Monthly Archives: February 2017

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

5 Feb 2017

Posted under

Affordable and Social Housing

If you don’t like these policies, we have others …

“A major shift in Tory housing policy in favour of people who rent will be announced by ministers this week as Theresa May’s government admits that home ownership is now out of reach for millions of families.

In a departure from her predecessor David Cameron, who focused on advancing Margaret Thatcher’s ambition for a “home-owning democracy”, a white paper will aim to deliver more affordable and secure rental deals, and threaten tougher action against rogue landlords, for the millions of families unable to buy because of sky-high property prices. Ministers will say they want to change planning and other rules to ensure developers provide a proportion of new homes for “affordable rent” instead of just insisting that they provide a quota of “affordable homes for sale”.

They will also announce incentives to encourage landlords to offer “family-friendly” guaranteed three-year tenancies, new action to ban unscrupulous landlords who offer sub-standard properties, and a further consultation on banning many of the fees that are charged by letting agents.

A senior Whitehall source said: “We want to help renters get more choice, a better deal and more secure tenancies.” They added that the government did not want to scare people off from renting out homes, but offer incentives to encourage best practice and isolate the worst landlords. By emphasising the rights of renters, as well as trying to boost house building, the white paper will mark a turning point for a party that since the 1980s, and the first council house sales, has promoted home ownership as a badge of success, while neglecting the interests of renters. …”

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2017/feb/04/may-abandons-home-owning-democracy-thatcher-tories

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

4 Feb 2017

Posted under

Accountability, Austerity cuts, Scrutiny, Spin, Transparency

A council “Communications Officer” (press officer) tells the truth about his soul-destroying job

“I can’t face watching I, Daniel Blake because every day I feel complicit in a system that denigrates vulnerable people.

I knew leaving the voluntary sector to go and work for a local authority would require a culture shift, but I did not fully comprehend how difficult it would be to put a positive spin on cuts to local services after years spent promoting social justice campaigns.

I am part of a team which creates and distributes communications to the general public, through newsletters, the council website, on social media and through the local media. Working in communications often means putting aside your personal opinions and values for the good of the organisation paying your salary, and I have a lot of sympathy with local authorities now I’ve seen it from the inside.

I field calls for stretched council services – and soon my job may be cut too.

With brutal funding cuts from central government and the growing pressure on services, many councils are trying to make the best of a bad situation and make budgets stretch, regardless of politics.

But when Ken Loach’s ‘I, Daniel Blake’ was released last year, all my friends went to watch it in the cinema. I could not face going with them, knowing I was complicit in the same system the film portrayed as destroying people’s lives.

I can see the red tape responsible for the denigration of vulnerable people around me every day, and to be responsible for dressing up the effects of needless bureaucracy in a pretty package for our local papers is soul-destroying. Our press releases go through rigorous rounds of sign off, through all sorts of departments, senior council officers and councillors, all of whom want to remove any material that could incur criticism, which results in bland, council-speak copy.

People probably wouldn’t expect a press officer to care about local reporters, especially as they are usually asking us for responses to critical stories about the council, but I have real sympathy with them. Most of them are inexperienced and clearly stretched for time and resources: their copy is riddled with factual errors that could easily have been double checked, resulting in fractious phone calls between our side and theirs.

The vulnerable people I became a councillor to help have no idea I’m here. The reality is most residents don’t have the time or inclination to attend committee meetings or read all the reports and documents produced by the council. They should know how funding cuts are going to affect their local services and communities. It’s all there in black and white if you know where to find it. It’s an easier time for us if contentious issues pass through committees easily, as there are fewer difficult questions from reporters for the week’s papers.

