Agenda item

Questions to Leader and Cabinet

(time limit 30 minutes)

Minutes:

The Leader of the Main Opposition, Councillor Sykes, raised the following two questions:

 

Question 1:  Local is the New Normal

 

“My first question concerns the future of our district centres in the post-Covid world.  This Administration has expended countless officer hours, commissioned many specialist reports, and expended many millions of pounds on its regeneration plans for Oldham town centre over the years.  Whilst some welcome progress has been made, much of the effort and expenditure has frankly come to nothing.  Now Covid-19 has slain the latest plans.  The prospects for the ‘Creating a Better Place’ master plan, first adopted by this Administration in July 2019 and involving an investment of £306 million, has just been reviewed by Cabinet and a third or £100 million axed off that budget.  Covid has massively increased our costs, decimated our revenue, and now as a Council we quite simply do not now have the cash.  The original plan envisaged a mixture of housing, retail, leisure and office developments.  We need many thousands of new homes and I would rather they be built in Oldham Town Centre and on brownfield sites than developed at the expense of our Green Belt and green spaces.  Now we will be restructuring existing retail, leisure and office spaces, rather than bringing new space into use.  If you walk through the Town Square and Spindles Shopping Centres you can see the empty spaces.  For over a decade now, footfall along Britain’s high streets has been declining.  Covid-19 has simply accelerated the trend.  Office workers are not coming back to our Town Centre, including the Council’s.  Home-working is here to stay, and for many of us it will continue to be the only way to work or the only way we can work.  For all the talk of investing in Oldham Town Centre to ‘Create a Better Place’, there has been no talk about, and no focus on, the other district centres in our Borough, except for Royton – which is still talk only.  The Administration may have adopted a new mantra ‘We are Oldham’ but Oldham is not just the Town Centre, it is a Borough of Town and District Centres, each with a proud history and its own distinctive character.  For local is the new normal.  The Council’s ambition of ‘Creating a Better Place’, there has been no mention of investing in these localities to make the local better.  So, I would like to ask the Leader tonight whether he and his Cabinet colleagues will consider reallocating some of the investment intended for Oldham Town Centre to create ‘Better Places’ to live for those of us who live, shop, socialise or work in Lees, Royton, Chadderton, Failsworth, Shaw and the Saddleworth villages?”

 

Councillor Fielding, Leader of the Council and Cabinet Member for Economy and Skills responded that it was unfair to say that the investment and regeneration strategy in and around Oldham Town Centre had come for nothing as that had overlooked the significant investment that had taken place in the Old Town Hall which had been converted into a cinema and restaurant complex which would very soon be full.  The Leader referred to the well-publicised ambitions the Council had to make the Egyptian Room into a food market in the style of Altrincham Market and Produce Hall.  The Leader added the residents of Oldham expected that under current circumstances when the Council was struggling in unprecedented financial pressures due to both coronavirus and ten years of cuts that looked set to continue, that the Council would review the ‘Creating a Better Place’ investment proposals and this had been done.  The Leader added that there would be no dialling down of ambition and would respond dynamically to the changes in the economy as a result of Covid-19.  The Leader said that Councillor Sykes was right to acknowledge that more people would be working remotely but that this also provided an opportunity to move some Council staff who were currently based outside the Oldham Town Centre campus back into the Town Centre and support businesses within the Town Centre.  The Leader also highlighted the ambition for the number of homes in Oldham Town Centre which had increased to 2,500 compared to 2,000 in the original version.  This would protect areas of green belt and reduce the amount that would have to be allocated under the Greater Manchester Spatial Framework (GMSF) and so the benefits would ripple out to all constituent parts of the towns and village of the borough as the Council would be able to withdraw sites from the GMSF being offset by the increased housing allocation in town.  The Leader said that Oldham Labour were committed to all the Borough’s towns.  It was recognised that Oldham borough was a collection of very different unique places.  There had been investment in Failsworth with the refurbishment of the Town Hall, investment in the retail offer in Failsworth District Centre and similar things were happening both organically and with support from the Council in places like Uppermill, Lees and Royton. The Leader added that most successful regeneration was where local people invested their own money in supporting the places they loved and cared about.  The Leader was pleased with the growth in the night-time economy and the quality of the offer in Royton which had been, in the most part, driven by local people who had invested their own cash.  The Leader added that it was often when communities put their hands in their pocket and support their local economy that the best results were seen.  The Leader guaranteed that Oldham Council under the current administration, was behind people who wished to invest.  Business grant schemes had been adjusted and the Business Support Team had been adapted to support this kind of activity.  The Leader added that if Councillor Sykes had any examples from constituents in Shaw that wished to access the support the Council offered to improve the local economy and night-time offer, he was advised to contact the team.

