“Three Quarters Of Tory Councillors Worried About Cuts To Children’s Centres, Poll Reveals”

Owl says: Yet it is their party and their votes that have caused this situation.

“Nearly three quarters of Conservative councillors are worried about government funding cuts to children’s centres, a new poll has revealed.

The research, which saw 508 Tory local government representatives quizzed by charity Action for Children, showed 72% believe long-term funding for children’s services is a major concern for their council.

More than half say budget restrictions are making it harder for councils to meet their responsibilities towards children and young people, while 38% believe there is a “lack of clear direction and funding” from government.”

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/three-quarters-of-tory-councillors-worried-about-cuts-to-childrens-centres-poll-reveals_uk_59ecabb8e4b0958c4682b7a2

EAST DEVON DISTRICT COUNCIL PLANNERS RECOMMEND DEVELOPMENT ON HIGH RISK FLOOD ZONES AT WINSLADE PARK

PRESS RELEASE

[Here’s a summary of recent developments regarding local planning applications which are likely to affect village residents. As you will see, things are once again starting to ‘move’ and we will endeavour toi keep you updated on decisions and outcomes if and when they occur. We are aware that since the Save Clyst St Mary campaign was first launched, nearly four years ago, a number of new residents have moved to the village who may wish to join the group. Should you know of anyone who has moved here since early 2014, we would be grateful if you could forward this document and encourage new residents to sign up to subsequent updates (via our email address or a note through the door of 11, Clyst Valley Road).]

“The latest hybrid planning application (16/2460/MOUT) from Friends Life Limited/Aviva for 150 dwellings, plus employment and new workplace units at Winslade Park is due to be considered by East Devon District Council’s Development Management Committee on 31st October 2017, with the Planning Officers’ Recommendation to the Committee of Approval with Conditions within a 58-page document containing 20 Conditions plus a proposed Viability Legal Agreement.

The outline new build part of the application incorporates very limited information, which the majority of Consultees have found insufficient for making informed decisions and have either recommended refusal (Devon County Highways), have major concerns, find the proposals unacceptable or object (including Historic England, Sport England, the Parish Council, Ward Councillor and East Devon’s Historic Conservation, Landscape, Tree and Environmental Health Departments), plus 225 total objections generated by local residents.

For the existing local community of Clyst St Mary the flood risk is a major concern because historically the Grindle Brook and River Clyst have frequently caused severe damage.

[Pictures of historical flooding]

The link below identifies the current flood risk and shows the vulnerability of the Winslade Park site, proving that substantial future flood defences are essential.

https://flood-warning-information.service.gov.uk/long-term-flood-risk/map?easting=297816&northing=90559&address=100040161688

East Devon’s planning recommendation states “The access road leading into the site, the area where the offices are proposed and areas of land around the Grindle Brook running through the site fall within flood zones 2 and 3 on the Environment Agency’s mapping system.

The new-build employment units are identified to be located adjacent to the entrance drive, part of this site is within flood zone 2 and a smaller part is in flood zone 3. Whilst it is not best practice to site new buildings in the flood zone, the allocation of the site is constrained by the flood zone(s) and if all buildings were sited outside the flood zone(s) then it is considered that the quantum of development in the allocation could not reasonably be delivered and therefore could affect the viability of the scheme. The employment use would be a less vulnerable use than the residential use and therefore it is less likely to be used/occupied in the event of a flood. Accordingly, it is considered that the proposed location of the employment units (based on the illustrative layout) would be acceptable and is the most appropriate location.”

Although the Environment Agency has been provided with a Flood Risk Assessment, their own website states that “flood defences do not completely remove the chance of flooding and can fail in extreme weather conditions,” leaving future residential and employment users of this site at risk.

Aviva is one of the linked companies associated with this proposed development at Winslade Park. Their Chief Executive, Mark Wilson, was noted for finalising the £5.6 billion acquisition of Friends Life with the resulting merger turning Aviva into one of the UK’s largest investors managing £300 billion plus assets.

Writing in the Telegraph in 2014, he emphasised that there should be a halt on building on “defenceless” flood plains. He stated that “As a nation we need to build more homes, but the cost of development must include the cost of defences. We can’t stop the weather, but we can act in unison to minimise the impact of extreme events and we know that the threat is only going to increase, with scientists predicting greater flood frequency and extreme weather as a result of climate change. Although the current focus for us all is coastal and river flooding, surface water flooding is a major concern. More homes, driveways and car parks all contribute to more water flowing into the system, and flowing quickly.”

He acknowledged that flooding is one of the most traumatic events that any householder or business can face, with families forced out of their homes, valuable and much-loved possessions being ruined and businesses struggling to trade. It can be many months before the drying-out process is completed and subsequent repairs can commence and he understood the emotional cost, trauma and feeling of vulnerability that comes with flooding. His mantra continued “Let’s be crystal clear: no defences, no development.”

