Councillor(s) Robinson and Hollingsworth sent apologies.

Councillor Latif would join the meeting late.

Councillor Gant declared an interest in items in items16b, 16c, 16g, and 16h, due to his role as the Cabinet Member for Transport Management for Oxfordshire County Council. He agreed that he would leave the room for these items.

Councillor Ottino declared, in relation to item 16a, that he receives income from the Oxfordshire pension fund as his late partner was an employee of Oxfordshire County Council. He also noted that his current partner is employed by Oxfordshire County Council. Councillor Ottino would remain in the meeting for the duration of any debate relating to this item.

Councillor Diggins declared her employment as a teacher in relation to item 16d; the Lord Mayor confirmed it was not a declarable interest.

Minutes of the ordinary meeting of Council held on Monday, 27 January 2025 and the budget meeting on Thursday, 13 February 2025.

Council is asked to approve the minutes as a correct record.

Council resolved to approve the minutes of the meetings held on Monday 27 January 2025 and Thursday 13 February 2025 as a true and accurate record.

Any proposed changes will be circulated with the briefing note or notified at the meeting.

None.

Announcements by:

1.     The Lord Mayor

2.     The Sheriff

3.     The Leader of the Council (who may with the permission of the Lord Mayor invite other councillors to make announcements)

4.     The Chief Executive, Chief Finance Officer, Monitoring Officer

The Lord Mayor announced his recent attendance at the Oxford Centre of Islamic Studies where he participated in Iftar and met the Deputy Prime Minister, the Faith Minister, and the High Commissioners to Pakistan and Bangladesh. Council heard of discussions regarding Oxford’s diverse immigrant communities and the importance of diverse representation across institutions, such as the universities and Councils.

The Lord Mayor also informed Council of his attendance at an event at the Oxford Playhouse with the Primary Playmaker Scheme which is in its tenth year. Council heard that the programme brings together children from areas of deprivation to provide professional support for writing short plays and developing future skills.

The Leader of the Council notified members of her recent correspondence with the Mayor of Ramallah following recent events on the West Bank. Council heard that the Leader has written back expressing deep sorrow and concern. Council was informed that the letter would be circulated.

The City Rector remembered Oscar Romero, an Archbishop from El Salvador, who on the date of this meeting in 1980, was killed during a church service. Council heard how Oscar Romero used his platform to speak for those who were voiceless and act for the needs of others.

Public addresses and questions to the Leader or other Cabinet member received in accordance with Council Procedure Rules in the Constitution relating to matters for decision in Part 1 of this agenda.

Up to five minutes is available for each public address and up to three minutes for each question. Questions must be less than 200 words.

The request to speak accompanied by the full text of the address or question must be received by the Director of Law, Governance and Strategy by 5.00 pm on Tuesday, 18 March 2025.

The briefing note will contain the text of addresses and questions submitted by the deadline, and written responses where available.

A total of 45 minutes is available for both public speaking items. Responses are included in this time.

There were no addresses or questions.

The Monitoring Officer has submitted a report asking Council to consider a change of seat allocation on Scrutiny Committee from the Real Independents Group to the Oxford Independent Group.

Recommendation: For Council to resolve to:

1.    Agree to amend the political proportionality of the Scrutiny Committee, to re-allocate the seat from the Real Independent Group to the Oxford Independent Group;

2.    Subject to the Political Proportionality being amended, agree to appointment Councillor Ajaz Rehman to the Scrutiny Committee for the remainder of the 2024/2025 municipal year.

Council received a report from the Monitoring Officer asking Council to consider a change of seat allocation on the Scrutiny Committee from the Real Independents Group to the Oxford Independent Group.

Councillor Brown introduced the report and proposed the recommendations, noting to Council that it requires no one to vote against it in order for it to carry through.

On being seconded by Councillor Jarvis, the recommendations were put to a vote and agreed.

The Head of People has submitted a report request Council to approve the policy for the payment of market allowances.

Recommendation: For Council to resolve to:

1.    Agree the market allowance pay policy

Council received a report from the Head of People requesting approval the policy for the payment of market allowances.

Councillor Chapman introduced the report and proposed the recommendations, explaining that it summarises the pay and rewards provided to Oxford City Council employees and outlines the how market allowances are utilised to supplement pay order to attract and retain talent.

