ITEM 6. Winter Fuel Payments
Motion (Lib Dem)
That this Council: -
(a) believes it is more important than ever that local people receive all the financial aid they are entitled to in order to help them keep their homes warm this Winter;
(b) notes that ‘Cold Weather Payments’ of £25 to local people are triggered when the average temperature falls below 0 degrees for a period of time;
(c) notes with dismay that the Government uses three separate weather stations in Nottingham, Bingley and Linton-on-Ouse to measure temperatures for different parts of Sheffield as part of the ‘Cold Weather Payments’ scheme;
(d) notes that this nonsensical way of measuring temperature levels in Sheffield has led to some parts of Sheffield receiving a ‘Cold Weather Payment’ whereas others have received nothing;
(e) furthermore notes that some of the areas which have unfairly lost out include some of the most deprived parts of Sheffield which contain a higher proportion of people who are in need of extra financial help to heat their homes;
(f) believes that the Government should adopt a fairer system by using one temperature measurement within Sheffield, at the Weston Park Weather Station, to gauge if local people across Sheffield are entitled to a ‘Cold Weather Payment’ and therefore welcomes the fact that the Leader of Council has written to the Prime Minister to express this view and call for action;
(g) notes with dismay that the Prime Minster’s Office has responded to this request with a standard response without making any reference to making the ‘Cold Weather Payment’ system fairer for Sheffield;
(h) does not believe that it is acceptable for the Prime Minster to ignore this request made on behalf of the people of Sheffield, therefore calls on Gordon Brown to listen and give the go ahead to put this illogical system right so that local people get a fair deal;
(i) asks for the support of all the local Sheffield MPs on this issue and urges them to use their influence in Westminster to ensure that the Prime Minister listens to Sheffield’s call for action;
(j) directs that a copy of this motion is sent to the Prime Minister and all local Sheffield MPs; and
(k) also directs that, if the Prime Minister again fails to listen to this request, the Chief Executive in consultation with the Leader of Council be permitted to start up a Council campaign on the issue and views expressed in this motion.
Amendment 1 (Labour)
That the Motion now submitted, be amended by the deletion of all the words after ‘That this Council:-’ and the substitution of the following words therefor:-
(a) believes it is more important than ever that local people receive all the financial aid they are entitled to in order to help them keep their homes warm this winter;
(b) notes that ‘Cold Weather Payments’ of £25 to local people are triggered when the average temperature falls below zero degrees for a period of time;
(c) notes that the Government currently uses three separate weather stations in Nottingham, Bingley and Linton-on-Ouse to measure temperatures for different parts of Sheffield as part of the ‘Cold Weather Payments’ scheme;
(d) notes that this way of measuring temperature levels in Sheffield has led to some parts of Sheffield receiving a ‘Cold Weather Payment’ when others have not and believes that this has the potential to be unfair;
(e) believes that it is vital that the Government’s system of measuring temperature levels in Sheffield is both fair, and recognised by local people as fair;
(f) understands that Clive Betts MP has raised this matter with the Minister for Work and Pensions, and has received a response from the Under-Secretary of State, Kitty Ussher, setting out the Meteorological Office’s justification for the present arrangements, but, advising that she would be pleased to receive any detailed representations about weather station linkages for future years;
(g) notes that representations need to be evidence-based in order to convince the Meteorological Office that a change to the system of measuring temperature levels in Sheffield is required;
(h) is therefore very pleased to note that Clive Betts MP has recently confirmed that Doctor Edward Hanna, Senior Lecturer in Climate Change in the Department of Geography at the University of Sheffield, has agreed to research whether information from the existing weather stations provides an accurate reflection of the actual conditions in Sheffield and, if they don’t, to investigate and make recommendations on alternatives which can be submitted to the Minister;
(i) thanks Clive Betts MP for his considerable work on this issue;
(j) understands that Doctor Hanna will be looking for the assistance of any organisations which have access to relevant information; and
(k) therefore asks that the Leader of the Council ensures that the City Council gives every co-operation to this important research.
Amendment 2 (Green)
That the Motion now submitted, be amended by the addition of the following words as a new paragraph (l):-
“notes that the best way to save money and the planet is to invest in energy saving and therefore directs that any Council campaign should also encourage people to seek advice from agencies such as the Sustainable Housing and Affordable Warmth (SHAW) team, South Yorkshire Energy Efficiency Advice Centre (SYEEC), Home HEAT helpline, Warm Front and the South Yorkshire Energy Centre at Heeley City Farm.”
