Agenda item

(time limit 15 minutes)

Police and Crime Panel                                          28 January 2020

                                                                                    31 January 2020

Greater Manchester Combined Authority            14 February 2020

                                                                                    29 May 2020

                                                                                    24 June 2020

MioCare Board                                                         23 January 2020

Peak Park District Authority                                   13 March 2020

                                                                                    22 May 2020

To note the minutes of the following Joint Authority and Partnership meetings and the relevant spokesperson to respond to questions from Members.

The minutes of the following Joint Authorities and Partnership meetings were submitted as follows:

Police and Crime Panel                                          28 January 2020

                                                                                    31 January 2020

Greater Manchester Combined Authority            14 February 2020

                                                                                    29 May 2020

                                                                                    24 June 2020

MioCare Board                                                         23 January 2020

Peak Park District Authority                                   13 March 2020

                                                                                    22 May 2020

Members asked the following questions:

1.         Councillor Al-Hamdani asked the following question on the Police and Crime Panel Minutes, 28 January 2020, Item PCP/09/20 – Child Sexual Exploitation:

            “The Deputy Mayor has provided a verbal update, which covers three strands of the CSE review, on Operation Augusta (with reference to Maggie Oliver’s allegations),on the situation in Rochdale, and the way respond in future to allegations of sexual exploitation, but due to the timing of the meeting, not on the investigation into Oldham – which has commenced and been running for several months in the intervening period.  Given the importance of this for anyone who has suffered any form of exploitation, and for reassuring other members of the public of the seriousness with which this must be treated, could you let us know when we can expect information to be provided on the investigation into Oldham will be provided to the GMCA, and indeed to the Borough Council, and what areas we expect this report to cover.

            Councillor Fielding, Leader of the Council and Cabinet Member for Economy and Skills responded that he was pleased to put on record his response as there was ample speculation made by people who were not in full possession of the facts surrounding this issue.  The review into historic child sexual exploitation in Oldham being conducted by an independent review team was well underway.  The review was being overseen by the GMCA Steering Group, chaired by the Deputy Mayor and the review team regularly reported progress to the steering group.  The terms of reference were publicly available.  Given the complexity and independence of the review the Council was not in direct control of the timeline for completion of the review or release of its report and it shouldn’t be to guarantee independence.  Through the GMCA Steering Group, the Council was confident that positive progress was being made.  The Leader commented that it was regrettable that the most verbal of those who made allegations on historic failings had refused to engage with the review.  The Leader further commented that it was regrettable that a small number of individuals continued to share allegations but had no evidence behind them.  The Leader hoped that upon hearing this response those making allegations without presenting evidence to support them to the authorities would think about their behaviour.  The Leader hoped that any victims would not be denied the justice they deserved by selfish individuals holding onto information that could allow prosecutions to take place and answers which were sought provided.  Further details would be provided to Council when made available.

2.         Councillor Harkness asked the following question on GMCA Minutes, 14 February 2020, Item GMCA53/20 – James Briggs:

            “I refer you to the note under Item 5.  That an update on James Briggs Limited be noted.  This sounds innocuous enough and few people, even journalists, would bother to investigate what is hidden within the lack of detail.  Further digging through the update reveals that in 2013 and 2014 loans were made by the GMCA to James Briggs totally £4,250,000 for business expansion and capital investment.  In August 2019, the business was bought and at that time a payment was made to the Greater Manchester Combined Authority supposedly to settle any outstanding debt.  Unfortunately, this £1,600,000 payment still left the combined authority £1,317,380 out-of-pocket.  The authority chose to write this off.  The agenda item was hidden, and the language used obtuse.  A failing as big as this should have been easier to find, not spanning several documents in less than a hundred words.  This is real life changing money that could have been spent on vital services in the region.  Correct me if I’m wrong but as I read it the Greater Manchester Combined Authority wrote off one million, three hundred and seventeen thousand and three hundred and seventy pounds (£1,317,370).  I would like to ask the question why?  Because it is a fact that Tetrosyl acquired the James Briggs firm in August 2019, a company now with a turnover of more than £150 million pounds per annum.  It is the shareholders of this parent business who have benefited from this write-off, and the rate-payers of this and the other nine Greater Manchester authorities who lost out.  Why was pressure not put on this private company to pay up?  I’d like to hear a worthy answer that justifies a write-off of £1.3 million to a huge company which is rolling in cash.”

