Agenda, decisions and minutes

An apology was received from Councillor Nick Carter.

To approve the minutes of the meeting held on 15 December 2015 (CA3) and to receive information arising from them.

The Minutes of the meeting held on 15 December 2015 were approved and signed as a correct record.

Councillor John Tanner had given written notice of the following question to Councillor Lawrie Stratford:

‘How does the cabinet suggest I explain to the voters in my division that Oxfordshire County Council wants to increase the County’s share of their Council tax by 4% but that the public services delivered by the County Council will be much worse?’

Councillor Stratford replied:

The increase in council tax will contribute to the rising costs in adult social care including increase in demand and the impact of the introduction of the national living wage. If we were not able to increase council tax by as much, then the cuts to public services would have been much worse. We need to be able to ensure we continue to meet our obligations to provide services for the most vulnerable (by which we mean adults who need help with personal care such as washing and eating, and children at risk of abuse and neglect.) Balanced alongside that we also need to be very much aware of what residents can afford to pay. It should be remembered that Council Tax rises in recent years have been much lower than the four per cent proposed this year. Such matters always represent the striking of a balance and councils across England are currently seeking to strike that balance as they set their budget.

Supplementary: Responding to a further question Councillor Stratford commented that all Councils were in a tough place and agreed that there were particular challenges for County Councils. The County Council was doing its best to respond to the challenges and he was aware that it could have been much worse.

Councillor John Howson had given written notice of the following question to Councillor Melinda Tilley:

“Who is representing the County on the review of post-16 education taking place at the request of BiS and the DfE and what views will they be expressing about post-16 education and its relation to 14-18 studio schools and UTCs in the County?”

Councillor Tilley replied:

“The lead representative for the County Council is Roy Leach, School Organisation & Planning Manager and he is supported by Adrian Lockwood and Richard Byard representing the OxLEP and Skills Board. With respect to the relationship with studio schools and University Technical Colleges, this will depend upon what future needs and current gaps in provision are identified through the detailed data analysis that the review will undertake.”

Supplementary: Councillor Tilley responding to a question from Councillor Howson seeking assurance that the needs of children post 16 where the Council had corporate parenting responsibilities were being represented stated that the Council will be expressing its views very strongly.

The Chairman had agreed the following requests to speak:

Item 6 – Clare Ellis, Housing Related Support Service User who also submitted a petition in support of homeless support services

Audrey Irons

Charlie Payne

Mary Stiles

Josephine French

Mark Bhagwandin

Jill Huish

Jo Lovell

Reverend Andrew Bevan

Dr Ramzy

Councillor Charles Mathew, local councillor

Councillor David Williams, local councillor

Councillor Nick Hards, Shadow Cabinet Member for Finance

Councillor Liz Brighouse, Chairman of Performance Scrutiny Committee

Item 7 - Mr John Grantham, Chipping Norton Action Group

Item 8 – Councillor Laura Price

Item 9 – Councillor Steve Curran

Item 10 – Councillor Liz Brighouse

Item 11 – Councillor Nick Hards

Cabinet Member: Finance

Forward Plan Ref: 2015/084

Contact: Katy Jurczyszyn, Senior Financial Adviser (Capital & MTFP) Tel: (01865) 323975

Report by Chief Finance Officer (CA6).

This report is the final report to Cabinet in the series on the Service & Resource Planning process for 2016/17 to 2019/20, providing councillors with information on budget issues for 2016/17 and the medium term. It sets out the proposed 2016/17 Corporate Plan, budget, the draft 2016/17 – 2019/20 Medium Term Financial Plan (MTFP) and 2015/16 – 2019/20 Capital Programme.  Information outstanding at the time of the Cabinet meeting will be reported to Council when it considers the budget on 16 February 2016.

The Cabinet is RECOMMENDED to approve:

(1)        the Review of Charges as set out in Annex 1.

The Cabinet is RECOMMENDED to RECOMMEND Council to approve:

(a)        the Corporate Plan;

(b)        in respect of revenue:

(1)       a budget for 2016/17 and a medium term plan to 2019/20, based on the proposals set out in Section 4.2;

(2)          a council tax requirement (precept) for 2016/17;

(3)          a council tax for band D equivalent properties;

(4)          virement arrangements to operate within the approved budget;

(c)      in respect of treasury management:

(1)       the Treasury Management Strategy Statement and Annual Investment Strategy;

(2)          to continue to delegate the authority to withdraw or advance additional funds to/from external fund managers to the Treasury Management Strategy Team;

(3)          that any further changes required to the 2016/17 strategy be delegated to the Chief Finance Officer in consultation with the Leader of the Council and the Cabinet Member for Finance;

(4)          the Prudential Indicators as set out in Appendix A of Section 4.5;

(5)          Minimum Revenue Provision Methodology Statement as set out in Appendix B of Section 4.5;

(6)          the Specified Investment and Non Specified Investment instruments as set out in Appendix C and D of Section 4.5;

(7)          the Treasury Management Policy Statement as set out in Appendix E of Section 4.5;

(d)          approve a Capital Programme for 2015/16 to 2019/20  as set out in Section 4.9 including:

                  (1)          the new capital proposals as set out in Section 4.9.1 (Appendix 3);

                  (2)          the Highways Structural Maintenance Programme 2016/17 and 2017/18 as set out in Section 4.9.2;

(e)          to delegate authority to the Leader of the Council, following consultation with the Chief Finance Officer, to make appropriate changes to the proposed budget.

Cabinet had before them the final report in the series on the Service & Resource Planning process for 2016/17 to 2019/20, providing councillors with information on budget issues for 2016/17 and the medium term. It set out the proposed 2016/17 Corporate Plan, budget, the draft 2016/17 – 2019/20 Medium Term Financial Plan (MTFP) and 2015/16 – 2019/20 Capital Programme.  Information outstanding at the time of the Cabinet meeting will be reported to Council when it considers the budget on 16 February 2016.

Clare Ellis, spoke in support of homeless support services and illustrated their value by detailing her own experience as a service user.

Audrey Irons spoke in support of the homeless support services praising them for their person centred, individual support. She asked the Cabinet not to take a decision which would fail the rough sleepers in Oxfordshire.

Charlie Payne spoke against the budget proposals, particularly those relating to children’s centres. She called on the Cabinet to resign rather than to accept that there was no choice but to make the proposed savings.

Mary Stiles, spoke against the proposals affecting children’s centres and bus subsidies. She stated that the proposals were short sighted, would have a catastrophic effect and in the long run cost more.

Josephine French spoke in support of children’s centres referring to evidence that stress I children had an effect on their long term development. She supported a universal service that protected against those long term social implications and protected against the generational cycle within families.

Mark Bhagwandin, commended the focus of the new Corporate Plan but was concerned that the vulnerable required funds set aside, in particular for the protection of children’s centres. He commended the work of children’s centres in improving people’s confidence and social skills. He commented that closure would be a false economy as the services they provided would still be required.

Jill Huish spoke against the proposals for children’s centres referring to her personal experience of the difference they made to people’s lives. She supported the principle of universal services without which those in danger of domestic abuse would be invisible.

Jo Lovell spoke in support of children’s centres highlighting their positive role in her life and drawing attention to the distress of stakeholders/users when they realised the extent of the cuts.

Reverend Andrew Bevan drew attention to the long term consequences of the proposed savings on the most vulnerable; particularly children aged 0-5 years affected by the children’s centres proposals.

Dr Ramzy stressed three priorities for society: education, security and health. He spoke against the proposed savings that took from the less fortunate. He asked that the Council look at making greater use of reserves and also commented that he would be happy to pay additional council tax to preserve services.

Councillor Charles Mathew, local councillor highlighted the importance of income generation and urged Cabinet to look to increase commercial income from fees for services to those able to afford it. He also asked that further consideration be given to  ...  view the full minutes text for item 5/16

Cabinet Member: Adult Social Care

Forward Plan Ref: 2015/102

Contact: Kate Terroni, Deputy Director – Joint Commissioning Tel: (01865) 815792/Shaun Bennett – Strategic Commissioner 07917 211068

Report by Director of Adult Social Services (CA7).

Following public consultation between 5 October and 8 December 2015, this paper reports on the results of the consultation and recommends the way Intermediate Care services are provided in North Oxfordshire in the future. Intermediate Care is the support people need to avoid going into hospital or to help people get back home as quickly as possible.

The Cabinet is RECOMMENDED to agree to move to implementation of Model A: the Intermediate Care Unit in Chipping Norton continues and the full 14 bed service is provided by the Orders of St John Care Trust.

Following public consultation between 5 October and 8 December 2015, Cabinet considered a report that set out the results of that consultation and recommended the way Intermediate Care services are provided in North Oxfordshire in the future. Intermediate Care is the support people need to avoid going into hospital or to help people get back home as quickly as possible.

John Grantham, Chipping Norton Action Group, referred to the services provided at Chipping Norton and the history and context around the beds there. He called for Chipping Norton to be included in the Review and that no decision be taken in the meantime. He added that the recent consultation had been poorly advertised and that local people overwhelmingly wanted the NHS to continue.

