(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 screens in the Council Chamber.
The following questions had been submitted:
1, Question asked by Peter Brown:
“Why does this Council allow Councillors to lie and deceive the public?”
Councillor Jean Stretton, Leader of the Council and Cabinet Member for Economy and Enterprise responded that the Council did not allow Councillors to lie. A process was in place for a member of the public who believed they had lied to, to make a complaint. The member of the public was expected to identify the elected member and bring forward evidence. It was not appropriate for every member to be besmirched.
2. Question asked by Joe Fitzpatrick:
“Who owns the land and buildings of the Collective Spirit free school, that is due to close at the end of this month, and if the land is sold for residential development, will Oldham council receive any payment for what was recently in the ownership of the residents of Oldham?”
Councillor Jean Stretton, Leader of the Council and Cabinet Member for Economy and Enterprise responded that the land occupied by the school hand been transferred to the school by the Department for Education. The Leader had written to the Secretary of State as under current legislation it was still a matter for the Secretary of State to decide. The Council was seeking for the land to be returned and proceed with the plans before the school for a capital receipt to be obtained.
3. Question received from Henry Stewart via email:
“When the transfer of housing
stock took place between Oldham Council and FCHO was this conducted
under 1) English Contract Law and 2) European Contract Protocols?
Yes or no answers to each question will
suffice."
Councillor Brownridge, Cabinet Member for Neighbourhoods and Cooperatives, responded yes to both questions. The matter had been considered at the Council meeting held on 15th December 2010 which included a report entitled “Housing Stock Transfer – Transfer Agreement” which was a matter of public record and available to view on the Council’s website.
4. Question received from Ian Bond via email:
“Regarding the "Oldham Masterplan": Given that you are confident enough to state that the development will bring in £50m to the local economy per annum (Oldham Chronicle, 3rd July 2017), can you inform the Taxpayers of Oldham how much this "Masterplan" is expected to cost and who will pay for it?”
Councillor Stretton, Leader of the Council and Cabinet Member for Economy and Enterprise responded that the forecast development costs were in excess of £350m as stated in the Cabinet report. It was not intended that the Council would invest on its own but would seek a joint venture partnership. The detail was not yet known. A period of consultation would be entered with the appropriate discussions. A joint venture partner was sought to share costs, risk and reward in order that the full costs of self-development did not fall to the Council alone. When a partner was in place, the procurement would be reported to Cabinet and Council later in the year.
5. Question received from Louise McCallum via email:
“Please can someone at the council meeting scheduled for tomorrow evening ask what action is going to be taken in the Hathershaw area, regenerated and now worse than it was before the regeneration.
This area is in serious rapid decline, there are so many urgent issues need addressing, the few good residents left in this area now just feel as though we are expected to be resigned to accept this is how the area is and we are not going to receive any support.
Not seen a single Labour councillor door knocking in my area despite my constant contact with various agencies regarding the horrendous problems we are encountering. Its about time they made themselves visible around the area to show that they care and are taking action.
Fly tipping, litter, low level crime, prostitution, brothels, anti social behaviour, the list goes on and we're just expected to live amongst this.
What is being done to address these issues?”
Councillor Brownridge, Cabinet Member for Neighbourhoods and Cooperatives responded that the Hathershaw neighbourhood was included in the Selective Licensing of Private Landlords scheme where agencies worked closely together to respond to local issues. The Environmental Enforcement team worked alongside the police for the discharge of warrants on identified households and where required, enforcement action had been taken. Fixed Penalty Notices had been issued to individuals where evidence had been found dumped and the Council had invested in CCTV cameras to gather evidence of anti-social behaviour and flytipping. Where the Police had evidence of criminal activity, arrests had been made and action taken. The Police had also seized a number of vehicles in the neighbourhoods and issues fines for driving offences. The District Teams had dedicated resources to the neighbourhood for the engagement of residents, community organisations and local schools to support community activity such as adult education classes, children’s activities, social activities and community projects which improved the area.
6. Question received from Shaun McGrath via email:
“Oldham council have contracts with First Choice Homes Oldham and the tenants for the stock transfer and the ‘3 tenants on the board’ condition is part of the paperwork. Will Cllr. Barbara Brownridge, a member of said board, confirm that there are indeed 3 tenants represented?”
