“Disgraced Carillion chief now director of firm in charge of inspections at Hinkley Point C nuclear power station”

“Carillion – the firm handed millions in contracts by the Tories – has just gone into liquidation leaving thousands of employees and small businesses facing bankruptcy and redundancy.

In July last year, the man responsible for the debacle – incompetent former Group Chief Executive of Carillion Richard Howson – stood down and seemingly disappeared on the same day the company’s disastrous finances were revealed.

But only after paying himself £1.5 million in pay and tens of thousands in bonuses and perks and leaving the firm with a massive £800 million pension deficit and debts of £1.4 billion of course:

So where is Howson now?

Locked up in a monastery somewhere, contemplating his failures and atoning for his sins?

Surprise surprise.

Here he is, hidden away as a new director of engineering and technical services company Wood Group:

https://www.woodplc.com/investors/the-board

Wood Group has just won a lucrative contract to carry out inspections at the UK government’s new Hinkley Point C nuclear power plant:

https://www.woodplc.com/news/press-releases/2017/wood-wins-hinkley-point-c-contract-worth-$16m

https://tompride.wordpress.com/2018/01/15/disgraced-carillion-chief-now-director-of-firm-in-charge-of-inspections-at-hinkley-point-c-nuclear-power-station/

EDA Councillor Martin Shaw on the next threat to our local NHS

PRESS RELEASE:

“Devon’s two Clinical Commissioning Groups (CCGs) are pushing ahead with far-reaching, highly controversial changes to the NHS in the County from 1st April – without alerting the public or even the public watchdog, the Health and Adult Care Scrutiny Committee at Devon County Council.

The changes will turn the Sustainability and Transformation Plan – which itself grew out of the misnamed ‘Success Regime’ which closed our community hospital beds – into a more permanent Devon Accountable Care System. The first phase, in the first part of the financial year 2017-18, will develop integrated delivery systems, with a single ‘strategic commissioner’ for the whole county.

However the real concern is the next phase, which will lead to the establishment of Accountable Care Organisations. These will lead to services being permanently financially constrained, limiting NHS patients’ options for non-acute conditions, and pushing better-off patients even more towards private practice.

Large chunks of our NHS will be contracted out for long periods, probably to private providers. The ‘toolkit’ for this fundamental change talks about ensuring ‘that there are alternative providers available in the event of provider failure’. In the aftermath of Carillion, do we really want most of our NHS contracted out to private firms?

Devon’s public are not being consulted about this change – unlike in Cornwall where the Council has launched a public consultation – and there is no reason to believe that they want a privatised, two-tier health system.

Devon’s CCGs have pushed the change through without publicity, and it is only because I have put it on the agenda that Health Scrutiny will have a chance to discuss in advance of April 1st. I have written a 7-page paper for the Committee outlining what we know about the ACS and posing eight questions which they should ask about it.

Martin Shaw
Independent East Devon Alliance County Councillor for Seaton & Colyton”

“Turning offices into homes threatens affordability – study”

“LGA estimates more than 7,500 affordable homes lost in England due to conversions that do not go through planning system

More than half of all new homes in some areas have been created by allowing developers to convert offices without building any affordable homes, an impact study of the policy has revealed.

Since 2015, 30,575 housing units in England have been converted from offices to flats without having to go through the planning system, in a bid by ministers to boost housing supply. It means there has been a potential loss of more than 7,500 affordable homes, according to the study by the Local Government Association.

Such office to residential conversions under permitted development rules in place since 2013 accounted for 73% of new homes in Stevenage during 2016-17, the LGA said. In Nottingham, Basildon, Newcastle-under-Lyme, Hounslow and Harlow the figure was more than half.

Last year the Guardian revealed plans by the London borough of Barnet to transform its former head office into 254 flats, some of which are to be 40% smaller than a Travelodge bedroom and have been labelled “dog kennels” by critics.

Across England and Wales, 8% of new homes since 2015 were created by the change of use in office buildings. Councils have warned that “office space could dry up as a result, leaving businesses and startups without any premises in which to base themselves”.

Martin Tett, the LGA’s housing spokesman, said: “Permitted development is detrimental to the ability of local communities to shape the area they live in. Planning is not a barrier to housebuilding, and councils are approving nine in 10 planning applications. But it is essential that councils, which are answerable to their residents, have an oversight of local developments to ensure they are good quality and help build prosperous places. The resulting loss of office space can risk hampering local plans to grow economies and attract new businesses and jobs to high streets and town centres.”

