Agenda, decisions and minutes

There were no apologies for absence.

There were no declarations of interest.

To approve the minutes of the meeting held on 24 May 2022 (CA3) and to receive information arising from them.

The minutes of the meeting held on 24 May 2022 were approved as an accurate record and signed by the Chair.

See attached Annex.

Members of the public who wish to speak at this meeting can attend the meeting in person or ‘virtually’ through an online connection. 

To facilitate ‘hybrid’ meetings we are asking that requests to speak are submitted by no later than 9am four working days before the meeting i.e., 9am on Wednesday 15 June 2021.  Requests to speak should be sent to chris.reynolds@oxfordshire.gov.uk

If you are speaking ‘virtually’, you may submit a written statement of your presentation to ensure that if the technology fails, then your views can still be taken into account. A written copy of your statement can be provided no later than 9am 2 working days before the meeting. Written submissions should be no longer than 1 A4 sheet.

10. Report from the Oxfordshire Joint Health Overview & Scrutiny Committee

Cllr Jane Hanna

11. SEND top-up funding for schools

Carole Thomson

13. Local Transport and Connectivity Plan

Cllr Charlie Hicks

Graham Smith

John Center

Deborah Glass Woodin

Danny Yee

14. Vision Zero

Alison Hill

Peter Barnett

Danny Yee

Cllr Dan Levy

15. National Bus Strategy – Enhanced Partnership

Danny Yee

17. HIF1 Grant Determination Agreement

Greg O’Broin

Chris Hancock

Richard Harding

Cllr Robin Bennett

Cllr Charlie Hicks

Cllr Ian Middleton

Cabinet Members: Finance and Corporate Service

Forward Plan Ref: 2022/067

Contact: Louise Tustian, Head of Insight & Corporate Programmes, louise.tustian@oxfordshire.gov.uk; Kathy Wilcox, Head of Financial Strategy, 07788 302163

Report by Corporate Director Customers, Organisational Development & Resources (CA6).

The Cabinet is RECOMMENDED to:-

a.    To note the Annual Report for 2021/22.

b.    To note the summary of the provisional year - end financial position for 2021/22 along with the year-end position on general balances and earmarked reserves as set out in Annex B.

c.    To note the virements set out in Annex B-2.

d.    To agree that the surplus on the On-Street Parking Account at the end of the 2021/22 financial year that has not yet been applied to fund eligible expenditure in accordance with Section 55(4) of the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984, can be carried forward to the 2022/23 financial year as set out in Annex B-3c.

e.    To approve the transfer of £4.6m underspends to general balances as set out in paragraph 6.6.

f.     To approve the updated risk share arrangements for the pooled budgets for Live Well and Age Well services from 1 April 2022 to 31 March 2023 as set out in paragraph 8.1.

g.    To approve the use of directorate underspends to offset the £1.2m overspend on COVID-19 costs related to High Needs in Children’s Services as set out in paragraph 7.1.

Cabinet considered a report presenting the Council’s annual performance report and provisional year-end finance position for 2021/22.

Councillor Glynis Phillips, Cabinet Member for Corporate Services, introduced the report which acknowledged the challenges presented by the Covid pandemic and the excellent partnership working with the NHS and city and district councils.  The partnerships were continuing to work well in supporting refugees from Ukraine and host families.  The report showed the initial progress made in the first year of the administration’s strategic plan.

Councillor Calum Millar, Cabinet Member for Finance, referring to the Provisional Revenue Outturn, particularly noted the underspend of $4.6m and its transfer to general balances which he believed was a prudent approach in challenging times.

The Chair put the recommendations which were agreed.

RESOLVED:

a)              To note the Annual Report for 2021/22.

b)              To note the summary of the provisional year - end financial position for 2021/22 along with the year-end position on general balances and earmarked reserves as set out in Annex B.

c)              To note the virements set out in Annex B-2.

d)              To agree that the surplus on the On-Street Parking Account at the end of the 2021/22 financial year that has not yet been applied to fund eligible expenditure in accordance with Section 55(4) of the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984, can be carried forward to the 2022/23 financial year as set out in Annex B-3c.

e)              To approve the transfer of £4.6m underspends to general balances as set out in paragraph 6.6.

f)                To approve the updated risk share arrangements for the pooled budgets for Live Well and Age Well services from 1 April 2022 to 31 March 2023 as set out in paragraph 8.1.

g)              To approve the use of directorate underspends to offset the £1.2m overspend on COVID-19 costs related to High Needs in Children’s Services as set out in paragraph 7.1.

