Agenda and minutes

The Mayor lead the meeting to observe two minutes silence marking the end of  World War One and to remember those who sadly lost their lives.

To consider any announcements by the Mayor in accordance with Council Procedure Rule 3(2)(ii).

The Mayor was pleased to present her activity since the last Council meeting which was attached for information to the Mayor’s Letter, but drew particular attention to the national lockdown from 5^th November, 2020.

Since the last Council Meeting the Mayor had also been involved in the Remembrance Sunday pre-recorded event online, the lay of a wreath in Clifton Park and paid tribute to the men and women who made the ultimate sacrifice.  In doing so she also offered her thanks to a number of people involved in the process.

The Mayor also attended Dalton Parish Council’s very small socially distanced outdoor event to lay a wreath.

The Mayor would also only be taking part in a very limited number of engagements/events for the remainder of this year:-

Christmas Lights Switch On - 20^th November, 2020.

Virtual Reclaim the Night Event - 25^th November, 2020

Big Hearts, Big Changes Virtual Event - 15^th December, 2020

To receive the apologies of any Member who is unable to attend the meeting.

Apologies for absence were received from Councillors Alam, Julie Turner, Tweed, Whysall and Yasseen.

Any communication received by the Mayor or Chief Executive which relates to a recommendation of the Cabinet or a committee which was received after the relevant meeting.

There were no communications received.

To receive the record of proceedings of the ordinary meeting of the Council held on 30^th September, 2020 and to approve the accuracy thereof.

Resolved:-  That the minutes of the meeting of Council held on 30^th September, 2020, be approved for signature by the Mayor.

Mover:-  Councillor Read                        Seconder:-  Councillor Watson

To report on any petitions received by the Council and receive statements in support of petitions in accordance with Petitions Scheme and Council Procedure Rule 13.

No petitions have been received since the previous Council Meeting held on 30^th September, 2020.

No petitions have been received since the previous Council Meeting held on 30^th September, 2020.

To invite Councillors to declare any disclosable pecuniary interests or personal interests they may have in any matter which is to be considered at this meeting, to confirm the nature of those interests and whether they intend to leave the meeting for the consideration of the item.

There were no Declarations of Interest to report.

To receive questions from members of the public who may wish to ask a general question of the Mayor, Cabinet Member or the Chairman of a Committee in accordance with Council Procedure Rule 12.

(1)  Mr. Liam Harron referred to the minutes of the Council meeting on 5^th September, 2018 where the Leader stated:-

“the Council would take action based on the outcome of that review” - a review by the Information Commissioner

On 21^st September, 2020 the Information Commissioner totally dismissed RMBC’s allegations that his request for information about “evidenced dishonesty” was vexatious, so asked was the Leader prepared to debate this matter in public?

The Leader explained the Council rejected an FOI request from Mr. Harron because it believed it to be vexatious.  Mr. Harron requested that this decision be reviewed by the ICO.

Mr. Harron seemed to be implying that there was evidence of dishonesty and that this notion was supported by the ICO.  This is simply not the case. 

The ICO were saying the Council could not apply Section 14(1) to the request (i.e. vexatious) and the Council were, therefore, to review its response.  This was very different to the ICO implying or supporting that there was and/or was evidence of alleged dishonesty.

Whilst the Council still believed it to be vexatious, the ICO did not believe the request was vexatious and hence requested the Council answer the request which it had done. 

The Council had now fully complied with the ICO’s findings and answered the FOI request. 

On 15^th October, 2020 the ICO contacted the Council to confirm the case was closed.  Therefore, the Council had complied with the Decision Notice and also considered this matter closed. 

The Leader explained he had not seen any evidence of what Mr. Harron described, but suggested if wanted to bring that forward to write to the Leader and raise, he would be happy to give it his due consideration.

In a supplementary question Mr. Harron indicated he had sent the Leader evidence three plus years ago.  He had referred to this at the last meeting and raised a similar matter at the last Cabinet meeting where he was advised to make a complaint.

Mr. Harron described how he had attempted to make a complaint and had received correspondence from the Complaints Manager dated 18^th July, 2019 where he refused to look at a very specific complaint and the reason he gave was information was to be reviewed.  He had heard nothing since.  He found it very confusing how to lodge a complaint and asked would this now be looked at and progressed.

