Transcript

good evening, everyone. I've turned 630, so I will begin. Item number one is apologies for absence. I've received apologies from Councillor Mckew. I don't think there are any others. Chairman, no others. Thank you. Item two, declarations of interest. No. If members come across an interest, perhaps they could declare it at the time and catch my eye as appropriate. Item number three, petitions and requests to address the meeting. There are no petitions or requests to address the meeting, but I welcome Councillors who are in attendance this evening. Councillor HINGLEA, the Opposition, is here and Councillor WOODCOCK, Labor Group Leader, is with us, and I'd ask them to just indicate in the usual way if you want to comment on an agenda item. Councillor BROAD, over you and scrutiny committee chairman is attending as he usually does. He will likely to comment on a agenda item 7, 8 and 11 this evening. If there are any others, Councillor WOODCOCK would just have to catch my eye as appropriate. Attending virtually, hopefully, are on the line. Councillor CONWAY, Councillor MACKLEAN, Councillor WALKER, and Councillor MIDDLETON, and I'll ask those members to come in on the screen as appropriate. Is that a hand up? Councillor WALKER, did you want to say anything at this stage? Just a short point. I was asked if I wanted to speak to item 10 and I indicated that I did. Okay, that's what we thought. I'll be sure to call you. Thank you. Item 4 is the minutes of our last meeting to confirm as a correct record the minutes of our meeting held on the 8th of January last. Our members agreed. Thank you. Item 5, Chairman's Announcements. The future Oxfordshire Partnership met last Tuesday. I did give a brief update on that to the Overview and Scrutney Committee last week, just as it were, a snapshot of what is going on there. And the FOP will be undertaking a review of the terms of reference for its own Scrutney Committee, which won't do any harm. For executive colleagues, items on the agenda were recommendations from the FOP Scrutney Panel and they have asked officers to initiate this review of their terms of reference. Basically, there is concern that the Scrutney Committee scrutinises more than what the FOP does. So that leads to the two arms of the organisation, as it were, going in different ways rather than on the same track. The next meeting of the FOP is on the 20th of March and items scheduled for that meeting include the annual report of the Oxfordshire Director of Public Health and the quarter three Oxfordshire Housing and Growth Deal, whereby the progress on implementing the Housing and Growth Deal is monitored. Item 6, Councillor Broughtt. Thank you, Chairman. Just going back to the FOP report, the item that prompted that was a request from the overview and Scrutney of FOP to study the Vision Zero campaign that's going on with Oxfordshire County Council and the FOP returned the comment. It was nothing to do with them, to which the FOP over view and Scrutney have said, yes it is. Yes, well, I can confirm that the FOP executive or whatever it's called, the committee reaffirmed its former position and said, no, none to do with us, ping, pong, ping, pong. And that's why they're going to review the terms of reference, to cut out ping pong of things and now to do with the FOP. I summarise a long story that that was it. Very debatable point. Thank you. Well, that's why it will be an interesting debate. Item 6, budget setting for 24-25 and the medium-term financial strategy up to 28-29. Councillor Nail, please. Thank you, Leader. Thank you. The report sets out the executive's proposed business plan and the related revenue budget for financial year 2024-25. The medium-term financial strategy for Child District Council up to financial year 28-29. The capital program to financial year 2029 and all supporting policies, strategies and information to recommend to Council. The executive is recommended to delegate authority to the section 151 officer as set out in paragraphs 1.1 and 1.2 of the report and also to make recommendations to Council as set out at paragraphs 1.3 to 1.10.1 of the report. The proposed net revenue budget for Child District Council for next financial year is 26.9 million pounds, which is a decrease of 1.4 million pounds from financial year 2023-24, being the current financial year that we are now in. The Council plans to fund 0.6 million of budget pressures and will deliver 1.8 million pounds of savings proposals and operational efficiencies within this budget envelope. Separately from the revenue budget, a capital program of 40.4 million pounds is proposed, of which 24.3 million pounds is expected to be spent in financial year 2024-25. It is proposed that the band D Council tax will increase by 5 pounds to 153 pounds 50. I would remind members this is the element of the total Council tax bill, which is set by and for Child District Council and there are other precepting authorities who go, whose amounts go into the total Council tax bill received by any one householder. We are all grateful to all the members of the public who took the time to learn more about our budget proposals and particularly to those that provided their views on them, sometimes in some detail in the public consultation exercise, which was undertaken. I turn to the wider economic picture. The executive acknowledges that it is facing considerable uncertainty in setting the budget for financial year 2024-25 because of financial conditions and so has ensured that it has proposed to create a contingency budget in case of further costs linked to inflation and other market risks. This is a prudent policy which allows the Council to be sure that it will be able to continue with its band expenditure no matter what risks arise within reason. Child District Council's borrowing has been fixed that rates significantly below what is currently available in the market. This gives the Council cost certainty in respect of its interest of payments. Some of the fixed rates come to an end during financial year 2024-25 and the borrowing will need to be replaced which is normal practice. The cost of this has been factored into the budget and into the medium-term financial strategy. A review of reserves has also taken place to ensure that resources the Council holds can be used strategically and are sufficient to address the financial risks and contingencies that the Council faces or may face in the future. A further document which makes part of the budget package is the medium-term financial strategy. This covers the next five years. For a financial year 2025-26 an ongoing funding gap has been identified which increases through to financial year 2027-28. The Council has established a strategy that will shape how it looks to review opportunities to reduce this gap and balance the budget in financial year 2025-26 and future years thereafter. Thank you, Vida. I hope that the members will be able to recommend this budget and the delegations set out in the report. Yes, thank you. Any member comments or questions on this? Councillor HINGLE, please. Thank you, Vida. Thank you to Councillor Nail for that introduction. Clearly my group has been scrutinising the budget proposals and continues to do so. One thing that is hindering that is the uncertainty around this new funding that is coming in from the government. We understand it is not going to be a huge amount. Most of that funding will go to top tier authorities but could any further clarification be provided on that and where it is intended to go within two hours budget and if not, when will that information be available? Yes, your