Agenda item

4.1

Petitions

4.1.1

Petition Regarding Changes to Bus Services in Tinsley

The Council received a joint electronic and paper petition containing 41 signatures, regarding changes to bus services in Tinsley.

Representations on behalf of the petitioners were made by Ishaq Mohammed. He informed the Council that people would become cut off by reducing and re-routing bus services from September and people of all ages would be affected by a lack of bus services to get them to their place of work, school or college, shopping facilities or enable them to visit family and friends.

The Council referred the petition to Councillor Mazher Iqbal, the Cabinet Member for Infrastructure and Transport. Councillor Iqbal stated that the Council did not run bus services, which were operated by private companies. However, the Council was part of a bus partnership. Changes to bus services had affected a number of neighbourhoods in the City.

The Economic and Environmental Wellbeing Scrutiny Committee had, at its meeting in July, undertaken a review of the Bus Partnership and representatives of the bus operating companies had taken part in that exercise to explain the changes to services. He said that he had also raised issues relating to bus services in Tinsley as the local Councillor and First Bus had agreed to arrange a travel workshop for residents, and people had been informed of this by leaflets delivered to each household. First Bus had been requested to consider putting in place a shuttle service. He said that he would write to Mr Mohammed to inform him of the outcome of that request.

4.1.2

Petition Requesting Traffic Calming Measures on Selborne Road

The Council received a petition containing 204 signatures requesting the implementation of traffic calming measures on Selborne Road.

Representations on behalf of the petitioners were made Carole Hanson. She stated that tragically, a pedestrian had died on the zebra crossing at the top of Selborne Road in June 2016. There was concern that there would be more accidents in future and that as a priority, there should be action to prevent further incidents. Delivery vehicles requiring access to local shops meant that pedestrians had a restricted view when attempting to cross the road and with the opening of a Tesco store, the amount of traffic had increased and there were more vehicles parking on the road. Buses also used Selborne Road and it was also thought that people using satellite navigation had led to an increase in those using the route as a short cut.  Pedestrians often stepped out into the road so they had a clear view beyond parked vehicles and were able to cross the road which was potentially dangerous. The City Council was requested to consider implementing traffic calming, the creation of a one way system and introduction of a speed limit of 20 mph.

The Council referred the petition to Councillor Mazher Iqbal, the Cabinet Member for Infrastructure and Transport. Council Iqbal stated that he was most concerned about the issues which the petitioners raised with regard to road safety. He had met with local Councillors and it had been agreed that a meeting be held in Crosspool to look at matters further. He said that there had been significant reductions to the Council’s budget in the past 6 years and that in turn had contributed to pressures on the road safety budget. He would investigate the concerns which the petition had raised and provide a written response.

4.1.3

Petition Regarding a Public Space Protection Order Relating to the  Alley between Ainsty Road and South View Crescent

The Council received an electronic petition containing 13 signatures requesting the Council to consult with residents to apply for a Public Space Protection Order to the alley between Ainsty Road and South View Crescent.

Representations on behalf of the petitioners were made John Taylor. He stated that the alley between Ainsty Road and South View Crescent was not well used as a public right of way although it provided access for residents to their homes. The alley was long and secluded with hidden areas where it curved and it was therefore difficult to see what was ahead, despite improvements to lighting. It was also a location subject to anti-social behaviour, including smoking, damage to gates, vandalism and litter as well as incidents of verbal abuse directed towards residents. It was difficult to identify individual perpetrators, although they were thought to be young people.  There were a lot of families living in the area and children played outside. People were concerned about the amount of rubbish which was left in the alley, which local residents cleared up themselves.

The petitioners requested that gates be erected at the entrances to the alley, to limit public access, except for residents, as a measure to prevent anti-social behaviour in the alley.

The Council referred the petition to Councillor Jayne Dunn, the Cabinet Member for Housing. Councillor Dunn stated that she had empathy with the petitioners due to the problems they were experiencing. She said that because of the Council’s budgetary position, it had to be certain that it was using resources correctly. She urged people affected to collect evidence of anti-social behaviour with the support of local councillors and the police and to report incidents. Evidence would help to support a decision as to what action to take and with regard to potential funding. 