Cabinet Member: Finance

Forward Plan Ref: 2021/225

Contact: Kathy Wilcox, Head of Financial Strategy Tel: 07788 302163

Report by Director of Finance (CA7).

To note the performance against the capital programme for 2021/22 as set out in the report.

The Cabinet is RECOMMENDED to note the performance against the capital programme for 2021/22 as set out in the report.

Cabinet considered a report setting out the performance against the Capital Programme shown in the latest monitoring report for2021/22 and also comparing back to the capital programme agreed by Council in February 2021.  The figures shown reflected those to be included in the Council’s Statement of Accounts for 2021/22.

Councillor Calum Millar, Cabinet Member for Finance, drew attention to the table in paragraph 14 of the report which showed the underspend in the programme for 2021/22.  Some of this related to significant projects that were being re-profiled for the new financial year and did not represent a risk to the grant funding.

He took the opportunity to report that there were significant pressures across the programme as a result of construction and other inflation.  Officers have been asked to assess the programme as a whole, and particularly the projects that have fixed grant funding, and report back to Cabinet.

The Chair moved the recommendations which were agreed.

RESOLVED: to note the performance against the capital programme for 2021/22 as set out in the report.

Cabinet Member: Finance

Forward Plan Ref: 2022/027

Contact: Tim Chapple, Treasury Manager, 07917 262935

Report by Director of Finance (CA8).

To note the report and recommend Council to note the council’s treasury management activity in 2021/22.

Cabinet is RECOMMENDED to note the report, and to RECOMMEND Council to note the council’s treasury management activity in 2021/22.

Cabinet had before it the Treasury Management performance for the 2021/22 financial year measured against the original budget agreed by Council in February 2021.

Councillor Calum Millar, Cabinet Member for Finance, described it as a broadly positive story.  Despite interest rates in the period being slightly lower than anticipated, the Council held slightly higher balances and mildly exceeded expectation in terms of income generation within treasury management.  The charts in Annex 5 showed that the team performance had significantly exceeded the benchmarking index.  He thanked the team for their hard work in a volatile period and hoped that their success would continue.

The recommendations were moved by the Chair, seconded by Councillor Millar and agreed.

RESOLVED: to note the report, and to RECOMMEND Council to note the council’s treasury management activity in 2021/22.

Cabinet Member: Corporate Services

Forward Plan Ref: 2021/220

Contact: Karen Edwards, Director of Human Resources Tel: 07825 521526

Report by Director of Human Resources (CA9).

Quarterly staffing report providing details of key people numbers and analysis of main changes since the previous report.

Cabinet is RECOMMENDED to note the report.

Cabinet considered a report providing an update for Quarter 4 on key HR activities along with a refreshed workforce profile at Appendix 1.

Councillor Glynis Phillips, Cabinet Member for Corporate Services, drew attention to the main points:

·       The apprenticeship programme was going in the right direction with 163 new apprenticeships in 2021/22 compared to 93 the previous year.  This was helping the Council to ‘grow its own’ staff in a competitive marketplace.

·       Spending on agency staff remained a concern at over £8m in Q4.  There was an urgent need for the Environment & Place directorate to finalise its structure to recruit to permanent places and Children’s Services was managing to reduce its numbers of agency staff.

·       A lack of qualifications in English and Maths had been identified as a barrier resulting in an imbalance in having a higher proportion of females in lower grade positions in the Council.  To redress this, staff were being given the opportunity to achieve Level 2 qualifications – the equivalent of GCSE qualifications.

The recommendations were moved by Councillor Phillips, seconded by Councillor Hannaby and agreed.

RESOLVED: to note the report.

The Cabinet is RECOMMENDED to:-

Consider the letter endorsed by the Joint Health Overview and Scrutiny Committee on 09 June 2022 and propose its response. 

Cabinet was asked to consider a letter endorsed by the Joint Health Overview and Scrutiny Committee at its meeting on 9 June 2022 in relation to care homes and the national Covid enquiry.

Councillor Jane Hanna, Chair of the Oxfordshire Joint Health and Scrutiny Committee (OJHOSC), noted that the scrutiny committee had previously made a request for an Oxfordshire review of the discharges to care homes at the start of the Covid pandemic.  There was no doubt that hard working officers had followed the national guidance at the time but there was a need to understand the lessons learned.