question is extremely timely, Councillor HINGLE, because we found out about two hours ago. Councillor Nail, can you remember it or do you want me to go to Michael? I think that for the detail on this, it would be best if the Section 151 officer gave us the details which are hot off the press. But I would stress that this late arriving information cannot really have made any impact to speak of on anyone reviewing these proposals because the total change is such a tiny proportion of our net revenue budget, let alone our gross revenue budget. Let alone our gross revenue budget plus the capital budget. So I think that whilst it is important information, we should certainly hear from Section 151 officer, it would be quite wrong to say that anyone had been hampered by the lack of this information in scrutinising the budget proposals that we have made long ago and in great detail. Thank you. Mr Furnace, yes. Thank you. So as I expected from the District Council's point of view, the element of minimum funding guarantee has gone up by about 180,000, which was the ballpark figure we were expecting. The government has made a couple of other minor announcements, so there's an additional 50K on top of that that will be coming and there is something else where they're going to give back some funding in relation to business rates. They haven't announced that figure quite yet, so we're going to do some rough maths and work it out and then put the delegation and told them to the Leader and Councillor Nell. Once we've agreed those total figures, the intention is we will add those to the contingency budget within the plan. And the basic plan is the 180K and any other little few Ks that come in will be rolled up and added to what is called the policy contingency. I think I've got the right, the name right. Such that it will be available for policy changes in the next financial year, because as years progress things happen and you have to kind of reaction you need a little pot to dip into. So that's that's the plan. You'd like to ask anything else. No other comments or questions on budgets? The only thing I would add to what Councillor Nell said, just because I think it's a significant synopsis and on page 15 of the agendas, it says that we adopt a forward looking and anticipatory approach to financial management and the peer review acknowledged that the Council is in a strong position regarding 24 or 25. The Council plans for and continues to succeed in encouraging and facilitating economic growth across the district. This success flows through the Council's finances, reflected in the level of income received from business rates and the new homes bonus. So in a nutshell there is a connection between economic growth and financial stability. That's the point I make. So the recommendations as set out moved all of them, and there's a lot, were taken them on block and they're moved by Councillor Nell are seconded by me. Our members agreed. Thank you. The next one is the annual delivery plan, which de facto is connected to the previous item. Councillor Dallymoe. Thank you, Leader. We are recommended to approve the annual delivery plan 24 or 25. The annual delivery plan sets a clear priorities and objectives for the year. It establishes a clear direction for our Council on an annual basis, supporting delivery of our commitments established in the Council's business plan. Workshops took place, horizon scanning looking at local and national contexts. This created a number of annual delivery plan priorities underpinning each business plan objective. The priorities were driven by key considerations such as a local response to national challenges, climate challenge change, partnership working and effectiveness. The ADP has 15 priorities, 14 being across housing that meets your needs, support for environmental sustainability and enterprise economy with strong and vibrant local centres, health, resilience and engaged communities and one priority for corporate functions that relate to continuous improvement through our transformation and producing a balanced MTFS. I would like to thank officers for all their hard work in producing this and move the recommendations that are set out in the paper to the executive. Thank you. Any member comments? Councillor broad. Thank you, Chairman. Just to add that there was no reports from the overview and scrutiny on this particular item, but if I might just add one thing that was commented rather than it's nothing you can do, but there was an item on there showing red for the waste disposal, which I just wanted to draw a member's attention to the fact that the measure seems to be backwards was the comment we made, which is that the more we can recycle the worse that gets according to the measurement system. And you'd think it would be the other way round. So in other words, we're sort of hitting ourselves for not achieving what the public is distributing as waste material. You know, they're probably composting waste material and reducing the amount. And yet it comes out in our measurements as being read. I don't think you can do much about it. I just thought it was an interesting aspect that was discussed at the meeting. It was a minor fascination. I have to say, and I hadn't thought about it until it was said. I took the view that, well, that's a good one to think about then when it comes to setting new ones, because it may well be, yes, as my late mother used to say, it may well be asked backwards, Barry. I don't think we're allowed to say that in public meetings. You just have. Yes. I agree with Council Board. I think it's a point that I've made in the past in terms of beating ourselves up for people not putting stuff in garden waste. And that's been a bad thing, but it's not going into residual waste, for example. So yeah, it's an interesting metric that I think needs to be looked at. And the other one was Council that says, if it's a hot summer, there aren't early any grass clippings, you know, because it's all dead. It is worthy of thought, that measure. No other comments saying, I just checked. I think there's, usually then we do this rehab. So this is, we're still on the annual delivery plan. So annual delivery plan, recommendations moved by Councilor Daniel Moore, seconded by me, our members agreed. Thank you. Next one is the homelessness and a rough sleeping strategy. Councilor Moore. Thank you, leader. So it's part of the Council's statutory duties to review homelessness within its Council area at least every five years and produce a strategy. And we've done that. Changing context necessitate a change of focus. Some challenges facing homelessness and rough sleeping remain the same. So issues of supply and affordability of housing, for example. But the new strategy acknowledges emerging pressures such as rising rough sleeping rates and a rise in domestic abuse prevalence, which is post COVID. And it also acknowledges the new additional pressures such as to provide advice and assistance to those fleeing conflict through resettlement schemes. The review of homelessness within the appendix analyzes a variety of data sources to identify trends and emerging challenges and pressures that informs the action plan and strategy objectives. Emerging trends include the rise in section 21, no fault eviction notices being used as contributory reasons for homelessness applications and the prevalence of homelessness and rough sleeping in certain population groups such as younger single males. Public consultation was undertaken as part of developing this strategy and took place between November and January. The consultation responses were overwhelmingly