Such strong opinions on flooding are applauded and ideally could benefit the development proposals by the Insurance Group for the residential, workplace and community areas at Winslade Park, Clyst St Mary that lie within flood zones!

The accessibility of guarantees for affordable insurance on households and businesses in flood-prone areas is comforting for existing homes and businesses but is East Devon District Council so restricted in the availability of quality development sites throughout their sizeable District that they are left reliant on recommending development on high risk flood zones?”

Update on “Stop the new plans to dismantle our NHS” petition

“Thank you for signing the petition STOP the new plans to dismantle our NHS. Please share.

https://you.38degrees.org.uk/petitions/stop-the-plans-to-dismantle-our-nhs

It is becoming clear that the mandated cuts of £22bn over 5 years the 44 STPs were supposedly ‘planned’ to fix, are not going to be possible in spite of some Hospital Trusts and CCGs doing what they said they would do to ‘deliver’ the NHS England mandated harsh, control totals.

Why are we not surprised?

The NHS Constitution has been broken in Hertfordshire where the CCG has decided to stop elective operations indefinitely for people who smoke and those with a BMI of 30 and above, in spite of fierce opposition from the Royal College of Surgeons and decidedly NOT the answer.

The obscene cost of a ‘market structure’ at the heart of the NHS is ignored in all this, obscured as many new MPs find out on entering Parliament and asking the question, by the fact that not one NHS body has the mandate to collect the information. This must be policy!

Academics estimate 12 to 30% NHS budget goes on transactions costs of the market, the high costs of PFI and prices of drugs and technologies (which rise ahead of NHS pay) in addition to the costs of management consultants. All this and not a patient treated. This must also be policy.

GPs and CCGs are not open about whether you are referred for treatment to an NHS or non-NHS organisation, ie for-profit, Community Interest Company or charity.

These plans are a smokescreen for further privatisation and finance industry involvement in the NHS.

https://you.38degrees.org.uk/petitions/stop-the-plans-to-dismantle-our-nhs

Please share.

Thanks for staying with us! We appreciate it greatly. With your help we CAN win this!”

The perils of private enterprise and social care – an impossible relationship

Guardian Letters:

“As long as social care is provided almost entirely by the private sector (under 10% remains in public hands) it will be impossible both to plan strategically and operate efficiently.

The private sector plays no effective collaborative role in the strategic planning of service provision (the duty of national and local government) modelled on expected demographic change over future decades. Indeed, private providers are essentially disparate and short-term focused – even handing back contracts mid-term when they prove or are predicted to be unprofitable. Moreover, they have no interest in providing care as a public good.

The private sector, in the market as it is currently structured, will always follow the money (that is, affluent old people who can pay for care out of their own pockets, and who are then placed in the position of cross-subsidising those who are paid for by cash-strapped councils, themselves unable to pay the full going rate as set by the providers).

Depressingly, this does not even address the issues around quality that are shown to arise time and time again in services that have been outsourced (which is essentially what the private provision of social care is really all about) – just look at the parlous state of many of our privately provided (but publicly funded) prisons, immigration centres, probation services and primary healthcare services.

The only difference is that social care is a hybrid form of outsourcing – private payers and publicly supported clients coexisting side-by-side within the same privately provided service.
Gillian Dalley
London

And just as interest rates are predicted to rise – Javid says government should borrow to build houses!

Owl says: suddenly when Tories see that lack of suitable housing = losing Tory votes, NOW it’s ok to borrow!

And who will the borrowed money go to – developers!

“The government should borrow money to fund the building of hundreds of thousands of new homes, a cabinet minister says.

Communities Secretary Sajid Javid said taking advantage of record-low interest rates “can be the right thing if done sensibly”.

Housing charity Shelter said his comments suggested the government was “going in the right direction”.

Labour said spending on new affordable homes had been “slashed” since 2010.
It comes as Mr Javid launched an eight-week review of housing, in which he has called on the industry to offer solutions to the home-buying and selling process. …

… Asked about the change in tone from the Tories’ previous approach to borrowing, Mr Javid said a distinction should be drawn between “vitally important” deficit reduction and “investing for the future” in housing and infrastructure.

“So for example… you borrow more to invest in the infrastructure that leads to more housing – take advantage of some of the record-low interest rates that we have. I think we should absolutely be considering that,” he said.” …

business

Cabinet Office minister “broke planning law”

“Caroline Nokes, the Cabinet Office minister, is facing calls to resign after planning laws were broken in obtaining permission for a new set of stables and a double garage at her constituency home.

A planning application to develop her £1m family house on the edge of the New Forest in Hampshire was submitted in the married name of her sister, who was identified as the property’s owner.

The form was submitted in the name of Elisabeth Bellingham and included a “certificate of ownership” signed on Bellingham’s behalf by Nokes’s agent.

