Return to Agenda

ITEM CC1

OXFORDSHIRE COUNTY COUNCIL

MINUTES of the meeting of the County Council held at County Hall on Tuesday 17 June 2003 commencing at 11.30 am, finishing at 5.50 pm and reconvening on Tuesday 24 June 2003 commencing at 10.30 am and finishing at 6.40 pm.

Present:

Councillor DAVID TURNER – in the chair

Councillors:

The Council considered the matters, reports and recommendations contained or referred to in the agenda for the meeting and decided as set out below. Except insofar as otherwise specified, the reasons for the decisions are contained in the agenda and reports, copies of which are attached to the signed Minutes.

40/01. DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST

(Agenda Item 1)

The following interests were declared:-

Councillor	Agenda Item	Nature of Interest
Bradshaw	3 – Priority Framework	Personal – member of Thames Valley Police Authority
Bradshaw	4 – Structure Plan Review	Personal – Chair of GTE for Oxford
Crabbe	4 – Structure Plan Review (Chapter 11)	Prejudicial – family ownership of gravel bearing land near Wallingford
Hastings	4 – Structure Plan Review (Chapter 2, paragraph 2.20)	Prejudicial – ownership of land in Begbroke
Roaf ) Purse ) Shouler ) Gatehouse )	4 – Structure Plan Review	Personal – Trustee of Oxford Preservation Trust
Tudor Hughes	4 – Structure Plan Review	Personal – Trustee of Hurst Water Meadow Trust

41/01. PETITIONS AND PUBLIC ADDRESS

(Agenda Item 2)

Petitions

Councillor Sanders presented a petition, containing approximately 250 signatures, urging the Council to improve road safety on the Marlow Road, Henley.

RESOLVED: to refer the petition to the Executive.

Public Address

The following requests to address the meeting had been agreed:-

Request from	Agenda Item
Michael Hugh-Jones 35 Headley Way Oxford	17 – Urgent decision of the Democracy & Organisation Committee: Periodic Electoral Review for the County of Oxfordshire

Mr Hugh-Jones expressed his concerns over what he saw as inadequate publicity regarding the Periodic Electoral Review. He was particularly interested in local democracy and greatly regretted that he had not been aware that this matter was being considered by the Democracy & Organisation Committee on 15 May.

42/03. A PRIORITY FRAMEWORK FOR 2004/05 ONWARDS

(Agenda Item 3)

The Council considered a report (CC3) from the Leader and Deputy Leader of the Council which identified ten service and budget priorities and three partnership priorities which the Executive had proposed should be taken into account when making the budget for 2004/05 and later years. This report invited the Council as a whole to consider these priorities and to offer advice and/or alternatives to the Executive on the basis of "one in, one out". This gave the Council, for the first time, the opportunity to help shape the Executive’s priorities before they were published for consultation with stakeholders and partners, after which the Executive would draw up its final budget recommendations to be considered by the Council in February 2004.

In relation to the GCSE Attainment priority, Councillor Bryden moved and Councillor Moley seconded that the Executive be advised to

1. delete "GCSE Attainment", and replace with "Educational Attainment"; and
2. in the Description, delete "the County Council’s PSA target for GCSE attainment" and replace with: "the County Council’s PSA targets 1, 2 and 3 for educational attainment".

1. "Twice as many people died on Oxfordshire’s roads in the first few months of 2003, compared to the same period last year" – p.17 of the latest Oxfordshire County Council magazine.
2. There is a national target of a 40% reduction in deaths on our roads by 2010 – p.23 of the Oxfordshire Plan, paper CC10 in this Council agenda.
3. "An increasing number of babies and toddlers are being injured on Oxfordshire’s roads and local (and national) statistics show that four out of five child car seats are incorrectly fitted" – p.17 of the latest Oxfordshire County Council magazine – "The Consumers’ Association and the AA Motoring Trust believe the child seat test should be made more realistic by increasing the speed – 30 m.p.h. at present – and including what would happen in a side-on crash" – Oxford Mail, 11^th June 2003.
4. "Recent government research indicates that between 12,700 and 19,500 premature deaths occur each year due to air pollution, mainly from traffic" (1% = between 127 and 195 deaths per year in Oxon.) - Oxfordshire County Council’s own booklet "Oxfordshire’s Environment 2001, Quality of Life Indicators: Air Quality (NO₂ levels). In the 2002/3 edition of these indicators, although it makes clear that the average Oxfordshire levels of NO₂ (15ppb) are consistently better than the UK average (18.4 ppb), there is a report that "Two Air Quality Management Areas have been declared to reduce localised high pollution levels: at Oxford City Centre and Henley-on-Thames".
5. "Three traffic bottlenecks remain the worst affected places for air quality in West Oxfordshire. A new report shows that Bridge Street and Mill Street in Witney, and Horsefair in Chipping Norton, are recording the highest levels of nitrogen dioxide in the district. They remain above the Government target levels to be achieved by the year 2005, and traffic management schemes may be needed to reduce them… Last year, all three of the sites figured above the target level of 21 parts per billion (ppb), and remained so again this year. The measurement at Horsefair was 35 ppb, with Mill Street 33 ppb and Bridge Street 29 ppb… Martin Rowland, head of West Oxfordshire District Council’s Environmental Health Department, said "As the prime source of nitrogen dioxide affecting residents is traffic, the action plan would have to involve traffic management, and working with the County Council to strive for improvements" – Witney and West Oxfordshire Gazette, 11^th June 2003.
6. "It’s only a matter of time before a life is lost unless schools install sprinkler systems to combat blazes" – Teletext 15^th June 2003. Sprinkler systems should be fitted in all new school buildings to combat the rising tide of life-threatening arson attacks, experts have claimed.

