Cabinet Member: Leader
Forward Plan Ref: 2016/156
Contact: Robin Rogers, Strategy Manager Tel: 07789 923206
Report by Chief Executive (CA6).
In September 2016, Cabinet considered reports from Grant Thornton and PwC and a recommendation from the Performance Scrutiny Committee on options for reorganisation of local government within Oxfordshire. Cabinet directed officers to engage with stakeholders and the public to prepare proposals for a new unitary council to cover the whole county.
A discussion document was published in January 2017 to inform an extensive stakeholder and public engagement process. This process has now been completed.
This report introduces the full proposal that has subsequently been developed and recommends that the proposals are submitted to the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government.
In addition to the report there are a number of annexes:
Annex 1: Bid document
Annex 2: Social and Community Impact Assessment
Annex 3: Summary of the engagement report
Annex 4: Letter of 20th February from Secretary
of State for Communities and Local Government
Annex 5: Full engagement report (to follow)
The Cabinet is RECOMMENDED to:
(a) Note and commend the approach taken
by the Leaders of Vale, South Oxfordshire, and the County Council in putting
the interests of residents, business and communities first in bringing forward
these proposals.
(b) Consider
the proposals, in particular taking note that 70% of those responding to the
representative household survey supported the proposal for a new single unitary
council for Oxfordshire
(c)
Respond to the recent letter from the Secretary of State and submit the
proposals for a new unitary council for Oxfordshire, subject to any minor
amendments required
(d)
Delegate the power to make such amendments to the Chief Executive in
consultation with the Leader of the County Council and with South Oxfordshire
and Vale of White Horse District Councils
(e)
Ask officers to seek local support from key stakeholders and the wider
public to promote the proposals to Government, and respond to any subsequent
consultation undertaken by the Secretary of State
(f)
Agree that the further development of the Area Executive Board model,
through the establishment of a Joint Committee, open to all Districts and City
Councils across Oxfordshire and the County Council, should be formed as early
as possible. This Joint Committee should work with the existing County
Council advisory group, local communities, Town and Parish Councils, and key
delivery partners to develop detailed proposals that articulate the role,
powers, format, scale and responsibilities of the Area Executive Boards which
will be submitted to the Implementation Executive for inclusion with the
proposed constitution of the new council.
(g) Ask
officers to take steps to establish the City Convention to work with residents
and local stakeholders to design the new model of governance in Oxford.
(h)
Authorise the Director of Law and Governance to agree the terms of
reference of the Joint Committee, which will include making recommendations
regarding the initial functions of the Implementation Executive, and to make
this council's appointments to the Joint Committee.
(i)
In light of the above decisions, and the absence of unanimity among the
current local authorities, confirm that the Cabinet does not support the
proposals for a Mayor and Combined Authority as being the best structure for
Oxfordshire.
Minutes:
In September 2016, Cabinet
considered reports from Grant Thornton and PwC and a recommendation from the
Performance Scrutiny Committee on options for reorganisation of local government
within Oxfordshire. Cabinet directed officers to engage with stakeholders and
the public to prepare proposals for a new unitary council to cover the whole
county.
A discussion document was
published in January 2017 to inform an extensive stakeholder and public
engagement process. This process has now been completed.
Cabinet considered a report
setting out the full proposal that has subsequently been developed and
recommending that the proposals are submitted to the Secretary of State for
Communities and Local Government.
Councillor Hudspeth, Leader of
the Council made a statement setting out the context and events leading to the
report before Cabinet and summarising in brief the reasons for the bid.
Ian Green, on behalf of the Civic
Society commented that they had thoroughly reviewed the original proposals and
submitted comments. Having considered the Better Oxfordshire proposals the
Civic Society was still of the view that it was not ready for public
consultation and was certainly not ready for submission to the Secretary of
State. In particular Mr Green highlighted that they considered the governance
aspects were too vague to enable assessment of the effectiveness of Oxford City
governance. They believed that more could be learnt from Wiltshire. Mr Green
also referred to the lack of consensus from all six councils in Oxfordshire and
felt that this meant it would not be agreed by the Secretary of State. He hoped
that Cabinet would agree to more efforts to achieve a consensus.
Dr Barbara Hammond, spoke against
the proposals on three grounds. Firstly she believed that there was no mandate
as there had been no formal consultation. People in her neighbourhood were
confused. The removal of public consultation from the transition stage was
deeply worrying. Secondly she stated that there was no evidence that the move
to a single unitary would meet the four objectives set out in the documents.
