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.

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?

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.”

“Councils or company bosses, those in power have a duty of stewardship”

Letter in Guardian:

“Aditya Chakrabortty (Opinion, 14 June) compared my appearance before a Tottenham magistrate [for refusing to pay council tax in protest against cuts to social security] with Philip Green’s appearance before MPs. It is an apt comparison. In both cases the authorities failed to take steps to prevent the kind of disasters facing the pensioners of BHS or the benefit claimants of the London borough of Haringey.

In my case, I asked Grant Thornton, Haringey’s auditors, to take into account the damage done to the wellbeing of many benefit claimants by welfare “reform” when auditing the enforcement costs, now £115, added by the council to the council tax arrears of more than 20,000 households a year. It is a last straw that breaks many hearts already struggling with rent and utility arrears and benefit sanctions .

Grant Thornton replied: “We have no remit … to opine on the impact of this policy on the wellbeing of those required to pay council tax.” Why not? Why didn’t Haringey tell them that the Ministry of Justice and the Department for Communities and Local Government have issued guidance specifically drawing the attention of courts and councils to the vulnerable circumstances of residents. Or Lord Freud tell them that “Four principles have underpinned welfare reforms. First the welfare system should support the elderly, vulnerable and disabled people…”

Reverend Paul Nicolson
Taxpayers Against Poverty”

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

Natural England newly- designated sites – only one in Devon

… and that is the South West Coast path works only.

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/natural-england-designations-programme-for-areas-sites-and-trails/natural-englands-designations-programme-to-march-2017

Dorset, devolution and democracy

Although this is about Dorset, much of it applies to Devon and East Devon. At least in Dorset, councillors (for now) remain in charge of their own destiny. In Devon and Somerset they have abdicated their responsibilities to local (and national and international) business interests, including developers and those with nuclear and arms interests.

And Dorset is making a token attempt to consult residents (although, as typical in these cases, they seem to be trying to keep it under their radar) unlike Devon and Somerset which have hijacked the process from under our noses amid secrecy and subterfuge.

“You are probably aware that Dorset County Council (DCC) is considering changing the way it is structured and moving to a Unitary Authority.

This means the district / borough level of local government would be abolished. It will likely mean fewer elected councillors making decisions and reduce overall capacity to deal with the needs of local residents.

Power is already far too removed. Instead of moving towards a vision of localisation, the proposed changes have the potential to create an even bigger gap in local democracy.

There will be a public consultation on this through July – September, a decision will be made by DCC, and should they wish to proceed with a Unitary Authority, a proposal to central government in early 2017.

It is currently uncertain if DCC will apply to postpone the 2017 County Council elections, but this has been voiced in DCC meetings as a possibility.

You are probably NOT aware of a separate plan for a Dorset Combined Authority (DCA) to cover:

· Dorset County Council
· Bournemouth Borough Council
· Poole Borough Council
· Purbeck District Council
· East Dorset District Council
· Christchurch Borough Council
· West Dorset District Council
· North Dorset District Council
· Weymouth and Portland Borough Council

In essence this is a body of 10 members, 9 drawn from elected councillors (a sort of super-cabinet) and 1 Local Enterprise Partner (someone appointed from “big business”).

The Dorset Combined Authority will have specific decision-making power, covering economic growth, regeneration / infrastructure and transportation. We are concerned there will be no environmental voice on this Authority. There is worry that a programme of road building that would literally pave the way to support oil & gas exploration and production (e.g. fracking) would go unchallenged:

https://www.dorsetforyou.gov.uk/article/421876/Everything-you-need-to-know-about-the-Dorset-Combined-Authority

Why are we telling you this?

The public “consultation” for the DCA is happening right now! Our apologies we did not become aware of this earlier. But even with our eyes and ears open across Dorset, Bournemouth, Poole and Christchurch this proposal and process was not on our radar until very recently. But it is now!

What can you do?

There are 3 key things we would ask you to engage in:

1. Participate in the consultation survey on the Dorset For You website. The closing date is

Friday 17th June

(yes, we know, it is a very hurried and low-key consultation). Just click on the link below to take part in the quite short survey:

https://www.dorsetforyou.gov.uk/article/422462/Give-us-your-views-on-the-Dorset-Combined-Authority-proposals

You may wish to say that for changes as serious as this, you would expect a referendum, and not just a short consultation exercise.