ITEM 7. Free Swimming
Motion (Labour)
That this Council:-
(a) notes that the major opposition party wishes to put on record its unreserved condemnation of the present administration’s decision to turn down grants from the Government to provide free swimming for Sheffield’s older citizens and children and young people;
(b) further notes that:
(i) the Government offered Sheffield an annual grant of £152,000 for two years (a total of £304,000), to provide free swimming for over 60s; and
(ii) it is estimated that, had Sheffield made an expression of interest to provide free swimming for under 16s, the Council would have been offered an annual grant of around £221,000 for two years (a total of £442,000) for this purpose; and
(iii) had Sheffield chosen to take up these grants and participate in the free swimming initiative Sheffield could have also expected to receive a capital grant to be spent on pool modernisation of around £100,000;
(c) is therefore astonished that over three quarters of a million pounds of investment in activities for the people of Sheffield has been turned down by the present administration;
(d) deplores the way in which this decision was taken behind closed doors and in complete contradiction of the present administration's avowed position of 'openness and transparency';
(e) notes that 300 out of 354 local authorities in England (including Doncaster, Rotherham and Barnsley) have confirmed that they will be offering free swimming to over 60s from April 2009;
(f) further notes that 296 out of 354 local authorities in England (including Doncaster, Rotherham and Barnsley) have expressed their interest in providing free swimming for under 16s, also to be invested from April 2009;
(g) believes that Sheffield’s pensioners and young people should be treated fairly, and, like other people across South Yorkshire - and indeed across the country - should be able to access free swimming from April 2009;
(h) also believes that obesity is one of the biggest health challenges that this country faces and therefore very much welcomes the recent announcement from Health Secretary Alan Johnson that Sheffield is one of nine towns who have been given the opportunity to lead the way in helping their residents live healthier lives as part of the new Change4Life movement;
(i) is delighted that Sheffield has been awarded £4,858,872 and wishes to put on record this Council’s thanks to the Government for selecting Sheffield as one of the nine ‘Healthy Towns’;
(j) is even more pleased that early indications suggest that the Council is not going to turn down this money, as they did with the grant of up to £850,000, which the Government offered for free swimming;
(k) believes that promoting healthy living, tacking obesity and encouraging participation in physical activity should be a top priority for this Council and therefore finds it astounding that the Council is not intending to sign up to the free swimming initiative;
(l) further notes that the Department of Health’s press release which announced the ‘Healthy Towns’ initiative, dated 10th November states:
‘From January onwards, families will start to see new local initiatives providing support and advice to help them live more healthily. For example, there could be healthy food promotions and recipes in supermarkets, walking campaigns, cycling groups or free swimming for under 16s.’
(m) considers that, given that nearly 85% of Councils have decided that they are able to afford to provide free swimming for under-16s and over-60s, without having received an additional grant to the value of £4.8m to promote healthy living, this Council has no excuse whatsoever for continuing to deny local Sheffielders the same opportunities to free swimming as over-60s and under-16s in almost 85% of local authority areas in England will receive from April 2009; and
(n) therefore calls upon the present administration to reverse their decision immediately and ensure free swimming is provided in Sheffield for over 60s and under 16s from April 2009.
Amendment 1 (Lib Dem)
That the Motion now submitted, be amended by the deletion of all the words after ‘That this Council:-’ and the substitution of the following words therefor:-
(a) is dismayed that the level of contribution offered by the Government to fund free leisure swimming for the over 60s and 16s and under falls way short of the estimated £1.1m cost to all of Sheffield’s local taxpayers and therefore supports the decision not to opt into the scheme
(b) recognises that there would be a cost to Sheffield of nearly £1.5m in the first two years of the scheme due to the Government shortfall,
(c) further notes that because the Government has only offered to fund the scheme for two years, the long term cost to the local taxpayer could run into millions more;
(d) given the substantial shortfall for Sheffield, supports the call to Government to provide more funding and is disappointed that the Government has failed to even acknowledge the correspondence;
(e) reaffirms the commitment to look at the decision again if the Government agrees to provide Sheffield with more funding;
(f) believes that, as much as it would be desirable to stop charging the over 60s and the 16s and under for leisure swimming, it is felt that the increase in Council Tax that would be required to pay for it is not justified, particularly at a time when individuals of all ages are feeling the effects of the credit crunch;
(g) confirms that the reason why other councils can afford to opt into the scheme and Sheffield cannot is due to the comparatively high cost of swimming in Sheffield and the poor state of this Council’s finances, both of which have been brought about by the policies of previous Labour administrations;
(h) notes the Labour Group’s position on this issue and looks forward to the extra expenditure required being included in their alternative budget proposal;
(i) notes that some 40% of people over 65 cannot swim and that around 40% of Sheffield’s children cannot swim 25 metres by the age of 11 as required by the National Curriculum;
(j) further notes that weak and non swimmers are disproportionately from low income backgrounds;
(k) believes being able to swim is an essential life skill and that all children should have the chance to learn;
(l) regrets therefore that the Government’s scheme does not include the offer of free swimming lessons;
(m) is happy therefore to confirm that the Council will bring forward a scheme that;
(i) would see a course of 8 swimming lessons being provided at a fee of £10 for any adult, a significant saving on the current offer in many Sheffield swimming pools of around £37; and
(ii) would see additional swimming lessons offered for primary age children targeted at non and weak swimmers; and
(n) supports this approach and looks forward to the Cabinet report that will bring forward such a scheme.