The Department for Housing Communities and Local Government defended the policy. “We are determined to build the homes our country needs and permitted development rights play an important role in helping us deliver more properties,” said a spokesman. “We need a mix of dwelling types to meet different housing needs and over 17,500 additional properties were created by converting offices in the year to March 2017.”

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2018/jan/18/turning-offices-into-homes-threatens-affordability-study

“Taxpayers to foot £200bn bill for PFI contracts – audit office”

“Cost of privately financing projects ‘can be 40% higher’ than using public money

Taxpayers will be forced to hand over nearly £200bn to contractors under private finance deals for at least 25 years, according to a report by Whitehall’s spending watchdog.

In the wake of the collapse of public service provider Carillion, the National Audit Office found little evidence that government investment in more than 700 existing public-private projects has delivered financial benefits.

The cost of privately financing public projects can be 40% higher than relying solely upon government money, auditors found.

They also disclosed that the government has a £35m equity stake in one of Carillion’s major projects – public money that is now at risk. …

There are currently 716 operational private finance deals with a capital value of around £60bn, the report said.

Annual charges for these deals amounted to £10.3bn in 2016-17. Even if no new deals are entered into, future charges that continue until the 2040s amount to £199bn, it said – money that could finance the entire NHS for 20 months. …

“After 25 years of PFI, there is still little evidence that it delivers enough benefit to offset the additional costs of borrowing money privately,” she said. “Many local bodies are now shackled to inflexible PFI contracts that are exorbitantly expensive to change.

“I am concerned that [the] treasury has relaunched PFI under new branding, without doing anything about most of its underlying problems. We need more investment in our schools and hospitals but if we get the contracts wrong, taxpayers pay the price,” she said.

Research by auditors found that private investors who charge public bodies for insurance on each project, have not passed on 15 years of lower insurance costs.

“Public bodies are paying more for insurance than the actual cost, providing a gain to [private] investors,” it said. …”

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/jan/18/taxpayers-to-foot-200bn-bill-for-pfi-contracts-audit-office

Police and Crime Commissioner wants our opinion on raising police precept

Sadly, she doesn’t want our opinion on the vast sum of money wasted on her and her employees which appears to be somewhere between more £1 million and up to £3 m depending on where you look (Owl is not an accountant) – with, of course, more staff to help her.

Click to access STA_REP_statement-of-account-YE-31.03.17_170929.pdf

(pages 12, 24 and 26)

“The Police and Crime Commissioner Alison Hernandez invites you to take part in a survey about increasing the precept for police funding in your area. Please click on the attached link to take part.

https://www.surveymonkey.co.uk/r/G2S8QP7

Thank you.
Message Sent By
Natasha Radford (Police, Community Messaging Officer, Devon and Cornwall)”

Swire this week: wants less tax on internal flights and less (or no) VAT for “historic building” repairs!

Is he flying from London City Airport to Exeter these days and does he live in a “historic building” in mid-Devon? Bet a lot of his mates live in historic buildings – aka stately homes or Grade 1 mansions in London!

How about a bit if work on stratospheric local rail fare increases or perhaps a little thought about those of his “just about managing” constituents who are not able to afford basic (full VAT) repairs to their very ordinary homes?

Oral Answers to Questions – Treasury: Air Passenger Duty (16 Jan 2018)
https://www.theyworkforyou.com/debates/?id=2018-01-16a.707.0&s=speaker%3A11265#g707.3

“Hugo Swire: May I congratulate my hon. Friend on his appointment? He has done extremely well. Airlines such as Flybe, which is based at Exeter airport in my constituency, undertake a disproportionate amount of domestic flights. As my hon. Friend will be aware, domestic flights, unlike international ones, are currently hit twice by APD—at both take-off and landing. Treasury officials, of course,…”

Oral Answers to Questions – Treasury: Topical Questions (16 Jan 2018)
https://www.theyworkforyou.com/debates/?id=2018-01-16a.719.6&s=speaker%3A11265#g720.6

“Hugo Swire: The cost of the backlog of repairs to our historic buildings is now estimated to stand at an alarming £1.3 billion, in large part because of the changes to VAT levied on repairs. Will my right hon.
Friend show that, as a Conservative, he genuinely believes in conservation and that something will be left standing for future generations to enjoy?”

More questions about two more failing privatised public services

EDUCATION:

“Parents are being “left in the dark” over who really runs schools in England, according to parliament’s education committee. It has called for the government to overhaul the oversight of academy chains after a string of high-profile failures.