The Leader was aware Mr. Harron had engaged in lots of correspondence and it was believed to be inappropriate in this meeting to speak about individual officers of the Council.  He suggested Mr. Harron resubmit his complaint and copy himself in and if he was still dissatisfied the Local Government Ombudsman would adjudicate.  This was the process Mr. Harron should follow.

(2)  Mr. Thirlwall referred to the last Council Meeting where he raised the issue of Councillors B. Cutts, John Turner and Reeder’s continued failure to properly complete their Register of Interests.

He asked could the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 406.

Should it be necessary, in the opinion of the Mayor, to consider excluding the press and public from the meeting in relation to any items of urgent business on the grounds that private information is likely to be divulged.

There are no such items at the time of preparing this agenda.

Resolved:-  That under Section 100(A) of the Local Government Act 1972, that should the Mayor deem it necessary the public be excluded from the meeting on the grounds that any items involve the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined under Paragraph 3 of Part 1 of Schedule 12(A) of such Act indicated, as now amended by the Local Government (Access to Information) (Variation) Order 2006.

To receive a statement from the Leader of the Council in accordance with Council Procedure Rule 9.

The Leader described today as a sombre day.

Not only was the contribution of our service men and women in two world wars and other conflicts being remembered, but the country was also back in national lockdown whilst the fight to get Coronavirus back under control was continuing.

Tribute was made to the Mayor and the Civic Office and all those who were involved in the making of such a beautiful film to mark Remembrance Day at the weekend.  It was, of course, deeply regrettable that the occasion could not be marked in the usual way, but it was a fitting online tribute observed by many hundreds of people.

Referring to the National Lockdown, as of Thursday, 5^th November all areas across England were again subject to new tighter restrictions.  These restrictions would remain in place until Wednesday, 2^nd December when they would then be reviewed.

In the last week (to Sunday 8th November) there had been a further 1,166 positive cases in Rotherham, the fourth highest weekly increase across South Yorkshire.

Rotherham NHS Foundation Trust had seen 28 COVID-19 deaths in the last week,  an increase of +23.  This brought the total number of deaths registered from COVID-19 in the Borough period to 382.  As of 3^rd November the 7-day infection rate was 505.3 per 100,000.

There were 122 hospital beds occupied by COVID-19 patients which was a slight reduction on the week before.  Two patients were requiring mechanical ventilation.

There were some signs that the corner was beginning to turn. There had been four or five days now where the number of new infections had fallen. The number of inpatients in the hospital was lower than it was about 10 days ago and because of the progress made in treating the disease, the number of patients requiring mechanical ventilation was lower than would have been expected during the first wave.

For some Members of this Council, those infections and illnesses may have touched you and your families directly and thoughts and prayers today were with all those and others similarly affected.

Further, the Community Hub and Rotherham Heroescontinued to provide support for the most vulnerable residents.

In terms of the Clinically Extremely Vulnerable; unlike the first Lockdown, people over 60 were not being advised to shield. Instead, the Government was writing to people who were Clinically Extremely Vulnerable (CEV).  For those that received this letter and needed support they should be asked to contact the Hub and register. Rotherham Community Hub and the Rotherham Heroes Volunteers could help. 

It was noted that as of 10^th November the Hub had received 196 new Registrations from people identified as CEV with 64 having requested support.

Drawing attention to Business Support, the Government had extended the Furlough Scheme at 80% until the end of March, 2021.  All businesses with a rateable value would be eligible to apply for the Government Business Support Grant.   The Tier 3 element was currently available to apply for on the website  ...  view the full minutes text for item 408.

To note the minutes of the Cabinet Meetings held on 21^st September and 19^th October, 2020.

Resolved:-  That the reports, recommendations and minutes of the meetings of the Cabinet held on 21^st September and 19^th October, 2020, be received.

Mover:-  Councillor Read                        Seconder:-  Councillor Watson

To consider the Cabinet’s recommendations in respect of the final version of the Library Strategy 2021 – 2026 and associated service offer.

Further to Minute No. 63 of the meeting of the Cabinet held on 19^th October, 2020 consideration was given to the report which set out in detail the vision and framework contained in the Library Strategy 2021–2026 and how the Strategy and new service offer would enable the Council to fulfil its statutory duty under the Public Library Act and meet the needs of the community through the delivery of the Libraries and Neighbourhood Hubs Service. 