Councillor Roz Smith enquired as to whether the Cabinet member felt that the policy will reduce the money being spent on temporary recruitment agencies to which Councillor Chapman clarified that certainty around alternative costs could not be provided, but emphasised his belief that without the policy, it would be more challenging to recruit people to those positions which are more difficult to fill.  

On being seconded by Councillor Brown the recommendations were put to a vote and agreed. Council approved the report. 

The Head of People has submitted a report for the annual Pay Policy Statement for 2025-2026.

Recommendation: For Council to resolve to:

1.    Approve the Annual Pay Policy Statement 2025/26.

Council received a report from the Head of People regarding the annual Pay Policy Statement for 2025-2026.

Councillor Chapman introduced the report and proposed the recommendations, noting that the requirement for an annual report has existed since the 2011 Localities Act. Council heard that the report summarises how Council employees are paid and that no changes are expected for next year as Council is mid-way through a two-year pay settlement.

On being seconded by Councillor Brown, the recommendations were put to a vote and agreed. 

The Monitoring Officer has submitted a report asking for authorisation to extend the terms of office of the council’s independent persons for a further four months to 31 March 2025.

Councillor Lizzy Diggins, the Chair of the Standards Committee, will present the report.

Recommendation: For Council to resolve to:

1.    Authorise the Monitoring Officer to extend the terms of office of the Council’s Independent Persons for a further four months to 31 July 2025.

Council received a report from the Monitoring Officer asking for authorisation to extend the terms of office of the Council’s independent persons for a further four months to July 2025.

Councillor Diggins introduced the report and proposed the recommendations.

On being seconded by Councillor Mundy the recommendations were put to a vote and agreed.

This item has a time limit of 15 minutes.

Councillors may ask the Cabinet Members questions about matters in these minutes.

To be circulated with the Briefing Paper.

Councillor Roz [HC1] [JM2] Smith, in relation to the report on Grant Allocations to community and voluntary organisations for the year 2025/26, queried the timing of grant decisions and asked whether all will be taken by the end of July. Specific refence was made to Headington Festival. Councillor Linda Smith emphasised that the timetable for the grant programme is published, is publicly available, and cannot be varied. Instead, it was recommended that members utilise ward budgets to support events such as Headington Festival, if required. 

To be circulated with the Briefing Paper.

In relation to item 14 of the minutes, Councillor Miles asked whether the Council has conducted any analysis of savings and efficiency for the three unitary proposals in relation to devolution. Councillor Brown confirmed that this work has begun.

In regards item 139 of the minutes on homelessness, Councillor Fouweather asked when a report on the outcome of the Housing First scheme can be expected. Councillor Linda Smith confirmed that work is ongoing to assess expansion possibilities and to increase the number of tenancies using the Housing First model. Council heard that a report could be expected at the Housing and Homelessness Panel.

To be circulated with the Briefing Paper.

No questions were raised.

Questions on notice from councillors received in accordance with Council Procedure Rule 11.11(b).

Questions on notice may be asked of the Lord Mayor, a Member of the Cabinet or a Chair of a Committee. One supplementary question may be asked at the meeting.

The full text of questions must have been received by the Director of Law, Governance and Strategy by no later than 1.00pm on Wednesday, 12 March 2025.

These, and written responses where available, will be published in the briefing note.

42 written questions were asked of the Cabinet Members and the Leader, and these and written responses were published before the meeting.

These along with summaries of the 18 supplementary questions and responses asked and given at the meeting are set out in the minutes pack.

The Lord Mayor informed Council that item 15 (Scrutiny Committee Update report) would be considered next as the public speaker for item 13 would not be in attendance until 19.30.

No outside bodies reports have been submitted ahead of this meeting.

None.

The Chair of the Scrutiny Committee has submitted a report which updates Council on the activities of scrutiny and the implementation of recommendations since January 2025.

Council is invited to comment on and note the report.

Council had before it the report of the Scrutiny Committee Chair.

Councillor Miles provided Council an update on the work of the Scrutiny Committee and its panels in the period from 29 January 2025 to 3 March 2025 during which the Scrutiny Committee had met twice, and each of the three panels had met once.

The Scrutiny Committee had discussed eight substantive items including the Equalities Update, the Annual Business Plan, and the Adult Exploitation Modern Slavery Update. 14 recommendations were made to Cabinet, of which 10 were accepted, 1 was accepted in part, and 3 were rejected.

Council also heard that the panels collectively reviewed nine substantive items and made 6 recommendations to Cabinet, all of which were agreed. 

