Agenda item

Public Questions

(time limit 15 Minutes)

Minutes:

1.    Question received from Duncan Breeze

Why has millions been spent on Alexander Park, but many others now represent derelict wastelands included Failsworth Park. Will there be any work done to improve Failsworth park so the residents of Failsworth can exercise and take there family’s there etc?

 

Councillor Chadderton, Cabinet Member for Neighbourhoods responded that the millions that were spent on Alexandra park were a result of a successful lottery bid which brought in just over £2.6 million. This was not recent money and had come in between 1997 and 2004. Bids had been put forward for other park and only one of the other parks, Dunwood Park in Shaw, had received lottery funding. Investment was and continued to be made in all parks with Section 106 money earmarked for Higher Memorial Park (Failsworth Park) and, if the local housing developments went ahead, would see an investment of around £65,000 into improvements to the hard service games area and general improvements to the parks landscape. When this money was received, she would ensure that a consultation exercise took place with Ward Members and the public prior to the commitment of the funding.   

 

2.    Question received from Matthew Smith

It’s become apparent in recent months that Mr Neil Wilby (Press) has much better access to Oldham Council and specifically the leader of the council than most of the constituents in the town. I recently emailed labour councillors on a number of issues and never got a reply, however Mr Wilby seems to have a hotline directly to the leader especially. May I remind Labour councillors & the leader of the council this is the same Journalist who has tweeted a number of offensive/abusive tweets about Labour MPs including Angela Rayner. Does the leader think it’s right that 1) A member of the press has better access to the council than most of the citizens of the town and

2) How do you expect the citizens of the town to take the leader seriously when she’s speaking about bullying & harassment, when she is happy to be in communications with a journalist, thanking him on a number of occasion, when he has made a number of offensive tweets regarding your female Labour colleagues?

 

Councillor Shah, Leader of the Council and Cabinet Member for Economic and Social Reform replied that she was glad he asked that question. She welcomed the opportunity to make the facts clear on a subject that was a matter of much online speculation. She had worked hard to improve the accessibility and transparency of the Council. She had introduced the Big Oldham Conversation, which involved holding public events across the borough, so the public could ask questions of her and the Chief Executive about the borough. A consultation had been launched on the town centre plans and ramped up engagement with local businesses. Local people could also ask questions at full Council and other meetings, and could contact their Councillors or the Council to ask questions and find out information, and they often did. Mr Wilby was an accredited journalist and his queries were managed through the Council’s Press Office, as any other journalist. The local media played an important part of holding the Council to account, so they did have fair and appropriate access to information and could ask questions at any point. The relationship with journalists was managed by Council officers and not by the Leader. In terms of her personal engagement with people on social media, she responded positively to a wide range of people, to talk about local issues and the borough on twitter and elsewhere. She thanked people would made useful comments and were positive about the town, and this should not be taken as an endorsement for everything that was said by those she engaged with. Although she strived to be accountable and open, whether with journalists or members of the public, engagement happened using the proper Council processes. It had come to her attention that there were a number of allegations of leaks and/or breaches of data sharing that did concern her. It was not acceptable for anyone in the Council to be sharing information inappropriately. Due to the speculation about this issue, she had asked for a thorough, robust investigation into where information which appeared to be leaked was coming from, which should conclude by the end of the week. Robust action would be taken against anyone found to be breaching the Council’s processes and procedures. She had made it very clear at the start of her leadership that she took her role and responsibility very seriously and she would ensure robust action would be taken to protect democracy and public confidence in Councillors and the Council.

 

3.    Question received from Robert Barnes

Following on from last month's question regarding the issue of giving the public a right of reply to Public Questions, would the Council Leader give serious consideration to suspending Standing Orders when there is no Youth Council business? This would allow for an extension of Public Questions to 30 minutes. A right of reply of two minutes for the public could then be built in to Public Questions. Why does the Council Leader not believe that the people of our town should have a right of reply to answers to questions they have raised? In the interests of transparency, accountability, democracy and trust in our Elected Members, would the Council Leader now look again at extending Public Questions to include time for members of the public to reply?

 

Councillor Shah, Leader of the Council and Cabinet Member for Economic and Social Reform replied that, as confirmed at the last meeting she had committed to reviewing the approach taken to public questions, including the time allocated to them. This review would be considered by the cross-party Constitution Working Group who could then make recommendations to Council. The objective would be to ensure that residents had as much opportunity as they could to engage with the Council, whilst still allowing time for other important business.

 

4.    Question received from Paul Shilton

Community centers are vital hubs of each community that they serve, and their futures must be secured for generations to come. Short term leases of up to 25 years are only offered to these facilities, when a more permanent lease could ensure community investment was not raised or donated in vain. After over 2 years, the 25 year lease for Grotton Pavilion is still to be confirmed. Can the Council assure this community that their community hub will not be sacrificed for the profits of developers in 25 years time, by providing a 100 year lease to ensure its future?

