Agenda item

(time limit 30 minutes)

Councillor Sheldon, Leader of the Conservative Group:

A question to Councillor Shah

“After speaking to Group members recently, I am not alone with some concerns. Requests to various departments are met in, sometimes, a less than positive way. Often the replies are excuses, often late and sometimes no reply is given. I must aver that other Council staff are very helpful.

Three examples:-

I reported a blocked grid near a lady’s house and she is fearful to go out when it rains because of flood water entering her property. The message I got back was the grids are cleaned once a year. That simply is not good enough.

I disagreed with Highways on another scheme and the reply I got from Highways was that they did not like the tone of my email.

Another one is a drainage ditch in Uppermill. I have reported that for two years and we have had a team out, we are having an evaluation survey, and the resident rings me every month to ask what is going on with this.

Please could I ask you to intervene by informing all Council staff that we councillors are elected by our residents to serve their needs. We do not insist, or disagree, or challenge staff decisions unless we believe it is for the best way forward for the Borough, to gain positive results. Thank you”

Councillor Shah, Leader of the Council and Cabinet Member for Economic and Social Reform responded with thanks for the question. Whilst she did not know and could not point to the specific examples raised, it was absolutely not acceptable. She felt she had been very clear that this was a resident-focussed Council. She had shared her priorities with the new Chief Executive, who shared her desire to ensure that everything the Council did had residents at the heart of it. She could only apologise at this point and say she would take the matter forward and she was sure the Chief Executive would too.

A further question to Councillor Shah

“Veterans and other members of the armed forces community are much-values citizens of our Borough and I am sure all Councillors would agree that Oldham Council ought to protect and advance their interests. Does the Council have any plans to select a successor to Cath Ball, as the elected Member Champion for armed forces issues? Also, does the Council have plans in place to improve its Defence Employer Scheme certification and fully fulfil the Forces Friendly employment practices?”

Councillor Shah, Leader of the Council and Cabinet Member for Economic and Social Reform, replied yes to all of those and Members would be notified of the new Champion in due course.

Councillor Sykes, Leader of the Liberal Democratic Group:

Question 1 - What is the future for the Tower block and civic centre building

“My first question tonight relates to the future of the Council’s estate and climate change.

Many employees across the private and public sectors have been working from home since the start of the COVID-19 pandemic, including much of the Council’s workforce and those of our partners in Unity, Miocare, and Oldham Community Leisure.

Homeworking means employees no longer must commute, and they can achieve a better work – life balance.

Given then we are likely to have less employees in our workplaces at all and see less of those that do, we shall have less need for office space.

Less buildings will need to be heated, lit, cleaned, and maintained and there will much lower bills for utilities.  Many will be surplus to our requirements.

This will also mean lower carbon emissions, so we will also benefit by moving closer to our aspiration to become a carbon neutral Council.

It is likely that in the future we shall have our core staff, working mostly in public-facing roles, in the new repurposed offices in the Spindles Shopping Centre, and perhaps some here on the Rochdale Road site supporting ceremonial and Council functions, but the rest of the Civic Centre will become redundant.

Can the Council Leader please tell me tonight what is being planned to identify and dispose of the unwanted office space, especially the Civic Centre tower block, or may be the whole Tower block and Rochdale Road site?

And what is planned or the vision for this large and strategically important town centre site when it becomes vacant?”

Councillor Shah, Leader of the Council and Cabinet Member for Economic and Social Reform, replied that consultation was ongoing and the Chief Executive was undertaking a staff survey. The results of that would be shared and an open staff conference with the Leader and the Chief Executive was planned to ensure the balance between work and life, whilst also meeting the needs of the local economy. Carbon efficiency would be factored in. The results of the consultation would be shared with the Leaders of the Opposition and more widely.

Question 2 - Discharging untested and infected patients into care homes

“I had hoped to ask my second question tonight under the agenda item ‘COVID-19 response questions’, but I see that yet again for the second time this item has been omitted from tonight’s agenda.

I have received a reassurance from the Leader that this omission was a result of administrative error rather than a change in the policy of this Administration, so I look forward to seeing this item back on the agenda for November 2021 Council, as it should be on every agenda until we have seen the back of this terrible pandemic.

So here then is my question.

