Agenda, decisions and minutes

To approve the minutes of the meeting held on 9 July 2024 (CC1) and to receive information arising from them.

The minutes of the meeting held on 9 July 2024 were approved.

Apologies were received from Councillors Bearder, Corkin, Hannaby, Haywood, Mallon, van Mierlo, Miller and Reynolds.

Council on 16 April 2024 agreed a dispensation for Councillor Constance.

Councillor Rouane declared that he was a director of OxLEP and was a member of the board of the Future Oxfordshire Partnership, both of which were referenced in the papers for the meeting and he stated were non-pecuniary interests.

Councillors Graham, Leffman and Thomas also declared that they were members of the board of the Future Oxfordshire Partnership.

Council congratulated Oxfordshire students who have recently received their results for A levels, GCSEs and other specialist qualifications.  The Chair also thanked all the teachers, schools and settings who have made it possible for students to achieve their goals.

Council was also notified of the passing in August of former Councillor Teresa Smith.  She was first elected as the Labour Member for the then Oxford South Division in 1985 with a majority of 679 votes, returned again in 1989, and stood down ahead of the 1993 elections.

Councillors Brighouse and Howson paid tribute to former Councillor Smith’s work on the Council and in particular on the issues facing disadvantaged children.  Members stood for a minute’s silence in memory.

The Chair thanked those who had attended the Chair’s Charity Afternoon Tea at the Earth Trust, Long Wittenham, which raised £1,100 for Parkinsons UK, My Vision Oxfordshire and Earth Trust charities.

The Chair asked Members to take note of the following events:

Monday 16^th December 2024 Carol Service with the Bishop of Dorchester, 6.30pm at St Michael’s Church Abingdon

Friday 10^th January 2025 Chair’s charity civic dinner, 7pm in Oxford.

Events attended by the Chair of Council since the July Council meeting were listed in the Schedule of Business.

To make any changes to the membership of scrutiny and other committees on the nomination of political groups and to note any changes to the Cabinet made by the Leader of the Council.

Council approved the following change to the membership of the Audit & Governance Committee:  Councillor Hicks to replace Councillor Baines

Council noted changes to committee membership given effect by the Monitoring Officer on 21 August 2024 under the delegated authority set out in the Constitution under Part 7.2, section 6.4 (l) using the functions under Section 16(1) and Section 16(2) of the Local Government and Housing Act 1989 to give effect to the wishes of the political groups as regards membership of scrutiny committees and committees of the Council:

Pension Fund Committee - Councillor Stevens to fill the vacancy

Audit & Governance Committee - Councillor Johnston replaced Councillor Hanna.

Members of the public who wish to speak on an item on the agenda at this meeting, or present a petition, can attend the meeting in person or ‘virtually’ through an online connection. Requests must be submitted no later than 9am one working day before the meeting i.e., 9am on Monday 9 September 2024 Requests to speak should be sent to committeesdemocraticservices@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 on the day of the meeting. Written submissions should be no longer than 1 A4 sheet.

The following petitions were received by Council

Lesley McCourt: Remove the traffic restrictions in Crowell Road – 152 signatures

Pete Nellist: SEND Services – 669 signatures

Ella Buckingham: SEND Services – 83 signatures

Hannah Pearce: SEND Transport Services – 154 signatures

The following members of the public addressed Council:

Item 13 Motion by Cllr Povolotsky:

Claire Brenner

Item 17 Motion by Cllr Sudbury:

Dr Steve Smith

Item 19 Motion by Cllr Povolotsky:

Anna Gurl

The texts of speeches that have been supplied to us by the speakers are published alongside the minutes.

Seven questions were asked. The questions, responses and supplementary questions are recorded in an Annex below.

Nineteen questions were asked. The questions, responses and supplementary questions are recorded in an Annex below.

Report from Leader of the Council.

The report summarises the decisions from the Cabinet meeting on 16 July 2024.

Council received the report of Cabinet covering the Cabinet meeting on 16 July 2024.

On Item 1 Oxfordshire Local Enterprise Partnership - Board Appointments, Councillor Brighouse asked for a full report on the transfer of the functions of OxLEP to the County Council and how it will relate to the newly established Skills England.

Councillor Leffman responded that Cabinet was reviewing what the structure of OxLEP will be going forwards and she believed they had until October to make that decision.  The Skills Bootcamp had been very successful.  The aim was to provide upskilling for people to have the opportunity for better jobs especially in the green economy and retrofitting homes for example.

