Agenda and minutes

Apologies for absence were received from Councillors Chauhan, Ghafoor and Kenyon.

To order that the Minutes of the Extraordinary Council meeting held on 21^st May 2025 and of the Annual Meeting of the Council held on 21^st May 2025, be signed by the Mayor as correct records.

RESOLVED:

That the Minutes of the meetings of the Council held on 21^st May 2025 (Extraordinary Meeting and Annual Meeting), be approved as correct records.

There were no declarations of interests.

The Mayor advised that item 16 (Member’s Allowances Scheme 2025/26) had been withdrawn from the agenda and would be considered at a future meeting.

The Mayor reported that the timings for the Motions to be considered at item 11 (Notice of Opposition Business) be allocated as follows: Liberal Democrat Group’s Motion – 10 minutes, Oldham Group’s Motion - 10 minutes and the Conservative Group’s Motion – 10 minutes.

(time limit 20 minutes)

There are no Petitions for this Council meeting to consider.

There were no petitions for this meeting of the Council to consider.

(time limit 20 minutes)

There is no Youth Council business for this Council meeting to consider.

There was no Youth Council business for this meeting of the Council to consider.

(time limit 15 Minutes)

1.    Question from Roger Blackmore

Will Oldham Council’s plans for the former Saddleworth School site include space for social housing and genuinely affordable housing? This site is still waiting to be developed and its position close to the centre of Uppermill could provide a significant contribution to local housing needs. Residents in Saddleworth, especially young people, find it increasingly hard to find genuinely affordable homes. Will Saddleworth be receiving a reasonable share of the 500 social homes the Council is aiming to deliver in the next five years as part of the Housing Delivery Action Plan? 

Councillor Shah, Leader of the Council and Cabinet Member of Growth replied, thanking Mr Blackmore for his question, adding that whilst full demolition and a number of site surveys have now been completed on the former Saddleworth School site, there are certain property issues that are still being worked through before the site can be taken forward for disposal.   

The site does however remain allocated for residential development, and as the property matters are resolved, specific plans with regards to the exact number or type of new homes to be delivered will be drawn up.   

I can however assure you that this will include a significant proportion of affordable and social homes, as well as all properties being low carbon housing, thereby supporting the borough's pioneering Green New Deal, with all new homes on Council sites being built to the government’s Future Homes Standards on sustainability.   

This is a very important site for Saddleworth, given how little land there is under Council control that’s suitable for housing in this part of the borough, and we will therefore do all that we can to ensure that we get the right type of housing that benefits as many local residents as possible.

2.    Question from Magd Sachs

Six months ago Oldham Council committed itself to ensuring ethical investment by the Greater Manchester Pension Fund. 

With reference to investment in fossil fuels, the urgency of action, in view of the increasing intensity of climate breakdown, is clear.  

What update can you provide on the creation a plan for stepping up divestment in fossil fuel companies, and also on ensuring transparency on the investment decisions taken by the Fund?  

Who is taking the lead on the actions in the motion? 

Can you provide a timetable of actions taken and planned? 

Councillor Jabbar, Deputy Leader and Cabinet Member for Finance, Corporate Services and Sustainability replied thanking Magda for the question, adding that we all recognise that the climate emergency is one of the biggest challenges facing our times and everyone has a responsibility to do their part.  

The Greater Manchester Pension Fund does invest in companies such as Shell and BP as part of its commitment to ensure the best return for members of the scheme. The Fund does recognise the need to ensure that it balances sound investment with an ethical approach and has committed to net zero by 2050. We can all  ...  view the full minutes text for item 8.

(time limit 90 minutes)

a.    Leader of the Council and Cabinet Member for Growth – including the Minutes of the meeting of the Cabinet held 24^th March 2025 and 7^th April 2025; the minutes of meetings of the Greater Manchester Combined Authority held 28^th March 2025 and 30^th May 2025; and the minutes of the meetings of the AGMA Executive Board held 28^th March 2025.

b.    Statutory Deputy Leader and Neighbourhoods Portfolio Holder

c.    Deputy Leader and Finance, Corporate Services and Sustainability Portfolio Holder

d.    Children and Young People’s Portfolio Holder

e.    Adults, Health and Wellbeing Portfolio Holder

f.     Education and Skills Portfolio Holder

g.    Culture and Leisure Portfolio Holder

h.    Enterprise Portfolio Holder

i.      Transport and Highways Portfolio Holder

In respect of this agenda item Councillor Woodvine MOVED and Councillor Lancaster SECONDED that Council Procedure Rule Part 4a, section 2.1.3 be suspended, to permit Councillor Woodvine to ask a question to the Leader of the Council, if time runs out on this item. On being put to the vote, the Motion was LOST.

