Daily Archives: 17 Jun 2016

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

17 Jun 2016

Posted under

Devolution, Hinkley C, Local Enterprise Partnership

More serious problems for Hinkley C: EDF managers not in board

And still we have seen no Plan B from our national government or our LEP, for which it is their main flagship (aka vested interest) project.

“Senior managers at EDF have told MPs that they remain convinced that the French state-controlled group should postpone the Hinkley Point project until it has solved a litany of problems, including the reactor design and multibillion-euro lawsuits over delays on similar schemes.

The letter from EDF managers to the UK parliament’s energy and climate change committee is the latest setback for the proposed £18bn nuclear plant, a flagship government energy policy that is intended to provide 7% of Britain’s electricity from about 2025, at a time when old coal and atomic plants are closing down.

In April, the French company said it was delaying a final investment decision (FID) until September while it consulted with trade unions, but engineers and other middle managers appear to remain implacably opposed.

A letter addressed to Angus MacNeil, the chairman of the committee, from the Fédération Nationale des Cadres Supérieurs de l’Énergie (FNCS) union “advises to delay the FID until better upfront industrial visibility is evidenced”.

Outstanding problems highlighted by the senior managers at EDF include:

Areva NP, the designer of the European pressurised reactor (EPR) planned for Somerset, “is currently facing a difficult situation”.

The French nuclear safety authority (ASN) may not give the green light to the EPR being constructed at Flamanville in north-west France due to various anomalies.

There may be “identical flaws” in an Areva EPR being built at Taishan 1 in China.

The scandal over falsification of parts from Areva’s Le Creusot that potentially put safety checks at risk.

Multibillion-euro litigation between Areva and the Finnish energy group TVO over delays to an EPR scheme at Olkiluoto remains unsettled.

An EDF offer to purchase Areva expired on 31 March, leaving “governance uncertainties upon the implementation of the Hinkley Point C project”.

Many of the problems have been raised by other unions inside EDF, such as the CGT, which are worried that EDF’s soaring debts and growing financial commitments are a danger to its future stability.

But the letter from Norbert Tangy, the president of the FNCS, to MacNeil highlights once again the huge list of problems. Among others is concern expressed by the ASN at a hearing on 25 May that any resolution of EDF and Areva’s twin financial problems could take considerable time.

The energy and climate change committee is investigating the financing of new nuclear plants and has twice called Vincent de Rivaz, the chief executive of EDF’s British subsidiary, EDF Energy, to explain the delays at Hinkley. …”

http://gu.com/p/4yjx2

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

17 Jun 2016

Posted under

Affordable and Social Housing, Austerity cuts

Comments

2 Comments

The housing crisis … a crisis of failing capitalism

” … across Britain, people are facing a crisis in housing and in basic pay. Headlines about the collapse of BHS and the horrific conditions at Mike Ashley’s Sports Direct have understandably shocked people, but these aren’t mere consequences of one or two rogue businessmen, but the symptoms of rapacious capitalism. The women in the Sports Direct warehouses who went into labour at work did so because work has become precarious, and zero-hours contracts have been allowed to bloom, because of government attacks on workers’ rights both under Labour and, to an increased degree, under the Tories.

If you’re on a zero-hours contract, you’re forced to scrabble for any work possible to pay your rent, accepting conditions most salaried people would walk out over. If you want to take your employer to court for sexual harassment, racial discrimination, or for forcing you out when you announced your pregnancy, you now have to pay to do so. The poorest have been denied justice, as well as decent pay and conditions.

Cuts to benefits, the cataclysmic farce of the universal credit rollout, and the assault on support for disabled people mean that, post-recession, people who struggle to earn a decent wage are denied basic support. The housing crisis is an affordability crisis, but not one that solely lies in the cost of London flats: people across the country simply can’t afford to live. Rents in the north west are lower, but pay is lower still. Geographic inequalities have worsened post-recession, and many areas feel as though they’ve been left behind.

