Agenda item

Report from Leader of the Council.

The report summarises the decisions from the Cabinet meeting on 19 November 2024.

Council received the report of Cabinet covering the Cabinet meeting on 19 November.

On Item 1, Including Everyone Equalities, Diversity and Inclusion Framework 2025 – 2029, Councillor Phillips asked why there was no mention of young carers.  Councillor Leffman thanked her for pointing that out and responded that she would make sure that it will be amended going forwards.

Councillor Pressel cited a number of examples of a lack of consideration of diversity in Council appointments and consultation, and asked if the Leader agreed that the practice fell far short of the policies.  Councillor Leffman agreed that there was a long way to go but that the Council wanted to lead on this and there were Key Performance Indicators that will be monitored.

Councillor Brighouse asked that Looked After Children be included in the consideration of inclusion and expressed concern that much of the data available was not very useful.  Councillor Leffman responded that officers were looking at ways to improve Council support for care leavers.  With regards to data, she believed that there was a lot of data there but that the Council sometimes did not make the best use of it and this was something she knew that officers were examining.

Item 2, Local Enterprise Partnership Integration - Phase 2, Councillor Brighouse stated her surprise that Council was only being asked to note the formation by Cabinet of a Cabinet Committee and asked that any further decision on this be more inclusive of Council.  Councillor Roberts responded that the decision was taken at a public meeting of Cabinet where Members could have asked to speak or put questions.

Councillor Smith asked for an update on progress and when the first Shareholder Committee meeting would take place.  Councillor Roberts responded that the first meeting will be on 17 December 2024.

Councillor Baines asked if the Cabinet Member would agree that it would be beneficial to have cross-party representation on the Shareholder Committee.  Councillor Roberts noted that the Committee had yet to meet to decide on the future approach so she could not give any commitment to that at this stage.

Councillor Bennett stated that he believed that OxLEP had paid more attention to the voices of larger businesses and asked if there would be a more inclusive approach to consultation.  Councillor Roberts confirmed that it was the intention to have more broad representation on any advisory panel such as including the community and voluntary sector.

Councillor Enright asked if the important relationships with the City and District Councils will be retained in the new advisory structure.  Councillor Roberts responded that discussions had already taken place with the other councils to ensure that.

On item 3, Climate Action Programme Six Month Update, Councillor Hicks asked the Cabinet Member to outline the plans to deal with the red indicator on Energy and the amber indicators on Transport.  Councillor Sudbury responded that the red indicator resulted from the rejection of a bid for government funding and that the Council was working with low-carbon groups to amend the bid.  The report to Cabinet included details on how the amber indicators were being tackled.

Councillor Pressel noted that it had been known for some time that LED lighting was more damaging to insects than sodium lighting and asked if this had been taken into account when deciding to switch to LED lighting.  Councillor Sudbury responded that it was white LED lighting that caused the biggest problem.  The decision to switch to LED had been taken by a previous administration but he had decided that all new lighting should use a yellower colour to reduce the harmful impact.

Councillor Snowdon asked the Cabinet Member’s view on the fact that the Council had not acquired a single electric vehicle for the gritter fleet.  Councillor Sudbury responded that that had not been his decision but that he had accelerated the decarbonisation of the fleet in his portfolio through acquiring second hand vehicles that can be obtained more quickly.

Councillor Johnston asked the Cabinet Member if he agreed that those who seek to obstruct progress towards net zero are amongst those endangering the future of the planet.  Councillor Sudbury agreed that there was still a powerful lobby working to obstruct climate action but that the administration will continue to do everything that they can.

On item 4, Educational Psychology Assessment Service, Councillor Brighouse asked what other options were looked at given the crisis in the service and Councillor Smith asked if there was a timescale envisaged on when the backlog would be cleared.  Councillor Howson responded that there had been a particular backlog in processing Education, Health & Care Plans (EHCPs) in one area and the Cabinet decision provided a framework to draw down educational psychologists from across the country to clear the backlog.  The service was doing its best to have it cleared by the end of this financial year.

