“Devon County Council has the biggest gender pay gap of all the councils in the South West.
A woman’s average hourly rate is 17% lower than men’s. This means they earn 83p for every £1 that men earn.
In contrast, women working for Plymouth City Council earn 3% more than men on average.
Devon County Council said that it had a high number of female part-time workers and six out of eight of its senior leadership team were women. …”
BBC Spotlight tonight: Cornwall – thanks to its attractive lifestyle and very fast broadband throughout the county from an EU project – is cornering the market in high-tech and software and gaming industries.
Devon – with its special, expensively – developed campuses and industrial areas and its “growth point” – is losing out.
Productivity match: Cornwall 1 – Devon 0
“Councils are selling off land: vast swathes of it. It’s estimated that 10 million hectares of public land have been sold in the past four decades, and sales are accelerating. In Gloucestershire, where I live, the council has sold £100 million of land since April 2011 and recently announced plans to sell up to £53 million more.
Who’s buying it all? There has been little press coverage of this fire sale of land, and councils are cagey about reporting it. To find out more, I wrote code to compare a mid-2017 version of the Land Registry’s Corporate & Commercial Ownership data, which lists what UK corporate bodies own, with the latest Overseas Companies Ownership data, which lists what overseas companies own. If titles move from the first dataset to the second, that indicates they’ve been sold to an overseas company.
I found that since summer 2017, local authorities, government bodies and universities have sold public land worth more than £100 million to companies in Jersey, Guernsey, Isle of Man, British Virgin Islands, Malta and Cayman Islands. This is despite David Cameron promising to end property sales to “anonymous shell companies” in May 2016.
These countries are tax havens and secrecy jurisdictions. Private Eye, Global Witness and Transparency International have exposed for years how offshore companies hide the true identity of the buyers, allowing ‘dirty money’ to be laundered through the UK. Yet still the sales go on.
There’s no suggestion that the sales below are being used for money laundering, or even good old-fashioned corruption – the few I can identify look like UK development groups using offshore vehicles. But the problem is, we just don’t know who the buyers are – that’s the point of offshore. And most likely, nor do the public bodies doing the selling!
The government recently announced plans for a register of beneficial owners of offshore companies that own UK property. But campaigners say this is too little, too late: unless draft legislation goes to Parliament soon, the register won’t be in place till 2021.
In the meantime, and despite Theresa May also promising a ‘crackdown’ on companies’ use of offshore tax havens (£), public bodies are still merrily selling off public land – plenty of it to anonymous companies in these “sunny places for shady people”. …
The councils selling land worth millions to offshore companies
[For specific examples see the remainder of the article]
Owl sees a problem: these groups need GUARANTEED funding for minimum 5-10 years. Chances of that happening? Zero. Hand-to-mouth funding can be worse than none at all – offering false hopes.
“Commissioning local community organisations to deliver services boosts local economies, says a study.
The pilot study found that together 10 local community organisations enabled approximately 1,400 jobs and £120m of gross value to be added to the local economy.
Commissioned by Locality and conducted by NEF Consulting, the study calculated the impact of each organisation’s value chain.
The findings are part of Locality’s Keep it Local campaign, calling for local commissioning of public services, and are revealed in the charity’s Powerful Communities, Strong Economies report.
The report, published at a time when large national organisations delivering government contracts are struggling, sets out the benefits of local commissioning of public services.
It shows that not only do local organisations have the skills and capacity to deliver public services, there are huge benefits to the local economy when they do.
It sets out how local authorities can ensure the billions of pounds they spend each year on services has maximum community and economic benefit.
The Halifax Opportunities Trust (HOT) is one of the organisations included in the study.
NEF Consulting found that by hosting a range of services and enterprises, they contributed approximately 300 full time equivalent (FTE) jobs and £14m of gross value added (GVA) to the local area.
Locality also calculated the economic impact of their contract for the Jubilee Children’s Centre on the local Calderdale Council area.
It found every £1 of income generated by HOT at Jubilee Children’s Centre created £2.43 for the local economy.
HOT chief executive Alison Haskins said: “Halifax Opportunities Trust was established 17 years ago by local people to support regeneration and tackle poverty.
