Agenda and minutes

To record apologies for absence.

Apologies for absence were submitted on behalf of Councillors Bentley, Dewhurst and Forder.

To adopt and sign as a correct record the Council minutes of the meeting held on 12 July 2023. 

RESOLVED: to adopt as a correct record the minutes of the meeting of Council held on 12 July 2023 and agree that the Chair sign them as such.

To receive declarations of disclosable pecuniary interests, other registrable interests and non-registrable interests or any conflicts of interest in respect of items on the agenda for this meeting. 

None.

To receive notification of any matters which the chair determines should be considered as urgent business and the special circumstances which have made the matters urgent, and to receive any announcements from the chair. 

The Chair of Council, Councillor Povolotsky, advised that, in accordance with Section 100B (4) (b) of the Local Government Act 1972, she had agreed to take one item of urgent business at the meeting – to appoint a member to the Future Oxfordshire Partnership’s Scrutiny Panel.

The reason for urgency being that the one of the current appointees, Councillor Roberts, was no longer permitted to be a member of the Scrutiny Panel following her appointment to Oxfordshire County Council’s Cabinet. The next scheduled meeting of the panel was scheduled for November prior to the next scheduled Council meeting.

Councillor Povolotsky advised that the item would be taken after agenda item 8.

Councillor Povolotsky referred to the wildfires, floods and earthquakes, humanitarian disasters, terrorism, war and disease outbreaks, which had occurred in the world since Council’s last meeting and highlighted her view that, as elected representatives, members had a responsibility to make decisions to change the course of society, climate, nature recovery and create a safe and prosperous place to live for all residents and future generations.  On behalf of Council, she offered her thoughts to those around the world caught up in acts of war, terrorism and conflict. 

As Chair she had the privilege to represent the council at the High Sheriffs Ceremony of the Glove at Christ Church Chapel and Law Lecture at Oxford University, given by the Attorney General, including a debate between law and politics and the dwindling number of lawyers that enter the political sphere. 

To receive any questions or statements from members of the public that have registered to speak. 

Riki Therivel had submitted the following question to Councillor Thomas, Leader of the council, but was unable to attend the meeting.

“Everyone agrees that a flood scheme is needed for Oxford.  The proposed Oxford Flood Alleviation Scheme comprises flood defences, raised bridges, etc., plus a highly destructive and expensive channel.  Construction of the channel will destroy much of the irreplaceable Hinksey Meadow, delay millions of journeys on the A34 and lead to more traffic jams and possibly accidents, encircle South Hinksey for 3-5 years, and strongly reduce recreational access in the North and South Hinksey area during and after construction.  The channel would provide less than 1% of the scheme's financial benefits.  The scheme can proceed without the channel.

We attach our summary Compulsory Purchase Order objection, which gives further information on the points above.

Both Oxfordshire County Council and the University of Oxford oppose the CPO despite being project partners.  North Hinksey and South Hinksey parish councils oppose the entire scheme because of the channel's impacts. 

Given this, and the fact that most of the channel's negative impacts would fall on Vale residents, with only a couple of homes in the Vale protected by the channel, why is the Vale of White Horse District Council supporting the flood scheme at the Compulsory Purchase Order inquiry?

Could we suggest that the Vale withdraws its support for the scheme for the CPO inquiry?”

Councillor Thomas provided the following written response in advance of the meeting:

“Thank you for your question, and I’m glad that you recognise the need for a flood scheme for Oxford.  Nobody wants to see a repeat of the devastating floods of 2007.

To have your home flooded is a miserable, upsetting and costly experience.  The Oxford Flood Alleviation Scheme offers enhanced flood protection to almost 1000 homes, many of them in South Hinksey which is in our district.

The purpose of lowering the floodplain is to provide more capacity for floodwater, drawing it away from homes and businesses.  Without the lowering of the floodplain my understanding is that the protection offered by the rest of the scheme is less certain.  It will be for the Environment Agency to make the case for the design of the scheme at the CPO inquiry which starts next month, and for the inspector to assess it on its merits.

I do appreciate that there will be some disruption while the scheme is under construction.  The Environment Agency has listened to concerns of South Hinksey residents and will locate its compound as far as possible from the village, with a protective earth bund to limit the impact.  I know they are aiming to move as much material as possible by rail, although that will require planning permission and other consents to be in place so it cannot be guaranteed.

