Swire adores Rudd? Seems so …

Rudd’s statement on the Windrush scandal:

“… While Rudd had been on her feet, her parliamentary private secretary, Rachel Maclean, had been busy handing out a list of tame questions she would like Tory MPs to ask her. It hadn’t taken her long. Apart from four other Home Office ministers who had been instructed to turn up and were sitting miserable and stoney-faced beside her, there were fewer than 20 Conservative backbenchers in the Commons for this latest humiliation.

And even they were fairly muted in their support, with only Hugo Swire declaring his undying love. Shares in Rudd as the next prime minister have nosedived in the past week. Just about the only thing keeping her in post is the sense that if she goes, then May might fall with her. …”

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/apr/23/amber-rudd-windrush-caribbean-immigration-home-secretaries

“Why I started a petition against NHS privatisation”

by Jamie Snape:

Today in Westminster MPs will debate a petition calling on the government to stop the privatisation of NHS services. Now, if I’m entirely honest, the date of a petition debate isn’t something that would normally appear in my calendar, however this particular debate I’m responsible for myself.

Until starting this petition I’d never campaigned on behalf the NHS, nor had I any connection to the plethora of local or national NHS campaign groups. So what drove me to begin the petition in the first place?

Well, it was after I’d encountered for myself the already privatised NHS services in my local area. Following this I was left with a clear understanding of what it means in reality, when our healthcare is provided by a profit-orientated business rather than an organisation focused on patient outcome like the NHS, and indeed what it is we are losing by privatising it.

As a parent, seeing my young children’s well-being affected directly and indirectly by NHS privatisation on more than one occasion, it motivated me to a degree that I might not otherwise have been.

So I began reading more about NHS privatisation, and why people like the late Stephen Hawking were so concerned. I concluded I could perhaps make a little difference myself by using a petition as a vehicle to help voice the concerns that many people have and that I share about creeping NHS privatisation.

This belief panned out, indeed a single post I wrote on Facebook about the petition was shared over 73,000 times, meaning it was very likely to have been read by more than a million people.

There are over 6,500 petitions on the parliament website right now, and it’s fair to say the UK public are petitioned out. Despite that, not too far short of a quarter of a million people took the time to sign this petition, which ultimately resulted in the scheduling of today’s debate in parliament.

NHS privatisation can mean so many things as there are so many aspects to it, so in terms of the debate itself, my hope is simply that I will observe a well-informed one. I hope that all the MPs involved demonstrate a real knowledge of the issues relating to it, such as the scale of current NHS privatisation.

What simply must be covered are the concerns surrounding the introduction of Accountable Care Organisations later this year, and their potential for leaving a back door wide open for a massive new wave of NHS privatisation.

If the debate centres around the small part of NHS privatisation, where a few people get bumped up the waiting list by having a routine operation performed by a private company, then I will of course be disappointed.

The concept of the NHS is erroneously referenced by many now in historic terms, especially when they are arguing in favour of NHS privatisation.

Personally, I see the NHS as something very much of the future, indeed I’m entirely certain that in years to come, a nation will only be considered civilised if it provides comprehensive free healthcare to all of its citizens.”

Source: Times (pay wall)

“Building free-for-all [in new planning regulations] puts rural West at risk”

Western Morning News article, Saturday 21 April:

“Pristine protected areas of the South West could be at risk from housing developments plans, a conservation charity has warned. Even officially designated Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty would face developments due to “vague” proposed new planning guidance for local authorities the Campaign to Protect Rural England (CPRE) says.

The Government argues that the new rules, part of a move to open up land to solve the housing shortage, would still protect the environment.
However Justin Hague of the South Hams CPRE, said “this would be game over” for conservationists.

Some of the south West’s pristine and most beautiful landscapes could have houses built on them under Government plans conservationists have warned.

The Campaign to Protect Rural England says even officially designated Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty would face major development due to the “vague” new planning guidance for local authorities.

The proposals- which are being consulted on until May 10 – would end the fight to preserve the precious areas, said the chairman of the group in one of the most under-pressure parts of the regain.

