Agenda item

4.1

The Lord Mayor (Councillor Tony Downing) reported that one petition and questions from six members of the public had been received prior to the published deadline for submission of petitions and questions for this meeting.  He added that one of the questioners was now not able to attend the meeting, and, in view of the pressure on time, he would arrange for a written answer to be provided to the questioner as an alternative to dealing with it in this meeting.

4.2

Petitions

4.2.1

Petition Regarding Provision Of Free School Meal Vouchers

The Council received a petition containing 975 signatures and concerning the provision of free school meal vouchers.

Representations on behalf of the petitioners were made by Kurtis Crossland. Mr Crossland said there were twenty thousand children in Sheffield who depended on free school meals. He referred to the Council’s October half term voucher scheme and the announcement that there would also be provision for free school meals during the Christmas holiday, which he said was very good news for anyone that depended upon free school meals. He said that some mistakes did occur in relation to the provision of vouchers in the October half term and he asked the Council to reassure people in that regard.

The Council referred the petition to Councillor Julie Dore, the Leader of the Council. Councillor Dore thanked Mr Crossland for presenting the petition and said that the Council had made the decision to provide free school meal vouchers in the Christmas holidays, following the decision to fund free school meal vouchers during the October half term and this was announced in the last week. She said that it was hoped that the Government would change its approach and listen to people to provide food to those most in need and especially during the Coronavirus pandemic and as a result of the economic effects of the pandemic upon jobs and wages. Councillor Dore referred to the negative effects on those families of coalition government austerity policies and welfare reform.

4.3

Public Questions

4.3.1

Public Question Concerning Crossing on Station Road, Halfway

Kurtis Crossland made reference to the provision of a pedestrian crossing on Station Road, Halfway and asked when construction was expected to start.

Councillor Bob Johnson, the Cabinet Member for Transport and Development, responded that timescales were difficult to estimate. There would be a consultation regarding the scheme and people would be made aware when that consultation was to begin.

4.3.2

Public Question Concerning Housing Offices

Sophie Thornton asked whether the Council still intended to reduce the number of housing offices and, if so, which ones were being considered for closure.

Councillor Paul Wood, the Cabinet Member for Neighbourhoods and Community Safety, stated that the Council was considering how it delivered the housing offices services. No final decisions had been made and there would be consultation with Tenants and Residents Associations prior to any decisions being taken. This would not take place immediately and was delayed because of the Coronavirus pandemic.

4.3.3

Public Question Concerning Garage Fly-tipping

Sophie Thornton said that following her question to Council in October, she had received a reply confirming that the garage site on Gervase Avenue had been tidied and the garage doors closed over the remaining fly-tipping. She asked the Council to reconsider its approach and clean out the garages to remove the remaining rubbish.

Councillor Paul Wood, the Cabinet Member for Neighbourhoods and Community Safety, responded that he would take the matter up with the relevant service on behalf of Sophie Thornton to make sure the situation relating to the garages was dealt with correctly.

4.3.4

Public Questions Concerning Streets Ahead and Street Trees and the Leader of the Council

Russell Johnson said that at a meeting in March 2018, the then Chief Executive of the Council had told him that an Amey sub-contracted or employed person had suffered a broken bone in the course of their duties at Meersbrook Park Road on 22 February 2018.  He asked where the Chief Executive had obtained this information and what corroboration was sought before repeating this as fact.

He asked if the Leader of the Council had considered the idea, which was also the subject of social media, that the Council should demonstrate its sincerity in the apology required by the Local Government Ombudsman in its report, by repaying Injunction costs of tree campaigners. If so, what conclusion had the Leader come to and why? He asked if the Leader was aware that there was widespread belief that the Ruling Group on the Council did not appear to understand the concepts of atonement or remorse?

Mr Johnson made comments about damage to Sheffield’s reputation resulting from what he stated was years of administrative malefaction by the Council and he asked whether the Leader would consider stepping down now, avoiding further risk by waiting until May 2021.

Councillor Mark Jones, the Cabinet Member for Environment, Streetscene and Climate Change, responded in relation to the first question, that he could not comment on conversations that had taken place between Mr Johnson and the former Chief Executive. However, he was working with officers to understand the background to this incident and allegations and he would respond to Mr Johnson in writing as to the findings of that investigation.

Councillor Julie Dore, the Leader of the Council, stated that she had known of the incident relating to a member of the workforce as referred to by Mr Johnson, because it was repeated several times during that period and was an issue in the public domain. She had not been formally informed that someone within the workforce had suffered an injury.

In relation to comments on social media, Councillor Dore responded that she did not engage with social media. She said peaceful campaigning against the replacement and replenishment of street trees was different to breaching an injunction. The Council had extended a full apology and had worked with campaigners to develop a new joint strategy for the future replacement and replenishment of street trees and this was in a good place.

Councillor Dore said that at present, people needed guidance, help and support during the Coronavirus pandemic and she was aware that there was a widespread belief that this Council was doing everything possible to save lives and to protect the most vulnerable.

4.3.5

Public Question Concerning Electric Vehicle Charging Outlets

Russell Johnson asked whether the Council was aware that, despite the Climate Emergency, and the declared intention to encourage electric vehicle ownership, Sheffield still had significantly fewer Electric Vehicle charging outlets than comparable cities and some much smaller towns and he asked why this was the case.