1. 20 schools a week are affected by deliberately started fires, according to the Arson Prevention Bureau (APB);
2. The figures, which are supported by a number of large insurance firms, show that a growing number of attacks happen while children are on the site;
3. Daytime school fires are "an accident waiting to happen" the APB chief Jane Milne warned, as the APB urged head teachers and education authorities to tackle the problem;
4. The latest figures show daytime arson attacks in schools have risen by almost 50% to 250 a year in 2000;
5. Schools have managed to combat out-of-hours arson attacks, which have fallen since 1994;
6. (In daytime) cloakrooms were particularly vulnerable – they were the scene of 60% of deliberately started fires;
7. The study found that arson attacks are most likely to happen during lunch breaks, between 1.0 and 2.0 p.m.;
8. Arson costs education authorities £115m a year, but if schools had to fit sprinklers it would save lives as well as cash, the APB said.

On being put to the vote this motion was lost by 34 votes to 22.

Councillor Brighouse then moved and Councillor Hodgson seconded that the Executive be advised that Social Inclusion be incorporated into each of the agreed priorities (not a separate priority on its own). This approach reflected the Oxfordshire Community Partnership’s idea of "Golden Threads", one of which was Social Inclusion. (See the presentation at the OCP Forum on 12^th June 2003 by Professor Graham Upton, Chair of OCP Steering Group.)

On being put to the vote this motion was carried nem con.

RESOLVED: to advise the Executive as follows:-

1. (by 43 votes to 6) GCSE Attainment priority:

Delete "GCSE Attainment", and replace with "Educational Attainment".

In the Description, delete "the County Council’s PSA target for GCSE attainment" and replace with: "the County Council’s PSA targets 1, 2 and 3 for educational attainment".

2. (by 23 votes to 21) Public Transport priority: add at end of description, " ,ensuring that rural areas also benefit."
3. (by 39 votes to 14) Youth Crime reduction priority:

Delete "to prevent young people from being drawn into" and replace with "To improve services for young people in order to prevent them being drawn into"

4. (by 31 votes to 16) West End of Oxford partnership priority: add at end of Description, "and progressing Expressway Oxford (GTE)."
5. (nem con) Social Inclusion – proposed theme to be incorporated into each of the agreed priorities (not a separate priority on its own). This approach reflects the Oxfordshire Community Partnership’s idea of "Golden Threads", one of which is Social Inclusion. (See the presentation at the OCP Forum on 12^th June 2003 by Professor Graham Upton, Chair of OCP Steering Group.)

43/03. OXFORDSHIRE STRUCTURE PLAN REVIEW

(Agenda Item 4)

The Structure Plan Working Group had been considering the content of the draft review of the Structure Plan to 2016. The draft update had been prepared in the light of the outcome of consultation on issues that had been carried out last year and a copy of the draft had been circulated to all members of the Council prior to the meeting of the Environment Scrutiny Committee on 16 May 2003.

A large number of houses and other development were planned already at Oxford, Banbury, Bicester, Didcot and Witney under the adopted Structur Plan. The Review draft proposed that the main locations for new employment development should be these four towns to encourage a more balanced and diverse range of employment in the towns. After 2011 the draft proposed that the focus for development should move towards the north–south corridor between Bicester, Didcot and Wantage-Grove. Apart from development on sites within the main urban areas, significant development, in addition to that proposed in the adopted Structure Plan, was proposed at Bicester and Grove in the period to 2016.

The next stage would be the placing of the draft on public deposit, giving members of the public and interested bodies the opportunity to make representations about it. This was a statutory stage, in which the Deposit Draft represented the Council’s formal proposals. It was the advice of the Council’s Monitoring Officer that a decision to approve the Deposit Draft could only be made by the full Council. It was, however, the Executive’s responsibility to put forward proposals for approval by the Council, but in doing so to take into account any comments from the Environment Scrutiny Committee.

