SUMMARY OF ISSUES DISCUSSED AT NON- BUSINESS COUNCIL MEETINGS 2004/05 INDEX

Section Subject Council Page Meeting date Number

1. Foreword 3

2. Introduction 3

3. Post Office Closures 7th July, 2004 3

4. Closing the Gap: Creating Successful 1st September, 5 Neighbourhoods 2004

5. Home Office Consultation Paper on 3rd November, 8 Prostitution 2004

6. Fluoridation of the Water Supply 5th January, 11 2005

7. South Yorkshire Police and South Yorkshire 2nd March, 14 Fire and Rescue Service - Strategic Issues 2005

8. Sheffield City Airport 4th May, 2005 18

9. Children’s Service 4th May, 2005 20

10. Conclusion 23

2 1. FOREWORD

1.1 During the year, Members of the Council received presentations that were of great interest to them and which demonstrated the importance of the Scrutiny function. Of necessity, the Council’s Scrutiny and Policy Development Boards are small, and Scrutiny Council presents an opportunity for all Members to ask questions and express a view on issues of overarching significance for the city.

1.2 It is pleasing to note that external organisations have acknowledged the value of addressing Members and in each case have been represented at the highest level. I would like to thank the staff of the Committee Secretariat, Legal and Governance, for making appropriate arrangements to ensure that Scrutiny Councils are effective and efficient.

Councillor Jan Wilson, Leader of the Council

2. INTRODUCTION

2.1 Every other month, as an alternative to Ordinary “business” meetings, the City Council meets in a format under which public questions and petitions, together with items referred from Cabinet or Scrutiny, will be considered, but Members' questions and Notices of Motion are replaced by a debate on a topic or topics generally chosen by a Scrutiny Board and/or the Scrutiny Management Board.

2.1 This report is being submitted to the Council meeting on 6th July, 2005 and summarises the topics that have been discussed in such Council Meetings during the Municipal Year 2004/5 and will be considered along with the Annual Reports of the Council’s Scrutiny Boards for 2004/5.

3. POST OFFICE CLOSURES

3.1 On 7th July, 2004, the Council received a presentation by Matt Silcock, External Relations Manager, Post Office Limited, on the current position and way forward regarding the proposed post office closures in Sheffield, as the Council had received representations and petitions from the public objecting to the Post Office’s proposals.

3 3.2 Mr. Silcock stated that the Post Office Network had lost £194m in the last year and that there were currently 16,000 post offices in use, with an even split between rural and urban areas. He referred to the decision in April, 2003 for benefit payments to be made directly into people’s bank accounts, which had resulted in a 40% loss of business for the Post Office. It had, therefore, drawn up proposals within the framework of a Network Reinvention Programme to stabilise provision of service to its customers. He explained that the current urban network was too vast for the amount of custom it received, despite work to increase the business it handled. The Post Office was, therefore, having to reduce a number of branches to ensure future viability of the rest and still retain a significantly large urban network. To do nothing would result in ad hoc closures and leave gaps in the network. The Post Office was working on developing its banking services and travel products, etc. and, whilst rental payments into post offices would help, it would not replace the 40% loss of benefits business. He stated that the closure of certain branches would mean that customers who previously visited those earmarked for closure would migrate to other branches nearby.

3.3 He mentioned that the Sub-postmasters working at the offices earmarked for closure had been asked whether they wanted to retire or work in another Branch. As regards compensation, £180m nationally had been earmarked for those Sub-postmasters whose offices had been identified for closure, £30m would be reinvested in existing Post Offices and £15m would be reinvested in Post Offices in urban deprived areas.

3.4 He stressed that, as part of the review, the Post Office had considered aspects such as availability of public transport, parking facilities, topography and ease of pedestrian access to the branches. A sophisticated computer modelling programme was used to help understand the levels of customers likely to migrate to branches to be retained, with no customer living more than one mile away from a branch.

3.5 The presentation was followed by a questions and answers session, during which Matt Silcock stated that network managers had walked the terrain and looked at the roads, links, etc. Whilst understanding the topographical issues, the fundamental issues still remained that there were too many branches for too few customers so the Post Office had looked at the feasibility of travelling to an alternative branch. He acknowledged that, in some cases, customers would have to walk further, or, in the case of elderly or disabled people, travel on a bus to the nearest alternative branch, but the Post Office had to set up a network that was viable.

3.6 In relation the possibility of relocating post offices into supermarkets or other businesses, he stated that businesses and shop owners were well aware of the fact that Post Offices were not particularly profitable, hence it was not easy to relocate to shops or supermarkets. Certain supermarkets were not interested in this, although the Post Office had good relationships with the Spar and Co-operative stores. A lot of post offices had been up for sale but people were not interested in buying them.

3.7 During the consultation period, the Post Office had received petitions against the closures and did listen to other opinion formers, including, in particular, Postwatch who had the power to oppose closures. He stated that the consultation period had ended on 20th May, 2004 and, at present, 11 out of the 16 branches would be going forward for closure, one had been withdrawn, one had already closed and decisions

4 were still to be made on the remaining three.

Outcome

3.8 The post offices earmarked for closure included 7 branches in the Central Parliamentary Constituency, 3 in Heeley, 3 in Hillsborough, 2 in Attercliffe and 1 in Brightside. Decisions were made by Post Office Ltd. to close 15 out of the 16 branches. The branch that remains open is in Lower Manor (Central Constituency) on Prince of Wales Road.

4 CLOSING THE GAP: CREATING SUCCESSFUL NEIGHBOURHOODS

4.1 On 1st September, 2004, the Council received a presentation by Bob Kerslake, Chief Executive, in relation to the Council's policies towards 'Closing the Gap' and ‘Creating Successful Neighbourhoods’. This was supplemented by presentations from partner agencies, including Jeremy Wight, Director of Public Health, North Primary Care Trust, Helen Fentimen, Chief Executive, South East Primary Care Trust and Dave Jackson, Director, Open Forum for Economic Regeneration (OFFER).

4.2 Bob Kerslake commented on Sheffield's vision of becoming a successful, distinctive City of European significance, with opportunities for all and listed 10 features of a successful City that comprised a strong economy, well educated workforce, vibrant City Centre, healthy population, low crime, good transport systems, good cultural and sporting attractions, cosmopolitan and inclusive, well run, sustainable and well regarded, with attractive, successful neighbourhoods. He defined successful neighbourhoods as a place where people choose to live, with low crime, attractive environment, clean, well maintained streets with open spaces, used and enjoyed, and a decent choice of homes and good schools.