Robert Halfon, the Conservative MP who chairs the committee, signalled to the the new education secretary, Damian Hinds, that the system of regulation had created overlaps and confusion, allowing some multi-academy trusts (Mats) to escape oversight.

“We are particularly concerned by the extent to which failing trusts are stripping assets from their schools. It is not clear to us that all schools are benefiting from joining Mats, or that trusts are providing value for money,” Halfon said in a letter to Lord Agnew, the academies minister.”

https://www.theguardian.com/education/2018/jan/17/mps-call-for-overhaul-in-oversight-of-england-academy-school-chains

PROBATION SERVICE:

“Private probation companies responsible for supervising more than 200,000 offenders in England and Wales face total losses of more than £100m, even after a £342m “bailout” by the Ministry of Justice, MPs have been told.

Ministry of Justice officials acknowledged on Wednesday that 14 of the 21 community rehabilitation companies were expected to make losses ranging from £2.3m to £43m by 2021-22, partly due to a sharp fall in the number of offenders being sentenced to community punishments.

Details of the state of the part-privatisation of the probation service – introduced by Chris Grayling when he was justice secretary in 2015 – were revealed during a Commons public accounts committee session. MoJ officials declined to comment on whether outsourcing was “an appropriate model” for probation services when pressed by Labour MPs, saying that it was a political question.”

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2018/jan/17/private-probation-companies-face-huge-losses-despite-342m-bailout

Would you like to take Exmouth Ocean “to the next level” for £50,000 per year

Has anyone seen this advertised locally? Bold type sentence is Owl’s highlighting – not the advertiser!

“Job Title General Manager
Sector
Public Sector & Leisure Trusts
Specialism Senior/General Management
Salary £50,000
Location South West

Details

Location – Exmouth, Devon Basic salary £50,000 (OTE £60,000) plus benefits Our client operates a multi-faceted hospitality venue in a prime location on the Exmouth seafront, with a turnover of over £2m. Facilities include 3 restaurants, a superb 200-seater function room with stunning views of the coast and Exe Estuary, a 12-lane ten-pin bowling alley, a large soft play zone and a SEGA amusement arcade.

The venue opened in 2015 but has yet to fulfil its potential. A dynamic, business-focused General Manager is now required to take the facility to the next level.

Reporting directly to the group CEO and Board, you will have significant autonomy and responsibility. The post will also include the oversight of a 500-seater, traditional entertainment facility with an 80-seater restaurant. Both venues are adjacent on the seafront and form the gateway to a proposed leisure redevelopment area, with works commencing in 2018.

You will provide strategic direction for all areas to achieve or exceed growth, key performance and ‘bottom line’ financial targets. You will have effective leadership skills and motivational qualities, and be ambitious, determined, goal-orientated and a team player. You will have significant experience having managed a large multi-functional hospitality or entertainment facility, or a group of facilities.

Your hours of work will be flexible, including some weekends and evenings.

http://www.strictlypeople.co.uk/opportunities_details.asp?page=&id=381

“The habitable homes bill could transform lives. MPs must back it”

“This coming Friday, 19 January, a bill is to be debated in parliament that could hugely improve the lives of many people in England.

“The Homes (Fitness for Human Habitation) Bill would give private and social tenants the ability to take landlords to court if their home is unsafe. Over a million homes are thought to pose a serious threat to the health or safety of the people living there. This classification, also known as a “category 1 hazard”, covers 795,000 private tenancies – one in six of the privately rented homes in the country.

The government announced support for the bill on 14 January – a relief for those of us who have campaigned for years on this. But the battle is not over yet. Even with government support, if fewer than 100 supporters show up on the day, a single MP could “talk the bill to death” – delivering a speech so long that there would be no time to vote on it.

The bill is necessary. Currently, if a landlord doesn’t respond to a request for repairs, it is up to the council to enforce the law. That entails a visit from environmental health officers to check for hazards under the Housing Health and Safety Rating System (HHSRS), such as mould, excess cold and fire risks. If any are found, they can compel the landlord to address them by issuing a formal enforcement notice – if flouted, prosecution awaits. …

… Incredibly, Friday’s bill proposes changes to a law that has existed since 1885. But there is one huge drawback: it is based on rent levels that haven’t been raised since 1957. So you have an option to take action only if you pay annual rent of less than £80 in London or £52 elsewhere. Average weekly rents in London are now £362 a week.

