Agenda item

(a) Public Questions on Decision – making, Digital Recording of Council meetings and the use of Council-sponsored Community Buildings

Mr. Martin Brighton asked the following questions which were responded to by the Leader of the Council (Councillor Julie Dore) as shown:-

(i) Would the Council re-consider implementing the proposals before it

today as they will lead to “rubberstamping” of policy decisions following political “showboating” by the leading party? How will the proposal demonstrate openness and transparency?

Councillor Dore responded that she assumed that the proposals to which Mr Brighton referred related to Item number 9 on the Council agenda concerning changes to the Council’s Constitution. She added that, should Mr Brighton decide to stay to observe the meeting, the Council would shortly discuss these matters, providing her with an opportunity to explain the proposed changes and the fact that they would not stifle debate or reduce Member accountability.

(ii) In light of the substantial changes coming into effect that require local authorities to both assist and facilitate citizens to attend and record public meetings, would the Council now re-consider its policy of not allowing the digital recording of meetings?

Councillor Dore responded that Members had received a report concerning web-casting but had decided that the cost of implementation was prohibitive, at an estimated cost of £100,000 and did not provide value for money at a time of severe financial stringency and she felt that there were other important things for the Council to invest money in at this time. She added that a record of meetings was taken through the preparation and publication of minutes. Councillor Dore stated that Council has asked Officers to bring forward a report detailing ways to improve public access to meetings.

(iii) What do Members think should be the Council policy towards Council-sponsored community buildings being used for Occult practices?

Councillor Dore responded that Mr Brighton’s interpretation of the suitable use of community buildings was a personal one but she indicated that she was not aware of the particular case that Mr Brighton referred to. However, if he supplied her with further details of the case, she would examine them by reference to Council’s policies/agreements and determine whether the Council needed to intervene in this case.

(b) Public Question on problems with Loose Dogs

Marie Raynor referred to her loss of sight at age 20 and problems she and her German Shepherd guide dog had experienced as they walked in certain areas of Sheffield. Whilst she and her guide dog received training from guide dogs staff, there were problems which they could not overcome without assistance. Other loose dogs were a major problem because they interfered with her guide dog, whilst she was working putting Ms. Raynor in danger of tripping or walking into other people or obstacles. Some assistance dogs were attacked by other loose dogs and had to stop working because of their injuries. She stated that people with assistance dogs should be guaranteed protection from loose dogs.

Ms Raynor stated that there were notice boards in rural areas, stating that dogs should be kept on a lead, to protect moorland birds and previous legislation permitted farmers to shoot a stray dog if it was worrying sheep. She asked if her safety was less important than that of a bird or a sheep and did she not have a right to walk along the pavements or through urban precincts without interference and did anyone need to take a loose dog into the City Centre or on residential pavements?

Mr Raynor specifically asked if Councillors and staff would agree to support her request for a Control Order, requiring all dogs to be controlled on a lead in precincts and on residential pavements, throughout Sheffield.

The Cabinet Member for Environment, Recycling and Streetscene (Councillor Jack Scott) responded that street clutter had been a major problem for the City, detrimentally affecting Sheffield’s reputation, but the Streets Ahead Programme would help to de-clutter the City Centre and other streets in the City.

The Council took action on loose dogs with approximately 1, 300 dogs being impounded each year. Legislation, including the Dangerous Dogs Act 1991, the Dogs Act 1871 and the Dog Control Act 1996, permitted action to be taken by the Magistrates, local authorities and the Police, including the introduction of Control Orders. Councillor Scott stated that he would be meeting with Ms Raynor and Councillor Janice Sidebottom to discuss the possibility of implementing a Control Order, requiring dogs to be on a lead at all times in highly populated areas and a restriction on the number of dogs being permitted in an area at any one time, work upon which had been commenced by the Council’s Dogs Team and the RSPCA. 

Councillor Scott stated that responsible dog ownership was important in assisting to resolve these problems but that the implementation of additional controls was a distinct possibility. He thanked Marie Raynor for bringing the matter to the attention of the Council.

