Agenda item

Questions to Leader and Cabinet

(time limit 30 minutes)

Minutes:

The Deputy Leader of the Main Opposition, Councillor C. Gloster, raised the following two questions:

 

Question 1: Adopt the 50 Point Climate Action Plan

 

“I hope that all members present will agree that arguing and debating for green policy at a local level makes all the difference when we take the challenge to central government.  The Liberal Democrats bringing the issue of climate change to council sets us on the right track, but it does not take us all the way.  The threat of climate change can be seen globally and locally as our weather becomes increasingly unpredictable.  Although some here might chuckle that Oldham weather has always been unpredictable.  In all seriousness, it’s one thing declaring a climate change emergency, but we must follow this through.  We are part of this world, and if we fail to acknowledge it, we fail in every other purpose we strive towards.  We must act on the declaration and make headway towards achieving an environmentally friendly Oldham Borough.  The environmental charity Friends of the Earth have realised a 50-point plan for Councils.  This is to help authorities like Oldham enact on our emergency climate change declaration.  As Councillors we campaign through Council to make our voice heard by the UK government.  I will not sound off every single points of the plan here tonight, bit I do ask the Leader if he will prescribe this Borough to the Friends of the Earth 50 point climate action plan so that officers and members can be made best aware of how to tackle the issue of climate change in Oldham Borough.”

 

Councillor Fielding, Leader of the Council, wished the Leader of the Opposition, Councillor Sykes, a speedy recovery.

Councillor Fielding, Leader of the Council confirmed that as a result of a Liberal Democrat motion the Council had declared a Climate Emergency.  Prior to that the Labour Administration had put forward a motion to establish a Green New Deal.  Declaring a Climate Emergency was not enough and it was the action that followed that determined how the authority would tackle the climate emergency.  In time, the Green New Deal would be declared and contained measures intended to take on energy efficiency, improve recycling rates, reducing the use of plastics and combatting climate change generally.  The Leader welcomed the support from the Opposition on this matter.  It was incredibly important which had been brought home particularly by the Australian bushfires.  The Leader was keen that the Council was at the forefront of plans in Local Government to tackle Climate Emergency and would be when the Green New Deal was published.

 

Question 2:  Interserve £10 Million Scheme

 

“In October 2019 it was revealed that Interserve will receive 13 million pounds of Oldham Council money to redevelop Oldham’s cultural art centre.  Culture is incredibly important, it defines who we are and our civilisation.  Teaching old and young about our local worth, arms our economy and society with confidence to do great deeds themselves.  A 13-million-pound scheme must be incredibly complex to finance, but I wonder if this Council made any effort to find a firm locally that could have done the same as Interserve?  For members that do not know, Interserve is a firm based in Reading.  How on earth are we keeping the money in Oldham by spending millions of pounds down south?  The point is, is that we not spending locally.  Although there will be a cultural return on the project, the workers of Oldham Borough will see little economic benefit.  I find it highly unlikely that this council will reverse such a large contractual decision with Interserve.  It is a shame we cannot now procure a local firm to envision the development of the Heritage and Arts centre.  Considering this, I must ask what efforts will be made by the recently established Cultural Governance Board.  Will these efforts be concentrated on finding local businesses and contractors from Oldham Borough, to work on the project throughout its duration?  We must procure locally if we are to improve locally.”

 

Councillor Fielding, Leader of the Council, highlighted the heritage and arts centre which was going ahead and would be an incredible cultural asset for the town.  The Leader also referred to the the ambitious regeneration plans that would be forthcoming around Oldham Town Centre.  The Leader had been vocal in how key cultural assets would be in the ambition for Oldham through the establishment of the night-time economy, the continued commitment to the Oldham Coliseum and supporting the Music Service when other authorities had made cuts to that type of service.  The Leader said it was correct that the Council should be spending as much money as possible in the borough for the creation of jobs, well-paid jobs and use local firms.  The process to the contract for the development of the Heritage and Arts Centre was part of a pre-determined tender process.  The Leader added that there was a commitment to significant increase in the amount of money spent locally within Oldham with a target of 60%.  In terms of spending money within the Borough’s boundaries, this compared favourably to neighbouring authorities in Greater Manchester and across the country.  The Leader was proud of the amount of money the Council kept within the borough which sustained local jobs into the pockets of local people.  Where the Council could do more, it would but sometimes that was not entirely possible.

 

Councillor Hudson, Leader of the Conservative Group, asked a question related to Troubled Families and was due to receive a £165m boost.  Councillor Hudson said the fund had been launched in 2012 by David Cameron and the programme had proved a success in transforming lives.  The programme had been revamped in 2015 to help 4000 families.  Councillor Hudson asked if the authority had made any claims on this fund to date.

 

Councillor Fielding, Leader of the Council, responded that the number of families with significant needs had increased significantly and whilst any money to support Council was welcome, the programme labelled Troubled Families was an insult.  The Council would make bids to the scheme and also needed a local government settlement to properly help those who needed it.  The Leader would find out the amount of funding received through the programme to date.

