Budleigh Salterton France-UK cable in doubt, so why the compulsory purchase notices?

“Two European Union-backed projects to export French electricity to Britain via subsea power cables have been thrown into doubt after officials in France raised concerns about the impact of Brexit on their profitability.

The projects to build 1,000 megawatt and 1,400 megawatt interconnectors running beneath the English Channel between Normandy to Hampshire and Devon [Budleigh Salterton] are a key plank of UK plans to ensure reliable future electricity supplies.

Once built, together they will supply Britain with the equivalent of the output of two Sizewell B nuclear power stations, enough to meet the needs of 2.5 million homes. The projects will cost more than £1 billion to build, for which they have received €13 million of EU funding. The links could also be used to export UK electricity to France.

However, Clive Moffatt, an energy consultant, said that there was “definite uncertainty” over how Brexit would affect the cost of importing or exporting electricity. He said that developers were increasingly concerned about possible trade restrictions that might make it “commercially unviable” to build the links. “These issues have not been resolved,” he said. “It’s going to take a while.”

A final decision was due by the end of December, with contracts awarded for the first 240km link to Fareham near Portsmouth, known as IFA2, by its developers, National Grid and RTE, the French electric grid operator. But National Grid has confirmed that a final decision on the £590 million scheme has been delayed until next year, after French officials expressed concern about the implications of Brexit for the terms of the project.

CRE, the French energy market regulator, said this month that it was launching a consultation on legal issues related to Brexit. “The approval of the IFA2 project will be the subject of a specific decision in January 2017,” CRE said.

National Grid said the IFA2 project was still expected to proceed, but it acknowledged that the French regulator had asked for more time to reach a decision.

“The UK vote to leave the EU in June 2016 happened after the incentive regulation application that RTE made for IFA2 and so it is understandable and reasonable that CRE, given its responsibilities, would now consult stakeholders on how Brexit could impact the regulatory incentives for the project in the coming years.” The IFA2 interconnector was due to enter operation by 2020.”

Meanwhile, a 220km scheme, FAB Link, will link France with Budleigh Salterton in east Devon via the Channel island of Alderney. It is due to enter service by 2022.

James Dickson, project director for FAB Link at Transmission Investment, the scheme’s UK developer, expressed confidence that the scheme would continue, but he acknowledged that Brexit had created an “unprecedented situation with all sorts of uncertainties”.

He said that the key question was whether or not the UK would remain inside the EU common energy market and, if so, what new terms would be introduced governing the cross-border trade in electricity. These will determine the profitability of the investment.

Mr Moffatt said that the British government had not yet reached a final decision.

Officials at the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy have identified the lack of legal clarity around interconnectors as one of their biggest challenges and the matter has been raised in meetings with ministers, The Times understands.

Mr Dickson played down the concerns, saying: “We expect there to be little impact. It’s business as usual.”

Source: The Times (paywall)

2017: the year the NHS dies (or gets murdered?)

“… And what about the money?

The frightening thing for ministers – and in particular the Treasury – is just how much cash the NHS is swallowing. Over £130bn is spent on the health service across the UK. In England, the budget was increased by 4% in real terms this year.

But still it hasn’t got enough. Hospitals continue to rack up deficits. And while the NHS will undoubtedly still manage to balance its books by year end in March because of surpluses elsewhere, the prospects for the next financial year are much gloomier.

The 2017-18 year will see a much smaller rise in the budget – under 1% once inflation is taken into account.

That – to borrow a phrase from former Manchester United boss Sir Alex Ferguson – really will be squeaky bum time. Yes you can always argue the Treasury will step in and provide more funds, but no area of government spending has had as generous a settlement as the NHS. Tough questions will be asked and cuts will undoubtedly have to follow.

Where is the axe falling?

Talking of cuts, isn’t there a whole host in the pipeline? Yes. In the coming months expect to hear plenty about the catchily named sustainability and transformation plans.

There are 44 of them covering the whole of England and some are pretty radical – involving closures of A&E and maternity units and, in some cases, whole hospitals. Consultations are likely to be getting under way over the next few months and these are bound to provoke local protests. …”


“Musical Council Boundaries”

“When the music stops, your local council leader will be here to tell you a story [1]

First, there was “devolution” for the Heart of the South West, which wasn’t devolution at all because it would have sucked powers upwards from localities to a vast “combined authority” covering all of Devon and Somerset, including Plymouth and Torbay [2].

Then came the idea for a Greater Exeter Growth and Development Board (the GEGDB), which would be a joint strategic authority made up of Exeter, East Devon, Mid Devon and Teignbridge Councils [3]. Joint authorities are in practice run by their officers, not councillors, because the officers negotiate a common acceptable position on a given issue and then serve it up the councillors as the only available option that the four councils will agree on.