Councillor Brownridge, Cabinet Member for Neighbourhoods and Cooperatives, responded that currently there was no legal requirement on First Choice Homes Oldham to have three tenant representatives or indeed to have any tenant representatives on the board. The 2010 offer document promised to have an initial FCHO board of 5 tenants, 4 independents and 3 councillors. The board was put into place from the stock transfer in 2011 and maintained for the duration of the offer document promise of 5 years until 2016. A full review of governance arrangements had been completed in 2015/16. Customer forums, tenants & residents associations, shadow customer congress and all tenants were formally consulted over an 8 week period. The recommendations of the review were agreed and involved moving from a board of 12 with selected constituent members to a more flexible board of between 8 – 12 members who are recruited based upon a skills and knowledge person specification. The rules for the FCHO had been changed to reflect these new arrangement and agreed with the regulators, the Homes Communities Agency and the Financial Services Authority. All tenants were notified of the changes. A tenant can be on the board if they can represent the skills required.
7. Question received from Syed Maruf Ali via email:
“The money that Oldham Council spend on services is raised through council tax collections. The majority of the funding is raised through government grants. The remaining funds are raised through charges that are paid directly by service users. These include charges for sports facilities, parking and contributions towards care packages. As a resident of Werneth/Coppice Ward I would like to know what percentage of the council budget is spent in Coppice/Werneth Ward per person compared with other wards in Oldham in the following categories:
Adults Service
Homelessness
Community sport and events
Child protection and other children’s services
Travel Assist
Library and community libraries
Waste management
Parks and nature conservation
Education, employment and training
Please keep the town centre investments separate from Werneth/Coppice Ward.”
Councillor Jabbar, Deputy Leader of the Council and Cabinet Member for Finance and Human Resources, responded that the majority of services were funded on a boroughwide basis and not ward based. When the budget was approved by Council, the Council allocated spending on particular services and did not specifically earmark or ringfence spending to a particular ward for the services listed. Furthermore, whilst some individual wards host facilities such as schools, parks, libraries, sports centres and community centres, these were provided for the benefit of all Oldham residents not just residents that lived within a particular ward. Oldham Council’s net revenue budget for the current financial year was almost £210m or approximately £909 per resident. Around 5.7% of Oldham’s population live in the ward of Werneth which meant the share of the Council’s revenue budget for Werneth residents on a per person basis was around £12m.”
8. Question received from Barbara Caffery via email:
“When are you going to do something about the constant fly tipping behind Belgrave road OL8 2JU, this is a constant issue which the council don't appear to be doing anything apart from clearing them nearly every week. Also when is the next resident meeting for hathershaw?”
Councillor Brownridge, Cabinet Member for Neighbourhoods and Cooperatives, reassured that every flytipping referral was investigated for any evidence that could lead to a prosecution before the waste was removed. There was also a dedicated team of Council and police officers who were working in the Hathershaw area and would make contact with the resident to discuss local issues.
9. Question received from Peter McCoy via email:
“Why do I a disabled person coping alone on minimal benefits have to pay bedroom tax?”
Councillor Jabbar, Deputy Leader of the Council and Cabinet Member for Finance and Human Resources responded that the Coalition Government had brought in changes as part of the Welfare Reform Act. Of all the austerity measures this was one of the most shameful which penalised the most disadvantaged. Sympathy was offered but this was out of the control of the Council. The Council supported those residents suffering a hardship as a result of the application of the size criteria through the Discretionary Housing Payment (DHP) scheme. Assistance could be made by contacting the team on 0161 770 6633. The Welfare Rights Service could also help maximise income for residents and they could be contacted on 01761 770 6655.
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 Jacques asked the following question:
“At the Hollinwood Park and Ride Metro station the new parking restrictions have seen an increase in the use of the multi storey parking, however, there has been an ongoing issue with anti-social behaviour and vandalism at the much valued facility. This has resulted in residents feeling less confident to use the service. Taking into account the current conditions would the relevant cabinet member advise what action TfGM are taking to improve passenger confidence and safety, whilst maintaining parking restrictions and whether there are any plans for additional parking at this or an adjacent site?”
