Something Wicked this way comes

I do not apologise for framing this article in terms of some unseen but anticipated evil. It is my concern that the actions of our Government, throughout this pandemic and particularly of late, are setting the scene for an unprecedented disaster for this country. The line from Macbeth seems appropriate in the circumstances. The full line is; “By the pricking of my thumbs, something wicked this way comes”
Macbeth-Act 4-scene 1

---

To frame this in a somewhat different light we can consider that;

“The first duty of the government is to keep citizens safe and the country secure.” (Home Office)

It is not difficult to argue that, from the start of this Covid19 outbreak, our Government has failed in this duty. Mainly because it wanted, through political ideology, to put our economy before the lives of our people but also because it failed to take the evidence of the scientific community as seriously as it should have. We did not lock down for an unconscionably long time and indeed have only introduced restrictions on visitors to this country today the 1st of June.

This inevitably lead to the chaos that was typified by testing services being withdrawn and elderly patients (untested) being discharged from Hospitals into community Care Homes, with the devastating results that followed. Despite the trends and the warnings from Italy, as the Virus rampaged through Europe, we were urged to “Take it on the chin” and only the prospects of hundreds of thousands of death as a result, diverted this Government from taking a “Herd Immunity” approach.

---

The lockdown arrived too late and the impact was therefore mitigated. We locked down when the deaths per day hit 200 and they were soon over 1,000, even now they hover somewhere between 200 & 400 per day, whilst new cases (official figures so probably about half of the real figures) are still stubbornly in the 2,000 per day region. The new cases peaked in excess of 8,000 and remained above 4,000 for the whole month of April. Data from Public Health England reported here , downturn blips after weekends are not unusual so worth waiting for the ongoing trend.

---

Throughout the approach of Government seems to have been one of lying or avoiding the scrutiny that this crisis demands. Essentially deceiving, dissembling & disinformation. So why am I talking about the potential for a new disaster and the '...something wicked...' comment? This is because two weeks ago the Government decided that the worst was over, we could amend the official guidance from 'Stay Home' to 'Stay Alert', though ask anybody what that means and you'll get different answers every time. We were also told it would be safe for children to go back to school and they created a way of spotting how we could ease lockdown restrictions over time.

Looking at this representation of that system, make your own mind up as to whether we should be looking at easing anything at this time.

---

Over the last few days this Government has systematically accelerated the easing of lockdown, we might want to ask why? The answer is simple, to protect and defend an unelected Special Adviser (Svengali?) to the Prime Minister, after he breached the lockdown rules to visit his mother on her birthday and take his wife to a Castle for her birthday. I am sad beyond measure that 350+ MP's (Conservatives) are allowing our country and it's people to be sacrificed on the alter of one man's ego.

I tweeted on 25th May that if Cummings survived the Rose Garden press conference then we had suffered a coup and he, not Bojo was effectively Prime Minister. This seems to have come to pass and from some sources the reason for this is to 'Get Brexit Done' in the midst of one of the most serious existential threats this country has ever faced. We are undone as a viable democracy and a laughing stock around the world.

---

The latest announcements have been met with concern by medical experts throughout the nation, yet we will be telling the most vulnerable in our society that they no longer need to 'Shield' to protect themselves from the virus. Though how they may feel about this when we have seen the damage that Cummings', actions have done to our public willingness to social distance is a different matter.

This weekend has been a disaster for social distancing and for the idea of any 'Common Sense' in the British public. Beauty spots locally and seaside destinations have been blighted by crowds and bad behaviour, causing injury and damage.

Moor and forest on fire, beaches overcrowded. It is only a matter of time before we see what Public Health issues they may also have caused. Sheffield's own Director of Public Health is not confident and all of this is being advocated whilst we still have no effective or even really functioning Test & Trace protocols in evidence.

---

There has been so much wrong with the way our Government has approached this Pandemic, I'm sure there will be volumes written eventually, that it is difficult to summarise but here's an attempt.

HMG priorities were;
Economy over people –
Defend Dominic Cummings & Bojo –
Get Brexit Done

To achieve these goals they have been willing to sacrifice the first duty of Government and throw away the lives of the public, under the Brexit Bus. They are willing to gag the press, throw out the evidence of science (whilst claiming to follow it) and to dismantle the democracy of the country.,/p>

We are of no consequence to these politicians and they simply do not care whether we live or die. They will feed us to the wolves and lie to our faces as they do so.

The Government has broken any trust the public had for their advice by defending the indefensible Cummings and by blatantly lying at every conceivable opportunity about their record dealing with Covid19.

So yes “...something wicked this way comes...”, welcome to the second wave.

Sheffield City Council – Cabinet Meeting - 20th May 2020

---

For the first time in it's 100+ years history the Leaders of the Council met remotely via internet services to enable at least some semblance of democracy to continue during these unprecedented times. This is my very concise report on the proceedings.