The Environment Agency has also listened to concerns about the impact on the grassland at Hinksey Meadow, and they have redesigned the route of the lowered floodplain accordingly.  The so-called “channel” will look  ...  view the full minutes text for item 31.

To receive any petitions from the public. 

None.

To consider the report of the head of legal and democratic on the Council Size Submission document.

Council considered the report of the head of legal and democratic which invited consideration and approval of a Council Size Submission document to the Local Government Boundary Commission for England as part of its electoral review of Vale of White Horse District Council.

The report set out the reason for the review - being the electoral inequality across a number of the district wards in the Vale. The first part of the review is for the Boundary Commission to consider how many members, the council size, Vale of White Horse District Council should have. Vale of White Horse District Council was invited to submit its views regarding this on a template document by 4 November. Following a decision on the council size by the Boundary Commission the review would then consider the warding patterns including the number of wards, the names of the wards and the number of members to represent those wards.

Councillor Lugova advised Council that, at its meeting on 13 September, the Community Governance and Electoral Issues Committee considered an officer draft which recommended no change to the council size of 38 members. However, following consideration of the issues the committee resolved to recommend that Council agree a revised submission document proposing an increase to 41 members. The committee felt that a small increase in the size of the council better reflected the recent and anticipated population growth, the increased workload on current members arising from this growth, the additional community representative role arising from requests to join community groups and the new member champion appointments and the desire to ensure the role of councillor remains attractive to a wide section of the community, particular those in work. The committee also agreed that a slight increase in council size could allow for two member wards in some of the larger rural district wards therefore retaining community cohesion. 

A revised council submission document was attached to the report which reflected a proposed council size of 41 and incorporated evidence and argument to support it.

Councillor Lugova thanked officers for the work put into the document and members of the committee for their consideration of the issue.

RESOLVED: to

1.    approve the draft Council Size Submission set out in Appendix A to the report of the head of legal and democratic to the Council meeting held on 11 October 2023 which recommended an increase in the size of the council from 38 to 41.

2.    Authorise the head of legal and democratic, in consultation with the Leader of the council, to finalise the Council Size Submission document for submission to the Local Government Boundary Commission for England.

At the annual meeting Council appointed Councillor Lugova as a substitute member on the Oxfordshire Joint Health Overview and Scrutiny Committee. Following Councillor Lugova’s appointment to the Cabinet, she is no longer permitted to be a member of a scrutiny committee.

Council is therefore invited to make a substitute appointment to the   Oxfordshire Joint Health Overview and Scrutiny Committee.

Council considered the appointment of a substitute member to the Oxfordshire Joint Health Overview and Scrutiny Committee.

RESOLVED: to appoint Councillor Batstone as a substitute member on the Oxfordshire Joint Health Overview and Scrutiny Committee.

Council considered the appointment of a member to the Future Oxfordshire Partnership Scrutiny Panel.

RESOLVED: to appoint Councillor Hallett to the Future Oxfordshire Partnership Scrutiny Panel.

To receive the report of the leader of council. 

Councillor Thomas, Leader of the council, provided an update on a number of matters. The text of her address is available on the council’s website.

To receive questions from councillors in accordance with Council procedure rule 33. 

1. Question from Councillor Rayner to Councillor Thomas, Leader of the council 

Rural bus services should be the lifeblood of our community. Yet the growing community of Kingston Bagpuize has a completely inadequate bus service to Abingdon, our nearest town. Buses only run every two hours and only before 5.00pm. Public transport is essential for commuters, young people accessing education and training, for socialising in the evenings and supporting the local economy. It is also an equalities issue; older people, those who are unable to drive or afford a car, can struggle to visit the GP, dentists and do their shopping.

This council has previously stated our commitment to public transport and active travel, to reduce air pollution, parking problems and improve heath, yet we seem to have limited power to make this a reality.

While this may be the case, could the Leader explain what is being done by other authorities and private bus companies to improve bus services between Kingston Bagpuize and Abingdon? And what more can be done, perhaps with the county council, to help our village secure a bus service that is fit for purpose? 

2. Question from Councillor Smith to Councillor Coleman, Cabinet member for environmental services and waste

There is growing concern in my ward about the number of single use disposable vapes that are littering our streets and public spaces. People who want to ensure their used vapes are disposed of safely are not always sure of which bin to use and there is next to know information about returning used vapes to retailers.

