Agenda item

3.1

Petitions

3.1.1

Petition Requesting Traffic-Calming Measures on Myrtle Road

The Council received a petition containing 195 signatures, requesting traffic-calming measures on Myrtle Road.

Representations on behalf of the petitioners were made by Beverley Nunn who stated that the petition requested traffic calming measures on Myrtle Road. The road was steep and used by people to avoid traffic on East Bank Road. There were a high number of vehicles using Myrtle Road and particularly between 8.00 am and 9.00 am and which travelled at high speeds. There was, at present, a 30 mph speed limit. The petitioners requested that the speed limit was reduced to 20 mph. She said that a main concern was the junction with Anne’s Road, where the primary school was located and there was no safe place for children and parents to cross the road. Large vehicles often parked in the vicinity of the junction which also affected pedestrians attempting to cross safely. The petitioners wished for options to be considered including the installation of speed bumps and introduction of a one way road by closing the road at the top, to help deal with the speed of vehicles and possibly installation of lights. Whilst on Spencer Road there was a pedestrian crossing patrol and lights, there was now no such provision on Myrtle Road to help people to cross the road safely.

The Council referred the petition to Councillor Jack Scott, Cabinet Member for Transport and Development. Councillor Scott said he knew the strength of feeling both from what had been said and from conversations with the local councillors. He acknowledged the issues which had been referred to, both in terms of the volume and speed of traffic using Myrtle Road and also the location of the School and Heeley City Farm. He also noted the options which the petitioners had suggested to help resolve some of the problems, including speed, parking restrictions and a one-way system. The Council would need to take a rounded view of the best way to manage vehicles safely in that area. Councillor Scott said that a meeting would be arranged urgently, together with other community representatives and local councillors to consider what the options were and what might be done relatively quickly and also potentially in the future when time and resources permitted.

3.1.2

Petition Opposing the Introduction of Double Yellow Lines Outside King Edward Swimming Pool, Clarkehouse Road

The Council received a petition containing 594 signatures, opposing the introduction of double yellow lines outside King Edward Swimming Pool, Clarkehouse Road.

There was no speaker to the petition.

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

3.1.3

Petition Requesting the Abolition of the Lord Mayor

The Council received an electronic petition containing 47 signatures, requesting the abolition of the Lord Mayor.

There was no speaker to the petition.

The Council referred the petition to the Leader of the Council (Councillor Julie Dore).

3.1.4

Petition Requesting the Council to Keep Councillor Magid Magid as Mayor of Sheffield

The Council received an electronic petition containing 17,558 signatures, requesting the Council to keep Councillor Magid Magid as Mayor of Sheffield.

There was no speaker to the petition.

The Council referred the petition to the Leader of the Council, Councillor Julie Dore.

(Note: Whilst the number of signatures on the petition had reached the required threshold, the lead petitioner had waived the right to (a) speak to the petition and (b) have the petition debated by the Council).

The Council referred both of the petitions relating to the Lord Mayor to the Leader of the Council, Councillor Julie Dore. Councillor Dore stated that it was her understanding that there had been three petitions relating to the Lord Mayor. In addition to the two petitions submitted to this meeting, there had been an online petition which had indicated that, in the opinion of the petitioners, the Lord Mayor had acted inappropriately and not in accordance with their views. However, there had been some comments made on the online petition which she said were totally inappropriate and of a potentially racist nature. The petition in question had subsequently been removed. Council Dore said that as she understood it, the second of the two petitions submitted to Council at this meeting had been brought to counter that earlier and subsequently withdrawn online petition. 

Councillor Dore said that each Lord Mayor brought their own individual personality to the role of Lord Mayor both in terms of their perspective and priorities for their year in office. The Lord Mayor undertook both regular activities and engagements and also carried out their own additional activities.

Councillor Dore commented that she could not in recent times recall such a public and vocal debate about the role of Lord Mayor as was the case in the present Municipal Year. However, this had shown that for some, there appeared to be a lack of understanding of the role of Lord Mayor.

Councillor Dore proposed that the matter was referred to the Overview and Scrutiny Management Committee, with a request that the Committee examines how to raise the profile of the role of Lord Mayor and how to improve understanding of the role. As part of this exercise she said that it may be appropriate to examine and revisit relevant protocols which had developed over time and on a cross party basis.

The Lord Mayor had a role as first citizen of the City and to engage with people. As well as a wider understanding of the role of Lord Mayor, it was apparent that some groups and individuals were more aware of how to gain access to the Lord Mayor than others. She felt that such matters could be addressed so as to raise the profile of the role of Lord Mayor and their function as an ambassador for Sheffield acting for the benefit and in the interests of the City.

