Search decisions

The Cabinet considered a report of the Executive Director of Place/Deputy Chief Executive which sought approval and acceptance of £1,500,000 Pride in Place Impact Fund capital grant allocation, from the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government (MHCLG) in September 2025 as part of the 2025 Spending Review.

Oldham had been allocated £1,500,000 capital from the Pride in Place Impact Fund from MHCLG to be spent over 2025/26 and 2026/27. The Pride in Place Impact Fund will cover the following objectives:

a. Community spaces: creating, extending, improving or refurbishing existing community facilities and enabling community organisations to take control or ownership of underused but valued local assets.

b. Public spaces: enhancing the physical environment in public spaces - examples of initiatives include new or improved green spaces or public squares, improved outdoor play, sports and leisure spaces, installing street furniture, public art or wayfinding.

c. High street and town centre revitalisation: making these areas more attractive and welcoming places where people congregate and which encourage economic activity. Examples of initiatives that could be funded are shop frontage improvements, adaptations that bring premises back into use, streetscape improvements, public art, trails and wayfinding, and creating or improving the infrastructure for regular markets.

Resolved:

1.    That the Cabinet approves the acceptance of the £1,500,000 capital Pride in Place Impact Fund from MHCLG and undertaken the following objectives:

A.    Community spaces: creating, extending, improving or refurbishing existing community facilities and enabling community organisations to take control or ownership of underused but valued local assets.

B.    Public spaces: enhancing the physical environment in public spaces - examples of initiatives include new or improved green spaces or public squares, improved outdoor play, sports and leisure spaces, installing street furniture, public art or wayfinding.

C.   High street and town centre revitalisation: making these areas more attractive and welcoming places where people congregate and which encourage economic activity. Examples of initiatives that could be funded are shop frontage improvements, adaptations that bring premises back into use, streetscape improvements, public art, trails and wayfinding, and creating or improving the infrastructure for regular markets.

2.    That the Cabinet notes that MHCLG has issued a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU), which has been reviewed by the Council ‘s financial services.

3.    That the Cabinet agrees to delegate authority to the Executive Director of Place (Deputy Chief Executive) to agree the terms of the MoU issued by MHCLG and any funding agreement in respect of the grant award in consultation with the Directors of Finance and Legal Services and approve appointments of professional teams and contract award in respect of the agreed budget.

4.    That the Cabinet agrees to delegate authority to Director of Finance, or Chief Executive, to finalise and enter into the MoU issued by MHCLG and any funding agreement in respect of the grant award subject to the completion of any necessary due diligence on subsidy control compliance and authority to agree and complete any project change requests under the MOU and/or funding agreement.

5.    That the Cabinet agrees to delegate authority to the Director of Legal Services or their nominee to formalise any necessary legal requirements including signing and/or sealing any documentation referred to and/or required to give effect to the recommendations and/or delegations in this report and authority to approve the appointment of external legal advisers if required to protect the Council’s interests and give effect to the recommendations in this report.

6.    That the Cabinet agrees to delegate authority to the Director of Economy or their nominated representative to agree monitoring and evaluation of defined outputs and negotiations thereupon as required over the grant delivery period of 2025/26 and 2026/27.

7.    That the Cabinet notes and endorses that the internal governance and administration for the MHCLG grant will be performed via the Creating a Better Place Programme Board (CaPB) structures.

8.    That the Cabinet notes that the Chair of the Place, Economic Growth and Environment Scrutiny Board, had agreed for this item to be considered at this meeting on grounds of urgency, namely due to the need to make a decision to accept the grant funding before the next scheduled meeting of the Cabinet on 17^th November 2025 and that he has exempted this item from call-in by virtue of Rule 14 of the Constitution.

The Cabinet considered a report of the Director of Finance that provided members with an update, as at 31^st August 2025 (Month 5), of the Council’s 2025/26 forecast revenue budget position (detailed at Annex 1 to the report) alongside the financial position of the capital programme together with the revised capital programme 2025/26 to 2029/30 (detailed at Annex 2 to the report).

The forecast adverse position for 2025/26 at the end of Month 5 was estimated to be £23.209m (£20.822m at the end of Quarter 1 – 30^th June 2025). The details within the revenue monitoring report for Month 5 followed on from the Quarter 1 report previously presented and outlined the general direction of travel for this financial year, highlighting any significant areas of concern which may not just impact on the current year, but also when preparing future budgets.

A forecast adverse position based on the Month 5 revenue controllable budget was £23.209m which was an unfavourable movement of £2.387m from the position previously reported. The increasing need for support of the Council’s services from residents and businesses, the complexity of the support needed, and inflationary costs continue to put pressure on service budgets and is demonstrated by the Month 5 forecast outturn position. These pressures, in the main were driven by escalating costs in essential statutory services supporting the most vulnerable residents, reflecting the broader challenges the Council and numerous Councils across the country are facing. This is particularly acute in statutory and heavily inspected services where there is little flexibility to mitigate rising costs, for example increasing pressures on social care budgets due to the support needs of vulnerable children and complexity in the needs of adult requiring support.

There was also an increasing need to support children with Special Educational Needs (SEND) and whilst significant work has been done in the last 12 months, homelessness presentations and use of temporary accommodation is still of concern given the numbers accessing this service.