The Environment Scrutiny Committee’s comments had been considered by the Executive on 10 June and had been circulated to all Councillors with the papers for that meeting. Having considered the Scrutiny Committee’s comments, the Executive on 10 June had resolved to:

1. thank the Structure Plan Working Group for their thorough work in drawing up the draft Review document;
2. note the issues identified during discussion of the draft Review document at the Environment Scrutiny Committee and that no collective view had been expressed by the Committee on those issues;
3. refer the draft Review document to the Council with a recommendation that the Council should formally approve an Oxfordshire Structure Plan Deposit Draft for public deposit for a period of six weeks starting in September 2003, subject to any changes that might be agreed in accordance with (d) below;
4. authorise the Director for Environment & Economy to make presentational and minor textual changes to the document prior to public deposit, subject to consultation with the Executive Members for Strategic Planning & Waste Management and Transport; and
5. authorise the Director for Environment & Economy, in consultation with the Executive Members for Strategic Planning & Waste Management and Transport, to finalise and implement a consultation programme for the deposit stage of the review of the Structure Plan.

1. reject the proposal that Bicester should continue to be a focus for development after 2011 and delete the requirement to build about 1,000 houses between 2011 and 2016, in addition to the houses already committed under the present structure plan for the town up to 2011 (paragraphs 2.10 and 2.11);
2. support the inclusion of land south of Grenoble Road, Oxford as an Urban Extension of Oxford for mixed uses, including the development of at least 1,000 houses within the plan period; and
3. amend subsequent chapters of the Deposit Draft as necessary to take account of these changes, noting that:

1. this would necessitate a revision of the Green Belt boundary, and
2. action would be needed to overcome the constraints identified by the Working Group.

44/03. ADJOURNMENT OF MEETING

At 5.50 pm it was moved by Councillor Harris, seconded by Councillor Gatehouse and RESOLVED: (by 30 votes to 24) that the meeting be adjourned to 10.30 am on Tuesday 24 June 2003.

The meeting reconvened at 10.30 am on 24 June 2003

45/03. OXFORDSHIRE STRUCTURE PLAN REVIEW (CONTINUED)

1. Completion of the town’s perimeter road;
2. Provision of more secondary and primary school buildings;
3. Identify and protect land for large-scale retail outlets;
4. Increase local recreational opportunities and provide additional leisure facilities, such as a cinema;
5. Extra community health provision.

1. delete the second sentence of the first paragraph;
2. delete the second paragraph so that land designated for employment use stays as such.

1. approve the Oxfordshire Structure Plan Deposit Draft, amended in accordance with the decisions set out below, for public deposit for a period of six weeks starting in September 2003:

1. (by 37 votes to 22, with 2 abstentions) to:
   
   

1. reject the proposal that Bicester should continue to be a focus for development after 2011 and delete the requirement to build about 1,000 houses between 2011 and 2016, in addition to the houses already committed under the present structure plan for the town up to 2011 (paragraphs 2.10 and 2.11);
2. support the inclusion of land south of Grenoble Road, Oxford as an Urban Extension of Oxford for mixed uses, including the development of at least 1,000 houses within the plan period;
3. amend subsequent chapters of the Deposit Draft as necessary to take account of these changes, noting that:

1. this will necessitate a revision of the Green Belt boundary, and
2. action will be needed to overcome the constraints identified by the Working Group.
2. (by 39 votes to 13, with 2 abstentions) to add at the end of paragraph 2.12:

"As there are already problems with the transport infrastructure, it is essential that the required improvements are in place before any development is occupied. Before planning permission can be given, it will be necessary to carry out a full environmental assessment into the possible risks of flooding both locally and further downstream."

3. (by 31 votes to 13, with 12 abstentions) to delete the present paragraph 2.20 and replace with:

‘Except as required for the provision of 1,000 houses in a mixed use development south of Grenoble Road, the County Council does not see a need to release land in the Green Belt around Oxford.’

4. (by 45 votes to 9) to amend Chapter 2 by the addition of a new paragraph at the end of the section headed "Post 2016" (paragraphs 2.16 - 2.21):

"As an alternative to the expansion of Bicester, Didcot and Grove and to development in the Oxford Green Belt, consideration should be given to the development of a new community beyond the boundary of the Green Belt. The preferred size and location of such a development will need to be determined so as to reflect the extent and location of future housing need as it becomes apparent".

5. (by 34 votes to 18, with 4 abstentions) that there should be no further housing development in Bicester and the surrounding areas in close proximity post 2016 (paragraphs 2.17- 2.18) until the present inadequate infrastructure has been improved, e.g.