Amendment 2 (Labour)
That the Motion now submitted, be amended by the addition of the following words as new paragraphs (o) and (p):-
(o) very much welcomes the administration’s proposals to bring forward a scheme that would see a crash course of 8 swimming lessons being provided at a fee of £10 for any adult and would see additional swimming lessons offered for primary age children targeted at non-swimmers and weak-swimmers; and
(p) however, considers that these proposals must be brought forward alongside the Government’s scheme of free swimming for under-16s and over-60s, not instead of this.
ITEM 8. Money for Rebuilding Primary Schools
Motion (Lib Dem)
That this Council:-
(a) notes that in April 2008 this Council made a bid to the Government’s ‘Primary School Capital Programme’ in order to rebuild and refurbish local Primary Schools;
(b) further notes that although the bid was put together and made under the previous administration, it was supported by the whole Council;
(c) believes that investment within Sheffield’s Primary Schools is a key part of addressing the pupil attainment and aspiration challenge set out by the new administration;
(d) was therefore shocked and dismayed to learn that the Government have asked for Sheffield to make substantial revisions to its bid, given the Government gave no indication that they had concerns with any aspect of the bid until their announcement on 12th November 2008;
(e) believes that this is an unacceptable way for the Government to behave given that providing our young people with a quality education is such an important issue;
(f) therefore calls on the Government to give the highest possible priority to Sheffield’s bid so that this Council can get on with the task of improving local Primary Schools which are already suffering from under investment due to past and present Governments;
(g) resolves to write to all local Sheffield MPs in order to ask for their support on this issue and furthermore resolves to write to the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families, Ed Balls MP, and the Schools Minister, Jim Knight MP, with a copy of this motion; and
(h) notes that the Council are meeting with Government officials on this issue, therefore this Council gives the Cabinet member its full support in trying to make the Government listen in order to secure the investment needed to provide the first class Primary Schools that future generations of Sheffield’s children deserve.
Amendment 1 (Labour)
That the Motion now submitted, be amended by the deletion of all the words after ‘That this Council:-’ and the substitution of the following words therefor:-
(a) notes that in April 2008 this Council made a bid to the Government’s ‘Primary School Capital Programme’ in order to rebuild and refurbish local Primary Schools;
(b) further notes that although the bid was put together and made under the previous administration, it was supported by the whole Council;
(c) believes that investment within Sheffield’s Primary Schools is a key part of addressing pupil attainment and aspiration, which is a vision shared by all Members of the Council;
(d) was therefore disappointed to learn that the Government has not yet signed off the investment of £20m in the City’s primary schools;
(e) is pleased, however, that the Council has been given three months to improve the bid, in order to receive the funding for the next financial year and understands that Council officers are confident that the Council will be successful in securing this funding from the Government;
(f) confirms that this Council is united in its aim to secure the investment needed to provide the first class primary schools that future generations of Sheffield’s children deserve;
(g) calls on the Government to give the highest possible priority to Sheffield’s bid so that this Council can get on with the task of improving local primary schools; and
(h) resolves to write to all local Sheffield MPs in order to ask for their support on this issue and furthermore resolves to write to the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families, Ed Balls MP, and the Schools Minister, Jim Knight MP, with a copy of this motion.
ITEM 9. Broomhill, Central and Nether Edge Area Panel libraries and leaf clearing decision
Motion (Labour)
That this Council: -
(a) is very disappointed that the Liberal Democrat Councillors in the Broomhill, Central and Nether Edge Area Panel have recently voted to cut library opening times in Broomhill Library and Highfield Library, in spite of:
(i) 200 local people signing a petition against this proposal; and
(ii) the fact that not a single member of the public at the meeting spoke in favour of this proposal.
(b) notes the Deputy Leader’s defence of the decision to cut the library opening hours, who was quoted in the Star as saying:
"The Liberal Democrat members listened to the entire community. This includes the majority of people in the area who, by voting for Liberal Democrat at the local elections, voted for extra graffiti removal and leaf clearance. The Greens and Labour don't agree with this as they obviously don't see cleaner streets as top of their agenda, but that's local democracy in action. Devolving power down to communities is about having these debates on what should and shouldn't be a priority."
(c) is extremely concerned about this defence for several reasons, including:
(i) the fact that, the Deputy Leader appears to be implying that by voting for the Liberal Democrats, and therefore ‘for extra graffiti removal and leaf clearance’ people knew that they were voting for a reduction in library services, which seems rather perverse;
(ii) the idea that the decision that was made was an example of ‘democracy in action’, which is baffling, considering that it seems that the only representations that local people made in relation to the proposal to cut library services were to oppose the reduction in library opening hours; and
(iii) the fact that the Deputy Leader seems to be implying that this decision was taken as a result of ‘devolving power down to communities’, when in fact the decision was forced through by Liberal Democrat Councillors, in the face of both local opposition from members of the public and opposition by the other local Councillors.
