Agenda item

The Leader of the Main Opposition, Councillor Sykes, raised the following two questions:

 

Question 1:  The Oldham Education Commission

 

“The end of the current school year is very nearly upon us.  My first question to the Leader tonight concerns the Oldham Education Commission and the pathetically slow progress made so far in implementing its recommendations.

In fact, the story of the Commission seems to have unveiled at the pace of a lethargic tortoise from inception.

The Commission was established over two years ago by our former Leader at a launch in June 2014.  An interim report in January 2015 failed to materialise.  A second interim report promised in September 2015 failed to materialise.  Then, when we on this side of the Chamber called for immediate publication, the December 2015 by-election was cited as reason to hold it up still further.

Finally in early 2016, the report saw the light of day.  Given the delay, anyone would have thought we were trying to compete with the Chilcott Enquiry.  You would have thought that, armed with its nineteen recommendations, our political and educational establishment would have been chomping on the bit to get going and make our schools great?

Like the mobile phone ad which urges us to be more dog, you would have thought that everyone involved would be saying we want to see the back of that lethargic tortoise and bring on the energetic hare.  But no, the tortoise seemingly prevails.

Two years have passed.  Two years in which the children of our Borough have been failed.  Two years during which the Head of Ofsted reported that only a third of our children are able to study at ‘good’ or ‘oustanding’ schools, less than half the national average.  Two years in which too many of our primary pupils have been taught in classes over 30.  Two years in which one in five children have not got a place at their first choice of secondary school.  And two years in which our level of educational achievement has languished below the national average.

Even last month I was disappointed when a report about Oldham’s Education Provision Strategy 2016-2020 was withdrawn from the agenda of an Overview and Scrutiny Board meeting.  A report that constituted over half the business; and the meatier half at that running to more than 100 pages, but as I said withdrawn!

Like the Chair of the Commission, Baroness Estelle Morris, I share the view that ‘a good education is crucial to the future success of Oldham.’

My first question to the Leader tonight is therefore when is she going to set that hare running – when are things going to happen to make education in Oldham better and then hopefully great for all our children?  After all they deserve nothing less!”

 

Councillor Jean Stretton, Leader of the Council, responded that the hare was running.  Implementation of the OESC was going well.  Schools had worked together and appointed the Educational Partnership Lead, Mr. Calvert, and he would take up his post in September.  The new body of the Educational Partnership was in the final stages of being formed and the schools were working together as collaboratives.  We had moved because now 70% of children were in schools which were good or outstanding.  Baroness Estelle Morris had been briefed with progress and she is pleased with what had been achieved since the publication of the report.

 

Question 2:  College Merger May Jeopardise Student Prospects

 

“My second question tonight is also concerns education.  And if I were still permitted three questions I would have made them all on ‘education, education, education’ – for it should be an issue at the forefront of the minds of all of us in the Chamber.

My question concerns the future prospects for the older students of our Borough, students looking to study at Oldham College on a vocational course.  We are aware of the discussions that are ongoing between Oldham, Tameside and Stockport colleges to create a new single entity covering East Manchester.  Oldham College seeks to provide a range of technical and professional courses in our Borough to local students.  And we are aspiring as a Borough to create a highly skilled workforce for the future.  So surely having a local educational offer of vocational courses for our Borough’s students must surely feature within our strategy?  Is this merger more about the survival of these currently independent colleges in the on-going so called Area Review?  Whose interest is it really in?

My fear is that the merger will lead to the courses that we need being taken away from our students who need them – and that many will find it difficult to access provision in Tameside and Stockport.  A merger must surely then reduce our students’ choices and erect un-necessary barriers to students continuing their education and training?  And why Tameside and Stockport?  Metrolink links us directly with Rochdale.

So my second question to the Leader tonight is what reassurance can she give me that the Council is working at the highest level to ensure that the vocational offer available to students living, and wishing to study, in our Borough will be maintained in a local centre based in our Borough, come what may?  Or will local provision go the way of the courts and tax office – I sincerely hope not!”

 

Councillor Jean Stretton, Leader of the Council, responded that there had been concerns at GM level as the way the review had been implemented and had not involved all post-16 education and was right to have concerns about where this had ended up.  She shared his concerns and has made it clear at GM.  What was proposed was to put the three colleges together, one of which had severe financial challenges but the Council cannot allow Oldham young people to be impacted by this financial challenge.  There had to be assurances that the financial challenges would be addressed which was not wholly allayed and that practices which had allowed these challenges in the first place not be allowed to continue.  Rochdale had been in conversation with the other three colleges and it was still possible that Rochdale would be in the collective.  There were also some issues around what might happen with the technical college.  It was very clear if accepted we have to commit to every decision going forward so as not to undermine the outcome of the review.

 

The Leader of the Conservative Group, Councillor Hudson, asked the following question to the Leader of the Council:

 

He appreciated that local government had difficult decisions to make regarding cuts, but he asked if it would be possible to ask the Cabinet to think again about the decision of refuse collection going to three weeks.  He added  the fact about the pest control and rat motion on the Council agenda.  Could it come back and tell Council what the money was being spent on to give convincing arguments to the resident of Oldham.  How was the decision arrived at, people were very aggrieved and he requested some background to the decision.

 

Councillor Stretton, Leader of the Council, responded that this was a decision that could not be reversed and it was not a decision taken lightly.  Every local authority had done something about waste collection.  This was not about saving money but avoiding future costs.  Waste management was shared and if the Council did not do this, or introduce smaller bins, Oldham would take up the larger share of cost of rubbish going to landfill.  There was nowhere to find the money and the Council could not raise council tax to cover that cost.  The Leader stressed that food waste would be collected weekly and households with special circumstances were able to request additional bins and larger recycling bins could also be requested.

 

The Mayor reminded the meeting that Council had agreed that, following the Leaders’ allocated questions, questions would be taken in an order which reflected the political balance of the Council.

 

1.       Councillor Fielding to Councillor Brownridge

 

“The number of notifications ward members have been receiving about incomplete refuse collection rounds, particularly green bin waste, seems to have been significantly higher so far this year that in previous years. Can the cabinet member responsible explain why this is and if the source of the problem has been identified, what will be done to address it?”

 

Councillor Brownridge responded that there had been a problem with bin sensors on the trucks but this had not been corrected.  Green waste was a particular issue as the volume varied greatly throughout the year.  Tonnages were significantly up on the same period last year which was positive in terms of recycling and the service reviewed the number of vehicles required on a daily basis.  When problems arose, the impact was limited as much as it could be and corrected as soon as possible.

 

2.       Councillor Shuttleworth to Councillor Hussain

 

“There can be no doubt that the metro link system has proven to be the success that many predicted and the 6 minute service that now runs from Shaw & Crompton is an even greater bonus.

 However, and this question has been asked before, when can we expect double carriages to become the norm as by the time that this service reaches Chadderton South, Hollinwood and Failsworth, it is invariably standing room only?”

 

Councillor Hussain, Cabinet Member for Environmental Services, responded that TfGM currently deployed as many doubles as possible, catering to the highest levels of demand which were seen on the network.  When TfGM launched the 6 minute service between Shaw and Crompton and the city centre, this increased capacity from Oldham into the city, which enabled Metrolink to carry more passengers.  The vehicles were intended to carry many more passengers than the seated capacity and, in common with all other urban light rail services, standing for all or part of a journey during peak times to maximise use of vehicle capacity was not unexpected.  TfGM monitored all services to ascertain the level of crowding on each vehicle and used the available fleet in double formation where most necessary.  TfGM would continue to monitor services on the Oldham Rochdale line for potential double operation in the future.

 

3.       Councillor Brock to Councillor Moores

 

“I am astounded by the level of loneliness that I have encountered from individuals who contact me regarding issues in my ward and then end the conversation or email saying ' I am lonely, and I have not spoken to anyone for 2 weeks'. The Campaign to End Loneliness confirms that loneliness worse for us than lack of exercise or obesity. Can the relevant Cabinet Member comment on the council's policies which can help to tackle loneliness and what more can be done at District level to help lonely people?”

 

Councillor Moores, Cabinet Member for Health and Wellbeing, responded that the Council recognised the impact that loneliness could have on people’s mental and physical health.  There was a body of international research which had shown that social isolation and loneliness could cause, or make worse, a broad range of physical and psychological conditions.  The Council commissioned a range of services which sought to reduce the level of social isolation and loneliness in Oldham.  These included services provided by Age UK, such as lunch clubs and day care centres.  Age UK also had a service call ‘Men in Sheds’ for men aged over fifty.  The Council also supported the Ambition for Ageing programme in Oldham.  This programme in Oldham was being led by Age UK Oldham and Action Together and aimed to create more age friendly places by connecting communities and people through the creation of relationships and the development of existing community assets.  The emphasis of the work in Alexandra, Failsworth West and Crompton was to make small practical changes within the communities which would help lonely and isolated people participate in their local communities.  The learning would be applied across Oldham in the next five years.  It also highlighted that the best response to reduce social isolation was to support the development of thriving communities, where people were well connected and supported each other, and where there was a wide range of social activity for people to be involved in.  This the main thrust of the Thriving Communities element of the Health and Social Care Locality Plan and highlighted the a pop up café, lunch clubs and a tea dance.

 

4.       Councillor Harkness to Councillor Chadderton

 

“In the light of the news that certain residents intend to pursue a judicial review in relation to the proposal to develop a new Saddleworth School in Diggle, can the Cabinet member please tell me how long it is anticipated the review will take and how much longer the children of Saddleworth will have to wait before they are able to study at a state of the art modern facility instead of a building that is crumbling by the day?  An finally, by the way, can the Cabinet member tell how much the judicial review will cost the local authority and what impact this will have on education provision in our borough?”