The request had been accepted in the context of a national review taking place.  However, it was now clear that the national review was going to take a very long time.  There had also been a recent court judgment that concluded that the discharges had been illegal and an Oxfordshire resident had been one of the litigants.  The scrutiny committee wished therefore to renew its request for a local review which could at least get started on early work.

Councillor Hanna accepted that the executive might not be able to organise a cross-system review in the time it is required to respond to a scrutiny report but she hoped that Cabinet could give a positive response which would be considered at the following scrutiny committee meeting.

Following comments from Cabinet Members the following points were agreed:

·       Consultation will take place with the Leader, Cabinet Member and Corporate Director for Adult Services to consider the terms of reference, timeline and resources required for a review and if costs could be shared with system partners.

·       The review should align with the national review as far as possible in order for comparisons to be made.

Cabinet will respond formally to the next OJHOSC meeting.  The Chair thanked all those working across the health and care systems for their hard work on behalf of residents of the county during the pandemic.

Cabinet Member: Children, Education & Young People’s Services

Forward Plan Ref: 2022/064

Contact: Kate Bradley, Head of SEND, 07584 262422

Report by Corporate Director for Children’s Service (CA11).

To update on the SEND Review:right support, right place, right time and to agree the SEND top-up funding for Schools.

TheCabinetisRECOMMENDED to

a)                Agree to continue the currentenhancementinTop-Upfundingfor EarlyYearssettings, mainstreamPrimary,mainstreamSecondaryandSpecial School forecast at approximately £4.1M for academic year 2022-23.

b)                Agree an approach that timetables the 2023-24 Top-Up funding decision as part of the Councils annual budget setting process to allow schools more time for planning

Cabinet had before it a report on providing Top-Upfundingfor EarlyYearssettings, mainstreamPrimary,mainstreamSecondaryandSpecial Schools.

Carole Thomson, Chair of the Oxfordshire Schools’ Forum, stated that the consultation process on this item had fallen well short of what was required by the Department’s good practice guide.  The Forum’s meeting on 26 April was presented with a totally changed paper published just three working days before the meeting.  It was promised that information would be circulated to Headteachers but this did not happen.  If the Council was to implement its SEND Strategy it was essentially to adopt a policy of investing to save in our mainstream schools.  There was no increased funding for special schools who may no longer be able to employ sufficient staff.  The Schools’ Forum was fully supportive of recommendation b).

Councillor Liz Brighouse, Cabinet Member for Children, Education & Young People’s Services, stated that she had attended the Schools’ Forum and heard the concerns expressed at this paper.  However, this paper was just extending a policy already in place.  She agreed that there was a need to consult with schools on how to take it further than this and that the Council needed to consider, in making its budget for next year, how it could provide the funds to support the strategy.  This administration was committed to building our own special schools and children’s homes to avoid sending children out-of-county.

Kevin Gordon, Corporate Director for Children’s Services, added that significant reform was expected in this area as recognised in a recent Green Paper.  In the meantime, this temporary measure was needed.  He was pleased that, even with a deficit in the High Needs Block, it had been possible to invest in some additional top-ups.

Councillor Brighouse moved the recommendations, Councillor Phillips seconded and they were agreed.

RESOLVED: to

a)                Agree to continue the currentenhancementinTop-Upfundingfor EarlyYearssettings, mainstreamPrimary,mainstreamSecondaryandSpecial School forecast at approximately £4.1M for academic year 2022-23.

b)                Agree an approach that timetables the 2023-24 Top-Up funding decision as part of the Councils annual budget setting process to allow schools more time for planning

Cabinet Member: Public Health & Equality

Forward Plan Ref: 2022/065

Contact:Emily Schofield, Acting Head of Strategy, 07881 311707

Report by Corporate Director Customers, Organisational Development & Resources (CA12).

To agree the recommendations set out in the paper.

The Cabinet is RECOMMENDED to

a)                  Agree the commissioning of research to provide an evidence base to underpin prioritisation and delivery

b)                  Agree to update our Including Everyone framework to set out our commitment to transgender and non-binary residents

c)                  Agree the approach to providing gender inclusive bathrooms through the council’s Property Strategy

d)                  Agree the approach to providing consistent and inclusive language

e)                  Agree to the development of an LGBTIQA+ guidance document

f)                    Agree to an annual review of progress

Cabinet considered a paper setting out the key areas of focus and recommendations for the Cabinet response to the motion agreed at Council in April 2022 requesting action to support our transgender and non-binary residents.

