Agenda item

(i)          Access to health services

 

A motion had been received and set out in the Summons in the names of:

Councillors: A. Arif, N Bayley, C Boles, N Boroda, C Cummins, S. Donnelley, U Farooq, E FitzGerald, N Frith, R Gold, D Green, J Grimshaw, S Haroon, M Hayes, G McGill, C Morris, E Moss, E O’Brien, K Peel, T Pilkington, A Quinn, D Quinn, T Rafiq, I Rizvi, L Smith, T Tariq, S Thorpe, S Walmsley, and M Whitby.

This Council notes that primary care services are in crisis, with people across our borough and the country struggling to access GP services and adequate dental treatment.

We recognise the tremendous efforts of GPs in Bury in maintaining services as far as possible during the course of the pandemic, implementing new ways of working, and in addition doing an incredible job in delivering the vaccination programme in the borough. However, we also know that many of our constituents are expressing concerns about accessing to GP services and also dental services.

This Council believes that everyone should be able to get an appointment to see a doctor or relevant health professional in a reasonable amount of time and local people have the right to receive dental treatment on a reasonable ongoing basis.

However, this Council is concerned by the government’s admission that they will be unable to deliver the promised 6,000 additional GPs by 2024/25 which will create further pressures on the system, particularly in places like Bury which already have a shortage of GPs.

 

This Council:-

(a)      recognises that general practices across the country are at breaking point, putting the whole of the NHS at risk;

(b)      believes that Primary Care is the ‘Bedrock of the NHS’, dealing with around 90% of patient contacts, and acknowledges that, currently, GPs and their teams are at the forefront of helping communities recover from the pandemic; caring for people whose mental and physical health has been affected by Covid 19; and leading the Vaccination programme; whilst at the same time, they are dealing with the backlog of people on waiting lists elsewhere in the NHS;

 

notes that:-

(c) (i)       in 2016 the Conservative Government promised to increase GPs by 5,000 in 5 years but that the overall number of GPs has seen little growth since 2015;

(ii)       the number of patients per practice is 22% higher than it was in 2015 but the GP workforce has not grown with this demand; there are now just 0.46 fully qualified GPs per 1,000 patients in England – significantly below the average number of physicians in comparable nations;

(iii)      there is a growing backlog of care in the NHS; long waits for specialist treatment are skyrocketing and pressure on Accident and Emergency Departments is reaching pre-pandemic levels;

(iv)      General practice and general practitioners are under pressure; a recent survey by the British Medical Association (BMA) showed high levels of mental health conditions and exhaustion; resignations from General Practice are also rising, and practices are shutting down at record rates; and

(v)      it is becoming increasingly difficult to get GPs to practice in deprived areas; as a result, those communities who most need good primary care are least able to access it; and

 

(d)      calls upon the Government and the Chief Executive of the NHS to take urgent measures to address this crisis, including:-

(i)       delivering on previously unmet promises to increase the number of GPs by at least 5,000;

(ii)       ensuring that incentives are in place to meet the primary care needs of communities with the greatest need;

(iii)      reducing red tape and bureaucracy by exploring with the profession which regulatory and administrative tasks need to be kept and which don’t;

(iv)      rebalancing the health system by encouraging better outreach work from secondary care; and

(v)      increasing investment in community-based health-promoting activities to address the underlying causes of poor health.

 

This Council resolves to:

Write to the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care urging him to bring forward a plan to fix the crisis in primary care, meet the target for new GPs and ensure everyone who needs an NHS dentist can access one.

Do everything we can locally through the new Integrated Care Partnership to ensure that residents (through patient voice and patient experience) in our borough can access primary care services as needed and without delay.

 

(ii)       Industrial Action

 

A motion had been received and set in the Summons in the names of:

 

Councillors S. Arif, Bernstein, Brown, Dean, Gartside, Harris, Lancaster, Hussain, Jones, McBriar, Rydeheard, Vernon

 

This Council is deeply concerned by the industrial action already undertaken by The Rail, Maritime and Transport Workers (RMT) Union and the further threatened industrial action by the RMT and other Trade Unions including Unite, National Association of Schoolmasters/Union of Women Teachers (NASUWT), National Education Union (NEU), Unison, General, Municipal, Boilermakers and Allied Trade Union (GMB),Communications Workers Union (CWU). This Council is also concerned by BMA threats to ballot for industrial action by junior doctors.

 

This Council believes that the demands of the Trade Unions threatening industrial action and the BMA are unrealistic in the context of normalisation and economic recovery from the pandemic and war in Ukraine.

 

The action already taken by the RMT Union detrimentally impacted business and social activities and until it is stopped will cause people to lose confidence in travelling by train which will damage the future long-term prospects for the rail industry and have a detrimental effect on the environment.

 

This Council resolves to:-

·         Call on the Chief Executive to write a letter to the General Secretary of the TUC asking to withdraw the support of the TUC for the current action by the RMT Union and to urge all Trade Unions threating industrial action to cease to do so.

·         Call on the Chief Executive to convene an emergency meeting of the Teachers Joint Consultative Committee to make clear that any potential industrial action set against the background of normalisation from Covid-19 will be damaging to children and young people attending schools in Bury and thus irresponsible.

·         Call on the Chief Executive to convene an emergency meeting of the Corporate Joint Consultative Committee to make clear any potential industrial action set against the background of normalisation from Covid-19 will be damaging to the communities of Bury and thus irresponsible. 

·         Call on the Chief Executive to write a letter to the Chairman of the BMA outlining the irresponsibility of any industrial action by Junior Doctors at this time.  

 

 

(iii)     Introduction of a Formal Socio-Economic Duty Policy

 

 A motion had been received and set out in the Summons in the names of:

 

Councillors D Berry, C Birchmore, A Booth, D Duncalfe, G Marsden, J Mason, M Smith, M Walsh

We are calling on the Council to formerly adopt a Socio-Economic Duty Policy. This will mean that any decisions on policy, funding or disposal of assets will be mindful of the impact on residents from more socio-economically disadvantaged backgrounds. Through this policy the Council would aim for a more equal society where residents’ access to quality education, health services, access to an equal standard of leisure services, public amenities and outdoor green spaces is not governed by their socio-economic status. The Council would introduce the requirement for observance of the guidelines derived from this policy into the formal decision making process.

 

This is a further extension of the proposal from the Overview & Scrutiny meeting that the Cabinet consider as part of its Antipoverty strategy adopting voluntarily the Socio Economic Duty as detailed in Section 1 of the Equality Act 2010.

 

The council notes:

·         Despite currently being rated as the third most affluent borough in Greater Manchester, Bury MBC currently has extremes of differences in Index of Multiple Deprivation ratings having several areas rated as being in the 10% most deprived while several other areas are in 10% least deprived.

·         There is a difference of average life expectancy of 15 years for men and 12 years for women between the longest and shortest life expectancy MSOAs.

·         The achievement of pupils in Maths and English GCSE in the lowest achieving MSOAs was 25.3% compared to the national average of 43.2% and the rest of the borough at 39.8% (2019 figures)

·         Some areas of Bury MBC have seen significant under investment for many years which has led to a deterioration of the area in terms of the quality of the council owned amenities and infrastructure.

 

This council resolves to:

1. Call on the Council to write and adopt a Socio-Economic Duty Policy requiring all departments at the Council to consider the potential of any policy, project or material amendment on all residents in the community. In particular they should ensure that areas of high socio-economic disadvantage are not unfairly impacted.

2. Ask the Council for the inclusion of 'disadvantaged socio-economic status' as a protected characteristic in council procedures. This should prevent anyone being subject to less favourable treatment in the exercise of their rights because of their inherited social status or economic situation.

3. Call on the Council to commit to more open consultation with residents on all projects going forward. They should endeavour to fully engage with residents, listen to feedback and act on the outputs of these on consultations.