Councillor Miles thanked all officers and councillors for their presentations, recommendations, and responses.

Council raised no questions.

Council noted the report.

The Lord Mayor informed Council that, as all items on the agenda other than motions had been completed early and the public speaker would arrive before 19:30, item 16b would now be considered.

This item has a time limit of 60 minutes.

Motions received by the Director of Law, Governance and Strategy in accordance with the rules in Section 11 of the Constitution by the deadline of 1.00pm on Wednesday, 12 March 2025are listed below.

Cross party motions are taken first. Motions will then be taken in turn from the Oxford Community Independents Group, Oxford Independent Group, Real Independent Group, Labour Group, Liberal Democrats Group, Green Group, Independent Oxford Alliance Group in that order.

Substantive amendments to these motions must be sent by councillors to the Director of Law, Governance and Strategy by no later than 10.00am on Friday, 21 March 2025so that they may be circulated with the briefing note.

Minor technical or limited wording amendments may be submitted during the meeting but must be written down and circulated.

Council is asked to consider the following motions:

a)    Strengthening Ethical Procurement and Investment Policies to Reaffirm Oxford City Council’s Commitment to Human Rights and International Law (proposed by Cllr Barbara Coyne, Seconded by Cllr Dr Hosnieh Djafari-Marbini)

b)    Impact of Traffic Filters (Proposed by Cllr Saj Malik, Seconded by Cllr. Mohammed Azad)

c)    Devolution (Proposed by Cllr. Susan Brown, Seconded by Cllr. Anna Railton)

d)    Ban Smartphones in Oxford Schools (Proposed by Cllr. Jo Sandelson, Seconded by Cllr Andrew Gant)

e)    Standing up for the rights of refugees, asylum seekers and all of Oxford's community (Proposed by Cllr Alex Powell, Seconded by Cllr Dianne Regisfold)

f)      Decent and Genuinely Affordable Housing for All (Proposed by Cllr. Linda Smith, Seconded by Cllr. Ed Turner)

g)    School Transport Support (Proposed by Cllr. Katherine Miles, Seconded by Cllr. Roz Smith)

h)    Better Bus Connectivity – Putting People Before Profit (Proposed by Cllr. Simon Ottino, Seconded by Cllr. Tiago Corais)

i)      Youth Mobility Scheme (Proposed by Cllr. Laurence Fouweather, Seconded by Cllr. Theo Jupp)

Council had before it 9 motions on notice submitted in accordance with Council procedure rules and reached decisions as set out below.

Motions agreed as set out below:

a)    Strengthening Ethical Procurement and Investment Policies to Reaffirm Oxford City Council’s Commitment to Human Rights and International Law (proposed by Cllr Barbara Coyne, Seconded by Cllr Dr Hosnieh Djafari-Marbini

Motions taken but lost:

b)    Impact of Traffic Filters (Proposed by Cllr Saj Malik, Seconded by Cllr. Mohammed Azad)

Motions not taken as the time allocated for debate had finished:

c)    Impact of Traffic Filters (Proposed by Cllr Saj Malik, Seconded by Cllr. Mohammed Azad)

d)    Devolution (Proposed by Cllr. Susan Brown, Seconded by Cllr. Anna Railton)

e)    Ban Smartphones in Oxford Schools (Proposed by Cllr. Jo Sandelson, Seconded by Cllr Andrew Gant)

f)      Standing up for the rights of refugees, asylum seekers and all of Oxford's community (Proposed by Cllr Alex Powell, Seconded by Cllr Dianne Regisford)

g)    Decent and Genuinely Affordable Housing for All (Proposed by Cllr. Linda Smith, Seconded by Cllr. Ed Turner)

h)     School Transport Support (Proposed by Cllr. Katherine Miles, Seconded by Cllr. Roz Smith)

i)      Better Bus Connectivity – Putting People Before Profit (Proposed by Cllr. Simon Ottino, Seconded by Cllr. Tiago Corais)

j)      Youth Mobility Scheme (Proposed by Cllr. Laurence Fouweather, Seconded by Cllr. Theo Jupp)

Real Independent Group Motion 

The Council notes that Oxfordshire County Council refuses to commit to a thorough economic impact assessment of the likely effects of the traffic filters on Oxford’s small business community, instead focusing solely on the dry data of just two metrics: Mastercard spend and footfall.[1] 

The City Council believes that these metrics fail to offer an accurate assessment of the economic impact on small businesses which would be better evaluated by reference to turnover, staff numbers and comprehensive face to face business forums. 

