Agenda and minutes

Council
Wednesday, 10th September, 2014 6.10 pm

Venue: Council Chamber, Civic Centre, Oldham, West Street, Oldham, OL1 1NL

Items
No. Item

1.

Questions to Cabinet Members from the public and Councillors on ward or district issues

(20 minutes for public questions and 20 minutes for Councillor questions)

Minutes:

The Mayor advised the meeting that the next item on the agenda in Open Council was Public Question Time. The Questions had been received from members of the public and would be taken in the order in which they had been received. Council was advised that if the questioner was not present then the question would appear on the screen in the Council Chamber.

 

The following questions had been submitted:

 

1. Question received from Joe Fitzpatrick via email

 

“Have you abandoned the Hotel Future project? and if you are determined to proceed with this scheme.

What is the start date, what will be the financial contribution from the council, will it still be a regional training centre

and how many jobs do you claim it will produce?”

 

Before responding to the question Councillor McMahon advised the meeting that the Council had become victims of its own success. Recent meetings had seen a huge increase in the number of questions submitted to Council and, due to the strict time limits imposed it was becoming more and more difficult to respond to all of them on the night. The Leader informed the meeting, and those members of the public watching and listening to the meeting, that a way would be found to put questions and responses on line.

 

 

Councillor McMahon, the Leader of the Council and Cabinet Member for Regeneration and City Region gave the following response to Mr Fitzpatrick’s question:

 

“There will be a future report that will come to a Cabinet meeting before Christmas that will outline the different options available to Council, of which hotel future will be one of those options. We are determined to get good value for money for the Oldham tax payer and clearly that requires due diligence and making sure that the scheme is financially viable and robust. So we are just going through that process now. That report will also outline the number of jobs that will be created, the economic impact of the hotel being there and the wider economic benefit and also outline a capital build schedule which will include a start date.”

 

2. Question received from Julia Turner via email

 

I attended the Shaw and Crompton District Executive on 22 July where I listened to the local Councillors putting forward four proposals for getting money together to carry out the work so that Shaw Baths can re-open. Please can the Council tell me when you considered these proposals and what decision did you make.”

 

Councillor Harrison, Cabinet Member for Adult Social Care and Public Health, gave the following response:

 

“The Council’s executive decision not to reopen Crompton pool was made under delegated powers by myself and Cllr Jabbar, the two most relevant portfolio holders, following detailed consideration of all issues and options.

Following the meeting of the Shaw and Crompton District Executive Councillor Jabbar and I have revisited the report and issues, and given careful consideration to the motion proposed.

As you may be aware the decision to  ...  view the full minutes text for item 1.

2.

To receive apologies for absence

Minutes:

Apologies for absence were received from Councillors Blyth and Chadderton.

3.

To order that the Minutes of the meeting of the Council held on 16th July 2014 be signed as a correct record pdf icon PDF 165 KB

Minutes:

RESOLVED that the Minutes of the meeting held on 16th July 2014, as amended and now circulated, be approved as a correct record.

 

Councillor Hibbert referred to a question which had been raised by Councillor Sykes, the Leader of the Opposition, at the meeting of the Council held on 16th July 2014 and Councillor Sykes requested the right to respond to Councillor Hibbert as a point of personal explanation. The Meeting, through the Mayor, acceded to this request.

4.

To receive declarations of interest in any matter to be determined at the meeting

Minutes:

In accordance with the Code of Conduct Councillor McCann declared a personal interest in Item 15 by virtue of his appointment to the Joint Venture Board.

Councillor Bashforth declared a personal interest in Item 14 Notice of Opposition Business – Motion 2 in that he was a member of CAMRA.

5.

To deal with matters which the Mayor considers to be urgent business

Minutes:

The Mayor informed the meeting that no items of Urgent Business had been received.

6.

To receive communications relating to the business of the Council

Minutes:

The Mayor advised the meeting that no items had been received relating to the business of the Council.

7.

To receive and note petitions received relating to the business of the Council pdf icon PDF 42 KB

(time limit 20 minutes)

Minutes:

The Mayor advised the meeting that two petitions had been received for noting by Council.