(d) considers the logic of the Deputy Leader’s defence to be a significant cause for concern;
(e) is furthermore appalled at the hypocrisy of the Liberal Democrats, considering that the Liberal Democrat Shadow for Culture, Media and Sport, Don Foster, recently issued a press release entitled ‘Library consultation must not be front for further cuts’ which quoted him as saying:
“I welcome a review of how libraries can be improved but I’m concerned that this is just a thinly veiled attempt to make further cuts to our fast-disappearing library services. Under Labour, we’ve seen the slow death of hundreds of libraries across the country.”
(f) believes that the Liberal Democrats should spend less time trying to score cheap political points and more time listening to the wishes of local people; and
(g) sincerely hopes that the Liberal Democrats’ claims that the community assemblies agenda is about getting closer to the views of local people are true, as the evidence so far suggests that the Liberal Democrats are not prepared to listen to local people and are instead using their power to push through their own preferred plans in the face of local opposition.
Amendment 1 (Lib Dem)
That the Motion now submitted, be amended by the deletion of all the words after ‘That this Council:-’ and the substitution of the following words therefor:-
(a) notes that both the Broomhill, Central and Nether Edge Area Panel and the South West Area Panel have recently made a decision to trial changes to local services and welcomes the fact that local members are using devolved powers to deliver on the priorities of their local community;
(b) notes the fact that both opposition groups do not agree with the decision taken by the Broomhill, Central and Nether Edge Area Panel and claim that local people are against the decision too, despite the fact that a recent poll in the Sheffield Telegraph showed 77% of people agree with the decision;
(c) notes the reference to a petition against the proposal which was signed by 200 local people, furthermore notes that upon closer inspection the wording of the petition was highly misleading and included the names of individuals who are not local to the area, including the Labour Party prospective candidate for Sheffield Central who lives in Dore;
(d) furthermore notes a recent letter from a local Green Party Councillor on the issue, in which she states:
“Those attending this particular meeting included people active in Broomhill Forum, Nether Edge Neighbourhood Group, Sharrow CAB, the Elders Congress, both Universities, an ex-councillor and an off duty council officer. The usual suspects, you might say, the vocal minority. But these are the very people, the "golden two percent", who are willing to give up their time to engage with, understand and invest in their communities.”
(e) confirms that, unlike the Green Party who have identified a golden two percent who should be given priority, the present administration values the opinion of 100% of the local community, including those that don’t have the time or inclination to attend public meetings; and
(f) condemns both opposition groups for being against the policy of giving power to local communities through empowering local members, furthermore supports the policy of the present administration as this Council does not want to see a return to the “Town Hall knows best” attitude that saw the previous administration voted out by local people earlier this year.
Amendment 2 (Green)
That the Motion now submitted, be amended by:-
(i) the deletion of all the words in paragraphs (e) and (f);
(ii) the insertion of the following words as new paragraphs (e) to (j);
(e) notes the words of Don Foster, Lib Dem Shadow for Culture Media and Sport that libraries play a vital role in our communities”;
(f) notes the Council press release of 18th Sept which states “The first of Sheffield’s Area Panels to exercise these powers is the Broomhill, Central and Nether Edge Panel, which is expected at its next public meeting to decide to implement a slight reduction in library hours in order to free up funds for more library books, graffiti removal, leaf sweeping and street cleaning”;
(g) notes the minute of the Broomhill, Central and Nether Edge Area Panel meeting of 6th November which notes that, “It was the overwhelming view of those members of the public in attendance at the meeting that the Panel should take no action in terms of re-allocating any of the £50,000 between the three services”;
(h) notes that Councillor Bernard Little proposed that this view be supported by Councillors attending the meeting;
(i) notes that Broomhill Councillor Paul Scriven did not attend the meeting and that, although Deputy Leader Councillor David Baker attended to give a presentation on arrangements for the new Community Assemblies in which he stated that “local people would be at the heart of decision-making in terms of providing local services and allocating budgets”, he left before the debate on budget reallocation;
(j) welcomes the 30% increase in citywide resources for graffiti removal and the work of the Sharrow Partnership to encourage reporting to Streetforce and the use of removal kits by local people; and
(iii) the re-lettering of existing paragraph (g) as new paragraph (k).
ITEM 10. Community nurseries and the child care review
Motion (Lib Dem)
That this Council:-
(a) believes it’s important that Sheffield has a joined up strategy for child care provision with all providers working together so that local families get the best possible services, therefore regrets that community child care providers have expressed concerns with the current policy which has been implemented by the previous administration;
(b) notes the concerns recently expressed by the Sheffield Community Childcare Forum and individual child care providers including;
(i) a lack of an agreed and shared vision and strategy for child care in Sheffield;
(ii) a lack of Council support for other child care providers; and
(iii) the view that children’s centres have been set up to compete with community providers, therefore putting community child care providers under financial pressure;
(c) welcomes the present administration’s decision to carry out an independent review of child care provision in Sheffield in order to look into the shortcomings of the present policy and make recommendations for the future; and
(d) looks forward to the independent review and the conclusions it makes and notes that the present administration are committed to bringing about a shared vision and strategy for child care provision in Sheffield.
