Agenda item

8.1

Deputy Lord Mayor – Declaration of Office

The Lord Mayor (Councillor Anne Murphy) informed the Council that on 28^th June, in the presence of the Whips of the political groups on the Council, Councillor Magid Magid, the Deputy Lord Mayor Elect for the Municipal Year 2017-18, made and subscribed to the declaration required by law to qualify him to act as Deputy Lord Mayor.  The Council noted the information reported by the Lord Mayor.

8.2

Petitions

8.2.1

Petition Objecting to the Felling of Trees in Millhouses

The Council received a joint paper and electronic petition containing 1,671 signatures, objecting to the felling of trees in Millhouses.

Representations on behalf of the petitioners were made by Phil Yates, who stated that the Council had a statutory duty to manage air quality under the Environment Act. Recent research suggested that the planting of trees along the side of roads could reduce Nitrogen Dioxide concentrations. In May 2017, it was widely publicised that there were dangerously high levels of air pollutants around the City. National Clean Air day was held on 6 June and he said there was nothing on the Council website relating to it and it was felt that the Council was not taking seriously its responsibilities in relation to air quality.

People had made clear their concerns in relation to street trees but trees had not been saved, even though the Independent Tree Panel had recommended that many were saved. It was also felt that whilst many people had asked for trees to be saved and the Council had said that felling of trees would be as a last resort, trees were to be replaced without explanation or exception.  

He said that it was felt that trees were being removed to save annual maintenance costs for Amey and asked that in a written response it be confirmed that this was not the case and to supply the name of the councillor or officer that stated this. He also requested the reason as to why trees recommended for retention were to be replaced. People had been told that there were more trees in the area which were to be felled without formal notice and he asked, if the trees were declared healthy when the survey was completed, then why did these need to be removed now? Residents wished to begin a process of mediation with the Council and would welcome the Council to suggest a suitable process whilst halting any tree felling.  People wished to keep healthy mature street trees, which he said helped to mitigate the effects of air pollution and it was acknowledged that this might mean that there would not be perfect pavement surfaces.

The Council referred the petition to Councillor Bryan Lodge, Cabinet Member for Environment and Streetscene and to Councillor Jack Scott, Cabinet Member for Transport and Sustainability.

Councillor Bryan Lodge, the Cabinet Member for Environment and Streetscene, responded that a number of petitions had been considered by the Council in relation to street trees. The Council had statutory duties in relation to the highways and with regards to equalities legislation and this included such issues as safe pavements and inclusive mobility.  

He said that a scoping project with regard to the highways programme was undertaken in 2005 and an outline business case was also produced, which identified that large numbers of street trees would need to be replaced. Consideration had to be given to the future and long term benefit of work and it was acknowledged that there were views on both sides as to the replacement of street trees.  Councillor Lodge said that a written response to the petition would be provided.

Councillor Jack Scott stated that poor air quality was responsible for many deaths in the City and in the UK as a whole and it was also a social justice issue. It was clear that the Government needed to do more with regard to air quality. It was not correct to say that the replacement of trees had a significant effect on air quality in Sheffield. There were 4 million trees across the City and real solutions were needed to the problem of poor air quality. As an example, the Council had relocated a school on the basis of poor air quality. There were significant things which might be done with regards to vehicles, diesel engines and a scrappage scheme. The Council had given a commitment in relation to air quality and it was hoped that people’s energy could be harnessed towards improving air quality in the City.

8.2.2

Petition Requesting the Suspension of the Streets Ahead Contract on Health and Safety Grounds

The Council received a petition containing seven signatures, requesting the suspension of the Streets Ahead Contract on health and safety grounds.

Representations on behalf of the petitioners were made by Richard Davis who stated that the Council must be informed by Amey of any conviction relating to health and safety. He asserted that Amey had not informed the Council of a subsequent conviction and he asked why the Council had not enforced the terms of the Streets Ahead contract in that regard. He said that there would be termination clauses in the contract. He said there was evidence which supported the possibility of misconduct.

The Council referred the petition to Councillor Bryan Lodge, Cabinet Member for Environment and Streetscene. Councillor Lodge requested that, if there were further points in the presentation Mr Davis had made to Council and which were in addition to those he had already made in writing to the Council, that these be sent to him as Cabinet Member and he would make sure that they were passed on to the appropriate person and investigated. He may have already received responses to the points made in previous correspondence.

