ITEM EX3EXECUTIVE – 10 AND 13 DECEMBER 2002Minutes
of the Meeting commencing at 2.00 pm on 10 December and adjourned at 5.15 pm;
and resumed at 11.00 am on 13 December and finishing at 12.40 pm
|
|
Request from |
Agenda Item |
|
Mr Harold Brew |
Item 11. Private Finance Initiative – Schools and Item 20. GTE for Oxfordshire |
|
Mrs Cynthia Bartlett ) Mrs Carole Thomson ) Mr Steve Whatmore ) Mrs Chris Kyle ) Mrs Heidi Plowman ) Mr Peter Symonds ) |
Item 13. Woodeaton Manor and Iffley Mead Special Schools |
|
Mr Steve Whatmore |
Item 14. Special School Planned Places |
|
Mr Graham Jones ) Mr Alan Lester ) Mr John Moyle ) Mrs Corrine Grimley-Evans ) |
Item 18. Broad Street, Oxford – Experimental Parking |
(Agenda Item 5)
The Executive received an oral report from the Chief Fire Officer which set out the latest position regarding the current pay dispute.
He advised that representatives of the Fire Brigade Union and the national employers were meeting at ACAS on 10 and 11 December with a further meeting between the two sides (without ACAS) planned for Thursday 12 December 2002. The next strike (8 days) was planned for Monday 16 December 2002. Staff morale remained high. He added that during the last 8 day strike, only 13 false alarm calls had been received. The normal average would have been 13 per day. This was good news and he hoped that this improvement could be maintained.
RESOLVED: to note the report.
(Agenda Item 6)
The decisions of the Executive on 12 November in respect of the proposals for changes in the Children’s Disability Service had been called in for consideration by the Social & Health Care Scrutiny Committee. As the Scrutiny Committee on 6 December 2002 had accepted the decisions of the Executive, those decisions had now taken effect and no further consideration was therefore required.
432/02. EARLY EDUCATION AND CHILDCARE DEVELOPMENTS
(Agenda Item 7)
The Executive on 25 June 2002 had approved strategies for meeting the County Council's statutory duties for sufficiency of funded education places for 3 and 4 year olds and for the development of childcare to meet targets as set out in the Early Years Development and Childcare Plan. The Executive now considered a report (EX7) which updated members on recent developments.
RESOLVED: to:
(Agenda Item 8)
The Executive considered a report (EX8) which provided an overview on the work of the Oxfordshire Teenage Pregnancy Strategy and presented the outcomes of the last assessment which had been received in June 2002.
RESOLVED: to:
(Agenda Item 9)
The Executive considered a report (EX9) on the outcome of consultation on the proposals for the redevelopment of homes for older people that had been transferred to the Oxfordshire Care Partnership, together with the financial and other evaluations that officers had undertaken on the redevelopment proposals.
Councillor Shouler addressed the Executive with regard to the proposals for Bicester. He urged the Executive to consider carefully the suitability of any replacement site as part of the evaluation process.
Councillor Hodgson addressed the Executive. He stressed the importance of the homes at Chipping Norton, Milton-under-Wychwood and Woodstock to their respective communities.
Councillor Seale advised that the programme was founded on good partnership arrangements with OCP, but the County Council did not have total freedom of action over replacement sites. However the need was recognised for those sites to be suitable, convenient, accessible and financially sound.
RESOLVED: to
(Agenda Item 10)
The Executive considered a report (EX10) which examined a proposal to integrate health and social care in respect of Mental Health Services for adults of working age and proposed that the administration services currently provided by Oxfordshire County Council and Oxfordshire Mental Healthcare NHS Trust, to the Community Mental Health Teams be amalgamated.
RESOLVED: to :
(Agenda Item 11)
The Executive considered a report (EX11) which outlined investigations into the potential for a PFI bid to fund school developments together with a supplementary report setting out the views of the Learning & Culture Scrutiny Committee and a response by the Acting Chief Education Officer.
Mr Petty tabled schedules (a copy of which is appended to the signed minutes) giving updated estimates of the cost of implementing a PFI arrangement, in the light of a DfES "tool kit" just published.
Mr Brew urged caution against the wholesale adoption of PFI and highlighted particularly the risk of take-overs of partner companies by foreign companies and the possible resultant loss of assets. He did not support the provision of very large schools, particularly in Wantage/Grove where there was a local preference for competition and choice.