Social media has become another accountability function for councils, which creates a lot more noise for us to deal with. Most councils will have active citizen campaigners ready to jump on any communication the council puts out to rip it to shreds. These days, it’s actually these people, rather than journalists, who spot the things the council would prefer went unquestioned. It can be disheartening, particularly when you’ve worked hard to capture the nuance of a complicated situation, but when you agree with the critics over the council it’s hard to take it too personally.”

https://www.theguardian.com/public-leaders-network/2017/feb/04/media-press-officer-council-cuts-local-papers-daniel-blake

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

4 Feb 2017

Posted under

Austerity cuts, Education (local)

More schools in East Devon to cut staff

“More schools in East Devon have revealed they are looking at reducing staff numbers because of cuts to education funding.

This week Clyst Vale Community College’s governing body told staff all their jobs were under consultation. The school in Broadclyst is facing a deficit and its student numbers are down by 300 compared with five years ago.

Two other East Devon secondary schools will also shortly be invoking their redundancy processes, but it has not been revealed which schools they are.

And now the headteacher of Exeter Road Community Primary School in Exmouth has admitted unless it makes cuts to its staffing costs it will unable to balance its budget.

Paul Gosling said: “Exeter Road has a higher percentage of children from disadvantaged backgrounds than the national average, but this school performs well because of the contribution that support staff make to the welfare and learning of vulnerable children.

“We are now preparing for the 2017/18 financial year and, based on the information that we currently have, unless we continue to make some cuts in our staffing costs we will not be able to balance our budget.

“Our good performance is put at risk by the savings we might be forced to make, as the number of support staff we employ is the only place left that we can cut.”

Schools in Devon will soon be seeing the impact of an estimated £3bn shortfall in the government’s education budget by 2020.

They are the first real terms cuts to education spending since the 1990s, with 98 per cent of schools set to lose funding at a time when costs are rising and pupil numbers on average are growing.

Devon is likely to lose an average of £401 per pupil – a total of over £35m for the region as a whole. It is feared class sizes in primary schools could rise and some GCSE and A Level subjects could be cut from the curriculum.

Russell Hobby, general secretary of school leaders’ union National Association of Head Teachers (NAHT), said: “School budgets are being pushed beyond breaking point. The government’s £3b real terms cut to education funding must be reversed or we will see education and care suffer.

“Already heads are being forced to cut staff, cut the curriculum and cut specialist support. A new funding formula is the right thing to do, but it cannot be truly fair unless there is enough money to go round in the first place.”

The NAHT is holding a series of national events to raise awareness among school leaders, governors and parents.

It will be meeting in Tiverton next Tuesday, February 7, to spread the word in the hope that local pressure will force the government to explain its rationale for cutting the education budget at a time when the school population is rising and costs are going up.”

http://www.exeterexpressandecho.co.uk/more-schools-to-cut-staff-in-east-devon/story-30111504-detail/story.html

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

4 Feb 2017

Posted under

Accountability, Austerity cuts, Devolution, EDDC, Golden Triangle LEP, Greater Exeter, Knowle/Honiton/Exmouth relocation, Local Enterprise Partnership

Single unitary councils would save most money say researchers

This post is from November 2016 but is reprinted here due to its topicality. Given LEP power-grabbing and “Greater Exeter” and “Golden Triangle” options, our district council’s plan to move to Honiton looks questionable to say the least.

Should any of the above options pan out, even the current bases at Sidmouth and Exmouth (plus changing Manstone depot to part-office) seems grandiose!

“Creating 27 unitary councils across the whole of England could save as much as £2.9bn, according to an independent analysis of local government reorganisation options undertaken for the County Councils Network.

The report by consultants EY examined six different single and two-tier governance scenarios for county and district authorities, using existing county boundaries. Based on the analysis of national data, EY found that creation of unitaries along county boundaries could save between £2.37bn and £2.86bn over five years, and average up to £106m per county. The single unitary option has the shortest payback period, generating savings within two years and two months, according to the review.

Among the other options examined was a move to create two unitary authorities per county, which would establish 54 councils.

Under this proposal, savings worth £1.17bn and £1.7bn would be made in a five-year timeframe, only around 59% of the saving of the proposal to create unitaries along current boundaries.