2. Write to your local town / parish, district / borough, county Councillor(s)and ask them one, some or all of the following:

Ask them to explain to you what the Dorset Combined Authority is all about. Ask them if they are aware of the consultation process, and if so why they have not done more in your ward to inform you about it and encourage engagement.

Ask them for their opinion about the advantages and disadvantages of the Dorset Combined Authority. Ask them if they think this is increasing or decreasing democracy at the local level.

Ask them if there will be a representative on the Authority focused on ensuring decisions around growth, infrastructure and transportation will be evaluated for their impact on the local environment (e.g. air pollution, wildlife protection, open spaces, etc.) and on the consequences for Climate Change.

Ask them how the 10 members will be selected or appointed. Ask them how those members will be held accountable for their decisions and by whom.

There may be other things you will want to ask them, but the above are a few ideas. If you are not familiar with the names and email addresses of the local councillors, a list of the councillors at all levels by each area / ward / division for West and South Dorset can be found within the article on our website:

https://westandsouthdorset.greenparty.org.uk/news/2016/06/14/changes-to-dorset%E2%80%99s-democracy-and-council-structure/

Many thanks for taking an interest and we hope you will take some action if you can.

Caz Dennett

Campaign Manager, West & South Dorset Green Party”

Hernandez now formally under investigation

She has always maintained that she should not stand down because she was not under investigation.

Well, now she is.

Devon and Cornwall Police and Crime Commissioner (PCC) Alison Hernandez is formally under investigation as part of the general election expenses row, it has been confirmed.

Ms Hernandez faces allegations she failed to properly declare election expenses when employed as the election agent for Conservative MP Kevin Foster.

Since she was elected on May 5, she has faced questions over her role in the financing of Tory campaigning but has insisted she has yet to be questioned or even contacted.

Now, the Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC) has confirmed a joint inquiry with a neighbouring force will take place to ensure independence for Devon and Cornwall police.

It said a managed investigation will be undertaken by West Mercia Police under the direction and control of the IPCC, and overseen by its deputy chair Sarah Green.

The probe will form part of a “wider investigation being undertaken by Devon and Cornwall Police” the IPCC added, in reference to separate allegations relating to other MPs implicated.

Deputy Chair Sarah Green said: “As Ms Hernandez is now a Police and Crime Commissioner, the IPCC will manage an investigation looking at whether she properly declared election expenses whilst acting as an election agent during the 2015 General Election.

On completion of the investigation we will decide whether any matters should be referred to the Crown Prosecution Service for its consideration.”

The inquiry will look into claims that more than two dozen Tory MPs failed to declare the costs of “battle buses” and hotel bills during last year’s General Election campaign.

The accused Devon and Cornwall MPs are Scott Mann in North Cornwall, George Eustice in Camborne and Redruth, Oliver Colvile in Plymouth Sutton and Devonport and Kevin Foster in Torbay.

Devon and Cornwall Police later announced that the investigation would be transferred to another police force.

The Office of the Police and Crime Commissioner (OPCC) made a referral to the Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC) immediately after the PCC election.

Andrew White, OPCC chief executive, said arrangements had been put in place to protect Devon and Cornwall Police from any suggestions that they may be subject to undue influence, and to ensure that any individuals who form part of this investigation will be treated impartially by an independent police force.

Ms Hernandez, who was summoned to an emergency meeting by the Police and Crime Panel amid anger over her comments on the issue, has faced calls to step aside.

The panel warned her not to make any more “political statements”.

Exeter’s Labour MP Ben Bradshaw and former Lib Dem MP for Torbay Adrian Sanders have added to calls for Ms Hernandez to step aside.

She said she had not yet been approached but was prepared to comply with any inquiry. “I stand ready to give evidence and answer any questions and am more than ready to assist,” she added.

http://www.plymouthherald.co.uk/Crime-Commissioner-Alison-Hernandez-officially/story-29395964-detail/story.html

Moirai – another coincidence?

Update: check out the comments on this post for further interesting information.

One of the people said to be a director of Moirai is Sarju (aka Bobby) Rach.

Could it be this person:

BobbyRach

The player on the right is identified in the image as “Bobby Rach”

http://pokerdb.thehendonmob.com/player.php?a=r&n=94242

Well, it is one way to raise money (or lose it)!

Our LEP and its “decisions” and “minutes”

At its last board meeting (18 May 2016) the Heart of the Southwest LEP “discussed” and ” noted” several things but doesn’t appear to have decided or actually done anything:

http://www.heartofswlep.co.uk/board-minutes-0

Unfortunately, minutes don’t appear until the next agenda is produced in July 2016.

Here is their last set of “minutes”:

Click to access LEP%20Board%20Agenda%2C%2015%20March%202016_3.pdf

Note there is no list of attendees and ” decisions” were to

“approve an approach” to “Growth Deal 3″

” agree to amend a funding allocation” followsing a “recent information from DCLG about changes to European (ERDF) funding for Nuclear build and decommissioning projects”

“note increased risk” to fund the Tiverton Urban extension and the mitigation actions being taken

“agree to delegate management decisions” about its budget to a sub-committee noting “Any variances in budget lines (singly or in aggregate) of more than 10% or £100,000 would require reference back to the board.”

Academies: can we afford (many of) them?

The man in charge of the Cornwall College Group has rejected calls from unions for him to take a pay cut.

Amarjit Basi earns £200,000 a year. The college is currently £9m in debt and around 60 staff face losing their jobs.

The University and College Union has suggested that he and other senior managers could take a drop in salary. In a statement, the college said the principal’s salary was in line with national pay scales..”

From BBC Spotlight news page today

And, yes, it is privately owned and run:

Cornwall College is a further education college situated on various sites throughout Cornwall, England, United Kingdom, with its main centre in St Austell. The college is a member of the 157 Group of [wait for it …] high performing schools. “

Wikipedia

Er, may be high performing but someone at the top can’t do their sums. Or, perhaps they can …

Hugo Swire replies to less than 25% of constituents’ letters within 2 weeks

according to statistics here:

https://www.writetothem.com/stats/2015/mps?o=n

Perhaps he should ask (one of) his Parliamentary Assistant to pull up her socks. It shouldn’t be too difficult, as it is his wife Sacha.

Whoops! As everyone in East Devon knows, referendums are not binding!

Well, we could have told you that Britain! Here in East Devon our council thinks referendums (referenda for the posh people) are just a minor annoyance and to be automatically ignored.

A really crucial detail about the upcoming EU referendum has gone virtually unmentioned and it is probably the most crucial detail: Parliament doesn’t actually have to bring Britain out of the EU if the public votes for it.

That is because the result of June 23 referendum on Britain’s EU membership is not legally binding. Instead, it is merely advisory, and, in theory, could be totally ignored by UK government.

This incredible detail is explained in a new blog post by Financial Times columnist and legal expert David Allen Green.

Green says that no legal provision was included in the EU referendum legislation that requires UK Parliament to act in accordance with the outcome of the EU referendum.

Instead, what will happen next if the public votes for a Brexit will be purely a matter of parliamentary politics.

The government could decide to put the matter to parliament and then hope to win the vote, Green says. Alternatively, ministers could attempt to negotiate an updated EU membership deal and put it to another referendum. Finally, the government could just choose to totally ignore the will of the public.”

http://uk.businessinsider.com/green-eu-referendum-not-legally-binding-brexit-2016-6?r=US&IR=T

“Greater Exeter” – not so great? Show yourselves “Greater Exeter Visioning Board”!

This article from May 2016 asks: what happened to the “vision for Greater Exeter” which, as the writer says, was a partnership between East Devon, Exeter and Teignbridge, set up in November 2014. Nothing at all exists to show what it did, does or might do in future.

It is interesting to note that, at that time, Cabinets and senior officers of all three authorities must have aware of devolution plans.

Whose Vision is it anyway

It’s a truism that politicians (and not only politicians) love making good news announcements. Even when they have to announce bad news, it’s always presented as positively as the spin doctors can manage. Announcements which are then followed up by nothing at all are not unheard of – after all, it’s the fact of announcing something that generates the media coverage, and then the circus moves on.

But what barely figures in the spin doctors’ handbook is the announcement which is then followed not so much by nothing as by a veil of secrecy. And here in Devon, we have a fine example.

On 24 November 2014, three district councils – East Devon, Exeter City and Teignbridge – announced that there were setting up a partnership to be called Greater Exeter, Greater Devon [1]. The stated aim is “to drive forward economic growth” through “joined-up decision making on planning, housing, resources and infrastructure”. A Greater Exeter Visioning Board would meet every month “to define work priorities”. The Board’s membership would be the leaders, chief executives and economic development lead councillors of each of the councils.

