(time limit 30 minutes)
Minutes:
The Deputy Leader of the Main Opposition, Councillor Chris Gloster, raised the following two questions:
Question 1: Local Lockdown in Oldham
“My question concerns the issue of Coronavirus Local Lockdowns. It is a great tragedy that after four months we are still dealing with the impact in human suffering, lost lives, and increasingly, the economic downturn caused by this terrible virus. Just as the situation appeared to be slightly improving and people began to experience hope, on the 29th June, the health secretary announced that the first local lockdown would be applied. This was of course in Leicester. This included the closure of schools (except for children of key workers), which partially reopened on 1 June, and non-essential retail, which reopened across England on 15 June. Before the lockdown in Leicester, the Government had suggested that local lockdowns would be handled by local leaders. What actually happened wsa that the imposition of lockdown in Leicester was decided by central Government. Boris Johnson’s leadership has overseen fatal communication blunders. These blunders kept ‘local leaders’ in the dark on what was happening with Covid-19, much too late. When Leicester went into lockdown, the Government said that the local seven-day infection rate was 135 cases per 100,000 people, three times higher than the next highest city. How did it get to that clear level of cases and local politicians and officers hadn’t a clue what was going on? The aim of a local lockdown is to control the spread of the Covid-19 by containing it within a localised area, but not necessarily by authority. It means re-imposing social distancing restrictions across the whole of the affected area. Sadly, Oldham has been harder hit than many other towns and cities in England by the Coronavirus Pandemic. I am optimistic that we have the right preparations in place for the worst-case scenario. As the Government has given consistently conflicting and confusing advice and acted slowly and communicated slowly, please can hel tell us what are we doing locally to make sure that we are ahead of the game, even if the Conservative Government is not? I know that tonight we have another detailed report on Oldham’s response to the Covid-19 crisis, but I believe many of our concerned residents would welcome an honest appraisal of our local situation and a reassurance that Oldham is ahead of the game in lay person’s language. So I invite the Leader to provide that appraisal and reassurance tonight by telling us more about our Oldham plan if we are required to go into local lockdown? And I would specifically welcome his assurance that the local track and trace testing data from the Department of Health and Social Care and its’ contractor Deloitte is now being passed onto our relevant health teams so they can act on them to help mitigate against any local spike in Covid-19 infection?”
Councillor Fielding, Leader of the Cabinet and Cabinet Member for Economy and Skills echoed the points raised in the question and the lack of communication from the Government and the lack of shared data from the Government with local authorities and referenced the leaders in Leicester who had not been in full possession of information to anticipate their position. The Leader responded that Oldham had a comprehensive Covid Management Plan and also had amongst the highest rates of testing in the country including innovative testing of asymptomatic people in at-risk occupations such as taxi drivers, front line restaurant workers and other high risk occupations which had high levels of exposure to other members of the public. Also testing for those at risk in care homes and been ongoing longer than other places in order to get a measure on the figures so the Council could come to any judgement that may be needed in the future or to put in any mitigating measures far enough in advance to have the effect of helping to avoid a local lockdown The Leader had contacted the Mayor of Greater Manchester and called for support asking for negative testing data as this was one element of the testing data the Government did not share and could not be built into forecasts. There was more data available now including the Pillar 2 data which had led to Oldham being featured, unfairly, in the national and local newspapers. Whilst Leicester had a rate of 135 per 100,000, which had led to the local lockdown, Oldham’s figure as on the date of the meeting, was 11.8 per 100,000 which was slightly above average but nowhere near the Leicester figure. The Leaders reassured members that there was a comprehensive management plan and testing was continuing. All the information would be demanded from Government that was needed. It was noted that the Council had more data than Leicester before it was placed in lockdown. The Leader was convinced that Oldham was well placed to avoid a local lockdown but very well placed to manage whatever might be necessary should the Council find itself in that position.