1. Completion of the town’s perimeter road;

2. Provision of more secondary and primary school buildings;

3. Identify and protect land for large-scale retail outlets;


4. Increase local recreational opportunities and provide additional leisure facilities, such as a cinema;

5. Extra community health provision.

6. In Policy G3:
   
   

1. (nem con) to replace references to "leisure and community facilities" with "leisure, educational, health and community facilities";
2. (by 27 votes to 24) to delete the words "will be provided within a timescale agreed by the local planning authorities" and replace with "will be provided in a phased manner as the development progresses".
   
   
7. (nem con) to amend Policy EN6 to read

"There will be a presumption in favour of physically preserving nationally and internationally important archaeological and geological remains, whether scheduled or not, and their settings. Where development affecting other archaeological and geological remains is allowed it should include appropriate measures to secure the preservation in situ or where this is not feasible, recording of archaeological and geological features before development."

with the heading changed to "Archaeology and Geology".

8. (by 28 votes to 24, with 3 abstentions) to delete the second sentence of the first paragraph of Policy E1 "Priority will be given to provision for science based industries …" etc.
9. (nem con) to amend paragraph 7.18 by the addition of a new sentence: "Consideration should also be given to innovative forms of ownership, such as co-operative housing developments, as a means of increasing the availability of affordable housing."

b. authorise the Director for Environment & Economy, prior to public deposit, to make the necessary changes to the document to reflect the amendments agreed by the Council, together with any presentational and minor textual changes that might be required, subject to consultation with the Executive Members for Strategic Planning & Waste Management and Transport.

46/03. MINUTES OF THE LAST MEETING

(Agenda Item 5)

RESOLVED: that the Minutes of the meeting of Council held on 1 April 2003 be approved and signed as a correct record.

In relation to Minute 32/03 (Question 3), Councillor Seale reported that he had provided Councillor Hodgson with the information he had promised. However, Councillor Hodgson indicated that he did not feel he had received a satisfactory response.

In relation to Minute 32/03 (Question 6), in reply to a question from Councillor Hodgson, Councillor Mitchell reported that there was a strong field of candidates for the post of Head of Procurement and interviews would be held on 15 July.

47/03. APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE

(Agenda Item 6)

Apologies for absence were received as follows:-

17 June

Councillors Dennis, Heathcoat, Jelf, Law, Ludlow, Simmons, Wilmshurst.

24 June

Councillors Dennis, Heathcoat, Hook, Karmali, Law, Ludlow, Wilmshurst, Witcher.

RESOLVED: in accordance with Section 85(1) of the Local Government Act 1972, to approve Councillor Dennis’s continued absence from meetings of the Authority on the grounds of ill-health.

48/03. OFFICIAL COMMUNICATIONS

(Agenda Item 7)

Former County Councillors Daphne Nash and Betty Roberts

The Chair advised the Council of the death on 26 May of former County Councillor Daphne Nash and on 17 June of former County Councillor Betty Roberts. Tributes were paid to both former Councillors and the Council observed a minute’s silence in their memory.

Councillor Margaret MacKenzie

The Council congratulated Councillor MacKenzie on being made an Honorary Alderman by the Vale of White Horse District Council.

Queen’s Birthday Honours List

The Council congratulated Richard Hallam, Director of the County Music Service, on the award of an MBE.

49/03. APPOINTMENTS

(Agenda Item 8)

RESOLVED: to make the following appointments on the nomination of political groups:-

Community Safety Scrutiny Committee

Councillor Jelf in place of Councillor Greene

Councillor Tompkins in place of Councillor McAndrews

Corporate Governance Scrutiny Committee

Councillor Evans in place of Councillor MacKenzie

Democracy & Organisation Committee

Councillor Patrick in place of Councillor Dennis

Health Overview & Scrutiny Committee

Councillor Patrick in place of Councillor Roaf

Learning & Culture Scrutiny Committee

Councillor MacKenzie in place of Councillor Brighouse

Pension Fund Committee

Councillor Harris in place of Councillor Gatehouse

Councillor Hodgson in place of Councillor Roy Mold

Standards Committee

Councillor Patrick in place of Councillor Dennis

50/03. OXFORDSHIRE PLAN 2003/04

(Agenda Item 10)

The Council was reminded that the Oxfordshire Plan, which fulfilled the statutory requirement to produce an annual Best Value Performance Plan, was one of the strategic plans which were subject to approval by full Council following consideration by both the Executive and relevant Scrutiny Committee, in accordance with the Budget and Policy Framework Procedure Rules set out in the Constitution. The Plan was required to be approved and submitted to the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister by the end of June.

On 29 April the Executive had agreed an outline draft of the Plan and invited the Corporate Governance Scrutiny Committee to make any comments in time for consideration by the Executive at its 27 May meeting. The Corporate Governance Scrutiny Committee had considered the draft Plan on 8 May 2003 and the key points arising during that debate had been reported to the Executive on 27 May. Having considered those comments, the Executive had resolved to recommend the Council to approve the Plan.