A response to a recent Freedom of Information request revealed that the Pennine Acute Hospital Trust – part of the Northern Care Alliance – discharged 152 patients to care settings between March 19 and April 15 last year.  96 of these patients were untested and of the 56 tested, 18 tested positive for COVID-19.

It seems to me a gross dereliction of the ‘duty of care’ that patients were discharged from hospital to care homes when they were untested or tested positive with a deadly disease.

Sadly, a significant number of care home residents died during the COVID-19 pandemic, and undoubtedly some instances of transmission occurred because of transfers into care homes from hospitals.

Can the Leader please provide me with assurance that revised procedures are now in place to ensure that in future all patients will be tested for COVID-19 before being discharged from hospital to care settings, so that never again will a situation arise where patients testing positive or not tested at all are discharged from hospital to unwittingly, and sometimes fatally, infect their fellow residents and staff in care homes?”

Councillor Shah, Leader of the Council and Cabinet Member for Economic and Social Reform, responded that the Covid-19 Response Item had been omitted by oversight and would be on future agendas.

Councillor Chauhan, Cabinet Member for Health and Social Care, responded that it was impossible not to agree with Councillor Sykes’ views. It was a national policy and was a wrong policy. He had openly challenged that policy and said it was unacceptable, putting not only those vulnerable people’s lives at risk, but also the staff, who had moved into care homes to care for the residents. Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) had not been provided by the government and the Council had been one of the first in the country to set up a  PPE collection point. He had personally visited care homes to ensure there was adequate cover. He could assure the meeting that the national policy had been changed and appropriate arrangements were now made to separate residents who were Covid-positive from those who were Covid-negative.

Councillor Hobin, Leader of the Failsworth Independent Party:

“I know the Leader of the Council is keen to make this administration inclusive and is happy to work with all Councillors to the benefit of the Borough. Does she think it is appropriate that present and past District Leads in Failsworth have refused and still refuse to hold District meetings with Councillors? Where else are elected Members supposed to raise issues or discuss improving the area we represent? Can she assure me that this will not be the case going forward and, as we are talking about inclusivity, could we also cascade something down to constituents and will she consider re-introducing public District Executive meetings which her predecessor scrapped?”

Councillor Shah, Leader of the Council and Cabinet Member for Economic and Social Reform, replied that District meetings were a really important part of local democracy and the Council reformed how they functioned before the pandemic to ensure that they were being used to discuss important local issues rather than being an unnecessarily bureaucratic exercise. She was happy to look into the matter raised and would encourage Councillors of all parties to work with their District Teams to engage with residents. District meetings had not been scrapped and had been held prior to the pandemic. She would look into the circumstances in Councillor Hobin’s district.

1.        Councillor Goodwin asked the following question:

Could the Cabinet Member for Health and Social Care outline what we know, and don’t know, about the impact on the health of children of Covid. What proportion of them, by age group - say pre-secondary and secondary school age - are affected by illness as a result of infection, how severely? How likely are they to suffer from long Covid?

Councillor Chauhan, Cabinet Member for Health and Social Care responded that the Covid update on children and young people was as follows:

•      Infection rates of children in Oldham mirror the national picture

•      Many children have/have had covid-19 without any symptoms

•      Long covid can have a life long impact on childrens’ life chances, partly due to missed education.

•      Evidence suggests pre-school children rarely have long covid symptoms but those in the 6-18 age groups are significantly more affected, particularly teenagers

•      Long covid in children can present differently than in adults.

•      Approximately 200 symptoms associated with children and young people long covid and include rash, stomach ache, swollen fingers & toes, brain fog, chronic fatigue, headaches, dizziness, chest pain

•      Childrens’ mental health and wellbeing is affected as a result of the covid pandemic and the number of mental health referrals is increasing nationally and locally

•      There has been an increase in children and young people attending acute services with Eating Disorders, Self-Harm, Suicidal Ideation, Anxiety & Hopelessness and depression, with a subsequent increase in admission to acute paediatric inpatients services (Paediatric bed base across GM has reduced due to infection control measures)

•      GM Long covid service spec in place.  Paediatric Assessment Clinics now set up with a multi-disciplinary team approach. Children can be referred into the MDT clinic at Royal Manchester Children’s Hospital if DGH unable to meet need.  MDT provides broad range of specialists and can tailor care to meet need.

