Agenda and minutes

To approve as a correct record and sign the Minutes of the Meetings of the Council held on 28 January and 3 March 2016.

The Minutes (copies of which had been circulated) of the meetings of the Council held on 28 January and 3 March 2016 were approved as correct records and signed by the Mayor.

To report that on 7 March 2016 the Chief Executive, in consultation with the Mayor, authorised the appointment of Mr Ian Clarke to the Independent Appeals Panel and the Exclusion Review Panel.  The action was taken urgently in order to allow the specified panel member to be appointed to consider and determine an exclusion review hearing in advance of this meeting of the Council Meeting.

The Mayor reported that the Chief Executive, in consultation with him, had authorised the appointment of Mr Ian Clarke to the Independent Appeals Panel and the Exclusion Review Panel.  The Mayor stated that the action had been taken urgently in order to allow the specified panel member to be appointed to consider and determine an exclusion review hearing in advance of this meeting of the Council Meeting.

To receive announcements from the Mayor.

The Mayor referred to the recent terrorist attacks which had taken place in Brussels, Belgium on 22 March 2016 and Lahore, Pakistan on 27 March 2016t and offered the Council’s condolences to the people of Brussels and Lahore and in particular to the families of those who lost their lives in the attack.

All those present at the meeting then stood in silence as a mark of respect to the memory of those who were killed and injured.

The Mayor then advised the Council Meeting that Councillor Lord Goddard and Councillor Hazel Lees had both served for 20 years as members of the Council and that this service would be recognised through the presentation of a Long Service Award certificate.

Councillors and officers to declare any interests which they may have in any of the items on the Summons for the meeting.

Councillors and officers were invited to declare any interests which they had in any of the items on the Summons.

Councillors declared a personal interest in Summons Item 6(i) – ‘Motion – Concerns regarding the Education White Paper’ where they were members of the Governing Body of schools within the Stockport Metropolitan Borough.

To receive any questions from and provide answers to the public in relation to matters relevant to the Council’s activities.

Members of the public were invited to put questions to the Mayor and Councillors on matters within the powers and duties of the Council.

Five public questions were submitted as follows:-

·         If Councillor Bailey could identify where she considered the Council should make savings in the light of written statements made by the Stockport Labour Group in relation to service reductions made by the Council.

Councillor Bailey responded that the budget and financial structures of the Council were extremely complex and that the cuts being imposed by the government have forced the Council to make savage cuts to its services.  With regard to the use of reserves it was suggested that the questioner read closely the original statement written by Councillor Ganotis rather than material on social media.  It was further stated that the use of reserves puts off a decision that is otherwise inevitable in adult social services.  Councillor Bailey stated that it was the job of the Executive to put forward a budget, while the role of the opposition was to scrutinise those proposals.

·         With regard to a comment made by Councillor Finnie at a previous meeting of the Council Meeting with regard to volunteering in the former Soviet Union and whether Councillor Finnie could suggest how such a scheme would address the cuts to the Council’s budget made by the government.

Councillor Finnie undertook to provide a written response to the questioner.

·         With regard to the Greater Manchester Spatial Framework call for sites process and the nomination of Woodhall Fields in Reddish Vale Country Park for future residential development.

The Leader of the Council (Councillor Sue Derbyshire) responded that the call for sites process was not an allocation process and the nomination of a site did not indicate that the land in question would ever be suitable for development.

·         Whether an assurance could be given that there would be no further cuts in operational hours or staffing at Great Moor Library.

The Executive Councillor (Safe & Resilient Communities) (Councillor Shan Alexander) responded that the library service was valued in Stockport and there were no plans to close any libraries.  However a review of all library services was taking place which included a full consultation the results of which would be available later in the summer.

·         Whether in the light of the market traders setting up their own consultation to rival that put forward by the Council on the relocation of Stockport Market, this indicated a failure of communication on the part of the Council and whether it was considered that sufficient time had been given for the consultation which had been programmed in for a three week period over the Easter holidays.

The Leader of the Council (Councillor Sue Derbyshire) responded she did not consider it a failure in communications and that there had been a significant response to the Council’s consultation.  While the consultation had been undertaken over the Easter period, this had not fallen during school holidays and the size of the response meant that people were able to access the consultation and respond if they wished.

To receive petitions, and by prior arrangement, receive delegations and presentations from members of the public, community groups or partnership organisations.

