Councillors split on ward alliances proposal

Unelected members of the public could have a say on how town hall funds are spent under new proposals.

A consultation is currently taking place on how Rochdale Council’s townships and councillors can better engage with communities they serve

A report has proposed six recommendations after a working group of township committee chairs and cross-party councillors decided ‘radical change’ was needed to encourage more people to become more involved in the running of their communities.

However the most contentious of these is the mooted creation of ward alliances to replace current area forums.

These would be made up of three ward councillors  – who would appoint a minimum of six members of the public – and are intended to promote discussion around issues of concern at a ‘very local level’.

But, controversially, this could allow unelected members to influence decision making around how funds of the borough’s four townships – Heywood, Middleton, Pennines and Rochdale –  are spent.

A presentation on the proposals – all of which would need to be approved before full council before being implemented – was given at a meeting of the Pennines Township Committee.

And it was the potential introduction of ward alliances which proved the most contentious 

Councillor John Blundell, who represents Smallbridge and Firgrove, expressed concerns over the alliances’ proposed ability to influence decisions around spending township funds ‘at a neighbourhood level’.

He said: “I’m not sure how that would be configured but, when you talk about getting the community involved, everyone of us around this table is a member of the community and we have been elected by the community to look after their money and leverage money from them.

“I’m not certain we should have people not elected to decide where public monies are spent. 

“I’m not completely opposed to it, because 99 per cent of the time it would be well meaning from very nice members of the public. 

“But if we were to do that, there would need to be some very severe mechanisms to make sure money is not spent in a way that may be thought inappropriate, or a person has not declared an interest properly.”

There were also concerns that the alliances could be dominated by a small number of people from each community.

Councillor Rina Paolucci said: “What we see at forums is it’s the same people that come with the same issues. They want what they want but don’t see what else is happening in the ward.”

Her Conservative colleague, Councillor John Taylor, who represents Wardle and West Littleborough agreed, adding: “People bring individual concerns and don’t have a holistic view of the ward. Any response or action would be disproportionate to what’s required.”

However Conservative leader Councillor Ashley Dearnley, said ward alliances could bring their advantages and would be ‘worth giving a try’.

He said: “There is certainly one chap in our ward who would be very interested in this particular model of ward alliance and I think it could work. 

“For example, the traffic problems on Halifax Road, a small group of people working on that, you might find it’s a much more positive way of engaging people and people being interested in a broader view of things than what we have now.”

And Labour’s Councillor Janet Emsley also said that a change to the current approach was needed, after party colleague Councillor Blundell suggested individual townships could develop their own methods of increasing community engagement without the need for a report.

She said: “We don’t do it at the moment, this is here to say ‘where are the gaps in working across the borough, what are we not doing at the moment’.

“We are not engaging with some of the people that might have some really good ideas that might fit into what our communities might want and need.”

Nick Statham, Local Democracy Reporter