Councillor Heathcoat in moving the recommendations referred to the detailed paper before Cabinet. She outlined the consultation that had taken place and stated that the service in its current form was not sustainable. Given the pressures being faced there had to be equality of service provision across the County. She noted that 70% of the usage was from across the County. She emphasised that, despite local concerns, there was good evidence of a good quality of care being provided by the Orders of St John Care Trust. She queried the accuracy of the Hospital Action Group report and suggested that it was partial and written to elicit a particular response

Councillor Hilary Hibbert Biles in speaking against the proposals stated that she wanted to keep 14 beds for the Chipping Norton area. She would have liked to have seen the Clinical Commissioning Group taking some responsibility and putting some funding forward. She defended the Hospital Action Group report.

RESOLVED: (by 7 votes for to 1 against) to agree to move to implementation of Model A: the Intermediate Care Unit in Chipping Norton continues and the full 14 bed service is provided by the Orders of St John Care Trust.

Councillor Hibbert Biles asked that she be recorded as having voted against the recommendation.

Cabinet Member: Adult Social Care

Forward Plan Ref: 2015/121

Contact: Benedict Leigh, Strategic Commissioner (Adults) Tel: (01865) 323548

Report by Director for Adult Social Care (CA8).

The current system of short term support social care in Oxfordshire has evolved piecemeal with services created in response to perceived problems and without a proper strategic consideration of the pathway as a whole. There are currently seven different services in place, and so it is difficult for professionals or members of the public to understand the most appropriate route that people should follow through them to meet their specific needs.

These short term services provide reablement, a key element of the council's aim to prevent further escalation of need for older adults and other vulnerable people; and crisis support at home, a safety net for people living in the community.

The pathway redesign proposed in the report brings together the functions of the seven current services into two new services: the Urgent Response and Telecare Service; and the Hospital Discharge and Reablement Service. If successfully delivered, this new pathway will provide the modelled demand for these services and the desired outcomes for people, at a reduced cost to the council by reducing duplication and by the services becoming more efficient and more effective.

The report describes the alternative methods available for purchasing the services and makes recommendations for the preferred options, after consideration of the risks and financial implications involved.

The Cabinet is RECOMMENDED to approve:

(a)          the service model and procurement approach for the Urgent Response and Telecare Service;

(b)          the Continuity of Provider approach to deliver a combined Hospital Discharge & Reablement Service (including community reablement);

(c)          the proposed gateways, including the option to change the approach to the procurement option if the provider fails to meet the gateway targets, delegating final approval of the gateways to the Director of Adult Social Services.

^{The Cabinet heard that the current system of short term support social care in Oxfordshire had evolved piecemeal with services created in response to perceived problems and without a proper strategic consideration of the pathway as a whole. There were currently seven different services in place, and so it was difficult for professionals or members of the public to understand the most appropriate route that people should follow through them to meet their specific needs.}

^{The pathway redesign proposed in the report brought together the functions of the seven current services into two new services: the Urgent Response and Telecare Service; and the Hospital Discharge and Reablement Service.}

^{The report described the alternative methods available for purchasing the services and made recommendations for the preferred options, after consideration of the risks and financial implications involved.}

^{Councillor Laura Price, Shadow Cabinet Member for Adult Social Care welcomed the removal of duplication of services. However she had some concerns about dealing with a new provider and noted that the report was short on details. She would want to see information about how the geographical provision would work; on whether the lower cost was just about the removal of duplication or about a different service; what was the length of contract for continuity; how will the telephone response service impact on carer support; on the programme of review to ensure that it was robust and measuring the impact of changes from the outset; and how it fit with the wider discussions on health evolution. Councillor Price asked that existing health and Wellbeing Centres be involved.}

^{Kate Terroni, Deputy Director for Joint Commissioning responded to the questions asked: there would be a single co-ordinated service provided on a locality basis to prevent zig-zagging across the County; the savings would be delivered through a reduction induplication, through reduced handovers and less travel; the length of the contract was to be discussed but it was not a short term exercise; there would be no impact on carer support; the Health Overview and Scrutiny Committee would have oversight; and subject to the budget decisions on 16 February if Health and Wellbeing Centres were available they would want to use them.}

^{Councillor Heathcoat moved the recommendations including a change to recommendation (c) to ensure that the final decision is taken in consultation with the Cabinet member and the Head of Paid Service.}

RESOLVED:                  to approve:

(a)           the service model and procurement approach for the Urgent Response and Telecare Service;

(b)           the Continuity of Provider approach to deliver a combined Hospital Discharge & Reablement Service (including community reablement); and

(c)           the proposed gateways, including the option to change the approach to the procurement option if the provider fails to meet the gateway targets, delegating final approval of the gateways to the Director of Adult Social Services in consultation with the Cabinet Member for Adult Social Care and the Head of Paid Service.