Councillor Bob Johnson, the Cabinet Member for Transport and Development, responded that the Council recognised the need to provide electric charging infrastructure points and to promote the take up of electric vehicles. The Council was in the process of a roll out of rapid chargers through the early measures fund and it was actively seeking further funding to be able to enhance the network. The Council had also worked with private organisations to help develop provision, which included charging points. A promotion scheme for electric vans was also being implemented with Highways England to provide incentives for businesses to change to electrified vehicles. He said that provision of charging infrastructure was reliant upon the national grid and the underlying infrastructure and it was therefore difficult to make comparisons between cities. The Council was moving ahead on this issue and was implementing rapid chargers, which may not be the same as the standard ones seen in other places.

4.3.6

Public Questions Concerning Local Government Ombudsman Report Concerning Street Trees

Ruth Hubbard asked whether as part of the “full apology" following the Local Government Ombudsman report, the people of Sheffield deserved an explanation as to why the Council took things "too far" and if not, why not?

Councillor Julie Dore, the Leader of the Council, responded that the details of the response to the Ombudsman’s report were in a Cabinet report and a copy of that report could be send to Ruth Hubbard or it could also be accessed on the Council’s website.

4.3.7

Public Questions Concerning Coronavirus

Nigel Slack asked several questions concerning the Coronavirus Pandemic. He stated that the Government had failed the nation by insisting that educational establishments continued to provide one of the major vectors for the ongoing crisis of infections, hospital admissions and deaths relating to Covid-19.

He said that this approach was damaging both to public health and to the economy and that the decision regarding lockdown had been taken weeks after the science demanded it, and that was the Government’s fault. Mr Slack commented that the City now needed to stand up and be counted.

He asked whether the City would demand that the Government close the schools, colleges and Universities, as demanded by teaching unions and 'the science' to help suppress the uncontrolled pandemic as they were contributing to community infections and as a result, all age groups were now being affected.

He said that it was entirely possible for the country to 'afford' a real national lockdown economically and to enable people to work on ways to support the mental health of those worst affected. He said that the Government chose not to do so and the Council followed orders.

Mr Slack asked: why the Council continued to follow flawed advice from the Government; when would the Council take the right steps to protect students, staff and workers in education; did the Council think this supposed 'lockdown' would work without closing education; and what did the Council say to those working in education and families of students who did not have faith in the Covid-19 related safety measures in place?

Councillor Julie Dore, the Leader of the Council, stated that representatives of the two Universities were attending this meeting of Council and she hoped that Mr Slack would be able to listen to their respective contributions.

She said that the Council had always stood up and been counted and had done so in relation to the present Government and had not shied away from standing up for Sheffield, including over the past ten years.

She said there was a difference between following advice from the Government and having to follow instructions. This day, Parliament would consider and vote upon further measures relating to the Coronavirus pandemic and which would determine whether schools and universities would be required to remain open or closed. That would be a decision of Parliament, rather than advice and the Council had to follow that decision.

She said that her political party and political group’s position was that education and learning should remain open and accessible. She said it was a very difficult balance to keep people safe from the virus, whilst also recognising the impact, in many other ways, of those decisions.

Those impacts might be far more harmful for some, especially children and young people who were the most vulnerable and disadvantaged as they would be disproportionately adversely affected by the closure of schools. It might also include matters of safeguarding and an increase in mental health conditions.

Councillor Dore said that there was also data to show that the impact on inequality would be long term and that the gap would grow wider. There were also consequences for the futures of some of the most very vulnerable and disadvantaged young people and which had already been seen with the previous lockdown.

She said that risks had to be properly managed but the cost of children being out of school was too high. There was also a balance to be considered with regards to the closure of other provision such as gyms, leisure centres and other wellbeing activities and the effect on people’s physical and mental wellbeing. She said that education was a priority.

Prior to asking the questions above, Mr Slack referred to a written response that he had received from the Cabinet Member for Children, Young People and Families and he expressed concern that in that written response he was being accused of blaming students for spreading the virus and of being divisive.

He stated that he did not blame the students or the pupils in schools and that he blamed the Government, the universities and accommodation providers for failing to protect those young people. He said that whilst no one sector was blameless, when people gathered in environments where staff and students felt unsafe, and where students were succumbing to infection, it was those in power who should shoulder the blame. He said that to infer that he thought otherwise was wrong and he expected an apology.

Councillor Jackie Drayton, the Cabinet Member for Children, Young People and Families, responded and said that in relation to Mr Slack’s request for an apology, she would apologise if she had upset him in what she said in the written answer, although she wished to make it clear that she was answering a written question to her. The question had talked about students and young people being responsible for the death of a family member and universities putting money over the health of their students.

She said that she did recognise that Mr Slack was very passionate about challenging organisations, including the Council and the universities and in his belief as to why he thought it best that students and young people should not be attending school and university. She said that she felt the language he had used was divisive and emotive and she did not accept that it was right to use that sort of language.

Councillor Drayton commented on the circumstances of many families and the challenges of having to support and teach children at home with restricted space and limited access to technology and also sustaining a job. She also referred to the raising of anxiety of people being together in one household. She said that the people who were disadvantaged the most were the poor and the vulnerable and that the pandemic was affecting those people more than others. She said that those children and young people needed to be at school to ensure they were supported and so long as the schools and universities were working hard to keep people safe, she would continue to support them.

Councillor Drayton said that she was sorry if Mr Slack was upset about what was said in the way she had replied. However, this was not meant in any other way than to disagree with the language he had used and she explained that she was happy to always receive a question from Mr Slack.