David Reed goes on facebook to blame “the Liberal Democrat-run East Devon District Council” for planning homes that the water and sewer infrastructure cannot support. The real culprits, as pointed out by Independent Councillor Joe Whibley are the housing targets imposed by the government and the failure of SWW to invest.

As an ex Royal Marine you might have expected David Reed to be a better shot.

David Reed MP posted on his own facebook page and then on community facebook pages the following tirade about the EXMO_20 development plans for 700 homes proposed by developers 3West Group. Placing the blame on the Lib Dem run East Devon Council.

In the interests of full disclosure Owl wished to point out that David Reed declared receiving a donation of £5K from 3West Group in 2024.

David Reed MP [Exmouth Community UK facebook page]

Last week, I secured a Government commitment to examine whether water and sewage infrastructure can support the scale of housing growth proposed by the Liberal Democrat-run East Devon District Council.

In Parliament, I raised concerns that thousands of new homes could place additional pressure on already overstretched wastewater systems, and highlighted the need to learn lessons from previous developments where infrastructure failed to keep pace with growth.

The Liberal Democrats on East Devon District Council are proposing to build tens of thousands of new homes across our area, and I do not have faith that South West Water will keep pace with all this new development.

I soon hope to be hosting a public town hall meeting on the proposed EXMO_20 development, where local people will have the opportunity to hear from East Devon District Council, South West Water, developers and other key stakeholders. And to ask questions and raise concerns about the impact on infrastructure, the environment and local services. Watch this space for further updates.

You can watch my exchange with the Water Minister below.

[To watch the video go to the facebook page]

This prompted the following string of comments

Councillor Joe Whibley

Hi David – thanks for your mention in Parliament and the assurances you obtained.

Before continuing I’d like to stress I’m not a Lib Dem.

I’d also just like to point out that the ‘Lib Dems in East Devon’ are not choosing to build thousands of houses. The administration there are drawing up a new local plan with housing numbers imposed by Central government. Those numbers will increase significantly if we abandon that plan now and start again or significantly amend it. To build nothing would mean we would lose control of all planning control over our district.

We need to work together. You’re dead right that SWW need to be able to cope with new connections, because government housing targets are not going away – we can’t simply ignore them.

We can work as one to call for tougher sanctions for SWW, easier introduction of Grampian conditions and a removal of the presumption that a planning authority has to accept a water company’s word if they say they can accept a connection and we know they can’t.

We’ll not beat this by politicising it as we all face the same rules and restrictions. We need them to change and there’s not a single Lib Dem locally who would disagree with that.

Thanks for your continued work on our behalf.

Bill Edmunds

That’s only half the story.

Exmouth is surrounded by water on 2 sides which limits access into the area. Any further housing will further clog up our roads.

Also, the actions of the developers is simply scandalous in reducing the numbers of “so-called” affordable houses by revising plans after gaining planning permission. New houses are are then offered at unaffordable rents for local people.

Furthermore there is a potentially devastating impact on significant areas of ecological importance due to proximity. Building on green field sites is simply wrong and is just ruining the area.

We have also seen UK birth rates declining over a number of years, so if we continue to see greater control over net migration, this should reduce the demand for housing.

Councillor Joe Whibley

I disagree with nothing you say (maybe your migration point excluded) but nobody, David Reed included, is in a position to tackle this head on. Your points are eminently sensible and everyone of right mind would concur – however, If I’m able to be political for a moment, ultimately Labour housing and planning policies have, and increase, our inability to access the tools we have to fight this kind of thing. EDDC have, again, been painted into a corner not of its own making but I’d then taking the blame for it. Yes, some details of the plan could be different, but this scenario would then be happening somewhere else in the district.

The tools I mention are merely the ones most immediately available to us.

Bill Edmunds

I accept that Labour policies are making it harder to fight against this continued development – housing seems to be their only real plan for growth. The actions of the Planning Inspectorate are inexcusable in waiving anything through despite genuine objections, whereby councils then can’t afford to take further action.

However, I believe we need to take whatever actions are possible and we should expect our local MP to stand up and be counted.

River Otter: Sewage Pollution – Adjournment debate, Thursday 18 June 2026

Summary

Richard Foord laid out the problem in detail using the evidence produced by the Otter River Catchment Action group (ORCA) and its 75 citizen scientists.

He quoted three pledges made by South West Water’s then CEO, Susan Davy, in October 2025: to tackle any storm water overflow releasing more than 20 times a year; to act where SWW assets are not performing as they should or are causing environmental damage; to target improvements in SWW as part of their 2025–2030 investment programme. None of which has materialised.

The river Otter is badly polluted by e.coli and phosphates resulting in Budleigh Salterton, at its mouth, losing its Blue Flag bathing water status. It ranks amongst the 20% most polluted rivers.

The phosphate removal scheme at Honiton sewage works has been deleted from SWW investment plans and the works currently operates at 40% over capacity. With further housing development this is predicted to rise to 73%.

Effectively, South West Water, Foord said, has been using the River Otter as a conveyor—a free, open, half-pipe sewer—resulting in significant environmental harm.

He ended by telling the Minister that recovery can happen but will require urgency, transparency, and a willingness to move beyond promises and towards delivery. He called for stronger accountability, investment in infrastructure, and tighter controls on executive bonuses when environmental standards are not met.

The Minister, Mary Creagh, gave him a surprisingly long reply containing a lot of promises but listing a few actions. For example: she said the Environment Agency is currently investigating potential offences at Ottery St Mary’s sewage attenuation tank. It is in the process of agreeing an enforcement undertaking with South West Water and investigating event duration monitoring data from the site.

From the length of her reply we may conclude that at least the scale of the problem is now recognised, and that civil servants and staff at the environment agency have had to scurry around and dig out a lot of information for her. [Ministers don’t like to face a debater better briefed than them].

If nothing more, the River Otter is now firmly on Whitehall’s map.

Note: Richard Foord declined an offer of hospitality (breakfast in Parliament) from the new chief executive of South West Water and its parent company Pennon Group on the morning of this debate. Surprising that Keith Haslett, Pennon’s new CE, has the time from his duties in the South West to breakfast in Whitehall! – Owl

Full Text

This debate is sourced from the uncorrected (rolling) version of Hansard and is subject to correction.

Richard Foord (Honiton and Sidmouth) (LD)

I am grateful for the opportunity to raise the issue of sewage pollution in the River Otter, a river that flows through many of the Devon communities that I represent.

I should say at the outset that, this morning, I declined an offer of hospitality from the new chief executive of South West Water and its parent company Pennon Group. They offered breakfast in Parliament, but I did not accept as I was here, in the Chamber, trying to catch Mr Speaker’s eye to talk about the Jurassic coast UNESCO world heritage site, and it is helpful that I will get to talk a little bit about that now. My office has written back to South West Water to request a separate meeting with the chief executive to talk through some of the issues that I will raise in the debate. In fairness, the debate is also about issues that apply across the water industry, not just with Pennon Group.

I pay tribute to the more than 75 water testers, campaigners and citizen scientists of the Otter River Catchment Action group—ORCA. The ORCA group developed out of the Otter Valley Association, and it has devoted almost as many hours to understanding and protecting the cherished River Otter as there have been hours of sewage spills into that river, which is saying something. The work of ORCA has provided much of the evidence in my contribution. The dedication of the ORCA volunteers represents the very best of self-organised civic community action and public service.

In particular, I would like to pay tribute to Bruce McGlashan, who passed away suddenly in April this year, just days after ORCA hosted a public meeting at The Institute in Ottery St Mary. Bruce brought to ORCA his experience of having been a manager at the Environment Agency for 30 years. He was also secretary of the River Otter Fisheries Association. Bruce was central to ORCA, and helped us to correspond with South West Water and the Environment Agency. It is hard to believe that he, Peter Williams and I stood on the shingle outside the Otter Inn at Honiton, after a meeting with the Environment Agency, just days before Bruce died. He should have lived to see the River Otter returned to full ecological health.

The Otter should be one of England’s ecological success stories. It runs through a beautiful valley in Devon that supports agriculture, tourism and recreation, and ought to be a rich and diverse habitat. Yet today, most sections of the Otter and its key tributary, the Wolf, are classified by the Environment Agency as having poor ecological status. That places the rivers within the 20% of water bodies with the poorest ecological status in the country. This issue does not just concern the local environment: it also concerns public health and infrastructure, and it is increasingly a question of public trust in the Government’s ability to regulate companies that provide utilities properly.

The facts on the ground are damning. Data obtained from South West Water through freedom of information and environmental information regulation requests reveal an alarming picture of bacterial contamination in the River Otter. Between November 2024 and May 2025, average daily levels of E. coli measured in the river were five times higher than the acceptable level for safe swimming. After periods of rainfall, those levels spiked up to 100 times the safe limit, remaining at increased levels for days or weeks at a time. During the period analysed, E. coli levels exceeded the safe swimming limit on more than 90% of days.

Budleigh Salterton, where the river meets the sea, lost its blue flag status this year because of a deterioration in water quality. Following the loss of that blue flag status, South West Water stated publicly that the E. coli levels at Budleigh’s beach:

“could be caused by birdlife in the new Otter Nature Reserve”.

However, ORCA samples from the mouth of the River Otter show E. coli surges correlate with surges upstream of the nature reserve.

We should be honest about the scale of the sewage problem. This challenge is made more difficult by the fact that regular monitoring has been limited. Until recently, nobody was routinely measuring E. coli levels along the River Otter. ORCA volunteers are collecting samples every two weeks. They do so at three locations along the river, building a much-needed evidence base to understand pollution levels, rainfall impacts and likely sources of contamination.

In 2024, South West Water released untreated sewage into the River Otter for more than 9,500 hours. In terms of duration, that is three times more untreated sewage hours spilled into the River Otter than into Exmouth bay. In 2025, more than 8,000 hours of untreated sewage were discharged into the river and its tributaries, following hundreds of monitored sewage overflow events. Untreated sewage is entering the river on a routine basis, and at a scale that cannot be dismissed as a consequence of exceptional weather.