Question 2: Turning the Frog Into A Prince
“Later tonight, I will second the Cabinet Member for Finance’s motion attacking the Government for its failure to honour its promise to fully reimburse Councils like Oldham for the financial hit cuased by Coronavirus, and I am happy to do this as he and I are both as one on this issue. However, I regret that this Entente Cordial cannot extend to another issue concerning a town centre regeneration project which has dragged on and on. I am of course referring to the Princes Gate development. The BBC on 19 November 2014 reported Oldham Council’s announcement on the ‘game changer’ and the promise of a 150,000 square foot retail development, with 800 homes and 700 parking spaces. Now after the withdrawal of Marks and Spencers, we now no longer have a ‘game changer’. We have the promise of a 28,500 square foot retail development and a hotel. And the promised ‘missing retail giants’ are now Lidl and Travelodge, not M+S. However, anyone passing the site, probably on a tram, can see nothing is happening. Yet the Council’s Town Centre Vision, agreed in June of last year, promised work ‘due to start on site autumn 2019’. It is interesting to contrast this inactivity with that seen in the centre of another town that you go to by tram from Mumps. And that town is Rochdale. Here you can step straight of a tram and into the new Riverside retail and leisure development. Councillors there also called Riverside a ‘game changer’. For phase one is a development totalling 200,000 square feet, including 24 shops, restaurants and a six-screen cinema. Not only can you play indoor golf and watch a film, but Rochdale offers visitors a new Marks and Spencer Foodhall. Work on site started in 2018. In April the Foodhall opened and in the last few days, other units in the development have started to open as promised. Two years on, bang on time. Despite Coronavirus. From time to time in Council meetings, we gently rib our neighbours in Rochdale, but on this, they have got things so right and we so wrong. The Leader will be very aware that we are fast approaching our sixth anniversary of inactivity at the Mumps site. So for my second question tonight I would ask him when will this Frog be turned into a Prince? When will we finally see something begin to happen at Mumps?”
Councillor Fielding, Leader of the Council and Cabinet Member for Economy and Skills responded that the Council remained committed to the complete regeneration of the town centre with rebalancing the economy in Oldham away from a retail led economy to the kind of night time economy, leisure and dining opportunities could be created that people in the modern day would like. People no longer shopped as they did on the local high streets. The Leader referred to Rochdale as there had been new retail space crated in Rochdale with their development, it was not completely new but had replaced existing retail space on Yorkshire Street in Rochdale. There was an opportunity to build new homes, retail and leisure opportunities at Mumps. It would need to be done in such a way that did not undermine the retail core of Spindles in the town centre. The opportunity to re-evaluate the entire regeneration strategy had been taken as a result of the COVID-19 as had been alluded to in a previous response during the meeting related to Creating a Better Place. The Council remained ambitious for the area in and around Mumps and hotel provision was still wanted in Oldham Town Centre, as were more retail units in the town centre, not necessarily in the same numbers as before. The Leader advised that news related to the development was not far away.
Councillor Byrne, on behalf of the Conservative Group asked the following question:
“Saddleworth School runs its own successful catering department and has done so for some years. The catering staff are funded through income from that department. Income available to use from this is £300k. The school is the only community school in Oldham running its own catering service, and therefore does not quality for any government grant. Academies and trusts with their own catering departments may be funded differently. The school needs to pay the staff itself and there will be a deficit of £150k. This is in addition to the losses as in other schools from lettings and lessons. Can we find a section of funding to cover this in the government grants which the Council has received?”
Councillor Fielding, Leader of the Council and Cabinet Member for Economy and Skills thanked the catering staff of Saddleworth School and all other schools who had continued to provide meals for both vulnerable children who attended schools and those who did not attended but still required to be fed during the day. The Leader sympathised with the comments and the school’s position which sounded as if the catering department was at an unfair disadvantage due to the structuring of the service within the school. The Leader was unable to comment without further details. The Leader gave assurance that the Council was committed to supporting schools and commented on how the schools had supported communities. The Leader responded that contact would be made with the school to see if there could be help with the funding gap the school was predicting.
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 Garry asked the following question:
“How can you tell if an alleyway is adopted or unadopted and how does it affect the ability to gate it? There are many alleyways in Failsworth West which are not gated which residents wish were because they would like to improve them as communal spaces like many resident volunteers have in other gated alleys. It is very frustrating as Councillors when there are residents keen to improve their area but the barriers to gating an alley way off scupper their good intentions.”
Councillor Brownridge, Cabinet Member for Neighbourhoods and Culture responded that the ability to gate an alley was governed by the Anti-Social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act. Decision upon the installation of the gates at any given location were dependent upon the Council’s ownership and/or duties to maintain the land and the funding available. In addition, there was a requirement under the legislation to evidence crime and disorder at a location to justify the need for the gates to be installed The Council could not physically restrict access over privately owned land , however residents could work with private landowners to have gates installed through a private arrangement with locally arranged funding agreements to undertake gating installations and ongoing maintenance. Details of who owned any piece of land could be obtained by any person via the Land Registry. Residents may be able to apply for grant funding for such schemes. Action Together would be able to advise on available grant streams. The Council fully supported this type of collaborative and cooperative working for environmental improvements.
