The Oldham Borough Council hereby gives Notice that no person shall cause any vehicle to proceed in Market Street, Shaw between Milne Street and Greenfield Lane/High Street and in Milne Street, Shaw from its junction with Market Street for a distance of 18 metres in a south easterly direction.
The restrictions are required to deal with a gas escape and will be in force for a period of 21 days from the date of this notice or until the works are completed whichever is the lesser period.
The works are expected to take 7 days.
The alternative route for those affected by the restriction shall be Beal Lane, Eastway and Greenfield Lane.
Ten years on after the Dilnot Report made recommendations to fairly and properly fund social care, the Conservative Government has still woefully failed to act in the face of a worsening underfunding crisis.
Oldham Liberal Democrat Group Leader, Councillor Howard Sykes MBE, is dismayed that after a decade of inaction under Tory ministers Britain’s elderly and most vulnerable people in receipt of care still face a future of anxiety and uncertainty.
“Whilst in the recent Queen’s speech contained just nine words about social care and no more money,” laments Councillor Sykes. “The Dilnot Report was published on 4 July 2011 during the Coalition Government. sought a commitment that Dilnot would be delivered, but the commitment was soon ditched once the Tories ruled alone”.
Councillor Sykes added: “The Prime Minister said on his appointment that he would end the care funding crisis ‘once and for all’, but the Queen’s Speech only contained a vague promise from this government to bring forward proposals ‘later in the year’. This same promise has been made year-on-year and this represents only the latest stage of the Tories playing a game of kicking the social care ‘can’ down the street.”
“The Association of Directors of Adult Social Services estimates councils in England are expecting to have to make around £608m of savings this year. Private care providers are increasingly having to turn away work because it is unprofitable, and care homes are haemorrhaging staff, who are often poorly paid and overworked.”
Councillor Sykes also identified the urgency of offering more care support to those in need who live at home. In conclusion, he said: “There are currently 1.5 million elderly and disabled people being denied the help they need with day-to-day tasks, like washing, dressing and preparing meals, because the eligibility criteria for care has been tightened by councils savaged by Tory austerity cuts.”
Oldham Liberal Democrat Leader Councillor Howard Sykes MBE is ‘disappointed’ to hear that the Mayor of Greater Manchester Andy Burnham does not intend to publish a report he commissioned about the failings of Greater Manchester Police until it is deemed ‘appropriate’.
Commenting Councillor Sykes said: “This report was paid for with public money to identify the failings of a public service also paid for with public money, so my view is the sooner it is in the public domain the better. I am glad that the Mayor has at least finally responded (after a reminder), but this is a letter which says nothing, gives no real promises and sets no deadline as to when this report will see the light of day.”
“The Oldham Liberal Democrat Group will continue to hold the Mayor and Police senior management team to account, and I look forward to the day when this report and the new Chief Constable’s action plan to improve the force are finally published.”
‘What did it cost us?’ Councillor Howard Sykes MBE, Leader of the Liberal Democrat Group and Real Opposition on Oldham Council wants an answer to that question in connection with the recent purchase of the Spindles and Town Square Shopping Centres.
Councillor Sykes has submitted a request under the provisions of the Freedom of Information Act to Deputy Chief Executive Helen Lockwood and Director of Finance Anne Ryans in order to drill down to the final bill for Oldham’s Council Tax payers.
“Different figures have been bandied about in Council meetings and in media reports. I would like to know what the final bill is, and I am sure that our long-suffering ratepayers want to know too,” said Councillor Sykes. “The final bill is not just the agreed purchase price but also the professional fees and any taxes associated with the purchase, and in addition the costs incurred in subsequently buying out the Top Man lease”.
“I hope that the response to my FOI request will bring clarity. In the interests of public accountability, it is important that with any large-ticket item the final cost to ratepayers is made public.”
The FOI request sent 28 June reads:
Helen Lockwood, Deputy Chief Executive; Cc Anne Ryans, Director of Finance
Dear Ms Lockwood,
Under the Freedom of Information Act, I would like to request confirmation of the total cost to Oldham Council of acquiring the Spindles and Town Square Shopping Centres.
In calculating the total cost, I wish you to include the purchase price agreed with the vendor, the legal and other professional fees associated with the completion of the purchase, stamp duty or other taxes payable to government in connection with the purchase, and the subsequent costs associated with buying out and processing the purchase of the Top Man lease and any other fees or payments required?