(c) Public Questions concerning violence in Myanmar (formally Burma)

Questions were asked by Messrs. Shayn Omair, Lay Naing, Ayub Choudhary, Kasim Chaudry and M. Aslam concerning the killing, violence and persecution being visited on parts of the Burmese population, some of whom were relatives and friends of Burmese people living in Sheffield and and UK. In particular, they asked that, in the absence of any significant media coverage at national and local level, how the Council might raise awareness of the problems within the City, as well as asking what leverage the Council had to put pressure directly on the Burmese Government and indirectly, through the UK’s Prime Minister, Foreign Office and United Nations, to press the Burmese Government to take action to stop the violence.   

The Leader of the Council (Councillor Julie Dore) responded that she recognised that it was a difficult and emotional time for many in Sheffield’s Burmese community because of the current plight of their family and friends in Burma. She referred to Sheffield’s standing as City of Sanctuary with a tradition of fighting oppression such as with the slave trade and apartheid. She stated that it was shameful that, in 2012, the incidents  now raised were occurring. She added that the Council would continue to join with other local organisations to raise awareness and also lobby Sheffield Members of Parliament and the Government.

Councillor Dore added that the Council was unable to influence the situation in Burma directly, but would press the Prime Minister and the Foreign Office to condemn the communal violence. Councillors Ibrar Hussain and Mohammad Maroof would seek the Council’s support later in this meeting, through a Notice of Motion, for various actions to be taken on the situation in Burma.

(d) Public Questions on violence in the Middle-East, the culture of Political Celebrity, Olympics 2012, environmental policies of the Council and the use of Shops to fund unregistered Charities

Mr Knowledge Kutekwa asked a number of questions concerning the war in Afghanistan and violence which had occurred in Libya, Egypt and Syria, the dangers of politicians becoming regarded as celebrities, for example Police and Crime Commissioners, the multi-cultural opportunities provided by the London Olympics, the extent to which Council policies were environmentally friendly and the use of shops to provide funding to unregistered and illegitimate charities.

The Leader of the Council (Councillor Julie Dore) responded that the violence in parts of the Middle East was an international issue, although the Council would continue to press the British Government to intervene as far as it could, to stop violence and oppression of the population there. As far as political celebrity was concerned, personally, she had never intended to enter politics or be a celebrity, but had entered this field with the aim of helping to develop social policy based on the principle of equality to make sure that all residents of the City got the best possible chance in life and access to Council services.

In relation to the Olympics, Councillor Dore stated that she thought that this had been a wonderful event, with more women participating than ever before and providing an opportunity for all countries to celebrate and come together through the universal language of sport.

In terms of environmental issues, Councillor Dore stated that she firmly believed in the environmental policies that the Administration was developing. She also believed that local politicians should be accountable.

Councillor Dore responded that she did not know what Mr Kutekwa was referring to in terms of shops and charities and asked him to supply her with further details on the matter.

(e) Public Question on changes to Council Tax benefit

Mr Douglas Johnson referred to the abolition of the Council Tax benefit system from April 2013 which would leave a gap of £4.6 million in the Council’s budget for 2013/14. Mr Johnson asked did the Council intend that all working age households pay at least a flat rate of 20% Council Tax as when the Poll Tax was introduced in 1990?  He also asked whether the Council was considering any other options to deal with the £4.6 million Government cut so that it did not fall solely on the poorest households in the City?

The Cabinet Member for Finance and Resources (Councillor Bryan Lodge) responded that the Government’s cut of £4.6 million in 2013/14 would have a major impact on the Council’s budget over and above that figure. However, the Council would try and minimise the impact of the changes on the City’s poorest households. In relation to Universal Credit, further clarity was awaited from the Government as to how this would work. The Council would try to ensure that any new scheme continued to be as fair and consistent as possible. However, it was likely that the consequences of the changes would be felt across the City, although the Council would look to support those people in most difficulty. The Government had said that pensioners would not be affected by the changes.