 

RESOLVED that the following petitions received since the last meeting of the Council be noted:

 

Neighbourhoods and Cooperatives

 

Petition relating to Stop the Suffering in Gaza (received 5th August 2014) (8,303 signatures) (Ref 2014-011).

 

Corporate and Commercial Services

 

Petition relating to the Re-opening of Crompton Pool (received 1st September 2014) (961 signatures) (Ref 2014-014).

8.

The Leader's Annual Statement

(30 minutes)

Minutes:

In delivering his Annual Statement the Leader of the Council, Councillor McMahon, reflected on the basic services that were delivered by the Council; those services which the public cared about. He referred to the improving journey that the Council had undertaken and thanked the local authority staff for their hard work.

 

A number of significant projects had been undertaken during the last year and the Leader highlighted the following:

 

  • Cinema
  • Old Town Hall
  • St Mary’s Housing Scheme
  • Building work across the town with cranes appearing on the skyline
  • Oldham College
  • Sports Centre
  • Latics
  • A decrease in the number of young people out of work
  • SATS results

 

Reference was also made to the results of the Peer Review and the highly commended rating that had been received by the Council for best Council in the Country.

 

The Leader stated that people cared that the Town’s streets were clean and that the bins were emptied - £141m had been taken out of budget but the Council was more efficient now than it had been previously; cuts have had to be made but Councillor McMahon posed the question as to how the Council would meet the challenges that lay ahead?

 

The Council’s books were in order and the financial position was very solid. As a Council ambition gets stronger every year. The Leader stated that he did not have a rose tinted view of what Oldham had been like in the past and that he believed that Oldham’s future was very positive indeed.

 

The basic services which the Council provided, for example Highways, were what mattered, pavements and roads affected everybody – this is what people complained about and with the investments made the Council was getting the main infrastructure right; Tax payers deserved a better deal.

Every main road in Oldham would now be repaired and there would be a 24 hour promise in place, the resources would be there to make this happen.

 

Tribute was paid to Officers in the Highways Team with particular reference to officers who had worked hard to make £14M available for the highways programme.

 

People had noticed what Oldham Council had achieved; the Department for Transport had noticed this and, as a result, Government Ministers had visited Oldham; and this in turn had resulted in the Authority being given more money than any other authority in Greater Manchester.

 

Mention was made of the fact that ITV’s John Stapleton had visited the town recently and had accompanied the pothole workers who had demonstrated how roads were repaired in Oldham.

15,000 potholes were repaired each year and 130 rapid response requests dealt with each month with 14 tons of tarmac being used each day and the Council’s £14m would be critical to that.

 

Tribute was also paid to the Street Cleaning Team, the frontline staff who had cleaned 100,000 miles of streets, moved 4,000 tons of rubbish and had dealt with 5,700 incidents of fly tipping last year.

 

The Leader stated that  ...  view the full minutes text for item 8.

9.

Outstanding Business from the previous meeting

(time limit 15 minutes).

 

Councillor Heffernan to MOVE and Councillor Murphy to SECOND:

This Council notes:

  • Its statutory duty under Section 23 of the 1908 Small Holdings and Allotments Act to provide allotments to the residents of this borough.
  • That the promotion of small scale food production on allotments has public health, community cohesion and environmental benefits.
  • That there is an increasing demand for allotments from residents of this borough and that in many areas there are significant waiting lists.
  • The current ongoing review of the use of Council’s assets in the borough

Given that it is recognised that the protection of existing allotments and the expansion of provision is desirable, this Council therefore resolves to:

  • Seek ‘statutory’ status for current and future allotments that it manages under Section 8 of the Allotments Act 1925. (Statutory status gives a further safeguard that the local authority must seek permission from the Secretary of State before selling or changing the use of a ‘statutory’ site)
  • Seek to identify, in conjunction with district partnerships, parish councils and local allotment societies, suitable sites in the Council’s ownership that have the potential to be developed into allotments as part of the district asset review, and identify sources of funding to make this a reality
  • Promote the virtues of allotments during National Allotments Week (4th – 10th August 2014)

Minutes:

The Mayor informed the meeting that there was one item of Outstanding Business from the last Council meeting.

