Agenda and minutes

There were no apologies.

There were no declarations of interest.

To approve the minutes of the meeting held on 18 December 2020 (PSC3) and to receive information arising from them.

The minutes of the meeting held on 18 December 2020 were approved.

10:10

Report by the Director for Finance

Note: Section 5.1 to follow on Monday 11 January 2021

The Committee is invited to comment on the Capital & Investment Strategy and supporting strategies included in this report. The Capital & Investment Strategy forms Section 5 of the suite of budget papers that comprise the Business and Budget Planning 2021/22 report considered by Cabinet on 19 January 2021 and Council on 9 February 2021.  

The Committee is RECOMMENDED to consider and comment on:

a)               The Capital & Investment Strategy (Section 5.1), incorporating

                       i.       The Treasury Management Strategy 2021/22 (Section 5.2)

                     ii.       The Investment Strategy 2021/22 (Section 5.3)

                    iii.       The Property Strategy (Section 5.4)

b)              The Draft Capital Programme 2021/22 to 2030/31 (Section 5.5)

c)               Changes to the Capital Programme (Section 5.6)

Lorna Baxter, Director for Finance, introduced the item.  She summarised the Capital and Investment Strategy (Section 5.1 in Addenda 2). Members were invited to provide comments for the discussion at Cabinet on 19 January 2021. 

Treasury Management

Tim Chapple, Treasury Manager, summarised the Treasury Management and Annual Investment Strategies (Section 5.2 in Addenda) and responded to questions from Members as follows:

·         The figures in Paragraph 82 were correct and the discrepancy with figures in Paragraph 5 will be corrected in the versions of the documents for Cabinet and Full Council.

·         The figure for Capital and Developer Contributions in Paragraph 15 was a combination of capital grants, capital receipts and developer contributions.

·         All of the Capital and Developer Contributions are forecast to be spent over a 10 year period and therefore it would not be prudent to use a proportion of it to invest in external funds as it is necessary to take a 10 year view.

·         The last sentence in paragraph 35 indicated that borrowing for OxLEP may take place earlier in the year if interest rates are forecast to increase towards the end of the year.

·         While the Bank of England had not ruled out negative interest rates it would be a draconian measure and was not considered likely.

Councillor Charles Mathew asked that consideration be given in this budget to raise the limit on investment in external funds from £101m to £125m as he believed that the rates available were worth what he saw as a minimal risk.

Investment Strategy

Steve Jorden, Corporate Director, Commercial Development Assets and Investment, summarised the strategy and responded to Members’ questions as follows:

·         Members should send to him a list of any Council owned properties in their area, not being fully utilised.  Due to workloads, there was a need to prioritise the work of the property team.

·         He did not have detailed information on the proposal in Eynsham West listed on Addenda Page 39 but would communicate with the local Member after the meeting (ACTION).

·         Work was proceeding on the One Public Estate programme.  The Council was talking with District Councils, the Fire Service and the University on possible sharing of properties.

·         Post-COVID there may not be the same need for office space which may raise the possibility of sharing space with other partners.  Currently the emphasis was on exiting costly leases.

·         Meetings will not continue to be entirely online but may be a hybrid mix of some people in a room and others online.  There will therefore still be a need for a council chamber – members of the public should be able to attend physically – but whether the current chamber was the best option was open to question.

·         It was not proposed to invest in industrial property for the sole purpose of a yield but consideration would be given to developing social housing or investment for regeneration.

Property Strategy

Steve Jorden introduced the strategy.  Officers responded to questions from Members as follows:

·         The Council was  ...  view the full minutes text for item 4/21

11:10

Report by Corporate Director Communities

This report updates Performance Scrutiny Committee on development of the new Oxfordshire Local Transport Plan- called the Local Transport and Connectivity Plan. Specifically, it outlines the context and key points included in a proposed Vision Document (Annex 1), on which it is proposed to undertake public consultation. It also includes a summary of the engagement exercise undertaken in Spring 2020 (Annex 2), and a summary of key evidence that has been reviewed to support development of the Vision. (Annex 3)

A brief presentation also will be given outlining the proposed delivery arrangements for the Active Travel Tranche 2 programme.  The presentation will set out the approach to governance, communications and engagement, provide a high level overview of the delivery programme and include a summary of progress to date.

The Committee is RECOMMENDED

a)                    to note progress on the Local Transport and Connectivity Plan and the timetable leading to Plan adoption set out in Annex 1,

b)                   to comment on any points on the Vision Document included in Annex 1 in an addenda to be submitted along with the Cabinet report of 19^th January, when they consider the Vision Document as the basis for public consultation in February 2021.

Local Transport Connectivity Plan

Jason Russell, Corporate Director, Communities, introduced the item.  James Gagg, Infrastructure Strategy Team Leader, gave a presentation summarising the report.  Officers responded to Members’ questions as follows:

·         A plan focussed on walking, cycling and public transport was good in terms of equality because it favoured those who did not have access to a car.  There will be an Equality Impact Assessment alongside the development of the LTCP.

·         The baseline report recognised the issue of public transport in rural areas and there was a specific question in the consultation to get feedback on that.  A new government bus strategy was due shortly and that was expected to include rural transport.

·         There was a separate strategy on electric vehicles which is planned to come to Cabinet later this year.

·         A number of smaller electric buses were being trialed for school transport and it was hoped to roll that out more widely.

·         There were opportunities to make changes to new developments to ensure that they tied in with new policies and other developments.

