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:

For my first question to the Leader tonight, I would like to return to the redevelopment of the Spindles and Town Square shopping centres.

 

At the November 2020 Council meeting, just after the purchase had been completed, I asked the Leader whether this represented a ‘risky purchase’ and pointed up the ‘significant sums of money’ that will be involved in repurposing and refurbishing these two shopping centres.

 

I am sure that many people will have been shocked to recently hear that the ‘significant sum of money’ this Administration has earmarked to repurpose and refurbish these shopping centres amounts to £68 million over five years.

 

Not for nothing did the Liberal Democrats brand it ‘Spendles’.

 

This truly is a whopping sum of money.

We all want to see a vibrant, viable town centre in the heart of our borough – and for our part Liberal Democrat Councillors also want to see vibrant and well-used district centres in Failsworth, Chadderton, Royton, Shaw, Uppermill, and Lees as well – but at what eventual cost?

 

My real fear is that we shall see the same cost and time overruns and abortive costs on this project that have dogged this Administration’s previous so-called ambitious town centre projects:

 

·         the abandoned Hotel Futures plan;

·         the abandoned Coliseum plans – plural;

·         the bankrupted My House;

·         the much delayed and costly ‘game changer’ at Princes Gate;

·         the over-budget town centre digital hub;

·         and lastly the town centre flagship, the Old Town Hall project, delivered at four times the original cost.

 

So can the Leader please tell me tonight how he will ensure that this project will be rigorously managed from start-to-finish, to ensure that it is delivered on time and to the current assigned budget or, for the sake of our hard-pressed tax payers, preferably much less?

 

Councillor Fielding, Leader of the Council and Cabinet Member for Economy and Skills, responded that the £68M figure quoted was not what it was intended to spend on Spindles and the plans for it had not yet been finalised. More than 2000 people had responded to the consultation and provided their ideas. External funding would be sought to reduce the overall cost to the Council.

Whilst the Opposition pointed to projects that had not come in on time or on budget, many projects had come in on budget and in time, or even better, including schools and leisure centres. The Administration was committed to regeneration and improving the Oldham economy and the Council was the only body that would do that. It would require taking a risk and being prepared to invest in the place and the people.

 

Question 2:

My second question to the Leader tonight references the sad anniversary yesterday of the first COVID-19 Lockdown in the United Kingdom.

 

This past year we have seen so much sacrifice and so much suffering.

 

Many of us have had COVID-19 or have seen loved ones, friends and family, die from this relentless, ruthless disease.

 

But we have also seen a great deal of courage and selflessness. 

 

We are all too aware of the incredible professionalism, fortitude, and, yes, bravery displayed by our wonderful NHS staff in their care for those afflicted by COVID-19.

 

But we should also remember the many others who have helped save lives and keep our society functioning during this unprecedented crisis.

 

Members of our emergency services, including the volunteers of our local Mountain Rescue Service; our care workers; our schools, education and nursery staff; our postal workers; our power, water and telecoms workers; bus, tram and train drivers; delivery drivers and warehouse staff; supermarket and shop workers; the many volunteers who support our communities, and of course our hardworking council staff, who like their colleagues in the NHS have found this time especially testing.

 

My question to the Leader concerns how we will mark this sacrifice, suffering, courage and selflessness in our borough in the future.

 

Oldham has been hit especially hard by COVID-19 and it will take a significant effort and a lot of time to recover. 

 

A large part of this recovery will revolve around the collective need for the people of this borough to grieve, to reflect and to remember.

 

I would suggest to the Leader that we need to commit as a borough to creating a bespoke collective space where that might happen – a memorial to our COVID-19 victims and its heroes. 

 

I am not seeking to prescribe what this memorial might be or where it might be, nor would now be the right time to establish it as we are not yet at the end of this tragedy. 

 

But I am confident that Oldham’s great people would get behind such a proposal, so could the Leader join me in making a commitment in principle tonight to make such a memorial a reality?

 

Councillor Fielding, Leader of the Council and Cabinet Member for Economy and Skills, responded that Councillor Sykes’ suggestion was welcomed. Many people across the borough had made great sacrifices, many loved ones had been lost and consideration should be given to an appropriate way to mark them. When the time was right, he suggested a cross-party group be drawn together to consider how this could be marked and he committed to doing this. 

