Agenda item

Public Questions and Petitions and Other Communications

To receive any questions or petitions from the public, or communications submitted by the Lord Mayor or the Chief Executive and to pass such resolutions thereon as the Council Procedure Rules permit and as may be deemed expedient.

 

(NOTE: There is a time limit of one hour for the above item of business.  In accordance with the arrangements published on the Council’s website in relation to meetings of the Council held remotely, questions/petitions are required to be submitted in writing, to committee@sheffield.gov.uk, by 9.00 a.m. on Monday 4th January.)

 

 

Minutes:

 

Public Questions

 

 

6.1

The Lord Mayor (Councillor Tony Downing) invited eight members of the public to ask the questions which they had submitted prior to the published deadline for submission of petitions and questions for this meeting.

 

 

6.2

Public Question Concerning Leader and the Business Community

 

 

 

Martin McKervey, Chair of the Sheffield Property Association and Chair of the Castlegate Partnership referred to Councillor Julie Dore stepping down from the role of Leader of the Council.  He spoke about Councillor Dore and to her working for and with the business community in Sheffield in a spirit of public and private sector partnership and collaboration.  Mr McKervey also welcomed both Councillor Bob Johnson as the Leader of the Council and Kate Josephs, the Council’s new Chief Executive.

 

 

 

He asked whether those present at this meeting of the Council would please join him in expressing the thanks and gratitude of the business community in Sheffield for everything that Councillor Dore had done to help and support business in the city.

 

 

 

The Leader of the Council (Councillor Bob Johnson) responded and said that he recognised the work that had been done by Councillor Dore and Mr McKervey as part of the Local Enterprise Partnership and Transport for the North and which led to the development of HS3 (High Speed 3).  Councillor Dore had also worked with the business community on the project to relocate HS2 and had also served as a member of the HS2 growth task force.  She had also worked on other projects in partnership with the business community including the city centre regeneration, Heart of the City, World Snooker, supporting the devolution deal and economic projects such as the Olympic Legacy Park.

 

 

 

Councillor Johnson said that he would join with Mr McKervey in thanking Councillor Julie Dore for the work that she had done with businesses and much more.  Councillor Johnson thanked Mr McKervey for attending the Council meeting to recognise that work.

 

 

6.3

Public Question Concerning Safe School Streets

 

 

 

Graham Turnbull made reference to a petition submitted to Council in December 2018 asking for Safe School Streets to be trialled in Sheffield.  He said that there had been such a trial and he thanked the Council and those that had worked on the schemes.  He asked whether 2021 would be the year that safe school street schemes would be rolled out and how many schemes could be expected.

 

 

 

The Leader of the Council (Councillor Bob Johnson) responded that the initial assessment of the ten schools in the safe school streets project had been completed and the aspiration was for the schemes to be delivered in 2021, notwithstanding any restrictions in the context of the pandemic and related difficulties.  He explained that the schools were located across the city and schemes were individually tailored to suit a particular location.

 

 

 

He explained that the designs were currently undergoing a review to consider the feasibility and implications of various options.  It was noteworthy that such schemes could only be implemented with the support of the schools and the local communities and would involve a great deal of consultation and planning prior to a scheme going ahead.  He said that consultation was a key element and this had been affected by the circumstances of the pandemic and it was acknowledged that Council resources had also been stretched.  However, it was the hope and aspiration that the schemes would be delivered in 2021.

 

 

6.4

Public Question Concerning Improving Local Democracy

 

 

 

Russell Johnson asked whether Councillor Johnson, as the Leader, would commit to implementing a modern committee system for the Council before the outcome of the referendum vote in May.  He asked if the Leader would agree with him that this would enhance accountability and reduce the ‘tribal’ character of the Council in recent years, thus helping to rehabilitate Sheffield Labour in the eyes of the public.

 

 

 

The Leader of the Council (Councillor Bob Johnson) stated that Councillor Terry Fox (the Deputy Leader and Cabinet Member for Finance, Resources and Governance) and the Overview and Scrutiny Management Committee had led on work relating to governance and the Big City Conversation had taken place.  He said that he would be looking at the issues raised and including how the Council engaged with people, made decisions and was accountable.  He said that he understood that there was a lot of consensus about what could be done and improvements that could be made.  He said that Councillor Fox and others would take the work forward.

 

 

6.5

Public Questions Concerning Street Trees and Injunction Costs Monies

 

 

 

Russell Johnson asked whether the Leader of the Council would bravely seize the opportunity created by the regime change to initiate a meaningful process, without fear or favour, to uncover the whole truth about the ‘Street Tree Scandal’.

 

 

 

Russell Johnson then asked whether the Council, under new leadership, would take the bold step of placing the Injunction Costs monies in a new tree planting fund to be focused on wards with a high level of deprivation.  He said that he believed that such a move would go some way to redefining the Council’s position on peaceful protest against injustice, in keeping with fine Labour Party traditions.