positive regarding the aims and priorities of this strategy and more detailed results are found within the appendix. Where the strategy was amended as a result of the consultation is also outlined following the useful insights provided by those who took part. The action plan is based around four key strategic priorities. These are interlinked and are of equal importance. The action plan places emphasis on the importance of partnership working in tackling homelessness as well as the importance of intervening early and understanding client needs at the earliest opportunity as the needs of clients are becoming increasingly complex. You can find these four priorities at section 3.1. I think it's also worth just pointing out that in section 3.5 you'll see that upon implementation of the new homelessness and rough sleeping strategy an annual update report will be provided to overview and scrutiny to monitor progress on the approved action plan. And finally I'd recommend members to read the forward written by me. My forward shall we say to the strategy and of course to read the strategy itself. Thank you. Thank you. Councillor WOODcough, please. Thank you, Councillor WOOD. I'll start by sending my best wishes to the King on the speed of recovery. I'll say this diagnosis this evening. It just links into what Councillor WOODcough said regarding section 21 and the increase that we're seeing which is obviously driving a lot of the homelessness or the presentations of homelessness of the council. At the last full council meeting a motion was put forward on criticizing the government for failing to bring in there from his ban on no fault eviction section 21s. And that motion was passed unanimously and part of that motion called on you as the leader to communicate with our members of Parliament and the government. I haven't seen any of that communication because the government would know we'd be grateful for the opportunity to see that and to understand how those criticisms and condemnations of the failure to implement that policy were put to the people in that motion. Thank you. Okay, fair enough. I'll ask officers to track back and find that for you. I think I think leader I can help with that. A letter was drafted and approved by myself on the 8th of January this year. And I'm more than happy to forward it to Councillor WOODcough. I understood that it was that we would as of normal afford the letter to members. So apologies if it hasn't gone out, but it was done. Okay, we'll see to that. Councillor Baud. Just to add that this obviously did, as was said, come to overview and scrutiny. There were no specific items to be brought back here to the executive and I look forward to the next stage. Thank you. Okay, I think Councillor WOODcough, a good point in reference to his Majesty the King. I've just been informed that there's been a news flash. I want to have a better phrase to the effect that his Majesty has been diagnosed with cancer. So it will be approved. I will use the A's with the chair because it will be appropriate for the Council to send a note to Buckingham Palace wishing him a speedy recovery. Anything else then on this one? So the recommendation as set out moved by Councillor Moore, seconded by me. Our members agreed. Thank you. Number nine, developing a Kidlington infrastructure and community asset strategy. Councillor Ford, please. Do we have two members that wanted to speak on it? Do we want to allow them to speak first or afterwards? I'll come to them immediately after you. Thank you. Thank you, Leader. Firstly, I'd like to thank Councillor McLean for bringing this item to full Council in December. The Kidlington area is set to experience considerable growth in the coming years. This important new programme puts us on the front foot when it comes to coordinating delivery of policies and engaging with the communities and helping to support our healthy place shaping ambitions. This programme will complete a trio of place-based programmes for the district following the example of Bambry Vision 2050 and the re-imagining bister work being done in connection with the Garden Town programme. Work to drive forward the Kidlington project will be funded from the Council's own budget, but in future years will increasingly make use of developer contributions. The programme will have a full-time officer support with new role created to manage a strategic oversight board, including the town, district and county councils and coordinate within the community, developers and other stakeholders. It's recommended that the MTFF is amended to include the allocation of resources and budget to support the development and oversight of a new infrastructure and community asset strategy for Kidlington and the surrounded areas of the PR sites as per the local plan partial review adopted in 2020. I'd therefore like to propose the recommendation that the Executive recommends to develop a Kidlington infrastructure strategy in 24-25 and resource to provide oversight to its ongoing delivery. Thank you very much. Councillor McLean, did you want to speak on this? Yes, please. That will be very helpful. I would like to thank the corporate director of communities involved for a meeting with all West Kidlington Councillors in order to better understand the local issues and requirements and we look forward to working constructively with offices there. I would like to hasten, if possible, acceptance of this. We are now in a situation where time is of the essence as we already have developers on site. We would very much like to ensure that infrastructure is in place as soon as possible for new and existing residents. The Councillors have originally requested that this infrastructure project not only look at what we are providing for the new developments that are coming forward but also investigate existing infrastructure that's in place such as drainage, foul water issues that we currently have in place in Kidlington and transport and obviously active travel, as we've said previously. Thank you. Thank you. Very appropriate synopsis and as it were, if we hadn't got a justification for this, you have adroitly given it this evening. Thank you. Councillor Conway, did you want to speak on this? Yes, I did, thanks. I've sent a written response to the report to the committee. In general, I obviously support the proposal. It's a red letter day when this Council directs some significant funding to this area so it's good to see that we're doing that and obviously it's something that does need to be done. I'm slightly concerned that we've just had mentioned that there was a meeting with Ian Bull and West Kidlington Councillors. Just a reminder that Kidlington is two wards and many of the developments that are listed here are in Kidlington East. It would have been helpful, I think, if Kidlington East Councillors have been invited to contribute to that meeting. I don't know if I was. I've searched my inbox and don't seem to be able to find any invitation to that meeting. Perhaps that's something to bear in mind in the future. Perhaps that confusion was caused by the bizarre literature that's being used in this report. For some reason, gosford and watery has been renamed North Oxford. Gosford and watery is in Kidlington East Ward as is obviously Kidlington. That's part of my concern is that this is being termed a Kidlington plan when the vast majority of the LPPR sites, the local planned partial review sites, are in big growth yard and gosford and watery. Obviously, big growth yard is in West Kidlington so there's been a meeting with those Councillors but I would urge there to be some