 

“MOTION 2

 

Councillor Heffernan MOVED and Councillor Murphy SECONDED the following Motion:

 

This Council notes:

 

  • Its statutory duty under Section 23 of the 1908 Small Holdings and Allotments Act to provide allotments to the residents of this borough
  • That the promotion of small scale food production on allotments has public health, community cohesion and environmental benefits
  • That there is an increasing demand for allotments from residents of this borough and that in many areas there are significant waiting lists
  • The current ongoing review of the use of Council’s assets in the borough

 

Given that it is recognised that the protection of existing allotments and the expansion of provision is desirable, this Council therefore resolves to:

 

  • Seek ‘statutory’ status for current and future allotments that it manages under Section 8 of the Allotments Act 1925. (Statutory status gives a further safeguard that the local authority must seek permission from the Secretary of State before selling or changing the use of a ‘statutory’ site)

 

  • Seek to identify, in conjunction with district partnerships, parish councils and local allotment societies, suitable sites in the Council’s ownership that have the potential to be developed into allotments as part of the district asset review, and identify sources of funding to make this a reality

 

  • Promote the virtues of allotments during National Allotments Week (4th – 10th August 2014)”

 

Councillor Heffernan requested that the final paragraph be omitted as the dates were no longer relevant.

 

AMENDMENT

 

Councillor Wrigglesworth MOVED and Councillor Jabbar SECONDED the following amendment:

 

 “Delete - Seek statutory status for current and future allotments that it manages under section 8 of the Allotments Act 1925. (Statutory status gives a further safeguard that the local authority must seek permission from the Secretary of State before selling or changing the use of the statutory site.)

 

The Motion will then read:

 

This Council notes:

 

  • Its statutory duty under Section 23 of the 1908 Small Holdings and Allotments Act to provide allotments to the residents of this borough.
  • That the promotion of small scale food production on allotments has public health, community cohesion and environmental benefits.
  • That there is an increasing demand for allotments from residents of this borough and that in many areas there are significant waiting lists.
  • The current ongoing review of the use of Council’s assets in the borough

 

Given that it is recognised that the protection of existing allotments and the expansion of provision is desirable, this Council therefore resolves to:

 

·        Seek to identify, in conjunction with district partnerships, parish councils and local allotment societies, suitable sites in the Council’s ownership that have the potential to be developed into allotments as part of the district asset review, and identify sources of funding to make this a reality.”

 

Councillor Heffernan exercised his right of reply.

Councillor Wrigglesworth exercised her right of reply.

 

A vote was then taken on the AMENDMENT.

 

On being put  ...  view the full minutes text for item 9.

10.

Youth Council

(time limit 20 minutes)

Minutes:

The Mayor advised the meeting that no Youth Council business had been received.

11.

Leader and Cabinet Question Time

(time limit 30 minutes – maximum of 2 minutes per question and 2 minutes per response)

Minutes:

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

 

Question 1 – Rotherham and Child Protection

 

My first question this evening concerns the tragic details revealed in a recent Independent Report commissioned by Rotherham Council about the failure of Children’s Services and other agencies in the Local Authority area to address child sexual exploitation over many years.

 

Professor Alexis Jay’s Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Exploitation in Rotherham covering the period 1997 to 2013 found there was a lack of scrutiny and challenge; a chronic failure of senior councillors, staff members and police officers to engage with the problem; and an inability of both councillors and the Local Safeguarding Board to monitor and challenge practices within the Council.

 

Whilst the Report focusses only on the failures of the agencies in Rotherham, previous cases show that these problems are not exclusive to one area and that every Local Authority needs to learn lessons from this report to ensure that its own services conform to best practice.

 

The Leader will recall that, immediately following the publication of Professor Jay’s Report, I wrote to both the Chief Executive and himself seeking reassurance that Oldham Council will be conducting its own review in light of the findings.  I am pleased that the prompt response contained such an assurance.

 

This is not an issue from which to make political capital so I want now to state for the record that the Liberal Democrat Group will be fully supportive of such a Review.