---

The Council's normal service is highly affected currently, both by the Pandemic and by Government changes to the way they are enabled to maintain services and make decisions during the crisis. This is impacting to some extent on the democratic process and is not what we would like to see happening but strange times can lead to unhappy circumstances and we must do what we can as organisations and individuals to maintain scrutiny of those in power and the decisions they make.

If the least we can do is to continue speaking truth to power then that is what we must do.

The meeting started a little after 2pm and, as is usual for what would normally be the first meeting after the Council's AGM it is essentially a short agenda. On this occasion, with the normal AGM having been cancelled all the faces of the Cabinet Councillors remained the same and in the same roles (this is unusual). The meeting was opened by Cllr Julie Dore, as leader, with some brief opening comments and effusive thanks to the people of the city for their forbearance through the 9 weeks of lock-down to date. She commented on the difficulties we have all faced adjusting to the restrictions and offered particular thanks to Council staff and Social Care staff for their dedication.

The agenda was still able to handle Public Questions, though it is now necessary to have the question in 2 days in advance if you want to be part of the meeting, On this occasion there were two questions;

Ibrar Hussein, for the Taxi Trades – asked about the plans for the Clean Air Zone in the current circumstances, the slow progress of putting licensing applications online and the slow response to petitions. This was answered by Cllr Bob Johnson and would be followed up with Mr Hussein direct.

Mike Hodson – Carter Knowle & Millhouses Community Group, asked about the engagement plans for the Director of Public Health and communities/groups in light of Public Health England guidelines and the fact of different 'r' rates (infections) within the country and region. This was answered by Julie Dore who is asking the DPH to respond to Mr Hodson.

---

The meat of the meeting was, not surprisingly, a report on the Covid 19 pandemic and the city's response and plans for the future.

This section of the meeting was introduced by the (Interim) Chief Exec, Charlie Adan and then heard from the Executive Managers responsible for the city's response. Key amongst these was Greg Fell as Director of Public Health. I won't give a blow by blow on his report, or the other Executive Managers there but highlight some of the key points that piqued my interest.

The DPH reported that, using reports to NHS111 of people using their infection algorithm, as well as normal figures of hospitalised cases, he was able to estimate that a truer figure of cases in Sheffield was 30,500. This is a useful extra level of information that continues to show how official figures are misleading. He also commented that, following Sheffield Hospitals testing programmes and a generally good response from the Sheffield public to the lock-down, Sheffield's ICU beds always maintained the capacity to deal with the cases that needed hospitalisation. Sadly 304 people to this date had died from the virus or complications associated with having the virus.

I did have some cause for concern over one or two of the comments;
How can we be certain that, as the DPH commented, those infected have developed any immunity or how long this may last? (inevitably I will be asking for evidence on this considering we test so little in this country)

I am also concerned that we continue to support following HMG guidelines when so much of what they have done to date has either been the wrong decisions or utterly confusing messages.(You can see further comment from me on these issues and more in this The Public Interest article )

---

An interesting point came up during the report on the logistical efforts the city has been making to tackle the pandemic, by John Mackilwraith (apologies if that's not correct, poor screen resolution makes the name difficult to make out) He reported that Sheffield quickly became the hub facilitating PPE deliveries for the whole of South Yorkshire, Public Services and Independent Sector. The city had supplied 85% of the Regions needs with the rest being drops from the HMG stock. As a result of some very hard work the Sheffield service had managed to maintain some 5 days supply at facilities across the South Yorkshire area and is also holding approximately 4 weeks stock for contingency.

A well organised public sector response in sharp contrast to the Central Government debacle on behalf of the NHS.

---

Lastly I want to highlight some of the financial impact that the Council have had to absorb to tackle this crisis. Eugene Walker, Executive Director for Finance, reported that the response to Covid 19 is currently estimated to cost the Council £77M and that £50M of that will be this year. Government is expected to provide grant support of £34M, leaving the city £16M short. This means that without further Government support and with the impact of current spending cuts to take into account the city will have to draw on it's reserves to fill this gap. Even then the city's reserves will be exhausted in 2022.

---

After the reports from Officers it was time for the Cabinet Councillors to make comments on the report. I comment briefly on these and first of all note that each of the Cabinet Councillors mentioned staff and workers and colleagues to thank everybody for their efforts during the crisis.

Abtisam Mohamed- Cabinet Member for Education and Skills Praised the efforts on ensuring that children on free school meals were provided with 4,000 food hampers over the Easter break and highlighting the lack of Government funding to allow for similar provision during Half Term and the Summer holidays. Also thanked the medium & small Voluntary Sector organisations for their exceptional efforts.

George Lindars-Hammond- Cabinet Member for Health and Social Care Highlighted the excellent response on PPE within S. Yorkshire, being facilitated by SCC and succeeding where HMG failed.