4.3 He reiterated the Council's approach to 'Closing the Gap' which would see Sheffield as a prosperous City with successful neighbourhoods across the whole of the City and improvement of the more deprived areas faster than the City as a whole. He highlighted some successes that had been achieved so far, where unemployment had fallen faster in Sheffield than nationally and fastest in the areas of Sheffield where it was highest; secondary school performance had improved fastest in the inner City areas; targeted action on housing, crime and the environment had made a real difference; and community based regeneration organisations and programmes had been established across a large part of the City. However, the Council still faced a major challenge and he pointed out that unemployment in Burngreave Ward was over three times the Sheffield average; people living in Netherthorpe could expect on average to live five years less than in the City as a whole; burglary rates in Sharrow were three times the City average; and educational attainment (e.g. pupils attaining five or more GCSE (A* - C grades) in the Manor Ward was almost three times less than the Sheffield average.

4.4 He elaborated on the four key elements of the ‘Closing the Gap’ policy, which was to identify the areas of the City that should be the focus of attention; agree the major transformational initiatives in a neighbourhood; review the delivery of mainstream services; and establish mechanisms to measure progress. He then displayed a map

5 depicting the areas for focused attention and explained that the number of people on income support had been used originally to identify pockets of deprivation below Ward level. Since that time, the Ward boundaries had changed and the Index of Multiple Deprivation was now being used, although this had, in the main, corroborated the earlier conclusions.

4.5 In relation to Health issues, he commented on partnership activities focused on tackling inequalities through a clear action plan with a regular review through the Primary Care Trusts and he commented on the unacceptable gap in premature deaths and other key outcomes. On Crime and Community Safety, he stated that Sheffield was a very safe City but, in some neighbourhoods, crime was at unacceptable levels and people felt unsafe. Neighbourhood nuisance also needed to be tackled. On Schools, recent examination results had revealed that improvements were fastest in poorer areas and the gap in the City was narrowing, with the gap between the City and national average also narrowing.

4.6 On the Environment, he stated that Parks Action Plans had been agreed with Area Panels and additional resources had been allocated for a cleaner streetscene. On sustainable homes, he stated that an investment plan was in place for public and private sector and commented on the targeted use of the Neighbourhood Renewal Fund and the link with Burngreave New Deal. He added that a neighbourhood centred options appraisal was in place, using a mix of ALMO and stock transfer, and housing market analysis was driving investment.

4.7 In summarising his presentation, he emphasised the key aims of the 'Closing the Gap' policy was to achieve prosperity and inclusion, building on National strategies for neighbourhood renewal and success already achieved in Sheffield, with a more systematic and focused approach on the delivery of mainstream services as much as additional regeneration funding. It was proposed to harness all of the changes in a neighbourhood together, establishing a sustained, systematic and strategic approach that unified funding streams, constantly reviewing progress, neighbourhood by neighbourhood and achieving transformational change across all deprived neighbourhoods.

4.8 Jeremy Wight then gave a presentation on Sheffield First for Health's contribution towards the 'Closing the Gap' policy. He showed graphs indicating percentage decreases in death rates for people aged under 75 years of age for the period 2001 to 2003 compared to 1997-1999 which showed a 21.8% improvement in the south west of the City compared to a 12.6% improvement in the north. He also showed graphs of standardised mortality ratio trends from 1981 to 1998 on all causes of death to people aged under 75 in specific Wards, together with a table of life expectancy by neighbourhood which, in Crookesmoor, was 71.93 years, compared to 87.04 years in Ecclesall. In demonstrating the health inequalities, he questioned why the gap was not narrowing and put forward a number of factors, including a long lead in time for disease development, complex multi-factorial causes such as income, the challenge of universal services with differential uptake and differential impact and life expectancy continuing to improve.

6 4.9 He then outlined the Health Inequalities Action Plan drawn up by Sheffield First for Health for developing a sure foundation through healthy pregnancy and early childhood, improving maternity services, improving opportunity for children and young people, improving school attendance and support in transition, improving NHS Primary Care Services, tackling the major illnesses of coronary heart disease, cancer, respiratory disease and mental illness. The plan aimed to strengthen disadvantaged and vulnerable communities, particularly in relation to health and social care policy and the development of community enterprise and the social economy. Wider determinants included the review of recruitment policy and practice so that more jobs in the National Health Service were filled by people from disadvantaged communities, for example, through support to the Jobnet initiative and a contribution to an apprenticeship scheme across the South Yorkshire NHS community. He also commented on a shared initiative between the Local Authority, Universities and the NHS to promote recruitment from disadvantaged communities, building on the success of the Nurse Cadet Scheme.

4.10 Helen Fentimen expanded on the partnership approach to the 'Closing the Gap' policy, indicating that it was as much a National Health Service responsibility as the City Council's. As a Member of the Boards of Sheffield First for Health, Sheffield First for Inclusion, Sheffield Homes and the Children and Young People Partnership, she commented on how each partner agency had a shared responsibility for the delivery of the policy. She stated that health inequalities featured higher and higher each year in the priorities of all four Primary Care Trusts who were keen to work with local agencies and Area Panels in their areas and invest their resources along side with the City Council's. Long term illness and chronic disease management were high priorities and resources was therefore fed into those areas.

4.11 Dave Jackson gave a brief explanation of the role of the Voluntary, Community and Faith (VCF) sector in contributing towards the delivery of the 'Closing the Gap' policy. He stated that OFFER managed the appointment of VCF representatives to Sheffield First and the various Partnership Boards and supported those appointed with briefing, documents, training etc., It also offered support to local Community Forums and networks to be better organised and to develop their voice and influence on Sheffield First Partnerships. OFFER also assisted some communities to develop their Community Action Plans and organised conferences and other events on specific themes that related to the policies of Sheffield First Partnership Boards, to discuss issues and help produce VCF sector Strategies.

4.12 He commented on work carried out with Voluntary Action Sheffield and the South Yorkshire Community Foundation to help groups, such as mothers’ groups and community forums to get established and to encourage the smaller organisations to feed into the Sheffield First Partnerships and Area Panels so that the VCF sector could contribute better to the delivery of the Council's 'Closing the Gap' policy. He referred to previous regeneration programmes in which the VCF sector played an important role in delivery but not in shaping the proposals and that this had changed with Neighbourhood Renewal Funding. It was important, therefore, for the VCF sector to have an equal dialogue with partners.

7 4.13 Members then viewed a video that had been produced by the Sheffield First Partnership on the 'Closing the Gap' policy, following which Members asked questions that were answered by the presenters, assisted by Joanne Roney, Executive Director, Neighbourhoods, Evelyn Milne, Head of Regeneration and Partnerships and Vince Taylor, Director, Sheffield First Partnership.

4.14 At the conclusion of the session, Councillor Jan Wilson (Leader of the Council) thanked Jeremy Wight, Helen Fentimen, Dave Jackson and Bob Kerslake for their presentations, along with Joanne Roney, Evelyn Milne and Vince Taylor for their contributions.

5 HOME OFFICE CONSULTATION PAPER ON PROSTITUTION

5.1 On 3rd November, 2004, the Council considered an Executive Summary of the Home Office Consultation Paper on Prostitution “Paying the Price” which had been published in July, 2004 with the aim of prompting a public debate on how to deal with issues raised by prostitution in England and Wales. The Consultation Paper invited views from a broad range of organisations on policy and practice to pave the way for the development of a co-ordinated strategy aimed at reducing the harms associated with prostitution and experienced by those involved and by those communities in which it takes place.

5.2 Members received a report and presentation by Julie Tasker, Principal Community Safety Officer which set the background to the consultation exercise, commented upon the structure of the consultation document, outlined the response made by the Sheffield Prostitution Forum and set out a timetable for the submission of the response to the Paper and which would now include comments made at this meeting. Also attending the meeting was Ann Lucas of the Sheffield Area Child Protection Committee and Sali Harwood, Project Manager, Sheffield Working Women’s Opportunities Project, both of whom outlined their organisations’ roles with regard to dealing with the problems of prostitution.

5.3 The Consultation Paper had been divided into chapters relating to key issues in respect of (a) how could men and women be supported to exit prostitution and are there examples of best practice at local level, (b) how can the link between sex and drugs markets be tackled, (c) how could those involved in prostitution increase their confidence in the criminal justice system, (d) how could the nuisance associated with prostitution be best dealt with and how could communities be actively engaged in this process and (e) what support do local partnerships need to respond to the issues associated with prostitution.

5.4 The report went on to indicate that the Sheffield Prostitution Forum had undertaken the task of drawing together views from agencies in the City on the issues raised in the Consultation Paper and had found that there was overwhelming evidence of Sheffield as a City with a longstanding and changing history of prostitution and outstanding commitment and effort to provide services from a small group of dedicated individuals who had championed the issues.

8 5.5 There was also general agreement that the document was an accurate reflection of the models of prostitution in Sheffield and covered the associated issues in a comprehensive way. There were however two sorts of questions in the Consultation Paper the first relating to the paper’s request for examples of good practice and the second asking for opinions. It was stressed that some questions covered both of these elements and where opinions were asked for there was a broad agreement amongst respondents with regard to issues relating to (a) awareness raising in schools, (b) co-ordinated working on the links between street sex and drugs markets and efforts to tackle violent crime, (c) prosecution of those involved in exploiting under age girls and boys, (d) ongoing funding and support for flexible support packages for women wishing to exit from sex work/drug misuse, (e) the need for joined up work to tackle harm caused to communities by sex work and drugs use, (f) ensuring that responses to sex work needed to both accept and challenge its existence and (g) the recognition that managed zones were not appropriate where sex workers were predominantly Class A drugs users as was the case in the City.

5.6 There was however a diversity of views concerning issues relating to the appropriate action to tackle “punters”, who were primarily kerb crawlers; the value and appropriateness of using ASBOs against dependent drug using sex workers, especially young women; whether support for women wishing to exit sex work and drug use should be compulsory i.e. linked to community sentences and whether there was need for further legislation around the issues of registration

Discussion

5.7 In the questions and answers session that followed, it was indicated that, since 2001, approximately 170 young people had been dealt with by the Area Child Protection Committee as being involved with or at risk of being engaged in prostitution. In relation to the numbers of off-street prostitutes operating in Sheffield, it was difficult to assess this because, for example, not only was such activity undertaken in recognised establishments but also in private property and extensive use was made of mobile telephones. Prosecutions for “kerb crawling”, which was an arrestable offence, were taken very seriously in the City. Reference was made to proposals being pursued in Sweden to actively prosecute those persons who were involved in the demand side of prostitution. If this was to be pursued in Sheffield there would be a need for extensive work to be undertaken on the supply side.

5.8 On the issue of Anti-Social Behaviour Orders (ASBOs) and particularly their application to “kerb crawlers”, it was indicated that their application had to demonstrate persistent behaviour and there was no certainty that the use of ASBOs against prostitutes would have a desirable impact in that the problem would move to other areas. So far as off-street prostitution was concerned, this was one of the central themes of the Consultation Paper and, although it would deal with some aspects of the problem, many prostitutes would not be acceptable on licensed premises because of their misuse of Class A drugs and they would therefore still be forced onto the streets.

5.9 It was noted that, although the Sexual Offences Act made provision for dealing with cases of exploitation, the terms of the Act, which required young people to make a complaint, were seen as a barrier to enforcement. There was a need, therefore, for

9 the Government to ensure that those people involved in exploitation were prosecuted without awaiting complaints from the exploited young person. It was strongly felt that further measures needed to be taken within the criminal justice system, particularly to deal with “pimps” and kerb crawlers.

5.10 Differing views were voiced on the establishment of “managed zones”, with some Members feeling that such measures would benefit the community in general and participants in particular, with zero tolerance being exercised in other areas of the City. Reference was made to such a scheme in Utrecht, which had resulted in a decline in associated criminal activity. However, there was still a general feeling from women and workers involved in the sex industry that they were not in favour of such measures. Others felt that it could lead to an increase in people entering the industry if “managed premises” were introduced, as the activities in these premises would receive a measure of legitimacy and be seen as legal. Some Members called for radical changes in the enforcement laws and were in favour of regulation, which would improve health and conditions for sex workers. It was acknowledged that prostitution moved around from one area to another and that there was a need to address the underlying problems which led people into prostitution and which were associated particularly with misuse of drugs.

5.11 A more enlightened view with regard to the issue of prostitution was welcomed by some Members, believing that sentencing should include treatment. However, it was acknowledged that the system was now better prepared to ensure that women could enter into drug rehabilitation. Provision also existed for the application of Drug Treatment and Testing Orders, with informal referrals also receiving positive reactions from sex workers. Members were conscious of the dangers inherent in street prostitution and believed that there was a basic need to recognise that participants in the sex industry were human beings and that safety and protection were major issues in this context

5.12 It was noted that most of the women involved did not make a positive choice to enter prostitution and they would have to change their lifestyles if they were to leave the industry. There was a perverse effect in fining prostitutes in that, prostitution was their only source of income and further financial impositions led them to continue their activities. Members felt that preventative work should begin early in life and that Surestart and the Youth Service had a critical role to play; effective drugs education and the adequate application of benefit entitlement would assist in this matter.