 

(i)          Access to health services

 

A motion had been received and set out in the Summons in the names of:

Councillors: A. Arif, N Bayley, C Boles, N Boroda, C Cummins, S. Donnelley, U Farooq, E FitzGerald, N Frith, R Gold, D Green, J Grimshaw, S Haroon, M Hayes, G McGill, C Morris, E Moss, E O’Brien, K Peel, T Pilkington, A Quinn, D Quinn, T Rafiq, I Rizvi, L Smith, T Tariq, S Thorpe, S Walmsley, and M Whitby.

This Council notes that primary care services are in crisis, with people across our borough and the country struggling to access GP services and adequate dental treatment.

We recognise the tremendous efforts of GPs in Bury in maintaining services as far as possible during the course of the pandemic, implementing new ways of working, and in addition doing an incredible job in delivering the vaccination programme in the borough. However, we also know that many of our constituents are expressing concerns about accessing to GP services and also dental services.

This Council believes that everyone should be able to get an appointment to see a doctor or relevant health professional in a reasonable amount of time and local people have the right to receive dental treatment on a reasonable ongoing basis.

However, this Council is concerned by the government’s admission that they will be unable to deliver the promised 6,000 additional GPs by 2024/25 which will create further pressures on the system, particularly in places like Bury which already have a shortage of GPs.

 

This Council:-

(a)      recognises that general practices across the country are at breaking point, putting the whole of the NHS at risk;

(b)      believes that Primary Care is the ‘Bedrock of the NHS’, dealing with around 90% of patient contacts, and acknowledges that, currently, GPs and their teams are at the forefront of helping communities recover from the pandemic; caring for people whose mental and physical health has been affected by Covid 19; and leading the Vaccination programme; whilst at the same time, they are dealing with the backlog of people on waiting lists elsewhere in the NHS;

 

notes that:-

(c) (i)       in 2016 the Conservative Government promised to increase GPs by 5,000 in 5 years but that the overall number of GPs has seen little growth since 2015;

(ii)       the number of patients per practice is 22% higher than it was in 2015 but the GP workforce has not grown with this demand; there are now just 0.46 fully qualified GPs per 1,000 patients in England – significantly below the average number of physicians in comparable nations;

(iii)      there is a growing backlog of care in the NHS; long waits for specialist treatment are skyrocketing and pressure on Accident and Emergency Departments is reaching pre-pandemic levels;

(iv)      General practice and general practitioners are under pressure; a recent survey by the British Medical Association (BMA) showed high levels of mental health conditions and exhaustion; resignations from General Practice are also rising, and practices are shutting down at record rates; and

(v)      it is becoming increasingly difficult to get GPs to practice in deprived areas; as a result, those communities who most need good primary care are least able to access it; and

 

(d)      calls upon the Government and the Chief Executive of the NHS to take urgent measures to address this crisis, including:-

(i)       delivering on previously unmet promises to increase the number of GPs by at least 5,000;

(ii)       ensuring that incentives are in place to meet the primary care needs of communities with the greatest need;

(iii)      reducing red tape and bureaucracy by exploring with the profession which regulatory and administrative tasks need to be kept and which don’t;

(iv)      rebalancing the health system by encouraging better outreach work from secondary care; and

(v)      increasing investment in community-based health-promoting activities to address the underlying causes of poor health.

 

This Council resolves to:

Write to the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care urging him to bring forward a plan to fix the crisis in primary care, meet the target for new GPs and ensure everyone who needs an NHS dentist can access one.

Do everything we can locally through the new Integrated Care Partnership to ensure that residents (through patient voice and patient experience) in our borough can access primary care services as needed and without delay.

 

On being put with 37 Members voting for and 12 against the Mayor abstaining the motion was declared carried.

