Proud of Oldham’s progress

Photo: Picture: Darren Robinson

MAKING his point . . . Charlie Parker replies to another question set by Chronicle readers.

IN THE HOTSEAT — COUNCIL CHIEF EXECUTIVE CHARLIE PARKER

The Chronicle is putting Oldham’s leading figures in the hotseat, giving local people the chance to ask the questions that really matter.

Richard Hooton poses the questions on behalf of readers, with today’s topics including controversies in the planning department, the Vance Miller inquiry and Mr Parker’s own pay packet.


Q By what process was Stewart Dobson chosen to handle the inquiry into the council’s handling of the Vance Miller trial? Was Dobson known to you personally and how thorough and genuinely independent was the inquiry?


A Stewart Dobson was chosen after we approached several companies that specialise in providing people to undertake this kind of review for local government. The brief provided to them was that we wanted an experienced senior local government specialist with a legal background. When a list of potential candidates was given to us, we went to great lengths to ensure that it was not someone necessarily known to me, or to any of the key officers or members likely to be involved in the investigation. Stewart met these requirements.

He is a qualified lawyer with many years of local government experience and had worked at the highest level — including being the chief executive of Birmingham City Council. I knew Stewart by reputation. He had also conducted a number of similar reviews. His review was incredibly through and independent. I think his final public report, plus the presentation he gave to the council’s Audit Committee and his detailed answers to their lengthy questioning, demonstrates his meticulous approach and impartiality.

Stewart went through the whole case management of the Vance Miller trial and looked at all the people who have been involved and through that process came to a conclusion about whether disciplinary action was taken and from the back of that we went through a disciplinary hearing.



Q How could the Vance Miller case result in the dismissal of one individual Tony Allen without similar action being taken against the people more senior?



A The disciplinary investigation was undertaken by Stewart Dobson who had complete independence in carrying this out and full access to all officers he thought necessary to probe.

I simply cannot comment further on the details of the disciplinary investigation, but I can assure you of Stewart’s diligence in ensuring this was thorough and completely unfettered by influence from any officer or politician. As he made clear in his report, he looked at everything and everyone.





Q What do you think your greatest achievements have been during your time in office?



A That is for the public to judge for themselves, but to be brief, I would say they are:

::Sorting out the council’s finances and enabling us to plan ahead with new-found confidence and financial stability.

::Having more than nine outstanding independent inspections last year of our services.

::Delivering Metrolink to the town centre.

::Having the most improved children’s services in the country.

::Putting together a strong and competent team that is focused on delivering excellent services that are value for money.

::And, finally, enabling Oldham to start getting into national press for the right reasons. A good example is the recent by-election. We received a lot of plaudits for the way the by-election was run. A lot of people have come back to us thanking us and saying that it was a professionally run and well managed in a very challenging environment with 130 media outlets. The forthcoming Barnsley by-election have asked us to help them and that’s improving our reputation.

We’re also shortlisted for the most improved council of the year.



Q THE Planning Department are constantly in the headlines surrounded by controversy, why has no review been undertaken and action taken on how the department is run and controlled?



A I think there are two issues here.

The first is that planning is very emotive: it impacts on everyone’s daily lives. It’s about where we live and work, our leisure activities, where we go to school or college and the method of transport we use to get there. So everyone has a view about planning in the borough — and rightly so.

The difficulty for any planning authority is balancing those views and opinions while also having to take an overview of the needs of the borough to ensure we’ve got the right mix of all key uses to support economic growth and improve the environment. Oldham Council deals with more than 1,300 planning applications each year.

Of these, at least 90 per cent are determined without significant comment as they are non-controversial. However, there are occasional large-scale or sensitive developments that do create a lot of interest, and that’s no different from any other planning authority in the UK. Turning to the management of planning, this has now been reviewed and we’ve put in place a new team who are focused on improving the service to all our customers. We’ve already changed where the public can access plans, for example, as part of these reforms. This is having a major impact on improving the perception of the service. That doesn’t mean that we will always make decisions that are popular or accepted by all — that simply isn’t possible — but we are firmly committed to ensuring all our planning decisions are open, transparent, consistent and hopefully maximise the benefits to residents.

This area remains a priority for me during 2011 and beyond. I want to ensure that planning is only making headlines for the right reasons.