The Mayor invited the Leader of the Council and Cabinet Members to present their reports and further invited non-executive members to ask questions thereon, as follows:

a.    Councillor Shah, Leader and Building a Better Oldham Portfolio Councillor Shah presented her report, including the Minutes of the meetings of the Cabinet held 24^th March 2025 and 7^th April 2025, the Minutes of the meetings of the Greater Manchester Combined Authority held 28^th March 2025 and 30^th May 2025 and the minutes of the meeting of the AGMA Executive Board held 28^th March 2025.

Councillor Wahid, Deputy Leader of the Oldham Group

Question 1: Genocide by Israel in Gaza

Councillor Wahid refers to what he describes as the ongoing genocide of the Palestinian people, by Israeli forces, in Gaza. The Oldham Group have, he adds, consistently displayed solidarity with the citizens of Gaza, since the beginning of the conflict in October 2023, whereas Labour have remained quiet. He asked if the Leader of the Council will acknowledge that actions taken by Israeli forces amount to genocide and will she lobby the United Kingdom’s government to do the same. In the same vein, Councillor Wahid, asks if the leader will lobby the government to ensure that British citizens who have participated in the genocide, by Israeli forces, are prosecuted under International Law.

Councillor Shah, in replying to Councillor Wahid acknowledged that his question did not relate to the contents of the report that she presented to this Council meeting, included in the agenda pack for this meeting. Councillor Shah stated her heartfelt sorrow for the suffering of the Palestinian people in Gaza but refused to allow Oldham Council to politicise this issue.

Question 2:

Survivors and family member of survivors welcome the U-turn by the Government to initiate a national enquiry into Child Sexual Exploitation. Councillor Wahid refers to earlier meetings of the Council’s Child Sexual Exploitation Steering Group where, he stated, that Councillor Shah had said that people calling for a National Enquiry were jumping on a bandwagon and also described campaigning on this issue as fashionable. Does, Councillor Wahid asked, Councillor Shah regret making those remarks and will she take the opportunity to apologise for making them?

Councillor Shah replied, that the issues referred to by Councillor Wahid were raised in a private meeting of the Council’s Council’s Child Sexual Exploitation Steering Group, which was attended by leaders of the Council’s political groups. The information that Councilor Wahid has included in his question should not have been addressed in a public forum, it the way that it was, without context and which mispresents the discussions that were held in that meeting.  ...  view the full minutes text for item 9.

(time limit 30 minutes)

(Motion 1 is being hosted by the Adminstration)

Motion 1: Article 4(1) direction on small HMOs

To be Moved by: Councillor Hince
to be Seconded by: Councillor Hindle

Residents are rightly concerned with the number of Houses of Multiple Occupancy (HMO’s) which are currently being introduced across the borough.

We have always believed HMOs are a symptom of the housing crisis and not a solution. In some cases, exploiting some of the most vulnerable people within our community through substandard and unsafe accommodation.

Whilst it is not possible to prevent full planning applications from being submitted, we can act to close the loophole that allows for permitted development rights for Houses in Multiple Occupation (HMOs) where between three and six unrelated people share basic amenities, such as a kitchen or bathroom.

Oldham Council currently permits, without the need for planning permission under ‘permitted development rights’, the change of use of a typical dwelling house occupied by a single household in use class C3, to a property used as a ‘small’ HMO that is shared by between three and six unrelated people in use class C4.

The Council can, however, adopt an Article 4 Direction to remove these permitted development rights. This will require a planning application to be submitted for change of use from class C3 to C4. This means due process will be applied giving residents a say in what happens in their communities.

We had hoped the government would introduce new legislation to make HMO developers more accountable and give residents a greater say by making it mandatory for small HMO developers to be licensed with the local authority.

In addition, the government has stated it is committed to removing all asylum applicants (approximately thirty thousand) from temporary hotel accommodation. We believe this action will inevitably mean further demand for HMOs.

We acknowledge and accept that the implementation of Article 4 borough wide will have a significant impact on available resources particularly the Planning Department. Therefore, to enable the council to gear up to meet requirements, the Civil Parish of Shaw & Crompton and Failsworth are to be prioritised with the implementation of Article 4. With Article 4 being extended to the rest of the borough no later than twelve months thereafter.

This Council resolves to:

1. As soon as possible, Cabinet to consider and make a direction pursuant to Article 4(1) of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 2015 on a borough wide basis prioritising the Civil Parish of Shaw & Crompton and Failsworth. Withdrawing the permitted development rights to convert a dwellinghouse (C3) to a House in Multiple Occupation (C4) is appropriate, and justified, to prevent harm to local amenity and promote the wellbeing of the aforementioned areas.

