At last Wednesday’s full Council, the Leader of the Opposition and of the Liberal Democrat Group on Oldham Council, Councillor Howard Sykes MBE, called on the Labour Administration to back his proposal to establish a Community Shop in Oldham with hard cash.

Following the opening of an outlet in London last year, Cllr Sykes wrote to Community Shop suggesting Oldham would be a suitable location for a store. He then had an invitation to visit the Community Shop’s flagship store in Barnsley in February this year and also had a behind-the-scenes exclusive tour of the food distribution warehouse.

Cllr Sykes said: “At February’s Council, I asked the Council Leader if he would be willing to work with me to establish a store in Oldham. Cllr McMahon has now referred the matter to the Council’s Overview and Scrutiny Board but I am keen to see the store up and running as soon as possible as I am convinced about the great benefits it would bring for the poorest households in our borough.”

Community Shop is a social enterprise that helps benefit claimants by providing them with the opportunity to purchase heavily-discounted ‘surplus’ food sourced from commercial supermarkets and the support they need to get back into employment.

Other than the prices, to all intents and purposes, the shop looks just like a regular supermarket with all food in date and fit to eat; it is cheaper because this is surplus food discarded by other retailers because it is misshapen or it has damaged packaging.

Describing the Community Shop concept as “worthy and practical”, Cllr Sykes also described his impressions of the merits of the project:

“Not only does this reduce food waste by selling ‘surplus food’ at discounted prices to local people on a low income, but you the project also addresses the waste of human potential and talent by engaging its members in productive training and activity that leads to employment.”

“The project provides participants with dignity, because they are able to purchase a range of quality goods at low prices, rather than receiving donations; with continuity, because they are able to access such food purchases on an ongoing basis as required; and with hope, because alongside this retail offer they are able to access support to move into work.”

Community Shop is keen to open up in Oldham. Its business model is sustainable with sales income being used to run the store and finance the activities that help members find work, but there is a sticking point.

Cllr Sykes described what this is: “The Community Shop model is sustainable but it requires significant initial capital investment to renovate an identified building to make it welcoming and fit for purpose.”

“At Wednesday’s full Council I asked the Council Leader to use some of the massive underspend in the Council’s Local Welfare Provision budget to back Community Shop. This Administration has previously given a commitment to use this money in other ways to benefit Oldham’s poor, so I asked the Leader and his Cabinet colleagues to commit to making available from this budget the £200,000-300,000 that will be needed to make an Oldham Community Shop a reality.”

The Leader of the Opposition and of the Liberal Democrat Group, Councillor Howard Sykes MBE, expressed his disbelief that the majority Labour Group failed to back Liberal Democrat proposals to support local jobseekers faced with benefit sanctions at last night meeting of Oldham Council.

Cllr Sykes said: “This is unfortunately typical of the conduct of Labour on Oldham Council. They condemn the Coalition Government at every opportunity but when the Liberal Democrats propose practical measures to support the poorest households in our borough Labour does not back us.”

“Since the introduction of welfare reform, the Liberal Democrats have proposed a raft of common-sense proposals to help those coping with its impact. Put simply Labour cries crocodile tears over the plight of the poor, but actually does nothing to improve their situation.”

The Liberal Democrat proposals were contained in an amendment to a Labour motion on sanctions.

Cllr Sykes added: “Other than making a few minor changes to the wording of Labour’s motion to ensure its factual accuracy, the Lib Dems amendment was purely intended to strengthen the impact of the motion by outlining a series of actions that the Council could do to support residents faced with benefit sanctions. Even the Conservatives could see the merits of our proposals as they voted in favour of our amendment – yet Labour did not. On this occasion their hypocrisy was truly breath-taking”.

