Councillor Geoff Smith

During Margaret Thatcher’s time (it is tempting to write ‘reign’) as Prime Minister I was living in London and while a member of the Labour Party I was most active as an NUT branch secretary.  I say this because views of Thatcher and particularly, the intensity of the response to her are bound up with what people were doing and where.  By the time she resigned I was in Sheffield but I had missed the miners’ strike.

I drank champagne when she resigned (although I thought she would lose the next election and her successor might not – and Major didn’t) because of the relief and joy that she was no longer in control and pleasure at the sight of Tories doing what they do well, stabbing one of their own in the back . I don’t feel the same about her death because although I was strongly opposed to her I never hated her and 22 years have passed. I feel much more strongly now about George Osborne because it is he who is doing the damage now and with a smugness and cynicism that is intensely annoying. However, I understand why ex miners in particular still hate her and have had a celebratory drink and, of course, Osborne and friends are very much Thatcher’s heirs.

She is being touted by her supporters as the greatest peace time prime minister of the twentieth century. The problem with such accolades is that they are devoid of ideology. Clearly she was one of two peace time prime ministers who had the biggest impact on the country, the other being Attlee. He brought in a social democratic consensus that had started during the war and dominated until Thatcher’s victory in 1979. She brought in a neo-liberal economic consensus that still survives.    

To argue which of them is the greatest, or indeed if they are both great, is pointless as the answer depends entirely on a political viewpoint.  It can certainly be said of her that she had conviction, political courage, determination, huge energy, an ability to excite and motivate Tories, and a lawyer type of cleverness. However, she had a certain amount of luck. She faced a divided opposition which had not developed a convincing social democratic response to the recent challenges of globalisation, European integration, manufacturing decline and the trade union question (finding a positive economic role for a strong trade union movement).  Her government gave signals to the Argentinian Junta that the Falklands were expendable and then became popular on the back of a Falklands victory which was in part due to Argentinian military incompetence.

And her ‘achievements’ are questionable. Tories greatly exaggerate the poor state of the country at the end of the 1970S. It didn’t feel like the apocalyptic place that they describe. There were problems but they didn’t have to be addressed by Thatcherism. There was an alternative.

Britain at the end of the 1970s was more equal than it had ever been.  She started Britain on the road to becoming one of the most unequal developed countries.  She severely damaged the trade union movement with the result that many people in work today have to exist on low wages and face exploitative working conditions.  Her notion that there is no such thing as society encouraged a selfishness and disregard for others which remains all too prevalent.  Her government started the bonfire of financial regulations which led to the miss-selling scandals, de-mutualisation and the banking crisis of 2007/08. She sold off nationalised industries in the name of efficiency and choice but it is not clear that the railway franchise owners are more efficient than British Rail and a choice of energy companies often seems to be a choice of who rips you off.  Selling council houses was popular but the failure to replace them with houses to rent led to a longer term housing crisis. Her destruction of metropolitan councils because they were strongly opposed to her was a blow for local government and regionalism. Her contempt for the inner cities started a cycle of rioting that has not ended and her attitude towards taxation and public services helped create a public mood which expects good services without paying for them.

 Abroad she may be popular in the USA but her attitude to apartheid and Nelson Mandela won Britain no friends in Africa.  Arguably military intervention in the Falklands encouraged other interventions, culminating in the disastrous invasion of Iraq in 2003. Finally her semi-detached attitude to the European Union and her hectoring style towards other European leader created a climate of European disengagement which we are reaping with the current popularity of UKIP.

Cameron and Osborne are Thatcher’s heirs.  The Labour government of 1997 to 2010 did more to reverse Thatcherism (particularly the repair of public services) than it has usually been given credit for. However, Thatcher’s cheeky comment that her greatest achievement was Tony Blair has some truth. The current Labour Party is faced with another huge task of developing an effective and convincing social democratic response to the mean, petty, rudderless, austerity for the poor and selfishness for the rich, Britain that Cameron, Osborne and Clegg will leave behind.

Labour: Elected in 2015 ?

 These are my personal views 

 As the government moves from one shambles to another and as its economic policy both fails and remains unaltered, more and more articles appear about how Labour can win in 2015. Once an unlikely dream it now seems a realistic possibility. Assumptions that each of the main parties rule for over a decade once they are in power have given way to reminders of the 1970s and the Heath one term government. The assumption that the Tories will gain an overall majority at the next election has given way to a reminder that the Tories have not won an outright election victory for twenty years and that they blew their best chance in 2010 against a tired Labour Party which had been in office for 13 years, was struggling to get the country out of the worst recession for over 80 years, and was led by an unpopular prime minister. And in 2015, assuming the Liberal Democrats do not cave in again, the Tories will not have the expected advantage of the boundary changes.

Part of the reason for the Tory failure in 2010 was the success of the Liberal Democrats but the U turn on tuition fees, the failure to stop Lansley’s NHS reforms, Clegg’s initial love in with Cameron and their enthusiasm for a failed economic policy have ruined any chances that the Liberal Democrats had of emerging in 2015 as near equals of Labour and the Conservatives, almost certain to hold the balance of power..

