Public Document Pack
Council
Wednesday 6 September 2017 5.00 pm Council Chamber, Town Hall, Pinstone Street, Sheffield, S1 2HH
The Press and Public are Welcome to Attend
COUNCIL
Wednesday 6 September 2017, at 5.00 pm Council Chamber, Town Hall, Pinstone Street, Sheffield, S1 2HH
The Press and Public are Welcome to Attend
MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL
THE LORD MAYOR (Councillor Anne Murphy) THE DEPUTY LORD MAYOR (Councillor Magid Magid)
1 Beauchief & Greenhill Ward 10 East Ecclesfield Ward 19 Nether Edge & Sharrow Ward Andy Nash Pauline Andrews Mohammad Maroof Bob Pullin Andy Bainbridge Jim Steinke Richard Shaw Steve Wilson Alison Teal
2 Beighton Ward 11 Ecclesall Ward 20 Park & Arbourthorne Ward Helen Mirfin-Boukouris Roger Davison Julie Dore Chris Rosling-Josephs Shaffaq Mohammed Ben Miskell Ian Saunders Paul Scriven Jack Scott
3 Birley Ward 12 Firth Park Ward 21 Richmond Ward Denise Fox Abdul Khayum Mike Drabble Bryan Lodge Alan Law Dianne Hurst Karen McGowan Abtisam Mohamed Peter Rippon
4 Broomhill & Sharrow Vale Ward 13 Fulwood Ward 22 Shiregreen & Brightside Ward Michelle Cook Sue Alston Dawn Dale Kieran Harpham Andrew Sangar Peter Price Magid Magid Cliff Woodcraft Garry Weatherall
5 Burngreave Ward 14 Gleadless Valley Ward 23 Southey Ward Jackie Drayton Lewis Dagnall Mike Chaplin Talib Hussain Cate McDonald Tony Damms Mark Jones Chris Peace Jayne Dunn
6 City Ward 15 Graves Park Ward 24 Stannington Ward Douglas Johnson Ian Auckland David Baker Robert Murphy Sue Auckland Penny Baker Moya O'Rourke Steve Ayris Vickie Priestley
7 Crookes & Crosspool Ward 16 Hillsborough Ward 25 Stocksbridge & Upper Don Ward Craig Gamble Pugh Bob Johnson Jack Clarkson Adam Hanrahan George Lindars-Hammond Richard Crowther Anne Murphy Josie Paszek Keith Davis
8 Darnall Ward 17 Manor Castle Ward 26 Walkley Ward Mazher Iqbal Lisa Banes Olivia Blake Mary Lea Terry Fox Ben Curran Zahira Naz Pat Midgley Neale Gibson
9 Dore & Totley Ward 18 Mosborough Ward 27 West Ecclesfield Ward Joe Otten David Barker John Booker Colin Ross Tony Downing Adam Hurst Martin Smith Gail Smith Zoe Sykes
28 Woodhouse Ward Mick Rooney Jackie Satur Paul Wood
John Mothersole Chief Executive
Contact: Paul Robinson, Democratic Services Tel: 0114 2734029 [email protected]
PUBLIC ACCESS TO THE MEETING
The Council is composed of 84 Councillors with one-third elected three years in four. Councillors are democratically accountable to the residents of their Ward. The overriding duty of Councillors is to the whole community, but they have a special duty to their constituents, including those who did not vote for them
All Councillors meet together as the Council. Here Councillors decide the Council‟s overall policies and set the budget each year. The Council appoints the Leader and at its Annual Meeting will appoint Councillors to serve on its Committees. It also appoints representatives to serve on joint bodies and external organisations.
A copy of the agenda and reports is available on the Council‟s website at www.sheffield.gov.uk. You can also see the reports to be discussed at the meeting if you call at the First Point Reception, Town Hall, Pinstone Street entrance. The Reception is open between 9.00 am and 5.00 pm, Monday to Thursday and between 9.00 am and 4.45 pm. on Friday. You may not be allowed to see some reports because they contain confidential information. These items are usually marked * on the agenda.
Members of the public have the right to ask questions or submit petitions to Council meetings and recording is allowed under the direction of the Chair. Please see the website or contact Democratic Services for further information regarding public questions and petitions and details of the Council‟s protocol on audio/visual recording and photography at council meetings.
Council meetings are normally open to the public but sometimes the Council may have to discuss an item in private. If this happens, you will be asked to leave. Any private items are normally left until last. If you would like to attend the meeting please report to the First Point Reception desk where you will be directed to the meeting room.
FACILITIES
There are public toilets available, with wheelchair access, on the ground floor of the Town Hall. Induction loop facilities are available in meeting rooms.
Access for people with mobility difficulties can be obtained through the ramp on the side to the main Town Hall entrance.
COUNCIL AGENDA 6 SEPTEMBER 2017
Order of Business
1. APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE
2. SUSPENSION AND AMENDMENT OF COUNCIL PROCEDURE RULES
To approve, for the duration of this meeting, certain revisions to the Council Procedure Rules, as set out in the schedule included with this agenda, in order to implement changes to the operation of the full Council meeting in accordance with the outcome of the Review of Full Council Meetings Member Working Group.
3. DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST
Members to declare any interests they have in the business to be considered at the meeting.
4. PUBLIC QUESTIONS AND PETITIONS AND OTHER COMMUNICATIONS
(a) 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.
(b) Petition Requiring Debate
The Council‟s Petitions Scheme requires that any petition containing over 5,000 signatures be the subject of debate at the Council meeting. A qualifying petition has been received as follows:-
Night Café for the Homeless and Vulnerable
To debate an electronic petition entitled “Night Café for the Homeless and Vulnerable”. The petition – https://www.change.org/p/sheffield-city-council-night-cafe-for-the- homeless-vulnerable - contains 7,538 supporters (as at 29th August) and includes the following wording:-
Services at night & weekends are none existent. With the help of local businesses and volunteers we would like to run a night cafe for the most vulnerable within our city and to finally bridge the gap between charities & services from closing to opening. The night cafe will also support services getting information out &
help guide people to the right places and be a hub at weekends to act as further support for the outreach teams like street pastors and police to bring people instead of tying up emergency services.
(The following 4 items of business are Notices of Motion submitted in line with the outcome of the Review of Full Council Meetings Member Working Group. 2 further Notices of Motion are included on the agenda as items of business 13 & 14, as these were submitted at variance to the decision of the Working Group.)
5. NOTICE OF MOTION REGARDING "SECURING BETTER TRANSPORT FOR SHEFFIELD AND THE NORTH" - GIVEN BY COUNCILLOR JACK SCOTT AND TO BE SECONDED BY COUNCILLOR OLIVIA BLAKE
That this Council:-
(a) welcomes the confirmation by the Government that high-speed services will run into Sheffield Midland station, and notes that the Labour Group have always championed the benefits of a city centre location for HS2 as this is where the greatest economic impact, transport benefits and job creation will be delivered;
(b) applauds the leadership, determination and hard work of the Council Leader, Councillor Julie Dore, in securing a HS2 city centre location, which will bring the maximum benefits for the whole of South Yorkshire;
(c) affirms that a city centre location is vital to ensuring Sheffield is well placed to maximise the benefits of HS2, and allows for the integration of HS2 with HS3, but believes this must extend to the north as well as to the south;
(d) highlights that whilst we welcome the fact that HS2 Ltd have committed to funding a junction, this Administration will be seeking further commitments from the Government to ensure that the connection north of Sheffield is funded to enable high speed connections out of Midland and up to places like Leeds and Newcastle;
(e) notes that despite the hugely positive news that HS2 will be coming to the centre of Sheffield, the Government have cancelled the electrification of the Midland Mainline which was due to be electrified by 2023; the Government have decided that 'bi-mode' trains - which can switch from electric to diesel power – will instead be introduced;
(f) believes that this move is outrageous and will deny Sheffield faster, greener, more reliable train journeys which would have been a big boost to our economy and would have led to significantly improved
air quality, another key aspiration of this Administration, particularly given the Government's woefully inadequate Air Quality Plan;
(g) believes that the Government‟s decision to cancel the electrification of the Midland Mainline is even more outrageous, given that the Government are continuing with Crossrail 2, a new London rail line, which will cost around £30 billion - denoting that whilst there is extra money for the south, the north continues to get neglected under this Government;
(h) notes that despite this significant setback, it is encouraging that HS2 Ltd said they would ensure that Sheffield was HS2-ready so it could benefit from a spur into the city centre off the main line, being, therefore, unaffected by the Government‟s decision regarding the lack of electrification on the existing line from Sheffield to Kettering, and that this Administration will continue to hold HS2 Ltd to account to ensure this happens;
(i) believes that as a nation we are too London-centric and too centralised; and that much more needs to be done to empower all England‟s regions; figures from the think-tank Institute for Public Policy Research (IPPR) show that funding per head in London for transport is £3,400 compared to just £427 per head in the north, and in total the north would have seen £59 billion more for transport if funded the same as London, and therefore, support is given to calls from Andy Burnham, Mayor of Greater Manchester, for this to be addressed urgently;
(j) states that the disparity between transport in the north of England and London must now be addressed and reiterates comments made by Council Leader, Councillor Julie Dore, prior to the transport summit in Leeds, that the Government must:-
(i) commit to making an integrated transport network across the whole of the north and especially a commitment to a Northern Powerhouse Rail; and
(ii) commit to upgrades that will make an immediate difference – particularly reversing their decision to cancel the electrification of the Midland Mainline.
6. NOTICE OF MOTION REGARDING "TACKLING THE DAMAGE OF FIXED-ODDS BETTING TERMINALS" - GIVEN BY COUNCILLOR JULIE DORE AND TO BE SECONDED BY COUNCILLOR MAZHER IQBAL
That this Council:-
(a) reiterates support for previous Council resolutions calling on the Government to give local authorities the powers they need to
respond to concerns from their local communities and stop the proliferation of Fixed Odds Betting Terminal (FOBT) machines and betting shops;
(b) notes that each betting outlet can provide four FOBT machines which offer casino style content, including games such as roulette, at up to £100 a spin, which can be wagered every 20 seconds;
(c) further notes there are now more than 35,000 FOBTs offering casino content on British high streets, illustrating this is a nation- wide issue, and that there are also more than twice as many betting shops in the 55 local authority areas with the highest levels of deprivation compared with the most affluent 115, which are equivalent by population;
(d) notes the nationwide campaign by leading charities and religious groups to reduce the stakes on category B2 Fixed Odds Betting Terminals in betting outlets from £100 to £2 per spin, and notes that this something which the Government‟s own Department of Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS), which regulates the gambling industry, is examining;
(e) further notes that a recommendation from the DCMS was due in the summer and that the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport (the Rt. Hon. Karen Bradley MP) has expressed frustration in Parliament about the delays;
(f) is dismayed by recent reports that the Chancellor has scrapped the review due to fears that cutting the stake to £2 would cost the Treasury in lost tax revenue;
(g) believes it is outrageous that the Government would make the decision on this basis and agrees with comments by Carolyn Harris MP, Chair of the all-party parliamentary group on fixed-odds betting terminals - “It is morally bankrupt to allow this situation to go on because of a misunderstanding of the economics of FOBTs. Britain will be financially better off if we take action on these machines.”
(h) wholeheartedly supports the campaign to reduce the maximum stake of FOBT to £2;
(i) demands better planning powers to restrict the localised proliferation of bookmakers, who are currently opening multiple premises in clusters to facilitate more machines, in accordance with the wishes of the local community; and
(j) directs that a copy of this motion be sent to the Government to convey Sheffield‟s full support for reducing the cap to £2 and to demand better planning powers for local authorities to deal with this.
7. NOTICE OF MOTION REGARDING "THE ELECTRIFICATION OF MIDLAND MAINLINE" - GIVEN BY COUNCILLOR IAN AUCKLAND AND TO BE SECONDED BY COUNCILLOR JOE OTTEN
That this Council:-
(a) regrets the Government‟s decision to scrap plans announced in 2012 by former Deputy Prime Minister, the Rt. Hon Nick Clegg, to electrify the Midland Mainline to Sheffield;
(b) believes that the decision by Transport Secretary, the Rt. Hon. Chris Grayling MP, to announce his support for Crossrail 2 adds insult to injury and demonstrates that this Government has abandoned its commitment to the Northern Powerhouse;
(c) is disappointed that research by Institute For Public Policy Research (IPPR) North shows Yorkshire and the Humber will get £190 per head of transport spending from 2016/17 onwards compared to £220 in the North East, £680 in the North West and £1,940 in London;
(d) believes that investment in transport connections across the north of England is vital to the goal of rebalancing the economy and bringing more investment and jobs to the north;
(e) further notes Transport for the North‟s independent research published in 2016 in the Northern Powerhouse Independent Economic Review which shows how new investments including „HS3‟ could unlock up to £97 billion and create 850,000 new jobs by 2050;
(f) notes that, to date, 85,000 people have signed a petition calling on the Government to boost transport spending in the north;
(g) notes delays to the Hope Valley capacity scheme, which was due to commence in May 2017 for completion by September 2018;
(h) calls upon the Transport Secretary to:-
(i) reverse the decision to scrap the electrification of the Midland Mainline;
(ii) approve the commencement of the Hope Valley capacity scheme;
(iii) pledge his immediate backing for the Northern Powerhouse Rail programme; and
(iv) give Transport for the North the same powers as those
enjoyed by Transport for London so that it can also raise private finance towards its own transport priorities; and
(i) directs that a copy of this Motion be sent to the Secretary of State for Transport.
8. NOTICE OF MOTION REGARDING THE LABOUR PARTY'S POSITION ON "BREXIT" - GIVEN BY COUNCILLOR JACK CLARKSON AND TO BE SECONDED BY COUNCILLOR KEITH DAVIS
That this Council:-
(a) (i) believes that the Labour Party, by changing its stance to adopt a soft "Brexit" as their party policy, will undermine "Brexit" talks, (ii) notes that the Labour Party now intends to keep Britain in the Single Market and continue with 'open door' EU immigration for at least four more years, which they claim is for an 'interim' period only, (iii) believes that this change of policy is rowing back on their previous Brexit position, especially after the Leader, the Rt. Hon. Jeremy Corbyn MP, stated that the UK had to leave the Single Market to fulfil the Brexit vote and (iv) further believes that many Labour voters will feel betrayed by the Party, due to it changing its stance on Brexit;
(b) is concerned that Jeremy Corbyn has admitted that he has no idea as to how long the "interim' phase would last, meaning a risk that freedom of movement would carry on, contributions to the EU's budgets would continue, and EU judges‟ involvement in the UK would remain;
(c) is appalled that the Shadow Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union, the Rt. Hon. Sir Keir Starmer, MP, has suggested that the Labour Party would leave the door open for staying in the Single Market, which this Council believes is in direct conflict with how the people of this country voted to leave the European Union;
(d) believes that, in respecting the referendum result, the Labour Party adopted a Euro-sceptic position to leave the Single Market and the Customs Union, and further believes that this reversal and change in policy will disgust many of the Party‟s members; and
(e) further believes that (i) the Labour Party has no vision whatsoever as to what Britain should look like outside the European Union, and whether they should leave or remain in the Single Market and (ii) that many of the Party's own MPs are mystified as to the Party‟s position, with continued internal wrangling and disagreements between Jeremy Corbyn and its grass roots members, which shows to the electorate that the Labour Party say one thing and then do another.
9. MEMBERS' QUESTIONS
9.1 Questions relating to urgent business – Council Procedure Rule 16.6(ii).
9.2 Supplementary questions on written questions submitted at this meeting – Council Procedure Rule 16.4.
9.3 Questions on the discharge of the functions of the South Yorkshire Joint Authorities for Fire and Rescue and Pensions – Section 41 of the Local Government Act 1985 – Council Procedure Rule 16.6(i).
(NB. Minutes of recent meetings of the two South Yorkshire Joint Authorities have been made available to all Members of the Council via the following link - http://democracy.sheffield.gov.uk/ecCatDisplay.aspx?sch=doc&cat=13165&path=0)
10. ANNUAL SCRUTINY REPORT 2016-17
To receive the annual report providing an overview of scrutiny activity undertaken by each of the Scrutiny and Policy Development Committees during the 2016/17 Municipal Year, and proposed activity for 2017/18.
Councillor Chris Peace, Lead Member for Scrutiny, will introduce the report, to be followed by an opportunity for Members of the Council to ask questions or make observations on the contents of the report.
11. MINUTES OF PREVIOUS COUNCIL MEETING
To receive the minutes of the meeting of the Council held on 5th July 2017 and to approve their accuracy.
12. REPRESENTATION, DELEGATED AUTHORITY AND RELATED ISSUES
To consider any changes to the memberships and arrangements for meetings of Committees etc., delegated authority, and the appointment of representatives to serve on other bodies.
13. NOTICE OF MOTION REGARDING "THE IMPORTANCE OF CONSTITUTION" - GIVEN BY COUNCILLOR DOUGLAS JOHNSON AND TO BE SECONDED BY COUNCILLOR ALISON TEAL
That this Council:-
(a) believes in the rule of law;
(b) notes that the UK has a long and proud tradition of organising society on rules of law and not on arbitrary decree; and that constitutions and agreed rules of procedure are essential for
democracy to function;
(c) notes the Review of Full Council Meetings Members Working Group has had several constructive meetings about improving the operation of Full Council, including through broadcasting, and will continue to work up options; and
(d) believes, therefore, in the need to safeguard democracy by scrutinising proposed changes to the Council‟s own constitution very carefully and ensuring that any changes comply with the constitution itself.
14. NOTICE OF MOTION REGARDING "REVIEW OF STUDENT ACCOMMODATION" - GIVEN BY COUNCILLOR DOUGLAS JOHNSON AND TO BE SECONDED BY COUNCILLOR ROBERT MURPHY
That this Council:-
(a) notes the report to Cabinet on 18 December 2013 on the Student Accommodation Strategy that warned of the risk that the provision of more purpose-built student accommodation will lead to over- supply and older blocks falling empty;
(b) notes that the Council‟s planning policy CS41 on “Creating mixed communities” requires a mix of tenures and sizes in large blocks of student accommodation and seeks to avoid over-saturation of student accommodation;
(c) however, notes that many recent planning applications for very large blocks of student accommodation have been passed even where not complaint with policy CS41; and
(d) therefore calls on the Administration to carry out an urgent re- assessment of the supply of and demand for student accommodation.
Chief Executive
Dated this 29 day of August 2017
The next ordinary meeting of the Council will be held on 4 October 2017 at the Town Hall
This page is intentionally left blank Agenda Item 2
S H E F F I E L D C I T Y C O U N C I L
COUNCIL MEETING – 6TH SEPTEMBER 2017
Suspension and Amendment of Council Procedure Rules (CPR)
To approve, for the duration of this meeting, the revisions to the Council Procedure Rules, as set out below, in order to implement changes to the operation of this full Council meeting, in accordance with the outcome of the Review of Full Council Meetings Member Working Group.
Revised Rules (Amendments/additions shown in bold text; deletions shown by strikethrough of text)
CPR 5 – Meetings of the Council -
5.4 - Ordinary meetings of the Council shall be held in the Town Hall at 2.00 p.m. 5.00 p.m. on the first Wednesday in months to be determined at the Annual Council Meeting or, in particular circumstances, at such other dates and venues as may be determined by the Lord Mayor or the City Council.
5.5 - Ordinary meetings will terminate at no later than 6.30 p.m. 8.00 p.m. Any unfinished business will normally be voted on without debate at the end of that time. Any meeting starting other than at 2.00 p.m. 5.00 p.m. shall finish no later than four hours and 30 minutes three hours after the start. Special and Extraordinary meetings of the Council shall also be subject to this rule.
