Agenda item

5.1

The Co-Operative Executive received an electronic petition containing 228 signatures opposing the Clean Air Zone Charging. There was no speaker to the petition.

Councillor Douglas Johnson responded and explained that the Clean Air Zone sought to reduce air pollution across the city to improve the health of everybody who lived and worked in Sheffield. Councillor Johnson stated that air pollution contributed to approximately 500 early deaths in Sheffield per year. He said that action had to be taken and added that there was a legal duty to address this issue. Councillor Johnson stated that the Clean Air Zone did not intend to charge cars.

5.2

The Co-Operative Executive received an electronic petition containing 33 signatures opposing the plans to impose red lines on Ecclesall Road. There was no speaker to this petition.

Councillor Johnson stated that an extensive consultation had taken place on this issue. He said that many responses had been gathered through this process. He stated that the aim of the proposals was to improve bus networks in Sheffield. He added that the consultation remained open, and feedback was welcome through this process.

5.3

The Co-Operative Executive received a petition containing 63 signatures requesting the review and removal of the double yellow lines at the junction of Gainsford Road and Staniforth Road. There was no speaker to this petition.

Councillor Johnson stated that the lines on this junction were introduced in 1981. He said he had more information on this area which he would share with the petitioner. He added that Officers were willing to look at this issue further in a resource appropriate manner.

5.4

Abby Hodgetts read out the following Public Question from Neil Schofield:

'I am asking this Question as Joint Chair of the Friends of Parkwood Springs, which is a large and active community group. We work in close partnership with the City Council to improve the whole of Parkwood Springs, as a resource for people, wildlife and the natural environment.

Later in this meeting the Co-operative Executive will consider at Item 10 a report entitled 'Parkwood Options Appraisal'.

Initially the Friends Group had considerable concerns about parts of the proposal. However, since Christmas we have been able to have very helpful discussions with Officers and the Cabinet Member. We remain absolutely opposed to an aspect of one of the options - that access by vehicles to the potential Skyline site might be from Cooks Wood Road/Shirecliffe Road. However we now understand why the Council needs to include that option in the process.

Can the Cabinet Member confirm that in line with Department of Transport guidance, the transport options study will include early identification of the environmental and community constraints and impacts of each option alongside technical appraisals? We believe this is essential to ensure  that fully informed decisions can be taken.

Can he also re-affirm that the Friends Group and any other appropriate community groups will be fully involved at every stage of the process from here on for the development of the potential Skyline site at Parkwood Springs, to ensure that their views and concerns are given full weight in the process?’

Councillor Terry Fox responded to this question on behalf of Councillor Mazher Iqbal, who was not in attendance. Councillor Fox stated that the Council valued their friend groups and all community organisations. He said that access options had to be included in the Parkwood Appraisals document as part of the assessment process. He added that the Council would continue to work with the friends’ groups, and he stated that had they fallen short on part of the consultation process he apologised. He said that there was a full agenda item on Parkwood Springs. 

5.5

Abby Hodgetts read out the following Public Question from Geoff Cox:

‘In May 2021 the Cooperative Executive was formed around six commitments, one of which was to implement the recommendations in Arup’s ‘Pathways to Zero Carbon in Sheffield’ report.

Is this Council still committed to implementing these recommendations by 2030?  Has the investment funding necessary to implement these recommendations been secured?  If not, please explain what steps are being taken to secure that funding and to what timescale?’

Councillor Johnson stated that the Council still had a commitment to implement the measures referred too, and he added that the Council was still on target to meet net zero by 2030. Councillor Johnson said that the required funding was not currently available. He said that the approach to addressing these issues was included in the 10 Point Plan, which would come to the Co-Operative Executive in due course.

5.6

Abby Hodgetts read out the following Public Questions from Nigel Slack:

Question One: ‘My apologies for the repetitive nature of this first question but since I am yet to receive a reasonable response I feel it necessary to continue asking, even in the face of such obstinate ignorance.

Firstly, my thanks to the Deputy Leader for her response to question 2 from the set of specific questions first asked on 17^th November 2021. Clearly the rules and expectations around 'recorded voting' within Council is worthy of further conversation.

The attached specific points, with respect to the new 'plan' for Property Services, were first put to Council in questions 1 & 3 of that same November date, 8 weeks ago, following on from an initial question on the issues in October 2021. I repeated the questions for the December Exec Meeting but Covid issues led to that meeting being cancelled, though the questions were forwarded to the Exec Member by Democratic Services. That question has not even received an acknowledgement, never mind any actual answers.

I therefore wish to give the Exec Member one last chance to respond in detail before escalating the matter. When might I expect a detailed response in writing? Please remember Council has had 8 weeks to respond so far.’

Question Two: I share the Leader's disappointment in the news that has come out over last weekend about the behaviour of the Chief Executive. I understand his wanting to await the report of Sue Gray before looking into this further, but remain concerned over the independence of the Sue Gray enquiry and the likelihood that 'scapegoats' will be sacrificed to save 'Big Dog' himself.

Irrespective, how soon after that report is published, might we expect the Senior Officer Employment Committee to meet and discuss the issues surrounding this revelation?’

Councillor Cate McDonald responded to question one. She stated that a written response had been submitted to question one, and she apologised that the answer had not been shared. Councillor McDonald said she would share a detailed response with Mr Slack in writing.

Councillor Fox responded to question two. He stated that since he had been informed of the issues mentioned he had been taking advice and following due process. He said he had announced that a committee had been set up to look into the matter and to establish the facts. He added that the committee was due to begin work on the 20^th January 2022, and that he expected the committee to move at pace. Councillor Fox said that the names of those on the committee would be shared shortly and he added that all powers would be handed over to that committee.