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 13^th July 2012.

 

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 the Council meeting

 

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

 

Former Oxford Bus Garage development

 

When the former Oxford Bus Garage site on the Cowley Road received planning permission, residents were told that part of the site (on the left as you face the site) would be a one storey employment site, what has changed?

 

What efforts did the Council make to advertise the development site for employment purposes and where was it advertised?

 

If a mistake was made in the planning process who is responsible, the Planning Department or the Legal Department?

 

Response: The original outline application for this site dates back to twelve years ago in 2000.  Ever since then, the City Council has sought to achieve some form of employment use on the site. However, as the years have passed the nature and scale of such a use have changed.   The outline application 09/01201/OUT in 2009 was reported to the Cowley Area Committee on 4th November 2009 and the Strategic Development Control Committee on 25th November 2009 and is still extant.  The reserved matters application 11/01150/RES was called in to the East Area Planning Committee and was approved on the 6th July 2011.  It is my understanding that it is this permission which is currently being implemented, and business space will be provided and offered onto the market.   I can find no reference to the B1 business space ever being described as "single storey" in any of these applications.

 

At the time of the original application the agreed process was to work in partnership with East Oxford Action, a Single Regeneration Bid organisation in existence at the time, to create a vehicle to own the employment part of the site through a development trust and that this trust would select a partner to fund, build and operate a start-up business centre.  Therefore at the time there was no intention that the City Council would be involved in advertising the site for employment purposes. 

 

I understand that Councillor Malik received a reply in November last year to his complaint that there had been irregularities in the way this site has been handled. This reply concluded that no mistake was made and it is not possible to attribute blame to any particular officer or department. Those originally involved, none of whom is still employed by the Council, worked with the best intentions.  Present staff have sought to ensure that the Council can achieve the outcome desired when the original permission was granted.

 

In a supplementary question Councillor Malik asked if the Board Member had himself looked at the planning agreement between the Council and the developer. The Board Member said that he had not.

 

2.   Question to the Board Member, City Development (Councillor Colin Cook) from Councillor Elise Benjamin

 

Westgate Development

 

Could the Portfolio Holder give a clear indication of what is precisely happening with the proposed new Westgate development and when we will be able to see exact plan?

 

Could he give an indication of what has been the total cost to the City Council of acquiring or achieving the emptying of Abbey Place housing from 2007 to 2011 and how has this money been used to replace the 14 unit facility with its generous storage space and gardens for vulnerable and disabled tenants in a city centre position?

 

Would he also say what is the justification in housing terms for the City Council, who has just published a Your Oxford bemoaning the lack of affordable housing in Oxford, in seeking to support the eviction and demolition of these 14 purpose built city centre units in good condition?

 

Response: Approval has previously been given by the City Executive Board on 8th February 2012 to the revised commercial terms with Crown Estates/Land Securities and the formal documenting of those terms is now progressing.

 

The direct costs to the Council in terms of acquiring the former Abbey Place properties, paying compensation, fees associated etc were met by the developer under the terms of a Compulsory Purchase Order Indemnity Agreement.  The original transaction with the former developer Capital Shopping Centres effectively involved a swap, provision of the replacement units in consideration of the disposal of Abbey Place to them.

 

The demolition of Abbey Place was required for the previous scheme and is so likely to be so required for the new scheme being promoted by Crown Estates/Land Securities.  The justification is that the level of housing has been maintained (with better quality properties being provided) and the removal of Abbey Place will facilitate significant commercial development in due course.

 

Land Securities are in the process of appointing a master architect and it is anticipated that the process of detailed design will commence in the near future.  There will be full consultation with interested stakeholders.

 

In a supplementary question Councillor Benjamin asked about the identification of suitable alternative housing provision. The Board Member responded by emphasising the opportunities a new Westgate development would bring to the Council’s area. He considered that it would not be in the Council’s interests to turn away the development opportunity.

 

3.   Question to the Board Member, City Development (Councillor Colin Cook) from Councillor Craig Simmons

 

Cowley Road Saturation Zone

 

Could the Portfolio Holder please indicate for the last 12 months how many license applications for extensions of hours and capacity increases have been approved and how many refused in the area covered by the East Oxford Saturation Zone?

 

Response: Two new applications approved, one variation approved, and no refusals.

