Agenda, decisions and minutes

To approve the minutes of the meetings held on 22 May and 4 June 2018 (CA3a and CA3b(to be circulated separately) respectively) and to receive information arising from them.

The Minutes of the meetings held on 22 May and 4 June 2018 were approved and signed as a correct record.

On a point of information Councillor Bartholomew referred to reference to Clause 5.5 in the preamble to minute 56/18. Subsequent discussion with Nick Graham following the meeting had clarified that the Clause was correct and would not be re-drafted. Nick Graham confirmed that reference to Chief Executive in that Clause was correct rather than employee as s113 agreements allowed the loaning of staff. He confirmed that if the arrangement was brought to an end the Chief Executive would revert to the originating authority.

Question received for the meeting on 22 May 2018.

At Cabinet the following question was submitted to the meeting on 22 May and in error was not processed. Cabinet that the question and response be included in the addenda for the next meeting

Councillor Howson had given notice of the following question to Councillor Hibbert Biles:

“In reply to a question posed at Cabinet on 17^th June 2014 about whether the then Cabinet member would make representations to the regional school commissioner and Ofsted as to the very high non-attendance at St. Gregory the Great School, the then cabinet member replied that the School Improvement officer had been sent into the school to try and establish the underlying cause of the high absence rate.  She had further requested that an analysis of poor attendance be undertaken on a class by class and year by year basis. This has been successful in improving attendance in the past.  Should this not improve attendance, she would then consider contacting Ofsted?

Can the current cabinet member offer any explanation as to why this school, now an academy, should have had the worst attendance figures for any school in Oxfordshire for the autumn term of 2017 despite being declared ‘inadequate’ by Ofsted during the previous school year and the actions following on from my earlier question?”

Councillor Hibbert-Biles replied:

“Trish Murphy is the allocated school liaison officer for the County Attendance team and started in her role in December 2017. She was allocated St Gregory the Great, by Jo Goodey, the new interim Education Inclusion Manager at a time which coincided with the Ofsted report.

Trish has been into the school on three occasions, the first being with Rachael Etheridge on the 27^th February 18 to meet with Elizabeth Lutzeier and Anita Whyte. This meeting was delayed for various reasons including other county representatives going into the school. Since then Trish has repeatedly tried to go into the school on a number of occasions, twice the school have cancelled the meeting prompting further delay.

Trish visited the school on the 9^th May shadowing the LCSS link worker identified for the school.Trish again visited on 23^rd May and met with Anita to go over the school attendance, there is showing some improvement with attendance and new systems are in place to track attendance and behaviour within the school. Fixed term exclusions are starting to come down which is having a positive impact on PA’s.

Weekly attendance reports are now being produced for the Head of Years to have a better oversight of the students, Trish reports that the school seem to be offering more support to students.

The County Attendance team continue to receive referrals from St Greg’s.There is some signs of improvement in attendance, the school were set an initial target of 91% by Rachael Etheridge, they are currently at 90.7% according to the data.

Clearly efforts have been impacted on by the struggle to get into  ...  view the full minutes text for item 58/18

The Chairman had agreed the following requests to speak:

Cabinet Member: Finance

Forward Plan Ref: 2018/001

Contact: Katy Jurczyszyn, Strategic Finance Manager (Finance, Strategy & Monitoring) Tel: 07584 909518

Report by Director of Finance (CA6).

The purpose of this report is to present and provide commentary on the provisional revenue and capital outturn position for 2017/18 prior to the formal closure of the accounts.

The Cabinet is RECOMMENDED to:

(a)         note the provisional revenue and capital outturn for 2017/18 along with the year-end position on general balances and earmarked reserves as set out in the report;

(b)         note the virements as set out in Annex 2a;

(c)         approve the transfer of over and under spends to general balances as set out in paragraph 12;

(d)         recommend Council to approve the use of £0.1m underspend on Transition fund for open access children’s services which will be transferred to the Budget Priorities Reserve until required as set out in paragraph 13; and

(e)         agree that the surplus on the On-Street Parking Account at the end of the 2017/18 financial year, so far as not applied to particular eligible purposes in accordance with Section 55(4) of the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984, be carried forward in the account to the 2018/19 financial year as set out in Annex 4.

Cabinet considered a report that presented and provided commentary on the provisional revenue and capital outturn position for 2017/18 prior to the formal closure of the accounts. Cabinet also had before them revised Annexes 1, 1a, 1b and 1c set out in the addenda to the meeting.