2. Councillor Hulme asked the following question:
“The Council acted quickly to paint double yellow lines on the A635 Holmfirth Road, following a weekend of unacceptable parking and behaviour by a minority of visitors to Dovestone Reservoir. Unfortunately, I am still receiving reports of double and pavement parking on the A635 and other local roads, which can make it difficult to residents to get in and out of their homes. How can we encourage people to keep fit and enjoy the countryside in a socially distanced manner without overwhelming beauty spots like Dovestone and what more can the Council do to tackle this anti-social behaviour by people who should know better?”
Councillor Brownridge, Cabinet Member for Neighbourhoods and Culture responded that the Council symphatised with residents regarding the problems that had been caused by the popularity of Dovestone and the surrounding area. Dovestone was owned by United Utilities and managed by the RSPB and Oldham Council had worked alongside these and other partners to find solutions to the issues created by an unprecedented number of visitors. Additional marshals had been funded who were on duty every day. The double yellow lines recently installed on the A635 Holmfirth Road were introduced to address significant problematic parking activity which caused serious road safety and traffic congestion issues. Although visitor numbers to the areas peaked as COVID-19 lockdown controls were eased, the problems had occurred previously. Now that the TRO’s were in place, traffic officers had been meeting with local councillors to consider to best manage the impact of the displaced parking that was taking place in adjacent residential areas and the village of Greenfield. Enforcement action regularly took place with 514 fixed penalty notices issues since 7th June 2020 when the yellow lines were introduced. The vast majority of these were either in the car park itself at Dovestone or on Holmfirth Road, but others were on the local residential streets. The Peak District National Park was trialling a car park ‘traffic light system so that visitors could see which car parks were full before they set off. The continued message from United Utilities, RSPB, the Council and partners was – enjoy Dovestone and the other green spaces, but act responsibly, respect the surroundings and clean up after yourselves. It was also suggested that there were many other green spaces in Oldham such as the Pennine Bridleway, Alexandra Park, Dunwood Park and wonderful country parks and local trails such as the Oldham Way, Medlock Valley Way and Crompton Circuit as well as fabulous canal routes along the Rochdale and Huddersfield Narrow Canals and footpath networks across Saddleworth and Beyond.
3. Councillor Jacques asked the following question:
“The Greater Manchester Spatial Framework is intended to allocate land for up to 14,000 homes in the Borough to meet our projected housing need. This included up to 260 homes on land in Woodhouses Village in my ward which is currently classed as green belt. These proposals were strongly opposed by local residents. I am grateful to the Leader for meeting with local representatives of the green belt action group to explain the position and undertand that the Council was looking for more viable brownfield sites to develop so green belt allocations can be reduced. Given the delay to the framework caused by Covid 19 has the Council used the time to find more such brownfield sites and if so how soon will we know whether they can offset green belt allocations such as those in my ward?”
Councillor Roberts, Cabinet Member for Housing responded that the Council reviewed the housing land supply position every year. The Council’s ‘Creating a Better Place’ programme identified a series of residential led development opportunities as part of repurposing the town centre and this fed into the latest housing land supply. Many of the GMSF responses suggested that derelict mills should be built o before using green belt land. A Mill Strategy was underway to look at which unlisted mills should be protected, but also possibly be converted for housing, with financial viability and other constraints taken into account. The strategy would also identify less important unlisted mills which could more easily offer land for new homes. At the same time, the Council did not want to undermine successful businesses which operated from some of the mills. All this evidence would feed into Oldham’s land supply. The revised housing land supply and other detailed viability work commissioned by the GMCA to inform revised strategic allocations which would be published in the final GMSF proposals later this year.
4. Councillor Hazel Gloster asked the following question:
“St. Paul’s Church on Rochdale Road Shaw partially collapsed in February 2019 and in excess of £250,000 later we have been left with dwarf walls and a pile of rubble. The Deputy Head of Planning has made clear that this cannot simply be rebuilt and would need a complete rebuild. There are more than 400 graves under this rubble, of local Shaw people, and this site is an absolute eyesore. Can I ask how efforts to resolve this issue are progressing, if this was Oldham Town Centre, it would have been resolved long ago?”
Councillor Roberts, Cabinet Member for Housing responded that a number of meetings had been held with representatives from the church and their contractors which local members had attended. Whilst the focus had been on making the building and site safe, the future use of the site would require an application from the site owners. Unfortunately, recent events had made wider meetings impractical. However, planning officers would make contact with the owners to discuss any proposals they may have. This was an issue around ownership and for the best approach to be sorted.
