““Clarence House has announced that Charles and Camilla will visit the Middle East on an official royal tour in November. The couple last travelled to the region together in March 2013.”
Can’t imagine that the Chairman of the Conservative Middle East Council (Hugo Swire) will be able to keep away from that jaunt.
It must be almost like being back in the Foreign Office. So much to do (sell?) in the Middle East, so much less time for East Devon.
“In a lengthy article in the Manchester Evening News, the prime minister said she was “absolutely committed” to devolving powers away from Westminster.
She said: “I don’t want to see our country dependent on one city any more. I want to get all of our great cities firing on all cylinders to rebalance our economy.”
Right – according to this model, ditch the LEP and have two “economic powerhouses” based on Plymouth and Exeter! (It is already happening secretly behind the usual closed doors – more on that soon).
Somerset? It doesn’t have a city, so let their city be Hinkley C!
“… Stop seeing ageing as being about older people: Ageing is about all of us. It isn’t about young versus old. We will fail to tackle the challenges and make the most of the opportunities of ageing whilst we pitch one generation against another.
Stop ignoring the demands and needs of an ageing population: In Government there is not and never has been a Minister, senior social or other post holder such as a ‘Commissioner’ or ‘Tsar’, or any cross cutting unit or Government strategy on an ageing society.
Stop delivering communities which fail to deliver beyond the basics: Sadly, many communities are even failing to provide the basics of public toilets and places to rest. A fear of falling and of crime acts as a barrier to getting out and about for many older people. We must deliver a more ambitious vision for our communities: of places which are fun and engaging for all ages, whilst also reducing the risk of isolation and loneliness.
End the discrimination: Age discrimination remains a barrier to the participation of older people in society. Legislation has gone some way to prevent discrimination but policymakers must ensure that older people are not prevented from accessing products and services simply because of their age. We all need to play a part in normalising ageing.
Reverse the decline in new and appropriate housing stock for older people: The numbers of new retirement homes being built are being allowed to fall at the same time as the numbers of older people are rapidly increasing. Too few new homes are being built. Those which are, are too often not accessible or adaptable for old age.
Stop ignoring the crisis in social care: Government investment in social care is sharply shrinking while the numbers of older people who need it are rising, yet good social care saves public money by reducing and postponing older people’s need for expensive acute hospital care and helps them to live independently for longer. Good social care for older people also allows family members to keep in employment – so they are not forced to choose between work and caring for an older relative.
Stop operating hospitals on a model designed for the past: Hospitals of the 21st Century are increasingly made up of older patients with complex needs. Sta ratios on hospital wards dedicated to older people, many of them with dementia, are typically lower than those in general wards. Yet we know that these older people often have greater need of help with essentials like eating and drinking.
Stop under-utilising older people: The over 65s in the UK currently spend around £2.2 billion per week (£114 billion per annum) on goods and services. Assuming the spending of the 65+ population rises in line with annual in ation of 2%, their spending will reach over £6 billion per week by 20377. People aged 65 and over in the UK last year contributed £61bn to the economy through employment, informal caring and volunteering. Yet almost four in ten workers aged 55-64 are not working. And almost half of the unemployed of this age range are in long term unemployment. We must do more to maximise the social and economic contribution of older people.” …
http://www.cpa.org.uk/cpa/docs/Ready_for_Ageing_Alliance_Manifesto.pdf
Our local health services are NOT overspent, they are underfunded.
We are NOT having to make “difficult choices” – we are being told what has been decided for us behind closed doors about the consequences of that underfunding.
“Public consultation” is far too little far too late. The decisions were made long ago about which services will suffer and we cannot reverse those decisions without a MASSIVE revolt against them, and even then concessions will be zero or minimal.
That is the reality.
If we want to change that most of us will have to vote out the people who brought us to this. Unpalatable for some, but the only course available to us.
“Spaces are still available for the East Devon Area of Natural Beauty Partnership annual forum
The evening will feature talks from Mike Ruiter of Seaton Jurassic and John Sheaves, chief executive of Taste of the West. The winner of the Ackland Award will also be announced.
