Agenda item

(time limit 15 minutes)

AGMA Executive Board                                          26 June 2020

Greater Manchester Transport Committee          10 July 2020

GM Waste and Recycling Committee                  12 March 2020

Health and Wellbeing Board                                  12 November 2019

Greater Manchester Combined Authority            26 June 2020

                                                                                    31 July 2020

MioCare Board                                                         23 April 2020

Peak Park District Authority                                   3 July 2020

                                                                                    24 July 2020

Police and Crime Panel                                          30 June 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:

AGMA Executive Board                                                      26 June 2020

Greater Manchester Transport Committee                      10 July 2020

GM Waste and Recycling Committee                              12 March 2020

Health and Wellbeing Board                                              12 November 2019

Greater Manchester Combined Authority                        26 June 2020

                                                                                                31 July 2020

MioCare Board                                                                     23 April 2020

Peak Park District Authority                                               3 July 2020

                                                                                                24 July 2020

Police and Crime Panel                                                      30 June 2020

Members asked the following questions:

1.         Councillor Williamson asked the following question on the Greater Manchester Combined Authority minutes, 31 July 2020, Item GMCA 122/20 – Brownfield Land Fund and Getting Building Fund:

            “The minute records that of the Government’s £400m Brownfield Land Fund, £81.1m has been allocated for Greater Manchester over the next five years, and that Greater Manchester has also been allocated £54m as part of the ‘Getting Building Fund’ to support post Covid-19 building recovery, to be spent by 31 March 2022.  Can the relevant Cabinet Member tell me how much of this money will be coming to Oldham and how this Council intends to spend it?”

            Councillor Fielding, Leader of the Council and Cabinet Member for Economy and Skills responded that none of the funding pot had yet been allocated so it was unclear at the moment how much would be allocated to Oldham.  The funding was to be used to bring forward sites for residential development on brownfield land that could evidence market failure.  GMCA were co-ordinating bids to the fund and submissions had been put forward in Oldham which sought a total of £17.942 million grant.  Future updates could be provided.

2.         Councillor Al-Hamdani asked the following question on the Greater Manchester Transport Committee minutes, 10 July 2020, Minute GMTC 50/20 Mayoral Update and on the Greater Manchester Combined Authority minutes, 31 July 2020, Minute GMCA 125/20, the Mayor’s Cycling and Walking Challenge Fund (MCF) and Emergency Active Travel Funding, Tranche 1 –

            “As people are being urged to return to school and to work, the Government allocation £250-million for an ‘Emergency Active Travel Fund’ to encourage everyone to walk or cycle where possible instead of taking public transport or returning to their cars.  Greater Manchester received £15,872,000.  The Transport Secretary also issued new Statutory Guidance on 9 May to all Highways Authorities, requiring them to deliver ‘transformative change’ within an urgent timeframe.  The Guidance included recommendations to consider ‘pop-up’ cycle facilities, widening footways, ‘school streets’ schemes, and reducing speed limits.  Can the relevant Cabinet Member tell me how much money from the Greater Manchester ‘pot’ Oldham has received and what this Council has or proposes to do with it to meet the requirements and aspirations of the Statutory Guidance?  And can the Cabinet Member also currently tell me what mechanism exists to consult with cyclists in this borough on our proposed cycle schemes?”

            Councillor Brownridge, Cabinet Member for Neighbourhoods and Culture responded that whilst the Government had indicated that Greater Manchester could receive up to £15.9 million from its Emergency Active Travel Fund, the Council still had to go through a competitive bidding process to access the Fund.  Government had split the fund into two bidding tranches and required single bids from Combined Authority areas.  Greater Manchester submitted a bid to Tranche 1 and had an initial allocation of £3.1m approved for the regions Tranche 1 schemes which in Oldham included pedestrian improvements in Oldham Town Centre.  No GM local authority had received any direct funding but would be able to recover the cost of delivering their agreed Tranche 1 schemes from the GM Allocation.  The government’s decision on the region’s Tranche 2 bid to secure the remaining indicative GM allocation was still awaited.  In addition to this Government funding, the GM Mayor had made £0.5m of emergency funding available to each GM local authority to support the Safe Streets Save Live campaign and the Council was busy making changes across the borough to support social distancing and active travel, including installation of new road markings, signing and footway widening.

3.         Councillor Harkness asked the following question on the Peak District National Park Authority Minutes, 24 July 2020, Minute 54/20 – National Park Management Plan Annual Monitoring Report 2019/20 – “The killing of Birds of Prey in the Peak District National Park includes parts of Saddleworth Moor.  In a recent report by the investigation team of the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds, it is reported that the Peak District National Park is one of the worse parts of the UK for the illegal killing of rare birds of prey.  Locally, in May, a buzzard was found with fatal injuries on land used for game bird shooting in Diggle and two years ago a red kite was seen being shot, and two owls were found shot dead on Saddleworth Moor.  There have also been shooting incidents, suspicions of poisoning and raids by egg robbers on nests in other parts of the Park. All birds of prey are protected by the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981. To intentionally kill or injure one is a criminal offence, punishable by an unlimited fine or up to six months in jail. But the deaths of every one of these beautiful and majestic creatures are not only deplorable crimes; they represent an irreplaceable loss to our natural environment and to humanity. The Peak District Annual Monitoring Report refers to moorland birds, and specifically birds of prey on Page 7, but the detail is quite vague.  I would like to ask the Council’s representative to the Peak District National Park Board whether this issue has been discussed at recent Board meetings and what the outcome was?  I would be especially interested to hear what action is being taken by the Board to work with the Police. RSPB, local wildlife charities and land owners like United Utilities and Yorkshire Water to end this menace and to bring offenders to book. If the issue has not been discussed, please can I ask him to raise it with the Chair and Board at the earliest opportunity?”