CPR 9.1 – Order of Council Business - The business of the Council shall be ordered in the Council Summons so as to include items of public engagement and public interest before other business items, and the business shall be taken in the order in which it appears in the Council Summons. However, the Council may, by a resolution passed on a motion duly moved and seconded, direct the order of precedence to be changed, in circumstances where the subject of a motion proves to generate public interest reflected by a significantly increased attendance by members of the public at a Council meeting and it is therefore deemed appropriate to take the motion in question as an earlier item of business. The motion to change the order of business shall be dealt with in accordance with the process set out in Council Procedure Rule 11(b).
Page 1
CPR 10.2 - Motions set out in agenda
(new rule) (a) For each Motion delivered to the Chief Executive, the written notice must include a subject title and the names of the Members who propose to move and second the Motion at the meeting. The subject title and names will be included in the Council Summons.
(former rule a) - Unless the Member giving notice states, in writing, that he/she proposes to move it to a later meeting or withdraw it, motions for which notice has been given will be listed on the Council Summons in an order based on a pre- determined formula according to the relative size of the various Party Groups on the Council, with Motions being considered in an order of priority identified by the various recognised Groups. The formula shall be agreed at the start of each municipal year, to take account of any changes in size of the Groups etc. The number of Motions submitted through the recognised groups for each ordinary meeting of the Council will be limited to no more than four. Provision shall also be made for the inclusion of any individual Motions that are not submitted through the recognised groups.
CPR 13.1(b) – Petitions Requiring a Council Debate - A 40 minute time limit for the item, with Members able to speak for up to three two minutes each, except for the appropriate Cabinet Portfolio holder’s initial contribution which shall be for up to five minutes.
CPR 17 (Rules of Debate at Council Meetings) -
17.5 – Content and Length of Speeches – Speeches must be directed to the question under discussion or to a personal explanation or point of order. Subject to the provisions of Council Procedure Rules, 11, 17.6, 17.12 and 17.13, speeches on motions or amendments shall be subject to a time limit of 3 minutes each speaker for the proposer of a motion and 2 minutes for the seconder of the motion, the mover and seconder of amendments, all other speakers on the debate, and for the right of reply for the mover of the motion.
17.6 – Time Limit for Debate - All Motions for which notice has been given in the Council Summons shall be subject to a maximum time limit of 25 minutes debate in total per Motion, including any amendments relating thereto. Upon expiry of the time limit, any and all outstanding business relating to that Motion including any amendments relating thereto, will be voted upon without further debate. All reports or presentations to be considered at ordinary meetings of the Council, shall not be subject to a maximum time limit.
Page 2
17.7 – (new Rule) Procedure for Debate –
Debates on motions for which notice has been given in the Council Summons, shall be conducted as follows:-
(a) The motion shall be moved and seconded; (b) Any amendments to the motion shall be moved and seconded in turn; (c) The subject matter under consideration shall be debated as a whole; (d) The mover of the original motion shall have a right of reply at the end of the debate; (e) Votes shall be taken on each amendment and the substantive or original motion.
(formerly 17.7) – When a Member may speak again –
A Member who has spoken on a motion matter may not speak again whilst it is the subject of debate, except:-
(a) to speak once on an amendment moved by another member;
(b) to move a further amendment if the motion has been amended since he/she last spoke;
(c) if his/her first speech was on an amendment moved by another Member, to speak on the main issue (whether or not the amendment on which he/she spoke was carried;
(ad) in exercise of a right of reply;
(be) on a point of order; and
(cf) by way of personal explanation
(formerly 17.8) – Amendments to Motions -
(a) Only one amendment may be moved and discussed at any one time. No further amendment may be moved until the amendment under discussion has been disposed of.
(ab) If an amendment is not carried, other any further amendments that have been moved will apply to the original motion may be moved. If no further amendments have been moved, the original motion is put to the vote.
Page 3 (bc) If an amendment is carried, the motion as amended takes the place of the original motion. This becomes the substantive motion to which any further amendments are moved will apply. If there are no further amendments, the substantive motion is put to the vote.
(formerly 17.12a) – Motions which may be moved during debate - When a motion or amendment matter is under debate, no other motion may be moved except the following procedural motions …….
(formerly 17.13 – paragraphs b & c) – Closure Motions –
(b) If a motion to proceed to next business is moved, seconded and spoken upon and, if not less than five persons have spoken on the motion matter under debate, and at least one member of each of the political parties recognised by the Council as constituting an identifiable and separate Party Group, having previously indicated to him/her a wish to contribute to the debate, has been given the opportunity so to do, the Lord Mayor will give the mover of the original motion a right of reply and then put the procedural motion to the vote.
(c) If a motion that the question be now put is moved, seconded and spoken upon and, if not less than five persons have spoken on the motion matter under debate, and at least one member of each of the political parties recognised by the Council as constituting an identifiable and separate Party Group, having previously indicated to him/her a wish to contribute to the debate, has been given the opportunity so to do, the Lord Mayor will put the procedural motion to the vote. If it is passed in circumstances where debate is on the motion or final amendment to a motion, he/she will give the mover of the original motion a right of reply before putting his/her motion and shall then put any outstanding amendments and the substantive or original motion to the vote.
Page 4 Agenda Item 3
ADVICE TO MEMBERS ON DECLARING INTERESTS AT MEETINGS
If you are present at a meeting of the Council, of its executive or any committee of the executive, or of any committee, sub-committee, joint committee, or joint sub- committee of the authority, and you have a Disclosable Pecuniary Interest (DPI) relating to any business that will be considered at the meeting, you must not:
participate in any discussion of the business at the meeting, or if you become aware of your Disclosable Pecuniary Interest during the meeting, participate further in any discussion of the business, or participate in any vote or further vote taken on the matter at the meeting.
These prohibitions apply to any form of participation, including speaking as a member of the public.
You must:
leave the room (in accordance with the Members’ Code of Conduct) make a verbal declaration of the existence and nature of any DPI at any meeting at which you are present at which an item of business which affects or relates to the subject matter of that interest is under consideration, at or before the consideration of the item of business or as soon as the interest becomes apparent. declare it to the meeting and notify the Council’s Monitoring Officer within 28 days, if the DPI is not already registered.
If you have any of the following pecuniary interests, they are your disclosable pecuniary interests under the new national rules. You have a pecuniary interest if you, or your spouse or civil partner, have a pecuniary interest.
Any employment, office, trade, profession or vocation carried on for profit or gain, which you, or your spouse or civil partner undertakes.
Any payment or provision of any other financial benefit (other than from your council or authority) made or provided within the relevant period* in respect of any expenses incurred by you in carrying out duties as a member, or towards your election expenses. This includes any payment or financial benefit from a trade union within the meaning of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992.
*The relevant period is the 12 months ending on the day when you tell the Monitoring Officer about your disclosable pecuniary interests.
Any contract which is made between you, or your spouse or your civil partner (or a body in which you, or your spouse or your civil partner, has a beneficial interest) and your council or authority –
- under which goods or services are to be provided or works are to be executed; and - which has not been fully discharged.
Page 5 1
Any beneficial interest in land which you, or your spouse or your civil partner, have and which is within the area of your council or authority.
Any licence (alone or jointly with others) which you, or your spouse or your civil partner, holds to occupy land in the area of your council or authority for a month or longer.
Any tenancy where (to your knowledge) – - the landlord is your council or authority; and - the tenant is a body in which you, or your spouse or your civil partner, has a beneficial interest.
Any beneficial interest which you, or your spouse or your civil partner has in securities of a body where -
(a) that body (to your knowledge) has a place of business or land in the area of your council or authority; and
(b) either - - the total nominal value of the securities exceeds £25,000 or one hundredth of the total issued share capital of that body; or - if the share capital of that body is of more than one class, the total nominal value of the shares of any one class in which you, or your spouse or your civil partner, has a beneficial interest exceeds one hundredth of the total issued share capital of that class.
If you attend a meeting at which any item of business is to be considered and you are aware that you have a personal interest in the matter which does not amount to a DPI, you must make verbal declaration of the existence and nature of that interest at or before the consideration of the item of business or as soon as the interest becomes apparent. You should leave the room if your continued presence is incompatible with the 7 Principles of Public Life (selflessness; integrity; objectivity; accountability; openness; honesty; and leadership).
You have a personal interest where –
a decision in relation to that business might reasonably be regarded as affecting the well-being or financial standing (including interests in land and easements over land) of you or a member of your family or a person or an organisation with whom you have a close association to a greater extent than it would affect the majority of the Council Tax payers, ratepayers or inhabitants of the ward or electoral area for which you have been elected or otherwise of the Authority’s administrative area, or
it relates to or is likely to affect any of the interests that are defined as DPIs but are in respect of a member of your family (other than a partner) or a person with whom you have a close association.
Page 6 2 Guidance on declarations of interest, incorporating regulations published by the Government in relation to Disclosable Pecuniary Interests, has been circulated to you previously.
You should identify any potential interest you may have relating to business to be considered at the meeting. This will help you and anyone that you ask for advice to fully consider all the circumstances before deciding what action you should take.
In certain circumstances the Council may grant a dispensation to permit a Member to take part in the business of the Authority even if the member has a Disclosable Pecuniary Interest relating to that business.
To obtain a dispensation, you must write to the Monitoring Officer at least 48 hours before the meeting in question, explaining why a dispensation is sought and desirable, and specifying the period of time for which it is sought. The Monitoring Officer may consult with the Independent Person or the Council’s Audit and Standards Committee in relation to a request for dispensation.
Further advice can be obtained from Gillian Duckworth, Director of Legal and Governance on 0114 2734018 or email [email protected].
Page 7 3 This page is intentionally left blank Agenda Item 10
SHEFFIELD CITY COUNCIL
Full Council
Report of: Overview and Scrutiny Management Committee ______
Report to: Full Council ______
Date: 6th September 2017 ______
Subject: Annual Scrutiny Report ______
Author of Report: Alice Nicholson, Diane Owens & Emily Standbrook-Shaw 0114 273 5065 ______
Summary:
This item presents the Annual Scrutiny Report 2016/17. The Annual Report provides an overview of scrutiny activity undertaken during the 2016/17 municipal year as well as Scrutiny priorities and highlights for 2017/18. It summarises the work of the Council’s 5 Scrutiny & Policy Development Committees: Overview and Scrutiny Management Committee Children Young People and Family Support Economic and Environmental Wellbeing Healthier Communities and Adult Social Care Safer and Stronger Communities ______
Recommendations:
Full Council is asked to note the work undertaken through the scrutiny committees during the 2016/17 municipal year, and proposed for 2017/18. ______
Background Papers: None
Category of Report: NONE
Page 9 1 of 1 This page is intentionally left blank
Sheffield Scrutiny Annual Report: 2016/2017
Page 11 Page
September 2017
Contents
Contents ...... 1
1.0 Introduction ...... 2
1.1 Chair‟s Introduction – Cllr Chris Peace, Chair of Overview and Scrutiny Management Committee 2017/18 ...... 2
1.2 Sheffield Scrutiny ...... 3
2.0 Overview of activity 2016/17 ...... 4
Page 12 Page 2.1 Overview & Scrutiny Management Committee 2016/17 ...... 5
2.2 Children, Young People & Family Support 2016/17 ...... 7
2.3 Healthier Communities & Adult Social Care 2016/17 ...... 13
2.4 Safer & Stronger 2016/17 ...... 1316
2.5 Economic & Environmental Wellbeing 2016/17 ...... 21
3.0 Scrutiny Objectives 2017-18 ...... 23
3.1 Approach to Scrutiny ...... 23
3.2 Proposed Work Programme 2017-18 highlights ...... 23
1 | P a g e
4.0 Recommendations ...... 27
1.0 Introduction
1.1 Chair‟s Introduction – Cllr Chris Peace, Chair of Overview and Scrutiny Management Committee 2017/18 Page 13 Page As Chair of Overview and Scrutiny Management Committee 2017/18 I present this report giving an overview of scrutiny activity during the 2016/17 municipal year, and looking forward at scrutiny priorities and highlights for 2017/18.
I would like to take this opportunity to thank all those who have given their time and expertise to support the work of the Scrutiny Committees this year - city partners, including public, voluntary and private sector organisations who have made a valuable contribution to our in-depth task groups; co-optees and observers on Scrutiny Committees who bring a different perspective to our work; members of the public who have raised issues through questions and petitions; officers from a range of organisations who provide us with information, advice and support as well as Members of the Council who drive the scrutiny process forward. This co- operation and collaboration enables us to do our job efficiently and effectively on behalf of the people of Sheffield.
2 | P a g e
This year we will continue to focus on policy development, and look at issues where we can have the most impact. We will keep working hard to ensure that the voice of Sheffield people is reflected through scrutiny, and that our recommendations lead to positive changes.
1.2 Sheffield Scrutiny
Scrutiny helps ensure that people making decisions are held to account, promoting clear and open decision making. It has a policy development role, investigating issues that are important to the people of Sheffield and making recommendations to decision
Page 14 Page makers about how we could do things differently. Scrutiny also has some statutory responsibilities that extend beyond the Council – to consider significant changes to health services and to scrutinise the work of the Safer and Sustainable Communities Partnership Board. Our meetings are open to the public to attend and every agenda has an item that allows members of the public to ask a question. Our Committees‟ membership includes statutory diocese representatives and parent governors, a co-opted school governor representative and observers from Healthwatch Sheffield.
In Sheffield, the Scrutiny function is carried out through 5 Committees:
Overview and Scrutiny Management Committee
Children Young People and Family Support
Economic and Environmental Wellbeing
3 | P a g e
Healthier Communities and Adult Social Care
Safer and Stronger Communities
2.0 Overview of activity 2016/17
Between them the 5 scrutiny committees in 2016/17 held 31 formal meetings, and covered over 70 subject areas. Depending on the nature of the topics, the extent to which detailed scrutiny is required, and the time and resources at their disposal, scrutiny committees use a range of approaches, including:
Page 15 Page looking at issues in detail at meetings through single item agendas, in some cases using the style of a parliamentary select committee
requesting briefing papers for information/awareness which in some cases may highlight a need for more detailed scrutiny
running in-depth task group reviews and sub-groups taking evidence from different sources and forming propositions to take back to the formal scrutiny committees
holding „call-ins‟ of decisions where some councillors have concerns to such an extent that they believe the decision should be reviewed, and
considering petitions that have been brought direct to Scrutiny or to Full Council and then referred to scrutiny.
4 | P a g e
Two in depth, “task group” reviews were undertaken during 2016/17, one on Hate Crime, detailed further on page 16, the recommendations of which have helped to form a Hate Crime action plan for the Safer and Sustainable Communities Partnership Board; and one on Western Road War Memorial, which was referred to Scrutiny by Full Council following a petition, reflecting the strength of public interest in this issue. The work of this group is ongoing and it will report in 2017/18.
There have been 6 „call-ins‟ this year, on issues ranging from primary school places to waste services, where Committees have reviewed decisions that have been made. After considering the issues, in each case the Committees voted to let the decisions stand.
Detailed information about the work of each Committee is set out below. Page 16 Page 2.1 Overview & Scrutiny Management Committee
Chaired by Cllr Tony Damms, OSMC‟s role is to lead on the scrutiny work planning process; lead the scrutiny of high level cross- cutting and city-wide issues – appointing joint committees where appropriate; scrutinise the use of Council resources – Resources Portfolio, budget monitoring, annual budget setting process; and monitor performance – referring areas of concern to the relevant Scrutiny and Policy Development Committee where appropriate.
Highlights from the work of the Committee in 2016/17 include:
Customer Experience Strategy – The Committee were briefed on the Customer Experience Strategy, delivering the priority „an in touch organisation‟ of Sheffield City Councils Corporate Plan. The Committee were brought up to date with the programme, and were pleased to hear there will be a new design for the Council‟s website launched April 2017, with ongoing developments to
5 | P a g e
improve customer experience of the website, members of the Committee were encouraged to hear the Council will keep all usual access channels open, including in person at Howden House.
How Sheffield City Council wants to do business: Ethical Procurement - The Committee previously considered a report on this topic in November 2015. The Committee looked at progress on this piece of work, the purpose of which is to enable the Council to „conduct business ethically, effectively and efficiently for the benefit of Sheffield‟ , they heard about a series of proposed revisions to protocols, process and tools, running across the City Council and its supply chain. The Committee asked the protocols be developed to maximise the Council‟s discretionary powers where appropriate.
Public Feedback on Scrutiny – The Committee received an overview of feedback given via the public feedback forms at each Scrutiny Committee meeting through the year 2016/17. Public feedback was that those attending did so fairly equally to listen or to Page 17 Page ask a question. The feedback included comments relating to the physical environment of the meetings, for example difficulty hearing the debate or style and content of meeting, the public welcome the opportunity to ask questions, and commented on the useful informative content and discussion at meetings.
Annual Performance Review 2016/17 and Quarter 2 update - The Committee considered an overview of Council performance 2016/17, which provided an opportunity to refer any concerns on particular performance indicators to specific Scrutiny and Policy Development Committees. Later in the year the Committee received a further update on Council performance 2017/18 at Quarter 2.
Revenue Budget and Capital Programme 2017/18 and Monitoring 2016/17 – in February 2017 the Committee considered the Revenue Budget and Capital Programme 2017/18 proposal, and agreed it be submitted to Cabinet without amendment. In November 2016 the Committee considered the latest revenue and capital budget 2016/17 monitoring reports.
6 | P a g e
2.2 Children, Young People & Family Support 2015/16
Chair: Cllr Ian Saunders Deputy Chair: Cllr Steve Ayris
Remit of the committee: Early Years, Children's Social Care, Child Safeguarding, Education, Family Support, and Youth Services.
Highlights from the work of the committee in 2016-17 included:
Delivering the SEND Reforms in Sheffield: an update on progress
Page 18 Page The Committee dedicated its September 2016 meeting to look at the progress being made in delivering changes to SEND services (special educational needs and disability); which were introduced by the 2014 Children & Families Act. The report outlined the progress being made across six main areas; the Inclusion Strategy, locality working, “the local offer”, delivering Education Health and Care Plans (EHC Plans), working with parents, children and young people and inspection arrangements.
The Children & Families Act brought in a requirement for all eligible children and young people to have an Education and Health Care (EHC) Plan, along with a statutory condition for plans to complete within 20 weeks. The Committee heard that Sheffield needs to convert over 2,000 statements into EHC Plans by April 2018 and that a number of factors mean there have been challenges in completing plans and meeting the statutory timescales.
7 | P a g e
The Committee raised questions and discussed a range of areas, including performance, staff training, provision in schools and school places and the role of parents. The Committee expressed its concerns regarding delivery of the SEND reforms, but accepted that steps were being taken to address these concerns. The Committee also agreed that the Chair and Deputy Chair should meet with the Cabinet Member and Executive Director for Children, Young People & Families to have a further discussion about some of the issues that had been raised. In addition, at its February meeting, the committee agreed to put co-production and SEND forward as a topic for consideration as part of the 2017-18 Work Programme.
Support & Services for Young Carers
Page 19 Page In November 2016 the Committee received a joint report from the Council and Sheffield Young Carers to update them on support and services for young carers, with reference to the requirements of both the Children & Families Act and Care Act 2014. The Children & Families Act came into force in April 2015. It significantly strengthened the rights of young carers and included new duties and requirements for local authorities. The Committee heard about the joint working between the Council and Sheffield Young Carers and the role of young carers through the Carers & Young Carers Board.
The report confirmed that Sheffield has made significant progress in widening the use of the young carer assessment and actions are in place to progress this still further. The Committee asked questions on a number of areas including assessment routes and processes, the role of health services, levels of support and early intervention and the role of schools. The Committee supported ongoing work to identify and support young carers in the city; including the fact Sheffield was a pilot area for the national Young
8 | P a g e
Carers in Schools Award, supported by Learn Sheffield, noting that four schools have achieved the award to date. The Committee were also supportive of the commitment in the School Improvement Strategy to identify every young carer in the city by 2020. However, they were concerned to hear that some schools have not yet identified a Young Carers Lead. In light of this the Committee asked the Chair to contact the Cabinet Member and the Executive Director for Children, Young People and Families, to ask that they write to all schools in the City to encourage them to nominate a Young Carers‟ Champion and get in touch with Sheffield Young Carers. This communication was sent in January 2017 around the time of Young Carers Awareness Day. The Committee will be following up with Sheffield Young Carers to understand the impact of this approach.