The forum will begin at 6pm on
Wednesday, September 28, at Seaton Jurassic.
Guests who book quickly will be able to enjoy a pre-event tour around the attraction’s new interpretation centre at 5pm.
Numbers are limited. To book, email info@eastdevonaonb.org.uk or call 01404 46663. Book by Friday, September 23, to avoid disappointment.”
http://www.sidmouthherald.co.uk/news/spaces_available_at_annual_aonb_forum_1_4698235
Hurry, hurry, hurry – while we still have an AONB to talk about.
Coincidence?
““Swire Oilfield Services, part of the worldwide Swire Group, is the world’s largest supplier of specialist offshore cargo carrying units to the global energy industry and is a leading specialist in modular systems, offshore aviation services and chemical handling.
Swire Oilfield Services can provide standard, specialised and bespoke products certified to DNV2-7.1 and EN12079 to the worldwide oil and gas market. With an extensive hire fleet it allows immediate access, 24 hours a day, to a comprehensive range of products anywhere in the world.”
Perhaps Mr Swire can assure us that he has no direct or indirect links with the company?
“China has failed to curb excesses in its credit system and faces mounting risks of a full-blown banking crisis, according to early warning indicators released by the world’s top financial watchdog.
A key gauge of credit vulnerability is now three times over the danger threshold and has continued to deteriorate, despite pledges by Chinese premier Li Keqiang to wean the economy off debt-driven growth before it is too late.
The Bank for International Settlements warned in its quarterly report that China’s “credit to GDP gap” has reached 30.1, the highest to date and in a different league altogether from any other major country tracked by the institution. It is also significantly higher than the scores in East Asia’s speculative boom on 1997 or in the US subprime bubble before the Lehman crisis.”
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2016/09/18/bis-flashes-red-alert-for-a-banking-crisis-in-china/
The largest donor to the Conservative Middle East Council, of which Hugo Swire has just become Chairman, is said to be a gentleman by the name of David Rowland.
Here is a Guardian article from 2010 on him:
“A multimillionaire property tycoon who persuaded Prince Andrew to unveil a bronze statue of him at his palatial home in Guernsey might not be considered a shy man. But David Rowland, the Tory donor who was due to take up the post of treasurer of the Conservative party within six weeks, has led a remarkably guarded life.
Notoriously camera shy, Rowland is said to have refused to give the Conservatives a photograph of himself. The only publicly available image of Rowland, a man whose business interests have spanned the globe, is a black and white photograph of him smoking a cigar, printed in the Observer in 1971.
The story was about his return from Paris, where the 25-year-old had gone into tax exile after selling his interests in Fordham Investment Group for £2.4m. The accompanying description of a “wheeler dealer extraordinaire” with a penchant for fat cigars is one that would not seem out of place almost four decades on.
Rowland, along with his son, is now estimated to be worth more than £730m, a sum that makes them jointly the 25th richest people in the country. He was also set to become one of the country’s most politically influential figures, as fundraiser-in-chief for the Tories.
The announcement by Conservative party central office that Rowland would not be taking the post due to his “developing business interests” capped a tumultuous summer for the property developer who, soon after the Tories announced that he would take over as their treasurer, became the subject of a string of stories in the Daily Mail that sought to paint his business dealings and personal life in a controversial light.
The son of a London scrap-metal dealer, Rowland is said to have left school without a single O-level. Aged 15, he was convicted of petty larceny at Wimbledon juvenile court, having stolen goods worth £2. That sum would soon pale into insignificance for Rowland, who within five years had turned his life around, bought a house and become a millionaire.
By his early 20s he was renowned for his business acumen and fierce approach to takeovers, later acquiring a business empire that, in the 70s and 80s, expanded into Europe and the United States.
As well as living abroad to avoid tax in the UK, Rowland reportedly used tax havens such as the Bahamas, Panama, Luxembourg and the British Virgin Islands for his business dealings.
The property tycoon has occasionally found himself in controversy.
One such occasion came in the late 80s, when Rowland participated in an attempt to take over Hibernian, one of Scotland’s top football clubs. The deal fell, however, incurring the wrath of the local MP, who tabled a motion in the House of Commons denouncing Rowland and David Duff, the lawyer he was apparently financing.
