Address from Councillor Ginette Camps-Walsh, Chairman of Beckly and Stowood Parish Council – Agenda Item 8: Local Government Reorganisation - Interim response to Government

In the Leader’s letter to the Minister regarding local Government devolution she said

“One option we will want to consider is the creation of a city-based unitary on expanded geography that will enable us to meet our unique potential, while enabling viable neighbouring unitaries to our north and south. We have ambitions for growth that go significantly beyond that in any existing or draft local plan in Oxfordshire, and which could give Oxford as a place the ability to meet all its own future housing need.”

Questions

1.           Has the Leader and cabinet seen our letter sent to the Minister and copied to her from neighbouring parishes and communities, attached, opposing this Plan? What 7 Agenda Item 3 consideration, if any, had the cabinet given to the acceptability to neighbouring rural parishes of this annexation with plans that would be likely to destroy their communities and individual identity of their villages and build on the countryside?

2.           The letter does not appear to have considered the targets set out for unitary authorities in the Minister’s letters namely a population of 500,000 + and using current district boundaries as the building blocks. Oxford has a population of 165,200 and Oxfordshire 750,2001. If Oxford City annexed sufficient surrounding parishes to reach a population of 500,000, it would leave an unviable rural unitary authority, with half the necessary population, in a crescent to the north, west and south of the city. Also, Oxford City would be outvoted by the annexed rural parishes. Wouldn’t a county wide unitary authority be the sensible option? The population numbers and boundaries are compliant with the Minister’s guidance and there are also shared services already supplied by the county, which isn’t the case with the Oxford Plan.

3.           In the recent Resident’s Panel questionnaire on this, the questions were extremely biased in favour of the City Council’s proposal. What is the point of very biased questions trying to provoke the answers the Council wants when they will have little validity or credibility?

a.    Reasonably unbiased questions would look something like this –

The Minister is looking for the size of new unitary authorities to have a population of 500,000 or more.

Do you think this is - about right?, too big?, too small?

The Minister has advised that new unitary authorities should be based on the boundaries of current district councils and should have a population of 500,000 or more. Current Populations- Oxfordshire : 750,200, Cherwell: 166,300, Oxford: 165,200, South Oxfordshire: 153,400, Vale of White Horse: 146,000, West Oxfordshire: 119,300 What do you think a new unitary authority including the City of Oxford should look like?

A county wide council including the whole of Oxfordshire?

A council based on the City of Oxford expanded to include other district councils? If a council based on Oxford which other districts would join with Oxford? Cherwell?, SODC?, Vale of the White Horse?

Beehive Oxford CC question –

How strongly do you agree or disagree with the following statements?

Councils should not be too large, so they better meet the needs of local residents:

A single council covering the greater Oxford area would best meet the needs of residents:

A single council covering the whole of Oxfordshire would best meet the needs of residents.

Councillor Brown, Leader of the Council, provided Cabinet’s response to the address:

Thank you for the letter you sent concerning local government reorganisation on behalf of several Oxfordshire Parish Councils and for your submission to this Cabinet meeting. I note the letter was sent before any its signatories would have seen any of the interim proposals for the creation of new unitary councils in Oxfordshire - including the 3 unitary proposal - as this was only published last Wednesday.

In proposing the creation of a new unitary council that includes the city of Oxford and some of the surrounding area in central Oxfordshire, we recognise that this will require a reconsideration of how we understand our communities and our area. Oxford’s boundaries have changed many times over the centuries to incorporate villages that still retain their own identity. Iffley Village became part of Oxford in 1928, Wolvercote in 1929, Blackbird Leys was built in the Green Belt in the 1960s and incorporated in 1991 into the city along with Old Marston, Risinghurst and Littlemore. The conurbation continues to expand, and the city exerts a gravitational influence on surrounding areas which make use of both the work and leisure facilities it offers. Redefined boundaries will crystallise this into direct and mutual responsibility. We would not simply be asking communities to join the city, we will ourselves be joining well established communities. We will need to draw on the wider identity that exists within areas beyond the city to help them become part of a cohesive whole.

It is already accepted that Oxford cannot meet all of its own need for additional housing, which is why there are sites outside the city in South Oxfordshire, Vale of White Horse, Cherwell and West Oxfordshire already allocated to provide additional housing to meet that need. A unitary based on the city with expanded boundaries can take charge of these sites, ensure that land is used efficiently, increasing density where appropriate to produce well-planned new communities. We would also release Grey Belt land as the Government has directed. We anticipate that city adjacent sites will build to higher density low-rise development - which would help reduce pressure on additional housing around existing villages.

Although the White Paper made reference to a population of 500,000 for new unitary authorities, ministers have made clear that this might be considered a midpoint between some slightly larger authorities and ones of about 300,000. Ministers have also been very clear that proposals and decisions should be based on what makes sense economically, and for local communities, as well as emphasising the importance of cities as places with clear identities and huge importance in terms of both local and national economies.

Our proposal would create three viable unitaries, each with a sensible economic area, including one to our north and one that would combine much of South Oxfordshire, and Vale of White Horse with West Berkshire - something the leaders of all three of those councils have commended.

A central Oxfordshire council would be much closer to local residents - and indeed parish councils - than one single council covering all of Oxfordshire - which, if created, would be the third largest unitary authority in England. The Greater Oxford area would be supported by an expansion of this Council’s existing Localities-based coordination of service integration and delivery, with dedicated officers covering groups of neighbourhoods. Our three unitary proposal also respects local identities. The experience of people within Oxford has a lot in common with those who are a short public transport ride into the city; there is much less obvious connection with those in places like Cropredy or Henley. And indeed, improving bus services into the city from neighbouring villages would be a priority for the new Council.

You have commented on our Residents Panel survey - which was asked a very straightforward set of open questions. The Panel itself is made up of a representative sample of Oxford residents and is overseen by an independent polling company. The City Council's primary responsibility is to act in the interests of residents and businesses and so it was entirely appropriate to seek some initial views. The questions asked whether people would favour a single countywide unitary or a unitary based on the Greater Oxford area. We have also started the process of engaging more widely. We recently invited a representative of the Oxfordshire Association of Local Councils to attend our regular meeting with the Oxford parish councils to seek views.

In due course as we develop our full proposal we will clearly want to engage residents and businesses more widely including those outside the city that would be being welcomed into a Greater Oxford council area. We want to get everyone's views so we can shape a new council that best meets our residents' needs. However, it is important to recognise that in the end it will be Government that decides the final shape of new authorities in Oxfordshire. What is certain is that in future none of our existing councils will exist in their current form. There won't be a south oxfordshire district council, or a county council or a city council on its current boundaries and responsibilities. Rather there will be new structures that bring together areas that had previously been separate.