Councillor Hodgson, after raising a number of questions on the report, asked that consideration of this issue be deferred until the resumed meeting of the Executive on Friday 13 December, to give further time for study of the tabled financial information.
Councillor Evans, speaking as Chair of the Learning & Culture Scrutiny Committee, emphasised the Committee's concerns now reported, particularly regarding the lack of opportunity for members to address the philosophical aspects of PFI and their view as to the need for a coherent, realistic plan for such developments across the whole County.
Councillor Moley was not opposed to the principle of PFI but urged that the Executive abide by the intention expressed in February to consider all options for future secondary school provision in Wantage.
In response to points raised during the addresses, Mr Mill reported that the cost of mounting a PFI bid to the point of letting a contract was estimated at some £300,000; PFI contracts were normally with a consortium, backed by a financial institution and with substantial penalties for default; and the County Council would retain the freehold legal title to their properties. He stressed that PFI offered the opportunity to fund certain projects where government criteria were met, and that this could release other funding for desirable projects outside the scope of PFI. In response to Councillor Hodgson, Councillor Crabbe pointed out that the basic financial information had been offered to members of the Learning & Culture Scrutiny Committee. The Leader of the Council advised that if the Corporate Governance Scrutiny Committee wished to examine PFI then it was for them to decide to do so for themselves, and that if members wished to discuss the general principle of PFI then a motion in Council to facilitate this could be tabled by any interested member.
RESOLVED: to approve the submission of an expression of interest for schools’ PFI credits to the DfES by 3 January 2003, to include a new aided secondary school in Didcot (subject to formal consultation); remodelling/re-furbishing of St Birinus, Didcot Girls, Greenmere School, Banbury School and The Cooper School; and a new primary school in Banbury.
(Agenda Item 12)
The Executive considered a report (EX12) which sought approval of the Authority’s priorities for capital and revenue investment in school buildings for 2002-06.
RESOLVED: to approve the Statement of Priorities as set out in the annexes to the report, EX12, with the future inclusion of supporting the 14 – 19 agenda.
(Agenda Item 13)
The Executive considered a report (EX13) which addressed a fall in pupil numbers at these schools and looked at options for their future.
Councillor Crabbe moved as set out in the resolution below.
Mrs Bartlett, Chair of the Oxfordshire Secondary School Head Teachers Association, referred to the difficulty of staff recruitment and retention where there was a threat of closure. Head Teachers wished to enter into dialogue with the LEA of the issue of how special educational needs should be met: there was an increase in pupils with more complex needs that some mainstream schools would not be able to accommodate - which could result in a possible increase in exclusions. She referred to difficulties in getting pupils through the admissions process: there had been continuing communication difficulties with the LEA. She emphasised that the high financial cost of funding out of county placements if provision could not be made available more locally. The County Council should acknowledge a duty to meet the needs of all children in full.
Mrs Thomson, Chair of the Oxfordshire Governors Association, referred to scepticism among the public about the qualification process: she believed there had been inconsistent advice and manipulation of the criteria, and the cost of alternative forms of provision had not been properly assessed. A proper evaluation of inclusion policy was required with an assessment of levels of achievement of pupils. Greater clarity was needed for pupils, their families and staff.
Mr Whatmore, Chair of Governors, Woodeaton Manor, rejected the principle of closure. The paper did not acknowledge the particular needs of children for which Woodeaton Manor catered: the school was an MLD establishment by designation but took pupils with complex social, emotional and behavioural problems, for whom it provided and effective and creative environment which mainstream schools could not offer. Many pupils in mainstream schools needed care and education of the type provided at Woodeaton. He urged the Executive to abandon the proposals set out in the report.
Mrs Kyle, a Governor at Iffley Mead, also referred to the manipulation of figures by the LEA and the lack of clarity in the admission process. The present proposal had been published without consultation with the schools, governors and parents. The two schools offered very different learning environments each suited to certain children who could not be satisfactorily catered for in mainstream education, which had failed many children. She supported the proposal for a review of the inclusion process but stressed that it should provide an independent evaluation of the LEA’s work.
Mrs Plowman, a parent governor at Woodeaton Manor School, described the difficulty she had encountered in securing a place for her son at the school. He had been struggling in mainstream education and had suffered one permanent exclusion with another imminent. He had ultimately gained a place at Woodeaton Manor and was now beginning to adapt but she felt that 2 years had been wasted. As children from the same age group were still waiting to enter the School she questioned how could it be maintained that demand for places was falling.