The Health and Safety Executive had investigated the issues previously raised by Mr Davis and had decided to take no further action. He referred to lost time injuries in relation to the Streets Ahead programme and to the policy of Amey with regard to accidents. If there were issues which require further investigation then action would be taken. Councillor Lodge said that a written response would be produced in relation to the petition.

8.2.3

Petition Requesting Traffic Calming Measures on Newman Road

The Council received a petition containing 80 signatures, requesting traffic calming measures on Newman Road. There was no speaker to the petition.

The Council referred the petition to Councillor Jack Scott, Cabinet Member for Transport and Sustainability.

8.2.4

Petition Supporting the Felling of Trees on Abbeyfield Road

The Council received a petition containing 32 signatures, supporting the felling of trees on Abbeyfield Road. There was no speaker to the petition.

The Council referred the petition to Councillor Bryan Lodge, Cabinet Member for Environment and Streetscene.

8.2.5

Petition Requesting Weight Restriction on Twentywell Lane, Prospect Road and Queen Victoria Road

The Council received a petition containing 112 signatures, requesting weight restrictions on Twentywell Lane, Prospect Road and Queen Victoria Road. There was no speaker to the petition.

The Council referred the petition to Councillor Jack Scott, Cabinet Member for Transport and Sustainability.

8.3

Questions

8.3.1

Public Question Concerning Tinsley Park

Adil Mohammed stated that when the school was built in Tinsley, there was a community user agreement and agreement to give the remainder of the Park protection by gaining trust status. He asked how far this matter had progressed.

Councillor Jackie Drayton, the Cabinet Member for Children, Young People and Families, stated that in relation to the community use, local councillors had been active with regard to the agreement to provide community activities for pupils at the school and for the community and there were classes and support for carers, although she did not have the details at this meeting.

Councillor Mary Lea, the Cabinet Member for Culture, Parks and Leisure, stated that the Tinsley Green and recreation ground had previously been in a poor condition and in 2003, a Surestart scheme was developed and there had been regeneration of the Park. Fields in Trust status for the Park was being pursued.

8.3.2

Public Questions Concerning Street Trees

Mark Banner asked why peaceful protesters, residents and bystanders were being intimidated with pre-injunction letters and the threat of the High Court and whether it was an attempt to stop legitimate opposition to free felling. He asked whether this demonstrated double-standards by the Council as it celebrated the mass trespass at Kinder Scout in 1932 and the right to roam.

He also referred to a process regarding a Councillor under the process relating to the Code of Conduct.

Dave Dillner stated that the Cabinet Member for Environment and Streetscene, Councillor Bryan Lodge had indicated that he would debate ecological, environmental and arboricultural issues on a public platform and he asked for this to now take place.

Councillor Bryan Lodge, the Cabinet Member for Environment and Streetscene, stated that there was a difference between peaceful protest and unlawful acts and whilst the Council was supportive of peaceful protest, in some cases people had trespassed inside the safety barriers. This presented a risk both to them and to the operatives on site. The Council was seeking individuals’ agreement not to step inside the safety zones. It was an individual’s decision whether they chose to ignore or challenge the matter in court. The Council had been faced with the decision, with regard to taking legal action due to the delays to the programme.

Councillor Lodge said that approximately six to eight percent of households objected as part of the surveys relating to proposals for street trees. The matter had also been tested in the court. Councillor Lodge said that he would not wish to see anyone arrested or stepping inside the safety barriers or in court. There had been support for the Streets Ahead programme from recent Council administrations to improve the highways in Sheffield. An Advisory Forum had also been set up and the issues relating to street trees had been debated in various places in the Council. Meetings had also been held with individuals and representatives of the Sheffield Tree Action Group. He would meet with members of the public and he had met with local councillors and residents in various wards in the City and would be pleased to meet again with the Sheffield Tree Action Group.

8.3.3

Public Question Concerning Legal Action   

Nigel Slack stated that the final destination on the Council's current track with respect to the tree campaigners could lead to actions for contempt of court. He said that this, in turn, could lead to people losing homes, businesses and personal belongings. It could also result in the bankrupting of pensioners and families with young children. He asked if the Council was willing, individually and collectively, to sanction such actions on its own residents.

