Agenda item

For action: To consider a report providing the Partnership with an early stage view of the project to develop a new place narrative for Oxfordshire and inviting the Partnership to engage further.

The Partnership considered a report which set out an initial explanation of the opportunity to develop a place narrative for Oxfordshire, an early-stage view of the project and its purpose and an invitation to the Partnership to engage further.

Bill Cotton, Corporate Director for Environment and Place, Oxfordshire County Council introduced the report and answered members’ questions. It was highlighted that the project was one of overall placemaking. Whilst there was a strong established vision for Oxfordshire, there were lots of projects, strategies, plans etc. It was a complex picture that could be a challenging story to communicate and to explain to potential investors, HM Government, and indeed local communities. Oxfordshire was a very diverse county, with an impressive range of businesses and organisations located within it but had challenges. The purpose of place narrative piece was to develop a powerful shared story for the county which everyone could support and which could be communicated to investors and HM Government so as to secure investment focussed on the county’s needs. A facilitated approach would be used to create the narrative with input from all sections of stakeholders using as many images and graphical information as possible.

It was stressed that the proposed place narrative was not an attempt to create additional strategies or policies. Nor was it a bid for an Oxfordshire unitary council and it was not linked to Local Plans or spatial planning.

The Partnership was informed that it was intended that Oxfordshire County Council would lead on the commissioning of consultants to assist in the process and it was hoped that members of the Partnership would become involved in the various groupings that would be established and as conduits about the work with their own local communities and stakeholders.

A detailed discussion of the paper took place with a number of technical questions around the proposals asked of officers, including what the differences would be between the proposed work and that already undertaken as part of refresh of the Oxfordshire Strategic Economic Plan, (SEP) and whether case study examples existed of the benefits of a place narrative existed. Bill Cotton responded that the work was intended to build upon the SEP work and gave examples of counties that followed such an approach.

Councillor Liz Leffman referred to a discussion held by the Infrastructure Advisory Group around the need to be more optimistic around future funding opportunities for infrastructure including looking at inward investment and the need to be proactive in preparing for bidding opportunities. It was important to have a vision for the infrastructure that was needed and to able to articulate that vision constantly in all external funding bids. Oxfordshire needed to be in a position of setting the narrative around its overall infrastructure requirements rather than simply reacting to specific HM Government bidding opportunities on an individual basis which were not always successful or successful only in part. To create healthy places for residents to live with convenient access to transport there was a challenge around funding without relying on developer contributions or HM Government funding and a need to take the initiative.

Whilst supportive of the principal of a place narrative and needed for such an approach, Councillor Bethia Thomas expressed concern over the pace with which the proposals were being brought forward and that whilst the current report set out an initial proposal there was still a significant amount of detail around the proposals that was not clear, for example whether it was focussed on public health or infrastructure or whether the narrative would be more closely related to a marketing strategy.  In the absence of sufficient information that there would be improvement to lives of residents it was difficult to commit to use of officer resources and time. 

Councillor David Rouane echoed the concern expressed by Councillor Thomas regarding the commitment of finite officer resource. Based upon the information within the current report he was not fully clear as to whether the purpose of the proposals was to create a document that was essentially a marketing tool for the county, whether it was a strategy document or whether it sought to set out the current situation or future ambitions of what Oxfordshire could be. Whilst acknowledging the assurance that the work was not related to a unitary governance position, the links to place narrative work in other counties had in the case of Hampshire been used in a subsequent unitary bid.

Professor Irene Tracey referred to the need and advantages to be gained by presenting a coherent outward facing narrative around Oxfordshire’s ambition and vision. It was likely that in the future there would continue to be national focus towards investment outside of the Southeast and therefore it was particularly important to have a compelling narrative if future funding opportunities were to be secured. In addition, there was a need for coordinated and strategic approach to securing private sector investment from leading companies which there was opportunity for the University of Oxford to assist with through its significant convening influence.

Councillor Barry Wood commented that from his experience major employers often approached local councils as local planning authorities directly to seek their advice and as points of contact. He expressed concern that there was a risk of duplication if this was not mitigated against as part of the development of the proposals.

Angus Horner welcomed the proposals as needed but agreed that the report needed to continue to be developed further and duplication avoided. He commented that since the renaming of the Partnership there had yet to be a strategic level debate looking forward 25 years, let alone into the next century around the impact that current changes would mean and the impact on Oxfordshire’s place narrative. By way of example, the population of Oxford had grown significantly over the previous 100 years and consideration needed to be given to the impacts of future population growth and Oxfordshire’s other ambitions set out in the Oxfordshire Vision for Long Term Sustainable Development.

Giles Hughes, Chief Executive of West Oxfordshire District Councill and Caroline Green, Chief Executive of Oxford City Council both referred to the importance of developing further detail in a future report, but that in their view there was benefit of progressing the proposals. Caroline Green commented that this would allow for the consideration and input from senior officers via the Partnership’s Executive Officer Group.

At this point, the Chair suggested that in light of the points made during the discussion and breadth of the ideas discussed, the report be noted on the basis that a more detailed report would be presented at the July meeting. Before then, further stakeholder engagement should take place around the contents and detail of the report including discussion at the Executive Officer Group. 

RESOLVED:

1.     That the report be noted.

2.     That a further report setting out further details and intended outputs be presented to the Partnership in July.