Urgent action needed on political advertising

“Following a request by the Culture Media and Sport committee, Facebook released the adverts Vote Leave ran during the EU referendum.

The series of adverts targeted specific Facebook users – but in many it was not clear who had paid for them.

We know who sends us leaflets during elections – we should know who’s paying for online adverts too.

Openness and transparency should be the standard during election and referendum campaigns, not the exception.

Will you sign our petition for online imprints and to release all the official adverts from the EU referendum?”

Sign the petition:
https://action.electoral-reform.org.uk/page/28040/petition/1

80+ people protest against proposed Sidford business park

“Protestors made their feelings clear as part of a march saying ‘no’ to the proposed multi-million pound business park development in Sidford.

In excess of 80 people turned up to the ‘Say No to Sidford Business Park’ campaign event on Monday.

Residents were armed with homemade placards voicing their opposition to the application, which is looking to create 8,445 sq m of employment floor space on the Two Bridges site.

Councillor Marianne Rixson said that there was more than 1.6million sq ft of commercial property available in Exeter and Honiton catering for B1, B2, and B8 business use.

The plans also did not ‘conserve and enhance’ the area under the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) guidelines.

She told the crowd: “This development is going to be within our AONB which is precious.

“The height of these buildings are going to be raised by 1.5m for them to flood proof the site, which with the 7.5m on top is going to be 9m high – that is twice the height of a normal bungalow.

“There is a duty to conserve and enhance, this is not going to do either.

“Also it says it should be in exceptional circumstances; we have very low unemployment and there is plenty of property elsewhere, where is the exceptional need?”

The youngest protester at the event was just two years old, with many children joining adults to raise their concerns about developing in the AONB.

Sidbury pupil Billy Bonfield, aged six, said: “I do not want people to build a big industrial estate.”

His mum Becky added: “He goes to Sidbury School, there’s always gnarl ups on the road – it’s just not big enough.”

Concerned cyclist Sue Dyson said: “I’m in fear for my life going up School Lane. If there is more traffic, I think I wouldn’t be able to do it, it’s bad enough as it is in.”

Graham Cooper added: “The best idea is to redistribute the employment space across the area and develop brown field sites first.

“You mustn’t go and develop AONB land unless there’s proven to be a need.”

Campaigners are currently taking to the streets of Sidford and Sidbury with a petition which they will look to present to East Devon District Council.

The campaign has raised £750 so far to spend on signs and posters and urged people to keep donating.”

http://www.sidmouthherald.co.uk/news/residents-march-against-plans-for-sidford-business-park-1-5624746

“Government proposes shake-up of Local Enterprise Partnerships”

More to folliw …

On 24 July 2018, with little or no publicity, the government brought out a review of Local Enterprise Partnerships:

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/strengthened-local-enterprise-partnerships

“The review proposes a number of changes to boost the performance of LEPs, increase their diversity and ensure they’re operating in an open and transparent way. These include:

up to £20 million of additional funding between 2018 to 2019 and 2019 to 2020 to support the implementation of these changes and embed evidence in Local Industrial Strategies

supporting LEPs to consult widely and transparently on appointing new Chairs and improve board diversity

an aim for women to make up at least one third of LEP boards by 2020 with the expectation of equal representation by 2023

a mandate for LEPs to submit proposals for revised geographies including removing situations in which 2 LEP geographies overlap … “

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/government-proposes-shake-up-of-local-enterprise-partnerships

Local Government Association news – too much (bad) news to choose from

Opinion: Last-minute ministerial statements

Polly Toynbee discusses the raft of ministerial statements issued on the last day of Parliament, including a change to planning laws, under which communities lose the right to have their say on developments if they fail to meet government-imposed targets. She questions whether this will be “a gift for developers” and references LGA Chairman Lord Porter’s view that it “punishes local communities”.
Guardian (Journal p4)

UK’s bus routes at a 28-year low

The UK bus network has shrunk by 8 per cent in a decade with bus routes at a 28-year low in terms of miles travelled, according to government figures. Councils subsidise nearly half of all bus routes in England but a total of 3,347 routes have been stopped or reduced since 2010. The LGA says councils face an overall funding gap of almost £8 billion by 2025 that could see 5,000 bus routes gone by 2022.
Mirror p8