Councillor Glynis Phillips, Cabinet Member for Corporate Services, summarised the report which included:

·       Proposed focused engagement with the LGBTIQA+ community on access to Council services and, through Healthwatch, to similarly engage on NHS services, leading to the development of a guidance document.

·       Updating the Including Everyone framework to ensure a clearer commitment to supporting our Transgender and non-binary residents.

·       Consideration of the implications of gender-inclusive bathrooms in the current review of property strategy.

·       A review in one year with an offer of discussion at the appropriate scrutiny committee.

Councillor Lygo proposed the recommendations which were seconded by Councillor Sudbury and agreed.

RESOLVED to:

a)                  Agree the commissioning of research to provide an evidence base to underpin prioritisation and delivery

b)                  Agree to update our Including Everyone framework to set out our commitment to transgender and non-binary residents

c)                  Agree the approach to providing gender inclusive bathrooms through the council’s Property Strategy

d)                  Agree the approach to providing consistent and inclusive language

e)                  Agree to the development of an LGBTIQA+ guidance document

f)                    Agree to an annual review of progress

Cabinet Member: Highway Management/Travel & Development Strategy

Forward Plan Ref: 2021/237

Contact: Joseph Kay, Strategic Transport Lead Tel: 07827 979234 / Melissa Goodacre, Infrastructure Team Leader Tel: 07825 314780

Report by Corporate Director Environment & Place (CA13).

To seek agreement of the LTCP document and supporting strategies for adoption by full Council in July 2022.

Cabinet are RECOMMENDED to

a)              Approve the content of the LTCP document, and the supporting strategies for adoption by the County Council on 12th July 2022, and

b)              Delegate the decision on the final LTCP document, including graphical format to the Corporate Director for Environment and Place in consultation with the Cabinet Member for Travel and Development Strategy.

Cabinet considered a report updating on the Local Transport and Connectivity Plan (LTCP), summarising the results of the LTCP consultation and outlining the key changes to the final LTCP.

Before discussing the report the meeting heard from the following speakers:

John Center stated that he believed Councillor Leffman was being hypocritical supporting traffic measures that did not affect her own town.  He criticised the Low Traffic Neighbourhoods for inconveniencing drivers, forcing them to take longer journeys.  He complained that the bus service where he lived in Littlemore was inadequate and that blue badge parking was not being enforced.  Complaints from him to the Council had gone unanswered.

Councillor Charlie Hicks, Deputy Chair of the Place Overview & Scrutiny Committee, summarised the report from the Transport Policy Development Working Group:

·       There was really good ambition on active travel plans but this was not matched by the necessary resources.

·       Car congestion was the major barrier to safer walking and cycling and to better bus services.  Solving this in the city would help rural services too.

·       There was a lack of ambition on rail.  Providing more stations should be considered.

·       A tougher stance was needed with the freight sector which was resisting change.

·       Modelling being used was not reliable and there was a lack of evidence base.

·       Land use and transportation needed to be considered together more closely.

·       There was a need to identify why previous local transport plans fell short on achievement.

·       The three main messages were: better data, stronger system leadership and understanding behaviour.

Graham Smith, urban designer, stated that ideals were not enough: they had to be linked through appropriate design ideas to the fabric of the built environment itself.  Without change in guidance and practice what will happen is that the old ways of doing things will continue to create formless places just like now.  The review of the previous LTP4 simply failed to identify key problems and blithely spent millions on poor, incoherent design and even missing out changes on major junctions.

Deborah Glass Woodin, Co-chair of the Coalition for Healthy Streets and Active Travel, noted that previous LTP plans had great words and that the problem was with implementation.  If they had been implemented the Council would not be spending £300m on new roads.  She welcomed co-production and urged working with local campaign groups.  On a personal level she was disappointed to see the commitment to ‘net-zero’ rather than ‘zero-carbon’.

Danny Yee, commended officers for their work and taking on feedback.  He recommended adopting the report but shared the concern that much of it will be ignored.  It had been policy for many years to promote walking and cycling but yet every new junction design had prioritised motor vehicles.  There was a need to provide clear guidance for designers, contractors and housing developers.