On item 2, Treasury Management Annual Performance 2023/24, Councillor Bartholomew questioned whether further LOBO (Lender Option Borrowed Option) loans would be called-in and what impact this would have on the County Council’s finances. Councillor Levy stated that he would ask officers for more details, but that with interest rates falling, the impact was expected to be positive.

On item 3, Business Management & Monitoring Report - May 2024, Councillors Baines and Povolotsky asked if the 20% increase in the charges for the Home to School Transport Spare Seats Scheme was a barrier to working class children getting the best education and if it was not higher than general inflation in the sector.  Councillor Levy responded that he did not believe it was a class issue – all children had to get to school.  The Council would not charge any more than it had to, given increased operating costs of the services. He stated that the Council would continue to work with the providers and schools to ensure they get best value for money.

Councillor Enright asked if the data on road defects could be broken down by locality and if Members could have the opportunity to provide feedback.  Councillor Levy welcomed the suggestion and responded that he would take it up with officers.

Councillor Phillips asked about public support for Low Traffic Neighbourhoods and traffic filters and if the Cabinet will continue to implement them without public support.  Councillor Levy responded that he believed that the policies being followed were popular and that the public will have an opportunity to express their views in the Council election in May 2025.

Councillor Bartholomew asked the Cabinet Member to provide details of the steps being taken to recover debt owed to the County Council referred to in paragraph 110 in the Annex to the Business Management & Monitoring Report - May 2024. Councillor Levy promised to send a written response.

On item 4, Capital Programme Update and Monitoring Report- July 2024, Councillor Baines asked why the additional £4m SEN Capital Grant has not been used to meet growing SEN demand across the county.  Councillor Levy responded that the money was put aside by this Council before the amount of the funding from the Government was known.  When the Council receives money from the Government it is used as intended.

Councillor Cherry  ...  view the full minutes text for item 88/24

Report by the Executive Director of Resources & Section 151 Officer

The Chartered Institute of Public Finance and Accountancy’s (CIPFA’s) ‘Code of Practice on Treasury Management 2021’ requires that the Council and Audit & Governance Committee receive a report on Treasury Management activities at least four times per year.  This report is the final report for the financial year 2023/24 and sets out the position at 31 March 2024.

Council is RECOMMENDED to note the Council’s treasury management activity and outcomes in 2023/24.

Council had before it for noting the Treasury Management Annual Performance 2023/24 report - the final report for the financial year 2023/24 and setting out the position at 31 March 2024.

The report was moved by Councillor Dan Levy and seconded by Councillor Liz Leffman.

Following discussion, Council noted the report.

The information contained in the report is exempt in that it falls within the following prescribed categories:

Paragraph 1 Information which is likely to reveal the identity of an individual. 

Paragraph 4 Information relating to any consultations or negotiations, or contemplated consultations or negotiations, in connection with any labour relations matter arising between the authority or a Minister of the Crown and employees of, or office holders under, the authority,

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, in that there is an expectation that consultation and negotiation should take place primarily away from the glare of publicity and public scrutiny in keeping with employment law. 

Report of the Chief Executive

RESOLVED: that the public be excluded for the duration of item 11 since it is likely that if they were present during that item there would be disclosure of exempt information as defined in Part I of Schedule 12A to the Local Government Act 1972 (as amended) and specified below in relation to those items 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.

The report was moved by Councillor Liz Leffman, Chair of the Remuneration Committee, and seconded by Councillor Pete Sudbury.

Following discussion in private, the recommendations in the exempt report were approved with 34 votes in favour, 13 against and 3 abstentions.

The Chair stated that she had decided to accept a proposed urgent motion for the Council meeting. 

Under Council Procedure Rule 2.2. (xiii) Council will “consider any business which, by reason of special circumstances which shall be specified in the minutes, the Chair agrees should be considered at the meeting as a matter of urgency.”

The motion proposed to respond to a decision by the Secretary of State on 4 September 2024 to approve the Thames Water Resources Management Plan.  This was announced after the agenda for this Council meeting had been published.  A period of 60 days has been given for feedback which will expire before the next Council meeting on 5 November 2024.

At the Council meeting on 9 July 2024, Council passed a motion of no confidence in Thames Water and reiterated its opposition to the planned design for SESRO (South East Strategic Reservoir Option) with 29 votes in favour; none against and 13 abstentions.  Council Motions in November 2021 and December 2023 opposing the SESRO plans were passed unanimously.

