Liberal Democrat Councillor and leader of the opposition on Oldham Council, Howard Sykes MBE highlights in a letter to the Council, recent steps taken over the border in Bradford to tackle people who casually throw litter from the windows of their vehicle.

The steps taken by Bradford City Council involve issuing a Fixed Penalty Notice for littering on the car owner.  Therefore, avoiding the difficult job of identifying the offender when observing littering from a moving vehicle.

Councillor Sykes has written to environment bosses at Oldham Council – Carol Brown and Helen Lockwood – urging them to adopt a similar in Oldham Borough.

“This is a simple thing we can do to help tackle the blight of littering.  I hope the Council will adopt this without delay,” stated Councillor Sykes.E

The following is a letter to Carol Brown (Environmental Services at Oldham Borough Council) and Helen Lockwood (Deputy Chief Executive Oldham Borough Council) from Councillor Howard Sykes regarding the issue of littering in the Borough:

12 July 2019

Dear Helen Lockwood, Carol Brown,

Re: Fines for Litterers & Fly-Tippers

Recent Fixed Penalty Charge notices in Bradford have been issued to tackle people casually and criminally throwing litter from the windows of their car.  As a Borough that contains hundreds of thousands of people, we must act now to contain the spread of discarded off hand waste in our area for fears that a little trickle of litter thrown from a vehicle here and there could mount up and seriously devastate the environment in which we live.

Plastic pollution is currently one of the world’s biggest environmental concerns.  It may seem likely that large amounts of plastic waste are inevitable with such a big population, but we can help with the plastic pollution issue by being aware of its dangers and taking steps to reduce waste, by doing our bit, as a proud cooperative Council.  Going back as far as July 2016, Oldham Liberal Democrats put forward a motion introducing a new Bin App to streamline waste management make recycling easy and accessible.

Even with this inclusive technology and local community groups like MAHDLO and Friends of Jubilee Colliery engaging in litter-picks over the years, the Council need to emulate other areas in their modern efforts to prevent littering.

These steps taken in the proposals by Bradford City Council seek to place the Fixed Penalty Notice with the car owner since identifying the sole individual responsible is often difficult for law enforcement when observing a moving vehicle.

The amount of rubbish in the region will increase as the population grows, and disposable plastic products, like water bottles and fizzy drinks cans, accumulate over time. Plastic pollution occurs when enough plastic has gathered in an area that it affects the natural environment and harms plants, animals, or humans.

In March 2019, the Oldham Liberal Democrats have called upon the Council to increase fines for dog fouling and we as a group think it appropriate to extend the fine to those who have taken it upon themselves to soil the locality with rubbish.

Considering this, can I ask what steps are being taken to tackle litterers?  Plastic toxins in dumps and from litter can seep into our groundwater rivers and reservoirs, which people drink out of every day.  In our parks and countryside, wind can carry plastic waste throughout the environment leaving no picturesque view safe from litter.

I hope you take the time to review this information and take the appropriate steps to be active on this environmental and social issue.

I look forward to receiving your response as soon as possible.

Yours sincerely,

Howard Sykes

Under Council Procedure Rules:

10.13 Points of Order or Personal Explanation.

A Member may raise a point of order or make a personal explanation at any time.

Personal Explanation in response to a public question from Warren Bates

Thank you, Madam Mayor, for giving me another opportunity to clarify what I very clearly meant in my question to the Leader of the Council at our meeting in December 2018.

Can I also thank Mr Bates for asking this question allowing me to further clarify any confusion that may have been caused the good citizens of our Borough.

Members will be aware that I responded to a near identical question to this one from Mr Charles Garrity at the March 2019 Council meeting.

At that time, I made clear that my comments were directed at the politicians who brought us Brexit, the very people who have brought us to this point’, rather than being directed at individual voters in this Borough, whether they voted leave or remain.

For the benefit of questioner Mr Warren Bates, a former UKIP Councillor, I am happy to once again to clarify this matter and hopefully put this matter finally to bed.  But I suspect not!

Mr Bates only quotes an extract of my question, and one might speculate that this is for the purposes of mischief-making and mis-representing what I said.

As with any question, it is important to look at this extract in the context of the entire question to properly appreciate it.

So I would first urge anyone with an interest to view the entire question on the Council’s website at https://www.oldham.gov.uk/info/200608/meetings/1940/live_council_meetings_online

And do look at it on the council web site not the edited versions and extracts that UKIP and its supporters have posted!

To aid viewers, I asked the question 1 hour, 42 minutes and 36 seconds into the proceedings.

Viewers may also wish to refer to my earlier reply to Mr Garrity’s question submitted to the March 2019 Council which can be found using the same link.

The question was read out by the Mayor in Mr Garrity’s absence, starting at 17 minutes and 28 seconds into proceedings and I provided my personal clarification from 19 minutes 53 seconds.

I would now like to spell out what I meant with specific reference to the extract quoted by Mr Bates in his so-called question.

Given that I previously referenced the former Soviet Union and the Western allies in the context of the Cold War, the ‘Here’ Mr Bates highlights clearly refers to is the UK, not Oldham, and the UK’s political establishment rather than its people.

I am personally convinced that to remain within the European Union is in the best interests of our Borough and its people.

As a member of the largest trading bloc in the world, Britain benefits from the most favourable terms of trade with its European neighbours, trade that is free of red-tape and bureaucracy.

In addition, millions of British citizens every year enjoy the benefits of membership by being able to travel, learn, work, holiday, fall in love, marry, raise a family, and live freely in any of the European member states.

And, lastly and most importantly, we should not forget that the European Union, and before it the EEC, has ensured that the member nations of Europe have never gone to war since 1945 – a blessed and unprecedented 74 – years of peace that our forebears in 1914 and 1939 must have desperately hoped for.

Consequently, my reference to ‘Little Englanders and Swivel Eyed Loons’ was specifically directed at those of our country’s political leaders who want to jeopardise this by so wilfully wishing to cast aside the many benefits of European Union membership.

And they are also very happy to mislead the British public in order to do so.  So they spoke of an illusory ‘£350 million a week for the NHS’ as a promise to the British people if we abandoned the club – or, as I put it, ‘breaking faith with the neighbours’ – even though our net financial contribution per annum, our membership fee so to speak, is only half that much!

What they did not speak of were the consequences of a No Deal Brexit.

This scenario is what I refer to as ‘frightening stuff’.

A scenario where medicines are in short supply.

Where there are food shortages, especially of perishable food, and price rises as a result.

Of passenger jets and air freight being delayed, even assuming they have the right permits to fly.

Of long queues of holidaymakers awaiting greater scrutiny of their new Blue passports by overzealous border officials.

And of lorry parks and traffic jams tens of miles long along the highways of Southern England and Northern Ireland because of the many new checks that will need to be carried out as a result of new ‘hard borders’ being created between mainland Britain and mainland Europe, and between Northern Ireland and the Republic.

This is indeed ‘frightening stuff’, Madam Mayor. 

This is not Project Fear, this is the Project Reality of a No Deal Brexit.

I hope and trust that this will provide final clarification on this matter for Mr Bates and others with an interest in this matter tonight, and that we can now move on in this Chamber to addressing our other pressing business matters that impact on the lives of our Borough’s citizens tonight.

QUESTION I ASKED ABOUT THE ABOVE AT WEDNESDAY’S COUNCIL MEETING

GMCA 68/13 – Town Centre Challenge: Future High Streets Fund Prospectus – page 36 in Council Agenda

Back in March of this year you will remember I asked the Leader about the persisting issue of St. Paul’s Methodist Church in my ward of Shaw.

The unfortunate collapse in February saw the closure of roads and a commendable response by emergency services for containing the situation.

What we now need to do is ensure council services sort out the issue of the derelict site and work with the Methodist church to provide a viable and workable community solution.

The building is now being cared for and undergoing repairs by the Methodist Church, but what is the future of this Place of Worship grade II listed building?

