(15 minutes for public questions and 25 minutes for Councillor questions)
Minutes:
The Mayor advised 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 be read out by the Mayor.
The following questions had been submitted:
1. Question received from Charles Garrity via email:
“I am an avid watcher of Council meetings on youtube. I would refer to full Council meeting 12th December regarding the insulting and abusive utterings of a senior member of the council, Opposition Leader Howard Sykes. This person when making reference to persons that used their democratic right to make a vote in the EU Referendum, that did not concur with his own views, were referred to as ‘swivel eyed loonies’. As the Mayor did not bring Councillor Sykes to task for this insulting remark {Councillors Code of Conduct Respect for Others}, I would remind the Council this meeting was streamed live. I would ask the following question: Does this Council condone the use of insulting remarks when describing constituents of the borough in the meetings of the Council. I would also ask that Councillor Sykes be instructed to make a full apology for his remarks at the next full Council meeting.”
Councillor Fielding, Leader of the Council and Cabinet Member for Economy and Enterprise responded that there was a Standards Hearings procedure which existed for this purpose. The Leader recalled that the matter under discussion was Brexit which had inflamed tensions. The Leader also responded that he was not in a position to ask the Leader of the Opposition to respond.
The Mayor invited Councillor Sykes to speak.
Councillor Sykes, Leader of the Opposition, addressed Full Council and provided a personal explanation.
2. Question received from Syed Maruf Ali via Twitter:
“Can you please raise this question at the full council meeting and I would like the Mayor to read the question out. Unemployment has always been high in Town Centre Base area. Most economically developed nations are now multi-ethnic, and, given current demographic trends, there is reason to believe that societies will continue to become more ethnically and culturally diverse. We the residents of Town Centre base would like to know what percentage of Oldham Council, NHS and Greater Manchester Police workforce are employed within 2 miles radius of civic centre/council offices? How many senior managers are employed by Oldham Council within 2 miles radius of civic centre? Oldham Town centre area have one of the highest number of NEETS, Unemployment and benefit claimants in England. Many Town Centre residents CANNOT access good/outstanding attainment School due to individual School oversubscription criteria. There has been increase in population in Town Centre area putting pressure on housing, school places and infrastructure. What's the attraction to migrants especially from EU to one of the poorest wards in Oldham with the highest unemployment & the lowest paid economy in GM? We urgently need the local authorities to invest in infrastructure in town centre base area such as Education, Employment, Training, access to employment, improve the local roads etc.”
Councillor Mushtaq, Cabinet Member for Employment and Skills, responded that data was only immediately available for council staff. 39.8% of council staff lived in post codes of which at least part is within 2 miles of the Civic Centre. Eighteen senior managers lived within 2 miles of the Civic Centre (a total of 166 although the latter hadn’t been asked for). Senior Manager was defined as earning over £45.6k FTE. Within the UK and internationally, new migrant groups would always (or almost always) move to the lowest rent areas available, which were typically deprived inner-city areas. As their communities became embedded and typically more prosperous, the would tend to move away from inner-city areas to more affluent but connected areas, often to be replaced by the next migrant group. This pattern had been repeated many times thorugh the history of Oldham. Inner areas of Oldham and other towns had some of the lowest rents in Greater Manchester, and low house prices had increased the size of the private rented sector. It was expected that this would attract migrant groups. While employment opportunities would be more limited than elsewhere, affordable housing would tend to be more of an immediate factor.
3. Question received from Ruji Surjan via email:
Councillor Chadderton, Cabinet Member for Children’s Services responded that children’s poverty was a priority for the Council. Meeting had been held and she referred the response to the Leader of the Council.
Councillor Fielding, Leader of the Council and Cabinet Member for Economy and Enterprise responded that child poverty was unacceptable in Oldham. The UK economy was the 5th largest in the world and the UN who had drawn attention to the poverty in Oldham. Despite the financial cuts, the Council had continued to invest in services and programmes. The range of schemes included Get Oldham Working and the Career Advancement Service which continued to provide employment opportunities, the Warm Homes Oldham continued to pull people out of fuel poverty every year with an estimated 5,600 people helped so far. The Council had taken a decision to make Oldham a living wage employer and pay a genuine living wage, the Oldham Education Commission and the Opportunity Area Oldham continued to develop approaches to improve social mobility and holiday hunger schemes aimed to match food provision with holiday enrichment activity to help families during the holidays. Over 3,500 meals had been delivered in the summer last year and it was planned to roll this out to more sites this year and to ensure all year provision. The Leader referred to poverty proofing and tackling poverty in schools through the ‘voice of the child’. Tackling poverty and inequality was a part of everything done by the Council despite the massive funding challenges.
