Ben Bradshaw MP on health cuts in Devon

From Ben Bradshaw, Exeter MP, column in Express and Echo. Owl wonders how many other local MPs will take credit for a government minister visit to the area!

“I’m pleased that a Government Health Minister agreed to my request in Parliament on Tuesday to meet local patients and NHS staff during a forthcoming visit to Devon to discuss concerns about controversial changes being proposed to services.

Among these is the loss of a significant number of local community hospital beds, including, possibly, the only community beds in Exeter, at Whipton Hospital.

This is just the first tranche of a wide-ranging set of proposals we’re expecting from Devon NHS managers who are grappling with a record financial deficit.

There can be good arguments for changing services, especially the better integration of health and social care and for shifting resources from beds and buildings to provide better support for people in their homes. But with the NHS already suffering its worst financial crisis ever and social care cut to the bone, we will take some convincing that these plans are genuinely about improving services and not just about filling a financial black hole of the Government’s making.

The House of Commons Health Select Committee, on which I sit, has told the Government repeatedly that current funding levels for the NHS and Social Care are not sustainable. We heard from NHS leaders this week that without significant extra resources the NHS will have to introduce widespread rationing, cuts in services and/or extend charging. So far, the Government appears completely oblivious to the seriousness of the situation.”

bhttp://www.exeterexpressandecho.co.uk/ben-bradshaw-on-syria-nhs-funding-and-hard-brexit/story-29801464-detail/story.html

“Tourist boost for Cornwall – but Devon could lose out”

Our only tourism vehicle at the moment is our Local Enterprise Partnership – which has a small amount of spin and rhetoric about tourism in its ” vision”but no actual plans or extra funding. Basically, tourism is left to the small and medium businesses that barely feature in their plans. Despite tourism having higher growth than any other sector they deal with.

Basically, if there isn’t a nuclear option, they don’t want to know. Tourism will no doubt be on the cards for Hinkley C though!


“Devon risks being sidelined from a lavish Government-backed advertising campaign to get Britons to holiday at home.

Domestic tourism board VisitEngland has been allocated almost £20 million through the Regional Growth Fund, the Government’s flagship plan to get economies outside of London motoring.

The tourist body for Cornwall, VisitCornwall, is among 14 partner organisations that will soak up much of the cash on promoting “staycations” via national media. But VisitDevon is currently not one of them.

The campaign is looking to capitalise on the feel-good factor surrounding the London Olympics and the Queen’s Diamond Jubilee next year.

Tourism leaders say the Government is right to invest in the industry as it helps meet the aims of boosting sectors beyond the City of London and reviving areas facing public sector job cuts.

Estimates say if the 13 per cent increase in domestic tourism is maintained until the end of the year it would mean an increase of £2.7 billion for the UK economy – enough to create more than 50,000 jobs spread across the whole of the UK.

The £20 million will be used on a three-year project entitled Growing Tourism Locally.

James Berresford, chief executive of VisitEngland, said: “With this additional money we can mount a serious campaign to stimulate domestic tourism that has the potential to create the equivalent of 9,500 full time jobs in areas across the country suffering economic challenges.”
He said tourism board “partners” will manage parts of the campaign. They represent Bath, Birmingham, Bristol, Cumbria, Durham, Kent, Manchester, Merseyside, Newcastle-Gateshead, Northumberland, Nottinghamshire, Peak District and Derbyshire, and York. Each body is thought to have secured match-funding from the private sector.

VisitEngland, which will buy television, newspaper and Internet space, is yet to decide the size of the slice of the cash each area will get. A series of thematic campaigns focusing on countryside, heritage, coastal and business tourism will run alongside.

Malcolm Bell, head of VisitCornwall, said beaches, coastlines and other “icons of Cornwall” would be deployed as “best products in the shop window” to sell England.
He added: “If you take the coastal theme, you would say isn’t it wonderful to have a seaside holiday in the UK – the product to sell that will be Cornwall. People understand it. This is a good use of public money because marketing works.”
VisitDevon was unable to comment yesterday, but VisitEngland said it could feature in the thematic advertising.”

http://www.westernmorningnews.co.uk/tourist-boost-cornwall-ndash-devon-lose/story-13731942-detail/story.html

Take control …

“Take control” are two of the most potent words in our language that have come to mean just one thing in the weeks since the Brexit vote.

But the desire for more control over our lives is not the exclusive preserve of Leave voters – and nor can it or should it be confined to the issue of immigration.

Our polling shows that people from all backgrounds and with every kind of belief now feel they have lost control over what matters most to them, whether it is the price of a home, the pace of technological change or the poisoning of our planet.

Far from being supporters of the status quo, a clear majority of remain supporters specifically identify big business and corporate elites as having “too much power over their lives”.

By an even bigger margin of 62%, those who voted remain in the referendum say that only a few people in power take all the big decisions, adding that there is not much the average citizen can do about it.

Those decisions now seem further out of reach than ever for millions of people after the party conference season. The government has confirmed its determination to pursue a hard Brexit, even though that risks making matters worse for people who already feel left behind in this economy.

At the same time, many people see opposition parties as being in disarray and deeply divided, leaving some to despair at the prospects for progressive politics ever providing answers, let alone getting the chance to put them into practice.

A storm in our economy and our democracy that has been gathering for decades is now firmly upon us. A torrent of wealth of power is washing away even the fragile footholds people had established in the economy. Many more now face losing control all together in the face of global, technological and climate change.

Yet, even in the midst of all this upheaval, a surge of energy is being generated that can crack open new possibilities for people to take more control right now – not at some distant point in the future.

The New Economics Foundation seeks to give people the tools to take control and change their lives for the better
Today, the New Economics Foundation is setting out ways to shift debate beyond secret negotiations over Brexit in the capitals of Europe, seemingly endless party infighting in Westminster’s opposition, or literal fights in Brussels over whose turn it is next to lead Ukip.

Instead, we are setting out an agenda for people to take control themselves, without having to wait for government to do it for – or to – them.

Our agenda for people draws on real experiences, ranging from those in seaside communities who feel abandoned by the political elite, taxi drivers in London trying to make a living in an Uber-ised economy, small businesses starved of finance, consumers overcharged for energy, and young families hoping for their first home or worried about the cost of childcare.