 

In a supplementary question Councillor Simmons asked if the Board Member agreed that the Cowley Road Saturation Zone policy was not working and the members of the Licensing and Gambling Acts Committee needed to be reminded of the policy. The Board Member replied that he did not agree. Licensing hearings took decisions on licensing applications on the evidence before them.

 

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

 

Barton West School

 

Would the Portfolio Holder agree that with such a large development (over 800 units of accommodation) the proposed Barton West Development must have a local primary school deep within the new development and it is important not to fantasize that this will happen but to ensure that there is a direct and clear commitment from the County Council to build a school.

 

Would he indicate what absolute and fulsome guarantees have been given by the County Council to build a new primary school within the new development?

 

Would he agree that going ahead building houses without community support such as new shops, community centres and schools, would mean a new estate would become a characterless dispirited accommodation block without a community hub

 

Response: Policy BA11 in the Barton Area Action Plan requires the provision of a new Primary School as part of a Community Hub within the local centre.  The onus to build the new school will fall on the developer not the County Council.  The County Council are already having detailed discussions with the Limited Liability Partnership, the Joint Venture Partnership between the City Council and Grosvenor, as regards the needs of the school.  There is no intention, and nor has there ever been any intention, to provide a characterless new estate. The City Council’s aspiration is to provide an exemplar development and it is working hard to ensure this outcome.

 

In a supplementary question Councillor Williams put to the Board Member that to go ahead with any large scale housing development without guarantees about community development was risky. The Board Member said in reply that if absolute guarantees were sought before development, no progress would be made. He referred again to policy BA11 in the Barton Area Action Plan. He suggested moreover that as the Council was the landowner it had considerable control and influence on the makeup and mix of the development.

 

5.   Question to the Board Member, City Development (Councillor Cook) from Councillor Craig Simmons

 

Gloucester Green

 

In the tender documents currently being prepared to tender out management of the Gloucester Green Market, can the portfolio holder confirm that environmental, social and local economic development criteria will be incorporated as tender requirements and whether the contract will be open to a 'community right to challenge'.

 

Response: Any tender will include the Council's normal procurement requirements, and particularly related questions on economic and social benefits.  If the Council receives a "community right to challenge" it will consider the request in the context of its plans for the development of an invigorated market solution.

 

In a supplementary question Councillor Simmons pursued the issue of community right to challenge. The Board Member responded that officer advice had and would continue to be taken on this matter.

 

6. Question to the Board Member, Leisure Services (Councillor Van Coulter) from Councillor David Williams

 

Replacement Blackbird Leys Pool costing

 

(A) Could the Portfolio Holder confirm that the estimated cost of the non Olympic replacement pool at Blackbird Leys has increased by over 30% since the scheme was first proposed in 2007 to the present figure of £9.2m?

 

Response: Following the September 2010 feasibility and business case the administration decided to include fun water for toddlers. This increased the cost of the scheme from £7.6 million to £8.5 million. In July 2011 we increased the contingency, making the project budget £9.23 million.

 

In a supplementary question Councillor Williams pursued the matter of the cost of a new pool. The Board Member repeated that a fixed price contract had been agreed for £9.23 million

 

(B) Could the Portfolio Holder give a categoric assurance that £9.2m is the final figure for building this modest replacement 35 metre facility and give Council a fulsome assurance that persistent rumours that the costs are already escalating beyond that figure are incorrect?

 

Response: The new high quality pool will be adjoined to Blackbird Leys Leisure Centre and comprises a 25 meter main pool, teaching pool, moveable floor to enable improved programming, toddlers splash pool, sauna, soft play area and low carbon technologies such as a biomass boiler and combined heat and power unit. 

 

A fixed cost contract has been signed with our construction company Willmott Dixon for £9.23 million. Legal challenges continue to delay the construction of the new pool and while we are confident we will ultimately be able to deliver our leisure facility strategy, defending the challenges is a costly and slow process.

 

The council has been awarded a £75,000 grant from Sport England towards the new pool at Blackbird Leys and this is at risk if the matters are not resolved soon.

 

Originally it was planned to be able to close the older expensive pools during this year.  Last year alone £97,000 was spent on maintaining Temple Cowley Pools in an attempt to keep the pool open until the replacement pool opens at Blackbird Leys.  This is becoming increasingly difficult and there is an increased risk of unplanned closures for emergency works to be undertaken.  The Council will therefore have to keep under review whether it is feasible to keep the pools open until such time as the replacement is open.