 

The Mayor reminded the meeting that the Council had agreed that, following the Leaders’ allocated questions, questions would be taken in an order which reflected the political balance of the Council.

 

1.       Councillor Davis asked the following question:

 

         

          Councillor Shah, Deputy Leader and Cabinet Member for Social Justice and Communities advised that Private Hire Operators who ran the companies had already received training on Data Protection which the Council had supplied last year.  It was for the Operators to implement that knowledge and convey it to their staff.  In terms of staff DBS checks, this was currently being implemented by the Council’s Licensing Team and would be rolled out this spring.  The Deputy Leader also said that staff DBS checks, staff recruitment and data protection policies were included in the Greater Manchester Minimum Licensing Standards which was to be consulted upon in the coming months.

 

2.       Councillor Shuttleworth asked the following question:

 

          “The Government has handed more than 100 councils across England a share of around £4m to crack down on criminal landlords and letting agents.  Has Oldham received any of this funding?”

 

          Councillor Roberts, Cabinet Member for Housing, responded that the Government had announced a number of one-off short-term funding opportunities which sounded more impressive than they were in reality.  This money was one of those schemes.  The Government announced a £3.8m pot for tackling rogue landlords across the country on 1st November 2019 with a very tight closing date for applications of the 1st December 2019.  The funding had to be spent by 31st March 2020 and could not be used for permanent staffing roles so would not have helped the Council’s main priority of inspecting people’s homes and taking action when necessary, including prosecution.  Given competing priorities for a team which like many Council services was under great pressure, a decision was taken to focus efforts on the next phase of private rented sector consultation that was due to start in the middle of January 2020.  This consultation would explore the opportunity to continue with the good work surrounding the selective licensing scheme in some neighbourhoods within the Borough and this approach was something that was more sustainable over a longer timescale.  What the Council needed was long-term revenue funding to enable the provision of effective and quality public services and not stop gap and one-off funding announcements.

 

3.       Councillor Surjan asked the following question:

 

         In recent years there has been a huge increase in the number of people driving, particularly in the Coldhurst area as it leads to the main Town Centre, Colleges and has crucial links to the motorway.  With many drivers using the big Tesco roundabout off Chadderton Way and Featherstall Road, local people have asked what will be done to reduce road traffic accidents and to make it safer for all drivers?  During rush hour traffic cars on Chadderton Way are usually backed up all the way to Rochdale Road making it difficult for residents to cross safely despite zebra crossings or for drivers to turn on to side streets, and cars coming down Featherstall Road North (Oldham Hospital side) and also the bypass, form long queues causing huge risks for those at the give way with oncoming cars approaching at great speed.  Does the Cabinet Member for Neighbourhoods agree with me that it is time traffic lights are installed at this busy roundabout for the safety of both local residents and drivers?”

 

          Councillor Ur-Rehman, Cabinet Member for Neighbourhoods Services, responded that the Council’s Traffic and Road Safety officers were already working closely with colleagues at Transport for Greater Manchester into the viability of the introduction of traffic signals at the Featherstall Road Roundabout to ease congestion particularly at busy periods.  In recent years changes were made to the road markings on the roundabout that resulted in significant improvements to road safety and ultimately far fewer road traffic injury collisions at the junction – this was closely monitored and reflected in Greater Manchester Police’s accident figures.  It was also to be noted that the road safety measures, which included Zebra Crossings and road humps along Featherstall Road continued to contribute to the road safety of the area since their introduction a number of years ago.

 

4.       Councillor Harkness thanked the Cabinet Member for the work which addressed road safety in Dobcross, recognised the hard work put in by the Dobcross community and hoped the petitions as noted would be reviewed.  Councillor Harkness referenced the closure of Thurston Clough Road and the decision to suspend gritting without consultation with local councillors.  Councillor Harkness asked if this could be looked at again and to support gritting so residents did not become isolated.

 

          Councillor Ur-Rehman, Cabinet Member for Neighbourhoods Services, responded that he would look into the issue, establish why the gritting service had been suspended, review if it could be reinstated and involve local ward councillors.

 

5.       Councillor Hulme asked the following question:

 

          “I welcome the allocation of funding from the new Local Government Fund to tackle speeding in Denshaw, an issue of concern for many residents.  Can the Cabinet Member for Neighbourhoods confirm the timescale for the work to be completed?

 

          Councillor Ur-Rehman, Cabinet Member for Neighbourhoods Services, responded that it was hoped that the measures could be introduced during this financial year, likely toward the end of March 2020.  The process would begin with a residents’ consultation on the proposals followed by the compilation of the TMU Report which summarised the initial consultation phase with key stakeholders (Emergency Services, Public Transport, Ward Councillors and local residents).  On completion, the TMU report would form the basis of the subsequent ModGov report.  This document would include the outcomes of the consultation process, detailed estimates and comments from both legal and finance heads and was necessary to acquire scheme approvals and authority to proceed with the works which included all Statutory Advertising of the associated Road Hump Notices, etc.  Once the ModGov report had been approved, the Statutory Advertising of the proposals could begin which takes 28 days to complete.  Following this, actual construction works on site should take no more than a week or so.