Councillor Phillips, Shadow Cabinet Member for Finance, highlighted the number of underspends and referred to recommendation (c) seeking approval to transfer of under and over spends to general balances. Although accepting the need for reserves to deal with unexpected events there was a current and urgent need for services. Councillor Phillips stated that decisions to move funds to general reserves be on a case by case basis with a far more nuanced approach being taken. Councillor Phillips asked that Cabinet reconsider recommendation (b) relating to the remaining transition fund and asked that the funding be used for open access. Councillor Bartholomew, Cabinet Member for Finance responding to the points raised stated that general balances were crucial to financial flexibility in delivering a balanced budget. He pointed to the result obtained of a 99.8% accuracy against the budget which was an outstanding result. The underspend on the transition fund was to go back to full Council for a decision.

Councillor Bartholomew introduced the contents of the report and thanked the Director of Finance, Katy Jurczyszyn, Emma Greenland and the Finance Team for all their work.

During discussion Cabinet commended a remarkable result particularly given that many of the County Council services were reactive and had to respond to increased demand. Support was expressed for the recommendation to put the underspend on the transition fund into l reserves so that it was available if needed later in the year. Councillor Gray, Cabinet Member for Local Communities explained that with recommendation (d)  the intention was to bring it back to Council with a view to ensuring that the money was available as required to ensure the sustainability of existing provision.

RESOLVED:             to:

(a)         note the provisional revenue and capital outturn for 2017/18 along with the year-end position on general balances and earmarked reserves as set out in the report;

(b)         note the virements as set out in Annex 2a;

(c)          approve the transfer of over and under spends to general balances as set out in paragraph 12;

(d)         recommend Council to approve the use of £0.1m underspend on Transition fund for open access children’s services which will be transferred to the Budget Priorities Reserve until required as set out in paragraph 13; and

(e)         agree that the surplus on the On-Street Parking Account at the end of the 2017/18 financial year, so far as not applied to particular eligible purposes in accordance with Section 55(4) of the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984, be carried forward in the account to the 2018/19 financial year as set out in Annex 4.

Cabinet Member: Public Health & Education

Forward Plan Ref: 2018/050

Contact: Neil Darlington, Admission & Transport Service Manager Tel: 07393 001242

Report by Director for Children’s Services (CA7).

The Council has proposed and consulted upon a number of changes to its home to school transport policies applying to Post 16 students and to those of statutory school age and these are outlined in the Cabinet report.

Oxfordshire County Council’s current Home to School Transport Policy is more generous than the law requires for Post 16 students who have an Education Health and Care Plan (EHCP) and for Post 16 mainstream students who attend Henley College. Unfortunately, given the continuing pressure on public finances, the Council now needs to critically consider whether it should continue to maintain spending on this non-statutory assistance for these groups of post-16 students. The main proposals include ending automatic free travel for most Post 16 SEND students attending their nearest suitable placement if that placement is over 3 miles away, ending Post 16 subsidised transport to Henley College, clearly specifying when free travel will be provided to alternative education providers and specifying charges for the “Spare Seat” Scheme (formerly known as the Concessionary Travel Scheme) for the years 2018/19 to 2022/23. In addition, as part of Oxfordshire County Council’s commitment to the Military Covenant we also consulted on whether to continue for a further year the current time limited free travel arrangements for those students who are resident at RAF Benson (the need for which is linked to the lack of sufficient places the nearest school, Wallingford School) the nearest school to RAF Benson.

The Cabinet is RECOMMENDED to agree the following proposals for SEND students:

(a)         assistance to all Post-16 students who would otherwise be unable to access education and to encouraging low income parents of Post 16 students to apply to their school or college for a 16–19 bursary to defray the costs of transport.

(b)         To agree to the setting of a specific cash limited budget for supporting access to after school clubs for those who have the most complex needs or are identified as being from vulnerable families who do not have access to transport. The eligibility criteria should be similar to those for supporting access to holiday activities for this group of children and young people who are aged 5 to 17.

The Cabinet is RECOMMENDED to agree the following proposals for all students:

(a)         To agree the ending of the current arrangements giving free travel to Post 16 students to Henley College and to implement this change from September 2018.

(b)         To agree that from September 2018 free travel should be provided for those students who have been placed at an alternative education provider if the places have been paid for by Oxfordshire County Council and the distance from home to the placement is over the statutory walking distance or the route is unsafe to walk even if accompanied, as necessary, by a responsible adult.