 

 

(C) Could the Portfolio Holder also give an assessment of how the massive new attractive Family Fun Pool, with slides, wave machines and superior facilities now being built in Didcot will have on the conventional traditional replacement Blackbird Leys Pool usage?

 

Response: The proposed pool at Didoct will be over 14 miles from Blackbird Leys and as such we do not believe it will have any real impact on usage of the new pool. As of the 10^th of July 2012 the responsible officer at South Oxfordshire District Council has confirmed that the Didoct pool remains at concept stage and the facility mix has not yet been agreed. There is as yet no approved scheme although they do have a £15m budget and a site has been identified.     

           

7.   Question to the Board Member, Housing (Councillor Scott Seamons) from Councillor Elise Benjamin

 

Tenant Liaison

 

What is the next move of the Labour Party with regard to tenant liaison in the City Council’s Housing Services?

 

Could the Portfolio Holder be clear as to what is being proposed for the new structure of Council Tenants Liaison illustrating if democratic structure will be taken away?

 

Response: Currently we are consulting with all tenants/leaseholders for their views on involvement and the draft Local Offers and the closing date is 16th July. There have been around 500 completed surveys returned so far which is very encouraging. This is part of the development of the strategy for tenants involvement which we are developing with TPAS(Tenants Participation Advisory Service). TPAS will analyse and collate the feedback which will be presented to a steering group that involves TPAS, Officers and tenants’ representatives. The final report will be going to the City Executive Board         in September outlining the way forward for Tenants Involvement.

 

8.   Question to the Board Member, Crime and Community Safety (Councillor Dee Sinclair) from Councillor Sajjad Malik

 

CCTV and licensing issues

 

(A) At a meeting the City Centre Police Sergeant said, we have CCTV cameras in Park End Street, but they are not that good.  Could the Portfolio Holder tell me what is wrong with them and why they are not good and what you will be going to improve them?

 

Response: The council jointly operate the city centre CCTV scheme of over 40 cameras, covering areas of the city from the railway station to Broad Street and down to St Aldates.  All cameras adhere to relevant standards of construction, are operated through a Code of Practice and are regularly maintained.

 

Park End St is a high volume area and the police regularly use CCTV footage to identify and apprehend offenders.  I am unaware of the particular incident the police sergeant is referring to but they may have been referring to the quality of the image.  Image quality can be affected by the distance from the camera, whether a clear view of the face was available and the camera location. 

 

(B)Could the Portfolio Holder provide the crime figures year by year in the City centre for 2008/09, 2009/10, 2010/11 and 2011 to date

 

Response:

 

Crime trend data from 2008/09 to 2011/12
Source: Thames Valley Police crime data
Crime type	2008/09	2009/10	2010/11	2011/12
Serious Acquisitive crime*	2770	2192	1910	1956
Theft from a person	611	578	638	618
Criminal damage	2883	2289	2294	1899
Total violence against the person with injury		1283	1024	800
Total violence against the person without injury		2722	2412	1764
Total violence against the person		4005	3436	2564
All crime	20627	18624	18243	17419
* Comprises Burglary dwelling, theft from a vehicle, theft of a vehicle,  personal robbery

 

(C)As most night spots are open till 3am and people are still on the street till 4.30am/5am does the Police stay till 5.00am or do their shifts end at 4.00pm?

 

Response: The police operate a specific Nightsafe operation at weekends when they have additional officers in the City centre and East Oxford, working closely with door staff, licensed premises and Street Pastors.

 

These additional officers end their duty at 4 a.m. but commonly continue working until the streets are cleared.  Most people are leaving premises at 3 a.m. and are gone by 4 a.m. 

 

The usual rota of early, late and night shift are maintained so at no time are there no police officers on duty in the city.

 

 

(D) Over the last year how many alcohol venues been given extension of hours against the Saturation policy within the Council’s Saturation Zone?

                 

Response: Three venues within the designated area have been given an extension of hours.

 

9.   Question to the Board Member, Cleaner Greener Oxford (Councillor John Tanner) from Councillor Graham Jones

 

Defacement of residents’ parking signs

 

How many residents’ parking signs have had to be replaced in Oxford in the last year due to spray-paint defacement?