RESOLVED: (on a motion by Councillor Mitchell, seconded by Councillor Margaret Godden and carried nem con) to approve the Oxfordshire Plan 2003/04 (CC10), subject to the addition of such further information as might be required by the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister, following consultation with the Leader and Deputy Leader of the Council.

51/03. ADULT LEARNING PLAN 2003/04

(Agenda Item 11)

The Council was reminded that the Adult Learning Plan was one of the strategic plans which were subject to approval by full Council, following consideration by both the Executive and relevant Scrutiny Committee, in accordance with the Budget and Policy Framework Procedure Rules set out in the Constitution. In November 2002 the Executive had agreed the Adult and Community Learning Service’s revised Purpose and Strategic Objectives as the basis for the Plan, and in December the Learning & Culture Scrutiny Committee had commended this, noting in particular the position in relation to fee standardisation; joint working with libraries; developing community learning including 'learn direct'; and the developing provision for settled ethnic groups.

The Learning & Skills Council had issued guidance for the Plan in February 2003, indicating at the same time what their priorities for funding would be and changing the delivery date from 31 March to June 2003. This had allowed time for fuller consultation with the Learning & Culture Scrutiny Committee, who had considered the draft Plan on 20 May and submitted their comments to the Executive on 27 May.

The Executive on 27 May had considered the Plan in the light of the Scrutiny Committee’s comments and had recommended the Council to approve it.

RESOLVED: (on a motion by Councillor Crabbe, seconded by Councillor Margaret Godden and carried nem con) to approve the draft Adult Learning Plan for submission to the Learning & Skills Council by the 30 June closing date, subject to incorporation of any matter required by further advice from consultees and/or the Learning & Skills Council.

52/03. REPORT OF THE EXECUTIVE

(Agenda Item 12)

The Council considered the report of the Executive (CC10) and Executive Members responded to questions in relation to the following items included in the report:-

Item	Questions from Councillors
2 – Highway Maintenance Programme 2003/04	Roy Mold MacKenzie
3 – Transport for Post-16 Students	MacKenzie
4 – Regional Transport Strategy	Roy Mold
6 – Children’s Disability Services	Standingford Hodgson
8 – Transport Capital Programme	Joslin
9 – Carterton, Witney and Oxford Transport Links	Hudson
10 – Road Safety and 30 mph Speed Limit Project	McIntosh-Stedman
11 – Special Management Strategy	Sandra Mold
13 – Financial Forecast 2004/05 – 2008/09	Hodgson
15 – Oxfordshire Community Network	Brighouse
16 – Job Evaluation	Evans Hudson Shouler
18 – Secondary Education in the Banbury Area	Harper Ferriman
19 – Special Educational Needs	Patrick
20 – Asylum Seekers Accommodation Centre	Segaran
26 – Vehicular Traffic on the Ridgeway	Hodgson
29 – Use of British Sign Language and the Standard Manual Alphabet in Schools	Hodgson

RESOLVED: (on a motion by Councillor Mitchell, seconded by Councillor Margaret Godden and carried nem con) In relation to item 30 (Debt Management Strategy), to approve the proposed Strategy (attached at Annex 1 to the Report of the Executive - CC12) for the control of the County Council’s borrowing.

53/03. QUESTIONS WITH NOTICE FROM MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL

1. QUESTION FROM COUNCILLOR BILL BRADSHAW TO COUNCILLOR DAVID ROBERTSON, EXECUTIVE MEMBER FOR TRANSPORT

Does the allowance the County Council makes to bus operators for annual inflation adequately take into account the cost rises in this sector and will the policy be modified to take account of these inflationary pressures?

ANSWER

I am sure members would agree that it would not be appropriate simply to give operators whatever inflation increase they themselves say that they need. County Council policy is therefore based on use of recognised national indices. We do not use the general inflation rate, but instead a basket of specialist indices more directly applicable to the bus indices. This basket was agreed with the bus industry, and last reviewed as part of the Best Value Review in 2000. It is made up of 45% Average Earnings Index Transport and Communications; 35% Index of Producer Prices (transport equipment); and 20% Retail Prices Index - Motoring Expenses (petrol and oil).

In recent years this has produced price increases well below the cost rises which operators have said they are experiencing. However, despite specifically asking other local authorities and those bus operators who have expressed concern at the current index, we have been unable to discover any alternative independent index which would better reflect local circumstances. I understand that the Confederation of Passenger Transport - the bus operators’ national association - is working on a national system of bus operator inflation indexing. I hope that Oxfordshire operators are ensuring that this work takes into account their circumstances. I intend, if and when the outcome of this work is published, to consider its applicability to Oxfordshire circumstances and to recommend that our system of inflation payments for subsidy contracts takes it into account if I feel that is appropriate.