 

Councillor Sheldon, Acting Leader of the Conservative Group asked a question about the length of the full Council meetings. It should be remembered that Oldham Council was not the government. Suggestions were put forward including declarations of interest being made on the “chat” function, the main and opposition parties be restricted to one motion per meeting, ward questions should only relate to items where enquiries though officers had been exhausted. The final item on this agenda was one of the most important matters for a long time and had needed to be brought forward on the agenda to give the opportunity for full debate. Could the Leader give consideration to the timing of future meetings and ask all Councillors to share their thoughts? A quick and timely meeting could be far more productive than many hours of debate.

 

 

Councillor Fielding, Leader of the Council and Cabinet Member for Economy and Skills, responded that he understood the points raised, particularly in relation to the roll calls and declarations of interest required to conduct a remote meeting. Most Members had their own views on issues and this was the place they could debate them with people who may not share those views. He would be happy to look again at the agenda for the Council meeting to see if it could be improved. Group members were encouraged to feed their thoughts to their Group Leaders for consideration in the next municipal year.

 

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

 

1.         Councillor Shuttleworth asked the following question:

Manchester United and England footballer Marcus Rashford. Rashford’s campaign to extend free school meals successfully forced a government u-turn, with Prime Minister Boris Johnson confirming that his administration would commit to ensuring meals were available to children during the Christmas break. Could the Cabinet Member, please advise us what funding is being made available to the Council and what plans are in place to ensure that all families entitled to free school meals receive the help they need?

 

Councillor Mushtaq, Cabinet Member for Education, responded that The LA were in receipt of funding from Government of nearly £1million to support vulnerable families with children and young people over the winter. We were currently working with schools, colleges and early years settings to ensure food vouchers get to families with children entitled to income based free school meals before schools finished for the Christmas holidays.

This would ensure that those eligible for free school meals on the grounds of low income received a £30 voucher to cover the two-week Christmas holiday at £15 per week per child. This support would also be offered in the February 2021 half term. In order that families received the vouchers that could be used in the Oldham supermarket of their choice we were obtaining vouchers via a third-party online hub – known as Wonde. These vouchers would also be available for Asylum Seeker Families with no recourse to public funds.

The funding would also allow the LA to top up a range of other financial schemes to support the vulnerable. This included:

·           Warm Homes Grant – money available for people who need help with fuel bills or to fix heating

·           Support for Care Leavers from age 18 up to 25 with food vouchers

Families were also being signposted to https://www.oldham.gov.uk/wecanhelp  where they could obtain further details of the help and advice available.

The Council would receive an additional £1.35m of funding to provide Holiday Activities and Food programme over the Easter, summer and Christmas school holidays. The purpose of the grant funding was to provide healthy food and enriching activities to disadvantaged children. The Easter programme of activities and food was being collated at present and would be promoted to eligible families shortly. The offer would be published on the Family Information Activities and Leisure Council webpage https://www.oldham.gov.uk/hsc/services/categories/1

 

2.         Councillor Leach asked the following question:

Can the Cabinet Member for Finance explain why the Tory Government has stopped giving councils Council tax freeze grants?  Doesn’t this amount to yet another Tory stealth tax increase and can he explain what has been the impact on the people of Oldham?

 

Councillor Jabbar, Cabinet Member for Finance and Corporate Green, responded that the Council Tax Freeze Grant was available to Local Authorities if they chose not to implement a Council Tax increase during the financial years 2011/12 to 2015/16.The grant received compensated Authorities for the Council Tax that would otherwise have been generated.

The impact of discontinuing this grant for the Government was a reduction in the level of grant provided to Councils.

The impact for the Council was a loss of a funding stream which, if not made good, would require budget cuts to be made. The removal of the grant meant the Council was therefore forced to increase Council Tax in order to maintain funding for services and to deal with new spending pressures.

It was important to note that, from 2016/17, the Government changed policy. The Adult Social Care Precept was introduced aimed at specifically funding Adult Social Care, an area significantly underfunded by Government for many years – thus shifting the burden of financing this vital service to Council Tax payers.