So can Labour win ? Most Definitely. Will they win ? Possibly. A 10% lead in the opinion polls mid-term is not unprecedented and governments have recovered from worse. Public support for David Cameron and Osborne’s economic strategy is still surprisingly high given their record.

So how can Labour win ? There are eight variables; all important and Labour needs to be doing well against most of them:

•  Government record
•  Effective opposition
•  Leadership – character, personality and competence
•  Values
•  Policies
•  Priorities
•  Tory attacks
•  Organisation

 Government Record and Effective Opposition

The first two go together. Clearly the government’s record is largely out of the hands of Labour but the way the record is viewed will, to some extent, be determined by the effectiveness of the opposition. It is highly unlikely that the government’s economic policy is going to succeed by 2015 in the way it promised after the election. At best recovery will be weak and debt reduction still have a long way to go. That will clearly be a plus but it will also present Labour with the challenge of saying what it would do if elected. Public services will be severely stretched and there will be widespread examples of unfairness with the rich still rich and the middle to poor suffering. Labour will have to keep hammering at these points; economic failure, poor public services and gross unfairness. The attack should be focused on the Tories with less attention given to the Lib Dems. The latter should be ignored most of the time (allowing for some regional differences such as in Sheffield Hallam) because they are in deep trouble anyway and to demonstrate that they are an irrelevance in a Tory dominated government.

What Labour can’t assume is that the omnishambles of recent months will continue. Some competence must break out at some point. How should Cameron be treated ?  As someone who is charming on the surface but nasty when rattled; as someone whose background and friends mean that he is out of touch with struggling Britain, as someone with few convictions other than wanting to be prime minister, and someone who cannot control what is still the nasty party of British politics, ill at ease with modern British culture.

 Leadership – character, personality and competence

We don’t have American style personality politics but how the public views Ed Miliband is important. Arguably we lost in 1992 partly because of public perceptions of Neil Kinnock, unfair though they were. Ed should score well on character and competence but is always likely to fair worse on personality (although he has a sense of humour which he could display more often). Some commentators suggest that character is best displayed by leaders taking on their own party and showing that they are their own man. But it isn’t necessary; what is necessary is being prepared to tackle difficult subjects and take decisive action when needed. It also helps in the current climate not to be seen to be sucking up to the media and to be financially pure regarding expenses and personal taxation.

Competence is an amalgamation of knowledge, argument, understanding of issues, convincing priorities and an avoidance of gaffes. Ed scores well on these although convincing priorities requires further work.  In the inevitable televised debates his competence should be manifest although there may still be some resistance to the hint of geekiness. But he will probably be up against Cameron and Clegg, whose charm will be severely tarnished.

 Values, Policies and Priorities

Values and priorities are crucial with policies less so; except that the government will always be pressing the opposition to produce detailed policies and it is important not to seem too evasive. Also it is easier in government if key policies have been worked out before the election.

 They key values should be fairness, honesty, responsibility and courage.

In Islington, Liverpool, Yorkand Newcastle, Fairness Commissions have reported and the Sheffieldone is due to report soon. Although involving other parties and non party representatives they have been driven by Labour administrations. In the Newcastlefinal report there is the statement, ‘We came to the conclusion that fairness is a primary concept, and regarded as intrinsically good in its own right. It is related to concepts such as equality, social justice, democracy, tolerance, good citizenship and social cohesion. It is not, however, the same as any of these. In each case there are valuable connections to be made’ And Newcastle identified four key elements: fair outcomes, fair process, fair opportunity and fair participation. Labour should make fairness a key element in the 2015 manifesto. It is widely accepted as a concept and Labour should be the political party that most people identify as the party of fairness; promoting fair taxes, fair benefits, fair rewards and fair opportunities. And in 2015 the growing inequality in an already very unequal society will mean that reducing inequality is a key element in creating a fairer society.

Most people have a very low opinion of politicians; unfair in many cases but undeniable. They are dishonest because they submit dodgy expenses claims, join privatised companies when they retire, avoid answering difficult questions and promise what they know they cannot deliver. To convince the electorate that Labour politicians are honest will be difficult, possibly impossible, but it is important to try. Also Labour must insist that honesty becomes (returns ?) a key value for other disgraced elites such as bankers and the media and that proper external regulation, not light touch regulation or supposed self regulation, is needed to support a culture of honesty. 

Ed Miliband has called for responsible capitalism and it is a useful starting point. The Tories have made much of the need for the poor to be responsible and Labour should not oppose that, while recognising that it is often difficult. But the contemporary responsibility deficit is not amongst the poor but amongst the rich. Labour should be merciless in attacking the irresponsibility of tax avoidance, unearned bonuses, grossly inflated salaries, and financial scams which benefit only a few and harm many.