5.13 At the conclusion of the meeting, it was generally held that the authorities should stop believing that they could totally eradicate prostitution but to continue to support the existing work and to increase funding levels and measures to combat the problems. Councillor Jan Wilson, the Leader of the Council, emphasised that the City Council would continue to support the work being undertaken with prostitutes and particularly through the role of the Sheffield First for Safety Partnership.

Outcome

5.14 The views expressed at the meeting were included in the Council’s formal response to the Consultation Paper and Members were reminded that they had the right to respond to the Consultation Paper in an individual capacity.

10 6. FLUORIDATION OF THE WATER SUPPLY

6.1 At the meeting on 5th January, 2005, the Council received presentations by John Green, Director of Dental Public Health, South Yorkshire Strategic Health Authority, assisted by Professor Mike Lennon, President of the British Fluoridation Society and by Liz McDonagh, National Pure Water Association, assisted by Dr. Diane Phillips of the National Pure Water Association.

6.2 John Green explained that the purpose of his presentation was to illustrate the dental health inequalities in Sheffield, assisted by Professor Mike Lennon, who would be able to help with specific issues on effectiveness and safety. He referred to the document “One In A Million - the facts about water fluoridation”, that had been published in early 2004, jointly by the British Fluoridation Society, the UK Public Health Association, the British Dental Association and the Faculty of Public Health, copies of which had been circulated to all Members of the Council. Prior to the passing of the Water Industry Act 2003, the Water Industry was not placed under a statutory obligation to fluoridate the water supply when asked to do so by Health Authorities, which had resulted in no new fluoridation schemes since at least 1985. Under the new legislation, fluoridation would only take place if a Water Authority had been asked to do so by a Strategic Health Authority, after consultation at local level had shown sufficient support for it. He stated that the South Yorkshire Strategic Health Authority remained neutral on the fluoridation of the water supply but was working with Yorkshire Water to ascertain the extent of the water network in the area with a view to drawing up technical and financial assessments, etc. but confirmed that the Authority had no current plans to consult on water fluoridation.

6.3 In commenting on the dental health inequalities in Sheffield, which mirrored other health and social issues in the City, he stated that a dental survey of all five year olds in Sheffield had been carried out in 2003/04 and he displayed a map that showed a three fold difference in dental decay experienced in areas across the City. He then displayed further slides illustrating the levels of decay at Ward and Primary Care Trust level using an index which gave an average value for the number of teeth affected by decay in a population and then displayed slides which showed that a decayed tooth was more likely to be extracted than filled in the east and north areas of the City. The final slide illustrated the mismatch between levels of dental decay and availability of dental practices in the City.

6.4 In summarising his presentation, he stated that the 2003 National Child Dental Health Survey confirmed Yorkshire as having almost the worst dental health in the United Kingdom and that an answer to a recent Parliamentary question showed South Yorkshire to be 27th out of 28 Strategic Health Authorities in terms of the number of dental general anaesthetics given for tooth extraction. He commented on programmes being carried out in schools to educate children on the need to brush teeth and reduce sugar intake, although its effect in reducing dental health inequalities relied, to a certain extent on the actions of parents. Fluoridation of the water supply did not have a bias either way in this respect. He added that the City Council could play a big part in improving children’s nutrition through its food and drinks policies in schools and that one of the most beneficial things was the provision of free school milk.

11 6.5 Professor Mike Lennon explained that the British Fluoridation Society was a Government funded health promotion group and he reinforced the comments made by John Green especially in relation to oral health inequalities. He referred to the slide that set out the average number of missing or decayed teeth in five year olds across the City and commented on the effect that teeth extraction had in contributing to a fear of dentists. He pointed out that this was a preventable problem when looking at the figures for the electoral wards such as Dore. He stated that, whilst there had been some successes in promoting dental health education in schools, there was a bias towards well-educated areas where parents would heed advice and do what was best for their children. There was a need, therefore, to re-double health education activities in schools. However, he was of the strong opinion that further measures to remove the dental health inequalities in Sheffield required the addition of fluoride in the water supply. He stressed that the dental health problems that existed in the city did not exist in cities like Birmingham and Newcastle where fluoride was added to the water supply in the 1960s. He added that fluoridation had been a long established public health measure in the United States of America and referred to the fluoridation status of the largest 50 US cities listed on page 73 of the “One In A Million” document, where 46 of them had been fluoridated. In conclusion, he regarded fluoridation as a safe and effective measure that would improve the dental health of people’s children and their neighbours’ children and would assist in reducing the oral health inequalities in the city.

6.6 Liz McDonagh pointed out that the controversy over fluoridation had been running for over 50 years and cited 14 Nobel prize winners in medicine and chemistry who had warned that fluoridation carried health risks. She added that some 180 Members of Parliament and a number of Lords were against fluoridation, that it was opposed by the Green Party, the Scottish National Party and Plaid Cymru and that a number of Councils had voted against it and formed the UK Councils Against Fluoridation Organisation. She added that in 1997, some 1,500 scientists and other professionals of the US Environmental Protection Agency had voted against fluoridation and had substantial evidence of its adverse effects. Many European countries had rejected fluoridation. In the United Kingdom, four water companies had refused to fluoridate when asked to do so and she displayed Yorkshire Water’s reasons for not agreeing to add fluoride to water supplies in its region in 1995

6.7 She then put forward three issues for consideration in her presentation and posed the questions as to whether fluoridation was effective, safe and ethical. To this end, she referred to the York Review that was published in September, 2000 by the NHS Centre for Reviews and Dissemination at the University of York, who were commissioned by the Government in 1999 to carry out a thorough scientific review of the worldwide research into water fluoridation. Whilst this scientific report could be read in full on the University of York’s website, she quoted the Chair of the Review’s Advisory Group who stated that the Review Team was surprised that in spite of the large number of studies carried out over several decades, there was a dearth of reliable evidence with which to inform policy and that, until high quality studies were undertaken, there would continue to be legitimate scientific controversy over the likely effects and costs of water fluoridation.