Government also introduced the concept of Core Spending Power. This was the Government’s assumption about the overall revenue funding available for Local Authority Services. This was published with the Local Government Finance Settlement. This was based on assumptions, including that Councils raise Council Tax by the maximum allowable (including the Adult Social Care Precept) before being required to hold a referendum on the level of the increase. In addition, from 2016/17, which increased Council Tax even more. 

Therefore Oldhamers had seen their Council Tax increase as a result of changing Government Council Tax policy.

However, although the financial position was challenging, the Council had chosen not to increase the Council Tax to the maximum level for both this year 2020/21 and for 2021/22.  For 2021/22 Oldham’s Council Tax increase of 2.99% was the lowest in Greater Manchester.

 

3.         Councillor Toor asked the following question:

Many schools generate income through before and after school clubs, (although in many cases these will only breakeven), however, during lockdown these facilities did not operate. Could the Cabinet Member for education please tell us were schools able to furlough before and after school staff, and also give us some idea of the impact on school budgets?

 

Councillor Mushtaq, Cabinet Member for Education, responded that the DfE did not, in general, expect schools to furlough staff. However, they understood that, in some instances, schools may have a separate private income stream and, where this income had either stopped or been reduced and there were staff paid from those private income streams, it may be appropriate to furlough staff. Staff could only be furloughed if they did not have any other job in the school.

The Council was aware of 5 maintained schools who had furloughed before/after school staff. In total these schools would receive income from the Government of £62k to the end of February and estimated this would be 68k by the end of the financial year

 

4.         Councillor Harkness asked the following question:

Information recently received from officers by my colleague, Councillor Sykes, has revealed that no new money has been found to provide much-needed disabled parking bays for the last three years and that work to progress the applications made for such bays has been placed on hold as there is no money to carry out any work even when approved.

To get about some disabled people in this borough are reliant upon being able to access a vehicle adapted for their use at a space that is near to their home. If they own the vehicle, they also need to park it there.

Three years is an awful long time to wait. Many of these applicants have been completely trapped at home throughout the COVID-19 Lockdown and tragically it is likely some applicants may die or be no longer able to drive by the time their applications are approved.

Can the Cabinet Member please tell me when this Administration will finally allocate more money from the budget to process and action these applications so that these needy people can finally be able to leave home and get about?

 

Councillor Brownridge, Cabinet Member for Neighbourhoods and Culture, responded that the applications received for disabled parking bays were currently being reviewed against the recently revised Disabled Bay policy, in line with the overall revised Council Blue Badge policy – provision had been made next financial year 2021/22 to continue to review and prioritise applications for action – the intention was to continue this process as an annual programme.

 

5.         Councillor Garry asked the following question:

The recent investment into the play area and sports courts at Lower Memorial Park in Failsworth West is welcome and makes it a genuine family friendly park. I am sure the new homeowners at the family homes on the Lancaster Gardens estate will make good use of it when weather permits. Could the Cabinet Member responsible confirm the total investment into this park and the source of the funding?

 

Councillor Brownridge, Cabinet Member for Neighbourhoods and Culture, responded that the funding totalling  £93,643 for the playscape and refurbished Multi Unit Games Arena in Lower Memorial park was funded through section 106, Failsworth and Hollinwood District and  Environmental services Greenspace Development budget and brought with it much needed improvements to the park that would be welcomed by existing residents and those now occupying the recently constructed properties by Bellway Homes

 

6.         Councillor Hulme asked the following question:

During the Chancellor’s budget announcement details were released of towns which had been successful in securing funding from the “Town Deal Fund”. I am aware that Oldham has bid for £41million for projects including, office space, a performance space, northern roots and a district heat network but was not included in the published list of successful bids. Does the Cabinet Member responsible have an update on Oldham’s bid?

 

Councillor Fielding, Leader of the Council and Cabinet Member for Economy and Skills, responded that on 11th December 2020, the Oldham Town Deal Board that existed to support the local delivery of the Towns Fund submitted a Town Investment Plan (TIP) bid for £41 million towards five projects, as part of Cohort 2a. The Government’s Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government (MHCLG) had announced Cohort 2a at the start of October 2020, thereby giving Town Deal Boards four submission options:

Cohort 1: 31st July 2020

Cohort 2: 30th October 2020

Cohort 2a: 11th December 2020

Cohort 3: 29th January 2021

By submitting the TIP in December 2020, after Oldham Council had purchased Spindles Town Square Shopping Centre in October 2020, the Board could specify the shopping centre as the preferred location for three of the five projects and strengthen the overall narrative.

