Agenda item

Public participation

Members of the public may ask questions of the Chairman of the Growth Board, or address the Growth Board on any substantive item at a meeting, subject to the restrictions set out in the public participation scheme.  The total amount of time allowed for public participation at a meeting shall not exceed 30 minutes, unless the Chairman consents to extend that time in the interests of the proper conduct of the business of the Growth Board. 

 

A person speaking to the Growth Board may speak for up to three minutes.  Board members may ask questions for clarification. 

 

Asking a question

Questions (in full and in writing) must be received by 5pm on Wednesday 22 January 2020 three clear working days before the Growth Board meeting. 

 

Addressing the Board

Notice of a wish to address the Growth Board by making a statement must be received by 12 noon on Monday 27 January 2020, the working day before the Growth Board meeting. 

 

Questions and notice of addresses must be submitted to democratic.services@oxfordshiregrowthboard.org or delivered/posted to Democratic Services, South Oxfordshire District Council, 135 Eastern Avenue, Milton Park, Milton, OX14 4SB. 

Minutes:

The Growth Board received four public questions and two public addresses.

 

1.            Councillor Judy Roberts had submitted a written question in relation to the Oxfordshire Rail Corridor Study report. Given her understanding that the Oxford Station Master plan was scheduled to be implemented by 2024, Councillor Roberts suggested that the programming of the signalling changes was unreasonably slow that the signalling changes required to implement the Cowley Branch line station must wait until 2026-27. The Growth Board was, therefore, asked put pressure on Network Rail to bring the signalling changes forward.

 

The Chair invited John Disley, Infrastructure Strategy and Policy Manager, to respond. The Growth Board was informed that the 2024 commitment was to Oxford Station Phase 2 (which facilitated East West Rail Phase 2), and that there was no firm assurance regarding the delivery date of the full station masterplan.

 

Further, they were also told that the reinstatement of the Cowley branch line required much more than signalling changes. For example, a track capacity upgrade would be required on the main line in order for services to be able to operate to/from Oxford and beyond. There was currently no funding or firm commitment to carry out this work.

 

The Oxfordshire Rail Corridor Study was effectively proposing to bring together Phase 3 of the Oxford Station upgrade (which would deliver the full masterplan), the track capacity upgrades and the Cowley branch line. All of these projects had been identified as being required by 2028.

 

Network Rail could only deliver schemes that were funded. The Oxfordshire Rail Corridor Study provided an opportunity to secure the commitment for further investment and, therefore, was an important step in the potential delivery of these projects.

2.            Sue Haywood on behalf of Need Not Greed Oxfordshire had submitted a written question about the Growth Board Review.  Whilst recognising and welcoming that the recent review had included recognition of the need to embed environmental and social wellbeing considerations more effectively into the Growth Board’s work and output, concern was expressed that the ‘growth’ agenda remained at the core of the Board’s purpose and title.  In relation to the Growth Board’s role as both an influencer to and influence of HM Government, fears were expressed regarding the impact of ‘influencers’ on the development of the spatial options within the Oxfordshire Plan 2050. Concerns were also expressed in reference to HM Government intervening in South Oxfordshire District Council’s Local Plan.

 

The Board was asked if it agreed that now was the opportunity to revisit, in the first phase of change arising from the review, the fundamental aims of the Growth Board as an important forum for collaboration between the local councils in Oxfordshire and reflect this as quickly as possible in the revised Terms of Reference for the structure.

 

In response, the Chair indicated that points were well made, but that the review did indeed provide an opportunity for the Growth Board to revisit its aims, and the report provided a starting point for that conversation. The Growth Board would review its aims in the coming months through the revised Terms of Reference. These would then progress through the relevant decision-making processes of each council for endorsement.

 

Sue Haywood was of the view that there was a feeling of disconnect and lack of awareness amongst local councillors about the Growth Board’s work.

For example, she was of the opinion, that there was a lack of engagement by local councillors, as elected representatives, in significant matters such as the Oxford to Cambridge Arc and the Local Industrial Strategy. She asked if the Growth Board would use the review to strengthen local accountability.

 

The Chair responded that local councillors had been engaged and involved in the Growth Board review including via dedicated workshops.

