The Public Interest

Showing posts with label Local Government Funding. Show all posts

Thursday, 21 May 2020

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.

Monday, 9 July 2018

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.

Friday, 15 July 2016

The First 100 Days – The Mayor of Sheffield City Region

On the 14th July I attended an event organised by the Centre for Cities, an independent cities think tank. I won't comment on their political colour, check out their website and judge for yourself. It was hosted by the Centre's Chief Executive, Alexandra Jones.

The panel for the event were Lord David Blunkett - Chair of the Sheffield City Partnership Board, June Smith – Engineering Employers Federation(EEF) and Dr Craig Berry – Deputy Director of Sheffield Political Economy Research Institute(SPERI). The audience amassed about 50 or so, mostly male, all white and generally over 50, reflecting the general apathy around this whole debate.

Alexandra Jones introduced the event as part 4 of the continuing programme of discussion on the priorities of City Region Mayors, to be elected in May 2017, focussing on the first 100 days of the role. She described the historic nature of the changes and the success of the Manchester Region in securing further deals above and beyond the original devolution agenda. She did also however express concern over the lack of certainty for the whole devolution agenda with ongoing changes in the Cabinet and the acknowledged role of Osbourne as the champion for these deals.

As she was speaking I have to say my own thoughts were more about this not being the least bit historic, as it was not a constitutional change, but just one more in a string of local governments re-organisations dating back to the 70's. My thoughts on the Manchester deals was around the £1Bn hole in their Health budget and their recent accession to the 'Justice' system powers due to have budget cuts of 25 to 30% next year. Devolution of powers or austerity & blame?

The first speaker was Lord Blunkett. His first comments were to clearly state that he was not going to put himself forward for the Mayoral job. That list is getting shorter by the day. He then went on to outline three areas he felt the Mayor should concentrate on in the first 100 days. Briefly these were; To have created a manifesto based on the ideals of the Sheffield 'Fairness Commission', to work to heal the divide in the city and the Region and to bring all the Councils together in common cause, recognising that sometimes the rivalries within the region and further afield were counter productive. To reach out to councils & councillors and ensure a definite role for them in the region. To look at the role of the public & civic society and potentially take on the lessons of the 'citizen's assemblies'. To develop something more than just an economic policy role for the Mayor, adding social policies as well. He briefly commented on Europe and envisaged a potential for the Mayor in engaging with EU cities to bridge the 'Brexit' gap and potentially a new Hanseatic League to foster European ties.

The next speaker was June Smith of the EEF. Her main points were about the Mayor's role in business and local government working together to optimise growth for the region. Getting planners to understand the needs of businesses and develop pro-business policies. There were also comments about the diversity of businesses in the region and the need for a broader range of businesses to be heard by the region and the Local Enterprise Partnership(LEP) and that the EEF could help with that. Finally that the Mayor's role with transport should ensure it supports growth of business and develop a consistent approach to business support.

Dr Craig Berry rounded off the speakers and he started with a warning that the current model of devolution was unlikely to deliver sustainability and growth particularly after Brexit. The theory on which the city regions were expected to succeed, 'agglomeration' around economic benefits, showed no evidence for developing successful cities and that the most successful cities were where the state had an integral role in involving social policies in the regions. He also commented that agglomeration was a divisive type of growth as it meant winners & losers. He asserted that we need to go further in to the basics of power and discuss on a national basis where powers should reside and make devolution plans appropriate to that outcome, before city regions could be truly successful. He was also concerned that the model in place would only further entrench the adversarial politics under which we currently operate, illustrating an assumption that seemed common to the panel that only political parties would field candidates.

The chair then opened the discussion to comments and questions from the floor. I won't try to provide comprehensive coverage, as the event will probably be available online in due course. My own comments and question were around the earlier comments I made on the lack of constitutional settlement for these devolution deals and the doubts around Manchester's deal and the transfer of austerity blame as well as powers. My final comment and question was to highlight the forecast by Barclay's that the UK is about to enter a year of recession and what would happen to promised funding if the city region failed to meet growth targets.

The responses were weak and centred around the idea that a positive and ambitious approach to the devolution deals and the Mayoral model will give business confidence enough to continue to invest. The crux of my question about the funding link to growth and the consequences of failing to meet those targets was not responded to by any of the panellists.

Where does that leave us? For me I feel the whole devolution agenda is now in serious trouble. Brexit has undermined the funding basis for a great deal of the regions ambitions, particularly for the Universities and the 'knowledge economy' they represent. The sacking of George Osbourne removes the champion of devolution from the game and with a cabinet minister at DCLG (Department of Communities & Local Government) who is a proven centraliser, he is responsible for the decision to close the Sheffield office of the Business Innovation & Skills (BIS) department, there may be precious little enthusiasm for continuing or expanding the whole process of devolution.

We are all whistling in the dark and hoping that the nightmare goes away. Meanwhile uncertainty and chaos reigns in Government and Opposition and the UK continues to drift.

Thursday, 22 October 2015

Sheffield City Region 'Devolution' Deal, with comments by Nigel Slack

This post details the devolution deal as currently written and signed by the leaders of the four Councils of South Yorkshire and the Chancellor of the Exchequer. I have added my own comments to the post, highlighted, expressing areas of concern and areas where clarification is needed or questions should be asked.

I hope you can each get something from this, despite the sometimes opaque or vague wording and that it will prompt further reading, and questioning of your elected representatives as a result.

Sheffield City Region Combined Authority Devolution Deal

This document sets out the terms of a proposed agreement between Government and the leaders of the Sheffield City Region to devolve a range of powers and responsibilities to the Sheffield City Region Combined Authority and a new directly elected mayor. Building on the City Deal, agreed in 2012, the Growth Deals, agreed in July 2014 and January 2015 and initial Devolution Agreement, agreed in December 2014, this Devolution Deal marks the next step in the transfer of resources and powers from central Government to the Sheffield City Region. All of these deals negotiated in secret and without public consultation or approval

The devolution proposal and all levels of funding are subject to the Spending Review and Sheffield City Region consulting on the proposals and ratification from the local authorities. But only the 4 Metros, Sheffield, Barnsley, Doncaster & Rotherham This agreement is subject to the enactment of the necessary legislation (The Cities and Local Government Devolution Bill and the Buses Bill), and to parliamentary approval of the secondary legislation implementing the provisions of this agreement. None of this is guaranteed. If one council disagrees it can be forced to accept, two refusing will sink the deal.

This agreement will enable Sheffield City Region to accelerate the delivery of its Strategic Economic Plan, strengthening its position as a world class centre for advanced manufacturing and engineering.

