Corruption, absolute corruption, developers and councils

BUT THIS BLOG AND OTHERS HAVE BEEN SAYING THIS FOR YEARS AND YEARS AND YEARS AND YEARS!

HEAD … BRICK WALL … HEAD … BRICK WALL

Here are just a few recent East Devon Watch articles:

Tell EDDC what you want Section 106 money spent on so they can ignore you and spend it on what they want!

Section 106 scandal: New controls and a surprising revelation from CEO Mark Williams

The Great EDDC Section 106 Scandal of 2016 – and probably earlier years

Another loophole to avoid “Section 106” payments

Developers, councils and Section 106: the shocking truth

and the BBC has only just discovered it!

“The council that ran the Grenfell Tower block struck deals worth nearly £50m last year to allow developers to avoid having to build affordable homes, research for BBC News shows.

Kensington and Chelsea’s own analysis shows it has built a fraction of the social housing the borough needs.

Developers can pay a fee if they can convince the council that affordable homes would make their plans unviable.

The council said it struggled to build affordable homes in a crowded area.
Kensington and Chelsea has been severely criticised for its failures over Grenfell Tower, including allegations that the regeneration of the tower was done on the cheap and that survivors of the blaze were not properly cared for.

At least 80 people died in the fire.

The disaster, in one of the richest areas in the country, has also thrown a spotlight on the council’s attitude towards its poorest residents.

Huge shortfall

The council’s policy is for half of homes in large housing schemes to be available for rent or sale at below market rates.

The official target is to build 200 affordable units – flats or houses – each year between 2011 and 2021.

But the council’s own figures show that since 2011-12, just 336 units have been built; in 2012-13, just four were completed.

At the same time, Kensington and Chelsea struck deals with developers to pay it nearly £60m.

Since 2011, the council has agreed payments worth £59.7m, in what are known as Section 106 agreements.

The council is allowed to charge developers a fee if their scheme would ordinarily be liable to include social housing but its backers can convince officials that to do so would make the proposal unviable.

That headline figure includes £47.3m in 2016 alone.

The figures have been calculated for BBC News by EG, a property consultancy firm, whose work includes researching planning committee reports for Section 106 payments.

Senior analyst Graham Shone said payment to the council had undergone a “step change” on previous years.

“Maybe the council is a bit more receptive to those kinds of agreements going through as a way to encourage development across the borough,” he said.

The council will gain £12.1m instead of affordable housing at Knightsbridge station

K1 development, Knightsbridge

Developers Chelsfield plan to “reinvigorate, restore and celebrate” the block above Knightsbridge Tube station.

The design includes retail outlets at street level, new offices, 35 residential apartments, an underground car park and a rooftop garden and restaurant.

Given the size of the development, to comply with the council’s own policy, the scheme should include affordable housing.

However, in their planning application, the architects say: “The size of units [flats] are larger than what would normally be associated with affordable housing based on the London Housing Design Guide.”

They also argue the service charge on the flats “would far exceed what would be a sustainable level for affordable housing”.

And while they had considered creating another lift to accommodate affordable housing, this would “compromise” the retail units on the ground floor.

A mix of private and affordable homes, they say, is therefore “not viable”.
The council accepted the arguments, passed the scheme, and will receive £12.1m in lieu of affordable housing at the development.

The payments are meant to help the council provide affordable housing in other parts of the borough or to renovate existing stock.

A paper prepared for the council’s cabinet last year shows that of the nearly £21m the council has received since 2009-10 for affordable homes, £9.2m remains unspent.

Developers can also pay fees to off-set other impacts of their schemes. And the same paper shows that of the total £57.3m that Kensington and Chelsea has received since 2009-10, £36.7m has still not been spent.

None of the developers’ contributions has been used to improve air quality, libraries, sports facilities or healthcare, and very little has been spent on employment initiatives or children’s playgrounds.

The leader of Kensington’s Labour group says he is shocked by the lack of new affordable homes

Robert Atkinson, head of the Labour group at Kensington and Chelsea, said he was shocked by the amount of money the council was receiving and how few affordable homes were being built.

“One of the beauties of living in London is you have a balanced population, and I do think we have a duty not to produce the prettiest ghost town in Western Europe.

“Our first loyalty should be to maintaining and strengthening our communities, and we have fallen down on that job terribly.”

The need for affordable housing in Kensington and Chelsea is acute.

A Freedom of Information request submitted by the BBC last year showed the council had spent £28m providing temporary accommodation to homeless residents in 2015-16, a figure that has doubled in five years.

Almost three-quarters of those people are being housed outside the borough – the highest proportion in London.

The council said that “as the smallest London borough”, with the second highest population density in England and Wales and 4,000 listed buildings, “the borough only has a limited capacity to deliver housing”.

A spokesman said its policy of allowing developers to negotiate on affordable housing “stems from government policy”.

“The council scrutinises any viability information provided by the applicants in detail and in some cases is able to secure higher proportions than those proposed by applicants,” he added.”

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-40643072

Rules … what rules … none apply to HS2

“Fears that high-speed rail project HS2’s £55.7bn budget could spiral higher have been underlined by an audit showing unauthorised redundancy payments to staff, far above the government cap on payouts.