engagement with East Kidlington and all the Councillors, including the last meeting, the Council on the current administration. The other concern I have, and I'm not going to go through all the other things that I've raised in here. I mean, apart from the, as I termed it, the rather bizarre language used about the football stadium which seems to be either in the past tense and the future tense and then we're talking about land that seems to be saying there's only by a UFC which is wrong, but I'll let you come back to me on all that. My other concern is much as I say our support and it's great that we're going to have an officer dedicated to this. The job description of that officer is a bit on the vague side, bearing in mind that the majority of the infrastructure we're talking about here, health, education and transport is controlled by OCC. It would be useful to know exactly how this is going to be structured. I mean, I have OCC being consulted. I know certainly as the member for OCC in that division that encompasses all the LPPR sites, I haven't been consulted. So it would be useful to know if this is going to be a multi-tier steering group or whatever we're calling it, that it has been discussed with OCC and to know exactly what we're going to do with this because we're talking about reasonably substantial amounts of money, which would be so great, but what we don't want to do is just throw money at the problem without an actual vision and bearing in mind that a lot of the funding for these infrastructure projects is going to come from the developers and we all know that is usually back loaded. So a lot of this may not even be the funding may not even be available for this until after the start of the developments on the sites. It would be useful to know, yes, I agree we need to get ahead of this and I think we've needed to get ahead of it for the last few years and I assumed that through the planning briefs we were doing that, although apparently not. So it would be useful to know how that's going to pan out. What we don't want is an officer who's appointed and then has to sit there twiddling his or her thumbs for an amount of time waiting for various agencies, including the county council and all the various developers who are in the best of worlds is difficult to get them to all talk to each other to find out where the funding and where the money's going to come from. And the other important points I made on that in my written response is to know that the money that is coming to Kidlington and the surrounding villages, both forwards to Kidlington from S106. There's a reference in the report to sale, I don't know why that's in there, but maybe someone can explain. That that money is going to be directed to Kidlington for infrastructure in Kidlington because as council would all know in the past summer, S106 money has been stumped up by developers and has gone into a kind of general part that doesn't necessarily come back to the areas that are affected. So I would urge, again, for that policy to be reviewed. I can see council shaking his head, but he has confirmed that to me in the past that money that has been put up by developers for development in Kidlington doesn't necessarily come back to Kidlington. I think that's something that we need to be certainly on this scale and to be changing. Thank you. Councillor Fours, please. Thank you, Leader. I'd like to thank Councillor McLean again for obviously being on top of this and bringing it forward for our attention. To answer some of Councillor Muralton's question, the question raised at full council was of the concerns of the LPPR sites on the existing communities of Kidlington and Yaunton, and the recommendation is to allocate, resource the budget to support the development nodes that have a new infrastructure and community asset strategy for Kidlington and the surrounding areas of the PR sites as per the local plan partial review adopting 2020. His concern over the table and North Oxford, this was taken directly from the local plan partial review for continuity. We understand some of your concerns around the language and attempts needed to be changed, so we'll certainly look at that. Still, it's currently being developed and therefore it's anticipated future still, so for avoidance of doubt, it's better to have both in there than one or the other because it could be either/or. Hopefully that answers some of the questions, Chair, and any others we will come back to you with answers to them. Obviously, as you stated in your email, it would be much more appreciated if they weren't sent just a few hours before a meeting. Thank you. Yeah, thank you. I'd only add Councillor Middleton. Like many things, these things have to start somewhere and they evolve over time and it's good that the gun has gone off on this one and there is a definite need for a Kiddlington area, infrastructure and community assets strategy. I don't think any of us disagree. I think there's a broad agreement that there's a need and so we should, as it were, get on with it. I also would add that we're saying here that we're going to resource oversight onto the ongoing delivery which is going to be, in a way, its strategies are good but action plans and implementations are even better, I guess. So the model that we have, it doesn't mean to say it be replicated exactly, but the model we have with Bista Garden Town is that there is a strategic delivery board for that which is hosted by the district at which county offices are present and are able to contribute because of some of the things, as you rightly say, particularly in respect of highways, overlapping the gift of the county and so they need to be integral to a strategic delivery and that's, we know that and we seek to make sure that is so. And there are other stakeholders, in Bista's case, in particular, Holmes England are important to us. So there are environment defra. There's like a, you know, do you want to mean, you can end up with the United Nations if you're not careful at these meetings but you can't do things on your own, you have to make sure that all the, as it were, all the dots are connected in which we will, our record on that is pretty good. We will endeavour to replicate that. Did you want to come back, Councillor MILTON? Yeah, just quickly, just, yeah, apologies to Councillor Ford. It was late and, you know, we all live busy lives but I'm, you know, quite happy to late, along how long it takes. I mean, we've waited this long, I'm sure a few more weeks won't make any difference. And as you say, the gun has gone off, but I, as I said, I think the gun has gone off a little bit late, perhaps the rabbits are already a long way down the road but we'll see where we are. In terms of the LPPR definitions, yeah, I'm not surprised, those were lifted from the report. They were rolling the report and that was pointed out numerous times at the time. I mean, we've got the whole site, the PR8 site in which is referred to as big brook, is actually largely in the arms. And we keep making, and the arms in parish council keeps making that point and no one seems to be taking any notice of it. And it is a source of local annoyance and I've raised it numerous times and I would suggest the, I appreciate the report from wherever it was 2018, can't be, you know, revised now. But I think we need to be careful of the language going forward because it is a source of localization. Thank you. That's OK. I think the bottom line is, Council Middleton, you can't please all the people all the time. And what we seek to do here is because it's been raised with us via a council meeting that this work needs to be done. We think we've reacted positively and we're going to seek and to keep a strong engagement with local members. You can certainly please the people in Oxford and Audrey, and if you get their name right. Well, very good, Council Middleton. Any other contributions on this? In that case, we're here. Councillor Broad. Thank you, Chairman. In my position, it's just a Councillor of Bister rather than anything to do with overview and scrutiny. I was interested in your term about firing the starting gun. I just wondered, especially with Bister, whether anybody had looked at the Bister vision that I was involved with before I was elected as a Councillor. And a number of other issues that were going were being developed around Bister at that time. 2010, was it? 2011? 