“Since then, we’ve grown to be an important local employer and purchaser.
“We realise that the way we operate as a community business is just as important as the activities and programmes we run to support businesses, employment, learning, families and social connections.”
Ms Haskins said HOT cared passionately about Halifax and about Calderdale.
“We will be here for the long term, not just for the length of a contract and will continue to contribute to local economic resilience and social value.”
Locality chief executive Tony Armstrong said: “Commissioners must heed the warning of the collapse of Carillion, and the profit warning at Capita.
“It’s time to halt the trend of outsourcing at scale to multi-national companies.
“Mega-contracts delivered by large national providers fails to meet people’s needs and wastes money.
“Organisations rooted in their local communities have deep knowledge and understanding of the area, strong existing relationships and the expertise to support people with complex needs.
“But their contribution goes much further – with huge impact on local jobs and the local economy.
“There is one sensible way forward for commissioning pubic services – keep it local.”
Locality is launching a set of free resources and toolkits to equip councillors, local authority commissioners and community organisations with practical advice to enable them to realise the local commissioning of services.
The three toolkits reflect the fact that council leaders, commissioners and community organisations need to work together to realise the benefits of local commissioning.”
More information about the events and toolkits to download can be found here.
David Cameron‘s multimillionaire friend has insisted the money earned from building 28 luxury homes will benefit the public by helping to restore his Grade II-listed manor house in the countryside.
Nicholas Johnston has claimed that despite owning two massive country estates, he doesn’t have the funds to restore his 4,000-acre Great Tew estate in the Cotswold Hills, Oxfordshire.
So the Old Etonian announced he plans to refurbish his manor with profits earned from a proposed £56million ‘world-class car museum’ that includes upmarket holiday lodges, as he says the restoration will be a public service.
The action has angered locals as it is common practice for big-time property tycoons to use a portion of the development funds to bankroll local parks, donate to schools or other initiatives for the community.
Mr Johnston told the [local] paper: ‘It is a very expensive thing to save. There isn’t the revenue from estate activities to allow the restoration of Tew Park.’
He added that if the Oxfordshire council rejects his plans, the hefty cost could fall back on the public, due to the council’s responsibility to protect listed structures, saying: ‘If I don’t have the money to do it … ultimately that falls back on the public purse.’
Mr Johnston is partnering with American billionaire Peter Mullin to build a ‘world-class car museum’ that has 28 holiday homes on site near an WWII airfield.
Mr Mullin is a vintage car enthusiast and owns a Bugatti Atlantic – there are only two in world.
The development on the estate would include a demonstration track and a suite for corporate events, as Mr Johnston claims that only owners who put their luxury cars up for sale will be able to buy a home there.
Kieran Hedigan, project director for the car museum, shot down claims the development was elitist and that Mr Johnston had ulterior motives.
In another fight over the Great Tew estate, involving rights of way access, a judge blasted Mr Johnston and said he would say ‘whatever he thought was most likely to advance his case, without regard to the truth’.
The Great Tew estate has been owned by the Johnston family since the 1960s.
Mr Johnston purchased the entire seaside village of Bantham in Devon for more than £11.5million in 2014 because he felt a sense of ‘freedom and an independence’ there.
He fought off a rival bid from the National Trust to buy the estate – which features a golf course, shop, beach and about 20 homes – and hopes his children will one day take it on as a lifelong project.
“British living rooms are nearly a third smaller than they were in the 1970s, a new study has found.
Homes built in the UK after 2010 have an average sitting room size of 184 sq ft (17.1 sq m) compared to 268 sq ft (24.9 sq m) around 40 years ago.
Houses also have less bedrooms today than they did in the past, with an average of just under three.
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5592755/UK-living-rooms-smaller-1970s.html#ixzz5CAGuMDte
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook
Owl says: Academies: they were supposed to be BETTER than local authority schools because they were free from the financial constraints and poorer management of local authorities they would raise standards (while making pots of money for the private companies running them!!! Right!