Finally Dr Hammond commented that it was the wrong time to introduce something
as disruptive as this in a region that was facing uncertainty due to Brexit.
Councillor Jean Fooks, local
councillor for Wolvercote & Summertown spoke in
support of the proposal which she pointed out had the support of the three main
parties on Oxfordshire County Council. She expressed disappointment that the
City Council and other district councils had refused to sit round the table.
Councillor Fooks referred to the leaflet produced by the City Council which she
believed should be rebutted as it made false claims. She would welcome greater
detail and felt that the revised bid before Cabinet today was an improvement.
It was essential going forward to involve local people.
Councillor Harris commented that
it was an inevitable part of the process of forming a new unitary council that
there would need to be rationalisation of staff. From his experience of this
type of process strong political decision making would be needed to ensure that
it was humanely followed through. Councillor Harris identified that there would
be many jobs lost, retirements, redundancy and a higher than normal level of
natural wastage. The process would be complex due to the need for continuity of
service provision, the requirement to harmonise different employment terms and
conditions. It was essential that the process of rationalisation was shown to
be fair and equitable. He added that he spoke as a supporter of a unitary
council but one that had been fully consulted on and where the final decision
on going forward was taken by full Council.
Councillor Pressel, local
councillor for Jericho & Osney, expressed her
concerns that the proposals would be a disaster for Oxford. People were
confused, there was insufficient detail and it was not acceptable if Oxford
should become a glorified parish council. She added that a unitary council was
not the only option but if it did go forward then she would wish to see the
City retain its current powers, its current share of council tax and its
current budget. Councillor Pressel added that she would wish to see a larger
joint committee so that there could be a fairer representation of men and
women.
Councillor Brighouse, Chairman of
Performance Scrutiny Committee stated that the comments of the Committee were
before Cabinet and that many of the Cabinet Members had attended the Committee
meeting. This was not the first time that the Committee had had an opportunity
to consider the matter as they had also looked at the two consultant reports.
The Committee at that time had considered that the way forward was for a
completely new council. The real issue was being able to run services for the
most vulnerable with everyone working together in the new council. Councillor
Brighouse recognised that this was a journey and that ultimately the Secretary
of State would decide but that the new authority should be built from the
ground upwards. Councillor Brighouse expressed concern that cultural issues be
recognised and the importance of engaging the BME communities. An important
principle going forward would be the need to listen to and engage with people
and to hear even the voiceless.
Peter Clark, Chief Executive paid
tribute to the many officers who had been involved in the bid development. He
briefly detailed the results of the two consultant reports and the work
undertaken since the decision by Cabinet in September 2016. In particular he
referred to the stakeholder engagement work. He expressed delight that South
Oxfordshire and Vale of White Horse District Councils had joined with the
County Council to produce the joint proposal. Their involvement had led to an
improved bid with strengthened local democracy, more detailed thinking around
Oxford City governance and council tax harmonisation and better protection for
local plans. The two District Councils had already agreed the proposal for
submission to the Secretary of State. Peter Clark outlined the process going
forward and confirmed that were the Secretary of State minded to agree the
proposal then the Secretary of State would have a period of formal engagement
with representations being invited over a 6-8 week period. Peter Clark advised
of a minor amendment to recommendation (h) to include consultation with the
Leader of the Council and the Chief Executive.
Peter Clark addressing the points
raised by speakers:
1.
Refuted the suggestion that the proposal was too
vague and not ready. The bid was 149 pages long and clearly set out the
principles to be applied. It recognised that the City Council was an important
part of Oxfordshire and set out the principle of a new council with pre-cepting powers and the concept of a City Convention. It was
not usual to attempt to set everything out at this stage.
2.
Referred to the engagement report that set out a
significant amount of support. He highlighted the door to door survey which he
considered was a true reflection of opinion and therefore carried considerable
weight.
3.
Commented that the report and bid document set
out the objectives and demonstrated how they would be met.
4.
Stated that there would be more detail going
forward but that a lot of that detail was for the new council or the
implementation executive to determine.
5.
Agreed that any process of staff rationalisation
needed to be fair transparent and robust. However the evidence from other authorities
was that compulsory redundancies would not be that great. It was not correct
that everyone’s job was at risk. There would be management rationalisation but
services would still need to be delivered.