Summary of the proposed Devolution Deal agreed by the Government and the Sheffield City Region Combined Authority with the support of the Local Enterprise Partnership

A new, directly elected Sheffield City Region Mayor will act as Chair to the Sheffield City Region Combined Authority and will exercise the following powers and functions devolved from central Government:

Responsibility for a consolidated, devolved transport budget, with a multi-year settlement to be agreed at the Spending Review. £ Unknown

Responsibility for franchised bus services, which will support the Combined Authority’s delivery of smart and integrated ticketing across the Combined Authority’s constituent councils. Metros only

Responsibility for an identified Key Route Network of local authority roads that will be collaboratively managed and maintained at the city region level by the Combined Authority on behalf of the Mayor. Metros only?

Powers over strategic planning, including the responsibility to create a spatial framework for the city region and to chair the Sheffield City Region Joint Assets Board. Less control for Sheffield City Council?

The Sheffield City Region Combined Authority (SCR CA), working with the Mayor, will receive the following powers:

Control of a new additional £30 million a year funding allocation over 30 years, to be invested to boost growth. Cuts to Sheffield Council alone in 2016 £50M

Responsibility for chairing an area-based review of 16+ skills provision, the outcomes of which will be taken forward in line with the principles of the devolved arrangements, and devolved 19+ adult skills funding from 2018/19.

Joint responsibility with Government to co-design employment support for the harder-to-help claimants, many of whom are currently referred to the Work Programme and Work Choice. SCR will also bring forward a proposal to pilot more intensive support for those furthest from the labour market. City Region workfare system?

More effective joint working with UKTI to boost trade and investment, and responsibility to work with Government to develop and implement a devolved approach to the delivery of national business support programmes from 2017.

In addition: None of which demand a Mayor

To support the development of the SCR Advanced Manufacturing Innovation District, the Government will offer the Sheffield City Region expert advice and support to ensure they are able to put forward a City Region led proposal to undertake a Science and Innovation audit.

The Sheffield City Region will work with HM Government to achieve their ambitions for a national Institute for Infrastructure within Doncaster.

HM Government will work with the Sheffield City Region Combined Authority to agree specific funding flexibilities to a Spending Review timetable. The joint ambition will be to give Sheffield City Region Combined Authority a single pot to invest in its economic growth.

Further powers may be agreed over time and included in future legislation. Carrot to ensure good behaviour?

Governance

1 Sheffield City Region (SCR) has taken bold steps in securing effective and accountable governance arrangements. The SCR Local Enterprise Partnership (LEP) was part of the first wave of LEPs established in 2010 and has been one of the strongest performers since then. The SCR was the first to submit plans for its Combined Authority under the Coalition Government, which was established in April 2014. The Combined Authority enables decisions on economic growth and development to be taken in an open and transparent way in one place for the whole of the SCR. Scrutiny and transparency still not established 1 year on

2 As part of this proposed agreement, the Sheffield City Region Combined Authority will adopt a model of a directly elected city region Mayor over the Combined Authority’s area with the first elections in May 2017. Interim arrangements? The existing Sheffield City Region Combined Authority will also be strengthened with additional powers. This takes the next step in transferring resources and powers from central Government to the Sheffield City Region. There is no intention to take existing powers from local authorities without agreement. Intention?/But if they agree? The agreement will protect the integrity of local authorities in the Sheffield City Region.

3 The directly elected Mayor for Sheffield City Region Combined Authority will autonomously exercise new powers. The Mayor will chair the Sheffield City Region Combined Authority, the members of which will serve as the Mayor’s Cabinet. Leaders of the 4 metros? The Mayor and the Sheffield City Region Combined Authority will be scrutinised and held to account by the SCR Overview and Scrutiny committee(s). Still in establishment phase The SCR Mayor will also be required to consult the SCR CA Cabinet on his/her strategies, which it may reject if two-thirds of the members agree to do so. 3 0f 4 Metros The SCR Cabinet will also examine the Mayor’s spending plans and will be able to amend his/her plans, if two-thirds of the members who have been appointed by constituent councils agree to do so. 3 of 4 metros

4 Proposals for decision by the Combined Authority may be put forward by the Mayor or any Cabinet Member. The Mayor will have one vote as will other voting members. Any questions that are to be decided by the Combined Authority are to be decided by a majority of the members present and voting, subject to that majority including the vote of the Mayor, Suggests Mayors Veto unless otherwise set out in legislation, or specifically delegated through the Authority's Constitution.

5 The Sheffield City Region Mayor and the other members of the Sheffield City Region Combined Authority will be required to work closely together. Specifically:

a the Mayor will provide overall leadership and chair Combined Authority meetings; and

b the SCR Cabinet Model, where the leaders have a clear portfolio of responsibilities, will act as a supporting and advisory function to the Mayor and Combined Authority in respective policy areas. (1 This will be based on the constituent members of the Combined Authority but can be extended to include any other members of the Combined Authority that change their member status from non-constituent to constituent. )

c The Mayor will also be a member of the LEP, alongside the other members of the Combined Authority, recognising the importance of the private sector in any growth strategies or delivery. Main power lies with Mayor and Local Enterprise Partnership?

6 The recent changes to strengthen the governance arrangements in the Sheffield City Region by formally establishing five Executive Boards that have delegated decision making powers from the Combined Authority, are expected to continue as part of this agreement.

7 Economic growth is a shared endeavour and is vital in delivering the Northern Powerhouse ambitions. The Mayoral Combined Authority will continue to work very closely with HM Government for the benefit of the public. Whose definition of benefit?

8 Sheffield City Region Combined Authority and Local Enterprise Partnership commits to work with partners across the North of England to promote opportunities for pan-Northern collaboration, including Transport for the North, to drive northern productivity and build the Northern Powerhouse.

Skills (19+)

9 The Government will enable local commissioning of outcomes to be achieved from the 19+ adult skills budget starting in academic year 2016/17; and will fully devolve budgets to the Sheffield City Region Combined Authority from academic year 2018/19 (subject to readiness conditions). These arrangements do not cover apprenticeships.

10 Devolution will proceed in three stages, across the next three academic years:

a Starting now, the SCR Combined Authority will begin to prepare for local commissioning. It will develop a series of outcome agreements with providers about what should be delivered in return for allocations in the 2016/17 academic year. This will replace the current system of funding by qualifications as providers will receive their total 19+ skills funding as a single block allocation. This new arrangement will allow the SCR Combined Authority to agree with providers the mix and balance of provision that will be delivered in return for the block funding, and to define how success will be assessed. Assumes privatised providers?

b For the 2017/18 academic year, and following the area review, Government will work with the SCR Combined Authority to vary the block grant allocations made to providers, within an agreed framework HMG Strings

c From 2018/19, there will be full devolution of funding. The SCR Combined Authority will be responsible for allocations to providers and the outcomes to be achieved, consistent with statutory entitlements. Government will not seek to second guess these decisions, but it will set proportionate requirements about outcome information to be collected in order to allow students to make informed choices. A funding formula for calculating the size of the grant to local / combined authorities will need to take into account a range of demographic, educational and labour market factors. Reward for good behaviour?

11 The readiness conditions for full devolution are that:

a Parliament has legislated to enable transfer to local authorities of the current statutory duties on the Secretary of State to secure appropriate facilities for further education for adults from this budget and for provision to be free in certain circumstances

b Completion of the Area Review process leading to a sustainable provider base

c After the area-reviews are complete, agreed arrangements are in place between central government and the Combined Authority to ensure that devolved funding decisions take account of the need to maintain a sustainable and financially viable 16+ provider base

d Clear principles and arrangements have been agreed between central government and the Combined Authority for sharing financial risk and managing failure of 16+ providers, reflecting the balance of devolved and national interest and protecting the taxpayer from unnecessary expenditure and liabilities Most risk to City Region?

e Learner protection and minimum standards arrangements are agreed

f Funding and provider management arrangements, including securing financial assurance, are agreed in a way that minimises costs and maximises consistency and transparency.

Skills (16-18)

12 HM Government commits to an Area Based Review of post-16 education and training leading to agreed recommendations by February 2016. The outcomes of the Area Based Review will be taken forward in line with the principles of the devolved arrangements. The review will be chaired by the Combined Authority and will include all post-16 education and training provision in the initial analysis phase. Recommendations will be focused on General FE and Sixth Form Colleges, however the Regional Schools Commissioner and the relevant local authorities will consider any specific issues arising from the reviews for school sixth form provision.

13 To ensure continued local collaboration following the Area Based Review, the Sheffield City Region Combined Authority will work in partnership with local colleges and providers to publish a local skills strategy. This will aim to help ensure that post-16 providers are delivering the skills that local employers require. It is expected that the Combined Authority will then collaborate with colleges and providers, with appropriate support from EFA, to work towards that plan.

14 Following the Area Based Review, HM Government would expect the Regional Schools Commissioner to continue to engage with the Sheffield City Region Combined Authority to ensure local links and working are maintained.

15 HM Government will work with Sheffield City Region Combined Authority to ensure that local priorities are fed into the provision of careers advice, such that it is employer-led, integrated and meets local needs. In particular, the Sheffield City Region Combined Authority will ensure that local priorities are fed into provision through direct involvement and collaboration with HMG in the design of careers and enterprise provision for all ages, including collaboration on the work of the Careers and Enterprise Company and the National Careers Service. Vagueness about private/public provision

Employment

16 Sheffield City Region Combined Authority will work with DWP to co-design the future employment support, from April 2017, for harder-to-help claimants, many of whom are currently referred to the Work Programme and Work Choice.

17 The respective roles of DWP and Sheffield City Region Combined Authority in the co-design will include:

a DWP sets the funding envelope, Sheffield City Region Combined Authority can top up if they wish to, but are not required to. Enables HMG to cut their share

b Sheffield City Region Combined Authority will set out how they will join up local public services in order to improve outcomes for this group, particularly how they will work with the Clinical Commissioning Groups/third sector to enable timely health-based support.

c DWP set the high-level performance framework and will ensure the support appropriately reflects labour market issues. The primary outcomes will be to reduce unemployment and move people into sustained employment. Sheffield City Region Combined Authority will have some flexibility to determine specific local outcomes that reflect local labour market priorities, these outcomes should be complementary to the ultimate employment outcome (for example in-work wage progression). In determining the local outcome(s) Sheffield City Region Combined Authority should work with DWP to take account of the labour market evidence base and articulate how the additional outcome(s) will fit within the wider strategic and economic context and deliver value for money. Minimal autonomy in implementing workfare

d Before delivery commences, DWP and Sheffield City Region Combined Authority will set out an agreement covering the respective roles of each party in the delivery and monitoring of the support, including a mechanism by which each party can raise and resolve any concern that arise. Therefore not part of deal yet

18 In addition, in the event employment support for this group is delivered through a contracted-out programme, Sheffield City Region Combined Authority will co-commission the programme with DWP. the respective roles of DWP and Sheffield City Region Combined Authority will include: Pressure to privatise?

a DWP sets the contracting arrangements, including contract package areas, but should consider any proposals from Sheffield City Region Combined Authority on contract package area geography. DWP set the rules

b Sheffield City Region Combined Authority will be involved in tender evaluation.

c Providers will be solely accountable to DWP, but DWP and Sheffield City Region Combined Authority’s above-mentioned agreement will include a mechanism by which Sheffield City Region Combined Authority can escalate to DWP any concerns about provider performance/breaching local agreements and require DWP to take formal contract action where appropriate. DWP in charge

19 In the event that alternative delivery mechanisms are put in place, comparable arrangements will be put in place.

20 Sheffield City Region will develop a business case for an innovative pilot to support those who are hardest to help. The business case should set out the evidence to support the proposed pilot, cost and benefits and robust evaluation plans, to enable the proposal to be taken forward as part of the delivery of this agreement, subject to Ministerial approval. City Region solution to workfare unlikely

Housing and planning

21 The Sheffield City Region Combined Authority Mayor will also exercise strategic planning powers to support and accelerate these ambitions. This will include the power to: Huge influence over local planning

a Create a spatial framework, which will act as the framework for managing planning across the Sheffield City Region, and with which all Local Development Plans will be in strategic alignment. The spatial framework will need to be approved by unanimous vote of the members appointed by constituent councils of the Mayoral Combined Authority. This approach must not delay any Local Development Plans, and will build upon the local plans being developed.

b Create supplementary planning documents, subject to approval processes in paragraph 21a.

c Create Mayoral Development Corporations, which will support delivery on strategic sites in the Sheffield City Region. This power will be exercised with the consent of the Cabinet member in which the Development Corporation is to be used. Interference in local planning

d Be consulted on and/or call-in planning applications of strategic importance to the City Region. Interference

22 Sheffield City Region and HMG will continue to discuss the devolution of housing loan funds to a Spending Review timetable. Sheffield City Region intends to develop further a proposition on a Housing Investment Fund, for discussion and development with HM Government. Carrot for good behaviour?

23 HMG will work with Sheffield City Region to support the operation of the Joint Assets Board, and support better coordination on asset sales. This will include ensuring the representation of senior HMG officials on the Joint Assets Board, using that Board to develop as far as possible and consistent with the government’s overall public sector land target, a joint programme of asset disposal using a portfolio approach, and to explore whether a right of first refusal for 28 days on all central government land and assets due for disposal can be developed that accelerates the pace of disposal. Through the Joint Assets Board, SCR and HMG will explore increased opportunities for using the public estate to generate low carbon energy. HMG sponsored Assett stripping?

Transport

24 The directly elected Mayor of the Sheffield City Region Combined Authority will be responsible for a devolved and consolidated local transport budget for the area of the Combined Authority (i.e. the areas of the constituent councils), including all relevant devolved highways funding, with a multi-year settlement to be agreed at the Spending Review. Functions will be devolved to the Sheffield City Region Combined Authority accordingly, to be exercised by the Mayor. Why the Mayor?

25 The directly elected Mayor of the Sheffield City Region Combined Authority will by 2017 exercise functions, devolved to the Combined Authority, for the franchising of bus services in the area of the Combined Authority, subject to local consultation. This will be enabled through a specific Buses Bill, to be introduced during the first Parliamentary session, which will provide for the necessary functions to be devolved.

26 This will help to facilitate the delivery of integrated smart ticketing across all local modes of transport in the city region, working as part of Transport for the North on their plans for smart ticketing across the North. This includes the production of a regional implementation plan for smart ticketing which Transport for the North will put forward to government by Budget 2016. Stalled in Greater Manchester

27 Government remains committed to the development of Phase Two of the HS2 network and will announce the way forward on Phase Two later this year.

28 Government is committed to building a Northern Powerhouse and remains strongly committed to the work by Transport for the North to identify and present to government a prioritised list of scheme options for the TransNorth rail enhancement programme and options for strategic road investment, including options for a new TransPennine Road Tunnel, by Budget 2016. Rail electrification on hold

29 Government, in consultation with Sheffield City Region, will continue to explore options to give Sheffield City Region Combined Authority more control over the planning and delivery of local transport schemes, particularly in preparation for HS2. This could include changes to the way that Transport and Works Act Orders are granted, if practical proposals for improving and speeding up the process are identified.

30 The directly elected Mayor of the Sheffield City Region Combined Authority will take responsibility for an identified Key Route Network of local authority roads that will be collaboratively managed and maintained at a city region level by the Sheffield City Region Combined Authority across the areas of the constituent councils. Metros only

Trade and investment

31 HM Government commits to strengthening support available for both trade and investment in the Sheffield City Region. None of which needs a mayor

32 On co-location, HM Government will review the Inward Investment resource location of regional (IST) staff across the three levels of: Partnership Managers; Business development and Key Account Management teams, currently in 8 locations nationally. HM Government will also look at options for co-location, under UKTI/IST management, without harming the overall efficiency of the working of the investment model.

33 On governance, HM Government will set up a joint governance structure (or join an existing one), with quarterly meetings attended by a Director level representative from both UKTI investment and Sheffield City Region Combined Authority. These will provide a forum to discuss progress on co-location, and on account management activity by both parties in the region. HM Government will wherever possible also use this structure to review key decisions and initiatives planned and/or implemented by both parties, including building a better shared understanding of the inward investment opportunities available in the region.

34 On international links, HM Government will provide a strengthened partnership between locally delivered services and embassy/consulate contacts through project Matchmaker.

35 On the Great campaign, HM Government will explore what options exist for using a portion of GREAT campaign budget for overseas based activity aligned to Sheffield City Region sector strengths with delivery managed by UKTI Marketing teams with input and influence from Sheffield City Region Combined Authority. This activity should be supported by sector based resource in overseas posts who have been specially briefed to have a strong understanding of Northern Powerhouse and Posts who are Matchmaker partners for Sheffield City Region sector strengths.

36 HM Government will also work with Sheffield City Region to build attractive regeneration/ investment propositions.

37 On trade: HM Government will ring-fence trade services resource within Sheffield City Region, develop an agreed export plan with a dual key approach to activities and reporting on outputs and outcomes to Sheffield City Region. Ring fenced resource remains subject to departmental budget changes. Subject to austerity cuts

38 An export plan will be agreed between SCR and UKTI HQ which will allow SCR flexibility, such as a specific local sectoral focus for Passport to Export and mid-sized business schemes or a different mix of products.

39 HMRC will work with the Sheffield City Region Combined Authority to provide relevant trade statistics data, within existing data protection assurance frameworks and policies, to assist with understanding the City Region’s export market.

Innovation

40 The Advanced Manufacturing Innovation District, centred around the Advanced Manufacturing Park is a nationally important asset and already delivers growth through innovation, productivity and high value employment. The City Region has an ambition to make the District world-leading – attracting investment and major industry to the area.

41 To support this HM Government will offer the Sheffield City Region expert advice and support to ensure they are able to put forward a City Region led proposal to undertake a Science and Innovation audit. This work will enable an evidence based approach to deepen the understanding of the City Region’s Science and Innovation strengths and provide a new and powerful way to understand how to maximise the economic impact from the UK’s research and innovation investment nationally. They will, for example, provide government with part of the evidence base on which to make decisions on catapults and could be used to explore how to further the Sheffield City Region’s advantage in advanced manufacturing.

42 HM Government will also offer Sheffield City Region Combined Authority dedicated workshops with the Smart Specialisation Advisory Hub to help areas identify their innovation strengths.

43 Through utilisation of the additional resources in the single pot it is expected that Sheffield City Region Combined Authority will bring forward a set of ambitious proposals to enhance the Advanced Manufacturing Innovation District.

44 The Sheffield City Region will work with HM Government to achieve their ambitions for a National Institute for Infrastructure within Doncaster. The Sheffield City Region will take forward discussions with HM Government to explore the potential for alignment of the new National College for High Speed Rail (NCHSR) based in Doncaster with the new Institutes of Technology to help meet a wider set of national infrastructure challenges. LEP lead not mayor

Business growth and support

45 HM Government agrees to continue to work with the Sheffield City Region to develop and implement proposals for a devolved approach to the delivery of national business support programmes from April 2017 onwards, subject to the outcomes of the Spending Review, and in line with the Devolution Deal agreed in December 2014.

46 Government and the Sheffield City Region Combined Authority will agree a joint programme to create the right environment to drive the commercial rollout of ultrafast broadband. Government will also support the SCR Combined Authority to reinvest funds into creative solutions to supplying superfast broadband to the last 5%.

47 Building on the currently agreed Enterprise Zone geography, Sheffield City Region will receive additional Enterprise Zones and/or extension of existing zones, subject to the current bidding round for further Enterprise Zones.

48 The Sheffield City Region LEP has requested additional flexibility on the use of Enhanced Capital Allowances within its Enterprise Zones. The government is open to further discussion on this providing proposals are compliant with State Aid rules and are fiscally neutral. Vague and not yet agreed

Fiscal

49 HM Government is committed to working with the Sheffield City Region Combined Authority to achieve Intermediate Body status for ERDF and ESF for the Combined Authority. HM Government will work with Sheffield City Region Combined Authority to test whether it will be possible to implement and if so, HMG and SCR will work together to agree a timetable to put this in place.

50 HM Government agrees to allocate an additional £30m per annum of capital and revenue funding for 30 years, which will form part of and capitalise the Sheffield City Region Combined Authority single pot. This will fund key City Region priorities and will be composed of 60% capital and 40% revenue. The fund will be subject to 5-yearly gateway assessments to confirm the spend has contributed to national growth. £30M becomes £12M revenue targetted at growth/economy and may disappear in 2020 if economy not improving nationally?

51 HM Government will work with the Sheffield City Region Combined Authority to agree specific funding flexibilities to a Spending Review timetable. The joint ambition will be to give Sheffield City Region Combined Authority a single pot to invest in its economic growth. This pot will comprise a flexible, multi-year settlement providing the freedom to deliver its growth priorities, including the ability to re-direct funding to reflect changing priorities, whilst upholding their statutory duties. This local freedom will be over a range of budgets to be determined by SCR and HMG in the run-up to and beyond the Spending Review, including as requested the Regional Growth Fund or its equivalent successor. HM Government expects to disburse this agreed settlement to the Sheffield City Region annually in advance. Vague and uncertain

52 The Cities and Local Government Devolution bill currently in parliament will establish the principles which will govern further prudential borrowing for combined authorities. Following Royal Assent, central government will consider how these powers could apply whilst ensuring no fiscal impact. Another PFI ?

53 HM Government will pilot a scheme in Sheffield City Region Combined Authority which will enable the area to retain 100% of any additional business rate growth beyond expected forecasts. What forecasts by whom? These pilots will begin in April 2016, subject to further detailed discussions between the Combined Authority and HM Government. HM Government will also discuss wider localisation of business rates with the Sheffield City Region Combined Authority. Commitment to current business rates to be returned to City Region? Forced competition between rates areas? Losing redistributive effect of tax.

Under this geography:

54 The Mayor for the Sheffield City Region will be elected by the local government electors for the areas of the constituent councils of the Sheffield City Region Combined Authority. The Mayor and Sheffield City Region Combined Authority will exercise the powers and responsibilities described in this document in relation to its area, i.e. the area of the constituent councils of the Sheffield City Region Combined Authority. 4 Metro councils only

55 Funding that is allocated to the SCR LEP, now and in the future, will continue to be allocated on the basis of the existing overlap formula.

56 Additional funding or budgets that are devolved as a result of this agreement will go to the SCR Combined Authority.

57 The Sheffield City Region Combined Authority must exercise functions in relation to its geographical area. Accordingly, if any of the Combined Authority spend is on activities of projects outside of its area, those activities or projects must in some way relate to the area – for example, be for the benefit of the area; they may also relate to some other area. The Cities and Local Government Devolution Bill, subject to parliamentary approval, can enable combined authorities such as the Sheffield City Region Combined Authority to take on a broader set of functions than economic development, regeneration and transport, dependent on secondary legislation.

58 Under the Mayor model, it is not expected that the role of the LEP or private sector be lessened.

Sheffield City Region Combined Authority commitments

59 The Sheffield City Region Combined Authority is accountable to local people for the successful implementation of the Devolution Deal; consequently, HM Government expects Sheffield City Region to monitor and evaluate their Deal in order to demonstrate and report on progress. The Cities and Local Growth Unit will work with the Sheffield City Region to agree a monitoring and evaluation framework that meets local needs and helps to support future learning.

60 Sheffield City Region Combined Authority will work with HM Government to develop a full implementation plan, covering each policy agreed in this Deal, to be completed ahead of implementation. This plan will include the timing and proposed approach for monitoring and evaluation of each policy and should be approved by the DCLG Accounting Officer. Agree to proposal then work out details?

61 The Sheffield City Region Combined Authority will continue to set out their proposals to HM Government for how local resources and funding will be pooled across the city region. Taking away from City Council?

62 The Sheffield City Region Combined Authority will agree overall borrowing limits with HM Government and have formal agreement to engage on forecasting. Sheffield City Region Combined Authority will also provide information, explanation and assistance to the Office for Budget Responsibility where such information would assist in meeting their duty to produce economic and fiscal forecasts for the UK economy. Borrow from whom against what security?

63 The Sheffield City Region Combined Authority will agree a process to manage local financial risk relevant to these proposals and will jointly develop written agreements with HM Government on every devolved power or fund to agree accountability between local and national bodies on the basis of the principles set out in this document.

64 The Sheffield City Region Combined Authority will continue to progress programmes of transformation amongst authorities to streamline back office functions and share more services and data, including on assets and property. Joined up thinking or formal combination

65 The Sheffield City Region Combined Authority will continue to adhere to their public sector equality duties, for both existing and newly devolved responsibilities.

Overall lots of wriggle room for HMG to change the goalposts along the way and for various areas of funding to become subject to austerity cuts in the future. Moreover there appears to be no mechanism to reverse out of this commitment if it proves detrimental to the City Region or to the City Council. The agreement will require City Region Councils to implement a version of Workfare and to continue the transformation of 16+ education into a employer biased training programme rather than an education system. Continuing negotiations are still secret and not subject to public approval.

Tuesday, 18 November 2014

"‘No time’ to consult public on Sheffield devolution deal" - article in The Star 18th November 2014

Nigel is quoted in today's local Sheffield newspaper The Star (18th November 2014, written by political reporter Ellen Beardmore ) concerning the undemorcratic nature of devolution that is being presented to Sheffield. more information after the link below.

Click here for The Star article

Thursday, 13 November 2014

When is Devolution Not Devolution? by Nigel Slack.

Since the Greater Manchester Combined Authority 'came out' as the first of the Northern Cities to be offered and to accept the Clegg/Osbourne version of devolution I have written about my concerns. I have written not only about their sudden acceptance of an imposed elected mayor but also about the weaknesses of the deal and the impact for the other Northern cities of this split in their, until then, united front.

Click here for the previous article Divide & Conquer the North? - by Nigel Slack - 3rd Nov 2014.

