Agenda item

Any county councillor may, by giving notice to the Proper Officer by 9 am on the working day before the meeting, ask a question on any matter in respect of the Cabinet’s delegated powers.

 

The number of questions which may be asked by any councillor at any one meeting is limited to two (or one question with notice and a supplementary question at the meeting) and the time for questions will be limited to 30 minutes in total. As with questions at Council, any questions which remain unanswered at the end of this item will receive a written response.

 

Questions submitted prior to the agenda being despatched are shown below and will be the subject of a response from the appropriate Cabinet Member or such other councillor or officer as is determined by the Cabinet Member, and shall not be the subject of further debate at this meeting. Questions received after the despatch of the agenda, but before the deadline, will be shown on the Schedule of Addenda circulated at the meeting, together with any written response which is available at that time.

Councillor John Tanner had given notice of the following question to the Cabinet Member for Growth & Infrastructure:

 

“Does the portfolio holder agree that closing half of Oxfordshire’s recycling

centres will make it more difficult for residents to recycle, risks increasing flytipping and will increase car journeys across the county. Will he look again at keeping the popular Redbridge recycling centre, in Oxford, open to the public, as well as to trade customers. Where does he suggest residents of Bicester, Chipping Norton and Faringdon should take their waste in future?”

 

Councillor Hudspeth replied:

 

The phased withdrawal (over the next 3- 4 years) of waste recycling centres is possible due to the new collection services introduced across Oxfordshire.

Services at the kerbside have expanded greatly in the last year and fewer

people need to visit the sites, reducing the number of trips and associated

CO2 emissions. The waste collection authorities have done a tremendous job in expanded recycling services, supported by “no side waste” policies to

stimulate behavioural change in the way that residents manage their waste.

In addition, the work that the Oxfordshire waste partnership has done on

home composting, waste reduction and re-use has seen many people utilising the community action groups, swap shops, making use of free-cycle and donating goods to charity.

 

The proposal to close some sites is supported by a contribution to district

councils to expand and reassess bulky waste charges. There are two

authorities working with the county on reuse of bulky items under a trial at

present. The services at the kerbside will be regular and economically

attractive, meaning that the householder will find it more attractive and cost

effective to utilise the services (already passing their home), reducing CO2

emissions and knowing that their goods are following a systematic waste

management process.

 

As for fly-tipping, residents are aware of the law and those currently legally

depositing rubbish at the sites are unlikely to turn into law breaking fly-tippers, especially with the choice of services on offer at the kerbside. The proposal is also supported by a contribution to enforcement and education to mitigate any risk.

 

Redbridge is not fit for purpose and is in need of major investment to upgrade the road infrastructure, concrete and drainage. The Kidlington site will be closer for all those residents in the north of Oxford and will have a reuse shop to maintain the theme of the waste hierarchy, gaining value from commodities rather than labour intensive recycling. It would be very expensive to keep both sites open in the current economic climate and therefore the Kidlington site will be the primary Oxford City facility. Residents from Bicester, Chipping Norton and Faringdon will all have a facility within their local authority area, making consistent services across the whole of Oxfordshire.

 

Combined with the above will be the Energy from Waste facility at Ardley,

which will generate electricity for 22,000 homes. This will avoid landfill tax

and LATs penalties, provide an income stream for the tax payers. To produce a similar quantity of electricity 120 wind turbines would have to be built creating a blot on the landscape of Oxfordshire.”

 

Supplementary: Councillor Tanner sought clarification of where the residents of Faringdon and Chipping Norton would take their recycling and when was it planned to close Redbridge.

 

Councillor Hudspeth replied that residents of Faringdon would use Drayton. There was a process to be  followed with regards to Kidlington and once this site was open Redbridge would close and the work on it would begin.

 

Councillor Roy Darke had given notice of the following question to the Leader of the Council:

 

"Can the Leader tell us the number of redundancy notices already issued to

County Council staff prior to Christmas 2010 and the expected number by the end of this financial year? What is the scale of other redundancy notices

relating to indirectly-employed workers involved in County Council-led

activities that have been issued already and the number expected to be

issued by 1 April 2011? Will he also confirm the overall and anticipated cost

to the council of redundancy settlements?"

 

Councillor Mitchell replied:

 

“67 employees have been served redundancy notices since 1 April 2010. The total cost of redundancy pay for these redundancies is £1.4 million.