2012, was it? Yes. Some of the members were involved in the Bister vision at that time, and the market square was indeed one of the options, and there was a campaign of having Gazebo set up and consulting with the public. Where's it all gone? That was the starting gun. Why are we not at the end of it now, instead of at the beginning? Well, the important thing, I think, is that delivery programs do take longer than any of us like, and that is a truism. My concern is not to deflect ourselves, interesting though it is, onto the subject of Bister this evening. I'm merely, probably, foolishly used that example in order to, as it were, Sator, Councillor, Middleton, and others, that there will be a structure to the way this is done. It won't be ad hoc or large. In respect of your questions, you need to send in, send in to me a written, John, to me, written questions so that I can get all the answers for you, such as they are. It is a matter of some interest. Councillor Ford will tell you where she spent last Friday and what she was doing. I was with her, shall we already know? Well, partly, the only reason I was raising this issue about the Bister Vision is we keep talking about a vision in, you know, Bister, Kiddington, wherever it is, Bambry, and there was a Bister Vision document. I just thought we could use the information that was developed in those days to help us with the present Bister Vision or any other visions that were done at the time. There was a lot of work done. I remember there was a huge, well, the A3, the biggest receipts in that, weren't they? A huge document was produced with lots of information on how it could be developed. I just don't want it to disappear. It seems we should use it, so if it can be gathered together and used to help with the present version of the Bister Vision, it would be great. Fair enough. Fair enough. Okay. Did I get as far as the recommendation? Kiddington? I proposed the recommendation. Ah, very good. Well, I seconded it. Our members agreed. Thank you. Next one is researching solar energy requirements. I think this is Councillor—is this Councillor McEw was going to do this? So I'll introduce this. Essentially, this was a matter raised by Councillor Walker, a full Council meeting, and what we're recommending here is to plan for next year's budget for the undertaking of research into these requirements of solar energy in the Chawa District. Effectively, we're responding to a direct prod in the ribs at the full Council meeting from Councillor Walker. Would you like to comment on this item? Yes. Yes, I'd fail to see the connection between the research into requirements with what was actually unanimously approved in the motion, because the motion was essentially about—it referenced the required—the—mentioned in the local plan of a five-fold increase in solar energy in the district, and there was much supporting evidence as to how that was to be achieved. And it looked like the only game in town was going to be large solar farms. And the motion asked for research into the means—and the best means under the rationale for different methods of solar generation. The recommendation seems to talk really about an energy plan in VISTA, and then it goes on to reference as an energy research study alongside the work of VISTA's energy needs. And it doesn't really address what was approved at Council. Also, it mentions—my motion mentioned the PASCO report, which was actually, as you know, an outline of different scenarios for achieving zero carbon and oxygen. It looked at different scenarios about this recommendation talks about an action plan. Well, the PASCO report doesn't give an action plan. It just presents these different scenarios. It makes some recommendations. It doesn't give an action plan. So I think really—and then going on to the table at the end, they're just a nod to this, to the solar energy strategy. And I think it is an important one, but given the capacity for large solar developments to have such an impact on food production, on community immunity, on the landscape, and also the changing energy environment and connection to the grid, all those things, I think, need a dedicated research. And that's why the motion asked for a criteria-based research progress, no criteria here, just really something, sort of a nod to the motion within a different, really quite a different piece of work. Okay, thank you. Well, that wasn't our intention. Mr Bull, would you like to respond to what Councillor Walker has said? Thank you, Leader, just to provide a bit of context. The reason there's reference to the VISTA work is purely to make the point that there's other work going on, which, by bringing this paper forward as quickly as possible, is an opportunity to get some of this work commissioned at the same time as that work and built into that commission. So this isn't a piece of work to look at VISTA. This is, as per the motion that was put forward, a piece of work to look at SOLA across Churwell and pick up the points that Councillor Walker has made, as it does, I think, say in 4.5, but the point is, is that by bringing this forward quickly and securing the budget now, I could get motoring on it, so to speak, and get the work done at the same time as some of the other work that's being commissioned is undertaken, really just for expediency. Okay, thank you. Councillor Woodcock. Thank you, Councillor Wood. As you're aware, the Labor Group supported the motion because it was passed unanimously, but we were very clear that we're very much full SOLA power, and that SOLA farms are way forward and that we need it. If we're going to equip ourselves for the remainder century and tackle climate change, my concern with this is not what's actually on the paper as it makes sense, and it seems a really good idea, and does seem in tune with the implication and the aims of the motion. My worry with any sort of research and evidence-based scheme is that when it comes back and gives its report and its conclusions, somebody who doesn't like those conclusions wants you to go and do another one. Is that likely? I have learned over my substantive time in local governments to accept that anything is possible, Councillor Woodcock. I think though that there needs to be elected members need composite advice from corporate officers on these things in order to be able to go on and make decisions, and elected members may choose to emphasize some things and de-emphasize others. That is the role, and so I'm anticipating that there will be some to and fro before this ends up finished, but that is as it were the normal process, is what I'm thinking. Councillor Baw, did you indicate? Yes, thank you, Chair. Just a couple of things. One is it's a great danger if we're not careful of when we do these sorts of bits of research that somebody, as you rightly said, latches