 

But for the information of all Councillors in this Chamber, and concerned citizens who are listening or watching these proceedings tonight, I would like to ask the Leader when and how the Council will be conducting this Review, and when we might expect to receive the findings?

 

Councillor McMahon, Leader of the Council, responded stating that this was a very traumatic issue relating to the failures of Rotherham Council and the Police and he considered it to be a severe let down to victims in that community. There was no doubt that Rotherham Council had failed and needed to be held to account but people would always ask what does it mean for our Town?

 

A request was put before Council that in accordance with paragraph 8.4 (l) of the Council’s Rules of Procedure the time limit for this item be extended to enable a full response to be given to this question and enable the Leader to explain about the form of Child Sexual Exploitation that had taken place.

It was RESOLVED that, in accordance with paragraph 8.4 (l) of the Council’s Rules of Procedure the time limit for this item be extended to enable a full response to be given to this question.

 

The Leader advised that there were elements of the report which prompted Members to ask “how could this type of behaviour have been allowed to happen?”

“There was a criticism that the Council was fearful, complicit in hiding the abuse that  ...  view the full minutes text for item 11.

12.

To note the Minutes of the meetings of the Cabinet held on the undermentioned dates, including the attached list of urgent key decisions taken since the last meeting of the Council, and to receive any questions or observations on any items within the Minutes from Members of the Council who are not Members of the Cabinet, and receive responses from Cabinet Members pdf icon PDF 59 KB

(time limit 20 minutes):-

 

a)     30th June 2014

b)     21st July 2014

 

Additional documents:

Minutes:

The Cabinet Minutes for the Meetings held on 30th June 2014 and 21st July 2014 were submitted. The Mayor reminded the meeting that, as previously agreed by Council, the last eight minutes of this section would be reserved for observations on responses received and responses to observations.

 

Questions and observations were raised by the following Councillors on Cabinet Minutes, as detailed below:

 

Questions

 

1. Councillor Sykes – Cabinet Meeting – 21st July 2014 - page 44, Minute 11 – Contract Award: School Expansion at East Crompton St. George’s CE Primary School.

Councillor Sykes queried if there were any other proposals to extend the number of places in primary schools in the catchment area of Shaw.

 

Councillor McMahon informed the meeting that as the Cabinet Member, Councillor Chadderton, was not at the meeting to give a detailed response to the question he would ensure that a briefing note would be provided for all Members

 

2. Councillor McCann – Cabinet Meeting – 21st July 2014 – page 45 and 47, Minutes 13 and 19 – Hotel Future – National Hotel Training Academy.

Councillor McCann stated that he did not have a problem with an item being withdrawn from an agenda so that further information could be obtained, proper project management, evaluation and the finances could be further evaluated and put in place but he reiterated a suggestion which had been made by the Main Opposition that where large schemes, such as this had been delayed they should be reviewed and project managed very carefully. He had concerns around the viability of the project with particular reference to the financial package were they still in tact and was it still viable for Oldham, would it still have a beneficial effect on the town and not leave a white elephant. Councillor McCann asked for further explanation or confirmation that actually this would be a serious look at what would be a massive investment for this town.”

 

Councillor McMahon responded stating that the Council had a responsibility to both obtain value for money and also put forward a viable proposition. The Council were trying to achieve a refurbishment of the Queen Elizabeth Hall alongside the Hotel. This would be of financial benefit to the local economy but also act as a catalyst; it was a scheme which had been costed and which was currently going through a process of value engineering; the scheme had to be affordable and make commercial sense. The Leader informed the meeting that a report would be produced before Christmas which would set out all the available options.

 

3. Councillor Harkness – Cabinet Meeting – 21st July 2014 – page 42, Minute 7 – Proposed Consultation for the 2015/16 Council Tax Reduction Scheme.

Councillor Harkness welcomed the report on the Council Tax Reduction Team stating that this was a move in the right direction but noted that there was still no reference to the setting up of a Hardship Scheme as Stockport Council had introduced.  ...  view the full minutes text for item 12.

13.