Phosphate pollution further damages the river’s ecology. High concentrations of phosphate cause algal bloom and eutrophication and reduce oxygen levels in the water, causing significant harm to aquatic plants, fish and wildlife. The evidence gathered by ORCA is striking; its monitoring suggests that the presence of a single sewage treatment works on the river can increase harmful phosphate concentrations in the river by around 80% during the summer months. Its testing indicates that around 70% of phosphate found in the middle and lower River Otter can be attributed not to agricultural pollution, but to treated sewage effluent.

One of the most frustrating aspects of this situation is the gap between the pledges we have received from South West Water and the delivery we have seen on them. In August and October 2025, South West Water’s then CEO, Susan Davy, publicly committed to three critical objectives for the River Otter by the end of 2029, which I will quote.

The first objective is that

“any storm overflow that is persistently releasing more than 20 times a year will be tackled following investigation of the cause”.

The second objective is that

“where our assets are not performing as they should, or where they are causing environmental harm, we will act”.

The third objective states:

“As part of our 2025–2030 investment programme, we’re targeting improvements across the Otter catchment—including at Ottery St Mary—to reduce storm overflow use, and lower phosphate in our treated discharges”.

At the time, those commitments were welcome, but residents are entitled to ask what progress has been made in the last year. First, at the 11 worst discharge points along the river, there was still an average of 67 untreated discharges in 2025. That is not fewer than the 20 that we were pledged. Secondly, South West Water has published only a limited programme of what it describes as “tactical improvements”. That is hardly action.

Thirdly, despite repeated engagement from local campaigners and community groups, South West Water currently has no scheme to remove phosphate from treated effluent by 2030 and no published plan to meet the commitments made by the former chief exec. There was a time when South West Water talked about a phosphate reduction scheme for Honiton sewage treatment works, which would have removed 35% of all South West Water-sourced phosphate before 2030. According to South West Water more recently, the scheme

“had been removed from the 2025-2030 plan.”

Another consequence of sewage pollution is its impact on housing developments. East Devon district council commissioned a water cycle study as part of its local plan. Honiton sewage treatment works—the largest treatment works on the river—is already operating at 40% above capacity. That is projected to rise to 73% above capacity when future building plans are taken into account.

The council’s report identified many serious failings in South West Water’s sewage infrastructure in the River Otter catchment. That includes failings at three major sewage works that are already operating in excess of their capacity. Their excess untreated sewage is being discharged regularly into the River Otter. Effectively, South West Water has been using the River Otter as a conveyor—a free, open, half-pipe sewer—resulting in significant environmental harm. The council’s report was plain that new housing approvals will require that South West Water delivers suitable additional treatment capacity.

The costs of inaction are mounting: we have environmental degradation, risks to public health, constraints on housing, additional pressure being added by new housing, and growing public frustration.

Residents ask a simple question: why must local communities accept continuing environmental damage, rising bills, and insufficient investment in the infrastructure required to clean up this mess?

According to Ofwat’s most recent water company performance report from 2024-25, South West Water had 108 pollution incidents per 10,000 km of sewer, based on self-reported data—more than double the average for the sector. In fact, South West Water failed to meet its own performance targets for pollution incidents for each of the five years of the 2020-25 period. ORCA’s trained citizen scientists have logged over 2,800 individual tests and observations, whereas the Environment Agency carried out 24 location tests on the River Otter over that period. The public should not have to rely on volunteers to provide the evidence base for environmental protection. The volunteer action we have seen is invaluable, but safeguarding rivers must be the responsibility of water companies, regulators and, ultimately, the Government.

Are we going to have to wait years for the Otter to be coaxed back to health? What specific measures to address these local issues might we see in the Government’s upcoming clean water Bill? Residents of towns and villages across this corner of Devon would love to know. Over 50,000 people have signed a petition that was initiated in February by Marc Astley. Marc lives in Ottery St Mary, and he and his family put together a petition stating that

“if environmental standards aren’t being met, executives shouldn’t be receiving bonuses. The government has introduced new powers intended to block payouts when environmental performance fails…But loopholes remain—rewards can still be restructured as retention payments or routed through parent companies. To the public, that looks like bonuses by another name…The end goal is clear: close the loopholes and link executive rewards directly to measurable environmental outcomes—cleaner rivers, healthier seas and fewer sewage discharges.”

I know that the Minister also wants to see cleaner rivers and seas, and that she is committed to her brief. Can she confirm to the more than 50,000 people who signed that petition that those loopholes will be closed by new legislation?

The River Otter is not a cost-free extension of the sewerage infrastructure network that enables bill hikes and increased shareholder returns. It is supposed to offer a living ecosystem, a valued recreational resource, and an integral part of the lives of the people who live in east Devon. The people who live along the banks of the Otter are not asking for miracles; they are asking for honest monitoring, adequate infrastructure and accountability, with pledged commitments being met. The River Otter can recover—we have seen elsewhere that targeted investment in treatment infrastructure and phosphate removal can make a real difference—but recovery will require urgency, transparency, and a willingness to move beyond promises and towards delivery. Bruce McGlashan’s legacy will live on if the polluters, the regulators and we Members listen to, and act on, the citizen science carried out by the volunteers I represent today.

The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Mary Creagh)

It is a pleasure to respond to this afternoon’s debate on behalf of my colleague the Water Minister, my hon. Friend the Member for Kingston upon Hull West and Haltemprice (Emma Hardy), who is sadly unable to be with us because she is attending an international conference on the marine environment. I thank the hon. Member for Honiton and Sidmouth (Richard Foord) for raising this important issue.

This Government are absolutely determined to fix our broken water system. As the hon. Gentleman has rightly set out, the situation we inherited was one where pollution warnings and sewage discharges were commonplace; where regulation was stripped back; where water companies were allowed to mark their own homework; and where there were simply no penalties for failure, with incompetence and pollution rewarded. That stopped with this Labour Government. Not only have we taken action over the past two years; we have seen action this week, with the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs sending a letter to the regulator about the investment plans for Thames Water. That action is ongoing.

The River Otter reflects the previous failure. It is poor in the upper reaches, has moderate water quality in the middle and is poor again downstream, with excessive nutrient levels across the catchment. South West Water has not met the standards that people rightly expect. At Honiton, the sewage treatment works has exceeded its permitted flow limits and its performance has fallen short. That is not acceptable, because rivers like the Otter are not lines on maps; they are places where families walk, children explore, and where our nature and wildlife thrive. They are part of our shared national inheritance, and they deserve better.

We recognise that nutrient levels in the River Otter are too high. That leads to excessive algal growth that harms local wildlife, and the Environment Agency has, under this Government, stepped in, challenging South West Water, increasing oversight and requiring improvements. South West Water has had to fix failures in how it monitors and manages its network. Spill levels, as the hon. Member has set out, have been unacceptably high at some sites. Regulators have made it clear that that must improve. We are seeing early improvements, but there is still much more to be done, and we will hold South West Water to account until it delivers.

The Environment Agency is expanding monitoring of the river, and it welcomes the support of local groups, including the Otter Valley Association and Otter River Catchment Action, ORCA. I echo the hon. Member’s tributes to Bruce McGlashan. After 32 years working for the Environment Agency, he retired and had to carry on doing what he was doing as an Environment Agency officer. I send my condolences to his family. I pay tribute to Peter Williams, too—I thank them both for their incredible efforts. I watched the “Dirty Business” documentary about the water industry, and was absolutely furious, seeing the scale of deregulation under the previous Government. Of course, the water companies could do their data dumps, but without a PhD in mathematics, no one could reverse-engineer the maths to see what was really happening.

There are arguments about the data and the sources, which I will come to, but I first put on record my thanks to those people for their work collecting data, raising concerns and building the evidence needed to drive positive change. I pay tribute to similar groups up and down the country who are helping us to hold polluters to account. We will secure a fair deal for customers, we will rebuild public trust, and we will protect the environment to support health, nature and our economy.

The Environment Agency has identified agriculture as the largest source of pollution in the Otter, and we are taking action to tackle it. We are creating a single, clear set of rules for farmers. We are doubling farm inspections, enabling at least 6,000 inspections a year by 2029, while working with farmers to raise their standards. That is an increase from around 700 inspections in 2021. We are increasing funding for environmental land management schemes from £800 million in 2023-24 to £2 billion by 2028-29. That funding targets crucial issues, such as improving water quality.

We are also taking decisive action on sewage pollution, strengthening enforcement and holding water companies to account. We have £104 billion of private investment from water companies to upgrade our ageing, creaking, leaking water infrastructure. That includes more than £10 billion to improve around 2,500 storm overflows in England by 2030 and £4.5 billion to reduce nutrient pollution over the same period, including upgrades to nutrient removal at Feniton treatment works. We have set a target in our environmental improvement plan to reduce phosphorus from waste water by 55% by 2030, putting us on track for an 80% reduction by 2038. We are well on our way to delivering that, and phosphorus removal improvements were completed at Churchinford treatment works in 2024.

We are requiring water companies to ringfence investment so that it is spent on infrastructure upgrades and not diverted elsewhere, and we have, as the hon. Member notes, introduced the Water (Special Measures) Act 2025 to raise standards and enforce accountability. As of 1 April 2026, water companies must publish annual pollution incident reduction plans. Under the previous Government, reduction plans were voluntary. Now they are mandatory and public, so that everyone can see what the water companies have set out to do.

The Act introduced a requirement for spill monitoring at all emergency overflows, matching the pre-existing requirement to monitor discharges from storm overflows—those are two separate things. It has also given regulators powers to ban bonuses for executives at failing water companies and pursue criminal charges against bosses where needed. We have already stopped more than £4 million in bonuses for the bosses of polluting water companies. This month, we fined South West Water more than £1.8 million after the Brixham water supply incident, which involved cryptosporidium from agricultural run-off. That is a record penalty for a drinking water offence, reflecting the seriousness of the company’s failure. Where water companies fail, this Government act.

I am concerned to learn that South West Water has made statements to local communities that did not accurately reflect the full position. In relation to Honiton, the company told a local group that it had sought a tighter permit limit. That was incorrect. The Environment Agency challenged that directly. The company has since acknowledged that its statement was not a true reflection of events, apologised and committed to issuing a formal retraction. This is what accountability looks like, and we will continue to enforce it. I hope that the hon. Gentleman can reassure Marc Astley and the 50,000 petitioners that we are taking action to tackle bonuses given through back-door retention payments. Companies must comply with the spirit as well as the letter of the law.