It seeks to give all of them the tools they need to take control and change their lives for the better. Coastal communities will find ways to revive a clean marine economy which brings together people who care about the environment with those who care about getting decent jobs. We are helping to develop a new taxi app owned and controlled by drivers themselves, from London to Leeds, to give them the chance to share in the vast new digital value being created around us.

The foundation is also drawing up plans to turn the scandal-torn RBS into 130 stakeholder banks that serve local firms rather than expecting them to serve it. We have teamed up with the Switched On London campaign to help communities generate renewable and affordable energy that gives them a real stake in a low-carbon future.

Furthermore, in a project with Citizens UK, we are creating the first maps of vacant public land available for the houses that need to get built. And we are helping parents expand the number of childcare co-operatives so they can not only afford a service fundamental to modern working lives, but also exercise more control over it.

This is not an agenda merely for clicktivists who think change happens on a smartphone screen on the way to a rally. We recognise that the tools people need to take control must be fashioned in partnership with institutions wielding real power, ranging from devolved government, city mayors and forward-looking businesses to trade union and community-led campaigns across the country.

But this is the first time a major thinktank has set itself a bigger ambition than merely influencing ministers or future legislation, or getting included in a political party’s manifesto.

The New Economics Foundation will focus on helping people and communities take control by engaging with new partners – from the Mayor of London and Google DeepMind to the GMB and Citizens UK – to explore new possibilities for change right now.

We are rooted outside the traditional boundaries of politics. We care most about people’s everyday experience. And we will work with communities of all kinds to give them the tools they need to build a better future because there has never been a more urgent need for a new economy than right now.”

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/oct/11/politicians-housing-employment-childcare-control-new-economics-foundation

“Information not held”

Freedom of Information requests to East Devon District Council on the whatdotheyknow website:

“EDDC policy and guidance on conducting public consultations
Response by East Devon District Council to tim todd on 23 March 2016.
Information not held.

Request for information that supports ‘success’ claims made by Cllr Moulding (Premier Inn)
Response by East Devon District Council to tim todd on 29 April 2016.
Information not held.

https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/body/east_devon_district_council

“Basic flood protection ‘missing in high risk areas’ “

“Hundreds of thousands of householders in flood risk areas have failed to install basic protection against rising waters, insurers say.

The Association of British Insurers said even buildings guarded by flood defences should have flood-proof doors in case embankments are over-topped.

The comments add to a complex blame game over responsibility for floods.

The insurers have been criticised by the Environment Agency for failing to protect inundated properties.

Local councils are also part of the melee – they want more cash for flood funding from the government, and more control of how it is spent. They are critical of the Environment Agency.

Ministers are in the fray too, as demands increase for tighter building standards to ensure at-risk homes are made more flood resistant.

Some of these tensions around flood policy are revealed in an unpublicised report to government that ministers plan to launch in coming weeks.

In the report, the Environment Agency blames insurers for failing to prepare for the increased threat of flooding.
The insurers, the agency says, should not simply re-instate flooded homes to their original state – they should ensure properties are resistant or resilient to future floods.
Emma Howard Boyd, who chairs the agency, says: “There is a disconnect between insurance reinstatement and resilient repair of property.

“Loss adjustors and builders do not understand the benefits of resilient measures.

“It is not clear that the insurance industry value property-level resilience or incentivising people to have it.”
That is despite research suggesting that precautionary measures are extremely good value.

The report’s main author, Sir Peter Bonfield, points the finger at householders for failing to improve their homes after flooding. …

… Finally, there remains the public. Comments made to me on trips to flood-hit areas in Devon [Topsham, Radio 4 Today programme today] and Cumbria suggest many reasons why owners of at-risk homes and businesses do not flood-proof their properties.

They include: distrust of builders; inability to get grants unless they have already been flooded; dislike of form-filling; uncertainty about flood protection products; complacency about future flooding; lack of help from insurance companies… or simply (and in many cases most powerfully), they can’t get round to it.”

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-37565462

Hard-working MP

Hugo Swire has put nothing on his MP web page since a very lukewarm response to East Devon bed closures on 22 September, after which he was made Chairman of the Conservative Middle East Council.

He has done 19 tweets since then: 10 on national or international issues and 9 on local issues – including 5 retweets from other sources.

His three latest (written) questions to Parliament were all about penalties for using mobile phones whilst driving:

https://www.theyworkforyou.com/search/?pid=11265&pop=1#n4

According to his official MP page his wife, who is his paid assistant at £35,000-£39,999 pa, does his website and press releases, though we don’t know if she also does any of his tweets:

http://www.midweekherald.co.uk/news/exclusive_hugo_swire_mp_in_the_herald_s_hot_seat_1_452145

Perhaps his wife is on holiday.

Many more peers than MPs

The net operating costs of the House of Lords in 2013-4 were £93.1m, approximately equivalent to £118,000 per Peer. So whilst on the basis of allowances and expenses, an additional 100 Peers would cost almost £2.6m, this is likely an underestimate of their true costs. 24 Aug 2015″

A VERY easy thing for Mrs May to fix. Will she fix it?

“The growing size of the House of Lords has become increasingly controversial. Under David Cameron’s premiership, membership rose from just over 700 members to well beyond 800 in just six years, and he appointed to the chamber at a faster rate than any other prime minister since life peerages began (see page 13 here for figures to 2015). Both the Lords’ size and rate of appointments have frequently attracted fierce press criticism. Public figures expressing concern in recent months have included the Chair of the Committee on Standards in Public Life, Lord Bew, and the outgoing Lord Speaker, Baroness D’Souza.