Notice of Administration Business

(time limit 30 minutes)

 

Councillor Roberts to MOVE and Councillor Riaz to SECOND:

This Council is aware of the ongoing negotiations between the European Union (EU) and the United States of America (US) discussing the Transatlantic Trade and Agreement Partnership (TTIP).

 This Council notes with concern the implications in particular the proposal to establish the right of multinational organisations to sue nation states in a special court (The Investor State Dispute Settlement - ISDS). This could adversely affect Oldham residents in the following ways:

  1. Big businesses could sue the United Kingdom Government if it raises the minimum wage arguing that this would adversely affect the profits of multinationals
  2. US healthcare companies could sue the UK Government for restriction of trade if the government passes a law to put a stop to privatisation of NHS services - Labour has pledged to repeal the Health and Social care Act. In addition, the Council recognises that the privatisation of NHS services undermines the integration of services needed to reduce health inequalities in Oldham and potentially threatens the incomes and working conditions of NHS employees

The Council also notes that Germany has taken a stand against businesses being able to sue national governments and France managed to get some areas excluded from TTIP.

 The Council resolves to:

Instruct the Chief Executive to write to Vince Cable, Secretary of State for Business Innovation and Skills, to ask him to join Germany in seeking to exclude national governments from being sued using ISDS and to secure the exemption of the NHS from the scope of TTIP.

Also to write to Debbie Abrahams MP, David Heyes, MP and Michael Meacher MP to ask them to support the motion and to use any other parliamentary means available to achieve the same outcomes.

 

Minutes:

Motion 1

 

Councillor Roberts MOVED and Councillor Ahmad SECONDED the following motion:

 

“This Council is aware of the ongoing negotiations between the European Union (EU) and the United States of America (US) discussing the Transatlantic Trade and Agreement Partnership (TTIP).

 

This Council notes with concern the implications in particular the proposal to establish the right of multinational organisations to sue nation states in a special court (The Investor State Dispute Settlement - ISDS). This could adversely affect Oldham residents in the following ways:

Big businesses could sue the United Kingdom Government if it raises the minimum wage arguing that this would adversely affect the profits of multinationals

US healthcare companies could sue the UK Government for restriction of trade if the government passes a law to put a stop to privatisation of NHS services - Labour has pledged to repeal the Health and Social care Act. In addition, the Council recognises that the privatisation of NHS services undermines the integration of services needed to reduce health inequalities in Oldham and potentially threatens the incomes and working conditions of NHS employees

The Council also notes that Germany has taken a stand against businesses being able to sue national governments and France managed to get some areas excluded from TTIP.

 

The Council resolves to:

Instruct the Chief Executive to write to Vince Cable, Secretary of State for Business Innovation and Skills, to ask him to join Germany in seeking to exclude national governments from being sued using ISDS and to secure the exemption of the NHS from the scope of TTIP.

 

Also to write to Debbie Abrahams MP, David Heyes, MP and Michael Meacher MP to ask them to support the motion and to use any other parliamentary means available to achieve the same outcomes.”

 

Councillor Chauhan spoke in support of the motion.

Councillor  Jabbar spoke in support of the motion.

Councillor  Sykes spoke in support of the motion.

Councillor  Hudson spoke on the motion.

Councillor  Heffernan spoke in support of the motion.

Councillor  Klonowski spoke in support of the motion.

 

Councillor Roberts MOVED an AMENDMENT from the floor indicating that the third line of the first paragraph should read “Transatlantic Trade Investment Partnership (TTIP)” and not “Transatlantic Trade and Agreement Partnership (TTIP)”.

 

Councillor Roberts exercised her right of reply.

 

On being put to the vote FIFTY FIVE votes were cast IN FAVOUR of the MOTION as amended with NO votes cast AGAINST and TWO ABSTENTIONS. The MOTION was therefore CARRIED.

 

RESOLVED that:

 

1. The Chief Executive be instructed to write to Vince Cable, Secretary of State for Business Innovation and Skills, to ask him to join Germany in seeking to exclude national governments from being sued using ISDS and to secure the exemption of the NHS from the scope of TTIP.

