Agenda item

5.1

Petition Requesting the Removal of Land at Jaunty View

An e-petition, containing 14 signatures, was submitted on behalf of the lead signatory stating the following:-

‘We the undersigned petition the Council to: Remove the piece of land at the top of Jaunty View as its causing obstruction to people getting in their homes including the elderly and disabled.

The land has no use and causes residents problems getting on and off their drives. The land is muddy through people having to mount it. There is difficulty for the elderly and the disabled getting to their homes due to the obstruction the land causes.’

5.2

RESOLVED: That the petition be referred to the Cabinet Member for Business, Skills and Development for consideration.

5.3

Public Questions in respect of Jessops Hospital, Redaction of the Highways Contract ‘Final Business Case’, Use of the Freedom of Information Act in Future Outsourcing Contracts and Parking Permits

Mr Nigel Slack submitted four questions. His first question referred to a recent planning decision in respect of the Jessop Hospital for Women (Edwardian Wing). He commented that he was still awaiting a response to his questions to Full Council on 3^rd April which were as follows:-

·        How can the Council now avoid the destruction of other listed buildings after setting this precedent?

·        Which Officers attended the meetings with Sheffield University?

·        What was the subject of these meetings?

·        Were the meetings minuted?

·        If so have these minutes been published and if not why not?

·        Why should we believe the forecasts summoned up by the University and what can the Council do to monitor these forecasts?

·        What will they do if the forecasts are wrong?

Mr Slack’s second question referred to the review of the redacted sections of the Highways contract ‘Final Business Case’. He stated that the first section of the review had now been completed. However, he was concerned about the speed of the review, given that there were eleven further sections to consider. He therefore asked if the review could be concluded at a faster rate?

The third question focused on a previous question Mr Slack had asked in relation to inserting into outsourcing contracts the requirement to comply with the Freedom of Information (FOI) Act. He had pursued this with his local Member of Parliament, Paul Blomfield. The response he had received from a House of Commons Library Expert was that it would be possible to include a duty to abide by the FOI within specific contract documents, although there was some uncertainty as to how enforceable this would be. The reply also suggested there were a number of ways in which the FOI can be used for current contracts either because the Council holds information about the service or the contractor holds information on behalf of the Council. Mr Slack therefore asked if the Council would digest what this meant for the public in Sheffield when they were making FOI requests and would they publish clear guidelines to assist them when doing so.

Mr Slack’s final question related to problems he had been experiencing in being issued with a parking permit and asked if this could be investigated.

In response, Councillor Leigh Bramall, Cabinet Member for Business, Skills and Development stated that he would provide a response to Mr Slack’s questions regarding Jessops Hospital within 24 hours.

In relation to the second question, Councillor Bryan Lodge, Cabinet Member for Finance and Resources commented that the redaction had been organised by the City Council. This was now with AMEY as the contractor and needed their final approval. This would be available before the end of June.

Regarding the third question, Councillor Lodge reported that there was a clause in contracts requiring compliance with the Freedom of Information Act. However, there were exemptions for commercially confidential and sensitive information. The Council had looked into this matter and contracts now included an approval to publish information unless the contractor marked an item as confidential.

The Leader of the Council, Councillor Julie Dore, added that it was her understanding that an Act of Parliament, such as the Freedom of Information Act, took precedence over Contract Law. She also cautioned that if the Council required the contractor to comply with Freedom of Information requests the contractor would likely include this within their costs causing a greater cost to the Council.

Councillor Bryan Lodge thanked Mr Slack for bringing to his attention problems in respect of issuing parking permits which was a Customer Services issue. He would investigate this and provide a response to Mr Slack.

5.4

Public Question in respect of Responses to Questions at Previous Cabinet Meeting

Mr Barry Bellamy commented that he had did not receive a response to questions that he had asked at the previous Cabinet meeting held on 10 April 2013. Following this meeting, he had emailed Councillor Dore expressing his concern that the questions had not been answered and requesting a private meeting. He had not received an acknowledgement or reply to this email.

Mr Bellamy further stated that the High Green Action Team had been waiting seven months for responses to questions asked at the Cabinet meeting held on 5 November 2012.

He thanked Councillor Mary Lea, Cabinet Member for Health, Care and Independent Living, for her response to a request for a meeting in respect of issues related to Sheltered Housing and for investigating the issues raised at the meeting. Sheltered Housing residents’ concerns expressed at this meeting had been passed on to Sheffield Homes and Mr Bellamy queried whether these had been passed on to the relevant people.

In response, Councillor Julie Dore apologised for not responding to Mr Bellamy’s email. There had been some confusion as to who would respond to the email. She stated that if Mr Bellamy submitted the questions he believed he had not had responses to in writing she would respond.

Regarding the issues in respect of Sheltered Housing, these had been referred to Councillor Harry Harpham, Cabinet Member for Homes and Neighbourhoods. She requested that Mr Bellamy provide details of the officers with which he had been corresponding on this matter. Councillor Lea and Councillor Harpham were investigating the issues raised by residents and a response would be provided shortly.