Oxford City Council, 7 October 2024

We are sure you were all glued to the live-stream of the Oxford City Council meeting last night.

(…just us then?)

We regularly live-tweet from County Council meetings, both Cabinet and Full Council. We’ve given City Council meetings less attention, and that’s perhaps an omission. So this month, we read the briefing pack, stocked up on cocoa, and watched the live-stream. (You can do the same: Oxford City Council, commendably, has a straightforward YouTube channel on which it broadcasts its meetings, rather than Microsoft Teams or the similar ungainly solutions chosen by other councils.)

How the City works

Let's start with the basics. Full Council meets just seven times a year. Every one of Oxford City’s 48 councillors, whether Labour, Liberal Democrat, Green or Independent, is entitled to attend, speak, and put forward motions. In practice, most decisions are taken by the ruling Labour group and ratified at monthly Cabinet or sub-committee meetings. But Full Council is the chance for other councillors to hold the ruling group to account, to ask the awkward questions, and to set out their own stalls. So in these four-hour meetings, the business of a £7bn city with 165,200 inhabitants is done. Time in these meetings is precious – to some.

The meeting divides into five sections, more or less. Firstly, admin and announcements. Secondly, councillors can ask cabinet members questions, and receive answers. These are submitted in advance, and published with answers in a briefing notes pack: councillors are entitled to ask a supplementary.

Next come addresses from members of the public. (You too can apply to speak at a meeting!) Then a few official Council decisions are made: as we say, most decisions go to Cabinet, but this time Gambling Policy and Senior Management Structure were up for approval.

Finally come motions from councillors. There is never enough time for all the requested motions, so the order rotates by party. If earlier items have dragged on, later motions will be ‘guillotined’ and remain unheard. The pace of any council meeting depends on the attitude and skill of the chair: this meeting was chaired with a firm hand by Lord Mayor Mike Rowley, supported by Cllr Tiago Corais and Caroline Green, Chief Executive of Oxford City Council, along with a phalanx of officers to ensure due process.

So what happened at this meeting?

Announcements

The standout content was an announcement by council leader Susan Brown regarding the Planning Inspectorate’s rejection of Oxford’s Local Plan (see our long read). She warned of at the risks of a delay to proactively plan for homes, borrowing a favourite phrase of Keir Starmer’s new Government to say that Oxford City Council are builders while “others in the county” are blockers.

She rejected many of the findings in the Planning Inspectorate’s note. There is no mechanism to appeal against these findings. But there is clearly no love lost between the councils in Oxfordshire.

Questions to Cabinet members

Regular Clarion readers know our rule of thumb: “Are they putting this on a leaflet?” This agenda item, where councillors submit questions for answers from Cabinet members, allows ward councillors to directly raise their residents’ concerns – but also to get good, attested lines for future leaflets.

There were no fewer than 53 questions this time. As the questions and responses are published in advance, everyone (assuming they've read the briefing notes) is aware of the issue. Councillors can then ask a supplementary question based on the written responses, at which point fireworks may ensue. Those 53 questions included:

• Flying the Palestinian flag in sympathy with Gaza (answer: the council flew the flag at half mast to convey the city's sorrow at the situation in Gaza and the events on 7 October)
• Early thoughts on the direction of travel of devolution (answer: nobody has a crystal ball but the council thinks it's A Good Thing)
• A broken flagpole (answer: it turns out not to be broken)
• Councillor freebies (answer: there's a register of interests for anything over £50)
• Repurposing of Gloucester Green car park to cycle parking (answer: no)
• Eight questions and supplementaries relating to the laden weight of bin lorries crossing the Bridge of Death Littlemore railway bridge, which reminded us of nothing more than this:

(We may be underselling it: there was some debate as to whether one of the bridges in question existed or not.)

• Flood prevention in Oxford (answer: an agreement on looking at convening a roundtable of small businesses in Oxford affected by flooding)
• The fireworks display in South Park and precautions taken to protect the park (answer: council was reassured of the robustness of preparations to protect the park)
• Women-only swim sessions under the new Serco Leisure contract (answer: the lifeguards resigned and are hard to recruit)
• 5G in Oxford (answer: there's a briefing for councillors on 22 October. Clarion footnote: we’d be overjoyed with 1G right now)
• Donnington Bridge closure (answer: nobody is happy, but at least there is now a minibus, which everyone is happy about)
• Transition of taxis to EVs (answer: it's happening as planned)

Addresses from the public

This time addresses were heard on four subjects.