This Council therefore requests that the Cabinet Member for Planning:  

1. Look to commission and publish its own independent survey of Oxford’s businesses with regard to the economic impact of the traffic filters with particular reference to?businesses' turnover and staff numbers impact, mainly established via Oxford City Council-organised surveys and face-to-face business forums across the city, which will help the council properly understand the impact. 

2. Commits to working closely with existing Oxford small business groups in order to maximise the response of the survey. 

Councillor Malik, seconded by Councillor Azad, proposed the amended motion as set out in the briefing note.

Councillor Brown left and rejoined the meeting during the discussion of this item.

Councillor Arshad left and rejoined the meeting during the discussion of this item.

Councillor Diggins left the meeting left the meeting.

The Lord Mayor invited Council to take a short break at 18.25 for 10 minutes.

Council resumed at 18.35.

Councillor Regisford rejoined the meeting following the break.

Following debate and on being put to the vote, the motion was lost.

The Council notes that Oxfordshire County Council refuses to commit to a thorough economic impact assessment of the likely effects of the traffic filters on Oxford’s small business community, instead focusing on three quantitative metrics (Mastercard spend, footfall and shop vacancy rates) plus qualitative business surveys as part of stakeholder engagement.^[1] 

The City Council believes that these metrics fail to offer an accurate assessment of the economic impact on small businesses which would be better evaluated by reference to turnover, and staff numbers. 

This Council therefore requests that the Cabinet Member for Planning:  

1. Look to commission and publish its own independent survey of Oxford’s businesses with regard to the economic impact of the traffic filters with particular reference to?businesses' turnover and staff numbers impact, which will help the council properly understand the impact. 

2. Commits to working closely with existing Oxford small business groups in order to maximise the response of the survey. 

This item will be taken at or shortly after 7.00pm

Public addresses and questions to the Leader or other Cabinet member received in accordance with Council Procedure Rules in the Constitution and not relating to matters for decision in Part 1 of this agenda.

Up to five minutes is available for each public address and up to three minutes for each question. Questions must be less than 200 words.

The request to speak accompanied by the full text of the address or question must be received by the Director of Law, Governance and Strategy by 5.00 pm on Tuesday, 18 March 2025.

The briefing note will contain the text of addresses and questions submitted by the deadline, and written responses where available.

A total of 45 minutes is available for both public speaking items.

Council heard 1 address and Cabinet Members read or summarised their written responses. Both addresses and responses are set out in full in the minutes pack.

1.    Address from Professor Nick Maynard – Support for Motion 16a

The Lord Mayor invited Council to break until 19.30.

Council resumed at 19.31.

Councillor Latif joined the meeting following the break.

Oxford Community Independent Group Motion

Council notes:

•   Oxford City Council’s commitment to human rights, equality and justice is longstanding.^[1] We have democratically embedded ethical policies and practices across our administration.^[2] We are committed to representing every resident in our international city, challenging inequalities,^[3] and upholding the fundamental rights and freedoms of all.

•   Our leader has noted “the historic role of ethical boycotts, which have played a pivotal role in campaigns for justice” and “Oxford’s prominent role in the anti-apartheid movement”, which culminated in Nelson Mandela’s 1997 visit.^[4]

•   Over the past year, successive International Court of Justice (ICJ) rulings have underlined UN member states’ obligation to actively avoid complicity in Israel’s illegal occupation of Palestine and grave violations of human rights,^[5] with UN experts warning that continued inaction “jeopardises the entire edifice of international law”.^[6]

•   Under international law, the legal norms that apply to a state extend to local authorities.^[7]

•   Council acted swiftly in response to Russia’s violations of international law.^[8]

Council believes that:

•   We have an ethical duty and legal obligation to avoid trade and investment relations and cooperation with entities that recognise, aid or assist violations of international law.^[9]

•   The Oxfordshire Pension Fund—to which Council employees and city residents contribute—should adhere to similarly robust ethical standards, in line with its fiduciary duty towards scheme members and employers.^[10]

Council resolves to:

•   Request that the cabinet member for finance and asset management strengthen our investment and procurement policies to incorporate, wherever possible and in line with applicable legislation, the UN Principles for Responsible Investment (UN PRI) and Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights (UNGP); and explicitly preclude Council knowingly, indirectly or directly, investing in or trading with entities implicated in:

