(time limit 30 minutes – maximum of 2 minutes per question and 2 minutes per response)
Minutes:
The Leader of the Main Opposition, Councillor Sykes, raised the following two questions:
Question 1:
“My first question of the Leader tonight again relates to the Greater Manchester Spatial Framework.
I make no apology for it, because in my part of the world this is undoubtedly the single most important local issue to our citizens.
I was surprised by the response of the Leader last time.
She talked of the need for more homes in our Borough and more aspirational homes in our Borough – something I do not disagree with – but there was no recognition that the growth and pain should be shared across the Borough, rather than concentrated in one corner of it!
I would like to reiterate that the land earmarked to build an awful lot of these new homes is in Shaw, in Crompton and in Royton.
It may be that only three percent of the Borough’s Green Belt is being lost, but the lion’s share of that amount is being lost is in the wards represented by myself and my colleagues for Shaw, Crompton and Royton.
Under the proposals outlined under the Greater Manchester Spatial Framework, over 3000 new homes will be built on green field sites in Shaw and Crompton alone!
Vast swathes of Green Belt stretching from the rear of Dunwood Park to Burnage will be lost forever to bricks, concrete and tarmac.
3,000 new homes built in two wards in which, as a consequence of the withdrawal of local facilities or underinvestment, we have primary schools that are already overcrowded and full; a secondary school that is falling apart; a dilapidated health centre that is near cardiac arrest; no swimming facilities or dry leisure provision; precious few youth facilities and no municipal tip. 3,000 new homes that are built for growing families will need more primary and secondary school places; more GPs and dentists; and new highways and more buses and trams to get them about their daily business. And doesn’t the decision not to replace Crompton Pool and Gym now look a little short-sighted given the number of new young residents that will need to learn to swim and the number of adults that will want to keep fit?
More and more of my constituents are frankly getting more and more fearful and angry about these proposals. This frustration was reflected in the fact that more than 200 residents turned up recently to a public consultation and we have had to organise a second event tomorrow, Thursday 15 December.
My question tonight is in three parts.
I would firstly like to ask the Leader whether she really is convinced that there is a need for such a large land grab of Green Belt to build so many homes and such an increase in industrial provision in our Borough? And if the answer is yes, why is it that the lion’s share of that burden is placed upon Shaw, Crompton and Royton rather than apportioned out with other parts of the Borough having a Fair Share?
And lastly would the Leader agree with me that we first need to develop on brown field land, on land with existing planning permission for housing and on unloved derelict sites, and also bring back empty homes into occupation and convert empty factories and mills into flats, before we look to touch any part of our precious Green Belt and Green Spaces?”
Councillor Stretton, Leader of the Council responded by saying she was convinced investment was required to build more homes in the Borough due to the failure of investment in the Borough over a number of years. The Leader was pleased that residents were attending consultation events and as a result of the consultation, proposals could possibly change.
As for other parts of the borough, significant schemes were planned such as Foxdenton. Clarification would be sought following the closing of the consultation and 12,000 homes would not just appear in the Borough overnight. It was not to be forgotten that there would still be development across the borough because developers would bring forward sites that were not included in the suggested strategic sites being brought forward if the Borough didn’t have strategic proposals in place, the Council would be left open to development by appeal.
The outcome of the consultation would need to be considered before any decisions were made. The Leader agreed to the points on prioritising brownfield sites and those sites which already had planning permission being developed first.
Question 2:
“In July 2013, I asked the then Leader of the Council to join me in backing Oldham’s live music and comedy scene. At that time, the former Castle Pub, a well-known music venue, had just closed on Union Street but there was still a vibrant music scene with six venues for live performances in the town centre. With the recent bad news that Marks and Spencer will not be joining us at Prince’s Gate, we need to highlight the positive things that Oldham has to offer.
With the opening of the new Cinema complex and a new Coliseum Theatre complex on the way, our night-time leisure offer is being transformed. No longer is Yorkshire Street and Union Street like the Wild West by night – instead we have cafés and bars that are safe for families and couples to visit after dark. So let’s celebrate that.
This presents us with the opportunity to showcase the best of what Oldham has to offer – shopping or a visit to our Gallery or Museum during the day, a bite to eat in the early evening in the restaurants in Parliament Square or the Independent Quarter, a performance at the Theatre, and then maybe the opportunity to stay on into the late evening for a drink or two in a real ale pub and the chance to listen to some live music or a comedy show.
Oldham potentially offers the perfect day out and; with the Metrolink network now being even more extensive and trams more frequent; it is possible for people to visit this Borough from every part of Greater Manchester. We need to shout about that. So now is the time to revisit how we promote the Borough.
As part of a new tourism strategy can I ask the Leader to ask officers to produce a brochure, or brochures if one is not enough, of real ale pubs and live music and comedy venues around the Borough with their links to public transport? And that this information is made available in print, web and an app.