•      Some CYP suffer post covid complications such as Paediatric Inflammatory Multisystem Syndrome (PIMS-TS) and many have required critical care across GM.  Over 120 children and young people to date with PIMS-TS in GM.

•      Increased number of CYP presenting with Type 1 Diabetes, however this requires further study

•      1 child in Oldham has died as a result of hospital admission due to covid

•      Lifelong health/economic impact of long covid in children not known and studies were ongoing.

At this point, the Mayor requested that the full response be sent to all Councillors as it was a complicated matter and could not be fully responded to in the two minutes allowed

2.        Councillor Hulme asked the following question:

I am pleased to have been told that the new residents’ parking in Diggle is nearly ready – it would be very helpful to look again at the diversion in place and see whether it can be safely removed or changed once the parking is useable. Can the Cabinet Member for Neighbourhoods ask for a review to take place and let me and the other ward Councillors know the outcome?

Councillor Chadderton, Cabinet Member for Neighbourhoods, responded that the works near Huddersfield Road, in terms of access for the new school, which would open next year and constructing the car parks were progressing well.

The next phase of the works would require construction on the Huddersfield Road itself where, at that point, the one way diversion was even more critical as this would provide the necessary working room for the construction activities to be completed safely keeping the operatives and the general public safe.

The one way system was an essential public safety requirement which needed to stay in place until the works were complete, which would be by the end of December this year.

It was appreciated this was a point of consternation in the local community and a source of annoyance to resident in Diggle, but it was vital this work was carried out in terms of the construction and opening of the new school next year.

3.        Councillor Toor asked the following question:

We regularly hear complaints from residents regarding the way the Council deal with issues including planning, standards of conduct, highways etc. Could we please be advised how many cases over the last 2 years have been referred to the ombudsman and how many of these complaints were upheld?

Councillor Stretton, Cabinet Member for Corporate Services replied that for the year 2019/2020, the Council received a total of 1,102 complaints. 71 of these complaints were reviewed by the Ombudsman. Of those 71 cases, only 13 (18.3%) were investigated and 7 (9.9%) upheld. Of the 7 upheld cases, the Ombudsman recognised that the Council had already determined fault and offered a suitable remedy in 2 (29% of cases) prior to their investigation.

When calculating the upheld rate, the Ombudsman used the number of cases taken forward for investigation and the number of these cases that were upheld. The Ombudsman calculated the Council’s upheld rate for 2019/2020 as 54% and this positively compared to an average upheld rate of 67% in similar authorities nationally.

For the year 2020/21, the Council received a total of 911 complaints, 55 of these complaints were reviewed by the Ombudsman. Of those 55 cases, 15 were investigated and 10 were upheld. The percentage of cases upheld in 2020/21 was 67% compared with the average upheld rate of 72% in similar authorities nationally. 

4.      Councillor Murphy asked the following question:

         Ward members were made a promise that they would be consulted on the location of new bins prior to a final decision being made. We have now recently found out that this promise amounted to a load of rubbish as we have been informed by officers that we shall be invited to a ‘drop-in session to go through proposed locations in each ward’. Once again it appears that promises made have not amounted to promises rendered. 

Please can I ask the Cabinet Member to give a commitment that the ‘drop-in session’ which we are each to be invited to will not in fact amount to a roll out of a fait accompli? Can I ask that instead it be an opportunity for members to not only challenge the locations proposed by officers, but to also suggest our own, and that this should include looking to replace those bins that have been removed over the last two years since the start of the bin review?

Councillor Chadderton, Cabinet Member for Neighbourhoods responded that she knew as a Councillor how important bins were to members of the public and all 60 Councillors. A lot of residents believed they paid a lot of their Council Tax to have bins emptied on time and it would be unwise to meddle with the Council’s bins. With regards to the consultation, an initial mapping process had been undertaken by officers within the street cleansing services. This was based on the existing locations of current street litter bins, and included officers recommendations on any changes, with their aim to provide a more widespread placement within each ward. These were recommendations only and subject to member consultation. Members through consultation were free to challenge any proposed locations and could recommend alternate placements, suggest new locations, including any bins previously removed. All these points however needed to meet certain criteria on placement, which would be shared with members in advance of consultation. Members could then recommend locations within the criteria, taking into account factors of demand, footfall, bin size and pavement space, accessibility for servicing and the safety of the public & staff servicing them. She would be arranging dates with the District Co-ordinators over next few weeks and sending out the list of criteria for members on placement. If Councillor Murphy wished to challenge the placement of bins in Shaw and Crompton, he would have his opportunity to have them placed where he considered necessary.