[the article goes on to say she has criticised property developers for manipulating planning laws and her father is leader of Hampshire County Council and the New Forest National Park Authority says prosecuting her is not in the public interest]…”

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/news/minister-broke-planning-law-720djmcr7

Source: Sunday Times (pay wall)

Another reason to have a breakaway eastern East Devon?

Very, very few people in the eastern part of East Devon will benefit from this, yet it is in the EDDC area.

“The Department for Transport (DfT) has confirmed funding for two major projects in Devon …

[One is £9 m at Sherford new town near Plymouth]

… east of Exeter, the continuing growth and development will receive a £4 million boost, which with £3 million developer contributions will deliver improvements to Moor Lane junction to provide more capacity for traffic using the A30 and from Sowton Industrial estate; extension of the higher quality cycle routes into the city; an additional multi-use car park at the Science Park; plus extension of the electric bike scheme.

The news has been welcomed by Devon County Council, which put in the bids for the DfT funding.

Councillor Andrea Davis, Devon County Council Cabinet Member for Infrastructure, Development and Waste, said:

“This is great news for Devon. Great for Devon residents, and great for Devon businesses. The £9 million will bring with it improvements in Exeter, and much needed access, and High Street, to the new town of Sherford. Both schemes will be a boost for new housing, jobs and connectivity in Devon.”

https://www.devonnewscentre.info/new-schemes-will-be-a-boost-for-housing-and-jobs-in-devon/

Academy school group allegedly strips its assets before transfer

“Wakefield City Academies Trust now stands accused of “asset stripping” after it transferred millions of pounds of the schools’ savings to its own accounts before collapsing. On 8 September it released a statement announcing it would divest itself of its 21 schools as it could not undertake the “rapid improvement our academies need”. It said that new sponsors would be found to take them over.

… Hemsworth Arts and Community Academy, a mixed secondary school in Pontefract, had £220,000 of funds, raised by volunteers at Christmas markets and other school events, transferred to the trust’s accounts earlier this year. It also saw a further £216,000, which had been held back for capital investment, moved over. “It’s not the trust’s money. It’s our money,” said a former governor at the school, who did not want to be named. “It’s money for the people in the area, their children and their grandchildren. It wasn’t for them to take.”

Heath View primary school in Wakefield had £300,000 transferred to the trust in September 2016. Another school, Wakefield City Academy, had more than £800,000 transferred towards the end of 2015. In both cases the trust told the schools’ governors that the transfer was a loan. Wakefield City Academy even received a number of small repayments. However, since the trust’s collapse both schools have been told that it no longer acknowledges the transactions as loans.

For Wakefield City Academy, the money had been held back to provide a financial cushion for when a particularly large cohort of children – born during the early 2000s baby boom – arrive in the secondary school system. “This money was our rainy day money,” said Kevin Swift, chair of the school’s local governing body. “It wasn’t just left under the mattress. It was money that we had anticipated we would have a very definite need for.”

High Crags Academy primary school in Shipley was instructed by the DfE to join the trust in April 2016 after being put into special measures the previous year. When it joined it had a surplus of £178,000, which was immediately moved to centralised accounts….

… Parents, teachers and governors say the financial problems at the Wakefield City Academies Trust had been clear for nearly a year before it collapsed. In November 2016 a draft DfE report leaked to the Times Education Supplement stated that the trust was in an “extremely vulnerable position as a result of inadequate governance, leadership and overall financial management”.

The draft raised concerns that the chief executive, Mike Ramsay, had been paid more than £82,000 for 15 weeks’ work, despite the fact that the trust was facing a large budget deficit. The DfE has so far refused freedom of information requests to see the final report.

The previous month, it had emerged that the trust had paid almost £440,000 to IT and clerking companies owned by Ramsay and his daughter. In a statement at the time, the trust said internal vetting procedures had found that the contracts represented the best value.

Although serious questions have been raised about financial managment, there is no suggestion of fraudulent activity….

While a spokesman for the Wakefield City Academies Trust declined to comment, the DfE said a failing academy trust could never profit from the transfer of its schools to new sponsors. A spokesman said: “We are working with the trust to ensure that there is minimal disruption for pupils.

“We are also working with the preferred trusts and schools to ensure they have the right support and resources they need to improve the outcomes for pupils as quickly as possible, which will include the necessary pupil funding.” … “

https://www.theguardian.com/education/2017/oct/21/collapsing-wakefield-city-academies-trust-asset-stripped-schools-millions-say-furious-parents

Telegraph: “Our new Bovis home is falling apart and our warranty is worthless’ “

Buying a new home from Bovis? Best read this first.

“Johanna Leonard was set to live the retirement dream. After 35 years the 57-year-old finance worker sold her north London home and bought in the small town of Chudleigh, Devon, with far-reaching views over Dartmoor.

The five-bedroom, three-storey property was part of a 48-strong scheme called Tors Reach, completed in 2015 by Bovis, one of Britain’s biggest housebuilders.

