(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 received from Joe Fitzpatrick via email:
“The planning approval for the new Saddleworth School was overturned because of incompetence by the planning department. Will you be seeking external consultants for the next attempt, and when will you submit the planning application for this much needed new school in Saddleworth.”
Councillor Brownridge, Cabinet Member for Neighbourhoods and Cooperatives responded that the Saddleworth School application had not been turned down because of incompetence. The Judicial Review judgement noted clearly that “it is not correct to characterise the main (planning) report as defective in the general sense asserted by the claimant. The report is lengthy but it is not unclear, nor factually misleading”. The Judicial Review was upheld relative to site selection issues, this would clearly need to be addressed when the application was returned to the Planning Committee. Professional legal advice from a QC will be in place.
2. Question asked by Valerie Lees:
“Having been in correspondence with St James Councillors since 22/06/2014 regarding my concerns about the dilapidated condition of London Road and Acre Lane Derker. I have been informed that Keepmoat were responsible for resurfacing the lower section of London Rd. once the building and the heavy traffic involved with the developments. Building was completed over 2 years ago, to date no works have commenced on the roads despite my repeated enquiries to what timescales to expect. We seem no nearer to a resolution or clarification of timescales or responsibilities. Would the relevant cabinet member explain the reason these works haven't been carried out and also when we can expect the promised works to be completed.”
Councillor F. Hussain, Cabinet Member for Environmental Services responded that talks between Unity Partnership and Keepmoat regarding the surfacing of London Road were close to completion. It was anticipated that work would begin on site over the next few months.
3. Question received from Ian Bond via email:
“How much Oldham Council spent on the ‘Your Oldham’ festival, and if they have figures for how many people attended the events, especially the concert on the 9th September 2017. Additionally, if the attendance figures for the concert were not collected, how many people the Council estimated attended.”
Councillor Stretton, Leader of the Council and Cabinet Member for Economy and Enterprise responded that the cost of the Your Festival totalled £17,500. During the festival week over 1,000 people attended the various events. Many more had attended the Market Street but these were not able to be quantified. The Oldham LIVE music event was the first of its type and offered established music acts from across recent decades for free in the town centre. The event ran all day from Noon until 10.00 pm in Parliament Square and attendee numbers were not able to be officially recorded as it was an unticketed event given it was a free and open event. The event had been discussed with local businesses and they were generally delighted with their trade throughout the day and evening. Overall, the numbers could only be estimated. There were hundreds of spectators who dropped into Oldham LIVE at various points during the day. The attendance was at its peak when The Farm closed the event with hundreds of spectators who danced and enjoyed themselves.
4. Question received from Liam McCallion via email:
“In light of the recent announcement regarding Oldham Council's preferred construction partner to redevelop the former Counthill School site, please can I ask when local residents in the Moorside area are to be consulted on this work as we are yet to receive any communication on this development apart from what has been issued to the media. Furthermore, with an increasing number of cars now parked on an already congested Haven Lane following the Meadow View development, what measures will be put in place to prevent further congestion in this area when the Counthill School site is later built? An accident is waiting to happen, just like in January 2013 when Andrew Paul Faragher lost his life on Haven Lane. On a number of occasions my neighbours and I have experienced several near misses due to there being not enough space on the roads, especially on the bend between Counthill Road and Haven Lane.”
Councillor Brownridge, Cabinet Member for Neighbourhoods and Cooperatives responded that a public consultation event was arranged for 27th November 2017 which would give residents the chance to see and comment on the proposals for the new housing and the former Ski Slope before they were submitted for planning consideration. The District Partnerships Team would be in attendance to address any other queries residents had. As with similar roads in the Borough, the safety record along Haven Lane and Counthill Road was monitored by the Council on an annual basis. In the last three years, there had been no injury collisions along this route between Crowley Lane and Ripponden Road. As part of the Planning Conditions associated with the Meadow View development, a series of Traffic Calming measures would be introduced along Haven Lane which ensured that vehicles could safely enter the main road from the new development and that there was no significant increase in parking on the lane. Full consideration would be given to additional traffic calming measures as part of any future development of the Counthill School site. However, these would include new parking spaces for users of the Sports Hall, a good level of driveway parking provision and a financial contribution towards further measures in the immediate area.
5. Louie Hamblett asked the following question:
“At the last council meeting a motion was put to the council about Level 1 heart provision in the region. Sadly the council did not join the central Manchester NHS trust and Manchester MPs such as the Shadow Education Secretary Lucy Powell fighting against this proposed downgrade. Can the relevant Cabinet Member tell concerned congenital heart patients what, if any, steps are being taken to work with local NHS bodies in order to ensure that, since the Manchester Heart Centre at Manchester Royal Infirmary's care provision is being significantly downgraded, the transition process to an appropriate standard of care will be as smooth as possible for all patients concerned, particularly those who are the most vulnerable, either by disability or due to lack of finances, within the borough.”