Transpose to the NHS and hospitals and you can see where this is leading …
“A multi-academy trust in Devon which was commissioned to support children who are unable to attend mainstream school is being replaced due to serious failings.
Devon’s alternative education provision (AP) has been running as a sponsored academy by SchoolsCompany who this week have apologised to parents for its financial mismanagement and not providing a high quality of education.
The SchoolsCompany currently run three AP academies in Devon – Central Devon Academy in Exeter, North Devon Academy in Barnstaple, and South and West Devon Academy in Dartington.
AP includes pupil referral units and education for children with medical needs or who are in care.
As a result of its failings, it has closed Tavistock Youth Café, a community-based model of education provision for children who are out of school.
The decision was based on concerns over the quality of education being provided, and health and safety.
At the beginning of the year North Devon Academy pupil referral unit was placed into special measures after a damning Ofsted report deemed it to be “inadequate” across the board.
In October 2017, a monitoring Ofsted inspection report following a visit to Central Devon Academy concluded safeguarding is not effective.
The academy was formed in March 2015, replacing the Devon County Council Pupil Referral Unit.
South and West Devon Academy in Dartington was last inspected in July 2014 and was rated good. At that time it was seeking to become a sponsored academy.
SchoolsCompany has already come under scrutiny this year following revelations of financial mismanagement of its other academy in Kent.
In February it apologised to its pupils and parents after admitting “unacceptable failures of financial management”.
The educational consultancy, school management and training company describes itself as being dedicated to improving services for children, but has now had to issue another apology this week.
A spokesperson for SchoolsCompany said: “The academies in Devon have fallen short of the high standards that young people should expect and there have been shortcomings in the trust’s overall financial management.
“We would like to apologise to our students and their parents. Young people deserve the very best education.”
At the beginning of the year the trust’s chief executive Elias Achilleos was suspended and replaced by an interim, Angela Barry.
In Devon, a short-term service level agreement has been made for Plymouth-based ACE Schools Multi Academy Trust to step in and have identified actions to address the current shortcomings.
It has not been confirmed who will take over as new sponsors of Devon’s AP.
A spokesperson for SchoolsCompany continued: “We agree with the respective Regional Schools Commissioners that new academy trusts should be identified as prospective sponsors to take over the trust’s four schools in Devon and Kent.
“These strong trusts will provide the expertise and stability needed to run the academies successfully. No decisions have been taken as to who these new sponsors will be.”
Concerns have raised by the impact the trust’s failings are having on Devon’s most vulnerable pupils.
An education worker, who asked not to be named said: “Huge amounts of Devon County Council funding have gone into the contract, along with central government funding via the Education and Schools Funding Agency.
“In the meantime all sorts of injustices are being meted out to the most vulnerable young people in the county and closure of provision in some localities.
“SchoolsCompany were already a failed company before Devon took them on. Their reputation in Kent, for example, is associated with the failure of a number of schools in an academy group.
“The very sad thing is Devon was one of the first counties to commission the education provision for its most vulnerable children in this sponsored academy way. That’s the greatest tragedy.
““The county took a massive risk but they were also under a lot of pressure from the Department for Education to make their local authority education provision over to sponsored academies.”
A spokesman for Devon County Council said: “The three academies are overseen by the Regional Schools Commissioner on behalf of the Government and are not Devon County Council schools.
“However, these academies serve vulnerable Devon children and we have been having continuing discussions with the RSC and the provider about improving the quality of education and care for these pupils.
“The Plymouth-based ACE academy trust is now working with SchoolsCompany and we are regularly meeting with them to monitor the situation and to ensure the needs of these vulnerable pupils are met.”
https://www.devonlive.com/news/devon-news/academy-trust-failed-devons-most-1425284
The initial response by EDDC to the planning application to extend the industrial site at Blackhill Quarry was negative:
However, subsequently EDDC changed its collective mind, as it so often does, and Dr Robert Murray – EDDC’s new Economic Development Manager (replacement for the somewhat controversial Nigel Harrison) now supports Clinton Devon Estate’s plans to extend industrial use of the site:
17.3022.MOUT Economic Development Response
However, each of Dr Murray’s points can (and should be) challenged as a correspondent details below:
“Further response to 17/3022/MOUT Blackhill Quarry
A response from the Economic Development Manager of East Devon District Council Dr Robert Murray gives support for the Blackhill Engineering proposed development within the AONB of Woodbury Common. (Planning Application 17/3022/MOUT)
However, the report includes many statements which are incorrect, and misleading.
