Sheffield City Council Cabinet Meeting 14th February 2018

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

---

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

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

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

---

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

---

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

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

---

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

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

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

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

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

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

---

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

17th September 2014 - Cabinet Meeting, by Nigel Slack.

Due to a cock up in room bookings we were attending Cabinet in the reception room at the top of the grand staircase, which allows for better use of microphones and I hope therefore better recording. After the usual housekeeping announcements and apologies for absence and the approval of minutes we moved to public questions.

My first question of the day focussed on the outrageous behaviour of Cllr Jack Clarkson (UKIP) at the last full council meeting. Following the dropping of some leaflets onto the UKIP positions below the public gallery, Cllr Clarkson, in the midst of an emotional debate on the 'no confidence' motion about the PCC, stormed up into the public gallery and, from my position appeared to be trying to assault the member of the public that had dropped the leaflets.

My question raised the need for this type of action to be disciplined as contrary to the council's code of conduct for councillors and whether that would be done by Council or by a member of the public complaining.

The response from Council Leader, Julie Dore was to the effect that normally they would wait for a member of the public to bring it forward in writing. However, since this is essentially what I had done with this question, she would forward the complaint on my behalf.

The audio for this question and answer is below.


My second question was the result of conversations at home around the issues of the Rotherham child sexual exploitation tragedy. I commented that whilst discussing the tragedy of the Rotherham report with friends, I was told that relatives of theirs had a vulnerable child and that Rotherham Council had offered them un-chaperoned taxi travel for their child. They refused and are now thinking they may have had a lucky escape. The question then arises, does Sheffield offer such taxi travel? Is it chaperoned? And are the drivers CRB checked?

The answer from Cllr's Jackie Drayton (Children, Young People and Families) and Isobel Bowler (Culture,Sport and Leisure) was to the effect that the majority of council transport for vulnerable people, young and old, was by in house vehicles and drivers, all appropriately checked. taxi services that were used were also checked and regularly updated and any persons using that service were carefully assessed first. Cllr Bowler (responsible for taxi licensing) commented that Sheffield's licensing procedures were rightly very strict but that there does exist a potential problem more generally because of drivers getting licenses from outside the city, over which she has no control. This needs taking to SCRCA in my opinion.

Full audio below.


Question 3 from me was in respect of a TTIP roadshow being advertised on the city region LEP (Local Enterprise Partnership) events calendar. The advertising for the event was unremittingly positive about TTIP and I felt contrary to the comments made on behalf of the council at the last full council meeting. I asked if anyone from council would be attending to offer a more balanced viewpoint. The rsponse from Julie Dore was one of surprise, it seemed this was the first she had heard of the roadshow but commented that she was meeting the CEO of the LEP that afternoon and would make further inquiries.

Full audio is below.


My final question to Cllr Leigh Bramall (Business, Skills and Development) about planning decision made after the fact at the 'Bluecoats' development on Psalter lane was almost sunk when he replied by e-mail the night before. However I commented that the reponse created further questions and asked to meet with him and planning to discuss it further. He agreed.

Full audio below.

To contact, email nrslack@aol.com