Page 20 Page Sheffield’s Emotional Wellbeing and Mental Health Transformation Programme, in response to Future in Mind.
The Committee dedicated its December 2016 meeting to focus on Sheffield‟s Emotional Wellbeing and Mental Health Transformation Programme, including a specific update on work in schools. A joint report was produced by the Council and Clinical Commissioning Group (CCG) and the session was attended by officers from SCC, the CCG, Sheffield Children‟s NHS Foundation Trust and Chilypep.
The Committee were pleased to hear about some of the progress being made in this area, including the Let‟s Talk Directory, the CAMHS School Link pilot and plans to ensure learning from this would be shared and progressed. The Committee also welcomed the early intervention approach being adopted and the commitment to parity of esteem between health and mental health.
9 | P a g e
However, there was some concern regarding consistent practice across schools in the city. The committee acknowledged the ongoing work across the school sector and with head teachers from the pilot schools, to both facilitate shared learning from the pilot and ensure a more consistent approach across the city; along with the challenging financial context. In light of this and in support of the ongoing work the Committee asked that the Chair write to Stephen Betts, Chief Executive, Learn Sheffield to ask for his support in encouraging all schools to engage with the Emotional Wellbeing and Mental Health Transformation Programme, including nominating a member of their Senior Leadership Team to act as an overall lead in terms of emotional wellbeing and mental health in their school. The Chair is due to meet with Stephen Betts and Jayne Ludlam in May (meeting delayed due to illness) to further discuss these issues and the request of the committee. Page 21 Page
School Attainment in 2016
In November 2016 the committee received a report outlining the provisional attainment results for the city. In advance of the scrutiny session members of the Committee attended a short briefing on data analysis, which covered the approaches and techniques used for attainment data and included example data sets.
At the scrutiny session, the committee received a detailed update on the provisional attainment results from Foundation Stage through to Key Stage 4. Members of the Committee asked questions around a broad range of areas, including joint working between schools, the role of Learn Sheffield, conversions to academies, attainment gaps and exclusions.
10 | P a g e
In conclusion, the Committee expressed its thanks to officers, teachers and pupils with regard to the progress that has been achieved in terms of attainment. They also requested a further more detailed report once validated data was available in the New Year and asked that this report also include a specific update on attainment of the following groups:
Special educational needs (SEN), black minority ethnic (BME), English as an additional language (EAL ) and Pupil Premium, and Locality comparison data and schools below floor target
Page 22 Page
This further report entitled “Final Results: City Context and School Performance” was presented to the committee in February 2017. Again the committee raised questions across a broad range of areas, with specific focus on attainment gaps and partnership working. In conclusion the Committee congratulated staff and students across the authority for the improvements in school attainment. They also asked that a report on Learn Sheffield and its role in school improvement be added to the Work Programme for 2017-18.
Scrutiny Prevent Task Group Update
The Scrutiny Committee set up a task group to look at PREVENT in 2015. The group focussed on statutory requirements outlined in the Counter-Terrorism and Security Act, and which came into force in July 2015. The Act introduced statutory measures intended to reduce the risk of individuals being drawn into terrorist activity. The Task Group focussed on the implications for children and
11 | P a g e
young people, and how we are responding to this in Sheffield. The Group reviewed evidence and identified a set of findings and recommendations across four themes: training and education, partnership working, safeguarding (telephone support & advice), and information gathering & sharing.
The recommendations were presented to Sheffield Council‟s Cabinet in March 2016 with a request for an update report by the end of the year. The Committee received this update in December 2016. The report they received provided an update on PREVENT and the latest policy content, it also outlined the current position against each of the ten recommendations made by the Task Group. The Committee noted the progress that had been made and thanked officers for the report.
Page 23 Page
12 | P a g e
2.3 Healthier Communities & Adult Social Care 2015/16
Chair: Cllr Pat Midgley Deputy Chair: Cllr Sue Alston
Remit of the Committee: Local NHS Services and Health Service Commissioning, Local Health Services, including the power of referral to the Secretary of State for Health, Public Health, Health Inequalities, Adult Social Care and support, Adult Safeguarding
Highlights from the work of the Committee in 2016/17 include:
Shaping Sheffield: The Plan – this place based plan was considered at a special meeting in February 2017. The Committee expressed concerns about the plan and established a Members Working Group to further examine the document as presented and Page 24 Page make recommendations to be forwarded to Sheffield Place Based and Director Leads. This Committee can choose to include ongoing progress of Shaping Sheffield: The Plan in its work programme for 2017/18.
Public Health Strategy – was considered on two occasions, firstly in draft in September 2016 and then in April 2017. In September the committee raised issues for inclusion such as Dental Health, particularly children; the language of the strategy; consideration of public health issues in determining licensing and planning applications; the city‟s healthy life expectancy reducing.In April the committee undertook an in-depth consideration of the final strategy, including the featured principle in the strategy of „Health in All Policies‟. The Scrutiny Committee was asked to inform „where to focus energy first?‟ out of the 10 areas highlighted in the strategy.
Community Pharmacy: national contract changes – this item responded to issues of concern regarding a changing landscape for community pharmacy and impact in Sheffield. The future fairness and inequality of pharmacy provision across the city, with a possible reduction in Community Pharmacy in the city was highlighted. The Committee heard from both NHS England and
13 | P a g e
Community Pharmacy Sheffield. NHS England indicated there would be minimal impact on patient health in Sheffield and an assessment of local progress on the Community Pharmacy Contract changes in Sheffield will be shared with the Committee.
Care Quality Commission Visits to General Practices Reports – Sheffield Clinical Commissioning Group (CCG) shared outcomes of the Care Quality Commission (CQC) inspection visits to Sheffield based General Practices. Sheffield CCG reflected on their activity to resolve issues identified through inspection. The Committee heard Sheffield CCG was proactive on quality and works with a practice on how it could improve. Not all General Practices in Sheffield had been inspected at the point of consideration, and a further report will be made available for the Committee when complete.
Adult Safeguarding – Following agreement last year to develop the relationship between Healthier Communities and Adult Social
Page 25 Page Care Scrutiny and Policy Development Committee and Adult Safeguarding, committee members attended a special training and awareness session provided by Sheffield Adult Safeguarding Board Chair and Head of Quality and Adult Safeguarding.
Home Care Task Group: Response – In April the Committee received a response to their Home Care Task Group Report of 2016, the aim of which was to improve the quality of home care services for Sheffield People. This noted that Adult Services propose changes in the next 6-12 months that respond directly to 8 of 10 original recommendations. This includes implementing a new mode of working for social work teams from August 2017; a new commissioning model and contract specification from October 2017 and introduction of a Case Management System from April 2018; tighter conditions for use of calls under 30 minutes in future; moving to an outcome based commissioning approach, a change over 4-5 years, with the new commissioning specification a start. All these are a positive response to the scrutiny committee recommendations across three of the four task group report themes: Assessment, Strategic Approach to Commissioning, Working with Providers. Adult Services referred to User Focussed Services as
14 | P a g e
being worked on as a priority this year, developing a robust mechanism with Healthwatch for collecting feedback from people who receive home care.
Scrutiny of Health activity outside of work programme
Commissioners Working Together Joint Health Overview and Scrutiny Committee - Councillor Pat Midgley represents Sheffield City Council on this Committee that meets in relation to the Commissioners Working Together Collaborative and Health Service Change in South and Mid Yorkshire, Bassetlaw and North Derbyshire. It is focussing on two NHS service reconfigurations - Hyper Acute Stroke Services; and Children‟s Surgery and Anaesthesia. Sheffield Healthier Communities and Adult Social Care Scrutiny and Policy Development Committee receive updates on activity. A Commissioners Working Together Joint Health Page 26 Page Overview and Scrutiny Committee has met four times this year and is scheduled to meet in June/July 2017.
15 | P a g e
2.4 Safer & Stronger 2015/16
Chair: Cllr Tony Damms Deputy Chair: Cllr Richard Shaw
Remit of the committee: Housing, Community Safety and Crime, Community Cohesion, Social Inclusion and Locality Management
Highlights from the work of the committee in 2016-17 included:
Hate Crime
Public awareness and understanding of hate crime has increased in recent years, as have levels of reporting. However, data
Page 27 Page suggest that it is still significantly underreported. Members were aware of public concern around this issue and following a number of discussions at Full Council at its meeting in September 2016 the Safer & Stronger Communities Scrutiny Committee agreed to set up a cross party Task Group to look at hate crime in more depth.
Following initial discussions around some of the issues involved, and a recognition that there was also work being led by other groups and organisations in the city, including the Equality Hub Network, the Group agreed to focus on the reporting of hate crime, specifically: “To understand the different ways hate crime can be reported in Sheffield, identifying things that are working well and any areas where improvements could be made”.
16 | P a g e
The Task Group used a range of approaches to gather data for their review, including desk top research, evidence gathering sessions and events and workshops. Members met with a number of individuals and organisations, including Sheffield‟s Equality Hub Network, Young Advisors from Sheffield Futures, and members of Sheffield Voices, a self-advocacy group for people with a learning disability.
The Task Group Report outlines their findings and recommendations. The recommendations aim to raise awareness of hate crime, increase reporting, support partnership working, and improve the data we have available in the city. This includes introducing a 24/7 helpline for victims who don‟t want to contact the Police directly, improved communication materials, and targeted awareness
Page 28 Page raising campaigns. The report was approved by the Scrutiny Committee in February 2017 and will be presented to Cabinet in April 2017. Cabinet will be asked for an initial response to their recommendations by July 2017, with a more detailed progress report to be provided by the end of 2017. As a number of the recommendations relate to the work of the Safer & Sustainable Communities Partnership Board, the Scrutiny Community will share their report with the Partnership Board in May 2017.
Linked to this work from October 2016 the Committee agreed to request regular briefing papers on hate crime and hate incidents in the city. These reports were produced by the Anti-social Behaviour and Community Safety Team and were submitted to each bi- monthly meeting. The reports gave a brief overview of the statistical data for the previous 12 months.
17 | P a g e
Neighbourhood Working: A New Approach for Sheffield
In February 2017, in advance of formal decisions being made, the Committee took the opportunity to look at the initial thinking on a new approach to neighbourhood level working in Sheffield. The Scrutiny session was attended by Councillor Jack Scott, Cabinet Member for Community Services and Libraries and Laurie Brennan, Policy and Improvement Manager who outlined that the approach which is designed to enhance the current Local Area Partnership (LAPs) model and bring a greater focus on developing community resilience across the city. The presentation outlined the two main strands of effective neighbourhood working, community leadership, empowerment and engagement and public service delivery. It confirmed that the developing proposals aimed to build upon the strengths of the LAP model and suggest that there is an opportunity to strengthen the support communities and Elected Members. Page 29 Page
Scrutiny Members raised questions and discussed a range of areas including: links with housing providers and local Area Housing Forums, best practice from other areas, community engagement, and the size of the current LAP areas. The Committee heard that a Cabinet paper would be brought forward in the coming months to establish the new model, which would then be reviewed after 12 months. The Committee requested an update prior to 12 months into implementation, and has scheduled this into their Draft Work Programme for 2017-18.
18 | P a g e
Welfare reform
Due to the scale and pace of change in relation to welfare reform in recent years the Committee have continued to receive reports regarding the changes and their impact. In December 2016 the Committee requested a further update, to include specific information on Personal Independence Payments (PIPs) and Universal Credit (UC).
The report set out the most significant current and future welfare benefit changes and provided information about how these had been addressed by the Council and its partners. The Committee heard that there were only a small number of people in Sheffield claiming Universal Credit (UC), with full roll out due to take place from July 2018. Personal Independence Payments (PIPs) had Page 30 Page started to replace Disability Living Allowance and, at the moment, the initial impact seemed to be manageable in Sheffield. However, evidence suggested that in other regions, the introduction of PIP had led to a reduction in the awards made. In terms of the lower Benefit Cap from January 2017, it was anticipated that there would be a rise from 113 households affected, to approximately 900.
Members of the Committee discussed the impact on council tenants, debt advice and support, and support for tenants of Registered Social Landlords. The Committee asked for a further briefing note on how the recently announced Autumn Statement was affecting tenants and the financial impact of these changes on the HRA (Housing Revenue Account). The Committee also asked that Officers undertake work to understand the costs incurred by the Council when carrying out an eviction, including rehousing after the eviction, and that this be shared with the Committee once complete.
19 | P a g e
Safer & Stronger Communities Partnership
In February 2017 the Committee received an annual update on the work of the Safer & Sustainable Communities Partnership. The presentation described the issues which had been faced by the Partnership over the last year and looked to its priorities for 2017/18. The presentation outlined membership of the Partnership Board and confirmed the statutory requirements linked to the board and the development of a strategy. The Committee heard that the Board includes representatives from South Yorkshire Police, the Local Authority, the Fire and Rescue Service, the Probation Service, the Clinical Commissioning Group (CCG) and the Voluntary Sector. Budget reductions meant there was a continuing need for effective partnership working to tackle issues with little or no additional resource. Reference was also made to performance; the new multi-agency Anti-Social Behaviour Team; work with Page 31 Page local communities; and approaches to restorative justice - including how it can be used to respond to hate crime.
The Committee questioned areas including: resources and budgets, work linked to PREVENT, relationships and joint working with local communities, and the partnership working arrangements with South Yorkshire Trading Standards and the Licensing Service to tackle safeguarding issues. In light of the level of interest from members, the Committee asked that Officers arrange an information session that is open to all Elected Members to provide an update on the work of the Sheffield Safer and Sustainable Communities Partnership. The session will take place in early May 2017.
20 | P a g e
2.5 Economic & Environmental Wellbeing 2015/16
Chair: Cllr Steve Wilson Deputy Chair: Cllr Ian Auckland
Remit of the Committee: Economic and Business Sector Development, Regeneration and Physical Development, Enterprise and Skills, Sustainable Development and Climate Change, Culture, Leisure and Tourism, Transport
Highlights from the work of the Committee in 2016/17 include:
Sheffield Bus Partnership (SBP) review – in 2015/16 as a result of an early review of the Sheffield Bus Partnership, there were a
Page 32 Page number of local petitions regarding changes to bus services and the Committee took an opportunity early in 2016/17 to hear again from South Yorkshire Passenger Transport Executive (SYPTE) and bus operators in regard to performance and key actions. They heard that punctuality had improved, and that Sheffield had been successful in securing funding to support introduction of more low emission vehicles.
Protecting Sheffield from flooding – the Committee considered the recent consultation activity and heard from the Sheffield Cabinet Member and the flood and water management team alongside other bodies including, Yorkshire Water, Moors for the Future Partnership, Peak District National Park and Sheffield & Rotherham Wildlife Trust. The Committee emphasised that officers should work with partners to look at the possibility of establishing a formally constituted Partnership Group. This should comprise representatives from all relevant agencies and organisations and members of the public, to look at all aspects of flood management including natural flood management and a whole catchment approach.
21 | P a g e
Call In of Cabinet Decisions - there were two call-ins of Cabinet Decisions in this municipal year by Economic and Environmental Wellbeing Scrutiny and Policy Development Committee. The Committee looked at the Waste Services Review: Consideration of Delivery Solutions for Waste Services and tested whether the market would respond to the opportunity to tender for waste collection services, the implications and risks of transfer of staff for elements being brought back in house now and possible future insourcing. The call- in of the China Economic and Civic Programme Update tested whether the views of current library staff, interest and user groups had been sought; whether any consideration had been given to other possible funding streams; what had been agreed between the Council and Guodong in June 2016; the nature of the Exclusivity Agreement, and whether this prevented the Council from engaging with other potential investors.
Western Road First World War Memorial task and finish cross party working group – this was set up to gather information
Page 33 Page and evidence to inform recommendations regarding the future of the Western Road First World War Memorial. The activity was prompted by a petition to Full Council in January 2017 in regard to trees on Western Road that are intrinsic to the war memorial. Following completion of the review, the report will be presented to the Economic and Environmental Wellbeing Scrutiny and Policy Development Committee for consideration, and then be presented to Full Council.
Economic Landscape – The Committee agreed to a task group on Economic Landscape in Sheffield this year. However, the timetable and format was revised in light of the request by Full Council to establish the Western Road First World War Memorial task and finish scrutiny working group. Over meetings with the Sheffield Chamber of Commerce and Industry in February 2017 and Creative Sheffield and Planning Services in April 2017, the Committee posed three questions: Is Sheffield serving the needs of business/developers? Are there any lessons for the future? How do we compare with other Cities or places?
22 | P a g e
3.0 Scrutiny Objectives 2017-18
3.1 Approach to Scrutiny
This year we will continue to have a policy focus in our work, aiming to look at issues where we can have the most impact. We want to look at how we can better engage and involve the public in Scrutiny‟s work, and improve our online information. We want to support scrutiny members to develop their skills and knowledge through training, where appropriate, and take a more joined up approach to scrutiny across the 5 Committees. Page 34 Page We will continue to work across the region and sub-region through our membership of Joint Health Overview and Scrutiny Committees looking at health service reconfigurations across various footprints and through links with the Sheffield City Region and the Police and Crime Panel.
3.2 Proposed Work Programme 2017-18 highlights
The following table shows intended topics from the Work Programme 2017/18. The scrutiny work programme is a living document and appropriate items can be suggested by members of the Committees throughout the municipal year.
23 | P a g e
Scrutiny Committees Work Programme 2017/18 highlights
Overview & Scrutiny Management Committee (OSMC)
To take an overview of Council performance and consider the performance Annual Performance Update 2017-18 management framework.
To consider the current and future position of local government funding, to include The Future of Local Government Funding changes to business rates, and steps the Council is taking to maximise income.
Page 35 Page Revenue Budget and Capital Programme To consider the budget and capital programme 2018/19 proposals before they are 2018/19 agreed by Cabinet
Children, Young People and Family Support
To receive a report on School Exclusions in the City. To include statistics on School Exclusions exclusions and analysis in terms of the factors that contribute to exclusions. It will also outline details of the appeals process and outcomes.
To consider how many children are educated in alternative settings, what the Home Education and Alternative Provision monitoring arrangements are and any social and emotional wellbeing issues.
24 | P a g e
To consider performance data on the 6 stages of the adoption process and a flow Adoption Performance chart outlining the stages of the process and expected timescales.
Healthier Communities and Adult Social Care
Select Committee style session to consider the state of dental and oral health in Oral and Dental Health Sheffield, in both adults and children, looking at how dental services are commissioned and oral public health initiatives Page 36 Page
To consider the proposals put forward by the Clinical Commissioning Group following Urgent Care Review their review of Urgent Care, as well as the consultation plan
To consider the draft Food Strategy with a particular focus on health, inequality and Food Strategy poverty.
Safer & Stronger Communities
To monitor progress on the implementation of the recommendations made by the Hate Crime follow up Committee following its task group looking at Hate Crime.
25 | P a g e
To consider current policy, activity and commissioning around homelessness, rough Homelessness sleeping and the Housing Independence Commission.
To consider current neighbourhood policing arrangements, including the combined Neighbourhood Policing Council/South Yorkshire Police team, future direction and progressing the Safe City agenda
Economic and Environmental Wellbeing
Page 37 Page Making it happen, a look at Programme/action plan for this Sheffield sustainability Growing Sustainably strategy - response to report of Sheffield Green Commission
To consider the Cabinet response to the recommendations of Committee‟s working Western Road War Memorial group.
26 | P a g e
4.0 Recommendations
4.1 Full Council is asked to note the work undertaken through the scrutiny committees during the 2016/17 municipal year and proposed for 2017/18
Page 38 Page
27 | P a g e
Agenda Item 11
Minutes of the Meeting of the Council of the City of Sheffield held in the Council Chamber, Town Hall, Pinstone Street, Sheffield, S1 2HH, on Wednesday 5 July 2017, at 2.00 pm, pursuant to notice duly given and Summonses duly served.