(c)         To confirm the increased  ...  view the full agenda text for item 61/18

The Council had proposed and consulted upon a number of changes to its home to school transport policies applying to Post 16 students and to those of statutory school age. Cabinet considered a report seeking approval of the changes and revised Home to School Transport and Travel Policy. Cabinet also had before them the comments and recommendations of the Education Scrutiny Committee, which had considered the Cabinet report at its meeting held on 18 June 2018.

Damian Haywood, a parent of a child with special educational needs (SEN) and Chair of the governing body at Mabel Prichard School spoke against the recommended changes relating to SEN students. Mr Haywood spoke of the importance of respite care for parents of vulnerable children and the impact that loss of transport to or from respite care would have on his and other families. If transport was curtailed it would affect his and others working lives. Families were really scared of the implications for their family circumstances. Mr Haywood also referred to the implications for the Education and Health Care Plan process, that was already under pressure and the changes would mean a need to review plans. Mr Haywood feared that the changes would restrict the life opportunities of young people and would lead to increased pressure on adult social care in future. Mr Haywood submitted a petition against the changes signed by 2,500 people, picking out the comment of one signatory that young people with SEN were entitled to live a full life despite their disabilities.

Phillip Middlewood, as a parent with two children with learning difficulties spoke against the changes relating to SEN students, Mr Middlewood explained the difficulties his family would face if transport to specialist out of school provision was removed. He indicated that as a family with a car they were unlikely to qualify for a spare seat under the policy and even if they did it was guaranteed only for one term at a time. Financially it was unlikely they would receive support if they did not get a seat on the bus and it was likely that either he or his wife would need to give up working.

David Mytton, speaking as a parent of a son with severe learning disabilities, spoke against the proposals as they affected SEN pupils. He outlined his son’s difficulties and stressed that the local college was not suitable and he was unable to travel alone to the suitable provision. He detailed the impact if transport was withdrawn and that although happy to pay a contribution he and others like him would not qualify for any help. His family was part of the special needs community and they stood together. Many families were intensely anxious about the proposals.

Keith Strangwood, in speaking against the recommendations supported earlier speakers in everything they said. He detailed the effect on families with children with SEN by reference to the circumstances of his daughter. She was in employment but if she lost transport for  ...  view the full minutes text for item 61/18

Cabinet Member: Public Health & Education

Forward Plan Ref: 2018/024

Contact: Debbie Rouget, Service Manager – Early Years Sufficiency & Access Service Tel: 07554 437472

Report by Director of Children’s Services (CA8).

The statutory universal free early years entitlement for 3 and 4 year old children is for 15 funded hours a week when offered term time only. The Council also currently offers a 25-hours a week, term time only, free childcare place for children of reception age, where they are not yet statutory school age and have not taken up a school place. This is funded through the government through the Early Years block of the Dedicated Schools Grant. The free place can be accessed at private, voluntary and independent providers (pvi) who are part of the Early Education Funding scheme and also in some maintained nursery provision. The Department for Education is ceasing to fund this provision at the end of March 2019. The report considers the implications for the Council and for families who may be eligible for the 25 hours funding. The policy for funding 25 hours childcare was a strand of the Single point of admissions policy approved by the Cabinet on 17 July 2007 and is therefore subject to Cabinet decision if any change is proposed. 

The Cabinet is RECOMMENDED to approve a change to the policy on Full Time admissions for Reception Aged 4 Year Olds to remove the 25-hour funding offer for children deferring or not taking up a school reception place, with effect from 1 April 2019

The statutory universal free early years entitlement for 3 and 4 year old children is for 15 funded hours a week when offered term time only. The Council also currently offers a 25-hours a week, term time only, free childcare place for children of reception age, where they are not yet statutory school age and have not taken up a school place. This is funded through the government through the Early Years block of the Dedicated Schools Grant. The free place can be accessed at private, voluntary and independent providers (pvi) who are part of the Early Education Funding scheme and also in some maintained nursery provision. The Department for Education is ceasing to fund this provision at the end of March 2019. Cabinet considered a report on the implications for the Council and for families who may be eligible for the 25 hours funding.

RESOLVED:             to approve a change to the policy on Full Time admissions for Reception Aged 4 Year Olds to remove the 25-hour funding offer for children deferring or not taking up a school reception place, with effect from 1 April 2019.

Cabinet Member: Environment

Forward Plan Ref: 2018/015

Contact: Peter Day, Minerals and Waste Policy Team Leader Tel: 07392 318899

Report by Director for Planning & Place (CA9).

