Agenda and minutes

To approve as a correct record and sign the Minutes of the meeting of the Council held on 15 September 2016

The Minutes (copies of which had been circulated) of the meeting of the Council held on 15 September 2016 were approved as a correct record and signed by the Mayor.

To report any urgent action taken under the Constitution since the last meeting of the Council.

No urgent decisions were reported.

To receive announcements from the Mayor.

The Mayor welcomed two of Stockport’s Paralympians, Andy Small and Carly Tait, to the Council Meeting and congratulated them and all other Stockport Olympians and Paralympians on their achievements during the Rio 2016 Games.

Each of the Group Leaders then spoke in turn to congratulate Stockport’s athletes on their success during the Olympic and Paralympic Games.

The Mayor then announced that there would be a communion service held at St Barnabas Parish Church, Bredbury on 30 October 2016 at 10.30 am to which all members were invited.

In addition, a Mayoral Prayer Breakfast would be held on 9 November 2016 which would be led by the Archbishop of Macclesfield. 

Finally, the Mayor reported that he would be holding a charity night at the Grosvenor Casino on 16 November 2016.

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

No declarations were made.

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.

Eight public questions were submitted as follows:-

·         Relating to the closure of beds at Stepping Hill Hospital and why it was considered that this would not damage patient care.

The Executive Councillor for Health (Councillor Tom McGee) responded that there were reductions in budgetary provision across local authorities and the health service that needed to be managed across the health economy.  Councillor McGee commented that it was not possible to continue to operate in the same way as before with less funding.  It was further commented that bed closures did not necessarily result in a poorer service and that hospitals frequently adjusted bed provision and further that Stepping Hill Hospital had recently opened up new specialist wards as part of the Healthier Together Initiative.  Councillor McGee stated that what was most important is that there was the right balance between what took place in hospitals and where community intervention and prevention were better placed to provide the right care for residents.

The Mayor agreed to group four public questions together as they all related to cuts to drug and alcohol treatment services:-

The Executive Councillor for Health (Councillor Tom McGee) responded that:-

·         In relation to the suggestion that current practice was unsafe, it was commented that the drug and alcohol services provided by the Pennine Care NHS Trust had recently been the subject of inspection by the Care Quality Commission who had raised no concerns with regard to safety.

·         There had been budgetary reductions of 17.5% and not the 40% asserted in the question.

·         The Council had renegotiated its contract with the Pennine Care NHS Trust which had resulted in changes to service provision based on the specification of the Council which was good practice.

·         There was significant evidence that group work was effective in drug and alcohol treatment.  However one-to-one services were still provided in those circumstances where it remained necessary.

·         Consultation on the budget was currently ongoing, however there were no proposals to reduce the public health funding specified in the contract and that the CCG received a 5.7% increase in funding which was directed to mental health provision.

·         There was currently no waiting list for young people to access drug and alcohol services and work was being undertaken to reduce the access time to within seven days.

·         There was an increase nationally in drug related deaths, however the local data suggests that this trend was lower within Stockport.

·         The ‘Family and Friends Survey’ of the drug and alcohol service suggested that over 90% of respondents would recommend the service to others.

·         Both Council staff and those employed by the Pennine Care NHS Trust were offered training on stress management.

·         The suggestion that the work of the drug and alcohol service has halted was incorrect.

·         In relation to the Stockport Together initiative and whether this would be rejected on the basis that the aim of Sustainability and Transformation Plans was to defund, demoralise, dismantle and privatise the NHS.

The Executive Councillor for Health (Councillor Tom McGee) responded that Stockport Together had existed as a concept for over two years in the context of reduced funding for health and social care.  Sustainability and Transformation Plans were introduced a year later and Greater Manchester was not one of the affected areas as it was part of the devolved health and social care package for the conurbation.

·         Relating to how the Council intended to provide sufficient and good care in people’s homes as part of the new Stockport Together arrangements.

The Executive Councillor for Adult Social Care (Councillor Wendy Wild) responded that the underfunding of adult social care was having a devastating consequence across the country and was one of the biggest challenges for the Council.  It was further stated that earlier in the year the Council  ...  view the full minutes text for item 2.(i)

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 presentations.

One petition was submitted with a stated 1,162 signatories requesting that the Council give consideration to making improvements to the surfacing and lighting of the Middlewood Way, Marple.

