Credit Guardian Martin Rowe:
Credit Guardian Martin Rowe:
Owl says: According to our Local Plan, the Greater Exeter Strategic Plan AND the plans of Local Enterprise Partnership, development in East Devon, Exeter, Devon and Somerset (economic and housing) was based on an expectation of constant, uninterrupted high growth. Now what?
“The consumer-driven momentum that has kept the British economy afloat since the Brexit vote is declining rapidly, with new data showing households in the grip of the most protracted squeeze on living standards since the economic crisis of the mid-1970s.
Against a backdrop of rising prices and stagnant wage growth, incomes adjusted for inflation have now fallen for three successive quarters, the first time this has occurred since the International Monetary Fund had to bail Britain out in 1976.
At the same time, the amount being set aside as savings has now slipped to just 1.7% of disposable income – the lowest level on record, and a fraction of the near-10% average for the last 50 years. Just a year ago, it was more than three times the current rate.
The new data from the Office for National Statistics shows that in the first three months of 2017, the mounting financial pressure on consumers brought the UK’s strong performance following last summer’s Brexit vote to an abrupt halt.
On Thursday, separate figures showed an unexpected jump in consumer credit. Households borrowed an extra £1.7bn in May – £300m more than had been expected – on credit cards, personal loans and car finance. A survey of consumer confidence also showed a steep decline.
Despite saving less and borrowing more, consumers still reined in their spending, contributing to economic growth confirmed today at just 0.2% – the lowest of any of the major G7 industrial nations.
Spending in the shops, new car sales and property transactions have all showed signs of weakness, and the Bank of England has expressed concern about rising levels of consumer debt. …”
Owl says: think there is no chance of a tsunami on the Severn estuary? Think again:
“Three former executives from the operator of Japan’s tsunami-stricken Fukushima nuclear plant went on trial Friday, the only people ever to face a criminal court in connection with the 2011 meltdowns that left swathes of countryside uninhabitable.
Ex-Tokyo Electric Power (Tepco) chairman Tsunehisa Katsumata, 77, and former vice presidents Sakae Muto, 66, and Ichiro Takekuro, 71, all pleaded not guilty to charges of professional negligence resulting in death and injury, more than six years after the worst atomic accident in a generation.
Katsumata told the Tokyo court it was impossible for him to have directly foreseen the risk of the towering waves that pummelled Japan’s northeast coast in March 2011.
“I apologise for the tremendous trouble to the residents in the area and around the country because of the serious accident that caused the release of radioactive materials,” Katsumata said in a barely audible voice, as he bowed.
But “I believe I don’t have a criminal responsibility in the case”.
The indictments are the first — and only — charges stemming from the tsunami-sparked reactor meltdowns at the plant that set off the worst atomic crisis since Chernobyl in 1986.
If convicted, the men face up to five years in prison or a penalty of up to one million yen ($9,000).
Prosecutors had twice refused to press charges against the men, citing insufficient evidence and little chance of conviction.
But a judicial review panel composed of ordinary citizens ruled in 2015 that the trio should be put on trial, which compelled prosecutors to press on with the case under Japanese law. …”
Owl asks: where are we on this? Has there been a u-turn on the u-turn on the u-turn yet, or does it come later today?
“Public sector workers are the most likely employees to take out payday loans, according to survey by a loans comparison website.
A survey of 8,000 people by Readies.co.uk revealed the majority of employed people taking out payday loans were working in the public sector.
Of those in employment seeking a payday loan, more than a quarter (27%) work in the public sector in roles such as nurses, teaching assistants and for councils, according to Readies.
The findings came a day after a proposed amendment to the Queen’s Speech to increase public sector pay and end the 1% pay cap failed to pass the Commons. There has been some suggestion that the government is poised to relax public sector pay limits.
Commenting on the poll’s findings, Stephanie Cole, operations manager at Readies, said: “Payday loans have a negative stigma attached to them, but the reality is that they are now part and parcel of some people’s’ lives as the pay squeeze intensifies as wage growth falls further behind inflation.