PRESENT
THE LORD MAYOR (Councillor Anne Murphy) THE DEPUTY LORD MAYOR (Councillor Magid Magid)
1 Beauchief & Greenhill Ward 10 East Ecclesfield Ward 19 Nether Edge & Sharrow Ward Andy Nash Pauline Andrews Mohammad Maroof Bob Pullin Andy Bainbridge Jim Steinke Richard Shaw Steve Wilson Alison Teal
2 Beighton Ward 11 Ecclesall Ward 20 Park & Arbourthorne Ian Saunders Roger Davison Julie Dore Shaffaq Mohammed Ben Miskell Jack Scott
3 Birley Ward 12 Firth Park Ward 21 Richmond Ward Denise Fox Abdul Khayum Mike Drabble Bryan Lodge Alan Law Dianne Hurst Karen McGowan Abtisam Mohamed Peter Rippon
4 Broomhill & Sharrow Vale Ward 13 Fulwood Ward 22 Shiregreen & Brightside Ward Kieran Harpham Sue Alston Dawn Dale Magid Magid Andrew Sangar Peter Price Cliff Woodcraft Garry Weatherall
5 Burngreave Ward 14 Gleadless Valley Ward 23 Southey Ward Jackie Drayton Cate McDonald Mike Chaplin Talib Hussain Chris Peace Tony Damms Mark Jones Jayne Dunn
6 City Ward 15 Graves Park Ward 24 Stannington Ward Douglas Johnson Ian Auckland David Baker Robert Murphy Sue Auckland Penny Baker Moya O'Rourke Steve Ayris Vickie Priestley
7 Crookes & Crosspool Ward 16 Hillsborough Ward 25 Stocksbridge & Upper Don Ward Craig Gamble Pugh Bob Johnson Jack Clarkson Adam Hanrahan Richard Crowther Anne Murphy Keith Davis
8 Darnall Ward 17 Manor Castle Ward 26 Walkley Ward Mazher Iqbal Lisa Banes Olivia Blake Mary Lea Terry Fox Ben Curran Zahira Naz Pat Midgley Neale Gibson
9 Dore & Totley Ward 18 Mosborough Ward 27 West Ecclesfield Ward Joe Otten David Barker John Booker Colin Ross Tony Downing Adam Hurst Gail Smith Zoe Sykes
28 Woodhouse Ward Mick Rooney Paul Wood
Page 39
Page 40 Council 5.07.2017
1. MINUTE'S SILENCE
1.1 Prior to the commencement of the business of the meeting, the Lord Mayor (Councillor Anne Murphy) referred to the shocking events that had occurred recently; the Grenfell Tower fire, the Manchester Arena bombing, the Finsbury Park Mosque attack, the London Bridge and Borough Market attack, and the Westminster attack, and the Council meeting observed a minute‟s silence in memory of those who lost their lives in those events and to pay respects to members of their families and friends and also to those who suffered injury in the events.
2. APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE
2.1 Apologies for absence were received from Councillors Michelle Cook, Lewis Dagnall, George Lindars-Hammond, Helen Mirfin-Boukouris, Josie Paszek, Chris Rosling-Josephs, Jackie Satur, Paul Scriven and Martin Smith.
3. DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST
3.1 There were no declarations of interest by Members of the Council.
4. MINUTES OF PREVIOUS COUNCIL MEETINGS
4.1 It was moved by Councillor Peter Rippon, seconded by Councillor Dianne Hurst, that the minutes of the ordinary meeting of the Council held on 5th April 2017 and the annual meeting of the Council held on 17th May 2017 be approved as true and accurate records.
4.2 Whereupon, Councillor Douglas Johnson requested that in section 5.4 of the minutes of 5th April (Petition Requiring Debate – Calling on the Council to “Save Ecclesall Road Trees”), in order to aid clarity, the note towards the top of page 17 of the minutes should be altered to read as follows –
(Note: A challenge was made under Council Procedure Rule 19 concerning comments made by Councillor Alison Teal during the debate and following advice by the Chief Executive the meeting was adjourned for a short period.)
4.3 Following advice by the Monitoring Officer, it was:-
RESOLVED: That the minutes of the ordinary meeting of the Council held on 5th April 2017 and the annual meeting of the Council held on 17th May 2017 be approved as true and accurate records, subject to the alteration in section 5.4 of the minutes of 5th April (Petition Requiring Debate – Calling on the Council to “Save Ecclesall Road Trees”) of the note towards the top of page 17 of the minutes to read as follows –
(Note: A challenge was made under Council Procedure Rule 19 concerning comments made by Councillor Alison Teal during the debate and following advice by the Chief Executive the meeting was adjourned for a short period.)
Page 3 of 50 Page 41 Council 5.07.2017
(NOTE: Subsequent to the meeting, a correction was made to item 6 of the minutes of the annual meeting of the Council held on 17th May 2017 to incorporate details of the Shadow Cabinet Member appointments that had been reported to and approved at the annual meeting of the Council, but which had mistakenly been omitted from the minutes published within the agenda for the meeting on 5th July 2017.)
5. ORDER OF BUSINESS
5.1 RESOLVED: On the motion of Councillor Peter Rippon and seconded by Councillor Dianne Hurst, that, in accordance with Council Procedure Rule 9.1, the order of business as published on the Council Summons be altered by taking item 9 (Notice of Motion regarding Fire Safety on Tower Blocks) immediately after the next item of business (Tower Block Review – item 4 on the agenda).
6. TOWER BLOCK REVIEW
6.1 The Council received a presentation from the Chief Executive of the Council, John Mothersole and the Director of Housing and Neighbourhoods, Janet Sharpe on the work undertaken to review the safety of tower blocks in the city, following the tragic fire at Grenfell Tower in Kensington and Chelsea. The presentation was followed by an opportunity for Members of the Council to ask questions.
6.2 There were matters that were known in relation to the fire at the Grenfell Tower, including that it was a 24 storey building, with a single central staircase and that a composite aluminium material rain-screen cladding with thermal insulation had been installed in 2015/16. It was also confirmed that gas was installed in the tower block.
6.3 There were also things which were not known at this time, particularly in relation to how the fire had taken hold and had spread so quickly, the management of the building, any outstanding actions from the London Fire service in relation to its safety and the exact details of the scope of the Inquiry into the tragedy.
6.4 In Sheffield, there were 24 Tower Blocks, all of which were externally clad, 14 of these were completed over 15 years ago. Three were clad in brick at Stannington and 21 with a rain-screen cladding system. 20 Tower Blocks had solid Aluminium metal cladding with a mineral type insulation, one block had an aluminium composite material (ACM) on its outer leaf that was sent down to the Government for testing. The other 20 tower blocks were clad in solid aluminium. It was confirmed that a testing programme was underway to finally confirm this. All 24 tower blocks had benefited from extensive fire stopping and compartmental works which commenced in 2010 and were now completed as part of the Council‟s 5 year Fire Safety Programme which included the provision of compartmentation works, external fire breaks and
Page 4 of 50 Page 42 Council 5.07.2017
fire retardant insulation. One tower block, which was sheltered housing, had a sprinkler system installed. There was a „Stay Put‟ Policy in place for all blocks, which had been agreed with South Yorkshire Fire and Rescue Service. All blocks had annual Fire Risk Assessments in place and benefited from regular checking every 6 weeks. A commitment had been made by the Council to consult with tenants and residents to install sprinklers in all Tower Blocks as further re-assurance to tenants.
6.5 One Tower Block in Sheffield, the Hanover Tower, had failed the new Government test on one element of the cladding. The block, comprising 126 flats and a single staircase had been refurbished in 2012 and a three-part cladding system was installed. There were fire stopping measures in the block which had also been subject to an independent fire safety quality check in 2010 and through annual Fire Risk Assessments. The design and build had been contractor led and the Council was clarifying why composite material was chosen to install to the outer leaf. However, this complied with Building Regulations.
6.6 Meetings had been held with Tenants and Leaseholders and the cladding was to be removed, during which time there would be 24 hour security in place. People would be offered temporary rehousing and consultation would take place to choose new cladding for the block. All tenants and their safety regardless of tenure was a priority for the City.
6.7 Other buildings, including those used by other institutions and the private sector were also being looked at and it was known that the Stephenson wing of the Children‟s Hospital had failed the new test on cladding and it would be removed. Other types of building which were being looked at in conjunction with the South Yorkshire Fire and Rescue Service included schools, private sector rented accommodation, university student accommodation, housing association, office and hotel buildings.
6.8 Information was being collected from the public and private sector to create baseline data and a single city database was in development, in conjunction with the South Yorkshire Fire and Rescue Service. The Council was seeking Government funding to address current actions and to install additional protection and regular updates were being provided to the Government.
6.9 Members of the Council asked questions relating to the presentation and responses were given by the Chief Executive and the Director of Housing and Neighbourhoods, as summarised below:
6.10 In response to question about the installation of sprinkler systems, Members were informed that there were mixed views regarding the use of sprinklers. There were different types of sprinkler system and the Council intended to install sprinklers if supported by tenants and residents but would first consult on a block by block basis. The tragic events at the Grenfell Tower would mean that once the outcome of the inquiry was completed it was likely that all local authorities would have to work through any recommendations. The City Council was highly responsible in the management of its estate and was
Page 5 of 50 Page 43 Council 5.07.2017
seeking to clarify matters with regard to the Hanover block. The Council had made assurances to tenants and leaseholders at the Hanover block that it would work on options for replacement cladding with them. There would be a timescale for the procurement and delivery of the new cladding system, although it was not intended that the building would be without cladding for an undue length of time.
6.11 The planning process alone was not adequate to consider in detail issues such as fire safety, although it was used to the extent that it could be legitimately. It was important to make sure good fire safety was designed into a building, but the planning process was limited to the extent that it could determine product or materials except if a building had listed status. One of the issues arising from the Grenfell tragedy might be the extent to which planning and building regulations might be used differently. Works undertaken to housing stock had to ensure that improvements and specifications met the relevant building standards. Sometimes design work was done by a contractor and at other times by a Council architect. Members were informed of such schemes as were tenants and leaseholders and Members were also offered briefings to help them respond to queries from local residents.
6.12 In relation to the level of confidence in current fire safety and building regulations, there was usually a high level of trust in state regulations. However, there was a question over how a product which had passed building regulations had now been found to have failed the new Government test. It could be that either a different test had been used or that the regulations being used were confusing or not adequate. Confidence in the measures in place and regulation might come out of the Inquiry if there was shown to be a process of learning.
6.13 The Council had a number of responsibilities which it had to perform under regulations to make sure tenants and properties were kept safe. The Council had a strong relationship with the Fire and Rescue Service. Annually, there was a joint inspection of all blocks of flats owned by the Council which also did its own checks. Six weekly inspections were carried out to help ensure safety and there were specific deadlines in relation to any works to properties.
6.14 A question was asked in relation to whether the South Yorkshire Fire and Rescue Service had the necessary funding and equipment to respond to such an incident and this would be referred to the Fire Rescue Service for a response. The Government would also be asked to provide resources to put in place the necessary safety work and measures.
6.15 In relation to the response of the local authority to an event such as that relating to the Grenfell Tower, the City Council did undertake emergency planning exercises, although reality was often different to training. Exercises were scenario based and included a debriefing process. The Council also reviewed its responses to real occurrences, such as with the floods in 2007. As to whether the City could cope with the scenario faced by Kensington and
Page 6 of 50 Page 44 Council 5.07.2017
Chelsea, there was capacity to re-home several hundred people, based on the fact that the Council was itself a large landlord and also had in place strong partnerships.
6.16 Whilst the Council had most power in relation to the residential sector, this was less so for the education and business sector, unless a building was in structural danger of collapse. The Council had offered schools access to the independent testing it was putting in place. Although the Council would not fund testing for the school, it would facilitate them gaining access to it.
6.17 The „Stay Put‟ policy was advice and people would always make their own judgements. The Fire and Rescue Service advise that, on balance, it was appropriate to follow the „Stay Put‟ policy on the basis of inspections of each tower block. The advice would depend on a particular building and the Inquiry relating to the Grenfell fire would establish whether or not a Stay Put policy was correct in that case.
6.18 As regards, the use of particular cladding materials and evidence relating to fire breaks, buildings behaved as whole and in relation to fire, it was important to deal with prevention of fire, containment and preventing the spread of fire.
6.19 Sprinklers were installed in a sheltered tower block at Gleadless Valley and fire stopping works had been carried out in other sheltered housing accommodation and all other Council owned accommodation in the City. Sprinklers and misting systems were used in accommodation for highly vulnerable people who could not evacuate a building themselves. The Council was, in conjunction with the Fire and Rescue Service, reviewing whether any additional measures were required.
6.20 The emergency planning service was a joint arrangement with Rotherham Borough Council and it applied to back office support and resilience. There were activities which were specific to Sheffield, such as the allocation of Forward Liaison Officers and Duty Chief Officers. The Sheffield specific functionality was not compromised by the joint arrangement.
6.21 It was acknowledged that the events at the Grenfell Tower affected tenants and leaseholders in Sheffield. The Council had provided information the day following that event and was talking to tenants and residents. There had been a comprehensive programme of drop-in sessions, information and liaison and people were also asking questions and getting answers from other expertise, including the Fire and Rescue Service. Working together with the Cabinet Member, there was also a programme of consultation. People wanted to see the results of testing on cladding and material which were being communicated as the results of the tests were confirmed. It was important that people‟s questions were answered so they felt confident.
6.22 It was important to obtain a city-wide picture of the condition of high rise buildings and the Council had a duty in relation to buildings for which it was responsible and was asking questions about other buildings. For example,
Page 7 of 50 Page 45 Council 5.07.2017
the Council was liaising with the City‟s Universities in relation to student accommodation blocks.
6.23 Fire-stopping measures had been installed in low and medium rise sheltered accommodation for vulnerable people and some had sprinklers. This had been done as part of a five year programme which had now come to an end. The Council had said that it would review the use of sprinklers and was working with the Fire and Rescue Service to consider proposals. There were behavioural issues which might contribute to safety in tower blocks and it was part of tenancy conditions to make sure that the behaviour of one person did not put others at risk.
6.24 In relation to the Hanover Tower, the Council would clarify why top level records stated that aluminium composite cladding had been installed in one tower block whereas, cladding on other blocks installed by the same contractor was solid aluminium. The cladding product used on Hanover Tower was legal and had passed the relevant standard.
6.25 The Council did not intend to ask leaseholders to contribute to the costs of cladding works when it was re-clad. The Council would look at the issue of insurance for tenants and leaseholders and also seek clarification from the Government.
6.26 Fire risk assessments included checks on fire doors. There were a small number of leaseholder properties where there was an option for the leaseholder or the Council to install a fire door and the cost would be met by the leaseholder. This matter was subject to a legal process to bring it to a conclusion so that all doors fully comply.
6.27 Consultation regarding sprinklers would take place after the summer and consultation would be on a block by block basis.
6.28 It was the Council‟s view that the Government should pay for the works necessary. However, work would not be delayed whilst the Council waited for the Government to deal with the matter of cost.
6.29 As regards the possibility of installing additional stairs, nothing would be ruled out at this point in time. However, there were issues to be dealt with in the immediate time following the Grenfell Tower tragedy; the Council would then deal with the issue of sprinkler systems, following which other potential measures could be assessed.
6.30 There had been incidents of fires in flats. Two had occurred in the Hanover Tower and both had been contained. There were approximately 65 fires annually and all of these were treated very seriously but the fire stopping work installed had contained the fires on all occasions.
6.31 Further information on what the Council was doing with regard to fire safety would be made available, including on the Council website.
Page 8 of 50 Page 46 Council 5.07.2017
6.32 It was proposed that consultation would take place at the same time in relation to sprinklers and bin chutes.
6.33 In response to question concerning the use of UPVC windows, Members were informed that Windows were an integral part of cladding systems. There were timber framed windows in 3 tower blocks and plans were in place to replace them.
6.34 Prior to the fire at Grenfell Tower, the Council and South Yorkshire Fire and Rescue Service had a programme of activity to ascertain how close the Fire Service could get to Tower Blocks and with regard to access. There were some issues which needed to be addressed concerning the parking of cars around blocks and the work to improve access was underway.
6.35 There was specific advice regarding what people should do in the event of a fire. Literature would be adapted to reflect the type of home that people lived in.
6.36 Joint inspections regarding fire safety were carried out with the Fire and Rescue Service and there was work such as to door closers that was done as part of that programme. Checks were being carried out to make sure there were no works outstanding and that all works previously identified had been completed in accordance with what the Fire Service had requested.
6.37 In relation to other buildings, such as hotels, the Council‟s primary role was in relation to the design and planning process. Developers may use an independent building control provider. Responsibility with regard to fire safety passed to the Fire and Rescue Service, which carried out regular checks of hotels.
6.38 It was proposed that sprinkler systems would include the public areas of Tower Blocks and individual flats within those buildings.
6.39 Periodic visits were made to tenants as part of the new Housing Service operating model and if an individual was hoarding material, which might present a problem, this was in breach of their tenancy condition and officers would work with that person to clear a property. Multi-agency work was also carried out with families.
The Council noted the information reported in relation to the review of Tower Blocks in Sheffield and thanked the Chief Executive and Director of Housing and Neighbourhoods for their presentation and for their responses to Members‟ questions.
7. NOTICE OF MOTION GIVEN BY COUNCILLOR JAYNE DUNN
Fire Safety on Tower Blocks
Page 9 of 50 Page 47 Council 5.07.2017
7.1 It was moved by Councillor Jayne Dunn, and seconded by Councillor Penny Baker, that this Council:-
(a) expresses its shock and sadness at the tragic Grenfell Tower fire, and our thoughts are with the families of people who have been killed and people who are injured and everyone who has been forced out of their homes as a result of the fire;
(b) notes that investigations into the fire and its causes are still ongoing and believes it will be important to consider any recommendations and their implications for Sheffield when the investigations are concluded;
(c) believes it is important that, following the fire, all local authorities across the country are conducting extensive investigations into the safety of their tower blocks and that the Council has been working with South Yorkshire Fire and Rescue Service to carry out appropriate checks over the past week;
(d) welcomes the commitment that has been made to retrofit all Council tower blocks in Sheffield with sprinkler systems and believes it is important that the Government commit to provide the funding for these systems in addition to any additional safety measures that are required as a result of the Grenfell Tower fire;
(e) notes that in addition to this, the Government is conducting fire safety tests on tower blocks with composite cladding and the Council has taken the decision to ensure that all Sheffield blocks are tested;
(f) notes that the tests from Hanover tower block have revealed that the cladding on the building should be removed and that action is being taken to do this immediately;
(g) confirms that the cladding at Hanover is not the same as that used at Grenfell Tower and in addition to this there are none of the other concerns that have been found at other tower blocks in other authorities, such as gas in the building and lack of fire doors, which resulted in some blocks being evacuated;
(h) reiterates the advice that Hanover residents are safe to remain in their homes while work to remove the cladding takes place and that this view is supported by South Yorkshire Fire & Rescue Service (SYF&R), however temporary accommodation has been offered to anyone who wishes to take it during the works;
(i) welcomes that swift action has been taken to remove the cladding and have security on site 24 hours a day while the building works take place and that updates have been held with residents to inform them of progress;
Page 10 of 50 Page 48 Council 5.07.2017
(j) recognises that, following the tragic fire at Grenfell Tower, tenants are concerned about their safety and believes it is important that the Council continues to provide as much information as possible to tenants and to continue to meet with residents, and welcomes the visits to tower blocks across the city from the Cabinet Member, Council Leader and local councillors since the incident to provide reassurance to tenants; and
(k) believes it is important that all partners continue to work together to ensure that work is carried out as quickly as possible to ensure all Sheffield tower blocks are safe and that people feel safe living in them, and particularly thanks South Yorkshire Fire and Rescue Service for their work in partnership with the Council.
7.2 Whereupon it was moved by Councillor Robert Murphy, and seconded by Councillor Douglas Johnson, as an amendment, that the Motion now submitted be amended by the addition of a new paragraph (l) as follows:-
(l) considering the safety implications of the Hanover Tower Block cladding and the need to reassure the public of the robustness of building safety frameworks, requests that a report be submitted to the next meeting of the Safer and Stronger Communities Scrutiny and Policy Development Committee setting out:-
(i) the reasons why the Hanover Tower Block came to fail fire safety tests;
(ii) the cause of the failures; and
(iii) the implications for other work carried out under the Decent Homes improvement scheme and for any other buildings in Sheffield.
7.2.1 (NOTE: With the agreement of the Council and at the request of the mover of the amendment (Councillor Robert Murphy), the amendment as circulated at the meeting was altered by the substitution of the words “next meeting of the Safer and Stronger Communities Scrutiny and Policy Development Committee” for the words “next full Council meeting”.)
7.3 On being put to the vote, the altered amendment was carried.
7.4 The original Motion, as amended, was then put as a Substantive Motion in the following form and carried:-
RESOLVED: That this Council:-
(a) expresses its shock and sadness at the tragic Grenfell Tower fire, and our thoughts are with the families of people who have been killed and people who are injured and everyone who has been forced out of their
Page 11 of 50 Page 49 Council 5.07.2017
homes as a result of the fire;
(b) notes that investigations into the fire and its causes are still ongoing and believes it will be important to consider any recommendations and their implications for Sheffield when the investigations are concluded;
(c) believes it is important that, following the fire, all local authorities across the country are conducting extensive investigations into the safety of their tower blocks and that the Council has been working with South Yorkshire Fire and Rescue Service to carry out appropriate checks over the past week;
(d) welcomes the commitment that has been made to retrofit all Council tower blocks in Sheffield with sprinkler systems and believes it is important that the Government commit to provide the funding for these systems in addition to any additional safety measures that are required as a result of the Grenfell Tower fire;
(e) notes that in addition to this, the Government is conducting fire safety tests on tower blocks with composite cladding and the Council has taken the decision to ensure that all Sheffield blocks are tested;
(f) notes that the tests from Hanover tower block have revealed that the cladding on the building should be removed and that action is being taken to do this immediately;
(g) confirms that the cladding at Hanover is not the same as that used at Grenfell Tower and in addition to this there are none of the other concerns that have been found at other tower blocks in other authorities, such as gas in the building and lack of fire doors, which resulted in some blocks being evacuated;
(h) reiterates the advice that Hanover residents are safe to remain in their homes while work to remove the cladding takes place and that this view is supported by South Yorkshire Fire & Rescue Service (SYF&R), however temporary accommodation has been offered to anyone who wishes to take it during the works;
(i) welcomes that swift action has been taken to remove the cladding and have security on site 24 hours a day while the building works take place and that updates have been held with residents to inform them of progress;
(j) recognises that, following the tragic fire at Grenfell Tower, tenants are concerned about their safety and believes it is important that the Council continues to provide as much information as possible to tenants and to continue to meet with residents, and welcomes the visits to tower blocks across the city from the Cabinet Member, Council Leader and local councillors since the incident to provide
Page 12 of 50 Page 50 Council 5.07.2017
reassurance to tenants;
(k) believes it is important that all partners continue to work together to ensure that work is carried out as quickly as possible to ensure all Sheffield tower blocks are safe and that people feel safe living in them, and particularly thanks South Yorkshire Fire and Rescue Service for their work in partnership with the Council; and
(l) considering the safety implications of the Hanover Tower Block cladding and the need to reassure the public of the robustness of building safety frameworks, requests that a report be submitted to the next meeting of the Safer and Stronger Communities Scrutiny and Policy Development Committee setting out:-
(i) the reasons why the Hanover Tower Block came to fail fire safety tests;
(ii) the cause of the failures; and
(iii) the implications for other work carried out under the Decent Homes improvement scheme and for any other buildings in Sheffield.
8. PUBLIC QUESTIONS AND PETITIONS AND OTHER COMMUNICATIONS
8.1 Deputy Lord Mayor – Declaration of Office
The Lord Mayor (Councillor Anne Murphy) informed the Council that on 28th June, in the presence of the Whips of the political groups on the Council, Councillor Magid Magid, the Deputy Lord Mayor Elect for the Municipal Year 2017-18, made and subscribed to the declaration required by law to qualify him to act as Deputy Lord Mayor. The Council noted the information reported by the Lord Mayor.
8.2 Petitions
8.2.1 Petition Objecting to the Felling of Trees in Millhouses
The Council received a joint paper and electronic petition containing 1,671 signatures, objecting to the felling of trees in Millhouses.
Representations on behalf of the petitioners were made by Phil Yates, who stated that the Council had a statutory duty to manage air quality under the Environment Act. Recent research suggested that the planting of trees along the side of roads could reduce Nitrogen Dioxide concentrations. In May 2017, it was widely publicised that there were dangerously high levels of air pollutants around the City. National Clean Air day was held on 6 June and he said there was nothing on the Council website relating to it and it was felt that the Council was not taking
Page 13 of 50 Page 51 Council 5.07.2017
seriously its responsibilities in relation to air quality.
People had made clear their concerns in relation to street trees but trees had not been saved, even though the Independent Tree Panel had recommended that many were saved. It was also felt that whilst many people had asked for trees to be saved and the Council had said that felling of trees would be as a last resort, trees were to be replaced without explanation or exception.
He said that it was felt that trees were being removed to save annual maintenance costs for Amey and asked that in a written response it be confirmed that this was not the case and to supply the name of the councillor or officer that stated this. He also requested the reason as to why trees recommended for retention were to be replaced. People had been told that there were more trees in the area which were to be felled without formal notice and he asked, if the trees were declared healthy when the survey was completed, then why did these need to be removed now? Residents wished to begin a process of mediation with the Council and would welcome the Council to suggest a suitable process whilst halting any tree felling. People wished to keep healthy mature street trees, which he said helped to mitigate the effects of air pollution and it was acknowledged that this might mean that there would not be perfect pavement surfaces.
The Council referred the petition to Councillor Bryan Lodge, Cabinet Member for Environment and Streetscene and to Councillor Jack Scott, Cabinet Member for Transport and Sustainability.
Councillor Bryan Lodge, the Cabinet Member for Environment and Streetscene, responded that a number of petitions had been considered by the Council in relation to street trees. The Council had statutory duties in relation to the highways and with regards to equalities legislation and this included such issues as safe pavements and inclusive mobility.
He said that a scoping project with regard to the highways programme was undertaken in 2005 and an outline business case was also produced, which identified that large numbers of street trees would need to be replaced. Consideration had to be given to the future and long term benefit of work and it was acknowledged that there were views on both sides as to the replacement of street trees. Councillor Lodge said that a written response to the petition would be provided.
Councillor Jack Scott stated that poor air quality was responsible for many deaths in the City and in the UK as a whole and it was also a social justice issue. It was clear that the Government needed to do more with regard to air quality. It was not correct to say that the replacement of trees had a significant effect on air quality in Sheffield. There were 4 million trees across the City and real solutions were needed to the problem of poor air quality. As an example, the Council had relocated a school on the basis of poor air quality. There were significant things which might be done with regards to vehicles, diesel engines and a scrappage scheme. The Council had given a commitment in relation to air quality and it was hoped that people‟s energy could be harnessed towards improving air quality in the City.
Page 14 of 50 Page 52 Council 5.07.2017
8.2.2 Petition Requesting the Suspension of the Streets Ahead Contract on Health and Safety Grounds
The Council received a petition containing seven signatures, requesting the suspension of the Streets Ahead Contract on health and safety grounds.
Representations on behalf of the petitioners were made by Richard Davis who stated that the Council must be informed by Amey of any conviction relating to health and safety. He asserted that Amey had not informed the Council of a subsequent conviction and he asked why the Council had not enforced the terms of the Streets Ahead contract in that regard. He said that there would be termination clauses in the contract. He said there was evidence which supported the possibility of misconduct.
The Council referred the petition to Councillor Bryan Lodge, Cabinet Member for Environment and Streetscene. Councillor Lodge requested that, if there were further points in the presentation Mr Davis had made to Council and which were in addition to those he had already made in writing to the Council, that these be sent to him as Cabinet Member and he would make sure that they were passed on to the appropriate person and investigated. He may have already received responses to the points made in previous correspondence.
The Health and Safety Executive had investigated the issues previously raised by Mr Davis and had decided to take no further action. He referred to lost time injuries in relation to the Streets Ahead programme and to the policy of Amey with regard to accidents. If there were issues which require further investigation then action would be taken. Councillor Lodge said that a written response would be produced in relation to the petition.
8.2.3 Petition Requesting Traffic Calming Measures on Newman Road
The Council received a petition containing 80 signatures, requesting traffic calming measures on Newman Road. There was no speaker to the petition.
The Council referred the petition to Councillor Jack Scott, Cabinet Member for Transport and Sustainability.
8.2.4 Petition Supporting the Felling of Trees on Abbeyfield Road
The Council received a petition containing 32 signatures, supporting the felling of trees on Abbeyfield Road. There was no speaker to the petition.
The Council referred the petition to Councillor Bryan Lodge, Cabinet Member for Environment and Streetscene.
8.2.5 Petition Requesting Weight Restriction on Twentywell Lane, Prospect Road and Queen Victoria Road
Page 15 of 50 Page 53 Council 5.07.2017
The Council received a petition containing 112 signatures, requesting weight restrictions on Twentywell Lane, Prospect Road and Queen Victoria Road. There was no speaker to the petition.
The Council referred the petition to Councillor Jack Scott, Cabinet Member for Transport and Sustainability.
8.3 Questions
8.3.1 Public Question Concerning Tinsley Park
Adil Mohammed stated that when the school was built in Tinsley, there was a community user agreement and agreement to give the remainder of the Park protection by gaining trust status. He asked how far this matter had progressed.
Councillor Jackie Drayton, the Cabinet Member for Children, Young People and Families, stated that in relation to the community use, local councillors had been active with regard to the agreement to provide community activities for pupils at the school and for the community and there were classes and support for carers, although she did not have the details at this meeting.
Councillor Mary Lea, the Cabinet Member for Culture, Parks and Leisure, stated that the Tinsley Green and recreation ground had previously been in a poor condition and in 2003, a Surestart scheme was developed and there had been regeneration of the Park. Fields in Trust status for the Park was being pursued.
8.3.2 Public Questions Concerning Street Trees
Mark Banner asked why peaceful protesters, residents and bystanders were being intimidated with pre-injunction letters and the threat of the High Court and whether it was an attempt to stop legitimate opposition to free felling. He asked whether this demonstrated double-standards by the Council as it celebrated the mass trespass at Kinder Scout in 1932 and the right to roam.
He also referred to a process regarding a Councillor under the process relating to the Code of Conduct.
Dave Dillner stated that the Cabinet Member for Environment and Streetscene, Councillor Bryan Lodge had indicated that he would debate ecological, environmental and arboricultural issues on a public platform and he asked for this to now take place.
Councillor Bryan Lodge, the Cabinet Member for Environment and Streetscene, stated that there was a difference between peaceful protest and unlawful acts and whilst the Council was supportive of peaceful protest, in some cases people had trespassed inside the safety barriers. This presented a risk both to them and to the operatives on site. The Council was seeking individuals‟ agreement not to step inside the safety zones. It was an individual‟s decision whether they chose to ignore or challenge the matter in court. The Council had been faced with the decision, with regard to taking legal action due to the delays to the programme.
Page 16 of 50 Page 54 Council 5.07.2017
Councillor Lodge said that approximately six to eight percent of households objected as part of the surveys relating to proposals for street trees. The matter had also been tested in the court. Councillor Lodge said that he would not wish to see anyone arrested or stepping inside the safety barriers or in court. There had been support for the Streets Ahead programme from recent Council administrations to improve the highways in Sheffield. An Advisory Forum had also been set up and the issues relating to street trees had been debated in various places in the Council. Meetings had also been held with individuals and representatives of the Sheffield Tree Action Group. He would meet with members of the public and he had met with local councillors and residents in various wards in the City and would be pleased to meet again with the Sheffield Tree Action Group.
8.3.3 Public Question Concerning Legal Action
Nigel Slack stated that the final destination on the Council's current track with respect to the tree campaigners could lead to actions for contempt of court. He said that this, in turn, could lead to people losing homes, businesses and personal belongings. It could also result in the bankrupting of pensioners and families with young children. He asked if the Council was willing, individually and collectively, to sanction such actions on its own residents.
Councillor Bryan Lodge, the Cabinet Member for Environment and Streetscene stated that the Council was asking people to sign an undertaking that they would cease from disrupting work. If they agreed to sign the undertaking, no further action would be taken. He said the Council supported peaceful protest. If an individual decided not to sign the undertaking, seek to persuade a Judge of the merits of their case or breach a safety zone, this was the decision of that individual and not the Council.
8.3.4 Public Question Concerning Cladding on Tower Blocks
Nigel Slack asked, if it is shown that the cladding on Sheffield tower blocks is not that originally specified would the Council‟s legal team devote as much resource to and be as assiduous in pursuing the contractors and suppliers of the cladding for damages as they were with “peaceful protesters”; and will any Councillors or Council Officers be disciplined, if they are found to have been involved in such a change to specifications?
Councillor Jayne Dunn, the Cabinet Member for Neighbourhoods and Community Safety, stated that the issues relating to cladding on Tower Blocks would be considered by the relevant Scrutiny Committee. She did not wish to draw conclusions too early in relation to the change in specification of cladding material used on the Hanover Tower or to rush to conclusions about such matters as disciplinary action. There were a number of people involved, including building contractors. The issue would be investigated and appropriate action would be taken.
Page 17 of 50 Page 55 Council 5.07.2017
8.3.5 Public Question Concerning Streets Ahead Work
Nigel Slack stated that on the 15th March 2017, he asked a question about what he believed to be the lack of care for vulnerable people exhibited by the Amey contract. He referred to an incident outside of his mother‟s home which had left her without her telephone. He said that after a distressing week, she had a fall and an extensive stay in hospital and was now unable to leave her home independently. He quoted the minutes of the meeting, which stated that “Lessons would be learned from the incident reported by Mr Slack and Councillor Lodge would investigate the particular case further.”
Mr Slack said that, despite this, he had not had a response to the issue. He asked the following: “Has any 'further investigation' begun; When will it report; When will I hear something; and Why should I believe anything the Cabinet Member tells me?”
Councillor Bryan Lodge, the Cabinet Member for Environment and Streetscene responded and said that he was sorry to hear what had happened to Mr Slack‟s mother regarding her fall. He had addressed the matter at the Cabinet meeting on 15 March and had said that Streets Ahead would do what they could. The issue relating to the telephone line was an issue for BT (British Telecommunications). Utilities were not always located where they were said to be and occasionally, lines were broken. Utility companies usually had protocols for dealing with vulnerable people. The Council had reviewed related processes and both Amey and sub-contractors were aware of the procedures. He urged other people to contact the Council if similar problems occurred and said that he would request the Head of Highways to respond to Mr Slack on the issues which he had raised.
8.3.6 Public Question Concerning Community Safety in Burngreave
Katun Elmi asked whether the Leader of the Council would visit Burngreave to meet with the community and especially with Somali mothers, to explain what the local Councillors and the Council were doing to stop violence in the area. She said that it seemed as if nothing was happening at present to make people feel safe on the streets of Burngreave.
Councillor Julie Dore, the Leader of the Council, said that she would gladly visit Burngreave to meet people. There were issues which had occurred in Burngreave and Spital Hill, which had been reported in the media. Action had been taken and she would ask Councillor Jayne Dunn and Councillor Jackie Drayton to also respond.
Councillor Jayne Dunn, the Cabinet Member for Neighbourhoods and Community Safety, stated that community safety in Burngreave was a priority and that she met with the Police and Crime Commissioner in Burngreave and with her Cabinet Adviser. A Neighbourhood Police Officer was to be deployed in Burngreave. Further to this, Gill Furniss MP for Brightside and Hillsborough had called a meeting in relation to the issues in Burngreave.
Page 18 of 50 Page 56 Council 5.07.2017
Councillor Jackie Drayton referred to incidents which had occurred in Spital Hill, including breaking of shop windows, which had made local people frightened. Local Councillors had met with the Police and the Council‟s Chief Executive with regard to action which might be taken. She had contacted local people including the mothers of Burngreave, Gill Furniss MP and the Assistant Police and Crime Commissioner and had done a walkabout to help reassure people. There would be Policing teams both in Burngreave and across the City as indicated by the Chief Constable when he attended the meeting of the City Council earlier in the year.
8.3.7 Public Question Concerning Streets Ahead Programme
Nick Jordan referred to an incident involving him and someone representing Amey and he said that the person photographed him and they had said that they found him to be aggressive. They had also indicated that they would not talk to him.
Councillor Bryan Lodge, the Cabinet Member for Environment and Streetscene, stated that he was sorry that Mr Jordan was faced with the situation that he had outlined in his question and if someone had been rude to him. He would expect people to behave respectfully, regardless of whether they were sub-contractors. He asked Mr Jordan to leave his contact details so that the matter could be investigated.
Councillor Julie Dore stated that people were encouraged to engage with the Council. She said that she was sorry that Mr Jordan had a negative experience. She said that contracts were complex matters and that certain services and projects were best delivered by the public sector and others by the private sector. However, the use of the Private Finance initiative was the only way to progress the Streets Ahead programme. Sub-contractors were allowed as part of the Streets Ahead contract, although those working on the programme should adhere to expected standards of behaviour. If a contractor was chosen from a different area of the country, such as Birmingham, that could not be stopped. The Council did, where possible, encourage ethical and locally based contracting and service provision.
8.3.8 Public Question Concerning Provision for Homeless People
Chris Simpson asked what the Council was going to do about the night café for the homeless to access when there were no other services available and referred to the petition on this subject.
The question was to be addressed by the Cabinet Member as part of the debate on the petition to Council.
(Note: During this item of business, and under Council Procedure Rule 20, the Lord Mayor ordered the removal of a member of the public from the public gallery on the grounds that they had repeatedly interrupted the meeting and following several warnings as to their behaviour.)
8.4 Petition Requiring Debate
Page 19 of 50 Page 57 Council 5.07.2017
L.I.F.E. Petition to Open a Sheffield Night Shelter
The Council received a joint paper and electronic petition containing 5,463 signatures, requesting the Council to open a night shelter for the homeless.
The Council‟s Petitions Scheme required that any petition containing over 5,000 signatures was the subject of debate at the Council meeting. A qualifying petition was received as follows:-
“After being involved with the homeless and vulnerable situation for a full year on the ground doing outreach I've noticed that there is a huge hole within the safety net of our city to keep people protected from rough sleeping and who generally find themselves homeless without warning. L.I.F.E (a new beginning) was created for the general public to just come together and help others in need with Sheffield Tent City being at the forefront of providing overnight accommodation with food/clothes/supplies/outreach services/medical supplies & assistance etc.
What myself [the organiser of the petition] and volunteers from Sheffield and surrounding areas plan to do next is open a night shelter within Sheffield city centre where not one single person will find themselves in need of help ever again”.
Representations on behalf of the petitioners were made by Anthony Cunningham. He stated that people were out on the streets perhaps because of mental health problems and issues including unemployment. He said that it appeared as though nothing was changing and things were generally getting worse for them.
He said that the provision of a night shelter would ease the tension, particularly at weekends. Street Pastors also needed a place to take people and people did not know where else they might go. The Tent City had been put in place but that could not be kept going. There was support available from organisations including Roundabout, Shelter, Crisis and the Archer Project. People were also coming to Sheffield from other places due to the housing crisis and trying to access help and support. People needed sanctuary. In some cases, people had come directly from prison and wished to access help. Services, such as at Howden House were not open over the weekend and people could not be expected to survive over the weekend period.