12 6.8 As to whether fluoridation was effective, she referred to research, quotes from scientists and experiences of cities in other countries which suggested that there was no strong evidence to support the effectiveness of fluoridation in reducing caries (tooth disease leading to discolouration) or in reducing inequalities in dental health across social groups. As to whether fluoridation was safe, she said that, if fluoridation was to be implemented, there would be a predictable increase in severe dental fluorosis, causing irreversible mottling, brown staining and pitting of permanent teeth. She commented on the potential disadvantages to sufferers of this condition and to the costs involved for anyone who wished to avoid fluoride. She pointed out that, because people obtained fluoride in appreciable quantities in tea, fish and other foods as well as toothpaste, etc, water fluoridation would give no control over any individual’s fluoride intake, but merely add to it. Some people were more susceptible to its adverse effects and, as it was a cumulative poison, it could cause conditions such as skeletal fluorosis. She quoted other research, evidence and from American trial court cases to suggest that fluoridation was harmful to health

6.9 As to whether fluoridation was ethical, she quoted from ‘Douglas Cross: Fluoridation, Medical Ethics and Human Rights – a review of the use of the silicofluorides to treat tooth decay in the United Kingdom and European Union’, which could be found on the website, to conclude that the chemicals used in artificial fluoridation were not classified as water treatment chemicals, their status in law being that of scheduled poisons, and that fluoridation represented extreme violation of medical ethics. She also commented that water companies had asked the Government to cover all costs of fluoridation and to grant them civil and criminal indemnity against claims arising from the measure. She pointed out that, if such an indemnity was agreed at the taxpayers’ expense, the Water Companies would be put above the law and need have no regard for the opinions of their shareholders or their customers. She suggested, therefore, that the City Council should strive to protect the health and fundamental human rights of the citizens of Sheffield by opposing mass medication via the water supply.

6.10 Dr. Diane Phillips addressed the Council by first explaining her personal health problems that had encouraged her to look into fluoridation. Her investigations had taken her back to a situation that occurred in the 1800s in a mountainous area in Argentina where people were suffering from particular health problems which proved to be thyroid dysfunction due to lack of iodine in the water supply. A decision was taken to iodinate the water supply, against advice from certain physicians who argued against a blanket solution that did not take account of an individual’s condition. This led to an epidemic of people with over-active thyroid glands. In order to lower thyroid activity, fluoride was used on patients. She then went on to relate to modern day concerns about fluoride’s effect on the thyroid gland, which regulates body temperature and energy levels. She stated that the body needed iodine to function properly, yet iodine would be displaced by fluorides and this would result in under-active thyroids

6.11 She added that other studies had linked fluoride with higher incidences of miscarriages, Down’s Syndrome births and decreased IQ levels. She pointed out that dental fluorosis occurred because of the interaction of fluoride with thyroid function and, whilst everyone was interested in improving the health of children, it did not make sense if therapeutic help finished up in damaging children more. She

13 added that fluoride was a thyroid interrupter and the addition of fluoride in water would not guarantee that the right dose was given to the right person at the point of delivery. In quoting that the road to hell was paved with good intentions, she warned against while trying to solve one problem creating another and advised the Council to oppose fluoridation of the water supply.

Outcome

6.12 Arising from the discussion, it was agreed that a dental representative be invited to serve on the Sheffield 0 to 19+ Partnership Board. The Lord Mayor (Councillor Mike Pye) thanked John Green, Professor Mike Lennon, Liz McDonagh and Dr. Diane Phillips giving their presentations and answering the questions asked by Members of the Council. Their presentations generated a lively questions and answers session that would assist Members in a debate that was planned for the following “business” Council meeting. The Council had last discussed the issue of fluoridation on 1st April, 1992 and at the Council meeting on 2nd February, 2005, with a free vote, the Council re-affirmed its opposition to the fluoridation of the public water supply

7. SOUTH YORKSHIRE POLICE AND SOUTH YORKSHIRE FIRE AND RESCUE SERVICE - STRATEGIC ISSUES

South Yorkshire Police

7.1. On 2nd March, 2005, the Council received presentations from Meredydd Hughes, Chief Constable, South Yorkshire Police on policing issues in South Yorkshire and Mark Smitherman, Chief Fire Officer and Chief Executive, South Yorkshire Fire and Rescue Service, on the South Yorkshire Fire and Rescue Service, Integrated Risk Management Plan.

7.2 Introducing his presentation, Meredydd Hughes referred to the National Policing Plan 2004/2007 which had been introduced by the Right Honourable David Blunkett MP, the former Secretary of State for the Home Office and indicated that the key priorities in the Plan related to (a) the provision of a citizen focused service to the public which responded to the needs of individuals and communities and inspired confidence in the police, particularly amongst minority ethnic communities, (b) tackling anti-social behaviour and disorder and (c) continuing to reduce burglary, vehicle crime, robbery and drug related crime in line with the Government’s Public Service Agreement Targets. The National Plan would concentrate upon combating serious and organised crime, both across and within force boundaries and narrowing the justice gap by increasing the number of offences brought to justice; with these aims being underpinned by the national themes of community engagement and civil renewal and counter-terrorism and the threat of terrorism.

7.3 The Chief Constable went on to indicate that the South Yorkshire Police Strategic and Local Policing Plan Priorities related to the provision of a citizen focused service, tackling anti-social behaviour and disorder, reducing crime, combating serious and organised crime and increasing the number of offenders brought to justice with these categories being the National Policing Plan Priorities and in addition the South Yorkshire Police Priorities were to improve visibility and public reassurance and improve road safety. Commenting upon the latter category, he stressed the need to

14 balance the demands of communities whilst his force continued to move towards targets on reducing accidents.

7.4 Turning to the Police Authority priorities, Mr. Hughes emphasised the three aims of effective communication with the public; increasing public reassurance and maintaining/improving performance. With regard to communications, he indicated that his Service’s call handling facility was still not as good as he would wish but nevertheless continued to show marked improvement. The area of increasing public reassurance was marked by continuing development of neighbourhood policing and joint working with the Local Authorities in South Yorkshire and particularly the City Council, whilst maintaining and improving performance was a priority set to meet public expectations.

7.5 The Chief Constable then went on to refer to his Force’s priorities, which also related to neighbourhood policing, improvement of the Atlas Court facility and the introduction of Automatic Number Plate Recognition equipment. He stressed that the Force would invest over £2m in resources into neighbourhood policing, that there was a determination to make the Atlas Court facility more effective whilst balancing this objective with other service demands and that investment into Automatic Number Plate Recognition would relate both to staff and equipment. It was the South Yorkshire Police’s strategy that, by March, 2007, on a force wide basis the Sheffield Policing Structure would be decided, arrangements for neighbourhood policing would be in place, budgets would be fully devolved and there would be centrally focused tasking and co-ordinating.