Just in case Prime Minister Theresa May was in doubt about the strength of feeling on this issue, the incoming Lord Speaker Lord (Norman) Fowler began his term by strongly speaking out for change. Fowler was formerly a cabinet minister under Margaret Thatcher, and party chairman under John Major, so has significant gravitas in Conservative circles. In a BBC interview on 16 September he suggested ‘that by the next election, [the Lords] should be at a number that is just less than the House of Commons’, emphasising how the current situation is damaging to parliament’s reputation. A particularly sensitive contextual issue is that the Commons is itself due to shrink in 2020, from 650 MPs to 600, under the government’s proposed boundary changes. In an interview for the House Magazine (reproduced on Politics Home) Fowler commented that ‘I don’t think that we can justify a situation where you have over 800 peers at the same time as you’re bringing down the Commons to 600 MPs’. Conservative chair of the House of Commons Procedure Committee Charles Walker has gone further, suggesting that getting the Lords below 600 should be made a condition for voting the boundary changes through. A cross-party group of peers is pressing for the Lords to vote on the principle of being no larger than the Commons in the near future (notably the UK is the only bicameral country in the world where the second chamber is larger than the first). Conservative chair of the Public Administration and Constitutional Affairs Committee, Bernard Jenkin, has meanwhile asked his committee to launch an inquiry into Lords numbers and appointments.

So this appears to be a reform whose time has come. But the key question is how best to reduce from 800+ members to 600. To succeed, any such reduction must be both sustainable and seen to be fair. Here I argue that this requires four interconnected things: a large number of departures before 2020, a long-term cap on the size of the House, limitations on future appointments, and an agreed principle of balance between the parties (and other groups). Without all four, any attempted reform is doomed to fail.”

http://www.democraticaudit.com/2016/10/11/800-peers-and-counting-how-can-we-cut-the-size-of-the-house-of-lords/

“Greater Exeter” and its impact on housing and infrastructure in East Devon

We learned recently that the current Stagecoach depot opposite the bus station in Exeter is going to be turned into a massive block of student housing – 557 units.

Now we hear that there are plans for the site of the Honiton Inn, on the roundabout opposite the bus station to be another student block of 101 flats with their own private gym and cinema – opposite a public gym and cinema!

http://m.exeterexpressandecho.co.uk/plans-in-for-huge-exeter-city-centre-student-block-on-honiton-inn-site/story-29794670-detail/story.html

What effect will this have on East Devon?

Well, “Greater Exeter” – whose “Visioning Board” like all such development and regeneration boards in “Greater Exeter” meets in secret – is making arrangements to do the next revision to its 3 Local Plans (Exeter, East Devon and Teignbridge) together.

It will be totally evident (in fact it is already) that Exeter’s main growth in housing will remain student housing. So, where will housing for other people go? Obviously East Devon and Teignbridge.

Cranbrook has natural boundaries beyond which it will soon make its further expansion much more difficult than heretofore. Therefore, it will be towns such as Exmouth, Honiton and Sidmouth – and the green fields in-between – that must be expanded to take in the commuters into Exeter, with a possible massive impact.

None of this is being put before the general public in any of the three areas nor is adequate infrastructure being planned for this big change (or at least we cannot be allowed know of any). And, of course, our Local Enterprise Partnership will “own” the business rates of the Exeter “Growth Area” and will have its fingers in the many development pies.

Time to start talking about the NEXT revision of the Local Plan which may well see even more massive development in East Devon on a much bigger scale than we could ever have imagined and could dwarf the extra numbers already agreed..

“MPs to be forced to drop lucrative second jobs if they stop them serving their constituents”

Aw, come on, since when did some MPs (and others in positions of influence nearer home) keep to the rules when extra money was on offer? They will say there is no conflict and blithely carry on – unless they get caught in a sting, of course.

“MPs will be forced to drop lucrative outside jobs if they “conflict” with their jobs serving their constituents, according to a proposed new code of conduct.

The MPs’ second jobs will be scrutinised by the Parliamentary standards watchdog for the first time in a major crackdown on politicians’ lucrative work away from the House of Commons.

A new code of conduct will require MPs to ensure that any outside work “does not conflict” with their day jobs representing constituents in Parliament.

The change in the rules – which are still to be approved by MPs – will radically cut back the amount of time MPs will be allowed to spend away from their constituents.

It could also make it easier for the Standards Commissioner Kathryn Hudson to stop MPs using their positions to win paid consultancy work outside the House of Commons.

An undercover investigation last year by the Telegraph found Jack Straw and Sir Malcolm Rifkind had offered to use their positions as MPs to win contracts. However they were cleared of wrongdoing by Mrs Hudson.

The new code of conduct for MPs proposes an additional rule, which have been introduced following “recent changes to other rules or issues that have become apparent during investigations”.

It says: “A member who undertakes outside employment must ensure that it does not conflict with his or her responsibilities under the Code of Conduct.”

The new draft code – the first for four years – has been signed off by members of the House of Commons standards committee ahead if a six week consultation.

It comes after a study last year from Transparency International found that scores of MPs are being paid millions of pounds a year for outside jobs.

The research found that 73 MPs were paid £3.4million in the past 12 months for “external advisory roles”, including in some cases board positions.

Tommy Sheppard, a member of the committee, said: “Most members of the public will take umbrage when MPs suggest doing this job is not a full time, or your principle, job.

“You should not be doing this on a part time basis; it is a full time wage and if you are doing the job properly it is well more than a 40 hour week.

“There needs to be some clarity in the system that when you are elected as an MP it is expected that it is a full time job and you do it on a full time basis.”

Mr Sheppard said the new presumption would be that MPs “usually” should not take second jobs but there could be exceptions such as for medical professionals or doctors.

He said: “There needs to be some a limit on any outside employment, either by remuneration or by hours undertaken. So that the second job is clearly seen as secondary.

There are people in this place who in terms of remuneration it would be hard to describe this any anything other than a part time job.”

Mr Sheppard said that the change to the code – which is open to comment from members of the public until November 30 – could be expanded to include MPs who are accused of using their positions to try to consultancy work.

Last year a Telegraph investigation showed how Sir Malcolm and Mr Straw had offered to use their positions as politicians on behalf of a fictitious Chinese company in return for at least £5,000 a day while they were MPs.

Mrs Hudson cleared Sir Malcolm and Mr Straw of wrongdoing”

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/10/10/mps-to-be-forced-to-drop-lucrative-second-jobs-if-they-stop-them/

Midas does turn everything and everyone it touches into gold!

“Property Personality of the Year

Winner: Karime Hassan, chief executive and growth director at Exeter City Council

In his time as chief executive of Exeter City Council, Hassan has earned a great reputation as a man who gets things done. His efforts have ensured that Exeter is well and truly open for business.”

Sponsored by: Midas Group

whose Chairman, Steve Hindley, is Chairman of the Local Enterprise Partnership and:

Chairman of Midas Group, Steve Hindley CBE DL, has been appointed Chairman of the CBI Construction Council, the first time a leader of a regional/mid market size business has held the post. Here he makes the case for construction as a driver of the local and national economy.

My new role is a significant one because the council represents the entire industry – designers, constructors, supply chain and specialist contractors – as a single point of contact with Government. …

Exeter is a very good example of this where projects undertaken by Midas Group are worth millions to the local economy. These include new work at Exeter University, the new Atass building on Exeter Business Park for Summerfied Developments, major retail projects for John Lewis Partnership, Waitrose and Morrisons and an extension to the Business Park at Hill Barton”

Property Personality of the Year is NOT listed on the Categories / Nominations Page – so presumably they were not accepting public nominations for this prize and Hassan was nominated by persons unknown.

As stated, ECC was NOT nominated for Local Authority of the Year – this was won by Plymouth City Council (shortlisted: East Devon District Council, Bristol City Council, Somerset County Council)so Owl wonders how its Hassan, CEO scored so highly for his award when his council did not.

and on that win by Plymouth City Council, note:

Local Authority of the Year
Winner: Plymouth City Council

Our judges said Plymouth City Council has demonstrated an exceptional and proactive approach to the built environment in the last 12 months. It has an innovative approach to planning infrastructure and housing needs and has a compelling vision for a waterfront city.”

Shortlisted: East Devon District Council, Bristol City Council, Somerset County Council”

We learn on the Plymouth City Council building front:

Midas recently started work on the landmark £3.6million Performing Arts Centre building at Plymouth University.

It is also leading renovation works at the £12million rejuvenation of North Prospect for Plymouth Community Homes.

Other major contracts in Plymouth include the £5million extension to the Kawasaki Precision Engineering factory in Ernesettle.

It is also building the £5million Frobisher House student digs project, funded by a Jersey-based private equity group, in Ebrington Street.”

http://www.plymouthherald.co.uk/city-construction-sector-s-thriving-says-midas/story-19715564-detail/story.html

Should you not know the story about King Midas yo umight want to reflecton its ending here:

http://www.primaryresources.co.uk/english/kingmidas.htm

Pro-Leave MP calls own government “fundamentally undemocratic, unconstitutional and cutting across the rights and privileges of the legislature”.

A pro-leave Tory MP has applied for an urgent debate on Brexit in an attempt to prevent the government from negotiating the terms for leaving the EU without consulting parliament.

Stephen Phillips, who voted to leave in the referendum, said the government appeared intent on negotiating “without any regard to the House of Commons” in a way that was “fundamentally undemocratic, unconstitutional and cuts across the rights and privileges of the legislature”.

Phillips said: “I and many others did not exercise our vote in the referendum so as to restore the sovereignty of this parliament only to see what we regarded as the tyranny of the European Union replaced by that of a government that apparently wishes to ignore the views of the house on the most important issue facing the nation.”

Phillips said he voted to leave for reasons of restoring sovereignty but was not a supporter of the official leave campaign.

The barrister, a member of the public accounts committee, said it was apparent after the Conservative party conference that the government had no intention of consulting parliament about its negotiating aims, and this was “simply not an acceptable way for the executive to proceed”.

He said Theresa May’s government had “no authority or mandate to adopt a negotiating position without reference to the wishes of the house and those of the British people expressed through their elected representatives”.

He has written to the Speaker, John Bercow, to request the urgent debate for this week, which will be ruled on later on Monday.

Asked about Phillips’s comments, the prime minister’s spokesman said it was absolutely necessary for MPs to scrutinise the process of leaving the EU but that MPs should not be given a vote on the package negotiated.

He said: “Parliament is of course going to debate and scrutinise that process as it goes on. That is absolutely necessary and the right thing to do. But having a second vote, or a vote to second-guess the will of the British people, is not an acceptable way forward.”

There appears to be growing disquiet among MPs – both from the leave and remain camps – about the government’s decision to press ahead with triggering article 50, which starts the two-year “divorce process”, without consulting parliament about the kind of relationship the UK should have with the EU in the future.

Phillips’s application for the debate was in addition to former Labour leader Ed Miliband’s unsuccessful request for an urgent question on the issue in the Commons. Instead of the question, David Davis, the Brexit secretary, is due to give a statement on plans to repeal the European Communities Act 1972.

[Ed] ….Miliband told the Observer: “Having claimed that the referendum was about returning sovereignty to Britain, it would be a complete outrage if May were to determine the terms of Brexit without a mandate from parliament.

“There is no mandate for a ‘hard Brexit’, and I don’t believe there is a majority in parliament for [it] either. Given the importance of these decisions for the UK economy … it has to be a matter for MPs.”

Nick Clegg, the former Liberal Democrat leader, said: “My great worry is that while there will be a vote on repealing the 1972 European Communities Act, which is about the decision to leave the EU, it will be left to the executive alone to decide the terms of Brexit. That would not be remotely acceptable.”

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/oct/10/tory-mp-anna-soubry-concerned-rush-hard-brexit

Keep a very good eye on your laptop at Hinkley C!

“It was an unusual burglary, in which four or five laptops were stolen from a Scottish renewable energy manufacturer in the dead of a March night in 2011. So innovative was the company that it had been been visited by a 60-strong delegation led by China’s then vice-premier only two months before.

Nothing else was taken from the company and the crime, while irritating, went unsolved and forgotten – until a few years later pictures began emerging which showed a remarkably similar project manufactured in the world’s most populous country.

Then some people who were involved in the Scottish company, Pelamis Wave Power, started making a connection between the break-in and the politician’s visit, which was rounded off with dinner and whisky tasting at Edinburgh Castle hosted by the then Scottish secretary, Michael Moore.

Max Carcas, who was business development director at Pelamis until 2012, said the similarities between the Scottish and Chinese products were striking. Speaking publicly for the first time, he said: “Some of the details may be different but they are clearly testing a Pelamis concept.”

It might be that China’s engineers had been working along roughly the same lines as the UK engineers. Or it may be that China attempted to replicate the design based on pictures of the Pelamis project freely available on the web.

Or there could be a darker explanation: that Pelamis was targeted by China, which has been repeatedly accused of pursuing an aggressive industrial espionage strategy. The answer matters, given security concerns raised by the government’s award of the Hinkley Point nuclear contract to China.

“It was a tremendous feather in our cap to be the only place in the UK outside of London that the Chinese vice-premier visited,” Carcas said. “We did have a break-in about 10 weeks after, when a number of laptops were stolen. It was curious that whoever broke in went straight to our office on the second floor rather than the other company on the first floor or the ground floor.”

Carcas, who is now managing director of the renewable energy consultancy Caelulum, added: “I could infer all sorts of things but I do not want to say.”

Ironically, Pelamis is now defunct but the Chinese product, Hailong (Dragon) 1, still appears to be under development.

Scotland has been at the forefront of the development of wave technology for decades. Pelamis was one of the cutting-edge companies, originally named the Ocean Power Delivery company when founded in 1998 and renamed Pelamis Wave Power in 2007.

The company, which employed a staff of 50, developed a giant energy wave machine, which it named Pelamis. It looked like a metal snake, facing directly into the waves, harnessing the power of the sea. It had a unique hinged joint system that helped regulate energy flow as waves ran down its length.

Other revolutionary features included a sophisticated control system and a quick mechanism for releasing it into the sea and recovering it. In 2004, it became the first wave energy machine to generate electricity into the grid.

China expressed interest in December 2010 in an email to Pelamis: “It is decided that His Excellency, Mr Li Keqiang, vice-premier of the state council of China, and the delegation (60 people) headed by him will pay a visit to the Pelamis Sea Energy Converter between 16.40 and 17.00 on Sunday 9 January.”

Li, who is now premier of China, was accompanied by other senior Chinese government officials and was shown round the key stages in the construction of Pelamis at the site in Leith, Edinburgh.

Moore was his host for the visit and recalled the Chinese had been very impressed. Asked about the coincidence of the visit, the break-in and emergence of a similar Chinese project, Moore said: “I am afraid I am not going to speculate. It is intriguing.”

The day was rounded off with the dinner at the castle. A Scottish government memo setting out the itinerary said: “Evening dinner at castle with whisky tasting, Scottish dancing, crown jewels.”

Any faint hopes that the Chinese might invest in the Pelamis project proved fruitless however. Three years later, in November 2014, Pelamis went into administration, having run out of funding after 17 years developing the project at a cost of £95m.

Two months after the Chinese visit, on the night of Monday 22 March 2011, the Pelamis office was broken into. The burglar – or burglars – managed to get through a perimeter fence and then the front door. They skipped the first-floor office of the German engineering giant Siemens and continued to Pelamis on the second floor.

Police Scotland, in a statement confirming the break-in, said no one had ever been caught. “Entry was forced to a business premises on Bath Road in Edinburgh between 11pm 21 March and 6.45 am on 22 March 2011,” the police said.

“A number of laptops, collectively worth a four-figure sum, were stolen from within. Officers conducted extensive inquiries at the time and any new information received will be thoroughly investigated.”

Break-ins at dockyards are not unusual. Pelamis had suffered before when copper cables were stolen from its site. But theft of laptops from its office was a first.

The pictures from China, show that the product, as well as looking roughly the same, also seems to have specific features such as a similar-looking hinged joint system and a similar system for placing in and recovering the project from the sea. Tests on the Hailong 1 were carried out in in 2014 and again in 2015 but on both occasions the tests had to be suspended because of rough seas.

It was an unusual burglary, in which four or five laptops were stolen from a Scottish renewable energy manufacturer in the dead of a March night in 2011. So innovative was the company that it had been been visited by a 60-strong delegation led by China’s then vice-premier only two months before.

Nothing else was taken from the company and the crime, while irritating, went unsolved and forgotten – until a few years later pictures began emerging which showed a remarkably similar project manufactured in the world’s most populous country.

Then some people who were involved in the Scottish company, Pelamis Wave Power, started making a connection between the break-in and the politician’s visit, which was rounded off with dinner and whisky tasting at Edinburgh Castle hosted by the then Scottish secretary, Michael Moore.

Max Carcas, who was business development director at Pelamis until 2012, said the similarities between the Scottish and Chinese products were striking. Speaking publicly for the first time, he said: “Some of the details may be different but they are clearly testing a Pelamis concept.

[see images in original article]

It might be that China’s engineers had been working along roughly the same lines as the UK engineers. Or it may be that China attempted to replicate the design based on pictures of the Pelamis project freely available on the web.

Or there could be a darker explanation: that Pelamis was targeted by China, which has been repeatedly accused of pursuing an aggressive industrial espionage strategy. The answer matters, given security concerns raised by the government’s award of the Hinkley Point nuclear contract to China.

“It was a tremendous feather in our cap to be the only place in the UK outside of London that the Chinese vice-premier visited,” Carcas said. “We did have a break-in about 10 weeks after, when a number of laptops were stolen. It was curious that whoever broke in went straight to our office on the second floor rather than the other company on the first floor or the ground floor.”

Carcas, who is now managing director of the renewable energy consultancy Caelulum, added: “I could infer all sorts of things but I do not want to say.”

Ironically, Pelamis is now defunct but the Chinese product, Hailong (Dragon) 1, still appears to be under development.

Scotland has been at the forefront of the development of wave technology for decades. Pelamis was one of the cutting-edge companies, originally named the Ocean Power Delivery company when founded in 1998 and renamed Pelamis Wave Power in 2007.

The company, which employed a staff of 50, developed a giant energy wave machine, which it named Pelamis. It looked like a metal snake, facing directly into the waves, harnessing the power of the sea. It had a unique hinged joint system that helped regulate energy flow as waves ran down its length.

Other revolutionary features included a sophisticated control system and a quick mechanism for releasing it into the sea and recovering it. In 2004, it became the first wave energy machine to generate electricity into the grid.

China expressed interest in December 2010 in an email to Pelamis: “It is decided that His Excellency, Mr Li Keqiang, vice-premier of the state council of China, and the delegation (60 people) headed by him will pay a visit to the Pelamis Sea Energy Converter between 16.40 and 17.00 on Sunday 9 January.”