The motion accused the pair of involving the Edinburgh club in loss-making dealings, called for an inquiry into “recent wheeling and dealing”, and described Rowland as a “shady financier”.
Another noteworthy aspect of Rowland’s life has been his friendship with the Duke of York, which has dated back several years. Prince Andrew unveiled a life-size bronze statue of Rowland – reportedly showing him smoking a cigar in “vaguely Churchillian pose” – in the grounds of Havilland Hall, the largest privately owned estate on Guernsey, in 2005.
More recently Rowland appears to have decided to forsake his privacy and take an active role in British party politics. Electoral law prevents foreign donations, and last year Rowland returned to his native country from decades of tax exile, relocating to Mayfair, which enabled him to make a string of large gifts to the Tories.
Rumoured to have paid £20,000 for a portrait of the prime minister, David Cameron, at a Tory fundraising auction, his conversion to the Conservative party’s cause seems to have been absolute.
In a little more than a year he donated almost £2.8m, making him the Tories’ largest benefactor. Exactly why a man who had not shown much interest in the party for at least a decade became an enthusiastic supporter remains a mystery.
He started with a sum of £1m in June last year, and continued to give as the general election drew nearer. By June this year, Cameron had appointed him to be his party treasurer. Rowland pronounced it a “tremendous honour”.
That appointment, however, may have placed him on a collision course with the Conservative party’s better-known benefactor, Michael Ashcroft.
In the time Rowland donated more than £1m to the Tory party, Lord Ashcroft, through his corporate vehicle, Bearwood Corporate Services, donated around £100,000, although his support of the party dates back far earlier. Rowland’s sudden promotion is also said to have irked a number of senior Tories.
Not long after Cameron unveiled his new treasurer, a series of critical articles appeared in the Daily Mail. Many appeared to focus on Rowland’s private life, and delved into marital issues dating back decades.
A more serious accusation concerned pollution from a lead smelting plant in Idaho, America, alleged to be one of the country’s worst industrial pollution scandals. The pollution was said to have caused acute respiratory health problems among local children.
Rowland was not connected to the plant when the pollution occurred in the 1970s. His property company bought Gulf Resources, which owned the plant, more than a decade later, in 1989.
Rowland and others were accused of diverting company assets which should have been used to clean up the contamination. It is alleged that the money was used instead in a property deal in New Zealand. He and other directors were also accused of transferring company assets overseas when they should have been used to pay for the health insurance of former employees.
According to a lawsuit in the US in 1997, Rowland and other directors were accused of engaging “in a course of conduct designed to loot and waste the assets of the company”. It was alleged that “the defendants entered into a series of transactions by which they transferred Gulf assets into their control”.
It was also claimed that when concerns were raised, Rowland gave assurances that Gulf would “meet its obligations for employee benefits and environmental clean-up, assurances alleged to be false and fraudulent”.
Rowland has called the court allegations “unsubstantiated and false”. He has been quoted as saying: “There were multiple defendants in the case and it is customary in such American cases for extreme claims to be made.
“No evidence was submitted in support of these false claims. The case was settled with no payment being made by David Rowland nor by any company connected with him nor by any other associates of his.”
So, how does the Conservative Middle East Council (Chairman Hugo Swire) get its money?
“British and Arab businessmen with strong commercial interests in Saudi Arabia are key funders of the Conservative Middle East Council, a Westminster body which has become increasingly vocal in its calls for Britain to stand by the House of Saud, despite the latter’s human rights abuses and possible war crimes in Yemen.
An investigation has revealed how the group has raised close to a million pounds since 2007, using the money to lobby for a stronger relationship with Saudi Arabia, as well as arrange delegations to other parts of the Arab world.” …
… an exclusive MEMO investigation has revealed that nearly all of the CMEC’s financial backers have strong business interests in Saudi Arabia and its smaller Gulf allies, ranging from defence to manufacturing to energy resources. This suggests that the support by the CMEC for an unconditional relationship with Saudi Arabia could be driven by donor preferences, something that is denied by officials. …
… By far the most generous current backer of the Conservative Middle East Council, according to Electoral Commission records, is David Rowland, a controversial British business tycoon, political financier and Monaco tax exile. Rowland has been involved closely in helping to secure multi-billion pound defence deals between British firms and the Saudi Arabian government; he has given the CMEC nearly £350,000 since 2010. In 2011, Rowland offered his private jets to Prince Andrew for free, as the member of the British royal family visited Saudi Arabia to help secure deals for BAE Systems.
