(time limit 30 minutes)
Motion 1
Councillor Sykes to MOVE and Councillor Murphy to SECOND:
This Council notes that:
· all councils are required by government to have a Local Plan which identifies land for housing, offices and industry;
· the proposed Greater Manchester Spatial Framework (GMSF) is one approach to fulfilling this requirement; however other local authorities have fulfilled this requirement by developing their own Local Plan;
· the GMSF is a twenty year plan, requiring a third more housing land to be identified than would be required by typical fifteen year Local Plans produced by many other local authorities, and is based upon pre-Brexit growth assumptions over such a long period, which cannot be verified;
· the GMSF proposals include significant releases of green-belt in the Borough of Oldham, particularly in Shaw, Crompton, Chadderton, Royton and Saddleworth;
Council further notes that:
· these early proposals were developed without sufficient involvement of residents or ward members;
· many residents and local politicians, particularly in Shaw, Crompton, Chadderton, Royton and Saddleworth, are strongly opposed to many of these proposals;
Council firmly believes that new housing development should first take place on brownfield or derelict sites, on sites with existing planning permission; and by converting long-term empty mills, shops and offices into homes; and that existing long-term empty homes should also be brought back into use, before any consideration is given to allocating green-belt or other protected open land for housing.
Consequently, Council condemns the current GMSF proposals as they fail to identify such sites that are available for development and are instead predicated upon developing new housing on green-belt land in the Borough of Oldham.
Council therefore resolves to:
1. Formally withdraw from the Greater Manchester Spatial Framework process and make arrangements to ensure that the GMSF does not apply to the Borough of Oldham;
2. Pursue Oldham’s own local plan. This should be a fifteen year Local Plan for the Borough which identifies that new housing development should first take place on brownfield or derelict sites, on sites with existing planning permission; and by converting long-term empty mills, shops and offices into homes; and that existing long-term empty homes should also be brought back into use, before any consideration is given to allocating green-belt or other protected open land for housing.
3. Make arrangements to comply with the duty to cooperate with other planning authorities;
4. Review existing development plan documents and build in a review process every five years.
Motion 2
Councillor McCann to MOVE and Councillor Blyth to SECOND:
Council recognises that:
· Bees and other pollinators play an essential role in the Earth’s ecosystem being vital for our food crops, gardens and countryside. Eighty percent of all crops reproduce as a result of the intervention of pollinators. The Government has estimated that this intervention is worth around £500 million to the UK food economy alone.
· The number of bees is in decline and some species have become extinct. Pollinator decline is attributed to a variety of factors including disease, climate change, loss of habitat, and the use of insecticides, such as neonicotinoids (or neonics).
· The use of herbicides containing glyphosate also poses a health hazard to humans.
Council recognises the value of establishing an action plan for the borough to help support bees and pollinators, and minimising the use of neonicotinoids and glyphosate on its land.
This Council resolves to:
· Cease the use of neonicotinoids and glyphosate on all land that it manages, with the exception where it is absolutely necessary in the control of Schedule 9 plants (under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981) or to protect Council assets.
· Establish a bees and pollinators action plan for the borough. Such a plan could include:
· Ask the Chief Executive to write to the Minister responsible calling on the Government to maintain the temporary ban on the use of neonicotinoids and to fund proper research into the hazards of neonicotinoids and glyphosate on human health and the environment.
Motion 3
Councillor Harkness to MOVE and Councillor Turner to SECOND:
Council notes that:
Council welcomes the work that has been carried out by its officers with colleagues at the Department of Work and Pensions, to:
· Build on the ‘minimum standards’ in DWP guidance by creating additional safeguards for vulnerable claimants in receipt of ESA in Oldham, based on a model successfully introduced in the London Borough of Greenwich.
· Create a Vulnerability Guide and process flow chart for DWP staff and advisors in front-line organisations, backed by bespoke training, so they can better support vulnerable benefit claimants
Council hopes that these measures will help reduce the incidence of sanctions in Oldham amongst this client group and looks forward to the expansion of the pilot project to vulnerable claimants in receipt of other benefits later in 2017.
Council resolves to work with DWP staff to:
· Promote the new safeguarding model to front-line Council staff and those of partners who support vulnerable claimants, as well as through local disability, employment and housing forums and the Action Together Poverty Agenda Group.
· Feature information on the new safeguards on the Council’s website and in future Council publications.
· Support the establishment of a local liaison group, with representation from DWP, work programme providers, and relevant local agencies to monitor the impact of safeguards.