The Strategy and service offer had been finalised following feedback from the last phase of consultation, along with the Equalities Impact Analysis.  All future delivery changes would. therefore, be underpinned by the Strategy. Particular attention was drawn to the exciting proposals  to reopen the refurbished library at Kimberworth, relocate the Thurcroft Library to Gordon Bennett, the increased community partnership work with the new Brinsworth Library collaboration with the Parish Council working on some new models of management and access and the need for libraries to diversify.

Particular reference was made to the refurbished, relocated and newly opened libraries in the Borough, the action plans and Equality Impact Assessments and how the report reflected the thorough process this Strategy had followed.  This report had already been considered by the Overview and Scrutiny Management Board and Cabinet and was now presented for approval by full Council.

Members welcomed this vibrant Strategy and some raised particular comments about the constraints of the Dinnington Library, why Aston Library was duly named when it was in Swallownest, the enhancements and relocation of Thurcroft Library and the success of the partnership approach to Brinsworth Library.

Whilst the majority of libraries were easily reached by communities, concern was expressed that some disadvantaged communities did not have a wonderful library to talk about which was disappointing for some.

The importance of volunteers and the work they did in supporting libraries was also emphasised.

Councillor Carter, however, expressed his concern about the transfer of Brinsworth Library and was of the view that the use of volunteers was the first step to removing professional operational staff and could lead to a reduction in usage.  He provided an example of what had happened in Tinsley over the border in Sheffield.  He saw no reason to invest in a new town centre library and believed the Council had failed in its relocation of the library to Riverside House.  He believed it a waste of money and believed this was why the budgets could not be balanced over many years.

Councillor Steele expressed his surprise at Councillor Carter’s comments given the distinct lack of interest in the scrutiny process where he would have found in-depth knowledge had he attended the many meetings and sub-groups.  He was happy to support the Library Strategy and valued Councillor Allen’s passion, commitment and protection to delivering libraries where others had slashed theirs.

This was echoed by Councillors Cusworth, Jepson, Read and Reeder, who welcomed the changes, the enthusiasm exhibited by staff, the resources and how the public could access these  ...  view the full minutes text for item 410.

To report on the establishment of political groups, the political balance of the Council and the entitlement of each group to seats on the Authority’s committees and to consider the appointment of members to the Council’s committees, boards and panels.

Consideration was given to the report which detailed how the Proper Officer was required to notify the Council of any change in the political balance of the Authority or the operation of new political groups under the Local Government (Committees and Political Groups) Regulations 1990.

Since the last Council meeting on 30^th September, 2020, the Proper Officer had received notification of changes to political affiliation.

With effect from 28^th September, Councillor Ian Jones confirmed his resignation from the Labour Party and intention to sit as a non-aligned Councillor.

With effect from 19th October, Councillor Kerry Albiston confirmed her resignation from the Labour Party and intention to sit as a non-aligned Councillor.

There were now 7 non-aligned Members, who were not in a political group. There were also 2 political groups in operation on the Council, the Labour Group (42 Councillors) and the Rotherham Democratic Party Group (11 Councillors).

In addition, there were 3 Councillor vacancies which could not currently be filled due to restrictions on the convening of by-elections (Coronavirus Regulations 2020). 

With the 149 seats available on Committees, Boards and Panels and under the calculation the Labour Group was entitled to 104 seats and the Rotherham Democratic Party Group entitled to 27.  This left 18 seats which could not be given to Members of the political groups and should be allocated to the 7 non-aligned Councillors.

Resolved:-  (1)  That the revised political composition of the Council be noted:-

(a) Labour Group – 42 seats

(b) Rotherham Democratic Party Group – 11 seats

(c) Non-aligned – 7 seats

(2)   That the entitlement of the membership of the political groups and non-aligned Members and such entitlements be reflected in Council’s appointments of Members to Committees be approved.

(3)  That, subject to the changes required from the previous Municipal Year’s entitlement, the appointments made by the Council in the 2019/20 Municipal Year to Committees, Boards and Panels and Joint Committees be continued for the 2020/21 Municipal Year along with the following changes to appointments:-

Licensing Board

Councillor Ian Jones to fill a non-aligned vacancy

Licensing Committee

Councillor Ian Jones to fill a non-aligned vacancy

Planning Board

Councillor Amy Rushforth to fill a Labour vacancy

Overview and Scrutiny – Improving Places Select Commission

Councillor Ian Jones to fill a non-aligned vacancy

Councillor Amy Brookes to fill a Labour vacancy

Overview and Scrutiny – Improving Health Select Commission

Councillor Kerry Albiston to take a non-aligned vacancy

To consider proposed amendments to the Constitution

Consideration was given to the report  which sought approval for amendments to various parts of the Council’s Constitution following a periodic review by the Constitution Working Group.