Since then there has been discussion and debate amongst a broad range of people as to whether this type of deal would be offered to Sheffield City Region and whether they would fall for the rhetoric. I use the word rhetoric because for me the Greater Manchester deal is full of holes, both in the freedom it alleges it will give Manchester and in describing it as devolution at all. The deal as outlined by the Daily Telegraph seems to be nothing more than an extended version of the 'City Deals' that have been around for a while now and which enable government to target funds at Local Councils in return for them following agendas and targets agreed between the two.

The freedoms being offered in the 'devolution' deal are similarly ringfenced with specific policy aims;
Housing Investment Fund £300M, to build houses.
Planning Powers, but no detail and presumably still bound by current planning law.
Local Transport, something already in negotiation in the North with Rail North and attempts to reintegrate bus services.
Pooling of Health & Social Care budgets, probably could be negotiated without this deal.
Greater responsibility for business support and economic regeneration, already being targeted at the City Regions through the Local Enterprise Partnerships.
£100M for 'welfare to work' making local councils responsible for administering National Policy on benefit claimants.

Why do I say this is not devolution? If you look at devolution as exhibited in Scotland you have some monies and policies determined by Westminster but, most importantly, a significant amount of money is given by way of a block grant with no strings attached and the Scots powers can decide how this money is spent. They can vary the way they spend that grant to achieve not only their legal obligations but also determined by their local policies rather than those handed down from on high.

That is devolution. In addition it is backed by legislation not some shady back room deal. Without an Act of Parliament the deals being bandied about by Clegg/Osbourne can be withdrawn by any future Government on a whim.

So where does that leave us in Sheffield? On the 5th I asked in the Full Council meeting a number of questions about the city's view on the Clegg/Osbourne deal. I knew something was amiss when a question I would normally expect to be answered by the Leader, Julie Dore was instead responded to by Leigh Bramall with his business and economy hat on. Then at the beginning of this week I was being told by a different city council cabinet member that there was no deal on the table.

Fast forward to Wednesday morning when I attended a meeting of the Sheffield Executive Board , that body of leaders from the city's public services, private sector and VCF sectors that influences the direction of policy within the city. The first hour and a half of the meeting was a closed session, public excluded.

Attending the open session it soon became obvious, from a number of dropped comments that the closed session had been discussing something about the 'devolution' deals doing the rounds. At the end of the meeting I enquired why the devolution discussion had been held in closed session and it became crystal clear that they had been discussing an actual offer on the table for the City Region to decide upon. I imagine and to some extent hope they were being asked their view, but possibly it was no more than an information session.

I was due to attend the City Council Cabinet meeting that same afternoon so drafted a quick question asking if the public would get an opportunity to consider and offer an opinion on the 'devolution' deal for Sheffield currently on the table, before the City Region decided? The answer, this time from Julie Dore was a straightforward No. She explained that they were under pressure to agree the deal before the Chancellor's Autumn Statement and therefore there would not be time. Just like that the option for any democratic debate on a huge decision for this city and this region is squashed.

The decision will now, presumably be made by the ten council leaders that make up the Sheffield City Region Combined Authority. Not by their Council's elected representatives debating the benefits or pitfalls of the idea, not by consultation and consent of the Millions of people over whom they will govern but by ten men and women behind closed doors negotiating and consenting to secret deals. That is why this is not devolution, it is not even democracy.

Finally we have to ask, why is the government so keen to have this deal decided before the Autumn Statement? The autumn statement is where the Chancellor reveals the Local Government settlement for the next financial year. In other words he will be telling local councils how much money they have to spend or cut over the following year. Could it be that once the City Regions have signed on the dotted line there will be a nasty clause in the small print that they have all overlooked? I guess only time and George Osbourne will tell but I wouldn't trust him would you?

Monday, 3 November 2014

Divide & Conquer the North? - by Nigel Slack - 3rd Nov 2014.

In the space of two days the idea of a considered and careful deliberation over the future of devolution in the North has become a done deal for Manchester and the source of huge problems for other Northern cities like Sheffield and Leeds.

Sunday started with the Daily Telegraph announcing that George Osbourne and Nick Clegg have agreed to give 'London style' self rule to Manchester, Sheffield & Leeds. The details were supposed to be announced in the Chancellor's autumn statement and the Nick Clegg sponsored Northern Futures Summit in Leeds on the 6th November would enable 300 experts, business leaders and politicians to vote on various options for the planned handover of powers.

By, what we in the North would call tea time Monday around 5pm, The Guardian's Public Leaders Network was reporting that the Manchester part of that Northern triumvirate had already done a deal with HMG. In exchange for agreeing to the imposition of a City Region Mayor, directly elected of course, the Greater Manchester Combined Authority would be given the extra powers earlier outlined and we're told control over £1Bn of public spending.

So within the space of twenty four hours the goalposts had radically changed. This gives the leaders of the two remaining City Regions a big headache. They have to think fast, do they continue to try and come up with a considered and consensual approach to devolution? One that fits their needs and is acceptable to the people they govern, or do they, for fear of falling behind the new Manchester Juggernaut, clamour to be allowed the same powers for the same concession to Mayoral style management?

We have to ask ourselves a question. The Manchester announcement comes three days before the Northern Futures Summit, directly after various other announcements about Opposition Party policies in this area and in time to have at least the Manchester Mayor in place, albeit an interim one, before the next General Election. Is this a coincidence? Probably not, there are very few coincidences in this type of political manoeuvring.

Why is this such a problem? I guess for me and for many other people that I've been in touch with over the last two days it comes down to one basic problem. The public are once more being handed some form of top down reorganisation that we have neither been involved in the design of nor asked for our consent to. The devolution of the English regions came to the fore after the Scottish Independence Referendum and the hope, throughout the country, was that there would be a serious and considered conversation. An inclusive discussion between academics in the field, politicians national and local, community leaders and, most importantly, the public about the form and function of devolved local government. The aim being to bring about a consensus that would stand the test of time and that could be enshrined in law to take the central interference out of local government.

This is now being denied us and in favour of a Mayoral system of governance that the Northern cities rejected as recently as 2012. In the referendums of that year Manchester rejected a Mayor by some 53% of the vote and Sheffield by 65%. The idea of a Mayor, however, remains attractive to the Government, why? Possibly because, although London as a region is dominated by Labour Councils, the 'city' is governed by a Conservative Mayor. This imposition is potentially seen by some, as a means to break the long standing Labour domination of the Northern cities.

Beyond this basic injustice of not giving the public a say, however, there are also other issues that may be leading the Northern cities into a well orchestrated trap. The plan outlines a number of new powers to be given to these new devolved Mayoral cities. The fact that these new powers will not be linked to any new money means that the government also get to drop fault for future cuts firmly in the city's lap, Cuts to or increased fares for public transport, the city's fault. Problems with integrated Health and Social Care budgets, the city's fault. Implementation of the controversial 'Welfare to Work' schemes, the city's fault.