Minutes:
Motion 1
Councillor Sykes MOVED and Councillor Murphy SECONDED the following motion:
“This Council notes that:
· All councils are required by government to have a Local Plan which identifies land for housing, offices and industry;
· The proposed Greater Manchester Spatial Framework (GMSF) is one approach to fulfilling this requirement; however other local authorities have fulfilled this requirement by developing their own Local Plan;
· The GMSF is a twenty year plan, requiring a third more housing land to be identified than would be required by typical fifteen year Local Plans produced by many other local authorities, and is based upon pre-Brexit growth assumptions over such a long period, which cannot be verified;
· The GMSF proposals include significant releases of green-belt in the Borough of Oldham, particularly in Shaw, Crompton, Chadderton, Royton and Saddleworth;
Council further notes that:
· These early proposals were developed without sufficient involvement of residents or ward members;
· Many residents and local politicians, particularly in Shaw, Crompton, Chadderton, Royton and Saddleworth, are strongly opposed to many of these proposals;
Council firmly believes that new housing development should first take place on brownfield or derelict sites, on sites with existing planning permission; and by converting long-term empty mills, shops and offices into homes; and that existing long-term empty homes should also be brought back into use, before any consideration is given to allocating green-belt or other protected open land for housing.
Consequently, Council condemns the current GMSF proposals as they fail to identify such sites that are available for development and are instead predicated upon developing new housing on green-belt land in the Borough of Oldham.
Council therefore resolves to:
1. Formally withdraw from the Greater Manchester Spatial Framework process and make arrangements to ensure that the GMSF does not apply to the Borough of Oldham.
2. Pursue Oldham’s own local plan. This should be a fifteen year Local Plan for the Borough which identifies that new housing development should first take place on brownfield or derelict sites, on sites with existing planning permission; and by converting long-term empty mills, shops and offices into homes; and that existing long-term empty homes should also be brought back into use, before any consideration is given to allocating green-belt or other protected open land for housing.
3. Make arrangements to comply with the duty to cooperate with other planning authorities.
4. Review existing development plan documents and build in a review process every five years.”
Councillor Brownridge MOVED and Councillor Steven Bashforth SECONDED the following AMENDMENT:
“After ‘this council notes that’
At the end of the first bullet point add:
‘and Oldham’s current Local Plan was approved by a government inspector in 2011.’
At end of second bullet point deleted from (GMSF) to end and add:
‘is a joint plan to manage the supply of land for jobs and new homes across Greater Manchester and as such, the GMSF will not cover everything that a Local Plan would cover’
· Delete third bullet point and replace with
· ‘The Housing White Paper proposes a standard methodology for calculating ‘objectively assessed need’ which will mean that whether a strategic or local (or both) approach is taken to identify housing land, the same amount of housing will need to be provided.’
In fourth bullet point line 1 insert ‘as they were originally published’ after the GMSF proposals and before include significant releases… add fifth bullet point:
· ‘taking a Greater Manchester approach enables land supply to be spread out between the 10 districts – it may very well be that relying solely on a Local Plan will increase the pressure on land in Oldham.’
After ‘This council further notes’ in bullet point 1 line 1 insert ‘for discussion in between ‘developed’ and without’’.
In bullet point 2 line 1 insert ‘at this stage’ between ‘politicians’ and ‘particularly’
Delete paragraph 2 and replace with:
‘Council is taking the following steps to ensure that a brownfield first strategy is delivered:
· Pressing for a Greater Manchester Land Reclamation programme and funding to make the development of brownfield land as cost effective as possible
· Reviewing the calculation of housing need to ensure that demand has been accurately identified
· Developing a Mills Strategy which balances Oldham’s heritage against housing and employment needs and assesses the costs of producing land viable and available for development
After Council resolves to:
Delete text in point 1 and replace with:
‘1. Press for changes to the Greater Manchester Spatial Framework which reflect the concerns raised by residents and ward councillors at the initial proposals including ensuring a robust brownfield first approach’
In point 2 line 1 delete Pursue and replace with ‘Update’ and add after ‘own local plan’ ‘in accordance with the statutory requirements and ‘delete this should be a fifteen year Local Plan for the borough’
Delete existing point 3 and renumber point 4. Add at end of new point 3 ‘as required to meet land supply obligations and protect greenbelt bland’ and delete ‘every five years’.