Councillor Moores, Cabinet Member for Health and Wellbeing responded that when NHS England took on the role of congenital heart disease services in 2013 it had an opportunity to drive service improvement and reduce variation in access and quality by the implementation of a set of nationally agreed standards which governed a truly national service. The standards described how congenital heart disease services of the very highest quality would be delivered. The NHS believed that implementation of these standards was the only way to ensure that patients were able to access care delivered to the same high standards, regardless of where they were treated. The previous service provided at MRI was below the proposed standards for Congenital Heart Disease services in terms of staffing provision, number of operations provided annually and the need for appropriate provision of 24/7 surgical or interventional cover. The decision to cease surgery and interventional cardiology for adults in Manchester ensured that the residents of Oldham had access to a higher quality service, understanding that ensuring safety and quality required further travel for patients and families. All other care, with the exception of surgery and interventional cardiology continued to be provided in Manchester. Assurances were provided that liaison was happening with NHS England, the national commissioners of the service to ensure there was a smooth transition for all adult congenital heart disease patients in Oldham to have access to the high quality services being provided a specialist centres.
6. Question asked by Mr. Brown:
“Why has this Council used the Local Government Act of 1972 and the Localism Act 2011 to allow Councillors Blyth and Klonowski to breach the Council's Code of Conduct putting a member of the public to distrust the Council and now face a Magistrates Court in search of the truth?”
Councillor Stretton, Leader of the Council and Cabinet Member for Economy and Enterprise responded that the Council had not used the legislation to allow a breach of the code. Standards Complaints had been made. The relevant Councillors were asked for their comments and the complaints had been sent to the Standards Sub-Committee for assessment. The Sub-Committee had decided that an investigation was not required into the complaints. That this resulted in Mr. Brown distrusting the Council was regrettable. The Leader had discussed the decision which had led to a magistrates summons with Mr. Brown and had advised against the course of action that had been taken. The final decision was Mr. Brown’s made in the knowledge of the likely outcomes.
7. Question asked by Mr. Kenyon:
“As a member of the public hearing a gentleman’s protest, I would like to know why results from Council discussions at the meeting of the Standards Sub-Committee on 19th January 2017 are withheld from the public domain. Are we living in a culture of secrecy and, if so, what have Oldham Council got to hide?”
Councillor Stretton, Leader of the Council and Cabinet Member for Economy and Enterprise responded that when complaints were first assessed, they were considered exempt information and, in this instance, this was agreed by the Standards Assessment Sub-Committee. However, if a matter came before the Standards Committee, if an investigator had concluded that a breach of the code had taken place that hearing would be open to the public unless there were any aspects of the matter to be considered that required an exemption. This was normal practice with Standards proceedings across the country.
8. Question received from Mr. McGrath via email:
“To quote from the RSPCA website: "We recognise that religious beliefs and practices should be respected. However, we also believe animals should be slaughtered under the most humane conditions possible. Evidence clearly indicates that slaughter without pre-stunning can cause unnecessary suffering". In light of Lancashire council voting to ban schools from serving non-stunned halal meat, will Oldham council now be following suit? I would like a written response to this question.”
Councillor Chadderton, Cabinet Member for Education and Early Years responded that all meat provided by the Catering Service conformed to the UK Assured Food Standards (AFS). These criteria ensured that all meat was fully traceable back to the farm and adhered to UK legal minimum welfare standards. All meat supplied to the Catering Service, including halal meat, was from animals which were pre-stunned before slaughter.
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 Salamat asked the following question:
“The streets in the Glodwick area flood when there is heavy rain. Could we please have a site survey to find out if this is because of blocked gullies or for another reason and a report given to elected members with estimated dates of work of any necessary work being carried out?”
Councillor F. Hussain, Cabinet Member for Environmental Services responded that he had already asked for this problem to be looked into and reported back to Members.
2. Councillor Larkin asked the following question:
“I regularly receive complaints from residents living close to schools in my ward complaining about the car parking and congestion caused by thoughtless parents and carers dropping children off at school. Please can the relevant cabinet member advise what schemes the council are currently supporting to encourage children to walk to school, rather than rely on being driven to the gates? Not only would more walking lead to less congestion, but the health benefits would also help our young people to start off life on the right foot.”
