About This Blog

The public should know all we can about the business of the decision makers that affect our lives, our wallets and our democracy. This is a record of my efforts to try and improve the levels of transparency and accountability within Sheffield City Council and others. To shine a light on how decisions are made and where the money goes. If I can also help others to find their own voice and influence along the way, then that is a bonus.

Showing posts with label Jack Scott. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Jack Scott. Show all posts

Saturday, 6 December 2014

Sheffield City Full Council Meeting of 3rd December 2014, by Nigel Slack.


The Lord mayor kicked off the meeting with the usual preamble but there were then a couple of announcements. Firstly it was announced that part of today's meeting would be audio recorded, by Kier as a test. The reason for the test is not made clear but hopefully it is part of the response to my ongoing attempts to get meetings recorded and webcast.


Further announcements were, a collection to take place in support of the Archer Project (homeless) and that the Women of Steel statue appeal had reached it's target. Great news. Lastly Cllr Julie Dore (Leader) announced the appointment of Cllr Jayne Dunn as the new cabinet member for Environment, Recycling & Streetscene. She replaces Cllr Jack Scott who seems to have left under a bit of a cloud in relation to the current recycling centre dispute.

After approving the minutes (a question over this will be in my Cabinet Questions in a couple of weeks) the meting moved on to petitions and public questions. There were two petitions this weeki, one relating to road safety on Sharrow Vale Road and one about access problems on a road with a wide central grass verge.

Then came questions one expressing concern over the consultation exercise about the changes to Chesterfield Road at Heeley, another about the Council's response times for complaints and one about the proposed changes to the road plan around Heeley City Farm and the suggested removal of many mature trees to make way for a bus lane.


My questions were up next. My first was a continuation of my attempts to find out what is happening on the City Region deal misleadingly labelled 'devolution'. The answer from Cllr Julie Dore (Leader) basically confirmed that the supposed deadline of the Autumn Statement for an announcement of a deal had been missed, heads of terms had not yet been agreed, and that as soon as the Council know what's happening, the public will know.

Audio below.

My second question asked about the governments commitment to the 'Northern Powerhouse' idea, in light of the announcement of the new Garden City based around Bicester in Oxfordshire, within commuting distance of the capital. Julie Dore responded that she understood the Garden City proposal was about housing mainly and that she hoped the government would still continue to invest in the economic future of the Northern cities.

Audio below.

Finally I asked about the Council supporting the call for a minimum wage of £10/Hour for the UK based on the successful campaign in Seattle USA to introduce a minimum wage of $15. It should be noted that this is already Green Party policy. The basis of the idea being both a reduction of in-work benefit costs and an increase in local economic activity as most low paid workers spent any pay increases in the local economy. Julie Dore again responded. She said she needed to see more evidence on the figure that was being chosen by the Unions to support this and to think about the general economic situation in terms of affordability but that in general she was minded to support the idea.

Audio below.

Unfortunately I was unable to stay for any more of the meeting but will be following up on the recording test that was carried out to see why it was undertaken and the result.

Monday, 10 November 2014

Meeting with Cllr Jack Scott - 10th November 2014, by Nigel Slack.


My meeting with Jack Scott (Cabinet Member for Environment, Recycling & Streetscene) was due to start at 11am. He finally arrived about twenty past full of apologies. Indications are he does this a lot. Apologies out of the way we got down to discussing matters that fall in his portfolio.


First up was Meadowhead roundabout. Well not just that roundabout but that's the one that kicked it off. For those that don't know a great deal of work was carried out at this roundabout, courtesy of the Highways Dep't rather than 'Streets Ahead', to address safety issues. At the same time however the green space that it had been was completely destroyed. There was a bit of justification for that, as poor maintenance had left many of the trees in a poor condition and some potential for them to fall into the carriageway.

This aside, a habitat for invertebrates and insects and consequently a feeding post for birds was lost. The few scraggy replacement trees were a poor substitute for the forty years of mature growth that had been destroyed. I pointed out to Cllr Scott that he underestimated peoples attachment to these minor green spaces and that a better solution might be found as a method to regreen, not just this space, but any space where mature growth had to be sacrificed for the sake of development, assuming of course that all efforts had first been made to prevent destruction if possible.


I have chatted the concerns through with a close friend of mine who, as a recent graduate from the MA in Landscape Architecture at Sheffield University, knows a bit about green things. We talked through my thoughts on needing to re-instate the planting and she came up with some great ideas on making the space a diverse habitat with minimal maintenance needs and a low cost planting scheme.

She drew up a scheme for me and we believe the cost would be in the region of £250 for the necessary saplings, bulbs and seeds. There is also a suggestion that by approaching this in concert with the University landscaping department, the initial graft could be a project for the students or some such and thereby keep additional costs minimal. Maintenance would also be low cost as the scheme creates good groundcover that inhibits weed growth and gives colour all year round.