 

Response: We have replaced 22 parking signs specifically due to spray paint defacement in the last year. However we have dealt with a further 24 incidents where we have managed to remove the spray paint rather than replace the sign and another 48 incidents of refixing or replacing vandalised/damaged residents’ parking signs.

 

The signs cost approx £30 each to replace and are mainly Controlled Parking Zone signs, and the City covers the cost from the Section 42 financial allocation.

 

In a supplementary question Councillor Jones asked whether the defacement of signs was increasing, whether expenditure on signs meant less money available to repair potholes and whether the police were involved. The Board Member said that he would ensure that incidents of sign defacement were brought to the attention of the police.

 

10.    Question to the Board Member, Cleaner Greener Oxford (Councillor John Tanner) from Councillor David Williams

 

Recycling Rates

 

Could the Portfolio Holder give the recycling rates for the City of Oxford and compare them with the surrounding districts for the following years:

 

2006-7

2007-8

2008-9

2009-10

2010-11

2011-12

 

What does the Portfolio Holder deduce from these figures?  Especially when contrasted against the rates for the surrounding District Authorities.  Would he agree that progress is painfully slow?

 

Response: No.  Progress has been good and continues to improve.  Since 2008 the residents of Oxford have increased their recycling of household waste by a quarter.  Just as important, the amount of total waste per household which is taken to landfill has continued to fall, as shown in the following charts:-

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

BVPI 84: Household Waste Collected Per Population Head (KG)

 

 

In a supplementary question Councillor Williams suggested that the figures supplied did seem to indicate that the recycling rate increase was slow and that it would not be until late 2020’s before recycling would be up to 100%. In reply the Board Member said that it should not be assumed that the percentage increase in recycling would continue at the same rate. Overall, the City’s recycling scheme was one to be proud of.

 

11.    Question to the Deputy Leader (Councillor Ed Turner) from Councillor Craig Simmons

 

Redundancies – Senior Officers

 

Could the Portfolio Holder confirm that certain long serving senior staff may soon take voluntary redundancy under ‘minor changes in senior management structure’?

 

Could he give an estimate of how much these redundancy packages will cost the authority? And confirm that there would be no large scale voluntary redundancy packages if these staff had worked until retirement.

 

Could he confirm that this was the real reason for earmarking £750,000 in a special redundancy pot in the budget when the policy for the Council was to meet the envisaged reduction in staffing by natural wastage?

 

For the record could the Portfolio Holder indicate in  whose interest he is working for, the welfare of senior officers or the ratepayer?

 

Response: A redundancy has arisen following the recent senior management restructure which was carried out to           ensure it remains fit for purpose in the light of the current challenges and aspirations of the Council - in particular, the continued drive for efficiency and performance improvement, plus an increased focus on community development and cohesion, education attainment and physical regeneration.  The restructure also provides more balance to Executive Directors' portfolios and better alignment of service areas: Organisational Development and Corporate Services with all the corporate levers to drive efficiency and effectiveness; Community Services delivering through Direct Services, Leisure and Parks, Environmental Development and a Community Development team; and City Regeneration focusing on major regeneration projects, planning and developing our housing service. 

 

Details of redundancy packages for senior officers are reported in the Council’s Annual Pay Policy Statement (published each March for that financial year). 

 

In total, is it estimated that the Council’s establishment will reduce by approximately 110 posts over the period of the current Medium Term Financial Plan.  This figure includes our best estimate of the impact the introduction of Universal Credit will have on our Housing Benefit function (we have been advised by the Department for Work and Pensions that TUPE does not apply). Consequently, provision has been made for a contribution to the redundancy reserve of £750k in 2012/13 which will be added to the balance as at 31/3/2012 of £1.2 million. A further contribution of £250k is planned to be made in 2013/14.  This figure is based on average costs over the previous 2 -3 years and is considered sufficient to fund future liabilities over the period. 

 

All reserves are reviewed as part of the annual refresh of the Medium Term Financial Plan.

 

In the interests of transparency, details of staffing reductions have been clearly set out in recent budgets, and it will be obvious to most councillors that some redundancy funding is required (with a higher level needed to avoid compulsory redundancies).  Regrettably that was not the case for the Green Group, which proposed a budget amendment last year which officers strongly advised against adopting, as it would not be deliverable, and would thus expose the authority to unacceptable risk.