A third approach considered abolishing county and district authorities and creating three unitaries per county. However, the creation of 81 new councils countrywide could result in a net cost to the taxpayer of £33m over five years, although the range could also include a saving of £526m, dependent on how senior management and councillors are structured across the authorities. Whatever transpires, our council serms hell-bent on the most expensive option:

The review also considered reforming the current two-tier system through merging districts to reduce the average number in a county area from 7.4 to 3. Such a scenario could make savings of between £531m and £839m over five years.

A further scenario to create three unitary authorities and a combined authority, which would then deliver major services like adult social care, children’s social care and transport, was likely to cost between £36m and £366m over five years. Such an approach has been considered in areas such as Oxfordshire and Buckinghamshire, but EY highlighted the risks of this ‘untried and untested’ model of reorganisation. …”

http://www.publicfinance.co.uk/news/2016/11/local-government-reorganisation-switch-unitaries-could-save-ps29bn#disqus_thread

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

3 Feb 2017

Posted under

Accountability, Health and Social Care (local), NHS (local), Scrutiny, Spin, Transparency

How long is a piece of NHS Property Services string?

New owners of Sidmouth Victoria Hospital under fire for ‘incomprehensible’ answer to rent question.

NHS Property Services (NHSPS) took over 12 East Devon community hospitals on December 1, 2016 – prompting fears from some trustees and representatives over the future of the facilities under a commercially-operated company.

Speaking at a recent Devon County Council (DCC) health and wellbeing scrutiny meeting, Councillor Claire Wright called for NHSPS bosses to be held to account and voiced her frustration at repeated failures to provide the authority with more information.

Cllr Wright asked the company to outline how much each community hospital is being charged in rent, but NHSPS says it is unable to disclose the figures as they remain in commercial confidence while lease negotiations are being concluded.

Cllr Wright said: “I asked for the information in June and I asked again and they said they would get the information and they did not. The answer they have given is incomprehensible.

“A very strong message needs to go back that we have now been waiting seven months for an answer to a very straightforward question and we would appreciate it if they would come to the next meeting because they now own 12 community hospitals across East Devon.”

NHSPS is responsible for managing 3,500 NHS buildings and ploughs any profits back into the health services – selling on property it considers no longer necessary.

Cllr Wright argued it cannot ‘pick and choose’ and, if it is – as claimed – a part of the NHS family, should be held accountable.

Sidmouth fundraisers have vowed to safeguard the future of the town’s hospital, which has undergone a £5million refurbishment paid for entirely by community contributions.

Vice president of the Sidmouth Victoria Hospital Comforts Fund, Frances Newth, said it has received assurance from NHSPS that there should be no noteable changes under the new ownership. She added that trustees have emphasised the amount of community support received in the town and the importance of maintaining it.

Responding to a question from DCC about the amount of rental income compared to figures spent on maintenance, NHSPS revealed its budgeted rental income for 2016/17 is £408 million nationally.

The amount set out for routine, small-scale maintenance in this period is £98 million – which does not include overheads such as salaries of teams carrying out the work – and an additional £60 million is forecasted for larger maintenance projects.

A spokesman for NHSPS said: “The information sent to the council this month was provided further to attending two committee sessions in 2016, where members had the opportunity to question company representatives in person.

“We have provided supporting written information on two other occasions, as requested by the council.”

http://www.sidmouthherald.co.uk/news/new_owners_of_sidmouth_victoria_hospital_under_fire_for_incomprehensible_answer_to_rent_question_1_4874530

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

3 Feb 2017

Posted under

Accountability, Development Management Committee, Scrutiny, Transparency

Tell the truth and be fired …

“A veteran councillor in Theresa May’s constituency has been sacked after questioning plans for thousands of homes in the green belt.

Leo Walters, a former Conservative mayor of the Royal Borough of Windsor and Maidenhead, was removed as chairman of the council’s housing scrutiny panel after expressing concern that the public had not been fully informed about the threat to the green belt.