Jackie Drayton- Cabinet Member for Children & Families Emphasised the great work done in Social Care with shielded people in sheltered accommodation and those adults with learning difficulties, who required a different approach

Paul Wood- Cabinet Member for Neighbourhoods and Community Safety Highlighted the staff's fantastic job at responding to emergency situations in the midst of the crisis and often within a matter of hours.

Mazher Iqbal- Cabinet Member for Business and Investment Commented on those in the public & voluntary sector who were often working very long days and 7 days a week to address the crisis. Also commented on the difficulty of making the mixed and confusing messages from HMG into something that SCC could deliver. Rhetoric – v – reality.

Bob Johnson- Cabinet Member for Transport and Development Praised the willingness of staff to take on redeployed roles during the crisis. He is also keen to progress some of the active travel proposals he has been working on with City Region and pleaded with Officers to make an announcement by the weekend.

Mark Jones- Cabinet Member for Environment, Streetscene and Climate Change Accepts there have been some problems of people not doing what they should, down to confusing and misunderstanding of Government messaging. Pleased Sheffield maintained open recycling centres and also important to continue efforts on climate change and flood defences to avoid additional crisis issues this winter.

Mary Lea- Cabinet Member for Culture, Parks and Leisure Expressed her upset at having to introduce such harsh measures with respect to bereavements and understands that even the announced relaxation is still difficult for people in grief. On a lighter note she was pleased that the investment in e-books had kept access to some library services available and that the city's parks had maintained an open status even if facilities were closed. They were clearly a lifeline for many.

Terry Fox- Deputy Leader & Cabinet Member for Finance, Resources and Governance Praised the speedy response of 'Mutual Aid' groups in the city and the work they were undertaking to keep communities functioning. Also commented on the flexibility of Council staff and their Unions in responding to the pandemic.

It will make an interesting backdrop to the 'Big City Conversation' around Neighbourhood Decision Making when that programme resumes.

Finally Julie Dore summed up by commenting that, at the time when she and the people of the city most needed to trust Government, we were unable to do so and how difficult this made every step. She also praised the work all Councillors of all parties for their efforts and contributions in the crisis.

---

Afterword

Inevitably the tone of the report and the Cabinet comments were of a positive nature, stressing the exceptional efforts of the workers and people of the city. There was no comment on the fights in Page Hall or the issues of Gang crime & shootings in Nether Edge.

I understand this, in a context of maintaining morale and compliance within the population, and hope that these issues are being dealt with by Cabinet members within their portfolios. It would be a serious mistake for us to take a fully 'Keep Calm & Carry On' approach when so much of what this Government has done so far has been detrimental to the Health & Wellbeing of the people of the country.

I will be engaging, I'm sure much to their delight, with members directly on some of the issues but recognise also that things may take a little longer than normal to get responses. I'm used to this however, still waiting on answers to questions for some three years.

We are by no means out of this crisis yet, we need to be prepared for further waves of infection, possibly worse than the first, and the way we work, shop, play and learn may well have changed forever. I hope and trust that key business leaders, including the relevant Cabinet members, are taking the need to review current plans for the City to heart and will include a broad range of stakeholders, including the public, in this ongoing effort

I encourage you to watch the archive of the meeting and to access the report papers both available here .

---

On a Lighter Note

The first remote Webcast of the Cabinet Meeting was also notable for the, shall we say, mixed impact of the visuals. There were a number of members who seemed to take the floating head approach to their appearance, others including officers, had some distortion to their features from proximity to their cameras and there were an interesting array of fake backgrounds on offer. All mildly amusing and not too distracting but if I had some advice it would be this;

Perhaps a harmonised background for the Officers – Be aware of your framing – Be aware of what you are doing with your hands etc. (at one point Bob Johnson looked as if he was giving a puppet show but lost his puppets).

However, all in all, a good start and at least retaining some level of scrutiny and public engagement. We shall see if other committees can match that.

Vanishing Democracy

A few weeks ago I wrote an article for publication in this month's Now Then Magazine, entitled “Vanishing Democracy” - Has Council Lost Touch with the People?

---

In what might be described as serendipity or, if you're of that mind, the Universe working in a mysterious way, I completed the article just a few days before It's Our City, the Sheffield Community Group launched their plans to create a petition about the City's democratic structure. The petition is aimed at calling on and possibly forcing Sheffield City Council to hold a referendum on changing to a Committee style structure away from the Strong Leader model we currently have.

If you read the article, via the linked title above, you will see that, between the Strong leader model of Governance and the impact of Austerity there has been a withdrawal by the Council into a more centralised decision making process. One that excludes the public (intentionally or not is immaterial) from having the voice and influence over decisions that we once enjoyed.

We all recognise how austerity and the gutting of Local Government finances has debilitated much of what Council's all over the country can do but, the way we respond to that reduced capacity is key to our ability to resist it's worst effects.

