Agenda and draft minutes

To receive any apologies for absence and temporary appointments.

Apologies were received from Cllr Thomas, substituted by Cllr Lugova, and Cllr McLean, substituted by Cllr Ley.

Apologies were also received from Martin Reeves, Chief Executive, for agenda item 12.

See guidance note on the back page.

There were none.

The Committee is recommended to APPROVE the minutes of the meetings held on 24 September 2025 and to receive information arising from them.

Subject to amendments where words had been missed in the draft for recommendations in 48/45, the Committee APPROVED the minutes of the meetings held on 24 September 2025 as true and accurate records of the meetings.

These had been adjusted for the report to Cabinet and would be corrected in the minutes.

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 speak must be submitted no later than 09.00 three working days before the meeting, i.e., Friday 07 November, 2025.

Requests should be submitted to the Scrutiny Officer at scrutiny@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.

Where there are a number of requests from persons wishing to present similar views on the same issue, the Chair may require that the views be put by a single spokesperson. It is expected that only in exceptional circumstances will a person (or organisation) be allowed to address more than one meeting on a particular issue in any period of six months.

Charlie Maynard, MP, the Member of Parliament for Witney, addressed the Committee stating that he was pleased the Witney Rail project had been included in the OxRail 2040 strategy, highlighting its importance for accommodating new housing in West Oxfordshire and alleviating severe congestion on the A40. He pointed out that the draft document did not fully acknowledge the extensive work already completed on the project's feasibility and cost-effectiveness. Charlie Maynard urged the committee to amend the strategy to allow for the rail line’s construction within the current plan period, rather than only afterwards, and suggested specific wording changes to reflect ongoing efforts and provide flexibility. He confirmed that these proposed amendments had been circulated to members.

The Committee also NOTED the letter from Phil Evans, a transport professional and local resident who was unable to attend, regarding the OxRail 2040 report.

The Committee is recommended to NOTE the progress of previous recommendations and actions arising from previous meetings, having raised any questions on the contents.

The Committee NOTED the action and recommendation tracker.

Attached is the Cabinet response to the Place Overview and Scrutiny Committee report on the Oxford Temporary Congestion Charge. The Committee is asked to NOTE the response.

The Committee NOTED the Cabinet response on the Oxford Temporary Congestion Charge.

The Committee is recommended to AGREE its work programme for forthcoming meetings, having heard any changes from previous iterations, and taking account of the Cabinet Forward Plan and of the Budget Management Monitoring Report.

The Committee APPROVED the forward work plan with additions.

February's agenda will include road safety, mobility hubs, and potential Fire and Rescue changes, with input before the Cabinet meeting. April already included three items scheduled, and committee involvement in the fire cover model was under discussion.

It was also NOTED that written responses to previous road safety questions had been published with the meeting minutes.

The Committee has requested a report on OxRAIL: 2040: Plan for Rail after the public consultation and before it is submitted to Cabinet for approval.

The Committee has invited Cllr Judy Roberts, Cabinet member for Place, Environment and Climate Action, to present the report as well as Robin Rogers, Director of Economy and Place, and Pete Brunskill, Rail Development Lead, to answer the Committee’s questions.

The Committee is asked to consider the report and raise any questions, and to AGREE any recommendations it wishes to make to Cabinet arising therefrom.

The Committee invited Cllr Judy Roberts, Cabinet member for Place, Environment and Climate Action, to present the report as well as Robin Rogers, Director of Economy and Place, and Pete Brunskill, Rail Development Lead, to answer the Committee’s questions.

The Cabinet Member and Director of Economy and Place introduced the OxRail 2040 report, emphasising its ambitious scope, year-long development, and the exceptional number of consultation responses it received. Widely supported, the plan aims to outline Oxfordshire’s connectivity needs and build a strong investment case, with a focus on achievable outcomes. They noted recent government approval for the Cowley branch line as a key milestone. The Rail Development Lead highlighted intensified planning efforts since June, including collaboration with WSP consultancy, broad engagement across the council and rail industry, and significant stakeholder support. The recent release of the Government’s Railways Bill was mentioned as aligning with the plan’s aspirations and providing future opportunities for mayoral authorities in rail development.

The Committee raised the following questions:

·       How would the plan remain a living document, expressing concern that it might become static and unused, and sought clarification on how flexibility would be maintained to adapt to opportunities and changes. Officers responded that the plan had been designed with ongoing partnership structures and regular engagement with rail operators and infrastructure providers, ensuring relationships and project updates would continue through organisational changes. Officers stated that the plan would be revisited and updated as projects progressed, with live groups working on specific stations and studies, and that monitoring and evaluation frameworks were included to support ongoing review and adaptation, so the document would remain relevant and responsive. 