The investigation also revealed that in June 2015, Rosemary Said, the wife of Syrian-Saudi businessman Wafic Said, gave CMEC £20,000; back in 2008, the donation was much more substantial, at £100,000. Wafic Said, who was banned from making donations to Westminster political parties as he does not hold British citizenship, is reported to have played a key role as a “fixer” in arranging the controversial Al-Yamamah deals between BAE Systems and the Saudi Arabian government, using his extensive network of contacts within the kingdom. Records show that alongside channelling funds to the CMEC through his wife Rosemary, Wafic’s son Khalid, has also given £12,500 to the organisation. …
… Energy boss Abdul Majid Jafar is also a donor to the CMEC, giving the group £15,000 in January 2014. His company, Crescent Petroleum, is the oldest of its type in the Middle East, and has extensive interests in the UAE, Bahrain and Iraq, with a smaller footprint in Saudi Arabia.
The investigation has also revealed that a construction firm called International Hospitals Group has donated £40,000 to the CMEC in the past two years. The company has secured several multi-million pound contracts with the government of Saudi Arabia, and received as a result “various letters of acknowledgement [i.e. references]… from senior Royal Princes” within the House of Saud, with which the company enjoys a strong business relationship.
A former funder of the lobby group is Pierre Rolin, a financier who previously provided investment management services to a $1bn American property empire owned by Prince Abdul Aziz Bin Fahd, a prominent royal in the House of Saud. Details of the extent of this portfolio were revealed in 2012 by investigative journalist Seth Hettena. However, Rolin stopped donating to the CMEC in 2009, and shortly afterwards it was revealed that his financial advisory business to the Saudi prince had collapsed.
The MEMO investigation also showed that the CMEC received an £18,000 donation from the London-based PR firm Bell Pottinger, which has represented Saudi Arabia in a public affairs and advocacy role. Its other clients have included the Bahrain government; the company declined to comment when contacted by MEMO, although a spokesperson for the CMEC said that the donation had been made because Bell Pottinger “supported the aims of the organisation at the time.”
The Director of the Conservative Middle East Council, Leo Docherty, told MEMO that donations (and thus donors) had not influenced decision-making within the group. “No donor has given us conditions,” he insisted, “but any big business person in the Middle East has strong interests in Saudi Arabia. We see ourselves as making the case for a constructive relationship, but we acknowledge it’s not perfect.”
The CMEC head claimed that a “huge amount of pressure” was being put on the Gulf States to reform. “Anyone who has a long-standing business relationship with the Gulf States, their job is to support these reforming tendencies,” he added.
“The Conservative Middle East Council [of which Swire was elected Chairman last week] or CMEC is an organisation which exists to ensure that Conservative MPs and Peers understand the Middle East.
CMEC achieves this through a number of activities. Firstly, it organises delegations of Conservative MPs and Peers to the region. Delegations have visited Israel and the Palestinian Territories, Libya, Egypt, Syria, Bahrain, Saudi Arabia, Iran, Lebanon and Tunisia.
CMEC also organises a number of events in the UK. These include talks by experts in the Houses of Parliament, receptions and lectures.”
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conservative_Middle_East_Council
“12 acre industrial site proposed for Sidford – my objection
A planning application for a 12 acre business park in an area of outstanding natural beauty in Sidford has caused huge controversy.
The proposal first emerged when I was a local plan panel member in 2012. It suddenly appeared in the papers for our final meeting in the March. The proposal caused such uproar that it spawned the birth of Save Our Sidmouth, which ploughed much funding into fighting the allocation of this land in EDDC’s Local Plan.