The housing crisis is everywhere, because pay, benefits and working conditions have worsened or been cut. Attacks on unionisation and government defences of zero-hours contracts will do nothing but fuel an already blazing fire. This is a nationwide crisis, because it’s a crisis of capitalism: as long as we subsidise companies for paying poverty wages, whilst blaming low earners for their own poverty, nothing will change.”

http://gu.com/p/4ydh7

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

17 Jun 2016

Posted under

Accountability, Democracy, Devolution, Transport (local)

“Elected mayors could be as remote from the public as Whitehall”

“Most areas in England will soon have a directly elected mayor, but without proper scrutiny mayors alone won’t solve the local accountability problem.

Before too long, most people living in England will find they have a directly elected mayor in their area, making big decisions on transport, economic development, skills, further education, and possibly public health and policing. These mayors will sit at the heart of devolution deals, agreed between central government and local areas, which will see accountability and responsibility decentralised.

Beyond elections, there will be quite limited local mechanisms for holding these mayors to account. True, combined authorities – bodies made up of elected councillor leaders from across the area – will have a role in decision-making. These combined authorities in turn must establish overview and scrutiny committees of local councillors, to hold decision-makers to account – mirroring the arrangements which apply to most local authorities.

But the existence of these new structures is not in itself a guarantee of accountability. There needs to be an active effort by mayors and local councils to ensure these arrangements really work in the way intended.

Poor accountability will lead to services feeling and looking just as remote as they do when directed from London
Nationally, the systems for accountability seem, oddly, rather stronger. Devolution deals give government significant powers to hold local areas to account for their delivery under the deal.

Funding comes with strings attached and can be withheld if expectations are not met. Whitehall is keen to continue to assert its authority – and parliament is keen to support it. Recently, the Commons public accounts committee (PAC) placed devolution deals alongside major national schemes like e-borders in highlighting the risks of huge amounts of public money being spent without parliamentary oversight. But this fails to take account of the fact that effective oversight will work best if it works at local level. …

… What will happen if we fail to develop robust systems for accountability at local level? The first risk is that devolution will be anything but – a decentralisation of responsibility while power remains firmly at the centre. A tussle of power and responsibility between those at local and national level will only ever be won by Whitehall, which has the interest and the power to maintain the status quo.

The second is that devolution will fail to deliver the outcomes which have been promised. The only way that devolution will be a success is if local politicians are able to take more power to develop and implement creative, exciting ways to improve local people’s lives. Poor or non-existent accountability will lead to services feeling and looking just as remote as they have done when directed from London. …

… Areas with devolution deals in place will have to take it upon themselves to develop systems that will give local people confidence that deals will be implemented in their interests, and that they will have an opportunity to influence this implementation. …”

http://gu.com/p/4yvp8

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

17 Jun 2016

Posted under

Accountability, Devolution

Cheshire devolution deal stumbles

… “Whilst the benefits of devolution are extremely favourable for our residents, the Government’s insistence on an elected mayor has made it difficult for all politicians to come to an agreement.

“The majority of councillors in Cheshire West and Chester were likely to support a consultation to seek the views of residents.

Housing concerns

Michael Jones, the former leader of Cheshire East Council, has said he is in favour of devolution – but not a deal which could involve more than 100,000 new homes in mid and south Cheshire.

A report on the LEP website talks of an aim to build a “constellation new city through the expansion and linkage of the cluster of towns and villages in mid-Cheshire with an expanded Crewe at its heart.”

But Cllr Jones says this was not the deal on the table when he was discussing devolution.

“The Northern Gateway which I put forward in 2014 – the aim was to work with our neighbours, Stoke, Newcastle, Staffordshire Moorlands and Shropshire, to get them to have houses,” he said.

“But they’re no longer talking about [them]… it’s all about what is going in Cheshire East and Crewe city, which was never agreed.”

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

17 Jun 2016

Posted under

Devolution

Hinkley C – more complications

“Areva, one of the French companies at the heart of the controversial Hinkley Point C nuclear project, has unveiled plans to break itself up into three parts in a bid to stem huge losses.

The 87% state-owned atomic engineering and uranium mining company is hoping to raise €9bn (£7bn) from the government and from selling off assets after running up losses of €2bn last year.

Areva, a 10% equity participant in the £18bn planned new Hinkley scheme, is also using the split to isolate financial commitments to a hugely delayed project at Olkiluoto in Finland.

“The two [restructuring of the group and the Hinkley scheme] are not intrinsically linked,” said a spokeswoman for Areva. “The company’s restructuring programme, which includes the sale of [Areva] NP’s operations to EDF, is a positive step forward that will make the whole business and industry stronger.”