The proposals set out in detail within this report have been reviewed and were supported by the Group, made up of cross-party Members with the amendments taking immediate effect and included changes to:-

·            The Chief Executive’s Sub-Scheme of Delegation.

·            Policy Framework Documents.

·            Council Procedure Rule 11 (Members’ Questions to Outside Bodies).

·            Council Procedure Rule 12 (Public Questions).

·            Scheme of Petitions.

·            Responsibility of Functions.

Councillor Carter wished to place on record his opposition to these changes.  He believed the public were being let down and failed to see how the Council had changed given the further restrictions; with those in charge  waiting to return to type with the making of decisions behind closed doors.

He believed it to be unacceptable and which was why 6 Labour Councillors had left the ruling group and showed  how weak the leadership was.

Councillor Steele pointed out all these elements had been subject to a full discussion and not all those involved with in agreement.  However, he praised the Council how quick it had reacted to the pandemic to get its meetings back up and running, a reflection on how open and transparent it was.

Councillor Cusworth pointed out that Councillor Carter merely made assertions and failed to challenge the robustness of such decisions as he failed to attend any meetings.

This was echoed by the Leader and believed the comments made did not bear any relation to fact or reality.  Member decision making was collective once a month and records of those meetings were easily accessible.

Resolved:-  (1)   That the scheme of delegation be amended to allow for the implementation of an emergency delegation for the discharge of non-executive functions to the Chief Executive, to progress decisions related to COVID-19 recovery, subject to statutory decision making safeguards.

(2)  That the list of the various Policy Framework documents referenced within the Constitution be updated.

(3)  That amendments be made to Council Procedure Rule 11 (which deals with Member questions).

(4)  That amendments be made to Council Procedure Rule 12 (which deals with public questions).

(5)  That amendments be made to the Scheme of Petitions.

(6)   That changes be made to the Responsibility of Functions (Appendix 9 of the Constitution):-

a.     That quorum figures for each committee individually be referenced (rather than stating one third of the membership).

b.     That the recommended amendments by the Health and Wellbeing Board be endorsed.

c.      That the size of Licensing Committee Hearing Panels be confirmed as five Members with a quoracy of three Members.

Mover:-  Councillor Read                        Seconder:-  Councillor Watson

To receive an update on the activities of the Council’s Overview and Scrutiny bodies in accordance with Council Procedure Rule 14.

Councillor Steele, Chair of the Overview and Scrutiny Management Board, introduced a further update for 2020/21 on the latest work carried out by the Overview and Scrutiny Management Board and the Select Commissions - Health, Improving Lives and Improving Places as set out in detail as part of the report.

Scrutiny was effective in Rotherham and as part of the pre-scrutiny process  recommendations or additional points were made for consideration by the  Cabinet.

The report set out details of the additional work undertaken and the sub-groups projects.  All Scrutiny Members, including the Opposition, were thanked for their input and in the getting of the best recommendations for scrutiny.  Invitations had been extended numerous times to Councillor Carter to attend meetings as this would be where he would find the answers to his questions.

Councillor Jepson echoed the comments and in particular the invitations to Councillor Carter and where he could, in fact, have a voice for the constituents he represented. 

Councillor Carter did not believe Rotherham demonstrated true scrutiny nor an open democratic process as he believed it should be chaired by an Opposition Councillor.

Councillor Cusworth and Napper disagreed with Councillor Carter.  If he attended Councillor Carter would realise the wealth and breadth of cross-party involvement that scrutiny brought to Rotherham and 2 of the Vice-Chairs were from the Opposition Party.

Further Members were disappointed with Councillor Carter’s view about Scrutiny and where, if he did attend meetings, would see that it served as an externally validated process which was fit for purpose.  They urged Councillor Carter to represent the people who elected him and not hide behind a non-democratic process.

Councillor Buckley was saddened by his Ward Colleague’s comments pointing out that Councillor Carter had the opportunity to become involved. It was such a pity for the people he represented that he failed to carry out the job he received an allowance for.

Councillor John Turner complimented the Chairs on their roles and this was endorsed by the Vice-Chairs.