Councillor Moores, Cabinet Member for Health and Wellbeing responded that this was something everyone understood regarding parking at schools. Walking to school brought many benefits and that children who walked rather than used the car tended to be generally more active than other children. Walking had the advantage that it required no preparation, no special equipment or venues and no expenditure of money. Local schools could choose how much or little they got involved with walking to school activities whether this was school or parental daily co-ordinated walking buses, walk to school once a week initiatives or one off walk to school weeks (the next national campaign was 14 – 18 May 2018). The Council had invested in the School Partnership which offered schools a suite of activities to support increased and sustained physical activity for children and young people. This included, but was not limited to: walking (walking to school, but mainly the daily mile), cycling, swimming, competitive sports and information on health food choices. The most popular walking activity was participation in the daily mile.
3. Councillor Toor asked the following question:
“I'm really concerned that recent weather especially heavy rain caused lots of flooding in different parts of Oldham including some streets in Medlock Vale Ward, for example Gainsborough Avenue. There has been a big puddle and there is no way for water to go anywhere, it looks as though the gullies have not been cleaned in all parts of the ward. I have witnessed the same situation on Ashton Road. Can the relevant cabinet member tell us some the reason for this flooding, and what action will be taken to improve the situation in Medlock Vale Ward.”
Councillor F. Hussain, Cabinet Member for Environmental Services responded that highway drainage systems in the UK were designed for average rainfall events. During times of heavy rain and storms, water would inevitably remain on the carriageway at low points. A site visit had been arranged to inspect the location reported on Gainsborough Avenue to determine a potential solution and it was reported that the road gullies were last cleared on 5th September 2017. Road gullies on Ashton Road were last cleared on 26th April 2017.
4. Councillor McCann asked the following question:
“I have a few times consulted the Greater Manchester Spatial Framework website for details of sites offered by land owners for development. As the window for offers is now closed, I am surprised at how lacking in clarity and detail the site maps are. There is, it seems, no comprehensive list of sites, and there is no information about the amount of land available for development on each site, or estimates about the possible number of houses that could be developed on each site. Would the Cabinet Member please ask Council officers to supply me and my colleagues in Saddleworth North, Shaw and Crompton with this information in an accessible and understandable format or ask whoever manages the GMSF website to do so?”
Councillor Brownridge, Cabinet Member for Neighbourhoods and Cooperatives responded that a comprehensive list of sites submitted to the GM Call for Sites was available on the GM Mapping website. Officers could provide a list of those sites submitted within Oldham. Sites put forward that were not within the Green Belt had been forwarded to individual districts for assessment as part of the Strategic Housing Land Availability Assessments.
5. Councillor McLaren asked the following question:
“The Chadderton Mill is a Grade 2 listed building and is currently used for storage and distribution purposes, Ward Councillors are constantly receiving complaints about operation at the Chadderton Mill, these complaints include damage to street furniture and buildings caused by HGVs turning off Fields New Road and Denton Lane into a narrow unnamed road in to access the mill. We have also received many complaints regarding HGV engines being left running for long periods while vehicles are waiting to the mill, and excessive amounts of litter spoiling the local environment due to poor housekeeping. Ward Members are aware that Officers from the Council and Heritage England have recently been in discussion with the mill owners, could the relevant Cabinet Member please tell us if these discussions will help to alleviate the genuine concerns of local residents?”
Councillor F. Hussain, Cabinet Member for Environmental Services responded that he appreciated the concerns raised and understood that officers arranged a joint meeting with the mill owners, Heritage England and ward members to discuss potential options for the future of the building. It was also understood that a follow up meeting had taken place with local members and officers and were now in a position of waiting for any proposals which may come forward from the representatives of the mill owners.
6. Councillor Malik asked the following question:
“I am delighted to welcome the opening of a new Audi Showroom and new B & M store at Ellen Street, Can relevant cabinet member tell us how many people have been recruited from the locality at Audi Centre and has there been any new recruitment at B & M Store.”
Councillor Akhtar, Cabinet Member for Employment and Skills responded that the new Audit and B&M developments had demonstrated a confidence in the economic growth in Oldham Council. The economic growth had seen exceptional performance in Get Oldham Working which had created more than 1,400 opportunities of which to date the tame had supported 856 citizens in sustainable employment and filled 194 apprenticeships. The B&M store had relocated to a bigger store so the majority of the 60 jobs were existing staff. The Audi garage created over 40 jobs which 20 were Oldham citizens through the Get Oldham Working team support programme. The remainder came from other Audi sites which ensured a smooth opening period, but the Council expected to support the company with new opportunities within the coming months.