He stressed that the Council was already faced with reducing its budget by £50 million in 2013/14 and so further tough decisions would have to be taken by the Council on Council Tax benefit and other services. The Council was looking at savings options, including reducing the Council Tax discount for empty properties.

(f) Public Question on action taken by City Council, South Yorkshire Police and other Agencies

Mr. Saleh Mohamed Ali referred to previous concerns he had raised at Cabinet concerning alleged unwarranted harassment and persecution by the Police over a period of six years, despite the fact that he had not broken the law. He contested that, in addition, as a Council tenant, he had now been put into debt by Sheffield Homes. He asked why he had been subjected to this action?

The Leader of the Council (Councillor Julie Dore) responded that, as she had explained at the meeting of the Cabinet on 22 August, which Mr Ali had attended, most of his allegations referred to other agencies such as the South Yorkshire Police. She suggested that he should consult with his local Councillors about the possibility of making a complaint through the police complaints process if any matters remained unresolved from a few years ago. In relation to his query about his rent account, she would request Councillor Harry Harpham (Cabinet Member for Homes and Neighbourhoods) to look into this to ascertain the current position and how an agreement might be reached to resolve any outstanding matters in this respect. She added that she knew that one of the Council’s Executive Directors had been involved in numerous discussions with Mr. Ali and the South Yorkshire Police and other agencies about the matters he had raised.  

(g) Public Question on the relationship between Local Government and Central Government

Mr Nigel Slack referred to the fact that the City Council recently hosted one of a number of public meetings on the renaissance of Local Government and the ongoing consultation process being carried out by the Political and Constitutional Reform Committee of the House of Commons to codify in law, the relationship between central and local government. He suggested that this code provided for a written guarantee of local government rights and responsibilities, codified arrangements for the funding of local government to prevent it being used as a political football, provided for a greater emphasis on local issues and should, therefore, make the local parties more accountable and would, in general, tip the scales back towards town hall from Whitehall.

Mr Slack asked, as the consultation period ends in exactly a month and written submissions need to reach the Political and Constitutional Reform Committee of the House of Commons by 5^th October 2012; did the Council agree that this is the most significant opportunity for restoring the reputation of local government in a generation; would the Council be making a formal submission on behalf of the City; would they publish that submission on the website and otherwise to enable the public to know their opinion; would the Council join him in urging all Councillors and all interested citizens to make individual submissions and with the Lord Mayor's permission, Mr Slack asked if the opposition parties in the Chamber be allowed to briefly answer the same questions?

In response, the Leader of the Council (Councillor Julie Dore) acknowledged that the Council had hosted a consultation event but stated that she had been disappointed with the attendance at the meeting, which perhaps in itself showed that local government needed to act to encourage greater public participation.  Additionally, Councillors had discussed this issue in a pre-meeting, with all political parties being invited. She added that she fully supported the establishment of a code but felt that, whilst it was a significant opportunity to restore local government’s reputation, it was not the most significant. Reputation actually had to be earned by the Council with the people.

The Council was still considering making a formal submission to Government on the matter and a formal submission, if made, by the Council would be published. Council Members were meeting with other interested organisations such as Sheffield for Democracy, to discuss responses.

Councillor Dore stated that, from a local government perspective, any code would need to enhance the representation of local people and the City Council was attempting to improve the way it engaged with local people on policy making. She assured Mr. Slack that he would be sent any feedback and stated that she would join with him, in urging Councillors to make individual submissions as part of the consultation.

The Lord Mayor (Councillor John Campbell) stated that public questions were answered by the Leader of the Council or the appropriate Cabinet Member and, should the other Groups on the Council wish to respond to Mr Slack’s questions, they could do so in writing.

(h) Public question concerning litter in the London Road/Vincent Road area

A member of the public referred to litter in the London Road and Vincent Road area and tipping of waste. He stated that he had informed the Council of this problem.