Buck’s bill would abolish the rent cap, enabling tenants to bring civil proceedings in the county court when a property is unfit for habitation under the Housing Act 2004. The landlord may even be made to pay compensation for the period for which the property was unfit.”

https://www.theguardian.com/housing-network/2018/jan/17/government-support-fit-homes-habitation-wont-pass-bill

John Prescott calls grandiose transport plans “fraud”

Owl says: perhaps John Prescott should read our Local Enterprise Partnership’s grandiose plans for our area and see if he thinks this description applies to some or all of them!

BIG plans do not equal big actions when there is no big money coming to anything other than Brexit, vanity projects and now shoring up privatised companies with government contracts.

LEP – Local Excessive Plans!

“A wide-ranging plan to upgrade transport across northern England was branded a “bloody fraud” by Lord Prescott yesterday amid claims that it is not backed by government funding.

The former deputy prime minister stormed out of a launch event in Hull in protest as Transport for the North (TfN), a “sub-national transport body” set up by the Tories in 2015 to co-ordinate transport across northern England, unveiled a £70 billion blueprint to transform road and rail links over the next 30 years. TfN has the power to produce a transport strategy, which the government must consider when making decisions, but it has no budget.

The report proposes cutting journey times between Manchester and Leeds from 49 to 30 minutes by building a new transpennine rail line. It also suggests another line between Liverpool and the HS2 link into Manchester, which is due to be built by 2033, and upgrades to existing tracks connecting Sheffield, York, Hull and Newcastle.

Lord Prescott told the BBC: “It can talk to the Treasury along with the strategic bodies but it can’t make a decision. It doesn’t get any money.”

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/news/john-prescott-calls-transport-strategy-a-bloody-fraud-7rmqg2g0d

“PEDIGREE CHUM”

Owl says: due diligence (lack of) and “chumocracy” – we know a LOT about that in East Devon!

“More than a week after Toby Young quit from the Office for Student Regulator, it has emerged that ministers turned down three other ‘appointable’ candidates in order to give the provocateur-journo his post. Labour MP Kevin Brennan, who got the facts in a Parliamentary answer, accuses ministers of ‘jiggery-pokery’.

Tory MP Robert Halfon said the appointment of Young “smacks of the elite” and was the “chumocracy at work”. There are concerns over the due diligence failures in the case and how more ‘suitable’ candidates were overlooked. It’s unclear when Young’s replacement will be chosen.”

Source: Huffington Post, “The Waugh Zone” online

Unemployed men with big families should have vasectomies says Tory MP tasked with increasing yourh vote

“A new Tory MP has apologised after he suggested unemployed people should have vasectomies to cut costs to the taxpayer.

Ben Bradley – who is tasked with building the Conservatives’ youth vote – made the comments in a blog post in 2012, unearthed by BuzzFeed News.

The Mansfield MP, who was made a party vice-chair in last week’s cabinet reshuffle, wrote that the UK was “drowning in a vast sea of unemployed wasters” because people on benefits were having too many children, and said he supported Iain Duncan Smith’s proposal at the time to introduce a benefit cap.

He went on: “It’s horrendous that there are families out there that can make vastly more than the average wage, (or in some cases more than a bloody good wage) just because they have 10 kids. Sorry but how many children you have is a choice; if you can’t afford them, stop having them! Vasectomies are free.

“There are hundreds of families in the UK who earn over £60,000 in benefits without lifting a finger because they have so many kids (and for the rest of us that’s a wage of over £90,000 before tax!).” …

https://t.co/F4e9uUyJzE

EDDC councillor desperately tries to justify expansion of Greendale and Hill Barton – going against Village Built Up Area requirements

Owl says: what a lot of help Greendale and Hill Barton are getting from (some) EDDC councillors! Hurriedly arranged meetings, a desperate race to find loopholes to allow expansion and now this. Is it a personal comment? Well, an awful lot of “we” in there!!! And quoting 2012 consultant’s views in 2018 – astonishing! AND playing down their own industrial sites (too big for small businesses) – REALLY!

“Mike Allen comment to Inspector on Hill Barton and Greendale issues

(The Lead Councillor for Business and Employment in East Devon District Council (EDDC) and past Chair of the Local Plan Forum which developed the current EDDC Local Plan)

EDDC welcomes proposals for business investment and the creation of units for small and medium sized enterprises across the East Devon area subject to NPPF and Local Plan criteria.

We appreciate that cumulative development along the A3052 road corridor has the potential to negatively impact upon existing communities and infrastructure and the operations of existing businesses. The lack of objection from Highways England on a recent nearby planning application is significant Hill Barton (HB) and Greendale Business Park (GBP) are situated near recently approved (on appeal) Yeo Business Park. This determination is of direct material significance in considering further proposed development.