Leaving aside the question of whether economic growth is the right objective, this seems a potentially useful measure. The three councils cover adjacent areas and face transport and land use pressures, particularly in Exeter and its surroundings.

In the course of keeping up to date with local initiatives I recently trawled the councils’ websites for news of the monthly meetings of the Visioning Board. Nothing at all. So, focussing on Exeter City Council, I looked for minutes of meetings that approved the setting up of the Board and received reports from it. Nothing at all.

Next step, ask the council. After the usual 20 days had elapsed, an Exeter City Council officer sent me a reply confirming the Board’s membership and setting out the dates each month on which it had met since its inception . However, the reply stated that the minutes of the Board’s meetings were not available to the public, though no reason for this was given.

So, here we are. A local authority body, promoted as a driver for economic growth and coordinating policies and planning on key issues, is announced with much fanfare and then vanishes into a cloak of secrecy.

Open government, indeed. I’ve asked the City Council a series of questions about the Board’s authority, functions and accountability. Watch this space for their response.”

https://petercleasby.com/tag/greater-exeter-visioning-board/

Scottish cities want radicall different devolution deals

Interesting that, in England, only London has solo devolution – seven Scottish cities want individual devolution deals.

http://www.publicfinance.co.uk/news/2016/06/scottish-cities-set-out-devolution-proposals

EDA INVITES HUGO SWIRE TO BECOME INDEPENDENT

http://www.eastdevonalliance.org.uk/news/20160614/eda-invites-hugo-swire-to-become-independent/

Hugo Swire MP has used his blog to attack the idea of Independents both in Parliament and at District Council level. This is EDA Chairman, Paul Arnott’s response:

“The last time I saw Hugo in the paper he was greeting US Secretary of State, John Kerry, to the anti-corruption summit in London. It seemed marvellous that although the Swire family name was dotted throughout the Panama papers Hugo was joining the fight for accountability and transparency.

So, may I suggest that he casts off the shackles of Conservative membership, and the ministerial code which he claims prevents him speaking in Parliament about his constituency, and join the free-to-speak, free-to-act Independents? With all the extra time he may even be able to find a home down here.

But as a matter of fact, Hugo is wrong that East Devon Alliance Independents operate as a bloc in the council. There are 15 Independents in the Independent group, including 9 who are also members of the EDA, and it is a matter of record that every one of them votes as they individually decide. There has never been and never will be the kind of arm-twisting beloved of EDDC’s Tory hierarchy, which itself does a disservice to many excellent Conservative councillors as perturbed by this as us.

As to being anti-Tory, this is a canard Hugo has tried to float before. In fact, we have just made a submission to the Home Office in support of his colleague Theresa May’s Action Plan on Money Laundering and Terrorist Finance, with reference to the possibility of money laundering through property development. This is as relevant in East Devon as it is to the gleaming new towers of central London.

Finally, the EDA registered with the Electoral Commission precisely so that our microscopic spend at the May 2105 elections was open to analysis by the public. We look forward to Hugo’s views regarding a number of his Devon Conservative colleagues whose own Parliamentary electoral expenditure returns are now being investigated by the West Mercia Police.”

Community Infrastructure Levy rules likely to change as developers don’t like them

Developers don’t like it, so, of course, it has to go.

The government’s specially appointed task force is to call for a radical overhaul of the community infrastructure levy six years after it was introduced.

It will recommend a major policy U-turn, stripping CIL back to its original purpose by funding local infrastructure with a simple, national base tax on all new developments.

Section 106 charges would return for infrastructure requirements on large developments.

The changes are expected to be considered after parliament’s summer recess. The recommendations come from the Department for Communities and Local Government’s CIL review panel, set up as an independent working group chaired by former British Property Federation chief executive Liz Peace.

Changes are likely to need primary legislation and could be inserted into the Neighbourhood Planning and Infrastructure Bill. …

… Barratt Developments’ group land and planning director Philip Barnes said: “We were hoping that when CIL was introduced it would give us more clarity and certainty, but actually we are finding we often have to negotiate s106 on top of CIL. If these changes were introduced they would give developers greater flexibility, whichcould speed up the delivery of larger sites.”

Details yet to be determined include how the base tariff would be set, whether any types of development would be exempt, and howmedium-sized developments could avoid being hit by both CIL and s106 requirements.

CBRE’s chairman of UK planning Stuart Robinson said: “The key questions will be, who will set the tariff and on what basis? And how will does affordable housing fit in?”