But Ms Leonard’s bucolic fantasy rapidly crumbled. She is about to spend her third winter in a cold house with a damp lower ground floor and faulty heating system. She has suffered a hotchpotch of building mistakes, bad practice and shortcuts, with brickwork scuffed by scaffolding, metal screws rammed into plastic pipes and gaps between the guttering and the outside wall that could allow water and insects to creep in.

The surface problems were apparent as soon as she moved in. “Doors weren’t shutting properly, including the front door, the garden wasn’t turfed, and it was very badly painted, but the Bovis site manager just told me to ‘make a list’,” Ms Leonard said.

She had bought off-plan but was reassured by the Buildmark warranty issued by the National House Building Council (NHBC).

The warranty – which is presented as a regulatory stamp of approval for the quality of most of Britain’s newbuild homes – dictates that any structural problems found in the first two years will be dealt with by the builder. From years three to 10 the NHBC takes over repairs.

When relations turned sour with Bovis Ms Leonard turned to the NHBC, which describes itself as the “leading standard setter for new homes”. Far from having her building defects rectified, however, she found her living conditions deteriorating further.

The NHBC first investigated Ms Leonard’s home in July 2016 after Bovis washed its hands of the case and agreed that there were 60 issues to be resolved. The first set included repair work to substandard brickwork using the NHBC’s contractor. But Ms Leonard said: “Due to poor workmanship I had to advise the NHBC that I no longer wanted them in my house. The brickwork looked better before they started to make good the damage.”

More repairs were agreed a month later. An NHBC report showed that coping stones on the balcony were marked and stained and very untidy in appearance. It wasn’t until April 2017 that the NHBC took the coping stones away and removed the glass barrier from the balcony. The stones and the barrier have not been replaced. “It’s an accident waiting to happen,” said Joe Ward, her ex-husband. Rather than a vista of rolling countryside, Ms Leonard now looks out over abandoned scaffolding.

“There are a lot of defects in my home and both the speed and skill of the NHBC contractors leave everything to be desired,” she said. “My health has been affected by this experience, I am on antidepressants and sleeping pills and have had counselling. I feel terribly let down by the whole rotten newbuild and regulatory system. The NHBC allowed a home with breaches of building regulations to be put on the market and sold.”

The public impression that the NHBC, which has 80pc of the warranty market, is an ombudsman of quality rather than an insurance company is compounded by the marketing of developers such as Taylor Wimpey. “The NHBC was established over 60 years ago and is the independent regulator for the new homes industry,” the firm’s website read until this summer, when the word “regulator” was suddenly dropped.

Despite its own branding as “dedicated to housebuilding standards”, the insurance mutual bounces culpability back to the builder. “Ultimately the quality of new homes is the responsibility of builders,” it said. “Our priority is to help builders minimise defects in the homes they build and to enable us to provide the 10-year Buildmark warranty to help when problems emerge.”

In a written statement apologising to Ms Leonard the NHBC said: “There are rare circumstances where complex cases can take longer to resolve than we would wish and unfortunately there have been delays in carrying out repairs. It is also clear that some of the remedial works have not been carried out to the high standards we expect of our contractors.”

Maria Miller, the MP for Basingstoke and vice chair of the all-party parliamentary group for the excellence of the built environment, has questioned both the role of the NHBC and its relationship with the construction industry.

“The warranty system is broken and the NHBC has failed the consumer year after year, leaving some buyers dissatisfied with the biggest purchase of their life. The only way to resolve a dispute now is to get an MP involved. We need to rectify the balance of power between customer and construction industry,” she said.

The Conservative MP called for a new ombudsman to regulate the warranty industry. Her concern followed reports this summer that payments flowed between developers and the NHBC.

The most significant of these “premium refunds” was £2.7m to one developer in 2012, while last year the biggest single payment was £750,000. This calls into question the independence of the warranty system, especially when nearly a fifth of the members of the NHBC governing council are also on the board of builders such as Bovis and Barratt.

The NHBC said premium refunds were a way to reward a developer’s good claims history and were not uncommon in the insurance industry.

Paula Higgins, chief executive of the HomeOwners Alliance, said: “There is a definite requirement for a new homes ombudsman or regulator that would act in the best interest of buyers – not the industry – to ensure that consumers are protected and our homes meet the standard that is expected.”

This month the NHBC offered Ms Leonard a £10,000 cash payment to fix the outstanding defects herself. But she said: “The only offer I will accept is for Bovis or the NHBC to buy back my home. For every mistake we uncover there are more behind it and repair costs could escalate quickly.”

A structural engineer agreed, saying: “If the site manager has allowed some of these errors, what else has been done or not done? There are a lot of hidden aspects to construction that will show over time.”

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/property/uk/new-bovis-home-falling-apart-warranty-worthless/

Old? Sick? Mentally ill? Disabled? Vulnerable? We’re cutting your benefits

“Plans to cap housing benefit for thousands of mentally ill, elderly and other vulnerable people in supported housing are to be re-examined after protests by MPs and charities.