7.6 In conclusion, the Chief Constable referred to the principle of “Driving Down Crime to Buy Time” and referred to the Sheffield Crime Performance Statistics for the year 1st April, 2004 to 1st March, 2005. In this regard he referred to a 26.8% increase in violent crime with a detection rate of 56.5% which increase related to the changes in policy for recording incidents of violent crime but stressed that, South Yorkshire continued to remain as safe as it had ever been. He also indicated that there had been a decrease of 6.9% in incidents of domestic burglary with a detection rate of 29%, a decrease of 22.8% in robbery with a detection rate of 30.4% and finally a decrease of 11.6% in motor vehicle crime with a detection rate of 12%.

South Yorkshire Fire and Rescue Service

7.7 Mark Smitherman then led a presentation by himself and officers of his Service upon the South Yorkshire Fire and Rescue Service Integrated Risk Management Plan which was the subject of a consultation process within the County that would end on the 28th March, 2005.

7.8 Introducing the consultation, John Hoey, Assistant Chief Fire Officer referred to the introduction from April, 2004 of the Service’s Integrated Risk Management Plan and indicated that such Plans applied to the whole of the United Kingdom Fire Service. He went on to refer to the provisions of the Fire and Rescue Services Act, 2004 which had introduced the most fundamental changes in the Service in the last 50 years and had resulted in the Service not just concentrating upon its reaction to fires but had also acquired a statutory obligation to address issues of fire prevention, together with community safety and road traffic accidents; with the latter obligations

15 resulting in closer consultations with Local Authorities.

7.9 Turning to the issue of Community Engagement, Mr. Hoey indicated that the primary focus of the Fire Service was one of prevention and protection in addition to its traditional role of intervention. The first of these two tasks would be addressed through education and legislation with intervention being carried out through the traditional method of operational response. The Integrated Risk Management Plan was now in its second year and had expanded to include engagement in community safety work, for example the carrying out of home fire risk checks, the adoption of a “risk based” approach to provision, the introduction of targets to reduce fatalities, injuries and arson, work to improve partnerships with other statutory bodies and the provision of value for money. There had been a number of successes in the first year of the Plan which related to an effective call challenging policy resulting a 50% reduction of hoax calls to the Service, the introduction of the safer homes concept, increasing the Service’s work with Sheffield First for Safety by the development of the Fire Service’s role as a strategic partner in the City and work to reduce arson by 40%.

7.10 The South Yorkshire Service was also engaged in protection and prevention work resulting from improved legislation which would ensure that by the end of the second year of the Plan, a whole range of organisations in the private sector would be responsible for undertaking fire risk assessments in their premises and that improved partnerships would see the Service increasingly involved in Local Public Service Agreements and strategic partnerships. The Chief Fire Officer went on to refer to a new risk profile which had been developed for dwellings in South Yorkshire and indicated those dwellings which were recognised as being in very high, high, medium and low risk, areas and in this regard drew a correlation between an areas risk level and the response time of the Fire Service whilst stressing that such times were maximum calculations. Reference was also made to the Service’s response to civil contingencies in the light of its statutory obligations to ensure that adequate provision is made for a variety of emergencies such as natural disasters and terrorist attack.

Questions on Police Issues

7.12 In a lengthy questions and answers session, many issues were raised, including stop and search practices carried out by the Police, particularly on persons from the black and minority ethnic communities in the City and what steps the police were taking which would give confidence to those communities that their actions were connected with anti-terrorism measures and did not have racist connotations. Other issues included gender and race make-up of the South Yorkshire Police force, the number of officers coming from areas of deprivation, recruitment from the black and minority ethnic communities and how effective were the links between the force and those communities. Questions were also asked about the level of complaints with regard to “999” and “2202020” calls and the use of serving police officers at the Atlas Court facility, the implications of the Licensing Act 2003 with regard to standard drinking hours and what measures could be taken to convince motorists to follow the Highway Code.

16 7.13 Specific issues were raised about incidences of anti-social behaviour in the Graves Park area, problems involving off-road motorcycles in the Ecclesfield area and partnership working in the Sharrow area of the City. Other local issues were raised, including the decline in community meetings, neighbourhood policing, measures the Authority were taking to improve the Neighbourhood Watch Scheme and the displacement of persons who were the subject of Anti-Social Behaviour Orders across the City.

7.14 Questions were also asked about the National Police Plan for 2004/2007 and its three priorities and what such priorities meant in the South Yorkshire context, whether enough resources had been put in place to deal with terrorist attacks locally and whether or not the police were more interested in administrative processes and victim support work than detecting cases of domestic burglary. The detection rate in connection with motor vehicle crime was also raised, along with the prosecution rate for violent crime and the need to constantly improve the standards of service to victims of violent crime.

Questions on Fire Service issues

7.15 Members’ concerns with regard to the Fire Service centred around the Integrated Risk Management Plan, with questions being asked about the risk assessment process, the provision of adequate cover, the potential closure of certain stations, whether arrangements were in place to ensure cross border provision in fire cover arrangements, for example around Mosborough, and if the transfer of resources from one element of the Service to another would lead to the detriment of parts of the Service. Other questions related to possible regionalisation of the Fire Service, discontinuing the use of aerial fire appliances and if the Service had considered investment in dogs to assist in fire investigation work.

Outcome

7.16 At the conclusion of the questions and answers session, Members of the Council made comments with regard to Fire Service response times, provision under the new licensing laws, the future configuration of fire services in the City, the involvement of the Police and Fire Services in the work of the North Area Panel and the Fire Service’s “Safer Homes Initiative”. The Lord Mayor, Councillor Mike Pye, thanked Meredydd Hughes and Mark Smitherman for their presentations who, in turn, thanked the City Council for the opportunity to attend the meeting and to explain, in detail, proposals with regard to the future of their respective Services.

7.17 Meredydd Hughes also expressed the view that he was in no doubt of the need for the City to have an efficient effective and community based police force and, in agreeing with these views, Mark Smitherman also expressed his commitment to community based working and the encouragement which he had received by the comments made during the course of the presentation.

17 8. SHEFFIELD CITY AIRPORT

8.1 On 4th May, 2005, the Council received a presentation from Louise Congdon, Managing Partner, York Aviation on the outcome of that company’s Economic Viability Assessment of Sheffield City Airport. Members of the Council had received an Executive Summary of the final report, which indicated that York Aviation was appointed in January 2005 to carry out an assessment of the Airport. The study was in response to the submission by Sheffield City Airport Limited and Sheffield Airport Property Limited of two planning applications in January 2004 for a conversion of part of the airport site to the “Blue Skies” Business Park and associated modifications to the airport.