Councillor Stretton, Leader of the Council welcomed the positive comments about the new cinema complex and plans for the Coliseum. The Deputy Cabinet Member Economy and Enterprise portfolio contained Tourism and Events and the Deputy Cabinet Member would take the comments on board which were entirely appropriate. The Borough did have a lot to offer and it should be shouted about.
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 Hewitt asked the following question:
“A new household benefit cap was introduced in November, can the relevant cabinet member please tell us how many people in Oldham will be effected by this change and also what support can be offered to these residents who have had their benefits cut yet again.”
Councillor Jabbar, Deputy Leader and Cabinet Member for Finance and HR responded on the latest installation of welfare reform because of the 2012 Act and added that 520 households had been impacted by the latest implementation of the caps. In 2012, during the first phase Oldhamers lost out on millions of pounds which had a major impact. In terms of support, the Council had a dedicated welfare rights team who could be contacted on 0161 770 6655. The Council would do what it could to support those impacted by welfare reform. The implementation meant that residents would not be able to pay rent, council tax or for food. The Government was blind as to the impact the changes had.
2. Councillor Toor asked the following question:
“The new cinema in our Old Town Hall is definitely a breath of fresh air for our wonderful town and its lovely people. Lots of families are using it and spending locally. Parking seems to be an issue for some people. They are still not sure where to park. If it's a 2 or three hour parking facility offered by the council then they still can't enjoy it fully due to the threat of getting a parking ticket. They can't enjoy their movie or even the food facilities nearby. Especially if a family come to watch a film then a single parent can't really leave the small kids in the cinema on their own and run for parking ticket or drag the whole family with them to put some money in the ticket machine. Can relevant cabinet member clarify the parking situation please?”
Councillor Fida Hussain, Cabinet Member for Environmental Services responded that officers would speak to the Odeon and ask them to advertise the fact that there was parking at the Town Square. Visitors to the cinema or new restaurants were entitled to discounted parking for up to four hours at £2 and free parking after 6.00 p.m. The discounted parking ticket also applied to the restaurants at the Old Town Hall.
3. Councillor James Larkin asked the following question:
“Natwest has recently announced
it will be closing several branches in the borough, including the
one in Royton.
Whenever I have used this bank, it has always had a queue of people
waiting to be served. The branch in Oldham Town Centre is already
very very busy. Could the relevant
Cabinet Member join me in asking Natwest to think again, particularly given the
large number of local residents who are older and less likely to
want to conduct their banking on-line and the increasing footfall
in the Royton precinct following the opening of LIDL and
Boyes.”
Councillor Stretton, Leader of the Council and Cabinet Member for Economy and Enterprise responded that the Council had been working hard to secure quality investment in Royton Town Centre over recent years, including the facilitation of the new Lidl Store which opened earlier this year. The investment would continue with planned improvement works to Royton Town Hall and by working closely with the new owners of the Royton Precinct. The Leader would write to Natwest setting out these points and ask them to reconsider this decision with a view to retaining this valued facility for the benefit of local residents.
4. Councillor Turner asked the following question:
“Rochdale Council has recently announced its intention to automatically issue library membership cards to all primary aged pupils when they start school. This seems an eminently sensible way to encourage membership and use of our public libraries from an early age – a habit I would hope lasts a lifetime. Can I ask the Cabinet Member whether we can also adopt this idea to help promote the virtues, and wonders, of libraries to our youngest readers?”
Councillor Brownridge, Cabinet Member for Neighbourhoods and Cooperative responded that she agreed on the importance of libraries support reading from an early age. Oldham had taken part in national reading initiatives such as Book Start which were embedded into Oldham’s Library Programme. The Council did not currently provide an automatic library membership scheme and would explore how this could be developed. The Council would want to link any scheme to the existing programme that included Reception Reads which focussed on developing a love of reading and regular library use with children aged four years. This would ensure the best use of any resources directed to automatic enrolment and give the scheme the best chance to make an impact on young lives.
5. Councillor Goodwin asked the following question:
“There is the odd one within this Chamber who seems to have relished the opportunity of constantly being critical of the redevelopment of the former Town Hall and because of this no doubt also the businesses that have come in to Oldham, to say nothing of the jobs that have been created and the overall contribution to the reinvigoration of the borough.
Does the Leader agree with me that the response from the good people of Oldham at the formal opening of the complex on the night of 21st October demonstrates just how out of touch some members are?”
