Minutes of the ordinary meeting of Council on 11 July 2011.

Council resolved to approve the minutes of the ordinary meeting held on 11 July 2011.

Councillors declared interests as follows:

(1)       Councillor Sajjad Malik declared a personal interest in agenda item 17(6) (Motion on Notice 6 – Cornmarket Notice Board) as he was a licensed badgeholder for the distribution of leaflets. (Minute 48(6) refers).

(2)       Councillor Sajjad Malik declared a personal interest in agenda item 17(13) (Motion on Notice 13 – Autumn Revised Budget) as he was associated with the hackney carriage and private hire licensed trade.  (Minute 48(13) refers).

(3)       Councillor Sajjad Malik declared a personal interest in agenda item 20 (Review of full Council procedures and other constitutional amendments) as he was associated with the hackney carriage and private hire licensed vehicle trade.  (Minute 51 refers).

(4)       Councillor Mohammed Altaf-Khan declared a personal interest in agenda item 17(13) (Motion on Notice 13 – Autumn Revised Budget) as he was associated with the hackney carriage and private hire licensed vehicle trade.  (Minute 48(13) refers).

(5)       Councillor Mohammed Altaf-Khan declared a personal interest in agenda item 20 (Review of full Council procedures and other constitutional amendments) as he was associated with the hackney carriage and private hire licensed vehicle trade.  (Minute 51 refers).

(6)       Councillor Mohammed Niaz Abbasi declared a personal interest in agenda item 17(13) (Motion on Notice 13 – Autumn Revised Budget) as he was associated with the hackney carriage and private hire licensed vehicle trade.  (Minute 48(13) refers).

(7)       Councillor Mohammed Niaz Abbasi declared a personal interest in agenda item 20 (Review of full Council procedures and other constitutional amendments) as he was associated with the hackney carriage and private hire licensed vehicle trade.  (Minute 51 refers).

(8)       Councillor Shah Jahan Khan declared a personal interest in agenda item 17(13) (Motion on Notice 13 – Autumn Revised Budget) as he was associated with the hackney carriage and private hire licensed vehicle trade.  (Minute 48(13) refers).

(9)       Councillor Shah Jahan Khan declared a personal interest in agenda item 20 (Review of full Council procedures and other constitutional amendments) as he was associated with the hackney carriage and private hire licensed vehicle trade.  (Minute 51 refers).

(10)     Councillor Joe McManners declared a personal interest in agenda item 17(7) (Motions on Notice – Health and Social Care Bill) as he was a General Practitioner.  (Minute 48(7) refers).

(11)     Councillor Ben Lloyd-Shogbesan declared a personal interest in agenda item 17(7) (Motion on Notice 7 - Health and Social Care Bill) as he was an employee of the National Health Service.  (Minute 48(7) refers).

(13)     Councillor Bob Price declared on behalf of all the Members on the City Executive Board, personal interests in agenda item 17(13) (Motion on Notice 13 - Autumn Revised Budget) as they were part of the Administration that set the budget in February 2011.  (Minute 48(13) refers).

(14)     Councillor Stephen Brown declared on behalf of all members of the Liberal Democrat Group, personal interests in agenda item 17(13) (Motion on Notice 13 – Autumn Revised Budget) as they may in the future be part of an Administration that set the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 32.

Apologies were received from Councillors Beverley Hazell and Nathan Pyle.

None made.

(a)       The Lord Mayor will announce the death recently of Kate Hayward, Telecoms Manager – ICT Strategy (Finance and Efficiency) and a minute’s silence will be held as a mark of respect.

 (b)      The Lord Mayor will welcome the new City Poet, Kate Clanchy, who will address the meeting.

(a)       The Lord Mayor announced that the new City Poet, Kate Clanchy was unable to attend this meeting, but would be attending the Full Council meeting on 19^th December 2011.

(b)       The Lord Mayor announced the birth of a baby boy for Councillor Beverley Hazell and on behalf of Council wished her and her new family best wishes.

(c)        The Lord Mayor said that she was enjoying her role as Lord Mayor and was delighted to meet people and organisations that highlighted the wealth of community involvement in the City.

(d)       Council stood for a minute’s silence in memory of Kate Hayward, Telecoms Manager – ICT Strategy (Finance and Efficiency), who had recently passed away.

The Sheriff said that Port Meadow was a large part of her duties and during a recent drive of cattle on Port Meadow, 311 cattle had been rounded up.  She added that there still seemed to be some confusion over issues of responsibility and to help resolve these she had organised a meeting for all concerned.

(a)       The Leader announced that a public consultation was underway concerning public rights of way and wayfaring and details could be viewed in St. Ebbe’s Street and Bonn Square, with any comments made to the City Centre Manager.

