Search decisions

Consideration was given to a report of the Director of Environment which sought approval to purchase new vehicles for the next three financial years (2022/23, 2023/24 and 2024/25).

A review of the Council’s fleet was undertaken in May 2022 and this identified a number of amendments which were required to the agreed content of the last Cabinet approved Fleet Replacement report. The amendments detailed in the report before Members provided an accurate forecast of vehicle purchasing requirements for the remainder of 2022/23 and the next three financial years and if approved would superseded the last Fleet replacement Programme agreed in 2019.

The Fleet management service had identified the remaining spend on vehicles for 2022/23 and the total spend over the next three financial years.

The report also sought approval to design and implement appropriate procurement strategies for the sourcing of the required vehicles and sought authority for the purchases to be approved by the Director of Environment in consultation with the Commercial Procurement unit.

Options/alternatives considered

Option 1 – to approve the purchase of new vehicles for the remainder of 2022/23 and the next three financial years (2023/24, 2024/25 & 2025/26) as detailed in this report and to delegate authority to design and implement appropriate procurement strategies for the sourcing of the required vehicles to the Director of Environment in consultation with the Commercial Procurement Unit so that the FMS can purchase vehicles over the next three financial years without referring back to Cabinet. On approval, the FMS will undertake all subsequent procurement and approval processes in line with the Council’s Procurement Processes

Option 2 – to delay replacing vehicles within the fleet replacement programme. Whilst this may save money in terms of delaying initial purchasing costs, the potential risk of repair and breakdown costs must be factored in. Due to the nature of work and the large majority of the council’s vehicle fleet (i.e., waste collection vehicles, highway repair), any vehicle that break downs has the potential to require a hired vehicle replacement. Hiring vehicles, to replace a current fleet vehicle, has a significant impact on service budgets as they are an additional and often unaccounted costs.

Option 3 – to look at other FRP models such as leasing and hiring. When the Council introduced its original FRP strategy in 2012/13, it was done to replace the leased and hired vehicle models which existed at the time. The current FRP strategy is based on the economical and management benefits gained from ownership of the vehicle. The FMS has worked to this strategy for the past ten years.

RESOLVED – That the Cabinet would consider the comerically sensitive information contained in the report at Item 13 before making a decision.

The Cabinet gave consideration to a report of the Director of Finance which provided details of the performance of the Treasury Management function of the Council for the first half of 2022/23 and a comparison of performance against the 2022/23 Treasury Management Strategy and Prudential Indicators. 

The Council was required to consider the performance of the Treasury Management function in order to comply with the Chartered Institute of Public Finance and Accountancy (CIPFA) Code of Practice on Treasury Management. This report set out the key Treasury Management issue for Members information and review and outlined:

An economic update for the first six months of 2022/23.;

• A review of the Treasury Management Strategy Statement and Annual Investment Strategy;

• The Council’s capital expenditure, as set out in the Capital Strategy, and prudential indicators;

• A review of the Council’s investment portfolio for 2022/23;

• A review of the Council’s borrowing strategy for 2022/23;

• Why there has been no debt rescheduling undertaken during 2022/23; and

• A review of compliance with Treasury and Prudential Limits for 2022/23.

Option/alternatives considered

In order that the Council complies with the Chartered Institute of Public Finance Code of Practice of Treasury Management the Council has no other option but to consider and approve the contents of the report.

RESOLVED – That:

1. That Cabinet approves and commends to Council the:
2. The Treasury Management activity for the first half of the financial year 2022/23 and the projected outturn position be approved and commended to Council.
3. Amendments to both Authorised Limit and Operational Boundary for external debt as set out in the table at Section 2.4.5 of the report be approved and commended to Council.
4. Amendments to the Capital Financing Requirement (CFR) as set out in the table at section 2.4.5 of the report be approved and commended to Council.

Consideration was given to a report of the Assistant Chief Executive which sought approval a review of the Local Improvement Fund (LIF) 2022/23 and update Cabinet on the proposals to provide £400,000 for larger capital projects in line with previous years and £100,000 revenue funding for smaller projects worth £500 to £3,500 responding to needs in local areas.