6.
Commented that the City Council needed to engage
in the process and that pre-cepting powers were
contained in the bid.
7.
The size of the Executive Board would be
determined by the Secretary of State.
From the floor Councillor Tanner
made comments in relation to the Chief Executive’s fitness to lead the County
Council and upon challenge apologised for those remarks. His apology was
accepted by the Chief Executive.
During debate Cabinet made the
following points:
1.
A number of Cabinet Members referred to parishes
in their Division that were well aware of the proposals and were not confused
by them. There had been strong support from rural parishes with one Cabinet
Member highlighting that all 19 Parish Councils in her Division were
supportive.
2.
Two separate reports had come to similar
conclusions about the best way forward with limited resources and agreed that a
single unitary saved most money. Cabinet Members supported the unitary proposal
as the best possible outcome for the people of Oxfordshire, avoiding
duplication, giving economies of scale and allowing the joining up of services.
It was a great opportunity to provide a one-stop shop for all residents in
Oxfordshire.
3.
Cabinet welcomed the increased opportunity for
individual councillors to make a difference in their area.
4.
Several Cabinet Members refuted the suggestion
that they and other County Councillors were remote from the people of
Oxfordshire. They attended parish
meetings, knew their local communities and the vast majority of county
councillors were the same.
5.
One Cabinet Member in supporting the proposals
indicated a preference for 5 area boards with pre-cepting
powers for each of them.
6.
Cabinet accepted the greater validity of the
door to door research which had been carried out by an independent company when
compared to the online survey which was self-selecting.
7.
A Cabinet Member refuted claims that a unitary
council would pose a threat to arts organisations in Oxford.
8.
There was some discussion of the context to the
current position including the role of the district councils with regard to the
devolution discussions.
9.
Cabinet highlighted the changes made to the
original discussion document “One Oxfordshire” which demonstrated that the
engagement had not been a paper exercise. They welcomed that if the Secretary
of State was minded to agree then there would be a period of formal engagement.
10.
Cabinet Members expressed disappointment over
some of the press releases coming from the district councils.
11.
Cabinet compared the lack of democratic
accountability in a combined authority and mayor model as against that in a
unitary council.
12.
Cabinet highlighted that good work already
underway in district councils around such matters as housing would be
complemented when developed alongside strategic services such as infrastructure
and education.
The Leader of the Council moved
the recommendations with the suggested amendment to recommendation (H) and it
was:
RESOLVED: unanimously to:
(a) Note and commend the approach
taken by the Leaders of Vale, South Oxfordshire, and the County Council in putting
the interests of residents, business and communities first in bringing forward
these proposals.
(b) Consider
the proposals, in particular taking note that 70% of those responding to the
representative household survey supported the proposal for a new single unitary
council for Oxfordshire
(c)
Respond to the recent letter from the Secretary of State and submit the
proposals for a new unitary council for Oxfordshire, subject to any minor
amendments required
(d)
Delegate the power to make such amendments to the Chief Executive in
consultation with the Leader of the County Council and with South Oxfordshire
and Vale of White Horse District Councils
(e)
Ask officers to seek local support from key stakeholders and the wider
public to promote the proposals to Government, and respond to any subsequent
consultation undertaken by the Secretary of State
(f)
Agree that the further development of the Area Executive Board model,
through the establishment of a Joint Committee, open to all Districts and City
Councils across Oxfordshire and the County Council, should be formed as early
as possible. This Joint Committee should work with the existing County
Council advisory group, local communities, Town and Parish Councils, and key
delivery partners to develop detailed proposals that articulate the role,
powers, format, scale and responsibilities of the Area Executive Boards which
will be submitted to the Implementation Executive for inclusion with the proposed
constitution of the new council.
(g) Ask
officers to take steps to establish the City Convention to work with residents
and local stakeholders to design the new model of governance in Oxford.
(h)
Authorise the Director of Law and Governance in consultation with the
Leader and Chief Executive to agree the terms of reference of the Joint
Committee, which will include making recommendations regarding the initial
functions of the Implementation Executive, and to make this council's appointments
to the Joint Committee.
(i)
In light of the above decisions, and the absence of unanimity among the
current local authorities, confirm that the Cabinet does not support the
proposals for a Mayor and Combined Authority as being the best structure for
Oxfordshire.
Supporting documents: