Agenda and minutes

There were no apologies for absence.

Members of the Overview and Scrutiny Committee are asked to consider whether they have an interest in any matters on the agenda and, if so, to formally declare that interest.

Councillor Susan Southworth declared an interest in the first call in item, public consultation on the draft housing strategy as she was the Deputy Cabinet Member for Housing. Councillor Susan Southworth would leave the virtual meeting during discussion of this agenda item.

A period of 30 minutes has been set aside for members of the public to ask questions in relation to the called in item(s) on the agenda for tonight’s meeting.

There were three members of the public present virtually to ask questions.

The Chair stated he would split the public question time into two sections, so the questions would proceed the debate on the different call in topics.

Jane Price asked a question on the draft housing strategy:-

The consultation document states that there will be flood prevention work, additional infrastructure for drains, roads, new bike paths and a school. Where are the detailed plans and costings for these? And why is there no mention of what happens to the wildlife living in the Bury areas (Walshaw). This is labelled brown belt but it is not, it has been natural grazing land for many years, why was it not classified as green belt?

Plans for estates were previously passed, for example in Ramsbottom stating they would do all these things and they did not happen. Planners, builders and councils go ahead and run out of money as they did not plan properly and undercut costs to get planning agreed in the first place. Then the real requirements and infrastructure are not completed leaving locals with thousands of additional houses and cars and the fallout of incompetent planning. Where is your detail, money and research into how to carry out the infrastructure changes needed?

Why was planning permission for a one storey building driving range previously turned down for Walshaw as this land was classed as key to the local environment and community? How can you justify destroying it now with so many old industrial areas around Manchester which need redeveloping?

The Chair felt that parts of the questions were not directly related to the call in topic and advised that the member of the public be informed on how to submit a question to the relevant committee outside of this meeting.

Stephen Cleur, a member of the keep Bury green group asked a question on the draft housing strategy:-

The survey had only interacted with a very small percentage of the whole population and would it be possible to delay the consultation for a further six weeks.

Mr Grant Hutchinson who was not present virtually, had submitted a question before the meeting but the Chair would not accept this as it was not directly related to the call in item.

Following the receipt of a Notice of Call-in within the required deadline, from Councillor Harris calling in the decision of the Cabinet set out in Minute CA.8 of the meeting held on the 14th October 2020, a meeting of the Committee has been convened in order to consider the matter in accordance with the reasons set out on the Notice of Call-In.

In considering the matter, the options available to the Scrutiny Committee are as follows:

1.   The Scrutiny Committee decides not to offer any comments on the Notice. In this situation the decision of the Cabinet will stand.

2.   The Scrutiny Committee decides to offer comments or

objections, which will be referred back to the Cabinet at the meeting arranged for the 11^th November 2020.

3.   The Scrutiny Committee may refer the Notice, without comment, to the Council. The matter will then be considered by the Council on the 25th November 2020 (a standard item appears on all Council summons to consider referrals from Scrutiny Committees). Any comments or objections from Council will be referred back to the Cabinet at the earliest opportunity, in accordance with the Council Constitution.

The Cabinet will be required to consider any objections and comments but will not be bound by them unless "it is contrary to the Policy Framework or contrary to or not wholly consistent with the Budget" (Overview and Scrutiny Procedure Rules - Paragraph 16(g) of the Council Constitution).”

A copy of the original paperwork considered by Cabinet, along with the decision Minute and Call –in notice are attached in the agenda packs.

The Scrutiny Committee considered a called-in decision of the Cabinet meeting held on the 14^th October 2020 in accordance with the Council Constitution.

The Cabinet had made the following decision:

Delegated decision

Cabinet agrees to:   

1. Acknowledge the work to date on developing the draft Housing Strategy.

2. Approve the draft Housing Strategy at Appendix 1 for public consultation for a period of six weeks.

3. Note that a further report will be produced with the final draft Housing

Strategy, that has taken into account the results and feedback from the

consultation.

Reasons for the decision:

Although there is no requirement for a Housing Strategy, it is best practice and provides for consideration of associated duties such as homelessness provision. The Council has undertaken an assessment of housing need within the borough. This report presents the new housing strategy based upon that assessment, which ties into other strategies including the Council’s overarching 2030 Strategy.

A call-in notice had been submitted by Councillor Harris setting out the reasons for the call-in of the decision.

The reasons were set out below:

·         There is inadequate information as to how the consultation methodology will reflect the views of all residents within the stated time frame. The proposed consultation methodology is inadequate to fully reach all residents.

The Chair welcomed the Cabinet Member for Housing Services, Councillor Cummings to the meeting and she responded to the public questions and reported that the piece of land at Walshaw was included in the GMSF which would be presented at an upcoming Cabinet meeting on the 11^th November.

Dr Carol Birchmore who was present at the meeting to ask a public question was invited by Councillor Harris, to provide some background information on how data was collected for research methodology. She explained how surveys were carried out in her professional role at Manchester University.

Councillor Cummings explained that the draft strategy set out the scale of the challenge facing the Borough on housing issues such as driving up quality, improving health and wellbeing, affordability, attracting and retaining skills along with climate change.

The last full assessment of housing need and demand in the Borough was undertaken in 2011. The changes within the housing market since then, together with the expected growth in population and household formation required an update to the housing profile; therefore in January 2020, Campbell Tickell in partnership with arc4, were appointed to support the Council to deliver a Housing Needs and Demand Assessment, which informs the new draft Housing Strategy. 

The final version of the Housing Strategy would include an implementation plan, which would be reviewed regularly to ensure that it is up to date in terms of available and committed resources.

Councillor Walker questioned if now was a good time to consult during the Covid 19 pandemic as certain groups were not meeting such as the faith alliance network. Also no displays could be promoted in locations such as local libraries or the Town Hall reception area.

Councillor Harris asked  ...  view the full minutes text for item OSC.281

Following the receipt of a Notice of Call-in within the required deadline, from Councillor Caserta calling in the decision of the Cabinet set out in Minute CA.10 of the meeting held on the 14th October 2020, a meeting of the Committee has been convened in order to consider the matter in accordance with the reasons set out on the Notice of Call-In.

In considering the matter, the options available to the Scrutiny Committee are as follows:

1.   The Scrutiny Committee decides not to offer any comments on the Notice. In this situation the decision of the Cabinet will stand.

2.   The Scrutiny Committee decides to offer comments or

objections, which will be referred back to the Cabinet at the meeting arranged for the 11^th November 2020.

3.   The Scrutiny Committee may refer the Notice, without comment, to the Council. The matter will then be considered by the Council on the 25th November 2020 (a standard item appears on all Council summons to consider referrals from Scrutiny Committees). Any comments or objections from Council will be referred back to the Cabinet at the earliest opportunity, in accordance with the Council Constitution.

The Cabinet will be required to consider any objections and comments but will not be bound by them unless "it is contrary to the Policy Framework or contrary to or not wholly consistent with the Budget" (Overview and Scrutiny Procedure Rules - Paragraph 16(g) of the Council Constitution).”

A copy of the original paperwork considered by Cabinet, along with the decision Minute and Call –in notice are attached in the agenda packs.

The Scrutiny Committee considered a called-in decision of the Cabinet meeting held on the 14^th October 2020 in accordance with the Council Constitution.

The Cabinet had made the following decision:

Delegated decision

Cabinet agrees to:   

Approve the Terms of Reference for the Radcliffe Regeneration Delivery Board as detailed in the report.

Reasons for the decision:

It is important that there are clear roles and responsibilities for oversight and delivery of the Radcliffe SRF. Each structure for governance including the RRDB needs clear terms of reference and division of responsibilities to enable the delivery of the SRF and other regeneration initiatives that may emerge over time.       

A call-in notice had been submitted by Councillor Caserta setting out the reasons for the call-in of the decision.

The reasons were set out below:

·         It is unclear how the members of the board was established. It is unclear on the size and scope of the budget available. It is unclear on the responsibilities of the board. There needs to be a more detailed description of the aims and objectives.

As mentioned previously in the meeting, the Chair had split the public question time item and dealt with the public questions related to the agenda item at this stage of the meeting.

Carol Birchmore asked a question onthe Radcliffe Regeneration Delivery Board:-

At a recent meeting regarding the 2020 draft of the GMSF I questioned the Head of Strategic Planning and Development at Bury Council about the choice of the Elton Reservoir site. He replied that the site was chosen because of its infrastructure. When I refuted this saying it was well known that there was a severe lack of decent infrastructure in Radcliffe it was pointed out that Radcliffe was currently the subject of a Strategic Regeneration Framework (SRF). At a recent webinar the public were informed that investment in the SRF was not dependent on Radcliffe being included in the GMSF and that the two issues were entirely separate. It was recently reported on Facebook by the chair of the SRF that Radcliffe will be receiving an investment of £100 million over the next decade but failed to say where this investment would come from. I therefore would like to know if investment in the SRF will only come about if the residents of Radcliffe accept another 3,500 homes built on their greenbelt and is long overdue investment in Radcliffe only now being considered in order to get Bury’s GMSF plan through?

A Supplementary question was asked:-

Is it not questionable that the individual in charge of trying to push through one of the largest proposed greenbelt developments (Elton Reservoir) in the plans of all 10 authorities making up the GMCA is also in charge of decisions about spending of public money in Radcliffe?

Gareth Staple-Jones asked a question onthe Radcliffe Regeneration Delivery Board:-

Will the council please declare whether funding for the Radcliffe regeneration project has been ring fenced and protected amidst a climate of cuts from  ...  view the full minutes text for item OSC.282

Any other business which by reason of special circumstances the Chair agrees may be considered as a matter of urgency.

No other business was reported.