 

3.         Michael Tyce on behalf of Campaign for Protection of Rural England (CPRE) had submitted a written question that asked whether the Growth Board supported the intervention of the Secretary of State in South Oxfordshire District Council’s Local Plan and the possibility of moving responsibility for the Plan to the County Council.

 

The Chair responded that the Growth Board’s view was that this was a matter for South Oxfordshire District Council and HM Government and, therefore, it would be unhelpful for the Board to become involved.

 

Michael Tyce rephrased the question to ask the Growth Board to comment on the principle of the Secretary of State intervening in any local plan.

 

The Board noted the remarks but restated its former position.

 

Angus Horner, OxLEP Business Representative – Science Vale, stated his personal view that in an ideal world the intervention by the Secretary of State would not have taken place, but the situation was very difficult.  In his view, Growth Board review provided an opportunity to revisit aims and there was an aspiration in collaboration to move forward together.

 

4.            Roger Williams on behalf of POETS (Planning Oxfordshire’s Environment and Transport Sustainability) had submitted a written question that asked the Growth Board to seek a commitment from HM Government to carry out the promised public engagement exercise on the Oxford to Cambridge Expressway (and that this should incorporate the review promised by Grant Shapps). The Growth Board was also asked for the review to give priority to addressing the climate emergency – which has been acknowledged by the Board and HM Government.

 

The Chair responded that the Growth Board had previously expressed the need for greater clarity from HM Government over their plans for the Oxford to Cambridge Expressway. Further, it was intended that the Growth Board would remain a space where these types of sub-regional issues could be discussed. Highways England were due to attend the Growth Board meeting on 26 November 2019 to discuss their consultation plans. However, this was cancelled due to the pre-election period affecting their attendance, and they were recently unable to commit to a revised meeting date. The Growth Board strongly supported the need for appropriate public consultation to be carried out by HM Government in relation to the Expressway, and this would be made clear to them at each stage of the process.

 

Roger Williams added that the implications of the Expressway were significant for housing numbers across the Oxford to Cambridge Arc, and for the Oxfordshire Plan 2050. It should, therefore, be subject to open public engagement and debate as promised by both local and central government.

 

The Chair commented that these points were acknowledged. Bev Hindle, Growth Board Director, commented that HM Government had intended to undertake a public engagement exercise over the summer of 2019. This had, however, not taken place for several reasons e.g. Brexit and the General Election. Whilst public engagement was currently on hold, it was still expected to occur. Furthermore, although related the Expressway was separate to the Oxford to Cambridge Arc.

 

Giles Hughes, Chief Executive of West Oxfordshire District Council, informed the meeting that there was no top-down housing target. Work was ongoing to develop a range of different housing growth scenarios and options. It would, however, be a matter for local councils in Oxfordshire to decide what action to take.

 

5.         Dr Jayne Manley, Chief Executive of the Earth Trust addressed the Growth Board to support the findings of the Growth Board review, particularly proposals for bringing more environmental consideration to the Growth Board’s work and links to Oxfordshire Environment Board. She commented that society faced significant challenges, but there was an opportunity for Oxfordshire to provide leadership in respect of the environment. This did need to be matched by appropriate resources.

 

6.         Ian Green, Oxford Civic Society addressed the Growth Board on the Oxfordshire Rail Corridor Study. The scale of the ambition of the proposals was welcomed as was the proposed next stages of work. The balance on medium/longer rail services of inclusivity versus segmentation was queried. He suggested that more rolling stock was needed that met local and feeder service passenger’s needs, not passengers travelling from locations such as Birmingham. Hourly services would not be enough on already busy lines and a wider review of access to rail services was needed. It was interesting to see what the impact of the proposals on freight would be and electrification needed to be supported.

 

John Disley, Infrastructure Strategy and Policy Manager responded that it was still early in the process, but that the balance of short and long-term could be examined (including any best practice from other regions). Oxford had the potential to be a national rail hub which was not the case for other areas.

 

Contact us - Democratic services

Phone icon

01235 422520
(Text phone users add 18001 before dialing)

Address icon

South Oxfordshire District Council
Abbey House, Abbey Close,
Abingdon
OX14 3JE