-    the production of weapons, weapon parts, or military equipment;

-    fossil fuel extraction, processing, or trade;

-    state violence and repression, war and occupation and/or grave violations of human rights as defined in international law (including war crimes, crimes against humanity, and genocide).^[11]

•   Request that the leader write a letter urging the Oxfordshire Pension Fund Committee to work with Brunel^[12] to:

-      extend existing investment exclusions^[13] and restrictions^[14] to encompass the above-listed activities, anywhere in the world;

-      divest from current investee entities known to be involved in illegal occupation and grave violations of human rights;^[15] and

-      commit to ensuring that all investee entities adopt and rigorously implement the UNGP, in addition to the UN Global Compact.

•   Commit to retendering our banking contract (including accounts for our wholly owned companies) as soon as possible.^[16]

•   Request that the cabinet member for business, culture and an inclusive economy issue and actively disseminate a statement encouraging local businesses and institutions to follow Council’s example in developing robust ethical trade and investment policies and practices, aligned with international law and standards.^[17]

•   Where no contrary legal requirement exists, forgo cooperation with authorities, institutions or  ...  view the full agenda text for item 110.

The Lord Mayor notified Council that any debate of motion 16a should relate only to the text of the motion as written, and not the attached footnotes which exceed the 500-word allowance. The Lord Mayor invited the Section 151 Officer (Group Finance Director) to provide some context to Council, noting that this would not subtract from the time allowed for debate. Council understood that 30 minutes remained for the debate.

The Lord Mayor invited the Group Finance Director to speak in relation to the motion, reminding Council that as the Section 151 Officer he is legally required to consider all investments under the principles of security, liquidity and yield. Any aspect of the motion which can legally be implemented will be, otherwise Cabinet will take the matter into consideration.

Debate of motion 16a resumed at 19.34.

Councillor Coyne, seconded by Councillor Dr. Djafari-Marbini, proposed the motion as set out in the briefing note.

During debate of this motion Council agreed to suspend standing orders.

Following debate and on being put to the vote, the motion was agreed.

Council notes:

•   Oxford City Council’s commitment to human rights, equality and justice is longstanding. We have democratically embedded ethical policies and practices across our administration. Our progressive procurement policies support local jobs, small businesses, the Oxford Living Wage, apprenticeships and social value; and our Treasury Management Strategy includes an ESG policy recently approved at budget council. We are committed to representing every resident in our international city, challenging inequalities, and upholding the fundamental rights and freedoms of all.

•   Our leader has noted “the historic role of ethical boycotts, which have played a pivotal role in campaigns for justice” and “Oxford’s prominent role in the anti-apartheid movement”, which culminated in Nelson Mandela’s 1997 visit.

•   Over the past year, successive International Court of Justice (ICJ) rulings have underlined UN member states’ obligation to actively avoid complicity in Israel’s illegal occupation of Palestine and grave violations of human rights,with UN experts warning that continued inaction “jeopardises the entire edifice of international law”.

•   Under international law, the legal norms that apply to a state extend to local authorities.

•   Council has previously written to Barclays Bank to ask it to desist from fossil fuel investments.

Council believes that:

•   We have an ethical duty and legal obligation to avoid trade and investment relations and cooperation with entities that legitimise, aid or assist violations of international law.

•   The Oxfordshire Pension Fund—to which Council employees and city residents contribute—should adhere to similarly robust ethical standards, in line with its fiduciary duty towards scheme members and employers.

Council resolves to:

•   Request that the cabinet member for finance and asset management bring forward to the next review of the Treasury Management Strategy and the Procurement Strategy costed policies that incorporate, wherever possible and in line with applicable legislation, the UN Principles for Responsible Investment (UN PRI) and Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights (UNGP); and that explicitly preclude Council knowingly, indirectly or directly,  ...  view the full minutes text for item 110.

Labour Group Motion

The English Devolution White Paper published by the Government on Monday 16 December 2024 will open up opportunities for our local economy and for local residents in Oxford. 

Devolution could give more influence here in our local community over the policies and services that impact on our lives and our local economy. 

Services currently run from Whitehall could instead be run by a new strategic authority for the Thames Valley, which would be led by a directly elected mayor. 

Learning from and inspired by the work of elected Mayors and strategic areas like Greater Manchester and the West Midlands, a Thames Valley authority linking together our cities, towns and villages has the potential to be the largest and most successful economy in the UK outside London. The opportunities for our region are huge, and we need to take advantage of them. 