Following road closures and the ongoing repair work, would it make more sense that the site could be fit into Oldham Borough Council’s housing framework and serve as a lived-in example of how we should think of using our existing buildings and not continuously attack our finite green belt.

Up and down the borough there are empty buildings in a similar condition to St. Paul’s, I gave reference in March, to empty Banks, post offices and Pubs.

Is St. Paul’s to become yet another tombstone of Shaw town centre?

The council has left Shaw out of its Phase 1 application for a Government financed Future High Streets Fund.

I strongly feel if the Council does not take this issue seriously Shaw will miss the deadline for summer 2020 as well, and the subsequent regeneration provided by such a grant.

Back in April 2019, myself and Liberal Democrat Councillors colleagues were in contact with the Methodist Church and Historic England and we have been informed the building will become safe as a result of the repair work.

However, as we could still be left with yet another disused space in our community, what is being done about the long-term future of St. Paul’s or will money continue to be sunk money into a pile of old stones which will be an ongoing blight on Shaw and Crompton?

Councillor Howard Sykes

For real time information: https://oldham.roadworks.org/

Leaders Questions to Oldham Full Council 10/07/2019

Q1: Keeping the Travelodge tourist pounds in Oldham

Madam Mayor, although it hardly represents the ‘gamechanger’ that his predecessor promised for the Princes Gate site, I do welcome the Leader’s recent announcement that there will be a new Travelodge at Oldham Mumps, and the fact that he has indicated that there is a demand for more hotel accommodation in the town centre.

A pity then that the Hotel Futures Project is dead in the water, but that is another story and I shall not go there tonight.

No rather I will turn to a Travelodge related matter.

If we are to truly maximise the benefits from this hotel development, we shall need to ensure that the spending made by guests staying there is, as far as possible, kept within our Borough.

The new hotel’s location at Mumps will mean that Manchester will be all too easily accessible by Metrolink and the city’s bright lights will represent a magnet.

I would like therefore to suggest that we look to work with the hotel’s proprietors to promote all that this Borough has to offer, and that would include our Coliseum Theatre, our Cinema complex, Gallery Oldham and our town centre shops, bars and eateries, as well as the delights of our Saddleworth villages.

Can the Leader tell me if he would be prepared to look to work with the Town Centre Partnership and with our other partners in the leisure and retail industries to see if we can come up with a discount voucher scheme and other similar incentives for hotel guests at both this and any future hotels to keep their vital tourist pounds in our Borough?

Q2: Let’s bring back our public water fountains

Madam Mayor, my second question tonight relates to my concern for our environment and involves a practical proposal to make available drinking water to the public.

In times past it was very common for municipal authorities and for individual philanthropists to provide drinking fountains, many very ornate, in public places.

This enabled everyone to access clean, safe drinking water for free – I am sure many members will themselves have used them in the past, the one dispensing Buxton spring water in the centre of that town being especially noteworthy.

I wonder though how many members here are aware that this practice has recently been revived by the Mayor of London who last year to his credit established a ‘drinking fountain fund’ with the support of the capital water utility provider, Thames Water.

This will locate new fountains, or rehydration points as they are now known, initially at twenty locations across the capital and thereafter on a rolling programme.

Apparently, Londoners drink an average of 175 bottles of water every year, so it is far better for them and for our environment to encourage them to fill up for free into a reusable bottle, rather than drinking and discarding single-use bottles, many of whom end up in our oceans and in our sea-life.

Citizens of our Borough may not perhaps consume so much bottled water, but any attempt on our part to replicate what has been done in London will make a tangible, practical contribution to making our Borough single-use plastic free.

Certainly, places that would merit the location of such rehydration points in our Borough would be our many beautiful public parks.

For example, last year in the height of summer, I visited Dovestones Reservoir and the water dispenser there was in great demand, but also in great need of renovation.

So, Madam Mayor, my second question to the Leader, and it is rather a suggestion, is will he look to replicate this excellent scheme in Oldham, perhaps by using some of our airport dividend, by establishing at least one new drinking fountain in each of our district centres and would he also ask our own Mayor of Greater Manchester, to replicate it across the conurbation, working with United Utilities to do so?

