Agenda and minutes

Apologies were tendered by Cllr Ley.

There were none.

To approve the minutes of the meeting held on 28^th June 2023 (PLOSC3) and to receive information arising from them.

The Committee is recommended to AGREE the minutes having raised any necessary amendments.

The Committee resolved to AGREE the minutes of the meeting of 28 June 2023 as a true and accurate record.

The Committee agreed to hear petitions and public addresses immediately before the item on Oxford United as both requests to speak related to that agenda item.

Cllr Duncan Enright, Cabinet Member for Travel & Development Strategy, and Rachel Wileman, Director of Planning, Environment, and Climate Change, John Disley, Head of Transport Policy, and Joseph Kay, Strategic Transport Lead, have been invited to present a report on area weight restrictions and the proposed approach to the management of Heavy Goods Vehicles (HGV) issues in Oxfordshire.

The Committee is recommended to consider the report, to ask any questions, and to AGREE any recommendations it wishes to make to Cabinet arising from the report and discussion.

Cllr Duncan Enright, Cabinet Member for Transport Policy, introduced the report which provided an overview of the area weight restriction feasibility study and the proposed approach to the management of Heavy Goods Vehicle issues in the county.  Cllr Enright explained that there was a multi-layered approach to the work and that the Committee’s feedback would be warmly welcomed.  Members’ local knowledge would be key to informing the strategy more widely.

The Head of Transport Policy, John Disley, explained that the Freight and Logistics Strategy, which was adopted by Council in July 2022 alongside the Local Transport and Connectivity Plan (LTCP), contained 47 actions and that the HGV Strategy related to action 10.  This was intended to be a countywide study to establish an approach for area-based weight restrictions.

The Head of Transport Policy explained that it had become quickly apparent that the complexities of the project were such that it was not deemed realistic to devise an Area Weight Restriction Strategy that could be quickly implemented for the whole county.  It was explained that other authorities had also found such a task problematic and that at least one other county council had moved away from an area-based weight restrictions approach as part of its freight strategy.  In order to better inform the Council, work was in progress to conduct detailed studies in the Windrush Valley and in Henley-on-Thames.

In discussion with the Committee, the following points were raised:

•         Oxfordshire was working with neighbouring counties to consider how best to approach the challenges of HGV movements.  England’s Economic Heartland was updating its freight strategy and there was an opportunity to feed into that and to explore cross-boundary strategies further.

•         There was concern by some members that the report which the Council had commissioned might not represent good value for money as delivered given that the scope had been amended and so the work undertaken was less than had been envisaged.

•         The scoring criteria in the technical report had negative scoring where solutions were “difficult to implement with high costs” or “intermediate efforts and costs to implement”.  Given that the challenge posed was inherently difficult, members considered this inappropriate and were concerned that it made the data less helpful than it should have been.

•         There was also concern that the report could have provided data to contribute towards a number of the other action points from the Freight Strategy but that it did not appear to do so.

•         There had initially been an expectation that weight restrictions were most likely to be the optimal solution to problems on the road network arising from HGVs.  The Council had learned through this process as part of a joint partnership piece with the consultants and one of the things it had concluded was that weight restrictions were part of the solution but not the only solution.

•         That enforcement of the restrictions was key was raised and that ANPR could be useful was discussed.  Consideration of whether physical barriers should  ...  view the full minutes text for item 4/23

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 9.00 a.m. four working days before the meeting i.e., 9.00 a.m. on Thursday 07 September 2023. Requests to speak should be sent to scrutiny@oxfordshire.gov.uk   

If you are speaking ‘virtually’, you may submit a written statement of your presentation to ensure that, if the technology fails, your views can still be taken into account. A written copy of your statement can be provided no later than 9.00 a.m. two working days before the meeting. Written submissions should be no longer than one A4 sheet.

Suzanne McIvor addressed the Committee and explained that she represented Friends of Stratfield Brake.  She encouraged the Committee to establish with which legal entity the Council was negotiating and to confirm to whom it was proposed to dispose of the land.

Ms McIvor also requested that the Committee should call on Cabinet to provide an open market valuation of the land under discussion and asked the Committee to encourage Cabinet to make the sale conditional on receipt of proof of committed funding for the stadium development; the safeguarding of funding for community benefits; clawback provisions; a financially sustainable business case.  There was also a request that details of alternative proposals should be made available.

Cllr Ian Middleton, the member for Kidlington South, addressed the Committee and raised a number of issues.

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, in that a negotiation is ongoing and would prejudice the position of the authority in the process of that negotiation and the Council’s standing generally in relation to such matters in future, to the detriment of the Council’s ability properly to discharge its fiduciary and other duties as a public authority.