Within the introduction summery Dr Murray states:
“The outline application seeks to accommodate (entirely within the industrial site) and improve the effectiveness and efficiency of an established and growing local business.”
This statement is not correct as the area which the expansion area is proposed to be built is outside the already approved engineering area (7/B/80/0620/22 dated 16/09/1980) and relates to land used for the processing of gravel and sand that had temporary planning rights from Devon County Council (the mineral Authority) with a clause that the area is required to be returned to the natural landscape of the heathland once processing and extraction has been completed.
This is also contrary to the view of Mr Gavin Spiller Principal Planning Officer for Western Planning Team at EDDC who wrote in Oct 2017 to Clinton Devon Estates regarding the proposed business units at Blackhill Quarry:
“In this instance, the Local Planning Authority recognise the previously developed nature of the site, however, in the glossary of Teams section of the Local Plan (which echoes those contained in the National Planning Policy Framework) previously developed land specifically excludes land that has been developed for minerals extraction or waste disposal by landfill purposes where provision for restoration has been made through development control procedures. Accordingly, the land would be greenfield”
A further statement Dr Murray makes in the following paragraph:
“Recently acquired by the SC group, Blackhill Engineering is a growing local business of almost 70 rears.”
Again, this statement is misleading and incorrect. Blackhill Engineering units where built following the granting of planning permission in 1980 for the regional workshop for the then tenant of the quarry for ECC (English China Clay). It was only following a change in tenants to AI (Aggregate Industries) in 1995 that the restriction for use for the quarry tenants’ own workshop was removed and full commercial use was permitted unrelated to the quarry.
Therefore, the commercial use at Blackhill Quarry could only have started in 1995 and therefore 23 years in operation, far less than the 70 years quoted.
Within the same paragraph Dr Murray states:
“The scheme requires no transport access modifications or landscape change”
Again, this is incorrect. The site in question has permitted development for Mineral extraction and processing only. Therefore, the access and landscaping is not as described as hardstanding and approved access, but temporary access and hardstanding which is required to be returned to the heathland area of Woodbury Common.
Dr Murrays Further comment in the Consultee Representations
“…. A change of use to B” industrial use is unlikely to have an impact on the qualifying features of the European designated site, or CWS (County Wildlife Site)”
The clear designation of this area is not Industrial land as Dr Murray implies but a part of Woodbury Common that until 2017 had a restricted permission to extract and process minerals. The total area around the quarry is designated as a SSSI (Special Site of Scientific Interest) and like other areas of the common which had temporary military or mineral uses have been returned to heathland, and included in the SSSI designation. Therefore, once the quarry and processing area has been re-landscaped would most likely to be included within the SSSI designation like these other areas within the pebblebed heaths.
Dr Murray then misrepresents a letter from Devon County Council by stating that they do not object.
Devon County Council are not a consultee on this EDDC Application, but where the agreed Authority for the previous Minerals extraction and therefore wrote explaining that the land proposed for Industrial development is on land agreed by DCC with an enforceable legal agreement to return this area back to the common.
Their final Paragraph explains their position:
“To clarify, Devon County Council as Mineral Planning Authority would not wish to raise any objection to the proposal so long as adequate complementary habitat to replace the lost heathland is provided elsewhere and that this is secured by condition or legal agreement. In such a scenario it would not then be reasonable for the County Council to seek to enforce the provisions of the legal agreement insofar as they relate to this small parcel of land”
Therefore, their conclusion is if the Applicant provides another suitable area as replacement complementary habitat they will not enforce the legal agreement. Unfortunately, the applicant has not provided evidence that they will provide any habitat replacement.
Dr Murray states on page 2 states:
“The submitted Statement on the Business Case and Economic Needs (Bell Cornwall Dec 2017) goes some way to highlighting the economic benefits of the proposed scheme, but falls short of a full economic impact assessment….
…. It fails to provide a fuller picture of the salient wider economic benefits which would follow from the proposed scheme”
Therefore, as the developer and their agents have not provided a full economic impact assessment that is generally required in these cases why is this application being considered until such a time that a full assessment has been made?
Dr Murray states on page 5 states:
“Recent constraints targeted at both Greendale and Hill Barton employment locations further reduce our ability to accommodate such valuable commercial development opportunities”
It is assumed that he is referring to the EDDC Villages plan that has a proposal to encircle both these large business parks with an “employment boundary”. This was agreed within the East Devon Local plan (approved only in 2016) that further growth at these 2 sites should not be further expanded into the countryside. This was because both are in unsustainable locations and distant from residential housing and public transport requiring employees to use their private cars which is against the NPPF (National Planning Policy Framework)
Both the Business Parks have never been in the local authority’s strategic policy for employment zones and grown as “exceptions” to the Local Plan Policies over the last 30 years.
The location of Blackhill Engineering existing site and the proposed extension are in similar unsustainable locations as Greendale and Hill Barton and require workers to commute in their own vehicles along unsuitable roads.
The Application for an extension to Blackhill Quarry would be against the NPPF and our local plan creating a third large industrial area within the countryside.
Further on Page 5 Dr Murray states:
“There is a clearly identified need for the subject business to expand with such positive recent trading (567% increase in annual turnover) taking their existing facility beyond capacity. The SC Group would not be seeking to take this substantial investment forward if they were uncertain of their ability to secure new employees….
Again, the above statement seems to conflict with the letter from Gavin Spiller following “pre-application advice in October 2017.
The letter states
“Pre-application advice is sought for the proposed erection of an additional industrial building to support the existing business being operated from the site together with the erection of 5 additional industrial use by other businesses”
The landowners Clinton Devon Estates asked for Pre-planning advice in Oct 2017 to build one unit for Blackhill Engineering and 5 additional buildings for “other businesses” but by Dec 2017 just 2 months later, a justification was submitted with the outline planning application that all the buildings where required for Blackhill Engineering.
This seems most odd that the advice given by the EDDC Planners in Oct 2017 was not to support the 5 speculative buildings but 8 weeks later there was a business justification to expand the whole area for Blackhill Engineering!
The final paragraph from Gavin Spillers letter regarding pre-application advice:
“…… it is considered that an application for the proposal to which the pre-application enquiry relates would not comply with the provisions Strategy7 and Policy E5 of the EDLP. However, should appropriate justification be submitted to support expansion of the existing business and additional building for their use may be able to be supported as a departure from policy given the economic benefits of retaining an existing employer.
The five speculative industrial buildings would not receive officer support”
Dr Murrays final comment:
“The economic case in favour of this proposed development on their existing site is particularly compelling. It is strongly recommended to our Planning Colleagues for approval”
It therefore can be seen that there is a conflict between the Economic Development Manager and the Planning Team at the Local Authority.
However, as Dr Murrays document shows the economic case presented has inaccuracies and should not form part of the evidence for a justification to:
• Ignore the condition regarding the restoration and aftercare scheme for planning application 10/0473/CM.
• Ignore Strategy 7 Development in the Countryside
• Ignore Policy E5 Small Scale Economic Development in Rural Areas
• Ignore Policy D1 Design and Local Distinctiveness
• Ignore Policy D3 Trees and Development Sites
• Ignore EN16 Contaminated Land
• Ignore Policy TC7 Adequacy of Road Network and Site Access
Until there is sound correct and true “Economic Impact Assessment” and adequate complementary habitat to replace the lost heathland is proposed and agreed by the landowner and the local authority this application should not be considered.
“People living in the countryside have been abandoned and left in the “digital wildnerness” by big mobile phone operators, it is claimed, with the worst-hit areas getting no new masts.
A Freedom of Information request has found that in areas where signal is the poorest no new applications have been submitted for new mobile phone masts in the past three years. …”
The best of both sides or the worst of both sides?