---

Greater participation from the city's people, investment in that participation and encouragement of that participation is absolutely vital. Councils need to loosen their obsessive control over so many aspects of what we are allowed to do, as community groups, as volunteers and as individuals wanting to support the needs of our city. They need to get behind local initiatives because they work, not because they fit a 'Party Political' agenda and grasp the nettle that is collaborative working within their decision making. An inability to see beyond the pound notes of a proposal or a deal or an opportunity is detrimental to good decision making. We need, in this City, at this time an appreciation of the 'Social Good' that can be done if we will only take the risk.

No one Political Party, Corporation, Voluntary Organisation or Individual has all the answers and nobody is right all the time. Looking at the way Council and Councillors respond to challenge and criticism, you would not believe that. Defensiveness and a bunker down attitude prevails and that is detrimental to making decisions that really benefit locally, and not just in the public purse, but in people's lives and their wellbeing.

---

I suspect there are few in Council who will read this and agree with me but I am very aware that there are Councillors of the current administration and many members of their political party who are uncomfortable with the way this city is managing itself. We must encourage those people to be more open in challenging the status quo and to put the people of the city before their 'Party' loyalty and the detrimental consequences that begets.

---

To support my work click on the button below.

It's Our City & We Can Change It

28th June 2018. This may be a date you want to remember. It's the date that Sheffield community group 'It's Our City' decided that enough is enough.

---

The group held a news conference on this day and launched a major challenge to the way Sheffield is governed. Anne Barr, one of the group's steering group started the event talking about how sad she felt when, attending a recent rally in the city, she saw a banner reading “Sheffield – Where Democracy Goes to Die”.

She went on to comment that, as a group they were trying to make a city where people can;
- Think, talk & work together.
- Become active & informed citizens.
- Ask for more from elected representatives.

Although originally growing out of the Streets Ahead PFI issue they are also looking at the way decisions are made locally & are impacting on broader community concerns. From the redevelopment and selling off of community assets (heritage buildings & community hubs) to missed opportunities and funding by simply failing to listen to the communities.

---

Then to the reason for the gathering. Ruth Hubbard, another of the group's steering committee, announced that they were planning to bring forward a petition demanding a change to the way the city is governed.

Sheffield is currently governed by a 'Strong Leader' model and that means that decisions about how the city works is made by just 10 people. The Leader of the Council and the Cabinet (currently 9 members). Elected Councillors beyond this inner group therefore have little or no power, irrespective of their Party colours. There is, however, power available to citizens of the city to remedy this situation. In the Localism legislation brought in under the Coalition Government there is a mechanism where a Council's electorate can force a referendum on changing the Council's structure.

In Sheffield this would mean forcing the Council to adopt a form of Committee governance, rather than the strong leader structure. It's actually a simple process too. The Group will create a petition under this localism legislation and, provided enough people on the city's electoral roll sign the petition, the Council has no choice but to hold a referendum on the change.

---

I won't go into what that will affect at this stage, that will come out over time as the petition is launched and campaigning begins. The first obstacle is to collect more than 5% of the electorates signatures. This number is not exact as yet but is expected to be around 21,000. This is the next step for the group and they hope to launch the petition in the next few weeks.

It sounds a big number but the petition to try and save the Georgian shops on Devonshire Green gained over 20,000 in a few days, so it is eminently achievable. There would still be a referendum to be won but in Councils where this has been undertaken that has also proved a winner.

---

My hope is that the Council will, as has happened with other Councils, choose to engage with this issue and simply agree to a real conversation about the issue and deliver a choice in a referendum at the next elections in May 2019.

Click here for It's Our City Website
Click here for It's Our City News Page

---

To support my work click on the button below.

Sheffield City Council Cabinet Meeting 14th February 2018

My questions to Cabinet this month were a bit unusual in a number of ways. Some are relatively straightforward but are a part of a longer term considered inquiry and one was delivered on the day instead of in advance as is my usual practice.

---

In a similarly unusual move some of the questions were either answered or written answers were offered before the meeting. In view of what came later, this was useful.

So: Question 1, on numbers of staff and budgets for Communications as against Democratic Services, I will be receiving a written answer.

Question 2, on capacity and number of students enrolled in the City's two University Technical Colleges, I will be receiving a written answer.

---

Question 3, on progress on my Conduct Complaint against a Councillor, I was updated verbally before the meeting and have since received a written answer. Apparently we are awaiting the arranging of a 'Consideration Sub-Committee' and have been since before Christmas. I wonder what will happen if this is not arranged before the AGM when everyone plays musical chairs in the committees?

---

Question 4, on the recent report by the Communities & Local Government Select Committee Inquiry into Overview & Scrutiny Functions in Local Government, was answered by Cllr Julie Dore (Leader). She commented that she would expect the Council's own Overview and Management Scrutiny Committee to consider the report as part of it's work programme. It would also look at all the recommendations of the report even though I had highlighted only certain parts.