 

                  This administration is completely committed to providing the best possible service to local people, in particular the most vulnerable.  We want to avoid compulsory redundancies, and support the council's excellent workforce, in circumstances where council funding is being slashed by a government wedded to a failed Thatcherite economic dogma.  Nobody's interests will be served by fantasy budget amendments, misinformation about the purpose of reserves, or a continued denial of the extent of the Council's financial challenges.

 

12. Question to the Deputy Leader (Councillor Ed Turner) from Councillor Ruth Wilkinson

Business Rates

 

How are preparations being made for the transfer of business rate retention at the local level next year?

Response: I am afraid the councillor is misinformed or has been misled by coalition government 'spin' - the vast majority of Business Rates (at a level set centrally) will be retained by the government or pooled centrally.

 

Business Rates Reform legislation was introduced in the Local Government Finance Bill in December 2011 with an intention for some business rate growth to be locally retained from 1^st April 2013. More recently the Government have indicated that it will retain 50% of business rate receipts (the ‘central share’) with the remaining 50% being distributed back to local authorities through Revenue Support Grant, (RSG). Communities and Local Government have also listed a number of specific grants that they roll into      mainstream funding, delivered through the new RSG, these include council tax support grant, council tax freeze grant and homelessness prevention grant. The level of grant for 2013/14 and 2014/15, the last two years of CSR10 will be laid out in the 2013/14 finance settlement report.

 

Therefore, despite the creation of RSG (and its increased size due to the rolling in of specific grants), local authorities will continue to be reliant on the allocation of a grant from central government (i.e. RSG, rather than Formula Grant) and will continue to receive funding notifications through a local government finance settlement.

 

Under the business rate growth retention scheme, local government (as a sector) will retain 50% of any NDR   growth (or decline) achieved locally. However, there is the potential for individual authorities to receive only a small proportion of any growth, due to the operation of a levy to dampen disproportionate gains or losses.

 

The current Medium Term Financial Plan provides for reductions in grant funding of 2% and 9% for 2013/14 and 2014/15 respectively and no prediction has been made at this stage for growth. Informally, we are hearing that central government funding cuts are likely to be greater than this level.

 

Discussions are ongoing with Customer Services staff, Finance and Economic Development as April 2013 approaches in order to support economic growth locally. Discussion will also be undertaken with the Valuation Office.  In addition the City Council is part of a County wide Group of Districts and County considering the financial implications of the cut to funding for council tax benefit, and also the changes the Business Rates.

 

In a supplementary question Councillor Wilkinson asked about the percentage of non-collection of Business Rates and she asked how robustness was decided. The Board Member said that he would arrange for a written response to be given, copied to all Councillors.

 

13.    Question to the Board Member, Customer Services and Regeneration (Councillor Val Smith) from Councillor Ruth Wilkinson

 

Housing Benefit

 

What is the current percentage of council errors in     benefit claims? 

 

Response: Following the Benefits Service Review we are in the process of establishing a new Quality Assurance system for Benefits processing. When this is established, performance will be reported on a monthly basis.  In terms of Benefit Subsidy, Local Authorities only receive full subsidy in relation to overpayments they have raised, providing that their level of Official error is less than 0.48% of their total Benefit expenditure. We have been below this threshold for the last three years. Official error is classified as an error caused by the action of a Local         Authority, or other government organisation, which the claimant could not have been expected to be aware of.

 

In a supplementary question Councillor Wilkinson asked how performance would be reported and in what document would it be reported to Councillors. The Board Member said that performance would be reported to the Department for Work and Pensions but could be copied to the questioner.

 

14.    Question to the Board Member, Cleaner Greener Oxford (Councillor John Tanner) from Councillor Jean Fooks

 

Green Travel Plan

                 

When will the City Council’s Green Travel Plan be ready for use? What basic data has been collected on staff’s travel choices?

 

Response: I understand the Green Travel Plan for staff will be completed by the end of this financial year. Most City Council staff already travel to work sustainably by foot, bike, bus and train. At work some employees already travel by bus, bicycle or in vehicles using renewable and electric fuel.

 

In a supplementary question Councillor Fooks asked for some precise information. The Board Member said he would obtain this and let the questioner have it.