Whilst there were hostels and bed and breakfast accommodation, there were problems with existing provision, including security. A building had been identified for a night shelter but he had been informed it was not possible to establish a night shelter there. However, he said that a night shelter was required to bridge the gap between public services and charity provision. Services could be made available to meet the needs of people, including medical provision, mental health services, which Street Pastors, and the Police might also be able to access. He expressed concern that relevant organisations were not making progress and there were arguments concerning financial resources.
Page 20 of 50 Page 58 Council 5.07.2017
In accordance with Council Procedure Rule 13.1(b), the Cabinet Member for Neighbourhoods and Community Safety, responded to the petition, following which the Shadow Cabinet Member for Neighbourhoods and Community Safety spoke on the matter.
Councillor Jayne Dunn, the Cabinet Member for Neighbourhoods and Community Safety responded to the petition. She said that she acknowledged much of what was said in the petition and said that both she and Mr Cunningham had met in relation to the issue. Many people were vulnerable and were preyed upon by dealers, were exploited or involved in prostitution. There were also people on the streets that were not homeless but did sleep on the streets. There was provision for people in Sheffield but there was also an understanding that improvements were needed.
A successful bid had been made, which had resulted in additional financial resources in South Yorkshire to help to support people who were sleeping rough. The Housing First scheme was designed to provide housing related support for 10 people with complex needs and the wrap-around support that was needed.
Councillor Dunn stated that support was also available through the Help Us Help campaign and the Help Us Help website provided information on the support available to people that were on the street. The Business Improvement District was also involved in the initiative. She recommended that City Councillors access the information on the Help Us Help website.
A night shelter was not thought to be a solution to the issues facing people that were on the streets. The „Tent City‟ was also something which had not provided a solution to the problems faced by people. The streets were not the right place for people and might serve only to worsen problems such as addiction.
Councillor Dunn thanked the petitioners and Mr Cunningham for submitting the petition. People could be housed and there was awareness that hostel provision also needed to be improved. The problems facing people sleeping rough and living on the streets were being looked at closely and from different perspectives. However, the Council would not be requesting that a night shelter be opened.
The Shadow Cabinet Member for Neighbourhoods and Community Safety then spoke on the matter, following which Members of the City Council debated the matters raised by the petition, as summarised below:-
There was a significant amount of work being done by the Council and in the City in relation to people on the streets. The petitioner had presented his experiences and it was for the Council to listen to that and review the issue as perhaps there were things that were being missed.
The issue of rough sleepers was increasing in the UK. Support was provided locally by organisations including the Archer Project and people needed advice on a range of issues. It was thought that evidence based solutions would be most effective, such as the Housing First programme, which had been set up and funded by the Council. There were also issues to be considered relating to
Page 21 of 50 Page 59 Council 5.07.2017
homelessness and LGBT (lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender) people.
Ex-service personnel and former prisoners had to be considered and people might not be able to access housing advice at Howden House at all times. There were buildings available which could be used to provide a place for rough sleepers to go and to access support from relevant agencies.
The issue of rough sleeping and people living on the street was a complex matter and the Council needed to continue to talk to people regarding their needs. St Wilfrid‟s was to open a residential facility for people with a history of being homeless or vulnerably housed.
Homelessness and rough sleeping were not the same things and people concerned were in crisis in their lives through various causes, including their mental health, substance abuse and relationship breakdown. There was not an easy way to categorise people in such circumstances. There had been an increase in the visible number of people who were homeless or on the streets and at the same time as government cuts. It was also difficult to deal with the considerable range of complex needs.
The representative of the petitioners, Anthony Cunningham, exercised a right of reply. He referred to a young person whose parents were both addicts and the child had been forced to leave home. Whilst people turned to advice and support, there were also many people accessing services, including at Howden House, which dealt with 15,000 calls each month. Central Government also had an important role to perform in supporting people. He said that there were buildings which could potentially be used to help house people, such as at Park Hill. It was also important to continue to help people and to build communities.
Councillor Jayne Dunn, Cabinet Member for Neighbourhoods and Community Safety, responded to matters which were raised during the debate. She suggested that some Members might wish to receive a briefing by the Housing Team. It was right, she said, to keep the dialogue going and she asked for recognition that the recent changes in relation to homeless provision had only been in place for a couple of weeks. The Council would continue to monitor the issue and keep talking with people.
The outcome of the debate on the petition was as follows:-
Proposal 1
It was moved by Councillor Julie Dore and seconded by Councillor Jayne Dunn, that:
This Council notes the petition calling on the Council to open a Sheffield Night Shelter, and refers the petition to the Cabinet Member for Neighbourhoods and Community Safety to determine any further action and to continue to monitor the position regarding rough sleepers in the City.
Proposal 2
Page 22 of 50 Page 60 Council 5.07.2017
It was moved by Councillor Penny Baker and seconded by Councillor David Baker, that:
This Council notes the petition calling on the Council to open a Sheffield Night Shelter, and refers the petition to the Cabinet on the grounds that it affects various Cabinet portfolios.
On being put to the vote, alternative proposal 2 was not carried.
Proposal 1 was then put to the vote and carried as follows:-
RESOLVED: That this Council notes the petition calling on the Council to open a Sheffield Night Shelter, and refers the petition to the Cabinet Member for Neighbourhoods and Community Safety to determine any further action and to continue to monitor the position regarding rough sleepers in the City.
9. REVIEW OF FULL COUNCIL MEETINGS
9.1 RESOLVED: On the motion of Councillor Peter Rippon and seconded by Councillor Julie Dore, that, in accordance with Council Procedure Rule 9.1, the order of business as published on the Council Summons be altered by taking item 8 on the agenda (Review of Full Council Meetings) as the next item of business, to enable the Council to receive the verbal update from the Director of Legal and Governance prior to the termination of the meeting after four hours and 30 minutes duration.
9.2 The Director of Legal and Governance reported on the progress of the work of the Member Working Group in reviewing the operation of the full Council meetings.
9.3 She outlined the composition of the Working Group and reported that a work programme had been agreed which is split into two stages. The first stage was to look at the purpose and the function of the Council meeting, consider solutions and change under the themes of “a modern, accessible and open meeting” and “an efficient, effective meeting that is fit for purpose”, look at best practice in other local authorities, and decide changes from the Council‟s September meeting, and the second stage was to consider a wider review of Council decision making and public engagement over the 2017/18 municipal year.
9.4 The Director commented that the Working Group had met on two occasions to date and had, at its first meeting, discussed the purpose of the full Council meeting and, at its second meeting, had discussed practical and structural issues associated with full Council meetings, including the importance of maintaining time for engagement with the public as well as Member debate, the time and duration of the meetings, managing the content and length of
Page 23 of 50 Page 61 Council 5.07.2017
agendas, tributes to former Councillors, and questions from the public and Members.
9.5 The Director added that members of the Working Group had been asked to consult with other members of their political group prior to further discussion being held at the Working Group‟s next meeting on 7th July on changing the start time and duration of the meeting, defining the purpose of the meeting, audio recording, layout and seating, managing the number of motions, time limits for speakers, order of business/structure of meetings, introduction of a regular break time, and simplifying the voting process, and she concluded her report by stating that she would circulate a written note of her report to all Members of the Council within the next few days.
9.6 The Council noted the information reported by the Director.
10. MEMBERS' QUESTIONS
10.1 Urgent Business
10.1.1 There were no questions relating to urgent business under the provisions of Council Procedure Rule 16.6(ii).
10.2 Supplementary Questions
10.2.1 A schedule of questions to Cabinet Members, submitted in accordance with Council Procedure Rule 16, and which contained written answers, was circulated.
10.2.2 Supplementary questions (under the provisions of Council Procedure Rule 16.4) were not able to be asked before the meeting terminated (under the provisions of Council Procedure Rule 5.5) after four hours and 30 minutes duration.
10.3 South Yorkshire Joint Authorities
10.3.1 Questions relating to the discharge of the functions of the South Yorkshire Joint Authorities for Fire and Rescue and Pensions (under the provisions of Council Procedure Rule 16.6i), were not able to be asked before the meeting terminated (under the provisions of Council Procedure Rule 5.5) after four hours and 30 minutes duration.
11. REPRESENTATION, DELEGATED AUTHORITY AND RELATED ISSUES
11.1 RESOLVED: On the Motion of Councillor Peter Rippon, seconded by Councillor Dianne Hurst, that (a) it be noted that Councillor Jim Steinke, who was elected on 22nd June, 2017 as a Nether Edge and Sharrow Ward Councillor, has joined the Labour Group on the Council, thereby restoring the political composition of the Council to the position that was reported to the Council‟s Annual General Meeting on 17th May 2017 when political proportionality was last
Page 24 of 50 Page 62 Council 5.07.2017
reported to the Council (i.e. 56 Labour : 20 Lib Dem : 4 Green : 4 UKIP), and that, accordingly, there is no requirement to revise the allocation of seats on Council Committees to the political groups;
(b) approval be given to the following changes to the memberships of Committees, Boards, etc:-
Children, Young People - Councillor Lisa Banes to replace and Family Support Councillor Terry Fox; Councillor Jim Scrutiny and Policy Steinke to fill a vacancy. Development Committee To appoint Mr. Sam Evans to serve as a Diocese representative on the Committee, filling a vacancy.
Economic and - Councillor Mike Chaplin to replace Environmental Wellbeing Councillor Lisa Banes; Councillor Scrutiny and Policy Paul Wood to fill a vacancy. Development Committee
Healthier Communities & - Councillor Tony Downing to replace Adult Social Care Scrutiny Councillor Karen McGowan. and Policy Development Committee
Safer and Stronger - Councillor Karen McGowan to Communities Scrutiny and replace Councillor Tony Downing; Policy Development Councillor Terry Fox to fill a vacancy. Committee
Access Liaison Group - Councillor Lisa Banes to replace Councillor Olivia Blake.
Allotments and Leisure - Councillor Lewis Dagnall to fill a Gardens Advisory Group vacancy.
(c) representatives be appointed to serve on other bodies as follows:-
Sheffield City Region - To appoint Councillor Mazher Iqbal Combined Authority to serve as a rotational member of the Authority (in addition to the Leader and Deputy Leader).
Church Burgesses - Councillor Peter Rippon to fill a Educational Foundation vacancy.
Environment Agency – - Councillor Karen McGowan to Yorkshire Regional Flood replace Councillor Tony Downing. and Coastal Committee
Learn Sheffield - Councillor Andy Bainbridge to
Page 25 of 50 Page 63 Council 5.07.2017
replace Councillor Michelle Cook.
Parking and Traffic - Councillor Karen McGowan to Regulations Outside replace Councillor Tony Downing. London (PATROL) Joint Committee
Parkwood Landfill Liaison - Councillor Karen McGowan to Group replace Councillor Tony Downing.
Sheffield Clean Air - Councillor Karen McGowan to Partnership replace Councillor Tony Downing.
Sheffield Compact - Councillor Cate McDonald to replace Councillor Jack Scott.
Sheffield Health and Social - Councillor Steve Ayris to replace Care Foundation Trust - Councillor Bob Pullin. Council of Governors
Sheffield Tobacco Control - Councillor Karen McGowan to Programme Accountable replace Councillor Tony Downing. Board
Sheffield Theatres Trust – - Mrs. Joan Barton to replace Mr. Tim Directors and Members Rippon.
Sheffield Waterways - Councillor Karen McGowan to Strategy Group replace Councillor Tony Downing.
South Yorkshire Passenger - Councillor Karen McGowan to Transport Users‟ Advisory replace Councillor Tony Downing. Group
Southey/Owlerton Area - Councillor Mike Chaplin to replace Regeneration Board Councillor Mark Jones; Councillor Andy Bainbridge to fill a vacancy.
Special Interest Group of - Councillor Olivia Blake to replace Municipal Authorities Councillor Ben Curran.
Transport 4 All - Councillor Craig Gamble Pugh to replace Councillor George Lindars- Hammond.
University Technical - Councillor Dawn Dale to fill a College Trust Board vacancy.
Voluntary Action Sheffield - Councillor Mark Jones to replace Councillor Adam Hurst.
Page 26 of 50 Page 64 Council 5.07.2017
Yorkshire and Humber - Councillor Jayne Dunn to replace Regional Migration Councillor Jack Scott. Partnership
Yorkshire and the Humber - Councillor Karen McGowan to Tobacco Governance replace Councillor Tony Downing. Board
(d) it be noted that, in accordance with the authority given by the City Council at its annual meeting held on 17th May 2017, the Chief Executive had authorised the appointment of Councillors Olivia Blake, Mark Jones, Shaffaq Mohammed and Peter Rippon to serve as the Council‟s representatives on the Local Government Association‟s General Assembly;
(e) it be noted that the Senior Officer Employment Sub-Committee, at its meeting held on 16th February 2017, appointed Carly Speechley to the post of Director of Children and Families, and that Carly Speechley commenced post on 3rd April 2017;
(f) it be noted that the Senior Officer Employment Sub-Committee, at its meeting held on 31st March 2017, appointed Mark Gannon to the post of Director of Business Change and Information Solutions, and that Mr Gannon commenced in post on 5th June 2017;
(g) it be noted that the Senior Officer Employment Sub-Committee, at its meeting held on 24th May 2017, appointed Mark Bennett to the post of Director of Human Resources and Customer Services, and that Mr Bennett will start in post on 14th August 2017; and
(h) it be noted that the Senior Officer Employment Sub-Committee, at its meeting held on 26th June 2017, appointed Eugene Walker (Interim Executive Director, Resources) to serve in that post on a permanent basis.
(NOTE: Further to paragraph (a) of the above resolution, the Council agreed to a suggestion made by the Leader of the Council that, in view of there being no time available for the Council to pay tribute to former Councillor Nasima Akther before the meeting terminated, and with the next Council meeting not being held until September, she should write to former Councillor Akther on behalf of the Council to express its thanks and appreciation for her service to the City of Sheffield.)
12. NOTICE OF MOTION GIVEN BY COUNCILLOR OLIVIA BLAKE
Recent Elections
Page 27 of 50 Page 65 Council 5.07.2017
12.1 It was formally moved by Councillor Olivia Blake, and formally seconded by Councillor Kieran Harpham, that this Council:-
(a) thanks the people of Sheffield for turning out in such large numbers and for using their vote in the General Election on 8th June 2017 and the recent Council By-Elections in Southey and Nether Edge & Sharrow Wards;
(b) notes that it is likely a record number of young voters took part in the General Election in Sheffield and throughout the UK and believes that this is a highly positive development for democracy in our country;
(c) congratulates Sheffield's newest Member of Parliament, Jared O‟Mara MP, and thanks all candidates for taking part in the General Election;
(d) notes there have been two Council By-Elections since the last business Council meeting in April 2017 and welcomes both new Sheffield Councillors to the Town Hall and thanks all candidates for taking part in these elections; and
(e) gives thanks to the police and all staff at the polling stations and the count for their hard work on and around the General Election on 8th June, and for the smooth running of the General Election and both Council By-Elections.
12.2 Whereupon, it was formally moved by Councillor Shaffaq Mohammed, and formally seconded by Councillor Colin Ross, as an amendment, that the Motion now submitted be amended by the addition of a new paragraph (e) as follows, and the re-lettering of original paragraph (e) as a new paragraph (f):-
(e) gives thanks to former Councillors Leigh Bramall and Nasima Akther and the former MP for Sheffield Hallam, the Rt. Hon. Nick Clegg, for their services representing the people of Sheffield and wishes them all the best for the future; and
12.3 On being put to the vote, the amendment was negatived.
12.4 The original Motion was then put to the vote and carried as follows:-
RESOLVED: That this Council:-
(a) thanks the people of Sheffield for turning out in such large numbers and for using their vote in the General Election on 8th June 2017 and the recent Council By-Elections in Southey and Nether Edge & Sharrow Wards;
(b) notes that it is likely a record number of young voters took part in the General Election in Sheffield and throughout the UK and believes that this is a highly positive development for democracy in our country;
Page 28 of 50 Page 66 Council 5.07.2017
(c) congratulates Sheffield's newest Member of Parliament, Jared O‟Mara MP, and thanks all candidates for taking part in the General Election;
(d) notes there have been two Council By-Elections since the last business Council meeting in April 2017 and welcomes both new Sheffield Councillors to the Town Hall and thanks all candidates for taking part in these elections; and
(e) gives thanks to the police and all staff at the polling stations and the count for their hard work on and around the General Election on 8th June, and for the smooth running of the General Election and both Council By-Elections.
13. NOTICE OF MOTION GIVEN BY COUNCILLOR JOE OTTEN
South Yorkshire Police and Crime Commissioner
13.1 It was formally moved by Councillor Joe Otten, and formally seconded by Councillor Penny Baker, that this Council:-
(a) notes the recent High Court judgment, which ruled that South Yorkshire Police and Crime Commissioner, Dr. Alan Billings, acted “unlawfully” in suspending former Chief Constable, David Crompton, and then asking him to resign;
(b) notes that the High Court further stated the decisions made by Dr. Billings were “irrational, perverse, unreasonable, misconceived and wholly disproportionate”;
(c) further notes that in the light of the suspension, the independent comment from HM Chief Inspector of Constabulary, Sir Tom Winsor, was to describe the action against the Chief Constable as “conspicuously unfair, disproportionate and so unreasonable that I cannot understand how the PCC has reached this view”;
(d) notes that Dr. Billings failed to criticise the conduct of police counsel at the Hillsborough inquest – this being a grievance of the Hillsborough victims‟ families – in the evidence he gave for his decision, even though he was dismissing Mr. Crompton for seeking to defend that conduct;
(e) believes that this ruling reveals Dr. Billings to be incompetent and irrational;
(f) notes that removing Mr. Crompton from his post is likely to cost taxpayers more than £500,000 in legal fees, plus additional staff expenses;
Page 29 of 50 Page 67 Council 5.07.2017
(g) recalls previous calls by the Sheffield Liberal Democrats for Dr. Billings to resign over his gross mishandling of this situation; and
(h) in light of the High Court judgment, endorses those calls for Dr. Billings to resign and requests him to consider his position.
13.2 Whereupon, it was formally moved by Councillor Peter Rippon, and formally seconded by Councillor Mark Jones, as an amendment, that the Motion now submitted be amended by the deletion of paragraphs (b) to (h) and the addition of new paragraphs (b) to (f) as follows:-
(b) accepts the ruling of the High Court and notes that the South Yorkshire Police and Crime Commissioner (PCC) has confirmed he will not be appealing the court judgement and that the Council‟s representatives on the Police and Crime Panel are able to question the PCC and scrutinise his actions in this matter at the Police and Crime Panel;
(c) regrets that the Police and Crime Commissioner positions were created by the coalition government and that the Police and Crime Commissioner is accountable to the public through the mechanisms of the legislation to introduce Police and Crime Commissioners, which was only able to be passed due to the support of Liberal Democrat MPs, which means that, ultimately, judgement is passed on the Commissioner‟s decisions at the next Police and Crime Commissioner election;
(d) notes the comments of Councillor Paul Scriven on 28th July 2016 in the BBC article “South Yorkshire‟s Chief Constable „should be sacked‟” which was after the decision of the Police and Crime Commissioner to suspend David Crompton "I was saying 18 months ago that David Crompton was not part of the solution he was part of the problem and he should have been sacked. I'm still of the view that the door should not be opened for him to walk through and get his pension. I believe he should be sacked for poor management, for not dealing with the problems of South Yorkshire Police and for bringing it in to disrepute. It's clear that [Dr] Billings does not have the backbone to take the strong action that's needed.";
(e) therefore believes it is clear that even after the decision had been taken to suspend David Crompton, the Liberal Democrats were criticising the PCC for not going further, by saying David Crompton should have been sacked, and further believes that yet again Sheffield Liberal Democrats have been caught out as hypocrites not concerned by the interests of policing in South Yorkshire but practising the most cynical form of political opportunism; and
(f) continues to extend its deepest sympathies to all families and friends and those affected by the horrific events of 15 April 1989, and to all of those who have campaigned for justice in the many years since; and
Page 30 of 50 Page 68 Council 5.07.2017
acknowledges that, with some individuals deemed to have been at fault by the Hillsborough Inquest having recently been charged with criminal offences, anguish will likely be experienced by a great many through the court process, and the Council‟s sincere sympathies go out to all of those affected in the continuing search for justice.