3.2

Public Questions

3.2.1

Public Question Concerning Serious Violent Crime

Saeed Brasab referred to incidents which had occurred in different parts of Sheffield and to the tragic death of Fahim Hersi, who grew up in Broomhall and accessed services at the Unity Gym and had later became a volunteer.

He asked what steps the Council intended to take in tackling the growing problem of violent crime and what new initiatives would be forthcoming and whether the Council would commit to working with community organisations and workers to address the growing community concerns relating to youth violence and knife crime.

He said that whilst the Council and Police had said that Sheffield was amongst the safest cities in the UK and, although that might be the case in some neighbourhoods, it was not so for some young people and particularly for deprived neighbourhoods like Broomhall. The successful public health approaches to knife crime elsewhere suggested that a new, holistic approach was required and he said that surely it was the time to try new ways of working together in order to safeguard young people, families and communities.

Councillor Julie Dore, the Leader of the Council, stated that gun and knife crime was a complex and serious issue for Sheffield. According to particular indicators and measures, Sheffield was considered to be one of the safest cities. However, that did not mean that violent crime did not affect certain communities nor that it was something to which the city should not respond in a serious manner. This was something which the Council did in partnership with other organisations, including the police and others, including stakeholders, particularly because the causes of crime were complex and there were many people and organisations involved which might address the issues collectively.

Councillor Jim Steinke was the Cabinet Member appointed to the Executive and Serious Organised Crime Board and, as Leader of the Council, she met regularly with the Police Chief Superintendent for Sheffield and the Police and Crime Commissioner. Ward Councillors would also have regular contact with policing arrangements in their locality to raise issues affecting the area. She commented that one of the Council meetings during the year was dedicated to the scrutiny of a particular matter. This normally took place in January and, in the past community safety was a matter that had been considered. She would recommend to the Overview and Scrutiny Management Committee that community safety be considered by Council at the January 2019 meeting. In addition, she would ask the Leaders of other political groups on the Council, together with the Lord Mayor and Whips to consider whether, at the next meeting of full Council, it would be appropriate to include an item to address to most current and serious issues relating to serious and organised crime. This was an issue which affected people, their families and communities and serious and organised crime was becoming more prevalent in the country as a whole and especially in cities. There were strategies in this regard, which Councillor Steinke would explain further.

Councillor Jim Steinke, the Cabinet Member for Neighbourhoods and Community Safety said that in relation to the joint approach that the Council was taking with the Police, there was a knife crime strategy which had been launched as a precursor to a wider organised violent crime strategy. The Serious Organised Crime Board would also be examining particular areas, which included Broomhall and would meet with community organisations and local councillors to explain what the Police were doing as part of the multi-agency approach and Operation Fortify, which was trying to address the issue of gangs and also to look at the ways in which communities might be supported where they had suffered directly or indirectly as a result of knife crime.

With regards to the approach which was being taken, this involved the Police, the Council and other agencies such as Sheffield Futures and was based on the Glasgow model, which had sought to and had successfully addressed knife crime to a point where, in 2017, there had not been a death from knife crime in Glasgow and which demonstrated that something could be done.

Both he and Councillor Jayne Dunn, the Cabinet Member for Education and Skills on behalf of the Council were leading work with the Police in order to work with schools and, for example, pupils in Year 7 with regard to the dangers of carrying a knife. Creative use of funding was also something which might be used to help support community organisations working in this area. He also commented that discussion of the matters at a meeting of full Council would be welcome.

There was also work to progress matters with the South Yorkshire Police and Crime Commissioner and local MPs. As regards the safer city approach, there was a need to look at the issue of serious violent crime objectively and he looked forward to meeting with Saeed Brasab and the organisations in the Broomhall community soon.

3.2.2

Public Question Concerning Right to Roam

Nigel Slack stated that a clause in right-to-roam legislation introduced in 2000 stated that any pre-1949 paths must be recorded by 2026 to continue to carry public rights. The Countryside and Rights of Way Act contained a provision that would extinguish those rights if the paths had not been properly recorded. Old footpaths and bridleways that are not recorded on the Council’s official Definitive Map of Rights of Way may cease to carry public rights.

He said that this may have particular issues for Sheffield, where there were potentially hundreds of urban alleys, gennels and cut-throughs, as well as meandering paths through some green spaces, that may not appear on the Council's official maps. He asked if there was a Council strategy to address this issue and, considering the lack of capacity within Council as a result of austerity cuts, was the Council working with any third sector organisations.