The proposal was well received by Jack Scott and we have agreed to get Fran Halsall into the discussion and progress the idea. This needs to be relatively quick as planting season is already upon us and it would be good to get this done before next spring. Cllr Scott and I both agreed that as a major feature on the Southern approaches to Sheffield the appearance off his site was important for the city as well as for local residents and wildlife.


The conversation then wandered a little as we discussed the current state of devolution for the Northern cities. Cllr Scott is a recent convert to my point of view that the deal accepted by Greater Manchester and allegedly being put forward for the Sheffield City Region is little more than an extended 'City Deal' and that without financial powers and legal status it does not really measure up as devolution at all. He assures me that as far as he knows there is not currently anything on the table for Sheffield but we'll wait and see.


I then asked for an update on Fracking. Previously we have talked fracking and I wanted to check up on the current license situation for the city. Cllr Scott has not been advised either by the relevant government department of by the group 'Frack Off' with whom he maintains contact of any new licenses in our area but there are some outstanding license blocks awaiting decisions by the sound of it. He seems quite sanguine about the potential of a license and claims to have a strong case to dissuade fracking companies from coming to the city region. He is not only relying on the normal pollution and saftety arguments but has taken on board my comments at our last meeting about the added dangers of our coal mining heritage. Sheffield is dotted with old mine workings dating back to the 17th and 18th centuries.


Finally I had only a short time to talk about that perennial favourite the bins. My area is not big for student housing but there are three or so houses in the streets around me that are student lets. My attention was drawn to a problem as the summer progressed, where many of the bins outside these student houses were not emptied because, as they left at the end of term, they dumped anything in any bin regardless of 'proper' usage.

After some eight weeks of this I finally complained to Veolia and, after a few more weeks the bins were finally emptied. Two thoughts occurred to me. One, why was this problem left to mature over the summer? And two, why aren't the landlords being held to account for their tenants? We discussed this problem and it became apparent that it may be the situation arose because of the fact there are only a few student houses in the area. The steps taken, outlined by Jack Scott, suggest that the problem is better handled in areas with a high student population and therefore landlords that are more used to the vagaries of student behaviour.

I did urge that the Veolia collection teams might need better support for their unemptied bin reports as the problem near me did not get dealt with for far too long. I also suggested that Landlords should be more accountable for their tenants and that some surcharge be available to prevent the Council picking up the tab for the problem. According to Cllr Scott, central government changes now prevent much by way of this type of action, so I suggested a 'Bond' similar to the security deposit that tenants leave with landlords to cover damage to the property during the tenancy. This seemed more feasible and Cllr Scott is going to look into the potentuial for that sort of scheme.


All in all it was a positive meeting and it will be interesting to see what concrete actions come from it. Needless to say I will try to keep my eye on it.

Sunday, 9 November 2014

Not my Sunday Sermon 2, by Nigel Slack


This may become a thing, a Sunday contemplation on the state of the world and our tendency towards 'self' over 'society'. I talked in my last Sunday piece about the attitude amongst so many people today, that if you are not a part of the economic machine, creating wealth for self or others, and the other is preferably somebody paying your wages, then our efforts are not considered worthy or even legitimate.


This is promulgated by government and media and, to some extent has become part of the narrative by all political parties. It seems they are incapable now of discussing their policies and plans except through the prism of getting the 'workshy' back to work. Economic growth has become the mantra of this neo-liberal religion, whether the world & society can sustain it or not. Dave DeGraw, US economist and author recently commented that there were only enough jobs in America for 50% of the working age population. This means the idea of full employment is a myth that politicians continue to peddle in order to make those who are unemployed or even underemployed (part time workers) appear to be part of the problem.

The real trick for politicians and corporations however, has been their ability to convince many of the rest of society that this is the case. They appeal to our selfishness, our baser instincts to protect our selves and our loved ones from the 'outsider'. We are in an unprecedented period of inequality in this society, where wages for most are stagnant or falling and yet where corporate profits and the fortunes of the richest are continuing to boom. This is not only a problem for those in low paid jobs but for those, until now, relatively secure middle classes and graduates.


Dr John Goldthorpe, a co-author of the study and Oxford sociologist, said:
For the first time in a long time, we have got a generation coming through education and into the jobs market whose chances of social advancement are not better than their parents, they are worse. Guardian 6th November 2014 . Patrick Butler.


The much vaunted upward mobility of the 1980's is now a frightening 21st century downward mobility. As a result more and more of the sections of society that prided themselves on either 'working class solidarity' or 'middle class social responsibility' are falling into a self oriented protective stance. The result is the labelling of those that fall outside the norms of society as something 'other' and an acceptance of the disassembling of previously supported care structures (for the unemployed, the disabled and the working poor) as necessary, even though they were not the people that caused the crisis of 2008 but the victims of it.