HS2 Ltd, the publicly funded company building Britain’s new high-speed rail network, spent £2.76m on payoffs in 2016, of which only £1m was authorised, according to the National Audit Office.

The head of the NAO, Sir Amyas Morse, said the findings highlighted troubling “culture and behaviours” at HS2, which needed to be addressed if taxpayers’ money was to be protected.

The NAO found that the redundancy payments were made in spite of explicit advice from the Department for Transport to HS2 Ltd that it was not permitted to exceed the civil service cap of £95,000.

HS2 circumvented the cap by placing a number of highly paid staff on gardening leave, continuing to pay them for several months although they were no longer working, on top of the maximum payouts. …”

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/jul/19/hs2-cost-nao-redundancy-payouts

and, in the same article:

HS2 has an agreement with the Treasury to allow it to pay higher wages than elsewhere in the public sector, which Higgins has insisted is vital to recruit the best talent. The previous chief executive of HS2, Simon Kirby, hired from Network Rail in 2014 to oversee the start of construction on a £750,000 salary, quit last September.

Heart of the South West: 50% self- interest, 49% spin, 1% substance

… and the 1% is generous!

That’s Owl’s summary of this puff job where the Emperors tell us how beautiful their new clothes are – and how we will all benefit from them:

http://www.devonlive.com/how-the-great-south-west-is-set-to-rival-northern-powerhouse/story-30447945-detail/story.html

“Never mind the quality – feel the width”!

And still not an ounce of accountability or transparency!

How long will our councils keep up the charade that these people are working for us – or working at all.

Government rules on civil servants moving to private sector replaced by … nothing

“Rules on civil servants moving to posts in the private sector have been operating with no guidance on their use because the Cabinet Office has failed for five years to produce this, the National Audit Office has found.

Its investigation of the Business Appointment Rules also discovered the rules do not say that a department can reject an application, only that these may be accepted or have conditions attached.

The rules apply when civil servants move to outside bodies and are designed to prevent them using privileged information or contacts gained in the civil service or to prevent any perception of impropriety.

Contentious appointments are supposed to be referred to the Advisory Committee on Business Appointments (Acoba).

They are administered by the Cabinet Office but the NAO found it removed guidelines for departments on administering the rules in 2012 to write fresh ones, which have never been completed.

The lack of clarity over rejection of applications even saw the Cabinet Office tell the NAO it thought such rejections did in practice happen, but was unable to supply any evidence.

Nor did the Cabinet Office maintain oversight of how departments implemented the rules, relying on them for enforcing compliance, transparency and public scrutiny.

Auditors also found it impossible to discover from transparency data whether all those leaving the civil service for the private sector who should have made an application under the rules in fact did so. …”

http://www.publicfinance.co.uk/news/2017/07/whitehall-missing-rules-private-sector-appointments-nao-finds

If YOUR vision for Port Royal isn’t the EDDC vision – you are “scaremongering”

Owl says: Well, that’s rich: who put the 5-storey building into the consultation document? EDDC. So who pre-judged the public consultation? EDDC.

Would the two councils have made such a fuss if it was a Conservative councillor who pointed this out? You decide.

” … Major landowners EDDC and Sidmouth Town Council are exploring options for Port Royal with a scoping study. They have revealed a concept for the site that could incorporate Sidmouth Lifeboat, the sailing club and up to 30 flats in a new building that could stand up to five storeys high.

In a joint statement from both councils, a spokesman said: “We are disappointed by a misleading and scare-mongering petition set up by a local district councillor, Cathy Gardner.

“It is a shame that this petition is pre-judging what the public think and the outcome of consultation with a petition pushing one person’s idea, rather than respecting the opinions of Sidmouth people.

“The councils are asking everyone to express their own opinions instead. The consultation is around the emerging findings of independent experts. There are no plans or proposals being made at this stage.

“We all want to see Port Royal looking as good as the rest of the town’s seafront. Positive ideas and constructive criticism are what we are seeing from Sidmouth people – that is the Sidmouth way.”

Councillor Jeff Turner, who leads the scoping study for the town council, added: “The consultants have not yet produced their final report and, contrary to the misleading statements in this petition wording, there is no fixed plan or proposal as to how Port Royal will be redeveloped.

“We should all wait to see what options emerge from the studies and consultations and how these are received and debated at both town and district councils, before jumping to conclusions.”

He said the study will also take on board the 1,800 responses about Port Royal in the Neighbourhood Plan.

The petition can be found at https://you.38degrees.org.uk/petitions/alternative-plan-for-sidmouth-s-port-royal-the-3r-s.

The campaigners are also staging a public meeting in All Saints Church Hall from 7pm on Wednesday, August 23.”

The councils’ consultation closes on Monday, July 31. It can be found at http://eastdevon.gov.uk/port-royal-consultation/.

Some good news: Manor Gardens, Connaught Gardens and Seaton Wetlands gets prestigious award

… “21 parks across Devon are officially among the very best green spaces in the country. The prestigious Green Flag Award – the mark of a quality park or green space – has been awarded to 21 parks across Devon.”