EDF, which is also part-owed by the French state, has its own massive debt problems and had refused to buy part of Areva, as ministers wanted, unless it could take the business without any financial commitments for the Olkiluoto 3 scheme.

Areva, which is providing the same European pressurised water reactor for Olkiluoto as is planned for Hinkley, is currently in a standoff over competing legal claims with the Finnish utility TVO relating to the project in Finland.

Areva said it was fully committed to sorting these issues out and completing the reactor, which is currently nine years behind schedule. The problems in Finland and the financial issues facing Areva and EDF have been seized on by Hinkley’s critics as reasons why the British government should pull the plug on the Somerset scheme.

They are unlikely to draw much comfort from the latest restructuring, which they may feel only points up once again the scale of the difficulties being faced by Areva and EDF.

A formal decision to go ahead with the investment at Hinkley has been put off until September amid internal opposition at EDF from unions and others about the wisdom of taking on such a major financial commitment.”

http://gu.com/p/4y8fg

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

17 Jun 2016

Posted under

Accountability, Democracy, Police (local), Transparency

Hernandez

Why hasn’t she stood down now she is under investigation? Officers in the police force would have to do so. It is not an admission of guilt, it is to ensure that investigations are clear of any influence.

In her job she will be meeting with other PCCs and Chief Constables from other areas, including the area investigating her.

Muddy waters and our Police and Crime Panel should be clearing them, otherwise, with a Conservative majority on the Panel, they could be accused of protecting one of their own.

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

17 Jun 2016

Posted under

Accountability, Democracy, Hugo Swire

Ministerial “code”?

How come a Minister can’t talk about his constituency in Parliament but CAN say which side he supports in a referendum that will affect his all his constituents for decades to come?

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

17 Jun 2016

Posted under

Accountability, Budleigh Salterton, Health and Social Care (local), Transparency

Budleigh Hospital – the, somewhat hazy, future?

These are notes written by an attendee at the recent meeting about the future of Budleigh Hospital. It represents the attendee’s personal views.

The way in which ” rent” is being tackled is very novel but, as always, the devil is in the detail.

Owl hopes the League of Friends has access to good lawyers!

“Budleigh Hospital League of Friends AGM followed by Wellbeing Hub Q&A 16/06/16

Chair’s perspective

• According to Chair, Dr David Evans, Swire and Toby Williams have been ‘very helpful in ironing out problems’ – more info on this would be interesting – eg what has Swire actually done (probably just enabling the roll out of Tory ideological destruction of the NHS at a local level?!).

• Dr David Evans also reported that he thinks the wellbeing hub is a pioneering project, one that he believes will be a model of success that other community hospitals in Devon will want to follow. There was a confusing and bizarre message that we should be proud of what we have (an empty building?!). Perhaps he was referring to the work of the League of Friends who do seem to put a lot of work into something that must be very incredibly frustrating.

NHS Property Services

• A contract will be signed between the League of Friends and the RD&E FT that will allow the Wellbeing Hub to ‘overcome’ the commercial rent issue for charitable organisations.

• The League of Friends described this lease as a ‘compromise’. In practice all rent will still be commercial (as they kept saying, this is ‘a legal requirement’), however as the League of Friends has money (raised locally) that they want to invest into the building, they have agreed (verbally at this point), that the money invested by the League of Friends will be converted into a lease – so a £100,000 investment in the property will be translated into a reduction (% unclear) for charitable sector users.

Sustainability, administration, etc all unclear, my question was about clarifying what was initially just a mention of this lease/compromise, but the answer didn’t go far enough.

• However a local alternative therapies practitioner (eg I know of one who wanted to rent space) would probably be charged commercial rent and therefore unlikely to be feasible for them to work from/offer services from the wellbeing hub.

The wellbeing hub

• In September they hope to have some example services available. But then this was contradicted with no access to building until 2017.

• Building is still in reasonable condition and a report of the work done while closed has been issued to the League of Friends (cost of work maintaining the empty building could be an interesting FOI as the League of Friends did not specify).

• It was suggested that the closure has allowed time to consider and test what ideas will work for the hub. Not convinced by this logic – I am pretty sure the hospital demonstrated that.”