RESOLVED – That the petition be referred to the Executive Councillor for Communities & Housing for consideration.

(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 Alex Ganotis 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:-

(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

There were no questions in relation to the business of the Greater Manchester Police and Crime Panel.

(c)        Greater Manchester Combined Authority

There were no questions in relation to the business of the Greater Manchester Combined Authority or the 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 (Policy, Finance & Devolution) (Councillor Alex Ganotis) commented that in the light of the public questions submitted at this evening’s meeting in relation to adult social care, should the Council take no action to mitigate against the reduction in its budget, the cost of providing adult social care could bankrupt the Council.

Councillor Ganotis further that on 28 October 2016, the Greater Manchester Combined Authority would be meeting to consider whether to give approval to go out and consult on the proposed Greater Manchester Spatial Framework.   Councillor Ganotis reported that there would be an opportunity for members of the public to engage with the proposals at the November and December rounds of the area committees.

Finally, Councillor Ganotis confirmed that the Executive’s Budget proposals had now been published and that these were subject to a genuine consultation with councillors and the public.

The Executive Councillor (Communities & Housing) (Councillor Sheila Bailey) reported that the Executive had responded to a parliamentary inquiry in respect of public parks which was being held by the Communities and Local Government Committee.  Councillor Bailey confirmed that there had been a significant response to the Inquiry and that Stockport had been invited to give oral evidence on 14 November which would be attended by the Greenspace Manager, Ian Walmsley.

The Executive Councillor (Economy & Regeneration) (Councillor Kate Butler) reported that the Council had now taken possession of the Stockport Exchange office development and were in negotiations over the letting of accommodation.  It was confirmed that the retail space within the building had been pre-let to Sainsbury’s and it was anticipated that they would open before the end of the year.  It was also confirmed that the adjacent Holiday Inn Express hotel would open before Christmas and that a second hotel in the town centre would open shortly.

It was further reported that the Redrock Leisure development was progressing on schedule and that Merseyway Shopping Centre occupancy and footfall were both up since it had been acquired by council. 

The Executive Councillor (Children & Family Services) (Councillor Colin Foster) reported that in March 2016, £150,000 had been allocated to voluntary organisations of which £50,000 had been put towards organisations supporting children and families.  Two projects had been successful in their applications for funding: counselling for looked after children and care leavers; and the second was working with targeted youth support and the youth offending service to work with vulnerable children and young people,

The Deputy Leader of the Council (Adult Social Care) (Councillor Wendy Wild) reported that five voluntary organisations that support adult care services had been successful in receiving funding, the details of which would be reported to the next meeting of the Adult Care Services & Housing Scrutiny Committee.

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 (Policy, Finance & Devolution) and the Executive Councillors (Children & Family Services), (Communities & Housing), (Education), (Health) and (Reform & Governance) answered questions and responded to comments relating to the business of the Executive in accordance with Council Meeting Procedure Rule 11.

To receive the Minutes of the Executive held on 4 October 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 Meeting held on 4 October 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 – 19 September 2016

Children & Young People – 21 September 2016

Corporate, Resource Management & Governance – 20 September 2016

Environment & Economy  – 22 September 2016

Health & Wellbeing  – 13 September 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, Area and Ward Committees:-

Ordinary Committees

Area Committees

Ward Committees

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

Ordinary Committees

Contributors – 29 September 2016

Health & Wellbeing Board – 16 August 2016

Licensing, Environment & Safety –27 July, 7 September and 12 October 2016

Member – 12 September 2016

Planning & Highways Regulation – 8 September and 13 October 2016

Standards Sub-Committee – 14 September 2016

Town Centre – 30 September 2016

Area Committees

Bramhall & Cheadle Hulme South – 29 September 2016

Central Stockport – 29 September 2016

Cheadle – 27 September 2016

Heatons & Reddish – 26 September 2016

Marple – 28 September 2016

Stepping Hill – 27 September 2016

Werneth – 26 September 2016

Ward Committees

Brinnington & Reddish Joint – 3 October 2016

Hazel Grove – 20 July 2016

This Council notes that

·         Guide Dogs is campaigning for legislation to ensure all taxi and minicab drivers undertake disability equality training as part of their license to ensure that they do not discriminate against disabled people