He said that he had been removed by Simon Dudley, the council’s leader, after “simply handing out facts”.

Mr Walters had sent an email to his fellow panel members informing them of a Freedom of Information response from the council revealing that 86 per cent of the land that it was proposing for development was in the green belt. …”

Source: The Times (paywall)

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

3 Feb 2017

Posted under

Accountability, Corruption, Democracy, Devolution, EDBF, Local Enterprise Partnership, Scrutiny, Sleaze, Spin, Transparency

Is Trump using the Local Enterprise Partnership model?

This is spookily like the way our Local Enterprise Partnerships (and before that, the East Devon Business Forum) were created – with business people in the driving seat and councils as passengers without seatbelts!

“President Donald Trump met with a roomful of top CEOs at the White House – and says he tried to install other titans of industry on his executive council only to have them nixed as ‘corporate raiders.’

Trump met with a group that included Jamie Dimon of JP Morgan, BlackRock CEO Laurence Fink, retired GE CEO Jack Welch – whom he called ‘legendary’ – and other business bigs.

As if that weren’t enough financial firepower, Trump said that he tried to get other financial bigs onto the panel, which meets about once a month to advise him the economy, taxes, and regulations.

‘So many people have called – friends of mine in big business,’ Trump said, ‘and that wanted to be on the committee.’

Billionaire Stephen Schwartzman of Blackstone private equity firm, who serves on the council, acted as gatekeeper. “I said, ‘Steve, can we get so and so?’ Trump said, with the CEOs gathered around him.

‘Nope,’ Schwartzman replied. ‘What do you mean no, it’s big business, massive business,’ Trump pleaded, in his telling.

‘How about this one?’ Trump would ask.

‘He’s a corporate raider, these people don’t want to be sitting with corporate raiders,’ was Schwartzman’s reply.

‘He’s been very very selective,’ Trump said, adding: ‘We’ll be putting a couple more on this.’

Introducing the group, Trump hailed BlackRock investment company CEO Larry Fink for having boosted his personal bottom line through investments.

Trump displayed no reservations about asking some of the world’s most influential bankers about their preferences for peeling back bank regulations enacted after the financial crisis.

‘We have some of the bankers here. There’s nobody to tell me better about Dodd-Frank than Jamie, so you’re going to tell me about it, but we expect to be cutting a lot out of Dodd-Frank.

The White House billed the event as a strategy and policy forum.
The group’s official title is the President’s Strategic and Policy Forum. It has 16 members.

Absent from the event was Uber chief executive Travis Kalanick, who announced just hours before that he had quit, following pressure from consumers over Trump’s new immigration order.

Trump didn’t mention Kalanick during his public comments.

The Uber boss quit the council, even as the company is facing blowback for its decision to drop its congestion pricing during a taxi boycott meant to oppose the immigration order.

He made his decision known in an email to employees, where he argued against Trump’s new immigration ban.

‘Earlier today I spoke briefly with the president about the immigration executive order and its issues for our community,’ Kalanick wrote. ‘I also let him know that I would not be able to participate on his economic council. Joining the group was not meant to be an endorsement of the president or his agenda but unfortunately it has been misinterpreted to be exactly that,’ he added.

Trump hailed another attendee, his Commerce Secretary nominee, billionaire Wilbur Ross.

‘When I campaigned for office I promised the American people that I’d ask for our country’s best and brightest, and we have that. Wilbur is representing us,’ Trump said.

Trump said of close confidante and business magnate Carl Icahn, ‘Carl Icahn called up and he goes, ‘I heard you got Wilbur. Everybody calls him Wilbur. I’ve never heard him called – we just know him as Wilbur, right?”

Trump met the business honchos as he prepared to sign executive actions asking the Treasury and the Labor Departments to examine reforms to roll back regulations intended to make markets safer and protect consumers.
The actions would examine the ‘Volcker Rule,’ meant to curb speculation, AFP reported.