Councillor Howard Sykes MBE,

Leader of the Opposition

Leader of the Liberal Democrat Group Oldham Council

                                                                                                                      

Liberal Democrat Cllrs Garth Harkness and Diane Williamson have written to the Chief Executive of Oldham Council, Dr Carolyn Wilkins and the Leader of Oldham Council, Councillor Sean Fielding to complain about the way in which the decisions were made for applications to build on protected land in Saddleworth and green spaces in Sholver.

“A previous application in Royton was refused on the same grounds as what was proposed for the protected land in Saddleworth.  The professionalism of the meeting was that bad that it descended into a shambles, with members of the public not knowing what how the committee voted” said Councillor Garth Harkness.

Councillor Diane Williamson added “We have lodged a formal complaint on the grounds of unfairness and procedural impropriety due to the poor leadership of the meeting and decisions made that maybe constitutionally questionable and therefore legally questionable”.

LETTER BELOW:

Dear Carolyn and Sean

On Monday 1 July we attended the extraordinary Planning Committee to consider the following planning applications:

PA/342008/18 Land at Hodge Clough Road

PA/342030/18 Land at Pearly Bank

PA/343269/19 Land at Knowls Lane

Members of the public and ward Councillors came to listen to the debates on the various applications and also to speak in support of refusal for all three applications.  Members of the committee then asked questions to the speakers, ward Councillors and planning officers.

It was at this point the meeting descended into a shambles due to the inexperience of the chair and vice-chair. 

Hodge Clough Road – we tried to put forward a proposal for refusal on Hodge Clough Road and the chair appeared to not know how to take the proposal forward.  He asked for those in favour of refusal and we put our hands up.  Then he says all those for the development, which is a clear breach of the constitution because he did not ask members to vote on approving the refusal put forward.  He then asks for the approval of the planning application, without getting the refusal voted properly.  He declares the application refused and the members of the public cheer.  Lots of hasty conversations were had about it; incorrect numbers were given to the public on who voted how and on what proposal.  The legal officer then declared that there was no decision made.  A Councillor proposed it and the chair instructs someone to second it.  The chair changed his vote and a member of public asked him what had changed his mind.  Then he got the vote calculation incorrect then says the correct one; the head of planning confirms the correct result.

Knowles Lane – It became extremely unclear as to what Councillors were voting for and members of public at one stage clearly did not know or understand what was going because some of the comments made.   Thee chair tried proposing and seconding himself.  The Vice-chair then asks if members want to put forward a proposal to approve it which appeared to put pressure on members to put forward a proposal to approve.  The Chair at one point declared it as unanimous to approve but that was incorrect.

Therefore on the grounds of unfairness and procedural impropriety we are writing to make formal complaint about the unprofessionalism leadership of the meeting and decisions made that maybe constitutionally questionable and therefore legally questionable.

Yours sincerely

Cllr Garth Harkness (as a member of the Planning Committee) and Cllr Diane Williamson (as a substitute of the Planning Committee).

This week is Fair Tax Week (6 to 14 July) and Liberal Democrat Councillor Chris Gloster is using the occasion to propose a motion at the next meeting of Oldham Council (10 July) calling for the Council to sign the Fair Tax Declaration.  The declaration is a call for action on corporate tax avoidance, making contractors who supply goods and services to public authorities pay their fair share of tax. Councillor Gloster is backed by his colleague, Louie Hamblett, Councillor for Crompton.

Chris, as the Council’s Shadow Cabinet Member for Finance, is a strong believer that businesses should act responsibly and pay their fair share of tax to finance public services.  Chris said:  “Corporate tax, like personal income tax, funds the essential public services like health, education, policing, social care and highway maintenance we all rely upon.  Polling from the Institute for Business Ethics found that corporate tax avoidance has in recent years been the primary concern of the British public when it comes to business conduct.  Taxpayers who make their own contribution rightly expect contractors to also pay their fair share in funding public services.”