4.1.4

Petition Regarding the Cleanliness of Streets in Darnall

The Council received a petition containing 51 signatures requesting action in relation to the cleanliness of streets in Darnall.

Representations on behalf of the petitioners were made by Janab Ali. He referred in particular to concerns with regard to the cleanliness of roads and backyards on Nidd Road, Ouse Road, Ouseburn Street, Swarcliffe Road and Staniforth Road. He said that although the Council had promised to clean the streets, this had not happened, people felt ignored and the situation had worsened. Many residents were upset about the occurrence of litter and dirt on the streets and the effect both on them and visitors to the area. It was of particular concern that some members of the community left rubbish including glass, takeaway containers and large furniture items. He said that people expected that the Council should support people in the community and teach others how to dispose of waste items in the right way.

The Council referred the petition to Councillor Bryan Lodge, the Cabinet Member for Environment. Councillor Lodge said that he was sorry that people felt ignored. The Tinsley area was receiving cleansing at a similar frequency to other areas in the City.

There were other similar reports of waste items such as fridges and take away containers being left as the petitioners had referred to in relation to Tinsley. Each month, the Council cleared 1000 tonnes of street rubbish. Councillor Lodge said that this was clearly not acceptable and it was an offence to drop litter. There was an instant penalty for littering and the Council issued fixed penalty notices to people caught dropping litter.  If people did not pay the fine, the Council would take them to Court.

Work was being undertaken with local people, Veolia, schools, businesses and Streets Ahead (Amey) in relation to the problems associated with litter and rubbish. Darnall Environmental Group also worked with schools and businesses. Councillor Lodge said that he would meet with the petitioners to see what could be done. He said that littering was anti-social and was both avoidable and unacceptable.

4.1.5

Petition Requesting the Council to Consider Accepting Child Refugees from Calais

The Council received a petition containing 185 signatures, requesting the Council to consider accepting child refugees from Calais.

Representations on behalf of the petitioners were made by Mike Reynolds. Mr Reynolds stated that in Calais there were approximately 600 unaccompanied asylum seeking children. 300 had relatives in the UK and there was a moral case for them to be reunited with their family. A further 300 children did not have family in the UK. Conditions in the camp in Calais or ‘the Jungle’ as it had become known were, he said, appalling and children were living in inacceptable conditions and in danger from trafficking.

There was a tradition in Sheffield of showing compassion and of welcoming strangers and the City had done so with several groups of refugees and asylum seekers over time. Sheffield was the first City of Sanctuary and the petition appealed to that tradition of compassionate concern for the vulnerable.

The Council was requested to bring a notice of motion to the Council meeting in October, urging local Members of Parliament to use their influence with the Government, from which resources and direction was needed. The Council was also asked to indicate that it would be willing to participate by receiving some of the children who were unaccompanied asylum seekers; and thirdly, the Council was requested to lobby the Government directly on behalf of those children.

The Council referred the petition to Councillor Jackie Drayton, the Cabinet Member for Children, Young People and Families. Councillor Drayton stated that many people would have seen reports in the media concerning conditions in Calais affecting families, adults and children. She knew people who had personally taken humanitarian aid to the camp.

Sheffield did have a history of giving sanctuary and was the first City of Sanctuary and one of the first local authorities to be part of the Gateway programme for refugees. More recently, Kent and Medway local authorities had responded to the large number of unaccompanied asylum seeking children by asking for other local authorities to help by taking those children and caring for them as looked after children. Sheffield City Council had responded straight away and said that it would meet with the two relevant Government Ministers to discuss the issue and the suggestion that quotas be used so local authorities were compelled to accept a number of children.

Councillor Drayton said that the City Council made a case for work to take place on a regional basis, instead of using individual quotas. It was most important to have the resources required to nurture and care for the children and young people. The context was significant cuts to the budget for children, young people and families. The Government would need to provide appropriate resources, including for housing, health, education and language skills. There were not, at this time, enough placements across the UK for the young people. Neither were there enough foster carers or accommodation to enable placement in residential homes, so further resources were required so that placements could be provided which served to protect the children and young people.