The Chair believed that these reasons amounted to special circumstances that justified taking this motion as a matter of urgency. 

The motion was proposed by Councillor Povolotsky and seconded by Councillor Gawrysiak.

Following debate, the motion was carried with 37 votes in favour; 14 against and 0 abstentions.

RESOLVED:

This Council notes that on Wednesday 4th September the Secretary of State approved the Thames Water Resources Management Plan (TWRMP) despite community and council opposition, technical data concerns and damning comments from the Environment Agency. 

This Council has passed many motions of concern including a vote of no confidence in Thames Water and we continue to express our concerns that the TWRMP is not fit for purpose and its schemes need independent scrutiny and review, including Waste Management, leaks and the South East Strategic Reservoir Option (SESRO) proposal.

This Council notes that Thames Water has 60 days to take into account feedback and we ask the Leader of the Council and the relevant Cabinet Member to urgently ensure that this Council’s voice and that of our residents are heard and that our recommendations have been taken into account.

We reiterate our objection to the plan on the table and continue to call for a public inquiry into the plan, and ask the Leader to request an urgent audience with the Secretary of State to ensure Oxfordshire’s voice is heard.

The Two Child limit to benefit payments was introduced by the Conservative Government in 2017 and is supported by the current Labour Government. It prevents families from claiming Child Tax Credit or Universal Credit for more than 2 children in the household.

Council notes the recent research conducted by the End Child Poverty Coalition which has found that:

• 1.5 million children in the UK live in households subject to the two-child limit on benefit payments. That is roughly one-in-ten children in the UK.
• In 2023/24 the two-child limit cost families up to £3,235 per child each year.
• Scrapping the two-child limit would lift 250,000 children out of poverty overnight, and significantly reduce the level of poverty that a further 850,000 children live in.
• Scrapping the two-child limit would cost £1.3 billion, however it is estimated that child poverty costs the economy £39 billion each year.

In Oxfordshire 10,850 children in 3050 households are currently affected by the two-child limit to benefit payments.

Council believes that the two-child limit is a cruel policy that should be scrapped.

Council resolves to:

• Ask the Leader of the Council to write to the Chancellor of the Exchequer and the Prime Minister expressing Oxfordshire County Council’s strong belief that the two child limit to benefit payments should be scrapped.
• Ask the Leader to write to all MPs covering the Oxfordshire area, asking them to commit their public support

The following motion was proposed by Councillor Kate Gregory and seconded by Councillor Bob Johnston.

“The Two Child limit to benefit payments was introduced by the Conservative Government in 2017 and is supported by the current Labour Government. It prevents families from claiming Child Tax Credit or Universal Credit for more than 2 children in the household.

Council notes the recent research conducted by the End Child Poverty Coalition which has found that:

• 1.5 million children in the UK live in households subject to the two-child limit on benefit payments. That is roughly one-in-ten children in the UK.
• In 2023/24 the two-child limit cost families up to £3,235 per child each year.
• Scrapping the two-child limit would lift 250,000 children out of poverty overnight, and significantly reduce the level of poverty that a further 850,000 children live in.
• Scrapping the two-child limit would cost £1.3 billion, however it is estimated that child poverty costs the economy £39 billion each year.

In Oxfordshire 10,850 children in 3050 households are currently affected by the two-child limit to benefit payments.

Council believes that the two-child limit is a cruel policy that should be scrapped

Council resolves to:

• Ask the Leader of the Council to write to the Chancellor of the Exchequer and the Prime Minister expressing Oxfordshire County Council’s strong belief that the two child limit to benefit payments should be scrapped.
• Ask the Leader to write to all MPs covering the Oxfordshire area, asking them to commit their public support.”

The following amendment was proposed by Councillor Baines and seconded by Councillor Charlie Hicks.

“The Two Child limit to benefit payments was introduced by the Conservative Government in 2017 and is supported by the current Labour Government. It This legacy of 14 years of Conservative Government prevents families from claiming Child Tax Credit or Universal Credit for more than 2 children in the household.

Council notes the recent research conducted by the End Child Poverty Coalition which has found that:

• 1.5 million children in the UK live in households subject to the two-child limit on benefit payments. That is roughly one-in-ten children in the UK.
• In 2023/24 the two-child limit cost families up to £3,235 per child each year.
• Scrapping the two-child limit would lift 250,000 children out of poverty overnight, and significantly reduce the level of poverty that a further 850,000 children live in.
• Scrapping the two-child limit would cost £1.3 billion, however it is estimated that child poverty costs the economy £39 billion each year.