 

 

 

The Leader of the Council (Councillor Bob Johnson) stated that the Local Government Ombudsman had conducted an inquiry and the Forestry Commission had also done so.  The Council had published a document entitled Review of Tree Investigations: Lessons Learned and Actions and which set out how the Council had learned lessons and the extensive work which had taken place over two and a half years to develop a new approach, including a new tree strategy developed jointly with partners, including STAG (Sheffield Tree Action Groups).  The lessons learned document set out ten lessons learnt and fourteen actions that had been taken to improve future practice.  An archive project had been set up to make sure all relevant information was in the public domain.  Councillor Johnson said that if, having gone through the archive, there were any specific things that remained unanswered relating to this issue, he would be pleased to meet with Mr Johnson with regard to those matters.

 

 

 

(NOTE: Russell Johnson had submitted three questions for this meeting of the Council.  The Lord Mayor explained that some of the content in question 3 was inaccurate and defamatory and therefore permission to ask the question, as submitted, would not be granted unless that content was withdrawn.  Mr. Johnson agreed to withdraw the relevant content from his question.)

 

 

6.6

Public Question Concerning Council Housing Repairs

 

 

 

Sophie Thornton asked why Council housing repairs waiting times were so long in Sheffield when compared to the waiting times of other local authorities in Yorkshire?

 

 

 

Councillor Paul Wood (Cabinet Member for Neighbourhoods and Community Safety) said that emergency repairs were attended to within four hours if there was a major breakdown and it was classified as such.  Urgent repairs were attended to within 24 hours.  There was a 25 day timescale for normal repairs.  However, some work in progress repairs did extend to 55 days.  The time taken to do repairs had reduced in the past 12 months and he said that he hoped that would reduce further.  There were some restrictions because of the Coronavirus pandemic and relating to safe working practices which had affected the service and some programmed work which had not been allowed previously during the first lockdown had subsequently been permitted to go ahead.

 

 

 

Councillor Wood explained that the Council undertook up to 10,000 repairs each month and sometimes a very small number of repairs were not completed to the level which was expected.  New technical solutions were being deployed for the repairs service and he expected that would improve the time taken to complete repairs.  Councillor Wood said that he apologised if people had waited for a repair.  He also said that he would look at the details of individual cases if these were provided to him.  He would also look at cases and concerns brought to his attention by all councillors.

 

 

6.7

Public Questions Concerning Streets Ahead Contract

 

 

 

Isabel O’Leary asked whether there were any unavoidable financial losses to the Council if Amey did not carry out the tree "felling programme" (as referred to in other legal communications to court) pursuant to Service Standard 6.38 or any other part of the Streets Ahead contract and if so, please could the relevant clause be specified.

 

 

 

Councillor Mark Jones (Cabinet Member for Environment, Streetscene and Climate Change) responded that he had asked Council officers to brief him on this specific issue and he would then provide a written answer to Isabel O’Leary.

 

 

6.8

Public Questions Concerning Streets Ahead

 

 

 

Justin Buxton asked the following 3 questions:

 

 

 

Why did the Leader of the Council specifically state, when asked by the presiding Judge, that she was "happy" with the Council's attempt to imprison residents pursuant to a civil injunction previously granted, when all the Council needed to do was implement an excusing clause to the Streets Ahead contract at no cost to the City?

 

 

 

What was the total net cost of all the legal action, evidence gathering and any other associated costs related in any way to all actions related in any way to the civil injunction Sheffield City Council obtained from Justice Males at Leeds Crown Court, including all subsequent committal proceedings; this would include any other associated costs related to each case, as mentioned above.

 

 

 

Mr Buxton said that the then Cabinet Member (Councillor Bryan Lodge) had previously stated on record that clause 19.1 of the Streets Ahead contract was effectively overridden by another clause(s) in the contract.  He asked the Council to please specify and provide the clause(s) to which he was referring.

 

 

 

Councillor Mark Jones (Cabinet Member for Environment, Streetscene and Climate Change) stated that questions concerning court proceedings had been asked previously and answered by Councillor Julie Dore and he referred Mr Buxton to the answers previously given.  He said that both he and Councillor Dore had continued to work with campaigners and other stakeholders to find solutions to issues regarding the retention of street trees.  There was a new Street Tree Strategy which had been co-produced with partners and the Council was working to adopt learning and recommendations from the consultative process.  He said that there were many challenges in seeking to retain and renew the tree stock and to preserve the public realm from which people could all benefit.

 

 

 

Councillor Jones said that in respect of the question regarding costs, he did not have this information at present and had asked for the information so that a written answer could be provided to Mr Buxton.

 

 

 

He said that with regard to the question concerning the particular clause of the Streets Ahead contract, he would provide a written answer to Mr Buxton.  Councillor Jones suggested, because of the current restrictions relating to Coronavirus, that a remote meeting was arranged in future with Mr Buxton to discuss these matters.

 

 

 

(NOTE: Justin Buxton had submitted four questions for this meeting of the Council.  The Lord Mayor explained that question 3 was not permittable under the Council Procedure Rules as it concerned a named former officer of the Council and that Mr. Buxton’s other three questions would be permitted.)

 

 

6.9

Public Questions Concerning Proposed Crossing on Station Road in Halfway

 

 

 

Kurtis Crossland asked the following questions in relation to the proposed crossing on Station Road in Halfway:

 

1.   When will the feasibility study take place?

 

2.   Will the results of the study be made public? If so, when?

 

3.   Will the incoming Cabinet Member support the campaign for the crossing?

 

 

 

The Leader of the Council (Councillor Bob Johnson) stated that officers were in the process of evaluating the potential for a crossing on Station Road and that work was ongoing.  He said that he had asked for the results of that study to be made available to him by the end of January.  Whilst this was not usually information that would be published, a decision could be made regarding that and, if there was public interest, the information could be disseminated by local Councillors and the Member of Parliament.  He said that the new Cabinet Member would work with the Cabinet and decisions were made collectively.  He reassured Mr Crossland that he would be made aware of the decision, together with other local people.

 

 

6.10

Public Questions Concerning Conduct

 

 

 

Ruth Hubbard stated that at November’s full Council meeting, the former Leader responded to a member of the public presenting a petition about free school meals and asking for greater collaboration by delivering an extraordinary attack on that member of the public.  She said that the Leader was egged on by at least one other member of the ruling group and that whilst this was not the first time the Leader was rude or, in her view, aggressive in responding to members of the public, the attempt to belittle and humiliate this member of the public was particularly nasty and bullying.  She said that to be clear, and to ensure that councillors were aware of the impact of such behaviour, she would say that many members of the public were nervous before asking questions because the Leader was known for responding in a hostile way.  She said that as a result, the Ante Room at the Town Hall before full Council, where public questioners are asked to gather, was frequently something of a support group for members of the public, sometimes attending the Town Hall for the first time.  Ruth Hubbard said that in November’s full Council, the Leader was called out by two other public questioners for her behaviour.  She asked what action the Monitoring Officer or others, took following the November full Council meeting in response to this bullying incident?

 

 

 

The Leader of the Council (Councillor Bob Johnson) said that he would welcome questions and petitions and that members of the public should be encouraged to ask questions and hold elected representatives to account.  Public questions were one way of seeing local democracy in action and were an opportunity for legitimate public concern and should be free of political opportunism.

 

 

 

He referred to the Council’s commitment to provide free school meals to children in Sheffield over half term and for the Christmas holidays and to a petition submitted to Council relating to free school meals.  Councillor Johnson expressed concerns about the use of public questions and petitions for party political reasons.  He said that complaints about the behaviour of Members were dealt with by the Standards complaints process and the information relating to complaints was personal and treated in confidence.  Standards fell within the remit of the Audit and Standards Committee and a report was produced annually summarising the number and outcome of complaints.

 

 

6.11

Public Questions Concerning Streets Ahead

 

 

 

Ruth Hubbard stated that in recent months the former Leader ruled out a public inquiry into ‘the street trees scandal’ in Sheffield.  She asked, given that the former Leader was likely, herself, to be a main subject of the inquiry, how is it possible that the decision on this could be made by her given the clear conflict of interest involved, how has this been dealt with?  Ruth Hubbard said that she noted that the Monitoring Officer who might normally step in to deal with this clear conflict of interest was likely also to be a key subject for an inquiry.

 

 

 

The Leader of the Council (Councillor Bob Johnson) responded that lawfully, a decision to embark on a public inquiry was one for the Council's executive to make, taking into consideration whether the public interests would outweigh the potential costs.  The Leader, as the Chair of the Council's executive, had been clear that the Council had apologised and had taken steps to remedy any mistakes made.

 

 

6.12

Public Questions Concerning Written Responses to Questions

 

 

 

Ruth Hubbard stated that one of the key reasons members of the public ask full questions at full Council was in order to ensure there was a public record of answers given.  She said that frequently people are told they will be responded to in writing.  Also frequently, members of the public return to say they had not received an answer in writing.  She said that she had often been told she will receive an answer in writing but didn’t think she had ever received such a letter.   She asked whether the Council would consider a follow up mechanism to ensure that where written replies are committed to that these were completed, and – in the absence of other reasons why information should remain confidential - will the Council ensure that these answers were made public in Council minutes given that the reason for asking was precisely to ensure they are made on public record.

 

 

 

The Leader of the Council (Councillor Bob Johnson) explained that a schedule of questions and petitions received from members of the public and answers provided by Cabinet Members was now published on the Council's website with documents for each of the Council meetings.  The schedule indicated whether a response was made at the meeting and was recorded in the minutes or that a written response was provided and a copy of that response was included in the schedule.  There was a schedule of questions, petitions and responses for the Council meetings in March, October, November and December 2020.

 

 

 

Councillor Johnson said that there was also a follow-up mechanism now in place to help make sure that members of the public do receive those answers in writing when promised and where appropriate.  He said that anybody not receiving a written response could contact him and he would make sure that happened.

 

 

 

 

 

Supporting documents: