Change Afoot in Northern Oxfordshire

Posted on    by

I did say I’d be back with more thoughts on the creation of the Northern Oxfordshire Council alongside Greater Oxford and the Ridgeway. And here I am.

Having had three options on the table, with each having strong and very vocal backers, no choice was ever going to get unanimous cheers – there are simply too many knock-on effects for that sort of unanimity. But sometimes you have a situation where a call must be made, and this was one of them.

IMO, pulling Banbury out from the administrative shadow and the massive tourist gravitational pull of Oxford is more positive than negative.

I don’t imagine that the adjustments and shifts will all be smooth. It’s not going to be a walk in the park. There will be plenty of serious administrative heavy lifting, new strategic alignments, a complete rethinking of how local services and budgets are managed, and political wrestling behind closed doors (and occasionally in the headlines).

Now, given what I’ve spent the last two years doing, it won’t surprise anyone to know I’ve looked at some of this through a visitor economy lens. Not exclusively, but it’s where my head is these days. 

For years, Banbury has effectively been treated as an edge case (if it was noticed at all) while regional visitor economy efforts and investment were (understandably) drawn to Oxford. 

Under the new structure, that dynamic flips and Banbury becomes the new administrative heavyweight, and that position has a direct impact on visitor economy decision-making surrounding the area.

Why do I think Banbury becomes the administrative centre? Well, it’s not because I am privy to any secrets – I can assure you of that. It just makes the most sense. At roughly 50,000 residents, Banbury will be the largest urban settlement in the new Northern authority, outweighing “sibling” towns like Witney (~30k) and Bicester (also ~30k). As Cherwell’s current headquarters is already at Castle Quay, the political and administrative gravity of the new council naturally sits right here in town.

And yes, I know West Oxfordshire’s offices are in Witney. I love Witney. But from a logistical point of view, it makes more sense (to me, anyway) for the headquarters of the council to be in a location with robust transport links. Witney, delightful though it is, simply doesn’t have those.

So, assuming I am right about Banbury becoming the administrative centre of the new council (I might not be, but you never know), it could give the local visitor economy a much clearer focus.

Instead of trying to fit into a generic “Cotswolds-adjacent” or ‘Oxford-overflow’ box, a Northern Oxfordshire council has an opportunity to define its own visitor identity. 

Uniting much of Cherwell with West Oxfordshire gives a single entity control over a unique “Cotswolds & Canal” corridor. Or it could lean into the idea of being England’s crossroads: canals, market towns, country houses, motorsport, the edge of the Cotswolds, and shopping. It’s a story that is economically coherent and distinct from what will very likely remain Oxford’s world-famous academic and heritage offer.

Banbury, thanks to its location and transport links, then evolves from a commuter and transit town into a destination hub. Up until now, regional tourism strategy was all about “dispersing” visitors out of overcrowded Oxford for quick day trips. The new Northern council won’t be trying to manage Oxford’s crowds; it will be focused on keeping visitors and spend right here in the north.

With our rail links and direct M40 access, Banbury is the logical base for people to stay, eat, and explore the wider northern landscape. It’s the next evolution of something we’ve said on The Banburian blog for years: Banbury’s central location makes it an ideal base for exploring some of England’s premier attractions without paying premier-attraction prices for hotels. Stay at a hotel or B&B in Banbury and you are less than an hour (often less than 30 minutes) from a wealth of locations serving a wide range of interests.

In order for the whole of the new council area to feel the benefit of those connections, the “last mile” and the “spoke” parts of the “hub-and-spoke” transport infrastructure will need serious thinking. But then, a lot of things will need serious thinking in the new council’s landscape. What’s one more?

None of this is going to happen automatically, and it will take strong local advocacy to make sure our town centre gets the focus and investment it deserves. But it feels to me like, after a long time, the map is finally drawn in a way that allows the northern part of the county to shine in its own way.

Lines Redrawn – Behold Northern Oxfordshire Council

Posted on    by

Well, well, well – that’s gonna make for some interesting conversations.  What am I on about?