 

(ii)       Industrial Action

 

A motion had been received and set in the Summons in the names of:

 

Councillors S. Arif, Bernstein, Brown, Dean, Gartside, Harris, Lancaster, Hussain, Jones, McBriar, Rydeheard, Vernon

 

This Council is deeply concerned by the industrial action already undertaken by The Rail, Maritime and Transport Workers (RMT) Union and the further threatened industrial action by the RMT and other Trade Unions including Unite, National Association of Schoolmasters/Union of Women Teachers (NASUWT), National Education Union (NEU), Unison, General, Municipal, Boilermakers and Allied Trade Union (GMB),Communications Workers Union (CWU). This Council is also concerned by BMA threats to ballot for industrial action by junior doctors.

 

This Council believes that the demands of the Trade Unions threatening industrial action and the BMA are unrealistic in the context of normalisation and economic recovery from the pandemic and war in Ukraine.

 

The action already taken by the RMT Union detrimentally impacted business and social activities and until it is stopped will cause people to lose confidence in travelling by train which will damage the future long-term prospects for the rail industry and have a detrimental effect on the environment.

 

This Council resolves to:-

·         Call on the Chief Executive to write a letter to the General Secretary of the TUC asking to withdraw the support of the TUC for the current action by the RMT Union and to urge all Trade Unions threating industrial action to cease to do so.

·         Call on the Chief Executive to convene an emergency meeting of the Teachers Joint Consultative Committee to make clear that any potential industrial action set against the background of normalisation from Covid-19 will be damaging to children and young people attending schools in Bury and thus irresponsible.

·         Call on the Chief Executive to convene an emergency meeting of the Corporate Joint Consultative Committee to make clear any potential industrial action set against the background of normalisation from Covid-19 will be damaging to the communities of Bury and thus irresponsible. 

·         Call on the Chief Executive to write a letter to the Chairman of the BMA outlining the irresponsibility of any industrial action by Junior Doctors at this time.  

 

On being put with 11 Members voting for 36 Members voting against and the Mayor abstaining – the Mayor declared the motion lost.

 

NB – Cllr Green was not in the Chamber when the vote was taken.

(iii)     Introduction of a Formal Socio-Economic Duty Policy

 

 A motion had been received and set out in the Summons in the names of:

 

Councillors D Berry, C Birchmore, A Booth, D Duncalfe, G Marsden, J Mason, M Smith, M Walsh

We are calling on the Council to formerly adopt a Socio-Economic Duty Policy. This will mean that any decisions on policy, funding or disposal of assets will be mindful of the impact on residents from more socio-economically disadvantaged backgrounds. Through this policy the Council would aim for a more equal society where residents’ access to quality education, health services, access to an equal standard of leisure services, public amenities and outdoor green spaces is not governed by their socio-economic status. The Council would introduce the requirement for observance of the guidelines derived from this policy into the formal decision making process.

 

This is a further extension of the proposal from the Overview & Scrutiny meeting that the Cabinet consider as part of its Antipoverty strategy adopting voluntarily the Socio Economic Duty as detailed in Section 1 of the Equality Act 2010.

 

The council notes:

·         Despite currently being rated as the third most affluent borough in Greater Manchester, Bury MBC currently has extremes of differences in Index of Multiple Deprivation ratings having several areas rated as being in the 10% most deprived while several other areas are in 10% least deprived.

·         There is a difference of average life expectancy of 15 years for men and 12 years for women between the longest and shortest life expectancy MSOAs.

·         The achievement of pupils in Maths and English GCSE in the lowest achieving MSOAs was 25.3% compared to the national average of 43.2% and the rest of the borough at 39.8% (2019 figures)

·         Some areas of Bury MBC have seen significant under investment for many years which has led to a deterioration of the area in terms of the quality of the council owned amenities and infrastructure.

 

This council resolves to:

1. Call on the Council to write and adopt a Socio-Economic Duty Policy requiring all departments at the Council to consider the potential of any policy, project or material amendment on all residents in the community. In particular they should ensure that areas of high socio-economic disadvantage are not unfairly impacted.

2. Ask the Council for the inclusion of 'disadvantaged socio-economic status' as a protected characteristic in council procedures. This should prevent anyone being subject to less favourable treatment in the exercise of their rights because of their inherited social status or economic situation.