 

Councillor Chadderton, Cabinet Member for Education and Early Years, responded that the Council had submitted its defence to the judicial review.  The procedure now was that Save Diggle Action Group’s application for permission to apply for judicial review would be determined within three weeks of the expiry of the time limit for filing the acknowledgement of service (i.e. by 18^th July 2016).  If permission was granted to appeal, the Judicial Review would then be heard on or before 1^st November 2016.  As part of the Council’s application to the High Court, the Council was seeking £7155 costs to pay for Counsel’s fees for drafting the Council’s defence.  The cost of paying for this legal advice was paid for out of the Planning Department’s legal advice budget.  It has therefore not affected the Education budget of the Council.

 

5.       Councillor Ali to Councillor Moores

 

“Poor oral health is affecting Children in Oldham. It has been reported hospitals are spending £35M a year on Childrens 'rotting teeth'. There are fears that youngsters sugar addiction is spiraling out of control. What actions are we taking in Oldham to promote good Oral Health?”

 

Councillor Moores, Cabinet Member for Health and Wellbeing, responded that oral health had an important role in the general health and wellbeing of individuals.  Poor oral health could affect the ability of children and young people sleep, eat, speak, play and socialise with other children.  The oral health of children under the age of five had been identified as a priority by the Oldham Health and Wellbeing Board.  The Board had set a challenging target to reduce the prevalence of dental decay in children aged five years from 48% to 38% by 2017/18.  An oral health action plan was implemented with high level actions weighted towards tackling the underlying causes of dental disease which included:

·       Increasing exposure to fluoride toothpaste,

·       Embedding oral health improvement into early years services,

·       Establishing a good oral health culture,

·       Increasing dentist attendance where preventative treatment can take place,

·       Reducing the frequency of consumption of foods and drinks with added sugar.

Public Health had commended the work being done in Oldham. But parents and carers must play their part by developing good habits from an early age.  Breastfeeding and healthy eating both have a massive positive impact on oral health.  Good oral health must start early.

 

6.       Councillor Toor to Councillor Stretton

 

“In light of the recent rise in hate crimes, what steps have been taken to protect our residents from this kind of unacceptable behaviour.
Can the leader give us assurance that, as a council, we are fully prepared and working with partners such as Racial Equality Partnership , Greater Manchester Police , Oldham Interfaith Forum to ensure safety and welfare of our residents?”

 

Councillor Stretton, Leader of the Council and Cabinet Member for Economy and Enterprise responded that Oldham Council was working closely with Greater Manchester Police and other community safety and cohesion partners which included the Oldham Race Equality Partnership and the Interfaith Forum and all had well established processes for monitoring hate crimes, hate incidents and community tensions in the borough, which enabled us to respond together in a timely manner should the need arise.  A senior police officer had attended a meeting and commented that Oldham was better equipped than most to get people around the table for a meeting if needed.  While it appeared that there was a level of fear and anxiety within some sections of the community – particularly Eastern European people since the EU Referendum – there had been no evidence of a significant upsurge in hate crimes or incidents in Oldham.  The Council would remain vigilant.  It was not acceptable for people to live in fear.

 

7.       Councillor Murphy to Councillor Brownridge

 

“I am sure that elected members would, where possible, love to preserve the remaining mills in our borough when they have architectural merit as a reminder of our textile heritage.  However, the reality is that some of these mills are in such a dilapidated condition that they cannot be saved.  In this condition, listed status can make it impossible to carry out demolition to make the site safe, to remove an eyesore and to create space for redevelopment.

The Cabinet member will be aware that this was recently the case with Hartford Mill in Werneth, where demolition has been so protracted.

Could the Cabinet Member please tell me if there are any other mills in the Borough in a similar condition to the Hartford Mill which also cannot be easily demolished because of their listed status and what the Council is doing to ensure that they are demolished in the interests of public safety and in order to build much needed public housing as soon as possible?”

 

Councillor Brownridge, Cabinet Member for Neighbourhoods and Cooperatives, responded that there were five listed mills at varying degrees of risk which included Hartford Mill and Baileys Mill.  A lot of the mills were iconic buildings and were linked to Oldham’s historical heritage and would be reluctant to see them all flattened.  Some were difficult to convert, but 67% of extant mills were in active use for either residential or commercial purposes.  There were a small number at risk and which caused a problem.  As part of the Greater Manchester Spatial Framework (GMSF) the Council would be reviewing all mill buildings in terms of a development strategy for the town.

 

At this point in the meeting, the Mayor advised that the time limit for this item had expired.

 

RESOLVED that the questions asked and responses provided be noted.