I will examine four main areas of consideration for Economic development in respect of this SPD for Business Parks:

1) It could be reasonably assumed that the Planning Inspector’s view that employment space proposals of a ‘relatively small-scale development that would provide jobs for local people’ would be applicable to the current plans for Business Parks in the area. It is similarly likely that this location would also be deemed a suitable location for small scale business units at appeal.

2) Greendale and Hill Barton Business Parks are larger scale and vitally important to the economic expansion of East Devon outside of the Science Park and Skypark areas.

3) The lack of residential neighbours means no loss of amenity.

4) There is clear demand for the facilities at Hill Barton and Greendale, without which business expansion would not be accommodated elsewhere. The medium quality, flexibility and appeal of the industrial storage space and units for larger growing businesses in the district is essential.

To be clear, we have no economic basis on which to challenge further development within the perimeters set in the Villages DPD.

5) EDDC’s Economic Development team have reviewed the Draft Villages Plan as well as the Sustainability Appraisal. Having also reviewed Strategy 27 and Policy E7 of the adopted Local Plan, in addition to material evidence in respect of employment land delivery below, I recommend that the Greendale (GD) and Hill Barton (HB) employment sites be removed from this Villages Development Plan.
Approval of this draft Villages DPD with GD and HB included will exacerbate the undersupply of employment premises we are already experiencing through non-delivery of our employment allocations in the adopted Local Plan.

The Council’s strategic drive is to prioritise the development of employment land in the west of the district. Any applicants are advised to examine the potential suitability of our Enterprise Zone sites (Inc. the Exeter Airport Business Park Expansion site; Cranbrook Town Centre; Skypark & Science Park), all of which benefit from infrastructure investment in excess of £25 million and include enhanced transport corridor infrastructure, rail stations and employment site infrastructure as well as being immediately adjacent to Exeter Airport and A30 and M5 junctions.

However, we are aware of some businesses feeding back a view that sites, such those examined above are aimed predominantly at the medium to large scale employers with scientific and professional or transport accommodation requirements in excess of 5,000 sq. ft. This can fail to meet the needs of many new and growing local medium sized manufacturing / B2 class businesses many of which would not be welcome in proximity to residential areas or on Science Parks.

In 2012 East Devon District Council Commissioned Professor Nigel Jump of Strategic Economics Ltd to carry out an independent assessment of the economic impact of the two strategic employment sites in East Devon. His conclusions were clear in that investment in these locations has unlocked valuable employment and economic growth in the district.

Moreover, these sites have the potential to make further economic net benefits (job creation, added GVA and inward investment) throughout challenging economic periods
to come. The report concludes that when social and environmental factors are considered, there remains a net positive impact of extended capacity at these sites which are yet to run their full course.

In light of this EDDC commissioned evidence, inclusion of Greendale and Hill Barton within the Villages DPD is unwarranted, contrary to the specialist advice we have commissioned and would cause demonstrable harm to the district.

These findings are echoed in 3 subsequent studies of demand for industrial and commercial space in East Devon which formed the overall economic element of the EDDC Local Plan which placed great weight on the sustainable balance of social, economic and environmental issues as the “Golden thread” which ran through the Local Plan and the NPPF

The proposals for the development of medium sized businesses of B2/B8 category fit well with a large number of B use premises enquires received by Economic Development in the last 2 years,

The filling out and redevelopment of Greendale and Hill Barton will complement the demand for larger B use provision and remain a welcome addition to the diverse mix of commercial accommodation required to facilitate indigenous business growth as well as the district’s ability to meet the needs of potential inward investors seeking to become established or grow their operations in East Devon.

Having recently reviewed B use premises demand across the district, the following updates can be cited: –

In Exmouth, B use accommodation at Liverton Business Park is in high demand. We have seen speculative build in this location with all but their final unit now let. They are unable to accommodate further demand

Across Clinton Devon Estate’s whole East Devon portfolio of commercial property; they have no other vacant B use premises available, representing a significant shortage of supply.

The Exeter and Heart of Devon Commercial Premises Register has received 43 separate enquiries for B1 Office accommodation in the District in the last 3 months

Greendale have received more than 80 B use premises enquiries in the last 12 months totalling more than 850,000 sq. ft.

Also, west of the Enterprise Zone, land is being brought forward for speculative development of small, flexible B use units.