‘(We) believe that Dodd-Frank in many respects was a piece of massive government overreach,’ a senior administration official told the outlet. ‘It imposed hundreds of new regulations on financial institutions, it established an enormous amount of work and effort for financial firms.'”

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4188962/Trump-meets-CEOs-says-ll-slash-bank-regs.html

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

3 Feb 2017

Posted under

Accountability, Democracy, Scrutiny, Transparency

Trump takes a leaf out of EDDC’s book!

“Public-interest advocacy groups say the White House appears to be deliberately structuring Trump’s growing roster of business-focused advisory groups in order to avoid becoming subject to a federal transparency law that requires such meetings be formally announced in advance and open to the public.

“Whether it’s hastily drafted executive orders put together in the dead of night and riddled with errors and not consulting the pertinent government agencies or putting together other proposals that are shocking to many Americans, nothing that has been done so far has been inclusive, so it’s not a surprise his small working groups of CEOs would be just the same,” said Lisa Gilbert of Public Citizen.

A 1972 law aimed at limiting back-room influence by special interests, the Federal Advisory Committee Act, regulates the operation of federal government advisory council. Normally, the meetings of such groups are announced at least ten days in advance in the Federal Register and the sessions are open to the public. Advisory committees are also required to have an official charter, records available to the public and a federal official present during all deliberations. Presidential advisory panels are also typically set up through executive orders.

So far, there have been no official notices of any meetings and no executive orders laying out the duties of the “Strategic and Policy Forum” or any other groups Trump is convening.”

http://www.politico.com/story/2017/02/trump-transparency-law-advisory-boards-234583

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

3 Feb 2017

Posted under

DCC, Education (local)

Comments

2 Comments

Academy schools cherry- picking pupils leaving state-funded schools to deal with the rest

“Councils are bidding for powers to require academies to admit challenging and difficult children, who might have been excluded from other schools.

Local authorities have a statutory duty to provide all children in their area with a school place, yet currently only have powers to direct maintained schools to take so-called ‘hard to place’ children.

If a council deems an academy as the best setting for a particular child, they have to apply to the Education Funding Agency, which makes the final decision. However, according to government statistics cited by the Local Government Association, only 15 out of 121 students put forward to the EFA for an academy placement have been accepted.

“By ignoring local council advice the EFA is allowing academies to effectively choose the children they want to admit,” said Richard Watts, chair of the LGA’s children and young people board.

“There are far stronger safeguards in place to ensure maintained schools do not cherry pick their pupils and the same measures should be in place for all academies.”

Decisions about where individual children are educated should be made in the best interests of the child, not to protect favoured schools, he added.

“It is now vital that councils are urgently given the powers to take these decisions locally, based on their local knowledge of the children, families and schools involved,” Watts said.”

http://www.publicfinance.co.uk/news/2017/02/councils-call-extra-powers-over-academy-admissions

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

2 Feb 2017

Posted under

Misc

And let’s hope this doesn’t happen in East Devon …

“If you’re having a bad day at work spare a thought for Tiverton’s town clerk – who has mistakenly opened a virus and wiped every council document since 2015.

John Vanderwolfe, who says it’s the worst thing that’s happened in his 12 years in the role, admits the blunder “is a lesson to us all.”

The virus infected Town Hall this week when an email arrived in Tiverton Town Council’s inbox claiming to be from a parcel delivery firm.

It explained that parcel needed to be collected, and that the URL link supplied would lead to a page containing details on how to retrieve it.

It was around five minutes later that it became apparent that a virus, disguised in the email, had infected every single one of the council’s computers.

On recollection, Mr Vanderwolfe sad it was fairly apparent the email was suspicious.

Mr Vanderwolfe explains: “Sometimes when you are in a rush and busy, you can slip up.