(b)       The Leader announced that the newly refurbished Old Fire Station would be re-opening on 5^th November 2011.

(c)        The Leader announced that the Remembrance Service would be held on Sunday 13^th November 2011 and all Members were welcome to attend. 

None made.

To hear addresses from members of the public in accordance with Council Procedure Rule 11.8 for which the required notice (1.00pm on Thursday 6^th October 2011) and the full wording of the address has been given to the Head of Law and Governance.

Council received eight addresses (texts of the addresses appended to these minutes) as follows:

(1)       Richard Lawrence-Wilson, a local resident submitted in advance details of his address to Council (now appended) on the Five Mile Drive Recreation Ground.

(2)       Pamela Webber, a local resident submitted in advance details of her address to Council (now appended) concerning the provision of public toilets.

(3)       William Clark, a local resident submitted in advance details of his address to Council (now appended) on the Town Green Fourteen.

(4)       Neil Holdstock, a local resident submitted in advance details of his address to Council (now appended) concerning the Headington Car Park.

(5)       Nigel Gibson, a local resident submitted in advance details of his address to Council (now appended) concerning football in Blackbird Leys.

(6)       Jane Alexander, a local resident submitted in advance details of her address to Council (now appended) detailing a Temple Cowley Pools update.

(7)       Nigel Gibson, a local resident submitted in advance details of his address to Council (now appended) concerning lack of democracy in Oxford.

(8)       Judy Compton, a local resident submitted in advance details of her address to Council (now appended) which concerned houses in multiple occupation.

A note in response to statements made concerning Town Greens and the impact of the Town Green on organised football (Public Addresses 3 and 5) was submitted by the Head of Law and Governance.

Councillor Mary Clarkson declared a personal interest in public address (1) as she was a member of a faith group that preferred burial to cremation.

Councillor Nuala Young declared a personal interest in public address (2) as part of her role as a Tour Guide she would show visitors to public conveniences.

Councillor Nuala Young declared a personal interest in public address (6) as she was part of the co-ordination of Oxford CND.

Councillor Tony Brett declared a personal interest in public address (8) as he knew the addressee.

Council heard all of the addresses and thanked the addressees for addressing Council.

To hear questions from the public in accordance with Council Procedure Rule 11.9 to the Leader or other Board Members of the City Executive Board for which the required notice (1.00pm on Thursday 6^th October 2011) and the full wording of the question has been given to the Head of Law and Governance and to hear responses from those Members.

Two questions were asked by members of the public.

(1)       Question to the Board Member, City Development (Councillor Colin Cook) from James Rowland

Student units

Oxford City Council's planning department continues to approve planning applications for purpose built student housing. Can you explain why this is the case as the Annual Monitoring report 2010  figures state that both Universities have achieved or, are about to achieve, the required CS 25 target that there should be no more than 3000 students  living in private accommodation in order to get permission for academic expansion.. Furthermore, Oxford University (OU) has stated that further purpose built accommodation is in the pipeline bringing the figure down to just 2650, whilst OU intends to stabilise its student intake. Oxford Brookes University (OBU) has announced a cut of 1000 on campus student places from 2012. OBU has recently sold a 100 bedded student hall (Cotuit Hall) to a private language school stating that this was now surplus to requirements.

Both universities therefore don't seem to have a need for further student accommodation. Moreover the Core Strategy Inspector  decided  that 3000 students in private accommodation was the appropriate target  and rejected .lower targets such as 2000 students in private housing  as additional land for student housing would need to be identified and  this would put too much pressure on land needed to meet housing targets. Why therefore does the City Council not recommend refusal for further speculative student developments on land which is not owned by the universities?

Response: The City Council’s policy is to ensure that the Universities have no more than 3,000 students each living in private accommodation. However the policy does not say “ and no less than” . This means that if either University or one of the Colleges wish to provide further purpose built accommodation they are able to do so and that would not be contrary to this planning policy.  

Nevertheless the Council's longstanding policy approach has been altered by the adoption of the Core Strategy.  The Inspector ruled that the occupancy restrictions that encouraged the two Universities to build more purpose-built accommodation should also be applicable to certain speculative student accommodation.  The City Council has responded to this by developing draft policy options on the location of student accommodation in its emerging Sites and Housing Development Plan Document.  If the preferred option in the recent consultation document is taken forward as policy, it will set out clear guidance to prospective developers about the locations in which future schemes may or may not be acceptable. 

This would achieve the Council's policy aims without imposing an unreasonable moratorium on all future schemes yet it will see further planning applications coming forward for purpose built student housing for occupation by a wider range of students than just those attending the two Universities.