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

The report on the engagement exercise regarding the proposal from Oxford United Football Club to the County Council as landowner will be considered by Cabinet at its meeting on 19 September 2023.

Cllr Liz Leffman, the Leader of the Council, and Martin Reeves, Chief Executive, have been invited to present the report and to answer the Committee’s questions.  Invitations have also been extended to Cllr Calum Miller, Cabinet Member for Finance, and Cllr Glynis Phillips, Cabinet Member for Corporate Performance, as well as to Vic Kurzeja, Director of Property Services, and Susannah Wintersgill, Director of Communications, Strategy, and Insight.

The Committee is recommended to consider the report, to ask any questions, and to AGREE any recommendations it wishes to make to Cabinet arising from the report and discussion.

The Committee had invited Cllr Liz Leffman, Leader of the Council, Cllr Calum Miller, Cabinet member for Finance, and Cllr Glynis Phillips, Cabinet member for Performance and Corporate Services to attend to present the report on the proposal from Oxford United Football Club to Oxfordshire County Council as Landowner that it should acquire the site on the edge of Kidlington known as The Triangle. 

The Committee had also invited Martin Reeves, Chief Executive, Vic Kurzeja, Director of Property Services, Susannah Wintersgill, Director of Communications, Strategy, and Insight, Carole Stow, Engagement Consultation Manager, and Paul Grant, Head of Legal, to attend.  The Committee welcomed representatives of Westco Communications (Westco), the independent company who undertook the engagement exercise on the Council’s behalf, Simon Jenkins, Director of Communications, and Rishi Moulton, Head of Insight and Data, to explain how the engagement process was undertaken and to answer technical question on it.

Anita Bradley, Director of Law & Governance and Monitoring Officer, attended to provide the Committee with in-person legal advice.

The Chair reminded the Committee that the purpose of this item was not to agree whether or not the new stadium should be built but, rather, to consider whether due process had been followed; whether a case had been made for sale or leasehold; whether the seven strategic priorities had been adequately assessed.

The Committee and those attending were reminded that the Committee was not a Planning Committee, and that indeed the Council was not the relevant Planning Authority. As an advisory Committee, no legal decisions could be taken by the Committee itself but there was benefit and public interest in highlighting to Cabinet particular aspects of the issues under consideration which would help further inform its decision. Topics for members to keep in mind were whether the engagement was fair, whether the Council had missed anything, and whether the papers were a fair and balanced representation of the evidence.

The Committee was taken through the consultation findings by Westco, a communications and engagement company commissioned by the Council to undertake the engagement on the extent to which the Council’s seven strategic priorities for a possible land transfer would be addressed. All aspects of the engagement, from question design, coding, analysing and reporting on results , were the responsibility of Westco on behalf of the Council. Measures had been taken to verify the data to ensure its robustness and accuracy.  There had been 5441 responses with 71% of responses being from Oxfordshire residents, 31% of whom lived within a two mile radius of the proposed site.

The Committee was presented with data showing that the assessment by respondents of whether OUFC’s proposals would address the different strategic priorities were sharply divided, with those living closest to the Triangle being doubtful, and those living further away being in agreement. The greatest areas of doubt expressed by local residents were whether the green barrier between Oxford and Kidlington would be retained, and whether the proposals would significantly improve the infrastructure and connectivity  ...  view the full minutes text for item 6/23

The Scrutiny Manager will submit a draft of the relevant parts Scrutiny function’s annual report to Council for consideration. The Committee is invited to ask questions and make comment on the draft and RECOMMENDED to identify any elements in need of amendment prior to sign-off by the Performance and Corporate Services Committee.

NB This item is to follow.

The Committee was advised that the draft Scrutiny Annual Report was not yet available but that it would be circulated by email for comment from members.

The action and recommendation tracker is used to monitor the implementation of previously-agreed actions and recommendations. The Committee is recommended to NOTE it, having raised any questions on the contents.

The Committee resolved to NOTE the action and recommendation tracker.

Cabinet has made no formal responses to Committee recommendations since the Committee’s last meeting.

There were no reports to receive.

The Committee is asked to consider the proposed work programme.  In deciding its work programme, the Committee is also asked to consider the relevance of any items on the Cabinet’s Forward Plan.

The Committee is recommended to AGREE its work programme.

The Committee resolved to AGREE its proposed work programme.  The Committee agreed to the Scrutiny Officer’s proposal that the all-member briefing previously suggested regarding the Street Design Strategy should be held as a meeting of members of the Committee to which all members could be invited.

There was a request that a work planning meeting should be held and that the work of the Transport Working Group should be expedited.