“This virus was horrible and now all of the documents are encrypted. Instead of [Microsoft] Word for example, it comes up with gobbledygook.

“It then asks for £3,000 in exchange for the file to be unlocked. But even then there is no guarantee they would do it.

“We have had an IT expert in to have a look but he is unsure on how to fix it. Our anti-virus wasn’t good enough for this one.

“It is a warning to other people and it I think our security for this type of thing needs re-thinking.

He added: “My advice is: If in doubt, don’t open it.”

Many documents, including finance and planning documents have been unaffected as they are either on separate systems or uploaded to the town council website.

According to Mr Vanderwolfe, the majority of those lost are letters – many of those sent in by residents.

The documents are expected to take some months to re-scan and upload onto the system.”

http://www.exeterexpressandecho.co.uk/dodgy-email-launched-virus-that-has-wiped-every-tiverton-council-document-created-since-2015/story-30107267-detail/story.html

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

2 Feb 2017

Posted under

Accountability, Democracy, Dorset

Dorset Local Government reorganisation goes ahead despite 3 councils dropping out

Interesting that the Secretary of State for Local Government can force the three recalcitrant councils to join the others …

“Six councils are to press ahead with asking communities secretary Sajid Javid to reorganise local government in Dorset, despite the remaining three opposing the idea.

A plan to create two unitary councils in the area at present covered by Dorset County Council and unitaries Bournemouth and Poole borough councils has now been voted on by all involved.

Christchurch, East Dorset and Purbeck have opposed the idea, though it was supported by the two unitaries, the county council and districts North Dorset, West Dorset and Weymouth & Portland.

The six are now expected to ask Mr Javid to reorganise the area into two unitaries. One would cover Bournemouth, Christchurch and Poole and the other East Dorset, North Dorset, Purbeck, West Dorset and Weymouth & Portland.
Matt Prosser, chair of the Dorset Chief Executives Group, said: “We now have a mandate from our councils [for reorganisation] and we have the backing of the public and other stakeholders. That is clear from the consultation results.

“Now, we have a duty to respond to that mandate and secure a sustainable and even brighter future for Dorset.”

The dissident trio face the problem that Mr Javid has powers to enforce the reorganisation even against their objections.

Christchurch leader Ray Nottage said: “Changes to the structure of local government in Dorset present an historic opportunity to transform our services at a time when budgets are being cut and our priority must be protecting frontline services.

“The secretary of state submission made by those councils that have agreed the recommendation might see the final decision regarding local government reorganisation taken out of our hands.”

Spencer Flower, leader of East Dorset, said: “If other councils in Dorset choose to make a submission to the secretary of state, the final decision regarding local government reorganisation will not be ours to make.”
Purbeck rejected reorganisation only on the chair’s casting vote, with councillors tied 11-11 on the proposal.”

http://localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=29888%3Agroup-of-dorset-councils-press-ahead-with-unitary-plan-despite-rejection-by-other-county-authorities&catid=59&Itemid=27

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

2 Feb 2017

Posted under

Accountability, Scrutiny

This would NEVER happen in East Devon!

“Tory councillor accused of being a ‘rogue estate agent’ for drugs syndicate

A Tory councillor was a “rogue estate agent” for a sophisticated drugs syndicate which grew more than a million pounds worth of Cannabis, a court heard.

Donal Hassett, 55, used false names, references and cover stories to rent houses which were turned into drug factories, it was said.

Police found 1,285 plants with a street value of almost £1.1m growing at seven properties, four of which were linked to the politician.

Hassett, who represents Newbridge for Bath and North East Somerset Council, denies two charges of conspiring with others to produce cannabis.

He admits fraudulently renting the houses in Somerset, Wiltshire and Bristol, but claims he had no idea they were being used to grow drugs, jurors were told.

The first charge relates to a drug-growing operation involving a 38-year-old Vietnamese man, while the second involves four other Vietnamese people.