·       Whether any proposals had been considered but excluded from the plan due to a lack of support from the rail industry. Officers replied that nearly all items with a realistic pathway to delivery had been included, and nothing significant had been omitted for lack of industry support. The only example given was the proposed "science line," which the rail industry felt was excessive alongside the Oxfordshire Metro concept, so it was removed; otherwise, the plan reflected projects with industry backing and feasible delivery routes.

·       Members asked about the climate impact assessment, specifically whether the plan could be more ambitious regarding biodiversity net gain, such as planting wildflowers and hedgerows along railway lines, and whether unused rail land could be used for housing. Officers responded that biodiversity and environmental improvements were central to the plan, with ongoing discussions about greening infrastructure and collaboration with Network Rail’s climate action team, including proposals for local solar power. The importance of ambitious biodiversity measures, was acknowledged, and Officers confirmed that housing near railways was being considered in partnership with the new rail property company, with master planning for stations like Banbury.

·       Members enquired whether unused rail land could be utilised for housing, noting the potential for well-insulated homes near railway lines. Officers replied that this approach was supported by government policy and was a mission of the new rail property company, Platform, to bring  ...  view the full minutes text for item 12/25

The Committee has requested a report on the the Infrastructure Funding Statement for 2024/2025 and an update on the Section 106 Improvement Programme.

The Committee has invited Cllr Judy Roberts, Cabinet member for Place, Environment and Climate Action, to present the report as well as Robin Rogers, Director of Economy and Place, and other members of the Programme Board to answer the Committee’s questions.

The Committee is asked to consider the report and raise any questions, and to AGREE any recommendations it wishes to make to Cabinet arising therefrom.

The Committee welcomed Cllr Judy Roberts, Cabinet member for Place, Environment and Climate Action, to present the report as well as Robin Rogers, Director of Economy and Place, and Ian Dyson, Director of Financial and Commercial Services, to answer the Committee’s questions.

Cllr Roberts briefly introduced the Infrastructure Funding Statement and Section 106 report by explaining that it was a retrospective statutory report required for government and also included a section detailing progress made as a result of scrutiny over the past 18 months. They emphasised that significant strides had been made, both in fulfilling statutory obligations and in improving work prompted by committee input.

The Committee raised the following concerns and questions:

·       When asked if the council had learnt from other local authorities on managing and spending Section 106 funds, it was explained that the Planning Advisory Service had conducted a benchmarking review of Oxfordshire, offering recommendations. The challenges faced were said to be widespread nationally, and Oxfordshire continued to learn from others. The Committee was told the review report could be circulated. It was clarified that a previous magazine article ranking Oxfordshire poorly was based only on funds collected, not on deliverability.

·       It was clarified that the dashboard reflected only the baseline capital programme; spending from the accelerated pipeline funding approved in October had not yet been included in financial projections. Officers explained that factors such as housing completions and demographic changes impact when Section 106 funds are spent. Efforts were ongoing to enhance visibility of projected and actual spending by developing parallel tables for confirmed and anticipated projects, while governance changes are being made to accelerate delivery and improve clarity.

·       The S106 system was described as complex, with funds often fragmented and bound to specific localities and projects, making spending difficult. It was highlighted that gathering enough funding for larger schemes was a challenge, and strict legal requirements must be met. The Council recognised that the report did not fully clarify these issues, and admitted the system was less than ideal. Efforts were underway to improve transparency and to speed up expenditure, aiming to address these challenges and to ensure more effective use of the contributions.

·       Concerns were raised regarding delays in the allocation of S106 funds and a perceived lack of accountability for these postponements. The response acknowledged these frustrations and clarified that, although a dashboard was available to track disbursements, infrastructure initiatives naturally involved extended procedures such as design, consultation, and procurement. It was noted that the Council had strengthened its oversight and was systematically reviewing older projects to identify and address bottlenecks, with both the administration and officers being held accountable for progress. Additionally, the importance of member engagement in prioritising local projects was highlighted as a means to enhance accountability and responsiveness.

·       The possibility of sharing the Section 106 dashboard with localities and planning committees to enhance oversight was discussed. It was clarified that members currently had access to the dashboard and could submit queries, and that expanding the scope of information available  ...  view the full minutes text for item 13/25

The Committee has requested an update on the Movement and Place Plans.

