(15 minutes for public questions and 25 minutes for Councillor questions)
Minutes:
The Mayor advised the meeting that the first item on the agenda in Open Council was Public Question Time. The questions had been received from members of the public and would be taken in the order in which they had been received. Council was advised that if the questioner was not present then the question would appear on the screen in the Council Chamber.
The following questions had been submitted:
1. Question received from MetroMeerkat via Twitter:
“Over the last 6 years, with most budgets & services being cut, how has number of Oldham Councillors & their direct costs changed?”
Councillor Shah, Cabinet Member for Performance and Corporate Governance, responded that the number of Oldham Metropolitan Borough Councillors has remained at sixty for many years. The Council had recently resolved that this was the appropriate number of councillors given the size of the population in the borough which ensure there was not democratic deficit.
The direct costs of councillors were the allowances which were paid to councillors. The level of these allowances were recommended to the Council by an Independent Remuneration Panel.
2. Question received from Martin Mathews via Twitter:
“What work’s being done with the regional schools commissioner to address the underperformance of secondary schools in Oldham?”
Councillor Akhtar, Cabinet Member for Education and Skills responded that the Local Authority worked closely with the new appointed Regional Schools Commissioner and with other partners in the school improvement process such as the Department for Education and OFSTED. It was important to remember that many of the secondary schools across Oldham performed very well and that under achievement was not the norm in all secondary schools. Where the local authority had concerns about maintained secondary schools there was a robust programme of support and intervention that was negotiated with schools. Many of the good and outstanding schools undertook this work on the Council’s behalf, in some cases schools from outside the Borough were brokered in for specific support. Where the local authority had concerns about an Academy, the regulations were clear, those concerns were brought to the attention of the Regional Schools Commissioner and it was for the Commissioner and DfE to take action for the improvement of academies. As a local authority, positive relationships were sought with all academies in Oldham in the Council’s role as Champion of Excellence for all and believed that every school should be good or outstanding in the borough. In most cases the relationships were strong and improvement was evident in academies. However, in some cases where improvement was too slow, representations had been made to DfE and they were taking action.
3. Question received from HackOldham via Twitter:
“How can we get Oldham Schools to engage with @STEMNET? There are very few requests in the borough stemnet.org.uk”
Councillor Akhtar, Cabinet Member for Education and Skills responded that STEMNET linked with all 163 state funded secondary schools in Greater Manchester which included all Oldham Schools through the Manchester Museum of Science and Industry. STEMNET had contacted STEM teachers in in Oldham schools and provided three free services: STEM Advisory Network, STEM Ambassadors and STEM Club support. It was for each school and governing body to decide which organisations they worked with. Some schools and colleges were actively involved. Blue Coat School was a specialist science school and sent representatives to STEMNET regional hub meetings and participated in the Engineering without Borders scheme. The Regional Science Centre participated in the STEM ambassadors scheme and participated in courses and visits. OBLG would be working with the Museum of Science and Industry to see if further links could be developed through Enterprise Hubs.
4. Question received from Joe Martin via email:
“On the council website under the Selective Licensing of Private Landlords - Consultation Report and final proposals report, you stated that the council will establish private sector landlord forum. Why has this not been established yet? The cabinet member also agreed to set up a dedicated website for this scheme, why has this not been done yet? I have met and spoken with many landlords who are confused in what the aims/objectives are for this scheme. Some landlords have asked for assistance in problems with their tenants but the council didn't seem to be bothered. Why is this? To be honest with you this was a labour party scheme and the council staff members don't even know what to do.”
Councillor Hibbert, Cabinet Member for Housing, Planning and Transport responded that the scheme, which would last for 5 years, began in St. Mary’s in May 2015 and was now active in 5 of the 8 neighbourhoods with the other three going live from 1st January 2016. The scheme would benefit landlords in a number of ways. As part of the licensing regime, the Council would provide landlords with a range of support services and training opportunities in order to ensure that they were able to meet the conditions of their licence and assisted in the running of their businesses. Work was ongoing on a dedicated website which would be launched shortly and were the Council couldn’t help, the Council would signpost landlords to other agencies. The Council would be running landlord forums but officers were waiting until the final neighbourhoods were operational in January 2016 so that all landlords could be invited. The Council’s Cabinet have requested a yearly update for the schemes and the first report was due in April. Mr. Martin was asked to provide more specific details to substantiate his statements in order to provide reassurance. Councillor Hibbert commended the excellent staff.