Amended motion to read:
“This Council notes that:
· All councils are required by government to have a Local Plan which identifies land for housing, offices and industry and Oldham’s current Local Plan was approved by a government inspector in 2011
· The proposed Greater Manchester Spatial Framework (GMSF) is a joint plan to manage the supply of land for jobs and new homes across Greater Manchester and as such, the GMSF will not cover everything that a Local Plan would cover
· The Housing White Paper proposes a standard methodology for calculating ‘objectively assessed need’ which will mean that whether a strategic or local (or both) approach is taken to identify housing land, the same amount of housing will be need to be provided
· The GMSF proposals as they were originally published include significant releases of green-belt in the Borough of Oldham, particularly in Shaw, Crompton, Chadderton, Royton and Saddleworth;
· Taking a Greater Manchester approach enables land supply to be spread out between the 10 districts – it may very well be that relying solely on a Local Plan will increase the pressure on land in Oldham.
Council further notes that:
· These early proposals were developed for discussion without sufficient involvement of Oldham residents or ward members;
· Many residents and local politicians at this stage particularly in Shaw, Crompton, Chadderton, Royton and Saddleworth, are strongly opposed to many of these proposals;
Council firmly believes that new housing development should first take place on brownfield or derelict sites, on sites with existing planning permission; and by converting long-term empty mills, shops and offices into homes; and that existing long-term empty homes should also be brought back into us, before any consideration is given to allocating green-belt or other protected open land for housing.
Council is taking the following steps to ensure that a brownfield first strategy is delivered;
· Pressing for a Greater Manchester Land Reclamation programme and funding to make the development of brownfield land as cost effective as possible
· Reviewing the calculation of housing need to ensure that demand has been accurately identified
· Developing a Mills Strategy which balances Oldham’s heritage against housing and employment needs and assesses the costs of producing land viable and available for development.
Council therefore resolves to:
1. Press for changes to the Greater Manchester Spatial Framework which reflect the concerns raised by residents and ward councillors at the initial proposals including ensuring a robust brownfield first approach
2. Update Oldham’s own local plan in accordance with the statutory requirements and which identifies that new housing development should first take place on brownfield or derelict sites, on sites with existing planning permission; and by converting long-term empty mills, shops and offices into homes; and that existing long-term empty homes should also be brought back into use, before any consideration is given to allocating green-belt or other protected open land for housing.
3. Review existing development plan documents and build in a review process as required to meet land supply obligations and protect greenbelt land.”
Councillor Harkness spoke against the AMENDMENT.
Councillor Jabbar spoke in support of the AMENDMENT.
Councillor Sykes exercised his right of reply.
Councillor Brownridge exercised her right of reply.
In accordance with Council Procedure rule 12.3 at least five Members requested a recorded vote on this Amendment. The Vote was recorded as follows:
|
Councillor |
|
Councillor |
|
|
Ahmad |
FOR |
Hussain, F. |
FOR |
|
Akhtar |
FOR |
Iqbal |
ABSENT |
|
Alexander A. |
ABSENT |
Jabbar |
FOR |
|
Alexander G. |
ABSENT |
Jacques |
FOR |
|
Ali |
FOR |
Kirkham |
FOR |
|
Ames |
ABSENT |
Klonowski |
AGAINST |
|
Azad |
FOR |
Larkin, J. |
FOR |
|
Ball |
FOR |
Larkin. T. |
ABSENT |
|
Bashforth, M. |
FOR |
Malik |
ABSENT |
|
Bashforth, S. |
FOR |
McCann |
AGAINST |
|
Bates |
FOR |
McLaren |
FOR |
|
Blyth |
AGAINST |
Moores |
FOR |
|
Briggs |
FOR |
Murphy |
AGAINST |
|
Brock |
ABSENT |
Mushtaq |
FOR |
|
Brownridge |
FOR |
Price |
FOR |
|
Chadderton |
FOR |
Qumer |
FOR |
|
Chauhan |
FOR |
Rehman |
FOR |
|
Cosgrove |
FOR |
Roberts |
FOR |
|
Dean |
FOR |
Salamat |
FOR |
|
Dearden |
FOR |
Sheldon |
AGAINST |
|
Fielding |
FOR |
Shuttleworth |
FOR |
|
Garry |
FOR |
Stretton |
FOR |
|
Gloster |
AGAINST |
Sykes |
AGAINST |
|
Goodwin |
FOR |
Toor |
FOR |
|
Haque |
FOR |
Turner |
AGAINST |
|
Harkness |
AGAINST |
Ur-Rehman |
FOR |
|
Harrison |
FOR |
Williams |
FOR |
|
Hewitt |
FOR |
Williamson |
AGAINST |
|
Hudson |
AGAINST |
Wrigglesworth |
FOR |
|
Hussain, A. |
FOR |
Heffernan |
AGAINST |
On being put the VOTE, 41 votes were cast in FAVOUR of the AMENDMENT and 12 votes were cast AGAINST with 0 ABSTENTIONS. The AMENDMENT was therefore CARRIED.