The Liberal Democrat proposals were that:

• The Chief Executive write to the next Secretary of State for Work and Pensions asking the incoming Government to adopt the recommendations resulting from last year’s Oakley Review and those from a recent inquiry of the Work and Pensions Select Committee, and also establish a broad independent review of benefit sanctions as early as possible.
• The Chief Executive also ask the new Government if Oldham can be considered as a location to pilot new proposals that the Select Committee identified – namely to develop a bespoke Vulnerability Guide with local partners to deliver enhanced services for vulnerable claimants and to issue written warnings and non-financial sanctions to claimants prior to imposing a financial penalty.
• A special workshop be convened through the Overview and Scrutiny Board to bring together local partners and Job Centre staff to establish ‘best practice’ in the implementation of benefit sanctions to reduce the number of claimants facing a financial penalty.
• The Council support local Job Centre staff in rolling out specialist training for advisors working with benefit claimants so they are better able to advise them so that they can avoid sanctions.
• That Councillors and advisors across a range of organisations be issued with the excellent toolkit on benefit sanctions produced by the Salvation Army

Cllr Sykes said: “Local Labour MP Debbie Abrahams is a prominent member of the Work and Pensions Select Committee and even she has called for a broad independent review of benefit sanctions to be convened by the government as early as possible in the next Parliament. Labour members on Oldham Council voted against this proposal.”

“Labour Councillor Dave Houle speaking in the Chamber said ‘that over sanctions we need to be sure that Oldham Job Centre is doing the right thing’. Our proposal to convene a special workshop to establish ‘best practice’ would have ensured that they are doing this. A pity then that Labour members voted also against this proposal.”

“Our proposal that Oldham be a pilot area to develop a specialist Vulnerability Guide for the delivery of improved services for vulnerable claimants and for the use of written warnings (a so called Yellow Card scheme) would also help. Sadly Labour Councillors also voted against this proposal, so more local claimants will suffer a cut in benefits as a result.”

 

Q1 Introduction of the National Living Wage

In December 2013 the Liberal Democrat Group brought a motion to Council proposing that Oldham Council become a National Living Wage Employer by April 2014.

The Leader will doubtless recall that in response to the motion that he made a personal commitment to ensure that every employee of this authority would be paid at least the National Living Wage by April 2015.

During the last Council Budget Meeting the Leader rightly paid tribute to the hard work and commitment of our employees, but in becoming a National Living Wage employer, this authority will commit itself to rewarding them fairly for their efforts and we will also set an example for other progressive employers in this Borough to follow.

My first question to the Leader tonight is two-fold – can he confirm that his commitment to introduce the National Living Wage for all staff will be honoured from today?

And can he also confirm whether home care workers and staff employed by contractors engaged by this Council will also receive the National Living Wage?

Q2 Renovation of Union Street West Footbridge

I am pleased to see that the much-hated Manchester Street footbridge is now finally demolished.

The Leader will recall that I made reference to the need to demolish this footbridge in a question to Council last year, but in my question I also referred to the dilapidated state of Union Street West Bridge which links the town centre and the Sixth Form College to Coppice.

This £900,000 bridge was opened in 2000, but it has always been plagued with broken glass panels, caused by the natural movement and flexing of the structure as pedestrians use it.

Because of this the bridge is ‘tinned up’.

This causes two problems – the metal barriers obscure vision, which has led to instances of vandalism and out-of-sight attacks on passers-by.

It also crosses one of the main arterial roads in Oldham – the Oldham Way – it is an eyesore to the many motorists that daily pass by it. Not the sort of gate way feature any of us would want I am sure?

I am sure the Leader will agree that the risk to the safety of residents and the less than favourable impression of Oldham created by the current condition of footbridge are both reasons to find a solution as soon as possible.

I was pleased to hear that the Department for Transport has recently awarded Oldham Council £3.16m to upgrade parts of the A62 and the Oldham Way, including carrying out vital structural repair works to the Oldham Way Bridge over Middleton Road.

Please can the Leader tell me tonight whether any of this money from the Department of Transport will be used by this Administration to fix the Union Street West Bridge as it too spans Oldham Way and if so when?

If not these funds from the Department of Transport what is being done to tackle this eye sore?

Q3 E-on and Elected Members

At February’s Council, the Leader responded to a question from my colleague, Councillor Dave Murphy, about the strained relationship between E-on and Elected Members in Shaw and Crompton.

In his question, Cllr Murphy made specific reference to the fact that E-on had refused point-blank to send a representative in response to a specific invite to attend a meeting of the Shaw and Crompton District Partnership.

In the Leader’s response he rightly expressed his “disappointment” that relations have not improved despite this issue being raised on several occasions in this Chamber and promised to send a letter to both the Community Lighting Partnership and to E-on to “make it absolutely clear that Ward Members need to be taken seriously”.