Recently, as part of their Business Plan for the use of the Owen Building, Rolle Exmouth Ltd provided details of 59 separate businesses, social enterprises, individuals, groups/classes, education & training providers who have declared an interest in finding small SME commercial premises in Exmouth
Lastly, to curtail the provision of good jobs at Hill Barton and Greendale would be to consciously, selectively and actively undermine our stated (and adopted) Local Plan ambition of delivering one job per new dwelling. This target has not yet been realised, resulting in an unsustainable imbalance between the provision of new homes and new, quality jobs in East Devon.

We cannot continue to overlook this imbalance as our young teens and twenties leave to pursue careers elsewhere and the economically inactive grow as a proportion of our aging population.

We continue to receive inward investment enquires of differing scales and different employment use classes, including from the Dept. for International Trade (DIT, formerly UKTI).

These request a diverse mix of investment formats and much needed employment opportunities from outside the district. However, it is often difficult to identify suitable available employment premises.

Maintaining a diverse mix of development land and premises is key to securing these investments and associated local economic benefit.

The increased density of employment possible on Greendale and Hill Barton sites for B1/B2/B8 use is a clear benefit to our established local supply chains and producers/providers served by these developments.

Finally – I am concerned about an issue of prejudice: I believe that it would be prejudicial to the economic development of East Devon to consider the imposition of Strategy 7 (Greenfield) on Hill Barton on Greendale since the sites are clearly well used industrial sites which are in the right location for the type of businesses they serve.

The two sites have been afforded a specific exception in Policy E7 – ‘Extensions to
Existing Employment Sites’ of our adopted Local Plan (See Pg. 196 “This policy will not apply at Hill Barton and Greendale business Parks”). While for landscape and other reasons we might wish to limit the further expansion of the sites, I believe it would be prejudicial to single out these two sites rather than the 50 other smaller industrial sites for special treatment.

The criteria already laid down within the Local Plan are fully sufficient to control and promote the appropriate development on these sites.

Recommendation

I recommend that the Greendale (GBP) and Hill Barton (HB) employment sites be removed from this Villages Development Plan. I recommend that any application of strategy 7 within the perimeters already agreed should not occur but that other Planning Policies on Industrial Land development should be applied on the basis of equity and equality with other industrial sites in East Devon.

Approval of this draft Villages DPD with GD and HB included and subject to strategy 7 will exacerbate the undersupply of employment premises we are already experiencing through non-delivery of our employment allocations in the adopted Local Plan.”

EDDC pre-empts its Exmouth seafront planning application with award of contract

The following press release says that EDDC HAS AWARDED a contract for a play area but later says it is “subject to [its own as yet undetermined] planning application!

PRESS RELEASE

“Coming soon to Exmouth’s Queen’s Drive – a new, free, Jurassic-themed, play space for children, teenagers and families

Council awards contract to playground equipment specialists

East Devon District Council is moving ahead with delivering new attractions and entertainment on Exmouth’s sea front, while longer term development plans take shape.

The council, who is the landowner, has awarded a contract for a new and free play space at Queen’s Drive with attractive and fun play equipment for children, teenagers and families. The council is investing £150,000 in the project and the free play space will sit alongside a range of other temporary uses, including food, drink and events to provide a lively and up to date attraction on the sea front.

Tenders were sought from play providers across the country to offer something very new for the town and six exciting and imaginative designs were submitted. The council has chosen award-winning playground equipment specialists, Eibe, who have come up with a great mix of activities for different ages and abilities, based on a Jurassic theme. There will be swings, slides, roundabouts and see-saws along with sand pits to dig for fossils, as well as pterodactyls (flying reptile) nests to climb in and around.

The centrepiece of the playpark, subject to planning consent, is expected to be a 7.5m high ‘Old Wise Tree’, a tower feature with climbing and balancing activities, as well as a 7m tubular slide. This, along with another tall piece of equipment proposed for the site, will need approval from the council’s development management committee. Permission is being sought as part of the council’s current temporary uses planning application for Queen’s Drive which is expected to go before the committee in March.

Work to install the play equipment will start after the permissions have been approved and the free play area is expected to be completed by late Spring.

Cllr Philip Skinner, the council’s portfolio holder for the economy and chairman of the Exmouth Regeneration Programme Board, said: “The free play space signals exciting changes underway for Exmouth seafront and we are looking forward to a positive planning decision on our application that will let the full installation begin.

“We want the Queen’s Drive site to be active and attractive for this holiday season and beyond. When we move toward permanent development and attractions on the site then equipment can be relocated and reused on other East Devon play sites, so that other children can continue to enjoy this brilliant new equipment into the future.”