China’s Vice Premier Li Keqiang (C) is escorted on a tour of the Pelamis Wave Power factory on January 9, 2011 in Edinburgh, Scotland.
Li Keqiang (centre) is escorted on a tour of the Pelamis factory on 9 January 2011 in Edinburgh. Photograph: WPA Pool/Getty Images
Li, who is now premier of China, was accompanied by other senior Chinese government officials and was shown round the key stages in the construction of Pelamis at the site in Leith, Edinburgh.

Moore was his host for the visit and recalled the Chinese had been very impressed. Asked about the coincidence of the visit, the break-in and emergence of a similar Chinese project, Moore said: “I am afraid I am not going to speculate. It is intriguing.”

The day was rounded off with the dinner at the castle. A Scottish government memo setting out the itinerary said: “Evening dinner at castle with whisky tasting, Scottish dancing, crown jewels.”

Any faint hopes that the Chinese might invest in the Pelamis project proved fruitless however. Three years later, in November 2014, Pelamis went into administration, having run out of funding after 17 years developing the project at a cost of £95m.

Two months after the Chinese visit, on the night of Monday 22 March 2011, the Pelamis office was broken into. The burglar – or burglars – managed to get through a perimeter fence and then the front door. They skipped the first-floor office of the German engineering giant Siemens and continued to Pelamis on the second floor.

Police Scotland, in a statement confirming the break-in, said no one had ever been caught. “Entry was forced to a business premises on Bath Road in Edinburgh between 11pm 21 March and 6.45 am on 22 March 2011,” the police said.

“A number of laptops, collectively worth a four-figure sum, were stolen from within. Officers conducted extensive inquiries at the time and any new information received will be thoroughly investigated.”

Break-ins at dockyards are not unusual. Pelamis had suffered before when copper cables were stolen from its site. But theft of laptops from its office was a first.

The pictures from China, show that the product, as well as looking roughly the same, also seems to have specific features such as a similar-looking hinged joint system and a similar system for placing in and recovering the project from the sea. Tests on the Hailong 1 were carried out in in 2014 and again in 2015 but on both occasions the tests had to be suspended because of rough seas.

The Hailong 1 appears to have been built at the Number 710 Research Institute, part of the Chinese Shipbuilding Industry Corporation, a commercial operation. The institute is also involved in developing military projects.

The Guardian sent a series of questions to the Chinese government asking for details about the origins of the Hailong 1 project but has had no reply. There is no suggestion that the Chinese premier is connected with the company or that he knows anything about the burglary.

Despite the similarities, neither the UK nor Scottish governments has any plans to challenge China over the patent. Calum Macfarlane, a spokesman for Wave Energy Scotland, said: “The IP [intellectual property] is not protected in China.”

Carn Gibson, who spent 15 years at Pelamis, where he was engineering manager, is disappointed that funding for the Pelamis project could not be found in the UK and appeared sanguine about the Chinese design.

Gibson, who is now senior consulting engineer at Quoceant, a new company that grew out of Pelamis, said he regarded it as a compliment that the Chinese may have thought it was an idea worth copying, especially if they were able to turn it into a viable commercial proposition. He was rueful though that it was being developed in the South China Sea rather than the Atlantic.”

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/oct/10/mysterious-factory-break-in-raises-suspicions-about-chinese-visit

Chartered Institute of Housebuilding tells government to build more affordable rent homes

“…The professional body for the sector made the comments as the chancellor Philip Hammond prepares to make his first major spending announcements in the Autumn Statement on 23 November.

At the Conservative Party conference last week, the chancellor and local government secretary Sajid Javid unveiled a £3bn housebuilding fund, and outlined plans to directly commission the construction of homes on publicly owned land. The aim is to build 25,000 new homes before 2020.

The CIH welcomed the announcements and recommended a range of further initiatives in its submission to ministers.

It called on the government to focus on substantially increasing the number of affordable rented homes in the UK. It also recommended increasing funding for regeneration, improving standards in the private rented sector, and renewing the fight against homelessness.

Gavin Smart, deputy chief executive of CIH, said: “We welcome the level of focus on housing by the government recently; in particular the acknowledgement that enhancing affordability will be central to solving our housing crisis.

“We believe that the Autumn Statement is the opportunity to turn this commitment into action and build a substantial amount of new properties at affordable rents. This is the only way we can really begin to tackle our housing crisis and make sure people of all incomes have access to a home they can afford.”

Among its other recommendations, CIH urged the government to follow through on pledges to introduce greater flexibility for affordable homes funding.

It also advised the government to allow councils to borrow more for housebuilding through “reshaping and extending” the housing revenue account borrowing provisions. Currently, councils are limited in how much they can borrow under a cap introduced when councils were made self-financing for housing debt in 2012.

The CIH also said local authorities should be exempt for the remaining stages of the scheme to cut social housing rents in exchange for extra investment in rented homes.”

http://www.publicfinance.co.uk/news/2016/10/autumn-statement-must-deliver-government-housing-promises-says-cih

No comment …

… “Exeter City Council has [also] celebrated success at another awards ceremony recently. Its chief executive and growth director Karime Hassan was named Property Personality of the Year at the Insider’s annual South West Property Awards in Bristol.” …

http://www.exeterexpressandecho.co.uk/exeter-city-council-scoops-award-for-hosting-radio-1-big-weekend/story-29794037-detail/story.html

Towns being pressurised to take the strain from rural areas?

Two articles below from the Rural Services network are essentially telling the same story: it’s too expensive to fund rural communities (particularly health and social care for older people) so let’s increase densities in towns and persuade people to live there instead.

What seems to be the message is “build it and they will come” – but who will come and why?

If you have no primary school, no doctor, no bus service in your rural village are you expected to up sticks and move to a town or city where housing density increases and these services are supposedly more easily accessed and where transport is supposedly better?

Very little of the new housing in towns and cities is affordable or built for low-income families or pensioners. Infrastructure is not being built to service the new houses (roads in Cranbrook are still unadopted) and doctors are stretched to their limit with current patients.

Community hospitals are likely to be closed in half of our towns, so, in a deepest rural area you will actually probably be closer to a community hospital than if you live in a town – if you have a car. Maternity services will be non-existent for rural parents.

What would persuade rural dwellers to move to towns where facilities are just as bad as in their villages? People who CHOSE a village carefully in the first place?