In Oxfordshire 10,850 children in 3050 households are currently affected by the two-child limit to benefit payments.

Council believes:

·       Reckless decisions by the former Government in supporting unfunded spending commitments has left a black hole in our nation’s finances.

·       Governments and political parties should never commit to unfunded spending commitments, this threatens the stability of our economy.

·       Tthat the two-child limit is a cruel policy that should be scrapped once the fiscal environment allows.

Council resolves to:

• Ask the Leader of the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 92/24

In September 2023, Ofsted and the Care Quality Commission declared their judgment post inspection that the Local Area Partnership (LAP) had multiple systemic failures.

Despite the Priority Action Plan (PAP), the Council is failing to meaningfully engage with and capture the voice of the user, our young people.

Council calls on Cabinet to consider;

1. Meaningfully involving young people and youth organisations throughout all policy-making processes within SEND improvement and the PAP. Co-management and co-creation structures are the best way to ensure direct participation.

2. Any consultations or engagement with young people by this council must have a visible public follow-up to the outcomes.

3. All Council policies and frameworks that affect young people, must include an impact assessment, and ensure there are mitigation measures in place for those youth groups that might be negatively impacted by a new policy or framework.

4. Ensuring all future events, in person/online, run by or funded by OCC, especially those related to the PAP, LAP, and SEND improvement, are open to all young people with the attendance of their parent or carer.

5. Launching a rapid task force for the voice of the young person and SEND users, and task them to create a framework for a Youth Forum within 3 months of this meeting date.

6. The leader to appoint a SEND Champion to enable seldom heard voices in the SEND community to feed into SEND improvement and services, and that person to sit on the SEND Improvement board.

Note: The motion, if passed, would constitute the exercise of an executive function in which case it will be referred to the Cabinet together with any advice the Council may wish to give, in accordance with Rule 13.5.1 (i) of the Council Procedure Rules in the Constitution. 

The motion was proposed by Councillor Sally Povolotsky and seconded by Councillor Eddie Reeves.

An amendment was proposed by Councillor Eddie Reeves and seconded by Councillor Nigel Simpson.  The amendment was accepted by the proposer of the motion.

Following debate on the motion as amended, it was carried with 50 in favour; 0 against and 1 abstention.

RESOLVED:

In September 2023, Ofsted and the Care Quality Commission declared their judgment post inspection that the Local Area Partnership (LAP) had multiple systemic failures.

Despite the Priority Action Plan (PAP), the Council is failing to meaningfully engage with elected members on a cross-party basis or and capture the voice of families affected and the user, our young people.

Council calls on Cabinet to consider;

1. More Mmeaningfully involveing young people and youth organisations throughout all policy-making processes within SEND improvement and the PAP. Co-management and co-creation structures are the best way to ensure direct participation.

2. Any consultations or engagement with young people by this council must have a visible public follow-up to the outcomes and tangible metrics to ensure outcomes are delivered.

3. All Council policies and frameworks that affect young people, must include an impact assessment, and ensure there are that reasonable mitigation measures are put in place for those youth groups that might be negatively impacted by a new policy or framework.

4. Ensuring that where appropriate all future events, in person/online, run by or funded by OCC, especially those related to the PAP, LAP, and SEND improvement, are open to all appropriate young people with the attendance of their parent or carer.

5. Launching a rapid task force for the voice of the young person and SEND users, and task them to create a framework for a Youth Forum within 3 three months of this meeting date.

6. The leader to appoint a SEND Champion from an opposition group to enable seldom heard that a wider range of voices in the SEND community to are able to feed into SEND improvement and services, and that such person to sits on the SEND Improvement board.

This Council deplores the government’s decision to cut Winter Fuel Payments (WFPs).  Age UK estimates that the government’s changes to WFPs could hit 2 million people across the country, who badly need the money to stay warm this winter.

This Council resolves to:

• Request Cabinet to launch a countywide awareness campaign working with our City and District Councils, local NHS partners, and charitable, civic and religious groups, to encourage elderly residents who are eligible for means-tested benefits such as Pension Credit to register and claim them to ensure that they continue to receive WFPs this Winter.

• Request that the Leader of the Council writes to the Chancellor of the Exchequer, urging a review of the government’s precipitous decision to means-test WFPs without public consultation and asking HM Treasury to ensure that vulnerable pensioners, particularly those who are eligible for, but who do not – or cannot – claim, other benefits under current thresholds are protected from fuel poverty.