onto one particular aspect. It's not really where the solder is any good, because it is. I think nobody would dispute that. It's more where you put it, and how you do it. It's not a question of rooftops and no farms or farms and no rooftops. It's something in between, which where you use the best advantages for the best opportunities in particular areas and for particular applications. Obviously, one of the big issues that I think is going to come out from this research is going to be this problem of the grid, and the grid connections, which is why in Northwest Bister and some of the issues that are going on in Bister is one of the big problems. Of course, part of that can be resolved to a degree, and I wouldn't like to say whether the government agrees, because it probably isn't, but there is an issue with the companies having solder on their roofs to provide their own energy to a degree to help balance the grid. It starts to resolve some of the issues of the grid if that can be done, but there are some issues with trying to do that, which we know about, and they need to be resolved. The only other aspect I was interested in is this is 2024 to 5, and a lot of what was asked for at the time when this motion came forward is really to try and ensure that the review of the local plan incorporates whatever the result of this is going to be. I mean, one of the aspects is already in part of the local plan I know of the review of the local plan, where it asks for solar panels on the roofs of new developments, new homes, new employment, that kind of thing, but it also should, as we allocate in a local plan, land allocation, to allocate land for a solar farm rather than, as it says in the document here, spontaneously appearing, and us being put in a position of either agreeing or not agreeing, and it almost comes over if we don't agree, then we don't agree with solar, which is not really the issue at all. It's more that we're presented with a semi-fata company, and I think if we planned for these things, then we would never end up in that position. So that's one of the reasons why the research needs to go in. But 2024-25, is that going to be, are we going to get the results in time to incorporate it with this review of the local plan? Well, I'll ask that question. I think because the local plan is going down the track on its own extended time frame. For me, the important point is, 24-25 is very close because it starts the first of April, and so it's very close, and so we will be triggering some substantive work. What I don't want to do is have officers, as it were, doing an awful lot of work, and not quite getting to the point where it started with Councillor Walker and the proposals that she made, because otherwise, we'll end up in a, oh, yeah, very interesting, but you've missed the question. And so it's going to be important as we progress with this work, and I'm sure Mr, Mr. Bol will be eager to do this, and that is we will ask officers to keep in touch with you, Councillor Walker, just because if you can, and I'll use this phrase lightly, if you can hit the tiller once or twice, we can avoid at six months down the track, members bouncing back up and saying, nice answer, but wrong question, you know what I mean. So I think that there, I want to avoid that if we can, and I think, well, that's a surprise. I'll just check with Mr. Bol. I haven't said anything out of turn. Thank you, Leader. The plan is to have commissioned and run this work rather faster at the start of the year than taking the whole of 24/25 to deliver it very much. That's just using the budget period in that year. I think as soon as the nod is approved, then we will crack on with commissioning and the work starting as quickly as possible. Okay, thank you. Councillor Walker, do you want to come back? Yes, I think, well, I think Councillor Broad expressed it very clearly what I wanted to say. Yes, and I think another point of the motion was that it needs to be criteria-based to know exactly what this piece of research is aiming to achieve, rather than it being very incorporated alongside other work. But it sounds like those criteria are being established, and I think there's a clear pointer in the motion as passed. I think we're on the same page, Councillor Walker. Councillor Middleton, do you wish to contribute on this one? Yes, thanks. I'm probably going to agree with most of the people, even yourself, on some of this stuff. In terms of getting solar on roofs and as part of developments, we are hamstrung by national policy. Regardless of what we say and what we think is the right thing to do, without there being some teeth from the NPBF, there's not really very much we can do about it, other than in courage and cajole. We've already got that in our local plan at the moment, and it doesn't generally achieve very much. It would be useful as part of this to have a lobbying process with national planning institutes and various authorities to get that message across that we need to be able to put this in at early stages, or it's not going to work, particularly on large industrial buildings. The other thing, there's lots of mentions in this about DSO, which slightly worries me, because I'm much more in favour of small microgrids and local energy generation, and unfortunately, that tends to be slightly twisted these days in that it must be local because it's in my back garden or near my community, but generally that energy is going into the grid and could end up in Glasgow. We've got that issue with the bottom of our solar farm at the moment, which is being sold as a local supply energy to Oxfordshire, but we all know that it will just go into the bucket of energy that supplies the whole country. It would be really good if we can have a lot more focus on local resilience in terms of energy generation, not just sticking panels on your roof and serving your own needs, but certainly with large developments that are coming on board, as we know, to have some sort of interconnectedness between them, and we've already seen examples of that in-char well, where we've got one estate generating electricity going into one set of batteries or into one system where appliances are working at certain times of the day to make use of that energy. But this all has to be interconnected, it all has to be there from the beginning. So I hope we can bring up some of that to the fore as well in this, but otherwise, yeah, it'd be great to see this work done. Yeah, I do agree with you, Councillor Middleton, albeit I shock myself in so doing. Were you, Councillor Middleton, I would not hold my breath waiting for changes to the NPPF. I have waited long over many years for changes to the NPPF, but anyway, I digress. This is one of those subjects that we could spend a lot of time talking about. All I'm interested in really this evening is triggering some work to be done so that we can make progress, I think. I would also say that there are examples in this district of where companies of retrofitted solar panels to their roofs for their own internalised use. I know that that is so because they've done that tri-tech, tri-tech's, I think I could pronounce it. How do you say it? Tri-tax, cemetery. And Councillor Middleton is right, and I think, Councillor Broadmover, all sorts of subplots on this about, it's all very well having solar panels, but you've got to get it into agrid or the grid in order to use it, in order to export it. And I think, I think, Councillor Middleton makes a point about when people market solar, I call them factories. They say, This is equivalent to, you know, 40,000 houses worth of electricity. And