(2)       Question to the Board Member, Finance and Efficiency  (Councillor Ed Turner) from Sietske Boeles 

Council Tax Exemptions

Oxford Brookes University (OBU) accommodates students on short courses in its student accommodation (classified  ...  view the full minutes text for item 40.

Council had before it the following:-

(a)       Minute extract and recommendation from the City Executive Board of 21 September 2011;

(b)       Report of the Executive Director City Services.

Councillor Ed Turner (Deputy Leader of the Council), seconded by Councillor Bob Price, moved and spoke to the City Executive Board’s recommendation.

Following a debate, Council resolved to approve a capital budget in the order of £264k for the purchase of equipment required to operate the service, financed as far as possible from Section 106 receipts and the residual from the redirection and virement of Direct Services budgets.

Council had before it the following:-

(a)       Minute extract and recommendation from the City Executive Board of 21 September 2011;

(b)       Report of the Head of Leisure and Parks.

Councillor Ed Turner (Deputy Leader of the Council), seconded by Councillor Bob Price, moved and spoke to the City Executive Board’s recommendation.

Following a debate, Council resolved to approve a capital budget in the order of £700k for the cost of the works to be included in the Council’s Capital Programme funded by prudential borrowing and to note that the revenue costs of financing would be financed form the reduction in management costs of the Leisure Management Contract referred to in the report.

City Executive Board decisions (Minutes)

(1)       Minutes of the meeting held on 21^st September 2011

Single Executive Member Decisions (Decision Sheets)

(1)       Decision Sheet of the Single Executive Member Decision meeting (Board Member – Corporate Governance and Strategic Partnerships) held on 3^rd August 2011.

(2)       Decision Sheet of the Single Executive Member Decision Meeting (Board Member – City Development) held on 8^th August 2011.

(3)       Decision Sheet of the Single Executive Member Decision Meeting (Board Member – Finance and Efficiency) held on 15^th August 2011.

(4)       Decision Sheet of the Single Executive Member Decision Meeting (Board Member – Housing Needs) held on 18^th August 2011.

(5)       Decision Sheet of the Single Executive Member Decision Meeting (Board Member – Finance and Efficiency) held on 7^th September 2011.

Council had before it (previously circulated, now appended):

(a)       Minutes of the City Executive Board held on 21 September 2011.

(b)       Minutes of the following Single Executive Member Decision meetings:

(i)                 Board Member, Corporate Governance and Strategic Partnerships – 3 August 2011;

(ii)               Board Member, City Development – 8 August 2011;

(iii)             Board Member, Finance and Efficiency – 15 August 2011;

(iv)              Board Member, Housing Needs – 18 August 2011;

(v)                Board Member, Finance and Efficiency – 7 September 2011.

City Executive Board – 21^st September 2011 – Questions

(1)       Councillor Turner asked what view Councillor McManners had on the extension to the Right to Buy Scheme and its implications.

In response Councillor McManners said that the proposed discount was 30% which would be disastrous for the Council which was taking on a huge housing debt with the reform of the Housing Subsidy Scheme.

Single Executive Member Decision – 7^th September 2011 – Questions

Councillor Rundle asked if an update could be provided with regard to the Harcourt House issue (Minute 15(2)).

In response Councillor Turner said that he would provide a written response.

None.

None received.

Questions on notice under Council Procedure Rule 11.10(b) may be asked of the Lord Mayor, a Member of the City Executive Board or the Chair of a Committee.

Questions on notice must, by the Constitution, be notified to the Head of Law and Governance by no later that 9.30am on Friday 7^th October 2011.

Full details of any questions for which the required notice has been given will be circulated to Members of Council before the meeting.

(a)       Questions notified in time for replies to be provided before this Council meeting.

1.         Question to the Board Member, City Development (Councillor Colin Cook) from Councillor David Williams

Councillor Nuala Young declared a personal interest as she was part of various campaigns that may use Bonn Square.

            Bookings for Bonn Square

Could the portfolio holder give an explanation as to why, amongst other groups, the Teachers Pension Rally on the 30th of June and the  March of the Invisible Disabled People on the 23 of July to stage rallies on Bonn Square were turned down?

Would the portfolio holder agree that Bonn Square’s primary function to this local authority and the people of Oxford is as a public speaker’s space and that it has a long tradition of used as a meeting and rally point for campaigns and events such as the May Day rally and public demonstrations.

Could he explain why he denied the use of the Square to the protestors and agree that although he may not agree with the protestors, their peaceful methods and message that is not a sufficient basis for refusal.