Things looked up for a while after a full council meeting last year saw Stuart Hughes and Graham Troman manage to overturn the decision to allocate this land.
However, the planning inspector had other ideas and late last year, reinserted the contested piece of land back into the Local Plan.A planning application was submitted by Fords earlier this year.
Last Monday evening (12 September) I attended a public meeting at Sidford Village Hall where the application was discussed. The hall was absolutely packed with angry residents who wanted the plans thrown out. There was talk of a boycott of Fords to express the deep unhappiness with a local business who wants to build an industrial estate in sensitive countryside adjacent to houses. The meeting concluded that residents would fight the application tooth and nail.
I am familiar with the proposal as a former Local Plan panel member, however, it was a very useful meeting where I heard first hand from residents exactly how the application might have an impact on their communities.
I have now submitted an objection, which is below.
Highways The road through Sidbury is narrow, congested with parked cars and already experiences very high levels of traffic.
As Sidbury’s Devon County Councillor I have tried to address many complaints about the road, its narrowness, twistiness and the increasing level of traffic and heavy goods vehicles travelling through to the A30 at Honiton. Sidbury Primary School has a very difficult parking situation, with many parents having to park on the opposite side of the road and dash across with their children.
There are inadequate pavements around the school and any increase in traffic and HGVs could make things even more hazardous for parents and young children travelling to and from school. A school governor at the public meeting at Sidford Village Hall on 12 September, expressed huge concern about the increase in traffic and the impact it will have on parents and children at school pick up and drop off times.
I question the assumption in the developer’s highways report that only 20 per cent of traffic generated by the business park would travel through Sidbury, with the remaining 80 per cent opting to go via Sidford crossroads. I would have thought it was far more likely that a bigger percentage of the traffic would choose to travel to the nearest fast road – in this instance the A30 – via Sidbury. Much quicker than travelling to Exeter along the A3052.
I believe that the developers are vastly underestimating the impact of the traffic on Sidbury. There are many old listed properties which line the roads in Sidbury, which could be damaged by the increase in HGVs along this road. The NPPF states that a highways objection can be sustained if the traffic impact is severe. I agree with many Sidbury residents and local councillors, who believe that it would be. The application should be refused on highways grounds alone.
Landscape impacts
I agree with the AONB team and Natural England both of which assert that the proposed development would have a significant adverse affect on the setting of the AONB. The team also states that the current building plans, despite being in outline do not comply with NPPF policies relating to development in AONBs. It has the potential to set a precedent and so must be planned extremely carefully, which it is not. The landscape architect also believes that the scheme would have significant adverse impacts on the surrounding sensitive countryside, with information on design missing from the application. The landscape architect concludes that the application is unacceptable on landscape grounds.
Natural England recommends “substantial revision” on the grounds of visual intrusion. I believe that the application should be refused on landscape grounds and poor design within an AONB.
The cycleway from Sidbury to Sidford
As the Devon County councillor for Sidbury this cycleway is a significant project that I am anxious to finalise. Progress has been slow mainly due to matters outside Devon County Council’s control. I note the AONB team’s comments relating to the proposed cycleway as being disjointed, fully exposed to the road with the rural character of the route being removed.
The AONB team observe: “If approved, it would be completely at odds with the principle of providing an integrated and well connected and accessible development not to include a fully linked route at the outset of the development. Without this, at present, the proposal will not fully “deliver cycle and footway improvements which should aid sustainable travel in the area, not just the business park”; furthermore it could not be regarded as a “highly permeable and appealing walking and cycling environment”.
The application should be refused on the grounds of not providing an acceptable cycle route.
Flooding
The Environment Agency advises that new more stringent guidelines as set out in climate change documentation should be used as a material planning consideration for this application.
Given that the fields are close to a major watercourse and the area is prone to regular flooding, I very much hope that EDDC will use these guidelines to assess the application. Devon County Council flood and coastal risk officer has also recommended refusal on the grounds of insufficient information relating to water run-off. The application should be refused on these grounds.
It is clear that the evidential comments from residents and key consultees can only leave EDDC with no option but to refuse the application. Pic. The area of outstanding natural beauty close to where the proposal is targeting.”