2.    To delegate authority to OMBC Planning Department to carry out all necessary consultation and to notify the Secretary of State in accordance with statutory requirements.

3.    That, the Shaw & Crompton Civil Parish and Failsworth wide Article 4(1) Direction will come into effect  ...  view the full agenda text for item 10.

Motion 1: Article 4(1) direction on small HMOs

Councillor Hince MOVED and Councillor Hindle SECONDED the following Motion:

Residents are rightly concerned with the number of Houses of Multiple Occupancy (HMO’s) which are currently being introduced across the borough.

We have always believed HMOs are a symptom of the housing crisis and not a solution. In some cases, exploiting some of the most vulnerable people within our community through substandard and unsafe accommodation.

Whilst it is not possible to prevent full planning applications from being submitted, we can act to close the loophole that allows for permitted development rights for Houses in Multiple Occupation (HMOs) where between three and six unrelated people share basic amenities, such as a kitchen or bathroom.

Oldham Council currently permits, without the need for planning permission under ‘permitted development rights’, the change of use of a typical dwelling house occupied by a single household in use class C3, to a property used as a ‘small’ HMO that is shared by between three and six unrelated people in use class C4.

The Council can, however, adopt an Article 4 Direction to remove these permitted development rights. This will require a planning application to be submitted for change of use from class C3 to C4. This means due process will be applied giving residents a say in what happens in their communities.

We had hoped the government would introduce new legislation to make HMO developers more accountable and give residents a greater say by making it mandatory for small HMO developers to be licensed with the local authority.

In addition, the government has stated it is committed to removing all asylum applicants (approximately thirty thousand) from temporary hotel accommodation. We believe this action will inevitably mean further demand for HMOs.

We acknowledge and accept that the implementation of Article 4 borough wide will have a significant impact on available resources particularly the Planning Department. Therefore, to enable the council to gear up to meet requirements, the Civil Parish of Shaw & Crompton and Failsworth are to be prioritised with the implementation of Article 4. With Article 4 being extended to the rest of the borough no later than twelve months thereafter.

This Council resolves to:

1. As soon as possible, Cabinet to consider and make a direction pursuant to Article 4(1) of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 2015 on a borough wide basis prioritising the Civil Parish of Shaw & Crompton and Failsworth. Withdrawing the permitted development rights to convert a dwellinghouse (C3) to a House in Multiple Occupation (C4) is appropriate, and justified, to prevent harm to local amenity and promote the wellbeing of the aforementioned areas.
2. To delegate authority to OMBC Planning Department to carry out all necessary consultation and to notify the Secretary of State in accordance with statutory requirements.
3. That, the Shaw & Crompton Civil Parish and Failsworth wide Article 4(1) Direction will come into effect once made.
4. To implement Article 4(1) Direction borough wide, no later than twelve months after coming into  ...  view the full minutes text for item 10.

(time limit 30 minutes)

Motion 1: Adult Neurodevelopmental Assessment and Support

To be Moved by: Councillor Bishop
To be Seconded by: Councillor Harkness

The council notes that:

There is currently no NHS provision for adults in Oldham who have a neurological condition such as Autism, ADHD or Dyspraxia, to access diagnostic or appropriate therapeutic support. There has been no statutory support offer for neurodivergent adults in Oldham for years, and the result has had severe repercussions for our mental health services, who see many presentations from people who fall into this category and have not been able to cope with their condition without therapeutic support and intervention. It has also meant additional pressure for their carers, parents or families who are left to pick up the pieces and try to manage as best they can, often with no training or support themselves.

Currently, Northern Care Alliance’s (NCA) Paediatric Services provide assessment and diagnosis for children aged 0-18 years, diagnosing and planning the care management for children with neuro-developmental concerns, neuro-disabilities or complex health needs. Once diagnosed, children and young people with neurodevelopmental conditions have historically had an annual appointment with a consultant paediatrician, who assesses their ongoing needs and in turn signposts them to additional therapeutic services where appropriate. However, once they turn 18, they are discharged and there is no transitional support nor an adult equivalent service and those adults who are undiagnosed have no access to an assessment pathway at all.

On the NHS own website, it states, ‘We know that with earlier, well-targeted community support, many admissions and long stays in mental health inpatient units could potentially be avoided.’ So, this situation is not just an ethical one, it is also a pragmatic and a fiscally prudent one. With recognition and support, we could reduce the costs associated with mental health burnout, breakdowns and crisis presentations, as well as the number of people experiencing extreme distress.

