Jump to content
nevthelodgemoorowl

Clive Betts responds in SAG / SCC. Write to your Councillor or MP

Recommended Posts

22 hours ago, upperwinngardensowl said:

Here my contribution thats been sent off this lunchtime.

(much of which well and truly ripped off from others)

 

Mr. John Mothersole,

Chief Executive,

Sheffield City Council,

Town Hall,

Pinstone Street,

Sheffield

S1 2HH

 

Dear Mr Mothersole,

 

Closure of Leppings lane

 

Like many others I am writing to comment upon the draconian restrictions which have recently been imposed at Hillsborough, allegedly in the name of safety, and your recent outspoken and critical comments about Sheffield Wednesday. I believe that the measures are unnecessary and disproportionate but are now directly increasing the safety risks in and around the football ground. I understand that the prohibitions are as a result of one isolated report commissioned from MMU.

I have had contact with Dr Billings on this issue to register my concerns, who has pointed out that the decisions are driven by SYP and the Council and not within his direct remit.

Nevertheless I am particularly interested in what has changed in the council and police position since the match commander of the very fixture that triggered this overreaction posted the following on the SYP website the night of the event.

Match commander thanks Sheffield fans after Derby

Date published: 04 March 2019 23:21

Dated: 04 March 2019 23:20:07

Following tonight’s highly anticipated Steel City Derby at Hillsborough Stadium, the match commander has thanked fans for their co-operation and support throughout the police operation.

Chief Superintendent Morley said: “Tonight saw the city come together to cheer on their teams and overall the behaviour from fans was positive and there was an exciting atmosphere for everybody to enjoy.

“During the course of the operation there was some minor disorder that resulted in the arrest of six individuals. This reduced level of conflict is testament to the attitudes and behaviour of both sets of supporters and the positive work by everybody involved.

“Thank you to our officers and our colleagues from other forces for their efforts, professionalism and effectiveness in keeping the public safe, under difficult circumstances.

“We hope your journey home was safe and that everybody enjoyed the match.”

 

To support your, and your partners subsequent actions, the match commander was either completely wrong, or purposely putting out a misleading statement. The alternative is that he was correct, telling the truth, and a major issue has been acted upon, where it did not exist.

I have been a Season Ticket holder for the kop for the last 48 consecutive years since I was a boy walking down from Parson Cross and for the last 10 years have approached from Middlewood (where the Tram stops are) and entered the ground by walking past Leppings lane. The latest changes do not directly affect me as much as others but I have witnessed countless scenes before and after games in that area to make me more qualified than someone who has been fed, what can only be, selective information.

 

The reputation of SYP, SAG and the council has been chipped away relentlessly by never ending restrictions on a stadium that, in its current form, has hosted crowds close to its 39,000 capacity on many occasions without incident.

People marvel at the gaps insisted upon between home and away fans that are simply not witnessed at any other ground in the country, including the incendiary Glasgow Rangers v Celtic fixture. Whole areas are prohibited, affecting revenue, atmosphere and creating frustration and anger on “sell out” occasions.

We do not see any of these restrictions in place down the road at Bramall Lane. That is a stadium where there have been innumerable incidents between home and away fans over recent years and where segregation immediately outside the ground is non-existent.

 

We have a situation where a Labour controlled council, is targeting predominantly working class citizens without recourse to any logic.

Would this happen in Liverpool, or Manchester, or Newcastle? Not a chance.

 

The latest decision, to deny access, for that is what it is, for home fans via Leppings Lane is another nail in the coffin for relations between the clubs fans and “the authorities”.

To do this when home games are against Luton and QPR where there are barely any away fans heaps more ridicule on the decision.

 

Anyone, absolutely anyone, could see what the effect of the Leppings Lane restrictions would be. If 50% of the fans in The North stand went out via Leppings Lane then there was only one other place they could go….Penistone Rd. It appears to have slipped everyone connected to this decisions mind that this is a major dual carriageway and that the pavement is about 3 yards deep. 3 weeks later a sticking plaster is applied to close off the road causing disruption and anger to many local residents. Remember this safety issue only existed because of the action by SAG/SYP.

 

I hesitate to mention the following, as history shows that the reaction to a safety issue SAG/SYP has itself generated is to impose another restriction.