2. QUESTION FROM COUNCILLOR BRIAN LAW TO COUNCILLOR MARGARET GODDEN, DEPUTY LEADER OF THE COUNCIL

Is the Deputy Leader of Council aware that in January - May 2003 usage of paper by the Duplicating Unit for Members’ reports, minutes etc. totalled approximately 290,000 sheets compared with approximately 435,000 sheets in the corresponding period of 2002, a decline in usage of one third? Would the Deputy Leader like to comment on this welcome trend?

ANSWER

I have been unable to confirm the figures that Councillor Law has produced. The Duplicating Unit say that paper usage has gone up slightly over the last year and that, in any case, they are unable to break it down by department. I shall try to clarify the true position.

3. QUESTION FROM COUNCILLOR NEVILLE F. HARRIS TO COUNCILLOR MARGARET GODDEN, DEPUTY LEADER OF THE COUNCIL

What is your opinion of the value of transmitting live, via the Internet, audio and visual webcasts (broadcasts) of County Council and Executive Meetings? Will you, in any event, take the necessary steps to arrange for an investigation into the cost and other practical challenges of making such webcasts?

ANSWER

Our web-site team has already carried out a feasibility study to investigate the cost, technical and other issues which would be involved in webcasting Council meetings. A proposal was put forward to the Chief Executive’s Modernisation Fund last year but was turned down on that occasion. The annual cost at that time was £42,000.

Should we wish to pursue this option again we might well include Executive meetings and possibly Scrutiny as well. It would need to have the support of members so there would have to be consultation beforehand.

It is clear that putting meetings on the web opens them up to a much wider audience and political groups might be a good forum for initial discussions as to whether we should reopen this proposal.

SUPPLEMENTARY QUESTION

First of all may I thank Councillor Godden for her answer and the encouraging sounds that she makes in it. I am quite keen on this sort of thing, but I am totally unaware that a website team carried out this feasibility study. I do not remember being told. If I was told or written to about it I have lost it in a sea of paper and that would be very unusual for me. So could I ask how Councillors were informed of this decision? Could I ask, if the decision was turned down, who turned it down and can I ask how I can be guided towards the appropriate report so that I can read it, with a view to having a discussion within our political group?

SUPPLEMENTARY ANSWER

As far as I am aware, no Councillors were consulted before the study was carried out but it was done within the department and a proposal came forward. The Modernisation Fund decisions are made by the Chief Executive with the advice of Leaders and to the best of my recollection it would have been a matter of money available and us deciding that this was something we did not want to pursue at the time. If enthusiasm is growing then we might think about it again. That is why I gave the answer in the terms I did. I think the first thing that needs to be decided is whether we the Councillors would wish our meetings to be broadcast on the web either this meeting or the Executive meetings or Scrutiny. They all could be and it is indeed a matter which people might like to discuss in their political groups. If we get a strong steer that in fact it is something we would like to do, we can then ask the IT department to have another look at the cost and we could bring it back and decide if we want to go ahead. If the general feeling is that we are not yet ready to be broadcast on the web then we need take it no further. As Councillors I think we have never visited it at all.

4. QUESTION FROM COUNCILLOR CHRISTINE WITCHER TO COUNCILLOR KEITH R. MITCHELL LEADER OF THE COUNCIL

The Executive’s Forward Plan is seen as a key public information document that acts in identifying the business of the Executive. At present, the Plan is seen as failing to explain clearly to the public and this Council how particular consultation processes that the Executive decides to undertake are to be carried out. Would the Leader agree that for the benefit of the public and this Council, the Forward Plan needs to be made more specific with its description on the format of these consultations?

ANSWER

I am not aware of the perception of failure to which Councillor Mrs Witcher refers and would be grateful for any evidence she can provide that this is a widespread view. I am, however, always willing to consider suggestions for improving the usefulness of the Forward Plan and would welcome such suggestions from Councillor Mrs Witcher or from other members of Council or the public.

5. QUESTION FROM COUNCILLOR BRIAN HODGSON TO COUNCILLOR ANNE PURSE, EXECUTIVE MEMBER FOR STRATEGIC PLANNING AND WASTE MANAGEMENT

Is Oxfordshire County Council giving active support to the "Don’t Choke Britain Partnership"? The Partnership, which is not anti-car, promotes the idea of reducing reliance on the single-occupancy car, by promoting alternative forms of transport, such as buses, trains, walking and cycling.

ANSWER

The Council are involved with a number of promotional events – Walk to School Week is one example. However, it is felt that the year long work that is done in the Travelwise and Integrated Transport Departments has a better chance to change the way people travel and so gives better use of resources. We are supporting the very same ideals that ‘Don’t Choke Britain’ does, but tailored to the specific needs of this county.