Autism and other neurodevelopmental conditions are not something which only affect children. In fact, recent research has suggested that as many as 90% of adults who have Autism are undiagnosed. Additionally, according to a study by Willis Towers Watson (WTW), nearly three-quarters (70 per cent) of neurodivergent employees experience mental health issues. Therefore, there is a real impact upon productivity, absence rates and wellbeing in the workforce and avoiding addressing it is only compounding the problem.

Currently, if an adult visits their GP to request an assessment, they are directed towards the Right to Choose option, which invites them to access private provision. The problem with this is that it provides barriers to accessing future NHS support and medication if necessary. In other words, it is not a choice, and many vulnerable people are being failed, and our mental health services and economy are suffering the consequences, as well as those individuals experiencing distress.

The council further notes that:

•      There is currently no diagnostic or therapeutic support pathway for adults with a neurodevelopmental condition in Oldham.

•  ...  view the full agenda text for item 11.

Motion 1: Adult Neurodevelopmental Assessment and Support

Councillor Bishop MOVED and Councillor Harkness SECONDED the following Motion:

The council notes that:

There is currently no NHS provision for adults in Oldham who have a neurological condition such as Autism, ADHD or Dyspraxia, to access diagnostic or appropriate therapeutic support. There has been no statutory support offer for neurodivergent adults in Oldham for years, and the result has had severe repercussions for our mental health services, who see many presentations from people who fall into this category and have not been able to cope with their condition without therapeutic support and intervention. It has also meant additional pressure for their carers, parents or families who are left to pick up the pieces and try to manage as best they can, often with no training or support themselves.

Currently, Northern Care Alliance’s (NCA) Paediatric Services provide assessment and diagnosis for children aged 0-18 years, diagnosing and planning the care management for children with neuro-developmental concerns, neuro-disabilities or complex health needs. Once diagnosed, children and young people with neurodevelopmental conditions have historically had an annual appointment with a consultant paediatrician, who assesses their ongoing needs and in turn signposts them to additional therapeutic services where appropriate. However, once they turn 18, they are discharged and there is no transitional support nor an adult equivalent service and those adults who are undiagnosed have no access to an assessment pathway at all.

On the NHS’s own website, it states, ‘We know that with earlier, well-targeted community support, many admissions and long stays in mental health inpatient units could potentially be avoided.’ So, this situation is not just an ethical one, it is also a pragmatic and a fiscally prudent one. With recognition and support, we could reduce the costs associated with mental health burnout, breakdowns and crisis presentations, as well as the number of people experiencing extreme distress.

Autism and other neurodevelopmental conditions are not something which only affect children. In fact, recent research has suggested that as many as 90% of adults who have Autism are undiagnosed. Additionally, according to a study by Willis Towers Watson (WTW), nearly three-quarters (70 per cent) of neurodivergent employees experience mental health issues. Therefore, there is a real impact upon productivity, absence rates and wellbeing in the workforce and avoiding addressing it is only compounding the problem.

Currently, if an adult visits their GP to request an assessment, they are directed towards the Right to Choose option, which invites them to access private provision. The problem with this is that it provides barriers to accessing future NHS support and medication if necessary. In other words, it is not a choice, and many vulnerable people are being failed, and our mental health services and economy are suffering the consequences, as well as those individuals experiencing distress.

The council further notes that:

•      There is currently no diagnostic or therapeutic support pathway for adults with a neurodevelopmental condition in Oldham.

•      The lack of such a service for  ...  view the full minutes text for item 11.

A report updating on actions from Motions approved at Council on 9^th April 2025.

Councillor Shah MOVED and Councillor Taylor SECONDED a report of the Interim Borough Solicitor which updated members on actions taken following the meeting of the Council held on 9^th April 2025 and also on any updated responses from meetings held in the last 12 months.

RESOLVED:

That the actions regarding motions and issues from the meeting of the Council held on 9^th April 2025, be noted and confirmed.

To seek approval from Council to agree to the principle of the making of a joint development plan document with the other 9 Greater Manchester councils.

Councillor Taylor MOVED and Councillor Shah SECONDED a report of the Executive Director of Place/Deputy Chief Executive that sought approval to agree to the principle of the making of a joint development plan document with the other nine Greater Manchester councils (Bolton, Bury, Manchester, Rochdale, Salford, Stockport, Tameside, Trafford and Wigan), to cover planning for minerals and waste across Greater Manchester.