4. Question received from Stephen Kenyon via email:
“Has the Leader of Oldham Council seen the YouTube footage of the Oldham Council Full meeting 12/12/19 where he falsely stated that YouTube footage was not edited to cover up Oldham Council's endeavours to hide the truth from the citizens of Oldham? Cllr Feilding also at this meeting suggests that I am lacking in respect for Oldham council and councillors. May I respectfully suggest to him that if he and his council were to become more respectable and adhere to their codes of conduct then I would gladly show them more respect? Does Sean Fielding feel ashamed and/or embarrassed that the sound was obviously switched off so that this simulacrum of a council could carry on hiding their misdemeanor's, collusion and cover-up from the public?”
At this point in the proceedings, the Leader was constantly interrupted by a member of the public and a disturbance occurred. The Mayor, as Chair of the meeting gave repeated warnings. The meeting was adjourned at 18.33 and reconvened at 18.34.
Councillor Fielding, Leader of the Council and Cabinet Member for Economy and Enterprise responded that, at the risk of sounding like John Bercow, Speaker of the House of Commons, Mr. Kenyon had asked the same question again with no substantial difference from last time. The Leader was aware of what was said at the meeting on 12th December 2018 because he had given the response. The Leader had given an account of what had happened and explained that, during the time of around 20 seconds when the audio went quieter, only the Mayor spoke and he had simply stated that there was a time limit for questions and that all questioners, in accordance with the rules, should stick to the text of the question they had originally submitted and that he needed to move on with the next public question. The Leader again clarified that it appeared that by having to appeal across the back of the stage to Mr. Kenyon – with his microphone turned off – the words of the Mayor were subsequently very quiet on the clip, but they could still be made audible by using a more powerful speaker. The Leader reiterated that there was not cover-up, no video or audio editing and no conspiracy. If Mr. Kenyon had stuck to the respect of asking the question that had been originally submitted then there would be no problems. Because the questioner did not like the factual answer provided, did not make it a conspiracy. For the avoidance of doubt, there would be no point in asking the question for the third time again and expecting a different answer. The webstream was run by a third party for Oldham Council. The picture coverage remained live, councillors’ heads were moving on it and the sound had merely become muffled.
5. Question received from Melanie Platt via email:
“Please would the council undertake a policy measure to ensure that the old routes of railways are not blocked or compromised by new building work. It is now widely recognised that the Beeching axe went too far and some of these lines could be reactivated for rapid light transport in the future – providing they have not been blocked by new development. One such is the Oldham to Saddleworth line, which if converted to Metrolink through Clarksfield, Lees, Springhead, and Grotton would provide much needed traffic relief and also do much to lessen Oldham’s worst pollution blackspot at Bottom Of th’moor. This is not a plea to re-open the line, just that the possibility remains to do so for the future.”
Councillor Shah, Deputy Leader of the Council and Cabinet Member for Neighbourhood Services, responded that the Council’s Local Plan already contained a policy which sought to protect former railway lines that may have an existing or potential transport use from development. That included use as a pedestrian footpath, cycle or bridleway or on to which a new public transport facility or an extension to an existing network might be introduced in the future. Former railway lines would continue to be protected under Local Plan Policy 17 on Gateways and Corridors unless an overriding need for the development can be demonstrated or they are already protected or allocated for another use in the Local Development Framework. The Local Plan document contained this policy and was available on the Council’s website at www.oldham.gov.uk/downloads/file/1445/development_plan_document-joint_core_strategy_and_development_management_policies)
At this point in the meeting the Mayor advised that the time limit for this item had expired. The Mayor reminded members that the Council had previously agreed that questions would be taken in an order which reflected the political balance of the Council. The following questions were submitted by Councillors on Ward or District matters:
1. Councillor Davis asked the following question:
Councillor Shah, Deputy Leader of the Council and Cabinet Member for Neighbourhood Services confirmed that the cameras on the A62 corridor were now back up and running and thanked the Councillors for their patience whilst the issue was resolved.
2. Councillor Judd asked the following question:
“Residents of Cherwell Close in Hollinwood have experienced varying amounts of flooding in recent years, the worst of which occurred in 2016 where 3 homes were flooded causing extensive damage. This occurs when the main combined sewer is at full capacity leading to surcharging of the road gullies. United Utilities have a responsibility of ensuring their assets are designed to cope with a 1 in 30 year flooding event however the road gullies are surcharging with every event of heavy rain. Can anything be done to get United Utilities to assess and confirm the integrity of their assets on both Cherwell Close and the connecting Roman Road?”
