Agenda item

4.1

Lord Mayor’s Communications

4.1.1

Award of Fairtrade Status

On behalf of the Council, the Lord Mayor (Councillor Vickie Priestley) received a certificate, presented by Alison Trezise and Jackie Butcher of the Sheffield Initiative for Fairtrade (SHIFT), awarding Fairtrade status for Sheffield.

4.1.2

Drummer Lee Rigby

The Deputy Leader of the Council and the Cabinet members for Homes and Neighbourhoods (Councillor Harry Harpham) read the following statement to the Council:

“Given that this is the first meeting of the Council since the death of Drummer Lee Rigby, I on behalf of the Council would like to pass our condolences to the family of Drummer Rigby.

We are aware that the English Defence League (EDL) are again planning to come to Sheffield City Centre this Saturday.  We value free speech but what I believe is important is that the family of Lee Rigby have said that he would not have wanted his death used to promote hatred and division.  Sheffield has long been proud of its culture of diversity and tolerance and we believe that anybody who intends to take part in this does so with dignity and respect befitting of the way the death of a member of the armed forces should be marked.”

4.2

Petitions

(a)          Petition concerning Fracking in the Sheffield City Region

The Council received a petition containing approximately 450 signatures and requesting the Council to ensure there is no exploration, development and production of shale gas in the Sheffield City Region through the hydraulic facturing process known as fracking.

On behalf of the petitioners, Joan Miller addressed the Council and stated that she was presenting the petition to Council as a representative of Sheffield Climate Alliance. She stated that the process of fracking could pollute water sources, used large amounts of water, cause air pollution and trigger earth tremors. Producing fossil fuels did not fit the United Kingdom’s laws relating to reducing carbon and the Council should support the generation of energy from renewable sources and the reduction of demand through improved planning and the insulation of buildings.

The process of fracturing coal seams used large amounts of water and also resulted in contaminants in the discharged water and the release of pollutants, radiation and salt and was physically harmful to the environment. There were more reserves of registered fossil fuels than could be safely burnt, whilst limiting any rise in global temperature to within 2 per cent. When burnt, the methane gas which was extracted contributed to global climate change and it was conceivable that, if the present trend continued, the rise in temperature would be nearer to 4 percent as stated by the World Bank.

Less energy needed to be generated from fossil fuels and the petition asked that Sheffield invests in low carbon and enables the creation of associated stable work opportunities.

The Council referred the petition to Councillor Jack Scott, Cabinet Member for Environment, Recycling and Streetscene. Councillor Scott stated that there was a need to reduce reliance upon coal, although there was no evidence that this was happening. A revolution was required in the energy market and the extraction of shale gas would neither bring about the necessary change nor provide energy security. He believed that it was not responsible for the Government to offer tax incentives in relation to shale gas and he agreed that there was little transparency in relation to the processes, chemicals used in fracking or levels of toxicity resulting from fracking. The integrity of every site would have to be insured to make sure there was no likelihood of water contamination and an environmental impact assessment should be undertaken before any fracking took place.

Councillor Scott stated that he was not in a position to say that there would never be extraction of shale gas in the region, but any such operations would need to meet strict conditions. He stated that a group would be set up to gather experts’ views so Sheffield leads the way in delivering a low carbon future.         

(b)          Petition concerning Burngreave against the cuts

The Council received a petition containing 369 signatures which called upon the Council to oppose the cuts and stand with the people of Burngreave and other communities in Sheffield who are having the services they relied on threatened with closure. The petition referred to the example of Dundee Council and asked Sheffield City Council to refuse to persecute the poor through the proposed ‘bedroom tax’.

The Council referred the petition to Councillor Harry Harpham, Deputy Leader and Cabinet Member for Homes and Neigbourhoods. Councillor Harpham stated that the Council did oppose the cuts and stood with those people who were campaigning against the cuts. The Council would not persecute those people who were the poorest in society and was doing a lot to ensure that people did not get into rent arrears, providing them with advice in relation to money management and opportunities, including the Credit Union and help to find employment and directing people to other agencies who could help.

(c)           Petition Supporting IKEA’s Proposal for a New Store on Sheffield Road, Tinsley

The Council received an electronic petition containing 501 signatures, which requested the Council to support IKEA’s proposal for a new store on Sheffield Road, Tinsley.

The Council referred the petition to Councillor Leigh Bramall, Cabinet Member for Business, Skills and Development. Councillor Bramall stated that he would pass the petition to the Council’s planning department and Planning and Highways Committee. He stated that the Council was working to assist IKEA with the planning process and that a large planning application had been received, which was considerably detailed. The Council welcomed the proposal for investment which the application from a company such as IKEA presented.

(d)          Petition Regarding Fruit and Vegetable Vans

The Council received a petition containing 228 signatures and requesting the Council to relax licensing conditions regarding fruit and vegetable vans so that they might trade within 400 metres, rather than 800 metres, of the nearest shop and on weekends as well as weekdays.

The Council referred the petition to Councillor Isobel Bowler, Cabinet Member for Culture, Sport and Leisure. Councillor Bowler stated that she would respond to the petitioners in writing.