Official guidance from MHCLG had previously confirmed that a TIP with a value exceeding £25 million would be subject to a greater level of scrutiny around value for money and the capacity and capability of the lead local authority to deliver a larger deal. 

The Chancellor’s Budget on 3rd March 2021 listed 45 new Town Deals based on TIPs submitted in Cohorts 1, 2 and 2a. Oldham was not included because MHCLG had that week requested additional information on three of the five proposed projects in the TIP. 

On 17th March 2021, Oldham Council submitted the additional information relating to projects, however we were still awaiting confirmation of when MHCLG would announce the outcome of the TIP assessment. The delay in receiving a funding offer could be attributed to assessors scrutinising bids for above £25 million in greatest detail – as expected.

 

7.         Councillor Jacques asked the following question:

A serious violent incident at Hollinwood tram stop was recently covered in the press. Many residents have raised concerns with me about safety at and around this stop. There is a particular problem with the blind corners on the main pedestrian route between the stop and Manchester road which contribute to people feeling unsafe. Could the Cabinet Member responsible advise how we may improve the quality of the environment at the tram stop to make it feel more welcoming to public transport users?

 

Councillor Chadderton, Cabinet Member for HR and Corporate Reform responded that the Council worked closely with Greater Manchester Police and Transport for Greater Manchester to ensure people feel safe whilst accessing/using public transport. TfGM was committed to ensuring all tram stops were safe spaces. A number of crime prevention measures had been undertaken previously at Hollinwood Tram Stop and there was ongoing work in response to the recent issues which had occurred.

The particular concerns highlighted in relation to the blind corners on the main pedestrian route between the stop and Manchester Road would be looked into and where appropriate and feasible to do so, further works considered to improve perceptions of safety and to build confidence in the location as a safe space.

 

8.         Councillor Williamson asked the following question:

The new MyHR computer software system has recently come online and into use by Council staff and HR managers.  This replaced the A1 system introduced only four years previously which frankly proved itself to be a bit of a failure, being significantly delayed, over budget, and prone to making errors in salary payments and the calculation of working hours to the disgruntlement of many staff. A1 apparently cost our financially struggling Council-Tax Payers over £2 million of their hard-earned money and MyHR will undoubtedly have cost them many more.

Can the Cabinet Member please tell me how much MyHR cost; what guarantees we have that MyHR will actually deliver for our staff and their managers, unlike its predecessor; and whether this Council has any means to recover any of its abortive costs in relation to the A1 system from its developers?

 

Councillor Chadderton, Cabinet Member for HR and Corporate Reform, responded that the approved budget for the implementation and the cost of licencing, support and maintenance for the new ITrent HR and payroll system - MyHR was £2.295m.  MyHR was replacing both the A1 and Selima payroll systems.

There was immense confidence in this new system by the payroll team who used it on a day to day basis; it was a highly regarded HR and Payroll (HRP) system that was in use with over 180+ LA’s across the country including most GM authorities. It was known as market leading and a public sector reputable product that was built specifically for the purpose of HRP.

There was already evidence that it was excellent, easier to use and more robust payroll accuracy following the go-lives; the specialist officer checks and feedback from managing 26 payrolls for almost 7000 employees across Team Oldham had supported this.

There was improved Resilience expected from a hosted cloud product with planned, regular maintenance and upgrades included within the annual maintenance cost. Access to service desk to resolve any issues and escalation process was available if required.

Feedback from staff and customers had been very positive to date.

The costs of A1 were not abortive as the system was in use and delivering payroll from its implementation in April 2017 until January 2021. 

Whilst the system had many issues and required the Council to implement many manual processes to improve accuracy, it did provide the core ability to pay employees every month. The system had reached a point where it required a major upgrade that would have cost a significant sum, on top of the regular costs required to continue the manual processes and regular upgrades. 

 

RESOLVED that the questions and responses provided be noted.