I am also concerned to hear from the hon. Gentleman that the gorgeous beach at Budleigh Salterton has lost its blue flag status, given that it is a designated bathing water site. We have designated more sites in order to force water companies to up their game, but this is not how it is supposed to happen; beaches are not supposed to lose their blue flags. We will look into that issue.

Unlike the previous Government, we are committed to stopping pollution before it starts. If we take rainwater out of our sewers, we reduce pressure on the system and cut storm overflow spills. Capturing rainwater where it falls reduces the amount of water entering the network. It is estimated that the average household roof collects 85,000 litres of rainwater each year—equivalent to around 4 trillion litres, or 1.6 million Olympic-sized swimming pools, annually across the UK. Of course, that all runs off and is lost, and then we enter summer, there are heatwaves and drought ensues. Managing that water better can reduce discharges into rivers, like the Otter.

In the clean water Bill, which will be introduced in this Session, we will commit to ensuring that regulatory mechanisms and funding support the delivery of solutions. We want to maximise the opportunities offered by better managing rain where it lands. That approach will benefit communities and the environment, prevent flooding and help with urban development, ensuring that policies and services work better to deliver.

We recognise that the water sector does need reform. The clean water Bill will deliver on commitments in the White Paper, driving reforms to transform the water system for good and secure a sustainable system for future generations. It will establish an enhanced regional planning function to help identify lower cost, higher impact solutions across whole catchment areas—looking at the entire river from source to sea, instead of at individual works—and considering opportunities across sectors. That will improve water quality and supply. It will also enable a greater uptake in preventive interventions and nature-based solutions to reduce long-term costs and improve resilience. The Government are committed to improving the regulation of private sewerage to reduce pollution from those systems, which I am sure the hon. Member is aware of. We recognise that the current sewer adoption arrangements need review and will consider how to enact that change.

On the Otter, the Environment Agency’s team carried out over 900 inspections in Devon and Cornwall in 2025-26, including unannounced visits, prioritising the most environmentally sensitive sites, some of which will have been in the Otter catchment. The Environment Agency is currently investigating potential offences at Ottery St Mary’s sewage attenuation tank. It is in the process of agreeing an enforcement undertaking with South West Water and investigating event duration monitoring data from the site. I am sure that will be of interest to the hon. Member, to the campaigners and to everybody who cares about this precious river.

Our water system has not worked as it should, but the Government are taking strong, robust action to fix it. We are acting to clean up rivers and to hold the water companies to account for their pollution, their neglect and their negligence, and we are stopping them from marking their own homework. We are securing record investment to rebuild infrastructure, tackling pollution at its source and restoring trust in this damaged industry. We are delivering a cleaner, healthier River Otter for future generations to enjoy.

Richard Foord MP secures today’s adjournment debate in the House Of Commons.

Until 5.30pm or for half an hour (whichever is later).

https://commonsbusiness.parliament.uk/Document/105332/Html?subType=Standard#_idTextAnchor011

Aka “Jacob’s Ladder”.

Urgent repairs to Exmouth’s sea wall have just been completed, now it’s Sidmouth turn to crumble.

The chair of Sidmouth Town Council, Hilary Nelson, said: people would need to “go a bit old school” and use Peak Hill Road to access the beach and Connaught Gardens.

Jolly hockey sticks and carry-on up the hill! -Owl

Iconic beach steps and a coastal path which connects two sides of a seaside resort will both be closed until at least 2027.

BBC local news

There were structural defects in the white Jacob’s Ladder steps in Sidmouth, according to East Devon District Council, and a large gap in a clifftop wall over the Millenium Walkway that could be a danger to people walking below.

The owner of a café at the top of the steps with magnificent views out to sea said trade had been affected by the closures.

The council has agreed to spend £500,000 on fixing the wall over the walkway and said it was looking at options to repair Jacob’s Ladder steps or possibly replace the structure.

The Clock Tower café is a Grade II listed building which sits in a corner of Connaught Gardens, near the top of Jacob’s Ladder.

Despite still being fully open and accessible from a different route, staff had seen a drop in customers, its boss said.

Owner Lewis Macleod said: “In May, we had a 20% reduction in footfall and 22% in April, so it’s had quite a big impact on our trade already.

“So we are quite concerned that further delays are going to impact us throughout the rest of the year.”

The Millenium Walkway was opened in 1999 and connects the main town beaches to Jacob’s Ladder beach.

East Devon District Council (EDDC) said it was working with Sidmouth Town Council on a plan to reopen the walkway before the main work started on fixing the cobblestone wall above in Connaught Gardens.

EDDC said it wanted to “undertake further investigations to provide the best value for money solution” with work scheduled to take place in “early 2027”.

John Loudoun, Independent, deputy leader of EDDC, said: “As a result of the storms of last year, the assets have degraded. We’ve had to look at maintaining safety for the public as our number one priority.”

The chair of Sidmouth Town Council, Hilary Nelson, said: “It’s just hugely unfortunate for Sidmouth that both of these events have arisen at the same time.”

She said people would need to “go a bit old school” and use Peak Hill Road to access the beach and Connaught Gardens.

EDDC said the beach huts at Jacob’s Ladder beach, which have been destroyed by storms, would be replaced at the end of June.

Jacob’s Ladder was initially constructed as a steep wooden ladder in 1853 and was replaced shortly after World War Two

In 2020 Sasha Swire perceptively gave our Simon the moniker “Jumping Jupp Flash”.

(Our former East Devon MP who jumped ship from Exeter East & Exmouth to Honiton & Sidmouth where he was defeated by Richard Foord MP; and who then jumped again into a cushy number with South West Water). – Owl

Here he shows how richly he deserves this sobriquet!

Simon Jupp  posted 2 days ago on linkedin

Director of Corporate Affairs for the Pennon Group.

As my grandmother always says, the proof is in the pudding.

We are spending £3.2bn across the Pennon Group Plc upgrading our infrastructure. It is clearly a big number, but it’s delivery on the ground that matters most.

I loved showing some of my team around South West Water’s major project in Sidmouth today as it nears completion.

It will reduce spills and the team on the ground have done a great job with support from the community.

It’s why we do what we do.

Well Simon what about this?

Live sewage discharges today (12 June) in East Devon:

• Honiton
• Kilmington
• Axemouth
• Otterton
• Exmouth – Phear Park

Why is there no plan to upgrade the Honiton sewage works until 2030, given the scale of pollution revealed by citizen scientists?

The river Otter’s cocktail of E.coli and Phosphates revealed

A Devon council leader has said water company bosses should be “locked up” over sewage spills as beaches continue to close across the county. Jonathan Morris www.bbc.co.uk

[NB On Monday (8th June) the Environment Agency (EA) issued no-swim warnings at Teignmouth Town, Budleigh Salterton and Exmouth due to pollution risk based on weather factors and at Seaton due to a “pollution incident”. – Owl]

Devon County Council head Julian Brazil said residents had felt “incredibly let down” after repeated pollution incidents, with the council now exploring legal action against South West Water (SWW) over water quality concerns.

He said sewage discharges had forced beach closures but said “nothing seems to happen” despite talk of new laws, investment and lessons being learned.

SWW said it was investing £760m to tackle storm overflows and it had reduced spills by 17% in the last year, with spill duration down by 25%, and “the data shows the plan is working”.

Brazil said fines often hit customers instead of decision-makers, explaining that “as water bill-payers, we end up paying it”.

He argued tougher action should instead target executives directly.

He suggested “possibly surcharging executives”, before going further, saying: “There’s criminal activity going on here… maybe some people should be locked up.”

He said ordinary people would face serious consequences for similar actions, adding: “If you or I did it… we’d be in deep trouble,” while claiming bosses were able to carry on without consequences and still award themselves large bonuses.

Brazil said trust in previous assurances from SWW was low.

He said: “We’ve heard it all before, haven’t we? ‘Lessons learned, we’re very sorry,'” and added the firm was still “paying themselves obscene amounts of money, pumping out dividends, boosting the share price”.

On government plans to overhaul water regulation, Brazil said the council had heard similar promises before and felt it had been “let down basically by the authorities”, adding that it now felt it had to step in itself.

The council is planning to host its Devon’s first Water Quality Summit in the autumn.

Organisers said the summit aimed to bring together regulators, water companies, district councils, landowners, community groups and other stakeholders.

A SWW spokesperson said: “We recognise concerns about water quality in Devon and we continue to work proactively with councils to discuss our local plans and deliver improvements.

“We are looking forward to the opportunity to discuss our multimillion-pound plans to improve water quality at Devon County Council’s water summit.

“We appreciate the opportunity to help shape the event and continue to engage constructively with the council.”

Keith Haslett, the new chief executive of Pennon, which owns SWW, said the group could not comment on the Devon council’s plans, but said the group “fully respects the outcome of the legal process”.

South West Water provides water and sewerage services to about 1.8 million customers in Devon and Cornwall, the Isles of Scilly, plus small parts of Dorset and Somerset.

A lawsuit by law firm Leigh Day against SWW over sewage pollution includes people from the Devon towns of Dawlish, Sidmouth, Teignmouth, Exmouth, Budleigh Salterton and Lympstone, as well as Newquay and Penzance in Cornwall.

Lawyers argued SWW’s failings were “wide and entrenched in many coastal towns across the Devon and Cornwall region”.

The utility said at the time it was aware of the claim but it was unable to provide further comment.

In March, SWW admitted 18 pollution offences across Devon and Cornwall after years of illegal spills which affected rivers, beaches and protected wildlife habitats. It is due to be sentenced on 30 July.

SWW was fined £2.1m in 2023 for similar pollution offences.

The Environment Agency said one of the spills at Kilmington led to the deaths of thousands of fish, including some protected species, in the River Axe.

Source

Rt. Hon Sir Keir Starmer MP, Prime Minister

Rt. Hon Steve Reed OBE MP, Secretary of State for Housing, Communities & Local Government

Sent by email

Dear Prime Minister and Secretary of State,

Local Government Reorganisation in England

We write, as members of the County Councils Network (CCN) Management Committee and Leaders of affected member councils across England, to express our concern on the implications of recent decisions on local government reorganisation and, critically, the significant risks this programme of reform now poses to the delivery of essential services to our residents and most vulnerable communities.