That is fine by me, I had at this stage highlighted areas I know SCC don't do currently in the hope of stimulating a debate on the effectiveness of scrutiny in the city. To that extent I am content … for now.

---

My final question of the meeting was submitted at short notice and therefore I expected little by way of an answer but it was to serve notice that a disagreement may be at hand. In my Question 5 I asked about a decision announced (in private to the Sheffield Star only) that day about Mount Pleasant House being sold to a company to make into a Care Home.

There had been, in the previous week, reasons to believe that the decision may have been based on 'mistaken' or missing information in the reports received by Cabinet Members. I therefore asked that the decision be referred to Scrutiny to ensure “...that a complete understanding of the decision can be achieved and that it is based on a full understanding of the impact of this decision on another gem of Sheffield's heritage before it is lost to the local community forever.”

I also asked for a number of bits of information about the stage of the negotiations with the successful bidder.

The initial response was from Julie Dore, who commented that there is a protocol for contract decisions and it is not possible to comment on confidential or commercially sensitive information. There was no comment about referring the decision to Scrutiny.

Cllr Olivia Blake (Cabinet Member for Finance) then confirmed the offer of a meeting for the following morning as she thought an early meeting with herself, Cllr Ben Curran (Cabinet Member for Planning and Development) and Cllr Mazher Iqbal (Cabinet Member for Business and Investment) would be useful to look at other locations to develop some of the proposals in the Mount Pleasant bid.

I suspect this story will run and run, whilst another unique gem of Sheffield's heritage is under threat.

---

To make small regular donations to my support, please click below.

Sheffield City Partnership Board Meeting 12th January 2018

This meeting was intended to focus on the current work streams around inclusive growth and to look at the current position of the State of Sheffield Report 2018, currently being written.

---

There were three presentations during the public session, the first was from the Cohesion Sheffield team looking at their work in the city.

First up for them was Mike Fitter of the Cohesion Advisory Group. He talked about the Cohesion Sheffield aims being 'a city where everyone is treated with dignity and respect.

They are a group that is a co-production between CAG and SCC and some of the early partners involved included, South Yorkshire Police (vis the PCC), University of Sheffield and John Lewis.

They work to two principles; Structural – Based on the fact that cohesion is undermined by deprivation and not diversity. Relational – The idea of the Cohesion Lens – How we all work together.

He also outlined the importance of inclusive growth to the cohesion agenda in the way it brings together social and economic policies. Commented positively on one of my favourite subjects, citizen engagement and community development. Then emphasised the need for local leadership that reflects the current diversity of Sheffield.

---

Angela Greenwood, Community Services Manager for SCC came next. She talked about how cohesion is about getting on with each other at all levels and about how we maintain cohesion and our ability to intervene when cohesion breaks down.

The benefits of co-production for SCC. Trusted and strong relationships, Innovation and the ability to do so much more as well as access extra funding. £835K from Central Government and £500K from Lottery funding.

Angela also highlighted some challenges; Mistrust of Council & Partners. Constant change of colleagues. Takes longer to achieve things through co-production & Sometimes hard to explain the concept.

The things that SCC were working on were listed as; Cohesion grant fund of £60K over 2 years. Cohesion Charter. Community Investment Deal & Regional & National work.

---

Finally there was Panni Loh, Development Co-ordinator for Cohesion Sheffield. She outlined the origins and development to date of the group. Based in Voluntary Action Sheffield but working across all sectors. Launched in October 2017, still new. She talked about key activities to date being around Engagement & relationship/trust building. Working with organisations to generate their own Cohesion Action Plans. Lastly there will be a Cohesion Sheffield conference on 21st March 2018 in the Town Hall, all welcome.

There were a number of comments and questions from the Board members around how success would be measured and the scale of the response moving up from individual organisations to a more general cohesion plan.

---

The next presentation was Simon Ogden of Creative Sheffield, presenting a summary of the Sheffield City Centre Development Plan 2018. This is due for a consultation period in Mid February.

The City Centre Plan is designed to outline a purpose & structure to planning in the city centre. A vision for the next ten years, a clear narrative to everyone, a signal to the market about opportunities in the city, a sales pitch/call to action and a single source of 'truth'

Why City Centre? It's a major driver of the City Region economy, it is key to growth for the city overall, it's a centre for the education sector, it's a meeting point for all the people of the city and it's part of the key to sustainable living.

Some of the key points he highlighted were the move towards a compact and High Quality retail area, three new business districts planned, growing the education campuses, Castlegate development and the better use of roads & public transport. There was a considerable amount more but the presentation was delivered at such a speed as to make it difficult for me to take notes but then, the public is not the audience for this really. That is to wait until the public consultation.