Courage is having the courage of our convictions, being prepared to be bold, and being prepared to take on dysfunctional vested interests. Despite much of the good achieved by the Labour governments of 1997-2010 there was some truth in the accusation that there was too much accommodation with Thatcherism and not enough confidence in a modern social democracy. This does not mean going back to the policies of the 70s and 80s but it does mean having confidence in, for example, comprehensive education, the public service ethos, local government, multiculturalism within a common citizenship, collective effort; the social and economic value of effective trade unions and international institutions and negotiation.  It also means welcoming the contribution of markets, entrepreneurship, talented individuals and globalisation, and recognising the importance of aspiration, while seeing the need for frameworks which ensure that the socio-economic system works in the interests of the many and not just a few.

The first priority has to be developing a sustainable economic recovery encompassing:

• a responsible financial sector which helps business to invest over the long term;
• government intervention and support to assist developing sectors that can grow and compete internationally
• a skilled workforce which is well educated when it starts work and continues to be trained;
• levels of consumption which are buoyant but do not rely on unsustainable personal debt;
• public deficit and debt reduction over time which does not further damage public services or reduce demand;
• green investment to enable growth which is compatible with carbon reduction.

 Other priorities should be:

• a fair taxation system which can sustain effective public services,
• a settlement for the increasing number of older people covering pensions and social care, which enables everyone to have a dignified old age, encourages savings for old age, and does not put too great a burden on younger generations
• comprehensive support for early years, including affordable and high quality child care;
• a substantial increase in house building and improving the quality of the private rental sector
• the development of a coherent and quality system of vocational training for 14-19 year olds.
• stopping further privatisation of educational and health services and developing more effective local accountability.

The policies follow from the values and priorities. It is important that they are costed and believable but also ambitious. For example, fairness and the repair of public services requires an effective assault on personal and corporate tax avoidance and international action to eliminate tax havens, a financial transaction tax, the development of a property tax, a more effective inheritance tax, a top rate of income tax of 49/ 50%, a reduced VAT rate, and income tax thresholds and tax rates for most workers and pensioners which are accepted as fair and necessary and are not a disincentive to work or innovation.  

 Tory Attacks

The Tories, increasingly desperate, will become ever more strident about welfare reform, debt reduction, immigration andEuropein the hope that by pandering to prejudice and branding Labour as the party of economic mismanagement they may be able to scrape back into office.. How should Labour react ? Ignore these issues, move to have identical policies, put forward clear alternatives ?

Debt reduction cannot be ignored. The failure of the government’s economic policy will mean that both the national debt and the annual deficit will still be high. However, that is no reason to continue with more of the same. The priority must be growth and if that means postponing deficit and debt reduction then we must explain why that is necessary. To continue to reduce demand when there is no growth would be to continue with the Tory folly. This is not to say that debt reduction is unnecessary or that we will be able suddenly to spend a great deal more on public services. But reducing debt should be a long term aim as should be restoring the health of public services. There has been too much defeatist talk suggesting that never again will we be able to have well resourced public services. This can and should be achieved. It will take time and will require strict and tough prioritisation but the goal should remain.

Ed Miliband recently made a sensible and useful speech about immigration. It established that on the left it is a legitimate subject for debate and that it is acceptable to have immigration controls. Concerns about overall numbers, the impact of immigrants on the wages of the lowest paid and the impact on services in particular towns and cities are all understandable. It is not enough just to repeat that immigration is beneficial to the country as a whole. It clearly benefits the comfortably off, it is less clear that it always benefits those who are struggling. Sensible and fair immigration controls should be accompanied with more enforcement of a living minimum wage, further controls on agency and casual working arrangements, additional support for local public services where there is additional need, a housing strategy which produces more decent, affordable homes and zero tolerance for racism. It would also be sensible to remove international students from immigration numbers and to ensure that international students feel welcomed in theUK.

In two respects welfare reform is similar to immigration: the demonisation of particular groups and the linked spread of myths. One role that the Labour Party and Labour Party members should play with both is to use every opportunity to debunk the myths. Regarding the benefits bill we should be clear about the percentage that is spent on older people, and clear that reducing unemployment, promoting a living wage and encouraging affordable housing are crucial aspects of reducing the benefits bill.  We should be opposed to benefit fraud but confident that much has been done to combat it already and clear that the enforcement priority is tax evasion, including unacceptable tax avoidance. We should support universalism where it is beneficial and justified, emphasise and encourage the link between contributions and benefits, help the long term unemployed and the young in particular to find work, and restore over time some of the worst examples of the Tory welfare cuts, with a particular focus on child poverty and the disabled.

On Europe we have less to fear as the Tories are likely to be divided and open to being outflanked by UKIP.  We should remain outside the Euro but active and responsible members of the European Union.

 Organisation

There is ample evidence that sustained campaigning at a local level makes a difference. This requires volunteers and members will only volunteer if they believe that winning is important because a Labour government will make a difference in ways which they can applaud. This does not mean that it will do everything they want; most members aren’t that naive, but they will be motivated to work for a party which has listened to their views and they can fully identify with.