Simon Ricketts, partner at law firm King & Wood Mallesons, said he would not want a lower CIL rate subsidised by higher s106 payments. He added: “If there is a shortfall between what is needed and a new, low CIL, that should not come from s106, which would add extra complexity.”

https://andrewlainton.wordpress.com/2016/06/03/task-force-to-accept-bpf-recommendations-on-cil/

Another fat cat getting fatter at our expense

Oh, the joys of unfettered capitalism!

“The boss of Britain’s worst rail company subjecting passengers to daily delays has been awarded a £2million pay deal.

David Brown, chief executive of Go-Ahead, saw a 10 per cent rise in his overall package for June 2014-2015, despite the poor performance of its rail franchises.

It also more than doubled from £924,000 the previous year, and £36.7 million was paid out to shareholders in dividends, up from £34.7 million the year before.

The huge payouts and increase in pay package revealed were branded ‘a national disgrace’ by a union boss.

After the figures emerged, one commuter write on Twitter: ‘Thank you for fleecing the entire commuting public.’

Mr Brown is the boss of Go-Ahead, which runs a number of companies including GTR, the operator of rail franchises Southeastern, Thameslink and Great Northern.

A survey by Which? found that passengers voted it the worst rail company in the country, with a satisfaction rating of just 46 per cent.

GTR also had the most delays and cancellations caused by a lack of train staff between April 1 2013 and December 12 last year with 62,000 incidents, according to Office of Rail and Road figures.

But last year, it warned passengers to expect three more years of misery until renovations to London Bridge station were complete.”

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3640455/Boss-Britain-s-worst-performing-train-company-awarded-2-1MILLION-pay-deal-branded-national-disgrace.html

Rich get profit, poor get blame

“On Wednesday, two very different men will have to explain themselves. Both appear in London, to a room full of authority figures – but their finances and their status place them at opposite ends of our power structure. Yet put them together and a picture emerges of the skewedness of today’s Britain.

For the Rev Paul Nicolson, the venue will be a magistrate’s court in London. His “crime” is refusing to pay his council tax, in protest against David Cameron’s effective scrapping of council tax benefit, part of his swingeing cuts to social security. In order to pay for a financial crisis they didn’t cause, millions of families already on low incomes are sinking deeper into poverty. In order to pay bills they can’t afford, neighbours of the retired vicar are going without food. The 84-year-old faces jail this week, for the sake of £2,831.

Meanwhile, a chauffeur will drive Philip Green to parliament, where he’ll be quizzed by MPs over his part in the collapse of BHS. A business nearly as old as the Queen will die within a few weeks, leaving 11,000 workers out of a job and 22,000 members of its pension scheme facing a poorer retirement.

There the similarities peter out. Nicolson was summoned to court; Green wasn’t going to bother showing up at Westminster. When the multibillionaire was invited by Frank Field to make up BHS’s £600m pension black hole, he demanded the MP resign as chair of the work and pensions select committee.

But then, Green is used to cherry-picking which rules he plays by. Take this example: he buys Arcadia, the company that owns Topshop, then arranges for it to give his wife a dividend of £1.2bn. Since Tina Green is, conveniently, a resident of Monaco, the tax savings on that one payment alone are worth an estimated £300m. That would fund the building of 10 large secondary schools – or two-thirds of the annual cut to council tax benefits.

Just as Green underinvests in society, so he underinvests in his companies. The man to whom he sold BHS last year, Dominic Chappell, told MPs last week that “for the past 10 or 12 years there had been little or no inward investment in the stores”. A staple of the high street had been run down.

Then again, what incentive has he had to do otherwise? Green bought BHS with just £20m of family money and borrowed the rest. Within four years, he had pulled £400m of dividends out of the firm – 20 times his initial outlay.

He used the same tactic to buy Arcadia – stumping up £9.2m in equity and taking out £1.2bn three years later. This isn’t retailing as you might think of it, it’s balance-sheet shazam – the kind of financial engineering that posed as real business in Britain’s bubble years. And it’s enabled Green to turn major retailers into what Robert Peston, in Who Runs Britain?, calls “giant gushers of cash”.

But in today’s Britain, the poor are forced to pay the unaffordable, while the tax-avoider is honoured for his contribution to society. Green was knighted by Tony Blair, while David Cameron appointed him a government adviser.

Just as Green pretends to be a cheeky chappy even though he went to boarding school, so any charlatan in pinstripes can claim to be a businessperson – and be handsomely rewarded. The barons who run our rail services tout themselves as “investors”, but for every quid they put into their trains, they take out £2.47. That level of underinvestment ensures commuters are never sure of getting in on time and having a seat – but shareholders and managers can make a fortune.

From Margaret Thatcher through Tony Blair to David Cameron, successive prime ministers have preached the virtues of free enterprise. We’ve ended up with an economy comprised of what parliament’s public accounts committee calls “quasi-monopolies” – from water to banks to electricity to public outsourcing – and big businesses being treated as money-sponges to be wrung dry by their owners and managers. …”

http://gu.com/p/4yxn9

Claire Wright responds to Hugo Swire’s rant about independents and the “Ottery Pack”

From Claire Wright’s Facebook Page

It was fortunate for Mr Swire that I was in the process of moving house and without internet for two weeks which meant I couldn’t respond fully to his blog posts that I fundamentally take issue with, relating mainly to Ottery St Mary Hospital and his government’s property management company, which is set to acquire 12 community hospitals in Eastern Devon, later this year.

Fortunately, I now have a full internet connection and below is my reaction.

Mr Swire seems angry that around 250 people came along to my demonstration at Ottery Hospital last month and didn’t believe his claims that the Secretary of State’s for Health’s new private company – NHS Property Services is entirely well meaning and benign.

Residents present were sceptical of his assertions that the company is only acquiring community hospitals (currently owned by local NHS organisations) and charging high market rents, in order to help maintain the buildings.

I held the demonstration on 21 May, as I am outraged by the news that NHS Property Services is to help itself to Ottery Hospital and 11 others in Eastern Devon. NHS PS has a remit for selling off hospital buildings that are “surplus to requirements.”

Mr Swire unexpectedly turned up at the protest, which he is quite entitled to do and asked to address the crowd after me, which I readily agreed to.

His response (which received heckling and jeering from the crowd) largely related to claiming that Ottery Hospital is entirely safe and that NHS PS wouldn’t and couldn’t sell it off.

My question, which I have asked repeatedly of NHS PS and of Mr Swire – what happens if the local NHS (which is around £80m in debt) can’t pay the rent, still remains unanswered.

My request to NHS PS, which has offered me similar assurances to Mr Swire, to view the draft terms and conditions of the contract, so I can satisfy myself that Ottery Hospital’s building is safe, has been refused.

I am reliably informed that elsewhere in the country community hospital buildings acquired by NHS PS have remained shut, with health clinics having to be held in church halls because of unaffordable rents, totalling around £500,000 a year. Before being seized by NHS PS, local health trusts owned the buildings so no rent was payable.

In Ottery’s case local people raised around £250,000 just 20 years ago to assist with the new hospital building.

Yet Mr Swire has suggested that the community should take out a long term lease in order to protect the hospital – from his own government?

The fact that the responsibility for maintaining community hospital buildings is now shifting from the local NHS to a politically appointed government minister, is also very relevant and has worrying implications.
So that’s the background. What has Mr Swire asserted since?

Well, firstly, he has accused me of “scaremongering” and “weaponising” the issue for my “own political advancement.”

I will not lower myself to respond to these silly comments.

He then goes onto claim that Budleigh Salterton is a good example of a community hospital turned into a health hub … but omits to mention that Budleigh Salterton Hospital remains shut because of ownership issues wrangling related to NHS PS taking over the hospital later this year and charging unaffordable rents!

Our MP’s derisory response to the problem doesn’t end here. Mr Swire has even insulted all the protesters at my demonstration on 21 May. He announced in his column in the East Devon press two weeks ago, also reproduced on his blog, that the residents who attended were a “left leaning pack that follow Councillor Claire Wright.”

Ottery St Mary Town Council is so angry about this remark that it will write to Mr Swire to complain.

I intend to fight the very dubious intentions of NHS PS all the way. This is just the beginning.

NHS Property Services is on the agenda at Devon County Council’s health and wellbeing scrutiny committee (of which I am a member) on Monday 20 June at 2pm. Please come along to County Hall and observe or watch online via the council’s website if you would like to know more. If you wish to address the committee you will need to register asap.

Some constituencies have MPs who fight their corner. It is a shame that East Devon’s MP is only interested in defending the indefensible actions of his government, which appears to be on a mission to degrade the NHS further each year.