 

15.    Question to the Deputy Leader (Councillor Ed Turner) from Councillor Jean Fooks

 

Dial-a-Ride

 

Now that the outturn figures for the year 2011/2 are showing a surplus of £500,000, which is proposed to be placed in a reserve,   will you now reconsider your decision not to pay the County Council, as provider of Dial-a-Ride services across the county, the £58,000 needed to reprovide the much-missed second dial-a-ride bus for the elderly and disabled residents of the city for another year?

 

Response: The outturn position for 2011/12 is a one-off saving and as a matter of principle should not be used to fund ongoing revenue costs such as the Dial a Ride Service, as suggested.

 

With effect from 1^st April 2012 concessionary bus services transferred to the County Council and grant monies from Department for Communities and Local Government are paid to the County Council through formula grant and as such it is considered that responsibility for delivering Dial-a-Ride lies with Oxfordshire County Council.  It is very regrettable that the County Council decide to cut the level of service.

 

When planning its budget proposals for next year, the administration will bear in mind the strong representations it has had from pensioners' groups on this issue (and it is to be hoped that the County Council will do likewise). However, given the likely scale of further cutbacks to council funding, no promises about reinstatement can be made at this stage.

 

In a supplementary question Councillor Fooks asked whether some of the surplus could be used for a second Dial-a-Ride bus. The Board Member replied first by repeating that Dial-a-Ride responsibility was that of the County Council. He suggested that the questioner as a County Councillor should bring her influence to bear on the County Council in respect of Dial-a-Ride provision. He then repeated his earlier remarks about next year’s budget and that the administration would bear in mind the representations received from pensioners groups on the matter but without commitment to the ability to provide money while faced with competing demands upon resources.

 

16.    Question to the Leader (Councillor Bob Price) from Councillor Jean Fooks

 

Ombudsman

 

What was the outcome of the complaint to the Local Government Ombudsman about the basis of the calculation of the fee for the partial release of the 1933 covenant on the property of one of my constituents in Sunnymead?

 

Response: The Ombudsman has decided to discontinue the investigation because the Council has agreed to pay the complainant £8,250 and to review its policy and procedures (for dealing with the release/partial release of restrictive covenants).

 

In response to supplementary remarks the Leader said that all points would be taken into consideration in the review referred to and in the asset management plan review.

 

17.    Question to the Board Member, Customer Services      and Regeneration (Councillor Val Smith) from Councillor Stuart McCready

 

Housing Benefit

 

Given the uncertainty of the impact of Housing Benefit changes, can the Portfolio Holder for Housing assure Council that meetings of the City Executive Board and the Housing Scrutiny Panel will be kept informed by way of routine reports this year of the numbers affected by the Housing Benefit Cap, the numbers seeking supplementary relief as a result, and what relief the Council has been able to provide?

 

Response: The question is assumed to relate to the overall benefit cap. No cases are affected by the household benefit cap. We will be receiving quarterly reports from the Department for Work and Pensions in relation to this matter. The first report contained 230 households affected by the benefit cap. However it seems that some excluded cases may have been included with this information.

 

In response to a supplementary question the Board Member agreed that scrutiny would be updated regularly on numbers of Council Houses subject to Right to Buy.

 

18.    Question to the Leader (Councillor Bob Price) from Councillor Ruth Wilkinson

 

Freedom of Information

 

Since January 1st 2011, what percentage of Freedom of Information requests to Oxford City Council have been answered in the time stipulated by law?

 

Response: From 1^st January 2011 until 31^st May 2012, 87.4% of requests were answered in the time stipulated by law (i.e. within 20 working days).  During that time 928 requests were received.  

 

In a supplementary question Councillor Wilkinson remarked that 1 in 8 Freedom of Information requests had not been answered in the time stipulated. What factors were contributing to this less than satisfactory situation. The Leader replied to say that the statistic did not represent unsatisfactory performance. Timescale to respond was short. Nevertheless, he would talk to officers about the Council’s performance to see what could be done.

 

(b)                                         Questions notified by the deadline in the Constitution where no reply in advance of the Council meeting was given

 

19.    Question to the Board Member, City Development (Colin Cook) from Councillor Jim Campbell

                                   

(a)Today is exactly six months since the strategic workshop to look at the future of the Covered Market. Can you please tell us what action has been taken to implement the 12 Next Steps that were proposed in the review document produced after the workshop?