Answer: The Teachers' Pension Rally on the 30th June was turned down because we had another pre-existing charity event booking for the site.  In the case of the March of the Invisible People the organiser did not give us the necessary details of what was proposed for us to assess whether they met the necessary Health and Safety standards.

I would not agree that the primary function of this space is as a public speaker’s space.  The Bonn Square protocol was prepared and introduced in 2009 following the major refurbishment of the area, which created a substantial new City Square where the public, both local residents and visitors, can meet up, sit and relax in new modern and attractive surroundings.

The square is part owned by Oxford City Council and part owned by the New Road Baptist Church.  In partnership with the Church we have agreed that events held at the site should be beneficial to the community and help promote the City through the creative use of the public space. We are particularly keen to encourage events that are in one of three categories - arts & cultural, historic, or charitable.   We have welcomed peaceful demonstrations and protests at the Square and we consider all applications for use of the Square on their merits. However we have to ensure that the event organiser has consulted the appropriate stakeholders and will comply with relevant health and safety standards.  We are unable to permit events to take place on the site if the organiser is unwilling to fill in the appropriate paperwork and take part in consultation with our stakeholders.

Councillor Williams in a supplementary question asked if the Board Member would agree that most people in Oxford considered Bonn Square as a place to express their feelings and would he not also agree that it gave a rather bad impression that  ...  view the full minutes text for item 45.

Statements on Notice under Council Procedure Rule 11.10(b) may be made.  Statements do not need to be directed to a specific Councillor.

Statements on notice must, by the Constitution, be notified to the Head of Law and Governance by no later that 9.30am on Friday 7^th October 2011.

Full details of any statements for which the required notice has been given will be circulated to Members of Council before the meeting.

None made.

The Head of Law and Governance has submitted a report which advises on the procedure that Council needs to follow under the Council’s Petitions Scheme in respect of large petitions, and to provide information specifically on the petition concerning publicly funded leisure in Oxford.

Council is being recommended to follow the procedure for large petitions in the Council’s Petitions Scheme by hearing the head petitioner for the petition entitled “No confidence in our Labour Council” and to then debate the petition and decide how to advise the Executive.

The Head of Law and Governance submitted a report (previously circulated, now appended) which advised on the procedure that Council needed to follow under the Council’s Petitions Scheme in respect of large petitions and provided information specifically on the petition concerning No confidence in our Local Labour Council.

Nigel Gibson the head petitioner presented the petition and spoke on its contents.

Councillor John Tanner moved the following recommendation:

“Council thanks Nigel Gibson for presenting this petition and noted its content”.

Following a debate, Council voted and resolved to support the recommendation by Councillor Tanner that the Council thanked Nigel Gibson for presenting the petition and noted its contents.

Council Procedure Rule 11.14 refers.  The Motions (listed in the order received) that have been notified to the Head of Law and Governance by the deadline of 1.00pm on Wednesday 28^th September 2011 are attached to this agenda.

Council had before it 16 Motions on Notice and reached decisions as follows:

(1)       Council Tax Benefit – (Proposer – Councillor Ed Turner, seconded by Councillor Antonia Bance)

Council notes with regret and alarm the consultation on cuts to council tax benefit.  Council believes that the cut - which will amount to nearly 20% in the council tax benefit of working-age recipients - represents an appalling indifference to the plight of people on low incomes (including many disabled people and those with children) and will be damaging to the aim of reducing child poverty, in Oxford and elsewhere.
 
Council expresses concern that local authorities are being incentivised to reduce benefits and spend funding elsewhere, and believes this could lead to a highly damaging 'race to the bottom' in levels of provision.  Council also expresses concern at the significant expense likely to be associated in chasing small amounts of money from those on low incomes, and at the significant extra complexity which will be introduced into the benefits system at a time when simplification is the government's stated aim.
 
Council notes that in the past politicians have expressed concern at a perceived unfairness in the council tax system, and finds it an act of gross political hypocrisy that these same politicians are now massively increasing the council tax burden upon the very poorest in our society.
 
Council asks the Chief Executive to draft a strongly-worded letter to Ministers on this subject, to be signed by himself and any group leaders who are willing.

Councillor David Rundle moved an amendment:- to delete the third paragraph.

Councillor David Williams moved an amendment:- to insert the following words at the end of the first sentence in the first paragraph “as proposed by the Coalition Government”

The mover of the substantive Motion, Councillor Ed Turner did not accept the amendment by Councillor David Rundle, but did accept the amendment by Councillor David Williams and following a debate, Council voted and the Motion as amended by Councillor David Williams was adopted as follows:

Council notes with regret and alarm the consultation on cuts to council tax benefit.  Council believes that the cut - which will amount to nearly 20% in the council tax benefit of working-age recipients - represents an appalling indifference to the plight of people on low incomes (including many disabled people and those with children) and will be damaging to the aim of reducing child poverty, in Oxford and elsewhere.