ITEM 11. Waste strategy
Motion (Labour)
That this Council: -
(a) is proud to note that this Council has increased the percentage of household waste which is recycled from a meagre 4% in 2001 to an impressive 27% currently;
(b) is also proud to note that Sheffield has one of the lowest landfill rates in England, at less than 20% of waste produced, and further notes that as a result of the Council’s bold decision to recover energy from waste via the city’s Energy Recovery Facility, heat is provided to over 140 buildings in the City Centre on the District Heating network including Ponds Forge, the Town Hall, Weston Park Hospital and the City Hall;
(c) notes that the district heating system removes the need to burn 13.6 million litres of oil per year and prevents 21,000 tonnes of CO2 from being released across the City each year;
(d) believes that, although these achievements are impressive, it is vital that the Council continues to improve upon this good work, and continues to increase the percentage of waste that is recycled and reduce the percentage of waste sent to landfill;
(e) notes that the report ‘Waste Strategy Development Public Consultation Documents’ was approved by the Cabinet on 12th November, 2008;
(f) further notes that this report authorises a consultation programme with Sheffield residents;
(g) is pleased that the Council is seeking to invite local people to have their say on this important issue;
(h) is, however, concerned that Veolia, the Council’s contractor, are also doing a very similar consultation exercise at the moment in the form of the ‘Sheffield Waste Management Survey 2008’, which is surely at the cost of the local taxpayer;
(i) furthermore considers that carrying out two surveys on the same subject at the same time does not appear to be a very prudent use of taxpayers money, given that the cost of the Council’s consultation programme alone totals £70,000;
(j) has further concerns that the Council is consulting on a possible service reduction for the 45,000 households in the City who currently have a green bin collection;
(k) notes that, prior to their becoming the current administration, the Liberal Democrats said that they will ‘expand recycling services through kerbside collections for an extra material’; and
(l) has concerns that the Liberal Democrats now, in fact, appear to be consulting on a possible reduction in kerbside collections.
Amendment 1 (Lib Dem)
That the Motion now submitted, be amended by the deletion of all the words after ‘That this Council:-’ and the substitution of the following words therefor:-
(a) is disappointed that the major opposition group are against consulting local people on how we should change local waste services in the future;
(b) notes the breathtaking hypocrisy displayed by the major opposition group given that they;
(i) were against the original decision on the waste contract which has brought about the increase in recycling and decrease in the amount of waste going to landfill;
(ii) were against the recent decision to introduce free kerbside recycling of garden waste;
(iii) failed to bring forward a new waste strategy whilst they were in control; and
(c) looks forward to the results of the consultation on the new Waste Strategy and welcomes the fact that, unlike the previous administration, the present administration are giving local people the opportunity to have a say.
Amendment 2 (Green)
That the Motion now submitted, be amended by the deletion of all the words after ‘That this Council:-’ and the substitution of the following words therefor:-
(a) welcomes the reference in the “Waste strategy development public consultation documents” report passed by Cabinet on 12th November 2008 to the waste hierarchy which sets out an order of preference for waste management, namely reduction, re-use, recycling and composting, energy reclamation and finally landfill;
(b) regrets that, due the capital investment in a giant new incinerator and the long term PFI contract with Veolia (then Onyx) signed by the Liberal Democrat Administration in 2001, any additional kerbside recycling will have to be funded by savings in other council services or by increasing Council Tax;
(c) regrets that, despite the claim to be committed to carbon reduction and best environmental practice, the report contains no proposals for reduction, re-use, repair and composting;
(d) regrets that there has been no modelling of the option of street level recycling banks;
(e) regrets that, while trying to be open about the financial implications of increased recycling, estimated costs have only been provided for a small number of pre-selected options;
(f) regrets that there appears to have been no independent critique of the information provided by Veolia (the WRATE analysis) which has informed the choice of options presented;
(g) regrets that there is no reference to the Regional Waste Strategy or how Sheffield could contribute to or benefit from it;
(h) regrets that there is no indication in the report of how the feedstock for the Bernard Road facility will be maintained if recycling rates for domestic waste double by 2020;
(i) regrets that whilst there is a commitment to work with commercial businesses to “reduce waste to landfill” the phrase “by reducing the carbon impact of waste” could mean that it will be incinerated instead;
(j) welcomes the acknowledgement in the report of the contribution made by the not-for-profit company, Reclaim, but regrets that there is no specific commitment to working with or expanding the role of the Voluntary, Community and Faith sectors; and
(k) therefore resolves to return to the drawing board and take advice from groups other than those with a vested commercial interest in order to come up with more imaginative, community oriented, far-sighted and economically advantageous options before going out to consultation.