Councillor Shah, Deputy Leader of the Council and Cabinet Member for Neighbourhood Services responded that the highways gullies and associated pipework was adequate in terms of capacity. However, due to the amount of rainfall (an average month of rain fell in 24 hours), and deficiencies with the overall combined United Utilities sewer into which the highways system flowed, the water exceeded the capacity of the systems. Discussions with United Utilities were ongoing and a meeting scheduled on 26 March 2019. The Council had approached the Environment Agency for additional external funding for an extensive study in relation to Cherwell Close to be undertaken.
3. Councillor Malik asked the following question:
Councillor Shah, Deputy Leader of the Council and Cabinet Member for Neighbourhood Services responded that the Council had raised the issue with the Royal Oldham Hospital (ROH) on numerous occasions in the past with the hope that some form of action would be taken to alleviate the problem which had been acknowledged by ROH. The matter had also been elevated to the Hospital’s Estate Management Team who were currently working on a future master planning exercise for the hospital to see if this matter could be factored into any future site designs to address these parking issues.
4. Councillor H. Gloster asked the following question:
“Whilst on our Chief Exec’s ward visit in October 2018, we came across a derelict property at 5 Queen Street, Shaw which has a Section 215 notice in the window of the property dated 2014. To my knowledge this property has been empty and derelict for at least 20 years. Can I ask the relevant Cabinet Member when we can expect this property to be brought back into use to provide a home for someone in need?”
Councillor Roberts, Cabinet Member for Housing, confirmed that the property at 5 Queen Street in Shaw was a long-term empty property and the Council had carried out works in 2014 in default of a legal notice served on the property. The owners were currently untracable and the cost of the works had been placed as a charge on the property. The Council was to keen to bring this and other long-term empty properties back into use and officers would be asked to explore all options to bring the property back into use and report back promptly to inform of the outcome.
5. Councillor Moores asked the following question:
Councillor Mushtaq, Cabinet Member for Employment and Skills responded that the Council, working with the Mayor’s office set up a task force to create a programme of activity to support those affected by the relocation. The Task Force included representatives from Bolton, Rochdale and Salford Councils, Shop Direct, DWP, USDAW and Growth Company. A lot of support had been provided to date and included 1-to-1 information advice and guidance sessions, 700 staff completed National Careers Service conversations creating individualised learning plans, 176 staff had enrolled onto apprenticeships, 350 staff had upskilled with health and safety, forklift truck refreshers, manual handling, etc., 583 staff had begun digital learning programmes and Maths and English would be launched by the end of March. Shop Direct agreed to offer a package of time off work to pursue training activity (45 hours for functional skills, 20% of work time for apprentices). Get Oldham Working, Rochdale Employment Links and the Growth Company had been delivering sessions 7 days a week to align with shift patterns. The Council continued to work with Shop Direct seeking replacement commercial usage of the sites in Oldham. Unfortunately, whilst the Government announced a task force for employees affected by the closure of Honda in Swindon (Conservative), the Government had yet to make any offers of support for those affected in Oldham. The MPs had requested that Richard Harrington visit Shaw to provide support to those affected in Oldham. The visit had been scheduled for 14th March.
6. Councillor Dean asked the following question:
Councillor P. Jacques, Cabinet Member for Education and Culture, responded that Waterhead Academy was part of the South Pennine Multi-Academy Trust who held accountability for the Academy’s outcomes. As a Local Authority, the Council worked closely with the Trust and all schools to support improvements in outcomes for Oldham’s children and young people. There were a huge range of accountability measures that schools and Academies were judged on and historically the measure that had been used included a number of A* - C grades. The equivalent measure under the new performance framework was the percentage of pupils who achieved a standard pass (grades 9 to 4) in mathematics and English. In this measure Waterhead Academy achieved 42.0%, a slight increase on the previous academic year. The Local Authority was driving forward a number of school improvement initiatives across Oldham. Waterhead Academy, for the reasons highlighted, was one of the schools receiving a range of support from the Local Authority and other school improvement partners. This support had a particular focus on improving the attainment of disadvantaged students, particularly disadvantaged boys. The Trust continued to work hard to improve outcomes at the Academy and recent visits had shown that there was a calm and peaceful atmosphere around the academy. The evident positive ethos, supported by interventions from the Trust, the Local Authority and financially supported through Opportunity Area investment was expected to have a positive impact on the 2019 results.