Councillor Bryan Lodge, the Cabinet Member for Environment and Streetscene stated that the Council was asking people to sign an undertaking that they would cease from disrupting work. If they agreed to sign the undertaking, no further action would be taken. He said the Council supported peaceful protest. If an individual decided not to sign the undertaking, seek to persuade a Judge of the merits of their case or breach a safety zone, this was the decision of that individual and not the Council.  

8.3.4

Public Question Concerning Cladding on Tower Blocks   

Nigel Slack asked, if it is shown that the cladding on Sheffield tower blocks is not that originally specified would the Council’s legal team devote as much resource to and be as assiduous in pursuing the contractors and suppliers of the cladding for damages as they were with “peaceful protesters”; and will any Councillors or Council Officers be disciplined, if they are found to have been involved in such a change to specifications?

Councillor Jayne Dunn, the Cabinet Member for Neighbourhoods and Community Safety, stated that the issues relating to cladding on Tower Blocks would be considered by the relevant Scrutiny Committee. She did not wish to draw conclusions too early in relation to the change in specification of cladding material used on the Hanover Tower or to rush to conclusions about such matters as disciplinary action. There were a number of people involved, including building contractors. The issue would be investigated and appropriate action would be taken.

8.3.5

Public Question Concerning Streets Ahead Work

Nigel Slack stated that on the 15^th March 2017, he asked a question about what he believed to be the lack of care for vulnerable people exhibited by the Amey contract. He referred to an incident outside of his mother’s home which had left her without her telephone. He said that after a distressing week, she had a fall and an extensive stay in hospital and was now unable to leave her home independently. He quoted the minutes of the meeting, which stated that “Lessons would be learned from the incident reported by Mr Slack and Councillor Lodge would investigate the particular case further.”

Mr Slack said that, despite this, he had not had a response to the issue. He asked the following:  “Has any 'further investigation' begun; When will it report;

When will I hear something; and Why should I believe anything the Cabinet Member tells me?”

Councillor Bryan Lodge, the Cabinet Member for Environment and Streetscene responded and said that he was sorry to hear what had happened to Mr Slack’s mother regarding her fall. He had addressed the matter at the Cabinet meeting on 15 March and had said that Streets Ahead would do what they could. The issue relating to the telephone line was an issue for BT (British Telecommunications).  Utilities were not always located where they were said to be and occasionally, lines were broken. Utility companies usually had protocols for dealing with vulnerable people. The Council had reviewed related processes and both Amey and sub-contractors were aware of the procedures.   He urged other people to contact the Council if similar problems occurred and said that he would request the Head of Highways to respond to Mr Slack on the issues which he had raised.

8.3.6

Public Question Concerning Community Safety in Burngreave

Katun Elmi asked whether the Leader of the Council would visit Burngreave to meet with the community and especially with Somali mothers, to explain what the local Councillors and the Council were doing to stop violence in the area. She said that it seemed as if nothing was happening at present to make people feel safe on the streets of Burngreave.

Councillor Julie Dore, the Leader of the Council, said that she would gladly visit Burngreave to meet people. There were issues which had occurred in Burngreave and Spital Hill, which had been reported in the media. Action had been taken and she would ask Councillor Jayne Dunn and Councillor Jackie Drayton to also respond. 

Councillor Jayne Dunn, the Cabinet Member for Neighbourhoods and Community Safety, stated that community safety in Burngreave was a priority and that she met with the Police and Crime Commissioner in Burngreave and with her Cabinet Adviser. A Neighbourhood Police Officer was to be deployed in Burngreave. Further to this, Gill Furniss MP for Brightside and Hillsborough had called a meeting in relation to the issues in Burngreave.

Councillor Jackie Drayton referred to incidents which had occurred in Spital Hill, including breaking of shop windows, which had made local people frightened. Local Councillors had met with the Police and the Council’s Chief Executive with regard to action which might be taken. She had contacted local people including the mothers of Burngreave, Gill Furniss MP and the Assistant Police and Crime Commissioner and had done a walkabout to help reassure people. There would be Policing teams both in Burngreave and across the City as indicated by the Chief Constable when he attended the meeting of the City Council earlier in the year.

