Sheffield 2021 Referendum

[Lex Luthor 10]

On 30/01/2020 at 18:13, max said:

There has been a consultation on what people would prefer to see in place of the current system. Details can be found here:

Call for evidence

 

Unfortunately,  this has now closed with, as I understand it, fewer that 1% of Sheffield's citizens having responded.

 

You can still have your say in The Big Conversation

If less than 1% have responded, then it needs to be conducted again, this time informing more of the public of the proposed changes and consultation.  Or do SCC view a 1% take-up a success?

[max 13]

6 hours ago, Lex Luthor said:

If less than 1% have responded, then it needs to be conducted again, this time informing more of the public of the proposed changes and consultation.  Or do SCC view a 1% take-up a success?

Thank you for your feedback and I think those are very important points. Perhaps you could communicate them to your local councillors or to the department which is conducting the consultations.

[Jeffrey Shaw 88]

12 hours ago, Lex Luthor said:

If less than 1% have responded, then it needs to be conducted again, this time informing more of the public of the proposed changes and consultation.  Or do SCC view a 1% take-up a success?

I've yet to meet anybody who was consulted or was even aware of a consultation exercise. SCC seem to have kept very quiet about the alleged public consultation. The 1% response suggests a very limited pool of respondents!

[Robin-H 11]

1 hour ago, Jeffrey Shaw said:

I've yet to meet anybody who was consulted or was even aware of a consultation exercise. SCC seem to have kept very quiet about the alleged public consultation. The 1% response suggests a very limited pool of respondents!

According to the Consultation Institute, the average response rate for UK public consultations currently stands at 0.7%. Consultations that achieve higher than a 1% response rate are considered ‘good’. Targeted consultation of course achieves much higher response rates. 

[Longcol 592]

4 hours ago, Jeffrey Shaw said:

I've yet to meet anybody who was consulted or was even aware of a consultation exercise. SCC seem to have kept very quiet about the alleged public consultation. The 1% response suggests a very limited pool of respondents!

I would have hoped that the people organising the petition would have informed the 26,000 people who signed it about the consultation.

[Annie Bynnol 610]

Since so many of he original 26000  petition signers did not provide the required Sheffield residence qualification or even lived in this country or voted multiple times or do not exist, perhaps it is no surprise that less than 1% of genuine residents have been persuaded to be  interested.

It is not democratic for a group of political activist's to manipulate a system for their political ambitions, some of whom have stood for council elections previously and failed.

 

Edited February 5, 2020 by Annie Bynnol

[Calvin Payne 10]

Yet again more nonsense about the 'It's Our City' petition. The required number to trigger the referendum was 20,092. That number was comfortably achieved. Some names were disqualified where people used 'commonly known' names or shortened versions rather than the name that is on the electoral register. The above accusations of fraud are serious and unfounded.

[tonk 10]

2 hours ago, Annie Bynnol said:

Since so many of he original 26000  petition signers did not provide the required Sheffield residence qualification or even lived in this country or voted multiple times or do not exist, perhaps it is no surprise that less than 1% of genuine residents have been persuaded to be  interested.

It is not democratic for a group of political activist's to manipulate a system for their political ambitions, some of whom have stood for council elections previously and failed.

This is complete nonsense. The 26000 were verified by the council... I'm sure this was done through gritted teeth. Yes a handful were deemed invalid but the result was overwhelming and deemed fair. Anyone who supports the current system simply hasn't taken the time to make themselves aware of the scandalous, perhaps even criminal behavior of SCC labour cabinet. The monies lost over there great China scam, the trees issue, the treatment of residents in shire green, and Darnall, the absolute scandal of the purposeful defunding of some of the most deprived areas is a result of the elite cabinet playing labour politics rather than looking after the people who vote for then..  the new committee system will be a car real opportunity for real change and also keep councilors on their toes.

 

 

[Eamonn Ward 10]

Sheffield City Council verified that more than 21,000 signatories were on the electoral register in Sheffield and stopped further verification at that point as it was 100% clear that more than 5% has been achieved. It was a phenomenal effort by It's Our City activists involving thousands of hours work. The vast majority of people signed after conversations at events that It's Our City attended citywide.  The first green shoots of a possible return to genuine community democracy in the city after a  disastrous decade. 

[Annie Bynnol 610]

 

If the standards of the petition were the same as other Government petitions, the huge number of invalid names would have been avoided from the start.

About 20 countries are represented.

Hundeds of anonymous or incorrect names.

Hundreds of multiple entries.

 

The fact it took so long to collect such a small number is indicative of the lack of interest.

 

The admission that so much effort was needed to persuade so few is very interesting.

 

The scary bit is the admission that the politcal aim is not a return to the committee set up, but to a Meusli Belt commune.

[Robin-H 11]

2 hours ago, Annie Bynnol said:

Since so many of he original 26000  petition signers did not provide the required Sheffield residence qualification or even lived in this country or voted multiple times or do not exist, perhaps it is no surprise that less than 1% of genuine residents have been persuaded to be  interested.

It is not democratic for a group of political activist's [SIC]  to manipulate a system for their political ambitions, some of whom have stood for council elections previously and failed.

 

(I’ll ignore the unfounded accusations that the petition is somehow invalid, as it’s been dealt with in comments above mine). 

Holding a referendum is not ‘manipulating the system’ and is democratic.  

 

You don’t want the structure of the council to change, then fine, vote against it. People who do are perfectly entitled to vote for it. That’s democracy. 

[Annie Bynnol 610]

17 minutes ago, tonk said:

 

I think you have made a genuine mistake of not separating my comments and you reply.