Yesterday (Thursday July 16) the UK gov announced that Oxfordshire and West Berkshire’s seven existing councils will be replaced by three unitary councils on 1 April 2028. So, we say ‘so long, farewell, auf wiedersehen and goodbye’ to Oxfordshire County Council and hello to the three new councils:

  • Greater Oxford Council – covering Oxford and its immediate surroundings
  • Northern Oxfordshire Council – covering most of the existing Cherwell and West Oxfordshire districts
  • Ridgeway Council – covering most of the existing South Oxfordshire and Vale of White Horse districts, combined with West Berkshire

I know not everyone is thrilled but I think putting Oxford at the centre of its own universe instead of turning everything in the county into an ‘also ran, Oxford satellite’ makes sense. I’m sure there were reasons the Ridgeway council took shape the way it did but I don’t know enough about the logistics of that area where Oxfordshre and West Berkshire touch to say.

But I definitely have thoughts about Northern Oxfordshire Council and think it presents some great opportunities for planning and management suitable for the area. What do I mean? Just that trying to treat all of Oxfordshire like a homogeneous economic, social and cultural entity was always going to mean huge swathes of the area was being mismanaged. The new structure, IMO, means things are a bit more like for like administratively – and that makes planning and management easier.

Anyway – much more thoughts on this to come, especially for what it means for the visitor economy (because some of the big ticket destinations ended up in falling under the Northern Oxfordshire Council).

Opinions are not facts. Not even in Banbury

Posted on    by

When people moan about Banbury not being what it used to be, I usually ignore it. Partly because it’s boring, but mostly because nothing is what it used to be – not people, places or events. Not even those fading into the rose-tinted past. That’s simply how places evolve.

But today someone on another page pinned the decline of Banbury (as they saw it) to the creation of Castle Quay and I thought to myself ‘Well, that’s just nuts.’ I won’t labour the point that opinions aren’t facts, no matter how confidently they’re stated.

But this Castle Quay theory? No. Opinion it may be but it’s also nonsense. How do I know? Because I looked it up.

It wasn’t entirely clear whether they meant the original Castle Shopping Centre, which opened in 1977, or Castle Quay following its 2000 rebranding. Since they specifically said Castle Quay, let’s use 2000 as our starting point.

What happened between 2000 and 2020?

The biggest change was a shift from a traditional market town with London overspill growth into a highly connected hub of logistics, advanced engineering, and motorsport innovation. Did CQ have a role in that one way or another? Probably not. The town’s location and its transport links were probably far more important factors

The estimated population was around 41,900 in 2000, rising to around 48,000–50,000 by 2020. It’s still going up now. 55,000 to 60,000 was the last estimate. What drives that rise? Employment opportunities and transport connectivity.

And the economy?

What about key economic drivers? In 2000 it was manufacturing and the food industry. By 2020, it had expanded with logistics/distribution taking the lead followed by advanced engineering and motorsport (and the food industry still plays an important role today). The shift from factories to logistics? Nothing to do with Castle Quay and everything to do with location, location, location and transport connectivity again.

You can’t talk about economic health without mentioning unemployment. Banbury has routinely had low unemployment across the area. In 2000 it was below the national average (approx. 2%–3%). By 2020 it was even lower than the national average, exceptionally low, at around 0.7%–1.5%. Even now, it remains resolutely below national averages.

What about retail? That front-facing thing everyone clamps on to like it’s some sort of gotcha.

I hope we can all agree that retail has been experiencing systemic, widespread disruption for the last 20 years or so. It’s been a massive shift impacting countless livelihoods, consumer behaviour of all kinds and the ripple effect can be felt across the global economy.

Was that shift underway between the launch of Castle Quay and now? Yes. Absolutely. Has that shift impacted the retail offering in Banbury? Yes, absolutely. Was that shift created by the launch and existence of Castle Quay? No.

In fact, I would suggest that Castle Quay was never a major factor in Banbury’s economic trajectory.

By 2020, the rise of online shopping and out-of-town retail parks systematically disrupted high streets everywhere, not just in Banbury. It wasn’t the shopping centre that changed consumer habits – it was the internet and wider economic shifts.

Look, I’m not saying Castle Quay has been a total success. Like many shopping centres, it’s had to adapt to the huge changes in retail. But that’s a very different claim from saying it caused Banbury’s decline.

So about this alleged decline?

The evidence simply doesn’t support the idea that Castle Quay triggered some sort of decline in Banbury. Between 2000 and 2020 the town was growing – in population, employment and economic diversity. Retail certainly changed, but that happened in towns across the country as online shopping and wider economic forces reshaped Britain’s high streets. Blaming Castle Quay isn’t just an oversimplification; it mistakes coincidence for cause.