They will also volunteer if activities are on offer which they feel comfortable with, if they are appreciated, if they are not expected to do more than they want, and if they are trained to do anything they are unsure of. And they will only volunteer a second time if their first experience was a good one; particularly that it was purposeful and well organised.

Recently the Labour Party has concentrated on telephone canvassing to a fixed script where there is no room for discussion. This has its place in identifying likely support. But there is also a place for knocking on doors and asking what issues people have, attending community meetings, inviting non members to interesting Labour Party meetings (it has been known) and putting in an appearance in the local shopping centre. To be a member of a political party is to be odd, to be an activist is to be even odder so it is important to show people that we share some normality (Acknowledgement to Tony Slatcher,Sheffield’s Labour organiser).  

Someone will say, ‘we only ever see you at election time’ even if you have been knocking on their door for years. However, it is important to show that we are interested in the local community at all times and not just in the few weeks before an election.

We live in an age of social networking so we ought to belong. This does not mean abandoning everything else but it does mean embracing websites, blogs, facebook, twitter and any other social media which become popular, and being better at using them than our political opponents. At the very least we should have informative and up to date local and national websites.

Finally, there remains a muted ideological divide in the Labour Party between those who say that we must inhabit the centre ground and those who say we should be firmly on the left. Both sets of protagonists miss the point. Public opinion is dynamic not static. It is not unprincipled to accept that politics is the art of the possible but it is not necessary to regard it solely as the art of implementing the outcomes of focus groups. The art is in moving the centre ground as far as possible to our way of viewing the world through articulating what we think we can achieve in ways which convince enough of the electorate.  

And very finally  Recently the New Statesman reprinted an extract from Clement Atlee’s speech to the Labour Conference in 1951. This is an extract from the extract which remains valid today.

‘We know the kind of society we want. We want a society of free men and women – free from poverty, free from fear, able to develop to the full their faculties in co-operation with their fellows, everyone giving and having the opportunity to give service to the community, everyone regarding his own private interest in the light of the interest of others, and of the community; a society bound together by rights and obligations, rights bringing obligations, obligations fulfilled bringing rights, a society free from gross inequalities and yet not regimented nor uniform.’

Geoff Smith, September 2012

There has been much comment about the relative performance of Olympic participants from private and state schools so I thought I would add a few thoughts.

1. I doubt this debate is happening in any other country. Private education is not as significant in most other countries. It is a part of our class heritage that we have never tackled.

2. Of course most private schools have much better sporting facilities than state ones and of course there needs to be more investment in sport in state schools. But it is not affordable for every state school to be brought up to the private school level. In every sport there has to be investment for young people in the club structure with close links developed with schools, particularly in more deprived areas. There is also a role for local authorities in sports education (remember that ?).  The current government is not helping. Funding for school sports partnerships – groups of schools which work together to improve the quality and range of sport on offer to children – has been drastically cut by the coalition. And it has approved selling off 21 playing fields.

3. I haven’t checked all the details but my impression is that the sports where private schools have done particularly well are equestrianism, sailing and rowing. The sports where state schools have held their own are athletics, swimming, boxing, football, and cycling. The former require expensive equipment (or animals) and access to specialist facilities. The latter do too at the highest levels but to start requires attendance at your local sports camp (Jessica Ennis at Don Valley Stadium) or your local awimming pool, having a bike as a birthday present or joining in a makeshift football game at your local park. I won’t mention how boxing starts.

4. It is the state school sports that are the most competitive because for the same reasons they have the most participants across the world. I am not decrying the acheivement of winning an equestrian medal (particularly if you are 54 with a history of terrible injuries) but it is easier than winning an athletics medal.

5. There is one private school, Millfield, which has produced a significant number of medal winners. This is hardly surprising as it is a specialist sport’s school which also takes in successful youngsters from state schools.     

 6. All Olympic participants deserve respect because all of them have undertaken years of dedicated training and submit themselves to the frightenting prospect of succeeding or failing in public.

7. The claim that private schools develop character and welcome success whereas state schools hate competition and accept failure has always been poppycock and remains so.

8. We have learned nothing from the Olympics about the private/ state divide that we did not know already. It remains a challenge for the Labour Party to do something effective about it.

Geoff Smith, Labour Councillor for Crookes, Annual Report May 2011 – June 2012

Contents: Introduction; Political and Economic Context; Local Issues; Local Funding; Local Visits and Meetings; Full Council; Budgets 2011/12 and 2012/13; Council Groups and Committees; Responsibilities 2012-13; Making Contact.

Introduction

When I was elected as the first Labour councillor for Crookes in May 2011 I promised to write periodic reports about being a councillor. I wrote two during the year and this is an annual report on my first year.

To start I would like to thank the voters of Crookes for giving me the chance to be a councillor for four years. I have enjoyed my first year and have learned a great deal about the work of the Council and the communities of Crookes, Crosspool and Sandygate.

Political and Economic Context

This is about being a local councillor so I do not want to take up too much space on national issues but it is inescapable at the moment because national issues have such a local impact.