 

                        Response: A written response would be sent to the questioner.

 

(b)Despite frequent requests from the Market Traders Association for a decision to be made, more that three months have now passed since the relevant date for the latest three year review for Covered Market rents? While I accept the legal validity of the point "time is not of the essence", can you tell us when the new notices will be served? 

 

Response: The notices would be issued on 18^th and 19^th July.

 

In a supplementary question Councillor Campbell said that the rate of increase was running at 40%-60%. Nine units in the Covered Market were vacant. Negotiations between Traders and the Council took a long time. Were the rent increases sought in the best interests of the Council, the City and the traders? In response the Board Member said that the increases sought were the result of the professional work conducted by the Council’s officers. Oxford had a buoyant retail economy with one of the lowest overall vacancy rates. Footfall showed a 7.7% increase against a 5.4% reduction nationally. He looked forward to working with the traders to improve uptake for the future.

 

20.       Question to the Board Member, Leisure Services  (Van      Coulter) from Councillor Jim Campbell

 

(a)       Has a final decision already been made to close one of the three remaining Squash Courts at the Ferry Centre? If so, can you give us             details of any consultation that has taken place with squash players and organisers in the city? If a decision has not been taken, what steps will you take to carry out such a consultation?

                       

(b)       In the light of the response of the National Squash Association what will be the impact of the proposed decision on a sport which is aiming for Olympic status?

 

Response: On part (A) the project was approved by the City Executive Board in September 2011. The works include a new café, spinning studio (static bike class) and a soft play area.

 

                        The project is part of the City’s leisure strategy to improve the quality of the centres that remain so they have a wider appeal. The success to date can be seen with Ferry Leisure Centre increasing its usage from 280,000 visits in 2009-10 to 456,000 visits in 2011-12.

 

The details of the proposal had been informed by Fusion’s expertise and customer feedback and then developed by the Leisure Partnership Board which is made up of senior officers at the Council and Fusion Lifestyle, elected members, and representatives from young people, older people, centre users and health. 27 of quarter one membership cancellations at Ferry gave the reason as not being able to book classes, with two specifically citing the reason as being that the Centre does not offer spinning.

 

The new development will increase participation by at least 22,000 participants per year alongside further reducing the management fee which lets us invest in inclusive activities such as the new targeted free swimming lessons.        

 

The usage of the squash courts overall is around 50% with some parts of the day as low as 5%. Squash continues to struggle to attract a broader range of participants, the first quarter of this year shows just 6% of squash bookings were from concessionary card holders. This compares to an average of 21% of all activities at Ferry being concessionary.

 

Following the return of public health as a responsibility for local councils, it is all the more important for the City's leisure offer to support the drive to increase participation and to encourage healthier local communities. Developing the leisure facilities and delivering high quality value for money services across the City will have positive outcomes for service users and the community as a whole.

 

The works have been communicated to Ferry centre users. We are meeting with the squash players to listen to their views to see if there is anything we can do that helps them to continue to play squash such as improving the quality of the remaining courts, or more coaching sessions. It would though be disingenuous to launch a public consultation on this matter.

 

On part (B) we are retaining two squash courts at Ferry which will still enable competitive leagues to be played.

 

In a supplementary question Councillor Campbell pressed the Board member on consultation.  The Board member said that the meeting he referred to earlier would take place tomorrow and the views expressed would be taken into account.

 

21.    Question to the Board Member, Leisure Services (Van Coulter) from Councillor David Rundle

 

Considering the recent concern over provision for squash in this city, when will the Council be reviewing its decision to concentrate support on a small range of sports rather than the wide and impressive plethora of sports in which Oxford's citizens participate and gain enjoyment?

 

Response: Sport England recognised 46 sports and there are many more outside of this. To ensure that we can maximise opportunities in line with current resources we have focus and priority sports that the Council’s Sports Development Team concentrate on and these are demonstrated within the Sport and Physical Activity review 2009. The Sports Development Team also work with the governing bodies of other sports when the opportunities arise, and have even been involved with Quidditch (from the Harry Potter books). This strategy has been extremely effective with 26.4% of adults participating in regular sports, placing us in the top quartile of district councils in the Country and also with one of the biggest increases in participation (5.7% (almost 10,000 more people)) of all districts since the baseline was first established.