Councillor Jack Scott, the Cabinet Member for Transport and Development, stated that the 2000 Countryside Rights of Way Act represented an enduring commitment to people which enshrined a commitment to the right to roam. The Council would use the tools available under the Act to encourage the development of more public rights of way. It was however not without its controversies and the Council did receive applications from landowners to de-register permissive paths and public rights of way. He said that as Cabinet Member, he had not approved such a request and could not imagine a situation whereby a right of way would be removed. The Council did, however approve the re-routing of paths in some circumstances.

The Act had set a deadline of 2026 for historic or recorded rights of way not yet been determined by legally definitive maps. He understood that work would be completed by the 2026 deadline.  In addition, rights of way could also be recognised for non-historic reasons and it was most important to get the network of rights of way right in accordance with the Council’s ambition. The Council worked with partners, including the Sheffield Local Access Forum, the Ramblers Association and the British Horse Society to assess and determine any historic routes which might be added to the definitive list as part of the pathfinder project and this had resulted in some 400 additional routes being added in recent years and there were also a significant number of other potential additions.

There was not currently an up to date plan or strategy with regard to the approach to rights of way and permissive pathways and that was something which needed to be addressed.  He would be working with the Cabinet Members for Environment and Streetscene and Culture, Parks and Leisure in order to address issues relating to transport and active travel, street scene and land ownership and he believed that others would also wish to be involved in that work as well. He commented that rights of way were vital and precious and the Council would act to protect and enhance them in the future.

3.2.3

Public Question Concerning 'Loan Charge Law'

Nigel Slack asked what the Council's understanding was of the impact on Sheffield workers of the 'Loan Charge Law' of 2017, which he said would affect employees paid through 'Contractor Loan Schemes' created to help employers escape responsibility for National Insurance charges for those people they employed who were previously treated as contractors?

Secondly, he asked how many employees delivering public services in the City would be affected by this move of HMRC to collect on the tax avoidance by the individual employee, despite the fact that they often had no choice but to subscribe to these schemes if they wanted to take up or retain their jobs?

Thirdly, he asked if it was found that employees were delivering Council services, was there anything Council can do to help prevent them being made bankrupt and how would the Council deal with employers using the schemes to avoid National Insurance costs?

Councillor Olivia Blake, the Cabinet Member for Finance and Deputy Leader of the Council said that unfortunately, she did not have any detailed analysis that she was able to share with regards to this matter and she was not aware of any individual situations. However, she would respond to the question in writing when the information was made available to her by Council officers.  She commented that it was a disgraceful situation which some people may be facing and it would be treated in an appropriate way and in view of the available data.

3.2.4

Public Question Concerning Broad Lane Walk-in service

Nigel Slack commented in relation to the Notice of Motion on the agenda for this meeting concerning the Broad Lane walk –in service and said that whilst agreeing with the sentiment of the Motion, he was disappointed that the opportunity had been missed to urge that the Broad Lane Walk-in service be returned to real NHS control, rather than the private company, currently delivering the service under the NHS brand.

He asked whether there was an opportunity to amend the Motion to reflect that issue and for the Council and MPs etc. to campaign to prevent public money that should be spent on care being diverted to shareholders.

Councillor Chris Peace, the Cabinet Member for Health and Social Care, referred to the notice of motion at this meeting of Council regarding the walk-in centre. She stated that with regard to privatisation in the NHS, many contracts were let to private providers and in some cases, providers had taken action to sue the NHS when they did not get a contract. She commented that this situation was not sustainable and it was something which was also fuelled by the Health and Social Care Act 2012. She said that the extended market based approach to health care was not right and she did not wish to see a health service subject to fragmentation or privatisation.   The Council would actively seek to influence the health and social care agenda anywhere it could. The Council had a strong voice and the campaign concerning the urgent care review had demonstrated that it was possible to act together and take an active part and to put forward a message.

3.2.5

Public Question Concerning St Paul’s Tower

Nigel Slack asked whether for clarity the Council would comment on its understanding of the issues with the St Paul’s Tower. He asked what was the problem, what was the cause, what remedial action was taken and was any further action either needed or expected?

Councillor Jack Scott, the Cabinet Member for Transport and Development, stated that the Council had been alerted to potentially loose cladding which a resident had heard from the 31^st floor of the St Paul’s loft building, which it was thought was due to windy conditions. However, nothing had fallen from the building. Following an inspection, it was decided to declare an exclusion zone on Arundel Gate to the junction with Furnival Gate, which was in place until 12.45pm. A specialist abseiling team attended the site to secure the panel and inspect the surrounding area with the cooperation of the building owner and tenants.