Schemes that are particularly successful in moving away from single occupancy car use are the Better Ways to School programmes and Travelplans. These, together with the work of the integrated transport officers, and indeed the new Water Eaton Park and Ride and the expanded Thornhill all give opportunities and the publicity to achieve modal shift.

SUPPLEMENTARY QUESTION

I would like to thank Councillor Purse for the answer. I referred earlier this afternoon, however, to the fact that so-called green cars are actually failing the environment test and that emissions could be as low as zero in future for bio-fuels produced by the most advanced techniques and hydrogen power. I would like to ask Councillor Purse if she is prepared to pursue the great environmentalist Michael Meacher’s suggestion to me on Saturday that the DTI could give research and development grants to develop for example hydrogen powered cars? This would be one way of ensuring that there were not so many asthma sufferers and others suffering from pollution.

SUPPLEMENTARY ANSWER

I could say I approve of them. I could say that if I ever meet a car manufacturer whose arm I could twist I will put a word in about them. I am really not sure how I can in my role do anything to further this, but if I do find an occasion when I can (this is a joke by the way and not a bribe) I hope I could have a ride in one rather than be given one. I would very much like a ride in one. If I ever find an opportunity I will certainly push for them.

6. QUESTION FROM COUNCILLOR BRIAN HODGSON TO COUNCILLOR KEITH R. MITCHELL, LEADER OF THE COUNCIL

1. following the formation of an administration in November 2001, this is now a member-led authority and it is important that members have ownership of the capital strategy and programme as much as the revenue strategy and budget;
2. the capital programme is significantly larger than it has been for a long time, primarily because of the significant increase in transport funding;
3. the Executive has stressed the importance of considering the capital and revenue budgets as a whole and of ensuring that both the revenue and capital budgets support the Council’s key priorities.

1. The Leader and Deputy Leader of the Council are both members of the Capital Programme and Asset Management Working Group. This is a planning and monitoring group with no executive powers. The Chairman of the Group is the Director for Resources. The group contains representatives from the Council’s Directorates and is responsible for formulating advice on the Capital Programme to the Executive.
2. The information provided to the Capital Programme and Asset Management Working Group will be provided to the Leader of the Opposition. Arrangements had been made with the previous Leader and Deputy Leader of the Opposition for regular briefings and these can be re-arranged for the new Leader and Deputy.
3. Monitoring reports on the Capital Programme are currently made quarterly while Revenue Budget monitoring is now reported to the Executive monthly. I wish to see the two brought together and have asked for a Capital Programme monitoring report to be provided on a monthly basis with effect from September 2003. As a report to the Executive, this information will automatically be circulated to all members of Council.
4. All members have the Budget and Oxfordshire Plan 2004-05 Binder. Whenever relevant capital programme information is available, briefings will be circulated for retention in the Binder.

7. QUESTION FROM COUNCILLOR BRIAN HODGSON TO COUNCILLOR MARGARET GODDEN, DEPUTY LEADER OF THE COUNCIL

Is the Executive planning to learn from Cambridgeshire County Council on "Social Inclusion through ICT" (Information Communication Technology)? Cambridgeshire County Council has just achieved Beacon Council status for its work in the ‘Social Inclusion through ICT’ category.

ANSWER

The Cambridgeshire scheme is a Broadband communication system that links schools, libraries, council offices and community access points. It has been developed with two District Councils and was helped by PFI credits from the DETR.

It is not clear whether the system reaches all of the most remote villages. There appears to be no attempts to provide individual access for businesses in rural areas which is a particular objective of the Oxfordshire Scheme.

I congratulate Cambridgeshire County Council on their success and hope that Oxfordshire will do even better.

SUPPLEMENTARY QUESTION

I have got, and I am pretty sure Councillor Margaret Godden has as well, a report from the Countryside Agency which refers to the fact that 95% of households in urban areas, this is nationally of course, are covered by broadband access. 26% have got broadband access in market towns, 7% in rural villages and 1% in remote rural areas. Rural businesses rely to a far greater extent on dial-up modems. Now I know that Councillor Godden referred briefly to this in a previous comment on the Executive report, but I just wondered how quickly she feels the Executive are able to address this relative lack of provision in areas of the kind that I represent, where I am constantly getting concerns that there is not full access to broadband?

SUPPLEMENTARY ANSWER

Well I can assure Councillor Hodgson that we are putting all the pressure that we can on officers to resolve this problem and they are responding to that. As I said earlier we are currently in talks with BT and it is that 1% access that we really want to address. We would like to see Oxfordshire entirely wired up. It sound as though Cambridgeshire is in fact a very long way from that, and if we were able to do it, it would be I think a real first in the country. So we should not under-estimate what we are trying to achieve. We have made it very clear that that is what we are aiming at and we are under great pressure from the public to achieve it. We are doing our very best.