Tax losses from just one form of tax avoidance, multinational profit-shifting, could be costing the UK some £7bn per annum in lost corporation tax revenues. Consequently, six in ten people feel that public authorities should pay attention to the tax position of any companies with which they engage as an important part of awarding a contract.

Chris added:  “Local councils receive and spend a great deal of public money.  Much of this money is spent on buying goods and services from private-sector contractors.  It is therefore imperative upon us to show good faith with the public by ensuring we only work with contractors who play fair by tax.  Some councils have also made investments in companies with a history of tax avoidance or purchases of commercial property from organisations based in tax havens.  We should demonstrate our commitment to exemplary tax conduct by refusing to go along with tax dodging in our investments or when buying land and property.  Signing this declaration and making these commitments real will show that Oldham Council supports international tax justice.

Oldham Council 10 July 2019 – Notice of Opposition Business – Adopting the Fair Tax Declaration

Council notes that:

• The 6 – 14 July 2019 is Fair Tax Week 2019.

• Polling by the Institute for Business Ethics finds that corporate tax avoidance has, since 2013, been the clear number one concern of the British public in relation to business conduct.

• It has been conservatively estimated that losses through just one form of tax avoidance, multinational profit-shifting, could be costing the UK some £7bn per annum in lost corporation tax revenues.

• An estimated 15% of public contracts have been won by companies with links to tax havens.

• 6 in 10 members of the public believe that UK Government and Councils should examine the tax practices of such prospective contractors as part of the procurement process.

• The Fair Tax Mark offers a means for businesses to demonstrate good tax conduct.

Council believes that, as a publicly-funded body and a major procurer of goods and services, it should demonstrate good tax conduct.

Council therefore resolves to sign the Councils for Fair Tax Declaration, and furthermore to lead by example and demonstrate good practice in our tax conduct, right across our activities, by:

• Ensuring contractors implement IR35 robustly and pay any due employment taxes.
• Shunning the use of offshore vehicles for the purchase of land and property, especially where this leads to reduced payments of stamp duty.
• Undertaking due diligence to ensure that not-for-profit structures are not being used inappropriately as an artificial device to reduce the payment of tax and business rates. 
• Ensuring that there is clarity on the ultimate beneficial ownership of suppliers and their consolidated profit & loss position, given that a lack of clarity could be strong indicators of poor financial probity and weak financial standing.
• Promoting Fair Tax Mark certification to local businesses, our contractors and in any business in which we have a significant stake and where corporation tax is due.
• Supporting local Fair Tax Week events and celebrating the tax contribution made by responsible businesses.

Supporting calls for urgent reform of EU and UK law to enable municipalities to revise their procurement policies and better penalise poor tax conduct and reward good tax conduct.

Liberal Democrat Councillor Diane Williamson is proposing a motion to the 10 July meeting of Oldham Council demanding the Government honour its previous commitment to provide £50-million in funding to Greater Manchester to fund the development of new housing on brownfield sites.  The Conservatives recently made the unilateral decision to renege on the deal.  Councillor Garth Harkness is seconding the motion, and their proposal is backed by the whole Liberal Democrat Group. 

Councillor Williamson represents Crompton ward.  Both the Crompton and Shaw wards, represented by six Liberal Democrat Councillors, and the two neighbouring Royton wards, are threatened with the prospect of thousands of new homes on the surrounding green belt under the Greater Manchester Spatial Framework (GMSF) proposals.

Councillors Williamson and Harkness, and their colleagues, want to see any new housing built on brownfield sites, former industrial land, rather than by destroying any irreplaceable greenbelt – and they want to see the Conservative Government cough up the promised money to do so.

Commenting on her motion, Councillor Williamson said:  “The Conservative Government stated in its white paper, ‘Fixing our Broken Housing Market’, that Councils should ‘maximise‘ the number of homes built on brownfield sites, and they promised Greater Manchester £50-million to remediate, or clean up, such sites for development.  In Oldham, most of our brownfield sites suffer from significant land or building contamination, which is the result of their previous industrial use. This contamination costs a small fortune to clean up and, without outside funding, housing development is often unaffordable.”