Councillor Drayton said that, in Sheffield, there were at present 28 unaccompanied asylum seeking children who were under 18 years old and 14 who were over 18 or care leavers. One young person had come from Kent to Sheffield but the family were not able to look after them and the child was now looked after by the Council. Councillor Drayton said that she believed Sheffield was doing over and above what was required of it and the Council would continue to lobby the Government and to work with other organisations, including Migration Yorkshire, the Home Office and the Department for Education. She hoped that the petitioners felt that the Council was supportive with regard to unaccompanied asylum seeking children.

4.2

Public Questions

4.2.1

Public Question Concerning Orgreave Truth and Justice Campaign

Barbara Jackson on behalf of Orgreave Truth and Justice Campaign, thanked the Council for its support in relation to the call for a public inquiry into the conduct of the Police at the Orgreave coking plant on 18 June 1984. The Council had resolved on two occasions to support the campaign and had done so in writing to the Home Secretary.

The campaign had met with Rt Hon Theresa May MP, the then Home Secretary, last summer and submitted a detailed legal submission to the Home Office in December 2015. They were due to meet with the new Home Secretary, Rt Hon Amber Rudd MP on 13 September 2016.

She asked the Council to write to the Home Secretary renewing its support for the campaign and asking her to order an inquiry into Orgreave.

Councillor Julie Dore, the Leader of the Council, responded to the question and thanked Barbara Jackson for bringing the issue to the Council. She agreed that it was necessary to continue to lobby for an inquiry into the events which took place at Orgreave in 1984. The Council had been clear about its position on this matter and had fully supported a public inquiry. Notices of Motion had been given by the late Councillor Harry Harpham in July 2014 and by Councillor Chris Peace in July 2015, both seconded by Councillor Terry Fox.

Councillor Dore stated that she would write to the Home Secretary on behalf of the Council. She said that the Police and Crime Commissioner was also in conversation with the Home Office in this regard and she commented on the actions of the former Home Secretary, Rt Hon Teresa May MP with regard to this particular issue. Councillor Dore said the potential for an inquiry was promising and wished the campaign well.

4.2.2

Public Questions Concerning Devolution

Nigel Slack referred to the departure of the former Chancellor, Rt Hon George Osbourne MP and the appointment of a new Secretary of State in the Department of Communities and Local Government and commented that there appeared to be a hiatus in the progress of devolution. He said that neither the City nor City Region seemed to know how the European Union Referendum result would impact on the deal and he referred to the fact that Derbyshire County Council was challenging the decision making process of Chesterfield to become a core member of the City Region.

He asked, bearing in mind that an appropriate geography for the City region was one of the City Council's 'red line' issues, if Chesterfield dropped out of the core membership, will the City review its decision on the devolution deal?

Councillor Julie Dore, the Leader of the Council responded that she had also responded to a written Members Question on this subject and the stance of a new Government as regards devolution. Whilst there was speculation, the Government’s position had not changed, as far as the Council was aware. The consultation relating to the devolution deal had been completed and the City Region was proceeding with submission of the scheme for the approval of the Secretary of State and then progression of the Order through Parliament. If there was a change, there would be further consultation.

There would be a review if a local authority pulled out of the deal and similarly, the Council would review its position if there were any further changes prior to the laying down of the Order in Parliament. The Leaders of the City Region were to meet with Government Ministers. The Mayoral Order was still a requirement before any funding could be drawn down. 

Councillor Dore said that, if there were any changes, the Council would review the matter.

4.2.3

Public Questions Concerning Freedom of Information

Nigel Slack asked whether in light of the recent comments of the Information Commissioner supporting the inclusion of private companies in the Freedom of Information Act and opposing the excuse of 'commercial sensitivity', will the Council include adherence to the principles of the Act in future outsourcing contracts.