13.3 On being put to the vote, the amendment was carried.
13.3.1 (NOTE: The Deputy Lord Mayor (Councillor Magid Magid) and Councillors Douglas Johnson, Robert Murphy and Alison Teal voted for paragraphs (b), (c) and (f) of the amendment, and abstained from voting on paragraphs (d) and (e) of the amendment, and asked for this to be recorded.)
13.4 The original Motion, as amended, was then put as a Substantive Motion in the following form and carried:-
RESOLVED: That this Council:-
(a) notes the recent High Court judgment, which ruled that South Yorkshire Police and Crime Commissioner, Dr. Alan Billings, acted “unlawfully” in suspending former Chief Constable, David Crompton, and then asking him to resign;
(b) accepts the ruling of the High Court and notes that the South Yorkshire Police and Crime Commissioner (PCC) has confirmed he will not be appealing the court judgement and that the Council‟s representatives on the Police and Crime Panel are able to question the PCC and scrutinise his actions in this matter at the Police and Crime Panel;
(c) regrets that the Police and Crime Commissioner positions were created by the coalition government and that the Police and Crime Commissioner is accountable to the public through the mechanisms of the legislation to introduce Police and Crime Commissioners, which was only able to be passed due to the support of Liberal Democrat MPs, which means that, ultimately, judgement is passed on the Commissioner‟s decisions at the next Police and Crime Commissioner election;
(d) notes the comments of Councillor Paul Scriven on 28th July 2016 in the BBC article “South Yorkshire‟s Chief Constable „should be sacked‟” which was after the decision of the Police and Crime Commissioner to suspend David Crompton "I was saying 18 months ago that David Crompton was not part of the solution he was part of the problem and he should have been sacked. I'm still of the view that the door should not be opened for him to walk through and get his pension. I believe he should be sacked for poor management, for not dealing with the problems of South Yorkshire Police and for bringing it in to disrepute. It's clear that [Dr] Billings does not have the backbone to take the strong action that's needed.";
Page 31 of 50 Page 69 Council 5.07.2017
(e) therefore believes it is clear that even after the decision had been taken to suspend David Crompton, the Liberal Democrats were criticising the PCC for not going further, by saying David Crompton should have been sacked, and further believes that yet again Sheffield Liberal Democrats have been caught out as hypocrites not concerned by the interests of policing in South Yorkshire but practising the most cynical form of political opportunism; and
(f) continues to extend its deepest sympathies to all families and friends and those affected by the horrific events of 15 April 1989, and to all of those who have campaigned for justice in the many years since; and acknowledges that, with some individuals deemed to have been at fault by the Hillsborough Inquest having recently been charged with criminal offences, anguish will likely be experienced by a great many through the court process, and the Council‟s sincere sympathies go out to all of those affected in the continuing search for justice.
13.4.1 (NOTE: 1. The Deputy Lord Mayor (Councillor Magid Magid) and Councillors Douglas Johnson, Robert Murphy and Alison Teal voted for paragraphs (a) to (c) and (f) of the Motion, and abstained from voting on paragraphs (d) and (e) of the Motion, and asked for this to be recorded; and
2. Councillors Andy Nash, Bob Pullin, Richard Shaw, Adam Hanrahan, Joe Otten, Colin Ross, Roger Davison, Shaffaq Mohammed, Sue Alston, Andrew Sangar, Cliff Woodcraft, Ian Auckland, Sue Auckland, Steve Ayris, Gail Smith, David Baker, Penny Baker and Vickie Priestley voted for paragraphs (a), (b), (d) and (f) of the Motion, and voted against paragraphs (c) and (e) of the Motion, and asked for this to be recorded.)
14. NOTICE OF MOTION GIVEN BY COUNCILLOR STEVE WILSON
Armed Forces Community
14.1 It was formally moved by Councillor Steve Wilson, and formally seconded by Councillor Julie Dore, that this Council:-
(a) wishes to pay tribute to all those serving, or who have served, in our armed forces, and places on record our enormous gratitude to them for keeping us all safe;
(b) notes that Armed Forces Day took place on Saturday 24th June; an occasion giving support to the men and women who make up the Armed Forces community, from currently serving troops to Service families, veterans and cadets;
(c) reaffirms the importance of such events and notes the success of recent events held in Sheffield in support of Armed Forces Day, including a veterans parade and a short ceremony led by the Lord
Page 32 of 50 Page 70 Council 5.07.2017
Mayor;
(d) notes that this year‟s event marks the 35th anniversary of the Falklands War and the sinking of HMS Sheffield;
(e) regrets the loss of life caused by the sinking of HMS Sheffield and places on record our sympathies to the friends and families of the 20 crew members who were killed in the missile attack of 4th May 1982;
(f) notes work undertaken by this Council to improve support of our armed forces communities, including a grant of £180,695 which Sheffield City Council successfully led a bid for from the Ministry of Defence‟s Covenant Fund, in partnership with Rotherham, Doncaster and Barnsley Councils, and Sheffield Hallam University; and
(g) notes that this grant, awarded in April, will help South Yorkshire gain a better understanding of the local Armed Forces community and strengthen the delivery of the Community Covenant; the grant money is being spent on research and training at Sheffield Hallam University and was officially launched to coincide with national Armed Forces Day in June.
14.2 Whereupon, it was formally moved by Councillor Ian Saunders, and formally seconded by Councillor Tony Damms, as an amendment, that the Motion now submitted be amended by the addition of the following words at the end of paragraph (e) - “and recognises all who survived that, and other, attacks during all wars, and that support must be given to all those who suffered mental health related issues (such as Post Traumatic Stress Disorder) as result of conflict, some of whom live in Sheffield”.
14.3 On being put to the vote, the amendment was carried.
14.4 The original Motion, as amended, was then put as a Substantive Motion in the following form and carried:-
RESOLVED: That this Council:-
(a) wishes to pay tribute to all those serving, or who have served, in our armed forces, and places on record our enormous gratitude to them for keeping us all safe;
(b) notes that Armed Forces Day took place on Saturday 24th June; an occasion giving support to the men and women who make up the Armed Forces community, from currently serving troops to Service families, veterans and cadets;
(c) reaffirms the importance of such events and notes the success of recent events held in Sheffield in support of Armed Forces Day, including a veterans parade and a short ceremony led by the Lord Mayor;
Page 33 of 50 Page 71 Council 5.07.2017
(d) notes that this year‟s event marks the 35th anniversary of the Falklands War and the sinking of HMS Sheffield;
(e) regrets the loss of life caused by the sinking of HMS Sheffield and places on record our sympathies to the friends and families of the 20 crew members who were killed in the missile attack of 4th May 1982, and recognises all who survived that, and other, attacks during all wars, and that support must be given to all those who suffered mental health related issues (such as Post Traumatic Stress Disorder) as result of conflict, some of whom live in Sheffield;
(f) notes work undertaken by this Council to improve support of our armed forces communities, including a grant of £180,695 which Sheffield City Council successfully led a bid for from the Ministry of Defence‟s Covenant Fund, in partnership with Rotherham, Doncaster and Barnsley Councils, and Sheffield Hallam University; and
(g) notes that this grant, awarded in April, will help South Yorkshire gain a better understanding of the local Armed Forces community and strengthen the delivery of the Community Covenant; the grant money is being spent on research and training at Sheffield Hallam University and was officially launched to coincide with national Armed Forces Day in June.
15. NOTICE OF MOTION GIVEN BY COUNCILLOR JULIE DORE
Safety of LGBT People in the Chechen Republic
15.1 RESOLVED: On the Motion of Councillor Julie Dore, seconded by Councillor Neale Gibson, that this Council:-
(a) is horrified by the reports coming out of the Chechen Republic, Russia, that as many as 100 gay men have been detained, tortured and killed because of their sexuality;
(b) notes that the Russian Government has ultimate responsibility for the safety of its citizens, yet it appears to have been wilfully in disregard of this duty as Chechen authorities committed the most terrible abuses due to appalling and disgusting prejudices, which have no place anywhere in the world;
(c) notes that whilst the Foreign and Commonwealth Office described these reports as "credible" and expressed concern, our whole Council believes the UK's representations on this issue should have been escalated to a much higher political level;
(d) believes there has been a significant deterioration in the human rights
Page 34 of 50 Page 72 Council 5.07.2017
situation for LGBT people across Russia in recent years and the Government should use the UK's influence to fight discrimination and promote equality; and
(e) reaffirms our commitment to LGBT rights throughout the world and directs that a copy of this motion be sent to the Foreign Secretary.
16. NOTICE OF MOTION GIVEN BY COUNCILLOR MARTIN SMITH
Freedom of Information Requests
16.1 It was formally moved by Councillor Shaffaq Mohammed, and formally seconded by Councillor Adam Hanrahan, that this Council:-
(a) notes that in 2016 nearly one in three requests to this Council for information under the Freedom of Information (FOI) Act were refused either in part or as a whole;
(b) notes this was a 35% increase in the refusal rate compared to 2014/15;
(c) notes that Sheffield, unlike some other core cities, does not publish data on FOI or Environmental Information Regulations (EIR) request refusal rates;
(d) believes that failure to publish an unredacted copy of the Amey contract or any documentation for the Guodong deal has contributed to a lack of trust in this Administration;
(e) agrees that it is right to withhold personal information, but withholding information on issues that are strategically important for the future of our city should not be done on a routine basis; and
(f) requests the Leader of the Council to carry out a review of the relevant policies and procedures and publish the outcome and recommendations of that review within the next three months, and immediately request the Chief Executive to publish FOI request refusal rates on a monthly basis.
16.2 Whereupon, it was formally moved by Councillor Olivia Blake, and formally seconded by Councillor Jack Scott, as an amendment, that the Motion now submitted be amended by the deletion of all the words after the words “That this Council” and the addition of the following words:-
(a) notes that under 30% (less than one third) of FOIs received in 2016 were refused in part or full and that consideration should be given to the fact that a partial refusal can mean only a very small element of a large request is refused; for example, all other information under a
Page 35 of 50 Page 73 Council 5.07.2017
request may be provided but where one question is exempted (refused) due to the information being available already in the public domain, such as the Sheffield City Council website, then this would count as a partial refusal;
(b) notes that the above can be construed as a problem of how refusals in FOIs are legally classified, as signposting to relevant information should in no way count as a refusal to grant information when the avenue for finding this information is made easily accessible (Section 21 of the Freedom of Information Act);
(c) further notes that the exemptions from disclosure which were most used during 2016 were Section 21, where information is accessible by other means (i.e. via the Council website) and Section 40, where the request was for, or included, information considered personal data which would have been refused or redacted in the response provided to protect the Data Protection Act rights of those individuals;
(d) contends that the Liberal Democrats public claims that there has been a 35% increase in the refusal rate in the last year, is completely inaccurate and that, in actuality, less FOIs were refused in 2016 than the year before it - the Council refused fully or partially 574 requests in response to the 1862 requests received in 2015 (just under 31%), whereas in 2016 the Council refused 558 of 1903 requests, which equates to just over 29% of requests received; and clearly this denotes a decrease in the overall numbers and percentage of requests refused, and nothing like the 35% increase quoted by the Liberal Democrats;
(e) notes that the Council publishes information on its FOI compliance online and there is no requirement to publish any information on FOI compliance or the use of exemptions, and as a result, the Authority has focused on providing details of its timeliness in response to FOI requests in accordance with the Act (20 working days); and in addition, this Administration is unaware of any other core cities publishing information to this level and would welcome details of those councils that do publish, so we can benchmark our transparency on the handling of FOIs;
(f) further notes that the Council cannot provide an unredacted copy of the Amey contract as in any commercial agreement there may be information within it which is legitimately commercially sensitive, including costing structures and the unique offer provided by the supplier during the tender process; however, in terms of the Amey contract, the Council is currently completing a full review of the contract to ensure that as open a version of the contract can be made as public as possible; this is a complex process and requires the review of the extensive contract by the Council and Amey, but once this review is complete a new version of the redacted contract will be made publically available;
Page 36 of 50 Page 74 Council 5.07.2017
(g) is unaware of any individual FOI requests for specific details of the “Guodong deal” and notes that the Council has published information through its website and press releases on the discussions with the Guodong Group;
(h) notes that, in addition, from an FOI perspective, the Council has mainly received requests focused on correspondence with the Guodong Group rather than specific details of the “deal” and, again, the Council may consider where appropriate the commercial sensitivity of information where disclosure would harm the commercial position of the Guodong Group, the Council or any other third party;
(i) confirms that every request will be assessed and reviewed in accordance with the Act but there are specific requests which might result in a similar refusal; for example, the Council will for certain exemptions apply the public interest test in the application both for and against an exemption, in accordance with the law and statutory guidance; and
(j) notes that the current process is transparent and in full accordance with the law and best practice with other local authorities; moreover the Council does not have the ability to rewrite statute and legal precedent in the handling of Freedom of Information Act and Environmental Information Regulations requests and, therefore, believes no further review is merited and that providing refusal rates regularly to the public as statistics in this case do not provide the full details.
16.3 On being put to the vote, the amendment was carried.
16.4 The original Motion, as amended, was then put as a Substantive Motion in the following form and carried:-
RESOLVED: That this Council:-
(a) notes that under 30% (less than one third) of FOIs received in 2016 were refused in part or full and that consideration should be given to the fact that a partial refusal can mean only a very small element of a large request is refused; for example, all other information under a request may be provided but where one question is exempted (refused) due to the information being available already in the public domain, such as the Sheffield City Council website, then this would count as a partial refusal;
(b) notes that the above can be construed as a problem of how refusals in FOIs are legally classified, as signposting to relevant information should in no way count as a refusal to grant information when the avenue for finding this information is made easily accessible (Section 21 of the Freedom of Information Act);
Page 37 of 50 Page 75 Council 5.07.2017
(c) further notes that the exemptions from disclosure which were most used during 2016 were Section 21, where information is accessible by other means (i.e. via the Council website) and Section 40, where the request was for, or included, information considered personal data which would have been refused or redacted in the response provided to protect the Data Protection Act rights of those individuals;
(d) contends that the Liberal Democrats public claims that there has been a 35% increase in the refusal rate in the last year, is completely inaccurate and that, in actuality, less FOIs were refused in 2016 than the year before it - the Council refused fully or partially 574 requests in response to the 1862 requests received in 2015 (just under 31%), whereas in 2016 the Council refused 558 of 1903 requests, which equates to just over 29% of requests received; and clearly this denotes a decrease in the overall numbers and percentage of requests refused, and nothing like the 35% increase quoted by the Liberal Democrats;
(e) notes that the Council publishes information on its FOI compliance online and there is no requirement to publish any information on FOI compliance or the use of exemptions, and as a result, the Authority has focused on providing details of its timeliness in response to FOI requests in accordance with the Act (20 working days); and in addition, this Administration is unaware of any other core cities publishing information to this level and would welcome details of those councils that do publish, so we can benchmark our transparency on the handling of FOIs;
(f) further notes that the Council cannot provide an unredacted copy of the Amey contract as in any commercial agreement there may be information within it which is legitimately commercially sensitive, including costing structures and the unique offer provided by the supplier during the tender process; however, in terms of the Amey contract, the Council is currently completing a full review of the contract to ensure that as open a version of the contract can be made as public as possible; this is a complex process and requires the review of the extensive contract by the Council and Amey, but once this review is complete a new version of the redacted contract will be made publically available;
(g) is unaware of any individual FOI requests for specific details of the “Guodong deal” and notes that the Council has published information through its website and press releases on the discussions with the Guodong Group;
(h) notes that, in addition, from an FOI perspective, the Council has mainly received requests focused on correspondence with the Guodong Group rather than specific details of the “deal” and, again, the Council may consider where appropriate the commercial
Page 38 of 50 Page 76 Council 5.07.2017
sensitivity of information where disclosure would harm the commercial position of the Guodong Group, the Council or any other third party;
(i) confirms that every request will be assessed and reviewed in accordance with the Act but there are specific requests which might result in a similar refusal; for example, the Council will for certain exemptions apply the public interest test in the application both for and against an exemption, in accordance with the law and statutory guidance; and
(j) notes that the current process is transparent and in full accordance with the law and best practice with other local authorities; moreover the Council does not have the ability to rewrite statute and legal precedent in the handling of Freedom of Information Act and Environmental Information Regulations requests and, therefore, believes no further review is merited and that providing refusal rates regularly to the public as statistics in this case do not provide the full details.
17. NOTICE OF MOTION GIVEN BY COUNCILLOR JOHN BOOKER
Brexit and Support to Small Businesses
17.1 It was formally moved by Councillor John Booker, and formally seconded by Councillor Pauline Andrews, that this Council:-
(a) believes there needs to be a bonfire of excessive EU regulations when the UK leaves the EU so that smaller businesses can compete successfully on the global stage;
(b) further believes Britain's 5.5 million small businesses are the life blood of our economy, making up 60 per cent of jobs in the private sector, according to the Federation of Small Businesses;
(c) also believes in (i) cutting business rates by 20 per cent for the 1.5 million British businesses operating from premises with a rateable value of less than £50,000, (ii) making HM Revenue and Customs investigate big business or public sector bodies that repeatedly make late payments to smaller customers, (iii) improving access to trade credit insurance to remove the drag on growth for businesses struggling to secure loans, and give small traders the confidence to expand their businesses and (iv) encouraging local trade by pushing every local authority to offer at least 30 minutes free parking in town centres and shopping parades;
(d) notes that local, regional and national governments have immense spending power totalling around £230 billion, and that whilst in the EU they are required to offer contracts right across Europe, which has
Page 39 of 50 Page 77 Council 5.07.2017
made it harder for British business to compete, and forced them to jump through expensive bureaucratic hoops, and believes that Brexit offers the perfect opportunity to open up government order books to smaller businesses, and encourage local, regional and national procurement strategies that will deliver better value for taxpayers;
(e) acknowledges that it takes courage and determination to set up your own business, and that many self-employed people work for less than the national living wage, especially when they start out, and believes that there should be no requirement for quarterly tax returns, and no increases in Class IV National Insurance or taxes for Britain‟s self- employed strivers and that taxes and red-tape should be kept to the minimum necessary; and
(f) places on record its belief that workers‟ rights must be protected once the UK leaves the EU, and that we must enforce the minimum and living wage and reverse government cuts to the number of minimum wage inspectors in England and Wales, and significantly tighten up the rules on zero hours contracts and severely limit their use.
