(time limit 30 minutes)
Motion 1
Councillor Moores to MOVE and Councillor Roberts to SECOND:
This Council is aware that Market Street in Shaw has been hosting the weekly Shaw Market, on a trial basis since the 27th August 2015. During the period of the trial Council Officers have consulted with market traders, local businesses, market users and the wider public this information was then collated and a report prepared for a Licensing Panel scheduled for Monday 2nd November 2015.
This Council welcomes the success of the Shaw Market trial with its positive impact on both the market and surrounding area including the increased demand for stalls on the market, and an increase in footfall on Market Street.
The Council notes that TfGM, and OMBC Highways Department have reported that there has been no disruptive impact on traffic movements in the area.
This Council resolves to work with the businesses located on Market Street, the market traders and the local community in supporting and maintaining a market provision in Shaw that will benefit the local and wider community.
Motion 2
Councillor Chadderton to MOVE and Councillor S Bashforth to SECOND:
This Council notes with
disappointment the passing of the Trade Union Bill at its second
reading in parliament on 14 September 2015.
This Council believes that the Bill represents the most vicious
attack on Trade Unions in over 30 years by introducing measures
that will make it more difficult for employees to stand up for and
defend their rights at work.
Amongst other things the passing of the Bill will introduce:
• The removal of the ability of public sector employees to
have Trade Union subscriptions deducted from their salaries.
• A requirement for unions to notify police if they intend to
discuss a strike on social media.
• A requirement for police to be notified 14 days in advance
of a strike if striking workers intend to use placards or
loudspeakers on a picket line.
• The appointment of a ‘picket supervisor’ for
each picket who will be required to wear an armband and give their
name and contact details to the police and their employer.
• A minimum turnout threshold of 50% in ballots for strike
action.
This Council further notes that human rights groups Liberty,
Amnesty International and the British Institute of Human Rights
have all condemned the Bill as an attack on the basic right to
protest.
The Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development has branded
this law to be an 'outdated response that could have potentially
counterproductive consequences'.
In Oldham we recognise the importance of Trade Unions and the work
they do representing their members. We have a good track record in
employee relations such as collective agreement of single status
work. We recognise the importance of liaising with our Trade Unions
colleagues and of early engagement.
Council therefore resolves to:
• Ask the Chief Executive to write to the Secretary of State
for Business, Innovation and Skills, Sajid Javid MP on
behalf of the Council setting out our opposition to the Bill.
• Ask the Chief Executive to write on behalf of the Council to
our local MPs setting out our opposition to the Bill and requesting
that they use all means available during the Committee stage of the
Bill to prevent it from being enacted in its current
form.
Motion 3
Councillor Dearden to MOVE and Councillor Roberts to SECOND:
Oldham Council notes with concern the continuing conflicts in the Middle East and Africa which are driving the current refugee crisis, particularly people fleeing war and persecution from Syria, Afghanistan, Eritrea and Iraq. We welcome the Government’s commitment to provide asylum for 4,000 people this year from the Syrian refugee camps but believe that as a country the United Kingdom can do more. Oldham has provided sanctuary and a new start for traumatised refugees in the past and calls on the Government to support Oldham and other councils to do more now.
Oldham’s refugee community includes approximately 160 destitute asylum seekers currently supported by a network of community organisations, friends, family and volunteers. Their position will be made worse by proposed reductions in financial support, particularly for women and children.
The Council welcomes the work done by individuals, community groups and religious groups in supporting asylum seekers and asks the Cabinet Member for Neighbourhoods to convene a meeting of those supporting refugees and Asylum Seekers in Oldham with the aim of developing an ongoing network and provide support to make the best use of all the work done already in the borough
The Council supports the efforts by AGMA to get a proper support system in place, including reviewing the role played by SERCO in administering asylum seeker support.
Oldham Council calls on the Government to put in place a properly funded and fair system including: fair allocation of refugees across the UK; long term funding for Councils; quick and accurate decision making about the status of refugees; better effort to support and integrate refugees (e.g. providing English as a Second Language teaching and investment in conversion of qualifications to UK standard); better administration of welfare benefits and investment in public services where needed.
Council also resolves to instruct the Chief Executive to:
1. Write to the Local Government Association to enlist their support in improving support for Asylum Seekers
2. Write to the borough MPs to inform them of the council’s position and request that they use whatever parliamentary means available to raise this matter with government
Minutes:
Motion 1
Councillor Moores MOVED and Councillor Roberts SECONDED:
“This Council is aware that Market Street in Shaw has been hosting the weekly Shaw Market, on a trial basis since the 27th August 2015. During the period of the trial Council Officers have consulted with market traders, local businesses, market users and the wider public this information was then collated and a report prepared for a Licensing Panel scheduled for Monday 2nd November 2015.
This Council welcomes the success of the Shaw Market trial with its positive impact on both the market and surrounding area including the increased demand for stalls on the market, and an increase in footfall on Market Street.
The Council notes that TfGM, and OMBC Highways Department have reported that there has been no disruptive impact on traffic movements in the area.