            Councillor McLaren, Oldham Council’s representative on the Peak District National Park Authority confirmed that the Annual Monitoring Report had been discussed at the meeting but with no specific reference made to birds of prey.  Councillor McLaren would seek further advice and information and report back to all members of Council.

.          

            an estimated breakdown of what proportion of any increases are related to that, rather than to the change in restrictions on visits, by comparing the data pre-lockdown, under lockdown and post-lockdown?”

            Councillor Brownridge, Cabinet Member for Neighbourhoods and Culture responded that the information requested was currently being investigated.  It was to be appreciated that the information would take some extensive investigation to enable the information to be pulled together.  The Cabinet Member would endeavour to get the requested information at the earliest opportunity and forward it via email.

5.         Councillor Hobin asked the following question related to Police and Crime Panel Minutes, 30 June 2020, Minute PCP/20/20 – Police and Crime Team Update –

            Councillor Hobin referred to the question asked earlier.          

“Over the last few days and weeks, some things had come to light that casts a shadow over the Council, a shadow which casts and calls into question the integrity of the Council, and as a result of this, the integrity into every member here tonight.  I am very proud to represent my constituency, unfortunately at times I feel no pride in being part of this Council.  Of course it’s to talk of the Child Sexual Exploitation allegations and the Council’s response.  It’s clear to me and many others that the review in place is not fit for purpose.  The scope is to narrow, the governance nowhere near independent enough regardless of what Councillor Fielding says, I am sure the public, when they see pictures of him and his good friend the GM Mayor, will call into question how independent this is.  It’s too big an issue to be dealt with in what is pretty much a self-managed review.  I believe it is now time to request a fully independent investigation and a public inquiry into all possible aspects of possible child sexual exploitation in our borough and this investigation should be with full legal standing.  This is not a party political issue.  This is more important than that.  Every day children’s future dreams are being turned into nightmares.  It’s our duty above all else to protect our children and not to decide because of which party you are in how you’re going to represent them.  You should be representing your constituents, the ones that have trusted you personally by electing you in.  If I quote from Edmund Burke ‘all that is required for evil to triumph is good men to do nothing’.  I refuse to do nothing on this.  The revelations of the Administration, apparently keeping secrets regarding council members criminal charges and convictions recently has diminished any trust or belief in this Council.  I understand why Councillor Fielding said the number one priority is child protection and that’s what it should be.  He also questioned people coming forward to the Council, but when the Leader of the Council has called allegations barefaced lies in the past on 2 occasions, when he’s gone public saying people are scaremongering on the internet, how do you expect people to come to trust in the Council?  I think it is time now for this Council to all come together and demand an independent public inquiry into what is going on.  I would like to see and I propose a full recorded vote tonight by members here and now to press this Administration on referring to the Home Office and the Local Government Minister a request for a full independent inquiry into child sexual exploitation in this borough and any other activity.  Anything short of this, I believe, is a dereliction of duty, anything other than this points to an Administration that is scared of any truth being discovered but it certainly doesn’t show this Council as the transparent Council they want it to be.  I would ask members to join with me in forcing this issue.  We need to vote, we need to push this Administration into a proper independent inquiry into what is going on in this borough.  Until we do that there are children at harm every single night.  We cannot sort this out until we know what’s gone on in the past.  I ask the Council for a full recorded vote of all members so we know who is on line with use and who isn’t.  Who are protecting people they shouldn’t be and wo are not looking after the interests of their constituents.”

            Councillor Fielding, Leader of the Council and Cabinet Member for Economy and Skills reiterated some things that had already been said and some things that Councillor Hobin had alluded to but which had not been said in the meeting but had been said publicly in the past.  Councillor Hobin had been advised to provide evidence which supported his assertion that there had been crimes committed or that there were flaws with the independent review which had already been commissioned.  Councillor Hobin so far had failed to provide anything.  If the Council were to request a new review from a Central Government department, the likelihood was that they would commission Malcolm Newsam and Gary Ridgway to do the work, as they were the people used in the past.  Any new review would only slow down the answers Councillor Hobin claimed he wanted.  Councillor Hobin and his associates online seemed mainly interested in spreading doubt in public services which was in itself placing young people in danger.  There had been seen those who knew what the rules for council meetings were and for things like Freedom of Information requests, doing the wrong thing, seemingly on purpose, so a cover up could be claimed when they didn’t get the answers.  The Council had committed that when the independent review reported its findings, Group Leaders would be brought together too consider any next steps to be taken and if the review unearthed any criminality that would be dealt with by the police.  The Leader asked once again that Councillor Hobin and others to bring forward any evidence that they had rather than spreading baseless accusations that undermined the fantastic work that Children’s Services teams did and placed children at risk by potentially dissuading those with information about abuse coming forward.

            The Mayor advised that a vote could not be taken on a statement.  If Councillor Hobin wished to submit a motion to the next meeting of Council, which has been seconded by another member under Opposition Business, this would be debated and voted upon.

RESOLVED that:

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

2.         The questions and responses provided be noted.