5. Councillor Briggs asked the following question:
“Dog fouling continues to be a problem across the Borough because of irresponsible dog owners. One area where it causes a major problem for my constituents is Recreation Road playing fields in Failsworth East. This playing field is used by local football teams and the organisers of the matches often have to clean up the field themselves in advance of the matches because the amount of dog dirt on the field makes it dangerous for local young people to play on. Is there more that can be done to prevent dog fouling in this, and other problem areas around the Borough and what can we do to tackle those irresponsible dog owners?”
Councillor Brownridge, Cabinet Member for Neighbourhoods and Culture responded this was a continuing problem in Failsworth and the rest of the Borough. The owners needed to be challenged to chair their behaviours and it was encouraged that anyone who witnessed individuals letting their dogs foul the playing fields to report it to Environmental Health. The behaviour needed to be challenged and this evidence would allow the team to target in their limited resources. Signage around the fields were to be reviewed and enhanced, where appropriate, to the messaging was clear to all users.
6. Councillor Haque asked the following question:
“Foster Carers play a vital role in caring for some of Oldham’s most vulnerable and sometimes challenging children and young people. Could the relevant Cabinet Member please tell us, what support was put in place to support Foster Carers during this very difficult period?”
Councillor Moores, Cabinet Member for Children and Young People responded that the vital role foster carers played in enabling children and young people to feel sage, secure and stable was recognised. In these unprecedented times, foster carers had gone above and beyond to ensure that children and young people received the highest standard of care. The Council was acutely aware that COVID-19 had had a significant impact on foster carers and had increased the level of support to counteract some of the additional pressures. The additional support provided included a two week allowance payment as a one off contribution this financial year to all foster carers; an activity duty system had been maintained which meant that foster carers always had a point of contact during working office hours; supervising social workers had continued to offer direct support to foster carers; Health Young Minds for Foster Carers and HYM were supporting carers in facilitating fostering support groups during COVID; specialist online training had been purchased to support foster carers and the children being cared for; proactive support offered to carers in respect of critical issues such as Black Lives Matter, and a weekly news bulletin being sent to all foster carers.
7. Councillor Ibrahim asked the following question:
“A lot of young people have been out around the borough enjoying the fine weather, unfortunately they are also tempted to take part in activities such as swimming and barbecues. We all know how dangerous these activities can be for individuals involved and the local environment. Could council please tell us, what interventions were put in place to try and encourage young people not to participate in these types of activities and have the youth service been active during this period
Councillor Moores, Cabinet Member for Children and Young People responded that the Youth Service had been active and supported young people throughout the lockdown. There had been some limitations in what they could deliver face to face, but the detached youth team and the District youth teams had been out in communities. They had been focused on supporting young people to be safe, delivering key safety messages and offering support where needed by targeting key ‘hot spots’ such as reservoirs, parks, open spaces and other places where young people enjoyed spending their time. The service had also been actively involved in the GM Safe4Summar campaign, which was an annual partnership campaign which took place over the summer months and involved the Greater Manchester Fire and Rescue Service (GMFRS), Greater Manchester Police (GMP), Greater Manchester Combined Authority (GMCA), the Council’s Community Safety Team, plus others with the ultimate aim to keep young people safe and provide information to their parents and carers. More information about the Campaign and to access to online activities could be found at www.safe4summer.com. There was a wider plan for summer provision and specifically, the Youth Service had a comprehensive summer programme of activities available to support young people during the summer months which included face-to-face youth work in all communities as well as targeted youth work in places as mentioned earlier.
8. Councillor Al-Hamdani asked the following question:
“I welcome the work to ensure that a thorough equality strategy is underway, as promised in the motion on Black Lives Matter at the last meeting. Our equality objectives, which were due to be updated at the start of the year have still not been. As these were due before the current coronavirus outbreak, and we have a legal obligation to update them, could the cabinet member please inform me as to the reason for the delay, and give a firm date as to when they will be updated?”
Councillor Shah, Statutory Deputy Leader and Cabinet Member for Covid-19 Response responded the Council was committed to tackling unlawful discrimination, harassment and victimisation, advancing equality of opportunity between people who share a protected characteristic and those who do not. In 2019, the Council had started to review the Equality Objectives. However, it was clear that this needed to be a more in-depth piece of work. Objectives need to be ensured that they aligned with the Workforce Strategy, as well as being backed up by a plan on how the objectives would be achieved. The development of the Equality Strategy was announced at the last Council meeting. The aim of the strategy was to place equality and diversity at the heart of what the Council did, setting ambitious goals and measuring progress against these in order to drive organisational improvement. It was important that the strategy and accompanying objectives were codeveloped with partners and residents. The draft strategy would be taken to Oldham’s Equality Advisory Group for consultation after which the strategy would be formally adopted and revised equality objectives through internal governance process and to be brought to September Council.
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