 

2. The Chief Executive be instructed to write to Debbie Abrahams MP, David Heyes, MP and Michael Meacher MP to ask them to support the motion and to use any other parliamentary means available to achieve the same outcomes.”  ...  view the full minutes text for item 13.

14.

Notice of Opposition Business

(time limit 30 minutes)

 

Motion 1

 

Councillor Dillon to MOVE and Councillor Sedgwick to SECOND:

 This Council notes that:

·        Nuisance telemarketing calls are an annoyance and irritation to many, but for the elderly and the vulnerable, these calls can be a source of considerable stress and fear to the residents of our borough

·        They also represent an opportunity for ‘boiler rooms’ to ‘scam’ recipients of significant sums of money

·        Ofcom (The Office of Communications) estimates that over 1 billion nuisance telephone calls are made every year.

·        In late 2013, the ICO (Information Commissioners Office) reported that it had received 240,000 complaints about nuisance calls since March 2012, which equates to 2000 complaints from Oldham Borough

·        The regulatory system is over complicated, deterring complaints by the public

·        It is often difficult to secure prosecutions as consent to receive calls is often given by consumers who have failed to ‘opt out’  from communications or is sourced from  lead generators who obtain ‘blanket consent’ and then ‘sell on’ their mailing lists

This Council welcomes the recent work in Parliament on this issue and the publication of action plans by the Department of Culture, Media and Sport and the regulators.

This Council calls on the Government to introduce legislation and regulation to:

·        Streamline and strengthen the regulatory framework

·        Require consumers to ‘opt in’ to consent and abolish the use of blanket consent

·        Publish the names of companies under investigation and those prosecuted

·        Lower the threshold for prosecutions under the Privacy and Electronic Communications (EC Directive) Regulations to include calls causing “nuisance, annoyance and inconvenience, or anxiety”

·        Make caller identification and call blocking equipment available free with training and support to elderly and vulnerable people, paid for by fines and an industry levy

·        Oblige telecoms companies, particularly landline providers, to provide caller ID and blocking services free to consumers

This Council therefore resolves to ask the Chief Executive to write to:

·        The Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport and the Joint Chairs of the All Party Parliamentary Committee on Nuisance Calls outlining the Council’s position

·        The borough’s three MPs asking them to make representations to Government Ministers in support of the Council’s position

                       

 

 

 

Motion 2

Councillor Williamson to MOVE and Councillor Blyth to SECOND

This Council notes:

·        That supermarkets pay no VAT on food whereas pubs, cafes and restaurants are obliged to pay the full 20%

·        This means that the costs avoided by supermarkets can be used to reduce the price of alcoholic products

·        This has led to a rise in domestic alcohol consumption, as well as placing further financial pressures on the licensed trade

·        That in France a reduction in VAT to 5% is estimated to have led to the creation of 225,000 jobs in the catering and licensed trades in the first year alone.

This Council welcomes:

·        The actions of family brewers and restaurant and pub chains in challenging this inequality by hosting the second annual Tax Equality Day on 24th September 2014. They are reducing prices for  ...  view the full agenda text for item 14.

Minutes:

Motion 1

 

Councillor Dillon MOVED and Councillor Sedgwick SECONDED the following motion:

 

“This Council notes that:

 

Nuisance telemarketing calls are an annoyance and irritation to many, but for the elderly and the vulnerable, these calls can be a source of considerable stress and fear to the residents of our borough.

They also represent an opportunity for ‘boiler rooms’ to ‘scam’ recipients of significant sums of money

Ofcom (The Office of Communications) estimates that over 1 billion nuisance telephone calls are made every year.

In late 2013, the ICO (Information Commissioners Office) reported that it had received 240,000 complaints about nuisance calls since March 2012, which equates to 2000 complaints from Oldham Borough

The regulatory system is over complicated, deterring complaints by the public

It is often difficult to secure prosecutions as consent to receive calls is often given by consumers who have failed to ‘opt out’  from communications or is sourced from lead generators who obtain ‘blanket consent’ and then ‘sell on’ their mailing lists

This Council welcomes the recent work in Parliament on this issue and the publication of action plans by the Department of Culture, Media and Sport and the regulators.