• Request that the Cabinet reprioritises monies within the Council’s budget for 2024/5 held within the Budget Priority Reserve and/or within other relevant contingency funds, with a view to establishing an Oxfordshire Winter Fuel Payment Protection Fund, akin to the Oxfordshire Resident Support Scheme, to ensure that pensioners who are in genuine hardship, but who are not eligible for other government support, are helped through the Winter.

Note: The motion, if passed, would constitute the exercise of an executive function in which case it will be referred to the Cabinet together with any advice the Council may wish to give, in accordance with Rule 13.5.1 (i) of the Council Procedure Rules in the Constitution. 

The time being close to 3.30 pm, the remaining motions were considered dropped in accordance with Council Procedure Rule 5.2.

Council requests Cabinet to consider approving the Councils for Fair Tax declaration. 

 This commits Councils to

• Lead by example and demonstrate good practice in our tax conduct, right across our activities.
• Ensure IR35 is implemented robustly and contract workers pay a fair share of employment taxes.
• Not use offshore vehicles for the purchase of land and property, especially where this leads to reduced payments of stamp duty. 
• Undertake due diligence to ensure that not-for-profit structures are not being used inappropriately by suppliers as an artificial device to reduce the payment of tax and business rates.  
• Demand clarity on the ultimate beneficial ownership of suppliers, UK and overseas, and their consolidated profit & loss position, given lack of clarity could be strong indicators of poor financial probity and weak financial standing.
• Promote Fair Tax Mark certification especially for any business in which we have a significant stake and where corporation tax is due.
• Support Fair Tax Week events in the area, and celebrate the tax contribution made by responsible businesses that are proud to promote responsible tax conduct and pay their fair share of corporation tax.

Council also requests the Leader of the Council to write to the Chancellor of the Exchequer supporting calls for urgent reform of UK procurement law to enable local authorities to better penalise poor tax conduct and reward good tax conduct through their procurement policies.

Note: The motion, if passed, would constitute the exercise of an executive function in which case it will be referred to the Cabinet together with any advice the Council may wish to give, in accordance with Rule 13.5.1 (i) of the Council Procedure Rules in the Constitution. 

In December Oxfordshire County Council removed 7 beds from the Chiltern care home. These beds were removed without any consultation with the GP’s who run them, Henley Town Council and the community of South Oxfordshire and Henley. This lack of consultation by the Council is unacceptable.

These beds were originally provided as NHS beds.

Following FOI requests to the Integrated Care Board Buckinghamshire Oxfordshire Berkshire West (ICB BOB) and the Council we have firmly established that these beds are NHS Beds funded by ICB, the Council and Oxford Health NHS Foundation Trust and cannot be closed without consultation.

Dr Broughton interim Chief Executive of the ICB BOB states 28^th February 2024

“The beds have not ‘lost NHS funding’, “The beds continued to be overseen by the Oxford University Hospital Hub team.”

These beds are NHS beds which cannot be removed without consultation.

This Council:

1.    Deplores the removal without consultation.

2.    Believes these beds which serve a population of 140,000 of South Oxfordshire should be reinstated.

This Council requests that Cabinet:

3.    Asks partners to seek to reinstate the 7 Chiltern Court Beds serving South Oxfordshire.

4.    Conduct a consultation if they still wish to remove the beds.

Note: The motion, if passed, would constitute the exercise of an executive function in which case it will be referred to the Cabinet together with any advice the Council may wish to give, in accordance with Rule 13.5.1 (i) of the Council Procedure Rules in the Constitution. 

In 2023, this Council unanimously agreed a motion committing to have due regard to the needs of future generations whilst meeting the needs of today.

We recognise that we are currently failing that by adding to accumulated damages from legacy climate pollution, which already vastly exceeds safe limits. That overshoot has doubled in the last 15 years. 

We note: 

"Baked in" economic damages of close to 20% of global GDP by 2050.

Reputable scientific/ energy industry bodies recognise the need for "negative emissions"; removing CO2 from the atmosphere, scaling to multiple billions of tonnes annually from the 2030s and we are alarmed at the lack of credible plans to build up the required technologies to the level of sequestration required, partly due to lack of current demand.

We also regret unavoidable negative impacts on future generations’ wellbeing from the requirement to finance this removal of our waste. We agree it is unacceptable to leave our children and grandchildren with potentially an impossible, unaffordable task to avoid a ghastly future. 