Over four years Sheffield Council will have to reduce its budget by about £175m with the threat of more cuts to come and we are only part way through this process. Inevitably this has had, and will continue to have, a significant impact on what the Council can provide. It reduces the amount of money that the Council can spend on services to local people by about a third. This is an unprecedented attack on local public services.

I call it an attack because I believe that much of it is unfair and unnecessary. I accept that the annual deficit and the overall debt have to be reduced from their current level over time but it does not make sense to try and do it all at once. The speed, nature and extent of the cuts are unjustified because:

• They are damaging the UK economy which continues to be in the longest slump since the nineteenth century with little prospect of recovery, and with high unemployment, particularly youth unemployment, and reduced real wages.
• We are not all in it together. The public expenditure cuts are largely focused on the poor and local government, with the rich enjoying a tax cut
• Northern councils are suffering much more than more affluent southern councils. The cut per person is £123 in Sheffield compared with only £5 in Windsor and £0 in East Dorset

This means that in my first year on the Council we have faced some very difficult choices and will continue to have to make tough decisions. It is impossible to make such cuts without damaging and reducing services. We have tried to make all services as efficient as possible and to concentrate resources on front line services and services to the poor and vulnerable. In the national arena we have fought Sheffield’s corner.

The people of Sheffield have not been fooled. They feel let down by the Lib Dem U turns and their support for Tory economic policies and the assault on the NHS. They know that Lib Dem attacks on the difficult decisions taken by the Labour council are pure hypocrisy. In Crookes I over turned a Lib Dem majority of over three thousand in 2011 and, although we did not win in Crookes in 2012, the Labour majority on the Council rose further to 34 with the Lib Dem representation down to 23.

I am also glad that the people of Sheffield had the good sense to reject an elected mayor. This was a rejection of celebrity politics and a vote in favour of proper accountability. It was not a rejection of more power for local government which is needed and can work under the current system; it does not require a mayor.

Local Issues

I have been alerted to 135 issues by local people, some of interest to just one or two people and others of wider concern. I cannot claim to have been successful every time in achieving what people want but I have tried. Where I have failed my intention has been to provide a full explanation of the reasons. Below is information about some of the issues that have been raised.

Highways/Streets/ Transport

Pedestrian Crossing on School Road – route to Westways School and the Crookes Practice

This is a longstanding request which, despite the cuts, was funded from the central council highways budget. It was built in February 2012.

Parking in Crookes

Crookes received the largest share of the South West Assembly highways fund for 2011/12 having been neglected for a number of years. There will be parking bays with 2 hour waiting limits outside the shops alongside the Grindstone and a review of the parking along the rest the high street in Crookes.

Pot Holes and Pavements

Quite rightly residents have continued to complain about the state of the roads and pavements. At last this is set to change. The Highways PFI scheme promised by the Labour government will start in autumn 2012 with most of the city’s roads and pavements replaced over a five year period.

Restoration of Bus Service on School Road

Unfortunately this was one where I failed. It hasn’t been possible to persuade South Yorkshire Passenger Transport Executive (SYPTE) or Sheffield Community Transport to fund this route. It doesn’t meet their criteria. I will keep looking for any possibilities.

Vernon Street Bus Shelter

This is not a new issue; I am told that the request for a bus shelter is at least 10 years old. My first request to SYPTE was rejected on the grounds that there was no money for new bus shelters and that space was too small to build a shelter. Undeterred I went back to SYPTE with a number of pertinent questions and arguments. I received a negative reply and there will not be a shelter in the near future but I am not going to give up on this one.

51 Bus Service

Passengers are unhappy with the reliability and punctuality of this service. I have passed on a number of complaints and at the time of writing I am waiting for a response to a request for a meeting with senior managers at First about this service.

Bollards and Double Yellow Lines

Cars destroying grass verges and parking at the corners at junctions is an issue throughout the ward. Bollards are an answer to the first problem but of course they cost money. Additional bollards have been placed onMarsh Laneand Stephen Hill. Double yellow lines also cost money because of the need to publish a TRO (Traffic Regulation Order) which involves an advert in the local press and consultation with neighbours. However, some more have been put in place.

Street Signs

Where street signs have been broken or disappeared I have helped residents to order new ones e.g. Spring View Roadand Ramsey Road.

Planning Issues

Planning request for a telecoms mast on Wesley Hall Chapel on Crookes

I alerted a number of local residents to this. I also put in an objection on the grounds that the development was not in keeping with the Chapel being a listed building. The request was turned down on those grounds.

Former Hollies Garage Site at the bottom of School Road

Tesco bought this site with a view to building a store. The plan was turned down by Sheffield Council and on appeal. Tesco still own this site. I was concerned at the amount of litter that there was on the site so I requested Tesco to organise a clean up which they did in December and again in March. I have also asked Tesco about their intentions for the site but they have not replied yet. I will continue to chase them.

Planning request for a Telecoms Mast on Redmires Road

I objected to this on the grounds that the plan was not in keeping with the local environment and the request was turned down. However, an earlier rejection of a similar scheme was overturned on appeal to the national planning inspector and it is likely that this one will go to appeal.