4.3

Public Questions

(a)          Public questions concerning the ‘bedroom tax’

Margaret Stone asked, given that the bedroom tax means a lot of the most vulnerable people in Sheffield are not going to be able to pay their Council rent, are the Council going to adopt a ‘no evictions’ policy?

Jo Taylor asked why have the Council not reclassified homes that are affected by tenants who are under-occupying and when is the Council to reclassify the homes of tenants that are affected to stop them losing their tenancy?

Patricia Ponssa asked when is a spare bedroom too small to function as a bedroom? She stated that a definition was needed for the purposes of the bedroom tax. A bedroom which is judged too small for a child by adoption authorities should not be liable for tax. She asked will the Council be joining with other councils to reclassify bedrooms?

A question was asked as to whether the Council would support people who campaigned against the bedroom tax?

In response to the questions, Councillor Harry Harpham, Deputy Leader and Cabinet Member for Homes and Neighbourhoods, stated that the Council Administration opposes the ‘bedroom tax’ and supports people who campaigned to get the measure scrapped. The tax did affect families in certain circumstances and particularly, for example, those with disabled children.

The Council would not adopt a policy of no evictions. However, the Council was arranging visits to all homes affected by the bedroom tax, so they might avoid getting into rent arrears in the first place. If the Council did not collect rent, it would affect the level of services which could be delivered for housing, which all came from rent income and this was not considered to be a responsible approach.

The Council would continue to offer all of the help it could, which included signposting people to advice services, such as Citizen’s Advice, the Credit Union, debt advice and support in obtaining employment and this was considered to be the best way to react to the introduction of the bedroom tax.

The Council was looking at whether it could reclassify bedrooms, as suggested in the questions. In the case of Leeds, the reclassification of bedrooms related to hard to let properties and one third of properties in Leeds were still eligible for the bedroom tax. Sheffield City Council was considering the idea of reclassification of bedrooms, although the economic impact of such a policy would also need to be considered.

The size dimensions of a bedroom are not taken into account for the purposes of the bedroom tax. However, room size criteria did apply for fostering and in relation to statutory homelessness.

(b)          Public questions concerning budget cuts

Ian Wallace asked whether the Council agreed that if the Government taxed the rich as even happened under Margaret Thatcher’s early years, then many of these cuts could be avoided.

In response, Councillor Harry Harpham, Deputy Leader and Cabinet Member for Homes and Neighbourhoods, stated that he agreed that the Government should tax the rich as they need to.

(c)          Public question concerning fossil fuel reserves

Beatrice Greenfield asked whether Councillors were aware that there were five times the fossil fuel reserves in the world that can be burned if we were to have a good chance of staying within a two degree global temperature rise and stated, therefore, that we do not need ‘fracking’.

In response, Councillor Jack Scott, Cabinet Member for Environment, Recycling and Streetscene, stated that, it was not thought that the world would run out of fossil fuels and neither should we pretend that a 2 °C rise in global temperature was a success. The IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) report says that a 2 °C rise in temperature may be as damaging in its effects as an increase of 4 °C. It was important that energy in the United Kingdom was de-carbonized. He referred to an amendment to the Energy Bill in Parliament concerning a reduction in the carbon intensity of power generation and the creation of ‘green jobs’ and expressed disappointment that the amendment, which presented an opportunity to create employment in green industries, was defeated in the Commons.

(d)          Public question concerning decarbonisation

Chris Broome stated that there was an ever increasing need for all our elected representatives to develop policies to enable the economy to be decarbonised and yet, on 4 June 2013, an amendment for a decarbonisation target in the Energy Bill was defeated in Parliament. She asked will the Council continue to show commitment to decarbonisation and the low carbon economy and press the Government to do likewise.

In response, Councillor Jack Scott, Cabinet Member for Environment, Recycling and Streetscene, stated that it was necessary to reduce global burning of fossil fuels and decarbonise power. At present, people were vulnerable to unnecessary increases in fuel bills. The low carbon economy was a potential catalyst in the United Kingdom for the creation of green jobs, decreasing carbon and cheaper energy bills. Councillor Scott said that he had written to the Energy Minister, to urge support for the amendment to the Energy Bill, considered in the Commons on 4 June, to which the questioner now referred. Pressure could be put on the Government in relation to this issue and potentially through the introduction of a Private Member’s Bill. The City Council would work with people and organisations towards a decarbonisation target relating to energy generation.

(e)          Public question concerning Councillors against the cuts

Jean Wildgoose stated that she was recently at a Peoples’ Assembly meeting in Nottingham and had talked to a councillor who was a member of Councillors Against the Cuts. She asked whether Sheffield Councillors would also become Members of Councillors Against the Cuts.

In response, Councillor Harry Harpham, Deputy Leader and Cabinet Member for Homes and Neighbourhoods, stated that Labour Councillors were opposed to the cuts. He had heard little about ‘Councillors against the Cuts’. He asked the questioner to provide more information to enable him to give serious consideration to the question posed. He suggested that the questioner write to the Deputy Prime Minister in relation to the budget cuts.