Finally (or perhaps not), proposals for a “South Devon” unitary council leaked out last week. This would be an all-purpose council covering East Devon, Exeter, Teignbridge, Torbay and Plymouth and, possibly, South Hams (sorry, Mid Devon, you’re out), discharging all existing district council functions plus those of Devon County Council within the new unitary area. Such evidence as is there is suggests the prime movers appear to be Exeter and Plymouth, if only because they refused to back further moves to support the “devolution” proposals.

The Exeter Green Party has written to the leader of Exeter City Council asking the following questions:

What mandate does the City Council have from the residents it serves to:
(a) attempt to reorganise local government decision-making structures?

(b) propose arrangements which would suck key decisions upwards from the elected representatives

of the people of Exeter to a new superior authority – the GEGDB – which would not be directly elected?

(c) propose a strategic authority – the GEGDB – which on the evidence of the 8 November paper would focus solely on economic growth to the exclusion of social and environmental considerations?

When does the City Council plan to publicise its thinking and actively consult residents and businesses on whether they actually want new local government arrangements and, if so, on the form they should take and how any new body might be fully accountable to local people?

It seems clear that the option favoured by Exeter and Plymouth is the South Devon unitary authority. Central government is believed to be offering £1 billion if the unitary is established, complete with an elected mayor. We don’t know what the money would be targeted at – improving public services, infrastructure, or grants to businesses? But a bribe’s a bribe.

A directly elected authority – which is what the unitary would be – is certainly preferable in democratic terms to the other options. But it would be a huge area, currently represented by 237 councillors elected by 105 wards (and that’s without South Hams). So a workable sized council will require a massive cull of elected members (no wonder the leaderships have been playing their cards close to their chests), leading to a weakening of the links between people and their councillors. On present ward boundaries, based on the most recent election results, 123 of the councillors would be Tories – a small majority, which gives pause for thought as to why Labour-run Exeter is so keen on the idea? Of course the new council could be a pathfinder, to be elected by proportional representation, which would change the political balance considerably. Look it’s a pig up there.

Many, many more questions. And meanwhile energy is being diverted away from service improvements into a potentially massive reorganisation. It still feels like the “old politics”. For the time being, we have to await the answers to the Green Party’s highly pertinent questions.


[1] You have to have been an aficionado of BBC Radio Children’s Hour in the 1950s to understand the reference!

[2] See my post https://petercleasby.com/2016/09/30/devolution-is-not-control/

[3] The proposals adopted by Exeter City Council’s Executive are at http://committees.exeter.gov.uk/documents/g4903/Public%20reports%20pack%2008th-Nov-2016%2017.30%20Executive.pdf?T=10, page 73.”


Greendale business family accused of neglecting city centre pub

“A year has passed since a long-standing pub in Exeter city centre closed its doors. But the mystery continues as to the future of it.

The Mint on Fore Street has been shut since New Year’s Eve 2015, and has remained closed ever since, despite plans to reopen ‘soon’. …

… Owners Greendale Leisure Ltd, based at Woodbury Salterton, have remained tight-lipped about their plans for the venue.

It was initially thought that the pub closed over ‘management issues’.

David O’Callaghan, of Gentry barber shop, said: “There have been all sorts of rumours, but no one is any the wiser.

“We have seen people taking out pumps, coolers, chilling units, the fruit machine and pool table. So maybe they aren’t going to keep it as a pub.

It’s an eyesore, and I’m concerned squatters are going to get in there.”


Business must be going well for the Carter family if they can afford to leave a city centre property empty for a long period.

“Company boss who gave £930,000 to Tory party receives knighthood”

Owl wonders if it wins Euromillions it might be able to call itself “Croney Owl”? Hugo’s croney knighthood from old pal and Eton schoolfriend David Cameron is looking grubbier and grubbier.

“David Ord, who becomes a knight in the new year, is a co-owner of Bristol ports and a member of the Conservative party’s Leaders’ Group, who were granted exclusive access to cabinet ministers under David Cameron and George Osborne. He has given more than £930,000 to the party since 2013.

Ord, a major opponent of the Severn Barrage, was once embroiled in a donations row after it emerged in 2014 that Bristol North West MP Charlotte Leslie had failed to declare the port owner’s donations to her local party on time, despite making numerous parliamentary interventions about the project. She apologised and was cleared of wrongdoing by the parliamentary watchdog.

Jeremy Corbyn said the honours for Tory donors were an insult to those who had been rewarded for charitable work or achievements. “The Conservatives are making a mockery of our honours system,” the Labour leader’s spokesperson said. “Every crony appointment is an insult to the incredible people from right across Britain who are rewarded for the great contributions they make to our national life”.

A Downing Street source defended the honours for Conservative donors, saying: “Being involved in political parties is generally considered to be an important part of civic society, and the alternative is having state funding for political parties, which is not where the consensus lies. When people dedicate their time and service to civil society it’s appropriate they can be honoured.” …