Moor View (Gosney’s) Farm

This was up for sale and it seemed possible that before it was sold the nineteenth century farm house and the outbuildings would be demolished without planning permission. I joined two members of the Crosspool Forum Executive early on a Monday morning at the site when there were rumours that the demolition would go ahead. I didn’t have to throw myself in front of a bulldozer and at the time of writing the buildings are still standing and no planning application has been made.

Student Related

Crookes has over 2,000 students living in houses of multiple occupation. I welcome students toSheffieldand Crookes. They are important for the future, help the local economy, undertake a considerable amount of volunteering and bring a vitality to the area. However, sometimes they cause problems.

Landlords of Student Houses

Two issues have been raised; the plethora of To Let signs and burglar alarms going off in the summer. I have had discussions with council officers about these and I am working on the development of a voluntary agreement on To Let signs and making proper registration of alarms part of the landlord registration scheme.

Bins on the Street

Some students do not seem to realise that they should move bins back after they have been emptied and not all landlords tell them. I plan to liaise with the University and the environmental team in the Council to ensure that students are aware of their responsibilities when they return in September and that there is enforcement if they (and anyone else) persistently fail to move bins.

Refund of Subscriptions to the University of Sheffield Sport Centre

This was an issue raised by the student newspaper, Forge Press. They were campaigning that students had not had sufficient opportunity to claim refunds when the swimming pool had been closed for 6 months. I supported the campaign on Twitter and in a press release that was reported in the Sheffield Star, wrote to theUniversityofSheffield, and seconded a motion on the subject in a full council meeting. The University changed its position and gave all the refunds.

Other

Additional Dog Litter Bins

These were agreed before I became a councillor but I spent a great deal effort ensuring that they were put in the agreed places and this was finally achieved before Christmas.

Local Funding

I was a member of the panels that considered bids to the SW Assembly climate change and older people activity funds for 2011/12. Organisations in both Crookes and Crosspool received funds.

I was also a member of the panel which considered bids to the SW Assembly consolidated small grants fund for 2012/13. It was heavily over subscribed but I am pleased to say that there were many strong bids from Crookes and more money went to Crookes than to other wards.

Local Visits and Meetings

I have attended meetings of the Crosspool Forum, Friends of the Bole Hills, Crookes Safety Forum, and Crookes and Upper Walkley TARA. As I have said before, I am happy to attend any group, to speak or to listen.

I have also visitedSt ThomasNursery Schoolwhich received an ‘outstanding’ Ofsted judgement, the Hagg Lane Allotments, theUniversityofSheffield Student Unionofficers, and the external relations officer of theUniversityofSheffield.

I enjoyed participating in the Crosspool Festival in July 2011 and I am looking forward to a number of events in July 2012.

Full Council

This is monthly. I seconded two resolutions that were carried. The first was on the need for compulsory registration to vote when the system changes from house to individual registration. The second was the request to theUniversityofSheffieldto refund users of its sports centre properly for the closure of the swimming pool for 6 months.  I also spoke during the debate on Occupy Sheffield and in other debates

Budgets 2011/12 and  2012/13

Despite the challenging times, the Labour Council since taking over from the Lib Dems in May 2011 has:

• Invested £500,000 to create a new apprenticeship scheme for 16-19 year olds, providing 100 apprenticeship places.
• Reinstated 10 Police and Community Support Officer posts
• Restored £190,000 cuts to Children’s Centres
• Restored cuts to the Sheffield Galleries and Museums Trust
• Reduced the number of senior staff on the Council
• Established a non party political Fairness Commission

 The Labour Council will stand up for Sheffield and prioritise jobs, growth, and protecting the most vulnerable. It will do its best to protectSheffieldfrom the Tory/ Lib Dem cuts.

Autumn 2012 will see the start of the multi million Highways project which will get rid of potholes and repair roads, pavements and the streetscene across the whole city.

 Over the next two years seven 20mph schemes will be introduced throughout the city – part of a long term commitment to a 20mph residential road speed limit.

 There will be 100 new places on the apprenticeship scheme.

 Work will be started with bothSheffielduniversities and local employers to try and develop a Sheffield Graduate Scheme to get more graduates into SMEs.

But inevitably there have been cuts as well. One early announcement was to move to fortnightly emptying of black bins. I supported this. My reasons were:

1. It will save substantial amounts of money.
2. Fortnightly black bin collections will encourage more recycling.

It has been suggested that the Council does not need to do this because the Government is offering to pay councils to keep weekly bin collections. However, the Government failed to provide details of the scheme until too late and it is highly unlikely to provide enough money to meet its requirement that weekly collections should continue for five years. It is also worth mentioning that 60% of local authorities have fortnightly collections already, that the Council is looking to improve the recycling service, and that houses with 6 or more people will be able to have larger bins.

Council Groups and Committees

I am on the Licensing Committee and have attended many meetings dealing with taxis, alcohol sales, shisha bars, street stalls, and music entertainment.