 

The council is in the process of agreeing a budget for the forthcoming financial year whereby some services are currently proposed to undergo significant transformation. It would be inappropriate to comment on potential future redundancies at this time. Given this, it is not possible to outline any potential costs.

 

We do not hold information on the number of redundancy notices issued by other organisations and we would not be able to comment on any proposed redundancies for such organisations.”

 

Supplementary: Councillor Darke queried what was the timetable for the redundancies.

 

Councillor Mitchell replied that until the budget was agreed in February 2011 it was not possible to be certain or to take forward formal consultation . However the Council had gone to great lengths to talk to staff affected. He paid tribute to the work being undertaken with the unions.

 

Councillor Sarah Hutchinson had given notice of the following question to the Leader of the Council:

 

“How has the Big Debate influenced the council's proposed budget, how much did the Big Debate cost (including the Big Debate t-shirts), and why nowhere in the summary of the debates is there mention of the very many people who expressed fundamental scepticism about the need for these cuts to be made, both locally and nationally?”

 

Councillor Mitchell replied:

 

“We gained some insight into the values different members of the public place on different County Council services but the overwhelming viewpoint was for different indviduals to seek to protect different services and there was little consistency either within each Group or across it.

 

It was made clear that the purpose of the Big Debates was not to discuss the coalition government's proposals to address the underlying structural budget deficit. The purpose of the Big Debate was to identify relative priorities for County Council services and to capture any helpful ideas for achieving savings. A number of people did indeed tell us that they did not want cuts but no one suggested a realistic alternative. The summary of the Big Debate only reports the headline issues. A more detailed report has been shared with the group leaders. We were also told that the services people were most concerned about were those supporting the vulnerable - older people, children and those with disabilities. Our budget proposals reflect these

views but all members will recognise that the scale of grant cuts inevitably means that there will be some impacts on services to the public despite our efforts to maximise cost reduction among back office functions and employee costs.

 

Over 1,000 people took part in the Big Debate. Much of the promotional activity was at no cost to the council and officers did their best to keep expenditure down, however there were inevitably some costs, particularly arising from the need to ensure appropriate and accessible venues for public meetings of such a size.The total cost was under £1,500, the most significant of which was spent on venue hire for the five public meetings. The media personalities who chaired the events gave their services at no cost. The cost was funded from the Council's Communications Budget.

 

I'm sure Group Leaders will make the detailed report available to those who wish to view it.”

 

Councillor Richard Stevens to the Cabinet Member for Adult Services:

 

“The Report by the Director for Social & Community Services indicates that

external providers already provide 72% of home support care in the County.

It goes on to say that the intention is to transfer 1,800 service users on to

personal budgets by March 2011, including all the current users of the Internal Home Support Service.

 

Will the Cabinet confirm:

(a) the percentage of current users of the Internal Home Support Service

who have been transferred to a personal budget to date (in the light of

the target being 100% of such users by March 2011); and

 

(b) in view of the fact that people do not have to have personal budgets if

they do not want them, the arrangements the County Council has put in

place for those service users currently receiving internal home support

services who elect not to have personal budgets?”

 

 

Councillor Fatemian replied:

 

(a) Only a few users of the internal Home Support Service have been

transferred to Personal Budgets so far. A managerial decision was

taken to put users of the internal service into the later stages of

transition to Personal Budgets, so that they could be made aware of

the proposed closure, and take decisions about use of Personal

Budget in the full knowledge that the service might be closed. If these

Service Users do in fact have to change their Provider in 2011, the

intention is that only one change has to be made, following the final

decision of Cabinet in April 2011.

 

(b) As Cllr Stevens should be aware. all eligible Service Users will be

allocated a Personal Budget in 2011. The allocation of a Budget is not

optional. Service Users do have a choice about how they use that

Budget.

 

They can however, chose how that budget is spent. If they choose not

to have a Direct Payment, they can ask the Council to undertake all the

arranging and purchasing of their support, according to their own

Support Plan. All current users of the internal Home Support Service

will be allocated a Personal Budget after their re-assessment, and then

offered a choice of how support is arranged.

 

If they do not wish to take an active role in arranging support, they will

be offered a range of alternative Providers to meet their support needs

within the budget available. Brokerage advice on the range of support

options will be made available from Council staff or external Brokers.

The details of how current internal service users will transition into new

support arrangements will be refined during the consultation phase,

and the plan will be implemented after the final Cabinet decision in

April.”