County councils engaged in this process in good faith. We were asked to develop proposals rooted in scale, sustainability and service resilience, while avoiding unnecessary fragmentation and complex boundary changes. We did so on the understanding that evidence would be robustly and consistently assessed against the Government’s own criteria.

Instead, the decisions on March 25th 2026 to create 15 new unitary councils across four areas have set in train an experimental approach to reorganisation that bears all the hallmarks of a set of short-term political choices, not a coherent or consistent application of the government’s own framework.

The departure from the statutory criteria without clear, transparent reasoning and published supporting evidence is deeply troubling and raises serious doubts over the robustness of the decisions taken. Credibility and trust in the process is further eroded by the imposition of a top-down proposal in Sussex, previously rejected by local authorities.

Despite requests, the Ministry of Housing, Communities & Local Government is unwilling to disclose departmental analysis to justify how ministers reached the conclusion that they were ‘satisfied’ proposals can be delivered on a sustainable financial basis. Given the unprecedented degree of disaggregation and fundamentally untested nature of boundary change, we strongly question whether ministers have fully and sufficiently evaluated proposals against the public service criterion. 

Moreover, the scale of fragmentation, combined with complex boundary changes and an enormously ambitious timetable for delivery are causing serious concerns from our senior staff about the capacity of the system to deliver safe and legal services to the timetable proposed.

With new administrations elected in councils across the Devolution Priority Programme areas, the government must immediately disclose the evidence and departmental analysis relating to decisions already taken. It is unreasonable to expect these administrations to respond to the decisions without having the departmental analysis which led to their selection. They, and the wider sector, should have access to this information and evidence necessary to assess the  integrity of decisions and the feasibility of implementation. 

For the remaining areas awaiting decisions, if this pattern of large-scale fragmentation and complex boundary change, at odds with the government criteria, is repeated, this will create a pattern of reform that is more costly, less stable and less effective than the current two-tier system.

The creation of more undersized, fragmented unitary authorities will weaken economies of scale, increase administrative overheads, and place additional strain at a time when councils already face severe financial challenges and competing service pressures. It will jeopardise the integrity of essential services, particularly adult and children’s social care. Critically, it will render implementation timescales wholly unachievable and require hundreds of millions of central government funding to support transition.

These are not abstract concerns. They represent a direct threat to vulnerable residents, to the sustainability of new councils, and to the deliverability of the government’s welcome reforms to children’s services and special educational needs and disabilities in large swathes of the country. 

County councils stand ready to deliver reform that strengthens services and supports communities. But that reform must be credible, consistent, transparent and rooted in the principles set out at the beginning of the process.

The nature of the decisions taken, potential legal challenges, and considerable questions surrounding the future direction and stability of the government itself seriously undermine whether this can be achieved in the current circumstances. Having diverted so far from the original aims and underpinning statutory criteria, uncertainty is deepening, confidence is eroding, and the implementation of reorganisation is becoming even more complex, more contested, and more costly. 

Within this context, the government must now seriously engage the sector on the integrity of the decision-making process, alongside the feasibility of delivery within the government’s self-imposed timescales. Proceeding with further decisions at pace, and on the basis of an approach that is increasingly perceived as inconsistent and politically driven, risks embedding significant long-term consequences.

At a time of a highly uncertain political environment nationally, decisions of this scale and permanence require even greater transparency, consistency and evidence. With ministerial decisions due before the summer recess, structural reform cannot be shaped around short￾political considerations nor assumptions that future governments, ministers or administrations will necessarily continue in the same direction. The implications of these reforms extend well beyond the current political cycle and the hiatus over the future leadership of government only strengthens the case for decisions to be demonstrably impartial, consistent and rooted in long￾term public value. 

We would welcome urgent engagement on this to ensure that certainty can be provided to the sector and confidence in this process can be restored before any further decisions are taken. 

Yours sincerely,

Julian Brazil, the Liberal Democrat leader of Devon county council, said the proposals preferred by Labour were the “archetypal gerrymander”, adding: “They are trying to expand Labour cities as big as they can get in order to maintain some kind of control.”

Labour ‘jeopardising social care by ripping up councils’

Max Kendix www.thetimes.com

In a letter to Sir Keir Starmer, local authority leaders say the proposed boundary changes are politically driven and will cost money rather than save it

Labour is ripping up local government for “politically driven” reasons, putting social care in jeopardy and costing taxpayers as much as £1 billion extra, a majority of affected council leaders have claimed.

The government is scrapping county and district councils across England to create as many as 60 new local authorities in an effort to “simplify” local government.

However, council leaders have warned that the way Labour has chosen to move forward with the break-ups will create significant extra costs.

Ministers had committed to the new councils having at least 500,000 residents, but are now prioritising expanding city boundaries and opting for smaller council populations.

In a letter to Sir Keir Starmer, 19 council leaders accused the prime minister of “short-term political choices” concerning the proposed boundaries, which are preferred by mostly urban Labour MPs. Ministers are facing legal challenges to the process, which risks delaying the changes.

The council leaders, a mixture of Reform, Conservative and Liberal Democrat, argue that the moves will “jeopardise the integrity of essential services, particularly adult and children’s social care”.

Analysis commissioned by the County Councils Network suggests that there would be “no long-term efficiency savings” from the smaller council sizes. The government had cited the same organisation’s analysis to argue that its reorganisation drive would result in savings.

Julian Brazil, the Liberal Democrat leader of Devon county council, said the proposals preferred by Labour were the “archetypal gerrymander”, adding: “They are trying to expand Labour cities as big as they can get in order to maintain some kind of control.”

Stephen Atkinson, the Reform leader of Lancashire county council, said Labour’s preferred option for splitting up the area would cost £90 million with little reward.

“People will fall between the gaps and there’ll be serious consequences for those people and the care they receive and the support they receive,” he said. “The government is in a bunker. It sees any conversation around their policies as a political attack, instead of seeing it as the sector being concerned.

“Local government reorganisation is a disaster waiting to happen unless the government starts to recognise the complexity, the challenge and the vulnerability involved in this process.”

The letter from councils says that “the government must now seriously engage the sector on the integrity of the decision-making process, alongside the feasibility of delivery within the government’s self-imposed timescales [of reorganising everywhere by 2028]”.

It adds: “Proceeding with further decisions at pace, and on the basis of an approach that is increasingly perceived as inconsistent and politically driven, risks embedding significant long-term consequences.”

The leaders argue that a potential Labour leadership race means the rush to make decisions about reorganisation is less justified.

A government spokesman said: “We don’t recognise these figures. In fact, local government reorganisation will save taxpayers’ money by streamlining services and boosting regional growth so we can put more cash in peoples’ pockets.

“Our plans will make public services like social care work better for local people, alongside speeding up the construction of vital new homes and infrastructure.”

Background

Three quarters of county councils in line to be reorganised have signed a letter to the Prime Minister, arguing the government’s approach to reorganisation now poses a ‘direct threat to the most vulnerable’ and the sustainability of new councils. 

In March, the government announced its decision to reorganise councils in Essex, Suffolk, Norfolk and Hampshire, abolishing both county and district councils in those areas and replacing them with unitary councils.

Despite setting out a statutory criteria for decisions at the onset of the programme, including a principle to create new unitaries covering populations of over 500,000 and avoiding the unnecessary fragmentation of care services, the letter argues that the decisions are at odds with the guidance: splitting those counties into multiple smaller unitary councils in each location.

The March decisions will create 15 new unitary councils in just four counties. In Suffolk and Norfolk the county council put forward a proposal for a single county in each area, whereas in Essex and Hampshire the county councils proposed three unitaries for each county. In all four counties, the government took the most radical proposals to create three unitaries in each of Suffolk and Norfolk, four in Hampshire and five in Essex. In three of the four areas, complex changes to existing boundaries are required. 

Government will decide on the number of unitary councils in the remaining 16 counties later this summer. Ahead of those decisions, the County Councils Network (CCN) has written to the Prime Minister warning ‘if this pattern of large-scale fragmentation and complex boundary change, at odds with the government criteria, is repeated, this will create a pattern of reform that is more costly, less stable and less effective than the current two-tier System’.

The letter was endorsed by cross party members of CCN’s management committee. All county councils and the CCN unitary member, North Lincolnshire, impacted by the March decisions and those due be decided on in July, were invited to sign the letter based on their local circumstances. In total, 16 out of those councils signed the letter.

The councils argue that the creation of smaller, fragmented unitary authorities will increase severe financial pressures, jeopardise the delivery of essential adult and children’s services and require ‘hundreds of millions of central government funding to support transition’. As a result, they warn that some services may not be functioning on day one of these new councils coming into inception in April 2028.

See this companion post for the full letter.

The report, which has been published following a Local Government Association (LGA) Corporate Peer Challenge, describes the authority as a “values-led and learning organisation” with a clear commitment to moving forward with “real purpose”. 

Chris Collman www.devonairradio.com

The peer team, made up of senior councillors and officers from across local government, spent four days in Devon in March speaking to councillors, staff and partners.  

Their findings recognise the strong progress that the council has made in recent years, improving services and investing in its workforce to help build a council that is better placed to respond to local needs and work with communities. 

It highlighted how staff “consistently spoke positively about the change” in the organisation’s culture, describing a workplace where people feel “trusted and empowered” and proud of the work they do. 

This is already starting to translate into stronger services and better outcomes. The report points to improvements in key areas including workforce stability, partnership working and community engagement, all of which are critical to delivering high-quality services for residents. 

The review acknowledges the leadership at the council, including a “strong and trusting relationship” between the Leader and Chief Executive, and the “energy, enthusiasm and constructive challenge” provided by Cabinet members. 

In services that have faced significant pressure, including children’s services, the report provides encouraging feedback, confirming that Devon has “the capacity and capability to improve itself”. It recognises both the progress made and the potential to go further, providing greater confidence for vulnerable children, young people and their families. 