 

6.       Councillor Leach asked the following question:

 

          “I welcome the decision to move to the new process of using development funding via the Local Improvement Fund and the decision to grant the funds for improvement to Lees Village.  I want to commend the work of the active Lees, Springhead and Grotton business hub, as well as Council district officers who have made this a practical project with such excellent prospects for success.  Can the Cabinet member confirm the arrangements for implementing the improvement work?”

 

          Councillor Fielding, Leader of the Council and Cabinet Member for Economy and Enterprise responded that in advance of the work commencing, the District Team with the support of Environmental Services, would engage with surrounding properties and stakeholders to discuss these and potential future uses of the space surrounding the library.  The proposals and designs set out within the LIF project would also be shared to ensure that the layout appeals to visitors, businesses and residents and that any positive suggestions could be included where possible.  Some elements of the scheme were designed to be flexible which meant that there could be future changes to the layout should they be required.  The work would be implemented with Environmental Services acting as main contractor with some aspects potentially being carried out by sub-contractors.  There would be lead-in times for street furniture which would be factored into the scheduling and a design meeting would be held within the next couple of weeks in order to develop the detail of the programme moving forward.  It was anticipated that the work would also act as a catalyst for discussions with private landowners in the village and that there would be scope for further improvements to take place in due course.

 

7.       Councillor Phythian asked the following question:

 

         Royton has recently concluded what will now be round 1 of a bidding process for match funding of shop front improvements on the Middleton Road and Rochdale Road areas of the town centre. A second round will now be made available by an additional £25,000 from the Local Improvement Fund. This is helping to deliver the long-standing commitment of this Labour Council to regeneration of the Royton Town Centre following the opening of the Leisure Centre and the Health and Wellbeing Centre and inclusion of Royton in the GM Mayor’s town centre challenge. Could the relevant Cabinet Member comment on the difference this investment will make to Royton?”

 

          Councillor Fielding, Leader of the Council and Cabinet Member for Economy and Enterprise responded that along with the ambitious programme for the development of Oldham Town Centre, the Council was also committed to investing in improvements in the Districts.  This was the idea behind the instigation of the Local Improvement Fund.  The Councillors in Royton had been extremely pro-active in supporting the recent Business Improvement Grant scheme for independent businesses along Middleton Road and Rochdale Road.  This had now been matched with an additional £25K from the Local Improvement Fund, which would enable the scheme to be expanded.  This investment, alongside the inclusion of Royton in the GM Mayor’s Town Centre challenge, and investment in Royton Town Hall, would make real differences for the community of Royton.  It would bring jobs and trade opportunities for local people, attract new customers to Royton, spend money locally and show Royton as a well looked after area with inward investment.  Changes in shopping habits and the arrival of national brands and supermarket chains to District Centres provided a wider choice for residents so it was essential that independent traders were supported in order to retain their local, unique distinctiveness.

 

8.       Councillor C. Gloster asked a question related to the Local Improvement Fund and noted how well Royton had done and gained in excess of what had been available under the old area scheme, but Shaw had received nothing.  Despite an evidenced application which included a survey of local youth who wanted improvements to the skate park.  Councillor C. Gloster asked when the park could be improved?

 

          Councillor Fielding, Leader of the Council and Cabinet Member for Economy and Enterprise responded that the size of the Shaw bid was £250k.  There was not an upper limit on bids but the Leader made reference to the previous arrangements which had allocated £10,000 per ward to spend.  The Leader advised that not all money under the LIF had been allocated and another mini-bidding round would be arranged. The Leader encouraged submission of another bid.  The Leader stated that £500K had been made available for the entire borough and significant investment had been awarded across the Borough including Saddleworth and Crompton.

 

9.       Councillor M. Bashforth asked the following question:

 

          “Cabinet has resolved that Oldham Council pledge to become Homeless Friendly, this and the decision to take the Housing Options service back in-house to me is welcome news.  Can the cabinet member responsible explain the Homeless Friendly culture and how this will be adopted and implemented by the council?”

 

          Councillor Roberts, Cabinet Member for Housing responded that Homeless Friendly was a registered charity that was founded in 2017 as part of not-for-profit social enterprise Beacon GP Care.  The charity asked that services examine the way business was conducted and pledge to make them accessible to homeless people. The aim was to promote a cultural shift in how homeless people were viewed and treated, for example offering understanding and flexibility in terms of difficult circumstances.  Oldham Council had agreed to adopt the following Homeless Friendly pledges:

·       Help meet the needs of homeless people;

·       Speak to homeless people with understanding and compassion;

·       Examine policies and procedures to ensure they were homeless friendly;

·       Train staff in the needs of Homeless People;

·       Work with partners and including and encourage they care for the homeless; and

·       Act as a hub for communities in efforts to help the homeless.

 

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.