 

Councillor Liz Brighouse had given notice of the following question to the Cabinet Member for Schools Improvement:

 

“The government has said that it intends to protect education funding but it is

becomingly increasingly clear that as a result of the cuts schools will find it

very difficult to make ends meet. In particular, will the Cabinet Member

confirm whether the pupil premium will compensate for the other funding

which has been cut or will governing bodies need to make cuts in their

budgets?”

 

Councillor Waine replied:

 

“The government has announced two year funding allocations for local

authorities and one year allocations for our maintained schools. The DfE have confirmed they will continue with the current distribution method for funding local authorities.

 

They have announced that they are simplifying the historic funding system by

mainstreaming relevant grants into the Dedicated Schools Grant. In

Oxfordshire we know our overall allocation based on per-pupil distribution

within the DSG is the same as last year.

 

Recognising the potential turbulence for schools, including that some schools

may see their individual budget vary in cash terms due to pupil numbers or

local distribution of funding, the government will be applying a national

protection arrangement for schools, in effect a minimum funding guarantee

that no school will see a reduction compared with its 2010-11 budget

(excluding sixth form funding) of more than 1.5% per pupil before the pupil

premium is applied. We will be working with Schools Forum to look at how the allocations affect our schools.

 

We have made all Schools aware that the Pupil Premium allocations to

Schools, which are designed to close the gaps between deprived pupils and

their non deprived peers and also to support service children, will be

determined by the School Census completed in January 2011. Children

currently eligible for free school meals (FSM) (or service children) and logged

as such by the census day will attract the pupil premium. It is vital that

Schools ensure eligible pupils are counted and complete their census. We

have given information on how our Food With Thought (FWT) team can

support them in this and we are providing additional support from the Schools

finance team to add capacity for this process. Any primary school who has

Oxfordshire School Meals service will already know how to use the FWT team to check and count pupils eligible for FSM.

 

The announcements by the DfE should now allow Governing bodies to be

considering their budget plans for next year, although we know that many

governing bodies have already planned ahead given the national budget

context. Our schools finance support team will be assisting any governing

body that finds it difficult to set a balanced budget, in each of the three months leading up to April we will be meeting with Schools Forum to support them.”

 

Supplementary: Councillor Brighouse sought information on the number of schools whose budgets would be cut.

 

Councillor Waine replied that it was not possible to be certain how the settlement would work out but that in the pupil premium a promise had been kept.

 

 

Councillor Susanna Pressel had given notice of the following question to the Cabinet Member for Safer & Stronger Communities:

 

“If the shocking proposals to close 20 libraries go ahead, when will we know

what is happening to the various buildings and stock, what provision will be

made for school groups who can't afford to travel greater distances to the

nearest library, why is the Council simultaneously cutting the mobile libraries

and above all why is the Council not protecting the libraries in our areas of

deprivation?”

 

Councillor Heathcoat replied that in retaining the proposed 20 libraries this provided for 80% of all business. A detailed response to the question of library stock had been given at the Safer & Stronger Communities Scrutiny Committee on 20 December; there would be a lengthy period of public consultation, including an equalities impact assessment with a decision to be taken in June 2012. The use of stock would be considered once decisions had been taken. The mobile service was being reviewed to ensure it was fit for purpose although it should not be seen as a straightforward replacement service. She refuted that areas of deprivation were not being protected as this had been looked at, including travel and transport in rural areas.

 

Supplementary:  Councillor Pressel asked what would happen if 90 -100% of the consultation was against the proposals.

 

Councillor Heathcoat replied that if there was support for such measures she could look at the opportunities to keep libraries in use  through community development.

 

 

Councillor Sajid Malik had given notice of the following question to the Cabinet Member for Finance & Property:

 

“Communities Secretary Eric Pickles has recently said that Councils who have

balances above 5% of their revenue expenditure should be digging into them

to help with adapting to this new age of austerity. Will the Cabinet Member

please confirm the level of balances that the Council holds, what that level is

in relation to our revenue expenditure, and how the Cabinet intends to utilise

those balances to mitigate some of the effects of these appalling cuts?”

 

Councillor Couchman replied:

 

“The list of balances produced for every council following Mr Pickles

announcement showed Oxfordshire's reserves position at 5 .05 %, so is on

the boundary of the category which the Minister was aiming at. The figures

for Oxfordshire are:

 

Non schools reserves £41.835m

 

Revenue expenditure £828.125m

 

Reserves 5.0518%

 

These figures exclude expenditure and reserves relating to schools.