The architects of the crash, bankers, politicians and corporations continue to profit from the crash almost without pause and the majority of the population are now so scared of their fragile employment and income security that they fall into line and hide behind the 'at least it's not me' selfishness that we all have, in some part, within our make up.


Personally, I will continue my efforts to be, at least partly, outside the system. The prospects for being able to be a full time conscience and watchdog for local politics and decision making is fading fast. Although I have connected with over 2,500 people through my funding campaign, only about 20 have responded with contributions towards my work. If all those I connected with had felt able to give the equivalent of a 'couple of pints and a bag of chips' then I would have busted my target. I continue to make my mark. This week a discussion on Twitter enabled me to make an SCC Cabinet member reconsider their positive stance on the Clegg/Osbourne plans for fake devolution to the Northern cities. This is the sort of thing no-one else is currently doing.

So people, if you were thinking that someone else would contribute, and therefore you weren't really needed, I'm afraid you were wrong, you are all needed. The withdrawal into self and selfishness that all of us are capable of seems just as prevalent in 'social benefit fundraising' as anywhere else. Without your support this campaign will not succeed and what murky decisions will slip by in the half light that remains? Will the few people able to make appearances at Council meetings be able to maintain the pressure? The visits to meetings in Rotherham, Barnsley and even further afield, that are now part of the City Region landscape, will not happen. If we end up with a City Region Mayor, where will they be based and who will be able to hold them to account?


If we want good governance, we cannot rely on the politicians to provide it alone. We must invest, either our time, something which few people can afford, or money, to support someone who has the time and the skills needed. You have a choice, I hope you will choose to support independent scrutiny for the decision making in the city and region. Visit my campaign page and support my work. If you don't, who will?

Friday, 20 September 2013

18th September 2013. Sheffield City Council Cabinet Meeting. by Nigel Slack.

The meeting started at 2pm and during the Housekeeping item on the agenda, the meeting was told by Julie Dore, Leader of the Council, that the proceedings could now be recorded by members of the public. This is the first Cabinet Meeting since these rules came into force but after asking the public gallery, all three of us, there were no requests to record this time around.

This emphasises for me the need for formal recording and webcasting by the Council of all relevant decision making meetings. Partly because people actually involved in the meetings do not necessarily have the time to do their own recording but also because they may not have the facility or confidence to do so.

As for this report of the meeting, it is my intention, with all these reports, to highlight areas of interest to me personally or of particular importance in the wider context of local politics. I will always supply, as soon as they are available, links to the minutes of the meeting from the City website.

After agreeing previous minutes, though there was some confusion over a couple of amendments that needed to be made, the meeting moved on to the item ‘Public Questions and Petitions’. There were no petitions at this meeting and so it was straight to questions.

There were three questioners, myself included.

The first questioner, who’s name I missed, expressed many concerns about the way the Streets Ahead project was being managed in the High Green area of the City. From accidents being caused by the works, to poor quality of work that would quickly deteriorate.
Councillor Julie Dore (Leader) responded by asking the questioner to give that information to Councillor Jack Scott (Cabinet Member for Environment, Recycling and Streetscene) who would respond in writing.
Councillor Scott indicated he had received that information already and would respond but also had some comments for the meeting. Councillor Scott stated that he was aware that High Green was a problem, it was behind schedule and the disruption seemed particularly high. He also said he believed that the residents would see it as worthwhile once the work was complete.

Question two was mine. I commented that I had a number of outstanding requests for information with the Council, ranging from 10 days to 10 months and asked when do such delays become too long?
I was also able to say that the 10 day item had been answered that very day when Councillor Mazher Iqbal (Cabinet Member for Communities and Inclusion) had passed me the information before the start of the meeting.

Councillor Dore asked for clarification on what items I meant and I was able to comment that the major items were already known to Councillors Bryan Lodge (Cabinet Member for Finance and Resources) and Mary Lea (Cabinet Member for Health, Care and Independent Living).

Councillor Lodge then repeated his continuing excuse that budget constraints meant that my request was not a priority and that when the information was available it would be published on the Council’s website. This response is feeling trite and insulting at this point when other Cabinet members are not, apparently, having the same problem.

Councillor Lea commented that there had been some confusion about the sending out of the information she was providing but that it was ready and I would have it by the end of the day. (An e-mail was waiting for me on my return home)

There was no actual answer to the question of when such delays become too long.

The final question came from Martin Brighton, a regular at these meetings. He asked a number of questions about integrity, innocence until proven guilty and sanctions against Councillors who fail to keep promises. What peaked my particular interest was a question about whether the leader was aware of members of Council stalking him?

Councillor Dore said she was not aware of such and if she believed she was being stalked she would call the police. I do hope there is a further instalment in this story in the near future.

The meeting then moved on to other business which is recorded in the minutes of the meeting and I left.

Next meeting 16th October 2013.

Download Minutes of the Meeting