Following adoption of the Minerals and Waste Local Plan: Core Strategy, the County Council must now prepare Part 2 of the Plan, the Minerals and Waste Local Plan: Site Allocations. The programme for preparing the Sites Plan in the Council's Minerals and Waste Development Scheme, December 2017 sets a target date of November 2020 for adoption. The first key stage is public consultation on site options (issues and options consultation), which is timetabled for June – July 2018.

In January 2018, the Proposed Site Assessment Methodology and the Draft Sustainability Appraisal Scoping Report were published for informal consultation. These documents will be revised in the light of consultation responses and will be published alongside the issues and options consultation to provide a further opportunity for public comment.

The Core Strategy identifies the additional requirements for mineral working over the plan period that the Sites Plan needs to make provision for through site allocations. In particular there is a requirement to provide for an additional 6 million tonnes of sharp sand and gravel. There are also requirements for allocations in the Sites Plan to provide additional capacity for recycled and secondary aggregate production and for certain types of waste management, particularly recycling. The Proposed Site Assessment Methodology included a renewed ‘call’ for site nominations, for both minerals and waste. The sites that have been nominated are listed in annexes to the report.

At this stage in the plan preparation process, no decisions are made as to the sites that should or should not be included in the plan or on any other policy matters. The issues and options consultation is about inviting views on what the plan should cover and what issues it should address, and establishing the site options and seeking information that will help in assessing those options. Apart from an initial high-level screening of mineral site nominations, the nominated sites have not yet been assessed. Assessment will be carried out after consultation on these sites has been undertaken as part of the issues and options consultation.

The report puts forward possible consultation questions about the nominated sites. The issues and options consultation also provides an opportunity to seek views on other issues relating to the allocation of sites. Possible issues and related questions for inclusion in the consultation are put forward in an annex to the report.

The Mineral and Waste Cabinet Advisory Group has considered the nominated sites and discussed possible issues and questions to be included in the issues and options consultation. The views of CAG members have informed the report.

Preparation of the issues and options consultation document is taking slightly longer than envisaged and it is now proposed that it be published in July 2018, with the consultation period running to September. This should not affect the timetable for subsequent stages of preparation of the Sites  ...  view the full agenda text for item 63/18

Following adoption of the Minerals and Waste Local Plan: Core Strategy, the County Council must now prepare Part 2 of the Plan, the Minerals and Waste Local Plan: Site Allocations. The programme for preparing the Sites Plan in the Council's Minerals and Waste Development Scheme, December 2017 sets a target date of November 2020 for adoption. The first key stage is public consultation on site options (issues and options consultation), which is timetabled for June – July 2018.

The issues and options consultation is about inviting views on what the plan should cover and what issues it should address, and establishing the site options and seeking information that will help in assessing those options. Cabinet considered a report that put forward possible consultation questions about the nominated sites.  The views of the Mineral and Waste Cabinet Advisory Group have informed the report.

Councillor John Sanders, Shadow Cabinet Member for Environment, in endorsing the recommendations queried whether there would be further stakeholder consultation under the duty to co-operate. He highlighted the apparent contradiction in paragraphs 7 and 20 about the availability of sites and welcomed that there were no changes to the deadlines. Councillor Sanders highlighted Question 5 in Annex 5 which raised concerns he had always had about site extensions. Councillor Sanders commended the work undertaken by Peter Day, both his diligence and his accuracy and attention to detail.

Peter Day responded to the technical points raised by Councillor Sanders and highlighted that paragraphs 7 and 20 referred to different things. Responding to a question from Councillor Constance, Peter Day highlighted the difference between a site taking a longer period to work for a number of reasons and requests for site extensions where fresh land was added. He confirmed that both required planning applications and consultation. Peter Day corrected an error in the report: paragraph 22 should be consistent with the recommendation. He also clarified on paragraph 33 that the consultation period was to the end of September 2018.

During discussion Cabinet stressed the importance of the restoration process for local communities.

RESOLVED:             to authorise the Director for Planning & Place, in consultation withthe Cabinet Member for Environment, to approve the Oxfordshire Minerals and Waste Site Allocations Plan Issues and Options Consultation Document for publication for public consultation, the document to include the site options listed in annexes 3 and 4 and the consultation questions at paragraphs 25 – 28 and annex 5 of this report, following consultation with the Minerals and Waste Cabinet Advisory Group.