5.      Councillor Lancaster asked the following question:

         At this time when our local economy is wanting to get back on its feet, small businesses in Diggle are facing an additional level of disruption with the diversionary routes in place adversely affecting footfall. Having made the case to the Council for financial support for these struggling small businesses, I have now been told that compensation will not be rewarded as it is not a ‘statutory function’ to do so. Will the Council reconsider their position of only abiding by the lowest standard, and make assurances that they will provide adequate financial support for Diggle’s small businesses?

         Councillor Akhtar Cabinet Member for Employment and Enterprise responded that the Council was business friendly and had worked hard to support as many as possible over the last 15 months through the pandemic supporting access to over £100m of grants. As the Borough came out of lockdown the Council was keen to help businesses get back on their feet. However, the Council had needed to make budget reductions in this financial year of £8.920m and, based on current estimates had a very challenging budget reduction target for both 2022/23 and 2023/24. The Saddleworth School was an investment in the future of the area and would support families and citizens in the area, which would have a benefit for the businesses in the long term. The new school building scheme was managed by the Department for Education and they did not, in any circumstance, award funds for disruption during new school developments. The Council had no such scheme and no recourse to public funds due to disruption created or loss of income. The Council had looked at providing business rate relief but majority of small businesses that would have relied on footfall would have received business rate relief either through the Small Business rate relief or Expanded Retail discount schemes. The Highways department were implementing the best solution they could find to support the development of Saddleworth School whilst minimising the impact on the local community. This was truly difficult, especially as the economy began to bounce back from the various lock down measures.

6.      Councillor C Phythian asked the following question:

         Manchester Council supplies free biodegradable bags to encourage the recycling of food waste in the Borough. Could OMBC do the same to encourage residents to recycle their food waste?

         Councillor Chadderton, Cabinet Member for Neighbourhoods responded that the Council currently subsidised the majority of bags supplied within the Borough, sold from local community stockists and libraries etc. The Council constantly reviewed its position and it would remain under review.

7.      Councillor Shuttleworth asked he following question:

         As members continue to hear complaints about the absence of police from our streets, perceived or otherwise, as well as comments being made on social media, may I ask the appropriate Cabinet member to confirm the number of police officers of all ranks engaged in Oldham prior to the general election on 6 May 2010 as against 6 May 2021?

         Councillor Chadderton, Cabinet Member for Neighbourhoods replied that Greater Manchester Police had provided the requested information with confirmation that staffing figures are produced monthly. In the last week of April 2010 there were 442 warranted Police Officers allocated to Oldham. In the last week of April 2021, 407 warranted Police Officers were allocated to Oldham. The figures included Officers of all ranks from Constable through to Chief Superintendent. In April 2010 there was a recruitment freeze at GMP and in April 2021, there was a recruitment drive, which was ongoing. The figures had increased significantly in the last six months. The figures for April 2021 included officers still in training who had not yet arrived in Oldham. The figures were head count numbers and included full and part time working.

8.      Councillor S Bashforth asked the following question:

         The Government are proposing reform waste collection which in its current form could mean local authorities having to supply up to seven separate bins to households. Can the relevant cabinet member comment on what the consequences of this would be for the council and for residents who would have to find space for 7 separate bins?

         Councillor Chadderton, Cabinet Member for Neighbourhoods responded that, as a resident she hoped she would not have to find space for seven separate bins. The government was currently consulting with stakeholders before making final rulings on how waste would be collected in future. Oldham had provided a co-ordinated response through the GMCA which was representing all GM local authorities. The preferred position put forward by GM was to keep the four bin system currently in place which had been proven to maximise collection efficiency and tonnage performance across the conurbation. The Council therefore awaited the publishing of the results of the consultation before considering and announcing any next steps.

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.