Cabinet Member: Environment

Forward Plan Ref: 2015/113

Contact: Peter Day, Minerals & Waste Team Leader Tel: (01865) 815544

Report by Director for Environment & Economy (CA9).

The County Council must prepare and maintain a Minerals and Waste Development Scheme, setting out the programme for production of the Minerals and Waste Plan. The original Oxfordshire Minerals and Waste Development Scheme came into effect in May 2005 and a number of revisions have been made since then, most recently in December 2014. The timetable for preparation of Part 1 of the Plan - the Core Strategy in the most recent revision is now out of date. In addition, a more specific timetable is needed for the preparation of Part 2 of the Plan - the Site Allocations Document. A further revision of the Development Scheme is therefore now required.

The Minerals and Waste Core Strategy was submitted in December 2016 for independent examination by a planning inspector. The revised programme shows that, subject to the Inspector's report, it is now expected the Core Strategy will be adopted by the Council in November 2016. The proposed programme for the Site Allocations Document shows work commencing in June 2016; consultation in September 2017; publication and submission for examination in 2018; and it being adopted by the Council in April 2019.

The Cabinet is RECOMMENDED to

(a)          approve the Oxfordshire Minerals and Waste Development Scheme (Seventh Revision) 2016 at Annex 1, subject to final detailed amendment and editing, to have effect from 4 February 2016;

(b)         authorise the Deputy Director Strategy & Infrastructure Planning to:

(1)     carry out any final detailed amendment and editing of the Oxfordshire Minerals and Waste Development Scheme that may be necessary, in consultation with the Cabinet Member for Environment;

(2)     take the necessary steps to bring the revised Scheme into effect from 4 February 2016 and publish the revised Scheme, in accordance with Sections 15 and 16 of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 (as amended).

The County Council must prepare and maintain a Minerals and Waste Development Scheme, setting out the programme for production of the Minerals and Waste Plan. The original Oxfordshire Minerals and Waste Development Scheme came into effect in May 2005 and a number of revisions had been made since then, most recently in December 2014. The timetable for preparation of Part 1 of the Plan - the Core Strategy in the most recent revision was now out of date. In addition, a more specific timetable was needed for the preparation of Part 2 of the Plan - the Site Allocations Document. A further revision of the Development Scheme was therefore now required. Cabinet had before them a draft Scheme.

Steve Curran, Shadow Cabinet Member for Environment referred to paragraph 8 of the report commenting that the supplementary planning documents on a Minerals and Waste Development Code of Practice and on Restoration and After-use of Minerals and Waste Sites were important and the Scheme should say more than it does. He noted that on page 419 it referred to approval already having been given and that this gave the wrong impression. The Chairman stressed that it was only a draft document. Councillor Curran commented that he would prefer to see any necessary additional decisions taken by the Cabinet Member as it is was important that decisions were seen as transparent. He made a number of detailed comments relating to delays, costs and funding requirements. He queried the use of consultants to facilitate stakeholder engagement.  In response Councillor Nimmo Smith  gave assurances that the decisions would be visible noting that the final report would come to full Council. He accepted that restoration was important but added that this was a procedural document. There would be opportunities for discussion throughout the process.

RESOLVED:           to

(a)            approve the Oxfordshire Minerals and Waste Development Scheme (Seventh Revision) 2016 at Annex 1, subject to final detailed amendment and editing, to have effect from 4 February 2016;

(b)            authorise the Deputy Director Strategy & Infrastructure Planning to:

(1)    carry out any final detailed amendment and editing of the Oxfordshire Minerals and Waste Development Scheme that may be necessary, in consultation with the Cabinet Member for Environment;

(2)    take the necessary steps to bring the revised Scheme into effect from 4 February 2016 and publish the revised Scheme, in accordance with Sections 15 and 16 of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 (as amended).

Cabinet Member: Deputy Leader

Forward Plan Ref: 2015/085

Contact: Maggie Scott, Chief Policy Officer Tel: (01865) 816081

Report by Chief Policy Officer(CA10).

This paper provides details of performance for quarter two for the Cabinet to consider. The report is required so that the Cabinet can monitor the performance of the Council in key service areas and be assured that progress is being made to improve areas where performance is below the expected level.

Cabinet is RECOMMENDED to note and discuss the performance reported in the dashboards and to make any comments necessary for escalation to Cabinet.