He apologised for the inconvenience caused to people by the closure of the road and the impact on people travelling to work and public transport. Further work would be undertaken on St Pauls Tower in the near future to check that this was not a wider issue. At this time, he understood that this related to a single pane which had become slightly loose and caused noise which a tenant had heard outside of their window. He said that further updates would be provided as necessary and he wanted to reassure people, once the further work was complete and an assessment had been done.

3.2.6

Public Question Concerning Social Media

Dave Dillner referred to the reputation of the Council and he asked the Leader of the Council to remind Councillors that when posting social media comments on sensitive matters, what was said did reflect poorly on the Council, despite declarations stating that what was said was a personal opinion.

Councillor Julie Dore, the Leader of the Council, said that she would be pleased to remind Councillors that posts on social media and particularly on a sensitive and emotive matter, could and did reflect poorly on the Council.

3.2.7

Public Question Concerning Nether Edge Hospital

Natasha Boyd asked a question concerning the Michael Carlisle Centre, Nether Edge. She said that there were families living in the area and that there were issues with regard to road safety. The Michael Carlisle Centre was a mental health institution. She believed that the Centre was providing inadequate care to some patients. There were indications of violence against women and drugs related issues. She said that she would strongly advise the Council to look at what was happening at the Nether Edge Hospital and the health and safety concerns in the Nether Edge Ward. She said that the Council should look at this as a matter of urgency.

Councillor Chris Peace, the Cabinet Member for Health and Social Care responded that she would provide a written response to the matters that had been raised. She said that the issues that had been raised were of great concern to the Council and there was a need to know what was happening and for the Council to influence matters, although it might not have direct control of certain issues. She gave an assurance that she would look at the matters that had been raised in the question.

Councillor Peace said that it would also be helpful to meet with Natasha Boyd and to discuss matters further.

3.2.8

Public Question Concerning European Union

Neill Schofield made reference to polling by YouGov during the summer, which had shown that there had been movement in a number of Sheffield constituencies to people who wanted to remain in the European Union. He said that (in reference to the poll) Sheffield Brightside and Hillsborough and Sheffield Heeley were both ‘remain’ constituencies. He asked what the Council was doing to reflect that in its contact with MPs and with outside organisations. He asked whether it would be possible to bring forward the consideration of this item of business on the agenda for this meeting.

Councillor Julie Dore, the Leader of the Council, responded that there were a number of amendments to the notice of motion on the subject of Brexit and the position of each political party represented on the Council was set out in the motion and amendments, a copy of which could be made available to Mr Schofield. She said that she did not wish to pre-empt the debate, which would take place at this meeting. The Council would vote on the issue and arrive at an outcome. She invited people to stay and listen to the debate.

3.2.9

Public Question Concerning It’s Our City Campaign

Kaltun Elmi asked how the changes proposed by It’s Our City were likely to be funded and why that group was insisting it was not political when she said it had campaigned on behalf of six candidates in the last Local Elections.

Councillor Julie Dore, the Leader of the Council stated that she was not able to answer the question of whether the It’s Our City group was political or not. However, the group had submitted a question to Council in September 2018. She commented that the It’s Our City website did present the group as semi-political, but she was not certain as to whether the group considered itself political or not. There were such issues as campaigning and electioneering literature to be considered as these needed to be within permitted election expenses.

As regards the proposed changes to governance, if the Council wanted to consider changing its governance arrangements, it would require a major conversation with all stakeholders in the City. There were nearly 600,000 people in the City and consideration would need to be given as to how peoples’ views might be canvassed and obtained. The Council would have to fund any change and, as part of the assessment of options around governance structures, it would have to take into account any additional costs. Moving to a committee model of governance may incur additional cost and this would need to be considered in the context of the Council’s budget. Consideration would also need to be given as to whether a change of governance was a priority for the Council as set against other issues such as social care.

3.2.10

Public Question Concerning Selective Licensing

Kaltun Elmi asked with regard to Page Hall Selective Licensing, which was to end in 2019, whether it could be confirmed that the scheme would be extended to other streets in the area and how the ongoing problems with some properties and as regards overcrowding could be addressed. She also asked for confirmation of any other areas of the City where Selective Licensing was being considered.