8.2 Ms. Congdon began her presentation by referring to the City’s economy generating further demand for and being more dependent upon international air links in the future but that the market would remain smaller than for other regional cities. Theoretically there was a market for a small number of scheduled services but attracting airlines would be difficult due to the physical constraints of the Airport limiting payload/range, even for operators of the new turbo-prop aircraft. As scheduled service operations would be perceived by airlines to be higher risk commercially due to past failures, they would expect substantial incentives from the Airport and/or public subsidies to recommence scheduled services. Even if services could be attracted, they would add relatively little to the connectivity of the City, given the services offered from other airports and would be less likely to provide good hub connections. Competition from low fare services at Robin Hood Doncaster Sheffield Airport would put pressure on airline yields and impact on the viability of scheduled services. With the proposed “Blue Skies” development, the Airport would be limited to a few general aviation aircraft and helicopter operations. The scope for scheduled helicopter operations had been raised but this was considered unlikely to be viable.

8.3 In respect of the economic development issues, she indicated that given the relatively limited range of services the Airport would offer and the range of services from neighbouring airports, its importance to economic development would, at best, be marginal and would need to be weighed against the costs of retaining the Airport. Taking a wider view, Sheffield was not disadvantaged in terms of air service connectivity compared to other United Kingdom and European cities but only in terms of very local (30 minutes) access to air services. Whilst air service connectivity was important, there was no clear pattern that better connectivity translated itself directly to higher economic growth provided there was good access to a wider range of air services from other airports. This would require improved surface access links to other airports.

8.4 Ms. Congdon then referred to a number of financial and viability issues. She stated that the Airport was losing around £400,000 per annum, with peak losses in access of over £1.1m and accumulated loses since the Airport opened of between £4.6m and £5.8m. The operator had made substantial efforts to attract new general aviation operators to the Airport, although the on-site aircraft operators had some concerns about the extent of support they had received. No evidence had been found that the operator had turned airlines away from the airport, although the current operational constraint added to the deterrent. There was little likelihood of the Airport being financially viable in the foreseeable future with estimated operational losses being in

18 the range of £250,000 to £1m per annum. Given the costs of developing the airport and the continuing losses, it could cost in excess of £20m to buy out the developer. In addition, initiating new air services would require substantial levels of public sector financial support.

8.5 She referred to a number of constraints that had been imposed by the Lease and Development Agreement. If, as expected, the operator could demonstrate in 2007 that the Airport was loss making, the Council was obliged under the Lease to allow the transfer of the freehold of land for £1 and the alternative use of the site, subject to planning approval. If it could be demonstrated that the operator had not used reasonable endeavours to attract business, then a closure could be challenged. However, the evidence was that the overall intent of the operator had been to achieve a viable business operating profitably, although some criticisms could be levelled at certain actions. It would be difficult to refuse the planned re-development of the site given that the existing Unitary Development Plan Policies, the Regional Spatial Strategy and other policy documents did not suggest a priority to retain the Airport and this would make it difficult to argue a special case in the new Local Development Framework. No overage payments would be due to the Council arising from the redevelopment of the site under the terms of the Lease but the developer was likely to see additional returns from early development if the Council approved the ‘Blue Skies’ development ahead of 2007 and the Council should seek compensatory benefits. There would not be a realistic way to secure retention of the Airport by operational subsidy alone and the developer would have to be bought out, otherwise the developer could simply wait until 2007 then exercise the right under the Lease. The costs of buying and operating the Airport were likely to exceed the likely benefits to be gained to the economic development of Sheffield.

8.6 In response to a number of the questions asked by members of the public in the “Public Questions” session at the start of the meeting, Ms Congdon indicated that the consultees had been recommended to them by key economic partners in the city. A public open day had been publicised locally and the Sheffield Chamber of Commerce and Industry’s website offered the opportunity for people to make comments. She considered that there was sufficient notice for people to comment. In respect of the report prepared in 2001, she was unaware if the report had been implemented.

Questions

8.7 In a detailed questions and answers session, Louise Congden was asked why the Airport had been unsuccessful, if the consultants could find evidence that airlines had been turned away from the Airport by the operator, who had decided to reduce the core services at the airport and the reasons for this decision and was it possible to fly a shuttle service to the Robin Hood Airport, as there were poor road links to that airport.

8.8 Other questions included whether connectivity with the rail network should have been taken into account, issues in relation to pollution and noise, the effect on house prices and businesses, and the possible steep rise in oil prices in the next five to ten years and the effect this could have on the airline industry, if the consultants had taken into account the position if the Government withdrew £9bn of tax breaks to the aviation industry and the impact this would have on the viability of airports. Additional

19 questions were asked about consultation with the business community, particularly with the Chamber of Commerce and Industry, on the amount of public funding made available for other City Airports and how long it had been before those airports became profitable, and whether there was a possibility of air services operating from the Airport in the next 15 years with a runway of only 530 metres.

8.9 On the financial side, it was asked whether there were any organisations willing to purchase the airport, how the airport site could be sold for £1, where was the evidence of the need for £25m to buy out the developer and support the Airport’s operation, whether the cost of relocation of the police helicopter had been taken into account and if there was a model for the airport operating now or in the future. Also if the new turboprop aircraft could use the Sheffield airport and if this had been considered in terms of its viability. It was also queried if there could be discussions with Peel Holdings on the City Airport being complementary to Robin Hood Airport and the possibility of a helicopter link between both airports. It was also asked if it would be possible to buy the land back for business development, whether the £250,000 funding for the Assessment report was sufficient to enable all the necessary questions to be answered and if a cost benefit analysis had been undertaken on the least amount of public investment required for the public of Sheffield to benefit from Robin Hood and Manchester airports. .

8.10 On the legal side, questions were asked about a possible breach of the Lease in respect of the operator’s endeavours to attract new business and if it could be proved that the operator had not used reasonable endeavours to attract business to the airport, could there be a legal challenge. It was also questioned if legal advice had been taken with regard to a possible breach of the lease or planning permission granted in 1991 for operation of a Code 2C airport and in respect of legal and property issues in undertaking the Study. Questions were also asked in relation to the amount of public funding towards the building of the airport, the land value for the Airport, issues relating to the revenue streams and the two companies involved in making an overall loss, the monthly costs to support the Airport’s operation, the sale of the land for £1and a possible conflict of interest with regard to Peel Holdings and the shareholders of the Robin Hood airport.