Could a copy of that letter be shared with all Elected Members please?

Like Cllr Murphy and the Leader, I too am disappointed at the service received by residents and the responses received by their Councillors from E-on and the Community Lighting Partnership and I too want to see something done about it.

Members of the public concur with this view judging by the number of letters and emails we continue to receive from irate constituents.

This contract is costing the council-tax-payers of Oldham many millions of pounds and we have the right to expect more from the contractors so I am sure that Councillors and constituents alike will be keen to hear whether the promised letter has been sent and what if any the reply was.

 

At Oldham Council’s full Council meeting on Wednesday (01 04 15), the Leader of the Opposition and of the Liberal Democrat Group, Councillor Howard Sykes MBE, will move an amendment to a Labour motion on benefit sanctions.

Labour’s motion condemns the application of benefit sanctions to claimants and calls on the Government to “urgently review” its approach to sanctioning.

Cllr Sykes explained why the Liberal Democrats are proposing an amendment:

“Although we agree with the spirit and intentions, the Labour motion as it stands does not contain any practical remedies to support local unemployed people facing the prospect of a benefits sanction.”

“Things have also moved on around sanctions since Labour first proposed this motion at the February full Council and our revised amendment takes these developments into account. We therefore hope that Labour will support this amendment.”

Cllr Sykes added:

“In July of last year, I wrote to the Secretary of State about benefit sanctions. In my letter, I called for the government to strike right balance between placing robust expectations on claimants to find work and giving them the right help and support to do so. Often claimants are not told what is expected of them and so may not be offered the chance or the right support to meet the requirements before being subjected to a sanction.”

“As a sanction can result in benefits being withdrawn from a claimant for between four weeks and – in the most extreme instances – three years, I believe that claimants should be given the information and support they need to take responsibility and make the right choices, as well as being made aware of their right to seek a review of the decision to impose a sanction or to appeal against that decision or to make a claim for a hardship payment”.

In late July 2014, the government published the Oakley Review which identified improvements that could be made in the communication and support offered by Job Centre Plus to benefit claimants. Most of these improvement measures are now being rolled-out in Job Centres across the country.

Earlier this month, the cross-party Work and Pensions Select Committee in Parliament published a report following an extensive inquiry into “the purpose, effects and efficacy of benefit sanctions” and whether their use is “appropriate and proportionate” for jobseekers with ill health and disabilities. This report also details a series of recommendations to the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions.

The amendment is being backed by Deputy Lib Dem Group Leader, Cllr John McCann. Commenting on the two reports, Cllr McCann said:

“The Liberal Democrats want the incoming government to ‘bite the bullet’ on sanctions and adopt all of the recommendations from last year’s Oakley Review, as well as those resulting from the recent Work and Pension Select Committee’s inquiry.”

“Both reports outline common sense recommendations that if fully implemented will vastly improve communications between the staff of Job Centre Plus and the benefit claimant, and strike the right balance between the obligations placed upon and entitlements expected by a benefit claimant looking for work.”

“The Liberal Democrat Group is sure that if they are implemented in full the relationship between Job Centre Plus staff and benefit claimants will improve, and, more importantly, fewer claimants will be left without money as a result of a benefit sanction. Unfortunately at present Oldham has one of the highest benefit sanction rates in the north of England and we are anxious to bring this figure down.”

As well as calling on the incoming government to take urgent action, the Liberal Democrats also want the Council and its partners to do more locally to help people facing a benefit sanction.

Cllr McCann added: “We want the Overview and Scrutiny Board to convene a special workshop to establish “best practice” in the local application of benefit sanctions. Here, Job Centre Plus staff, Council officers, Councillors, and representatives from key community partners – such as the VAO Poverty Agenda Group, Citizens Advice Bureau, and the Oldham Work Club Network – can meet to agree a way forward”.

The Liberal Democrats are also keen to ensure that advisors working in community settings receive training and information to support claimants. Job Centre Plus has developed a pilot training programme for roll out in Oldham, and the Salvation Army has developed an extremely useful ‘toolkit’.