Population and employment figures are drawn from ONS and local authority data.

Banbury and the MICE market: an opportunity we’re not quite claiming?

Posted on    by

I’ve been noticing something over the past few months.

Across both the hospitality and travel sectors, there’s been a noticeable shift toward meetings, conferences and events – what the industry tends to bundle together as “MICE” (I know it sounds like a pest problem but I promise it’s a profit centre). Hotels are talking about it more. Venues are investing in it. Destinations are actively competing for it.

Which makes absolute sense in the current economic climate. Leisure travel is still strong but it is also unpredictable. Business meetings and events, on the other hand, offer a lot more consistency and reliability.

And, as is often the case these days, that got me thinking about Banbury.

On Paper v Reality

Because on paper, Banbury should be reasonably well placed to benefit from this trend. We’re well connected – direct rail links, easy access to the M40, within reach of both London and Birmingham. That connectivity is a huge asset. We’re close enough to Oxford to be part of the same conversation, but far enough away to avoid some of the cost and congestion.

But that’s on paper. In reality, we’re not really in that conversation.

Oxford is, understandably, a major draw. Bicester with its iconic retail offering, Golf Club and Bicester Motion has carved out its own niche. Banbury, meanwhile, sits slightly to the side and feels like it’s present, but overlooked.

The Local Venue Scene

It’s not because we don’t HAVE any relevant venues. We do. Off the top of my head:

  • There are traditional options like Whately Hall Hotel, which offers the kind of multi-room, residential setup that works well for smaller conferences and training events. And while it is a hotel – it’s even part of a chain – it’s got a sense of character most chain hotels can only dream of.
  • There are more flexible, creative spaces like The Mill Arts Centre, where theatre and meeting space overlap in useful ways – particularly for talks, presentations or anything that benefits from a slightly different setting.
  • There are hybrid, experience-led venues like The Light Banbury, which combine meeting space with built-in social and team-building elements. What better place to have an ‘all in one place’ team or corporate away day?
  • There are also more formal, civic spaces like Banbury Town Hall. Often associated with weddings and receptions, it’s also used for fundraising dinners, talks and larger gatherings—and can accommodate conferences of up to around 200 people.
  • And then there are the more informal, community-led options – places like Banbury Cricket Club Pavilion, which might not appear in traditional venue searches but can work perfectly well for the right kind of event.

There are probably others. But you get the idea.

Individually, none of these are trying to compete with Oxford’s more famous or larger venues. After all, they aren’t insane.

But taken together, they start to suggest something else: Banbury as a practical, well-connected option for smaller meetings (say, under 150 people – with some options stretching beyond that) where access, value and flexibility matter more than scale and prestige.

Those are the kind of meetings that make up a significant proportion of business activity and the vast majority don’t always need a flagship destination.

The Visibility Problem

Partly, it’s a question of scale and recognition. Larger destinations have established reputations, budgets and the resources to promote them. They also have organisations dedicated to amplifying their offer.

But it’s also a question of how the offer is presented.

At the moment, Banbury’s venues largely promote themselves individually. Which is entirely reasonable. And if any of the local stakeholder organisations are tackling this, I’ve not seen it. The result is that there’s no collective story about what Banbury offers as a place for businesses to meet.

And without that, it’s difficult for the town to register as an option in the first place.

None of this requires a grand strategy to start shifting. Sometimes it’s as simple as making the implicit explicit.

Banbury is:

  • well connected
  • easier to navigate than larger destinations
  • often better value than nearby alternatives
  • home to a mix of venues that suit different types of smaller events

 

 

That’s a perfectly viable proposition and if consistently articulated will do most of the heavy lifting.

Lean In to Locality

There’s also something else in Banbury’s favour, something we see percolating in recreational tourism too and that’s unique experiences, something a bit different, with an authenticity and sense of place. It can be harder to quantify than cost and location but it is increasingly a factor in decision making.

There’s a growing appetite in the MICE space venues that feel a little more grounded, less like interchangeable conference backdrops and more like real places with their own character. Market towns, independent venues, walkable centres – these are the environments where people can step out of a meeting, walk along the canal or browse the market and feel like they’ve actually gone somewhere.