No such arrangements have been made for this meeting.

There were no petitions or presentations.

The Mayor expressed his thanks to Councillor Shan Alexander and Councillor Wendy Meikle for their work in each raising approximately £7,000 for the Mayor’s Charity.  The Mayor led a round of applause for both councillors as a mark of gratitude for their work in raising funds in support of young carers in Stockport.

The Mayor also announced that this would be the last meeting of the Council to be attended by Councillors Shan Alexander, Peter Burns, Martin Candler, Kevin Hogg, Hazel Lees and Wendy Orrell following their forthcoming retirement from the Council after the local elections on 5 May 2016.

The Group Leaders then paid tribute to the retiring councillors.

Finally, the Mayor stated that this would also be the last full meeting of the Council Meeting to be attended by him in advance of his retirement from the Council on 5 May 2016.  The Mayor expressed his thanks to the Council for bestowing the honour of being Mayor of the Borough upon him.

(a)       Section 41 Spokespersons

The following councillors to answer questions (if any) on the business of the joint authorities:-

(b)       Greater Manchester Police and Crime Panel

Councillor Sue Derbyshire to answer questions (if any) on the business of the Greater Manchester Police and Crime Panel.

(c)        Greater Manchester Combined Authority

The following councillors to answer questions (if any) on the business of the Greater Manchester Combined Authority and the Transport for Greater Manchester Committee:-

(d)       GMCA/AGMA Scrutiny Pool

The following councillors to answer questions (if any) on the business of the GMCA/AGMA Scrutiny Pool:-

Councillors:   Sue Ingham

                          John McGahan

                          Wendy Wild

(a)       Section 41 Spokespersons

There were no questions in relation to the business of the Greater Manchester Fire and Rescue Authority or the Greater Manchester Waste Disposal Authority.

(b)       Greater Manchester Police and Crime Panel

Councillor Lloyd referred to a question he had asked at a previous meeting of the Council Meeting in relation to information received from Councillor Stuart Corris that Greater Manchester Police would be reducing the number of police officers from 8,000 to 4,000 by 2020.  Councillor Lloyd asked Councillor Derbyshire what discussions had been had with the Interim Mayor of Greater Manchester in relation to the timescale for imposition of these cuts and what they will mean for Stockport.

Councillor Derbyshire responded that the Police and Crime Commissioner for Greater Manchester had set his budget, and that the Government had then announced that they were reversing to some degree the proposed level of cuts to the policing budget and the Commissioner had also raised the the precept levied for policing by the maximum permitted to also mitigate against this.  Councillor Derbyshire stated that notwithstanding these measures, cuts would still need to be made although it was not possible at this stage to identify what that would mean for Stockport.  Councillor Derbyshire undertook to provide a written response to Councillor Lloyd with further details of the proposed impact of the budgetary reducations.

(c)        Greater Manchester Combined Authority

There were no questions on the business of the Greater Manchester Combined Authority or Transport for Greater Manchester Committee.

(d)       GMCA/AGMA Scrutiny Pool

There were no questions on the business of the GMCA/AGMA Scrutiny Pool.

To receive a report from the Executive Leader and other members of the Executive on the conduct of Executive business since the last Council Meeting.

The Leader of the Council (Councillor Sue Derbyshire) reported that it had originally been planned for the Environment and Economy Scrutiny Committee and the Executive to consider proposals for Stockport Market at their respective meetings in April.  However, all Group Leaders considered that more time was needed to assess the responses to the public consultation and that the proposals should not be brought forward at this stage.

It was further reported that at the last meeting of the Greater Manchester Combined Authority on 18 March 2016 the Authority had its first ever vote in respect of a report on the implications for Greater Manchester of the United Kingdom leaving the European Union.  Councillor Derbyshire commended the report to members of the Council.

The Executive Councillor (Independence & Wellbeing) (Councillor John Pantall) reported on the decision by the Stockport Clinical Commissioning Group to approve their operational and financial plans which included a significant increase in their overall budget which included an increase in the resources to support those with mental health problems.

Councillor Pantall further reported on the flu vaccination statistics for the past winter which showed that overall the rate of vaccination continues to decline, although Stockport outperformed its peers.

To answer questions from Councillors addressed to the Executive Leader or other members of the Executive, in accordance with Council Meeting Procedure Rule 11.