 

Question 2: Full Pay for Anyone Forced to Self-isolate

 

“I agree with Greater Manchester Mayor Andy Burnham who recently called for the Government to pay for anyone forced to self-isolate their full wages, where there is no employer to do so.  The current situation is a nonsense and it discourages people from participating fully and faithfully in Track and Trace and from choosing to self-isolate.  I will use two examples.

Person A: a low-paid employee working in the ‘gig’ economy, not knowing how many hours or how many days a week or a month they will work and forced to claim Universal Credit to make ends meet and battling between pay days with financial insecurity and the complexities and frustrations of the benefits system.  Person A isn’t entitled to full pay when they do not work; their employer only offers Statutory Sick Pay. 

Person B: A self-employed tradesperson with a start-up business carrying out jobs for private customers in domestic dwellings.  Person B goes out to work from a makeshift office under the stairs, and, as a self-employed person, if they don’t work, they don’t earn; they have no employer-based sick pay scheme.  If our Persons A and B go for a well-earned pint in the pub at the end of the day – separately of course because under Oldham’s rules they cannot meet in the same pub as members of two separate households – they are meant to record their personal details with the establishment in case there is a Covid infection there and they need to be traced.  But why does Person A or Person B have any incentive to diligently fill in their details when, if they were subsequently contacted and forced to self-isolate, they will lose at least 10 days and possibly two weeks work, with little or no sick pay as a result?  That is why you see Track and Trace records in pubs and elsewhere noting the presence of Batman and Bart and Lisa Simpson amongst their recent customers.  Now the Government has now grudgingly agreed to pay the recipients of Universal Credit or Work Credits a paltry sum of £13 a day for any time that they are required to self-isolate.  Oldham is one of the first pilot areas where this will apply.  Would the Leader agree that this derisory sum will in no way recompense Person A and Person B form Oldham for their loss during self-isolation?  And will he agree to join with me to introduce a meaningful compensation scheme?  Then A and B can faithfully record their Track and Trace details and participate in self-isolation, and not have to disguise their movements using the names of fictitious superheroes or cartoon characters.  Then we can fight and tackle the blight Covid-19 is causing to our Borough and the communities that live and work within it.”

 

Councillor Fielding, Leader of the Council and Cabinet Member for Economy and Skills responded that the examples illustrated the important point that people faced to their earnings if they were told to self-isolate.  During conversations with the Government when the Council was successfully avoiding a local lockdown, the case was made around the loss of earnings, particularly for self-employed people. The loss of earnings was too great and people chose not to self-isolate which in-turn lead to a greater spread of coronavirus.  The Leader was pleased that Councillor Sykes had raised the issue to Council and responded that he personally was a signatory to the petition on the ‘Time Out to Help Out’ Campaign which had been launched jointly with the Trade Unions and by the Mayors of both Greater Manchester and Liverpool City Regions and demanded a no loss of earnings which meant that no-one should be out of pocket and people should be able to claim for any lost wages whilst self-isolating, that quarantine was a civic duty, and not expected to lose out in the same way that people were not expected to lose out when on jury service.  A simple claim system so that people continued to be paid as normal whether it was an employer or a self-employed person, in order to claim earnings back from the Government relatively easily and which would, in turn, deliver an effective track and trace system so that people did give genuine names and did not feel it would be punitive to have to self-isolate.  The Leader encouraged all members of all groups to sign the ‘Time Out to Help Out’ petition as it was true the paltry sum offered was not going to dissuade or act as enough of an incentive for people to self-isolate when they really needed to in order to protect the rest of the Borough.