Councillor Jim Steinke, the Cabinet Member for Neighbourhoods and Community Safety, responded to the questions. He referred to the problems which occurred at Fir Vale School, which had been resolved in terms of the immediate issues within the school. There were issues relating to cohesion in the area, which he, the Chief Executive and others had examined in a recent meeting in order to address the situation.

He said that it was recognised that with the Selective Licensing scheme coming to an end there were issues to address. Selective Licensing had been successful in Page Hall. However, there were clearly issues which had not been addressed and it was also important that improvements do not get lost and lessons were learnt so that things were done better in the future.  There was a need to look at the potential to widen some of the benefits of Selective Licensing beyond the streets that were within the Selective Licensing schemes at present.

Councillor Steinke said that the Selective Licensing model was very prescriptive and it had to be self-funding. A change of Government policy was required and the Council was seeking to put pressure on the Government to make policy changes. The Council had also looked at other local authorities with regard to licensing schemes which may be broader than the strict criteria of Selective Licensing.

He also said that, ideally, all private sector housing would be licensed. He made reference to the potential to use some of the Housing Revenue Account more creatively.

London Road, Abbeydale Road and Chesterfield Road were to have Selective Licensing schemes in November 2018. Landlords were currently required to register for those schemes.

Selective Licensing did seek to address a range of issues, including health and safety and fire safety, benefit fraud, overcrowding, poor quality housing, and issues relating to immigration and trafficking.

3.2.11

Public Question Concerning Ethical Procurement

Alan Story made reference to the ethical procurement policy which had been adopted by the Council, which required that companies with which the Council had contracts must pay tax, be tax compliant and operate transparently. He asked if this was the Council’s policy, why it was not applied to the Streets Ahead Private Finance Initiative.

Councillor Olivia Blake, the Cabinet Member for Finance and Deputy Leader of the Council, said that the ethical procurement policy was a robust policy and one which was leading the way in local government procurement and commissioning. The policy covered a range of issues not only including tax avoidance and tax evasion but issues such as grave misconduct and where the Council could use discretion to exclude firms and it sought clarity in relation to supply chains, values and ethics.

The Council also wanted more public sector bodies to adopt a similar approach to ethical procurement and would have discussions with partner organisations in the City. She commented that she did not believe that the Government had gone far enough in addressing the issue at a national level.

Councillor Blake said that the policy was agreed in March 2018 and was not in place when the Streets Ahead contract was arranged and signed. Therefore the processes within the policy including the pre-qualification questionnaire and the code of conduct were not in place at that time. The ethical procurement policy was future facing and not something which could be pushed back in time. However, the ethical procurement policy did demonstrate the direction that the Council wished to take. The Council would always hold contractors to account and continue to ensure that the policy and its social values were promoted and applied in relation to future commissioning and procurement.

3.2.12

Public Question Concerning Leaving the European Union

Stephen Porter referred to research as regards the effect on business of leaving the European Union (EU) and asked what the Council could do to ensure that retail, academic, manufacturing industries were made aware and safeguarded from the negative effects of Brexit?

Councillor Julie Dore, the Leader of the Council, said that she agreed with the research which had concluded that the impact on Britain of leaving the EU would be damaging not only to industry but to people’s lives. She also referred to the benefits of European legislation.

An assessment was being carried out as to the impact of Brexit on the Council and the continuity in providing Council services, including supplies and the workforce and matters which directly affected the Council. The Chamber of Commerce and Local Enterprise Partnership (LEP) were looking at work on the actual impact on industry and the sectors of industry mentioned in the question were also doing impact assessments.

The problem was that there was no certainty as to how Britain would leave the EU, if at all, which meant that it was problematic to undertake any assessment or analysis. She said that she believed that whatever deal was concluded, things would be worse than they were at present. The Council was continuing to engage with the LEP and other organisations, including the Chamber of Commerce, the Cutlers Association and Business Advisory Panel and through Creative Sheffield and Council’s economic team. She hoped that collectively, the City would be as prepared as it could be.

3.2.13

Public Question Concerning Webcasting

Mr A Benson asked why Sheffield was the only Council Chamber in South Yorkshire with no facility for webcasting and similarly with facility to webcast its Scrutiny Committees.

Councillor Olivia Blake, the Cabinet Member for Finance and Deputy Leader of the Council, said that she was acutely aware that the Council did not have webcasting facilities in place at this time. The Council was currently conducting a review of how it might achieve this. A consideration was the number of potential hours to be webcast and the cost. The Council was committed to podcasting or webcasting in a cost effective way and was considering options, including in-house solutions. People would also be aware that the audio equipment in the Council Chamber also needed to be looked at.