“The pay squeeze, particularly on public sector workers, will only serve to increase the number of people turning to payday loans who are already struggling with rising fuel, food and transport costs.”
Public sector unions have protested ongoing public sector pay restraint.
Speaking after the Queen’s Speech vote on public sector pay, Kevin Courtney, general secretary of the National Union of Teachers, said: “Pay for all public sector workers needs to be increased. The autumn budget must ensure that this 1% cap is lifted for all public servants.”
“The claimant in Hussain v Sandwell Metropolitan Borough Council  EWHC 1641 (Admin), Cllr Mahboob Hussain, was alleged to have been engaged in various transactions in early 2012 which involved procuring the sale of council assets to family friends at a substantial undervalue.
The councillor, an elected Labour member of the Labour controlled authority, was also alleged to have used his power and influence as a senior politician within Sandwell to have parking tickets issued to his family expunged.
The council’s audit committee had commenced an investigation after various allegations circulated in 2014 in the press and on social media that there had been serial and longstanding wrongdoing by elected members.
An external firm of solicitors were brought in to assist. The firm interviewed Cllr Husssain on two separate occasions about the allegations.
“Regrettably, towards the end of the process, the solicitor conducting the investigation made a personal and derogatory observation about the claimant and his family to the chief executive,” Mr Justice Green said.
The chief executive, Jan Britton, then considered whether it was proper to continue with the firm given the risk of bias. It was decided that – with the investigation at an advanced stage – the work should be completed. But it was also decided that the evidence and report should be submitted to leading counsel for independent advice.
The solicitors’ report was presented to Sandwell Council in April 2016. A QC then advised in May 2016.
“The gist of the advice was that there was a serious case to be met by the claimant and that the solicitors report and the opinion should be placed into the public domain to address criticisms then being made in the press that the authority was suppressing wrongdoing and not taking its obligations seriously,” Mr Justice Green said in a press summary of the ruling.
Counsel also advised that a formal investigation of the allegations against the claimant under the Localism Act 2011 be initiated.
The judge said the investigation then became ‘political’ in the sense that the investigation was used by members against each other during elections of a new Leader of the council. The solicitors’ report and the QC’s opinion were leaked.
When the council said it intended to publish the two documents, Cllr Hussain sought permission for judicial review and an order prohibiting publication.
The High Court refused permission for a judicial review challenge, but the Court of Appeal went on to grant permission. Sandwell’s investigation was stayed by the High Court pending the outcome of Cllr Hussain’s challenge. This also prevented the authority from convening a standards committee investigation to hear and then rule upon the allegations against him.
The claimant advanced a number of grounds of challenge. The judge said these raised issues about the scope of the powers of local authorities generally to investigate alleged wrongdoing under the Local Government Act 1972 and the Localism Act 2011 and the interaction between these measures and the Data Protection Act 1998.
The claimant argued that:
The investigation was and remained flawed and unlawful because it was infected by bias, politically motivated, oppressive, irrational and unreasonable.
There was no lawful power to investigate alleged misconduct pre-dating the coming into effect of the Localism Act 2011 (1 July 2012), and no power more generally to invoke the powers in the Local Government Act 1972 and the Localism Act 2011 in support of investigations into this sort of alleged misconduct.
In relation to the decision to place the solicitors’ report and the QC’s opinion into the public domain, this was an irrational and politically motivated act, that it was infected by bias, and in any event the decision was unlawful under data protection legislation and violated the rights of Cllr Hussain and his family under Article 8 ECHR.
Dismissing the claim for judicial review, Mr Justice Green said: “On the evidence before the Court there is a serious prima facie case against the claimant. The allegations should now be investigated properly in accordance with the formal arrangement instituted by the council under the LA 2011 [Localism Act].
“The council has ample powers to conduct investigations into this sort of impropriety. The argument that Parliament intended an amnesty to be accorded to those engaged in wrongdoing before the coming into effect of the LA 2011 (on 1st July 2011) is rejected. The decision to publish the solicitors report and the opinion were fully justified and in the public interest and were not prohibited by data protection laws or Article 8 ECHR.”