3. Call on the Council to commit to more open consultation with residents on all projects going forward. They should endeavour to fully engage with residents, listen to feedback and act on the outputs of these on consultations.

 

An amendment was moved by Councillor Gold and Seconded by Councillor Morris to

 

First paragraph replace Council with Government

 

We are calling on the Government to formerly adopt a Socio-Economic Duty Policy. This will mean that any decisions on policy, funding or disposal of assets will be mindful of the impact on residents from more socio-economic disadvantaged backgrounds.  Through this policy the Government would aim for a more equal society where residents’ access to quality education, health services, access to an equal standard of leisure services, public amenities and outdoor green spaces is not governed by their socio-economic status.  The Government would introduce the requirement for observance of the guidelines derived from this policy into the formal decision making process.

 

Second paragraph delete from ‘the proposal from’ to the end of the sentence

This is a further extension of the proposal from the Overview & Scrutiny meeting that the Cabinet consider as part of its Antipoverty strategy adopting voluntarily the Socio-Economic Duty as details in Section 1 of the Equality Act 2010.

 

Second paragraph insert after of

Bury's Inclusion Strategy, updated following an independent review across Bury Council and Bury CCG, saw the additional of socio-economic vulnerability included as a local community of interest in addition to the protected characteristics set out in the Equality Act 2010.  As such when decisions are being made in terms of policy development or reviews, and an Equality Impact Assessment is carried out then due regard is required to be given to the impact of any proposed change/decision in terms of the impact this would have on those experiencing economic vulnerability and the impact on inequality. As with considerations across protected characteristics this requires those conducting work to consider the impact of this, any potential positive or negative impact; mitigations to address any negative impact; and outline means of engagement and review.  It forms a core principal of the ‘Let's Do it Strategy’,in the Equality Impact Analysis, which goes further and asks “What will the likely overall effect of your activity be on equality, including consideration of intersectionality”

 

Third paragraph insert after notes “that despite our best efforts to address issues of inequality”

So it reads

This Council notes that despite our best efforts to address issues of inequality

•      

Despite currently being rated as the third most affluent borough in Greater Manchester, Bury MBC currently has extremes of differences in index of Multiple Deprivation ratings having several areas rated as being in the 10% most deprived while several other areas are in 10% least deprived.

•       There is a difference of average life expectancy of 15 years for men and 12 years for women between the longest and shortest life expectancy MSOAs.

•       The achievement of pupils in Maths and English GCSE in the lowest achieving MSOAs was 25.3% compared to the national average of 43.2% and the rest of the borough at 39.8% (2019 figures)

•       Some areas of Bury MBC have seen significant under investment for many years which has led to a deterioration of the area in terms of the quality of the council owned amenities and infrastructure.

 

Insert before the start of the fourth paragraph

“However this Council recognises that inequality has vastly increased since the introduction of the austerity programme, cuts to welfare benefits, changes to public service funding which removes the recognition of the need to address inequality and tax cuts to the wealthy. 

This council resolves to”

Delete ‘all residents’ in paragraph 1. and amend community to country

1.     

Call on the Government to write and adopt a Socio-Economic Duty Policy requiring all departments at the Government to consider the potential of any policy, project or material amendment on all residents inthe countrycommunity.  In particular they should ensure that areas of high socio-economic disadvantage are not unfairly impacted.

2.     

Ask the Government for the inclusion of 'disadvantaged socio-economic status' as a protected characteristic in Government procedures. This should prevent anyone being subject to less favourable treatment in the exercise of their rights because of their inherited social status or economic situation.

3.     

1.    Call on the Government to commit to more open consultation with residents on all projects going forward.  They should endeavour to fully engage with residents, listen to feedback and act on the outputs of these on consultations.

The amendment on being put with 28 members voting for and 20 voting against and the Mayor abstaining the amendment was carried.

 

The substantive motion on being put with 29 members voting for and 19 voting against and the Mayor abstaining the Mayor declared the motion carried.