7. Councillor Fielding asked the following question:
“The layout and upkeep of the car park fronting Tesco at Failsworth District Centre has been longstanding concern since the opening of the supermarket in 2007.
• Bollards and lamp posts have been knocked over and not replaced.
• The white lines on the car park are not visible in many areas.
• The sign at the exit points the wrong way.
• There is persistent flooding at the Ashton Road West entrance.
I called a site meeting almost four years ago and was given assurances by employees of Brookhouse that the above matters would be resolved. They have not been. The District Executive also allocated some money to a range of layout improvements for which plans have been drawn up by officers of Unity Partnership. To date these improvements have not taken place and there is no sign that they will be doing soon. Could the Cabinet member responsible urgently look in to this matter and clear whatever blockages are preventing a solution to the state of Tesco car park from being realised.”
Councillor F. Hussain, Cabinet Member for Environmental Services responded that the Council and Brookhouse were aware of the ongoing issues with Tesco as they had failed to engage in September 2017. The Leader of the Council wrote again to the Chief Executive of Tesco and asked them to promptly consider and approve the car park and highway improvement schemes designed by Brookhouse. Despite chasing, this letter had failed to yield a response. As the land was leased to Tesco, the Council and Brookhouse had very little ability to make changes to what was, in effect, third party land and therefore reliant on the cooperation of the food store. Some of the issues raised, namely the missing bollards, lamp posts, fading white lines, signage and flooding were issues which should be managed by Tesco as part of their full repairing lease. The Council and Brookhouse would seek to ensure that Tesco complied with their repairing covenant and general lease obligations and insisted that any defects were repaired at the earliest opportunity.
8. Councillor Murphy asked the following question:
“Crompton House School’s expansion plans have shown a clear lack of engagement with elected members both from the School and Oldham Council. My colleagues and I want to know what is going on in our patch? as it will be us left picking up the pieces when this goes to planning committee for approval; members of the public need to know that we have had no input whatsoever, which I feel has been quite deliberate. We have not been kept in the loop with reference to updates or input and have found out any information by chance. To add to the conspiracy every single Shaw & Crompton Parish Councillor received a delivered invite letter to a consultation event at the School, but the Borough Councillors were missed from the invite - would the Cabinet Member agree that this is unacceptable and agree to work with elected members on this project?”
Councillor Chadderton, Cabinet Member for Education and Early Years responded that this was an administrative error by the school that ward councillors had not received an invitation. The planning application had not yet been submitted. A meeting would be arranged with ward councillors to allow feedback and discussion before the planning documents were submitted.
9. Councillor Goodwin asked the following question:
“It is my understanding that the junction on the A663 Broadway at Foxdenton Lane will be ?developed to ensure the best flow of traffic as part of the nearby housing development. Can the relevant Cabinet member reassure residents in Chadderton South that actions will also be taken at the A663 Broadway junctions with the M60, and adjacent roads, to improve the flow of traffic and to reduce congestion which is a regular problem?”
Councillor F. Hussain, Cabinet Member for Environmental Services responded that planning permission for Broadway Green specifically required that the developer made provision for improvements to the Broadway/M60 junction. The details with regard to this were currently being discussed and finalised between the developer and Highways England.
10. Councillor Roberts asked the following question:
“The Grasmere Road and Dogford Road areas of Royton North have suffered from severe flooding in recent years. Ward councillors recently received a briefing about probable causes (culverts appear to be to blame) and potential remedies which will need funding from the Environment Agency. Can the Cabinet Member update us on progress in getting the necessary funding from the Environment Agency?”
Councillor Brownridge, Cabinet Member for Neighbourhoods and Cooperatives responded that discussions had taken place with the Environment Agency (EA) that informed them of the flooding issues at the Grasmere Road and Dogford Road areas of Royton. An application was being prepared to carry out a feasibility study to forward to the EA looking for grant funding. A proposed shared solution would be the EA carrying out works to the River Irk with the Council carrying out works to the Grasmere/Dogford Road area.
11. Councillor Hewitt asked the following question:
“A Lees resident, Mr Mike Platter, has asked me to see if I can get an answer to his question about the improvements to the Ring and Ride service. His mother attends day care at Laurel Bank, her doctors feel this helps her with her dementia’ and is wheelchair bound - her main carer does not drive and they rely upon the Ring and Ride service to get to and from Laurel Bank. Booking is a nightmare: just this week they could find her a trip home but no trip out and on Friday they got an outward bound but no return. The booking system is unhelpful - you need to ring in advance a week before but when they rang last week they were first in the queue but still could not get lifts booked in for their mother. Ring and ride will not take advanced bookings for less than 6 people, despite offering a large window for pick-ups, users are still not guaranteed a pick up. The web site does not give any information about booking conditions. Could the Cabinet member responsible press TfGM to improve the booking system so passengers can use essential services such as day care?”