According to Department of Trade figures, the UK has approximately 1,000,000 acres of contaminated land, much of it in Northern towns, like Oldham.  The estimated average cost of cleaning up contaminated land is £250,000 per acre – meaning a staggering £250-billion would be required to clear them all up for development. 

Councillor Williamson added:  “The fact is that on remediation this Government is all talk.  £50-million is nowhere near adequate to address the challenge that we face in Greater Manchester in making these sites fit for use.  In reality we probably need ten times as much or more, but the money would be a start and every brownfield acre that we can redevelop for housing means an acre of irreplaceable green belt that we can save.  It is our hope that Councillors from across all parties will back our ambition next Wednesday to lobby this government to get our promised money back; after all it is the stated position of this Council to build on brownfield first!” 

The motion to full Council on 10 July reads as follows:

Motion – Restoring Government Funding for Brownfield Housing Development

Council notes that:

• The Conservative Government in its white paper ‘Fixing our Broken Housing Market’ stated that more homes should be built ‘by maximising the contribution from brownfield sites’.
• Brownfield sites suffer from significant contamination, whether below-ground or in a building’s construction, which is the result of previous industrial use as cotton mills; chemical and coal gas plants; coal mines; and dye works.
• Decontaminating such sites is very expensive at an average cost of £250,000 per acre and this cost often renders housing developments unaffordable.
• According to Department of Trade figures, approximately 1 million acres of brownfield sites are contaminated.
• Much of this land is in Northern towns, like Oldham, a legacy of their industrial past.

• In the Outline Housing Package agreed between the ten Greater Manchester authorities and the Conservative Government in 2017, a ‘land fund’ worth up to £50 million was pledged by central government to support the development of housing on brownfield sites by paying for the cost of remediation.
• The Conservative Government has recently reneged on this pledge.

Council condemns the decision by the Conservative Government to withdraw its offer of the Outline Housing Package, which will make the delivery of new homes on brownfield sites unaffordable and force more development onto the Green Belt, a direct contradiction of the Government’s own stated policy.

Council resolves to ask the Chief Executive to:

• Write to the Secretary of State for Communities and Housing urging the minister to restore the Outline Housing Package to fund the remediation of brownfield sites in Greater Manchester
• Copy in our local MPs, the Mayor of Greater Manchester, the leaders of the other Greater Manchester local authorities and the Chair of the Local Government Association asking them for their support for Oldham’s position.

The Leader of the Opposition and of the Liberal Democrat Group, Councillor Howard Sykes MBE, will be calling in a motion for Oldham Council to back the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals at its next meeting on 10 July.

In September 2015, 193 world leaders met at the United Nations General Assembly in New York to adopt seventeen Sustainable Development Goals.  These goals seek the eradication of extreme poverty and hunger, improvements in public health, reductions in child and maternal mortality, better educational outcomes, more gender equality, better international co-operation and a environmentally sustainable future for our planet to help the United Nations achieve the ambition articulated in their 2000 Millennium Declaration of creating ‘a more peaceful, prosperous and just world’ by 2030.

Councillor Sykes believes that local government, as well as the UK government, should be aiming to help deliver these worthy objectives, and he is backed in his ambition by Liberal Democrat Councillor for Saddleworth West and Lees Sam Al-Hamdani, who has previously worked with UN agencies such as the World Health Organisation.

Commenting, Councillor Sykes said:  “These goals may seem lofty and New York may seem a long way from Oldham, but we can all make our own contribution, whether we are a Council or an individual, as part of one world community to achieving them.  Unfortunately, even in Britain, one of the world’s richest countries, many children still go to bed hungry and food bank use and homelessness is on the rise, so we still have work to do even on our own doorstep.  In a world increasingly threatened by climate change, we have seen an increasing incidence of fierce fires on our local moors meaning we should all now redouble our efforts to ensure that the preservation of our natural environment is placed front and centre when we consider our actions, whether as a citizen or as a public body.”