This Council calls on the Government to introduce legislation and regulation to:

Streamline and strengthen the regulatory framework

Require consumers to ‘opt in’ to consent and abolish the use of blanket consent

Publish the names of companies under investigation and those prosecuted

Lower the threshold for prosecutions under the Privacy and Electronic Communications (EC Directive) Regulations to include calls causing “nuisance, annoyance and inconvenience, or anxiety”

Make caller identification and call blocking equipment available free with training and support to elderly and vulnerable people, paid for by fines and an industry levy

Oblige telecoms companies, particularly landline providers, to provide caller ID and blocking services free to consumers

 

This Council therefore resolves to ask the Chief Executive to write to:

 

The Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport and the Joint Chairs of the All Party Parliamentary Committee on Nuisance Calls outlining the Council’s position

The Borough’s three MPs asking them to make representations to Government         Ministers in support of the Council’s position.”

No Members spoke on the Motion, Councillor Dillon exercised his right of reply and Council moved straight to the vote.

 

On being put to the vote the MOTION was CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.

 

RESOLVED that:

 

1. The Chief Executive be asked to write to the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport and the Joint Chairs of the All Party Parliamentary Committee on Nuisance Calls outlining the Council’s position

2. The Chief Executive be asked to write to the Borough’s three MPs asking them to make representations to Government   Ministers in support of the Council’s position.”

 

Motion 2

 

The Mayor informed the meeting that the Chief Executive had had notice that Councillor Blyth would be unable to second this Motion and had nominated Councillor McCann to take his place.

 

Councillor Williamson MOVED and Councillor McCann SECONDED the following Motion:

 

“This Council notes:

 

That  ...  view the full minutes text for item 14.

15a

To note the Minutes of the following Joint Authority meetings and the relevant spokespersons to respond to questions from Members pdf icon PDF 145 KB

(time limit 8 minutes):-

 

Greater Manchester Waste Disposal Authority

 

 

21st March 2014

Association of Greater Manchester Authorities Executive

 

27th June 2014 (AGM)

27th June 2014

25th July 2014

 

Greater Manchester Combined Authority

 

 

Joint AGMA Greater Manchester Combined Authority

 

27th June 2014 (AGM)

27th June 2014

25th July 2014

 

 

27th June 2014

Transport for Greater Manchester

 

20th June 2014 (AGM)

Police and Crime Panel

27th June 2014 (AGM)

 

 

Additional documents:

Minutes:

The Mayor reminded the meeting that, following agreement by Council, this section would be split into two sections. The first, to consider Joint Authority Minutes and the second to consider Partnership Minutes.

 

Minutes of the Joint Authorities were submitted as follows:

 

Greater Manchester Waste Disposal

Authority                                                                                 21st March 2014

 

Association of Greater Manchester                                    27th June 2014 (AGM)

Authorities Executive                                                            27th June 2014

                                                                                                25th July 2014

 

Greater Manchester Combined Authority                          27th June 2014 (AGM)

                                                                                                27th June 2014

                                                                                                25th July 2014

 

Joint AGMA Greater Manchester

Combined Authority                                                              27th June 2014

 

Transport for Greater Manchester                                       20th June 2014 (AGM)

                                                                                                20th June 2014

 

Police and Crime Panel                                                       27th June 2014 (AGM)

 

The following question, advance notice of which had been given, was raised by Councillor Dillon in relation to the Minutes of the Greater Manchester Waste Disposal Authority:

 

In view of the fires at the Waste Disposal Authority’s recycling plant operated by Viridor Laing in Bredbury and the private recycling plant in Salford. Could the spokesperson for the Waste Disposal Authority advise whether there are any regulations under this action plan or already existing to reduce the risk of fire in the private recycling plants, and what actions have the Waste Disposal Authority taken in the Action Plan referred to in this minute to reduce the risk of fire in the recycling plants owned by the Authority  and operated by Viridor Laing.”