This international award, now in its third decade, is a sign to the public that the space boasts the highest possible environmental standards, is beautifully maintained and has excellent visitor facilities.”

Award winners in East Devon:
Manor Gardens – Exmouth
Connaught Gardens – Sidmouth
Wetlands – Seaton

http://www.devonlive.com/the-21-best-parks-in-devon/story-30447716-detail/story.html#kjYoSipEqvX4rHJW.99

“Property values in desirable areas could go down in a radical bid to spark new building”

Oh dear! In East Devon we are getting LOTS and LOTS of houses being built but prices are still going UP and UP – not DOWN as Javid tries to suggest should happen! How will Javid deal with THAT? Or is it exactly what he wants, and the suggestion that prices should fall is just a smokescreen for even more rampant development in high-cost areas?

“Communities Secretary Sajid Javid is preparing to unveil a striking new rule that will make NIMBY councils take local affordability into account.

Under it, every authority will have to calculate how easy it is for young workers to get on the housing ladder by working out their local salary-to-house price ratio.

The average house in Britian now costs 7.8 times the average salary – an all-time record.

And in some areas of the south east, the figure rockets to above 12 times people’s wages.

Mr Javid wants to slap a new automatic legal requirement on councils with ratios that are too high to make them green light thousands more homes, so that a significant increase in housing supply reduces prices over time.

Mr Javid’s test has been debated intensely in No10 for six months over fears it will spark a rebellion from some Tory MPs, The Sun can also reveal.

It could also ignite a dangerous backlash in solid Tory areas as home owners panic about their own houses losing value.

But a senior government source said last night: “Sajid has come up with what he insists is an objective and transparent test to increase supply.

“For once, councils won’t be able to fudge it, and that is key.

“There was nervousness in Downing Street before the election about upsetting the horses, but he has persuaded a lot of us round.”

Mr Javid’s plan could be unveiled as early as tomorrow.

In a preview of his plan, Mr Javid mounted a withering attack on councils three weeks ago for failing to build enough.

The Cabinet minister branded them refusal “not good enough” and declared that “the era of tolerating such poor, patchy performance is over”.

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/4047763/property-value-in-desirable-areas-could-be-forced-down-under-a-radical-new-test-to-spark-more-building/

Conservative MEP’s “fake news”?

“In one of the more bizarre developments of silly season 2017, it has emerged that Daniel Hannan, the Conservative MEP and author of Brexit manifesto What Next, shared stock images of Wales and the US while claiming to be walking in the English countryside.

In May 2016 the MEP for South East England wrote that he was going on a walk and stopping for a pie at the Vine at Hannington, a “traditional country pub serving home cooked food and real ales”. “15 miles up and down over Hampshire’s sloping fields, pausing for a pie @VineHannington. God, I love England in May,” he declared in a now deleted tweet. He shared an image of a gate, a Hawthorn hedge and some rolling hills.

Unfortunately, that idyllic scene is nowhere to be found in Hampshire, which falls within Mr Hannan’s constituency. It is an image of Godre’r Graig, Glamorgan in Wales, and was taken by keen photographer John Ball in May 1998.

John Ball told the blog Zelo Street, which first spotted the tweets, that he had taken the photo 150 miles away from where Mr Hannan claimed to be. “The photo used by Daniel Hannan on 6 May 2016 is a copy of the photo in the ‘Images of Wales’ feature on my website. I took the photo myself eighteen years ago on 20 May 1998,” he said.

Mr Hannan wrote on Twitter some months later that he was walking in the Home Counties and enjoying the scenery. “And then, suddenly, the dandelions. Ah, the sweet sounds and sights of summer and the sun,” he wrote above an image of a field filled with dandelions. The tweet has since been deleted.

This image is actually of a field in Barre, Vermont, has been taken by a professional photographer, and is used by a blogger, Ruth Kassinger, to discuss the merits of the dandelion plant as a source of rubber.

i has contacted Mr Hannan for comment to see if indeed he downloaded random pictures from the internet of different places after returning from a walk to “give us a [very general] sense of what he’d seen” because he was too civilised to do so whilst actually walking.”

https://inews.co.uk/essentials/news/uk/fake-views-mep-daniel-hannan-says-hes-walking-english-countryside-tweets-picture-vermont-usa/

The newspaper failed to ask the question that is interesting Owl: was he REALLY in the English countryside when he says he was and, if not, where was he?

“Electoral fraud is an affront to democracy. Those who commit it should be sent to prison” says Daily Telegraph

“The voting system in Britain has been heavily reliant on trust ever since an equal franchise was extended to women in 1928 and the voting age was lowered to 18 in 1969. No one is checked or required to present identity documents. Postal votes are available, which can lead to people being pressed to back particular candidates. And proxy votes can be cast in one constituency without proper controls over whether the same person has voted in another.

In Northern Ireland, intimidation of voters was an issue during the Troubles and, latterly, postal vote fraud has been identified in some constituencies with large south Asian populations. In much of the country, however, this phenomenon has been largely absent and has probably had little influence on election outcomes. …”

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/2017/07/18/electoral-fraud-affront-democracy-commit-should-sent-prison/