Please can I also ask for confirmation that there are now no outstanding costs for the Council to meet in relation to the purchase of the two shopping centres and the Top Man lease?
And that there are no further leases to acquire in the two premises?
30 new disabled parking spaces to be installed by Council after 3 year wait.
The wait is finally over for 30 fortunate families who will be getting disabled parking spots in the next twelve months, some of whom have been waiting for years.
Officers confirmed the decision this week, after years wrangling over funding, and lengthy delays while new qualifying criteria were eventually produced.
Mark Kenyon, Liberal Democrat Councillor for Grotton, Springhead & Lees, took up the cause after being contacted by a frustrated resident over a year ago and has led a campaign to provide disabled parking bays.
Councillor Kenyon said: “Despite welcoming the decision by this council to provide these 30 spaces, I’m also incensed that there’s at least another 30 families who have missed out. A disabled parking spot is not a perk to be won in a council lottery, it’s a lifeline. Covid has increased isolation across our area, and disabled parking spaces give people the same freedom and choices that many of us take for granted – if we go out of the house, we can get back in again.
“Conservative cuts have forced difficult choices on councils across the land, but how our council can spend millions on a shopping centre but not find it in their heart or their pockets to finance disabled parking spaces for 3 years is beyond me.”
Applicants who have been successful are being notified over the next few weeks.
Councillor Kenyon concluded: “I’m happy for those 30 families who have been successful, but I’ve not forgotten those who have missed out – the fight for fairness goes on.”
The Greater Manchester Pension Fund must divest from fossil fuels, not only to protect the planet, but to protect the pensions of thousands of people across the region. At the next full meeting of Oldham Council (Wednesday 14 July 2021), the Liberal Democrats will propose a motion to deliver exactly that.
Councillor Sam Al-Hamdani, who will be proposing the motion, said: “It is time the Greater Manchester Pension Fund did the right thing by our environment and pulled out the money invested in fossil fuel industries that massively contribute to global warming, and instead reinvest it in green technologies which do good.”
The Fund is currently one of the biggest investors in fossil fuels with over £1.7 billion in the oil, coal and gas industries.
“As an employer, Oldham Council pays into the fund to top up the contributions of our employees, yet we are a Council committed to becoming carbon neutral within five years,” added Councillor Al-Hamdani. “How can we achieve our goal of carbon neutrality when our money continues to bolster a fund that is so invested in industries which contribute to the destruction of our environment and the pollution of our air?”
The motion is being backed by Councillor Louie Hamblett. He explained that divestment is not only ethical, it also makes financial sense.
“To prevent irreversible global warming at least 80% of all proven fossil fuels must remain in the ground and unburnt. This will mean the rapid decline in the operations of fossil fuel companies and a rapid decline in the value of fossil fuel stocks.
“Green investment has become more and more attractive financially, and when the stock market crashed at the start of coronavirus, it was sustainable investments that bounced back first.
“It is surely commonsense to divest now, whilst fossil fuel stocks have value, and reinvest the money in environmentally sustainable businesses. It will preserve the value of the fund, ensure future returns to people across Greater Manchester, and do good by our planet.”
The motion tabled at the Full Council meeting on 14 July 2021 reads
Motion – Pension Fund Divestment from Fossil Fuels
This Council recognises that:
· Burning fossil fuels contributes significantly to global warming, jeopardising the stability of our climate upon which our well-being and economy depend. Such activity also has a negative impact upon air quality and so public health.
· Research demonstrates that 80% or more of the world’s proven fossil fuel reserves will have to remain unburnt if we are to have a reasonable chance of keeping global warming to well below 2 degrees Celsius, the globally agreed target for climate change mitigation.
· Since 80% of fossil fuels must remain in the ground, the reserves of the fossil fuel industry risk becoming ‘stranded assets’ with little or no value – representing a substantial financial risk for those that invest in them.
· Greater Manchester Pension Fund currently has around £1.7 billion invested in the oil, coal and gas industries. This is environmentally and financially irresponsible.
· To date, over 1,100 institutions representing over $14 trillion in assets have committed to divest from fossil-fuel companies. These include the World Council of Churches, the Irish state, New York City, the British Medical Association and a growing number of UK local authority pension funds.
· As a local authority with a commitment to become carbon-neutral by 2025, it is illogical for Oldham Council to make employer contributions towards a pension fund that is committed to investments in fossil-fuel companies.
Council resolves:
· Not to invest directly in fossil fuel companies.
· To mandate its representative to the Greater Manchester Pension Fund Board to call for the adoption of Responsible Investment policies which:
o Immediately freeze any new investment in the top 200 publicly traded fossil fuel companies;
o By the end of this year, divest from direct ownership of companies involved in coal mining;
o Within two years, divest from direct ownership of all fossil fuel companies, along with any commingled funds that include any fossil fuel public equities and corporate bonds;
o Set out an approach to quantifying and addressing climate change risks affecting all other investments, and
o Focus future investments on areas that minimise climate change risk and, where possible, invest in local climate solutions that will benefit fund members, their families and the wider community.
· To ask the Chief Executive to write to the Leaders and Chief Executives of the other 9 Greater Manchester local authorities outlining this Council’s position and asking for their support.
Proposed by: Seconded by:
Councillor Sam Al-Hamdani Councillor Louie Hamblett
Liberal Democrat councillors are determined to fight to keep control of the Peak District National Park in local hands after rumours of a takeover by Whitehall mandarins.
Councillor Hazel Gloster is bringing a motion to the next meeting of Oldham Council (14 July 2021) calling for the Peak District National Park Authority to be retained, rather than abolished and absorbed into a new National Landscape Authority. This drastic action was recommended two years ago after the Glover Review, and Councillor Gloster has no doubt this will be a retrograde step.
Councillor Gloster outlined her concerns: “At present, our local National Park is managed locally by an authority board with local representatives, including one Councillor from Oldham Council. If the authority is abolished there will be no accountability to local people and local councils, and the park will be one amongst many managed from Whitehall by faceless bureaucrats with no connection to the area.”
The motion is being backed by new Councillor Mark Kenyon who feels strongly that the authority is worth saving. “The Peak District National Park is an amazing natural resource, right on our doorstep. Especially during lockdown, the Park has been a lifeline to many offering tranquility and a breath of fresh air, particularly to the many people in the borough without a back yard or garden”, added Councillor Kenyon. “In the post-Covid world it’s important that we all get a say on how this area is managed and how it can be improved. Without local management, our needs will be drowned out by priorities set in London.”
The Leader of the Oldham Liberal Democrat Group, Councillor Howard Sykes MBE, wrote in May to the Minister responsible for National Parks, Lord Benyon, outlining his objections to the transfer of power, and the motion asks for the support of neighbouring local authorities covered by the Peak District and Oldham’s three local Members of Parliament in this fight to preserve the Park Authority.
The motion tabled at the next full meeting of Oldham Council (14 July 2021) reads:
Hands off our Peak District National Park
Council notes that:
2021 is the 70th anniversary of the Peak District and other National Parks
Our precious National Parks represent an irreplaceable national natural resource which provide enjoyment, education and employment for countless thousands of people every year and are treasured and loved by millions more.
At present, every National Park is managed by its own LOCAL Park Authority with LOCAL representatives who know and serve the community and keep LOCAL oversight. The Park District National Park Authority includes an appointed representative from Oldham Council.
Council is therefore gravely concerned that the Glover Review of 2019 proposed the replacement of the local National Parks Authorities with a National Landscape Service which would centralise services under one, nationally run, new organisation, and that the Government is giving active consideration to accepting this recommendation.
Council is opposed to the replacement of the locally run National Parks Authorities because:
It is contrary to the Government’s ‘levelling-up’ agenda which involves government decentralising power and working more directly with local partners and communities.
The 2019 Conservative Party Manifesto stated that “the days of Whitehall knows best are over” (p.26) and pledged to give communities of all sizes far more control. This Council questions how a centralist National Landscapes Service would achieve this.
The move is contrary to international good practice in the management of protected landscapes which emphasises the importance of management being undertaken with, and through, local people and mainly for, and by, them.
Locally run and locally managed National Parks consider local circumstances and take account of local feelings and requirements without the burdensome red-tape of national management.
Council therefore resolves to:
Ask the Chief Executive to write to the Secretary of State urging them not to replace local National Parks Authorities with a National Landscape Service or to take any step which will remove or degrade their powers
Ask the Chief Executive to send a copy of this letter to the Chair of the Peak District National Park Authority
Ask the Chief Executive to also copy in our three local MPs and the Chief Executives of other local authorities covered by the Peak District National Park asking for their support and/or similar action