This paper provided details of performance for quarter two for the Cabinet to consider. The report is required so that the Cabinet can monitor the performance of the Council in key service areas and be assured that progress is being made to improve areas where performance is below the expected level.

Councillor Brighouse, Chairman of Performance Scrutiny Committee highlighted the financial performance and the difficulty in reducing budget line with decisions previously made. This was a threat to the County and its services. At the last Performance Scrutiny Committee they had focussed on Children’s Social Care and safeguarding.

Councillor Rodney Rose moved the amended recommendation as set out in the addenda.

Councillor Hudspeth, Leader of the Council, referred to a number of areas where there were challenges in terms of performance. There was increased need at a time of resource constraints. The impact of further cuts would need to be carefully considered.

Individual Cabinet Members commented on particular figures in their portfolios.

RESOLVED: following discussion to note the performance reported in the dashboards.

Cabinet Member: Environment

Forward Plan Ref: 2015/107

Contact: Richard Warren, Strategic Manager – Project Delivery Tel: (01865) 241577

Report by Director for Environment & Economy (CA11).

The Council’s Major Infrastructure Delivery Team is managing the delivery of a number of major highway improvement schemes.  Some of these schemes require additional land to enable delivery of the proposed improvements which will reduce congestion, improve movement, access and safety and encourage use of sustainable transport.

This report details various schemes which are at an early stage of development, but which are considered, subject to approvals, to require additional land. Any delay in acquisition of the land to progress the schemes could result in loss of opportunity to secure funding and meeting Government programme for residential and business growth.

The report requests the delegation by Cabinet to the Director of Environment and Economy in consultation with the Executive Cabinet member to exercise Compulsory Purchase powers for the purchase of land for these schemes, in the event that the land required cannot be purchased by negotiation.

Cabinet is RECOMMENDED to:

(a)            approve delegation of the exercising of Compulsory Purchase powers to the Director of Environment and Economy, in consultation with the Executive Cabinet Member for the purchase of land required for the delivery of the major infrastructure schemes outlined in paragraphs 7, 8 and 11 of this report, in the event that the land cannot be acquired by negotiation so as to keep to the programme of the schemes.

(b)            note that in so far as the whole or any part or parts of land required is not acquired by negotiation, the making of a Compulsory Purchase Order under provisions contained in Part XII of the Highways Act 1980 for the acquisition of the land, will be progressed.  This could include providing the necessary attendance, expert witness provision etc at a Public Inquiry if required.

The Council’s Major Infrastructure Delivery Team is managing the delivery of a number of major highway improvement schemes.  Some of these schemes require additional land to enable delivery of the proposed improvements which will reduce congestion, improve movement, access and safety and encourage use of sustainable transport.

Cabinet considered a report that detailed various schemes which are at an early stage of development, but which are considered, subject to approvals, to require additional land. The report requests the delegation by Cabinet to the Director of Environment and Economy in consultation with the Executive Cabinet member to exercise Compulsory Purchase powers for the purchase of land for these schemes, in the event that the land required cannot be purchased by negotiation.

Councillor Hards, speaking as a local councillor supported the recommendations.

RESOLVED:        to:

(a)            approve delegation of the exercising of Compulsory Purchase powers to the Director of Environment and Economy, in consultation with the Executive Cabinet Member for the purchase of land required for the delivery of the major infrastructure schemes outlined in paragraphs 7, 8 and 11 of this report, in the event that the land cannot be acquired by negotiation so as to keep to the programme of the schemes.

(b)            note that in so far as the whole or any part or parts of land required is not acquired by negotiation, the making of a Compulsory Purchase Order under provisions contained in Part XII of the Highways Act 1980 for the acquisition of the land, will be progressed.  This could include providing the necessary attendance, expert witness provision etc at a Public Inquiry if required.

Cabinet Member: All

Contact Officer: Sue Whitehead, Committee Services Manager (01865 810262)

The Cabinet Procedure Rules provide that the business of each meeting at the Cabinet is to include “updating of the Forward Plan and proposals for business to be conducted at the following meeting”.   Items from the Forward Plan for the immediately forthcoming meetings of the Cabinet appear in the Schedule at CA12. This includes any updated information relating to the business for those meetings that has already been identified for inclusion in the next Forward Plan update.

The Schedule is for noting, but Cabinet Members may also wish to take this opportunity to identify any further changes they would wish to be incorporated in the next Forward Plan update.

The Cabinet is RECOMMENDED to note the items currently identified for forthcoming meetings.

The Cabinet considered a list of items for the immediately forthcoming meetings of the Cabinet together with changes and additions set out in the schedule of addenda.

RESOLVED:to note the items currently identified for forthcoming meetings.