Councillor Ben Curran, the Cabinet Member for Finance and Resources, replied that he supported the idea of the Council’s contractors being subject to the Freedom of Information Act. At present, the Council applied the Act as far as it was able to in respect of companies with which it had a contractual relationship. However, the issue of commercial interests still applied at this time.

4.2.4

Public Questions Concerning Fracking

Nigel Slack stated that there were rumours on social media about seismic testing coming to Sheffield, as part of precursor plans for fracking within the City boundaries. He asked whether the Council could give the latest news on any contacts from potential fracking companies or their contractors, as well as the current policy of the Council to the potential for fracking in the City.

Councillor Mazher Iqbal, the Cabinet Member for Infrastructure and Transport, responded and stated that he had not seen anything on social media regarding fracking and asked Mr Slack to forward the relevant information to him. He said that a Notice of Motion had been given at the Council meeting in September 2013 regarding fracking. The Government had issued licenses for the right to explore sites for shale oil and gas in the UK, including in the Sheffield City Region.

He said that the Government had continued to ignore local authorities and local communities. There was no consultation when licenses were issued. 28 days’ notice had to be given to the local authority of any exploration. He said that it was appalling that communities could be treated in this way and the only obligation on those who had obtained a licence was to inform the relevant local authority. Councillor Iqbal stated that he would write to the Government regarding licenses and consultation with individuals and communities.

4.2.5

Public Questions Concerning Trees on Tinker Lane

Nigel Slack referred to the felling of a number of live, healthy and immature trees, as part of what residents were advised was, tree and verge maintenance on Tinker Lane. He asked if the Council would clarify at what point “...prune the trees and cut back the verges...” became felling of healthy trees that show no evidence of damaging the road; was Amey’s arboreal expert consulted; and was Council aware of the plan to fell the trees rather than to prune them?

Councillor Bryan Lodge, the Cabinet Member for Environment, responded that he had spoken with relevant Council officers and they would investigate this matter further. He would write to Mr Slack with the outcome in response to his questions.

4.2.6

Public Questions Concerning Ferrovial, Parent Company of Amey

Dave Dilner referred to recent publicity concerning Australian detention camps housing asylum seekers and run by Ferrovial, the parent company of Amey. He asked whether the Council considered this company to be a fit and proper business partners and what steps will be taken towards communicating the Council’s views on this matter to Amey and Ferrovial. He asked if the Council would join him in deploring what he alleged was “their involvement in human suffering and misery in the pursuit of profit.”

Councillor Bryan Lodge, the Cabinet Member for Environment, responded and confirmed that Ferrovial was the parent company of Amey. The Council entered into a contract with Amey in 2012. A company named Broadspectrum was contracted in 2014 to run the detention camps to which Mr Dilner had referred. Councillor Lodge said that he agreed with comments concerning the unacceptable conditions for those people who had been held in the camps.

He understood that Ferrovial had since bought Broadspectrum and had stated that they would not tender to renew the contract to run the detention camps beyond the term of the contract. The Australian government had also said that they would close the camps. Broadspectrum had entered into the contract to run the detention camps in 2014 and before they were acquired by Ferrovial.

Councillor Lodge stated that he had made enquiries to Amey about this matter.

4.2.7

Public Questions Concerning Street Works

Dave Dilner asked when Amey would be held to account and penalised for delays to street works and what he alleged were daily abuses of National Joint Utilities Group (NJUG) Regulations and BS (British Standards) standards of working practice.

Councillor Bryan Lodge, the Cabinet Member for Environment, stated that in relation to delays to street works, Amey were held to account and penalties were applied as appropriate. He said that the Council was grateful to members of the public when they submitted photographs to evidence concerns relating to the performance of Amey. The Council also penalised Amey with regard to any breach of regulations or code of conduct and relevant clauses within the contract would be applied. Whilst the penalties applied by the Council amounted to substantial sums, the detail was not published because it was classed as commercially sensitive.

Councillor Lodge said that the core investment period of the Streets Ahead programme was to end in 2017 and it needed to be brought back on schedule. Works carried out as part of the programme were inspected and were the subject of reporting to him as the Cabinet Member.