We had a full council meeting at 4pm today.  It was primarily to discuss the council’s response to the Core Strategy.  The leading group had tried to get our leader to jointly sign a letter with the leader but our group was of the view that this is far too important an issue to sign off behind closed doors so we asked for a full council meeting.  The main areas of contention were the numbers of new houses in the strategy, whether the Northern Gateway should be included and whether the employment land allocation needs reviewing, in the light of how much land earmarked for employment use has been fallow for such a long time.

The amendments to the response proposed by our group were:

Delete “8,000 new homes” in line 2 and substitute with “9,000 new homes” to read:

(1) Endorse the housing figure in the Core Strategy of at least 9,000 new homes between 2006 and 2026 and confirm that this level of growth is considered appropriate in the absence of the target from the South East Plan

After point (1) insert the following paragraph:

Council urges the Leader and the two Members of Parliament for Oxford to campaign immediately for a recognition that the housing needs of Oxford City over the plan period cannot be met solely by building within the city; and that a mechanism to meet economic, social and environmental needs of the economic unit of which Oxfordshire and the neighbouring Local Planning Authorities (unitaries and District Councils) should be formed as a Local Economic Partnership.

and

After point (1) [and amendment 2] insert the following paragraph:

Council calls for a new employment land study to be undertaken before any targets for quantity and diversity of jobs are enshrined in the Core Strategy
The Labour group outvoted all these amendments and I must say I have never seen them quite so tetchy.   I felt that the meeting was essential so that the Council’s response could be debated and voted on in public but unfortunately some administration members had said they thought it was “silly politics.  The building and development plan for the next 20 years in Oxford doesn’t seem like that to me!