·         Figures from a Guide Dogs survey shows that 3 in 4 assistance dog owners have been refused entry to businesses and taxis because of their dog

·         It is not currently compulsory for every taxi and minicab drivers to undertake disability equality training as a condition of obtaining their licence

·         Reddish Labour MP Andrew Gwynne tabled a Private Member’s Bill on 29th June 2016 to make the completion of disability equality training a requirement for the licensing of taxi and private hire vehicle drivers in England and Wales

·         The Disability Equality Training Bill reduces any potential burden on licensed drivers by requiring them to take the training when they next renew their licenses and by ensuring that drivers who have already undertaken disability equality training would not be required to duplicate their training

·         The Transport Select Committee, Law Commission and House of Lords Equality Act Committee, as well as 29 national charities and organisations, have recommended disability training for all taxi and minicab drivers

This Council believes that

·         Taxis are essential to disabled people’s independence as many disabled people are unable to drive or use public transport

·         The emotional impact of facing discrimination and confrontation when trying to carry out everyday activities can take a significant toll on disabled people leading to a loss of confidence and independence

This Council resolves

·         To welcome the Disability Equality Training Bill which is scheduled for second reading in the House of Commons on 18th November 2016

·         For the Leader of the Council to write to the Minister of State for Disabled People, Health and Work highlighting the support of Stockport for mandatory disability training for all taxi and minicab drivers

Moved by:                  Councillor Chris Murphy

Seconded by:           Councillor Yvonne Guariento

RESOLVED - This Council notes that

·         Guide Dogs is campaigning for legislation to ensure all taxi and minicab drivers undertake disability equality training as part of their license to ensure that they do not discriminate against disabled people

·         Figures from a Guide Dogs survey shows that 3 in 4 assistance dog owners have been refused entry to businesses and taxis because of their dog

·         It is not currently compulsory for every taxi and minicab drivers to undertake disability equality training as a condition of obtaining their licence

·         Reddish Labour MP Andrew Gwynne tabled a Private Member’s Bill on 29^th June 2016 to make the completion of disability equality training a requirement for the licensing of taxi and private hire vehicle drivers in England and Wales

·         The Disability Equality Training Bill reduces any potential burden on licensed drivers by requiring them to take the training when they next renew their licenses and by ensuring that drivers who have already undertaken disability equality training would not be required to duplicate their training

·         The Transport Select Committee, Law Commission and House of Lords Equality Act Committee, as well as 29 national charities and organisations, have recommended disability training for all taxi and minicab drivers

This Council believes that

·         Taxis are essential to disabled people’s independence as many disabled people are unable to drive or use public transport

·         The emotional impact of facing discrimination and confrontation when trying to carry out everyday activities can take a significant toll on disabled people leading to a loss of confidence and independence

This Council resolves

·         To welcome the Disability Equality Training Bill which is scheduled for second reading in the House of Commons on 18^th November 2016.

·         For the Leader of the Council to write to the Minister of State for Disabled People, Health and Work highlighting the support of Stockport for mandatory disability training for all taxi and minicab drivers.

This Council Meeting notes with great concern:

·         That the current government is considering expanding grammar schools, including introducing new ones;

·         That the government has confirmed that reforms are being considered which could allow Free Schools to introduce academic selection;

·         That the government may first seek to expand grammar schools by the backdoor by exploiting loopholes in existing legislation; and

·         That any proposal to reintroduce grammar schools would mark a return to the premature selection and division of young people according to a simplistic and one-off measure of academic ability.

This Council Meeting further notes:

·         The strong performance of schools in Stockport with record A-Level and GCSE results during the 2015-16 academic year and Ofsted judging that 86.3% of pupils in our borough attend schools deemed good or better;

·         That Stockport has no publicly funded grammar schools;

·         That there is not a single mention of disability in the government’s consultation paper, that the Department for Education has failed to carry out an Equalities Impact Assessment and that inclusive education campaigners say expanding grammar schools will discriminate against disabled children, leading to more segregation in special schools;

·         That the OECD’s Head of Education has said that grammar schools benefit wealthy families without raising overall educational attainment, with ‘a one-off test likely to favour social background over true academic potential’; and

·         That the independent Education Policy Institute found no evidence that expanding the grammar school network would improve overall standards and warned that the government’s proposals could widen the attainment gap between rich and poor pupils.