5. Question received from Elroy Walters via Twitter:
“Are M&S still opening in Oldham? If so when? There are rumours of them pulling out…”
Councillor McMahon, Cabinet Member for Economy & Enterprise confirmed that Marks and Spencer were still coming. He further responded that the Council had entered into a legal agreement in December 2014. Demolition of the remaining properties was ongoing with completion plan in February 2016. It was currently planned that the stores were due to be opened in summer 2018.
6. Question received from Joe Fitzpatrick via email:
“As the young leader abandons his Vision for Oldham, leaving the residents to pay the bill for his crazy schemes, could he tell us.
Will he be able to manage on the MP's salary, or will he continue to collect his councillors allowance, whilst working in London.”
Councillor McMahon, Cabinet Member for Economy and Enterprise, responded that it was clear he was not leaving Oldham. He would be fighting in a different place for the best interests of the town he cared about and for the town to be a better place. Proof that Oldhamers believed in those schemes was borne out by the election results. He confirmed that this would be his last Council meeting as Leader.
7. Question received from Graham Ankers via Facebook:
“Would members and council agree that the condition of social housing properties made of 'Wimpey no fines' is not to a satisfactory standard, and that residents of around 70 properties should not have to live in fuel poverty due to notoriously cold hard to heat homes that are prone to condensation that leads to mould which in turn leads to health problems?”
Councillor Hibbert, Cabinet Member for Housing, Planning and Transport, responded that he was aware of the issues and was working with ward councillors investigating the concerns. He confirmed that a complaint on this matter had been reviewed thoroughly through the Council’s Complaint Procedure. The complainant had been advised that if they disagreed with the Council’s view that they should contact the Housing Ombudsman to seek an independent review.
The Council’s Contractor, Inspiral, was currently undertaking a survey of houses to review if there was an issue of condensation and he assure that he would address any issues with the contractor as they arose. The houses in Crossley had received substantial improvement through the Gateways to Oldham PFI scheme, which included new doors and windows, a new roof, a new kitchen and bathroom, re-wire, loft insulation and internal refurbishment. The houses had a Standard Assessment Procedure rating for energy efficiency above the social housing average.
8, Question received from Andrew Sayers via email:
“I would like to raise a question related to this news story:http://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/kind-hearted-volunteers-help-transform-10573979
The building is located at the junction of Manchester Road/ Isle of Skye Road (A635) with Chew Valley Road (A669) (approx OS SD001 039)
Question: In light of the story of the homeless man who has taken up residence in the disused ex-Council bus stop/ public toilets in Greenfield, can the Council confirm what steps it takes to help the homeless in Oldham and Saddleworth? “
Councillor Hibbert, Cabinet Member for Housing, Planning and Transport, responded that how the Council dealt with homelessness within Oldham was set out in its Homelessness Strategy. Since 2003, huge progress had been made in how homelessness was tackled in the Borough. The Council had moved away from reactive services at the point of crisis to funding services which focussed on the prevention of homelessness within the Borough. This included family mediation for young people and advice services for people at risk of losing their home through mortgage repossession. Oldham has had historically among the lowest levels of homelessness acceptances in Greater Manchester, with last year only 49 households being accepted as homeless. We’ve had excellent partnership working in place to address the issues and in 2014/15 services prevented homelessness in over 2,000 cases.
Front line statutory homelessness and housing advice services for all Oldham residents were provided by First Choice Homes Oldham on behalf of the Council through the One Point Housing Options Centre which was based at First Place on Union Street. The centre was open weekdays during office hours and people could present there during office hours or they could telephone the service. There was also a free phone number for households who had become homeless when the offices were closed. They could speak to staff who provided advice which included access to emergency temporary accommodation if required.
In the few cases where people were reported to be sleeping rough, links would be made with the person through neighbourhood based staff, usually policing staff, as they were out in the area throughout the evening/night. These staff were provided with information which included out of hours contact information that provided help to access services.
9. Question received from Kathy Brooks via email:
“I have been advised by
council officials that the responsibility for removing the now
defunct lighting under the council's street lighting replacement
scheme rests with ENW. However ENW maintain that the responsibility
lies with the Council
Which is correct and who within the Council will take
responsibility for ensuring that the appropriate body takes the
necessary action?”
Councillor Hibbert, Cabinet Member for Housing, Planning and Transport, confirmed that the responsibility was with the Council’s contractor Eon, however, there was a need for Electricity North West for the provision of a suitable connection and this may have been where there was some confusion. If there was any doubt, contact should be made with the Council’s Client team who would advise on each specific case.