17.2 Whereupon, it was formally moved by Councillor Mazher Iqbal, and formally seconded by Councillor Ben Miskell, as an amendment, that the Motion now submitted be amended by the deletion of all the words after the words “That this Council” and the addition of the following words:-
(a) believes that leaving the EU presents an opportunity to empower local businesses to compete successfully on the global stage;
(b) notes that the United Kingdom Independence Party (UKIP) are very fond of stating that „red tape and regulations need to be cut‟ and that there should be a „bonfire of EU regulations‟, but in reality many EU regulations will need to be complied with in order to trade with members of the European Single Market and, as such, believes such claims that a lot of EU regulation will be “ripped-up” is disingenuous;
(c) further believes that instead of racing head-long into removing EU regulation, a considered approach needs to be taken and supports the position of the Labour Party that Brexit should ensure regulation which provides the „exact same benefits‟ as the single market, with a focus on an outcome that prioritises jobs and economy;
(d) notes that the Labour Party has raised fears that Conservative backbench MPs will use the Repeal Bill to weaken EU rights and protections, and that Labour MPs will oppose any attempt to do so;
(e) highlights that the Labour Party had a manifesto commitment to replace the Repeal Bill with an EU Rights and Protections Bill that would address these concerns and ensure that all EU rights and protections would be enshrined in UK law without qualification, limitation or sunset clauses; and that Labour MPs will fight for
Page 40 of 50 Page 78 Council 5.07.2017
significant improvements along these lines in the Great Repeal Bill;
(f) believes that our country‟s small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) are the backbone of our economy, providing 60 per cent of jobs in the private sector, according to the Federation of Small Businesses; and that technological changes, like the spread of digital manufacturing and rapid communication, mean smaller and faster businesses will be the future of our economy;
(g) believes that Labour is the party of small business and understands the challenges our smaller businesses face; and notes that, in order to provide the support many small businesses need, the Labour Party‟s 2017 Manifesto proposed to mandate a new National Investment Bank, and regional development banks in every region, to identify where other lenders fail to meet the needs of SMEs and prioritise lending to improve the funding gap;
(h) acknowledges that Labour stood on a manifesto commitment to reinstate the lower small-business corporation tax rate and introduce a package of reforms to business rates – including switching from RPI to CPI indexation, exempting new investment in plant and machinery from valuations, and ensuring that businesses have access to a proper appeals process – while reviewing the entire business rates system in the longer run – and to scrap the quarterly reporting for businesses with a turnover of under £85,000; and
(i) notes that Labour MPs opposed the Government‟s attempts to increase taxation on National Insurance (NI) contributions for the self- employed and further notes that, following the Labour Party‟s strong showing at the recent General Election whereby the Conservative Party lost its majority, this proposal has been dropped from the Government‟s recent Queen‟s speech.
17.3 On being put to the vote, the amendment was carried.
17.4 It was then formally moved by Councillor Andrew Sangar, and formally seconded by Councillor Adam Hanrahan, as an amendment, that the Motion now submitted be amended by the deletion of all the words after the words “That this Council” and the addition of the following words:-
(a) notes that 56% of exports from Sheffield go to the EU, compared to 12% to the US and 2% to China;
(b) believes this demonstrates that the Government's plans to take Britain out of the Single Market are reckless and will hit local businesses hard when they are no longer able to export freely to their biggest customer;
(c) is disappointed with the Labour Party‟s position on Brexit and believes that its Leader, the Rt. Hon. Jeremy Corbyn MP, has failed
Page 41 of 50 Page 79 Council 5.07.2017
the young Labour voters who wanted a different approach to Brexit, after he imposed a three-line whip on Labour MPs to abstain on a cross-party amendment to keep the UK in the Single Market;
(d) notes that all Sheffield MPs abstained on the amendment to keep the UK in the Single Market despite 49% of Sheffield voting to remain in the EU last year; and
(e) directs that a copy of this motion be sent to all Sheffield MPs.
17.5 On being put to the vote, the amendment was negatived.
17.6 The original Motion, as amended, was then put as a Substantive Motion in the following form and carried:-
RESOLVED: That this Council:-
(a) believes that leaving the EU presents an opportunity to empower local businesses to compete successfully on the global stage;
(b) notes that the United Kingdom Independence Party (UKIP) are very fond of stating that „red tape and regulations need to be cut‟ and that there should be a „bonfire of EU regulations‟, but in reality many EU regulations will need to be complied with in order to trade with members of the European Single Market and, as such, believes such claims that a lot of EU regulation will be “ripped-up” is disingenuous;
(c) further believes that instead of racing head-long into removing EU regulation, a considered approach needs to be taken and supports the position of the Labour Party that Brexit should ensure regulation which provides the „exact same benefits‟ as the single market, with a focus on an outcome that prioritises jobs and economy;
(d) notes that the Labour Party has raised fears that Conservative backbench MPs will use the Repeal Bill to weaken EU rights and protections, and that Labour MPs will oppose any attempt to do so;
(e) highlights that the Labour Party had a manifesto commitment to replace the Repeal Bill with an EU Rights and Protections Bill that would address these concerns and ensure that all EU rights and protections would be enshrined in UK law without qualification, limitation or sunset clauses; and that Labour MPs will fight for significant improvements along these lines in the Great Repeal Bill;
(f) believes that our country‟s small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) are the backbone of our economy, providing 60 per cent of jobs in the private sector, according to the Federation of Small Businesses; and that technological changes, like the spread of digital manufacturing and rapid communication, mean smaller and faster businesses will be the future of our economy;
Page 42 of 50 Page 80 Council 5.07.2017
(g) believes that Labour is the party of small business and understands the challenges our smaller businesses face; and notes that, in order to provide the support many small businesses need, the Labour Party‟s 2017 Manifesto proposed to mandate a new National Investment Bank, and regional development banks in every region, to identify where other lenders fail to meet the needs of SMEs and prioritise lending to improve the funding gap;
(h) acknowledges that Labour stood on a manifesto commitment to reinstate the lower small-business corporation tax rate and introduce a package of reforms to business rates – including switching from RPI to CPI indexation, exempting new investment in plant and machinery from valuations, and ensuring that businesses have access to a proper appeals process – while reviewing the entire business rates system in the longer run – and to scrap the quarterly reporting for businesses with a turnover of under £85,000; and
(i) notes that Labour MPs opposed the Government‟s attempts to increase taxation on National Insurance (NI) contributions for the self- employed and further notes that, following the Labour Party‟s strong showing at the recent General Election whereby the Conservative Party lost its majority, this proposal has been dropped from the Government‟s recent Queen‟s speech.
17.6.1 The votes on the Substantive Motion were ordered to be recorded and were as follows:-
For paragraphs (a), (c) to - Councillors Ian Saunders, Denise Fox, (e) and (g) to (i) of the Bryan Lodge, Karen McGowan, Kieran Substantive Motion (45) Harpham, Jackie Drayton, Talib Hussain, Mark Jones, Moya O‟Rourke, Craig Gamble Pugh, Mazher Iqbal, Mary Lea, Zahira Naz, Andy Bainbridge, Steve Wilson, Abdul Khayum, Abtisam Mohamed, Cate McDonald, Bob Johnson, Lisa Banes, Terry Fox, Pat Midgley, David Barker, Tony Downing, Mohammad Maroof, Jim Steinke, Julie Dore, Ben Miskell, Jack Scott, Mike Drabble, Dianne Hurst, Peter Rippon, Dawn Dale, Peter Price, Garry Weatherall, Mike Chaplin, Tony Damms, Jayne Dunn, Richard Crowther, Olivia Blake, Ben Curran, Neale Gibson, Adam Hurst, Zoe Sykes and Mick Rooney.
Against paragraphs (a), (c) - Councillors Andy Nash, Bob Pullin, Richard to (e) and (g) to (i) of the Shaw, Adam Hanrahan, Joe Otten, Colin Substantive Motion (22) Ross, Pauline Andrews, Roger Davison,
Page 43 of 50 Page 81 Council 5.07.2017
Shaffaq Mohammed, Sue Alston, Andrew Sangar, Cliff Woodcraft, Ian Auckland, Sue Auckland, Steve Ayris, Gail Smith, David Baker, Penny Baker, Vickie Priestley, Jack Clarkson, Keith Davis and John Booker.
Abstained on paragraphs - The Lord Mayor (Councillor Anne Murphy), (a), (c) to (e) and (g) to (i) the Deputy Lord Mayor (Councillor Magid of the Substantive Motion Magid) and Councillors Douglas Johnson, (5) Robert Murphy and Alison Teal.
For paragraphs (b) and (f) - Councillors Andy Nash, Bob Pullin, Richard of the Substantive Motion Shaw, Ian Saunders, Denise Fox, Bryan (63) Lodge, Karen McGowan, Kieran Harpham, Jackie Drayton, Talib Hussain, Mark Jones, Moya O‟Rourke, Craig Gamble Pugh, Adam Hanrahan, Mazher Iqbal, Mary Lea, Zahira Naz, Joe Otten, Colin Ross, Andy Bainbridge, Steve Wilson, Roger Davison, Shaffaq Mohammed, Abdul Khayum, Abtisam Mohamed, Sue Alston, Andrew Sangar, Cliff Woodcraft, Cate McDonald, Ian Auckland, Sue Auckland, Steve Ayris, Bob Johnson, Lisa Banes, Terry Fox, Pat Midgley, David Barker, Gail Smith, Tony Downing, Mohammad Maroof, Jim Steinke, Julie Dore, Ben Miskell, Jack Scott, Mike Drabble, Dianne Hurst, Peter Rippon, Dawn Dale, Peter Price, Garry Weatherall, Mike Chaplin, Tony Damms, Jayne Dunn, David Baker, Penny Baker, Vickie Priestley, Richard Crowther, Olivia Blake, Ben Curran, Neale Gibson, Adam Hurst, Zoe Sykes and Mick Rooney.
Against paragraphs (b) - Councillors Pauline Andrews, Jack and (f) of the Substantive Clarkson, Keith Davis and John Booker. Motion (4)
Abstained on paragraphs - The Lord Mayor (Councillor Anne Murphy), (b) and (f) of the the Deputy Lord Mayor (Councillor Magid Substantive Motion (5) Magid) and Councillors Douglas Johnson, Robert Murphy and Alison Teal.
18. NOTICE OF MOTION GIVEN BY COUNCILLOR JACK SCOTT
Child Tax Credit Changes
18.1 It was formally moved by Councillor Jack Scott, and formally seconded by Councillor Mike Drabble, that this Council:-
Page 44 of 50 Page 82 Council 5.07.2017
(a) notes with concern and alarm that child poverty has worsened in recent years and believes that the new changes to Child Tax Credit will make this situation worse; and further believes that levels of child poverty in this country are a disgrace and it should be seen that a central task of any Government should be to help prevent, reduce and eradicate child poverty;
(b) believes that the Government is in neglect of its duties by changing the Child Tax Credit and Universal Credit provision to two children per family; and notes that the changes were introduced as part of the Welfare Reform and Work Act 2016, despite Parliamentary opposition from the Labour Party, citing in particular the lack of an equality impact assessment for any changes;
(c) notes that Child Poverty Action Group have raised concerns that this change will push more children and families into poverty, and that the Joseph Rowntree Foundation has published a report which suggests that the two child limit could push 200,000 children into poverty;
(d) highlights in particular the appalling so-called „rape clause‟; which requires a mother seeking benefits for a third child to prove she has been sexually assaulted or that the child was conceived through abuse or within an abusive relationship;
(e) endorses entirely the view of the Fawcett Society, which has stated: "Women have been consistently and repeatedly hit hardest by austerity measures and tax and benefit changes. Child poverty is rising. The new two child limit in the Tax Credit system will see another 200,000 children pushed into poverty, and the disgraceful „rape clause‟ that accompanies it pushes women into disclosing sexual violence in order to obtain financial support.";
(f) believes that the so-called „rape clause‟ forces women into a horrifying ordeal; having to recount their sexual abuse via an eight- page document in order to prove that their abuse is worthy of government support, clearly showing how badly conceived the policy is;
(g) believes that rather than making suffering victims and survivors go through this ordeal, the policy should be entirely scrapped as it is extremely damaging to survivors of abuse and will lead to a greater number of children in child poverty; and
(h) calls upon the Government to immediately reverse, what this Council believes to be, this disastrous, unfair and spiteful policy and directs that a copy of this Motion be submitted to the Prime Minister and Sheffield's Members of Parliament.
18.2 Whereupon, it was formally moved by Councillor Joe Otten, and formally
Page 45 of 50 Page 83 Council 5.07.2017
seconded by Councillor Sue Auckland, as an amendment, that the Motion now submitted be amended by:-
1. the deletion of the following words at the end of paragraph (b) – “despite Parliamentary opposition from the Labour Party, citing in particular the lack of an equality impact assessment for any changes”;
2. the addition of new paragraphs (c) and (d) as follows:-
(c) is therefore disappointed that, despite this rhetoric, analysis by the Resolution Foundation found that the 2017 Labour Party manifesto pledges to press ahead with £7bn of the £9bn of welfare cuts proposed by former Chancellor, the Rt. Hon George Osborne, and that the £2bn that had been allocated would reverse less than half of the cuts to child benefit and Universal Credit;
(d) recalls that in July 2015, the then acting leader of the Labour Party, the Rt. Hon Harriet Harman MP, instructed Labour MPs to abstain on the Welfare Reform and Work Bill at its second reading rather than join SNP, Liberal Democrat and Green MPs in voting against the Bill;
3. the re-lettering of original paragraphs (c) to (h) as new paragraphs (e) to (j).
18.3 On being put to the vote, the amendment was negatived.
18.4 The original Motion was then put to the vote and carried as follows:-
RESOLVED: That this Council:-
(a) notes with concern and alarm that child poverty has worsened in recent years and believes that the new changes to Child Tax Credit will make this situation worse; and further believes that levels of child poverty in this country are a disgrace and it should be seen that a central task of any Government should be to help prevent, reduce and eradicate child poverty;
(b) believes that the Government is in neglect of its duties by changing the Child Tax Credit and Universal Credit provision to two children per family; and notes that the changes were introduced as part of the Welfare Reform and Work Act 2016, despite Parliamentary opposition from the Labour Party, citing in particular the lack of an equality impact assessment for any changes;
(c) notes that Child Poverty Action Group have raised concerns that this change will push more children and families into poverty, and that the Joseph Rowntree Foundation has published a report which suggests that the two child limit could push 200,000 children into poverty;
Page 46 of 50 Page 84 Council 5.07.2017
(d) highlights in particular the appalling so-called „rape clause‟; which requires a mother seeking benefits for a third child to prove she has been sexually assaulted or that the child was conceived through abuse or within an abusive relationship;
(e) endorses entirely the view of the Fawcett Society, which has stated: "Women have been consistently and repeatedly hit hardest by austerity measures and tax and benefit changes. Child poverty is rising. The new two child limit in the Tax Credit system will see another 200,000 children pushed into poverty, and the disgraceful „rape clause‟ that accompanies it pushes women into disclosing sexual violence in order to obtain financial support.";
(f) believes that the so-called „rape clause‟ forces women into a horrifying ordeal; having to recount their sexual abuse via an eight- page document in order to prove that their abuse is worthy of government support, clearly showing how badly conceived the policy is;
(g) believes that rather than making suffering victims and survivors go through this ordeal, the policy should be entirely scrapped as it is extremely damaging to survivors of abuse and will lead to a greater number of children in child poverty; and
(h) calls upon the Government to immediately reverse, what this Council believes to be, this disastrous, unfair and spiteful policy and directs that a copy of this Motion be submitted to the Prime Minister and Sheffield's Members of Parliament.
18.4.1 (NOTE: 1. Councillors Andy Nash, Bob Pullin, Richard Shaw, Adam Hanrahan, Joe Otten, Colin Ross, Pauline Andrews, Roger Davison, Shaffaq Mohammed, Sue Alston, Andrew Sangar, Cliff Woodcraft, Ian Auckland, Sue Auckland, Steve Ayris, Gail Smith, David Baker, Penny Baker, Vickie Priestley, Jack Clarkson, Keith Davis and John Booker voted for paragraphs (a) and (c) to (h) of the Motion, and voted against paragraph (b) of the Motion, and asked for this to be recorded; and
2. The Deputy Lord Mayor (Councillor Magid Magid) and Councillors Douglas Johnson, Robert Murphy and Alison Teal voted for paragraphs (a) and (c) to (h) of the Motion, and abstained from voting on paragraph (b) of the Motion, and asked for this to be recorded.)
19. NOTICE OF MOTION GIVEN BY COUNCILLOR GAIL SMITH
Public Parks
19.1 It was formally moved by Councillor Gail Smith, and formally seconded by Councillor Roger Davison, that this Council:-
Page 47 of 50 Page 85 Council 5.07.2017
(a) notes that 14th to 23rd July is “Love Parks” week;
(b) believes that Sheffield has some of the best public parks in the country and our parks are something which sets Sheffield apart as the “Outdoor City”; and
(c) calls on the Authority to get involved in Love Parks week and become an official supporter of the campaign.
19.2 Whereupon, it was formally moved by Councillor Mary Lea, and formally seconded by Councillor Talib Hussain, as an amendment, that the Motion now submitted be amended by the deletion of paragraph (c) and the addition of new paragraphs (c) and (d) as follows:-
(c) notes that this Administration is committed to promoting our green spaces and is fully supporting the upcoming „Love Parks week‟ and that Sheffield City Council will be an official supporter of the campaign; and
(d) notes the Administration‟s considerable achievements in securing the best possible parks and green spaces for the city, despite relentless government cuts, including:-
(i) a huge £1.5m investment in our parks over the next three years;
(ii) the biggest deal of its kind in the country for tennis in parks; with courts at nine sites being created, or otherwise brought back into use after becoming, in many cases, derelict and unplayable;
(iii) 30 signed Run Routes have been created at 14 locations across the city, providing simple to follow trails through Sheffield‟s parks and woodlands;
(iv) state of the art 3G football pitches and football hub at Thorncliffe, High Green;
(v) improved wheelchair and disability access to our parks to make Sheffield an outdoor city for all;
(vi) officially recognised even more areas with fields in trust status, such as Ochre Dike Playing Fields which is one of more than 800 green open spaces in Sheffield;
(vii) creation of 14 additional woodlands and, in the last tree planting season alone, more than 8,600 extra trees in 40 locations; and
Page 48 of 50 Page 86 Council 5.07.2017
(viii) Sheffield boasts one of the largest numbers of 'Friends Of' groups in the UK, in comparison with other major cities, and by working in this partnership, the Administration ensures that our green spaces are well used and maintained.
19.3 On being put to the vote, the amendment was carried.
19.4 The original Motion, as amended, was then put as a Substantive Motion in the following form and carried:-
RESOLVED: That this Council:-
(a) notes that 14th to 23rd July is “Love Parks” week;
(b) believes that Sheffield has some of the best public parks in the country and our parks are something which sets Sheffield apart as the “Outdoor City”;
(c) notes that this Administration is committed to promoting our green spaces and is fully supporting the upcoming „Love Parks week‟ and that Sheffield City Council will be an official supporter of the campaign; and
(d) notes the Administration‟s considerable achievements in securing the best possible parks and green spaces for the city, despite relentless government cuts, including:-
(i) a huge £1.5m investment in our parks over the next three years;
(ii) the biggest deal of its kind in the country for tennis in parks; with courts at nine sites being created, or otherwise brought back into use after becoming, in many cases, derelict and unplayable;
(iii) 30 signed Run Routes have been created at 14 locations across the city, providing simple to follow trails through Sheffield‟s parks and woodlands;
(iv) state of the art 3G football pitches and football hub at Thorncliffe, High Green;
(v) improved wheelchair and disability access to our parks to make Sheffield an outdoor city for all;
(vi) officially recognised even more areas with fields in trust status, such as Ochre Dike Playing Fields which is one of more than 800 green open spaces in Sheffield;
(vii) creation of 14 additional woodlands and, in the last tree
Page 49 of 50 Page 87 Council 5.07.2017
planting season alone, more than 8,600 extra trees in 40 locations; and
(viii) Sheffield boasts one of the largest numbers of 'Friends Of' groups in the UK, in comparison with other major cities, and by working in this partnership, the Administration ensures that our green spaces are well used and maintained.
19.4.1 (NOTE: Councillors Andy Nash, Bob Pullin, Richard Shaw, Adam Hanrahan, Joe Otten, Colin Ross, Roger Davison, Shaffaq Mohammed, Sue Alston, Andrew Sangar, Cliff Woodcraft, Ian Auckland, Sue Auckland, Steve Ayris, Gail Smith, David Baker, Penny Baker and Vickie Priestley voted for paragraphs (a) to (c) of the Substantive Motion and abstained from voting on paragraph (d) of the Substantive Motion, and asked for this to be recorded.)
20. NOTICE OF MOTION GIVEN BY COUNCILLOR PAULINE ANDREWS
Charges To Access Services In Hospitals
20.1 At the request of Councillor Pauline Andrews and with the consent of the Council, the Notice of Motion Numbered 18 on the Summons for this meeting was withdrawn in accordance with Council Procedure Rules 11(x) and 17.10.
Page 50 of 50 Page 88