Cabinet Member: Deputy Leader

Forward Plan Ref: 2018/079

Contact: Ben Threadgold, Policy and Performance Service Manager Tel: 07867 467838/Samantha Shepherd, Senior Policy Officer Tel: 07789 088173

Report by Chief Executive (CA10).

The Corporate Plan sets out the County Council’s overarching strategy for the period 2018-2021. It states our updated vision for ‘thriving communities’ in Oxfordshire and describes the council’s main priorities and the specific actions that will be taken in the period to March 2019.

This document builds on a short, public-facing document (the 'prospectus') which was published in October 2017 and summarised the council's vision and priorities. The Corporate Plan 2018-2021 expands on the messages in the prospectus, drawing together our vision, values and the key areas of focus for the coming year.

The intended audience for the Plan is Councillors, staff, partners, inspectors and residents with a specific interest.

Cabinet is RECOMMENDED to:

(a)          note the Draft Corporate Plan 2018- 2021;

(b)          RECOMMEND that the Draft Corporate Plan be agreed by Council;

(c)          Delegate authority for final additions and changes to be agreed by the Leader and the Chief Executive on behalf of Cabinet.

The Corporate Plan sets out the County Council’s overarching strategy for the period 2018-2021. It states the Council’s updated vision for ‘thriving communities’ in Oxfordshire and describes the Council’s main priorities and the specific actions that will be taken in the period to March 2019.

The Corporate Plan 2018-2021 expands on the messages in the prospectus, published in October 2017drawing together the vision, values and the key areas of focus for the coming year.

Councillor Laura Price Deputy Leader of the Opposition, referred to the previous discussion on home to school transport for children with special educational needs and stated that this raised real concerns for her over what had previously been a largely positive response to the Corporate Plan. She was pleased the Plan was shorter, more balanced in its content and a better document from working together. She welcomed the realistic approach to the scale of the challenges the Council faced. She had been keen to see the need for democratic input from residents and officers had listened to the challenge. However, she hoped that it would inform the Council’s approach. She felt that given the decision making today some of that would ring hollow with residents. There was a challenge back to councillors to be familiar with the document and to take it into every meeting and see it applied to decisions being taken. She suggested that the Working Group have the final say on any final additions or changes. A Cabinet Member responded that following a robust discussion on home to school transport there had been a clear split. The decision had been taken very seriously.

Councillor Brighouse, Chairman of Performance Scrutiny Committee, referred to the history of the document that had failed to gain approval at a previous Council meeting. The current document was excellent and the content would be discussed by Performance Scrutiny Committee before consideration by full Council in July. She looked forward to that discussion and thought that the time taken had made for a much better document.

Councillor Judith Heathcoat, Deputy Leader of the Council, commented that a cross part working group had been involved both before Council in February and since. They had responded to the views expressed for a shorter, more focussed document that included achieving future plans and priority outcomes. Councillor Heathcoat outlined the Corporate Plan document and Annex B that would be used to monitor and manage performance. She stressed that the document was very much a living document and she would be working with officers to find innovative ways to raise awareness of it. In response to the point raised by Councillor Price that final changes should lie with the Working Group, Councillor Heathcoat stated that the changes referred to were only about editing changes to correct typos and not about changes to the structure of the document.

RESOLVED:             to:

(a)          note the Draft Corporate Plan 2018- 2021;

(b)          RECOMMEND that the Draft Corporate Plan be agreed by Council;

(c)          Delegate authority for final additions  ...  view the full minutes text for item 64/18

Cabinet Member: Leader

Forward Plan Ref: 2018/002

Contact: Sue Whitehead, Principal Committee Officer Tel: 07393 001213

Report by Director for Law & Governance (CA11).

To consider member appointments to a variety of bodies which in different ways support the discharge of the Council’s Executive functions.

The Cabinet is RECOMMENDED to:

(a)        agree appointments to the bodies set out in the Annex to this report;

(b)        agree that following a review of appointments a further report is submitted to the October meeting of Cabinet

Cabinet considered a report on member appointments to a variety of bodies which in different ways support the discharge of the Council’s Executive functions.

RESOLVED:            to:

(a)        agree appointments to the bodies set out in the revised Annex included in the addenda; and

(b)        agree that following a review of appointments a further report is submitted to the October meeting of Cabinet.

Cabinet Member: All

Contact Officer: Sue Whitehead, Committee Services Manager Tel: 07393 001213

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 CA.  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.