The rethink, expected within weeks, also follows evidence from the National Housing Federation, which found that 85% of schemes to build new supported and sheltered homes for vulnerable people have been shelved by housing associations because of fears that the new funding system will make them unsustainable.

The move comes amid suggestions that ministers may cut the six-week waiting time for universal credit payments after an outcry from Tory MPs.

More than 700,000 people in supported housing usually have the accommodation element of their costs met entirely through housing benefit. But under plans announced by the government in 2015, and due to be introduced from next year, these payments would be capped in the same way as for people renting in the private sector.

As accommodation costs are higher in supported housing, because of the extra services and communal spaces provided, charities and others critics say the proposed system would leave residents facing big potential shortfalls. This is despite ministers saying that they could get help from special funds run by local authorities.

The plans have caused an outcry, with charities warning the system would be bureaucratic, unworkable and would leave people facing uncertainty and worry about whether they could afford to remain.

Supported housing provides a secure, safe place for the most vulnerable, the majority of whom are older people or those with long-term disabilities, as well as the mentally ill, people with disabilities, those at risk of homelessness and women fleeing domestic violence. An inquiry, by the communities and local government and work and pension committees in parliament, called for an urgent rethink, saying: “In particular, we have been concerned by reports of providers choosing to postpone or cancel investment decisions, as well as increased levels of anxiety among vulnerable tenants who fear they may no longer have the guarantee of a home for life.”

The communities secretary, Sajid Javid, told a recent session of the communities and local government committee the report had been “very helpful” and he expected to announce a decision soon that would show ministers had listened. Pressure for a climbdown is mounting before an opposition day debate on supported housing that will take place on Wednesday.

On Monday the charity Rethink Mental Illness will publish a report showing people with the highest needs, and the highest costs, are likely to suffer the biggest shortfalls in rent.

The charity says this will be most evident in parts of the country where rents are cheapest and therefore housing benefit payments will be lowest. Research has shown the cap will mean housing benefit will only cover about two-thirds of accommodation costs in some parts of the country. …”

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2017/oct/21/government-uturn-expected-on-housing-benefit-cap-after-protests

Infrastructure: the forgotten need and M5 worst road for traffic jams in 2016

More and more houses, more and more and more cars … tipping point now reached.

“The UK has been confirmed as having more traffic jams than anywhere else in Europe. The Independent Transport Commission has found that the cost of these jams to the UK economy is a staggering £9 billion per year. That’s more than the cost to most European countries combined.

… Looking at vehicles per capita, the UK is 34th in the world. It comes behind France, Sweden, Italy, Luxembourg and Greece, so that doesn’t seem to be the problem. The UK has six million fewer cars than France on its roads. …

Additionally, research by traffic analytics company Inrix shows that, in 2016, drivers encountered 1.35 million traffic jams in the UK. That works out on average to 3,700 traffic jams every day. The estimated annual cost of £9 billion wasted is based on time, fuel spent while idling or starting vehicles in jams and the resultant cost of all that unnecessary pollution.

M5 wins title of “worst traffic jam” in 2016

On 4 August 2016 at the M5 near Somerset, two lorries collided. This created the worst traffic jam of last year, with a 36-mile tailback. It took workers 15 hours to clear the debris. This jam alone was estimated to have cost £2.4 million.

The northbound M6 has three serious traffic jams in the top five worst traffic jams of 2016, while a serious car accident on the A406 was the fourth worst jam of the year.

The causes of the worst queues ranged from fuel spills and emergency repairs to broken down lorries. November was the worst month in terms of the total number of traffic jams. There were 169,000 on the UK’s major roads during that month. April had the second highest number of jams recorded.

UK roads not fit for purpose

Investment has been made to update Britain’s main trunk roads. We are totally reliant on these to get up and down the country. Unfortunately, the sheer volume of traffic on them means that if anything causes the traffic flow to stop at all, there are no alternative road systems nearby for drivers to move across to. Many of the new “smart motorways” being built across the UK are exacerbating the problem because they are built with no hard shoulder in place, just emergency refuge bays provided at maximum intervals of 2,500 metres. …”

[The rest of the article consists of (a) the government saying it is working on the problem and (b) a plea for more roads which hardly seem worth commenting on]

https://www.petrolprices.com/news/worst-traffic-jams-europe/

Hammond’s threat to “hire builders” for green belt – conflict of interest?

[see post earlier today]

The question mark about conflict of interest is because, with this government, NOTHING EVER seems to conflict.

Is it a conflict of interest to threaten to put “government employed” builders on to the green belt if you are an MP and Chancellor of the Exchequer AND you own MASSES of land adjacent to said green belt?

If you are a Conservative MP and Chancellor, with the opportunity to get shedloads of money from it, apparently not. At least in their universe:

“Chancellor Philip Hammond could make millions of pounds if green belt land he owns gets planning permission for new homes in the future.