The Local improvement fund was established in 2019 with the aim of supporting districts to improve the quality of life in local areas, to improve community buildings, equipment and other facilities and engage with residents to prioritise schemes that matter to them.

It was proposed that for 2022/23 the LIF should be adapted to support the larger local capital projects and also boost funds for smaller interventions in wards to see improvements in the area quickly.

The £400,000 element of the fund would be distributed through a similar process as in previous years, through expressions of interest for projects over £10,000 and would be assessed by a cross party advisory panel, 2 Labour councillors, 1 Liberal Democrat and 1 Conservative councillor. Recommendations from the panel would be considered by the LIF Cabinet-Subcommittee for final approval.

The remaining £100,000 revenue funding will be available for buds of £500-£3,500 would be assessed at a monthly meeting of the Cabinet sub-committee.

Options/alternatives considered

Option 1 – Do nothing.

Option 2 – Review the proposed approach and agree to proceed with the LIF

RESOLVED – That the proposals for the Local Improvement Fund 2022/23 and the process for allocating the funding be approved.

The Chair agreed to accept an Item of Business, Establishment of the Greater Manchester Integrated Care Partnership Boards a matter of urgency in accordance with S.100 B (4) of the Local Government Act 1972; Urgent Cabinet approval was required to enable the Council to have representation on the Integrated Care Partnership Board.

Consideration was given to a report of the Deputy Chief Executive, which sought approval of the establishment of the Greater Manchester Integrated Care Partnership (GM ICP) as a joint committee and outlining the terms of reference for the GM ICP.

The ICP was one of two statutory components of an Integrated Care System, alongside the Integrated Care Board (ICB).

ICPs have a statutory duty to create an integrated care strategy to address assessed needs, such as health and care needs of the population with the Integrated Care Board’s area including determinants of health ad wellbeing such as employment, environment and housing and to prepare an integrated care strategy.

The minimum core membership would consist of 10 representatives from the 10 districts and a member of the ICB.

Options/alternatives considered

Option 1 – For Oldham not to agree to the establishment of the Integrated Care Partnership.

Option 2 – To agree to the establishment of the Integrated Care Partnership as a Joint Committee and appoint member representation with a substitute.

RESOLVED- That;

1.    Approval be given to the establishment of the Greater Manchester Integrated Care Partnership as a joint committee of the Integrated Care Board and the ten Greater Manchester local authorities.

2.    The Terms of Reference of the Greater Manchester Integrated Care Partnership be noted.

3.    Councillor Barbara Brownridge be appointed as a member of the Greater Manchester Integrated Care Partnership and Councillor Amanda Chadderton as the substitute member.

Councillor Brownridge and Jabbar declared an other registerable interest in this item, by virtue of their Council appointment to the Northern Roots Oldham Ltd board, left the room and took no part in the discussion and voting thereon.

Consideration was given to a report of the Executive Director, Place and Economic Growth which sought approval of the procurement approach for the next phase of the Northern Roots Visitor Centre and external works following completion of the stage 3 design.

It was reported that the proposals before Cabinet included, following successful procurement, a preconstruction services agreement would be awarded to the contactor submitting the most favourable bid, the extension of the existing appointment of JDDK Architects and sub-consultant team to complete Royal Institute of British Architects stage 4 design to provide construction and buildability advice to the eventual contactor during the preconstruction services agreement and the preferred contactor, Bike Track Limited as the Council’s preferred contractor for the specialist mountain bike and pump track. 

Options/alternatives considered

Option 1 – Agree the approach and progress the Northern Roots visitor Centre external works and Bike Hub projects including the appointment of the consultant team set out in the report.

Option 2 – Do not agree the proposal in the report and reprofile the allocated funds form the Town Deal allocations.

RESOLVED – That the Cabinet would consider the commercially sensitive information contained in the report at Item 12 before making a decision.