ITEM CMDT7 CABINET MEMBER FOR TRANSPORT – 15 FEBRUARY 2007INTERIM FUNDING ARRANGEMENTS FOR OXFORDSHIRERURAL TRANSPORT PARTNERSHIPReport by Head of TransportIntroduction1. This report invites the Cabinet Member for Transport to consider future funding for the Oxfordshire Rural Transport Partnership for an interim period from April 2007 to March 2008, arising from a hiatus in central government funding delivered through the South East England Development Agency. The measure proposed is expected to be a short-term expedient only, and it is expected that the present funding arrangements can be resumed from 2008. Oxfordshire Rural Transport Partnership 2. The Oxfordshire Rural Transport Partnership (ORTP) was formed from 1 October 2002 as the result of the consolidation of the former separate RTPs in various parts of Oxfordshire. The lead partner is Oxfordshire Rural Community Council. 3. Initially three districts of Oxfordshire formed their own RTPs (Cherwell, Vale and West Oxfordshire District Councils) in 1999. South Oxfordshire District Council joined with the Vale of White Horse RTP on 1 October 2000 and formed the Southern Oxfordshire RTP. 4. All rural districts in the county were thus covered by the RTP programme. The three partnerships were administered as one through a single Steering Group. This was particularly beneficial when dealing with countywide matters. From 1 October 2002 the Districts agreed that this should be formalised by consolidating the three partnerships into a single entity known as the Oxfordshire Rural Transport Partnership. 5. Oxfordshire County Council and all four rural districts have been in membership of the Steering Group since inception, together with other key agencies including Primary Care Trusts and representatives of community organisations concerned with access issues. 6. The aims of the ORTP are: (a) To promote social inclusion in rural Oxfordshire by ensuring, as far as possible, that everyone in rural Oxfordshire is able to access the following: (i) employment (ii) shops and commercial services (iii) leisure, cultural and social activities (iv) health and welfare services (v) education and training (vi) statutory service centres (vii) information and advice providers. (b) To achieve this as far as possible by promoting the accessibility and use of public or community transport services giving priority to the needs of individuals or groups who currently lack adequate transport. 7. The ORTP is administered by a Rural Transport Partnership Officer (RTPO), and derives its local funding from Oxfordshire County Council and from the four ‘rural’ district councils of Oxfordshire (i.e. excluding Oxford City Council). In 2005/06 the estimated costs of the RTPO on a full cost recovery basis were £43,516, covering salary, rent and rates and all on-costs. SEEDA advised that they would contribute £31,227 leaving the other funders to meet the balance in equal proportions. This was £2,458 each to Oxfordshire County Council, Cherwell District Council, South Oxfordshire District Council, Vale of White Horse District Council and West Oxfordshire District Council. Oxfordshire County Council’s contribution to the RTPO costs was met from the Delegated Fund. 8. In 2005/06 all other costs of the ORTP were directed towards specific transport-related projects. Each project was part-funded by SEEDA; and Oxfordshire County Council and the district councils each contributed to some of the projects, in varying proportions. 9. The total contribution of Oxfordshire County Council towards transport projects in 2005/06 amounted to £5,079 and represented 22.76% of total project expenditure by ORTP. 10. In this way, Oxfordshire County Council contributed towards the costs of: the Reaction Arts Festival, Bus 4 Us, FISH Sonning Common, the Lifeline Service and the Community Transport Directory. A full account of all ORTP projects and their associated funding streams appears in the ORTP Year 7 Annual Report (1 April 2005 to 31 March 2006). 11. Over the life of the ORTP the four district councils have contributed a similar sum to Oxfordshire County Council. The total expenditure by Oxfordshire County Council on projects has been £118,000 the total expenditure by the rural District Councils on projects has been £112,000 and the total expenditure on projects in Oxfordshire provided by outside funding, delivered through the OTRP has been £727,000. It is evident, therefore, that the ORTP has been able to act as a ‘multiplier’ of Oxfordshire County Council funding, drawing in central government resources to provide benefits to Oxfordshire residents. 12. The success of the ORTP should not be judged solely on the projects undertaken. Regard should be given to other achievements, some of which are outlined below. Generally these are as a direct result of the work of the ORTP and some are indirect or as a result of the involvement of the RTP Officer in discussions. 13. Wallingford – Abingdon – Witney bus service. The introduction of this service showed the influencing ability of the ORTP. Financial and other support was obtained from outside the ORTP and included Abingdon – Witney College, Culham European School, Milletts Farm Centre and “The Rose Revived” public house at Newbridge. In 2003 the RTPO worked closely with Oxfordshire County Council to formulate a bid to the Department for Transport under the Rural Bus Challenge scheme. This is seen as an example of where the ORTP can have a catalytic role to play outside of the relationship to the Countryside Agency/SEEDA. It is also a significant indicator of the extent of partnership working within the ORTP. 14. Octabus dial-a-ride. This service for disabled and mobility-impaired people in Oxford City, Vale of White Horse, and West Oxfordshire commenced in April 2005. The origins of this initiative were a direct result of an ORTP Steering Group meeting in 2003. From this initial meeting a joint service review was undertaken, other service funders were invited to participate, and a new partnership was formed. Again the forum of the ORTP was instrumental. The RTPO continues to contribute analysis and advice to the Octabus Partnership steering group. 