ITEM 12. School Meals and the Ministry of Food
Motion (Green)
That this Council:-
(a) notes the decision of Rotherham Council to continue funding the " Ministry of Food" pilot with support from the NHS and Department of Health;
(b) believes that cookery skills are no longer automatically passed down the generations and the "Pass it On" model addresses this key area in the battle against fast food and obesity;
(c) directs officers to draw up a report into the "Pass it On model", with options for implementing it in Sheffield, in consultation with relevant groups, and bring back to Council in three months, if possible;
(d) notes that approximately 300,000 children across the country now eligible for free school meals are not actually currently receiving them;
(e) also notes that in Finland and Sweden, where school meals are free, take up is 90% and 85% respectively;
(f) further notes recent research by the University of Sheffield shows how difficult it is for families to sit down and eat together at night in our modern world of flexible working;
(g) therefore believes it is vital to ensure children get at least one good meal a day through the provision of free school meals for all children, not just those in a pilot for primary schools;
(h) also believes that the Government funding of £1.8 billion required for this would be offset by future NHS savings through reduced risk of obesity and increased social wellbeing through improved behaviour and greater engagement of children with education, which is linked to diet;
(i) calls upon the Government to give every child free school dinners; and
(j) directs that a copy of this motion is sent to the Secretary of State for Health, Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families, Minister for Children, Young People and Families, and all Sheffield Members of Parliament.
Amendment 1 (Lib Dem)
That the Motion now submitted, be amended by the deletion of all the words after ‘That this Council:-’ and the substitution of the following words therefor:-
(a) believes that a quality school meals service is essential and therefore regrets that the service has suffered from a chronic lack of investment over the years, thanks to both past and present Governments;
(b) therefore calls upon the Government to provide the investment in order to fund school meal services appropriately so that a targeted and effective service can be offered within all local schools;
(c) notes that, at the present time, there is a lack of evidence to show that the “Ministry of Food“ pilot has been a success or that it provides value for money, therefore believes that it wouldn’t be appropriate to use resources on a policy that is yet to be properly tested and evaluated;
(d) notes that any group on this Council are free to table proposals around free school meals, the “Ministry of Food” pilot or any other policy, as long as they identify where they will raise the necessary funding;
(e) notes that the budget for 2009/10 will be set at next years special Council meeting and therefore looks forward to seeing proposals from all groups on the Council.
ITEM 13. Council Housing and the Housing Revenue Account System
Motion (Lib Dem)
That this Council:-
(a) notes that, despite constant warnings and calls from the then opposition, the previous administration has done nothing to help address the huge shortfall in investment for council housing stock beyond 2010/11;
(b) furthermore notes that, under the current Housing Revenue Account system, in the future Sheffield would enter into negative subsidy which would effectively mean that local tenants would be paying a ‘tenant tax’ into the Government treasury;
(c) is vehemently opposed to the Government imposing a ‘tenant tax’ on local Sheffield tenants and calls on the Government to provide a sustainable solution so that the necessary investment is provided to keep council housing stock maintained to a decent standard and local tenants don’t see huge increases in rent levels;
(d) regrets that the previous administration failed to put pressure on the Government to provide a long term sustainable solution for Sheffield and attempted to hide the impending financial shortfall from local tenants;
(e) confirms that the present administration will press the Government to provide a solution, being open and honest with local tenants on the long term future of their homes;
(f) directs that a copy of this motion is sent to the relevant Government Ministers and all Sheffield Members of Parliament; and
(g) also directs that all local Tenants’ and Residents’ Associations are informed of Council policy in this respect.
Amendment 1 (Labour)
That the Motion now submitted, be amended by the deletion of all the words after ‘That this Council:-’ and the substitution of the following words therefor:-
(a) confirms that this Council has been well aware for many years that there is a shortfall in investment for council housing stock beyond 2010/11;
(b) also confirms that this longstanding issue has at all times been shared with tenants in an open and honest way;
(c) further confirms that this issue has been raised and debated on a regular basis at the City-wide forum;
(d) applauds the investment of £1billion via the Decent Homes Programme which is the biggest programme of investment in housing that this City has ever seen;
(e) welcomes the fact that by the end of the Decent Homes Programme every home in Sheffield will be a decent home;
(f) notes that while the Decent Homes Programme investment is incredibly welcome, the previous administration made clear that this investment does not replace the need to find a long-term solution to the issue of investment for council housing stock;
(g) considers that the charge that ‘the previous administration has done nothing to help address the huge shortfall in investment for council housing stock beyond 2010/11’ could not be further from the truth;
(h) confirms that, in fact, the previous administration spent a lot of time lobbying the Government on this important issue;
(i) further notes that during their time in power the previous administration played a very important role in moving forward discussions and developing options in relation to the ‘free standing’ Housing Revenue Account model;
(j) calls upon the administration to behave like serious politicians by stopping their hectoring and starting to develop a sensible way forward in working towards a sustainable, long-term solution to this difficult problem;
(k) believes that any solution must ensure that Sheffield tenants get a fair deal; and
(l) calls upon the administration to keep all local Tenants’ and Residents’ Associations both informed and involved in decisions relating to this important issue.