There were a number of projects mentioned that are already underway, either having gained planning approval or indeed being under construction. This rather undermines the idea of a consultation in anything but name only. The plans appear firmly established and the consultation will be a rubber stamp approach I suspect. It is not untypical of the approach of top down design projects, they make the decisions we get to say how much we like it...or not.

I had hoped to hear that real public consultation would be a regular part of the future vision for the city so that the people that live in and use the space can influence the direction it takes. Having a say once every ten years is not good enough in a world where social media can enable regular checks and balances on what planners have in mind.

My final point would be that the heritage economy was mentioned only in passing with respect to Castlegate and it is clear that progress on the steps needed to both safeguard and bring that area back into productive use is painfully slow.

---

The last presentation was a gallop through the current position on the writing of the State of Sheffield Report 2018 which is due to be published shortly. This was given by Andi Walshaw, Performance & Research Manager for SCC.

He restated the original remit for the report and outlined the agreement as to what would be in this years report. Four sections were identified for detailed reporting. Safety & security, Democracy & engagement, Social and community infrastructure and Health & wellbeing. Each of these would be 2-3000 words with illustrations. More information can be seen in the presentation on the SCPB website.

An initial draft had been circulated to the board for their comments but Andi highlighted some of their thoughts. On the positive, there was plenty of content to work with, there were interesting new topic areas and there had been good engagement with the guest authors.

Improvement was needed in the following areas. Initial content was different to the 'usual' approach of the report, too much opinion and not enough facts, less reference to sources of information than previous years.

There then followed a brief report on the preparations and comms needs for the publication and launch of the report. The comments from the board largely reflected the editor's comments.

---

Thereafter the meeting wound up. The presentations can be viewed on the SCPB website. The next meeting is Friday 16th March, more details to follow.

---

The Festival of Debate.

---

Few people can have failed to notice the huge range of events that have been going on in the city during the 'Festival of Debate' . This series of events, organised by Now Then Magazine and Opus Independents, is a huge shot in the arm for political thought and activity in the city.

---

The reason I say this is quite simple, the majority of the events are organised not by politicians, political parties, or media companies but by those outside the 'bubble'. This may sound trite, but I mean it as a compliment to the power of the individuals and to the small groups of committed souls that think they can make a difference. The Festival of Debate is an outlet enabling them to make that difference.

Some of you will be aware that I am involved in a number of the events. My enthusiasm is about more than my own involvement, I've never needed to crow about my local activism, I do what I do to generate positive change, as I see it. I'm behind the festival because it's giving all those involved the confidence, contacts and experience to continue to be activists after the events are over and done.

---

With each event that I'm involved in I am trying to give people not just an interesting experience but a glimpse of how they can get involved in local activism. With the PechaKucha event, I wanted people to take away a sense that it's for each of us to decide where we draw that line in the sand beyond which we will not stand for 'it' any more. I tried to show that it's not about being like someone else but about finding your own passion, knowing what you want to change and understanding what you personally can do to effect that change.

The 'Devolution Debate' will, I hope, show how we can take debate to the powerful, particularly around election time, and that it is important to be aware and involved as early as possible to ensure that we get a result that works for the majority and not the usual lobby groups and influential shadows that politicians listen to. I want to make people aware that the knowledge and experience is out there and that we can all tap into it to learn more of the information behind the deliberations of 'decision makers'. Whether it's academics or local community activists, access to their knowledge and experience means we can all have a say, if we find the way that works for us.

---

My last event is more personal. I will be 'in conversation' with a friend, the writer, Laurence Peacock, in front of a public audience. This time I will be talking about me but mostly about what I do, why I do it and how I do it. I hope that, with this event, I can help others to find their own 'voice and influence'. It's an important part of what I do but that voice is something that we each have, in different ways, we just need to work out how it works for us.

That's why this series of events is so important, it is showing that one person, alone or in a group of like minded individuals, can make a difference. It could be argued that this sort of stuff is easier these days, with modern social media any one person can create their own soap box. That is true, organising and connecting anonymously is easier, but there is still the danger of being one voice shouting into the void. Connections other than clicking 'like' or 'retweet' are more essential than ever.

---

To hear someone speak passionately about their cause is always more powerful than reading the comparable words in print or on screen and that is why events on the scale of the Festival of Debate are needed, to connect us to each other in a human way. To listen, to talk, to debate. This is what democracy should be about.

Overview & Scrutiny Management Committee Meeting of 26th November 2014, by Nigel Slack.

---

This committee is responsible for keeping a watchful eye on the work programmes of the Council's scrutiny committees. It also has overview of city wide matters that cut across other committee boundaries.

---

After the usual housekeeping announcements and approval of minutes, the meeting moved straight to Public Questions. I had put a question about the review of the Locality Management arrangements and their scrutiny but was asked by the Chair, Cllr Chris Weldon (Labour) if it could be passed to the next days Safer & Stronger Communities Scrutiny meeting, which was more appropriate as they were to receive a report on same. I agreed.