I was on the Economy and Environmental Wellbeing Scrutiny Committee. This has discussed the outcome of the waste management review, quizzed business leaders about what they want from the Council, met organisations providing help to particular unemployed groups; discussed ways of developing green jobs in Sheffield and considered ways of increasing short term tourism inSheffield. It also scrutinized in detail the decisions to introduce mobile CCTV for parking offences and 20mph schemes in residential areas.

I was on the Environmental Performance Working Party. It looks at how well the Council is doing and also received an impressive presentation fromForgeValleyschool students about what the school is doing to protect the environment.

I am a member of the Corporate Parenting Board which is responsible for looked after children.

As one of the Crookes councilors I am a member of the South West Assembly.

Within Labour Group I have been on Adult Social Care and Public Health working groups.

Responsibilities 2012/13

I will continue to be on the Licensing Committee and the Corporate Parenting Board.

I was elected as Secretary of the Labour Group on the Council after the May election.

I have been appointed as a Cabinet Assistant for Communities and Inclusion.

I have applied to be on the Adoption Panel.

I believe in being open about pay. As a councillor I will receive an allowance of £11,742.45 (same as for 2011-12) and as a cabinet assistant I will receive an additional allowance of £5,268.63 making a total of £17,011.08

Making Contact

Tel: (Town Hall) 0114 273 5588 (Mobile) 07581214783

Email: geoff.smith2@sheffield.gov.uk

Surgeries:

Between 12.30pm and 2.00pm on the third Wednesday of the month (except December) in St Columba Church, Manchester Road, Crosspool. 
 
Between 6.30pm and 7.30pm, on the fourth Wednesday of the month (except December) in the Gilbert Room, St Thomas Church (opposite Crookes post office), Crookes. 
 
I am also happy to see constituents at other times and to receive telephone calls and emails. 

Address:

Councillor Geoff Smith, Labour Group,SheffieldCity Council, Town Hall,Pinstone Street,SheffieldS1 2HH

As you will know the Arts Council announced in late January that Sheffield’s bid for Renaissance funding of £4.2 m over three years had been rejected. This has very serious consequences for the future of the Museum Trust and what it can deliver to the people of Sheffield.  There was a storm of protest which included a couple of emails from me to the Arts Council. Below is my initial email to Alan Davey the Chief Executive of Arts Council England, the reply from Cluny Macpherson the Regional Director and a follow up email from me.

Email to Alan Davey:

I am writing to express my surprise and disappointment that Museum Sheffield’s bid for a share of Renaissance Major Grant funding has been rejected. This is particularly worrying given that it follows the decision last year to reject the application to become a National Portfolio Organisation. I realise that insitutions are always reluctant to reverse decisions that they have just announced but I would ask you to consider carefully and favourably any appeal that may be made. Failing that, I urge you to consider urgently using other funding to help one of England’s major cities continue to offer a valuable cultural service to its over half a million population and continue its successful strategy of using cultural development to attract much needed inward investment and short stay tourism.

When I first came to Sheffield from London over 20 years ago it had interesting and much loved museums and galleries but they could not be said to of the range and standard that England’s fourth largest city deserved. Following years of development a step change was achieved in 2004 by national funding. There has been a wide range of national exhibitions and, in keeping with the Sheffield tradition of being an inclusive city, a splendid mixture of the traditional and the new, and successful outreach to children and young people from all over the city. The museums and galleries provision complements Sheffield’s role as a creative force in the visual arts with its large number of resident artists and designers and its successful art and design education at Sheffield Hallam University. I am also aware from speaking to local business leaders that the physical transformation of the city centre and the cultural success of theatre, film and the visual arts has played a major role in helping Sheffield attract inward investment and continue with its regeneration. Your funding decision will make this much more difficult. I would love it if the City Council was able to plug the gap but with £57m cuts for next year on top of £80m this year this is not possible (I will spare you my standard political diatribe about the cuts Sheffield has to implement).

As I said I am Londoner by birth and upbringing and I have lived in Sheffield for over 20 years. Accordingly I understand London perceptions and know Sheffield well. There has been a metropolitan perception that, despite its size, somehow Sheffield is not a major city in the way that Leeds and Manchester are, and anyway, they aren’t that far away. Sheffield is a major city equal to Leeds and Manchester in every respect except the way it is sometimes treated by national organisations. I gather that before the Major Grants announcement, Sheffield already received the lowest spend per head from the Arts Council’s National Portfolio Organisation funding (£4.62 per person, compared with £20.32 per person in Leeds). Also looking at the funding map that you have provided I see that there is a large gap which represents South Yorkshire, East Yorkshire and East Midlands. Surely geographical spread is one of the criteria that you have to take into account.

Of course I understand that the Arts Council England has less money now to fund organisations and has to make difficult decisions. However, I urge you to reconsider the case for providing crucial support for Sheffield’s museums and galleries.