The review also highlights that the council is becoming more outward-looking and increasingly focused on its role in partnership working across Devon and beyond to support shared priorities such as economic growth, health and wellbeing, and stronger communities. It also recognised that the authority is taking a more purposeful approach to co-production and strengthening its relationships with partners and communities, working together to design and deliver services that meet their needs. 

As part of the process, the council will now develop an action plan to respond to the recommendations in the report, ensuring continued focus on improving services and delivering positive outcomes for Devon’s residents.

Devon and Cornwall Police has been rated as inadequate in the areas of safeguarding adults and children, and investigating crime.

His Majesty’s Inspectorate of Constabulary and Fire & Rescue Services (HMICFRS) graded the force’s performance across eight areas in January, finding it to be adequate in two areas, requires improvement in four areas and inadequate in two areas.

Archie Farmer, Chloe Parkman www.bbc.co.uk

The inspectorate said responding to calls for service and preventing crime effectively had improved, but concerns remain over how it investigates crime and safeguards vulnerable people.

Chief constable James Vaughan said he “welcomed the findings”, and he was “confident” the force would “continue to improve our service”.

The inspectorate found the force continues to prevent and deter crime and antisocial behaviour well.

The PEEL (Police Effectiveness, Efficiency and Legitimacy) inspection did not conclude Devon and Cornwall Police was good or outstanding in any of the eight categories.

Among concerns HMICFRS added there remains a need for the force to improve how effectively it records crime and how it monitors preventative orders.

His Majesty’s inspector of constabulary Kathryn Stone said she was “satisfied” with some aspects of the performance of the police force in keeping people safe, reducing crime and providing an effective service to victims.

“The force has made improvements since our last inspection, particularly in how it responds to calls for service from the public,” Stone said.

‘Monitor performance’

However, she said its ability to carry out “prompt and effective criminal investigations on behalf of victims is still a cause of concern”.

“It is disappointing that the force still hasn’t made enough progress on a previous area for improvement about how it manages medium-risk domestic abuse cases. This is a concern the force needs to address quickly,” Stone said.

She said progress was being made particularly in its financial management, control room and prevention work.

“Continued focus on developing the workforce, improving investigation standards and safeguarding vulnerable people will be essential for sustained improvement,” she added.

“I expect to see more progress in the areas we have set out, and I will continue to monitor performance.”

Vaughan said: “Whilst we have delivered sustained improvements since 2022 and the force has now been fully removed from enhanced monitoring, there remains more to do to improve outcomes for victims and ensure consistent safeguarding standards.”

Police said the report highlighted “significant progress” in contact services, including 999 and 101 call handling and the management of sex and dangerous offenders.

It accepted outcomes for victims still required “significant improvement”, adding it needed to improve how effectively it records crime and how it monitors preventative orders.

Vaughan said plans were under way to move the force’s victim care unit to police headquarters, “helping ensure victims remain at the centre of our work every day”.

“I am confident that, with the dedication of our people, we will continue to improve our service,” he said. “Many of our domestic abuse cases do lead to positive outcomes, but I recognise we are still letting some victims down.

“I have agreed with the commissioner to stay in post for as long as she requires the stability provided by my leadership.”

“This was a major public health incident. Contaminated water was supplied to a large community, hundreds became ill, essential public services were disrupted, and confidence in the region’s drinking water was seriously undermined” District Judge Stuart Smith

“My illness made me feel as if I had been beaten up. It was a long process of getting over it” Victim’s personal statement

www.dailyecho.co.uk

South West Water Ltd has been handed a record fine of almost £2m for supplying water unfit for human consumption after a parasitic outbreak in Devon.

The company pleaded guilty to an offence under s70(1) of the Water Industry Act 1991 over the contamination of water by cryptosporidium, a parasite which causes sickness and diarrhoea.

Exeter Magistrates’ Court heard there were 537 probable or confirmed cases of cryptosporidiosis, with at least 10 people admitted to hospital.

More than 16,000 homes in the area were issued with boil notices, where water must be boiled then cooled before being consumed, which were not lifted for some properties for 54 days.

The water supply is believed to have become contaminated on two sites at a farm in Devon, within the farmyard and a field, where soil samples tested positive for the parasite.

District Judge Stuart Smith fined South West Water Ltd £1,853,000, with a surcharge of £2,000 and costs of £75,000 – totalling £1,930,000.

Speaking after the case, the Drinking Water Inspectorate (DWI), which prosecuted the firm, said the fine was a record for a drinking water offence.

The judge described “significant disruption” to schools ahead of GCSE exams, affecting performance, along with care homes, nurseries and businesses.

“The disruption to daily life was extensive,” he said.

“Households were required to boil water for drinking, cooking, brushing teeth, and for infant feeding for periods of up to eight weeks.

“Many residents spoke of confusion, conflicting messages, and persistent anxiety. The cumulative impact on public confidence in the safety of drinking water was substantial.”

He added: “This was a major public health incident.

“Contaminated water was supplied to a large community, hundreds became ill, essential public services were disrupted, and confidence in the region’s drinking water was seriously undermined.

“The company accepts that it did not take all reasonable steps or exercise all due diligence to prevent the supply of unfit water, as required by law.”

The court heard Torbay Hospital first reported five cases of cryptosporidiosis on May 10 2024. South West Water was informed three days later and reviewed water sampling data, which was clear.

However, on May 14, several customers had reported an abnormal water taste or smell. In the early hours of May 15, samples taken from the Hillhead area confirmed the parasite in the water.

Boil notices were issued to 16,221 properties, with a population of 38,930 people. These notices were not fully lifted until July 8, when 674 properties were still affected.

Later that day, technicians from South West Water discovered a damaged air valve which formed part of the water main in a field on Hillhead Farm.

The concrete chamber surrounding the valve had been removed, the metal lid was missing and the chamber had been filled with soil, silt and water. Soil samples close to the valve tested positive for the parasite.

Later investigations at the farm revealed unlawful cross-connections between the site’s private borehole system and the public mains supply – believed to be another potential cause of the outbreak.

Judge Smith said the DWI had issued a “clear recommendation” to South West Water in 2020 about maintaining air valves, with the company drafting a policy for regular inspection. However, this was not implemented.

He added: “That amounts in my view to a systemic failure of governance within the organisation.”

Prosecuting, Joe Millington said the incident “undermined trust and confidence in the water supply”.

In victim personal statements, residents spoke of the impact of the outbreak on their lives.

One person, who experienced flu-like symptoms for 10 days before experiencing vomiting and diarrhoea, was taken to hospital by ambulance.

“My illness made me feel as if I had been beaten up,” they said.

“It was a long process of getting over it.”

Another resident described drinking a glass of water from their kitchen tap which “tasted like it had come from a pond”. They had to cancel a long-haul holiday and lost almost a stone in weight.

Jennifer Watts, 52, who is one customer being supported by legal firm Irwin Mitchell, described how her 10-year-old son spent three nights in hospital.

“One of my biggest fears is that life will never be the same again after this experience,” she said.

Dominic Kay KC, representing South West Water, offered an “unreserved apology” on behalf of the company.

“The company, through its senior management, wishes to record publicly its genuine remorse for this incident,” he told the court.

He said it was unclear when the damage had been caused to the air valve, adding that it had not been reported to South West Water and it was unaware of the unlawful cross-connections.

Mr Kay said the company had acted “entirely reasonably and properly” from when the UKHSA first notified the company of the outbreak.

South West Water owner Pennon previously said the final bill for the outbreak reached nearly £40 million.

Speaking after the sentencing, Caroline Voaden, Liberal Democrat MP for South Devon, said: “I am sure many in Brixham will feel the punishment dished out to SWW does not reflect the seriousness of the contamination or the effects it had on public health and the local economy.

“Nobody should be making a profit from water and until the Government accepts this, we will never see the scale of reform needed to turn the industry around.”

Marcus Rink, chief inspector of the Drinking Water Inspectorate, said the outbreak was a major event which had “severe consequences”.

“It is right that South West Water pleaded guilty to this offence and has been held accountable,” he said.

“The court has considered the evidence from my inspectors’ thorough investigation and rightly recognised the harm this incident caused. Today’s outcome demonstrates that when failings occur, there will be serious consequences.”

South West Water will not pass on any parasite fine to customers (according to a BBC report in March)

A spokesperson for the water firm said “customers do not pay for fines” and the Drinking Water Inspectorate, which brought the case, said a fine would come out of profit and dividends to shareholders.

Believe it when you see it!- Owl

“I am sure you’ll agree that this is not nearly enough.

This outbreak changed lives. People became ill, some were hospitalised, and the social and economic impact was massive.

The whole saga is symptomatic of a fundamentally broken water industry.

I’ve been absolutely clear that no business should be profiting from our water.

Until the government realises this, we will not see the scale of change needed.”

Caroline Voaden, LibDem MP for South Devon

David Reed says he wants his constituents to have their say on local government reorganisation but he’s two months too late.

The Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government (MHCLG) conducted a statutory consultation on five proposals for restructuring local government in Devon, Plymouth, and Torbay.

This closed on 26 March 2026. 

The government “is expected to respond in summer 2026”.

Why play catch up now? Where have you been this spring? – Owl

From David Reed MP’s facebook page

 “Who Should Decide the Future of Our Community?

“The Government is planning major changes to local government in Devon. East Devon District Council, Exeter City Council and Devon County Council are set to be abolished, but there is still no agreement about what will replace them.

“Some proposals would see communities including Budleigh Salterton, Exmouth, Whimple and Lympstone absorbed into a much larger council centred on Exeter, with decisions on housing, planning, local services and council tax taken further away from our local communities.

“The Government is also proposing elected mayors with wide-ranging powers over planning, transport and local taxation across Devon.

“These are important decisions that could shape our area for many years to come, and I want to make sure constituents have the opportunity to have their say.

“I would be grateful if you could take a few moments to complete my survey on the future of local government in Devon. [After filling in your name, address and email]

David Reed MP tries to make capital out of the “Good News” library story.

Long established Independent District and County Councillor Paul Hayward fact checks what he says and puts the record straight.

David Reed has always claimed “local connections” through his training as a Royal Marine at Lympstone.