Commenting, Cllr Sykes said: “Information empowers people and the Liberal Democrats want to ensure that front-line volunteers and advisors can access appropriate training and that everyone who comes into contact with benefit claimants, including elected members, has a copy of the ‘toolkit’ to hand as a useful resource. The District Partnership teams are in a unique position to ensure that this is distributed widely”.

Cllr Sykes was especially pleased to see that one of the recommendations made by the Select Committee was the piloting of written warnings and non-financial sanctions where a claimant does not in the first instance meet the conditions for claiming benefits (i.e. to be available for and actively seeking work).

He said: “In my letter to the Secretary of State last year, I called for the introduction of a so-called ‘yellow card’ scheme. At its 2014 annual party conference, the Liberal Democrats adopted a national policy to campaign for the introduction of a ‘yellow card’ scheme and I am pleased to see that the Select Committee has also adopted my idea.

This will provide another chance for errant claimants to comply with requirements that they attend meetings with advisors and are actively seeking work without initially suffering a financial penalty.

“The Select Committee is also recommending that a Vulnerability Guide be produced in consultation with partners to identify ‘best practice’ in supporting vulnerable and disabled claimants.”

“The Select Committee is suggesting that the government establish pilot areas where these practices can be introduced. In our amendment, we are suggesting that Oldham be one of these pilot areas”.

Copy of motion and amendment below: 

ORIGINAL MOTION READS: 

The New Economy recently published a report which reviewed the impact of benefit sanctions. This has been reviewed by the Oldham Poverty Action Group and local data collected through a workshop.  The Group has stated that:

• The sanctions system itself is complex and the wording in official letters is difficult to understand. Local residents do not know they can access hardship payments from the DWP and are not clear about Local Welfare Provision.
• Many organisations that work to support claimants believe that sanctions are applied when they shouldn’t be.  For example when there are exceptional circumstances that have led to the claimants actions, e.g. when a person is sanctioned for not attending an interview when the letter inviting them arrived after the date of the meeting.
• People who are already vulnerable are often more likely to incur sanctions e.g. concerns were expressed about people with mental ill health and with poor literacy/numeracy skills.
• Overall there seems to be less support services available to help people facing multiple disadvantages who are affected by sanctions which means people are left isolated and need to turn to charitable help.

According to the Children in Poverty Action Group only about one third of sanctioned claimants appeal and yet 56% are successful at getting the sanction overturned which implies that confidence and understanding about the appeal process is likely to be poorly understood and that too many sanctions probably shouldn’t have been applied. A number of work clubs in Oldham are now trying to support claimants with the appeal process and it is appears that where claimants have skills issues (e.g. literacy issues) that they will not engage in submitting appeals.

I thereby call on the Chief Executive to write to the Government asking it to urgently review its approach to sanctioning. It is accepted that sometimes sanctions are required but there should be a fairness test and clear support pathways for those sanctioned.

 ORIGINAL MOTION READS: 

The New Economy recently published a report which reviewed the impact of benefit sanctions. This has been reviewed by the Oldham Poverty Action Group and local data collected through a workshop.  The Group has stated that:

• The sanctions system itself is complex and the wording in official letters is difficult to understand. Local residents do not know they can access hardship payments from the DWP and are not clear about Local Welfare Provision.
• Many organisations that work to support claimants believe that sanctions are applied when they shouldn’t be.  For example when there are exceptional circumstances that have led to the claimants actions, e.g. when a person is sanctioned for not attending an interview when the letter inviting them arrived after the date of the meeting.
• People who are already vulnerable are often more likely to incur sanctions e.g. concerns were expressed about people with mental ill health and with poor literacy/numeracy skills.
• Overall there seems to be less support services available to help people facing multiple disadvantages who are affected by sanctions which means people are left isolated and need to turn to charitable help.

According to the Children in Poverty Action Group only about one third of sanctioned claimants appeal and yet 56% are successful at getting the sanction overturned which implies that confidence and understanding about the appeal process is likely to be poorly understood and that too many sanctions probably shouldn’t have been applied. A number of work clubs in Oldham are now trying to support claimants with the appeal process and it is appears that where claimants have skills issues (e.g. literacy issues) that they will not engage in submitting appeals.

I thereby call on the Chief Executive to write to the Government asking it to urgently review its approach to sanctioning. It is accepted that sometimes sanctions are required but there should be a fairness test and clear support pathways for those sanctioned.