Add to this the fact that whilst some of the powers are attached to funding currently managed by government and this will come to the Mayors alongside the powers, it will still be attached to specific projects and unavailable to the general spending power of the region so is still controlled by government targets and performance expectations. Financial independence? No, just more responsibilities to implement central policies.

This video that follows is a reminder of just how bad the finances are for Sheffield for the next financial year.

Sheffield City Council's Budget Conversation 2015/16

These announcements over the last two days have therefore managed to achieve some important goals for the coalition. The consensus of the Northern cities has been broken with Manchester now being held up as a beacon of the future and Sheffield and Leeds being lured into the same honey trap, and the Councils are being divided from their electorate, who are getting no say in this process and will therefore blame the councils when it all goes pear shaped.

Above all however, this is a process not properly thought through, with no support from the public and with no foundation in law. If the next government is of a different mind they can change this arrangement, again, and all this will go away.

Wednesday, 22 October 2014

sheffield city council, budget conversation of 21st october 2014, by nigel slack.

A quick headcount at the start of the meeting suggested some 100 or so people there and the mix was fairly even in genders but largely older adults with a scatter of younger ones. Better than the usual collection of older types that inhabit these events (Me included).

A brief opening statement by John Mothersole (Chief Executive) was followed by some context for the presentation by Cllr Ben Curran (Cabinet Member Finance & Resources).

As part of that context he reminded us that the figures discussed were not definitive but subject to change depending on the Chancellor's Autumn Statement, which would indicate the extent of Government plans to further cut public spending, and the announcement in late December of the Local Government Settlement, which would give exact figures for the cuts to each council's grant from government.

The headline figure however forecasts a need to reduce council spending by £60M in 2015/16. It was noted at this stage that this is in the year when the Chancellor, George Osborne, had predicted that austerity would be over. The slides for the presentation are here, and are relatively self explanatory.

SCC budget Presentation Slideshow

The rest of my comments will be to highlight points brought out in the presentation not on the slides and to report something of the question and answer session. The first few slides were there to illustrate the level of the cuts to local government budgets, the highest percentage cuts apart from the welfare budget, and that there is significant opinion and evidence that the cuts are not being applied either evenly across all councils or taking into account different levels of need.

The latter slides in Cllr Curran's part of the presentation attempt to illustrate the scale of the cuts already made, 2015/16 will mean £300M lost from council spend since 2010, and the administration's belief that they have been able to maintain their principles and their ambition for the city. This included the plans for 5,000 new homes built over the next three years, thousands of apprenticeships to try and tackle our youth unemployment levels and introducing the living wage to all council employees and 80% of contract company employees. (a subject I chased with both councillors and officers from an early stage)

The presentation then moved to John Mothersole for the more detailed facts and figures and the approach the council were considering.

The initial slides in this part illustrated the relatively small amount of the budget that the council has discretion over. From a total £1.4Bn budget most is spent on services fixed by either government, education or housing needs. This leaves only £477M of discretionary spend. So with the 2015/16 cuts the contribution to the city from government grants will have fallen by 50% and that discretionary budget by 30%.

All this is being done in the face of a growing population in the city and a weak economic outlook for both the city, the country and the world. The growing population and cost pressures such as inflation also mean there is less service can be delivered with the same amount of money from this budget.

The presentation then went on to discuss the approach the council are looking to take and some of the things already done to achieve savings in the past. It also illustrated some changes that may have a positive impact on the city's budget, such as the New Homes Bonus and Community Infrastructure Charge on developers which could raise over £11M in the medium term, so not all for 2015/16. An even greater impact would be for central government to release more of the business rates they keep, £129M back to the city, without this it remains difficult for the council to reduce business rates (for start up small businesses etc.) without further impact on budgets.

One slide shows the confused position on money available and what is available to cut. Total public spending in Sheffield is £4.5Bn, the council's share of that in direct services is £800M much of the rest is spent via the council but on things like schools, health, transport and emergency services. Ringfenced money. Of the £800M some of that is also ringfenced for fixed budgets and so the money where the council can find cuts is only £477M. The council is therefore aiming to try and get more control over the total £800M and be able to use it more imaginatively and effectively as a result. Whether government will let go of these strings is questionable, whatever colour is in power.

The final slides were about how we, the public, can get involved. I think this is important, because without some offer of alternative ideas we will be stuck with whatever the councillors decide. The council think this is important because they can then say we were asked even when we don't like their answers.

The event then moved into a question and answer phase. The questions were mostly about clarification off certain budget areas and things like the difference between capital and revenue. The short answer to that is capital money is for one off projects (usually buildings etc) and revenue is for day to day running expenses. Like buying a car, that is capital. Petrol, insurance, car tax, that's revenue.

One person asked about the way the government fixed the amount of the money they distribute to councils. The answer essentially was that it is now based on population in the main and the need or deprivation of a council area is less and less important in the calculation. This is illustrated by the way city councils are proportionally worse hit by cuts than leafy rural southern counties, some of whom have seen increased levels of government grant.

I asked whether the new Sheffield City Region Combined Authority would be able to look at shared services between authorities to benefit from economies of scale and service efficiencies over bigger areas. The response was that this was possible in the medium to long term but unlikely to be in time to affect 2015/16 budget. I also asked whether there was any sign that the government might move it's position on the business rates retention. The response to this was a flat no.

The meeting wrapped at 7.30pm but there will be much more to come on this. I urge everyone to look at the information on the slides, think about the services they receive or contribute to and what could be done differently. We can't get away from this and even a change in government looks unlikely to change the impact for 2015/16, much as we might hope they would come to their senses and realise that austerity and spending cuts are making matters worse not better. Lobby your councillors, lobby your MPs, make your voice heard in the community and in the corridors of power.

Finally, the council's twee video presentation is below. It views a bit like a budget for toy town but I guess it helps get the basics out there and hopefully makes people think.

SCC Budget Video Presentation.

Thursday, 16 October 2014

Sheffield City Council Cabinet Meeting of 15th October 2014, by Nigel Slack.

Cabinet meeting had a few interesting nuggets this time round, so this is quite a long report. First I'll deal with my 'part' in the meeting. After the usual preamble and agreeing the minutes of the last meeting we headed in to public questions. This is generally more relaxed than in the Full Council meetings and I took the opportunity to advertise the Sheffield for Democracy PCC Hustings event on Tuesday 21st October at the United Reform Church in the city centre.

Here's the audio of my comments.