And how would those villages survive if they COULD and did move? Only the rich will soon be able to afford rural living (where no access to a “transport hub” or a school or a doctor will not worry them) and ordinary rural families and older people on average incomes will be forced into inadequate town and city properties whether they like it or not.

And why, if this IS the way of the world, is there still so much pressure to build more and more houses in these small villages?

Is this really the answer to our problems?

Cranbrook or Uplyme? Honiton or West Hill?

Soon you may have no choice.

Challenges faced by rural communities

The Rural Services Network has urged the government to use its forthcoming Autumn Statement to address challenges faced by rural communities.

The network has called on Chancellor Philip Hammond to include two targeted measures in the Autumn Statement, due next month.

One measure seeks to boost economic growth and productivity in rural areas. The other seeks to improve care for older rural people.

The first policy proposal calls for investment in rural infrastructure in order to support rural growth and employment.

The network proposes that this measure focuses on improvements to rural broadband connectivity, rural public transport and better provision of affordable rural housing.
“It is important that rural economies can be productive and can grow, both for the wellbeing of rural areas themselves and as contributors to the national economy,” says the proposal.

“However, rural areas have some relative weaknesses.”
Rural weaknesses include productivity levels that are below the national average, low wages and below average capital investment by businesses, says the network.

The second policy proposal is for improvements in adult social services provision in rural areas.

The proposal calls for revenue grant funding investment to end further reductions in adult social services provision and to take account of the ageing population.

Rural areas are home to a disproportionate number of older people within their populations, which places a significant extra burden on adult social services.

“Adult social services are already over-stretched as a result of reducing local authority budgets,” says the network’s proposal.

“Many social services department have tightened up their criteria for helping residents and now focus only on high priority cases.

The network says one outcome is that many older people are not discharged from hospital as quickly as they otherwise could be, which is an additional cost for the NHS.

“Growing demand for adult social services risks taking the situation to breaking point.

“It is acknowledged that upper tier local authorities are being allowed to raise their portion of Council Tax income by an extra 2% to help address this concern.

“This, however, does not keep pace with rising costs faced by the sector, including those from National Minimum Wage and National Insurance increases.”

The network wants funding for adult social services protected, as it is for the NHS.

Central government could achieve this with a specific extra grant to upper tier local authorities, says the proposal.
Despite attempts to protect frontline services, in the 2014/15 financial year the relevant authorities were planning budget reductions of £420m for adult social services.

A slightly larger sum would be needed to account for the growing number of older people.

Nationally, some £1bn would be needed to stop further service reductions or pressures in just one financial year, says the network.

More appropriate levels of formal care for older rural people would reduce pressure on and save costs in the NHS, it says.

These benefits would not only accrue to rural areas, but they would be particularly valuable there given their population profiles, it adds.

http://www.rsnonline.org.uk/services/network-urges-chancellor-to-address-rural-challenges

More attractive towns and cities can ease pressure on countryside”

“MORE attractive towns and cities would ease development pressure on the countryside, say rural campaigners.

Housing should be developed alongside transport infrastructure for economic, social and environmental benefits, says the Campaign to Protect Rural England (CPRE).

The charity argues that high-density development near to high-quality public transport services could boost businesses and jobs.

It also calls for more well-designed homes and more diverse, exciting communities, arguing that they would reduce pressure on the Green Belt and the wider countryside.

The recommendations are made in CPRE’s ‘Making the Link’ paper which, it says, builds on emerging government thinking.

CPRE policy adviser Trinley Walker said: “To build the homes we need and make our towns attractive for residents and businesses, housing development and transport must go hand in hand.

“Good access to public transport should be an important factor when councils make decisions about where to build houses – yet it often gets side-lined.

“This means that in many towns the potential for regeneration, quality housing and better connected communities is missed.”

The paper highlights the government’s recent NPPF consultation identified 680 commuter hubs suitable for high density development.

It argues that attention can also be given to smaller places like market towns, which delivering connectivity, services, employment and business opportunities for rural communities.
Situating high-density housing near transport hubs can concentrate development on brownfield sites in need of regeneration and increase connectivity to employment centres, says the paper.

This has the potential to make towns more attractive for residents and business, halt damaging urban sprawl and reduce car use and road congestion, it argues.

The paper suggests a number of options to encourage such development.

These include reduced business rates for local businesses and the roll-out of planning tools to help identify suitable locations for development.

The paper calls for higher-density development based around public transport hubs, planned around local services and waking and cycling.

High density development needn’t mean tower blocks in market towns, it says.

Terraced housing and mansion blocks can provide high density homes and preserve the unique character of towns, the paper argues.

‘Making the Link’ is the sixth paper in CPRE’s Housing Foresight series, which aims to provide innovative policy solutions to critical housing issues.”

http://www.rsnonline.org.uk/environment/cities-can-ease-pressure-on-countryside

Leave you home to grandchildren not children says Housing Minister!

“The housing minister, Gavin Barwell, has suggested that parents should leave their houses and savings to their grandchildren rather than their children to help them get on the housing ladder.

Barwell made the call for pensioners to skip a generation when writing their wills as he revealed that his 75-year-old mother had chosen to leave her £700,000 house in Croydon to her five grandchildren rather than himself and his brother.

The MP for Croydon Central, who owns a £750,000 house three miles from his mother’s, said the decision could help to reduce intergenerational financial inequities. “Generally in life we all like to think that our children are going to be better off than us. In terms of new technology and life expectancy, they are going to be,” he told a fringe meeting at the Conservative party conference in Birmingham last week.

“But at the moment, as things stand, they are less likely to own their own home and we need to do something about that.”