Wonder which political party they vote for in the UK?
“The world’s richest 1% are on course to control as much as two-thirds of the world’s wealth by 2030, according to a shocking analysis that has lead to a cross-party call for action.
World leaders are being warned that the continued accumulation of wealth at the top will fuel growing distrust and anger over the coming decade unless action is taken to restore the balance.
An alarming projection produced by the House of Commons library suggests that if trends seen since the 2008 financial crash were to continue, then the top 1% will hold 64% of the world’s wealth by 2030. Even taking the financial crash into account, and measuring their assets over a longer period, they would still hold more than half of all wealth.
AdvertisementHide
Since 2008, the wealth of the richest 1% has been growing at an average of 6% a year – much faster than the 3% growth in wealth of the remaining 99% of the world’s population. Should that continue, the top 1% would hold wealth equating to $305tn (£216.5tn) – up from $140tn today.
Analysts suggest wealth has become concentrated at the top because of recent income inequality, higher rates of saving among the wealthy, and the accumulation of assets. The wealthy also invested a large amount of equity in businesses, stocks and other financial assets, which have handed them disproportionate benefits. …”
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2018/apr/07/global-inequality-tipping-point-2030
“Update on OUR NHS – Comprehensive Healthcare for All – STAGE 3
Hello Friends
As a backer you know our Judicial Review, challenging NHS England’s contentious Accountable Care Organisation contract, will be heard on Tuesday 24th April at Leeds High Court, 1 Oxford Row Leeds LS1 3BG
We’d like to invite supporters and fellow campaigners to a rally outside the courts from 9. 30am, to support the vital NHS principles our Judicial Review aims to defend. We will be inviting Press & Media.
This week we had a really good meeting with our legal team from public law firm Leigh Day and Landmark Chambers, to discuss the ‘skeleton case’ – a summary outline – which is due to be sent to the court in the next few days.
The skeleton case is based on our deep concern that the payment mechanism proposed for the Accountable Care Organisation contract is not only unlawful under current NHS legislation – but will lead to restrictions and denial of NHS care, and the abandonment of the core NHS principle of providing comprehensive care to all who have a clinical need for it, free at the point of use.
This would mean replacing treatment based on patients’ clinical need with treatment based on assessments of financial risk and returns – a total departure from core NHS principles, replacing them with health insurance company principles.
This is because the Accountable Care Organisation contract requires NHS commissioners to pay a fixed lump sum to cover the whole range of services for the population in a given area – rather than the present system which pays NHS providers an agreed price for the treatments they have actually delivered to patients.
Without reference to the number and complexity of treatments delivered to patients, the ACO contract’s proposed fixed population payment would pass financial risk to the providers – and from providers to us the patients.
Why? Because if providers were to get more patients needing more complex treatments costing more than the fixed lump sum they receive, they would face spending money they don’t have. They’re not likely to want to do that. The only way to avoid that would be to restrict or deny patients’ access to treatments. Particularly patients whose treatments are more costly and whose prognosis means their treatment is not such good value for money.
In our view, NHS England is playing fast and loose with existing NHS law about how prices are set and payments are made for health care provided to NHS patients.
Although we don’t in any way support the 2012 Health and Social Care Act, which increased private companies’ access to NHS contracts, fragmented the NHS and removed the Secretary of State’s duty to provide a universal, comprehensive health service in England, it is the law.
If NHS England wants to change price setting and payment methods for the provision of NHS services, it should do it in accordance with the law. If changing payment mechanisms means changing the law, that is something for Parliament – and the public that puts MPs there – to decide.
Ask yourself… “what happens when government and its quangos decide they are above the law?” It doesn’t bear thinking about.
As well as being undemocratic, NHS England’s proposed changes to how NHS services are priced and paid for would undermine the NHS as a comprehensive health service for all who have a clinical need for it.
They are about enabling moves to a cut price, bargain basement NHS that uses the same business model as the USA’s limited state-funded health insurance system that provides a restricted range of health care for people who are too poor or old to pay for private health insurance.
Thanks for your support so far.
Please share this with friends and campaigners.
We will fight this all the way.”