This was followed by my first question. The question was inspired by the article in the Guardian on Tuesday about the MIPIM (Le marché international des professionnels de l’immobilier) conference that is normally held in Cannes, South of France, but has an inaugural UK version in London this week. The Guardian article suggests the conference is THE place to be if you are a council wanting to sell off the family silver, or housing estates, that type of thing.

To quote from the article.

"For the past 25 years, this conference – Mipim for short – has been held in Cannes. It’s a jaunt so lavish as to be almost comic – where big money developers invite town hall executives for secret discussions aboard private yachts, and whose regulars boast that they get through more champagne than all the liggers at the film festival. Suitably oiled-up, local officials open talks with multinational developers to sell council housing estates and other sites. All this networking is so lucrative for the builders that they even fly over council staff. Last year, Australia’s Lend Lease paid for Southwark’s boss, Peter John, to attend Cannes. This is the same Lend Lease to which Southwark sold the giant Heygate estate at a knock-down price: 1,100 council flats in inner London to be demolished and replaced with 2,500 units, of which only 79 will be for “social rent”."

I therefore asked whether this was the same conference that Cllr Leigh Bramall (Business ,skills and development) had attended last year and whether Sheffield attendees had any restrictions placed on them about selling off the city's family silver? Leigh Bramall and Julie Dore (Leader) both responded, Cllr Bramall indicating that it was the same conference, explaining that he and the Chief Executive, John Mothersole, roughed it in cheap bedsits whilst there and that they only attend these events to attract investment in the city for projects like the retail quarter. Cllr Dore added emphasis to the question of restriction making it very clear that any decisions on anything that came out of such conferences would be made in Sheffield by the council.

Question 1 audio below.

My second question was based on the report on Grounds Maintenance being approved at this meeting. The report itself recommends keeping ground maintenance in house but changing some of the structural management elements. The part of the report that got me interested was comment on the weighting of the decision making process. The key outcome weightings determine what are considered the most important aspects of the decision. In this case it fell out as follows.

Customer First 30%
Value for Money 30%
Council considerations 20%
Employee consideration 20%

I asked whether the same weightings were applied to all council contract decisions whether currently outsourced or not and how this would affect the consideration of contracts for which the council no longer had the 'capacity' to bring in-house.

Cllr Ben Curran (Finance and Resources) responded that weightings were used in all decisions of this nature but that they were different depending on the service under review. Services that were mainly internal processes would not have the same level of 'customer first' weighting. Service quality, however, was always factored in and they did not always choose the cheapest option. He passed no comment on the second part of my question. I guess the follow up will be to get some breakdown of the types of contracts and the corresponding weightings, to see if they are reasonable in the eyes of the public.

Question 2 audio below.

After further questions from members of the public the meeting moved on to consider a number of reports brought for approval. Item 9. was the first on the subject of the Grounds Maintenance arrangements for the council. In brief the report recommended the retention in-house of this service with some structural changes to how it was managed. The outcome was straightforward with the recommendations approved. The interesting bit was in comments on the report where Cllr Julie Dore asked whether the 'Sheffield Standard' which they were applying to the quality of the maintenance carried out could be extended to those private landlords (like housing associations) who were supposed to maintain their own grounds. Although the response was not a complete yes, it suggested that discussions on this were already under-way with those landlords.

The report at item 11. on Independent Living Solutions, was essentially about the various aspects of the city's independent living strategy for older and vulnerable people in conjunction with the Clinical Commissioning Group. There was one element of concern for me in this, or more correctly in the language of the presentation to cabinet, where the council officer referred to the Health and Care economy. The problem is this suggests an approach where the considerations are about money first and people second. This may not be the case but that is certainly the perception. In such a context words are important and should be chosen with care to reflect the truth of a statement.

The final part of the meeting went on to look at budget reports and in the first report we, the public, got our first glimpse of the chilling future for the city's budget in 2015/16. The indications are that the Government grant to Sheffield for next year will drop by £45 Million or 29% and the projected shortfall in the city's budget would consequently be some £38M. Another serving of austerity that will be very difficult to swallow.

The audio of the comment is here.

To contact, email nrslack@aol.com
To 'like' on Facebook click here
To follow on Twitter click here
To support Nigel's self-funding Indiegogo campaign click here

Sheffield City Council meeting agenda with links to reports.

About This Blog

Pages

Thursday, 21 May 2020

Sheffield City Council – Cabinet Meeting - 20th May 2020

Afterword

On a Lighter Note

Monday, 9 July 2018

Vanishing Democracy

Friday, 15 July 2016

The First 100 Days – The Mayor of Sheffield City Region

Thursday, 22 October 2015

Sheffield City Region 'Devolution' Deal, with comments by Nigel Slack

Sheffield City Region Combined Authority Devolution Deal

Summary of the proposed Devolution Deal agreed by the Government and the Sheffield City Region Combined Authority with the support of the Local Enterprise Partnership

Governance

Skills (19+)

Skills (16-18)

Employment

Housing and planning

Transport

Trade and investment

Innovation

Business growth and support

Fiscal

Under this geography:

Sheffield City Region Combined Authority commitments

Tuesday, 18 November 2014

"‘No time’ to consult public on Sheffield devolution deal" - article in The Star 18th November 2014

Thursday, 13 November 2014

When is Devolution Not Devolution? by Nigel Slack.

Monday, 3 November 2014

Divide & Conquer the North? - by Nigel Slack - 3rd Nov 2014.

Wednesday, 22 October 2014

sheffield city council, budget conversation of 21st october 2014, by nigel slack.

Thursday, 16 October 2014

Sheffield City Council Cabinet Meeting of 15th October 2014, by Nigel Slack.

The Public
Interest

Questioning Politics At A Local Level
Here In Sheffield And Beyond

About This Blog

Pages

Thursday, 21 May 2020

Afterword

On a Lighter Note

Monday, 9 July 2018

Friday, 15 July 2016

Thursday, 22 October 2015

Sheffield City Region Combined Authority Devolution Deal

Summary of the proposed Devolution Deal agreed by the Government and the Sheffield City Region Combined Authority with the support of the Local Enterprise Partnership

Governance

Skills (19+)

Skills (16-18)

Employment

Housing and planning

Transport

Trade and investment

Innovation

Business growth and support

Fiscal

Under this geography:

Sheffield City Region Combined Authority commitments

Tuesday, 18 November 2014

Thursday, 13 November 2014

Monday, 3 November 2014

Wednesday, 22 October 2014

Thursday, 16 October 2014

Questioning Politics At A Local Level Here In Sheffield And Beyond

The Public
Interest

Questioning Politics At A Local Level
Here In Sheffield And Beyond