Sheffield Council makes new public apology over tree-felling scandal

The Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman (LGSCO) recommended that the local authority offered a “public unreserved apology” to the people of Sheffield for the numerous problems it had uncovered. These included misleading the public about its tree removal strategy, misrepresenting expert advice and acting with a “lack of transparency, openness and on occasion, honesty”.

The investigation was sparked by a complaint by member of the public Alan Robshaw relating to the controversial removal of eight trees on Rustlings Road, Sheffield, in November 2016.

The removal, which involved council contractors accompanied by police officers arriving on the street at 5am, came despite the authority’s Independent Tree Panel recommending only one tree for removal.

Mr Robshaw died in May this year and the LGSCO said the council should also issue an apology to his family, in addition to the more general apology to the public for its overall handling of tree-felling work.

An initial statement made by the council following the publication of the report said: "Sheffield City Council has issued an apology following its handling of a complaint regarding the approach to street trees as part of the Streets Ahead programme".

An updated version published today now reads: "The Council unreservedly apologises for mistakes made in its handling of a complaint about the way we removed street trees from Rustlings Road in November 2016 and accepts the findings made in the report of the Local Government & Social Care Ombudsman which draws attention to general failings in the implementation of the street trees elements of the Streets Ahead programme. We apologise for these failings."

A statement issued following the publication of the LGO’s findings from Councillor Mark Jones, cabinet member for Environment, Street Scene and Climate Change at Sheffield City Council is also included alongside the new apology but has not been altered.

It said the authority had “got some things wrong” but added that the report was representative of a “very different and difficult time”, with the authority’s approach now focused on partnership working and retaining trees where possible.

Coun Jones added: “In this specific case, we will be apologising to the complainant’s family and giving reassurances that we are already on the right path towards a more open and sustainable vision for how we manage street trees, not just for now, but for many years to come."

The initial statement was criticised for not going far enough by tree campaigners, who also highlighted a previous ruling last year by the Ombudsman which criticised the council over residents being misled about the expert advice given on whether a threatened tree should be felled.

Rebecca Hammond, from the Sheffield Trees Action Groups organisation, said of the initial statement: "The Ombudsman has told SCC to make an unreserved apology. The mealy-mouthed statement published on the council’s website is not an apology.

"There have now been two damning rulings by the Local Government Ombudsman. It is very clear that an inquiry is needed into what happened, and SCC must learn lessons rather than expecting us to move on without evidence that anything will change in the future.”

The LGSCO report also revealed the council had raised concerns about the publication of its findings.

“The council has commented that it has concerns that our decision to issue this report may undermine the work it has done to build better relations with citizens and rebuild public trust,” it said. “That is not our intent and we trust this recognition of the positive steps taken by the council reflects that.”

Councillors must debate findings

Sheffield councillors must take action as a result of the LGSCO findings, the Ombudsman has said.

A spokesperson said: “We welcome the council’s prompt position that it accepts the findings of our report. But it must now consider our report at its full council or cabinet – or other appropriately delegated committee of elected members – and tell us within three months the action it has taken, or proposes to take.

“At that point we will decide if we are satisfied with the council’s response to all the recommendations to put things right in our report. This is a standard requirement when we publish public interest reports.”

Support The Yorkshire Post and become a subscriber today.

Your subscription will help us to continue to bring quality news to the people of Yorkshire. In return, you'll see fewer ads on site, get free access to our app and receive exclusive members-only offers.

So, please - if you can - pay for our work. Just £5 per month is the starting point. If you think that which we are trying to achieve is worth more, you can pay us what you think we are worth. By doing so, you will be investing in something that is becoming increasingly rare. Independent journalism that cares less about right and left and more about right and wrong. Journalism you can trust.

Thank you

James Mitchinson