However, Barwell added that he did not want to live in a country where it was necessary to have a wealthy grandparent simply to get on to to the housing ladder, the Telegraph reported.”

http://www.theguardian.com/society/2016/oct/09/skip-a-generation-when-passing-on-homes-says-housing-minister

The ” Exmouth Splash”special song, dedicated to Andrew Moulding and Philip Skinner

Talking Heads, “Road to Nowhere”:

“Road To Nowhere”

Well we know where we’re goin’
But we don’t know where we’ve been
And we know what we’re knowin’
But we can’t say what we’ve seen
And we’re not little children
And we know what we want
And the future is certain
Give us time to work it out

We’re on a road to nowhere
Come on inside
Takin’ that ride to nowhere
We’ll take that ride

I’m feelin’ okay this mornin’
And you know,
We’re on the road to paradise
Here we go, here we go

[CHORUS]

Maybe you wonder where you are
I don’t care
Here is where time is on our side
Take you there…take you there

We’re on a road to nowhere
We’re on a road to nowhere
We’re on a road to nowhere

There’s a city in my mind
Come along and take that ride
and it’s all right, baby, it’s all right

And it’s very far away
But it’s growing day by day
And it’s all right, baby, it’s all right

They can tell you what to do
But they’ll make a fool of you
And it’s all right, baby, it’s all right
We’re on a road to nowhere.”

http://www.azlyrics.com/lyrics/talkingheads/roadtonowhere.html

What Trump tells us about global corruption, UK tax avoidance and government policies

Our own rich MPs (of all parties) hide their personal wealth by putting it in “blind trusts” for the duration of their parliamentary careers, supposedly not offering their “advice” on how the money is invested …. yeah, right!

“… Donald Trump is offering himself as president of a country whose federal income taxes he gives every appearance of dodging. He says he is fit to be commander in chief, after avoiding giving a cent more than he could towards the wages of the troops who must fight for him. He laments an America where “our roads and bridges are falling apart, our airports are in third world condition and 43 million Americans are on food stamps”, while striving tirelessly to avoid paying for one pothole to be mended or mouth to be filled.

Men’s lies reveal more about them than their truths. For years, Trump promoted the bald, racist lie that Barack Obama was born in Kenya and, as an unAmerican, was disqualified from holding the presidency. We should have guessed then. We should have known that Trump’s subconscious was trying to hide the fact that he was barely an American citizen at all.

He would not contribute to his country or play his part in its collective endeavours. Like a guest in a hotel who runs off leaving the bill, Trump wanted to enjoy the room service without paying for the room. You should never lose your capacity to be shocked, especially in 2016 when the shocking has become commonplace. The New York Times published a joint piece last week by former White House ethics advisers – one to George W Bush and one to Barack Obama, so no one could accuse the paper of bias. They were stunned.

No president would have nominated Trump for public office, they said. If one had, “explaining to the senate and to the American people how a billionaire could have a $916m ‘loss carry-forward’ that potentially allowed him to not pay taxes for perhaps as long as 18 years would have been far too difficult for the White House when many hard-working Americans turn a third or more of their earnings over to the government”.

Trump’s bragging about the humiliations he inflicts on women is shocking. Trump’s oxymoronic excuses about his “fiduciary duty” to his businesses to pay as little personal tax as he could are shocking. (No businessman has a corporate “fiduciary duty” to enrich himself rather than his company.) Never let familiarity dilute your contempt.

And yey, looked at from another angle, Trump is not so shocking. You may be reading this piece online after clicking on a Facebook link. If you are in Britain, the profits from the adverts Facebook hits you with will be logged in Ireland, which required Facebook to pay a mere €3.4m in corporate taxes last year on revenues of €4.83bn . If you are reading on an Apple device, Apple has booked $214.9bn offshore to avoid $65.4bn in US taxes. They are hardly alone. One recent American study found that 367 of the Fortune 500 operate one or more subsidiaries in tax havens.

Trump may seem a grotesque and alien figure, but his values are all around you. The Pepsi in your hand, the iPhone in your pocket, the Google search engine you load and the Nike trainers you put on your feet come from a tax-exempt economy, which expects you to pick up the bills.

The short answer to Conservatives who say “their behaviour is legal” is that it is a scandal that it is legal. The long answer is to invite them to look at the state of societies where Trumpian economics have taken hold. If they live in Britain or America, they should not have to look far.

The story liberal capitalism tells itself is heroic. Bloated incumbent businesses are overthrown by daring entrepreneurs. They outwit the complacent and blundering old firms and throw them from their pinnacles. They let creative destruction rip through the economy and bring new products and jobs with it.

If that justification for free-market capitalism was ever true, it is not true now. The free market in tax, it turns out, allows firms to move offshore and leave stagnant economies behind. Giant companies are no longer threatened by buccaneering entrepreneurs and innovative small businesses. Indeed, they don’t appear to be threatened by anyone.

The share of nominal GDP generated by the Fortune 100 biggest American companies rose from 33% of GDP in 1994 to 46% in 2013, the Economist reported. Despite all the fuss about tech entrepreneurship, the number of startups is lower than at any time since the late 1970s. More US companies now die than are born.

For how can small firms, which have to pay tax, challenge established giants that move their money offshore? They don’t have lobbyists. They can’t use a small part of their untaxed profits to make the campaign donations Google and the other monopolistic firms give to keep the politicians onside.

John Lewis has asked our government repeatedly how it can be fair to charge the partnership tax while allowing its rival Amazon to run its business through Luxembourg. A more pertinent question is why any government desperate for revenue would want a system that gave tax dodgers a competitive advantage.

What applies to businesses applies to individuals. The tax take depends as much on national culture as the threat of punishment, on what economists call “tax morale”.

No one likes paying taxes, but in northern European and North American countries most thought that they should pay them. Maybe I have lived a sheltered life, but I have no more heard friends discuss how they cheat the taxman than I have heard them discuss how they masturbate. If they cheat, they keep their dirty secrets to themselves. Let tax morale collapse, let belief in the integrity of the system waver, however, and states become like Greece, where everyone who can evade tax does.

The surest way to destroy morale is to make the people who pay taxes believe that the government is taking them for fools by penalising them while sparing the wealthy.

Theresa May promised at the Conservative party conference that “however rich or powerful – you have a duty to pay your tax”.

I would have been more inclined to believe her if she had promised, at this moment of asserting sovereignty, to close the British sovereign tax havens of the Channel Islands, Isle of Man, Bermuda and the British Virgin and Cayman Islands.

But let us give the new PM time to prove herself. If she falters, she should consider this. Revenue & Customs can only check 4% of self-assessment tax returns. If the remaining 96% decide that if Trump and his kind can cheat, they can cheat too, she would not be able to stop them.• Comments will be opened later

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/oct/08/free-market-in-tax-grotesque-idea-donald-trump-tax-havens