 AMENDMENT AS FOLLOWS:

Proposed by Cllr Howard Sykes, Seconded by Cllr John McCann

Insert before the start of the motion:

‘This Council notes that:

• Benefit claimants enter into a Claimant Commitment in which they agree to meet certain conditions in return for benefit payments, referred to as “conditionality”.

–        Sanctions are imposed when a claimant fails to satisfy “conditionality” without “good reason”.

This Council wishes to ensure that local benefit claimants are made aware of:

• The advice and support available from Job Centre Plus, Get Oldham Working and the Oldham Work Club Network.
• The importance of meeting “conditionality” and of furnishing “good reason” as soon as possible where they cannot do so.
• Their right to appeal against sanctions, and the support that is available to them from the Citizens’ Advice Bureau and the Welfare Rights team.

–        Their right to apply for a Hardship Payment or for Local Welfare Provision, and the importance of refreshing their claim for Housing Benefit and Local Council Tax Support should they be sanctioned’.

Delete: ‘The’ before New Economy in the First Line of the original motion.

Replace: ‘Oldham Poverty Action Group’ with ‘VAO Poverty Agenda Group’ in the Second Line of the original motion.

 Replace: ‘Children in Poverty Action Group’ with ‘Child Poverty Action Group’ in the Eighteenth Line of the original motion.

Insert after the end of the Twenty Fourth Line of the original motion ending ‘submitting appeals’ the following wording and bullet points:

‘Council therefore welcomes:

• The recent publication of the Oakley Review with its many recommendations to improve communications and support from Job Centre Plus staff to help claimants meet “conditionality”, avoid sanctions, access hardship payments, and appeal.
• The recent publication of a report by the Work and Pensions Select Committee following an inquiry into “the purpose, effects and efficacy of benefit sanctions” and whether their use is “appropriate and proportionate” for jobseekers with ill health and disabilities.
• The recent work at the Oldham Job Centre, in conjunction with the Oldham Housing Investment Partnership, to develop a pilot training project for roll-out to external advisors so they are better able to help claimants meet “conditionality”.

–        The publication of the Sanctions Toolkit for advisors by the Salvation Army.’

Delete in the Twenty Fifth Line of the original motion: ‘I thereby call on the Chief Executive to urgently review its approach to sanctioning’.

Insert at the end of the original motion the following wording and bullet points:

‘Council therefore resolves to:

• Ask the Chief Executive to write to the next Secretary of State for Work and Pensions asking the new Government to:
• Adopt all of the Oakley Review recommendations
• Adopt all of the recommendations resulting from the recent Work and Pension Select Committee’s inquiry
• Establish a broad independent review of benefit conditionality and sanctions as soon as is practicable in the next Parliament
• Ask the Chief Executive to specifically reference in her letter two of the recommendations arising from the recent Work and Pension Select Committee’s inquiry, namely that:
• In advance of new legislation, there should be pilot areas where a written warning and a non-financial sanction (a so called “yellow card”) is employed where a claimant fails in the first instance to meet conditionality

o   A Vulnerability Guide should be developed, in conjunction with healthcare professionals and local welfare-to-work agencies, for use by Job Centre staff with vulnerable claimants

And ask the Chief Executive to request in her letter that Oldham be the location of pilot projects for testing these concepts

• Ask the Overview and Scrutiny Board to convene a special workshop to which elected members, Job Centre staff and representatives from relevant local agencies can be invited to establish “best practice” in the application of benefit sanctions, particularly where applied to vulnerable claimants.
• Ask the appropriate Cabinet Member and officers to work with the Employer and Partnership Manager at the Oldham Job Centre and with the Chair of the VAO Poverty Agenda Group to support the roll out of the recently developed Job Centre training programme for advisors working with claimants. 

–        Ask the appropriate Cabinet Member to ensure that the Sanctions Toolkit is distributed electronically as widely as possible to advisors and relevant organisations by the District Partnership Teams’.

THE MOTION AS AMENDED TO READ AS FOLLOWS:

This Council notes that:

• Benefit claimants enter into a Claimant Commitment in which they agree to meet certain conditions in return for benefit payments, referred to as “conditionality”.

–        Sanctions are imposed when a claimant fails to satisfy “conditionality” without “good reason”.