Councillor Duncan Enright, Cabinet Member for Travel & Development Strategy, thanked the speakers and noted the common view that implementation was key.  More detailed plans and area strategies will come with the next stage and the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 82/22

Cabinet Member: Highway Management

Forward Plan Ref: 2022/082

Contact: Paul Fermer, Asst Director Community Operations, 07825 273984 / Caroline Coyne, Assistant Project Manager, caroline.coyne@oxfordshire.gov.uk

Report by Corporate Director Environment & Place (CA14).

Approve the County Council Vision Zero commitment.

The Cabinet is RECOMMENDED to

(a)                    Approve the County Council Vision Zero commitment to: “Eliminate all fatalities and severe injuries on Oxfordshire’s roads and streets, to have a safer, healthier, and more equitable mobility for all.  Work closely with partners and stakeholders to take a whole system approach, working together on infrastructure, behaviour, technology and legislation to achieve this change” 

(b)                   To note the proposed ‘Vision Zero’ programme and governance arrangements being assembledas set out within this report.

(c)                    To note the drawdown of initial funding of £0.25m from the Budget Priorities Reserve to develop and start to progress the implementation of Vision Zero. Required for additional resources and delivery of key infrastructure changes at known areas of concern for road users.

Cabinet had before it a report providing an overview of the proposed approach and scope of Vision Zero for Oxfordshire to try and reach a target of zero for fatalities and life changing injuries from road traffic collisions by 2050.

Before considering the report, the Chair had agreed to requests from a number of speakers to address the meeting.

Alison Hill, Chair of Cyclox, welcomed the report and the funding allocated and added that active travel campaign groups were ready to help.  Some local authorities were allocating £20 per person per year towards active travel and Oxfordshire needed to be up there with them.  However, the decision approving £294m expenditure on new roads would make targets more difficult to achieve.  Her group was also disappointed at what she described as the abandonment of the Banbury Road and Woodstock Road schemes.

The Chair responded that those schemes had not been abandoned.  The administration will find a way to make them happen but it will not necessarily be with Growth Deal money.

Peter Barnett stated that this was a fundamentally different approach that would need strong leadership from councillors and senior officers to make it happen.  He was disappointed to see no evidence of outside collaboration in its development.  Open access to data was important as well as the development of an action plan to lay out how the strategy would be achieved.

Danny Yee urged councillors to use the collision and injuries mapping tool that was available to see the extent of the problem.  Many rural roads had a worse rate of accidents on a per trip basis and due to higher speeds, more fatalities and serious injuries.  A cross-system approach was needed with guidelines provided and political willingness to restrict motor traffic.

Councillor Dan Levy, the County’s Active Travel Champion, stated that most accidents involving fatalities and serious injury to pedestrians and cyclists occurred at junctions, which were primarily designed for motorists.  Cycling needed to be made more convenient and having to mix with lorries seriously discouraged cycling.  Many of the changes needed will result in slowing down traffic.  This might be unpopular in the short term but he asked Cabinet to approve this new policy to promote a healthier more active county.

Councillor Andrew Gant responded to a number of points made by the speakers:

·       He thanked the campaign groups for their valued input into all such policies of the Council.

·       With regard to the expenditure on roads versus active travel, central government dictated most of this in their decisions on allocation of funds.

·       The number of accidents was not a good measure of the safety of a road.  There may be fewer accidents because people are afraid to walk or cycle on the road.

·       Schemes needed to take into account their connectivity beyond their boundaries.

Other Cabinet Members reiterated the commitment to listen to expert advice and see the implementation of this policy through.

The recommendations were proposed by Councillor Gant, seconded by Councillor Enright and agreed.

RESOLVED  ...  view the full minutes text for item 83/22

Cabinet Member: Highway Management

Forward Plan Ref: 2021/214

Contact: John Disley, Infrastructure Strategy & Policy Manager, 07767006742

Report by Corporate Director Environment & Place (CA15).

To seek approval of the Enhanced Partnership.

Cabinet is RECOMMENDED to

a)              Approve the draft Oxfordshire Enhanced Partnership Document (attached as Annex 1) for submission to the Department for Transport.

b)              Consult on the draft Enhanced Partnership Document with all Oxfordshire Bus Operators, for the statutory 28 objection period.

Cabinet received a report setting out the proposals for the Oxfordshire Bus Enhanced Partnership (EP), reflecting the Council’s indicative Bus Service Improvement Plan (BSIP) funding allocation and the schemes / measures which this is proposed to fund.  It also asked for agreement to the draft EP, including the Governance arrangements for the Partnership.

Before considering the report, the Chair had approved a request to speak.

