Agenda and minutes

1.1

Apologies for absence were received from Councillors John Booker, Dawn Dale, Tony Damms, Craig Gamble Pugh, Mark Jones, Alan Law, Chris Rosling-Josephs, Gail Smith, Zoe Sykes and Cliff Woodcraft.

2.1

Councillors Olivia Blake, Mike Drabble and Paul Scriven each declared a personal interest in Agenda Item 6 - Notice of Motion regarding Access To Urgent Primary Care (See Minute 6 below) - (a) as a Non-Executive Director of Sheffield Health and Social Care Trust, (b) due to him providing mental health counselling services in non-urgent primary care, and (c) due to his partner being employed by NHS England as a Medical Director, respectively.

2.2

Councillor Jack Scott declared a personal interest in Agenda Item 7 - Notice of Motion regarding Crisis in Children’s Social Care (See Minute 7 below) – as Chief Executive of Home-Start South Yorkshire, an organisation which provides support for parents and children.

2.3

Councillors Douglas Johnson and Alison Teal each declared a personal interest in Agenda Item 13 – Changes To The Constitution (See Minute 13 below) – in so far as it related to the Monitoring Officer Protocol, on the grounds that a proposed revision in Section 4 of the Protocol (Procedure For Dealing With Complaints Regarding City, Parish And Town Councillors And Co-Opted Members) is to include a reference to the Monitoring Officer reserving the right to deal with any issues arising in the course of business that concerns the conduct or alleged conduct of a Member in the absence of a complaint if the Monitoring Officer deems it reasonable and appropriate to do so.  Councillor Johnson stated that the reason for him declaring this interest was that the Monitoring Officer had recently made such an allegation against him, which he fully denies, and Councillor Teal stated that the reason for her declaring this interest was that the Monitoring Officer has been attempting to proceed with such a complaint against her since April 2017, despite the absence of such a power.

3.1

It was formally moved by Councillor Peter Rippon, and formally seconded by Councillor Michelle Cook, thatapproval be given, for the duration of this meeting, to certain revisions to the Council Procedure Rules, as set out in the schedule included with the agenda for this meeting, in order to apply the changes to the operation of this meeting that were used at the September, October and November Council meetings as part of a pilot exercise being overseen by the Review of Full Council Meetings Member Working Group.

3.2

Whereupon, it was formally moved by Councillor Douglas Johnson, and formally seconded by Councillor Alison Teal, as an amendment, that the Motion be approved with the exception of the rule relating to CPR 10.2 relating to a limit on the number of motions, and, furthermore, re-approves the revised formula for the order of the motions adopted indicatively at the meeting of this Council in October 2017.

3.3

On being put to the vote, the amendment was negatived.

3.4

The original Motion was then put to the vote and carried as follows:-

4.1

Petitions

4.1.1

Petition Requesting the Council to Take Action to Reduce Air Pollution

The Council received a joint electronic and paper petition containing 305 signatures, requesting the Council to take action to reduce air pollution.

Representations on behalf of the petitioners were made by Graham Jones. Mr Jones stated that he was presenting the petition on behalf of the Burngreave Clean Air Campaign. Air pollution caused by traffic contributed to the premature death of many people annually and especially vulnerable groups included older people, unborn children, taxi drivers and people living in poorer areas such as Burngreave, which had several schools in one of the most polluted areas of Sheffield, with busy A roads running through it.

The petition also sought to support the introduction of anti-idling measures and Mr Jones said that children walking to school, rather than being taken in cars, would be better for people. Local people had been responsive when approached about this issue. Monitoring of pollution in Burngreave had been carried out and which showed high levels of Nitrogen Dioxide. The petitioners sought to increase awareness of the issue of air quality as well as reducing the effects of pollution. One of the measures which could be taken was to introduce walking buses for school children and to move traffic away from residential areas. He said that he was pleased that the Council had developed a Clean Air Strategy with proposals concerning anti-idling measures.