If Banbury does have a place in this part of the market, it may not be about building something new so much as joining up what already exists—and being a little more deliberate about how it’s presented.

Because at the moment, the pieces are there. They’re just not quite telling a shared story.

Banbury’s Next Chapter? Why the Masterplan and Town of Culture Need Each Other

Posted on    by

Banbury’s had one of those weeks where things suddenly feel like they might be happening.

Within the space of a day, two significant announcements landed. Cherwell District Council (along with partner organisations) confirmed that Banbury will submit an expression of interest for the UK Town of Culture 2028, and then also released details on a Banbury Masterplan, with a particular focus on Castle Quay and the town centre.

On paper, these are two separate developments. One is about culture; the other about regeneration and the built environment. In reality, they only make sense if they’re connected.

The “where” and the “why”

At its simplest, the Masterplan is the “where.” It deals with the physical shape of the town – how the centre is laid out, how spaces connect, what happens along the canal and through Castle Quay, and how people move through it all.

The Town of Culture bid, on the other hand, is the “why.” It’s about what fills those spaces – the activity, the stories, the creative life of the town, and the reasons people choose to spend time here rather than somewhere else.

You can have one without the other. But it rarely works well.

A town can invest in new paving, improved public spaces, and a refreshed waterfront – and still feel curiously hollow if there’s no clear sense of purpose behind it. Equally, a cultural programme – however ambitious – struggles to land if it isn’t rooted in spaces that support it, showcase it, and make it visible.

The real, long-term opportunity for Banbury lie in bringing these two strands together.

What success could look like

If the Masterplan and the Town of Culture bid are aligned from the outset, they reinforce each other.

The Masterplan becomes more than a redevelopment project. It becomes a framework for cultural life – ensuring that performance, creativity, community activity, and everyday cultural experiences are designed into the town rather than added as an afterthought. (And let’s be honest, “afterthought” is a design language we’ve seen a bit too much of in the past.)

At the same time, the Town of Culture bid gains credibility. It can point not only to heritage and existing assets, but to a clear, tangible commitment to shaping the town’s future – to creating spaces where culture can thrive long after any single year of programming has ended.

This is, in many ways, what these bids are really about. Not a single year of activity, but a longer-term shift in how a place thinks about itself and presents itself to others.

The risk of disconnect

Of course, the reverse is also true. If these two efforts proceed on parallel tracks without meaningful coordination, the result is familiar: a town centre that looks improved but feels no different; a cultural programme that generates activity, but lacks a strong sense of place. It would be a missed opportunity to turn two good ideas into something more substantial.

Banbury isn’t alone in facing this challenge. Many places have found that coordination – between organisations, between strategies, between ambitions – is where things become difficult. Which is why the timing of these announcements matters.

The process is the point

One of the more interesting aspect of a competition like this is that the process itself often delivers value, regardless of the outcome. Places that have gone through the City of Culture bidding process frequently talk about benefits such as:

  • Stronger collaboration between local organisations
  • A clearer articulation of local identity
  • Increased visibility for cultural activity
  • New investment and momentum that continues beyond the bid

In that sense, Banbury’s opportunity isn’t limited to whether it wins a title in 2028. The real question is what it builds along the way.

An open question

For all of this to work, two things will matter more than anything else.

The first is coordination – not just in principle, but in practice. Aligning plans, priorities, and delivery across organisations that don’t always naturally operate as one.

The second is visibility.

In other towns pursuing similar bids, there’s been a clear effort to share progress publicly, create central points of information, and invite input from residents and local groups. If Banbury is serious about this, that kind of openness will be important – not just for transparency, but for building the sense of shared ownership that these initiatives ultimately depend on.

Because culture, in the end, isn’t something that can be delivered to a place. It has to be built with it.

Early days

It’s still early. Plans will evolve, priorities will shift, and the practical realities of delivery will no doubt assert themselves soon enough.

But taken together, these two announcements suggest something more than “business as usual.” Handled well, they offer Banbury a chance not just to improve how the town looks, but to think more clearly about what it is – and what it wants to become.

That is a conversation worth having.

I’ve posted about Banbury as a potential bidder for Town of Culture before.  I didn’t think the great and the good would bother but I am delighted to have been proven wrong.