The council is continuing work on proposals for temporary uses for other parts of the site and is awaiting the outcome of its procurement process to select a food operator for the site. In addition, the council is finalising the appointment of an experienced event organiser to assist with the planning of a programme of activities for part of the site.”

“Electoral Commission clears Remain campaign over allegations from Conservative MP”

The complaint was made by ex-Tory Minister Priti Patel, who was fired from (sorry “resigned from”) Theresa May’s Cabinet for having had numerous unauthorised meetings with Israeli politicians while “on holiday” in the country.

”Claims by Conservative MP and high-profile Leave campaigner Priti Patel that the Remain campaign broke the law during the European referendum have fallen apart under investigation from the Electoral Commission:

Former Cabinet minister and Brexiteer Priti Patel had … alleged that Britain Stronger in Europe failed to report joint spending with Labour, the Lib Dems and the Tories.

But the Electoral Commission said it did not have “reasonable grounds” to believe the official Britain Stronger in Europe (BSiE) group exceeded its spending limits and would not be opening an investigation.

In a letter to Ms Patel, the commission’s head of regulation Louise Edwards said: “Following examination we are satisfied that while liaison took place there is no evidence of joint spending as a result.

“The evidence indicates that the meetings were advisory in nature, focused on communications and did not involve or result in decisions on referendum spending, or the coordination of campaign activities across campaigners, as part of a common plan or other arrangement.” [Daily Mirror]

What has, however, stood up to scrutiny is a long list of rule breaking by anti-EU campaigners:

Nigel Farage fined half his salary
Brexit campaigners fined for sending 500,000 spam SMS
Record £12,000 fine for Brexit campaigner
Brexit campaigner fined £1,500
Two Brexit campaigners fined £1,000 each
11 anti-EU campaign groups struck off”

The full, very strongly worded letter from the Electoral Commission to Ms Patel is here:

https://www.markpack.org.uk/153854/priti-patel-remain-campaign/

Tomorrow last day for comments on EDDC’s “planning application” for Exmouth seafront

The words “planning application” appear in quotes because it barely meets the requirement for an outline planning application, let alone a full one!

More haste … more money?

The planning application reference is 17/2944/FUL and must be quoted at all times.

You may write, email or login to the planning portal

http://eastdevon.gov.uk/planning/view-planning-applications-enforcements-and-planning-appeals/

to place your objections. If you wish to speak to someone in planning the number is 01395 516551.

Please note that your objections must be to EDDC by 17th January so it is too late to write.

Accountable Care Organisations: what the former Medical Director of the NHS thinks you should know

Dr Graham Winyard is a former medical director of the NHS and deputy chief medical officer. This is his view on “Accountable Care Organisations” one of which is planned for Devon:

“Brexit’s dominance of media coverage and parliamentary time is providing the perfect cover for controversial reform of the NHS by stealth.

Jeremy Hunt and NHS England’s latest big idea is Accountable Care Organisations (ACOs). These bodies would be allowed to make most decisions about how to allocate resources and design care for people in certain areas.

At the moment, that’s done by public bodies whose governance is regulated by statute, set up by parliament after wide consultation and sometimes fierce debate. ACOs, by contrast, can be private and for-profit bodies. They are not mentioned in any current legislation and would have no statutory functions. They are not subject to the statutory duties imposed on other parts of the NHS.

Although NHS England plan to get several ACOs up and running this year, no detailed policy proposals have been presented to parliament or the public. Indeed, details are so sparse that the House of Commons library briefing is forced to use definitions provided by the King’s Fund, a health think tank.

Hunt is planning to lay a raft of secondary legislation – which doesn’t require a full parliamentary vote – in February, so that the first ones can be up and running by April 1st.

The ACOs are going to be given long-term commercial contracts of between ten and 15 years. We know these are difficult to get right and expensive to get out of. Think of Virgin and the East Coast Main Line or the private finance initiative, which has left the NHS paying hundreds of millions to offshore finance companies for hospitals that cannot now be afforded. Warnings about risks of PFI were once brushed aside as alarmist, often by the same people who now dismiss criticism of ACOs in similar terms.

I’m working with four colleagues to challenge these proposals through judicial review. Our case is not concerned with whether ACOs are a good or bad idea. That’s for parliament and the public to decide, not the courts. Our case is that such a radical and significant change cannot lawfully be introduced and implemented without public consultation, parliamentary scrutiny and primary legislation. The case was filed on December 11th and clearly struck a chord with the public. They’ve provided £176,000 through crowd funding in over 6,000 donations.

We are also deeply concerned that by using contracts instead of statute to allow ACOs to operate, the government is exposing the NHS to major risks.

