Agenda item

Public Questions and Petitions

To receive any questions or petitions from members of the public

Minutes:

5.1

Public Question in respect of Devolution

 

 

5.1.1

Nigel Slack commented that, with Chesterfield and Bassetlaw withdrawing their applications to join the City Region ‘Constituent’ Councils and with Barnsley and Doncaster considering a ‘Whole Yorkshire’ devolution approach, where does that leave the current Sheffield City Region deal? Will it go ahead now, in the form originally envisaged in 2014? What of the Council’s commitment to a ‘geographically appropriate’ deal? With both major parties apparently committed to dropping ‘Mayors’ for future deals, will we still be electing a Mayor for the City Region in 2018? The Sheffield City Region Combined Authority meeting on July 3rd appears to have disappeared. Why is that?

 

 

5.1.2

The Leader of the Council, Councillor Julie Dore, commented that there had been a meeting scheduled for 3rd July to discuss devolution. As the issue needed further clarification the meeting had been cancelled. This would allow time for officers to further discuss the issue with the Government and report back to the Combined Authority.

 

 

5.2

Public Question in respect of Park Tennis Contract

 

 

5.2.1

Nigel Slack raised a concern in respect of the Park Tennis CIC contract. Despite the potential benefits of the contract he asked ‘Was there no Sheffield or City region organisation (rather than Oxford) able to offer a similar proposal? Did the Council consider a local solution of any other type? How much of the contract price will disappear to Oxford in ‘Management Fees’ or Director’s Emoluments?

 

 

5.2.2

Councillor Mary Lea, Cabinet Member for Culture, Parks and Leisure, responded that the sites will still be owned by SCC as landlord – Parks Tennis CIC will simply operate them. Parks Tennis CIC would have to submit monthly reports to the Council which would be subject to Freedom of Information Legislation. The contract was advertised on YORtender and no other applications were received. It was not cost effective for the Council to operate. The contractor was a not for profit company. Any profit was reinvested in sites. The contractor did not make any payments to the Council and they had responsibility for maintaining the sites.

 

 

5.3

Public Question in respect of the Mental Health Action Group

 

 

5.3.1

Nigel Slack commented that, the last time a representative of the Mental Health Action Group attended Cabinet, he was publically assuaged by suggestions that an application to continue that funding would be looked on favourably. What happened? Is the Council providing any support to the Mental Health Action Group team in their crowd funding attempt?

 

 

5.3.2

Councillor Cate McDonald, Cabinet Member for Health and Social Care, responded that not all applicants were able to be informed of the outcome. However, the Council would continue to provide support to the Mental Health Action Group.

 

 

5.4

Public Question in respect of Tower Blocks

 

 

5.4.1

Nigel Slack commented that, after the tragedy in Kensington, he was encouraged by the statement put out by the Council in regards to fire safety in the City’s tower blocks. However further questions needed to be considered. Who implemented the improvements in Sheffield (company)? What sub-contractors were used? Were insulation panels independently checked before, during or after fitting? Chancellor of the Exchequer, Phillip Hammond suggests potential illegality on behalf of the contractors, can we be confident this is not the case here? What are the blocks’ status with respect to sprinklers, extinguishers, fire stairs etc? Will the fire service report be made public?

 

 

5.4.2

Councillor Jayne Dunn, Cabinet Member for Neighbourhoods and Community Safety, responded that she would provide a written response to Mr Slack’s questions.

 

 

5.5

Public Question in respect of Hyperloop Technology

 

 

5.5.1

Nigel Slack stated that Hyperloop transport technology was being developed. This was a technology that enabled capsules to travel at ground level at aircraft speeds and would give travel time to London of around 20 minutes. Three schemes in the UK had been successful in getting to the last round of the ‘Hyperloop One Challenge’, with the potential for any of these to be one of the first in the world. Mr Slack asked where Sheffield was in this conversation?

 

 

5.5.2

Would the Cabinet Member for Business and Investment agree to meet with Mr Slack and the individual who tried to push this idea for Sheffield to see if something could be done to rescue some level of involvement for the City in these schemes?

 

 

5.5.3

Councillor Mazher Iqbal, Cabinet Member for Business and Investment, responded that the bidding process for potential hyperloop schemes required a lot of detailed, technical information that needed to be provided in a short space of time, which we simply did not have. Councillor Iqbal would be happy to meet with Mr Slack  to discuss these issues further.

 

 

5.5.4

Councillor Julie Dore commented that the City needed credible not incredible transport schemes. The focus should be on HS2 and HS3. She would be happy to meet to discuss the issue but it was not a priority for the Council. Transport for the North would be interested in the Northern Arc if it was a success. The issue had been raised at the Business Adviser Panel and the Council would keep a watching brief.