The Council referred the petition to Councillor Jack Scott, Cabinet Member for Transport and Sustainability. Councillor Scott stated that the Council had published a report to Cabinet concerning a Clean Air Strategy. He said that there were many challenges relating to clean air, other than transport, and these included issues of inequality and fairness, exclusion and social justice. Clean air was a fundamental right for people and it was the most vulnerable in society who were affected by polluted air. He commented on the work being done, including with Burngreave Ward Councillors who had championed work with regard to air quality. He agreed that the situation could be described as one of crisis and a public health emergency and expressed concern that the negative health effects of pollution contributed to the deaths of some 500 people in Sheffield annually. This was an issue which needed to see improvement for everyone and a closing of the gap between areas where air quality was best and worst. He commented that the Government did not appear to be taking action on air quality which was sufficient to the challenges it presented.

He said that air pollution was also a major drain on the City’s economy, put at £200 million annually and that there was not necessarily a tension between clean air and economic growth. There was also a Public Transport Vision, which had been submitted to the December meeting of Cabinet. Meanwhile, the Air Quality Strategy set out immediate actions, including in relation to vehicle idling, working with communities towards a Neighbourhood Champion  ...  view the full minutes text for item 4.

5.1

Urgent Business

5.1.1

There were no questions relating to urgent business under the provisions of Council Procedure Rule 16.6(ii).

5.2

Questions

5.2.1

A schedule of questions to Cabinet Members, submitted in accordance with Council Procedure Rule 16, and which contained written answers, was circulated and supplementary questions, under the provisions of Council Procedure Rule 16.4, were asked and were answered by the appropriate Cabinet Members.

5.3

South Yorkshire Joint Authorities

5.3.1

There were no questions relating to the discharge of the functions of the South Yorkshire Joint Authorities for Fire and Rescue or Pensions, under the provisions of Council Procedure Rule 16.6(i).

6.1

It was moved by Councillor Steve Ayris, and seconded by Councillor Shaffaq Mohammed, that this Council:-

(a)       is committed to good access to our local NHS services for all our citizens;

(b)       notes the progress update report to the Healthier Communities and Adult Social Care Scrutiny and Policy Development Committee on 15th November 2017, “Reviewing Urgent Primary Care across Sheffield”;

(c)        is concerned that the proposals involve the closure of the Walk-In Centre at Broad Lane and the Minor Injuries Unit at the Royal Hallamshire Hospital;

(d)       also notes:-

(i)         that the majority of consultation respondents in the report feel that the proposed changes will not make it simpler to know where to go if they need urgent care (treatment for minor injuries or illnesses within 24 hours); and

(ii)        public concerns about the possible impact on emergency services (A&E/Ambulances) and lack of availability for those living in large parts of the City;

(e)       therefore calls on the Clinical Commissioning Group to abandon any plans to close the Walk-In Centre at Broad Lane or the Minor Injuries Unit at the Royal Hallamshire Hospital and revise their plans accordingly; and

(f)        will mount a campaign to prevent closure of these facilities, and in order to achieve this, calls upon the Leader of the Council to set up a group of Party Leaders on the Council to co-ordinate the Council’s opposition to the closure of the Walk-In Centre on Broad Lane and the Minor Injuries Unit at the Royal Hallamshire Hospital.

6.1.1

(NOTE: With the agreement of the Council and at the request of the mover of the Motion (Councillor Steve Ayris), the Motion as published on the agenda was altered by the substitution, in paragraphs (c) and (e), of the word “Lane” for the word “Street”.)

6.2

Whereupon, it was moved by Councillor Lewis Dagnall, and seconded by Councillor Kieran Harpham, as an amendment, that the Motion now submitted be amended by the deletion of paragraph (f) and the addition of new paragraphs (f) to (i) as follows:-

(f)         notes the sustained damage which has been inflicted on NHS services since the formation of the Coalition government in 2010, and the beginning of austerity;

(g)        further notes that since Labour created the NHS in 1948, spending on health had increased every year by over 4%, rising to almost 7% per year during the Labour governments of 1997-2010; since 2010, however, the Department of Health’s budget has grown by just 1% per year in real terms, far below what would be required in any decade - let alone in one in which the country faces new health challenges such as an ageing population;

(h)       will, in partnership with the “Save Our NHS Group”, which was set-up as a response to austerity, call on NHS England and the Department of Health to work with the Clinical Commissioning Group (CCG) to avoid the proposed closure of the Broad Lane Walk-in-Centre and the Minor Injuries Unit at the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 6.