Councillor Stretton, Leader of the Council and Cabinet Member for Economy and Enterprise responded that she agreed that the development had had a fantastic impact on Oldham. Molino Lounge, Nando’s and Gourmet Burger Kitchen had opened and the companies had put significant investment into the new restaurants. The feedback from local businesses was that footfall and trade had increased following the opening of the Odeon cinema and restaurants. Recruitment following the Old Town Hall transformation was:
· Odeon Cinema/Costa/Cleaning Company – 70 jobs created; 55 filled with Oldham residents
· Molino Lounge – 20 jobs created; 15 filled with Oldham residents
· Gourmet Burger Kitchen – 25 jobs created; 12 filled with Oldham residents
· Total: 115 jobs created; 82 filled with Oldham residents.
6. Councillor Roberts asked the following question:
“The government’s children and social work bill proposes allowing councils to request specific exemptions from legislation and statutory guidance to allow them to ‘innovate’ to improve children’s experiences of being looked after by the local authority. Our Corporate Parenting role is one of any councillors most serious responsibilities. Does the Cabinet Member feel that allowing a local authority to effectively opt out of many of the current regulations put in place to safeguard children is an opportunity to improve, or a threat to, the wellbeing of children in our care?”
Councillor Harrison, Cabinet Member for Social Care and Safeguarding responded that Oldham Council took its responsibilities as a Corporate Parent very seriously and those responsibilities extended across elected members, council officers and partner agencies. The bedrock of this approach was how the voices of those young people who were currently looked after and those who had left local authority care had been listened to.
As an example, the Council had held the Annual Corporate Parenting Conference on 17th November and young people shared their experiences of Oldham’s care system to help improve the support given to care leavers. The Children and Social Work Bill put additional proposed requirements on local authorities and their partners and clearly set out the corporate parenting principles by which the Council and it partners should operate. The Bill’s proposal around the ‘power to test different ways of working’ was, according to the government partly informed by what young people had been saying about care planning and review processes however there had been widespread concerns at the implications. It needed to be noted that the clause in the Bill regarding requests for exemption from statutory requirements was rejected by the House of Lords and had been removed. The clause in question did state that any request by a local authority to seek exemption would require local consultation before formal submission to the Secretary of State for consideration. In Oldham, the implications of the Bill would be carefully considered as it progressed and would not act against the best interests of looked after children.
7. Councillor Fielding asked the following question:
“The Council has taken the wise decision to support independent local businesses by operating a business improvement grant scheme. I am particularly pleased that, after their success in Oldham Town Centre, these grants were rolled out to other areas of the Borough, including to businesses along the A62 corridor through Failsworth. This scheme has helped to support the small businesses that are the backbone of our local economy and has also ensured the continued vibrancy and unique identity of our local shopping parade. Could the Cabinet Member please update Council with the key headlines from the implementation of this scheme in Failsworth?”
Councillor Jean Stretton, Leader of the Council and Cabinet Member for Economy and Enterprise responded that independent businesses were particularly important to the District Centres where they helped to create a strong sense of local identity and customer loyalty and trust. District Centres were often the location for family businesses that had been trading for long periods of time – many of them for a number of decades. Improvements to the exterior of key buildings which included fascia’s and shop fronts could both uplift an area and the visitor’s perception of the District Centre and assisted in attracting new independents. Discretionary grants of 50% of the eligible costs of improvements up to a maximum of £3,000 had originally been made available. A further report went to Cabinet on 21 March 2016 which sought an increase in the maximum grant from £3,000 to £8,000 following a request from the local grant review panels. The report was approved and the grant documentation updated that reflected the increase in the maximum grant available. Local grant review panels consisted of a selection of ward members for the area review grant applications and provided recommendations as to whether the applications received were to be approved, varied or rejected. Five grants had been awarded in the Failsworth A62 corridor which totalled £16,500 and four of these grants had been paid which totalled £12,000. One approved grant planned to implement the improvement work to the shop front in Spring 2017. Completed grant funded works included the installation of disabled W.C. facilities, installation of a footbridge to access the upper floor of a restaurant, provision of electrical supply and new windows and doors to premises that were vacant. There had been a lot of interest in the grant scheme and plenty of enquiries had been received. A mail out to all business in the eligible area was programmed for January 2017.
8. Councillor Gloster asked the following question:
“Can the Cabinet Member please tell me if this Council as a Living Wage Employer will be increasing the minimum wage for all staff to £8.45 per hour from April 2017 in line with the recommendations of the National Living Wage Foundation? And will the Cabinet Member also update this Chamber on the progress made by this Council since approving a motion in April that we should seek accreditation as a Living Wage Employers?”
Councillor Jabbar, Deputy Leader of the Council and Cabinet Member for Finance and HR responded that the recommendations of the National Living Way foundation had been implemented last April and it was intended going forward a further increase would be implemented from 1st April next year. There was a need to understand the financial implications. The Council was committed to supporting low paid employees. This was one of the first initiatives of the Administration when they came into power in 2011.
At this point in the meeting, the Mayor advised that the time limit for this item had expired.
RESOLVED that the questions and responses provided be noted.