 

In a supplementary question Councillor Rundle asked for more detail about non-focus sports and the Board Member agreed that this detail would be supplied to the questioner.
                 

22.    Question to the Board Member, Housing (Scott Seamons) from Councillor Jim Campbell

 

Last month Icolyn "Ma" Smith was told that she would no longer receive funding from the City Council for the weekly lunch she has been providing for the homeless in the City for more than 20 years. The grounds for the rejection of her application were that "research has shown that this kind of facility encourages rough sleeping". Do you agree with this view?

 

Response: Firstly I believe it would be useful to set out to council the history surrounding grant applications to ‘Ma’ Smith and why she did not receive a grant in 2010/11.

 

In respect of the homelessness grants – Mrs Smith received funding of £5,000 from the City Council in each of the years 2006/7, 2007/8, 2008/9, 2009/10. A further application for £8,000 in 2010/11 was turned down and it should be noted this coincided with a cut in the grants budget of £250,000 that year. In the year 2010/11 36 applications were received and a total of £216,658 requested against a budget of £68,000 for the homelessness in the open bidding programme.

 

During the latter two years that Mrs Smith received a grant she did so under the homelessness commissioning theme and subsequent monitoring information at the time told the council that a high percentage of the users of the Manzil Way facility had their own place. Further, full council with the support of all parties adopted the ‘Place of Change’ approach to our homelessness commissioning theme. This decided to prioritise grants for organisations that supported rough sleepers into settled accommodation and contribute to the reduction of repeat homelessness. Since Mrs Smith’s facility doesn’t reduce the number of rough sleepers, is used by some people who are not homeless and was unable to confidently say that it could be sustained on less than 50% of the requested grant (limiting options for officers) officers recommended that the facility not be funded that year. The recommendations of funding in the open bidding grants programme that year were supported by all parties.

 

Mrs Smith made no further grant applications in the most recent two years.

 

On the issue the questioners have asked if whether or not soup kitchens and facilities like that run by ‘Ma’ Smith encourage homelessness, this is an emotive and difficult question with differing opinions. Indeed there is division in opinion amongst homelessness charities: Jeremy Swain, chief executive of Thames Reach (homelessness organisation), said: “Street handouts do little to help people make the step away from rough sleeping. Instead they frequently prevent people from facing up to the reality of the harmful life-style they have adopted.” Whilst former chief executive of Shelter, Adam Sampson said “Well-developed and co-ordinated soup runs play a valuable role in providing a mixture of practical and emotional help to vulnerable homeless people”. Charles Fraser, chief executive of St Mungo’s homeless charity, provided a more nuanced view, “While we recognise the compassion involved in providing food to vulnerable people, those in distress and rough sleeping need services that will support them off the streets for good”. These quotes reference street handouts but I believe the debate to be similar.

 

For my own part I do not see soup kitchens or soup runs and facilities like Mrs Smith’s as encouraging homelessness although they may not alleviate the problem. Consequently, I would not have expressed the view that “this kind of facility encourages rough sleeping” quoted in the Oxford Mail. I believe the Council to be taking the right approach in focussing its limited funding through grants to organisations like the many hostels in the city that provide shelter, food and clothing for the homeless; provide skills, work or training to help people secure accommodation. I welcome the compassion shown to vulnerable people by Mrs Smith and her team of volunteers and am happy that she has received considerable financial support for her work from the ‘Secret Millionaire’. Finally it is important that institutions providing hot food or clothing to the homeless link those people up with the range of hostels in the city or the city outreach team workers as we strive to end rough sleeping in Oxford and ensure ‘No Second Night Out’.

                                   

23.    Question to the Board Member, Housing (Scott Seamons) from Councillor Sam Hollick

 

Could the portfolio holder please present and explain the evidence that soup kitchens encourage rough sleeping, as suggested by a City Council spokesperson in the Oxford Mail of 8th June?

 

Response: The Board Member referred to his response to Councillor Campbell.

 

In a supplementary question Councillor Hollick said that he had not considered the language used in the Oxford Mail of the 8^th of June as attributed to a City Council spokesperson to have been helpful. In response the Board Member said he tended to agree. The Council’s response had not been approved politically. He would make sure that this did not happen again.