Fargate Redevelopment

[redruby]

11 hours ago, lavery549@yahoo said:

I know there are far worse places than Sheffield , I live in Bradford & that is far worse . Also , Leeds is bad . Most Cities have problems , that's a fact of life . 

Should we just give up and not try to improve things then?  Just because there are other places that are as bad or worse?  Hopefully the PSPO will improve matters.  

[Planner1]

12 hours ago, RollingJ said:

That makes sense - I suppose it makes them look 'busy'.

Nothing to do with “looking busy”, they are busy enough anyway.

 

Reports to the council committees go through a lengthy clearance process, starting with the head of service, director, exec director etc. The relevant political portfolio holder will also need to see it and discuss it. Various services within the council will also need to see and sign it off, such as legal, finance, HR, equalities, environment, communications, etc etc.

 

All of these can and do raise questions and want to clarify issues with the report authors. The people who have to review the reports are senior officers who are incredibly busy anyway, so it isn’t always easy to get their input as other priorities often intervene.

 

There is a forward plan of reporting and it can take around 3 months to get something into a committee agenda.

 

This isn’t bureaucracy as some put it, it’s due diligence, as reports can have significant outcomes for the council and the people of the city, so the right people need to have had input and it needs to be checked.

 

Also we are in a general election period. Councils aren’t allowed to put out anything vaguely controversial or political during the run up to an election and a round of meetings is often cancelled to give time for a new administration to come in and allocate roles to individual councillors, who need to be trained, briefed and advised. The election can add a month or two to report timescales.

 

 

 

 

[hackey lad]

2 hours ago, Planner1 said:

Nothing to do with “looking busy”, they are busy enough anyway.

 

Reports to the council committees go through a lengthy clearance process, starting with the head of service, director, exec director etc. The relevant political portfolio holder will also need to see it and discuss it. Various services within the council will also need to see and sign it off, such as legal, finance, HR, equalities, environment, communications, etc etc.

 

All of these can and do raise questions and want to clarify issues with the report authors. The people who have to review the reports are senior officers who are incredibly busy anyway, so it isn’t always easy to get their input as other priorities often intervene.

 

There is a forward plan of reporting and it can take around 3 months to get something into a committee agenda.

 

This isn’t bureaucracy as some put it, it’s due diligence, as reports can have significant outcomes for the council and the people of the city, so the right people need to have had input and it needs to be checked.

 

Also we are in a general election period. Councils aren’t allowed to put out anything vaguely controversial or political during the run up to an election and a round of meetings is often cancelled to give time for a new administration to come in and allocate roles to individual councillors, who need to be trained, briefed and advised. The election can add a month or two to report timescales.

 

 

 

 

Sunaks  fault .

[Baron99]

2 hours ago, Planner1 said:

Nothing to do with “looking busy”, they are busy enough anyway.

 

Reports to the council committees go through a lengthy clearance process, starting with the head of service, director, exec director etc. The relevant political portfolio holder will also need to see it and discuss it. Various services within the council will also need to see and sign it off, such as legal, finance, HR, equalities, environment, communications, etc etc.

 

All of these can and do raise questions and want to clarify issues with the report authors. The people who have to review the reports are senior officers who are incredibly busy anyway, so it isn’t always easy to get their input as other priorities often intervene.

 

There is a forward plan of reporting and it can take around 3 months to get something into a committee agenda.

 

This isn’t bureaucracy as some put it, it’s due diligence, as reports can have significant outcomes for the council and the people of the city, so the right people need to have had input and it needs to be checked.

 

Also we are in a general election period. Councils aren’t allowed to put out anything vaguely controversial or political during the run up to an election and a round of meetings is often cancelled to give time for a new administration to come in and allocate roles to individual councillors, who need to be trained, briefed and advised. The election can add a month or two to report timescales.

 

 

 

 

My bold. 

 

All these people & 'experts' involved yet many times they just end up with egg on their faces when 'Oops!  We didn't realise that would fall off if we twisted this.  Never mind, lessons will be learned. :

[Planner1]

1 hour ago, Baron99 said:

My bold. 

 

All these people & 'experts' involved yet many times they just end up with egg on their faces when 'Oops!  We didn't realise that would fall off if we twisted this.  Never mind, lessons will be learned. :

Would you rather they did nothin? You don’t get it wrong then.

 

Private sector companies get it wrong too, why would local government be any different?

[Baron99]

6 hours ago, Planner1 said:

Would you rather they did nothin? You don’t get it wrong then.

 

Private sector companies get it wrong too, why would local government be any different?

As you stated previously, all the lengthy processes, checking, rechecking, due diligence, reporting & re-reporting & discussions between the various council services.   And yet last year SCC wasted close to a million pounds of Govt money, (I say Govt money as we know tax payers money), on a mystery that Conan Doyle would have been proud of.  The mystery case of the missing Fargate electricity cable. 

 

When private sector companies get it wrong, it tends not to cost me a penny.  When SCC get it wrong AGAIN, there's some of my council tax I'll never see again. 

[hackey lad]

9 minutes ago, Baron99 said:

As you stated previously, all the lengthy processes, checking, rechecking, due diligence, reporting & re-reporting & discussions between the various council services.   And yet last year SCC wasted close to a million pounds of Govt money, (I say Govt money as we know tax payers money), on a mystery that Conan Doyle would have been proud of.  The mystery case of the missing Fargate electricity cable. 

 

When private sector companies get it wrong, it tends not to cost me a penny.  When SCC get it wrong AGAIN, there's some of my council tax I'll never see again. 

[redruby]

35 minutes ago, Baron99 said:

As you stated previously, all the lengthy processes, checking, rechecking, due diligence, reporting & re-reporting & discussions between the various council services.   And yet last year SCC wasted close to a million pounds of Govt money, (I say Govt money as we know tax payers money), on a mystery that Conan Doyle would have been proud of.  The mystery case of the missing Fargate electricity cable. 

 

When private sector companies get it wrong, it tends not to cost me a penny.  When SCC get it wrong AGAIN, there's some of my council tax I'll never see again. 

I rather suspect that when private sector firms get things wrong the cost does get passed on the consumer more often than not. And not all of the councils income is from council tax. I’m not particularly defending the council but am not falling for the old ‘private sector is more efficient’ cobblers because clearly it is not (e.g. water).  

[hackey lad]

Owt happening yet ?

[SheffieldForum]

16 hours ago, hackey lad said:

Owt happening yet ?