Bristol Crown Court heard that £56,000 was put into his bank account while the second conspiracy was going on, between January 2015 and March 2016.

A further £81,000 was placed in the account of Tan Tran, 27, who is standing trial alongside Hassett.

Prosecuting, Simon Burns said Hasset, of Bath, Somerset, was the “property fixer, the rogue estate agent”, while Tran was the “courier, assistant”.

He said: “They were part of an organised sophisticated drugs syndicate operating to produce very large quantities of cannabis.

“It was as plain as a pikestaff that they had knowledge of what they were involved with.”

http://www.somersetlive.co.uk/b-nes-councillor-donal-hassett-accused-of-being-a-rogue-estate-agent-for-drugs-syndicate/story-30104558-detail/story.html

Mr Hassett had served on the Licensing Committee at Bath Council and was expelled from his local Conservative Party pending the outcome of these proceedings.

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

2 Feb 2017

Posted under

Accountability, Austerity cuts, DCC, Dorset, EDDC, Golden Triangle LEP, Knowle/Honiton/Exmouth relocation, Local Enterprise Partnership, PegasusLife, Scrutiny, Sidmouth/ Sidford/ Sidbury, Somerset, Transparency

Relocation and local government reorganisation – a chance to save money!

What is currently more important in local government? Saving money, saving money by merger or being profligate? These seem to be the stark choices facing our district, with its reliance on the Local Enterprise Partnership for strategy, direction and funding.

Closer examination of the agenda for the next Cabinet meeting reveals that there are two references to local government reorganisation: at the bottom of page 111 and on page 115:

“Identify opportunities for rationalising/improving existing public sector governance arrangements and make recommendations to the constituent authorities/partners”

This appears to be a clear reference, as it not only refers to reform, but also says that the recommendations will go to ‘constituent authorities’. In other words we are not talking just about the LEP. The new Joint Committee clearly has mergers in mind. Add “Greater Exeter” into the mix and we come out with even more likelihood of massive changes. THEN add a mooted “Golden Triangle LEP” and we have a truly chaotic situation.

Owl wonders if these are circumstances in which to pursue a new HQ for EDDC at Honiton. Any proposal involving EDDC and avoiding building at Honiton can immediately claim to have made a minimum saving of £10 million plus interest payments, plus many associated costs – savings now being the mantra nowadays.

The relocation from Knowle could, in the above circumstances prove to be most expensive suicide note in the history of our district. And those EDDC members who waved through the move to Honiton, without the slightest idea of the cost, could in these circumstances be likened to turkeys voting for Christmas.

We have seen with the reorganisation in Dorset, that the reform and merger of local government authorities is very much in the air, and Dorset has been suggesting that the creation of two unitaries will lead to annual savings of many millions of pounds.

So it’s not surprising that things have gone very quiet with EDDC relocation. Firstly, there is local government reorganisation all around us and within our nearby city and the county. Secondly, the Pegasus deal for Knowle has seemingly gone very much on the back burner.

We have recently seen the formal separation – ‘decoupling’ – of the Exmouth Town Hall work from the Honiton proposal which seems to have had more to do with mothballing Honiton than it had to do with allowing Exmouth to proceed more quickly.

Work to refurbish Knowle is almost certainly millions of pounds cheaper than relocating. Plus, a new building in Honiton would immediately depreciate enormously on day one of occupation – 50% plus has been suggested.

Of course, PegasusLife could always put in a planning application for the Honiton site!