Councillor Watson was keen to point out that Rotherham’s scrutiny process was held in high regard and described how both he and Councillor Steele had attended an East Midlands meeting to talk about how scrutiny worked in Rotherham.  This was endorsed by Councillor Walsh who took his scrutiny duties very seriously and was proud to be part of the process.

In his right to reply Councillor Steele was keen to be provided with proof by Councillor Carter when the Borough’s scrutiny integrity was brought into question.  Even the Commissioners were keen for Rotherham’s scrutiny process to return when it was initially suspended, which was tribute to the dedication and commitment in the process.  He had spoken at several conferences and even spoke in Sheffield about how the system worked.  He believed Rotherham’s scrutiny function was good and worked well.

Resolved:-  That the report be received and the contents noted.

Mover:-  Councillor Steele                          Seconder:-  Councillor Napper

To note the appointment of the Director of Public Health

Consideration was given to a report which provided formal notification of the Director of Public Health’s appointment following a robust recruitment process leading to the appointment of Ben Anderson.

The employment start date of the new Director of Public Health would be 4^th January, 2021.

The Council paid tribute to the former Director of Public Health, Terri Roche, for all her work her in Rotherham and wished her the best in her retirement.

Councillor Carter echoed the sentiments for Terri, but found it astounding that the Borough had gone all summer without a Director of Public Health in the middle of the pandemic.  He, therefore, welcomed the appointment of Ben Anderson.

The Leader reiterated that Rotherham had had cover from Doncaster’s Director of Public Health and he too welcomed Ben to Rotherham.

Resolved:-  That the appointment of Ben Anderson as the Director of Public Health for Rotherham MBC be noted.

Mover:-  Councillor Read                        Seconder:-  Councillor Roche

To receive updates from Ward Councillors from Wingfield, Anston and Woodsetts and Boston Castle on the activities supporting Thriving Neighbourhoods across the Borough.

Further to Minute No. 55 of the meeting of the Cabinet held on 19^th November, 2018, consideration was given to the annual Ward updates for Wingfield, Anston and Woodsetts and Boston Castle as part of the Thriving Neighbourhood Strategy.

The Strategy signalled a new way of working for the Council both for Members and for staff and covered every Ward in the Borough delivered through Ward Plans developed with residents to address local issues and opportunities.  Ward Members would be supported by the neighbourhood team and would work with officers and residents from a range of organisations to respond to residents.

Councillors Ireland and Jepson, on behalf of the Anston and Woodsetts Ward, gave an update on their Ward priorities as follows:-

-               Clean and Green activity with Anston Park Junior and Anston Brook Schools to promote the environment, involvement in environment projects and the consequences of littering

-               Speed watch events around various locations in Anston and Woodsetts in conjunction with South Yorkshire Police.  From last year’s budget a mobile vehicle activated speed unit had been purchased which enabled it to be moved around the Ward where there were known speeding hotspots

-               Together with Woodsetts Parish, Council, 3 permanent speed signs had been funded and awaiting installation

-               Community Chest had been successful again this year.  Community groups had all suffered throughout the pandemic and had needed a lot of extra support

-               A number of improvements within the Woodland Drive Community Centre including CCTV, new local play park and the installation of a defibrillator on the side of the Centre.  Replacement defibrillator pads had been funded through the Community Leadership Fund

-               There were 5 defibrillators within Anston.  Thanks were conveyed to Start a Heart with whom work had taken place

-               There was ongoing work with the Probation Service decorating the Community Centre.  The facelift was part of a wider scheme to encourage more users into the Centre

-               There were several woodlands in the area with a number of trees cut down for safety purposes.  These had been made into bench seats/used for woodland activities and distributed to local schools for reading gardens

-               Pumpkin trail where over 100 people had attended over the 3 days

Councillor McNeely, on behalf of the Boston Castle Ward, gave an update on its Ward priorities as follows:-

-               Sincere thanks to all the volunteers, businesses, community groups and local residents who came together in various ways to help in the community

-               Wellgate House – Ward Councillors had worked closely with South Yorkshire Police, Places for People, the Council and local residents to target anti-social behaviour around the property.  As a result local residents now kept the Police and Councillors updated via a Whatsapp group

-               Ward funding had been used to work in partnership with the local Mosque to look at the possibility of developing a hub for community activities

-               Herringthorpe Playing Fields – in response to community concerns regarding anti-social behaviour and following a  ...  view the full minutes text for item 415.

To receive and consider reports, minutes and recommendations of the Standards and Ethics Committee.