Danny Yee was disappointed that the proposals did not include integrated ticketing or a revival of the “Pick Me Up” service.  However, he urged Cabinet to adopt the plan.  He believed that giving the political leadership required to make difficult decisions was going to be more important than the technical details of proposals.  He noted that the potential 10-month implementation date would be difficult to meet and would require emergency planning.

An amendment was proposed by Councillor Tim Bearder, seconded by Councillor Sudbury and agreed as follows:

Annex A of Oxfordshire Enhanced Partnership Plan & Scheme:

On Agenda Page 667 in the row headed “Bus Lanes” it currently states under “Timescale”: “Existing facilities to be retained at least at current hours of operation”.

Append “ – bus lanes will only be removed if modelling can show that alternative bus priority measures would improve bus journey times and cycle and pedestrian safety.”

Councillor Andrew Gant, Cabinet Member for Highway Management, responded that, while the “Pick Me Up” service had not been economically viable, it was not far off and he hoped that improving conditions generally for bus services might enable it to be looked at again.

Councillor Gant congratulated officers on achieving the indicative offer which was better than many local authorities have achieved.  He drew particular attention to the £1 flat fare in the city for under-19s which would get them into the habit of using public transport.  He hoped that could be extended to the whole county in the future.

Other Cabinet Members commented as follows:

·       Mobility hubs were the key to improving services across the county.  These proposals demonstrated the Council’s commitment to improving bus services.

·       The flat fare rate should be available to young people across the county.

·       The current service was not inclusive and consideration should be given to reviving the ‘Pick Me Up’ service.

·       It was hoped that a wide interpretation of the term ‘user groups’ could be taken in consulting on proposals to include for example the Children in Care Council, Age UK and disability groups.

Councillor Gant responded that the report included extending under-16 fares to those under-19 outside the city.

Councillor Gant proposed the recommendations with the amendment to Annex A of the Partnership Document.  Councillor Millar seconded and they were agreed.

RESOLVED to:

(i)              Approve the draft Oxfordshire Enhanced Partnership Document (attached as Annex 1) for submission to the Department for Transport.

(ii)            Consult on the draft Enhanced Partnership Document with all Oxfordshire Bus Operators, for the statutory 28 objection period.

In the event that any Member or Officer wishes to discuss the information set out in Annex 1 to Agenda Item 17 or the Annexes to Agenda Item 18, the Cabinet will be invited to resolve to exclude the public for the consideration of the Annex by passing a resolution in relation in the following terms:

"that the public be excluded during the consideration of the Annexes since it is likely that if they were present during that discussion there would be a disclosure of "exempt" information as described in Part I of Schedule 12A to the Local Government Act, 1972 and specified below the item in the Agenda".

NOTE:

The reports do not contain exempt information and are available to the public.

THE EXEMPT ANNEXES TO THE ITEMS NAMED HAVE NOT BEEN MADE PUBLIC AND SHOULD BE REGARDED AS ‘CONFIDENTIAL’ BY MEMBERS AND OFFICERS ENTITLED TO RECEIVE THEM.

It was agreed that there was no need to go into private session.

Cabinet Member: Travel & Development Strategy

Forward Plan Ref: 2022/045

Contact: Hannah Battye, Head of Infrastructure Delivery, 07808 573 932

Report by Corporate Director Environment & Place (CA17).

The information in this case is exempt in that it falls within the following prescribed categories:

3. Information relating to the financial or business affairs of any particular person (including the authority holding that information)

and since it is considered that, in all the circumstances of the case, the public interest in maintaining the exemption outweighs the public interest in disclosing the information.

Annex 1 containing exempt information under the above paragraph is attached.

The Cabinet is RECOMMENDED to:

1.    Approve the amendments to the Grant Determination Agreement (GDA)

2.    Seek an additional letter of comfort from Homes England and Department of Levelling Up, Housing and Communities (DLUHC).

3.    Authorise the signing of the Grant Determination Agreement by the Director for Transport and Infrastructure, in consultation with the Director of Law & Governance, Director of Finance, Cabinet Member for Travel and Development Strategy and Cabinet Member for Finance.

Cabinet had before it a report outlining the renegotiated position and options considered as requested by the meeting of Cabinet in March.