This council welcomes any movement of power away from Whitehall closer to local communities, and the Mayoral Strategic Authorities will gain strategic powers on transport, employment, growth and skills and strategic planning. 

The White Paper also gives us an historic opportunity to bring all local government services back together and to an authority that reflects our city geography. 

Council believe once unitary geography is established, citizens of Oxford and our local communities will be best served from having councillors who are as close to those communities as possible.  

It believes that in designing new unitary authorities, there is a balance to be struck over size and that very large authorities are unlikely to be sufficiently responsive to their communities. 

We are rightly proud in Oxford that our councillors are representative of our wider community in terms of age, gender, work, skills and diversity. We want to ensure that far into the future councillors of all parties and none will continue to represent the full diversity of our historic city. 

Our councillors will represent all ages; those in work, retired or carers; those whose families have lived here for generations and those who have recently made our city their home; people from many different jobs and experiences and from different working backgrounds and cultures; of different, ethnic, religious and political influences. 

With local government reorganisation alongside the creation of a new strategic authority for the Thames Valley, it is vital that in the new unitary councils, the future representatives are able to continue the long tradition of standing up for the people of Oxford and those who work here. 

Council resolves: 

• To pledge to put the citizens of the city of Oxford and its surrounding areas at the heart of all of our discussions to develop proposals that will be best for the residents and businesses in our city. 

• To work at pace but to also make sure that we are taking sufficient time to develop sound proposals that will support Oxford’s residents and economy to be well governed for the decades ahead 

This motion was not taken as the time allocated for debate had finished.

Liberal Democrat Group Motion

This Council supports calls for the immediate implementation of a ban on the use of smartphones in all primary and secondary schools for children up to the age of 16 years within Oxford, with exceptions to be addressed here. 

MP Josh MacAlister’s Safer Phones Bill¹ has been watered down^[1] to exclude the ban on smartphones in schools. He reports, “It’s time to address the negative effects of excessive screen time and social media use on children’s health, sleep and learning. Parents are crying out for legislation to support them in keeping their children safe from online harm. Gen Z themselves regret how long they spend on social media. In January, Norway has chosen to raise the digital age of consent. At the beginning of this month, Denmark has implemented measures around schools and afterschool clubs”. 

Gillian McDermott Head of Cutteslowe Primary School points to Jonathan Haidt’sThe Anxious Generation,^[2] showing overwhelmingly the harm done to children through excessive use of smartphones. He examined what happened to young people in the early 2010s that triggered the surge of anxiety and depression, social isolation and cyber-bullying and academic disengagement from 2012 which in some cases have contributed to self harm and death since then.  

The LibDem MP Max Wilkinson^[3] says regulations are far behind reality and technology. Barnardos^[4] say that the average teenager is spending up to five hours a day on social media. Ofcom research^[5] found that 71% of children aged between 5 and 15 used a smartphone to get online in 2023. 75% of parents had concerns related to content inappropriate for their children’s age. 73% was adult or sexual content.  

In schools such as Michaela^[6] in London the general conduct of the children is excellent and the high academic levels are some of the best in the country. “School is key”, says its Head Teacher Katherine Birbalsingh^[7] “the one sure way of children being able to change their stars”.  

Eric Schmit^[8] the ex-boss of Google and Alphabet emphasised the use of smartphones can be safe but need to be moderated. “Why,” he asks, “would we run such a large uncontrolled experiment on the most important people in the world, which is the next generation?” 

Smartphones should be permitted for certain academic activities or research, and students with specific learning needs may be permitted to use smartphones as a support tool. 

This Council: 

1. Regrets that Josh McAlister’s Bill has been watered down. 

2. Notes that Secretaries of State for Education have favoured mandatory limits on mobile phone use in schools over the last fifteen years. 

3. Notes that Baroness Kidron in a debate in November 2024 drew attention to "increasing interest in mandating that schools be mobile phone free”. 

4. Asks the Leader to write to the Secretary of State for Education urging support for the original intentions of the McAlister Bill. 

5. Whilst noting that we are not the Local Education Authority, offers its support and encouragement to schools  ...  view the full agenda text for item 112.

This motion was not taken as the time allocated for debate had finished.