The Leader of the Council; The Deputy Leader of the Council (Support &

Governance) and the Executive Councillors (Safe & Resilient Communities), (Supporting Adults) and (Supporting Children) answered questions relating to the business of the Executive in accordance with Council Meeting Procedure Rule 11.

To receive the Minutes of the Executive held on 16 February and 22 March 2016 and the record of executive decisions taken since the last Council Meeting, (schedule enclosed, decisions previously circulated) and consider any recommendations they contain.

The Mayor declared the Minutes of the Executive Meetings held on 16 February and 22 March 2016 (copies of which had been circulated) and the record of executive decision taken (copies of which were circulated) since the last meeting of the Council to be duly received.

To receive a report from the Chairs of the Scrutiny Committees on the conduct of Scrutiny business.

To receive a report from the Chairs of the Scrutiny Committees on the conduct of Scrutiny business.

There were no reports from the Chairs of the Scrutiny Committees on the conduct of their business since the last Council Meeting.

To answer questions from Councillors addressed to the Scrutiny Chairs, in accordance with Council Meeting Procedure Rule 11.

There were no questions relating to the business of the Scrutiny Committees in accordance with Council Meeting Procedure Rule 11.

To receive the Minutes of the following Scrutiny Committees:-

The Mayor declared the Minutes of the following Scrutiny Committees (copies of which had been circulated with the Summons) to be duly received:-

Adult Care Services & Housing – 1 February and 7 March 2016

Children & Young People – 3 February and 9 March 2016

Corporate, Resource Management & Governance – 2 February, 8 March and 10 March 2016

Environment & Economy  – 4 February and 10 March 2016

Health & Wellbeing – 26 January and 1 March 2016

Scrutiny Co-ordination – 21 March 2016

To receive a report from the Chairs of the Planning & Highways Regulation; Licensing, Environment & Safety; and Audit Committees on the conduct of their business since the last Council Meeting.

There were no reports from the Chairs of the Planning and Highways Regulation; Licensing, Environment and Safety or Audit Committees on the conduct of their business since the last Council Meeting.

To answer questions from Councillors addressed to the Chairs of Ordinary and Area Committees, in accordance with Council Meeting Procedure Rule 11.

There were no questions relating to the business of the Ordinary, Area and Ward Committees in accordance with Council Meeting Procedure Rule 11.

To receive the minutes of the following Ordinary and Area Committees:-

Ordinary Committees

Area Committees

Ward Committee

The Mayor declared the Minutes of the following Ordinary, Area and Ward Committees (copies of which had been circulated with the Summons) to be duly received:-

Ordinary Committees

Appointments – 9 March and 23 March 2015

Audit – 23 March 2016

Contributors – 27 January and 24 March 2016

Employment Appeals Committee – 21 January and 26 January 2016

Health & Wellbeing Board – 13 January and 17 February 2016

Licensing, Environment & Safety – 24 February 2016

Licensing, Environment & Safety Sub – 16 March 2016

Planning & Highways Regulation – 25 February 2016

Stockport Homes Member – 22 February 2016

Area Committees

Bramhall& Cheadle Hulme South – 11 February and 17 March 2016

Central Stockport – 11 February and 17 March 2016

Cheadle – 9 February and 15 March 2016

Heatons& Reddish – 8 February and 14 March 2016

Marple– 10 February and 16 March 2016

Stepping Hill – 9 February and 15 March 2016

Werneth– 8 February and 14 March 2016

Ward Committee

Brinnington & Reddish Joint  – 2 February 2016

This council meeting notes:

·           the very high quality schools in Stockport, with 90% of primary and 74% of secondary pupils attending "good" or "outstanding" schools;

·           the excellent relationship between the council and schools, all focused on delivering the best education possible so that each of Stockport's young people can attain their full potential;

·           the invaluable role of parent governors and local authority governors, acting as "critical friends" to both support head teachers and hold them to account; and

·           the relatively small number of schools in Stockport that have thus far chosen to become an academy.

This council meeting notes with great concern the recently published education white paper "Educational Excellence Everywhere", including proposals which will:

·           force all schools to become academies, irrespective of each school's wishes;

·           transfer the land and buildings of such schools from being owned by local residents through their local authority to central ownership by the Secretary of State;

·           remove the requirement for schools to elect parent governors;

·           leave local authorities with the responsibility for various aspects of the education system, including provision of sufficient school places, whilst apparently "freeing schools from local authority control"; and

·           allow head teachers more flexibility in relation to using unqualified teachers.