7. Councillor Harrison asked the following question:
“About ten years ago, some blocks of flats were partially built on Near Birches Parade, Holts. For whatever reason, the developer abandoned them before completion. Over the years, the buildings and surrounding site became a target for fly tipping, vandalism and anti-social behaviour. Consequently, I've received many valid complaints from Holts residents. Recently, the site was cleaned up and the entrance to the site boarded to keep people out. Can the cabinet member tell me if this is a sign that the flats are about to be developed to a habitable standard and made available as much needed homes.”
Councillor Roberts, Cabinet Member for Housing responded that the site in question was in private ownership and was therefore unfortunately outside of the direct control of both the Council or any local Registered Provider. In such circumstances, the Council only had powers to act in the event that the property was not kept in a safe and secure condition, otherwise the Council was entirely reliant on the existing owner bringing the property into use. However, officers would continue to monitor the condition of the property and take any appropriate action as required.
8. Councillor Sykes asked the following question:
“The changing rooms at New Barn Playing Fields continue to fall in to rack and ruin, would the Cabinet Member for Economy and Enterprise tell me the plans for the future with this building? And would the Cabinet Member for Neighbourhood Services please tell me what efforts are being made to get the building used again?”
Councillor Fielding, Leader of the Council and Cabinet Member for Economy and Enterprise responded that the changing rooms at New Barn playing fields were included in the Council’s Sports Pitch Strategy which was aimed at growing grass roots football in the borough. The Pitch Strategy was a requirement by the Football Foundation which enabled Oldham to secure funding for playing field projects. Sadly, this building had been the target of a spate of vandalism over recent months which had left the building with limited use until such time as building repairs could be undertaken. Approval was being sought to commit capital expenditure to resolve the issues in time for the new football season.
9. Councillor Hewitt asked the following question:
“The Council should note that local businesses in Saddleworth West and Lees, working with Greater Manchester Police and councillors, have formed a fully-constituted committee to realise the ambition to turn Lees High Street into a go-to area, rather than a drive through place, taking good practice from the successes of other villages in the area. We ask that the member with special responsibilities for communities attend a forthcoming meeting of the Lees, Springhead and Grotton business hub and fully support our ambitions.”
Councillor Ur-Rehman, Cabinet Member for Policing and Community Safety responded that the Business Group had been working with Council officers and Ward Members who had attended meetings to support the development and establishment of the group. The group were also being supported by Council Officers in preparing an application to the Lees Business Improvement Grant Scheme. This was an excellent example of local councillors and communities getting together in a cooperative way of working. The project could be highlighted as good practice.
10. Councillor Shuttleworth asked the following question:
'We have spent an enormous amount of time researching the schools in the borough and considered our application best suited to Sylvia's academic acumen. We assumed Sylvia would be given at least one of her three preferences. We also know there are children who have not asked for Radclyffe School within their application, however, they have been placed at our daughters preferred school. How is this lottery drawn? ' May I request that the Cabinet member for education explains how circumstances such as I have just highlighted can come about, i.e. one child not getting their preferred choice yet another being placed at that same school which they didn't apply for, and also request confirmation that each area of the borough has been treated equally and fairly when it comes to school placement.
Councillor P. Jacques confirmed that there were no redirected admissions to The Radclyffe School. All pupils offered The Radclyffe School had The Radclyffe as one of their preferences. The Radclyffe School was oversubscribed on offer day. Once a school had more applications that it had spaces, the publicly available over-subscription criteria was used. Oldham Local Authority were not the admissions authority for all but on secondary school in Oldham, Saddleworth School, therefore the local authority only set the oversubscription criteria for Saddleworth. All the other schools set their own oversubscription criteria. All the details on the schools’ policies were available both on the schools website and the Oldham Council website at http://www.oldham-council.co.uk/school_admissions/index.php/oldham-schools/
Once the Local Authority/school had ranked each application into a criteria, the system allowed all the schools oversubscription criteria to be applied to all preferences from all pupils. On the lead up to offer day, the system ranked all applicants in order of criteria and then worked out who was to be offered a place. It was set out how many pupils each school could take and the system then offered that set amount of places. Anyone not offered a preference was added to the waiting list. If a preference could not be offered, the pupil would be redirected (allocate a place not requested) to a school to ensure a place was allocated for that pupil. All on time applications were looked at first. If a pupil had applied on time and had been redirected, it meant that the schools for which they had made preferences were full with on-time applicants and that the pupil in question was not high enough up the criteria to be offered a place. The pupil would be added to the waiting lists of their preferences and then redirected to the nearest school with a space. The late applications were then look at and the same process applied. All applications were treated fairly and equally. All applications were treated fairly and equally. All applications were looked at against the same criteria using the exact same system. The oversubscription criteria differed from school to school but it was noted that oversubscription criteria only came in play if a school received more applications that it has places to offer. Preferences could not be guaranteed and the schools which were popular filled quickly. The frustration was understood and the authority was looking to expand places.