            Councillor Fielding, Leader of the Council and Cabinet Member for Economy and Skills responded that the investment fund from which the James Briggs firm original loans were made derived from the Regional Growth Fund which was granted to the GMCA for investment into businesses in 2012 and 2013.  The GMCA took the decision for a recycling fund to be created for loans to businesses in Greater Manchester who could not access other private sector funding and therefore created or sustained jobs that ultimately otherwise wouldn’t have been created or sustained if left to the market.  The financial intervention provided by the GM Investment Fund involved higher risk than traditional bank loans in order to ensure access was available to more GM businesses that otherwise would have been.  Unfortunately, this also meant that the chance of default was higher and, in some case, the value of investments may not be recovered in full.  The James Briggs firm transaction dated back to 2013 and, at the time of the original investment, provided much needed financial support to a long standing and significant employer in the Oldham Borough.  Due to a deterioration in the company’s financial position, £1.9m of GMCA’s loan was converted to equity in January 2019 to stabilise the business and safeguard jobs within the Oldham economy.  In June 2019, the majority owner in James Briggs agreed to sell the business to Tetrosyl and, as a minority shareholder, GMCA was forced to sell its shareholding.  GMCA received the same price per share as the private sector owner of the business and represented the market value of the investment at that time.  There was nothing that GMCA could legally due to increase the share price, but officers did have several meetings with the management at Tetrosyl to maximise the return to GMA as much as possible.

3.         Councillor Hazel Gloster asked the following question on the MioCare Board Minutes, 23 January 2020, Item 9 – MD Update:

            “The minutes reports the end of year loss of £229,000.  I would like to ask how this loss is being addressed to make the business again solvent?  And what the impact of this loss will be on the delivery of service in this and future years?”

            Councillor Steven Bashforth, Chair of MioCare Board responded that the losses occurred mainly due the impact of the pay awards given recently to MioCare Staff.  Fortunately, there was not impact on service delivery and, in fact, MioCare had performed exemplary through the COVID crisis.  Actions were in place to mitigate against a similar position in the future.  MioCare was part of the Community Health and Social Care Alliance and a key partner in the evolving Health and Social Care for Oldham there would be an opportunity to do that.  MioCare was also taking on additional activity which would help in the balancing of the books.  Councillor Bashforth added that for the current financial year, MioCare would be reporting a balanced budget and much of the COVID-19 related costs would be managed through access to the national government infection control fund.  Councillor Bashforth added that following a further check, the period 5 accounts which were to be presented to the Board in a couple of weeks showed a forecasted surplus.  Councillor Bashforth also added that this highlighted the underfunding of Adult Social Care and the budget pressures it faced, reflected the challenges faced by all social carers.  MioCare along with other responsible social care providers would continue to lobby the government for the funding to be reviewed.

4.         Councillor Williamson asked the following question on the Police and Crime Panel Minutes, 31January 2020, PCP/14/20 – PCC Component of the Mayoral Receipt:

            “On the recruitment of new police officers, whilst the news is welcome, please can I ask how inequalities issues are being addressed in the recruitment of new officers for Greater Manchester and specifically for Oldham, to ensure that the composition of the Greater Manchester Police Service continues to reflect the communities that it serves?”

            Councillor Steve Williams, Deputy Cabinet Member for Covid-19 Response and Oldham Council representative on the Police and Crime Panel responded that he would write formally to Councillor Williamson.  Councillor Williams responded that following a recent training course, half of the recruits were female.  GMP had a positive action team in place to ensure recruitment took place properly.  Councillor Williams had received information but want to ensure the data was correct.  He would raise the question at the next meeting and provide the information.

RESOLVED that:

1.         The minute of the Joint Authorities and Partnership meetings as detailed in the report be noted.

2.         The questions and responses provided be noted.