EDDC produced the above press release headline as spin:
Unfortunately, the truth is more likely that EDDC is so keen on its developers and developing anything and everything, that neighbourhoods are scrambling as fast as they can to protect what few green and pleasant places they still have left after the Local Plan hoovered most of them up, before developers get their sticky mitts on them!
The writer of this letter had one crucial sentence (the last one, in bold) taken out by Sidmouth Herald where it was recently published:
“In last Friday’s Sidmouth Herald a short letter I had submitted for the Opinion page was printed – but minus its final sentence, thus taking away its punch line.
The letter submitted said:- ”
The Chairman of the Sidmouth Town Council Planning Committee is reported as telling the Planning meeting considering the Sidford Business Park that “It’s in the Local Plan. We have to fight the details”.
It only remains in the Local Plan because the EDDC voted, on 26 March 2015, to remove it – but in apparent ignorance of the fact that, the plan having already been submitted to the Inspector, they needed to send him evidence to support their decision. None was sent!
It is now up to us to overcome this incompetence. We have to challenge not just the details but the whole principle of building a Business Park ( a fancy name for an Industrial Estate!) on this site and on this scale.”
THIS IS THE MISSING SENTENCE CUT BY SIDMOUTH HERALD:
The proposal is yet another toxic legacy of the late, but unlamented, East Devon Business Forum.
Do you agree with this censorship?
THE PLANNERS CAME TO OUR TOWN
The planners came to our town
To see what they could do
We’ll smack this place around a bit
Who cares about the view?
We’ll knock it down and mess it around
We’ll sound its final knell
We’ll rip the heart right out of the place
And the locals can go to Hell
Hands off, hands off
They must be on Cloud Nine
The planners they can stick their plan
Right where the sun don’t shine
The planners came to our town
To grab the Market Square
There’s nothing much of value
That ever happens there
The market’s so untidy
We can’t see why the fuss
We’ll make it nice and neat and clean
For boring people like us
Hands off, hands off
They must be on Cloud Nine
The planners they can stick their plan
Right where the sun don’t shine
I don’t care what the planners think
Their plan is plain absurd
Its up to every one of us
To give the loonies the bird
We’ll march, petition and protest
With signatures by the load
And if that doesn’t do the trick
We’ll sit down in the road
Hands off, hands off
They must be on Cloud Nine
The planners they can stick their plan
Right where the sun don’t shine
Composed for a Facebook page protesting about inappropriate development in Totnes by Sam Richards, but could be anywhere.
Young families are being “ghettoised” in inner city areas by the housing crisis while older homeowners become isolated in the suburbs, a report says.
The Intergenerational Foundation says the number of areas dominated by over-50s has risen sevenfold since 1991 as young people move into the cities.
Even within urban areas, older people, children and young adults are living increasingly separate lives, it adds.
The government said housebuilding was an “absolute priority”.
The foundation, which aims to protect the rights of younger generations in policy-making, analysed segregation by age in local areas across the UK. …
… Mr Hanton said that now only 5% of people living in the same area as someone over 18 are over 65, compared to 15% in 1991.
This was weakening the bonds between the generations and leads to a lack of understanding of each other, he said.
Nigel Wilson, chief executive of Legal and General, said: “We have created an inter-generationally unfair society. …”
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-37385292
And in East Devon we put the rich home-owning old in Sidmouth and the young renting poor in Cranbrook
“Britain’s most senior police officers are demanding that official complaints about their conduct and behaviour be kept secret.
The Chief Constables’ Council recently discussed moves that could be made to stop the public finding out about investigations into alleged corruption and misconduct. …
… David Burrowes, a lawyer and MP on the Home Affairs Select Committee, said: ‘There are many people like doctors and politicians who are named when allegations are made against them, so I don’t think police officers should have a special rule. It’s very important that law enforcers aren’t treated differently.’ …
And what stance will our Police and Crime Commissioner, also under investigation herself, take about this one? Agree, so that future PCCs could be included in anonymity? Or prefer the disinfectant of sunlight?
And what about representatives on Police Panels? Hide away the dirty linen or wash it for all to see?