11. Councillor Phythian asked the following question:
“Please can the relevant Cabinet member inform us of progress on the investigation works being carried out in the Grasmere Road area of Royton North which are intended to find the cause of flooding in this area?”
Councillor Shah, Deputy Leader of the Council and Cabinet Member for Neighbourhood Services responded that the study was currently underway in this area was part of an official detailed process to gather information according to multi-staged Environment Agency (EA) policies and requirements and this investigative stage was itself funded by the EA. The Council had been successful in gaining this initial funding already. This study comprised actual physical investigative works with subsequent detailed analysis and calculations was to be completed in May 2019 and issued to the EA for further consideration against other similar studies submitted across the UK. After consideration, the EA could make further funding available for actual site construction of the necessary works. The Council, in it capacity as Lead Local Flood Authority (LLFA) had significant success in gaining additional funding from the EA for flood alleviation schemes across the Borough over the last few years, but it was noted that receiving funding from the EA was not guaranteed and was given according to their timeframes.
12. Councillor Curley asked the following question:
“Last Summer we had to deal with the horrendous fires on Saddleworth Moor. At the time much was made of efforts to combat the then current situation and to plan for possible future eventualities. However, the worst fears of the community were realised much earlier this year with the unseasonably warm period in February heralding more fires which even described by Sky News as “Apocalyptic”. The situation at Dovestone reservoir has been a constant source of worry and frustration with access problems and the potential for further fires and environmental damage a constant danger. Dovestone is frequently referred to by OMBC as one of the centrepieces of the tourist attractions for the borough. Through the provision of the Dovestone Marshalls we have seen that Marshalls can alleviate much of this problem. The funding for this however was only supposed to be temporary, yet Councillors were again asked to commit more of their individual budgets this year and have now committed 20% of their budgets for this purpose. Will the Cabinet member responsible provide guaranteed future funding for Marshalls and other measures as well as leading in seeking funding from other stakeholders such as United Utilities, The Peak Park Authority and in particular Hollow Oak Limited (a company of the Purico group) as the Marshalls ensure that there is safe access to the properties at Heytop and New Barn for the residents there who are tenants of the properties owned by Hollow Oak. It is only fair therefore that Hollow Oak pay towards the safety of their tenants so we can help safeguard the homes, farms and local environment. After all this area is of huge significance to the whole Borough and Gtr Manchester. It is only right that OMBC must lead on financing these measures.”
Councillor Jabbar, Deputy Leader of the Council and Cabinet Member for Finance and Corporate Resources responded that the Council recognised the good work undertaken by the marshals last year and was mindful of the damage caused by the recent fires. The Council was supportive of the initiative and would assess the level of resources required to support its continuation and positively seek external contributions. All parties would be contacted to assess the best approach going forward including the deployment of resources as appropriate.
13. Councillor Briggs asked the following question:
“One of my constituents is experiencing great difficulty in negotiating the very poor condition of the pavements close to his house, in his wheelchair, rendering him virtually housebound. While I appreciate the vast amount of this Labour council’s investment in repairing and resurfacing our roads, please can the relevant cabinet member advise me of the plans for investment in our pavements?”
Councillor Shah, Deputy Leader of the Council and Cabinet Member for Neighbourhood Services responded that within the Council’s proposed highways investment programme over the next three years, there was an overall allowance of £300K to carry out some targeted footway resurfacing works – this would be used for tackling footways on a purely condition based approach at present, and any issues of a Disability Discrimination Act (DDA) nature, e.g. damaged dropped kerbs, damaged tactile paving where fitted would be repaired. In terms of initial implementation of DDA compliant facilities at junctions across the whole Borough, generally these are only implemented as part of an appropriate related capital improvement scheme and not currently as a complete programme across the borough.
At this point in the meeting, the Mayor advised that the time limit for this item had expired.
RESOLVED that the questions and responses provided be noted.
NOTE: Councillor G. Alexander left the meeting during this item.