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

2 Feb 2017

Posted under

Accountability, Devolution, Health and Social Care (local), Local Enterprise Partnership, NHS (local), Scrutiny, Transparency

Our Local Enterprise Partnership and the NHS (or not the NHS)

Comment turned into post:

“In the light of the concern over the future of the NHS it may be worth reminding ourselves just what Heart of the South West LEP proposed, on our behalf, in their 2015 Devolution Statement of Intent:

We [HOTSW] will:

• Increase productivity by reducing ill-health and reliance on the state

• Reduce overall need for formal health and social care services

• Reduce the cost of health and social care

• Help more people with long-term illnesses or mental ill-health start or return to work

What we need:

• Freedom to pool budgets and direct resources to local need

• Freedom to develop a commissioning framework that supports local decision-making

• Freedom to establish effective, integrated governance and delivery structures

• Freedom to develop local metrics and incentives

(The associated productivity prospectus says something which sounds even more sinister: “A healthier population means lower public sector costs and increased economic activity. To fill 163,000 more jobs [by 2030] we must engage the non-working population in the labour market which will require a significant health and care contribution.”)

Here is what the Public Accounts Committee concluded about LEPs and devolution in its report of 27 June 2016. (Kevin Foster MP, Conservative Torbay, is a Committee member)

“9. It is alarming that LEPs are not meeting basic standards of governance and transparency, such as disclosing conflicts of interest to the public.

LEPs are led by the private sector, and stakeholders have raised concerns that they are dominated by vested interests that do not properly represent their business communities. There is a disconnect between decisions being made by local business leaders and accountability working via local authorities.

It is therefore crucial that LEPs demonstrate a high standard of governance and transparency over decision making, at least equal to the minimum standards set out by government in the assurance framework.

It is of great concern that many LEPs appear not be meeting these minimum standards. The scale of LEP activity and the sums involved necessitate that LEPs and central government be pro-active in assuring the public that decisions are made with complete probity.

The fact that 42% of LEPs do not publish a register of interests is clearly a risk to ensuring that decisions are made free from any actual or perceived conflicts of interest. The varying presentation and detail of financial information across LEPs also makes it difficult to draw meaningful conclusions or make comparisons across LEPs on how they spend public money.”

https://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201617/cmselect/cmpubacc/296/29605.htm

The National Audit Office in a 2016 report also made the obvious, but crucial, point that LEPs do not yet have an established track record of delivery.

Our future is in their hands!”

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

1 Feb 2017

Posted under

Accountability, Consultation, DCC, Devolution, EDDC, Local Enterprise Partnership, Scrutiny, Somerset, Transparency

Comments

1 Comment

EDDC Cabinet to discuss devolution and LEP on 8 February … councils only “influence” LEP

From Cabinet agenda – Owl summary: it has taken 5+ years for the participating councils to realise that the business people on the LEP are running rings round them and still the only thing councils can do is “influence” those same business people:

“Risk implications will continue to be addressed at all stages of these proposals.

The Secretary of State is yet to formally clarify his position on the HotSW devolution proposal although the overall policy direction seems to be becoming clearer.

In the circumstances the Leader feel that the partnership needs to move forward with the priority development of the HotSW Productivity Plan and that this can best be achieved through the establishment of a formal Joint Committee in place of the current informal governance arrangements. This will put a formal governance structure around the Productivity Plan preparation, approval and delivery so minimising risk to the County Council and the other partner authorities. It will give partners the ability to negotiate with Government at pace, particularly on the emerging Industrial Strategy but without the statutory commitment required to establish a Combined Authority.

Without a Productivity Plan and Joint Committee in place the Council and its partners will be at a disadvantage in negotiating and lobbying Government on a range or policy initiatives including the growth agenda and are likely to miss out on potential funding streams.

…..

“The HotSW Joint Committee will provide a formal strategic partnership to complement and maximise the ability of local sub- regional arrangements to deliver their aspirations. It will allow the partners to collaborate to agree and deliver the Productivity Plan as well as engage effectively with the Government, other deal areas and other LEPs on a range of policy agendas. It will allow the partnership to test and improve its ability to work together as a potential precursor to the establishment of a Combined Authority at some point in the future. It will also provide a mechanism to work alongside and influence the LEP on strategic investment decisions affecting the HotSW area and to secure improvements to LEP governance and accountability.”

Click to access combinedcabagenda080217final.pdf

(topic begins on page 107)