To confirm the minutes as a true record.

Resolved:-  That the reports, recommendations and minutes of the meeting of the Standards and Ethics Committee be adopted.

Mover:-  Councillor McNeely                   Seconder:-  Councillor Clark

To receive and consider reports, minutes and recommendations of the Audit Committee.

To confirm the minutes as a true record.

Resolved:-  That the reports, recommendations and minutes of the meeting of the Audit Committee be adopted.

Mover:-  Councillor Wyatt                        Seconder:-  Councillor Walsh

To receive and consider reports, minutes and recommendations of the Health and Wellbeing Board.

To confirm the minutes as a true record.

Resolved:-  That the reports, recommendations and minutes of the meetings of the Health and Wellbeing Board be adopted.

Mover:-  Councillor Roche            Seconder:-  Councillor Mallinder

To receive and consider reports, minutes and recommendations of the Planning Board.

To confirm the minutes as a true record.

Resolved:-  That the reports, recommendations and minutes of the meetings of the Planning Board be adopted.

Mover:-  Councillor Sheppard                 Seconder:-  Councillor Williams

To receive and consider reports, minutes and recommendations of the Licensing Board Sub-Committee and Licensing Sub-Committee.

To confirm the minutes as a true record.

Resolved:-  That the reports, recommendations and minutes of the meetings of the Licensing Board Sub-Committee and Licensing Sub-Committee be adopted.

Mover:-  Councillor Ellis                          Seconder:-  Councillor Beaumont

To put questions, if any, to the designated Members on the discharge of functions of the South Yorkshire Police and Crime Panel, South Yorkshire Fire and Rescue Authority, Barnsley, Doncaster, Rotherham and Sheffield Combined Authority and South Yorkshire Pensions Authority, in accordance with Council Procedure Rule 11(5).

There were no questions for the designated spokespersons.

To put questions, if any, to Cabinet Members and Committee Chairpersons (or their representatives) under Council Procedure Rules 11(1) and 11(3).

(1) Councillor R. Elliott asked the Leader of the Council “We anticipate the Government will not issue free school meal vouchers for the Christmas holiday. The Leader must confirm now that RMBC will ensure that children will be fed, or will he stand back again while a Cabinet Member promotes inequality across the Borough for children by making a unilateral decision on behalf of his Ward only?” In asking his question Councillor R. Elliott welcomed the change in policy from the Government regarding free school meals that had occurred since he had submitted the question.

In response the Leader noted his agreement with Councillor R Elliott regarding the welcome change of policy by the Government. The Leader noted that the decision had been made by Members representing the Wales Ward to support the provision of free school meals, using funds from their allocated Community Leadership Fund. The Leader noted that this action did not promote inequality as Members in other Wards could have acted accordingly if they had so wished. The Leader advised that this decision had been taken before the Government announcement that the proposed extension of the holiday activity programme, including funding for free school meals to cover England during the school holidays in 2021 had been made.

There was no supplementary question.

(2) Councillor Cowlesasked the Cabinet Member for Housing “In the next stage of Selective Licensing I am informed that it may take up to 3 years to complete house inspections. Surely it is unreasonable, indeed unfair, to force landlords to pay for a license 3 years ahead of any inspection being carried out”.

In response the Cabinet Member for Housing stated that that he did not think it was unreasonable or unfair. The Cabinet Member advised that it would, however, be unreasonable and unfair to abandon tenants in areas with acute needs and where the standard of properties was poor. The Cabinet Member advised that the Selective Licence Scheme and its associated fee did not solely purchase a housing inspection, but also paid for enhanced engagement and targeted enforcement in order to seek to improve properties in the designated areas.

The Cabinet Member noted that the Selective Licensing declaration had been a 5 year scheme with inspections being targeted based on risk with those properties that had been assessed at a higher risk being dealt with first, with further inspections being arranged where further concerns were raised.  The Cabinet Member advised that the new designations for Selective Licensing areas had been made on the basis of properties being in areas with high levels of deprivation and sought to improve the quality of property in these areas so that the poorest residents of Rotherham had access to good quality housing.

As a supplementary question Councillor Cowles asked whether the delays in an inspection being paid for and taking place were acceptable. Councillor Cowles also questioned the ability of any rental property to reach the level of electrical safety as required by the latest 19^{th  ...  view the full minutes text for item 422.}

Any other public items which the Mayor determines are urgent.

There were no urgent items for consideration.