 

Councillor Dean advised that the fires referred to by Councillor Dillon were at two privately owned waste management facilities in Bredbury and Salford. The fire at the Bredbury site was on a neighbouring property to the GMWDA facility at Bredbury and these privately owned facilities are regulated by the local planning authority, Environment Agency and Greater Manchester Fire and Rescue Service.

 

The GMWDA waste treatment facilities at Salford are operated by Viridor Laing (Greater Manchester) Ltd and these facilities have fire detection and suppression systems installed which are regularly tested and maintained.

The situation in both cases was soon brought under control and both sites operated to the regulations that had been imposed on them.

RESOLVED that:

1. The Minutes of the Joint Authorities as detailed in the report be noted.

2. The question raised and response given be noted.

 

15b

To note the Minutes of the following Partnership meetings and the relevant spokespersons to respond to questions from Members pdf icon PDF 253 KB

(time limit 7 minutes)

 

Oldham Leadership Board

 

23rd July 2014

 

Minutes:

Minutes of the Partnership Meetings were submitted as follows:

 

Oldham Leadership Board                                                              23rd July 2014

 

No questions or observations were raised on these Minutes.

 

RESOLVED that the Minutes of the Oldham Leadership Board held on 23rd July 2014 be noted.

16.

Pay Policy Statement Update pdf icon PDF 75 KB

Minutes:

Consideration was given to a report of Councillor Jabbar, Cabinet Member for Finance and Human Resources which reminded Members of the approval by Council in February 2014 of the Council’s Pay Policy. Members were also reminded that on 26th June 2014 Selection Committee had confirmed the assimilation of two existing Executive Directors to manage two of four revised Executive portfolios and approval was now sought for the salary range attached to the two vacant Executive Director positions prior to recruitment.

 

RESOLVED that:

 

  1. The remuneration range for the two vacant posts of Executive Director at £120,000 - £138,000, which is unchanged from 2012/13 and the existing Pay Policy Statement for the current year, be approved.
  2. The revisions to the 2014/15 Pay Policy Statement be approved and the amendment to the Executive Director designations that will appear on the list of all chief officer posts with salaries over £100,000 as detailed in section 4 of the report, be noted.

17.

Treasury Management Review 2013/14 pdf icon PDF 221 KB

Minutes:

Consideration was given to a report of Councillor Jabbar, Cabinet Member for Finance and Human Resources which reviewed treasury management activities compared to the actual prudential and treasury indicators for 2013/14.

 

RESOLVED that:

 

  1. The actual 2013/14 prudential and treasury indicators as detailed in the report be approved.
  2. The annual treasury management report for 2013/14 be approved.

18.

Independent Remuneration Panel Recommendation

Minutes:

Consideration was given to a report of the Borough Solicitor which requested Members to consider the recommendation of the Independent Remuneration Panel in relation to the Chair of Unity Partnership.

 

RESOLVED that the allowance for the position of the Chair of Unity Partnership be fixed at 30% of the Leader’s allowance.

19.

Appointment of a New Independent Person under the Localism Act and Independent Members on the Remuneration Panel

Minutes:

Consideration was given to a report of the Borough Solicitor informing Members that there had been a recent vacancy for an Independent Person to serve on the Standards Committee. It had also been necessary to review the composition of the Independent Remuneration Panel due to the fact that two of the Panel Members had indicated that they no longer wished to continue beyond their current term. Details of the interview process and the outcomes were outlined in the report.

 

RESOLVED that:

 

1. The number of Independent Persons on the Standards Committee be increased from three to four.

2. Charles Bourne and Ghazala Koosar be appointed to serve as Independent Persons on the Standards Committee for a period of 3 years.

3. Karen Williams and David Willcock be appointed to serve as Independent Members on the Independent Remuneration Panel for a period of 3 years.

4. In order to ensure continuity in the reviews undertaken by the Independent Remuneration Panel an extension of 3 years be given to the remaining members, Peter Claber and John Barlow.

20.

Update on Actions from Council pdf icon PDF 92 KB

Additional documents:

Minutes:

Consideration was given to a report of the Borough Solicitor informing Members of actions that had been taken following previous Council meetings and providing feedback on other issues raised at the meeting.

 

RESOLVED that the report be noted.