The Committee has invited Cllr Judy Roberts, Cabinet member for Place, Environment, and Climate Action, to present the report and has invited Paul Fermer, Director of Environment and Highways, and Ashley Hayden, Transport Policy and Strategy Team Lead, to answer the Committee’s questions.

The Committee is asked to consider the report and raise any questions, and to AGREE any recommendations it wishes to make to Cabinet arising therefrom.

The Committee requested an update on the Movement and Place Plans, and invited Cllr Judy Roberts, Cabinet member for Place, Environment, and Climate Action, to present the report and welcomed Hannah Battye, Head of Place Shaping, and Ashley Hayden, Transport Policy and Strategy Team Lead, to answer the Committee’s questions.

The Cabinet Member reported that the Movement and Place Plans were ongoing, building on the local transport connectivity plan. These documents were intended to detail completed projects, forthcoming funded schemes, and future priorities identified through community input. The Head of Place Shaping noted that these plans update the 2016 versions, were not yet finished, and would continue to be developed with input from communities to ensure appropriate measures are included. The Transport Policy and Strategy Team Lead explained that the plans were designed to be updated annually, with consultations currently taking place for the Science Vale and Bicester & Mid Cherwell areas, and mentioned scheduled public engagement events.

Members raised the following questions and queries:

·       An inquiry was made regarding developments at Milton Park, emphasising its significant growth within the medical and biotech sectors, specifically whether the implementation of the Milton Park cycle path could be expedited in response to increased demand from new businesses and residential projects. Officers acknowledged that Milton Park’s ongoing expansion was recognised, and it was noted that measures were being taken to accelerate the completion of the cycle routes. A dedicated individual was currently managing progress on the Milton Park cycle path, although certain outstanding issues still required resolution.

·       It was argued that the boundaries proposed in the place plans did not accurately reflect local movement or character, with particular reference to areas such as Henley, Wallingford, and Wantage, where boundaries appeared either arbitrary or failed to encompass adjacent communities. In response, officers emphasised that the boundaries presented were merely initial proposals. They assured the Committee that these would be thoroughly reviewed and refined through collaboration with colleagues and additional engagement, especially as the process advances towards formal consultation with stakeholders and local communities.

·       The involvement of town and parish councils, along with other stakeholders, in the development of Movement and Place Plans was discussed. Officers outlined that the process involved initial engagement with town and parish councils, district members, and key stakeholders prior to formal consultation. It was noted that input from members had already shaped aspects of the plans, and that public engagement events were scheduled to take place at community locations. It was also proposed that workshops or interactive sessions with parish and town councils could facilitate their participation from the start and promote broader community involvement.  

The Committee AGREED to recommendations under the following headings:

• That the Council should review the proposed geographical boundaries for the Place plans to ensure they pass the ‘sense check’
• That the Council should engage proactively with parish and town councils to ensure that local needs are understood
• That the Council should engage proactively with local members to ensure that local needs are understood

The Committee has requested an update on the Fire and Rescue Improvement Programme.

The Committee has invited Cllr Jenny Hannaby, Cabinet member for Community Safety, to present the report and Rob MacDougall, Chief Fire Officer and Director of Community Safety, to answer the Committee’s questions.

The Committee is asked to consider the report and raise any questions, and to AGREE any recommendations it wishes to make to Cabinet arising therefrom.

The Committee will adjourn at the conclusion of this item and will reconvene at 14:00.

The Committee requested an update on the Fire and Rescue Improvement Programme, and invited Cllr Jenny Hannaby, Cabinet member for Community Safety, to present the report and Rob MacDougall, Chief Fire Officer and Director of Community Safety, to answer the Committee’s questions.

The Cabinet Member introduced the fire and rescue service improvement item by noting the report provided an update on progress addressing areas for improvement identified in the latest inspection, highlighting that six critical areas had been addressed and emphasising the success of the dynamic improvement pipeline and the Fire Improvement Board. The Chief Fire Officer added that 26 areas for improvement had been identified, with six completed, and explained the importance of fire survival guidance, the structure of the improvement programme, and the involvement of the inspectorate liaison officer to ensure progress and oversight.

The Chief Fire Officer clarified that the inspection took place in January, but the report was not published until July, explaining an apparent discrepancy in the scrutiny report.

The Committee raised the following questions:

·       The Committee enquired about staff morale in the fire service amid proposed changes and the potential for a greater role for cadets. The Chief Fire Officer explained that morale was monitored via surveys and ongoing staff engagement, acknowledging that consultations regarding changes had had some impact. He highlighted the value of cadets, noting six active units across the county, and stressed their positive role in youth engagement and community support. However, expansion of the cadet programme depended on resources and the availability of volunteers.