Councillor F. Hussain, Cabinet Member for Environmental Services responded that the TfGM Metrolink Team was working in partnership with organisations such as the Travel Safe Unit, Greater Manchester Police, the new Metrolink operator and the Oldham Youth Team to target the individuals responsible and an enhanced presence along the Oldham-Rochdale line be given. The team were repairing the lighting in the Park and Ride and were also working towards upgrading it to LED as a high priority. TfGM was also funding an additional team of security patrols who would operate on this line after 6 pm in the evening and included planned patrols at Hollinwood. On the network as a whole, there would be a significant uplift in staff presence from mid-July as the new operator increased the number of customer services representatives and deployed a dedicated team of new recruited travel safe officers where they were most needed.
2. Councillor Haque asked the following question:
“Can the relevant cabinet member please tell us what plans
there are for improving the traffic flow at the Elk Mill
roundabout? Over the last few months we have seen queues building
on roads leading to the roundabout especially coming on from
Burnley Lane.
I have personally received a number of complaints from my
constituents about build up of traffic
from the roundabout going up to North Chadderton School. I feel we
need to look at this urgently and find a
solution.”
Councillor F. Hussain, Cabinet Member for Environmental Services, responded that the Council was aware of the limited capabilities and performance of the Elk Mill roundabout with regards to how it was able to deal with high volumes of traffic at peak periods. In recent months increased queuing had taken place along the Burnley Lane approach to the junction. This has been primarily due to the closure of Streetbridge Road in order for essential gas main replacement works to be carried out by a utility contractor and this would be re-opened within the next week which should assist. The Council was working with Transport for Greater Manchester to proactively develop a bid to the Department of Transport for funding for the whole signalisation of the junction to be completed.
3. Councillor Gloster asked the following question:
“Is the Cabinet Member aware of the recent incidents of serious criminal activity in Shaw, namely fighting between gangs over the weekend and the apparent arrest of a man carrying a machete outside the Blue Bell Inn on Monday 10 July?
These are the latest in a series of serious public order issues that have occurred in Shaw Town Centre on an increasingly frequent basis, usually involving youths, not necessarily from the Shaw and Crompton area, who are meeting up to cause disturbance, fight between each other, intimidate my constituents and steal from the local supermarkets.
Shaw and Crompton ward members are gravely concerned by this ongoing unacceptable situation, which is having a serious impact of the quality of life of Shaw and Crompton residents and visitors to our town and an impact on the local economy.
Does the Cabinet Member agree that this situation is unacceptable and that additional resources, both Police and youth services, are urgently required to combat this issue? And can she please reassure me and my colleagues that she will do all that is possible to make these resources available at the earliest possible date?”
Councillor Brownridge, Cabinet Member for Neighbourhoods and Cooperatives, responded that everything possible was being done with the resources available. The Detached Youth Team were in regular attendance in the Shaw district and were working with many young people on the streets. This work included challenging young people’s behaviour, providing guidance and supporting them into positive activities. The team were also working with TfGM and had access to the tram network which enabled them to work with young people who used the trams. Actions had been taken against a number of individuals who were engaged in anti-social behaviour in the area and Community Safety Services continued to work closely with the Neighbourhood Policing Team. Resources had been deployed where they were most needed, whenever possible. This was in addition to the work being undertaken to develop Pubwatch schemes in the area which ensured a safe night time economy and engagement work which was undertaken within schools in the area.
4. Councillor Roberts asked the following question:
“The Manchester Arena terrorist atrocity had devastating consequences for families across the North West and beyond, including for a family living in Royton North. The Royton District team, supported by colleagues across the council, worked extremely hard to support people affected by this and to help the family and community organise the two events on Tandle Hill as commemoration and remembrance. As well as sending condolences and sympathy to the two Royton families directly affected, would the Cabinet member for Neighbourhoods join me in thanking the Royton District team and other Council staff for their contribution at this sad time?”
Councillor Brownridge, Cabinet Member for Neighbourhoods and Cooperatives thoroughly endorsed the sentiments of the question and placed on record not only her thanks to Council staff who gave support and advice to the families and friends of those killed but also to the greater community who rose and supported the families with great dignity.
5. Councillor M. Bashforth asked the following question:
“Despite constant pressure from the Royton South councillors and the best efforts of our Environmental Team (who have been very helpful) we are still struggling to get the owners of the derelict former furniture factory on Holden Fold Lane to fulfil their obligation to knock down, clear and make safe the site.