Hot on the heels of this article:
“A donation box installed on Sidmouth seafront that has been removed for maintenance will not be reinstated as the repairs are ‘too costly’.
A Freedom of Information Request submitted to the council had revealed that so far the council has received less money in donations than the cost of installing the box itself. …
… The cost of the sign and its legs were £276, and the cost of the box was £125, and the amount collected to date is £165.75, the Freedom of Information Request reveals. …”
https://www.devonlive.com/news/devon-news/sidmouth-donation-box-cliff-fall-1416667
comes this cartoon from the current Private Eye:
” … Over the past two years, health bosses have charged £5.8m on taxpayer-funded credit cards to finance their lavish lifestyles.
Purchases included helicopter lessons, go-karting outings, bookings at five-star hotels, trips to cocktails bars, and stops at fast-food joints.
This behaviour shines light on a deep hypocrisy from health bosses, who on the one hand work to implement a sugar tax – effective today – to discourage taxpayers from consuming sugary drinks, and on the other hand use the same taxpayers’ money to fund their own trips to McDonalds.
Putting the hypocrisy aside, there is a wider issue here, of how taxpayer money is spent once it’s in the hands of the state.
We are always told that the solution to any given problem is more spending, and consequently calls to ramp up taxes naturally follow. But that argument fails down flat when nearly £6m that could have been used to top up a low-income parent of three, or go towards a health service we are perpetually told is “in crisis”, has been spent on public officials to live their weekends like rock stars.
The UK government is already spending around 40 per cent of GDP – the majority of that is from tax intake, but tens of billions are still borrowed from future generations.
There is no justification for increasing the burden on taxpayers by a penny more. There are already funds in the system that could help the most needy. They are just sitting in the wrong pockets. …”
http://www.cityam.com/283465/theres-enough-tax-money-feed-hungry-children-its-just-wrong
“Broadband speeds in rural areas are up to three times slower than those in neighbouring cities, analysis has found.
Statistics published by the county councils network show that more than two-thirds of England’s counties are below the national average download speed of 45mbit/s.
In some places rural counties lag significantly behind neighbouring urban areas.
For example, in north Yorkshire residents have an average download speed of 30.2mbit/s, compared to York’s average speed of 102mbit/s.
The rural county of Ryedale, which includes part of the North York Moors, has average speeds of just 25.8mbit/s, less than a fifth of those experienced in the nearby city.
Rural Dorset has average speeds of 26.9mbit/s, less than half those enjoyed in neighbouring Bournemouth, of 61.2mbit/s.
The slowest broadband in Britain is in west Devon, the report adds, at just 21.8mbit/s.
Ofcom data shows that 91 per cent of homes and businesses in the UK now have access to superfast broadband, defined as 30mbits/s.
The network said that all but four of the 79 areas council areas which have speeds below this level are based in non-urban counties. …”
” … In a speech in south-east London, Mr Bartley – who shares the leadership with MP Caroline Lucas – said more representation for his party at local level will “build a better Britain from the bottom up”.
“We are taking the next step towards getting a Green at every table in every room – a Green on every council,” he said, claiming he could “feel change coming right across the country”.
“There’s not a seat in this country where the Greens cannot win,” he told supporters.
Voters are “tired of the status quo” of “cosy, complacent” councils dominated by just one party, he said, attacking councillors “sat down with a dozen of their mates, toeing the party line”. …”
“Ageing workforce a “ticking time bomb” as employers deal with mental and physical frailties”
Local authorities are sitting on a “ticking time bomb” due to the ageing workforce a Mid Devon officer has said.
In a statement regarding fitness for work issued by the authority, the Council said that they were aware that as the average age of the workforce increases the physical ability to perform manual tasks can become more challenging and ultimately can contribute to higher sickness absence rates attributable to muscular-skeletal conditions. …
… Discussions over the district’s handling of the ageing population were brought up by Councillor Jenny Roach who shared her concerns.
“When you read this report it talks about the individual being fit for work and the authority making sure that a person was fit for work,” she said. “When you get to be over 60, and you’re having to do a hard job you’re not going to be as fit for work as when you’re 28/29. I know you’re talking about people having other skills but in reality what can be done for those people?