ITEM 14. Post Office Card Accounts
Motion (Labour)
That this Council: -
(a) welcomes the recent news that the Post Office’s contract for the Post Office Card Account (POCA), which distributes benefits to 4.3 million claimants, has been renewed;
(b) understands that the next contract will run at least until March 2015, with the possibility of an extension beyond that;
(c) welcomes the comments of James Purnell, the Pensions Secretary that:
“The circumstances have changed because of the current financial situation. It means that people are even more reliant on the Post Office than before.
It's a social service which people look forward to visiting. It is often at the heart of local communities.”; and
(d) is pleased that the Government has listened to the widespread concerns about putting the post office network further at risk.
Amendment 1 (Lib Dem)
That the Motion now submitted, be amended by (i) the addition of the following words at the end of paragraph (c):-
“but this Council is also dismayed that the Government is demanding thousands of Post Offices across the UK close and in light of these comments asks that the Government reverse the closure programme;” and
(ii) the deletion of all the words in existing paragraph (d) and the substitution of the following words therefor:-
“(d) condemns the Government for not listening to widespread concerns, including a 20,000 person strong petition from local people, and decimating the Post Office network throughout the UK including Sheffield.”
Amendment 2 (Green)
That the Motion now submitted, be amended by the addition of the following words as a new paragraph (e):-
“directs that, in view of the ‘changed circumstances’, the Chief Executive of Sheffield City Council requests the Government for an immediate moratorium on all post office closures and re-institutes the £150 million a year subsidy to maintain the network.”
ITEM 15. Diversity Day event
Motion (Labour)
That this Council:
(a) is pleased that students from three Sheffield schools, City School, High Storrs and Tapton produced videos that were shortlisted in the “Diversity Day” video competition for young people "What does diversity mean to you" which was organised by the European Union's Fundamental Rights Agency in Vienna in November and is delighted that the entry from Tapton School "Being Different Belonging together" won the competition;
(b) is aware that the "Diversity Day" event in Vienna is an annual event with over 2000 young people and school children taking part which encourages young people to stand up against the discrimination that people face because of their gender, ethnic origin, religion, disability, age or sexual orientation; and
(c) believes it would be advantageous to young people in Sheffield if a similar event were to be organised in Sheffield in 2009 and therefore resolves;
(i) to invite all the young people from Sheffield who were shortlisted for the “Diversity Day” video competition to a reception in the Town Hall to recognise their achievement and show their videos, therefore directs the Chief Executive to make the necessary arrangements; and
(ii) to direct the Chief Executive to look into the feasibility of organising a similar “Diversity Day” event in Sheffield in 2009 and report back to the Cabinet within three months.
ITEM 16. Electrification of Midland Mainline
Motion (Labour)
That this Council:
(a) supports local Member of Parliament Clive Betts, who is leading representations from all the Sheffield MPs for electrification of the Midland Mainline between Sheffield and London;
(b) notes that recent engineering innovations mean that the capital costs of electrification, which historically have been a barrier to investment, can now be significantly reduced, making electrification a realistic proposition;
(c) believes that the Midland Mainline should be at the top of the list when any schemes are considered for electrification;
(d) further believes that electrification of the Midland Mainline between Sheffield and London would be good news for the city, good news for the environment and good news for local jobs; and
(e) directs that a copy of this motion is sent to Rt Hon Geoff Hoon MP, Secretary of State for Transport, David Brown, Director General of South Yorkshire Passenger Transport Executive, and all Sheffield Members of Parliament.
Amendment 1 (Lib Dem)
That the Motion now submitted, be amended by:-
(i) the deletion of all the words in paragraphs (a) and (b);
(ii) the insertion of the following words as new paragraph (a):-
“reaffirms its support for the electrification of the Midland Mainline between Sheffield and London and regrets that, after 10 years of a Labour Government, Sheffield is still waiting for the necessary investment;” and
(iii) the re-lettering of existing paragraphs (c) to (e) as paragraphs (b) to (d).
Amendment 2 (Green)
That the Motion now submitted, be amended by (i) the deletion of all the words in paragraph (b) and the insertion of the following words as new paragraphs (b) to (d):-
“(b) notes that the technology for electrification has been available at affordable prices for many years and while other European countries have electrified the majority of their railway system, in Britain the proportion of long-distance trains powered by electricity has actually fallen since 1997;
(c) believes that the Government’s model of franchised rail services and deregulated rail infrastructure has led to levels of complexity and profiteering that have stifled modernisation and wasted millions of pounds;
(d) believes that given the current economic and environmental crises, any reasonable assessment would recommend improvements to rail infrastructure over building more roads;” and
(ii) the re-lettering of existing paragraphs (c) to (e) as paragraphs (e) to (g).