This council meeting believes that the education white paper is simply an ideologically motivated device, seeking to force onto schools the choices which the Conservative government believe are best for them but which they are not choosing to take for themselves, disguised as promoting choice and freedom, when there is no evidence that academy status always helps schools to deliver better education outcomes.

This council meeting further believes that forcing schools to become academies against their wishes is both illiberal and undemocratic, and that the resulting education system will become ever more polarised and unsustainable, harming the life chances of a generation of young people.

This council meeting therefore resolves to ask the Chief Executive to write to the Secretary of State for Education, asking her to:

·           think again about forcing schools to become academies, instead designing a system which allows academy and non-academy schools to co-exist in a sustainable way, to ensure school places and education quality can be delivered for all our young people;

·           think again about allowing schools to remove parents from their governing bodies when we should be increasing their role and influence in school management;

·           think again about all of the other measures which collectively put at risk the quality of teaching and education outcomes.

This council meeting further resolves to ask the Chief Executive to write to the Borough’s MPs and Working Peers requesting their response to the white paper and, for those who support the white paper, asking them to demonstrate how the proposals will improve educational outcomes in Stockport.

Moved by:                  Councillor Shan Alexander
Seconded by:           Councillor Colin Foster

MOVED AND SECONDED - This council meeting notes:

·         the very high quality schools in Stockport, with 90% of primary and 74% of secondary pupils attending "good" or "outstanding" schools;

·         the excellent relationship between the council and schools, all focused on delivering the best education possible so that each of Stockport's young people can attain their full potential;

·         the invaluable role of parent governors and local authority governors, acting as "critical friends" to both support head teachers and hold them to account; and

·         the relatively small number of schools in Stockport that have thus far chosen to become an academy.

This council meeting notes with great concern the recently published education white paper "Educational Excellence Everywhere", including proposals which will:

·         force all schools to become academies, irrespective of each school's wishes;

·         transfer the land and buildings of such schools from being owned by local residents through their local authority to central ownership by the Secretary of State;

·         remove the requirement for schools to elect parent governors;

·         leave local authorities with the responsibility for various aspects of the education system, including provision of sufficient school places, whilst apparently "freeing schools from local authority control"; and

·         allow head teachers more flexibility in relation to using unqualified teachers.

This council meeting believes that the education white paper is simply an ideologically motivated device, seeking to force onto schools the choices which the Conservative government believe are best for them but which they are not choosing to take for themselves, disguised as promoting choice and freedom, when there is no evidence that academy status always helps schools to deliver better education outcomes.

This council meeting further believes that forcing schools to become academies against their wishes is both illiberal and undemocratic, and that the resulting education system will become ever more polarised and unsustainable, harming the life chances of a generation of young people.

This council meeting therefore resolves to ask the Chief Executive to write to the Secretary of State for Education, asking her to:

·         think again about forcing schools to become academies, instead designing a system which allows academy and non-academy schools to co-exist in a sustainable way, to ensure school places and education quality can be delivered for all our young people;

·         think again about allowing schools to remove parents from their governing bodies when we should be increasing their role and influence in school management;

·         think again about all of the other measures which collectively put at risk the quality of teaching and education outcomes.

This council meeting further resolves to ask the Chief Executive to write to the Borough’s MPs and Working Peers requesting their response to the white paper and, for those who support the white paper, asking them to demonstrate how the proposals will improve educational outcomes in Stockport.

At 8.07 pm, it was

RESOLVED – That the meeting be adjourned.

The meeting reconvened at 8.17 pm.

AMENDMENT MOVED AND SECONDED - This council meeting notes:

·         the very high quality schools in Stockport, with 90% of primary and 74% of secondary pupils attending "good" or "outstanding" schools;

·         the excellent relationship between the council and schools, all focused on delivering the best education possible so that each of Stockport's young people can attain their full potential;

·         the invaluable role of parent governors and local authority governors, acting as "critical friends" to both support head teachers and hold them to account; and

·         the relatively small number of schools in Stockport that have thus far chosen to become an academy.