Councillor Sykes exercised his right of reply.
A vote was then taken on the SUBSTANTIVE MOTION.
On being put to the vote, the SUBSTANTIVE MOTION was CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
RESOLVED that:
1. Changes be pressed to the Greater Manchester Spatial Framework which reflected the concerns raised by residents and ward councillors at the initial proposals including ensure a robust brownfield first approach.
2. Oldham’s own local plan be updated in accordance with the statutory requirements and which identified that new housing development should first take place on brownfield or derelict sites, on sites with existing planning permission; and by converting long-term empty mills, shops and offices into homes; and that existing long-term empty homes should be brought back into use, before any consideration was given to allocating green-belt or other protected land for housing.
3. Existing development plan documents be reviewed and a review process be built in as required to meet land supply obligations and protect greenbelt land.
Motion 2
The Mayor informed the meeting that the time limit for this item had expired and Councillor McCann as Mover of the Motion and Councillor Blyth as Seconder of the Motion requested the motion be put to the vote. Councillor McCann in moving the MOTION to the vote ACCEPTED the AMENDMENT.
“Council recognises that:
· Bees and other pollinators play an essential role in the Earth’s ecosystem being vital for our food crops, gardens and countryside. Eighty percent of all crops reproduce as a result of the intervention of pollinators. The Government has estimated that this intervention is worth around £500 million to the UK food economy alone.
· The number of bees is in decline and some species have become extinct. Pollinator decline is attributed to a variety of factors including disease, climate change, loss of habitat, and the use of insecticides, such as neonicotinoids (neonics).
· The use of herbicides containing glyphosate also poses a health hazard to humans.
Council recognises the value of establishing an action plan for the borough to help support bees and pollinators, and minimising the use of neonicotinoids and glyphosate on its land.
This Council resolves to:
· Cease the use of neonicotinoids and glysophate on all land that it manages, with the exception where it is absolutely necessary in the control of Schedule 9 plants (under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981) or to protect Council assets.
· Establish a bees and pollinators action plan for the borough. Such a plan could include:
o Using planning powers to protecting habitats that are important to bees and pollinators
o Encouraging all new developments to provide for pollinators
o Stopping the use of insecticides on local authority land
o Establishing wildflower meadows on public green spaces and along public highways
o Planning pollinator-friendly plants, such as those identified in the Royal Horticultural Society’s Perfect for Pollinators scheme
o Planting trees for bees, such as blossom-producing, spring flowering trees
o Identifying measures to enable bee-keeping to thrive in our borough
o Asking the public not to use insecticides in their garden and to plant bee-friendly plants
o Encouraging schools to help children engage with this agenda
o Asking the public health bodies and social housing partners to support our efforts
· Ask the Chief Executive to write to the Minister responsible calling on the Government to maintain the temporary ban on the use of neonicotinoids and to fund proper research into the hazards of neonicotinoids and glyphosate on human health and the environment.”
AMENDMENT
The Mayor informed the meeting that the Chief Executive had received notice that Councillor Brock would be unable to move this amendment and nominated Councillor Roberts to take her place.
Councillor Roberts MOVED and Councillor Briggs SECONDED the following AMENDMENT:
“Amend paragraph 2, lines 12 to 14, to as follows:
‘Council recognises the national pollinators’ strategy as the best way of stemming the decline of bees. Bees do not know borders – therefore in order to best protect bees there needs to be a national strategy that is upheld by all local authorities.’
The final paragraph containing the resolution is to be amended by removing the second bullet point.
Insert a new third bullet point to say
· ‘maintain the standards outline in the National Pollination Strategy as much as is practicably possible’
Insert a new fourth bullet point to say:
· ‘continue to use the Green Dividend Fund to create more ecosystems where bees can flourish.’
Insert a new fifth bullet point to say:
· ‘Use this year’s consultation on Bloom and Grow to inform residents of the best way for maintaining their local ecosystems and identify measures to enable bee keeping.’
Amended motion to read:
“Council recognises that:
· Bees and other pollinators play an essential role in the Earth’s ecosystem play an essential role in the Earth’s ecosystem being vital for our food crops, gardens and countryside. Eighty percent of all crops reproduce as a result of the intervention of pollinators. The Government has estimated that this intervention is worth around £500 million to the UK food economy alone.