(f)           Public questions concerning street lighting in Wincobank

Valerie Wilson asked why her Tenant’s Association was informed last year that work would be carried out on the street lights this month and, subsequently, 3 weeks ago, they were informed that it would actually be 3 years until the work was done as part of Streets Ahead project. She stated that she had lived on Jedburgh Street for 40 years and there had never been street lights on the side of the road on which her home was located and only three older lights on the other side of the road.

In response, Councillor Jack Scott, Cabinet Member for Environment, Recycling and Streetscene, stated that he was not familiar with the place to which the questioner referred but that he would speak to the ward Councillors and suggested that he visit at night time to see whether an interim solution could be implemented and meet with the questioner and members of the Tenants and Residents’ Association.

(g)          Public question concerning the creation of climate change jobs

Jenny Patient referred to the recent mini-stern report for Sheffield, which shows that 6000 jobs can be created by investing in tackling climate change. She asked how might the Council and the City Region obtain investment in climate change jobs, instead of in fossil fuel extraction, in the area that will cause dangerous climate change.

In response, Councillor Leigh Bramall, the Cabinet Member for Business, Skills and Development stated that, whilst the Council did not control the investment of private companies, it could lobby in relation to the investment necessary for employment in the area of climate change. The City Region Investment Fund was able to be used to boost the economy, the City’s District Heating system might be further utilised and there was potential to build a more self-reliant region in terms of energy. The Local Enterprise Partnership had established a low carbon sector group. There were innovative companies in the City developing processes for power generation, including wave power. He explained that he wanted the City Region to develop a thriving low carbon sector.

(h)          Public questions concerning Streets Ahead contract

Peter Hartley asked at what date will the full contract and price per year be available to the public of the contract between Sheffield City Council and Amey. He stated that he was not pleased by the way that Amey was subcontracting their work and the answer in response to the reporting of a blocked drain that needs the road digging up and the u-bend replacing. He also asked for the detail of the Council’s contract with Kier. Mr Hartley requested a written response to the above questions. 

In response, Councillor Bryan Lodge, the Cabinet Member for Finance and Resources, stated that the Council was as transparent as possible in relation to making information about contracts available to the public. There were elements of confidentiality relating to commercial contracts and the Council requested contractors’ permission to make contractual information available to people. The contracts were publicised.

The multi-million pound Streets Ahead contract was awarded to Amey following extensive negotiations. The contract was in its first year and there would be investment in the highways infrastructure during the next 5 years. Given the scale of the contract, there were things which would go amiss and would need to be properly addressed.

The contract with Kier was subject to renewal at this time. It included repair of housing and management of the remaining civic estate and both were being renegotiated and a meeting was being arranged for interested parties and contractors. Councillor Lodge confirmed that he would write to Mr Hartley concerning the matters that he had raised.

(i)            Public question concerning recording of Council meetings

Martin Brighton referred to Southwark Council, which allowed its citizens to tape and film its meetings and take audio and video recording of meetings. He asked why Sheffield cannot follow the example of Southwark.

In response, Councillor Harry Harpham, Deputy Leader and Cabinet Member for Homes and Neighbourhoods, stated that Councillors had considered the issue of recording meetings and had taken the view that they did not think that it was always appropriate.

(j)            Public question concerning accountability

Martin Brighton made reference to accusations made which related to him and to a recent accusation, in particular, that he was responsible for depriving the employment of two advice workers for a year because of his requests for information. He stated that the Council has cost the taxpayer money by not disclosing the information when first asked and that the Chief Executive had publicly stated that these estimated costs are over half a million pounds and rising. He asked will the Cabinet Member be held to account for these costs. Will the adviser to the relevant Cabinet Member be held to account and will the senior officers be held to account?

In response, Councillor Harry Harpham, Deputy Leader and Cabinet Member for Homes and Neighbourhoods, stated that he had no knowledge of the accusations relating to Mr Brighton, to which he now referred and he suggested that Mr Brighton contact the police if he was aware of such allegations.

(k)          Public question concerning minutes of housing consultation meetings

Martin Brighton stated that, several months ago, in this Chamber, it was agreed that the minutes of all housing consultations and meetings of the eight sub sets could be made available on the Council’s website. He stated that the wishes of the Cabinet Member have not been acted upon, and possibly ignored altogether. He asked, why are the minutes still being withheld from the public and when will they be made available?

In response, Councillor Harry Harpham, Deputy Leader and Cabinet Member for Homes and Neighbourhoods, stated that he had said that the minutes of the eight policy working party meetings should be available on the website and that the minutes were available from April 2013, backdated to November 2012.

(l)            Public question concerning allegations and evidence

Martin Brighton stated that the Council, in response to allegations, accusations or innuendo against Council officers or Members, always insists upon evidence before acting. He asked, what are the Council exceptions to this principle, where it is allowed for the Council officers to impose a sanction and financial prejudice in the absence of evidence and only on the basis of already disproved allegations, accusations and innuendo?

In response, Councillor Harry Harpham, Deputy Leader and Cabinet Member for Homes and Neighbourhoods, stated that, if an allegation was made, then he would expect there to be firm evidence of the matter.