![click here to go to Now Then Magazine Article "Retail Quarter: Shopping Heaven or Hell? " by Nigel Slack"](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjWhFV617fa6LvCLNRNPrmbBd_4T1Uxcsflk35lIU8Fqp-QYjt8laGYlqo6CMAz9OmWCUe2bpe13SP__gRsw_lf0FHfHTc4mLUcnclri3c_Ia21lFTfbvoVbZHxl1lFg0cEjPWuu38GAc5E/s1600/555.jpg "click here to go to Now Then Magazine Article "Retail Quarter: Shopping Heaven or Hell? " by Nigel Slack\"")
![http://nowthenmagazine.com/sheffield/issue-90/devolution/](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgPDbO3NbFAvfNzccxNaVHsxkAX7u35UfQ4uPI8sy0rt0jn4UKPFRGZo4Wja8zttlRX9nRhTDictCsbYn28lxXuyuwg3J7UYmIRJG2tuETQP9-HCQDxbBNh7X2KDwVEBgBbfkcnJjCBIFcA/s1600/99.jpg "click here to go to Now Then Magazine Article "Devolution: Lost Cause? " by Nigel Slack\"")
The City Region meetings are always curious affairs. The bulk of their business is conducted out of the public gaze followed by a brief (½ hour) formal meeting to receive reports, public questions and make formal decisions.
This was where I was able to get the responses to my questions about their approach to the potential imposition of an elected City Region mayor.
Below is my question, annotated with the responses delivered by Sir Steve Houghton, Leader of Barnsley Borough Council and the Chair of the SCRCA.
"It seems that the new 'Cities and Local Government Devolution Bill' may take some time to progress through the legislative process. The Chancellor however is saying he is already in negotiation with the 'Northern Powerhouse' cities about the new so called devolution powers and the imposition of an elected Mayor."
"His agenda is, yet again, deliberately tight no doubt to try and prevent the Combined Authority from consulting the public on the conditions and restrictions that the deal includes. (Some nods of agreement from other members to this) Last time the Authority resisted the pressure to agree to an elected mayor and as a result were granted fewer powers than Manchester City Region. The same blackmail approach seems to be in the offing again."
"What will be the SCRCA approach this time?"Who is leading the negotiation?
Ben Still (Executive Director Local Enterprise Partnership) and his team will lead the negotiations, supported by the Council Chief Executives and reporting to the SCRCA
Will they accept a directly elected Mayor?
The preference of the Combined Authority would be to retain the current governance arrangements but, if Ministers insist on some form (and there are several) of Mayoral model, it will depend on whether the devolution deal and its benefits will be worth it.
Will the public be consulted and their opinion sought?
If the deal negotiated includes any form of Mayoral arrangement then there will be consultation with the public across the City Region but there will be no referendum.
Will the individual Councils and most importantly their councillors be consulted and their opinion sought?
That would be a matter for each Council but judging from the nods around the table most probably.
Will the SCRCA resist a deal that is inappropriate for the make up of the City Region with it's cross county ties or will it compromise it's principals through fear of falling behind an imagined brighter future gifted to Manchester through their wholesale capitulation? (This caused some amusement from around the table and a comment from Steve Houghton that Manchester might disagree with that comment)
The SCRCA preferred approach is for all the Councils to be involved but they are aware of the problematic nature of the Regions cross border arrangements.
This was about as full an answer as I might hope for at this time but clearly not giving away any of the SCRCA red lines when it comes to the negotiations. Only time will tell whether the SCRCA version of a good deal will match that of the public in this city and the region.
Coincidentally the next item on the agenda was an update from Ben Still on the Devolution Deal. He reported that government were asking for proposals from the City Regions by the beginning of September. The SCRCA would put forward a deal if their own discussions on what they should be asking for were concluded in the next few weeks. He also commented that they would be looking to try and ensure a common approach from both Sheffield and Leeds City Regions. The key issues would include the concerns over the geographic anomalies of the Sheffield region.