This Council wishes to ensure that local benefit claimants are made aware of:

• The advice and support available from Job Centre Plus, Get Oldham Working and the Oldham Work Club Network;
• The importance of meeting “conditionality” and of furnishing “good reason” as soon as possible where they cannot do so.
• Their right to appeal against sanctions, and the support that is available to them from the Citizens’ Advice Bureau and the Welfare Rights team.
• –        Their right to apply for a Hardship Payment or for Local Welfare Provision, and the importance of refreshing their claim for Housing Benefit and Local Council Tax Support should they be sanctioned.

New Economy recently published a report which reviewed the impact of benefit sanctions. This has been reviewed by the VAO Poverty Agenda Group and local data collected through a workshop.  The Group has stated that:

• The sanctions system itself is complex and the wording in official letters is difficult to understand. Local residents do not know they can access hardship payments from the DWP and are not clear about Local Welfare Provision.
• Many organisations that work to support claimants believe that sanctions are applied when they shouldn’t be.  For example when there are exceptional circumstances that have led to the claimants actions, e.g. when a person is sanctioned for not attending an interview when the letter inviting them arrived after the date of the meeting.
• People who are already vulnerable are often more likely to incur sanctions e.g. concerns were expressed about people with mental ill health and with poor literacy/numeracy skills.

–        Overall there seems to be less support services available to help people facing multiple disadvantages who are affected by sanctions which means people are left isolated and need to turn to charitable help.

According to the Child Poverty Action Group only about one third of sanctioned claimants appeal and yet 56% are successful at getting the sanction overturned which implies that confidence and understanding about the appeal process is likely to be poorly understood and that too many sanctions probably shouldn’t have been applied. A number of work clubs in Oldham are now trying to support claimants with the appeal process and it is appears that where claimants have skills issues (e.g. literacy issues) that they will not engage in submitting appeals.

It is accepted that sometimes sanctions are required but there should be a fairness test and clear support pathways for those sanctioned.

Council therefore welcomes:

• The recent publication of the Oakley Review with its many recommendations to improve communications and support from Job Centre Plus staff to help claimants meet “conditionality”, avoid sanctions, access hardship payments, and appeal.
• The recent publication of a report by the Work and Pensions Select Committee following an inquiry into “the purpose, effects and efficacy of benefit sanctions” and whether their use is “appropriate and proportionate” for jobseekers with ill health and disabilities.
• The recent work at the Oldham Job Centre, in conjunction with the Oldham Housing Investment Partnership, to develop a pilot training project for roll-out to external advisors so they are better able to help claimants meet “conditionality”.

–        The publication of the Sanctions Toolkit for advisors by the Salvation Army.

Council therefore resolves to:

• Ask the Chief Executive to write to the next Secretary of State for Work and Pensions asking the new Government to:
• Adopt all of the Oakley Review recommendations
• Adopt all of the recommendations resulting from the recent Work and Pension Select Committee’s inquiry
• Establish a broad independent review of benefit conditionality and sanctions as soon as is practicable in the next Parliament
• Ask the Chief Executive to specifically reference in her letter two of the recommendations arising from the recent Work and Pension Select Committee’s inquiry, namely that:
• In advance of new legislation, there should be pilot areas where a written warning and a non-financial sanction (a so called “yellow card”) is employed where a claimant fails in the first instance to meet conditionality

o   A Vulnerability Guide should be developed, in conjunction with healthcare professionals and local welfare-to-work agencies, for use by Job Centre staff with vulnerable claimants

And ask the Chief Executive to request in her letter that Oldham be the location of pilot projects for testing these concepts

• Ask the Overview and Scrutiny Board to convene a special workshop to which elected members, Job Centre staff and representatives from relevant local agencies can be invited to establish “best practice” in the application of benefit sanctions, particularly where applied to vulnerable claimants.
• Ask the appropriate Cabinet Member and officers to work with the Employer and Partnership Manager at the Oldham Job Centre and with the Chair of the VAO Poverty Agenda Group to support the roll out of the recently developed Job Centre training programme for advisors working with claimants.

–        Ask the appropriate Cabinet Member to ensure that the Sanctions Toolkit is distributed electronically as widely as possible to advisors and relevant organisations by the District Partnership Teams.