This Council Meeting believes:

·         That the best way to raise attainment, including for pupils with the best academic ability, is to provide a great education with a stretching curriculum for everyone;

·         That allowing multi-year entry to grammar schools, for example at both ages 11 and 14, would still prevent many pupils from accessing the excellent education they have a right to;

·         That young people have varied and complex aptitudes and abilities, and that they develop at different rates; and

·         That grammar schools reinforce inequality and serve to boost the life chances of already high-achieving pupils whilst not improving overall levels of social mobility:

This Council Meeting resolves to oppose any development of grammar schools in Stockport.

This Council Meeting further resolves to ask the Chief Executive to write to the Secretary of State for Education, informing her that Stockport Council

·         Opposes any expansion of grammar schools;

·         Calls on the government to abandon selection by ability into different schools and any change to Free Schools to enable them select on the basis of academic ability; and

·         Calls on the government to respect the spirit of existing legislation on grammar schools and not seek to create new grammar schools under the guise of expansion.

Moved by:                  Councillor Dean Fitzpatrick

Seconded by:           Councillor Suzanne Wyatt

At this stage in the proceedings, in accordance with Council Meeting Procedure Rule 14.11(b) (Closure Motions), it was MOVED AND SECONDED and that the question now be put.

For the motion 19, against 37, abstentions 1.

MOTION NOT CARRIED

The Council Meeting therefore proceeded to continue in debate.

It was then

RESOLVED – (41 for, 14 against, 3 abstentions) This Council Meeting notes with great concern:

·         That the current government is considering expanding grammar schools, including introducing new ones;

·         That the government has confirmed that reforms are being considered which could allow Free Schools to introduce academic selection;

·         That the government may first seek to expand grammar schools by the backdoor by exploiting loopholes in existing legislation; and

·         That any proposal to reintroduce grammar schools would mark a return to the premature selection and division of young people according to a simplistic and one-off measure of academic ability.

This Council Meeting further notes:

·         The strong performance of schools in Stockport with record A-Level and GCSE results during the 2015-16 academic year and Ofsted judging that 86.3% of pupils in our borough attend schools deemed good or better;

·         That Stockport has no publicly funded grammar schools;

·         That there is not a single mention of disability in the government’s consultation paper, that the Department for Education has failed to carry out an Equalities Impact Assessment and that inclusive education campaigners say expanding grammar schools will discriminate against disabled children, leading to more segregation in special schools;

·         That the OECD’s Head of Education has said that grammar schools benefit wealthy families without raising overall educational attainment, with ‘a one-off test likely to favour social background over true academic potential’; and

·         That the independent Education Policy Institute found no evidence that expanding the grammar school network would improve overall standards and warned that the government’s proposals could widen the attainment gap between rich and poor pupils.

This Council Meeting believes:

·         That the best way to raise attainment, including for pupils with the best academic ability, is to provide a great education with a stretching curriculum for everyone;

·         That allowing multi-year entry to grammar schools, for example at both ages 11 and 14, would still prevent many pupils from accessing the excellent education they have a right to;

·         That young people have varied and complex aptitudes and abilities, and that they develop at different rates; and

·         That grammar schools reinforce inequality and serve to boost the life chances of already high-achieving pupils whilst not improving overall levels of social mobility:

This Council Meeting resolves to oppose any development of grammar schools in Stockport.

This Council Meeting further resolves to ask the Chief Executive to write to the Secretary of State for Education, informing her that Stockport Council

·         Opposes any expansion of grammar schools;

·         Calls on the government to abandon selection by ability into different schools and any change to Free Schools to enable them select on the basis of academic ability; and

·         Calls on the government to respect the spirit of existing legislation on grammar schools and not seek to create new grammar schools under the guise of expansion.

To approve the following amendments to the list of members appointed to serve on the Admission Appeals Panel:-

From Education Members to Lay Members

Anna Christensen

Jill Jones

Maureen Sweeney

RESOLVED – That approval be given to the following amendments to the list of members appointed to serve on the Admission Appeals Panel:-

From Education Members to Lay Members

Anna Christensen

Jill Jones

Maureen Sweeney