At this point in the meeting, the Mayor advised that the time limit for this item had expired.
The Mayor reminded Members that the Council had previously agreed that, questions would be taken in an order which reflected the political balance of the Council. The following questions were submitted by Councillors on Ward or District Matters:
1. Councillor Roberts to Councillor Harrison:
“Given that Royton North has an older age profile than the rest of Oldham, and of England as a whole (22% of the population is aged over 65), I am very concerned by recent assessments of the growing gap in funding for social care for older people and the impact of Government cuts on the money available to pay providers of residential care for old people. Could the relevant Cabinet Member comment on the measures being taken by the Council to provide the best care for our older citizens, and in particular whether the Four Seasons chain of care homes has any homes at risk in Oldham?”
Councillor Harrison responded that in relation to residential care for older people, and the care sector more generally, the Council was working with the market to identify those cost pressures that they are experiencing, or likely to experience in the near future, such as the introduction of a new National Minimum wage from April 2016. Recommendations would then be as to what price we should be paid to providers for the delivery of care and support to people in residential care, or in their own homes, to enable statutory obligations to be met and to stabilise the market.
The Council was also working with health partners and with other local authorities across Greater Manchester to identify those areas where we could all benefit by doing things differently and joining up services. Very specialist services were a good example of that, where we might not need a great deal of provision, but when we would need it, it could be hard to get or very expensive.
More broadly, it was recognised that some of the ways in which services were delivered needed to change, to enable us to better manage demand in the future, by enabling more people to receive the care and support they need in their own home, or in supported accommodation such as extra care housing, where it is safe and appropriate for them to do so. Tandleview in Royton was an excellent example of this, where accommodation and care was delivered in a different way than residential care. The Cabinet Member also confirmed that Four Seasons did not operate any homes in Oldham.
2. Councillor Fielding to Councillor Brownridge:
“The area of greenspace to the rear of properties on Coronation Road Failsworth suffers from flooding following periods of heavy rain. Through correspondence with United Utilities, I know that they acknowledge that the drainage system in the area is not of sufficient capacity to cope with the demand placed on it. However they have advised that they do not have the money available to fix this problem within the next five years.
Is there any remedial action that the Council can take to improve drainage on this land in the short term? This area is a popular recreation ground and shortcut for local residents.”
Councillor Brownridge responded that the issue had been discussed with Unity who confirmed that the drainage issue was the responsibility of United Utilities. The Council did not have the funding for works that was not its responsibility but would put pressure on United Utilities to discharge their obligation more quickly than five years.
3. Councillor Shuttleworth to Councillor Hibbert:
“Chadderton South residents who live on both sides of Broadway between Hollinwood Avenue and Mough Lane/ Butterworth Lane, and those who live between Mough Lane and the M60 junction, are constantly seeing this stretch of road suffering heavy ponding to such an extent that the footpaths and garden areas are constantly having to be cleared of grit and other debris washed up as a result of passing motor vehicles as a result of the inability of the drainage system to take away the surface water.
Despite continual requests to Highways England to deal with this long standing problem, may I request that the Cabinet Member responsible for Highways ensures that as we head further in to winter that some action is taken to alleviate the problem for these residents until such time as the body responsible provide a long term solution.
Needless to say that this is a real and severe problem for any person travelling this stretch of highway on foot, including the footpath outside the Boat & Horses public house due to a number of blocked gullies.”
Councillor Hibbert responded that he was fully aware of the issues and had discussed this with ward colleagues and one which was raised quite often with Highways England. Highways England were responsible for all elements of the section of road that included the drainage. Members and officers had been working closely with them to try to progress some of the issues raised. Related to the flooding around Stott Road, it had been identified that there was a wider issue in the area. A meeting was to be arranged in the New Year between Highways England (HE), United Utilities and officers for the issue to be progressed. HE were trying to secure funding for resurfacing the full length of Broadway in the next few years and were working on resolving the outstanding drainage issues prior to this work. In the meantime, if there were immediate issues related to flooding, these were to be reported to HE’s contractor. The Cabinet Members had provided the contact details to ward councillors.
4. Councillor Williamson to Councillor Moores:
“On Friday 20 November my colleagues and I received a number of phone calls and messages to say that the alarm at Crompton Pool kept going off. We reported it at 3pm but it was not until 10pm that eventually it stopped. The door had to be broken and the alarm disabled.
I would like to thank Unity, First Response and senior officers at the Council for resolving the situation for the residents living in the vicinity of the pool, on that evening.