ITEM 17. Mortgages and reposessions
Motion (Green)
That this Council:-
(a) notes that:
(i) mortgage repossessions are growing with the prediction from the Council of Mortgage Lenders that more than 45,000 people will lose their homes this year creating even more pressure on our social housing stock;
(ii) the rise in living costs generally has contributed to the growing numbers of mortgagors unable to meet their contractual monthly mortgage instalments;
(iii) the commission based financial advice sector has done little to help borrowers find the most appropriate products for their needs, and has been given incentives to recommend sub prime mortgages over better value high street mortgages; and
(iv) debt advice agencies are unable to provide financial product advice as they are not authorised to do so by the Financial Services Authority;
(b) is concerned at the growth of 'sale and leaseback' or 'mortgage rescue companies' offering home owners the opportunity to sell their homes to the company, sometimes considerably under the market value of the property and renting it back, becoming tenants;
(c) further notes that:
(i) this type of scheme can provide some people with a practical solution to their financial problems and the possibility of the sale and leaseback provider offering a reasonable route out of repossession;
(ii) leaflets and advertising of sale and rent back schemes can give mixed messages to homeowners about their legal position as a tenant once they have sold their property;
(iii) the Communities and Local Government mortgage rescue initiative, although welcome, will only assist those borrowers whom the council might have a statutory duty to house if made homeless; and
(iv) the Civil Justice Council Pre Action Protocol for mortgage possession, effective from 19.11.08, will do little to help borrowers who are unable to meet their contractual mortgage payments; and
(d) therefore resolves:
(i) to produce a report looking into the feasibility of funding genuinely impartial financial advice for borrowers to switch to more appropriate products and report back to Full Council within two months, if possible;
(ii) to endeavour to ensure that the Communities and Local Government mortgage rescue initiative is widely publicised as a viable alternative to homelessness for eligible homeowners, and will seek to ensure that any profits from the scheme are invested in providing affordable homes to rent and buy;
(iii) to work with housing charities in warning consumers about the dangers from sale and leaseback companies;
(iv) to take whatever steps it can to signpost people to independent advice prior to the sale of their home so that their rights and obligations as a tenant are made clear; and
(v) to join Shelter and Citizens Advice in the call for Government and Financial Services Authority to regulate sale and leaseback schemes to ensure customers are given all relevant information and treated fairly.
Amendment 1 (Lib Dem)
That the Motion now submitted be amended by the deletion of all the words after ‘That this Council:-’ and the substitution of the following words therefor:-
(a) notes with concern the global recession that is beginning to take hold and its implications for local people;
(b) believes that there are a number of issues that require particular attention during hard economic times, including: -
(i) ensuring that we support the local economy as much as possible in order to minimise job losses and providing a fast and effective service that helps people back into work through support and access to training;
(ii) encouraging local people to come forward for advice and signposting then to relevant experts when they are experiencing financial difficulties, also aiming to ensure that residents are receiving all the financial benefits and help they are entitled to;
(iii) raising local people’s awareness about ways they can reduce energy and food bills at a time when we have seen huge increases in costs;
(iv) ensuring council tax bills are as low as possible given that they hit the poorest in our society the hardest;
(v) ensuring that we have appropriate support in place to deal with any increase in homelessness, offering advice where possible to local people who are experiencing problems in paying their mortgage;
(vi) working together with health and other partners to deal with any increase in stress related illness due to financial and/or family breakdown;
(c) believes that local people see the effects of the recession as one of their prime concerns and therefore welcomes the fact that this Council is already tacking action on the issues identified above;
(d) directs that, as soon as possible, a report is brought to Cabinet and then Council which outlines in greater detail what the Council is doing to help local people during the recession, making appropriate recommendations on how we can further improve our services on a wide range of issues that are affecting local people during the recession.
Amendment 2 (Green)
“that Sheffield City Council seeks to become a fast track authority to adopt the Mortgage Rescue initiative."
ITEM 18. Council to support Ban Bullying at Work
Motion (Green)
That this Council:-
(a) notes that:
(i) bullying in the workplace is a serious issue;
(ii) at least 1 in 4 people may be bullied at some point during their working lives and that 40% of UK organisations still do not have an effective policy on bullying;
(iii) every year 18.9 million days working days are lost to industry as a direct result of workplace bullying, costing the UK economy 6 billion pounds and massively impacting on productivity, creativity, morale and general employee wellbeing;
(iv) it is listed as a supporter of The Andrea Adams Trust the UK charity dedicated to raising awareness of workplace bullying;
(v) this year's November 7th 'Ban Bullying at Work' Day has been the most successful to date, with over 420 supporting organisations' participating in a wide variety of awareness raising events on the day; and
(vi) Sheffield Trade Unions have played a leading role in promoting ‘Ban Bullying at Work Day’; and
(b) therefore resolves to:
(i) ensure that its website and intranet has a permanent link to the 'Ban Bullying at Work' campaign;
(ii) remind people, through its website and other publicity, that the Council’s “Dignity and Respect at Work” policy gives a clear message that bullying will not be tolerated in this organisation;
(iii) encourage the Ban Bullying at Work campaign “Speak out Survey” to be filled in by all council employees and members;
(iv) actively develop best anti-bullying practice as a policy for Sheffield City Council; and
(v) prominently publicise all subsequent “Ban Bullying at Work” days.