 

Councillor Sheldon, on behalf of the Conservative Group ask the following question:

 

“The Council Leader will be aware of the letter that we, the Conservative Group, sent to him last week about Child Sexual Exploitation.  It is an issue which rises above party politics and is an issue which demands a full and transparent investigation.  With the growing allegations, will the Council Leader join us in writing to the Home Secretary asking for a full independent investigation into the current allegations and crimes yet to be discovered?”

 

Councillor Fielding, Leader of the Council and Cabinet Member for Economy and Skills responded:

“Councillor Sheldon has said that this is an issue that should rise above party politics but then uses it to make a political point.  I have written back to the Conservative Group and I can read excerpts from the letter that I sent, which I am still waiting a response to.  The Conservative Group, and indeed Councillor Sheldon in this meeting tonight, has made another assertion that there are criminal acts that have taken place.  If there is evidence of criminal acts that have taken place then Councillor Sheldon, his colleagues, or anyone who has evidence of them need to submit them to the appropriate people for investigation.  But what I would say is that keeping vulnerable children safe is the council’s number one priority.  Our children’s safeguarding teams work tirelessly to make sure children are in the safest environments possible, that families are supported to keep children safe and that those who are victims of abuse are supported and cared for.  The work that our children’s services teams do saves lives.  They have my full admiration and support and I know that many others in this chamber will support those sentiments.  But that doesn’t mean we can’t improve what we do.  Unfortunately, child abuse in all its forms, is far too common, and we have to continually improve our practice.  In order to be reassured that we, as a council, are doing and have done everything we can to keep victims safe I asked the Greater Manchester Mayor to commission an independent review to look into the allegations that are circulating online.  He appointed Malcolm Newsam and Gary Ridgway to oversee a review around these historic CSE allegations.  Both Gary and Malcolm have extensive experience in social care and policing, taking on appointments by several government ministers in the past and carrying out reviews in other areas including Northamptonshire and, more recently, Manchester.  The independent review is now underway and, when it is completed we will welcome its findings and acknowledge and learn from any areas they identify where we could do better.  Rather than proposing a new review, I would again implore those making allegations to work with the review team.  Neither this review, or any other that people call for, whether it’s commissioned by the Greater Manchester Combined Authority or by the Home Secretary, can look into allegations made on social media without any evidence – anyone who has any should come forward.  People who experience child abuse have to be able to trust public authorities.  I hope that the review will help build that trust, by pinpointing any failures in the past and showing people that our services are learning and improving.  Allegations about child abuse or the credibility of the review team that do not have evidence to support them damage that trust, particularly when made by elected representatives.  The recent approach taken by some members taken in this chamber including the Conservatives disappointingly undermines the trust and confidence that our residents have in children’s social care.  If people don’t have confidence in social care they may be less willing to report concerns and, put simply that could place children in danger, and cost children’s lives.  I can only finish this contribution by again appealing to Councillor Sheldon and any other members in this chamber or anybody out there listening who has evidence of crimes or child abuse to submit it to the appropriate authorities, whether than be the police or the review team.  Of course, I also need to say that when we originally asked the Combined Authority to commission a review, the group leaders of all political groups on the council were briefed on this, including Councillor Hudson, and so the Conservative Group should be well aware of the Terms of Reference, which are publicly available, and the work programme of the review.”

 

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 McLaren asked the following question:

 

           I have been contacted by a local resident who only recently left the house. She has now been on the bus three times, each time she goes on the bus, she wears a mask as instructed, but on all three occasions someone, sometimes two people have been allowed to board the bus with no mask on. This is a cause of great concern for the resident. So could I ask the relevant Cabinet Member what can be done about this?”

 

            Councillor Brownridge, Cabinet Member for Neighbourhoods and Culture responded that there were a number of exemptions for the requirement to wear a mask so it could be possible that some of those people who weren’t wearing masks were doing it for legitimate reasons.  Handwashing and social distancing were the two most important ways of combatting the virus but the short answer to the question was that at the moment it was not possible for the Council to make people wear masks if they chose not to, but the Cabinet Member stressed that choosing not to wear a mask was a selfish act and urged everybody to follow the rules that had been set down.