This council meeting notes with great concern the recently published education white paper "Educational Excellence Everywhere", including proposals which will:

·         force all schools to become academies, irrespective of each school's wishes;

·         transfer the land and buildings of such schools from being owned by local residents through their local authority to central ownership by the Secretary of State;

·         remove the requirement for schools to elect parent governors;

·         leave local authorities with the responsibility for various aspects of the education system, including provision of sufficient school places, whilst apparently "freeing schools from local authority control"; and

·         allow head teachers more flexibility in relation to using unqualified teachers.

This council meeting believes that the education white paper is simply an ideologically motivated device, seeking to force onto schools the choices which the Conservative government believe are best for them but which they are not choosing to take for themselves, disguised as promoting choice and freedom, when there is no evidence that academy status always helps schools to deliver better education outcomes.

This council meeting further believes that forcing schools to become academies against their wishes is both illiberal and undemocratic, and that the resulting education system will become ever more polarised and unsustainable, harming the life chances of a generation of young people.

This council meeting therefore resolves to ask the Group Leaders and Cllrs Alexander and Foster to write to the Secretary of State for Education, asking her to:

·         think again about forcing schools to become academies, instead designing a system which allows academy and non-academy schools to co-exist in a sustainable way, to ensure school places and education quality can be delivered for all our young people;

·         think again about allowing schools to remove parents from their governing bodies when we should be increasing their role and influence in school management;

·         think again about all of the other measures which collectively put at risk the quality of teaching and education outcomes.

This council meeting further resolves to ask the Group Leaders and Cllrs Alexander and Foster to write to the Borough’s MPs and Working Peers requesting their response to the white paper and, for those who support the white paper, asking them to demonstrate how the proposals will improve educational outcomes in Stockport.

At 8.21 pm, it was

RESOLVED – That the meeting be adjourned.

The meeting reconvened at 8.26 pm.

The Council Meeting then proceeded to debate the amendment.

Upon the amendment being put to the vote:-

For the amendment 48, abstentions 13.

AMENDMENT CARRIED

The amendment was then put as the substantive motion and it was

RESOLVED (48 for, 13 abstentions) - This council meeting notes:

·         the very high quality schools in Stockport, with 90% of primary and 74% of secondary pupils attending "good" or "outstanding" schools;

·         the excellent relationship between the council and schools, all focused on delivering the best education possible so that each of Stockport's young people can attain their full potential;

·         the invaluable role of parent governors and local authority governors, acting as "critical friends" to both support head teachers and hold them to account; and

·         the relatively small number of schools in Stockport that have thus far chosen to become an academy.

This council meeting notes with great concern the recently published education white paper "Educational Excellence Everywhere", including proposals which will:

·         force all schools to become academies, irrespective of each school's wishes;

·         transfer the land and buildings of such schools from being owned by local residents through their local authority to central ownership by the Secretary of State;

·         remove the requirement for schools to elect parent governors;

·         leave local authorities with the responsibility for various aspects of the education system, including provision of sufficient school places, whilst apparently "freeing schools from local authority control"; and

·         allow head teachers more flexibility in relation to using unqualified teachers.

This council meeting believes that the education white paper is simply an ideologically motivated device, seeking to force onto schools the choices which the Conservative government believe are best for them but which they are not choosing to take for themselves, disguised as promoting choice and freedom, when there is no evidence that academy status always helps schools to deliver better education outcomes.

This council meeting further believes that forcing schools to become academies against their wishes is both illiberal and undemocratic, and that the resulting education system will become ever more polarised and unsustainable, harming the life chances of a generation of young people.

This council meeting therefore resolves to ask the Group Leaders and Cllrs Alexander and Foster to write to the Secretary of State for Education, asking her to:

·         think again about forcing schools to become academies, instead designing a system which allows academy and non-academy schools to co-exist in a sustainable way, to ensure school places and education quality can be delivered for all our young people;

·         think again about allowing schools to remove parents from their governing bodies when we should be increasing their role and influence in school management;

·         think again about all of the other measures which collectively put at risk the quality of teaching and education outcomes.

This council meeting further resolves to ask the Group Leaders and Cllrs Alexander and Foster to write to the Borough’s MPs and Working Peers requesting their response to the white paper and, for those who support the white paper, asking them to demonstrate how the proposals will improve educational outcomes in Stockport.

To note that Celia Tierney has been appointed to the post of Monitoring Officer with effect from 1 May 2016.

RESOLVED – That it be noted that Celia Tierney had been appointed to the post of Monitoring Officer with effect from 1 May 2016.