“The High Court recently rejected a challenge to refusal of planning permission for 650 homes in Cheltenham. The ruling is important on the issue of residual cumulative impacts of development, writes Ashley Bowes.
Mr Justice Holgate has refused Bovis Homes and Miller Homes permission to proceed to challenge the decision of the Secretary of State to withhold planning permission for 650 new homes in Cheltenham, finding the claim to be “unarguable”.
The challenge was of particular note for its analysis of paragraph 32 of the National Planning Policy Framework, which provides that development should be prevented if the “residual cumulative impacts of development are severe”.
The Inspector had concluded at IR,225 that:
“Whilst I can agree therefore that the development should not need to solve all existing unrelated transport problems, the existing or future “in any event” situation on the highway network, is not an unrelated problem which evaluation of the proposed development ignore. It is a related problem which is highly pertinent to the evaluation of the current appeal proposal”
He went on to have regard to the guidance in DfT Circular 02/2013, paragraph 9 which provides:
“Development proposals are likely to be acceptable if they can be accommodated within the existing capacity of a section (link or junction) of the strategic road network, or they do not increase demand for use of a section that is already operating at over-capacity levels, taking account of any travel plan, traffic management and/or capacity enhancement measures that may be agreed …”
Mr Justice Holgate was not persuaded that the Inspector and Secretary of State arguably erred in law by taking into account of the existing highway situation when resolving the paragraph 32 NPPF questions.
In particular, the Judge noted that it would be open to a decision taker to rationally conclude that a given development could wash its own face in highway impact terms, but due to existing over capacity, the residual cumulative impacts of the development could be severe.
Whilst the decision that the claim is not arguable does not create binding authority on the meaning of para.32 NPPF, it does provide an interesting insight into the breadth of discretion open to a decision taker when resolving whether the residential cumulative impacts of development are severe.
Ashley Bowes is a barrister at Cornerstone Barristers. He acted for the successful Interested Parties (Leckhampton with Warden Parish Council and Leckhampton Green Land Action Group Ltd, instructed by Richard Stein at Leigh Day) before the High Court, and on behalf of Leckhampton Green Land Action Group Ltd before the planning inquiry.”
Notes
Appeal decision letter reference: LAND AT KIDNAPPERS LANE, LECKHAMPTON, CHELTENHAM APP/B1605/W/14/3001717
Case reference: Bovis Homes Ltd & Miller Homes Ltd v SSCLG (CO/3029/2016) (2 September 2016).
Swire’s Twitter feed today informs us how excited he is that Hinkley C is going ahead.
Does anyone recall him saying anything at all about Hinkley C in the last few months?
Why does he wait until things are decided to tell us he supports them?
Might it be that he watches which way the wind blows and then bends with it?
So you thought we would see more of our constituency MP now that he is a backbencher – now he has even MORE reasons to be away from East Devon.
He won’t have time to save our NHS, he will be too busy brokering arms deals.
“I’m delighted to become Chairman of the Conservative Middle East Council this week, taking over from Sir Alan Duncan. Alan has been a superb Chairman over the last year and leaves CMEC firmly established and respected among Conservatives.
I am particularly delighted to be back in a role I much enjoyed before the 2010 election and my renewed involvement in CMEC reflects my longstanding interest in the Middle East.
Having been a Minister of State in the Foreign Office for the last four years I understand British foreign policy. And without doubt, the Middle East is of unparalleled importance.
For that reason CMEC is more active and more important than ever before. It’s imperative that Conservatives seek to understand the Middle East and appreciate the many challenges facing that region. But we must also recognise and celebrate the diversity and dynamism of the region. And we must appreciate the wealth of commercial opportunities the Middle East presents and – more importantly – the many longstanding friendships and historic alliances we have across the region.
CMEC has a busy program for this autumn and I am delighted that we will also be launching a new and improved website in the coming days.
Whether on Syria, Palestine, the Gulf, Egypt, Iran or the many other countries across the region CMEC will continue under my Chairmanship to facilitate a greater understanding of the issues, and to allow Conservative parliamentarians to travel to different parts of the region to see it for themselves.