 

2          Councillor Surjan asked the following question:

 

            “We know that traffic accidents on the road are very high and in the month of May alone during lockdown, Fire Rescue were call out 72 times for Road Traffic Collisions.  With the message being sent out people should avoid public transport we know many will turn to cars to get to places thus increasing risks.  This statistic mentioned is only those that are recorded, I’m sure there are dozens more which haven’t been reported to GMP and even more near misses.  For a few months now residents have raised concerns of speeding and dangerous driving on Mars Street in Coldhurst with many children being put at risk and their cars being damaged (i.e. wing mirrors knocked off) by reckless young drivers and lorry drivers.  They were informed nothing could be done as there were not official data recorded.  Just two weeks ago I sent a photo of a car that had smashed into the bollards on Mars St, thankfully no one was hurt.  The cost of fixing those bollards will no doubt come from tax payers money.  Will the relevant Cabinet Member reassure residents of the area that this matter will be looked into?  And look to put plans in place to reduce reckless driving across the wider borough by young drivers and lorry drivers?”

 

            Councillor Brownridge, Cabinet Member for Neighbourhoods and Culture responded that the Council took road safety very seriously.  Unfortunately, what was being experienced in Oldham and elsewhere in the country was a general increase in motorists travelling at higher speeds than normal.  This could be elated to there being lower traffic volumes and absence of Police presence and in rural settings the attraction of the challenging nature of the routes.  Speed limits were set in accordance with DfT guidelines and in consultation with the police and were designed to reflect the nature and characteristics of the road and the environment it was in. However, reckless driving and those who wished to ignore the Highway Code or the posted limited could not be legislated which is why the police were relied upon to enforce limits as currently local authorities could not penalise speeding drivers as such activity was deemed a Moving Traffic Offence and out of the Council’s jurisdiction.  That said, Traffic and Road Safety officers would be pleased to work with the elected member and investigate what could be done to mitigate the current unsocial activity and enhance the existing traffic management facilities.  With regard to the actual damage referred to in the question, the area had been inspected and two damaged concrete bollards identified.  A work order had been issued for the footway to be made safe and the bollards replaced.

 

3.         Councillor Haque asked the following question:

 

            “I note that the Government has extended the ban on courts hearing landlord’s applications for possession until the 20th September and is now requiring that tenants are given 6-months notice rather than 3 until at least the end of March 2021. Can the Cabinet Member for Housing tell us what is known about the likely impact of Covid 19 on tenants in Oldham and whether she thinks the measures so far announced are enough to prevent large numbers of evictions and people losing their homes?”

 

            Councillor Roberts, Cabinet Member for Planning responded that the majority of registered social landlords in Oldham had signed up to the National Federation of Housing Association pledges which were:

1.        Keeping people secure at home: No one would be evicted from a housing association home as a result of financial hardship caused by coronavirus, where they were working (or engaging) with their housing association to get their payments back on track.

2.        Helping people to get the support they need: Housing Associations were helping residents to access benefits and other support to alleviate financial hardship, which included supporting people to get work where possible.

3.        Acting compassionately and quickly where people were struggling: Housing associations would work with any resident who was struggling to find arrangements to pay rent that was manageable for them in the long term.  Legal action would only be taken in serious circumstances – as a lost resort where a resident would not agree a plan with their landlord to help them pay their rent, or where it was needed urgently in cases of domestic abuse or of anti-social behaviour that was putting other residents or communities at risk.  The pledges would help residents who resided in socially rented homes.  The Housing Advice Team was also working with private landlords to understand issues that they were facing as a result of Covid 19.  What would also help was if discretionary housing payments (DHP) could be increased and ‘rules’ around its use relaxed, for example, at the moment only people eligible for support with housing costs could access DHP.  This excluded any households on a higher income who might have been affected by Covid and unable to afford their rent, in turn, this affected private landlords who could not get their rent and so they could also face financial hardship.  The extension of the eviction ban was welcomed though more generally there was an urgent need to reform how costs were covered by housing benefit or the housing element of Universal Credit.  The local housing allowance needed to permanently meet local market rents.  The bedroom tax and benefit cap be abolished.  The combine impact of these measures could mean that residents receiving housing support significantly below their rent found it difficult to pay their rent and also meet their other household costs.

 

4.         Councillor Williamson asked the following question:

 

            “The Government recently gave the Council £215,000 to use in ‘reopening town centres’.  What has this money been spent on?”