The Tory minister purchased three acres of greenbelt land neighbouring his family home in Surrey from housebuilder Martin Grant for £100,000.

He then came to an “option” agreement with the housebuilder in the 2008 sale that allows the housebuilder to buy the Chancellor’s land back in the future and any uplift in the value of the land would be split equally between the two.

A local property expert has estimated that should Hammond’s land get planning permission then it could be worth £2m an acre, netting him a potential £3million profit.”

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/chancellor-philip-hammond-could-make-10765588

“Dispatches discovered that one such landowner who could benefit from such a windfall is the Chancellor Philip Hammond. In 2008 Hammond bought 3 acres of greenbelt land neighbouring his family home in Surrey from housebuilder Martin Grant for £100,000. Martin Grant Homes is planning to build 1,700 homes on greenbelt land near Mr Hammond’s home which has already been rezoned for housing.”

http://www.channel4.com/info/press/news/secrets-of-britain-s-new-homes-channel-4-dispatches

“Help to buy has mostly helped housebuilders boost profitsl

“The chancellor, Philip Hammond, is lining up another £10bn to extend the “help to buy” programme first launched by George Osborne in 2013, which has already sucked up £10bn of taxpayers’ cash. Yet a report from Morgan Stanley – not usually the type to stick the knife into a flagship government policy – lays bare how this colossal sum has been almost entirely wasted.

Those billions have not helped buyers. The money has gone almost entirely into the pockets of the giant housebuilding firms, which have raised the price of developments by almost exactly the amount made available by the government. All it has meant for first-time buyers is more misery – by pushing up house prices.

Help to buy works by giving aspiring homeowners an interest-free government loan worth up to 20% of a property’s value – if the buyer opts for new-build. The idea was that it would provoke a wave of new building.

But the Morgan Stanley report, headlined “The help to buy premium – and its unintended consequences”, drily unpicks the data, revealing how the beneficiaries have been the major developers. Researchers compared the price of new-build houses in 2013, when the scheme began, with the price of existing or “second-hand” houses.

There has always been a small premium for new-build; people will pay extra for spanking-new kitchens and bathrooms. But since 2013, that premium has rocketed. “The divergence between new-build and second-hand prices is higher than it’s been since records began,” says the report.

It says that the price of new-build has outstripped second-hand by 15% since the start of help to buy. “We are now around 5% points away from the level at which new-build prices have diverged by the full amount of the government’s equity loan (20% of house price across England).”

Of course, Morgan Stanley didn’t produce this report for the likes of me to make a dig at the government. Its interest is in the share prices of the major housebuilders. It worries that the big builders won’t be able to get away with charging a premium of more than 20% for new-builds, and that the super- profits may be coming to a close.

Make no mistake about just how much help to buy has fuelled developers’ profits. The new-build market is increasingly reliant on help to buy, with the large builders – Barratt, Taylor Wimpey, Persimmon – suggesting that about half of their volumes are help-to-buy purchases. And what a brilliant money-making wheeze it has been. Morgan Stanley says: “Help to buy (and broader house price inflation, among other things) have helped housebuilder earnings triple since its launch.”

The builders will say the scheme has, indeed, provoked some supply, but evidence is thin. Morgan Stanley says: “Though it has helped drive supply, figures provide ammunition for critics who suggest it has pushed up prices, rather than making them more affordable.”

Despite this, Hammond is preparing to bung another £10bn at the developers – perhaps to “give clarity and certainty” about the scheme – which even the rightwing Adam Smith Institute says is “like throwing petrol on to a bonfire”.

But George Osborne didn’t need investment banks or thinktanks to tell him this back in 2013 when he launched this madness. Guardian Money at the time spoke to the people at the sharp end: young people excluded from the property market. Duncan Stott of the PricedOut group was particularly prescient: “Help to buy should really be called ‘help to sell’, as the main winners will be developers and existing homeowners who will find it easier to sell at inflated prices. Pumping more money into a housing market with chronic undersupply has one surefire outcome: house prices will go up.”

But the government chooses to listen to the developers instead. Britain’s housing market is broken, and help to buy is just making it worse.”

https://www.theguardian.com/money/blog/2017/oct/21/help-to-buy-property-new-build-price-rise

Should the East Devon district be split? The People’s Republic of Eastern East Devon?

A recent commentator on this blog wants to see Sidmouth leave EDDC.

This raises an interesting possibility.

There is a case for EDDC being broken up as it is already the largest District Council in Devon, and the fastest growing. Increasingly, our district council concentrates on its western side – the Science Park, Cranbrook – the LEP Growth Area – and aligns itself more and more with “Greater Exeter” with other communities feeling increasingly out on an ignored limb.