The ten Greater Manchester Council leaders, at the Association of Greater Manchester Authorities (AGMA) Executive Board meeting on 28th March 2025, had agreed to the production of a statutory Greater Manchester Joint Minerals and Waste Plan (GMJMWP). 

The submitted report asked Council to consider the necessary steps required in relation to seeking approval from all the Greater Manchester districts to commence preparation and to delegate its preparation to the AGMA Executive Board. 

The existing Greater Manchester Minerals and Waste Plans required to be updated in full because they were out of date having been adopted over ten years ago. Their replacement with a single, joint minerals and waste plan would ensure efficient compliance with national planning policy.

1.    That Council agrees to the principle of the making of a joint development plan document with the other nine Greater Manchester councils (Bolton, Bury, Manchester, Rochdale, Salford, Stockport, Tameside, Trafford and Wigan), to cover planning for minerals and waste across Greater Manchester.

2.    That Council notes that the Cabinet will be asked to agree to a recommendation, to delegate the formulating and preparing of the draft joint development plan document to the AGMA Executive Board.

3.    That it is noted that there will be further reports to future meetings of the Council in respect of, matters, which are within the remit of the Council including adoption of the joint development plan document.

Council is asked to consider changes in relation to appointments to Committees for 2025/2026.

Councillor Jabbar MOVED and Councillor Shah SECONDED a report of the Interim Executive Director of Resources, which asked Members to consider changes in relation to appointments to Committees for 2025/2026, which were detailed at Appendix 1 of the submitted report.

The report advised Members that since the annual meeting of the Council, several changes had been proposed to appointments to Committees. These appointments did not affect the Council’s overall political balance.

RESOLVED:

1.    That the changes to the appointments to Committees, as set out in Appendix 1 to the submitted report, for the 2025/26 Municipal Year, be agreed.

2.    That the Chief Executive be granted delegated authority to make any in-year changes to appointments, where notified.

Council is asked to consider proposed updates to the pay policy statement and the organisational framework for the authority.

Councillor Shah MOVED and Councillor Jabbar SECONDED a report of the Chief Executive, which advised members that the Council’s corporate plan ‘Ready for the Future’ had established ambitions to drive change by focusing on three missions: healthier, happier places; great place to live; and green and growing. To turn the ambitions into reality, the Council needed to have appropriate organisational leaderships arrangements in place for it to deliver against the ambitions set out in the plan, but to also continue to deliver statutory services and priorities.

The Council’s Appointments Committee had met and considered revisions to the Council’s senior management team structure and the submitted report detailed recommendations from that Committee for Full Council’s consideration.

To ensure that the right organisational leadership arrangements were in place, in May 2025, the Council’s Appointments Committee met to consider changes to the Council’s senior management team structure. The structure proposed changes to some roles and to move to a senior management structure of four executive director roles comprising:

·            Executive Director of Place (Deputy Chief Executive).

·            Executive Director of Resources.

·            Executive Director of Health and Social Care (Deputy Chief Executive).

·            Executive Director of Children and Young People.

The Appointments Committee agreed to this structure and to commence recruitment to the vacant role of Executive Director of Resources role; together with recruitment to a number of other senior management team roles, some of which have interim arrangements in place.

In line with the Council’s Pay Policy Statement, Council is required to consider the case for any salary in excess of £100,000, prior to any appointment to the chief officer posts that it relates.  The salary package will be defined as basic salary, any performance related pay, fees, routinely payable allowances and benefits in kind, that are due under the contract. The roles of Director referred to in the submitted report were graded at Director level and would be appointed on a spot salary between £104,337 to £115,105 and the roles of Executive Director have been graded at Executive Director level and the vacant role would be appointed on a spot salary of £144,160.  The Appointments Committee approved a market supplement of up to £10,000 for the roles of Director of Growth and Director of Digital in light of a benchmarking exercise to attract the right candidates for the roles.

RESOLVED:

1.    That Council notes the decision of the Appointments Committee to move to a senior management structure of four executive directors.

2.    That Council notes that the Appointments Committee have redesignated the vacant role of Assistant Chief Executive to Executive Director of Resources.

3.    That Council notes that the Appointments Committee have approved the redesignation of the Director of Economy to the Director of Growth and approved the recruitment to this post, and should it be required, to apply a market supplement of up to £10,000.

4.    That Council notes that the Appointments Committee have renamed the Strategic Director of Children’s Services to the Executive Director of Children and Young People.

5.    That Council notes  ...  view the full minutes text for item 15.

Council is asked to consider the recommendations of the Independent Remuneration Panel. (Report to follow)

The Mayor advised that this item had been withdrawn from the agenda and would be considered at a future meeting.