“Not to sound too dramatic, but for countryside campaigners it would be game over” said Justin Hague, chairman of the South Hams branch of the Campaign to Protect Rural England. (CPRE)

Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB) would be handed “on a plate to the developers”

He is urging people to write to their MPs to build opposition to the proposed changes.

The controversy is over sections of the National Policy Planning Framework (NPPF) which sets out the Government`s Policies on proposed developments and how they are expected to be applied.

Changes are being but forward partly to help solve the housing crisis.
The aim is to “bring forward more land in the right places” for development, the Government says “Protecting and enhancing the natural environment “ is one of the three key objectives , the document states.

However conservationists are concerned by what they say is watering down of the NPPF policies protecting special areas of the countryside and coast which were put in place in 2012.

Their attention focuses on one section of the proposals, Conserving and Enhancing the Natural Environment.

In the existing document, reference is made to protected areas such as National Parks and AONBs as having the “highest status of protection in relation to landscape and scenic beauty.

The wording disappears under the new proposals.

Mr Hague said absolute tests that helped reinforce protection of the special areas would also go if new guidelines were agreed.

“The proposals say major developments will only be allowed in exceptional circumstances. But what is “major”? Is that 100 homes? In the South Hams in the AONB 10homes could have a huge impact.

“It massively opens the door for development in AONBs” he said.

“My concern is these proposed changes are buried in a huge document that few people have the time or interest to read.

Mr Hague said he had an “unprecedented” response since he expressed his concerns in newsletter to fellow CPRE members in the South Hams.

“Usually I get three or four responses” he said “This time I had 70!”
Mr Hague said the South Hams faced particular pressure for development because of the desire for second homes.

Developers were struggling to sell homes in less-desirable areas, even with the assistance of the Governments Help to Buy Scheme “

They would be able to sell those houses like hot cakes to second home owners if they were able to build in beautiful areas and on the coast” he said.”

Would you take business advice for your small business from our Local Enterprise Council/Serco?

The Heart of the South West Local Enterprise Partnership is obsessed with growth, mostly because it has promised an over abundance of it.

So, it is interesting to receive an email from their “Growth Hub” to see what it promises:

Home

Well that’s nice – they offer advice. Always helpful, though Owl guesses it depends where the advice comes from.

Is it from those “business leaders” on the Board of the LEP? Or one of the board member councillors (though many of those seem to have had either little business experience, none at all, or so long ago that computers hadn’t bedn invented).

No, scroll down to the bottom of the email and you get:

Our mailing address is:

Serco Employment, Skills and Enterprise
Envoy House
61 Longbridge Road
Plymouth, Devon PL6 8LU
United Kingdom

A company which offers outsourcing services all over the world, particularly in the UK.

So what does Wikipedia have to say about Serco?

“The 2017 Paradise Papers revealed that Appleby carried out a risk assessment of Serco and noted it had a “history of problems, failures, fatal errors and overcharging” and had faced allegations of fraud and cover-ups.”

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serco

and an article in The Guardian saying that, in Australia, outsourcing with Serco is “an accident waiting to happen”:

https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2018/apr/23/outsourcing-ndis-contact-centres-to-serco-an-accident-waiting-to-happen

and a Telegraph Business article headed:

“Serco recovery still on ‘long and winding’ road, says boss Soames”

The boss of troubled outsourcer Serco has warned that its road to recovery will be “long and winding” as its strategy to concentrate on providing services to governments means it is exposed to political changes.

Rupert Soames said the business’s five-year plan remained on track, after its shares were hit when the company today announced that last year its revenues fell by 13pc to just over £3bn … .

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2017/02/22/serco-recovery-still-long-winding-road-says-boss-soames/

“Number of zero hours contracts rises by 100,000 in 2017, says ONS”

“The number of zero hour contracts in the UK labour market rose by around 100,000 last year according to the Office for National Statistics.

The agency reported that in its latest survey of firms there were 1.8 million contracts that did not guarantee a minimum numbers of hours in the year to November 2017. The equivalent number in November 2016 was 1.7 million. …”

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/news/zero-hours-contracts-number-ons-gig-economy-latest-a8317646.html