It would seem from anecdotal evidence that he vast majority of Sidmouth residents would vote to leave EDDC, especially when EDDC is cutting all its ties with the town and moving physically and increasingly representationally to Honiton/Exeter.

The interesting bit is whether other communities would wish to join with Sidmouth in a ‘breakaway’. Would Newton Poppleford, Otterton, Branscombe and Beer, Ottery, Budleigh, Colyton and Seaton be up for creating a new largely rural and coastal authority? And what to call it? Eastern East Devon? Jurassic Devon?

There would be no problem over viability. Some functions might still be shared. Others, such as street cleaning, could be devolved to town council level where it belongs.

There would be an obvious improvement in democratisation, and representation, and, crucially, a big improvement in the quality of councillors. There is also an interesting opportunity to create from the outset a non-party-political district responsible for its own planning. Far more people would stand for an authority when they had a much greater say in decisions affecting their own community; when they and they alone decided on such things as health care, education and environment without having to kowtow to “Greater Exeter”.

Jurassic Devon would have a population of about 50,000, which many would say would be close to the ideal.

Time to consider the break away?

Would you start a new small business these days?

“More than 56,000 small businesses in England will face steep tax rises next year, research indicates.

Business rate increases will total £152m in April, rates specialist CVS said, putting a heavier burden on firms already reeling from rising inflation.

The prediction follows a drop in retail sales last month as inflation hit its highest level in more than five years. “For many shops, this may be the last straw,” said Helen Dickinson, chief executive of British Retail Consortium. “Across the country, especially in economically deprived and vulnerable communities, the cost of failing to take action will likely be seen in yet more empty shops and gap-toothed High Streets,” she added.

CVS says its research shows that 37,364 small shops will see their business rates bills rise above inflation next April, with 30,198 small shops facing rises in their rates bills of between 10% and 14.99%.

Business rates are a property tax based on rental values. The rates increase annually, in line with September’s Retail Prices Index, a measure of inflation. The ONS this week said the RPI rate of inflation had reached 3.9%.

Meanwhile, the UK’s key inflation rate climbed to 3% in September, driven up by increases in transport and food prices. The pick-up in inflation raises the likelihood of an increase in interest rates – currently at 0.25% – in November, the first rise in a decade.

Tighter belts

“Brexit is driving inflation,” CVS chief executive Mark Rigby said, urging the chancellor to be “bold” in his November Budget and freeze inflationary rate rises in 2018. “Import prices have risen given the fall in the pound with prices rising faster than wages, causing households to tighten their belts on spending, especially on big ticket items,” he added.

The Treasury periodically changes the rateable value of business properties to reflect differences in the property market, a process known as revaluation. Under the latest revaluation, which came into effect on 1 April, “transitional relief means big increases to bills are phased in gradually over the five years of the tax regime,” according to CVS.

In March, the government announced £435m in support to firms facing the steepest increases in bills following the revaluation. The package, which came after £3.6bn in transitional relief, included capping the increase in bills of 16,000 small businesses to £50 a month this year.

‘Heads in the sand’

“We are delivering the biggest ever cut in business rates to businesses across the country,” a Treasury spokesperson said. “The almost £9bn package will see a third of all businesses pay no rates at all and will mean nearly a million companies will see their bills cut,” they added.

CVS says fewer than half of all councils in the country have revised business rate bills after the introduction of the relief package in the spring Budget. “Ministers mustn’t bury their heads in the sand,” BRC’s Ms Dickinson said. “In his Budget next month, the chancellor needs to get a grip on the matter and rule out a rise in business rates to help save shops, protect jobs, and preserve high streets.”

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-41693417

Hammond threatens to “hire builders” to build on green belt to speed housing construction

“MINISTERS could hire builders to erect thousands of homes under Budget plans being pondered by the Chancellor.

The Government would free up public land and get construction firms to use it.

Homes could then hit the market right away rather than wait for firms to release them when prices rise, Sun columnist James Forsyth reveals today.

Philip Hammond is also said to be ready to take on Tory backbenchers by loosening curbs on green belt development in a bid to solve the housing crisis.

One insider indicated No10 may back the move despite the likely fury of Tories across the South East.

The insider said: “The PM has moved on this issue but is not entirely there yet.”

Theresa May pledged to take “personal ownership” of the drive to speed up housebuilding during No10 talks with the industry earlier this week.

Before the 2015 election, Tories pledged one million new English homes by 2020 and 500,000 more in the following two years.

Ministers accept they face defeat at the next election in 2022 unless they sort out the housing crisis. Experts warn that an entire generation cannot get on the property ladder.

And charity Shelter said resulting rent rises were seeing poorer Brits cut back on food, clothes and kids’ toys.”

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/4733588/philip-hammond-considers-freeing-up-sites-and-hiring-builders-for-thousands-of-new-homes/

Northern Ireland: “Planned cuts to health service could face legal challenge”

In England no unions seem to be doing this. In Devon our Tory councillors would not even refer cuts to the Secretary of State (as they have a legal right to do) in case it upset him but no union has responded.