8.3.7

Public Question Concerning Streets Ahead Programme

Nick Jordan referred to an incident involving him and someone representing Amey and he said that the person photographed him and they had said that they found him to be aggressive. They had also indicated that they would not talk to him.

Councillor Bryan Lodge, the Cabinet Member for Environment and Streetscene, stated that he was sorry that Mr Jordan was faced with the situation that he had outlined in his question and if someone had been rude to him. He would expect people to behave respectfully, regardless of whether they were sub-contractors. He asked Mr Jordan to leave his contact details so that the matter could be investigated.

Councillor Julie Dore stated that people were encouraged to engage with the Council. She said that she was sorry that Mr Jordan had a negative experience. She said that contracts were complex matters and that certain services and projects were best delivered by the public sector and others by the private sector. However, the use of the Private Finance initiative was the only way to progress the Streets Ahead programme. Sub-contractors were allowed as part of the Streets Ahead contract, although those working on the programme should adhere to expected standards of behaviour. If a contractor was chosen from a different area of the country, such as Birmingham, that could not be stopped. The Council did, where possible, encourage ethical and locally based contracting and service provision.       

8.3.8

Public Question Concerning Provision for Homeless People

Chris Simpson asked what the Council was going to do about the night café for the homeless to access when there were no other services available and referred to the petition on this subject.

The question was to be addressed by the Cabinet Member as part of the debate on the petition to Council.

(Note: During this item of business, and under Council Procedure Rule 20, the Lord Mayor ordered the removal of a member of the public from the public gallery on the grounds that they had repeatedly interrupted the meeting and following several warnings as to their behaviour.)

8.4

Petition Requiring Debate

L.I.F.E. Petition to Open a Sheffield Night Shelter

The Council received a joint paper and electronic petition containing 5,463 signatures, requesting the Council to open a night shelter for the homeless.

The Council’s Petitions Scheme required that any petition containing over 5,000 signatures was the subject of debate at the Council meeting.  A qualifying petition was received as follows:-

“After being involved with the homeless and vulnerable situation for a full year on the ground doing outreach I've noticed that there is a huge hole within the safety net of our city to keep people protected from rough sleeping and who generally find themselves homeless without warning. L.I.F.E (a new beginning) was created for the general public to just come together and help others in need with Sheffield Tent City being at the forefront of providing overnight accommodation with food/clothes/supplies/outreach services/medical supplies & assistance etc.

What myself [the organiser of the petition] and volunteers from Sheffield and surrounding areas plan to do next is open a night shelter within Sheffield city centre where not one single person will find themselves in need of help ever again”.

Representations on behalf of the petitioners were made by Anthony Cunningham.

He stated that people were out on the streets perhaps because of mental health problems and issues including unemployment. He said that it appeared as though nothing was changing and things were generally getting worse for them.

He said that the provision of a night shelter would ease the tension, particularly at weekends. Street Pastors also needed a place to take people and people did not know where else they might go. The Tent City had been put in place but that could not be kept going. There was support available from organisations including Roundabout, Shelter, Crisis and the Archer Project. People were also coming to Sheffield from other places due to the housing crisis and trying to access help and support. People needed sanctuary. In some cases, people had come directly from prison and wished to access help. Services, such as at Howden House were not open over the weekend and people could not be expected to survive over the weekend period.

Whilst there were hostels and bed and breakfast accommodation, there were problems with existing provision, including security. A building had been identified for a night shelter but he had been informed it was not possible to establish a night shelter there. However, he said that a night shelter was required to bridge the gap between public services and charity provision. Services could be made available to meet the needs of people, including medical provision, mental health services, which Street Pastors, and the Police might also be able to access. He expressed concern that relevant organisations were not making progress and there were arguments concerning financial resources.   

In accordance with Council Procedure Rule 13.1(b), the Cabinet Member for Neighbourhoods and Community Safety, responded to the petition, following which the Shadow Cabinet Member for Neighbourhoods and Community Safety      spoke on the matter.

Councillor Jayne Dunn, the Cabinet Member for Neighbourhoods and Community Safety responded to the petition. She said that she acknowledged much of what was said in the petition and said that both she and Mr Cunningham had met in relation to the issue. Many people were vulnerable and were preyed upon by dealers, were exploited or involved in prostitution. There were also people on the streets that were not homeless but did sleep on the streets. There was provision for people in Sheffield but there was also an understanding that improvements were needed.