Councils seek £50,000 care home cap to help rural areas

No one should have to pay more than £50,000 for a place in a care home, the County Councils Network has said. Its report, published in advance of the Government’s delayed green paper on reform of the care system, said: “For more people in rural areas to benefit from a cap on care, it needs to be set at a lower level, potentially as low as £50,000. It is estimated that only one in 10 people would benefit from a £72,000 cap.” It said the cap must be fully funded.
Mail p19

School holiday hunger cash

The Government will put £2 million towards a series of projects across the country providing activities including free football classes, play sessions and cooking classes. These projects will also provide free meals for the most disadvantaged families who may rely on the free school meals they receive during term time.
BBC Online, Mirror p17

Wheelchair shortage

Millions of people are being left without wheelchairs as they recover from illness and risk being “trapped” in their own homes, the British Red Cross has warned. The charity said a lack of information about services, stigma around wheelchair use and a “postcode lottery” are among the reasons people are not getting the right support.
BBC Online, i p9

UK heatwave

The London Fire Brigade has called for councils in the capital to introduce a ban on barbecues in parks and drivers are being urged not to throw rubbish from their cars after a string of grassland fires during the heatwave.
BBC Online, Sky News Online, ITV Online, all papers

Flat owners have to pay £3m recladding cost of two Manchester blocks

The owners of 345 flats in two Manchester apartment blocks built with flammable cladding will have to pay an estimated £3 million to have their homes made fire-safe, following a ruling by a tribunal. The tribunal ruled in favour of the freeholder who argued that the flat owners, as leaseholders, should pay for the replacement of the cladding at a cost of £10,000 each through their service charge.
Guardian Online

“Chairman and vice-chairman of Somerset County Council audit committee resigns”

“[Somerset] COUNTY Hall has been rocked by the resignation of the top two councillors in charge of overseeing its finances amid claims it will run out of money later this year.

Audit committee chairman Cllr Dean Ruddle and his deputy Cllr Neil Bloomfield both stood down yesterday (Wednesday). Fellow committee member Cllr Mike Rigby said he believes they have quit to avoid being “left holding the baby”.

The move comes in the week that council leader Cllr David Fothergill denied claims Conservative-led Somerset County Council was on the brink of bankruptcy. He told the County Gazette the authority faces huge financial pressures but was not about to issue a 114 notice, which warns of insufficient funds to pay its bills.

Mr Rigby said: “I’ve been concerned for some time that our budgets are being continually slashed by central government to the point where we can no longer meet our legal duties. “I had thought that we could make it into next year as a council without running out of money. “But after recent developments, I’m not now convinced we can make it that far, despite the emergency spending measures put in place at County Hall. “I’m not surprised that the chairman and vice-chairman have decided to go. Who wants to be left holding this baby?

“It’s about time that our Conservative administration stops supporting the government until the government undertakes a proper review of government finance.”

Cllr Claire Aparicio Paul and Cllr Gemma Verdon have been appointed as chairman and vice-chairman of the audit committee respectively.”

http://www.somersetcountygazette.co.uk/news/16366065.chairman-and-vice-chairman-of-somerset-county-council-audit-committee-resigns/

Hinkley C – and you thought it was only French workmanship we had to worry about!

“China wants to become a global leader in nuclear power and the UK is crucial to realising its ambitions.

While other countries have scaled back on atomic energy in the wake of the Fukushima disaster, state-backed Chinese companies benefit from the fact that China is still relying on nuclear energy to reach the country’s low-carbon goals.

“China is going in the opposite direction. The massive experience possessed by the Chinese nuclear industry, consistently building for the past 30 years and adopting various next-generation technologies, is being recognised by the global nuclear industry,” said Zaf Coelho, the director of Asia Nuclear Business Platform, based in Singapore.

The UK, where as many as six new nuclear power stations could be built over the next two decades, is an obvious export target for Chinese nuclear. If state-owned China General Nuclear Power (GNP) – the main player in China’s nuclear industry – buys a 49% stake in the UK’s existing nuclear plants, as it was recently reported to be considering, that would mark a significant expansion of China’s role in the UK nuclear sector.