Now we have the entirely predictable situation where fans from the North stand are having to walk round and underneath the South stand, in order to cross the bridge onto Parkside Rd then towards Leppings lane. This is on top of the existing traffic from the Kop and against the flow of fans from the South stand heading towards Penistone road therefore causing more congestion than previously existed and potential safety issues. In addition, everyone in the South stand is now funnelled onto the bridge or towards Penistone road, as they cannot exit via Leppings lane.

 

Additionally, and I assume perceived hooliganism was the catalyst behind the whole debacle, you have a situation where everyone walking up Parkside road after a match can for the first time ever, be 100% certain that anyone walking towards them is an away fan. For some, this might be a trigger for confrontation that previously could not exist.

 

If you and your partners fail to reconsider the facts and apply some common sense and work WITH the club and its fans rather than against them, then I can only assume that exactly the same restrictions will be put in place IMMEDIATELY at Bramall Lane. If they are not, then we have to question the motivation behind these decisions.

Two wrongs do not make a right but at least we would have uniformity.  

        

 

 

I welcome your comments.

 

 

 

CC

Stephen Watson – Chief Constable SYP

Clive Betts MP

Angela Smith MP

(no point contacting Jared O’Mara)

Dr. Alan Billings – South Yorks Police and Crime Commissioner

Julie Dore – Leader of Sheffield Council

Excellent well thought out letter there.:tango:

  • Agree 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mr arseholes has prorogued Hillsborough..very unconstitutional.

Need gina foookin miller to wave some legal papers about.

WTF:

  • Agree 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 03/09/2019 at 16:20, upperwinngardensowl said:

Here my contribution thats been sent off this lunchtime.

(much of which well and truly ripped off from others)

 

 

Excellent letter. Nothing has come of mine so far, not even an acknowledgement, but not a surprise.

The more letters we all send, the better so please Owlstalk members, get writing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@nevthelodgemoorowl @Andrew Robinson @upperwinngardensowl

All. Good stuff guys. Maybe however you are going down the wrong route. If you write a complaint to Sheffield Cc about what Motherarsole and SAG have done,  they have to respond AND investigate to all points accordingly. If not the can be referred to the ombusdsman. 

https://www.sheffield.gov.uk/home/your-city-council/make-complaint-council-service

They ought to be concentrating on the apprently catastrophic and dangerous shambles they've made taking over the DLO from Kier. 

  • Like 1
  • Agree 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You know what to do don’t you lads and lasses?

 

Get rid of the incompetent shitestate Labour council that has perpetuated Sheffield for to long

 

Crossbow preferably lol

 

but the vote will also work

  • Agree 8

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, baz9209 said:

You know what to do don’t you lads and lasses?

 

Get rid of the incompetent shitestate Labour council that has perpetuated Sheffield for to long

 

Crossbow preferably lol

 

but the vote will also work

Are you mad?

  • Agree 1
  • Disagree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Costello 77 said:

Are you mad?

True. Takes bloody ages to reload a crossbow.

  • Agree 1
  • Haha 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

On 03/09/2019 at 16:20, upperwinngardensowl said:

 

I hesitate to mention the following, as history shows that the reaction to a safety issue SAG/SYP has itself generated is to impose another restriction.

 

 Super letter , Winners. Especially the quoted line.

Nailed it in a nutshell.

 

  • Agree 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I sent Clive my letter to the Star about the restrictions and the nice man has thanked me. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Pope's dead and all tha...t but I've done a bit of research which, of course, any fine and upstanding journalist would do in search of an honest story.

 

I must add that I am certainly not a legal expert and I am simply quoting extracts from what the Government says, via the Health and Safety Executive website, about Safety Advisory Groups (SAGs). Also, I am certainly not suggesting that the club should not engage, co-operate or work with the HSE, SAG or the local authority in this instance. I merely cut and paste what the law/advice says.

 

(Summary below if you don't want to read the detailed content in the bullet points or read the HSE-GOV website).


1) SAGs are non-statutory bodies and so do not have legal powers or responsibilities, and are not empowered to approve or prohibit events from taking place. Event organisers and others involved in the running of an event, retain the principal legal duties for ensuring public safety. (bold type highlights by me)

2) Event organisers should determine whether there is a SAG, or similar arrangements, in the relevant area and if appropriate, submit their event proposal for discussion and advice. Attendance of the event organiser at SAG meetings may be voluntary. There is however benefits to be gained from engagement in the SAG process from the outset. LAs may of course require events organiser’s attendance eg as a condition of using their land.

3) Discussions may extend beyond an organiser’s duty to comply with workplace health and safety law and even the boundaries of an event site, to include considering the impact on the local transport network and civil contingencies in the event of an emergency. The advice provided by the SAG and any decisions taken should be proportionate to the risk profile of the event. (my bold type)

4) Some event organisers will already have established effective liaison arrangements with external bodies or organisations like the LA and emergency services, because they will be involved in the wider management of the event eg crowd management to and from a venue and emergency arrangements. To facilitate this, some events establish a planning group/s. In these circumstances, it is often unnecessary to set-up a separate SAG. (my bold type again)

5) HSE does not routinely sit on or attend SAG meetings. It is not normally appropriate for HSE to take part in the decision-making process at the planning stage, particularly where the event is organised by an LA. HSE inspectors may, however, be asked by a SAG and/or event organiser to provide advice and guidance on occupational health and safety matters, particularly where HSE is the enforcing authority for the activity concerned eg fairgrounds, broadcasting and construction activities. In these circumstances HSE is normally able to provide such advice to regulators, duty holders and others without having to attend the SAG although a local decision may be made that attendance would be appropriate.

HSE inspectors are not in a position to authorise or approve an event organiser's safety plan, so their contribution shouldn't be inferred by the SAG or the event organiser as sanctioning their methods of controlling risk. (again, my bold type)


So, in summary:-

a) SAG have no authority or legal powers to approve or prohibit events from taking place.
b) Liability basically remains with the event organisers even where SAG or the HSE is has been engaged or "offered advice".
c) The advice given by SAG (and the actions taken thereafter) should be proptionate to the risk.

 

If it was the local authority making the decisions, The Local Government (Review of Decisions) Act 2015 requires LAs to put into place formal review procedures for any decision which stops or restricts a proposed event on the grounds of health and safety. This act states that once the review is completed, the person asked for the review has rights to to appeal against or otherwise challenge a decision that has been reviewed.

 

Further information from:-
http://www.hse.gov.uk/event-safety/safety-advisory-groups.htm

 

  • Agree 1
  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Musn't Grumble said:

The Pope's dead and all tha...t but I've done a bit of research which, of course, any fine and upstanding journalist would do in search of an honest story.

 

I must add that I am certainly not a legal expert and I am simply quoting extracts from what the Government says, via the Health and Safety Executive website, about Safety Advisory Groups (SAGs). Also, I am certainly not suggesting that the club should not engage, co-operate or work with the HSE, SAG or the local authority in this instance. I merely cut and paste what the law/advice says.

 

(Summary below if you don't want to read the detailed content in the bullet points or read the HSE-GOV website).


1) SAGs are non-statutory bodies and so do not have legal powers or responsibilities, and are not empowered to approve or prohibit events from taking place. Event organisers and others involved in the running of an event, retain the principal legal duties for ensuring public safety. (bold type highlights by me)

2) Event organisers should determine whether there is a SAG, or similar arrangements, in the relevant area and if appropriate, submit their event proposal for discussion and advice. Attendance of the event organiser at SAG meetings may be voluntary. There is however benefits to be gained from engagement in the SAG process from the outset. LAs may of course require events organiser’s attendance eg as a condition of using their land.

3) Discussions may extend beyond an organiser’s duty to comply with workplace health and safety law and even the boundaries of an event site, to include considering the impact on the local transport network and civil contingencies in the event of an emergency. The advice provided by the SAG and any decisions taken should be proportionate to the risk profile of the event. (my bold type)

4) Some event organisers will already have established effective liaison arrangements with external bodies or organisations like the LA and emergency services, because they will be involved in the wider management of the event eg crowd management to and from a venue and emergency arrangements. To facilitate this, some events establish a planning group/s. In these circumstances, it is often unnecessary to set-up a separate SAG. (my bold type again)

5) HSE does not routinely sit on or attend SAG meetings. It is not normally appropriate for HSE to take part in the decision-making process at the planning stage, particularly where the event is organised by an LA. HSE inspectors may, however, be asked by a SAG and/or event organiser to provide advice and guidance on occupational health and safety matters, particularly where HSE is the enforcing authority for the activity concerned eg fairgrounds, broadcasting and construction activities. In these circumstances HSE is normally able to provide such advice to regulators, duty holders and others without having to attend the SAG although a local decision may be made that attendance would be appropriate.