A successful bid had been made, which had resulted in additional financial resources in South Yorkshire to help to support people who were sleeping rough. The Housing First scheme was designed to provide housing related support for 10 people with complex needs and the wrap-around support that was needed.

Councillor Dunn stated that support was also available through the Help Us Help campaign and the Help Us Help website provided information on the support available to people that were on the street.  The Business Improvement District was also involved in the initiative. She recommended that City Councillors access the information on the Help Us Help website.    

A night shelter was not thought to be a solution to the issues facing people that were on the streets. The ‘Tent City’ was also something which had not provided a solution to the problems faced by people. The streets were not the right place for people and might serve only to worsen problems such as addiction.

Councillor Dunn thanked the petitioners and Mr Cunningham for submitting the petition. People could be housed and there was awareness that hostel provision also needed to be improved. The problems facing people sleeping rough and living on the streets were being looked at closely and from different perspectives. However, the Council would not be requesting that a night shelter be opened.

The Shadow Cabinet Member for Neighbourhoods and Community Safetythen spoke on the matter, following which Members of the City Council debated the matters raised by the petition, as summarised below:-

There was a significant amount of work being done by the Council and in the City in relation to people on the streets. The petitioner had presented his experiences and it was for the Council to listen to that and review the issue as perhaps there were things that were being missed.

The issue of rough sleepers was increasing in the UK. Support was provided locally by organisations including the Archer Project and people needed advice on a range of issues. It was thought that evidence based solutions would be most effective, such as the Housing First programme, which had been set up and funded by the Council. There were also issues to be considered relating to homelessness and LGBT (lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender) people.

Ex-service personnel and former prisoners had to be considered and people might not be able to access housing advice at Howden House at all times. There were buildings available which could be used to provide a place for rough sleepers to go and to access support from relevant agencies.

The issue of rough sleeping and people living on the street was a complex matter and the Council needed to continue to talk to people regarding their needs. St Wilfrid’s was to open a residential facility for people with a history of being  homeless or vulnerably housed.

Homelessness and rough sleeping were not the same things and people concerned were in crisis in their lives through various causes, including their mental health, substance abuse and relationship breakdown. There was not an easy way to categorise people in such circumstances. There had been an increase in the visible number of people who were homeless or on the streets and at the same time as government cuts. It was also difficult to deal with the considerable range of complex needs.

The representative of the petitioners, Anthony Cunningham, exercised a right of reply.  He referred to a young person whose parents were both addicts and the child had been forced to leave home. Whilst people turned to advice and support, there were also many people accessing services, including at Howden House, which dealt with 15,000 calls each month. Central Government also had an important role to perform in supporting people. He said that there were buildings which could potentially be used to help house people, such as at Park Hill. It was also important to continue to help people and to build communities.

Councillor Jayne Dunn, Cabinet Member for Neighbourhoods and Community Safety, responded to matters which were raised during the debate. She suggested that some Members might wish to receive a briefing by the Housing Team. It was right, she said, to keep the dialogue going and she asked for recognition that the recent changes in relation to homeless provision had only been in place for a couple of weeks. The Council would continue to monitor the issue and keep talking with people.

The outcome of the debate on the petition was as follows:-

Proposal 1

It was moved by Councillor Julie Dore and seconded by Councillor Jayne Dunn, that:

This Council notes the petition calling on the Council to open a Sheffield Night Shelter, and refers the petition to the Cabinet Member for Neighbourhoods and Community Safety to determine any further action and to continue to monitor the position regarding rough sleepers in the City.

Proposal 2

It was moved by Councillor Penny Baker and seconded by Councillor David Baker, that:

This Council notes the petition calling on the Council to open a Sheffield Night Shelter, and refers the petition to the Cabinet on the grounds that it affects various Cabinet portfolios.

On being put to the vote, alternative proposal 2 was not carried.

Proposal 1 was then put to the vote and carried as follows:-

RESOLVED: That this Council notes the petition calling on the Council to open a Sheffield Night Shelter, and refers the petition to the Cabinet Member for Neighbourhoods and Community Safety to determine any further action and to continue to monitor the position regarding rough sleepers in the City.