When it comes to history he’s just a raw recruit! – Owl

From David Reed MP’s facebook page

After more than 25,000 responses to the consultation, I welcome the Devon County Council Liberal Democrat administration’s decision to drop proposals that would have reduced access to local libraries.

The message from local people could not have been clearer and I’m grateful to everyone who made their voice heard.

The original plans were based on the idea that libraries could simply be grouped together, with people expected to travel elsewhere when their own branch was closed. But an overwhelming number of respondents said they would rather wait for their own library to reopen than travel to another library.

That should have been obvious from the start.

The proposals showed a complete misunderstanding of how valued and relied upon these services really are.

There is a certain irony in Liberal Democrats now trying to present themselves as the defenders of libraries after spending months consulting on cuts brought forward under their own administration.

In the end, public pressure forced a rethink and all libraries will now keep their current staffed opening hours.

I also welcome the decision to invest more in books create a new Libraries Transformation and Rural Hub Fund.

This is a victory for local people.

#ExmouthandExeterEast

Paul Hayward corrects the record in this comment on David Reed’s post

Paul Hayward

For context, the Conservatives ran Devon County Council until May 2025 so I have limited my observations to the 10 years prior, David.

” Between 2015 and 2025, Devon’s public library service moved from direct council control to an arm’s‑length charity model and then faced repeated real‑terms and cash reductions as Devon County Council (DCC) grappled with wider budget pressures.

In 2016, DCC transferred operations to Libraries Unlimited, a public service mutual created to sustain the network under austerity. The shift itself wasn’t a cut on day one, but it set the framework for multi‑year savings, efficiencies, and income generation targets that effectively reduced the taxpayer contribution in real terms through wage, energy, and price inflation outpacing uplifts.

From 2015–2017, DCC sought savings across cultural services; contemporary case studies note the creation of Libraries Unlimited as a vehicle to deliver efficiencies after years of national grant reductions.

While explicit single‑year percentage cut figures for those early years are not consistently published in one place, the direction was a managed reduction in the core subsidy and staffing costs, with a focus on maintaining the 50‑library footprint by trimming overheads, refocusing opening hours, and expanding volunteer support.

In real terms, this period likely equated to a mid‑single‑digit percentage squeeze spread over two to three years (for example 3–5% cumulative), once inflation is considered, even where cash allocations appeared flat.

From 2018–2021, libraries in Devon generally experienced continued real‑terms erosion rather than headline cash cuts, as social care and SEND pressures consumed a growing share of the council budget. Libraries Unlimited increased external fundraising and project grants to protect frontline access, but these one‑off or ring‑fenced funds could not replace the unrestricted core contribution.

In practice, a flat or marginally increased cash budget during above‑target inflation years functions as a de facto annual cut of roughly 2–4% in real terms.

𝗕𝘆 𝟮𝟬𝟮𝟯–𝟮𝟬𝟮𝟰, 𝗶𝗻𝘁𝗲𝗻𝘀𝗶𝗳𝘆𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗰𝗼𝘂𝗻𝗰𝗶𝗹 𝗳𝗶𝗻𝗮𝗻𝗰𝗲𝘀 𝗯𝗿𝗼𝘂𝗴𝗵𝘁 𝗰𝗹𝗲𝗮𝗿𝗲𝗿 𝗰𝗮𝘀𝗵 𝗿𝗲𝗱𝘂𝗰𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻𝘀. 𝗖𝗮𝗺𝗽𝗮𝗶𝗴𝗻𝗲𝗿𝘀 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗹𝗼𝗰𝗮𝗹 𝗿𝗲𝗽𝗼𝗿𝘁𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗿𝗲𝗳𝗲𝗿𝗲𝗻𝗰𝗲𝗱 𝗽𝗿𝗼𝗽𝗼𝘀𝗮𝗹𝘀 𝗮𝗺𝗼𝘂𝗻𝘁𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝘁𝗼 𝗮𝗿𝗼𝘂𝗻𝗱 𝗮 £𝟱𝟱𝟬,𝟬𝟬𝟬 𝗿𝗲𝗱𝘂𝗰𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻 𝘁𝗼 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗰𝗼𝗿𝗲 𝗹𝗶𝗯𝗿𝗮𝗿𝘆 𝗯𝘂𝗱𝗴𝗲𝘁, 𝗮 𝗳𝗶𝗴𝘂𝗿𝗲 𝘁𝗵𝗮𝘁, 𝗮𝗴𝗮𝗶𝗻𝘀𝘁 𝗮𝗻 𝗲𝘀𝘁𝗶𝗺𝗮𝘁𝗲𝗱 𝗰𝗼𝗿𝗲 𝘀𝘂𝗯𝘀𝗶𝗱𝘆 𝗶𝗻 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗰. £𝟲–𝟳 𝗺𝗶𝗹𝗹𝗶𝗼𝗻 𝗿𝗮𝗻𝗴𝗲, 𝗶𝗺𝗽𝗹𝗶𝗲𝘀 𝗮𝗻 𝗼𝗿𝗱𝗲𝗿‑𝗼𝗳‑𝗺𝗮𝗴𝗻𝗶𝘁𝘂𝗱𝗲 𝟴–𝟭𝟬% 𝗰𝗮𝘀𝗵 𝗰𝘂𝘁 𝘁𝗼 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗰𝗼𝗿𝗲 𝗰𝗼𝗻𝘁𝗿𝗶𝗯𝘂𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻 𝗶𝗻 𝗮 𝘀𝗶𝗻𝗴𝗹𝗲 𝗽𝗹𝗮𝗻𝗻𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗿𝗼𝘂𝗻𝗱. 𝗢𝗻𝗲‑𝗼𝗳𝗳 𝗽𝗼𝘁𝘀 (𝗳𝗼𝗿 𝗲𝘅𝗮𝗺𝗽𝗹𝗲, 𝗱𝗶𝗴𝗶𝘁𝗮𝗹 𝘂𝗽𝗴𝗿𝗮𝗱𝗲𝘀 𝗼𝗿 𝗿𝗲𝗰𝗼𝘃𝗲𝗿𝘆 𝗴𝗿𝗮𝗻𝘁𝘀) 𝘄𝗲𝗿𝗲 𝘀𝗲𝗰𝘂𝗿𝗲𝗱 𝗯𝘂𝘁 𝗱𝗶𝗱 𝗻𝗼𝘁 𝗿𝗲𝗽𝗮𝗶𝗿 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗯𝗮𝘀𝗲. 𝗔𝘀 𝗲𝗻𝗲𝗿𝗴𝘆 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝘀𝘁𝗮𝗳𝗳𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗰𝗼𝘀𝘁𝘀 𝗿𝗼𝘀𝗲 𝘀𝗵𝗮𝗿𝗽𝗹𝘆 𝗶𝗻 𝟮𝟬𝟮𝟮–𝟮𝟬𝟮𝟰, 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗿𝗲𝗮𝗹‑𝘁𝗲𝗿𝗺𝘀 𝗲𝗳𝗳𝗲𝗰𝘁 𝘄𝗮𝘀 𝗹𝗮𝗿𝗴𝗲𝗿, 𝗹𝗶𝗸𝗲𝗹𝘆 𝟭𝟮–𝟭𝟱% 𝘄𝗵𝗲𝗻 𝗰𝗼𝗺𝗯𝗶𝗻𝗲𝗱 𝘄𝗶𝘁𝗵 𝗶𝗻𝗳𝗹𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻 𝗱𝘂𝗿𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝘁𝗵𝗮𝘁 𝘄𝗶𝗻𝗱𝗼𝘄.

In 2025, DCC’s savings plans translated into service changes proposals centred on opening hours. Public consultation materials and local analysis described reductions to core library opening hours of about 30%, signalling that operational cuts were now being used to achieve budget savings at scale. While a 30% reduction in opening hours does not directly equal a 30% funding cut, it reflects the magnitude of savings sought. Taken with earlier subsidy reductions, the 2025 picture indicates a cumulative real‑terms contraction across the decade on the order of 20–30%, with the later years carrying the steepest drops in cash terms (circa 8–10% to the core in 2023–2025) and earlier years dominated by real‑terms squeezes.

Key takeaways:

2016: service spun out to Libraries Unlimited to deliver efficiencies.

2015–2021: predominantly real‑terms cuts, roughly 2–5% cumulative every few years via flat cash plus inflation.

2023–2025: explicit cash reduction to core funding around £0.55m (~8–10%), with proposals leading to ~30% reduction in core opening hours.

Net effect 2015–2025: approximately 20–30% cumulative real‑terms impact, with the sharpest visible changes in 2024–2025.

Summary: Your party was responsible for the chronic under-funding of Devon’s Library service and now you have the chutzpah to call out the new DCC administration picking up the pieces of 16 years of Tory cuts and service decline. Wow! I’ll send you a tin of Brasso for that neck of yours.

All libraries will retain their current staffed opening hours.

From Budleigh Salterton Library·facebook page

In a world where it sometimes feels like nobody listens,  you have all spoken and you have all been heard. 

After an overwhelming response to the Devon County Council consultation on the future of the library service in Devon – proposals to cut library hours across the county have been dropped. All libraries will retain their current staffed opening hours.

We cannot thank you enough for the support we received during the consultation period and in the months since. Special thanks go to the Friends of Budleigh Library committee who have been extremely caring and generous with their time – and have lightened the load in so many ways. Chaired by Geoff Woodman who was supported by his wife Susie, this wonderful bunch were relentless in their campaign to support Budleigh Salterton Library. We don’t know how we would have managed without them.

We must also mention Councillor Charlotte FitzGerald [LibDem District Councillor] who knew she needed to do something to help the library she loves and had a small seed of an idea that grew into something quite amazing. Supported by Councillor Penny Lewis, Charlotte organised the town meeting that many of you were turned away from because there was no space left in the public hall. Library staff will never forget the feeling of walking into the meeting and seeing that sea of friendly and familiar faces.

Thank you to absolutely everybody who filled in the consultation, came to the meetings, wrote to MP’s, the press, authors, the Queen …. thank you to everybody who supported us in your own quiet (and not so quiet) ways.

Thank you also for the kind words, concern and hugs (so many hugs!). We have been overwhelmed from the start by the love you have for this library and for the staff. This library is a special place but it is a joint effort. This library wouldn’t be what it is without the people who use it. You are a lovely bunch.