·       How were the fire and rescue service addressing plans for retirements and recruitment, including succession planning. The Chief Fire Officer stated that succession and workforce planning were ongoing areas of attention, with an establishment board that regularly reviewed retirements, staff turnover, and recruitment requirements. Succession planning was identified as an area for improvement in the inspection report and was being addressed.

·       The procedures regarding how the fire and rescue service monitored response times, as well as the handling of exceptions such as instances where response times exceed targets, were addressed. It was clarified that response times were tracked through the Council’s monthly business monitoring report, with defined targets established for attending calls within set timeframes. Any responses exceeding 14 minutes were subject to investigation, and this data was published in the annual performance report, which was subsequently presented to the committee for review.

·       The Committee enquired about the expected timeline for completing the identified areas for improvement and the safety outcomes, particularly those related to the fire cover model. The Chief Fire Officer confirmed that the areas for improvement currently on hold were anticipated to be completed within this financial year, with all issues resolved prior to the next inspection. The fire cover model was clarified as a means of enhancing service delivery and implementing key safety measures identified by the inspectorate, rather than a cost-saving initiative. The Committee was to receive further detailed updates on these developments in due course.

The Committee adjourned for lunch  ...  view the full minutes text for item 15/25

The Committee has requested a report on the Council’s proposal for Local Government Reorganisation before it is considered by Cabinet on 13 November.

The Committee has invited Cllr Liz Leffman, the Leader of the Council, to present the report and has invited Martin Reeves, Chief Executive, Lorna Baxter, Executive Director of Resources and Section 151 Officer (Deputy Chief Executive), and Helen Mitchell, Programme Director: Local Government Reorganisation to answer the Committee’s questions.

The Committee is asked to consider the report and raise any questions, and to AGREE any recommendations it wishes to make to Cabinet arising therefrom.

The Committee is also provided with copies of alternative proposals from other councils for Local Government Reorganisation in Oxfordshire.

The Committee requested a report on the Council’s proposal for Local Government Reorganisation before it was considered by Cabinet on 13 November. The Committee invited Cllr Liz Leffman, the Leader of the Council, to present the report and welcomed Lorna Baxter, Executive Director of Resources and Section 151 Officer (Deputy Chief Executive), Anita Bradley, Director of Law and Governance and Monitoring Officer, Rob MacDougall, Chief Fire Officer and Director of Community Safety, Helen Mitchell, Programme Director: Local Government Reorganisation, Robin Rogers, Director of Environment and Place, and Susannah Wintersgill, Director of Public Affairs, Policy and Partnerships, answer the Committee’s questions.

The Leader of the Council introduced Local Government Reorganisation, outlining three proposals for submission: a single unitary authority from the County Council, plus two- and three-unitary options from districts and the city. She urged a focus on making the strongest case for a single unitary, particularly regarding service integration, councillor numbers, and the impact on key services such as adult social care, children's services, and transport. Comments were invited to shape the final proposal.

The Programme Director explained that three options for Local Government Reorganisation had been developed, following a statutory invitation for reform. Engagement with the public and partners focused on refining the proposals, emphasising simplicity, minimal disruption, and the importance of strong local governance, particularly the role of town and parish councils. The rationale for a single Oxfordshire-wide authority included historical continuity, integrated services, and efficient transition without fragmenting existing provision. The Programme Director highlighted aims to build on best practice and enhance service delivery, especially in homelessness and housing.

The Executive Director of Resources and Section 151 Officer presented the financial aspects of Local Government Reorganisation, noting that PwC’s independent evaluation showed guaranteed savings from reorganisation and additional, less certain savings from transformation. She stressed that the single Oxfordshire authority was deemed the most financially resilient and lowest risk, according to the Financial Resilience Index, particularly given likely funding cuts under the Fair Funding Review. She further explained that adopting a single unitary model would lead to minimal changes in council tax levels, making it a more stable option compared to the two- or three-unitary proposals.

The Chair opened up the discussion to Members inviting comments and questions on the One Oxfordshire Proposal.

·       During the discussion on local government reorganisation, a councillor enquired about the future management of Oxford City Council's council homes, raising concerns about housing debt and the potential impact of a single unitary authority on council housing. Officers explained that all council tenants would be securely transferred to the new authority, which would also inherit the existing expertise and skills in housing management. The Executive Director clarified that the housing debt was asset-backed and would be treated separately from general debt, and emphasised that any decisions regarding the future structure or management of council housing would be made by the new authority, not predetermined in the current proposal.

·       A councillor inquired about the implications for West Berkshire if it were not part of the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 16/25