Q Oldham Council held a ‘consultation’ on whether land at Failsworth Lower Memorial Park should be swapped for another piece of land. 89 per cent of those who voted said ‘No’. Why is Oldham Council pressing ahead with a land swap against the wishes of the people of Failsworth?



A Yes, the council did support the consultation programme and – of those people who attended the meetings — a large number were opposed to the proposal to transfer the charitable status of the land to the North of the Lancaster Club on to an alternative site or sites in the Failsworth area. However, it’s important to note that a significant number of the respondents were part of an action group which is opposed to a stadium being developed on the proposed site at any price.

And in fact the trustees have a wider role to play in making any decision in that they have to take into account that the beneficiaries of the trust are all the people of Failsworth — in the consultation only 0.29 per cent of residents living in the area have actively expressed opposition to the proposed transfer.

Our role as the council is to balance the views of the vocal minority against those of the silent majority. Neither side has the monopoly on all the right answers.

As many readers will know, the council has made an application to the Charity Commission to transfer the charitable status. It is for that body to finally decide whether or not it would be in the best interests of the trust for this to proceed. The details of the consultation exercise were included within the application and therefore the Charity Commission are aware of the local objections. I believe this will — rightly — form part of their considerations in making their final decision.

These issues are very emotive to residents and we fully understand that. What we are also acutely aware of is that the potential loss of the borough’s professional football club is at stake here too.

We must strive to find a way forward that balances residents’ concerns with the future of Oldham Athletic and the borough’s regeneration prospects. There are never easy answers here. Just look at the problems Brighton have had with their stadium plans, for example, or the current controversy over the long-term plans for London’s Olympic Stadium. This kind of debate and emotions are replicated up and down the country and it is absolutely right that we examine them in full.





Q On what basis did you decline the suggestion/recommendation that chief executives of councils should take a pay cut?



A Firstly, I am not sure who suggested that chief executives should take a pay cut. If this question refers to what Eric Pickles (Secretary of State) thinks then perhaps there is more to it than he suggests.

For starters, no chief executive in Greater Manchester is being asked to take a pay cut by any council. Chief executives are responsible for multi-million-pound businesses, often with personal liabilities with a requirement to deliver not only value for money, but the highest standards of services in a very challenging financial environment. These jobs are increasingly complex and they require a major commitment. On average I work around 65-70 hours a week, and recently I have worked much more than that. I am also chief executive of the Greater Manchester Waste Authority — another multi-million-pound organisation.

I took a cut in my overall package to take the Oldham job. I haven’t had a pay award for the past two years and I won’t for the next two. I’m not seeking sympathy for that — but they are an important background information to add to this debate.

With regard to the comparison often made with the Prime Minister’s salary, a recent report by Will Hutton for the Government pointed out that the PM gets several “add ons” that form a total annual package of around £581,651. This includes his PM’s salary, MP’s salary, official residence, plus a car and driver. On leaving office, Prime Ministers also get a public duty cost allowance worth around £90,000 — plus their MP’s salary if they continue in the House of Commons. They also immediately get an index-linked pension equal to half of their final salary entitlement (i.e. £99,330) when they step down as PM - regardless of how long they have been in office. I am not sure that my salary compares with these figures!



Q Are you an adviser or do you have power? How can we measure Charlie Parker’s effectiveness?



A The chief executive’s role is both advisory and one that has powers delegated to it by the council.

This includes the role as head of paid service — reporting to full council on how officers discharge the council’s services — plus overseeing the number and performance of officers required to do this.

I also have overall responsibility for the management of the organisation.

Like everyone else, I have an annual appraisal. This is conducted by an independent person.

Oldham Council’s performance over the past two years has shown significant improvements across a wide range of services and functions.

This has included delivering our improvement programme that has put a sound financial management base in place.

I’m proud to say we’ve also had dramatic improvements in services such as recycling, catering and most recently the outstanding rating for our Children’s Services.




Tomorrow’s topics include council cuts, regeneration, the by-election, the council’s financial woes, caring for the elderly, badly maintained car parks, Oldham controversial logo and how many staff actually live in Oldham.



An edited version, like today’s, of the full interview will appear in the Chronicle and online in the e-Chron (subscription required)