We’re concerned that ACOs will be governed only by company and contract law, yet can be given “full responsibility” for NHS and adult social services. Because they span free health care and means-tested social care, ACOs will be able to decide on the boundary of what care is free and what has to be paid for. They can include private companies – including private insurance and property companies – which will make money from charging. Their accountability is unclear, in spite of their name, yet they will be given long-term contracts and be allowed to make “most decisions” about how to allocate NHS resources and design care for the local population. They will have control over the allocation of huge amounts of taxpayers’ money, yet their accountability for spending it and their obligations to the public would be under commercial contracts instead of statutes. The parallel with railway franchises seems inescapable. And by establishing them this way, it’ll be harder to exclude ACOs from free trade deals.

Lots of serious people are genuinely worried and object to their fears being brushed aside. If ACOs are not opening the door to greater privatisation of the NHS, why is their detailed documentation so explicit that they can indeed be private bodies?

We are not zealots opposed to change. We’re simply people who care about the founding principles of the NHS, have taken the trouble to read the small print and have the experience and knowledge to understand its implications.

If ACOs are now seen as being central to the delivery of effective health and social care, they should be set up as proper public bodies with clear democratic accountability. This would require a detailed explanation, proper public debate and the kind of parliamentary scrutiny that primary legislation demands.

https://t.co/wKr3bYTMEQ

Is it the Conservatives we are supposed to trust with business?

“[John Manzoni the civil service chief executive]said [to the Public Accounts Committee] that it was not until November that officials “really started to notice” the problems at Carillion, whose chairman, Philip Green, is an adviser to the prime minister on corporate responsibility.

Between July and November, Carillion issued three major profits warnings and its shares crashed by 91%.”

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2018/jan/15/carillion-fallout-deepens-as-workers-face-pay-being-stopped-in-48-hours

Osborne and Carillion then and now

“George Osborne’s Evening Standard editorial on Carillion today: “Why has the state found itself so dependent on a few very large outsourcing firms? The failure to use a variety of smaller, mid-size companies undermines innovation and leaves services hostage when things go wrong.”

George Osborne, signing off on another Carillion contract as Chancellor in 2014: “It is great to see successful companies like Carillion winning contracts around the world. This deal, the first in a pipeline of many, will help us reverse the age-old trend of not exporting enough, boosting growth and creating jobs.”

He even wore their hat…”

https://order-order.com/2018/01/15/osborne-on-carillion-then-and-now/

Lessons to learn BEFORE Accountable Care Organisations are operating

Professor John Colley of Warwick Business School says Carillion was sunk by two serious mistakes:

“Too many contracts were taken at poor margins and terms, which prevented any subsequent profitability under competitive pressure. Some were allocated during the recession when it was win work at all costs.

“The other key issue is project accounting, which tends to recognise losses late in the project, effectively when the project starts to run out of money. There will no doubt be serious retrospective scrutiny of the accounting.”

and

Guardian columnist Simon Jenkins:

What the Carillion saga demonstrates is the rampant indiscipline in the contracts themselves. The company’s demise is attributable to favouritism, cost escalation, excessive risk, obscene remuneration and reckless indebtedness. Carillion and its bankers clearly thought it too big to fail. Whitehall behaved accordingly. It was like a pre-2008 bank.

There must now be a review of how privatisation is working. Its so-called parastatal companies are not true private entities. They depend on the state, and the state depends on them. Their lobbyists develop an unholy relationship with ministers and officials – witness the uncontrolled revolving door between Whitehall and the boardrooms.

and

Peter Kitson, Partner at law firm Russell-Cooke, says Carillion may have caused its own demise by pitching its services at an uncompetitively low rate – to win business.

”The procurement rules (the Public Contracts Regulations) which govern public sector procurement are central to understanding what has happened here. Almost all Carillion contracts have been competitively tendered under those procurement rules.

The rules require public sector clients to investigate and possibly to exclude any tenderer whose bid is ‘abnormally low’. One contributory factor here may be that Carillion has tendered at very low margins, possibly unsustainably low, in order to win these huge volumes of work.

If such bids have succeeded, that can only mean either than the Regulations themselves are ineffective or that public sector clients lack the confidence or the expertise properly to enforce those rules.

Following this morning’s announcement, I am sure that many of those public sector clients will be seeking advice on the extent to which those same procurement rules allow short term emergency replacement contracts to be let without formal procurement.”

https://www.theguardian.com/business/live/2018/jan/15/carillion-crisis-liquidation-last-ditch-talks-fail-business-live