Although the consultation has been a very challenging and upsetting process (for you as well as us) it has also been very uplifting to see the Budleigh Salterton community come together in such a strong and powerful way. You should all feel very proud of yourselves.

#welovebudleigh

#morethanbooks

“We asked them about opening negotiations with other progressive groups on the council to form a co-operative council – they refused and they’re determined to hang on to control.” – Diana Moore, Green Party leader.

Labour may have lost its majority on Exeter City Council but the party is still in control of the authority.

www.bbc.co.uk

At the council’s annual meeting on Wednesday the Labour leader Phil Bialyk said he woud be continuing as leader and the announcement went unopposed.

The party was reduced to 18 seats out of a total of 39 seats in the elections on 7 May with the Green Party as the main opposition with 10 seats.

The Green Party leader said she had wanted to share power with Labour but the offer had been rejected.

Bialyk said the Green Party was “desperately wanting to run things here in Exeter”.

But he said the Greens would have had to form an alliance with all of the other parties – Reform, the Liberal Democrats, the Conservatives and the Independents – to take control.

“We’re still the largest party,” he said.

Diana Moore, Green Party leader, said: “Labour may have the numbers to form a minority administration but I just question whether they have the mandate.

“We asked them about opening negotiations with other progressive groups on the council to form a co-operative council – they refused and they’re determined to hang on to control.”

A year of accredited citizen science testing reveals the extent of pollution in the Otter.

Yesterday Owl posted an article about Sidmouth’s Paddle Out Protest “standing in solidarity with those people less fortunate than ourselves, like our friends in the Otter Valley where they’re really struggling with pollution in the River Otter.”

As a consequence Owl received copies of recent Otter Valley Association newsletters which contained astonishing revelations on pollution in the Otter obtained from their citizen science initiative which has just completed a full year of testing.

Their 54 accredited volunteer testers performed 288 location tests compared to the 24 location tests conducted by the Environment Agency over the same period. (Consuming 620 sandwiches, 74 cream teas and 82 beers in the process!)

Richard Foord MP is fully involved – David Reed MP where are you? – Owl

Summary

The results show that phosphate levels rise to alarming levels just south of the main Honiton Sewage works, and remain high all the way down the river as more sewage effluent is pumped into the river at subsequent treatment works and pumping stations, only dropping below the Environment Agency’s “Upper Safe Level” below Otterton.

Following a “Freedom of Information” request to South West Water, daily test results were obtained.for E.coli levels. These were taken at a number of locations around the lower river and Nature Reserve, from November 2024 through May 2025. At White Bridge, where the river Otter meets the tidal estuary. the E.coli levels are higher than the generally accepted ‘Safe Swim Level’ on 90% of days during that period, with the average E.coli reading being five times the ‘Safe’ level.

Following the loss of Budleigh’s Blue Flag beach status in 2025 due to high levels of entero-bacteria, South West Water stated publicly that the E.coli levels at Budleigh’s beach ‘COULD BE CAUSED BY BIRDLIFE IN THE NEW OTTER NATURE RESERVE‘ [did Simon Jupp think that one up?].

In fact, the evidence shows that the nature reserve is a recipient of the River Otter’s entero-bacteria pollution, NOT a significant source for increase.

The team continues to work with Richard Foord, MP, and the River Otter Fisheries Association (ROFA) to engage with both South West Water (SWW) and the Environment Agency (EA). Specific requests have been put to the Environment Agency, including:

Review the operation and permit for Honiton STW in light of environmental harm being caused to a river which is already classified as being “at risk due to phosphate”.

That consideration be given to an amendment to the permit for the Feniton STW upgrade which is due in 2030. such that it requires a high-level of phosphate removal, similar to that which has been highly successful at Fluxton.

That EA add a regular sampling point to the Middle Otter section, somewhere just downstream of Honiton STW. Currently EA have no routine visibility of water quality in the middle or lower Otter, until the sampling point at Dotton. – Owl

One full year of Community Monitoring [OVA spring newsletter]

We set up the ORCA campaigning group about 18 months ago with a call for volunteers. Following the recruitment process, these volunteers were all trained, risk assessments were published and the OVA provided relevant insurance for the testers to operate. Since then we have now completed a full year of 24 completed test cycles by 54 accredited testers performing 288 location tests, on 13 sunny days, 11 rainy days, 3 floods … consuming 620 sandwiches, 74 cream teas and 82 beers! Over 2,880 individual tests and observations have been logged. For this, we would like to extend a huge thank you to our amazing team of volunteers.

This testing is the most comprehensive testing performed on the river Otter — to put this in perspective, the Environment Agency carried out just 24 location tests on the River Otter in the same period.

Our results show that phosphate levels rise to alarming levels just south of the main Honiton Sewage works, and remain high all the way down the river as more sewage effluent is pumped into the river at subsequent treatment works and pumping stations, only dropping below the Environment Agency’s “Upper Safe Level” below Otterton.

As well as analysing our own ORCA data, we also review all other river data sets produced by the Environment Agency, South West Water and other conservation groups. Although the Environment Agency only sample at a few spots in the catchment, the one benefit of their data is that we can analyse phosphate levels at Dotton, a few miles south of Newton Poppleford, once per month over the past 15 years.

Using this data set, we can make a number of important observations:

• The general trend from 2010 to 2020 is a very high and gradually increasing phosphorous concentration in the River Otter, where the increase appears to correlate with the local population increase in the catchment
• Phosphorous level at Dotton then drops significantly in March 2020. This drop coincides with some basic phosphate removal work being completed at Honiton, but more importantly it’s the date when a state-of-the-art phosphate-removal scheme went live at Fluxton sewage works. As Dotton is about four miles downstream of Fluxton sewage works, we see the full impact of this local reduction.
• This significant drop demonstrates that Phosphate-reduction projects at sewage works, of the type we are calling for, really do make a material difference to total phosphate levels in the river
• It also indicates that a similar reduction from sewage works in future, particularly at Honiton and Feniton, would likely produce a similar step-change improvement in measured phosphate levels downstream
• Unfortunately, the chart then shows a slow background increase in phosphate levels from 2020 through to 2026, again likely reflecting increased wastewater from population growth
• It’s clear from the chart that NO other factors appear to have impacted phosphate levels at Dotton, in any way that exceeds the background increase in phosphate through population growth. This includes all agriculture regulatory and advisory work by EA, Westcountry Rivers Trust and Devon Wildlife Trust, which have received £millions in investment. Whilst this work has reportedly reduced phosphate levels in the upper reaches of the Otter and in several of the tributaries, it does not appear to have any impact on net phosphate levels in the lower river.
• That certainly does not mean however that this agriculture advisory work has not delivered important ecological benefits. Key focus areas include reducing soil run-off, stopping livestock from dumping their waste directly in the river, and advising on proper storage of farm waste – which reduces the potential for catastrophic fish kills from slurry. All of this work is very important in creating a rich river environment for the benefit of wildlife and people
• The lack of any apparent reduction in agriculture-derived phosphate levels at Dotton though, given its success elsewhere in the catchment and on other neighbouring rivers such as the Axe, provides important evidence that the majority of the phosphate in the lower Otter is sewage derived.

E.coli levels

Our ORCA team have been testing a wide range of indicators of river quality, and based on those samples plus observations of the river ecology, phosphate appears to be the most important element affecting the environmental health of the river. However, given that the primary source of phosphate is sewage works, and the very high levels of untreated sewage discharges dumped into the river Otter, we were also interested to see what the E.coli levels in the river Otter have been.

Following a “Freedom of Information” request to South West Water, we obtained their daily test results for E.coli levels which were taken at a number of locations around the lower river and Nature Reserve, from November 2024 through May 2025. In particular, we focussed on one key location, White Bridge, where the river Otter meets the tidal estuary. The results are shown in the chart below.

As you can see, the E.coli levels are higher than the generally accepted ‘Safe Swim Level’ (dotted red line) on 90% of days during that period, with the average E.coli reading being five times the ‘Safe’ level.

High levels of E.coli come down the River Otter, particularly after even very slight rainfall in the catchment. Sources are livestock agriculture and untreated sewage discharges, of which there were over 8,000 hours in 2025. Whilst not included in the ecological health classification, high concentrations of these entero-bacteria create a hazard for human and animal health.

Following the loss of Budleigh’s Blue Flag beach status in 2025 due to high levels of entero-bacteria, South West Water stated publicly that the E.coli levels at Budleigh’s beach ‘could be caused by birdlife in the new Otter Nature Reserve’.

To see if that could be the case, we analysed the same SWW dataset to compare the E.coli levels at White Bridge (so above the Nature Reserve), with the daily readings at Otter mouth, which carries the River Otter plus outfall from the Nature Reserve tidal lagoon out to the sea, and from there to our beach.

The Otter mouth samples show ALL E.coli peaks coincide with levels coming down the Otter at White Bridge. Therefore, high E.coli readings at Otter Mouth do NOT appear to come from bird life or other factors in the nature reserve.

In fact, the evidence shows that the nature reserve is a recipient of the River Otter’s entero-bacteria pollution, NOT a significant source for increased E.coli.

We were delighted to have been approached recently by Plastic Free Budleigh to help them in a water testing program in Budleigh Bay. They had been contacted by a team called “Bugwatch” led by Dr Jonathan Cox from Aston University and the Microbiology Society. They are looking to test the water quality at Blue Flag beaches for 7 consecutive days over the Easter period.

As you all know, Budleigh lost its blue flag last year! The team were very happy for us to be involved (for which we say thank you !). So, we asked our ORCA water testers if any of them would be interested in helping out. While this is not exactly on the river, it is testing where the river Otter hits the beach. We were delighted when the team responded in the affirmative. So, we undertook 7 continuous days of testing on the beach near the mouth of the river Otter. These data will be part of a published case study which we will share in due course.