What impact has the prevalence of single use vapes had on Vale services, and what is the council already doing to address this?

3. Question from Councillor de la Harpe to Councillor Thomas, Leader of the council 

Given that the Prime Minister has recently made announcements that it is his government’s intent to roll back climate emergency initiatives and commitments, thereby making his target of hitting net zero by 2050 even less achievable, can the cabinet member assure residents that we remain committed to our climate emergency goals, explain how we might mitigate this new risk to our plans, and write to the Prime Minister to express our utter disappointment in his actions?

4. Question from Councillor Edwards to Councillor Pighills, Cabinet member for community health and wellbeing

Recently the dental practice in Faringdon has closed its doors to all NHS patients. This has caused great concern as it is the only practice in Faringdon and serves the residents of the town and many of the outlying villages in the Western Vale.

Could you clarify what influence the council could have in these circumstances and what if anything we can do to help improve the level of service in Faringdon and the rest of the district?

5. Question from Councillor Cooke to Councillor Thomas, Leader of the council 

Thames Water have now published their latest plans for the proposed mega-reservoir in the  ...  view the full agenda text for item 37.

A. Question from Councillor Rayner to Councillor Thomas, Leader of the Council

Rural bus services should be the lifeblood of our community. Yet the growing community of Kingston Bagpuize has a completely inadequate bus service to Abingdon, our nearest town. Buses only run every two hours and only before 5.00pm. Public transport is essential for commuters, young people accessing education and training, for socialising in the evenings and supporting the local economy. It is also an equalities issue; older people, those who are unable to drive or afford a car, can struggle to visit the GP, dentists and do their shopping.

This council has previously stated our commitment to public transport and active travel, to reduce air pollution, parking problems and improve heath, yet we seem to have limited power to make this a reality.

While this may be the case, could the Leader explain what is being done by other
authorities and private bus companies to improve bus services between Kingston
Bagpuize and Abingdon? And what more can be done, perhaps with the county council, to help our village secure a bus service that is fit for purpose?

Response

Oxfordshire County Council is the Local Highway Authority, and works closely with local bus operators. Public transport services are deregulated and therefore operate on the basis of which services are profitable. The recent adoption of an Enhanced Partnership has helped further the joint working on buses, seeking to regain bus patronage to pre-pandemic levels, as well as increase bus ridership in the future. The Government has introduced a £2 fare cap scheme, which applies to the S6 and number 15 buses that currently operate in Kingston Bagpuize.

Kingston Bagpuize is a growing community, with a Local Plan housing site to the east of the village. Demand for journeys to Abingdon and other locations is likely to grow with the new homes. The outline planning permissions for the housing development includes transport mitigation to provide additional bus stops and improve the regularity of the number 15 bus to and from Abingdon. So we can hope to see improved bus provision for Kingston Bagpuize arising from the new development. 

Ahead of the new homes being delivered and the bus service being improved, local initiatives could help bridge the gap, such as car sharing with scheduled trips or events, and community transport. Community transport can target those who are unable to travel without support, and I understand that “Helping Hands 4 Villages” offers help with transport and befriending in the Southmoor, Kingston Bagpuize, Longworth & Hinton Waldrist areas. For further information and support I am sure your local county member for Kingston Bagpuize will be happy to oblige.

B. Question from Councillor Smith to Councillor Coleman, Cabinet member for environmental services and waste

There is growing concern in my ward about the number of single use disposable vapes that are littering our streets and public spaces. People who want to ensure their used vapes are disposed of safely are not  ...  view the full minutes text for item 37.

To consider motions from councillors in accordance with Council procedure rule 38. 

(1)       Motion to be proposed by Councillor Foxhall, seconded by

        Councillor Crawford:

Council’s Pay Policy Statement approved on 15 February 2023, ensures that all directly employed staff receive at least the Real Living Wage as annually defined by the Living Wage Foundation.  The Real Living Wage is currently £10.90 an hour and will be updated on 24^th October of this year.  

The payment of at least the Real Living Wage to our employees is one way of ensuring that all our suppliers and residents are aware that we recognise the importance of the Real Living Wage in helping to reduce in-work poverty.

