, will multiply the impact.

From April 2026, the Oxford Living Wage, a voluntary rate set at 95% of the London Living Wage, will be £14.06 an hour. It recognises the high cost of living in Oxford, costs that OCC workers must meet.

This Council aims for a healthier, fairer and greener county, one that delivers real social value: Paying all staff a living wage is fundamental.

In 2025-6 OCC’s lowest paid staff earnt £980 less than if an Oxford Living Wage was in place.

OCC could also implement an Oxfordshire Living Wage, reflecting the real cost of living in Oxfordshire.

This Council therefore commits to an Oxfordshire Living Wage and asks Cabinet to

• Include sufficient capacity in the 2027/2028 budget to meet the cost of implementing the Oxford Living Wage for all staff 
• Ensure all new contracts negotiated after such decision has been made require contractors, suppliers and service providers to pay the Oxford Living Wage and existing providers as contracts get renewed
• Seek to work with Oxford City Council and Oxfordshire District Councils to explore expanding the Oxford Living Wage to be an Oxfordshire Living Wage
• Publicly promote OCC’s commitment to the Oxfordshire Living Wage”

Following discussion, Councillor Evans proposed that the question be now put and this was seconded by Councillor Walker.  The Chair agreed that the item had been sufficiently discussed and put the proposal to move to the vote meaning there would be no further debate.

The vote was lost with 20 votes in favour, 24 votes against and 5 abstentions.

Following further discussion, the question was put.  Councillor Worgan stood to request a roll call vote and at least seven other Members stood to support the request.

The motion was carried.

The result of the roll call vote was as follows: 

Councillors voting in favour (47): Baines, Barlow, Batstone, Bearder, Brant, Brighouse, Cherry, Coles, Cotter, Crichton, Edosomwan, Epps, Fawcett, Filipova-Rivers, Fletcher, Fry, Gant, Garnett, Gaul, Graham, Greenaway, Gregory, Hanna, Hannaby, Higgins, Hingley, Hope-Smith, Jones, Leffman, Levy, Lugova, Lygo, Markham, McLauchlan, McLean, Middleton, Overton, Phillips, Pressel, Rawlins, Roberts, Saul, Smith, Stevens, Thomas, Webb, Worgan.

Councillors voting against (0)

Councillors abstaining (13): Ashby, Du, Evans, Fenton, Field-Johnson, Henwood, Malik, Mallon, Plumb, Robertshaw, Sargent, Snowdon, Walker.

For eleven consecutive years, under varying political leaderships, Oxfordshire County Council was named the top performing county council waste disposal authority.

- The 2025 Satisfaction Ratings of Services survey showed 72% of residents were satisfied with the way Household Waste Recycling Centres operated, with only 16% dissatisfied.

- The hard-work of employees who operate our centres, alongside the conscientiousness of Oxfordshire residents, made the operation of centres a success story in our county.

In spite of this positive record, this Council administration has implemented a series of changes, including a mandatory booking system and the need to bring proof of address with you when using a centre.

This Council acknowledges that:

- The new rules for using waste and recycling centres place additional bureaucratic burdens on residents, making it harder for them to use local centres.

- The implementation of these rules, we believe, has reduced the number of visits to the centres, with more waste likely to be redirected into District & City Council waste collections or, in some cases, fly-tipped.

- These rules are, therefore, a threat to the high rates of recycling previously seen in our County and risk undermining public satisfaction with waste and recycling services.

Therefore, this Council resolves to request the Cabinet to reconsider the issue of rules for using the household waste and recycling centres; revoke these new and unnecessary burdens on local residents; and return to the popular and successful model previously operated.

Note: The motion, if passed, would constitute the exercise of an executive function in which case it will be referred to the Cabinet together with any advice the Council may wish to give, in accordance with Rule 13.5.1 (i) of the Council Procedure Rules in the Constitution.

The motion was proposed by Councillor Evans and seconded by Councillor Walker.

“For eleven consecutive years, under varying political leaderships, Oxfordshire County Council was named the top performing county council waste disposal authority.

- The 2025 Satisfaction Ratings of Services survey showed 72% of residents were satisfied with the way Household Waste Recycling Centres operated, with only 16% dissatisfied.

- The hard-work of employees who operate our centres, alongside the conscientiousness of Oxfordshire residents, made the operation of centres a success story in our county.

In spite of this positive record, this Council administration has implemented a series of changes, including a mandatory booking system and the need to bring proof of address with you when using a centre.

This Council acknowledges that:

- The new rules for using waste and recycling centres place additional bureaucratic burdens on residents, making it harder for them to use local centres.

- The implementation of these rules, we believe, has reduced the number of visits to the centres, with more waste likely to be redirected into District & City Council waste collections or, in some cases, fly-tipped.

- These rules are, therefore, a threat to the high rates of recycling previously seen in our County and risk undermining public satisfaction with waste and recycling services.

Therefore, this Council resolves to request the Cabinet to reconsider the issue of rules for using the household waste and recycling centres; revoke these new and unnecessary burdens on local residents; and return to the popular and successful model previously operated.”

The Chair advised that he would hear one speaker from each party on this motion.

Following discussion, an electronic vote was taken and the motion was lost with 23 votes in favour, 33 against and 4 abstentions.

Council notes both that:

1. The Oxfordshire Climate Risk and Vulnerability Assessment (2024) identifies flooding and extreme heat as significant, growing climate risks; driven by warmer, wetter winters, more intense rainfall events, and prolonged summer heat waves.
2. The impacts of climate and ecosystem collapse are now acknowledged to be even greater than thought in 2024, posing an existential threat to human habitation, that will dwarf any economic collapses seen to date if serious adaptation does not become ‘business-as-usual’ in the same way that fiduciary duties are.

The assessment illustrates the need for catchment-wide, preventative approaches that build resilience across landscapes and communities to decrease flooding impacts – i.e. to make space for water upstream of residents’ living room. For heat, urban design is key to resilience, preventing heat islands, and residents’ deaths.

Council notes adaptation measures’ success depends on being multi-year, multi-stakeholder collaboration, community and catchment-based.  Partners’ (e.g. Environment Agency) work on 6-year funding cycles, allowing capacity and capability to build appropriately – starkly different to the 1-year Oxfordshire County Council (OCC) funding bid environment. 

Council requests that Cabinet implements:

• Sustained (ring-fenced for at least 6 years to match partners) and significantly increased investment to further build OCC’s capacity and capability to convene and work in catchment-based, multi-stakeholder action groups to embed climate adaptation activity as an essential part of business-as-usual 
• Two councillor-led action group pilots, convening, alongside officers and partners, to build capability in resilience through action, via

• A catchment for flooding, 
• An urban neighbourhood for urban heat islands

Note: The motion, if passed, would constitute the exercise of an executive function in which case it will be referred to the Cabinet together with any advice the Council may wish to give, in accordance with Rule 13.5.1 (i) of the Council Procedure Rules in the Constitution.

The time being 3.50 pm, the motion was not considered in accordance with Council Procedure Rule 5.2.