local people think, Oh, that's me, that's my at war, excellent. It doesn't mean your else, it means it's equivalent to 40,000 houses, somewhere off the natural grid, assuming you can get into it. So there are, you know, you have to sort of have a degree of cynicism about these kind of things. Councillor Broad. Just very briefly, it just connects to everything you were saying. I forgot to mention, of course, and you will know from the Futroxage Partnership that there are the local area energy plans, the lake, which are going on in the county. So this project should fit in with that local area energy policy anyway, which is really good. And just as a slightly amusing thing, we called it Pasco, the pathway to zero carbon autoature. They've suddenly decided to rename that to something where you can't say, which is net zero root map. Yeah, I had no words. I know not why that has happened. It counts the same. I think what Councillor Broad is referring to is the newsroom. Of course, Councillor Wood, when you refer to the waiting for the MPPF changes, you will recall that it did change last December 2023 has just been updated. But also, I think we need to not only look at the MPPF, but look at the planning practice guidance on various issues as well, which are just as useful as putting stuff into the MPPF. Energy generation and networks is a complex process, although I'm sure Mr. Packford will and Mr. Bowell will attune to. And all work needs to be done across the sector to ensure that we've got sufficient energy generation to meet the needs across the country, not just in Charwell or Oxfordshire. Okay, so, Councillor HINGLEY. Thank you, Councillor. Just very briefly, I just wanted to recognise the effort that Councillor Walker has put into this. I know the first time that she has invested a lot of time and effort into this strategy, and that I agree with yourself and now is the time to turn that effort into work. So I look forward to seeing what comes out of this in due course. Thank you. I agreed. So the recommendation moved by me, as centred by Councillor Nell. Our members agreed. Thank you. The next one is the performance risk and finance monitoring report. Councillor DALYMORE, please. Thank you, Leader. The Council is performing well against its third quarter objectives, including business plan measures, peer review actions, annual delivery plan milestones, and equality's diversity and inclusion action plans. The Council has achieved 92% of its targets for the third quarter. 60 measures report green, three amber, and two red, as set out at all but one of them are in track to hit their end of your targets. Just to touch on the point that Councillor Broad picked up, I and the team are looking forward to the current monitoring KPIs, and it's my hope that a full refresh will be occurring next to the next year. The committee has asked just to note the report, this aspect of the report. Thank you, Councillor Nell. Thank you, Leader. The financial aspect of the report covers forecasts. These are forecasts made as at the end of November 2023 for the position of the Council's revenue budget, and separately its capital budget, at the end of the financial year. The committee has asked to note the contents of the report, to approve the use of reserves as set out in Appendix 5, to approve the use of policy contingency funds of $1.476 million, to mitigate the deficiency in India income from the Section 31 grant. This is a purely technical timing change. We will get that money, the Section 31 money, but not in this financial year. To note the repurposing of £30,000 from the Fairway Flats refurbishment project, for the works at Cope Road in Banbury, which has been approved by the Section 151 officer under delegation powers. Turning to the revenue budget, the Council's forecast out-turned position for financial year 2023-2024 is that its expenditure will almost exactly match its budget. And pausing there, the officers generally, and in particular the finance team, have to be commended for achieving this remarkably close result. This is after a proposed transfer to reserves of £500,000, and in addition to this, an underspend within the policy contingency item, which will offset the lower-than-budgeted in-year income from the Section 31 grant. The overall forecast position is an improvement of £259,000 over the previous month's forecast. If members consult Table 4 in the report, they will see the top major variances in the revenue budget. And these are the Section 31 grant, the policy contingency items, planning and development, legal democratic elections and procurement and environmental services. And the members will note the reasons for these. Policy contingency has been released to mitigate a shortfall in budgeted Section 31 grant related to business rates income. The shortfall is due to a timing issue relating to when funds can be recognised. Development management has had a forecast overspend link to agency costs and costs associated with planning appeals. Within the legal and democratic section of the budget, the additional expenditure is due to the costs of elections, agency costs and under recovery of income. And within environmental services, the overspend is primarily linked to the volatility of recycling costs and the demand for recycled materials, which has been falling. Turning to the capital budget, the capital budget for the year was an expenditure of £27.371 million. There is a forecast in year underspend of £14.019 million, of which £13.869 million is to be re-profiled into future years. I'll say that another way, the vast majority of the capital money which we cannot spend this year is being re-profiled into future years. It's not a case of we're not spending, it's a case of we're not spending it within this financial year. There is then a small overall forecast underspend of £150,000. The top five variances in the capital budget have been found at table nine and these relate to the development of Newland at the Bistadepo, to Castle Key Works, to section 106 monies for the Bistad leisure centre extension, to the vehicle replacement programme and to the Bistadepo community centre. Turning to aged debt, at the end of December 2023, the council had outstanding debt of £3.062 million and this refers to debt owed to the council and this compares to a figure of £4.967 million in September 2023. Aged debt over 120 days has reduced significantly, mainly due to departments proactively liaising with customers chasing payment of invoices and to the write-offs agreed by the executive committee of £787,000 in November 2023. Of the outstanding debt, £750,000 is less than 30 days old. I would remind members that the financial regulations under which the council works make provision for writing off debts that are bad, debts that are uneconomical to collect or debts that are irrecoverable. The council maintains a number of bad debt provisions in its accounts. In the anticipation that debts will become bad and this is normal practice in all organisations, both public sector and private sector. Once bad debts are recognised, these are then charged to the relevant provision which is reduced by that amount. So when we write off bad debts, it is not that we are foregoing the cash that has already been done by making the provision, if you like. The council does hold sufficient provisions for bad debt that by writing off the amount of debt mentioned in this report, the total provision will not be exceeded and the result will be that there is no expense in the accounts related to bad debt. This provision is reviewed on a regular basis to ensure that we have