This Council resolves to work with the businesses located on Market Street, the market traders and the local community in supporting and maintaining a market provision in Shaw that will benefit the local and wider community”.
AMENDMENT
Councillor Gloster MOVED and Councillor Sykes SECONDED
“Insert new second paragraph to follow ‘Monday 2nd November 2015’ as follows:
‘Council notes that local elected members are keen to work with the Administration and Council officers to find a solution that guarantees the continued viability of Shaw Market, and regrets the friction that has arisen from the Administration rejecting consultation on the option to redevelop and promote the market on its existing historic site (the so called ‘staying put’ position’).’
Insert in the now third paragraph after ‘Market Street’ a new sentence as follows:
‘Whilst Council welcomes the significant additional spend on free events, publicity, advertising, questionnaires and staff to promote the on-street market, it regrets that this same effort was not made previously to ensure the success of the Market on its historic site’.
The motion as amended to read:
This Council is aware that Market Street in Shaw has been hosting the weekly Shaw Market, on a trial basis since the 27th August 2015. During the period of the trial Council Officers have consulted with market traders, local businesses, market users and the wider public this information was then collated and a report prepared for a Licensing Panel scheduled for Monday 2nd November 2015.
Council notes that local elected members are keen to work with the Administration and Council officers to find a solution that guarantees the continued viability of Shaw Market, and regrets the friction that has arisen from the Administration rejecting consultation on the option to redevelop and promote the market on its existing historic site (the so called ‘staying put’ position’).
This Council welcomes the success of the Shaw Market trial with its positive impact on both the market and surrounding area including the increased demand for stalls on the market, and an increase in footfall on Market Street. Whilst Council welcomes the significant additional spend on free events, publicity, advertising, questionnaires and staff to promote the on-street market, it regrets that this same effort was not made previously to ensure the success of the Market on its historic site.
The Council notes that TfGM, and OMBC Highways Department have reported that there has been no disruptive impact on traffic movements in the area.
This Council resolves to work with the businesses located on Market Street, the market traders and the local community in supporting and maintaining a market provision in Shaw that will benefit the local and wider community”.
Councillors Gloster, Sykes, Bates, Blyth and Judge spoke on the amendment.
Councillor Moores did not exercise his right of reply.
Councillor Gloster exercised his right of reply.
On being put to the VOTE, THIRTEEN VOTES were cast IN FAVOUR of the AMENDMENT with FORTY FOUR VOTES cast AGAINST and NO ABSTENTIONS. The AMENDMENT was therefore LOST.
AMENDMENT 2
Councillor Williamson MOVED and Councillor Murphy SECONDED:
“Insert in paragraph 3 after ‘in the area’ a new sentence as follows:
‘However some residents and traders have reported traffic disruption and gridlock on market days’.
Insert after paragraph 4 new paragraphs as follows:
‘Council notes that in surveys feedback from local traders has been mixed. Whilst some welcome the on-street market, others, who are well-established traders, report significant reductions in takings and problems accessing their premises to make deliveries on market days.
Whilst ensuring the future of Shaw Market should be a priority for everyone, Council recognises that this must not be at the risk of jeopardising the viability of existing Market Street businesses.’
Motion as amended to read:
This Council is aware that Market Street in Shaw has been hosting the weekly Shaw Market, on a trial basis since the 27th August 2015. During the period of the trial Council Officers have consulted with market traders, local businesses, market users and the wider public this information was then collated and a report prepared for a Licensing Panel scheduled for Monday 2nd November 2015.
This Council welcomes the success of the Shaw Market trial with its positive impact on both the market and surrounding area including the increased demand for stalls on the market, and an increase in footfall on Market Street.
The Council notes that TfGM, and OMBC Highways Department have reported that there has been no disruptive impact on traffic movements in the area. However some residents and traders have reported traffic disruption and gridlock on market days.
Council notes that in surveys feedback from local traders has been mixed. Whilst some welcome the on-street market, others, who are well-established traders, report significant reductions in takings and problems accessing their premises to make deliveries on market days.
Whilst ensuring the future of Shaw Market should be a priority for everyone, Council recognises that this must not be at the risk of jeopardising the viability of existing Market Street businesses.
This Council resolves to work with the businesses located on Market Street, the market traders and the local community in supporting and maintaining a market provision in Shaw that will benefit the local and wider community.”
Councillor Williamson spoke in support of the amendment.
Councillor Wrigglesworth spoke against the amendment.
On being put to the VOTE, THIRTEEN VOTES were cast IN FAVOUR of the AMENDMENT with FORTY FOUR VOTES cast AGAINST and NO ABSTENTIONS. The AMENDMENT was therefore LOST.
A vote was then taken on the ORIGINAL MOTION. On being put to the VOTE, FORTY FOUR VOTES were cast IN FAVOUR of the MOTION, with NO VOTES cast against and THIRTEEN ABSTENTIONS. The MOTION was therefore CARRIED.
Motion 2
Motion 2 was carried over to the next meeting.
Motion 3
Motion 3 was carried over to the next meeting.