 

However, we do also review our reserves on an annual basis to ensure that

the purpose for reserve is still valid, and that it is necessary to hold those

reserves. The detail of the reserves are published in the statement of

accounts, and are monitored on a regular basis through the monthly

monitoring to Cabinet.

 

The reserves at 31 March 2010 total led £60.764m (including schools) the

major elements relate to:

 

Capital Reserve and Prudential Borrowing reserve                    £16.6m

Planned usage within the Capital programme of all funds

 

Local Management of school and other schools reserves           £15.1m

A balance of surplus and deficits, for which the usage determined by the

schools who hold the reserve

 

Budget reserve & Carry forward reserve                                       £7.1m

Planned usage throughout the period of the MTFP

I

Insurance Reserve                                                                            £6.0m

Held against known and anticipated claims, a reduction in this reserve is already planned for £2.4m

 

Efficiency Savings and Change Fund                                            £2.8m

Held to manage investments, change management and handle costs of reductions in service

 

Waste Management                                                                         £2.5m

Held against planned expenditure to deliver the waste strategy

 

On-Street Parking                                                                             £1.6m

Held to manage the year on year cash flows

 

Shared Services                                                                               £1.3m

Held to manage the change in working - planned usage within MTFP

 

Other reserves (less than £1m individually)                                   £7.8m

Smaller reserves under £1m, for a variety of reasons, all of which are reviewed regularly”

 

Councillor John Sanders had given notice of the following question to the Cabinet Member for Transport:

 

“Does the cabinet member for transport have any plans to extend controlled

parking zones in the City? I ask this question because although I have been

assured that there are no such plans, I was also assured that increases to

CPZ charges would be limited to the RPI and this has not been the case, with CPZ charges increased by 25 percent.”

 

Written response from Councillor Rose:

 

“Cllr Sanders will see from the budget proposals that we are not planning to

carry out or review any such schemes as there is no funding

available. However, if funding were to become available in the future this

could be reconsidered depending on priorities at the time.”

 

Supplementary:  Councillor Sanders sought reassurance that CPZ charges would not be further increased. He queried what would be done for those areas of East Oxford and Oxford borders that had no CPZ.

 

Councillor Hudspeth, responding on behalf of Councillor Rose, referred to the efforts to introduce a scheme into Magdalen Road but these had been unsuccessful as no local agreement could be reached. There were no plans at the moment.

 

Councillor Val Smith had given notice of the following question to the Cabinet Member for Children, Young People & Families:

 

“Have the Cabinet seriously thought through the consequences of changing

the youth services?

 

My concern in the City is that the HUBs, unless staffed with experienced

youth workers who are well used to managing the behaviour of troubled

young people, will fail.

 

The provision of therapeutic help and rehabilitation is an important part of

early intervention that the Council is keen to promote – this kind of provision

needs to be delivered by experienced and professionally trained workers if

they are to be successful and create a positive future for young people, their

families and the families they will go on to have. Many young people not in

training education or work will only connect with the help of trained youth

workers

 

This work, along with that done in my division on sexual health, substance

and alcohol misuse and teenage pregnancy, is vital. I feel, by diluting down to the hubs, we are at risk that these services will start to fail, with consequences that we cannot begin to imagine.”

 

Councillor Chapman replied:

 

“Considerable thought based on local, national and international evidence and analysis of data and other information has gone into the re-shaping of a

number of services to create the re-designed new early intervention service.

 

The new early intervention service will be delivered from 7 hubs and will be

funded by joining together resources from youth, connexions, services

supporting behaviour and mental heath, attendance and engagement

services, family and children’s early intervention service and the pre-court

prevention team. Staff from all of these disciplines will be eligible to apply

for the posts in the new early intervention teams. Given that all of these staff

already have considerable expertise in working with children young people

and families with multiple problems; the skill base of the workforce will be

significant and relevant. Rather than a dilution, we see the hub teams as a

strengthening of existing arrangements, ensuring that holistic approaches are possible, delivered by a team with multiple skills and experience, allocating the right resources to the needs of each child, young person and family as required.

 

The model being proposed has been developed by key managers across all

of these services aligning with the research evidence on what works for

children, young people and their families. We have had very positive early

discussions with our partners who are looking forward to working with us in

new ways to support young people should the proposal go ahead.