At the conclusion of the meeting Vicky Seddon and myself had a brief chat with the Vice Chair, Cllr John Burrows (Leader, Chesterfield Borough Council) who commented on the general antipathy within the SCRCA for any Mayoral model but also hinted at the need for the region to be pragmatic about the offer from the government. In fact they had spent a couple of hours already that afternoon trying to agree what the SCRCA should be asking for from government as their initial proposal.
Now that is the meeting I wish I'd been observing.The meeting was chaired today by Cllr Leigh Bramall, deputy leader and Cabinet Member for Business, Skills & Development, as the leader, Cllr Julie Dore was away on Council business. We weren't told what. The usual introductions and housekeeping arrangements were concluded and we moved on to what, for me is generally the most interesting part of the meeting, Public Questions.
Today Council received questions on;
Normanton Hill pedestrian crossing and the delay in it's implementation. Cllr Terry Fox Cabinet Member for Environment and Transport replied that council are committed to the crossing and the delay is due to resource issues but it will happen.
The sale of Walkley Library to the Forum Cafe Group and a request for information on the negotiations between the council and the cafe group. Cllr Isobel Bowler Cabinet Member for Neighbourhoods replied there had been no formal report to cabinet on the issue and she would treat the request as a Freedom of Information request to find out what letters or e-mails etc were available on the negotiations. This would not however be available in time for the Scrutiny Committee meeting next week. (seems to me a reason for delaying both the scrutiny decision and the formal sale until the information is available to the public and councillors on the committee)
The setting up of the new 'Schools Company' as a formal body to try and ensure equal treatment across all schools in regard to early intervention and other similar services. Cllr Jackie Drayton Cabinet Member for Children, Young People & Families commented that as any school became an academy and as new academies were built the council lose some of the budget for these services to the individual schools. The new company is an attempt to ensure the schools continue to have a co-ordinated approach and that with non council schools contributing the budget may be preserved.
Tinsley Green Youth Club and the impact of the new school extension planned for the location. Cllr Jackie Drayton replied that the council supported the youth club as budgets allowed and that other organisations also provided additional hours for the club to be open. She pointed out that the new school will have community space inside for local use also and that she would be happy to assist any 'Friends of the Park' group that came into being but that council could not promote this, it had to come from the community themselves.
I was then able to weigh in with a mighty six questions (council will be lacking meetings in August) which went as follows;
First, with concern being expressed about the weakness of council planning policies, particularly in respect of heritage sites, where are council on the new Sheffield Local Plan to bring policies up to date? And will they adopt the same proposals as Islington plan to create for greater transparency in developers 'viability' claims used to reduce commitments to building affordable housing?
Cllr Leigh Bramall responded, commenting that the details of the process were very dry and rather than go into detail he would send the information in writing. He added that there was an ongoing problem with capacity, meaning too few council employees to do the job, and that a final 'Local Plan' might be 2 to 3 years away. He also commented that the city had a good record with heritage assets and were considered a 'best practice' council in this area. On the Islington initiative he commented that he would keep an eye on it and see how it developed.
Question two was about the 'Save Devonshire Street' campaign and whether in light of the campaign achieving it's funding for an appeal against the council's demolition decision they would look again at the advice received by the group from their legal team and reconsider defending the decision.
This was responded to by Cllr Jayne Dunn Cabinet Member for Housing who commented that one judge had already agreed with the Councils decision being correct but that of course they were in dialogue with the campaign group.
Question three asked about the Councils stance on the new 'Devolution Deal' being promoted by George Osbourne and whether they would continue to resist the imposition of a City Region Mayor? I also asked whether they would consult on this with the people of the city?
Cllr Leigh Bramall replied, as Julie Dore was missing, that 'in principle' the council was opposed to imposed elected mayors, it was not being ruled out. It would depend on how good the deal was and whether they felt they could deal with the consequences. He also commented that Nationally government could now, with a majority, force this through. On the matter of public consultation, he made no comment at all.
My question four asked whether the review of council meeting procedures would be go ahead, as requested by the leader of the Sheffield Lib Dems and would the public be involved in the review?
Cllr Bramall reported that the Leader, Julie Dore, would be looking at this he was sure that in any review the public would be involved.
Question five, was in respect of the Grade 2 listed building known as Mount Pleasant. I wanted to know if the council had signed any agreement with a commercial developer in respect of the building and the empty school behind? I also asked for a meeting with the relevant Cabinet Member to discuss evidence of misleading information being used in regard to this building.
The response was from Cllr Jayne Dunn who confirmed that a lease agreement has been signed on the building and also that she would be happy to meet with me to discuss the matter further.
Lastly I asked about the Skyride event in Sheffield. I commented that I found it distasteful it was sponsored by a Rupert Murdoch media company. However this year I also found out the stewards for the event were from G4S, a company that the city council have agreed not to use in council contracts because of their poor human rights record. I asked whether the council would work to ensure this was not the case at the event next year?
Cllr Bramall responded that the event was a nationally sponsored event so they could have no influence over the direct sponsor ie. Sky but that he would bring the matter of the stewarding to the attention of Cllr Ben Curran Cabinet Member for Finance and Resources who would respond to me in writing, he not being at the meeting today.
So, a mixed bag of answers, some positive some less so and areas of further work identified. I will now follow up on the devolution matters with the City Region and the Mount Pleasant issues whilst awaiting the further information I have been promised.
Few people can have failed to notice the huge range of events that have been going on in the city during the 'Festival of Debate' . This series of events, organised by Now Then Magazine and Opus Independents, is a huge shot in the arm for political thought and activity in the city.
The reason I say this is quite simple, the majority of the events are organised not by politicians, political parties, or media companies but by those outside the 'bubble'. This may sound trite, but I mean it as a compliment to the power of the individuals and to the small groups of committed souls that think they can make a difference. The Festival of Debate is an outlet enabling them to make that difference.
Some of you will be aware that I am involved in a number of the events. My enthusiasm is about more than my own involvement, I've never needed to crow about my local activism, I do what I do to generate positive change, as I see it. I'm behind the festival because it's giving all those involved the confidence, contacts and experience to continue to be activists after the events are over and done.
With each event that I'm involved in I am trying to give people not just an interesting experience but a glimpse of how they can get involved in local activism. With the PechaKucha event, I wanted people to take away a sense that it's for each of us to decide where we draw that line in the sand beyond which we will not stand for 'it' any more. I tried to show that it's not about being like someone else but about finding your own passion, knowing what you want to change and understanding what you personally can do to effect that change.
The 'Devolution Debate' will, I hope, show how we can take debate to the powerful, particularly around election time, and that it is important to be aware and involved as early as possible to ensure that we get a result that works for the majority and not the usual lobby groups and influential shadows that politicians listen to. I want to make people aware that the knowledge and experience is out there and that we can all tap into it to learn more of the information behind the deliberations of 'decision makers'. Whether it's academics or local community activists, access to their knowledge and experience means we can all have a say, if we find the way that works for us.
My last event is more personal. I will be 'in conversation' with a friend, the writer, Laurence Peacock, in front of a public audience. This time I will be talking about me but mostly about what I do, why I do it and how I do it. I hope that, with this event, I can help others to find their own 'voice and influence'. It's an important part of what I do but that voice is something that we each have, in different ways, we just need to work out how it works for us.
That's why this series of events is so important, it is showing that one person, alone or in a group of like minded individuals, can make a difference. It could be argued that this sort of stuff is easier these days, with modern social media any one person can create their own soap box. That is true, organising and connecting anonymously is easier, but there is still the danger of being one voice shouting into the void. Connections other than clicking 'like' or 'retweet' are more essential than ever.
To hear someone speak passionately about their cause is always more powerful than reading the comparable words in print or on screen and that is why events on the scale of the Festival of Debate are needed, to connect us to each other in a human way. To listen, to talk, to debate. This is what democracy should be about.