Will the cabinet member responsible give Environmental officers the authority to get the site cleared immediately and make the area safe for the residents who live next to the site?”
Councillor Brownridge, Cabinet Member for Neighbourhoods and Cooperatives responded that relevant permission required demolition of the structure. A condition had been imposed which ensured that appropriate mitigation measures were put into place to safeguard protected species currently at the site during the implementation of the application. The building could not be demolished until the measures were in place. The applicant has been requested to implement the measures.
6. Councillor Phythian asked the following question:
“Could the cabinet member for neighbourhoods outline the action that has been taken in response to complaints from elected members and the public about rats at Thornham Mill and confirm that the owners will be recharged for any costs arising to the Council in getting rid of this problem?”
Councillor Brownridge, Cabinet Member for Neighbourhoods and Cooperatives confirmed that in response to complaints from both elected members and members of the public, officers from Environmental Health had served legal notices on the owners of the mill for the removal of waste that contributed to the problem. This notice was not complied with, therefore the Council had instructed contractors to carry out the works and this cost would be invoiced to the owners of the mill.
7. Councillor Turner asked the following question:
“Following the spate of antisocial behaviour and vandalism at the empty ambulance station on Moor Street, Crompton, although I was disappointed that the Council had to take on this responsibility, due to the failure of the new owner to co-operate, I was pleased to see that the Council had partly secured the premises yesterday.
Can I please ask the relevant Cabinet member, in the interest of health and safety, when the broken shutter will be repaired or replaced? because although the windows, interior doors and side doors have been boarded up, the building is still easy to access and I’m sure it will only be a matter of time before the boards on the interior office doors (which once inside the building are invisible to public view) will be removed and this cycle of vandalism, setting fires and antisocial behaviour will continue.”
Councillor Brownridge, Cabinet Member for Neighbourhoods and Cooperatives, confirmed that the empty ambulance station was in private ownership and that officers from Environmental Health had been contacted on Monday of this week by the Police regarding problems at the building and the fact that it was empty and open to access. The new owner had been contacted and asked to carry out emergency works by Tuesday or the Council would them and reclaim the costs. As on Tuesday evening, the building had been secured by the owner and not the Council. Officers had been asked to inspect the building again to make sure that the owner had carried out the works to a satisfactory standard and had also been asked to monitor the situation and keep in touch with the new owner with regard to long term plans.
8. Councillor Chadderton asked the following question:
“Residents adjacent to the OAFC car park have been asking why it doesn’t appear to have any sort of management in place. Residents experience asb in the form of cars racing around the car park at all hours of the night, people turning up in cars with loud music playing and regular noise and road rage at the one way gate leading into the site which does not have any indication who has right of way. This is on top of the many years it is taking to tidy up the site which still has a way to go. Can the cabinet member responsible please ask officers to investigate who is responsible for the upkeep and management of this car park and use whatever powers they have to get them to deal with the entrance gate and ensure the site is not left open to anyone who wishes to use it for asb purposes?”
Councillor Brownridge, Cabinet Member for Neighbourhoods and Cooperatives responded that the District Team and Community Safety Services would take action as appropriate against any persons identified as being involved in anti-social behaviour in the locality. The land was not in Council ownership or control, it was understood to be owned by Oldham Athletic Football Club.
9. Councillor Iqbal asked the following question:
“Local residents are becoming increasingly concerned about the large number of high speeding cars driving in residential areas.
The speed humps that were installed many years ago have started to become worn out. Could the relevant Cabinet Members update me on the plans for Oldham council in replacing these speed humps?”
Councillor F. Hussain, Cabinet Member for Environmental Services responded assured that the Council took road safety very seriously and were committed to reducing the number of road traffic accidents on Oldham’s roads. In previous years, the introduction of road humps had not only helped reduce traffic speeds significantly but also the likelihood and severity of any traffic collision.
However, as had been pointed out, some of these features were in excess of 20 years old. There were an increasing number of road humps in the Borough that were in need of refurbishment or repair to help maintain their speed reduction capabilities. This issue would be addressed by the exploration of the most appropriate funding mechanism for a programme of remedial work to be delivered.