The only other question was from Alan Kewley. He first expressed concern over the time taken to respond, in writing to questions when that was promised. His response to the questions asked at the previous months meeting had arrived in his e-mail that very morning and he had no time to digest the response nor disseminate it before today's meeting. He then went on to discuss how it might be possible to increase public involvement in these meetings and with more and more Council's now webcasting their meetings what the potential was for this in Sheffield?

The Chair's response was that there had been lots of changes over the last few years that had improved peoples involvement in council matters and that webcasting had been considered in the past. He promised a written answer from officers, that would come to the board for their consideration. Cllr Ian Auckland (Lib/Dem) asked that the responses be available within ten days. The Chairs agreed this should be so.

---

The main item of interest on the rest of the agenda was a report on the Boundary Commission review of the ward boundaries for the council. This was given by James Henderson and Victoria Penman.

They recapped the position so far. The commission had considered the size (number of councillors) of the council and agreed to keep that at 84, in 28 three councillor wards. This stage of the commissions proceedings was consultation about the actual ward boundaries. This is a complex decision and the Boundary Commission report is available here. The main problem however was to cut the size of the Central Ward which had 148% of the number of electors it was supposed to have. The consequence of this is that the Commission has radically shifted many residents into neighbouring wards and the ripples move outwards to a lesser degree.

There were eight public comments in this item, six from residents in Highfield who were unhappy about the splitting of the community into two different wards and two from Bradway who were upset that the same thing had happened to Bradway last time around and had not been corrected this time.

---

There were also comments from the members of the committee about Highfield and who had made this decision. James Henderson said it was a result of the decision about Council size. The Council elects by thirds and this meant that all wards had to have three councillors. A proposal by officers to split the Central ward in two each with two councillors was therefore not feasible despite the fact it was the best solution to future proof the ward against new development that was in the offing.

Cllr Sarah Jane Smalley (Green) commented that she understood there had been consideration of a proposal to split Gleedless from Arbouthorne and that this would have balanced the numbers but it was unpopular with Councillors in that area. Cllr Pat Midgley (Labour) suggested that boundary changes settle down over time and few people now remember the defunct Castle ward.

Cllr Jillian Creasey (Green) commented that the Council still needed to make strong submissions to the commission as they are a powerful consultee and their comments would be crucial. Finally Cllr Bryan Lodge (Labour) wanted to clarify for the record that this was a commission proposal and not the City Council's.

---

The Chair then summarised that this was the second consultation by the commission and that all public comments today would be included in the Council's submission. He also asked officers to meet with the Highfield community and relevant Councillors to get further comments.

The rest of the agenda was quickly despatched and the meeting dispersed.

Unite Community Branch Meeting of 5th November 2014, by Nigel Slack.

---

Tonight I was invited by the Unite Community Sheffield branch to talk about what I do and the Funding Campaign I'm running. (See my orange buttons on this blog) I was the last item on a busy agenda so I had the opportunity to see something of what Unite Community do.

---

The meeting started with an update on the campaign to boycott shops and companies in Sheffield that subscribe to the governments 'Workfare' (welfare to work) schemes. The latest was a protest outside a shop called Savers, on Haymarket. The day went well by the sound of it and with the connections they were making with the public and their reaction to the schemes was a great example of what direct action can achieve in raising awareness.

There were then updates on the Orgreave truth & justice campaign and the Freedom Rides protests. Tony & George, the two pensioners arrested at one of the events are up before the Sheffield Magistrates Court on the 8th December and the group are hoping for significant public support for the two men. Next were brief reports on a number of ongoing matters, the GMB unions strike at Sheffield Recycling Centres against the Veolia sub-contractor 'Green Company', The EDL march (again) in Rotherham and the anti-fascist response, The rep from Unite Community that went to the National Climate Change Meeting and from the Sheffield Trades Council and the Sheffield People's Assembly.

Finally there were two motions passed by the meeting. One supporting a woman's right to choose following the advent of an American pro life group starting to establish in this country and one to support the victim of convicted rapist Ched Evans, who is being hounded and abused by his supporters and some of the fans of Sheffield United.

---

Last of all I had the oportunity to outline my work with my 'Public Interest' profile and my attempts to bring greater transparency and accountability to Sheffield City Council and others in our region. I answered question after that including;
Isn't that why we pay Councillors? - Yes but they have less freedom than me to ask questions at meetings such as full council and cabinet where they cannot & Councillor performance is not consistent.
Why don't I stand for election? - It's expensive to do as an independent and as above would reduce my freedom to act. Were I to join a party that would reduce my independence as all party politicians are expected to submit to the party line.

I left them with some written material about what I do and hopefully they will distribute this through their own networks. All in all an interesting meeting with a group that could achieve a great deal given the support they need, much like me I guess.

Central Local Area Partnership – Planning & Licensing Meeting. of 4th November 2014, by Nigel Slack.