· The number of bees is in decline and some species have become extinct. Pollinator decline is attributed to a variety of factors including disease, climate change, loss of habitat, and the use of insecticides, such as neonicotinoids (or neonics).
· The use of herbicides containing glyphosate also poses a health hazard to humans.
Council recognises the national pollinators’ strategy as the best way of stemming the decline of bees. Bees do not know borders – therefore in order to best protect bees there needs to be a national strategy that is upheld by all local authorities.
This Council resolves to:
· Cease the use of neonicotinoids and glyphosate on all land that it manages, with the exception where it is absolutely necessary in the control of Schedule 9 plants (under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981) or to protect Council assets.
· Ask the Chief Executive to write to the Minister responsible calling on the Government to maintain the temporary ban on the use of neonicotinoids and to fund proper research into the hazards of neonicotinoids and glyphosate on human health and the environment
· Maintain the standards outlined in the National Pollination Strategy as much as is practicably possible
· Continue to use the Green Dividend Fund to create more ecosystems where bees can flourish
· Use this year’s consultation on Bloom and Grow to inform residents of the best for maintaining their local ecosystems and identify measures to enable bee keeping.
Councillor McCann did not exercise his right of reply.
A vote was then taken on the SUBSTANTIVE MOTION.
On being put to the vote, the SUBSTANTIVE MOTION was CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
RESOLVED that:
1. The Council cease the use of neonicotinoids and glyphosate on all land that it manages, with the exception of where it was absolutely necessary in the control of Schedule 9 plants (under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981) or to protect Council assets.
2. The Chief Executive be asked to write to the Minister responsible calling on the Government to maintain the temporary ban on the use of neonicotinoids and to fund proper research into the hazards of neonicotinoids and glyphosate on human health and the environment.
3. Standards be maintained as outlined in the National Pollination Strategy as much as is practicably possible.
4. The use of the Green Dividend Fund be continued to create more ecosystems where bees could flourish.
5. This year’s consultation on Bloom and Grow be used to inform residents of the best way for maintaining their local ecosystems and identified measures to enable bee keeping.
Motion 3
The Mayor informed the meeting that the time limit for this item had expired and Councillor Harkness as Mover of the Motion and Councillor Turner as Seconder of the Motion requested the motion be put to the vote.
“Council notes that:
· In April 2015, a motion was carried in relation to the application of benefits sanctions which stated that ‘People who are already vulnerable are often more likely to incur sanctions’
· Vulnerable claimants, particularly claimants with mental health conditions, conditions on the autism spectrum, or learning disabilities, continue to be disproportionately sanctioned.
· Guidance from the Department of Work and Pensions (DWP) to its staff recognises the need for additional safeguards for vulnerable claimants in receipt of Employment Support Allowance (ESA) to reduce the incidence of sanctions.
Council welcomes the work that has been carried out by its officers with colleagues at the Department of Work and Pensions, to:
· Build on the ‘minimum standards’ in DWP guidance by creating additional safeguards for vulnerable claimants in receipt of ESA in Oldham, based on a model successfully introduced in the London Borough of Greenwich.
· Create a Vulnerability Guide and process flow chart for DWP staff and advisors in front-line organisations, backed by bespoke training, so they can better support vulnerable benefit claimants
Council hopes that these measures will help reduce the incidence of sanctions in Oldham amongst this client group and looks forward to the expansion of the pilot project to vulnerable claimants in receipt of other benefits later in 2017.
Council resolves to work with DWP staff to:
· Promote the new safeguarding model to front-line Council staff and those of partners who support vulnerable claimants, as well as through local disability, employment and housing forums and the Action Together Poverty Agenda Group.
· Feature information on the new safeguards on the Council’s website and in future Council publications.
· Support the establishment of a local liaison group, with representation from FWP, work programme providers, and relevant local agencies to monitor the impact of safeguards.”
A vote was then taken on the MOTION.
On being put to the vote, the MOTION was CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
RESOLVED that the Council work with DWP Staff to:
1. Promote the new safeguarding model to front-line Council staff and those of partners who supported vulnerable claimants, as well as through local disability employment and housing forums and the Action Together Poverty Agenda Group.
2. Feature information on the new safeguards on the Council’s website and in future Council publications.
3. Support the establishment of a local liaison group, with representation from DWP, work programme providers, and relevant local agencies to monitor the impact of safeguards.