 

The Directorate has set aside a fund to support further training and

development for all staff involved in delivering our new early intervention

service; to ensure that skills are transferred, new ways of working are

embedded and multi-agency work is effectively supported. (See line 5 in

annexe 1 and paragraph 7.4 in the business strategy)”

 

Supplementary: Councillor Smith queried whether legal advice had been sought on the Youth Centre and Hubs proposals as she felt that there was a legal requirement to provide sufficient leisure facilities.

 

Councillor Waine replied that it was a shared responsibility across all councils including District Councils. He undertook to respond in writing in relation to the legal query raised.

 

 

Councillor Jean Fooks had given notice of the following question to the Leader of the Council:

 

"The Leader appointed Cllr Fatemian as Cycling Champion some time ago.

There have been concerns about the lack of quarterly reports from several of

the champions and I regret that there is no report since July from the Cycling

Champion. Given the enhanced recognition of the importance of cycling in

LTP3, this is particularly worrying; what has he been doing in this role since

July and should the role be given to another councillor, perhaps a non-cabinet member or even a member of the opposition, to ensure that cycling, which is of course of particular concern in the city of Oxford, is well championed? For instance, there was initial enthusiasm for the Bike Polite scheme; nothing has been heard about this since the elections in May. "

 

Councillor Mitchell replied:

 

“I understand the Champion prepared a report for September 2010, sent it the cabinet member for comment but it seems not to have arrived or subsequently uploaded.

 

With the pressures of the Big Debate, the budget cycle and the illness of our political assistant, the report has not been published. Here it is:

 

‘Cycling Champion’s September Report

I continue to take an active engagement in cycling all over the county. During August, in my capacity as cycling champion I was involved in a series that the BBC did on television and radio on the numbers of people cycling into the City and the provision of facilities for cyclists.

 

In a private capacity though obviously linked to the role, I was also at the final stage of the Tour of Britain in early September and, more importantly, set an example because, unlike some other councillors, I will not cycle without a helmet and obey all traffic laws.

 

More recently I have been in communication with officers from E&E and the local group, Cyclox, over the plans for replacing the cycling lanes on the Old Abingdon Road once the work on raising/replacing Redbridge is complete and have also commented on the proposals from E&E for increased bicycle parking in the city – highlighting reasons for and against the different locations suggested.’

 

I would add that Cllr Arash Fatemian is an active Tweeter and I am setting out some of his cycling tweets below:

 

Dec 8              Having a great day at work - just hope the weather holds long enough that the racing bike can negotiate the Oxford roads home tonight..

Dec 1              On the 1st day of Christmas I cycled into work - froze while doing so but felt good to be back on the bike again...

Nov 30            Due to a combination of being away, being ill and now the bad

weather, I have hardly been on my bike at all during November #cyclingfail

Nov 15            My cycle in this a.m. included v.cold weather, roadworks, traffic, & fog - about to leave the office for the return journey - oh joy

Nov 10            Tried to be a polite and responsible cyclist earlier but only got abuse from the bus driver - surely that response encourages bad cycling??

Oct 17             Watching tour of Lombardy highlights & respect given the conditions, though just seen one of the world’s best descenders come off his bike.

Oct 13             As @OxfordshireCC Cycling champion this site made me smile at the corner of St Aldates this morning... http://twitpic.com/2xbucq

Oct 6               Waterproofs came in handy today - Wet cycle in - wetter than it looked though not as much as I thought, thanks to @106jackfm for the tip...

Sep 20           Good luck to all those taking part in BikeBlenhemPalace at

@BlenheimPalace today ... especially in this weather...

Sep 24           Frustrated by the weather...yesterday when cycling 20km [approx 12½ miles] to various meetings it was windy & rainy...on bus today & it's pleasant...

Sep 22           Mildly surprised that my beloved racing bike lasted 2 hours on the Cowley road tonight - Guessing Ox bike thief fraternity on a night off

Sep 11           Caught out by freak hailstorm on cycle to South Hinksey

Surgery...Jeans no longer solid & desperately trying to dry out in surgery...

Sep 8              Schoolboy error - left cycle lights at home so forced to leave bike at county hall and now on bus home...

Aug 25            The 'strategic' decision to leave my waterproof trousers at home this morning led to an 'interesting' cycle home - soaked from waist down.”

 

Supplementary: Councillor Fooks asked when he had met with Cyclox and Area Committees over the Local Transport Plan 3. Councillor Fatemian replied that he had not been invited to Area Committees. He met  with Cyclox and was in email communication with them regularly.