Mr Symonds, whose daughter attended Iffley Mead School, described similar difficulties which he had encountered over a long period. Since gaining a place there had been a dramatic improvement in her well-being and behaviour. The school was an integral part of his daughter’s development and represented the best chance available to her. By keeping both schools open the County Council would be giving such children a future.
Councillor Witcher agreed with earlier speakers that Woodeaton Manor and Iffley Mead catered for different needs: she did not consider there was a case for either amalgamation or closure, which would compromise the needs of the children; the prospect of closure would have a great affect on the families and staff involved. She supported Councillor Crabbe's proposal for review, but not if it took place alongside preparations for closure of either school.
Councillor Purse was concerned that parents seemed to have been misled and their belief that figures may have been manipulated was worrying. She considered it paramount that these issues should be addressed prior to consultation. She could not support the motion as set out below and moved its amendment by deletion of (a) and (b). The amendment was put to the meeting and lost by 4 votes to 3 (Councillors Janet Godden, Purse and Seale voting in favour).
RESOLVED: by 5 votes (Councillors Crabbe, Farrow, Janet Godden, Robertson and Seale) to 1 (Councillor Purse) to ask the Acting Chief Education Officer to:
(Agenda Item 14)
The Executive considered a report (EX14) which set out proposals for planned places and pupil banding for the financial year 2003/04.
Mr Steve Whatmore addressed the Executive. He advised that if these proposals were agreed then the decision taken earlier in the meeting in respect of Woodeaton Manor would be prejudiced, as the resultant loss of income would mean that the school could not operate. He urged the Executive to retain the figures for Woodeaton as at April this year until the consultation had been carried out and a decision reached on the future of the school.
RESOLVED: (Councillors Crabbe and Robertson dissenting) to agree the planned places proposals set out in Annex 1 to the report subject to reinstating the residential and day figures for Woodeaton Manor to current levels.
(Agenda Item 15)
The Executive had before them an outline project appraisal EX15) for development of early years and childcare provision within the Botley area, including the relocation of Elms Road Nursery School.
RESOLVED: to approve the project appraisal.
(Agenda Item 16)
The Executive considered a report (EX16) which invited them to consider the drafting of the plan in the light of the Scrutiny Committee’s comments as set out in the addenda sheet.
RESOLVED: to authorise the Acting Chief Education Officer, in consultation with the Executive Members for Learning & Culture and Schools, to submit a draft Adult Learning Plan to the Learning & Culture Scrutiny Committee for comment, taking account of available guidance from the Learning & Skills Council.
The meeting thereupon adjourned and reconvened on 13 December 2002
Business conducted on 13 December
The Deputy Leader of the Council in the Chair
(Agenda Item 21)
The Executive considered a report (EX21) which presented an action plan to address the issues raised in the comprehensive performance assessment process. Mr Capaldi advised that the Audit Commission had announced an overall rating of "fair" for Oxfordshire.
Councillor Hodgson addressed the Executive. He felt the rating was disappointing, and referred in particular to the lack of priority given to crime prevention and the poor correlation of resources with need as identified through poverty maps.
The Deputy Leader felt that the County Council had moved on considerably since the assessment, which had been carried out in May, and she was confident that many improvements to the services provided by the County Council had been achieved since then.
RESOLVED: to:
443/02. REVIEW OF CHARGES
(Agenda Item 22)
The Executive considered a report (EX22) which set out proposed charges as part of the annual budget process in accordance with the Corporate Charging Policy agreed by the Executive.
RESOLVED: to note those charges prescribed by legislation and approve those charges where there was local discretion as set out in the schedules appended to the report EX22.
(Agenda Item 23)
The Executive considered a report (EX23) which outlined certain specific concerns which had been identified in the local government community about the possible effect of current GATS negotiations on local authority freedoms and powers.
Councillor Hodgson expressed concern that GATS could substantially weaken local authority’s ability to exercise democratic control over the services they provided, because of the trend towards outsourcing.
RESOLVED: to:
445/02. PUBLIC TRANSPORT INFORMATION STRATEGY
(Agenda Item 19)
The Executive considered a report (EX19) on the outcome of negotiations with bus operators on the implementation of the new obligations under the Transport Act 2000 in respect of the kind of local bus information to be provided and the methods by which that information should be provided
Councillor Harper expressed opposition both to the proposed County Guide and to the contributions proposed to offset operators’ costs in improving service information. He considered that all services should be retendered on the basis of the requirement to provide such information.