 

            Councillor Fielding, Leader of the Council and Cabinet Member for Economy and Skills responded that the key focus for the funding was to support the reopening of the town centres and high streets in district centres shopping districts and community shopping locations, especially in vulnerable communities.  Oldham Council had and continued to put a huge amount of effort to offer sound and evidenced-based information to businesses and residents during the Covid-19 emergency.  This project and additional funding was helping to target activities in alignment with the CV19 Management Plan, and had allowed the Council to build and add value to initial works and activities underway.  Specific activities included:

·         Supported the development of an action plan for how to continue to safely reopen the high street and local economy;

·         Communications and public information were managed to ensure the reopening of high streets across the borough were done successfully and safely;

·         Business engagement and awareness raising activities to ensure that reopening was and could be managed successfully and safely; and

·         Temporary public realm changes to ensure that reopening could be managed successfully and safely.

 

5.         Councillor Hulme asked the following question:

 

            “Over the past 6 months schools, colleges and community facilities were all shut down leaving many of Oldham’s young people at a loose end for large parts of the day, potentially resulting in them engaging in behaviour that could be dangerous or considered anti-social. Could the cabinet member responsible for youth services please tell us what was put in place to interact with young people and to divert them away from these types of activity?”

 

            Councillor Moores, Cabinet Member for Children and Young People responded within information related to what had been delivered by the Youth Services and partners.  The Youth Service had been active in supporting young people throughout the lockdown.  There had been some limitations in what could be delivered face-to-face.  From the start of lockdown in March, the Youth Service had delivered an extensive 7 day-a-week programme of online sessions, one-to-one support to vulnerable young people and community-based engagement.  The face-to-face work had steadily increased in line with the end of lock down and the changes in Government restrictions but was fully risk assessed and adhered to social distancing and Covid safe procedures.  The Youth Service had delivered a comprehensive summer programme of activities with an average of 40 sessions per week delivered online and face to face along side a range of wider summer activities offered from a range of organisations across Oldham.  Oldham Youth Service had worked closed with Police and Community Safety colleagues so they were able to respond to any potential anti-social behaviour or other youth related issues.  They were also involved in supporting the GM Safe4Summer campaign.  The Youth Service continued with the youth work offer and were supporting the community engagement programme currently taking place across Oldham to support the fight against Covid and were supporting the return to school, developing youth engagement sessions across localities in Oldham and offering targeted programmes to schools, colleges and communities to support young people.  As well as the Council’s own Youth Service, organisations within the community and voluntary sector delivered an offer to young people and continued to increase that offer as the restrictions and guidelines to youth sector organisations changed.  The Cabinet Member expressed this thanks to the teams for the support provided during this period.

 

6.         Councillor Phythian asked the following question:

 

            “Many Oldham residents are struggling financially at the present time, they are having to make decisions about paying their rent and utility bills or buying food. Oldham Food Bank, is a volunteer led organisation that provides outstanding support for residents who have found themselves in this position. What support have Oldham Council given to the Food Bank during this very difficult period?”

 

            Councillor Shah, Deputy Leader of the Council and Cabinet Member for the Covid-19 Response responded that the Council had and continued to support the Food Bank in a number of ways which included to continue to charge a peppercorn-only rent for premises; purchased refrigeration equipment for the Food Bank at the start of the pandemic; provided staff support, up to 10 staff, as a minimum, on a regular basis over 7 days a week; provided officer support related to the setting up of a bulk purchasing arrangement with suppliers, established supply links to FareShareGM and linked the Food Bank into other sources of food donations which had come in from across Greater Manchester.  In addition, Environmental Services had provided the foodbank with veg boxes from produced grown through the summer.  In terms of funding, £20K had been set aside from the Growing Oldham Feeding Ambition (GOFA) to provide financial support.  Funding had been approved in principle from the DEFRA Local Authority Emergency Assistance Scheme to support the longer-term sustainability of the Food Bank.  It was important that the support offered across Team Oldham be recognised and the excellent partnership that had formed in particular between the Council, Action Together and the Foodbank to support the borough’s most vulnerable communities during this difficult time.  The partnership working continued to ensure that people could continue to access food as the economic impact of Covid 19 was felt.

           

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.