Council expresses concern that local authorities are being incentivised to reduce benefits and spend funding elsewhere, and believes this could lead to a highly damaging 'race to the bottom' in levels of provision.  Council also expresses concern at the significant expense likely to be associated in chasing small amounts of money from those on low incomes, and at the significant extra complexity which will be introduced into the benefits system at a time when simplification is the government's stated aim.

Council asks the Chief Executive to draft a strongly-worded  ...  view the full minutes text for item 48.

None made.

The Head of Law and Governance has submitted a report which asks Council to approve the Schedule of polling districts and polling places for the administrative area of the City Council as required by the electoral Administration Act 2006.

Council is asked:

(a)       To approve the Schedule of polling districts and polling places as set out in Appendix A to this report;

(b)       To give the Returning Officer the delegated power to make changes to polling stations in emergencies;

(c)        To subsume polling districts GC into GB, KC into KA and ME into MC.

The Head of Law and Governance submitted a report (previously circulated, now appended) which asked Council to approve the schedule of polling districts and polling places for the administrative area of the City Council as required by the Electoral Administration Act 2006.

Council resolved:

(1)       To approve the Schedule of Polling Districts and Polling Places as detailed in Appendix A to the report;

(2)       To delegate power to the Returning Officer to make changes to polling stations in emergencies;

(3)       To subsume polling districts GC into GB, KC into KA and ME into MC

The Head of Law and Governance has submitted a report, the purpose of which is to review the operational and constitutional procedures applicable to Council meetings to allow for more efficient public engagement and to propose other constitutional amendments.

Council is asked:

(a)    That the changes to Council procedures described in the report are agreed by Council

(b)    That the Constitution be amended to reflect the changes proposed to the Council Procedure Rules, the Council scheme of delegation and the Contract Procedure Rules as set out in the body of the report, with effect from the 11^th October 2011.

(c)     That every Council meeting is filmed and published on the internet.

The Head of Law and Governance submitted a report (previously circulated, now appended) the purpose of which was to review the operational and constitutional procedures applicable to Council meetings to allow for more efficient public engagement, and to propose other constitutional amendments.

Councillors Mohammed Niaz Abbasi, Mohammed Altaf-Khan, Shah Jahan-Khan and Sajjad Malik, declared personal interests as they were associated with the hackney carriage and private hire licensed vehicle trade.

The Leader of the Council, Councillor Bob Price said that the item had been discussed at the Corporate Management Team and the proposals were to address the amount of papers produced for Council and the difficulty that this caused the public and Members in following the meeting.  He added that the proposals would have allowed only one document to be produced.  He further said that he wished to withdraw paragraphs 1-16 and recommendation (a) of the report and the reference to Council Procedure Rules from recommendation (b) and to refer back to Officers these parts of the report for further discussion with Members.

Councillor Brown welcomed the withdrawal of paragraphs 1-16 by Councillor Price.  He said that while he had the greatest sympathy in improving the current procedures, he still needed to be persuaded that the proposals would benefit the public, aid transparency and make the Council meeting better.

Councillor Williams felt that the proposals were a device to limit the number of questions submitted to reduce criticisms.

Councillor Tanner supported the amended recommendations and said that it was about dealing with the business on the agenda and the democratic process.

Councillor Benjamin felt that the use of the St. Aldate’s Room was a good move, but that there were still issues with the sound system.

Councillor Price said that the withdrawn paragraphs were not about restricting the public and Members, they were simply changing the current deadlines which were confusing for some, to one deadline instead.

Council resolved:

(a)       That the Constitution be amended to reflect the changes proposed to the Council scheme of delegation and the Contract Procedure Rules as set out in the body of the report with effect from 11^th October 2011;

(b)       That every Council meeting be filmed and published on the internet.

If Council wishes to exclude the press and the public from the meeting during consideration of any aspects of the preceding agenda items it will be necessary for Council to pass a resolution in accordance with the provisions of Section 100A(4) of the Local Government Act 1972 specifying the grounds on which their presence could involve the likely disclosure of exempt information as described in specific paragraphs of Part 1 of Schedule 12A of the Act if and so long as, in all the circumstances of the case, the public interest in maintaining the exemption outweighs the public interest in disclosing the information.

(The Access to Information Procedure Rules – Section 15 of the Council’s Constitution – sets out the conditions under which the public can be excluded from meetings of the Council).

None.