However, now that sadly Crompton Pool is going to be demolished in January, and lots of work is going to be done on the site, can we have assurances that if there are any issues in the evenings or over the weekend, they are resolved quicker than this instance?”
Councillor Moores responded that there were a number of call outs on that evening and First Response attended and addressed the issues with the alarm. First Response would continue to monitor security and would undertake regular checks of the site until the demolition contractor started work in January. Officers would ensure that, in the event of a break in, First Response would respond promptly. In January, the demolition contractor would take responsibility for the site. A letter which contained information about the start date and duration of the works had been circulated to the neighbouring residents and businesses. The letter also contained “anytime” contact details that were to be used for the duration of the works.
5. Councillor S. Bashforth to Councillor Brownridge:
“The heavy rain over the last few weeks has seen two areas in my ward Royton South have seen an increase in flooding over recent years. One is in and around Plumton Clough the other is at the bottom of Valley New Road.
At Plumbton Clough we have had our own environment officers and officers from the Environment Agency inspect the site and are told it is the land owners responsibility to deal with the flooding but after repeated attempts to get some action, none has been taken.
At Valley New Road, the flooding seems to be a result of natural springs and underground water courses being overwhelmed by the heavy rain but in both cases I have not been able to get any definitive answers.
If we have to use our powers to force landowners to act then we must do so if we can carry out some works to relive the situation then can we also do so.
Can the cabinet member responsible please help me get some real action taken on both these issues?”
Councillor Brownridge responded that the problem was a suspected blockage of a culvert and it was the responsibility of the riparian owner. The Council were in discussions with representatives and requested the the Council be informed of how they intended to ensure the water level was brought back to pre-2015 levels and were awaiting a response. The Cabinet member would keep ward members informed.
6. Councillor G. Alexander to Councillor Hibbert:
“I am aware that Unity Partnership have had a meeting with Persimmon Construction company to repair snags on the Northgate Estate Moorside.
Could the Cabinet member let us know how soon the work will begin and completed so that after a lengthy 13 years the estate will finally be adopted by the council?”
Councillor Hibbert responded that officers were currently working to rearrange a meeting which Persimmon Homes had failed to attend and were also attempting to negotiate the extent of works required prior to them finally entering into an agreement which would enable the adoption of the roads to follow and gave assurances that this would be done as quickly as possible.
7. Councillor Garry to Councillor Hibbert:
“Sadly too many people flout the traffic regulations outside St.
Mary's, Propps Hall and South
Failsworth schools and park on the waiting restrictions.
Greater Manchester police have stepped up patrols in these areas
and have publicised the results on facebook. What is the council doing to combat this
kind of parking that poses a danger to children? Also, may I
ask how many fixed penalty notices have been issued to parents
who choose to ignore waiting restrictions in these
locations?”
Councillor Hibbert responded that this was a borough-wide problem. NSL Limited were employed to enforce traffic management within the borough of Oldham which included the monitoring and control of traffic regulations outside 90 secondary and primary schools. Since September 2015, 129 Penalty Charge Notices had been issued outside schools which demonstrated the Council was reacting to the danger this type of illegal parking posed to children. Since September 2015, 5 visits had been made to the three schools in question and 2 penalty charge notices issued. NSL had been requested to increase their patrols to these specific areas to address the concerns being raised about people parking illegally. He also added that he had received information that the CCTV cars had undertaken a joint operation at St. Mary’s school in cooperation with the police.
8. Councillor Harkness to Councillor Akhtar:
“As a ward member I am concerned for the residents I represent that Waterhead Academy has had yet another head teacher resign, which brings yet more upheaval to the school. What is the council doing to ensure that the children attending, and due to attend, the school will receive a decent education?”
Councillor Akhtar responded that he shared Councillor Harkness’s concerns. The Council continued to work with the office of the Regional Schools Commissioner and the Department for Education to secure a successful education for children at this school. The recent OFSTED report, which was published on 9th December 2015, highlighted a number of significant issues faced by the Academy. The Cabinet Member was pleased that the Dean Trust was supporting the school and welcomed the news that local providers were also working with the school. The Local Authority had, on several occasions, noted its concerns about the progress of learners at the school to the DfE and the Regional Schools Commissioner and he was assured that they were taking the appropriate steps to bring about the required improvement at the school.
9. Councillor Ahmad to Councillor Akhtar:
“Parents of pupils
attending Clarksfield School are
concerned regarding the condition of the school buildings. Over the
last 18 months the school has had to be closed on 13 occasions
because of repair issues. Pupils have lost 3066 days of education
or 5 per cent. Clarksfield School needs
replacing urgently.
