Agenda item

To consider a report to the Future Oxfordshire Partnership which summarises recent discussions about the future purpose and scope of partnership working, and presents an interim position to the Partnership for endorsement.

The Panel considered a report to the Future Oxfordshire Partnership which summarised recent discussions about the future purpose and scope of partnership working within Oxfordshire and which presented an interim position for endorsement by the Partnership. It requested that officers develop the plans in more detail along with revised terms of reference.

Councillor Liz Leffman, Chair of the Future Oxfordshire Partnership attended the meeting and introduced the report, responding to questions from Panel members. She spoke to the Oxfordshire Housing and Growth Deal as the foundation of the Oxfordshire Growth Board, the Partnership’s predecessor body, and how the current governance arrangements had been put in place to support and monitor the Deal. As the Deal came to end in March 2025, discussion had been taking place as to what the role of the Partnership should be in the future.

It was felt that through the Partnership, the Oxfordshire local authorities and partners had worked well in collaboration and that in the future there would be several areas which needed consideration on a countywide basis, including but not limited to, strategic infrastructure, nature recovery and transition to Net Zero. The continuation of a mechanism for the Leaders of the Councils to come together and discuss these issues was felt to be high importance, but it was intended to refocus the Partnership as a formal joint committee of Leaders only, notwithstanding the important contributions external partners had made to the Partnership’s work. Engagement with those partners would continue.

Local Government devolution was area where there was a need for Leaders to collectively consider a potential way forward regarding HM Government’s proposals that might also include discussion around reshaping governance structures in Oxfordshire itself.

It was stressed to the Panel that the high-level proposals set out in the report represented current thinking and remained work in progress, with a number of issues including the desirability of establishing sub-committees and their possible remits outstanding.

The Panel undertook a detailed discussion of the report with a range of views expressed. A summary of the main points raised is set out below:

·           That there needed to be clarity around legal responsibility for any decision-making powers delegated to the joint committee and that if such powers were delegated to it there would be a need and requirement for a formal statutory overview and scrutiny committee with its own full legal powers. Regardless of the exact legal position, it was felt overview and scrutiny should be central in the proposed governance arrangements.

·           Rather than seeking to find a new purpose for the Partnership as proposed in the report, there was a need to explore and challenge whether there was a need for a joint committee to exist at all. Strategic issues could be considered by Leaders as when they arose.

·           The paper did not set out estimated costs for the operation of the joint committee, despite the need to reduce costs and reduce bureaucracy where it was not needed. Although there was reference in the report to the shared costs of the core Partnership support team, no information had been provided regarding the costs to each individual council of officer time in supporting the Partnership or a refocussed joint committee.

·           Given the pressure on finances it was important to be clear as to the value added by the Partnership in addition to other existing cross Oxfordshire bodies such as the Local Nature Partnership or Inclusive Economy Partnership. Officers from across the councils were and had always shared information and best practice.

·           The situation about HM Government’s proposals for devolution and local reorganisation was unclear at the time of the meeting and that it was felt premature to develop proposals for what the joint committee might do.

·           Some members of the Panel expressed significant concern regarding qualified majority decision making and commented that the terms of reference of the revised joint committee should specify that unanimity of all the authorities would be required for decisions.

·           That strategic planning policy including housing need was entirely within the remit of district councils through the sovereignty of their Local Plans. Strategic planning should be specifically excluded in the revised terms of reference from the joint committee’s remit and role.

·           That any proposals for economic growth and investment needed to be consistent with the sustainable principles of the Oxfordshire Strategic Vision and based on GVA per capita. 

·           There was a need for discussion space for Leaders, but it should not be decision making and therefore reference to a ‘Board’ should be avoided.

·           Several members commented that they felt it was an appropriate time to consider the future role of the joint committee and that they broadly supported the proposals within the report and refocussing the joint committees work to operate where it could add value.

·           That the lessons around what was felt to be the failure of previous joint collaborative arrangements, such as the end of the Oxfordshire Plan 2050 project, did not appear to have been taken on board and members were concerned mistakes would be repeated.

·           That lessons could be learned from successful joint working in other counties with two tier authorities that did not have a joint committee in place, but the counter point was made that a number of other successful ‘growth boards’ existed.

In response to the points made to that point, Councillor Leffman stressed there was an important distinction between the development and agreement of cross boundary strategy which the new joint committee was proposed to have a role in and actual delivery which would remain the responsibility of the individual councils to deliver. The point around the uncertainty of HM Government’s proposals about local government reorganisation in the absence of the White Paper was acknowledged, but it was felt better to begin preparations now in the likelihood that a transition to a unitary form of governance would be announced.

Councillor Leffman agreed that more information was needed on costs.

In the discussion of recommendations to the Future Partnership it was proposed that the remit of the joint committee be restricted to a forum for the discussion of devolution to meet as and when required and that the additional matters set out in bullet points two to four of paragraph nine of the report relating to inclusivity and inequality, sustainability and infrastructure not be progressed through the new joint committee. Upon being put to a vote this was not agreed and after further discussions it was resolved as follows.

RESOLVED: The Scrutiny Panel recommended that in the event the Partnership supports the officer recommendation that plans for the Partnership reset be developed in more detail, the following matters be agreed and/or clarified:

1.     That if a joint statutory committee of the Leaders is reconstituted as a successor to the Future Oxfordshire Partnership, consideration of an overview and scrutiny function be central to its design and that this be affirmed by the Partnership. The Panel noted that the report already says that a formal O&S is required in the relevant legislation.

2.     The Panel recognises the complicated and evolving nature of HM Government’s proposals around devolution and potential local government reorganisation and that this makes current future planning difficult.  It recommends that there be opportunity for scrutiny of any devolution proposals at an Oxfordshire wide level in addition to scrutiny at individual council level.

3.     That in advance of any final decision about the Partnership’s successor a full financial breakdown of all costs, covering the current and proposed support arrangements including meeting arrangements may be beneficial.

4.     That the Partnership agree and affirm that in seeking to maximise opportunities for investment and funding in Oxfordshire, any successor joint committee to the Partnership should  act in accordance with the agreed principles of sustainable growth set out in the Oxfordshire Strategic Vision.

5.     That there be clarity around the governance arrangements of any successor to the Partnership in respect of voting arrangements, quorum and safeguards for individual constituent authorities who do not support a proposition adopted by the joint committee.