On item 5, Treasury Management Mid Term Review 2024/25, Councillor Baines asked what the administration’s priorities were in relation to the surplus returns on cash balances generated by the Treasury Management team.  Councillor Levy responded that the priorities were outlined in the budget papers that had been published.

On item 6, Business Management and Monitoring Report - September 2024, Councillor Baines asked how the Cabinet Member intended to bring the finances in Children’s Services under control.  Councillor Levy responded that he had confidence in the Director of Children's Services and her team’s ability to do so but that the administration will always prioritise children over the need to stay exactly on budget.

On item 7, Capital Programme Approvals - November 2024, Councillor Smith asked what the unspent balance of Section 106 funds had been in 2021.  Councillor Levy responded that the figure was £226m when the LibDem-Labour-Green administration took over in 2021.  Since then, around £87m had been spent on such as libraries and schools.  Another £172m has been collected.  He stated that he was confident that the money was being spent effectively.

Councillor Baines asked if modal shift required the ‘carrots’ of attractive alternatives such as mini-Hollands rather than a ‘stick’ approach.  Councillor Levy responded that he did not agree that the efforts to encourage people to switch to buses should be characterised as being a ‘stick’ approach.

Councillor Bartholomew noted that £6.646m was being spent on the East Oxford mini Holland and asked how such expenditure on such a small area could be justified when rural roads were in great need of repair.  Councillor Levy responded that there were particular issues in East Oxford and he believed that the mini Hollands would be exemplar projects that the county could be proud of.

Councillor Enright noted that Members had been informed that the Shores Green Development had been delayed until 2026 and asked if this amounted to another pressure on the Capital Programme with projects being delayed again and again.  Councillor Levy confirmed that there had been a misprint and that the notice should have read until 2025.

On item 8, Local Transport and Connectivity Plan Monitoring Report, Councillor Pressel noted that the report showed cycling had decreased while car trips had increased and asked if the poor state of paths and highways was a factor in this.  Councillor Roberts agreed that the statistics across the county were disappointing and responded that Council was putting as much resource as it could into improving surfaces.

Councillor Hicks noted that the number of cycle trips would have to be doubled to reach the Council’s target and asked the Cabinet Member if the proposed £2.5m funding in the budget papers was going to be enough to work towards that goal.  Councillor Roberts responded that some of the funds under Highways Maintenance included work to improve active travel facilities as well.

On item 9, Outline allocation of cost of living and associated community wealth building funding for October to March 2024/25, Councillor Baines asked what engagement the Council planned to have with the Government’s newly established Child Poverty Task Force.  Councillor Ley advised that he would provide a written response.

Councillor O’Connor asked if the Council would be working with grass-roots community groups as well as established charities in the distribution of funds for cost of living support. Councillor Ley confirmed that this has been the case and progress will continue to be monitored.

Councillor Hannaby asked how many residents have been helped so far through the cost of living support.  Councillor Ley responded that it was several thousand.

Councillor Hicks asked if social value could be taken into account when reviewing rent agreements with community organisations such as Flo’s The Place in the Park.  Councillor Ley responded that he would have to consult with the Cabinet Member for Finance on that.

On item 10, Cabinet Response to Council Motion on SEND Services, Councillors Brighouse, Waine and Corkin asked if the Council will continue with coproduction in the priority action plan and if the involvement of all parent groups will be real.  Councillor Howson responded that coproduction was an important part but the Council also had certain legal responsibilities that could not be devolved to others.

Councillor Reeves noted that an Extraordinary Meeting of Council in October 2023 had agreed a cross-party approach and he asked the Cabinet Member if he was content that this was happening.  Councillor Howson responded that he was not content in that he had received very little correspondence from the other parties outlining how they believe that should work.

Councillor Haywood asked for better metrics that indicate an improvement in the actual SEND services of the Council.  Councillor Howson responded that the number of officers working on EHCPs had increased from 57 to 64 since July 2023 and 44% of EHCPs were rated good or outstanding compared to 21% in July 2023.

Councillor Reeves asked the Cabinet Member to rate SEND services out of a score of 10.  Councillor Howson responded that services had improved since 2023 and he would give it a score of 5 out of 10.