Could the cabinet member inform me if there any
opportunities to achieve government funding to replace this
school?”
Councillor Akhtar responded that the Council was still looking for opportunities for funding. School closures were declared by the Headteacher based upon her judgement. When colleagues at Unity Partnership or the Council’s Property team had been made aware of issues causing a school closure, they would attend the site to arrange remedial works or to assess and agree the safety of the building to permit the school to be reopened. The Council recognised the school’s desire for a new school building and had taken opportunities when they arose to apply for central government grant funding. The Cabinet Member would arrange for a meeting with ward councillors on the concerns that had been raised.
10. Councillor McLaren to Councillor Hibbert:
“Could the Cabinet Member for Transport, please advise us what if any steps are being taken to alleviate the continuing parking problems around the Freehold Metrolink Stop?”
Councillor Hibbert responded that the parking problem at Freehold had been raised with Transport for Greater Manchester (TfGM) who agreed that there was a demand for additional park and ride facilities at Freehold. TfGM had a list of stops on the Metrolink network where this was the case. They had added Freehold to their list of stops at which they would consider future park and ride provision, but any park and ride scheme would be dependent on the availability of funding and land. In the short term the Council would work with TfGM to look at whether there was scope to transfer some of the demand to other Metrolink stops with park and ride provision through a combination of signage and enforcement. The Cabinet Member recommended the park and ride facility at Hollinwood.
11. Councillor Malik to Councillor Hibbert
“For some time now parents have been complaining about the access
to Richmond school through Winterbottom Street. This matter was
made worse when the Metro link opened. Parents and local residents
regularly complain about parking on Winterbottom Street and the
fact that there is no turning circle. I am genuinely worried that
one day there will be a serious incident.
Can the relevant cabinet member work with the ward councillors to
find an urgent solution to this problem?”
Councillor Hibbert responded that he had met with officers and the headteacher of Richmond School to discuss the issues raised and shared these concerns. Although parents were aware of the confined area within Winterbottom Street for vehicles to enter, manoeuvre and park when dropping off and collecting their children from school, some insisted on using the street which resulted in obstructive parking practices which affected both motorists and pedestrians. There was currently a proposal for the implementation of some parking measures for the reduction of people using the area to park all day for the Metrolink which caused complications for school traffic. It was acknowledged that parents could park on yellow lines at school times but at the least the removal of the vehicles which currently parked all day would make access into the street much easier. The Road Safety team had also carried out training with the pupils to raise their road safety awareness.
12. Councillor Judge to Councillor
Hibbert:
“Firbank school in Royton is in serious need of a 20mph zone around it and the surrounding roads. In particular, Grasmere Road has become a busy Rat Run for vehicles of all types. Can the Cabinet member responsible for traffic and road safety please make this school a priority when planning new schemes?”
Councillor Hibbert responded that feedback was always welcomed from local communities regarding the issues in an around where they live. Highlighted road safety concerns held to enhance the ongoing commitment which saw year on year physical engineering measures being deployed as well as road safety education campaigns being delivered in schools throughout the borough.
The traffic management issues around schools could be complex and to that end it was appropriate that appropriate information on traffic speed, traffic movement and associated traffic volume was collected. To that end, the Cabinet Member confirmed that officers would start to look at the issues around this school and when baseline data had been gathered, officers would work with ward members and the school in sharing what information had been gathered, the measures which might be appropriate to be deployed that addressed any issues and how funding could be accessed in the future.
13. Councillor Sedgwick to Councillor Hibbert:
“I want to raise an issue in my ward that I think will affect members in every ward. This relates to properties that has been purchased, partially refurbished and then left unfinished and often neglected for years. Such properties become eyesores and ‘blights’ on their community.
We have two eyesores in my ward the little shop on St John Street and the Temple Bowling Pub on Huddersfield Road. Something needs to be done about them so can I ask the Cabinet Member if and when anything can be done by this Council about these derelict properties? There is also on Lees Road a restaurant or takeaway with a window smashed and was a disgrace.”
Councillor Hibbert responded that officers had worked with the owners of the buildings to secure and tidy the sites. The Council would continue to monitor the situation and ensured owners carried out any work that was deemed necessary under the limited powers at the Council’s disposals. The Cabinet Member asked that Councillor Sedgwick provide the details to him and he would provide an update as soon as possible.
At this point in the meeting, the Mayor advised that the time limit for this item had expired.
RESOLVED that the questions and the responses provided be noted.