• Greg Owen asked questions around developer Peabody’s new development in Blackbird Leys. He was concerned at a possible breach of planning conditions regarding the adjacent Spindleberry Nature Reserve. Cllr Louise Upton thanked him for bringing these concerns to the attention of the council, and committed to look into any possible breach.
• Chaka Artwell, former independent city council candidate for Barton, gave a flamboyant speech raising the issue of “discrimination” of the council against non-internet users. He requested that city councillors make their home addresses public so that they could be written to instead of emailed, and not “hide behind the town hall and the internet”. Cllr Nigel Chapman defended the council's inclusion policies, citing services available face-to-face and on the phone: he said the council’s contact centre handles over 180,000 calls annually.
• Georgie Steele has two sons who need carers. Her carers are often migrant workers with severe restrictions on their employment: in her view, “they are being systematically exploited by their sponsoring agencies… they’d been told repeatedly ‘don’t complain or we’ll send you home’”. Her speech begins 2hr46 into the meeting, and is worth watching in full. Council leader Cllr Susan Brown gave a heartfelt response which encouraged anyone with concerns to contact their anti-slavery co-ordinator in confidence.
• Multiple speakers spoke in support of the tabled motion around keeping Campsfield House detention centre closed. Speakers called it “a shocking abuse of human rights” and a detention centre “operated for profit by a private company”, citing conditions leading to “a cycle of trauma, self harm and suicide attempts”. They called for a more compassionate approach to asylum seekers. Again it fell to leader Susan Brown to respond, reiterating that Oxford City Council’s own position opposed the reopening of Campsfield House, and saying she’d written to the Home Secretary accordingly.

Motions for debate

Any remaining time at the meeting, up to a maximum of 60 minutes, is devoted to “Motions representing the city” proposed by individual councillors with the backing of their party group.

Winter Fuel Payments: The new Labour Government has resolved to end universal winter fuel payments, restricting eligibility to those in receipt of Pension Credits and other benefits. 15,285 pensioners in Oxford who are currently eligible for winter fuel payments will no longer be able to claim the payment from this winter onwards.

The Liberal Democrats used their motion to propose that the City Council should write to the Government to protest against this change, making alternative suggestions as to how it could be managed. The Independent Oxford Alliance in turn put up a minor amendment to remove a suggestion of taxing wealthier pensioners, while Labour proposed another amendment around the Government’s commitment to the triple lock. The IOA amendment was passed; the Labour one wasn’t; and finally, the (amended) LibDem motion was passed with some, but not all, Labour votes. Being the biggest party on the council doesn’t always mean getting your own way.

(As always, though, we ask: how significant is Oxford City Council writing to the government? There is no doubt as to the compassion of individual councillors towards pensioners impacted by this. Yet with just 60 minutes available for debate, is this the most impactful act the City Council could choose?)

Keep Campsfield Closed: The Green Party used their motion to propose a reiteration of the council’s opposition to the re-opening of Campsfield House. Oxford is a City of Sanctuary. Several councillors had personal experience of working or visiting Campsfield House – or of being migrants. Following at times emotional speeches from almost all sides of the chamber, a motion was overwhelmingly passed requesting that the Leader of the Council write to the Home Secretary calling on her to abandon plans to reopen Campsfield House; reduce the number of asylum seekers held in detention; and to establish safe and legal routes for people to claim asylum.

The following motions were not discussed, due to the time constraints being reached:

• Zero Emission Zone: an Independent Oxford Alliance motion on air quality assessments in the ZEZ.
• Winter Fuel Payments: a second motion on the subject, this time from the Oxford Independent Group.
• Decent and Genuinely Affordable Housing for All: a motion from the Labour group covering a host of housing issues, from controls on short-term lets (Airbnbs) to welcoming plans for the Abingdon Reservoir.
• Protection of Carers from Exploitation: a motion from the Liberal Democrats following up Georgie Steele’s speech earlier, calling for simplified visa applications.
• Bus travel for asylum seekers in Oxford: a motion from the Greens asking for free bus travel to prevent isolation among asylum seekers.

To call the meeting a marathon would be an underestimate. It lasted 4hr30. The marathon world record is 2hr01. Was every minute spent effectively? We heard multiple questions on the laden weight of a bin lorry, and debated the existence of a bridge on Sandy Lane West. (Roads, for the record, are the responsibility of the County Council.) We heard impassioned arguments as to how to phrase a letter to the Government.

Yet housing and planning, arguably the city’s main responsibilities, went largely undiscussed. The rejection of the Local Plan was mentioned in the leader’s opening remarks and then forgotten: no emergency motion, no “what now?” debate. We don’t expect every Oxford politician to share the Clarion’s hobby-horses, of course, but we wonder whether the city’s challenges are getting the airing they deserve.