15. Community Transport seminars. The ORTP launched a Best Practice Guide to Community Transport in Oxfordshire and followed this up by arranging a series of regular, generally bi-annual, seminars for voluntary car schemes and other community transport groups in the county, as a forum to share and exchange experiences and best practice and an opportunity for ORTP officers and other relevant personnel to acquaint such groups with up-to-date legislative and policy developments that may impinge on their work. These seminars continue to be well-regarded and effective by leaders of community transport schemes. 16. Local Strategic Partnerships. In conjunction with other staff at the Oxfordshire Rural Community Council, the ORTP officer has ensured that, as far as possible, Local Strategic Partnerships have reflected the problems and needs of rural communities in respect of transport issues. 17. The ORTP is an important element of the Local Transport Plan, as it seeks to deliver transport to meet the needs of people living in ‘deeper’ rural areas for whom conventional bus services may not exist, or may not be appropriate (because of accessibility of vehicles, for example). To facilitate their input to the development of the second LTP, the ORTP produced a Community Transport Strategy and a paper of points to be included in the LTP, emphasising the rural issues. These submissions were well received as they gave Oxfordshire County Council transport planning an independent insight into the problems faced in rural areas. Additionally, ORTP officer comments were fed into the development of the current Oxfordshire County Council Bus Strategy. 18. NHS Trusts. There had been little appreciation by NHS Trusts of the transport issues in rural areas when accessing healthcare. There are examples of new health centres being built with little or no public transport access. This creates pressures on the County Council’s public transport team to provide subsidised bus services to provide such links. By questioning the philosophy and approach of the NHS Trusts and its impact on missed appointments the ORTP is starting to see an improved understanding of the issues in some areas. Much work remains to be done, but a start has been made. 19. Concessionary fares. The ORTP organised a meeting of the five district councils to look at the operation of statutory and other fare concessions in Oxfordshire with particular emphasis on the treatment of community transport. The meeting was extended to look at the impact of free concessionary travel from April 2006. 20. During its life the ORTP has moved from being solely a source of funding to a position where it also has an influential role in considering future strategic actions and influencing partnership working on projects. It is felt that this needs to be maintained and increased. 21. The previous record of the ORTP’s strategic approach to transport and access issues clearly shows that a “transport led” approach has not been Oxfordshire’s way of approaching rural access to services. A variety of different transport-related solutions have been used to enable otherwise excluded people to access essential services or to make journeys by public transport to improve opportunities and reduce congestion. These latter solutions have been with increasing collaboration with Oxfordshire County Council’s Public Transport Team to ensure that there is a good possibility of long-term sustainability. The ORTP has not focussed primarily on designing and managing specific transport services and projects, which has been the case in a number of other counties. Changes to Central Government Funding 22. The Rural Transport Partnership funding scheme was formerly administered by the Countryside Agency on behalf of the Government and provided up to 75% matched funding towards the cost of ORTP work, including officer costs, to promote improved transport provision (usually community based) in rural areas. The programme was originally introduced as being for three years but was subsequently extended because of its success. 23. From 1 April 2005 the responsibility for the administration of the Rural Transport Partnership Programme in its final year was transferred from the Countryside Agency to the various Regional Development Agencies in the country. The ORTP came under the scope of the South East England Development Agency (SEEDA). 24. Initially, SEEDA indicated that, with the central government funding provided they would be able to continue ORTP funding with the same scope and focus as the former Countryside Agency programme for a further year to 31 March 2007, when they would start their new Rural Access to Services Programme (RASP) with funding through DEFRA. In the meantime there would be consultation and discussion about the detail of the RASP’s future focus. 25. Whilst it was expected that the direction and focus of the RASP might differ in detail from the former Countryside Agency programme, no suggestion was made of any break in continuity of funding. RASP Programme 26. As the RASP programme has been developed and consulted upon by SEEDA during the past year, the aim and themes have varied and at one point seemed to exclude transport. Continued pressure directly on SEEDA and on the Minister for the Third Sector by ORTP and ORCC have brought about the current framework, issued on 22 January 2007. 27. The main aim of the new SEEDA programme, as stated on 22 January 2007, is “to help rural people access services in new and innovative ways”. The themes have now been defined as “1) Better service provision locally for rural people (reducing the need to travel)” and “2) Improving access to essential services not available locally, for the most disadvantaged (improving people’s life chances)”. Funding ‘hiatus’ 28. In November 2006 SEEDA determined, without consultation, that the start date for RASP would be deferred from 1 April 2007 to 1 January 2008, and that no funding would be available through SEEDA to Rural Transport Partnerships, including ORTP, during the ‘hiatus’ period that would result. 29. The ORTP was therefore faced with the loss of 75% of its project funding, and with the loss of SEEDA support for the RTPO salary and on-costs, from 1 April 2007 until 1 January 2008. This threatened the ability of ORTP to position itself to bid for RASP funding during 2007. 