The Council worked with Transport for Greater Manchester Casualty Reduction Partnership to regularly monitor the injury collision rates on Oldham’s roads, particularly where excessive speed may have been a contributory factor.
10. Councillor Dearden asked the following question:
“Taylor Street in Chadderton Central is part of an estate managed by First Choice Homes, a number of properties in this area were purchased in the 'right to buy scheme'. Unfortunately, at least one such property that could and should provide a good family home has stood empty for at least 3 years, 'right to buy' was and is a scheme that is open to abuse and this is just one example of that abuse. Could the relevant Cabinet Member advise me what if any steps can be taken to prevent properties that should be available to Oldham residents standing empty?”
Councillor Brownridge, Cabinet Member for Neighbourhoods and Cooperatives explained that deterrents coupled with advisory help had a degree of success with the number of long term empty properties which was currently 1,143. There were a number of steps that officers in Environmental Health were taking, working with colleagues in Council tax, to focus the attention of owners of empty properties whilst offering advice and assistance which included the following:
· Council tax was still payable on empty properties, with the exception of the ones awaiting probate or required major/structural works.
· Council tax increases to 150% on properties that remained empty two years and over;
· Officers offered advice and assistance to property owners who wanted to consider options for the property;
· Enforcement action could be taken where empty properties were considered detrimental requiring owners for improvement to be made;
· Enforcement action could be taken where empty properties caused a statutory notice/effecting others.
It was not an offence for a property to be left empty if it was kept secure and in good order, the Council had no legal powers to bring the property back into use.
11. Councillor Hudson asked if there had been any news from TFGM regarding the upgrade of the rail line which affected Greenfield, if there were plans in place as the closure of the bridge would cause significant disruption.
Councillor F. Hussain, Cabinet Member for Environmental Services responded that he was not aware of any plans at the moment but would advise and get back to him.
12. Councillor Hewitt asked the following question:
“Cars and lorries are part of our lives, for better or worse.
Rural life depends on the highway network for connections and communication. Many villages lie along the route of busy country roads connecting villages together into Oldham and beyond.
Developers have an appetite for building new homes in and around our villages attracted by higher market prices in semi - rural and rural areas increasing traffic and pressure on the infrastructure.
Lees, Springhead and Grotton suffer greatly with lack of parking and narrow roads as well as heavy traffic on the main arterial road through all 3 villages towards Lydgate, with traffic travelling at speed whenever possible especially after passing the speed camera or exiting a bottle neck and being stationary in a queue of traffic.
Would the member whose portfolio it is sit down with me to discuss creating a Safety and Civility plan for traffic management in the villages around the Borough?”
Councillor F. Hussain, Cabinet Member for Environmental Services responded that a meeting would help and would ask officers to contact Councillor Hewitt.
13. Councillor Goodwin asked the following question:
“Collective Spirit was opened by the Department for Education and closed by the Department for Education. Can the Cabinet Member for Education update us on the work being done by the Council to ensure that students are supported in their transfer to a new school from September 2017 and would she agree with me that this is a further example of a failed Conservative policy which has used Education as an ideological weapon rather than meeting the needs of Oldham's young people?”
Councillor Chadderton, Cabinet Member for Education and Early Years responded that when something went wrong with a school it was felt that this was the Council’s fault as the general public see the Council’s role as the leadership of the town. The Council had not opened or closed the school. The school had been opened and closed by the Department for Education. The Council had done an immense amount of work, the time of which was three weeks before the end of term with many families panicking and angry as to where their child would attend school in September. The Council was offering support to the families and support to Oasis. Drop in sessions had been arranged over the next two weeks. Priorities were being made which ensured every child was offered a place. Chadderton Councillors would be kept informed.
14. Councillor Mushtaq asked the following question:
“I have recently been contacted by a resident with concerns about guide dogs being prevented from entering taxis. Can the relevant cabinet member please inform me of the council policy on this issue?”
Councillor F. Hussain, Cabinet Member for Environmental Services responded that the drivers of hackney carriages or private hire vehicles were bound under the Equality Act 2010 to taken as assistance dog in their vehicle unless they had a medical exemption certificate issued by the Council. The Council had and would continue to take action against drivers who took it upon themselves to refuse to take an assistance dog in their vehicle. This included taking court action where necessary and reviewed whether they were a suitable person to continue to hold a licence with this Council.
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.