Outcome

8.11 In the discussion that followed, a number of observations were made, but the conclusions reached by the consultants were generally accepted, with certain dissenting viewpoints. The Lord Mayor (Councillor Mike Pye), thanked Louise Congdon for her presentation and for answering questions from Members of the Council.

9. CHILDREN’S SERVICE

9.1 Jonathan Crossley-Holland, Executive Director, Children and Young People, gave a presentation on the setting up of the new Children’s Service in Sheffield and referred to the scale of the re-organisation of the services which would affect 120,000 children and young people in the City and 15,000 staff across the agencies, of which 2,000 were in the City Council. He emphasised that it was a major change process and revolved around the five ‘Every Child Matters’ outcomes of Being Healthy,

20 Staying Safe, Enjoying and Achieving, Making a Positive Contribution and Achieving Economic Well-being. The emphasis would be on prevention. It was important that each Early Years’ Centre was integrated in terms of delivery of those outcomes. The City and the City Council would be inspected in 2007 on whether the new Service was delivering those outcomes and the five outcomes would translate in terms of an offer to children and families in the City. As part of the national challenge, the Council’s obligation was to establish a Children’s Service Authority by 2006 or 2008, nominate a Lead Member and appoint an Executive Director.

9.2 The Council’s role was around accountability of effectiveness and value for money of all local authority Children’s Services. There would be leadership to engage and encourage partners and communities to work together to improve Children’s Services and a particular focus on attainment and safeguarding and promoting the welfare of children across the agencies. The Executive Director explained that part of the Council’s role would also be in promoting the five Every Child Matters outcomes through improvements in ways of working, namely a closer focus on children and young people, integrated working through frontline staff, shared processes across agencies, joint audits, plans and commissioning arrangements and pooled budgets and inter-agency partnership arrangements at a city and local level.

9.3 He referred to the draft Mission for Sheffield which was “to ensure Sheffield’s children and young people achieve and are safe to enable them to learn, enjoy and be healthy and to make Sheffield a leading European city in which to raise a family”. The tiered model of need covered universal services (tier 1), additional support (tier 2), specialist support (tier 3) and care away from the home (tier 4) and the aim would be to ensure fewer children required tier 3 and 4 support.

9.4 In terms of the City’s organisational approach, there would be a 0 to 19+ Partnership Board (comprising representatives of the City Council, health sector, police, probation service, schools, learning and skills council, further education and the voluntary sector). There would be a lead Member appointed in May 2005 and a Children and Young People’s Directorate would have its top structure in place by July 2005 and be fully implemented by the end of December 2005. The overall structure would take three to four years to fully implement. The Directorate would be based around five service groupings of Local Delivery, City-wide Services, Quality, Improvement and Support, Resources and Planning, Partnership and Performance and its ethos would be about transformation not amalgamation and social care would be part of all service groupings. A key feature of the new structure would be the local dimension and this would involve strengthening local working, Service Districts (involving health, early years and schools, young people, 14-19 year olds and city-wide services) and Extended Schools.

9.5 In conclusion, he indicated that the new Service and way of working not only offered a tremendous opportunity but also an enormous challenge to make it work. There were no additional resources, but growing expectations and there was a great deal of good will and talent and it was about making the best use of this in a more effective way.

21 9.6 Isabel Hemmings (Sheffield Children’s NHS Trust) informed Members that the Health Service was fully committed to partnership working on the new Children’s Service. She emphasised that it would make a huge difference to children in Sheffield. There were issues around preventing illness and reducing health inequality that would be addressed. The Health Service was taking a multi-agency approach to support the most vulnerable children and address their needs more widely and reduce the number needing help. There would be more local delivery of health care and the aim was to be able to access services more easily.

9.7 Mo Laycock (Headteacher at Firth Park Community Arts College) referred to the partnership working and the success of her Community College that had pioneered the facilities now being promoted through Extended Schools. She referred to the breakfast club and after school activities, adult learning and leisure activities which meant that the school was open until 9.00 p.m. and on Saturdays. She considered that by working in partnership it would be easier to address the needs of vulnerable children and issues of learning and attainment and poor diet.

9.8 Brian Taylor (Headteacher, Wybourn Primary School) stated that it was about ‘Every Child Matters’, joined up working and local services making a difference. It was a new start and transformation not amalgamation. There would be new relationships in organisations and between organisations. The aim was for every child to reach its potential.

Questions

9.9 Questions were asked and answers given on a number of issues, including the training of staff, how was it planned to communicate the proposed changes across the City on improving parenting skills, if there would be a mechanism to fully engage children and young people, whether the organisational span of the new service was too large with the consequence that some children might not be dealt with.

9.10 Other questions included the issue of confidentiality and secrecy, whether physical activities were part of the Extended Schools approach, whether Connexions was one of the agencies that were engaged and if the Service Districts would be co-terminus, have a range of services and activities and relate to natural communities. Also, if steps that would be taken to ensure there was no departmentalism and that the new Service encompassed all departmental cultures,

9.11 Concerns were raised that Social Services and Education had not linked in to the work of a number of Area Panels and that the Full Service Districts appeared to have no relation to Area Action boundaries or ways of working. It was queried how the new system would ensure that these links were made and how to ensure that dental health was not omitted.

Discussion and outcome

9.12 Members concluded that the new Service would be the most important change in recent years, with schools placed at the heart of local communities, everyone working jointly and savings reinvested for care and support. Care would be at the heart of the Children’s Service. A number of points were made, including that the new Service

22 would be viewed as primarily community based and preventative and there was a need to ensure that it contributed to the Closing the Gap policy. Members viewed the new Service as a positive development and a real challenge.

9.13 The Lord Mayor (Councillor Mike Pye) thanked Jonathan Crossley-Holland, Isabel Hemmings, Mo Laycock, Brian Taylor and Penny Peysner for attending the meeting and answering questions from Members of the Council.

10. CONCLUSION

10.1 This is a summary of the issues discussed during the year and more details can be found in the minutes of the Council meetings which can be inspected at the Council’s First Stop Reception, Old Town Hall, Pinstone Street entrance or viewed on the Council’s website (www.sheffield.gov.uk/your-city-council/council-meetings). In addition to the above issues, the Council at its meeting on 6th July, 2005 will receive and note the Annual Reports of the Council’s five Scrutiny Boards, together with the Annual Report of the Lord Mayor for the Municipal Year 2004/5.

28th June, 2005

23