But the depth of CGN’s existing involvement in UK nuclear may surprise some.

The most high-profile project is the £20bn Hinkley Point C power station in Somerset, which is being built by EDF Energy with a French reactor design but was only made possible by CGN UK’s 33.5% stake to underwrite its daunting finances.

It was that Chinese ownership of a strategic piece of infrastructure that led Theresa May to temporarily halt the signing of the crucial subsidy deal for Hinkley when she became prime minister.

Isabel Hilton, the CEO of Chinadialogue.net, said the UK opening up vital infrastructure to China was without parallel in the western world. “No other OECD country has done this. This is strategic infrastructure, and China is a partner but not an ally in the security sense.

“You are making a 50-year bet, not only that there will be no dispute between the UK and China, but also no dispute between China and one of the UK’s allies. It makes no strategic sense.”

The UK has appeared amenable to Chinese investment, though recently the UK cybersecurity watchdog warned British telecommunications companies against dealing with Chinese tech firm ZTE. One expert acknowledges that security concerns are a potential check to Chinese ambitions.

Zha Daojiong, a professor of non-traditional security studies at Peking University, said: “The question is not whether your nuclear technology is safe or not, it’s a question of politics. To be blunt, most countries think: ‘Anybody but China.’ This kind of thinking is becoming more and more popular among western countries. It’s a serious problem.”

CGN is also drawing up plans for Bradwell B in Essex, where China hopes to showcase its own nuclear reactor technology. CGN UK holds the majority stake (66.5%) in the development company, with EDF in a supporting role. Then there is a third joint venture to get Bradwell’s Chinese reactor design through the UK nuclear regulatory process.

Finally, there is Sizewell C in Suffolk, where EDF wants to build a clone of Hinkley Point C if it can attract enough private investment. CGN holds a 20% share.

While Germany and other western countries have turned their backs on nuclear, the UK is strongly committed to new nuclear to meet its carbon goals and this means, despite security concerns, the government needs Chinese involvement.”

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2018/jul/26/chinas-long-game-to-dominate-nuclear-power-relies-on-the-uk

Pray for (constant) westerly winds at Hinkley C!

Reactor fault raises spectre of delays at £20bn Hinkley Point

Doubts about the Hinkley Point nuclear plant being built on time intensified yesterday when its developer announced fresh delays to a prototype in France caused by defective welding.

EDF, the French state-controlled energy company, is building Britain’s first new nuclear plant in a generation in Somerset and aims to start generating electricity from the £20 billion project in 2025.

The company is building the same reactor type at Flamanville, Normandy, but has repeatedly had to put back the start-up date, originally 2012, because of construction problems.

EDF said yesterday that first power generation at Flamanville would now slip by a year to early 2020 because it needed to repair “quality deficiencies” in the welding in part of the plant that carries steam to the turbines. The cost of the plant has increased by a further €400 million to €10.9 billion, more than three times its original budget.

City analysts at RBC Capital Markets said the announcement would “add to concerns about whether EDF’s other projects . . . can be delivered on time and budget”. Hinkley Point is due to generate 3.2 gigawatts of power, seven per cent of Britain’s power needs, and is meant to help keep the lights on when coal and older nuclear plants close.

Theresa May gave the plant the go-ahead in 2016 despite widespread concerns over high subsidies to be paid by consumers and about EDF’s inability to build reactors on time and to budget.

Hinkley had already been delayed from its original 2007 plans to start generating by Christmas last year. Costs had risen to £18 billion by the time it got the go-ahead. EDF raised the estimate to £19.6 billion a year ago and warned that start-up could be delayed to 2027 but has since insisted it is sticking to the 2025 start date.

France began working on the reactor type, known as the EPR, 25 years ago. Four reactors were supposed to be operating by now — in France, Finland and China — but construction has been plagued by problems and only one, in Taishan, southern China, is working.

The most serious issue delaying Flamanville was the discovery of a weakness in the reactor vessel. The French factory that made the vessel was subsequently found to have falsified safety tests for components supplied to the French nuclear industry.