HSE inspectors are not in a position to authorise or approve an event organiser's safety plan, so their contribution shouldn't be inferred by the SAG or the event organiser as sanctioning their methods of controlling risk. (again, my bold type)


So, in summary:-

a) SAG have no authority or legal powers to approve or prohibit events from taking place.
b) Liability basically remains with the event organisers even where SAG or the HSE is has been engaged or "offered advice".
c) The advice given by SAG (and the actions taken thereafter) should be proptionate to the risk.

 

If it was the local authority making the decisions, The Local Government (Review of Decisions) Act 2015 requires LAs to put into place formal review procedures for any decision which stops or restricts a proposed event on the grounds of health and safety. This act states that once the review is completed, the person asked for the review has rights to to appeal against or otherwise challenge a decision that has been reviewed.

 

Further information from:-
http://www.hse.gov.uk/event-safety/safety-advisory-groups.htm

 

Therein lies the conundrum. If SWFC take no notice and something untoward happens we will be crucified. If SAG and HSE says its ok we can say we liased with the appropriate bodies.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

catch 22 I am afraid

Ignore them and summat remotely dodgy happens, irrespective of whos to blame, we cop it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Frazzlebeak said:

Therein lies the conundrum. If SWFC take no notice and something untoward happens we will be crucified. If SAG and HSE says its ok we can say we liased with the appropriate bodies.

 

Not really.

 

It says that whatever action is taken, SWFC as event organisers are liable regardless of what HSE or SAG say. Presumably (although I don't know for certain) SAG are involved because of potential risks outside the ground and on the roads, pavements to and from the ground where SWFC cannot be held to liability.

 

Also (but again, don't take my word for it as I am not legally trained), in health and safety matters, people can be personally liable for risk. Technically, if someone spills coffee on the stairs in the office building and does nothing about it, if someone else slips on the spillage and gets injured, the person who has spilt the coffee could be liable personally for not doing anything about it.

 

I used to run a sports club with coaches, vounteers, supervision and management of a facility and the whole area is a minefield when it comes to making sure that you have taken appropriate action and have plans in place in the event of people getting injured, abused, etc.

  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

United currently sit 5th in the table for most banning orders which again makes a mockery of why we are sanctioned and they are not.

 

Has Mothersole actually replied to anyone or just buried his head in the sand?

  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

At Hudds both sets of fans were in same stand. Exiting at the same time funnelling together on the car park/road 

 

i didnt  see any trouble

 

sag would have had a reyt hissy fit. 

  • Agree 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎04‎/‎09‎/‎2019 at 18:45, Peacenocchio said:

@nevthelodgemoorowl @Andrew Robinson @upperwinngardensowl

All. Good stuff guys. Maybe however you are going down the wrong route. If you write a complaint to Sheffield Cc about what Motherarsole and SAG have done,  they have to respond AND investigate to all points accordingly. If not the can be referred to the ombusdsman. 

https://www.sheffield.gov.uk/home/your-city-council/make-complaint-council-service

They ought to be concentrating on the apprently catastrophic and dangerous shambles they've made taking over the DLO from Kier. 

I have good Idea. How about you have a try ? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎02‎/‎09‎/‎2019 at 19:52, bash said:

One thing sums up the Sheffield Derby for me. In April 1993 I went down to the Wembley Semi on a minibus from Chapeltown, organised by a massive Wednesday fan. There was 9 or 10 Wednesdayites on it, and three Blades, two us were 15 years old. They let the kids have a free ride down, and we hadn't even reached Junction 35 before I had a can of Stones in my hand. Do they think that could happen nowadays?

That's very much looking back through rose tinted glasses.  Remember someone was killed that day.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have a feeling SAG meetings regarding us start off with the words "How do we get them?"

  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Has anyone had a response to their letters?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, York_Owl said:

That's very much looking back through rose tinted glasses.  Remember someone was killed that day.

 

Whilst nobody should lose their lives at a football match, the death was as a result of one punch and he banged his head on the floor. Not trying to justify it by any means but those who didn’t know the circumstances could read your comment as being the outcome of widespread serious disorder and it wasn’t.

  • Agree 2
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...