Response from Cluny Macpherson:

Thank you for your recent correspondence regarding our Renaissance major partner funding decision for Museums Sheffield. As Regional Director for the Yorkshire, I’d like to take the opportunity to reply to you on behalf of both of my Chief executive, Alan Davey, and the Arts Council. 

As someone who has also moved to Yorkshire from the south over 20 years ago, I share your experience of how the region has changed through culture-led regeneration. 

As you will be aware, historically, investment levels in the arts have varied across England, mainly due to the different priorities of the old regional arts boards, local authorities and other funders.  Although I accept that Sheffield’s funding from us is relatively low compared with the cities you mention, it is also true that by other measures the City does quite well when compared to all the unitary authorities of the region. It is a picture that Arts Council England is working hard with our funding partners to address, in Sheffield and elsewhere – and it’s another reason why it was so important to ensure that Renaissance Major partner funds were distributed across the country. 

We wanted to invest the major grants money as evenly as we could across England, so that the whole museums sector, and audiences across the country, would benefit. Where that didn’t prove possible, we will use the Renaissance Strategic support fund to fill geographical gaps, and to fund other important museums work.  I have already started to talk to Museums Sheffield about that. We recognise that, even though Renaissance was never designed to be a major source of income for museums, it is important additional development money. 

This is the first time major grants to regional museums have been awarded for a three year period (2012/13 – 2014/15) via an open application process against published criteria. Decisions were taken using specialist museums knowledge and expertise, from inside and outside the Arts Council, and we made our choices only against the principles and priorities that we had published in advance. 

Overall we received 29 applications for the Renaissance Major partner grants programme requesting almost £40 million a year against a total annual budget of around £20 million – meaning that applications nationwide amounted to double the budget available to us and we have had to make some very difficult choices.  

We have provided Museums Sheffield with a full assessment of their application, along with a detailed explanation of how it progressed through our decision making process. 

Arts Council England recognises and values the important work of Museums Sheffield. That’s why we’re discussing with them how we might support their ambitions for the future with funding from other parts of the Renaissance programme. In the meantime, they will receive transitional funding to help them adjust to these changes, the first payment of which has already been agreed. 

We’ll also be investing in regional museums through the other parts of the Renaissance programme – the Museums development fund and national programmes. Since assuming responsibility for museums, we have set out our strategic goals for the sector in Culture, knowledge and understanding: great museums and libraries for everyone. All four parts of the Renaissance programme reflect these goals. You can read more about Renaissance, our open application process and how we made our Major partner funding decisions here 

We know that not everyone will agree with all our funding decisions but Arts Council England’s job is to make the choices we believe will best ensure that as many people as possible across the country have access to great art and culture. 

We’re holding constructive conversations with a number of other unsuccessful applicants, looking at how we might best invest in their future, despite the difficult circumstances.  We want to help them continue to do their valuable work because, in tough economic times, we need the inspiration, escape and enjoyment that great art and culture give us more than ever. 

You may also be aware that last Friday I met with John Mothersole and Cllr Julie Dore regarding this matter, and have further meetings planned with Council officers on Monday. 

I’d like to thank you again for taking the time to share your views with us. I hope the above information will help to reassure you that we can and will continue to work with key partners such as Museums Sheffield – to help them continue to deliver the great work that we know audiences across the region enjoy.  

If you have any further queries please contact me, or our Enquiries team on 0845 300 6200 or email enquiries@artscouncil.org.uk

Email reply to Cluny Macpherson from me:

First, thank you for giving me such a detailed response so quickly. And I am encouraged by some of it; the willingness to engage with representatives from Sheffield, the short term funding and the possibility of further funding in the future. Clearly I hope the latter results in some significant longer term funding. 

As you will be aware this has been a major topic of conversation in Sheffield since the decision was announced and I have had more emails on this issue than on any other since I was elected last May. So I just wanted to add a couple of other comments. It has been suggested that one of the reasons that Sheffield failed with its bid was that there could only be two successful bids in Yorkshire and that Leeds and Yorkwere preferred. I won’t comment on Leeds but I will onYork. This seems to me to be in a very different category from Leeds, Sheffield andManchester. It is a major national heritage city in the way that Cambridge, Oxford andBath are, with significant international and national tourism; not a major city supporting a large population with a significant urban hinterland. In a funding sense it seems to me to be in a different national category rather than a Yorkshireregional resource. Also Sheffield is very close to the East Midlands; indeed the Sheffield City Region, which is recognised by the government as the vehicle for regeneration funding and support, includes parts of Derbyshire and north Nottinghamshire as well as South Yorkshire, an area with a population of 1.4m. As I noted in my previous email theEast Midlandswas completely without funding. 

I also gather that an issue was ‘resilience’ which I am told means long term viability or being able to survive in hard times (can’t help feeling that there is a paradox here that funding is available if you don’t really need it but not if you do). I pointed out last time the extent of the local government cuts in Sheffield but I am sure you know that the Council has decided not to cut its grant to Museums Sheffield which is almost the only grant or budget which has not been cut next year. I am not sure how we can better demonstrate our support.