Councillor Robertson pointed out that the proposals sought to balance the needs of all users, both urban and rural. Mr Luck reported that retendering in such a manner would have severe resource implications; and on the basis of the abnormal operation of inflation in the bus services market it was unlikely that true costs comparisons could be achieved, whereas the overall costs to the Council were likely to be substantially increased as a result.
RESOLVED: to:
446/02. PILOT HOME ZONES
(Agenda Item 17)
The Executive considered a report (EX17) which summarised the results of the consultations carried out during September 2002 in the four potential pilot Home Zones previously identified as potentially benefiting from Home Zone treatment, discussed how the Pilot Home Zones would be progressed and outlined individual steps with timetable for implementation beginning in 2002/04 and running through to 2007/08.
Councillor Hodgson welcomed the proposals for Charlbury, which he said had strong local support.
The Deputy Leader of the Council expressed disappointment that consultation on the Pilot Home Zone for Stapleton Road would be delayed until 2004/5. The scheme had initially aroused considerable opposition from neighbouring streets but residents had now moved on to discuss quite positively the benefits which might come to the whole area from a properly worked out scheme and it would be a great pity to lose that momentum. She hoped that consultation could start no later than 2003/4 even though it might not be possible to implement the scheme until later. As changes were currently proposed to the junction of Lime Walk and Old Road, to facilitate buses using Churchill Drive it would also make sense for the Home Zone consultation to run alongside that work.
RESOLVED: to:
447/02. BROAD STREET, OXFORD - EXPERIMENTAL PARKING
(Agenda Item 18)
The Executive considered a report (EX18) which detailed the results of the public consultation on the existing half-hour free experimental parking in the central area of Broad Street.
Mr Lester urged the Executive to continue with the present arrangements.
Mr Moyle referred to a shoppers’ sample survey carried out on 8 December which indicated support for the retention of the central parking arrangements. He would prefer an increase in the maximum period of stay to one hour, but would not oppose the introduction of a charge for this.
Mr Jones suggested that removal of the current parking arrangements could result in a further drop in trade which would be enough to damage the area irrevocably. He also recommended that 6 spaces should be provided west of Turl Street to allow 15 minutes to access the Tourist Information Centre and for brief stops for visitors to College buildings. He suggested that this would also have the benefit of channelling cyclists' movements into Turl Street, with consequent safety benefits.
Mrs Grimley-Evans referred to the survey by the Oxford Civic Society, Oxford Consumers’ Group and Oxford Pedestrians Association, the results of which suggested that people considered Broad Street to be more important historically and aesthetically than had been suggested in the Director of Environmental Services’ report. There were concerns that the retention of parking could increasingly attract more drivers in search of parking spaces. She urged the Executive not to make the central parking area permanent but to limit parking to the kerbside. In any event she suggested that the provision of spaces for disabled people in the centre of the street was both hazardous and inconvenient for disabled drivers.
Councillor Margaret Godden referred to the tabled letter from Mr Carl Woodall, Director of Bursar of Balliol College, in favour of retaining the short term parking arrangements. She felt that the grounds for limiting parking to 30 minutes were understated in the report.
Councillor Robertson commended the proposals. He believed that the retention of the parking had caused fewer problems of drivers searching for spaces than had been anticipated, but had channelled cyclists’ movements and helped pedestrians. He agreed that the location of disabled persons’ spaces in the centre of the street was inappropriate.
RESOLVED: by 4 votes (Councillors Crabbe, Farrow, Robertson and Seale) to 1 (Councillor Margaret Godden), (Councillor Purse abstaining) to:
448/02. GTE FOR OXFORDSHIRE
(Agenda Item 20)
The Executive considered a report (EX20) which set out proposals for securing greater County Council involvement in the management and development of the GTE Project.
Mr Harold Brew addressed the Executive. Although he was committed to public transport he could not support the GTE project. He considered a far better investment would be to develop tram systems and heavy rail links, with 1st and 2nd class facilities on buses.
Councillor Robertson commended the proposals set out in the report.
RESOLVED: to:
449/02. FORWARD PLAN AND FUTURE BUSINESS
(Agenda Item 24)
The Executive considered schedules of proposed additions and amendments for the roll forward of the Forward Plan, together with a list of items for the next two meetings.
RESOLVED: to:
in the Chair
Date
of signing 2003
Return to TOP