Councillor F. Hussain, Cabinet Member for Environmental Services responded that the Ring and Ride booking system had been raised with Transport for Greater Manchester who confirmed that the Ring and Ride Service was very popular and experienced high demand. An ongoing review of the service had identified that the booking system required to be reviewed. There was a wish for an online booking facility to be introduced to reduce phone congestion. A significant issue was the number of trips that were cancelled, 18%. By enabling an easier way to cancel journeys, it was hoped that this would free up spare capacity that was currently wasted.
12. Councillor Sheldon asked if there had been any progress with the speed reduction at the Royal George and also raised the issue of the safety at the junction of Oldham Road and Platting Road and the junction of Wall Hill Road and Huddersfield Road where cars were sliding off the road.
Councillor Hussain, Cabinet Member for Environmental Services thanked Councillor Sheldon for his questions. He would look into the issues raised and respond with an update.
13. Councillor Williams asked the following question:
“Please can the Cabinet Member update us on progress with recent new housing developments in Hollinwood?”
Councillor Brownridge, Cabinet Member for Neighbourhoods and Cooperatives responded that there had been several major residential developments in Hollinwood. In 2015 Countryside Properties completed 52 new family homes at the former Royd Mill site and in August 2017 the same development had also finished 80 homes at the former site of Durban Mill. Keepmoat Homes had also been developing in Limehurst Village on land that had been vacant since 1997. Keepmoat had so far completed and sold 64 homes at Rowan Tree Road and were mid-way through building a further 69 homes on cleared sites along Whitebank Road.
14. Councillor Jacques asked the following question:
“Failsworth has been subjected to increasing number of criminal acts over the last month, attacks on taxi cabs and two serious "Ram Raids" in an attempt to remove the ATM machines and other valuables. This has caused significant inconvenience and concern amongst residents who are feeling extremely nervous and worried about increasing crime levels. Can the cabinet member responsible provide some reassurances to constituents that this isn't the start of a crime wave and press upon those responsible for policing that current staffing levels, leave many of us feeling vulnerable and less confident in our ability to rely upon police force to keep people safe?”
Councillor Brownridge, Cabinet Member for Cooperatives and Neighbourhoods responded that the Community Safety and District Teams were working closely with the Neighbourhood Policing Team in Failsworth and Hollinwood and all efforts were being made for the identification of the persons responsible for the anti-social behaviour and criminality. Action would be taken as appropriate against persons identified as involved. Other alternative options for intelligence gathering in the area was being considered which included the potential issue of dash cams to taxi drivers in the area. Dash cams had been used successfully in other areas, with evidence from the cameras being used in prosecutions, with the long term impact being a reduction in incidents being reported. The Community Safety and Cohesion Partnership did not believe this to be the start of a crime wave and the Partnership endeavoured to provide the best service possible with the resources available. The concerns raised about the level of police staffing will police staffing would be brought to the attention of the Divisional Commander and the Deputy Mayor.
15. Councillor G. Alexander asked the following question:
“When will Persimmon complete the snaggings on the Northgate Estate so the Council can finally adopt the Estate”
Councillor F. Hussain, Cabinet Member for Environmental Services responded that officers continued to pursue Persimmons for a meeting and a resolution to the outstanding issues. However, unfortunately the Council did not have powers to force the adoption process.
16. Councillor Turner asked the following question:
“Under the Armed Forces Covenant, this authority has agreed to award Medium Priority to service applicants on our social housing register. Six such applicants have been registered - I believe that one is from my ward. At present it is not recorded how long such applicants remain on the register before being housed. Will the Cabinet Member for social housing agree to request that housing allocations staff record such information?”
Councillor Brownridge, Cabinet Member for Neighbourhoods and Cooperatives confirmed that the Council did record the length of time households had been on the Housing Register and included those who had served in the Armed Forces. It was noted that the length of time on the Housing Register did not automatically improve a household’s chances of getting a social housing tenancy, either with the Council or housing association partners. As a result of the vast majority of homes being allocated via our Choice Based Lettings (CBL) scheme, all households on the Housing Register were encouraged to actively participate in the scheme by regularly looking for suitable homes advertised on the CBL website and place bids on the homes in which they were interested. Evidence showed that those households who actively participated in the scheme stood a much better chance of securing a tenancy that those who did not.
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.