Councillor Sykes wants the Council to carry out an audit of what it has done to contribute towards the goals and what more it might do in the future.  He added:  “In our motion, Councillor Al-Hamdani and I will be asking the Council’s Overview and Scrutiny Board to conduct this audit with our social partners and to present a report of their findings to a future meeting of Oldham Council.  We both look forward to reading it with great interest and then to implementing it with vigour.”

Council 10 July 2019 – Notice of Opposition Business –

Motion 1 – Making a Commitment to the UN Sustainable Development Goals

Council welcomes the UK Government’s commitment to the delivery of the seventeen Sustainable Development Goals adopted by the world community at the United Nations in September 2015. The goals form part of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development which seeks to eradicate extreme poverty, address inequality and injustice, and promote sustainable development and peace.

The goals are to: 

• End poverty in all its forms everywhere
• End hunger, achieve food security and improved nutrition and promote sustainable agriculture
• Ensure healthy lives and promote well-being for all at all ages
• Ensure inclusive and equitable quality education and promote lifelong learning opportunities for all
• Achieve gender equality and empower all women and girls
• Ensure availability and sustainable management of water and sanitation for all
• Ensure access to affordable, reliable, sustainable and modern energy for all
• Promote sustained, inclusive and sustainable economic growth, full and productive employment and decent work for all
• Build resilient infrastructure, promote inclusive and sustainable industrialization and foster innovation
• Reduce inequality within and among countries
• Make cities and human settlements inclusive, safe, resilient and sustainable
• Ensure sustainable consumption and production patterns
• Take urgent action to combat climate change and its impacts
• Conserve and sustainably use the oceans, seas and marine resources for sustainable development
• Protect, restore and promote sustainable use of terrestrial ecosystems, sustainably manage forests, combat desertification, and halt and reverse land degradation and halt biodiversity loss
• Promote peaceful and inclusive societies for sustainable development, provide access to justice for all and build effective, accountable and inclusive institutions at all levels
• Strengthen the means of implementation and revitalise the Global Partnership for Sustainable Development

Wishing to replicate the UK Government’s position on the goals, this Council resolves to make a similar commitment to their delivery, as far as is practicable and within its power and resources, and calls upon the Health and Overview and Scrutiny Boards to identify the work that is already being done by the Council and its partners and what more can be done, and to present a report with its findings and recommendations to a future meeting of full Council.

Crompton Liberal Democrat Councillors Diane Williamson, Dave Murphy and Louie Hamblett are outraged by current proposals to scrap the entitlement to a free television licence for all those aged 75 or over.

Crompton has the highest ratio of residents of retirement age of any electoral ward in Oldham, and the three local Lib Dem Councillors know that this will hurt a lot of their older constituents hard financially.

Speaking on behalf of her ward colleagues, Councillor Williamson said: “The current Conservative Government decided to no longer fund free TV licence fees for everyone aged 75 or over, and instead placed the financial responsibility for maintaining them on the BBC. 

To save money, the BBC has now decided to withdraw free TV licences from anyone not in receipt of Pension Credit.  However, it is important not to deflect the blame upon the BBC, but to instead place the blame fair-and-square with those who are ultimately responsible – parsimonious ministers in this current Government.”

Councillor Williamson added: “Sadly more and more of our older residents are housebound and live their lives alone. A television represents their ‘window to the world’ and a social companion; is it too much to expect the Government to foot the bill to pay for free licences for everyone aged 75 or over who have paid their taxes all their working lives?  It has been estimated that up to 5,000 older people in Oldham will be affected, many because they do not claim Pension Credit even though they are entitled too. Quite a few will live in Crompton.”

Crompton Liberal Democrat Councillors are supporting the Age UK petition calling for the British Government to take back responsibility for meeting the cost of a free TV licence for all those aged 75-and-over. Councillor Williamson concluded: “The petition represents one way that anyone can register their opposition to this monumental decision. If our constituents are as angry about this as we are, we would ask them to sign it, because together we can stop this Government-sponsored switch off and restore free licences for our over-75’s!”

The Age UK petition can be found at:

https://campaigns.ageuk.org.uk/page/34266/petition/1