·         There was work on-going in partnership with bus companies to look at new routes but there will be places where it was not viable and where there was a need to look at alternatives such as shared transport.  It was possible to “pump prime” services for new developments as had been done recently in Didcot.

·         The consultation process was set out in the papers and there will be work with engagement colleagues on how to ensure a fair and transparent consultation.

·         Officers had received training on the healthy streets approach which will help inform how transport schemes were developed.

·         There was now a better engagement with the freight industry through their attendance at Strategic Transport Forum meetings and there was an opportunity to build on examples of freight consolidation in Oxford.

Members made the following suggestions which will be brought to the Cabinet discussion:

·         The reduction of inequalities needs to be more strongly reflected and the public health team should be engaged in LTCP development to ensure it is in line with the Director for Public Health’s emphasis on reducing inequalities.  For example, a person’s employment prospects may be seriously limited by poor public transport connections where they live.

·         There is a need for an equality impact assessment on the consultation itself to ensure that it reaches all communities.  The consultation should include Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty.

·         More needs to be done on connectivity into and between main towns.  Nearly all of the money for buses seems to be going to Oxford or for services to and from Oxford.

·         Congestion on the Oxford Ring Road needs to be tackled and it was noted that much of the congestion takes place in areas experiencing deprivation.

·         Members would support moves to develop delivery hubs to reduce the number of large lorries in built-up areas.  More access control is needed to combat “rat running” by HGVs.

·         Trees have an important role to play alongside main roads to assist  ...  view the full minutes text for item 5/21

12:00

A report from Oxfordshire Children’s Safeguarding Board.

Lara Patel, Deputy Director – Safeguarding, introduced the report.  While it had been completed in 2017, the publication had been delayed until November 2020 due to a police investigation.  The most important issues in the review were the fact that the child was electively home educated and had therefore less contact with professionals, had complex health issues and had received fragmented service from health.  There was now a clearer pathway for bowel and bladder conditions and a greater awareness that home education can result in a limited amount of contact for professionals with a child.  All parents that home educate were now sent information on health services that they can access.

Lara Patel responded to Members questions as follows:

·         Health professionals were now more aware of the link between constipation and mental health as well as the longer-term physical health effects.  Constipation had been an issue in other serious case reviews.

·         It was important to keep repeating to professionals the message regarding the limitations in accessing children who were home educated which needed parental consent.  The former Independent Chair of the Oxfordshire Safeguarding Children Board had written to the Department for Education on this matter and they were currently reviewing the guidance but there was no indication of any major change soon.

The Chairman asked Anita Bradley as Director for Law and Governance to discuss with safeguarding and education officers what can be done under current legislation in situations where parents refuse access to children who are being home educated and for the Education Scrutiny Committee to examine the issue (ACTION).

Councillor Michael Waine, Chairman of the Education Scrutiny Committee, stated that the committee had looked at the issue about a year ago but would review it again in light of this latest case and the fact that numbers being home educated in Oxfordshire had increased from 650 to 900 since the pandemic.

Lara Patel described two primary reasons behind the increase during the pandemic.  Some parents had enjoyed home educating but some were afraid to send their children to school because of the risk of infection.  The challenge for the DfE was to balance parental rights with safeguarding children in an appropriate way.

12:30

Report by the Corporate Director for Customers and Organisational Development and Director of Finance

The report at Appendix 1 sets out Oxfordshire County Council’s (OCC’s) progress towards Corporate Plan priorities during November2020.  The report will be considered at Cabinet’s 19th Januarymeeting.

The Committee is RECOMMENDED to note the report and consider any matters for future attention by theCommittee.

Louise Tustian, Head of Insight and Corporate Programmes, summarised the report and officers responded to Members’ questions as follows:

·         The Committee will have an opportunity to review the Outcomes Framework in the new financial year as well as the targets and tolerances for the RAG ratings.

·         While the government had not met in full the extra costs to the Council from COVID, it was possible to downgrade the leadership risk level (LR11 on Agenda Page 158) because the Council had adopted the revised budget and will hopefully agree the budget for 2021/22, both of which were balanced.

Louise Tustian agreed to come back to Members of the Committee after the meeting with responses to the following questions (ACTIONS):

·         Why there was no rate available for air quality under indicator 12, Agenda Page 145.

·         Whether the libraries’ click and collect service was regarded as an essential service under COVID regulations.

·         If the changes from Amber to Green were mostly due to the lockdown or if they actually reflected a real improvement.

·         How the rating on the carbon neutral target could be green when the Council had not yet set out its ambition in the light of the commitment to be carbon neutral by 2030.

·         Why the rating on air quality was amber when there had been a dramatic reduction of traffic under the pandemic.

·         If it was possible to move more quickly on the installation of LED lighting.

·         If care staff working under Home First had been prioritised for vaccination.

The Chairman moved the recommendation with the addition that she will bring the matters raised to Cabinet.

RESOLVED: to

a)            note the report and consider any matters for future attention by the Committee; and

b)           report the issues raised to the Cabinet discussion of the papers on 19 January 2021.

12:50

To agree the Committee’s work programme for future meetings based on key priorities and discussion in the meeting.

It was agreed to add the following to the March meeting – possibly requiring a full day meeting:

·         Income Generation

·         NEATS, Apprenticeships, Young People

The following items to be added to the June meeting if the local elections are postponed:

·         Transport, Place Setting and S106

·         Home First

·         Outcomes Framework

The following item to be added to the list of items ‘to be scheduled’:

·         Children being cared for out-of-county.

·         Review of LTCP and Active Travel