30. The ORTP steering group met in November 2006 to consider four options for the future, in the light of this unexpected information from SEEDA. The four options considered were: (a) To dissolve the partnership (b) Seek to continue the partnership on its present basis (including RTP Officer and Community Transport Advisor posts), sourcing funding from existing and other (unknown) sources. It was assessed that £50,000 would be required, comprising £10,000 from each funding partner. (c) Operate the partnership without an officer or any project funds (d) Seek to convince SEEDA that Oxfordshire needs to improve access by the provision of transport. 31. The view of the funding partners was that options (b) and (d) should be attempted. There was felt to be no merit in attempting to continue the ORTP without an officer or project funds – it would become no more than a ‘talking-shop’. Proposal to Provide ‘Bridge’ Funding of ORTP32. It is felt that the ORTP has had a valuable role in delivering funding for transport-led projects in the county over and above that which could have been delivered by the County Council acting alone, or which could have been procured within the County Council’s available budgets. 33. There is every reason to believe that the ORTP could continue playing such a valuable role in future, particularly now that the focus of SEEDA’s RASP themes now appear to be settling in a direction compatible with the existing aims and objectives of the ORTP. 34. To enable this to happen it is proposed that £50,000 in ‘bridge’ funding is provided by the Oxfordshire funding partners of the ORTP, with each partner contributing £10,000. In Oxfordshire County Council’s case the proposal is that this money should be sourced from the existing annual Delegated Fund, established by the former Public Transport Sub-Committee in August 2001. 35. The other funders in Oxfordshire have indicated their support of the proposal to provide ‘bridge’ funding of the ORTP during the SEEDA funding ‘hiatus’, subject to Oxfordshire County Council agreeing as the lead authority on transport. South Oxfordshire District Council has confirmed its support for the proposal, whilst the lead officers of the other authorities have stated that they confidently expect support following Oxfordshire County Council’s agreement. 36. Oxfordshire Rural Community Council and the other ORTP funding partners, whose own funding policies will hinge on the County Council’s decision, hope it will be seen as essential to continue to maintain the ORTP through the ‘hiatus’ in central government funding. ORCC have asserted the view that they are not pressing the case for joint ‘bridge’ funding to maintain the ORTP officer post in 2007/08 in order to avoid having to lose an experienced member of staff, with all that entails. 37. ORTP are pressing the case because they are convinced that the work of the ORTP is a vital ingredient in the work across the county to improve access to services for as many rural residents as possible, especially those who “fall through the net” in terms of mainstream transport provision. It would be very much regretted if the valuable work and potential of the Partnership were to be lost, simply through the lack of a relatively small amount of funding for 2007/08. 38. ORTP have their eye on other funding sources, including SEEDA, for the period beyond the impending ‘hiatus’, but the ORTP (with its officer) needs to be fully functioning in 2007/08 in order to be in a position to make a solid case for this other support. There are also important and productive areas of ORTP work that need to be progressed during that period, so as not to lose the value of what has already been achieved. Oxfordshire County Council – Rural Transport Partnership Delegated Fund39. At its meeting on 30 August 2001, the former Public Transport Sub-Committee of Oxfordshire County Council agreed to establish a Delegated Fund of up to £10,000 per annum. 40. The formal resolution was worded so as to “authorise the Director of Environmental Services to approve up to £10,000 revenue support per annum for individual RTP initiative applications in Oxfordshire subject to the project being public transport orientated and to the project covering the entire county (or at least two RTP areas) or that the ‘local contribution’ came from a funding partnership between the County Council and the appropriate District Council”. 41. Advice received from Democratic Services has been to the effect that the resolution of the former Public Transport Committee to establish the Delegated Fund cannot be interpreted in such a way as to permit the interim funding of the RTPO in the way proposed. 42. The opportunity has therefore been brought before the Cabinet Member for Transport to make a fresh determination as to the use to which the Delegated Fund may be put, for a period of one year only, from 1 April 2007. Financial Implications 43. It is emphasised that no additional funding is required of Oxfordshire County Council as a result of this proposal. There is therefore no direct financial implication to Oxfordshire County Council, except that it will not be possible, additionally, to support rural transport projects for the proposal period. Implications for People Living in Poverty 44.
People living in poverty, particularly those in rural areas,
are more likely than the population as a whole to be dependent on public
transport, without the option of using private transport instead. Improvements
to transport in rural areas facilitated by the Oxfordshire Rural Transport
Partnership may thus more directly impact on such people. These extra
transport opportunities improve access to community facilities and therefore
contribute to improving the quality of life for some people living in
poverty. RECOMMENDATIONS 45.
The Cabinet Member for Transport is RECOMMENDED to agree
that the Delegated Fund of £10,000 (per annum) established by the former
Public Transport Sub-Committee in 2001 may be used, for the financial
year 2007/08 only, to provide a 20% contribution to the salary and costs
of the Rural Transport Partnership Officer, subject to the agreement of
all four of the ‘rural’ Oxfordshire district councils to contribute a
like sum for the same purpose. STEVE HOWELL Background papers: Nil Contact Officer: Neil Timberlake. Tel: Oxford 815585 February 2007
|