7.1

It was moved by Councillor Andy Bainbridge, and seconded by Councillor Jackie Drayton, that this Council:-

(a)       notes that the past seven years of austerity has hit some of the most vulnerable in our society the hardest and that in the last year alone, 646,120 children in England sought support after suffering from neglect or emotional abuse;

(b)       further notes that since 2010 the number of child protection investigations nationally have increased by 108% to 185,450 cases a year - with little to suggest that this trend is likely to change without major intervention from central government;

(c)        believes that early intervention is crucial but with reducing funds and an increasing number of children requiring emergency support, many councils have been forced to cut back on preventative services;

(d)       notes the recent warnings by three leading children’s charities (Children’s Society, Action for Children and the National Children’s Bureau) that early intervention services had been hit hardest by government cuts since 2010, and the formation of the Conservative-Liberal Democrat coalition, with targeted funding for early intervention having fallen by 55%;

(e)       further notes that by the end of the decade it is set to fall another 29% in real terms (or £808 million) with the most-deprived councils having to cut funding six times more than the least-deprived;

(f)        reaffirms this Administration’s commitment to protecting vulnerable children and that, even in the face of continuing funding cuts, the Administration believes in the importance of early preventive action for children and young adults;

(g)       acknowledges earlier commitments made by this Administration, most recently at October’s Full Council meeting, to provide additional support for early years and those affected by adverse childhood experiences (ACEs);

(h)       notes that rather than reduce children’s services, this Administration has reconfigured centres to expand from 0-5 years to provide a range of children’s services to family centres for 0-19 years (and to 25 for those with learning difficulties);

(i)         further notes that this Administration has also brought children centres closer to people with outreach services now running from a variety of services such as schools and GP surgeries  - covering all of the city;

(j)         believes that the Liberal Democrats opportunistically opposed the newly configured children’s services, and erroneously and repeatedly stated that children centres, such as Angram Bank, would be closing, when in reality no such closures were ever proposed or have subsequently taken place;

(k)        believes that this Administration will do everything it can to protect the city’s children, but that without additional funding from central government, it is becoming increasingly difficult;

(l)         notes the results of a recent survey by Action for Children which found that, of 500 Conservative Councillors surveyed, over 50% believed that central government funding cuts have made it harder for their council to support services for children and young people, and further notes that the Local Government Association (LGA) has warned that the number of children in care was at a “tipping point” with record high numbers continuing to  ...  view the full minutes text for item 7.

8.1

It was moved by Councillor Olivia Blake, and seconded by Councillor Abtisam Mohamed, that this Council:-

(a)      believes that this year’s Budget was further evidence that we have an out-of-touch Government with no idea of the reality of people’s lives and no plan to improve them;

(b)      notes that real wages are lower than they were in 2010 and the Budget confirmed a further hit to living standards with disposable income set to fall in 2017, but despite these dire predictions, the Chancellor of the Exchequer made no mention of Local Government funding;

(c)       further notes that national economic growth is the lowest it has been since the Conservatives came to office and the recent Budget confirms that failure, with growth revised down in every year of the forecast, and the National Living Wage revised down to £8.56 per hour;

(d)      further notes that productivity has been revised down every year, while business investment has been revised down next year and each following year, and that rather than pause the rollout of Universal Credit, the Chancellor offered help which is only a fraction of the £3 billion a year cuts made to the scheme;

(e)      supports the Labour Party’s alternative budget which would scrap the public sector pay cap, pause and fix the Universal Credit roll-out, and introduce a real living wage of at least £10 an hour by 2020; Labour would bring forward investment in infrastructure across every region and nation to create high-wage, high-productivity jobs, and start a large-scale housebuilding programme, backed up with controls on rents;

(f)       believes that the small-scale tinkering with councils’ borrowing for housing falls far short of what is needed – as recent changes will provide only an average of £293m a year over three years; further believes this national picture is not good enough and notes that in Sheffield we are ready to build more homes for the city, if only the Government would lift the borrowing cap;

(g)      believes that all Government ministers since 2010 should be ashamed by the number of people homeless or sleeping rough in this country, with the number of people sleeping on UK streets having more than doubled since 2010, a remarkable failing of recent Governments given that, under Labour, rough sleeping fell by three-quarters;