sufficient within it. The report also contains details of the aged debt write-offs during the year, the council tax debt write-offs and the housing benefit write-offs. When members look at those, I would urge them to remember that the Child District Council is a collecting authority for council tax and therefore collects much larger sums by way of council tax than the sums that actually are for the benefit of Child District Council. So the right office to be put in the context of our total collection, most of which is passed on to other bodies. Finally, turning to reserves, there is at table 13 a complete description of the council's reserves and their changes between the 1st of April 2023 and the expected balance on the 31st of March 2024. Members will note that the general reserve of 6.15 million remains unchanged and this sum is calculated by the section 151 officer according to a complex procedure but which reflects the minimum amount that the council must keep on hand to meet unexpected contingencies. There is then provision for earmarked reserves and reserves relating to ring-fenced grants received by the council and capital reserves. The finance officers continue to monitor the council reserves on a quarterly basis and I would remark that they are in a relatively healthy position and this year at least the council is not having to use its reserves in respect of its overall revenue position which is a good result. Thank you Peter, that is all. Thank you. Any member comments or questions on the performance and the finance monitoring? No, I just add my own commendations really for the work that goes into the preparation of performance monitoring and in respect of budget management for a lot of a better phrase because these things do not get done by as it were just machines, artificial intelligence, we actually use real intelligence to deal with these things and we do not as electric members commend that work as often as we should and so I endorse the comments that have been made this evening. The recommendations are as set out moved by Councillor Dallymoe, seconded by Councillor Nell. Our members agreed. Thank you. Number 12, Daddington neighbourhood plan. Councillor Sames. Thank you, Leader. Very straightforward members will recall that for a neighbourhood plan to go forward it needs to be consulted on. It goes through to inspection by an examiner from the pins, planning inspector, that is the word I was looking for, who looks at the report and makes recommendations. In this case the examiner made a series of recommendations and congratulated the parish council on an excellent plan. Having considered the examiners report, our officers or of the view that all the recommendations made by the inspector should be accepted and therefore in aspects of looking at the modifications which are proposed we are recommending that this plan be the modifications be accepted by the executive and then we move forward to the next stage which is to go to a public referendum which presumably will happen in May. Am I correct? Yes. There is one amendment that Mr Peckford would like to note. I'll just pass you on to him for that one but I would like to propose the recommendations that are on the page and I believe I have a secondary new Councillor Wood. You do, Mr Peckford. Thank you, Leader. Just a slight error at Para 3.3 of the report which refers to the public consultation at the Regulation 14 stage and it refers to consultation taking place between October 2017 and November 2017. That may have actually been on the first version of the Dennington plan. The correct reference is between November 2022 and January 2023. Thank you, Leader. Oh, I'm very glad you pointed that out to us. It's made all the difference. Thank you. So, the recommendation to proceed to referendum is what it says. And to accept the submission from the inspector. Yeah. As set out, moved by Council same, seconded by me. Our members agreed. Thank you. Item 13 is the sale of Boddicoot House. Councillor Reeves, please. Thank you, Leader. This report relates to the sale of Boddicoot House. The Council is the freeholder of the site and question and the property has been marketed for sale. The report identifies the Council's preferred bidder which is the regional developer with a proven track record. The recommendations before us are twofold at 1.1 to delegate authority to the corporate director of resources and consultation with myself and the section 1.5.1 officer to proceed with the heads of terms set out in appendix 5 and thereafter to enter into negotiations for the sale contract with Lucy developments limited. And secondarily at 1.2 to delegate authority to the assistant director of law and governance to enter into heads of terms. By way of brief background, Leader, the executive made its decision on at the 6th of November 2023 to relocate the Council's offices to castle key. The sale of Boddicoot House was considered by the executive at that meeting where the delegated authority was granted to the corporate director of resources and consultation with myself and the section 1.5.1 officer to proceed with the issuing of draft heads of terms. We have, as colleagues will be aware, two other occupiers of this site, both of whom have at least sold interest, sanctuary housing and Oxfordshire County Council's registrars department. We're working with them as one would expect to ensure the good and proper ongoing provision of public services to residents. It should be noted that the paper relating to the office relocation back in November highlighted that this enabled the potential sale of Boddicoot House and this paper is to approve the recommendations as I've described. Any questions surrounding the financial information as we'll find at Appendix 5 should be taken in private reasons of commercial confidentiality. On that basis, Leader, what I propose to do is formally move recommendations 1.1 and 1.2 under item 15 under the advice of the assistant director for law and governance. I'm very happy, however, to take any general questions in public before we move to our private session. I have a seconder when the time comes in Council and now. Thank you. Two-stage progress, as you've intimated, the headline recommendations are set out now and details of the Appendix 5 for one for better summary in the exempt stage. Yes, for clarity, I'll formally move and ask the executive to agree through you, Leader, Recommendation 1.1 and 1.2 under item 15, i.e. in private. My opening remarks were simply that by way of opening the debate up, should colleagues have any general questions there upon? Okay, I've got it now. Thank you. Are there any comments on this? Councillor HINGLE. Thank you, Leader. Just to ask if there's any change on the timetable for this, is are we still intending to proceed with the sale of the move into Council key by the end of this calendar year? Yes, general update on that would be helpful. Yes, is the short answer. We ask no change to the timetable. Okay, thank you. Any other points on this? In that case, we'll move then on to the exclusion of the public and press. Is that correct? Yes. So, the agenda item 14, exclusion of the public and the press for the reason set out on the agenda and as explained by Councillor RISE proposed by me, seconded by Councillor Nail. Our members agreed. Thank you. As it were, so item 16 is a re-admittance of the public and the press. Welcome back, everyone. Item 17 is urgent business. There are no matters of urgent business, so it only remains for me to thank members and officers for their attendance and to declare the meeting closed. Thank you. a [BLANK_AUDIO]