Green Group Motion

Council notes:

1. Oxford City Council is an accredited Council of Sanctuary^[1] and Oxfordshire County Council is currently seeking accreditation as a Council of Sanctuary^[2], making Oxford an area where both tiers of local government have shown commitment to the rights of migrants and refugees. 
2. Oxford City Council has on multiple occasions taken action to call out hostility towards and demonisation of migrants.^[3]
3. Oxford has a proud history as a diverse and welcoming City and is home to a range of wonderful advocacy groups such as Asylum Welcome and Refugee Resource and other grassroots organisations. 
4. Recent actions taken by the government, such as the changes to the Good Character requirement for British Citizenship, significantly impact the rights of refugees and others seeking recognition as citizens of this country, including those who settle in Oxford.^[4]
5. The UK Government has recently announced a decision to cut international aid in order to finance expanded military spending. 
6. The UK government has sought to use tactics including filmed deportations in order to ‘deter’ irregular migrants.^[5]
7. The UK government has pushed on with the development of Campsfield House Immigration Removal Centre despite clear local opposition, including from Oxford City Council.^[6]

Council believes:

1. As a City of Sanctuary, Oxford has a moral and ethical duty to stand up for the rights of migrants, refugees and asylum seekers.
2. Changes to citizenship guidance are punitive and unjust, harming the ability of people seeking sanctuary to make a home in cities like Oxford. 
3. Changes to citizenship criteria risk indirect discrimination on the basis of nationality and may be incompatible with Articles 31 and 34 of the Refugee Convention, of which the UK is a signatory.^[7]
4. Changes to international aid are short-sighted and likely counterproductive. In particular, such changes risk increased global insecurity and will undermine the work the UK does to support the global community. 
5. The use of filmed deportations is cruel, vindictive, inhumane and probably ineffective.^[8] Such practices have no place in a country which proclaims itself to be a liberal democracy.
6. The new UK government has continued the toxic legacy of the previous government, relying on costly gimmicks in defiance of all evidence around what constitutes effective policies for the management of irregular migration.
7. The UK could at any time choose an effective method to address irregular migration by introducing safe and legal routes for people to access sanctuary

Council resolves to:

1. Request that the leader of the Council:
   1. Write to the Prime Minister expressing this council's dismay at the decision to cut international development funding, foreclose refugees gaining citizenship and continue with the evidently false idea that deterrence can reduce irregular migration. 
   2. Issue a public statement affirming its support for the rights of migrants and refugees to have a path to sanctuary and citizenship. 

This motion was not taken as the time allocated for debate had finished.

Labour Group Motion

Across the UK a shortage of housing[1] and uncontrolled increases in private rents[2] have led to a soaring rise in the number of households made homeless[3] and a massive increase in the demand for temporary accommodation.[4] In Oxford we’re working hard to prevent homelessness, minimise use of temporary accommodation (especially hotels), and reduce costs. Our housing needs team has received national recognition for their work, but 237 Oxford households still spent last Christmas in temporary accommodation, and we are spending over £4million a year on it. 

The watering down of Local Plan housing targets by the Tories means some councils, including in Oxfordshire, have been dodging their responsibility to those in need now and future generations by failing to plan for the homes that are so desperately needed.?? 

This Council is building homes. Our wholly owned company OxPlace will build more than 2000 homes in the next decade. We have a rolling four-year target to provide 1600 affordable homes for local people through building, buying and through partnerships with housing associations. We also work with private developers like at Barton Park which is over 50% affordable and Oxford North which will be at least 35% affordable. 

Pressures on the budgets of housing associations and local housing authorities mean that developers find it increasingly difficult to find buyers for the affordable homes for rent within mixed developments, leading to the stalling of schemes even if they have planning permission. 

This Council congratulates our Housing Needs Team on being shortlisted for the 2025 LGC Awards for their work to prevent homelessness in the face of a housing crisis. This Council also asks the Leader of the Council to write to the Secretary of State for Communities, Housing & Local Government to convey that:?? 

• This Council applauds the new Labour Government for its reversal of cuts to housing numbers in Local Plans and welcomes the return of strategic level planning to ensure that homes are delivered. 

• This Council welcomes the Government’s approval of the long-overdue reservoir near Abingdon, necessary to support new homes in Oxfordshire. 

• This Council welcomes the Government’s commitment to the ending of Section 21 ‘no fault’ evictions which are a driver of homelessness. 

• This Council welcomes this year’s increase of £600k in our allocation of Homelessness Prevention Grant and calls on the Government to ensure future allocations take into account the true drivers of homelessness and the work done by councils on prevention. 