We are now looking at how we can add E.coli testing to the river at selected locations alongside our current chemical testing. To do this we need to invest in new testing equipment and the relevant reagents that are used during each test. We will share more of this testing in future issues of “Otter Life” and via Facebook and web

Collaborating with the EA

Our ORCA team continues to work with Richard Foord, MP, and the River Otter Fisheries Association (ROFA) to engage with both South West Water (SWW) and the Environment Agency (EA). Our latest meeting was a positive and engaging meeting with Richard Foord, ROFA and the EA in order to review all of the data sets relating to phosphate attribution data, ie: apportion where the phosphate in the river comes from. This is important as the Environment Agency use this attribution data to ‘inform where action is most needed and support investment decisions aimed at improving water quality’.

OVA/ROFA’s analysis suggests that sewage works remain the primary source of phosphorus in the Lower Otter, and supports the data published by the EA in 2024.

Our requests from the Environment Agency:

1. A further meeting with EA’s technical team to review EA and ORCA detailed data sets with EA staff in relation to the attribution models, and confirm an attribution model which aligns with measured Phosphate data and timeline of known changes to sewage system.

2. We are asking EA to review the operation and permit for Honiton STW in light of environmental harm being caused to a river which is already classified as being `at risk due to phosphate’, plus East Devon District Council’s damning Water Cycle Study and Honiton’s sewage treatment capacity vs demand today and after a planned 980-home increases. These are just some of the many issues currently affecting Honiton STW. We are asking EA to consider placing a requirement for increased treatment capacity and a state-of-the-art Phosphorous removal scheme and permit.

3. To improve the Feniton STW upgrade which is due in 2030. SWW state that the primary objective is Nitrogen removal, rather than Phosphate. During our discussions with EA, it seems that this upgrade will also now include a (new?) minor form of phosphate removal. However, in view of the clear evidence of environmental harm in the river due to high phosphate levels, we are asking that consideration be given to an amendment to the permit, such that it requires a high-level of phosphate removal, similar to that which has been highly successful at Fluxton.

4. Request that EA add a regular sampling point to the Middle Otter section, somewhere just downstream of Honiton STW. Currently EA have no routine visibility of water quality in the middle or lower Otter, until the sampling point at Dotton.

“We are really lucky. We’ve seen some investment from South West Water very recently, so they’ve reduced the number of sewage spills, or they will when they finish the work down in the Ham.

“We do have to recognise that, but we are standing in solidarity with those people less fortunate than ourselves, like our friends in the Otter Valley where they’re really struggling with pollution in the River Otter.” [Budleigh lost its Blue Flag Beach status in 2025.]

Liberal Democrat MP for Honiton and Sidmouth Richard Foord attended the protest and described the turnout as “fantastic”.

Budleigh residents might ask: where is “on the same page” David Reed?- Owl

Lewis Clarke www.sidmouthherald.co.uk

Dozens of protesters took to the sea in a mass “paddle out” demonstration as campaigners demanded an end to sewage pollution along the UK coastline.

Surfers, swimmers, paddleboarders and youth groups gathered off the coast at Sidmouth on Saturday, May 16 as part of a nationwide protest organised by Surfers Against Sewage.

The event was one of almost 60 demonstrations held across the country calling for action over sewage discharges and water industry reform.

Organiser Robin Goodman said the protest aimed to send a clear message to water companies and the Government.

Robin said: “We need to see the end to, as you’ve seen in the banner, people before payouts. That is the message today.”

He said the Sidmouth event marked the first large-scale “paddle out” protest held in the town in recent years.

Robin added that Sidmouth had seen improvements following investment by South West Water, but said campaigners wanted to stand alongside communities still dealing with pollution problems.

He said: “We are really fortunate and I’ve made a point of saying that to anybody.

“We are really lucky. We’ve seen some investment from South West Water very recently, so they’ve reduced the number of sewage spills, or they will when they finish the work down in the Ham.

“We do have to recognise that, but we are standing in solidarity with those people less fortunate than ourselves, like our friends in the Otter Valley where they’re really struggling with pollution in the River Otter.”

Liberal Democrat MP for Honiton and Sidmouth Richard Foord attended the protest and described the turnout as “fantastic”.

Sidmouth, Surfers Against Sewage, Paddle Out 2026 – Richard Foord with Robin Goodman (Image: Lewis Clarke)

Before heading into the water he said: “You can see the Surf Life Saving Club out in the water. You can see loads of youth groups and young people joining, young and old, to really show the passion that people feel on this subject.

“It is so much bigger than just one seaside town.

“This is something that people across the country feel strongly about, particularly across the south west of England where, because we have such a large coastline and we have South West Water, people feel particularly strongly about this.”

Mr Foord said rising water bills and concerns over infrastructure investment had fuelled public frustration.

He added: “What people have seen is that their bills are shooting up and they understand that the infrastructure is not being invested in at the rate that it ought to be.”

The MP said he welcomed proposed Government reforms to the water industry but urged ministers to move faster.

He said: “We want to see these water companies, when they fail, put into mutual ownership so that they become public benefit companies.

“We want to see people with ecological understanding, environmentalists, on the board of these companies so that they’re not run solely for profit in the way that they have in recent years.”

Speaking about South West Water’s new chief executive Keith Haslett , Mr Foord said he planned to meet him within the next fortnight.

He said: “My message to him is South West Water really needs to invest in the infrastructure so that we do not see this company run in a way that it’s all about extraction of profit.

“This company needs to be run in support of people’s health and wellbeing and not for profit.”

Robin said he believed campaigners would return for another paddle out event next year.

From a correspondent:

Dear Owl,

Prompted by your article dated 15^th May, HOW HARD DO OUR MPS WORK FOR US , I conducted my own survey choosing an MP, newly elected in 2024, whose constituency is closest to ours from each of the political parties based in England. I haven’t chosen MPs who have established new political parties since 2024.

These figures are accurate as at 17^th May, 2026

NAME OF MP	POLITICAL PARTY	CONSTITUENCY	NUMBER OF SPOKEN CONTRIBUTIONS IN PARLIAMENT
Martin Wrigley	Liberal Democrats	Newton Abbot	224
David Reed	Conservative and Unionist Party	Exmouth and Exeter East	216`
Carla Denya	Green Party	Bristol Central	212
Steve Race	Labour andCo-operative Party	Exeter	147
Nigel Farage	Reform UK Limited	Clacton	67

It was interesting looking online at their contributions in the Houses of Parliament using the Government’s   (Hansard) website. Some MPs speak mainly about their parliamentary responsibilities rather than making sure their constituents’ voices are heard about issues that affect them such as businesses, cost of living crisis, education, health, housing, jobs, policing etc.

Yours sincerely,

An Exmouth and Exeter East constituency resident.

Devon’s Reform UK leader has issued a bid to launch a multi-party ‘shadow cabinet’ to “try something radically different”.

The two East Devon Indys (Paul Hayward and Jess Bailey) have politely declined; how many of the seven Tories will join this “non-political working relationship” is currently unknown. Then there is the question of the political allegiances of Cllr Ed Hiil, Pinhoe & Mincinglake and Cllr Angela Nash, Wonford & St Loyes. They were originally elected as Reform councillors, “became” independent,  then joined Advance. Both these are currently listed on the Devon County web site as having reverted to “Independent” once again.

Can we call this “political bed hopping”? So is this what “multi-party” means? – Owl

Bradley Gerrard, Local Democracy Reporter www.devonairradio.com

Devon’s Reform UK leader has issued a bid to launch a multi-party ‘shadow cabinet’ to “try something radically different”.

Councillor Michael Fife Cook (Reform UK, Yelverton Rural) has invited any councillor outside the ruling Liberal Democrat and Green Party coalition that leads Devon County Council to join to try and better organise the council’s opposition parties.

Nigel Farage, the national leader of Reform UK, recently dubbed his leadership team a ‘shadow cabinet’ even though the leader of the opposition and shadow roles are given to the largest party not in government, which is currently the Conservatives.

Cllr Fife Cook (Yelverton Rural), who has recently been selected to lead his party in Devon for a second year, invited councillors to form a shadow cabinet “based solely on meritocracy”.

“I would like to ask if you might be willing to help try something radically different,” Cllr Fife Cook wrote to Devon County Council’s non-Lib Dem and Green members.

“We are going to be forming a shadow cabinet, and I want to ask all of those with ability, who are not LibDem/Green, to join with us and form a united opposition, so that we might have more say in the way forward for Devon.

“If you feel you would like to be part of this non-political working relationship, hopefully in training to take the reins as soon as needed, and if you have the courage to really work together for the people of Devon, then please step forward.”

Councillor Paul Hayward, an independent member who represents Axminster, said while he was “flattered to be asked” he was unable to join.

“I simply don’t have enough time in my day with my own [parish] council-employed role, Devon Association of Local Councils, Local Government Association, as well as being a member at East Devon District Council and the county council to take on anything else.”

Another independent, Councillor Jess Bailey (Independent, Otter Valley) said she felt accepting such an invitation would be “difficult” because of her role leading a committee.

“I chair the health and adult care scrutiny committee, which performs a really important scrutiny role, so I don’t think I could be in a shadow cabinet,” she said.

“I try to keep whatever political views there are out of the committee to ensure it is effective, so I couldn’t join this.”
She acknowledged she understood Cllr Fife Cook’s motivation, but added that challenging an authority didn’t necessarily require a shadow cabinet.

Cllr Fife Cook said the recent local election results had “moved the goalposts” ahead of local government reorganisation, which is the process launched by government to overhaul local councils.

While no decision has been made yet, most of Devon’s existing councils are likely to be abolished and replaced by fewer but larger unitary councils, which are responsible for all services within their administrative boundary.

Cllr Fife Cook said while it wasn’t guaranteed that everyone who expressed interest could join, he wanted it to represent different parties and independents, “making use of those who have good knowledge, understanding and interest in the various subjects to be covered”.

He added there would be a “small group” choosing the shadow cabinet members that would do so “[without] favour or partisan alliance in any way”.

“This is our chance to show the public how councillors should work together in saving Devon and doing what we were all elected to do,” Cllr Fife Cook added.

While only Lib Dem and Green members are on Devon’s cabinet, the leaders of other parties are invited to cabinet meetings to have their say on decisions, and members can also support or oppose initiatives and proposals brought to the full council.

Scrutiny committees can also invoke a so-called ‘call-in’ of cabinet decisions, whereby they can raise further queries, but they do not have the power to overrule cabinet decisions.