I look forward to seeing you at a CMEC event soon.
The Rt Hon Sir Hugo Swire KCMG MP”
http://cmec.org.uk/depth/news-analysis/rt-hon-sir-hugo-swire-mp-takes-over-cmec-chairman
“On 15 September, Prime Minister Theresa May officially gave the go-ahead for the controversial Hinkley Point C nuclear power station. After May put the project under review in July, there were rumours that it might be cancelled. But today’s sudden announcement appears to have cemented the deal.
But the move should come as little surprise. Because when you look at who is behind it, and who benefits from it, it appears that the Tories (once again) have their snouts firmly in the trough.
An eye-watering white elephant
The £18bn new plant in Hinkley, Somerset is being built by French energy company EDF, and financed by both them and the Chinese government. The latter agreed to the financing, in return for approval of a Chinese-led and designed project at Bradwell in Essex. But there are concerns about escalating costs and the implications of nuclear power plants being built in the UK by foreign governments.
The deal been slammed by both Labour and environmental campaigners. Green Party MP Caroline Lucas, meanwhile, has called Hinkley “the biggest white elephant in British history”. She said that it was absurd and disappointing that the deal was to proceed when the government is reducing support for cheaper, safer and more reliable renewable alternatives:
Instead of investing in this eye-wateringly expensive white elephant, the government should be doing all it can to support offshore wind, energy efficiency and innovative new technologies, such as energy storage.
But a quietly released report by Greenpeace shows that the deal was probably always going to go ahead.
EDF: in bed with the government
Analysis done by Greenpeace found that ten advisers and civil servants who worked at the former Department for Energy and Climate Change (DECC) in the last five years had links to EDF. One was recently employed by the DECC and was also a manager at the Office for Nuclear Regulation, the regulator for the nuclear industry. This was before they became a licensing officer for EDF.
An EDF Strategy Manager had a 13-month secondment to the DECC commercial team while working for auditors KPMG. As Greenpeace notes, the DECC commercial team “played a crucial role in deciding to press ahead with the Hinkley project”. It was this team which had oversight on who invested in Hinkley Point C. Additionally, a communications officer for EDF was previously the Senior Ministerial Visits Manager at DECC until early 2016. And a policy adviser and analyst for the now-defunct department had previously done the same job at EDF.
This is on top of the fact that former Liberal Democrat Energy Secretary, Ed Davey, now works as a lobbyist for MHP Communications – where EDF just happens to be a client. As Martin Williams describes in his book Parliament Ltd: A journey to the dark heart of British politics:
When he lost his seat in 2015, he [Davey] went off to join MHP Communications. He had connections with the firm already: MHP acted as lobbyists for EDF Energy, who Davey “had dealings with as a minister”… When MHP’s Chief Executive announced Davey’s appointment he was able to speak candidly about the benefits of employing a former energy minister. “Ed’s unique insight into the energy sector will be particularly valuable to the companies that we work with in that sector. His knowledge of the top-level workings of Britain’s political system will also prove immensely useful to a range of our clients and to MHP itself”.
It was Davey who was responsible for the initial agreement between the government and EDF. But the links to EDF Energy and the Tory government run deeper than the Greenpeace analysis. And go right to the top of the Conservative Party.
Tories: in bed with EDF
Sir Richard Lambert heads EDF’s Stakeholder Advisory Panel. It gives EDF “strategic advice and direction”. Knighted under David Cameron, he’s a non-executive director of the Foreign and Commonwealth Office, acting as lead advisor to the Foreign Secretary. He was in this role under Philip Hammond, who appears to have been crucial in getting the Hinkley deal pushed through. Lambert said of the Hinkley deal:
The Stakeholder Panel will be taking a particular interest in the final investment decision on Hinkley Point C.
Also advising EDF is Dame Helen Alexander. She is a non-executive director at Rolls-Royce, which has £100m worth of contracts at Hinkley, Alexander is also the Deputy Chair of the “women on boards” review. She was appointed by Sajid Javid in February 2016.”
http://www.thecanary.co/2016/09/15/hinkley-tories-private-bank-balances-going-nuclear/
East Devon Watch 