• This Council calls on the Government to give councils the power to regulate the short-term let sector to stem the flow of properties from the private rented sector into short-term lets.? 

• This Council calls on the Government to ensure that investment in power, water and sewerage is delivered to support new homes. 

• This Council calls on the Government to increase grant funding for new social housing, to ensure that this city, and this country, benefits from the expansion of social housing we need to ensure everyone has a decent and genuinely  ...  view the full agenda text for item 114.

This motion was not taken as the time allocated for debate had finished.

Liberal Democrat Group Motion

Council notes significant and increasing traffic volumes on Oxfordshire’s road network.^[1]

Council notes that school-related traffic can be a significant contributor to traffic volumes: for example, a Transport for London study found around a quarter of morning peak car trips were for school drop-off.^[2]

Council notes the significant benefits reported by parents, residents and pupils from the County Council’s School Streets programme.^[3]

Council fully supports and encourages schools in our city in making every effort to support non-car travel to and from school by pupils.

Council:

• Gives its full support to schools which are providing bus services for pupils, and schools which may wish to do so,

·       Supports efforts to manage and reduce car travel to schools and danger and congestion around the school gate, with attendant benefits for people’s health and well-being, 

Council resolves to request that the Cabinet member with responsibility for transport liaison write to County colleagues, allowing school transport to use Park and Ride sites for pickup and drop-off.

This motion was not taken as the time allocated for debate had finished.

Labour Group Motion

This Council notes under the previous Tory government and current County Council administration the loss of bus services across Donnington Bridge and around both Herschel Crescent and Greater Leys.[1]  

This Council notes that the new route of the 3A forces elderly residents to cross the dangerous 40mph Grenoble Road and that the County Council has made no attempt to put safe crossings of this road in to access the bus stops on the far side. 

This Council notes that it is often the most vulnerable in society, the elderly and the disabled who are most reliant on public transport.[2]

This Council notes the positive impact on congestion that an integrated public transport system can have.[3]

This Council welcomes the near doubling of bus funding to Oxfordshire by the Labour Government.⁶ 

This Council asks its Leader to write to County Councillor Andrew Gant the cabinet member with responsibility for public transport requesting he: 

• Bring bus services in-house allowing democratic control of fares routes and timetables and putting people before profit 

• Introduce a network of minibuses that connect Greater Leys, Herschel Crescent, Donnington Bridge and other areas with Cowley Centre and Headington 

• Extend the 3/3A and other routes such as from Barton, Marston and Northway to the railway station – ending the 12 minute walk from the City Centre 

• Re-establish other lost bus routes across our City

This motion was not taken as the time allocated for debate had finished.

Liberal Democrat Group Motion

This council notes that:

• The UK previously benefited from the EU’s Erasmus+ programme, which supported youth mobility and exchange. Prior to Brexit, our young people were able to freely travel between member states, and wider European Economic Area (EEA) to live work and study without time limits.

• Since the UK’s departure from the EU, young people in Oxfordand across the UK face increased barriers to living, working, and studying in European countries, limiting opportunities that were previously available. We now have a 90-day limit on the time we can spend in European countries without buying a visa.

• In Oxford, a very high proportion of its residents  (~40% are younger people aged between 15 and 35 according to 2021 Census data) would be eligible to benefit from a youth mobility scheme.

• The UK currently has Youth Mobility Schemes with Australia and Japan allowing 18–35 year olds to move and work freely between countries for up to 2 years. A UK/EU Youth Mobility Scheme could follow this model. In April 2024 the EU Commission expressed a desire to open negotiations with the UK on a youth mobility scheme for young people aged 18–30, which was rejected by the previous Conservative Government and has yet to be accepted by the current Labour Government.

This council believes:

• Opportunities for young people to travel, study, and work abroad can foster cultural exchange, personal development, and economic growth.
• A Youth Mobility Scheme between the UK and the EU would offer structured opportunities for young people to gain international experience and develop skills valuable to their personal and professional futures.
• Local businesses — especially those in hospitality — would benefit from the extra temporary personnel offered by young people across the EU taking advantage of the scheme.

This council resolves to:

• Publicly endorse the principle of establishing a Youth Mobility Scheme between the UK and the European Union.

• Request the Council Leader to write to the Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs, and the Secretary of State for Education, urging them to open negotiations with the European Union to create such a scheme.

This motion was not taken as the time allocated for debate had finished.