8. QUESTION FROM COUNCILLOR BRIAN HODGSON TO COUNCILLOR TONY CRABBE, EXECUTIVE MEMBER FOR SCHOOLS

Is the Executive intending to restore the cut in this year’s budget for Health and Safety in Learning & Culture?

ANSWER

There is no plan for any expenditure under this heading this year. Should a special and urgent matter arise it would be considered on its merits.

SUPPLEMENTARY QUESTION

Yes, Chair I am sorry about the discourtesy of not warning Councillor Crabbe about this. I do not really understand the reply because I have got in front of me a document, which I think Councillor Crabbe is aware of, that was tabled at the Teachers Consultative Committee on behalf of the Teacher Unions saying that the Learning & Culture Health & Safety Advisory Committee regret the reduction in their Education Health & Safety Budget and believe that such a cut-back is short-sighted. They are concerned about not being consulted at any time during the budget reduction process. Obviously they are concerned also about the 2004/05 budget and are concerned to be consulted on a matter as important as Health & Safety. I would have hoped for a better reply, frankly, on this vital matter.

SUPPLEMENTARY ANSWER

There is nothing more I can really say. There is no expenditure under this heading this year and, as I said, if anything urgent did come up then we would obviously consider it. Obviously it is too early to say whether or not this would be included in next year’s budget. What it will depend on is whether or not we get a more reasonable settlement from Government. Already we have had a very high increase in the Council Tax level and this is one of those things, unfortunately, which had to be dropped because of those reasons.

9. QUESTION FROM COUNCILLOR ANDREW BROWN TO COUNCILLOR TONY CRABBE, EXECUTIVE MEMBER FOR SCHOOLS

54/03. MOTION FROM COUNCILLOR KEITH R. MITCHELL

(Agenda Item 14)

Councillor Mitchell moved and Councillor Robertson seconded the following motion standing in his name at Item 14 in the agenda:-

"Because of the emerging deficit budgets in many Oxfordshire schools and of the prospect of redundancy in schools due to government under-funding, this Council invites the Chief Executive of the Audit Commission to institute an examination of the processes and evidence base by which the government determined the level of funding for schools in the 2003/04 Local Government Settlement and to recommend what steps should be taken to deal with any perceived shortcomings in that process."

After debate the motion was put to the vote and was carried by 21 votes to 0, with 14 abstentions.

RESOLVED: accordingly.

55/03. MOTION FROM COUNCILLOR JEAN FOOKS

(Agenda Item 15)

Councillor Fooks moved and Councillor Roaf seconded the following motion standing in her name at Item 15 in the agenda:-

"Oxfordshire County Council views with concern the present lack of Government targets to meet stated objectives to reduce energy consumption and improve the energy efficiency of people's homes. It therefore welcomes the Sustainable Energy Bill currently entering the Committee stage in the House of Commons, which would not only set targets for improved domestic energy efficiency, for a reduction in carbon dioxide emissions and for 25% of our electricity to come from renewable sources by 2020, but also require an annual report of progress towards these targets.

The County Council resolves to ask all Oxfordshire MPs to support the Bill and especially the retention of the targets within it, as the best way to ensure a real improvement in the quality of life of both its present and its future citizens."

Councillor Hodgson moved and Councillor Hudson seconded the amendment of the motion by the deletion of the first sentence and the words "It therefore" at the beginning of the second sentence and their replacement by "Oxfordshire County Council". This amendment was acceptable to Councillor Fooks and with the leave of the Council and of her seconder she amended her motion accordingly.

The substantive motion as amended was put to the vote and was carried nem con.

RESOLVED: accordingly.

56/03. MOTION FROM COUNCILLOR BIDDY HUDSON

(Agenda Item 16)

Councillor Hudson moved and Councillor Brighouse seconded the following motion standing in her name at Item 16 in the agenda:-

"In view of our commitment to affordable and key worker housing, this Council advises the Executive that it should always consider local needs when disposing of surplus property, while bearing in mind the financial priorities of the Authority."

Councillor Margaret Godden then moved and Councillor Purse seconded the amendment of the motion by the deletion of the words "always consider" and their replacement by "continue the Council’s present practice of considering". On being put to the vote this amendment was carried by 18 votes to 17.

The substantive motion as amended was then put to the vote and was carried nem con.

RESOLVED: accordingly.

57/03. URGENT DECISION OF THE DEMOCRACY & ORGANISATION COMMITTEE: PERIODIC ELECTORAL REVIEW FOR THE COUNTY OF OXFORDSHIRE

in the Chair

Date of signing 2003

Return to TOP