“I would prefer it if the authority was saying that this was a major issue as people are having to work longer to keep the money flowing. We should make sure as an authority to make sure that jobs are mechanised as they have done in healthcare.”
Cllr Roach added that the word lifting is no longer used in healthcare, and has been replaced by the term moving and handling and that Mid Devon District Council should look into ways of mechanising jobs to avoid heavy lifting.
She added: “I can think of nothing worse than at 68, having to go out every day in all sorts of weathers when your arthritis is killing you and life heavy boxes. It’s a really big issue, and it’s not usually an issue people of qualifications or high positions will have to worry about. It’s the people who are refuse collectors who will have to continue to do that job.”
Catherine Yandle, Mid Devon’s group manager for performance, governance and data security replied: “Actually, that’s a fallacy. I totally agree that they’re the ones who you think would be impacted more, but in general, that’s not the case. We all lose the ability to think and to react in quite the same way when we get older.
“Unfortunately, because the default retirement age finished about five years ago, we are waiting and sitting on a ticking time bomb of issues with older staff and people whose retirement ages have been lengthened so they have to work longer to get their pensions, who feel the pressure to do so, so they will feel they need to work longer.
“We can’t just look at people’s functional health in respect of their physical wellbeing. We look at cognitive health and how they assimilate information. Because of age discrimination, you can’t say to people that they should retire; there isn’t a default retirement age. If they’re not performing in the way that we want them to be that physical or mental agility, then we will have to go down the capability route with them because there is no way of us dismissing those people unless they chose to go.
“We have a solicitor here who is also a qualified HR practitioner, so we’re very fortunate that we’re able to have somebody who has that understanding. This is very difficult for us as an employer.”
Cllr Roach said she was concerned how the Government was pushing people to work beyond their late 60s, yet being told they no longer are fit to carry out tasks they used to be able to.
“It’s fundamentally wrong, and that is not unfair. I think this Council should be doing something about it,” she added.
However, Ms Yandle added: “I agree with you, I don’t think it’s fair, I don’t think it’s right, it leaves a very nasty taste in the mouth of the employer for having to do that, but that’s where we are.
“We could accept a lesser performance, but I don’t think you as councillors would be happy with that, because you want value for money, you are representing the electorate who expect people to be performing at a certain level.”
https://www.devonlive.com/news/devon-news/ageing-workforce-ticking-time-bomb-1418980
Women earn 6% MORE than men at Exeter City Council
Women earn 3.2% less than men at East Devon District Council
Women earn 17% less than men at Devon County Council
NHS Northern, Eastern and Western Clinical Commissioning Group pays women 40.7% (yes 40.7%) less than men
Look for other major employers (local and national) here:
“Broadcast on Friday (30 March), the whole episode of BBC Radio 4’s Farming Today programme on Friday (30 March) examined the issue of hospital transport.
The programme details the impact of large-scale cuts on bus services since the introduction of austerity measures.
At the same time, medical services have been increasingly concentrated in ‘centres of excellence’ in towns and cities, with few specialist facilities available in local community hospitals.
Rural Services Network chief executive Graham Biggs told the programme more and more services were being centralised into larger towns.
“Accessing those services is increasingly difficult whilst at the same time public transport is being reduced,” said Mr Biggs.
It was true there was a shortage of medical specialists but something had to be done around accessibility – whether via public transport or some other means, he said.
Patients in rural areas needing to use public transport to get to hospital often faced painfully long journey times, reported the programme.
Presenter Emma Campbell travelled to hospital with a listener called Sandra, who has to take three buses in each direction to get from her home in Somerset to her appointment in Bath.
Sandra faced a travel time of over three hours each way, for a 10 minute appointment – a situation which was “not uncommon at all” for rural residents, said Mr Biggs.
The programme also heard from representatives of Age UK’s ‘Painful Journeys’ campaign, who also explained the extent of the problem in rural areas.
The full programme can be heard by clicking here
https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b09wpn4f
(available until 28 pril 2018)
East Devon Watch 