Before considering the report the Chair agreed to hear the following speakers:

Richard Harding emphasised that reducing car traffic was an important part of all local and central government policies in order to reduce carbon emissions.  Studies had shown that by-pass schemes generally result in more traffic than predicted and ultimately fail to even reduce traffic in the town centres.  He believed that this plan would induce more traffic and result in demands to link to the M40.  He asked that the scheme be paused while the administration considered how to transition to a low carbon future.

Gregory O’Broin, Chair of Appleford Parish Council and the Neighbouring Parish Council Joint Committee, stated that all five Parish Councils in the Joint Committee strongly opposed this road.  HIF was a solution from an earlier decade.   It was not necessary to deliver housing and there were alternative infrastructures available.  The HIF scheme was not designed to promote sustainable modes of travel and it will not improve air quality or reduce CO2 emissions.  He asked Cabinet to pause and consider alternatives.

Chris Hancock stated that the current estimated cost of £294m for this road was the highest expenditure of 31 future HIF1 schemes in the UK and one of the most expensive per new home realized.  It could be anticipated that the three bridges could approach 1/3 of the total scheme cost whereas redesigned bridges to a reduced scale to support a dedicated busway with lightweight cycleway/footpath bridges alongside could be constructed at less cost and with much less risk.

Councillor Robin Bennett, Berinsfield & Garsington, recognised that this was a legacy project.  He supported the letter to Highways England making clear opposition to any kind of East-West expressway.  However, this project risked locking in car dependency.  It was not fully funded requiring borrowing by the Council which was already under all kinds of funding pressures.  He would not be minded to proceed as the government had not given sufficient assurance.

Councillor Charlie Hicks stated that there was a high risk of this project becoming a financial black hole.  Inflation at current rates was likely to add £30m to the costs.  Policies on transport were changing and new roads would shortly be consigned to the history books.  These houses were for future generations and each generation drives less.  There were alternatives in rail and active travel and providing more facilities locally and he asked Cabinet to explore those.

Councillor Ian Middleton suggested that Cabinet call the government’s bluff on this project and let them build the roads if that’s what they want.  It was a most controversial project and the Council will be held responsible.  It was at odds with everything the administration stood for.  The government was calling for more climate friendly development so there was an opportunity to pause this project and examine alternatives.

The Chair noted the letter from  ...  view the full minutes text for item 86/22

Cabinet Member: Travel & Development Strategy

Forward Plan Ref: 2022/080

Contact: Hannah Battye, Head of Infrastructure Delivery, 07808 573 932

Report by Corporate Director Environment & Place (CA18).

The information in this case is exempt in that it falls within the following prescribed categories:

3. Information relating to the financial or business affairs of any particular person (including the authority holding that information)

and since it is considered that, in all the circumstances of the case, the public interest in maintaining the exemption outweighs the public interest in disclosing the information.

Annexes containing exempt information under the above paragraph are attached.

To seek approval for GDA amendment / Deed of Variation.

The Cabinet is RECOMMENDED to

a)                  Note the draft terms of the proposed Deed of Variation

b)                  Authorise the Director of Transport & Infrastructure, in consultation with the Director of Law & Governance and Director of Finance, to finalise the terms of, and enter the Deed of Variation to the Grant Determination Agreement.

Cabinet considered changes to the HIF Grant Determination Agreement (GDA) agreed in principle, between Oxfordshire County Council and Homes England, which include:

(a)                Inclusion of the delivery of the Science Transit scope within the Infrastructure to be delivered under the GDA.

(b)                Update to the Milestones schedule and Delivery Plan to reflect an integrated programme for HIF2 and Science Transit.

(c)                Draw down of Homes England funds against costs incurred on the Science Transit programme.

Councillor Duncan Enright, Cabinet Member for Travel & Development Strategy, summarised the proposal which was to merge two pots of funding in order to achieve greater flexibility in the two schemes.

Councillor Tim Bearder responded that he did not particularly value either scheme however there was no commitment from the Council to put a large amount of money into this and both schemes had been developed a long way so he would not oppose this move.

The recommendations were proposed by Councillor Enright, seconded by Councillor Brighouse and agreed.

RESOLVED to:

a)              Note the draft terms of the proposed Deed of Variation

b)              Authorise the Director of Transport & Infrastructure, in consultation with the Director of Law & Governance and Director of Finance, to finalise the terms of, and enter the Deed of Variation to the Grant Determination Agreement.

Cabinet Member: All

Contact Officer: Colm Ó Caomhánaigh, Committee Officer Tel: 07393 001096

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 CA19.  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 (CA19) 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.