The judge said he had also decided that even if he were wrong in his analysis of the powers of the local authority and that it had in the past acted unlawfully that none of these breaches would be material or have any real impact on the fairness of the investigatory procedure going forward.
“A striking feature of the case is that the standards committee, which will hear and adjudicate upon allegations made against the claimant, has not yet been convened, due to the stay that the claimant successfully obtained from the High Court,” Mr Justice Green said. [His emphasis]
“When the stay is lifted, which it will be by Order of this Court, the claimant will have a full opportunity to present his case and establish that the allegation against him are to be rejected.”
The judge said he agreed with the position adopted by the council that the allegations were serious and that there was a powerful public interest in those allegations being thoroughly and fairly tested and adjudicated upon.
“The fact that the issues have acquired a ‘political’ flavour to them is not a reason for the council, as a body, to act differently. On the contrary it must act independently and objectively throughout, as it has done,” he noted.
The stay on all proceedings was lifted.
Commenting on the ruling, Sandwell’s Britton said: “We welcome the judgment that the claim for a judicial review has been rejected in totality and that the council’s case has been vindicated.
“Now legal issues have come to a conclusion, the council is able to proceed with its standards process.”
Something going very wrong here … seems like ” working well for 99% of users” may be more spin than substance”
“Maggots found in Sidmouth bin after three weeks with no collection
Maggots were found feeding on ‘rotting, stinking mess’ after food bins in Sidmouth were not emptied for the first three weeks of a new waste scheme. …”
…The recent heatwave – which also beat down on ‘disgusting’ overflowing dog bins around the valley – worsened the situation and left 83-year-old Joyce Waterhouse ‘unable to cope’, so a relative took all her recycling to landfill.
East Devon District Council (EDDC) said the rollout to 51,000 homes was working well for 99 per cent of residents and asked people to ‘bear with us’. …”
“A public meeting to update the community on the saga surrounding Honiton Hospital will be held next month.
The session, which will be held at the Mackarness Hall on July 11, from 7pm, has been organised by Honiton Senior Voice and the steering committee of Save our Hospital Services.
Honiton and Tiverton MP Neil Parish and Independent councillor Claire Wright have been invited to the meeting, as well as Honiton mayor Cllr John Zarczynski.
Cllr Wright recently proposed to Devon County Council that NHS Northern, Eastern and Western Clinical Commissioning Group’s (NHS NEW Devon CCG) decision to close all inpatient beds at Seaton and Honiton hospitals should be referred to the Secretary of State for Health.
The proposal was deferred until July but the meeting will be updated of any progress and given details of how to represent their view when the council meet.
June Brown, chair of Honiton Senior Voice, said: “We are far from giving up on saving our hospital beds and the ball has now been placed at the feet of NEW Devon CCG to answer the questions that have been raised by East Devon and Devon county councillors.
“As far as we are concerned the case for retaining the beds is overwhelming given the needs in this area and the pressures on Royal Devon and Exeter Hospital and other services.
“We think our GPs also want these beds retained so hope to send a very strong message from this meeting to the NEW Devon CCG to answer the case made. In coming months we shall continue the fight to retain these beds.”
Senior Voice spokesman Tony Simpson added: “Staff at Honiton Hospital are already having to consider their futures and there is already uncertainty about what will happen after September by doctors, nurses and patients who may need in patient facilities locally.
“There seems little prospect that the alternative quality home care systems promised will be in place.
“Look around Honiton – almost every care agency is desperately advertising for staff on fairly low wages and sometimes without adequate training. There are just insuffient care resources being put in.
“We also call on our MP to organise a delegation to Jeremy Hunt from local bodies representing patients, professionals and health trade unions.
“Mr Parish should now be standing up in Parliament telling the government that he and the people he represents will not accept the closure of beds, maternity and other services at any price.
“We expect him to vote according to his constituent’s wishes.”