(h)      notes that the budget also did nothing for the country’s 4.5 million private renting households; whereas a Labour Government would control rents, make three-year tenancies the new norm, and introduce new minimum standards;

(i)        believes that the Chancellor has not done nearly enough to end the current misery caused by the rollout of Universal Credit as the Government are still offering a desperate choice to those moving on to Universal Credit - wait 5 weeks to receive support or take a Government loan, going further into debt to make ends meet;

(j)        believes that the social security system should seek to prevent people from getting into debt, not encourage it, and support is given to the Labour  ...  view the full minutes text for item 8.

9.1

In view of the consent of the Council having not been given to a request made by the mover of the Motion (Councillor Robert Murphy) for permission to alter the wording of paragraph (a) of the Motion as published on the agenda, the Notice of Motion regarding “Public Accountability of Members and Officers” at item 9 on the Summons for this meeting, was withdrawn at the request of Councillor Murphy and with the consent of the Council, in accordance with Council Procedure Rules 11(a)(x) and 17.10.

10.1

It was formally moved by Councillor Alison Teal, and formally seconded by Councillor Magid Magid, that this Council:-

(a)       notes the importance of active play for the health and wellbeing of young people, and the success of organisations like Bristol-based CiC Playing Out in promoting the temporary use of residential roads for ‘playing out sessions’ to encourage active play;

(b)       further notes that Playing Out has found that the level of dangerous nitrogen oxide air pollution on the roadside can be significantly decreased during a play street session, providing an additional health benefit;

(c)        welcomes the fact that a small number of playing out sessions have already been held in Sheffield, including in May 2017 on Wake Road, but believes that Sheffield City Council can do more to support and promote this positive initiative;

(d)       believes that playing out sessions will be most successful if they are resident-led, but that Sheffield City Council has an important role to play in supporting residents to plan and run these sessions on their own streets; and

(e)       therefore calls upon the Administration to instruct officers to:-

(i)         develop a policy framework to enable a pilot to take place in Sheffield in the summer of 2018, including designing a quick and simple application process for residents wishing to facilitate playing out sessions on their street, and removing barriers to them doing so;

(ii)        make contact with relevant officers where similar schemes are currently operating successfully, such as Leeds, Hackney, and Bristol, to learn about the key steps to successfully implementing the policy, and to research the concept on the Playing Out website; and

(iii)       present proposals to Cabinet within two months for approval, with a view to advertising the new scheme in time for communities to come forward to be part of the pilot during the school summer holidays 2018.

11.1

RESOLVED: On the Motion of Councillor Peter Rippon, seconded by Councillor Michelle Cook, that the minutes of the extraordinary meeting and the ordinary meeting of the Council held on 1^st November 2017 be approved as true and accurate records.

12.1

RESOLVED: On the Motion of Councillor Peter Rippon, seconded by Councillor Michelle Cook, that Councillor Peter Rippon be appointed to serve on the Senior Officer Employment Committee in place of Councillor Mazher Iqbal.

13.1

RESOLVED: On the Motion of Councillor Peter Rippon, seconded by Councillor Michelle Cook, that this Council adopts the changes to the following parts of the Constitution, as set out in the report of the Chief Executive now submitted, and its Appendices, including the revised page 2 to Appendix D circulated at the meeting:-

(a)       Part 4 – Contracts Standing Orders;

(b)       Part 5 – Monitoring Officer Protocol;

(c)        Part 5 – Procedure For Dealing With Complaints Regarding City, Parish And Town Councillors And Co-Opted Members (Appendix to the Monitoring Officer Protocol); and

(d)       Part 7 – Management Structure and Statutory/Proper Officers.

13.1.1

The votes on the revision of the Monitoring Officer Protocol in so far as it related, in Section 4 (Procedure For Dealing With Complaints Regarding City, Parish And Town Councillors And Co-Opted Members), to the inclusion of reference to the Monitoring Officer reserving the right to deal with any issues arising in the course of business that concerns the conduct or alleged conduct of a Member in the absence of a complaint if the Monitoring Officer deems it reasonable and appropriate to do so, were ordered to be recorded and were as follows:-