Where is the anger that seems to be more prevalent in Northern Ireland, whose coffers have recently been boosted by the promise of £1 billion from the English Tory party (paid for by us) to keep them in power, some of which will no doubt go to health services?

“Plans to cut millions of pounds from health services in Northern Ireland could face a legal challenge from trade unionists.

Extra money has been found from within the wider public sector to limit cuts to front line services which once threatened to reduce the number of hospital beds and delay operations. But a union representing thousands of healthcare workers urged trusts responsible for implementing the savings to challenge the Department of Health. Unison said: “If you do not do so, we will challenge you using all legal means at our disposal, a process that has already begun through the complaint Unison has submitted to the trust for the major breaches of your equality duties.”

Senior representatives of the union attended public meetings of trust boards across Northern Ireland on Friday. They told board members: “You are meant to act as guardians of the health service as members of this Trust Board.
“Today, we are repeating our call to you to stand with us to challenge the lack of funding for proper health and social services in Northern Ireland.
“You have seen over the past six weeks that we are prepared to fight for it, and the public is prepared to fight for it. “It is time that this Board, both executive and non-executive alike, demonstrated that you too are prepared to fight for the public you are appointed to serve.”

Trust boards are tasked with drawing up detailed plans for achieving any savings proposed by the Department. The Department has said extra funding announced recently will reduce the projected £70 million savings needed by the end of the financial year. Of the proposed £31 million adjustment affecting front line services only £3 million will now be required, the Department has said in a letter to health trusts. The rest will be found from less visible or back office services, termed “low impact” by the department, which do not affect the public as directly.

But unions have expressed deep unease about the plan. A statement from the Department said it noted Unison’s comments but the position remained as set out in the letter to trusts.

The South Eastern Health Trust agreed to go ahead with low or no impact proposals in its savings plan. It said the additional money had allowed the board to “step away” from major or controversial proposals in the plan.
“However, the meeting heard that while this additional funding will offset some of the current budgetary pressures, the underlying financial challenge has not gone away. “The savings agreed today are mostly non-recurrent so the Trust will be faced with finding significant savings in the years to come, whilst demand for services increases as people live longer and chronic conditions increase.”

Chief executive Hugh McCaughey said it was absolutely essential that we move forward with the transformation of our health and social care system.
“We must use the months ahead to discuss publicly how we better use the significant levels of funding already available for health and social care, and develop a model of healthcare which is sustainable and affordable.”

Controversial proposals which will not now go ahead included a £2 million reduction in locum doctor and agency staff spending. Those given the green light include:

Slowing the transfer of services to the new ward block in the Ulster Hospital;

Replacing agency and locum with in-house staff;

Savings in administrative and management areas like staff travel

Introduction of car parking charges at Ards Hospital”

http://www.irishnews.com/news/healthcarenews/2017/10/13/news/planned-cuts-to-health-service-could-face-legal-challenge-1162005/

Cranbrook attempts to rid itself of the developers’ “estate rent charge”

Cranbrook’s estate rent charge – currently around £150 per year per household – may be scrapped if plans by Cranbrook Town Council (CTC) go ahead.

If approved, the annual charge – for the management of Cranbrook’s public spaces, including play areas and the Country Park – would be replaced next April by an increase in CTC’s element of the East Devon District Council (EDDC) council tax bill.

But the increase won’t be a flat rate.

It would be a banded charge, depending on the rateable value of a property.

However, CTC believes its proposal will save people money. The council says that ‘considerable’ savings would be achieved by ‘cutting out’ expensive collection, legal and administration costs, removing management layers and being able to negotiate maintenance contracts.

In addition, all households in Cranbrook would contribute towards the maintenance of facilities within the town’s boundaries, whereas at present the estate rent charge is limited to those who purchase homes from the main consortium of developers.

“This is a significant step for the town,” said Cllr Kevin Blakey, CTC’s chairman. “The estate rent charge has been a continual source of concern for residents with the threat that the management company may seek to collect substantial back-payments and also raise charges without any apparent checks and balances.

“Some residents may feel this change is unfair, but based on the savings which the town council can make and the fact that we feel that it is fairer for all households to contribute to the maintenance of public amenities and facilities, we believe this is the right thing to do.

“It also provides an opportunity for those less able to pay to apply the current arrangements for council tax relief.

The developers and CTC are keen to reach an agreement.

Cllr Kevin Blakey said: “Both parties are working on the basis that the agreement would provide a clean break between the current estate rent charge position and the future. The town council wants to take control of the estate rent charge, once and for all.”

CTC has issued a Q&A sheet at: http://www.cranbrooktowncouncil.gov.uk/wp-content/uploads/2017/09/170908-ERC-Press-Release-QA.pdf

http://www.cranbrookherald.com/news/ctc-s-estate-rent-charge-shake-up-1-5233944