We take our responsibility to future generations seriously and therefore request Cabinet to commit to: 

• Promoting local R&D and commercialisation of emerging negative emission technologies (NETs).

• Going beyond net zero, into negative emissions on our own account, at the earliest reasonable opportunity, in ways that have local environmental/ economic benefit and/or contribute to scaling up NETs.

• Working with our partners, suppliers and our networks to build a significant level of "demand pull", further stimulating the growth of NET supply chains.

Note: The motion, if passed, would constitute the exercise of an executive function in which case it will be referred to the Cabinet together with any advice the Council may wish to give, in accordance with Rule 13.5.1 (i) of the Council Procedure Rules in the Constitution. 

In 2018 this Council passed a motion stating that it was opposed to the licensing of a badger cull in Oxfordshire.

When DEFRA announced that badger culling would be phased out by 2025, many people believed that the cull had ended. Sadly, culling in Oxfordshire intensified, seemingly with the intent of shooting as many badgers as possible before the deadline. Over 50% of the county is in the killing zones.

A new DEFRA policy now allows epidemiological culling or ‘epi-culling’, which involves killing up to 100% of badgers across a large area in response to a new cluster of herd breakdowns. Epi-Culling was first introduced in Cumbria, and has been adopted on a trial basis in parts of England over the past five years. Oxfordshire is now being considered by DEFRA for future epi-culling programmes. 

A recent scientific report shows that epi-culling is ineffective as a control measure. However, DEFRA, Animal and Public Health Agenda, the bTB Hub/NFU and British Cattle Veterinary Association, continue to advocate its use.

This Council therefore :

1. Re-affirms our opposition to badger culling and condemns the introduction of epidemiolocal culling which has been shown to be an ineffective control measure for bTB.
2. Asks the Cabinet to consider a specific policy that badger culling will not be permitted on Council owned land.
3. Requests that the Leader writes to DEFRA making clear our continued opposition to the cull and any extension of it in size and scope, especially with regard to epidemiological culling.

Note: The motion, if passed, would constitute the exercise of an executive function in which case it will be referred to the Cabinet together with any advice the Council may wish to give, in accordance with Rule 13.5.1 (i) of the Council Procedure Rules in the Constitution. 

Council notes it’s been 12 months since Ofsted SEND report which resulted in identification of widespread and/or systemic failings leading to significant concerns.

Council notes the undue stress and costs for families to take cases of education needs for SEND children to tribunal.

People Scrutiny in October 2023, heard that no tribunal would be sanctioned without a director’s approval, yet the number of parents appealing to SEND tribunal is at a record high.

Council recognises that tribunals often put families through extreme financial and mental strain, and that working together in a trauma-informed, restorative and truly co-produced way, will help this county’s young people achieve better outcomes.

Council notes that the appointment of a SEND cabinet member has been ineffective on improving the county wide provision and the role should be reviewed urgently by the leader of this council.

Council recognises that unmet need is a combination of lack of provision and the previous government’s “mainstream” agenda.

Council asks the Cabinet to

1. work towards better decisions actioned early on in cases so that families don’t need the tribunal service to redress the unlawful practice.
2. form a rapid task force to work with officers to investigate tribunal case numbers and seek to develop a better solution between this council and SEND families in Oxfordshire.
3. explore the expansion of EOTAS and alternative provision for neurodivergent children unable to attend school, especially whilst the SEND provision undergoes enhancements and service growth in the county.

Note: The motion, if passed, would constitute the exercise of an executive function in which case it will be referred to the Cabinet together with any advice the Council may wish to give, in accordance with Rule 13.5.1 (i) of the Council Procedure Rules in the Constitution. 

Council notes the success of bus franchising in Greater Manchester, where, since bringing buses back into public control, bus use is higher and bus services are more reliable.

Subject to the outcome of the feasibility study, Council requests Cabinet to bring buses back into public control in Oxfordshire (through bus franchising) and to create an accessible and integrated transport network for Oxfordshire. 

To enable the development of an accessible and integrated transport network, Council asks the Leader to write to the Secretary of State for MHCLG asking for the greatest possible devolution of transport and spatial planning powers as part of the devolution deal.

Note: The motion, if passed, would constitute the exercise of an executive function in which case it will be referred to the Cabinet together with any advice the Council may wish to give, in accordance with Rule 13.5.1 (i) of the Council Procedure Rules in the Constitution.