---

The meeting was chaired by Neale Gibson (Labour) who is also chair of the Central LAP. Presentations were given by Maria Duffy, Head of Planning and Steve Lonnia, Head of Licensing. The meeting was to look at the role of planning and licensing particularly within the city centre and with respect to the night time economy.

---

The presentations essentially outlined the powers, or more accurately the lack of powers, available to local authorities to restrict or manage development within the city centre, and particularly with respect to licensing of the night time economy. Power seems vested in the developers and public objections are often up against professional legal types when arguing against any proposed changes.

The bigger problem, that became apparent as the meetings presentations and discussions went on, was the seeming ability for developers to simply suggest benefits and positive impacts but the need for objectors to be able to prove and evidence the negative impacts of proposals. Add to that the power of big money when it comes to employing legal types to defend their position and their power to threaten appeals, that can cost councils big money to defend and you see the problem.

---

There is potentially one light in the dark and that is the councils Unitary Development Plan and the 'Night Time Uses Policy' that it contains. These two documents allow the council, through it's planning department to draw up guidelines that it considers necessary to good planning and development within the city. It can attempt to protect the mix of 'uses' within areas and also specify conditions that can be applied concerning night time use, such as opening hours, live music, etc.

Once again however the plan must be able to resist the test of reasonableness that developers will try to undermine. Suggesting that the UDP is too restrictive or unreasonable means that they can appeal decisions to the 'planning inspectors' who can overturn a council decision at the stroke of a pen and even award legal costs against the council. As a result councils are timid about declining developments and it would seem that any suggestion of an appeal will enable a proposal to find favour. That, at least, is how it seems.

---

Is there a solution to this? Yes, the proper devolution of planning powers to the councils. Allowing councils to develop and enforce their own planning guidelines, based on local difference and local needs and, more importantly, wants without interference from outside watchdogs would protect local diversity both between cities and towns but also within the different areas of cities and towns. After all, as Cambridge is different to Sheffield both in landscape and culture, so Tinsley is different to the city centre within Sheffield.

21st October 2013 - Sheffield City Council, Locality Management General Briefing, by Nigel Slack

This was a meeting of invited members of the voluntary sector in order to brief them on the new arrangements for 'Locality management' that will replace the now abandoned 'Community Assembly Meetings'. I presume that I was invited, as an individual, because there is to be no public meeting as such.

The meeting was opened by Councillor Geoff Smith (Labour) who gave a welcome statement and relayed the apologies of Councillor Mazher Iqbal (Cabinet Member for Communities and Inclusion) who had lead the development of the new arrangements. He then introduced Sharon Squires (Director, Sheffield First Partnership). She helped the City Council in developing the model for the new arrangements, Local Area Partnerships. She explained that the success of LAP's would be about building strong and resilient communities that can cope with the huge changes that are being thrust upon them by the current austerity measures. She also emphasised that Locality Management was a part of the framework of the solution but not all of it.

The meeting was then presented with a slide show of the new arrangements by Martin Hughes (Locality Manager) who discussed how the VCF sector (Voluntary, Charity, Faith) could get involved. The new model has four key principles. Councillors as community leaders, Prioritise resources to areas of greatest need, Develop effective partnership working, and Enable communities to help themselves.

Each Ward will have a lead Councillor drawn from the three that represent each ward, Central Ward will be represented by Councillor Rob Murphy (Green). They will represent the ward to the LAP's who will have a small discretionary amount of money to spend on priorities that the four wards in each LAP agree on. These LAP's are lead by a Chair who is a Councillor, for Central it is Councillor Neale Gibson (Labour) but we are told that this partnership is not a decision making body and is not formally constituted.

At the end of the presentation there was an opportunity for questions. There were a number of questions on some of the ways in which the VCF sector can get it's voice heard in the larger arena, as many of them connect over the ward and area boundaries. I asked a particular question about the use of IMD (Index of Multiple Deprivation) for defining the levels of the 'Ward Pots' or discretionary funds for each ward. I referred to a recent meeting of the Sheffield Executive Board that received a presentation on Community Resilience and Wellbeing from the Young Foundation and discussed the need to reach beyond the stats of IMD in measuring the health of a community. I asked whether other measures would be used. The response was that IMD would be used for now but others would 'probably' be added as time went on.

There were then many comments and questions about the public oversight of the LAP's and the lack of formal structure for the public attendance at LAP meetings. The general response was to the effect that there is no formal structure to the meetings and they would generally not be open to to the public as it is not a formally constituted body. I therefore pushed them on the comments of the 'Fairness Commission' that fairness should not only be done but be seen to be done.

With the number of comments the organisers finally agreed that they would take back the comments and see what could be done to improve levels of trust in the structure and arrangements. We will see whether this comes to anything or whether, like so often, it was just to placate the meeting.


Cabinet Report on the replacement of Community Assemblies