However, Council is currently unable to become accredited as a Real Living Wage employer as it does not have a clear commitment, or plan in place, to ensure that all the contracts it awards to third parties require that those companies are committed to paying, as a minimum, the Real Living Wage.

All our major contracts are joint arrangements between Vale of White Horse and South Oxfordshire District Councils.

Whilst Council recognises that it cannot simply change existing contracts, requiring payment of at least the Real Living Wage is something we are able to address in future procurements and contracts.

To demonstrate its commitment to the Real Living Wage and secure accreditation as a Real Living Wage employer, Council confirms its belief that:

•               no Council employee, or employee of its third party contractors, should be employed on less than the Real Living Wage.

Council therefore asks:

1      The Chief Executive to continue to engage with Unison, as the Council’s recognised trade union, to ensure that this position is maintained going forward in respect of all employees.

2      The Chief Executive to prepare a report for Cabinet, outlining the steps that are required for our Council to secure accreditation as a Real Living Wage accredited employer.

3      The Chief Executive to include, within this report, proposals to implement a requirement on all future contracted providers to pay at least the Real Living Wage to all their staff throughout the duration of the contract, identifying any likely costs associated with this.

4      Cabinet to consider the report when prepared and, should its recommendations be approved by both South Oxfordshire and the Vale of White Horse, authorise the Chief Executive to work with colleagues to implement its recommendations as soon as practicable. 

5      The Chief Executive to bring to the attention of all existing third parties who currently provide services directly on behalf of the Council, our view that all employers should, as a minimum, pay the Real Living Wage to their staff and seek an update on their companies’ position in relation to this matter.

6      The Chief Executive to update Council on progress towards its Accreditation as a Real Living Wage Employer when the next Annual Pay Policy Statement is brought before it.

(2)       Motion to be proposed by Councillor Edwards, seconded by      Councillor Cox:  ...  view the full agenda text for item 38.

(1)       Councillor Foxhall moved, and Councillor Crawford seconded, the

         motion as set out on the agenda at item 11(1)

Following debate and being put to the vote the motion was declared carried.

RESOLVED:

That Council’s Pay Policy Statement approved on 15 February 2023, ensures that all directly employed staff receive at least the Real Living Wage as annually defined by the Living Wage Foundation.  The Real Living Wage is currently £10.90 an hour and will be updated on 24^th October of this year.  

The payment of at least the Real Living Wage to our employees is one way of ensuring that all our suppliers and residents are aware that we recognise the importance of the Real Living Wage in helping to reduce in-work poverty.

However, Council is currently unable to become accredited as a Real Living Wage employer as it does not have a clear commitment, or plan in place, to ensure that all the contracts it awards to third parties require that those companies are committed to paying, as a minimum, the Real Living Wage.

All our major contracts are joint arrangements between Vale of White Horse and South Oxfordshire District Councils.

Whilst Council recognises that it cannot simply change existing contracts, requiring payment of at least the Real Living Wage is something we are able to address in future procurements and contracts.

To demonstrate its commitment to the Real Living Wage and secure accreditation as a Real Living Wage employer, Council confirms its belief that:

•               no Council employee, or employee of its third party contractors, should be employed on less than the Real Living Wage.

Council therefore asks:

1      The Chief Executive to continue to engage with Unison, as the Council’s recognised trade union, to ensure that this position is maintained going forward in respect of all employees.

2      The Chief Executive to prepare a report for Cabinet, outlining the steps that are required for our Council to secure accreditation as a Real Living Wage accredited employer.

3      The Chief Executive to include, within this report, proposals to implement a requirement on all future contracted providers to pay at least the Real Living Wage to all their staff throughout the duration of the contract, identifying any likely costs associated with this.

4      Cabinet to consider the report when prepared and, should its recommendations be approved by both South Oxfordshire and the Vale of White Horse, authorise the Chief Executive to work with colleagues to implement its recommendations as soon as practicable. 

5      The Chief Executive to bring to the attention of all existing third parties who currently provide services directly on behalf of the Council, our view that all employers should, as a minimum, pay the Real Living Wage to their staff and seek an update on their companies’ position in relation to this matter.

6      The Chief Executive to update Council on progress towards its Accreditation as a Real Living Wage Employer when the next Annual Pay Policy Statement is brought before it.

(2)       Councillor  ...  view the full minutes text for item 38.