 

Councillor Chadderton, Cabinet Member for Neighbourhoods replied that the Council valued its community facilities and was always keen to work with community groups to retain and develop their services in Council premises in accordance with its Council policy. The Council and the Grotton Residents Association had agreed terms for their continued occupation of their premises.  This agreement was approved on 6th October 2021 and was now with the respective parties solicitors to formalise the matter.

 

5.    Question received from Roland Smith

It’s good to see the council has volunteered Oldham to accommodate asylum seekers, however I have a big concern that Oldham Council is doing this without improving facilities in the town. My doctors takes typically 3 weeks for a face to face appointment. My granddaughter struggled to get in her first chose of school, which was the closest to her home. Oldham A&E is at busting points both financially and resources. I have a real fear the town is taking too much of the responsibility when it comes to asylum seekers, especially when you see the Tory run councils which take zero to little in terms of asylum seekers. Whilst it’s helpful to take these people it can’t be done at the detriment of the current population. Can you reassure me if we are to take more asylum seekers, then these areas are massively improved?

 

Councillor Shah, Leader of the Council and Cabinet Member for Economic and Social Reform replied that the Council had not volunteered to accommodate more asylum seekers. The Home Office informed Oldham Council that they intended to use the hotel due to the significant pressures currently in the national asylum system. Decisions regarding where asylum seekers were placed were taken by the Home Office. The regional provider Serco produced a list of hotels for the Home Office, which then decided which hotels to use. The Council did not receive any funding for this and she echoed the concerns about this and also about the inequity of the current asylum dispersal system. Decisions on placements were made by the Home Office based on cost, with people placed where cheap accommodation could be found. As a result, places with higher levels of poverty were taking more asylum placements than more affluent areas and the areas with higher numbers of placements were also the areas hardest hit by the impact of cuts to public service funding over the last ten years. This same issue had been raised, time and again, with the government. The previous Home Secretary, Sajid Javid, made a commitment in 2018 to address this but there has been no change and she had raised this exact same issue again in a recent letter to the Home Secretary, Priti Patel, and was awaiting a response.

 

6.    Question received from Peter Roberts

Oldham has the highest youth unemployment rate, could the relevant cabinet member please inform the Council what support is available for young people to support them into employment or training.

 

Councillor Akhtar, Cabinet Member for Employment and Enterprise replied that the youth unemployment rate in Oldham had been dramatically impacted by Covid. Youth Unemployment peaked in March 2021 at 16.4%. In November this had dropped to 10.9%, a 34% reduction over that 8 month period. The re-opening of the economy was having an impact and reducing youth unemployment. A year ago there were just 5,000 jobs posted across Greater Manchester and this had now more than doubled to almost 11,000 vacancies. The Council was working hard with partners to promote access to a range of schemes such as Kickstart, GMCA ESF NEET’s Youth Employment programme, work was ongoing with Get Oldham Working, Job Centre Plus, Princes Trust, Positive Steps, Rio Ferdinand Foundation and Oldham Enterprise Trust to provide support to 12 projects that were in place to support unemployed residents. He would urge unemployed and NEET young people to get in touch with the Council or the job centre, who would put them in touch with the relevant scheme for support. Get Oldham Working had supported 9,000 Oldham residents into employment over the last 8 years.

However, there was gap for emerging for some 18 year olds. Some of this would be addressed by the Community Renewal programme that Positive Steps and Northern Roots were successful in winning. The economy was improving, there was a growth in new business start ups and a great demand for business space in Oldham. The Council and Partners would be launching a campaign in the new year to make sure that the young people of Oldham knew what support was available over the next year and beyond.

 

7.    Question received from Peter Scoltock

Just recently the Council promoted the Oldham Business Growth Fund to Businesses across the Borough and invited bids from the manufacturing, creative and digital sectors. Could the relevant Cabinet Member please update on how many Businesses have been supported through this Fund, the number of anticipated jobs created and the amount of Private Sector Contributions.

 

Councillor Akhtar, Cabinet Member for Employment and Enterprise responded that the Council was finalising the approval of the grant agreements and it was expected that the Business Growth Grant (value £345,045) would support 26 companies to create 120 jobs and leverage a further £555,815 private sector investment/contribution.

 

8.    Question received from Janet Hargreaves

Could the relevant cabinet member please share what plans the council has to engage with small businesses across the borough and explain how the GM clean air zone charge will affect small businesses in Oldham.

 

Councillor Jabbar, Cabinet Member for Finance and Low Carbon replied that small businesses had been engaged around the GM Clean Air Plan and the Clean Air Zone that would be operational from 30th May 2022. The Council had already been actively engaging with small businesses via press releases and social media posts as well as promoting the Clean Air Plan via the weekly business newsletter which had 5,000 subscribers. Information had also been posted recently regarding the grant funding available to owners of non-compliant HGVs so they could be helped to replace prior to May 2022. Details of other grant funding focussed towards owners of non-compliant Light Goods vehicles (LGVs) and Taxis who had an exemption to any charges in the Zone until 1st June 2023. This grant funding would be made available at the end of January 2022 and the Council had committed with all GM Authorities to continue engagement with the affected business owners.