Since the last report was presented to the Cabinet, the Executive Team had implemented enhanced controls on expenditure with future revenue monitoring reports expected to show the positive impacts of these management actions. Details on these controls were included in Annex 1 to the submitted report. Given, the in-year financial position of the Council, the level of reserves available and the budgetary gaps already within the MTFS, the outcome of the Local Government Finance Settlement for 2026/27 and future years will have a significant influence on the financial sustainability of the Council and the Council’s ability to set a balanced budget over the short term. The budget pressures the Council has faced in recent years cannot continue to be mitigated without significant action both to reduce projected spend in year and to reduce costs over years to come. Further details of mitigations underway were included at Annex 1 to the submitted report.

The Director of Finance’s report outlined the most up to date capital spending position for 2025/26 to 2029/30 for approved schemes. The revised Capital Programme budget for 2025/26 is £122.222m at the close of Month 5. Actual expenditure to 31^st August 2025 was £20.042m (16.4% of the forecast outturn).

Options/alternatives considered:

Options/Alternatives 1 was to agree the recommendations detailed in the submitted report.

Option 2 to not agree the recommendations and to propose alternative forecasts.

Option 1 was the preferred Option.

Resolved:

1.    That the Cabinet notes the contents of the report.

2.    That the Cabinet notes the forecast revenue position at the end of Month 5 at £23.209m with mitigations in place to reduce expenditure as detailed at Annex 1, to the submitted report.

3.    That the Cabinet approves the revised Capital Programme for 2025/26 including the proposed virements and notes the forecast for the financial years to 2029/30 as at the end of Month 5 as outlined in Annex 2, to the submitted report.

The Cabinet considered a report of the Executive Director of Place (Deputy Chief Executive) which sought the designation of a new Site of Biological Importance (SBI) and to adopt changes which had occurred to other SBI boundaries within the borough.

Appendix 1, of the submitted report, provided a map of the new SBI (Ladcastle Heath) and maps of the other SBI boundary changes (in respect of Medlock Headwater and Strinesdale, Moorgate Quarry and Armit Road Lodge). These changes were outlined at Appendices 2 and 3, to the report, alongside details of the other SBIs reviewed.

The Greater Manchester Ecology Unit (GMEU) periodically survey SBI’s across Greater Manchester as part of a continuous process and notifies the council when there are changes that need to be made to the designations. The submitted report outlined changes to SBIs from site surveys carried out by GMEU in 2022 (received 2025).

The report therefore seeks to designate a new Site of Biological Importance (SBI) – Ladcastle Heath and to adopt changes which have occurred to other SBI boundaries within the borough, as outlined in Appendices 1, 2 and 3.

Options/Alternatives considered:

Option 1 - To designate a new Site of Biological Importance (SBI) – Ladcastle Heath and to adopt changes which have occurred to other SBI boundaries within the borough, as outlined in Appendix 1, 2 and 3. The advantage of this option is that the SBI will be subject to the principles set out in National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) to avoid, mitigate and as a last resort compensate any harm. It will also contribute to the GM Local Nature Recovery Strategy (LNRS) Target 1: To increase the amount of land designated for nature by 5,000ha by 2035, growing this from 11% to 15% of the city-region. There are no disadvantages to this option.

Option 2 – To not designate a new Site of Biological Importance (SBI) – Ladcastle Heath and to not adopt changes which have occurred to other SBI boundaries within the borough, as outlined in Appendix 1, 2 and 3. The disadvantage is that the new SBI and boundary additions will not have been designated and therefore the full extent of the SBI’s may not be given due consideration under NPPF, Places for Everyone (PfE) and the Local Plan. This option would not contribute to the LNRS Target 1: To increase the amount of land designated for nature by 5,000ha by 2035, growing this from 11% to 15% of the city-region. There are no advantages to this option.

Option 1 is the preferred option.

Resolved:

That the Cabinet agrees to

1.    To designate a new Site of Biological Importance (SBI) – Ladcastle Heath and adopt changes which have occurred to other SBI boundaries within the borough, as outlined in Appendix 1, 2 and 3; and to

2.    Note the District Synopsis and District Fact Sheet.

The Cabinet considered a report of the Director of Communities which advised that the Council has a statutory duty to house homeless households under the Housing Act 1996, as amended by the Homelessness Reduction Act 2017. Where prevention was not possible, and permanent housing couldn’t be found in sufficient time, the Council was obliged to provide temporary accommodation, until households could be accommodated permanently.

The current arrangements in relation to key elements of temporary accommodation provision in Oldham were due to expire in the coming year, and required re-procuring, to ensure that the Council had adequate access to accommodation for homeless households.

Options/Alternatives considered:

Option 1: That a robust, transparent procurement and commissioning process is undertaken to procure the following:

a.             A new framework for nightly-paid temporary accommodation

b.             The provision of short-term emergency provision for temporary accommodation, via a dynamic market notice.

That framework and contract-award decision making responsibilities are delegated to the Deputy Chief Executive (Place), ensuring that the exercise and contract award are carried out in a timely fashion, in order to ensure that we have sufficient provision in place to meet our obligations around homelessness.

Option 2: That some or all of the above procurement exercises are not agreed. This would mean that the Council would have less access to appropriate short-term and temporary accommodation and may struggle to meet our statutory obligations.

Option 1 was the preferred Option.

Resolved that:

1.             That a robust, transparent procurement and commissioning process is undertaken to procure the following:

a.             A new framework for nightly-paid temporary accommodation

b.             The provision of short-term emergency provision for temporary accommodation, via a dynamic market notice

2.             That framework and contract-award decision making responsibilities are delegated to the Deputy Chief Executive (Place).