EDF insists it has learnt the lessons from the EPRs being built elsewhere, ensuring that the British project will proceed more smoothly. However, Britain’s nuclear safety regulator has raised concerns about substandard quality control checks on EDF’s supply chain.

A source insisted that Hinkley should not suffer the same problems as Flamanville because the project uses a different contractor and testing method, both of which had already been deployed successfully in Finland.
Kate Blagojevic, head of energy at Greenpeace UK, said: “EDF’s nuclear design just doesn’t work very well.

The nuclear power plant in Finland is a decade late and because of yet more technical problems, the Flamanville plant has gone from late to later. This bodes ill for Hinkley Point C.”

A spokesman for EDF said: “The construction of Hinkley Point C remains on track. The project has already benefited, and will continue to learn from the experience of other projects.”

Source: Times (pay wall)

“As inequality grows, so does the political influence of the rich”

“SQUEEZING the top 1% ought to be the most natural thing in the world for politicians seeking to please the masses. Yet, with few exceptions, today’s populist insurgents are more concerned with immigration and sovereignty than with the top rate of income tax. This disconnect may be more than an oddity. It may be a sign of the corrupting influence of inequality on democracy.

You might reasonably suppose that the more democratic a country’s institutions, the less inequality it should support. Rising inequality means that resources are concentrated in the hands of a few; they should be ever more easily outvoted by the majority who are left with a shrinking share of national income. …

A rising tide lifts all votes

The evidence that concentrated wealth contributes to concentrated power is troubling. It suggests that reducing inequality becomes less likely even as it becomes more urgent. It implies that a vicious cycle of rising inequality may be developing, with a loss of democratic accountability as a nasty side-effect. Some social scientists argue that this is, indeed, the way of things. In “The Great Leveler”, published last year, Walter Scheidel writes that, across human history, inequality inevitably rises until checked by disasters like wars or revolutions.

This is excessively pessimistic. The rich are powerful, but not all-powerful, or uniform in their determination to keep distributional policies off the agenda. And Western democracies still function. If political leaders tried it, they might well find that redistribution is a winner at the ballot box.”

https://www.economist.com/finance-and-economics/2018/07/21/as-inequality-grows-so-does-the-political-influence-of-the-rich

New planning rules = developer free-for-all again

As Owl understands it (feel free to correct) Local Plans and Neighbourhood Plans are now basically ripped up unless developers are BUILDING just about everything for which they have permission (building, not land-banking).

A new “Housing Delivery Test” will apply from November 2018. If DEVELOPERS have not built enough homes using these calculations COUNCILS will be penalised by having planning decisions taken from them and DEVELOPERS WILL BE ALLOWED TO BUILD JUST ABOUT ANYWHERE. Just like the old days when we had no Local Plan. Neighbourhood plans will then also count for nothing.

As the CPRE points out:

“…Rather than delivering ‘what communities want’ as it claims to promise, the new planning rulebook and its new ‘housing delivery test’ will result in almost all local plans becoming out of date within two years. It is a speculative developers’ charter and will lead to the death of the plan-led system.

“Without a local plan, councils and communities have little control over the location and type of developments that take place. This results in the wrong developments in the wrong places – local communities’ needs are ignored and valued countryside destroyed for no good reason.”

https://www.pbctoday.co.uk/news/planning-construction-news/revised-national-planning-policy-framework-provokes-mixed-feelings/43866/

Nice one, Tories!

For the geeks amongst us, the methodology of the “Housing Delivery Test” – (9 pages) which will be implemented from November 2018 – is here:

Click to access HDT_Measurement_Rule_Book.pdf

CPRE adds its voice to major criticisms of National Planning Policy Framework

“The Campaign to Protect Rural England has labelled the revised National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) a ‘speculative developers’ charter’, as the government published its new planning rulebook earlier today (24 July).

Despite a promise to ‘build attractive and better-designed homes in areas where they are needed’, CPRE points out that far from fulfilling this promise, the NPPF will continue to favour the delivery of any development, rather than development that meets communities’ needs, respects the environment, and adheres to policies in the NPPF other than those which deal with housing delivery.

CPRE’s key concern is the new ‘housing delivery test’. The NPPF continues to encourage councils to set high targets for housing delivery and this new policy has been produced to enforce this delivery. However, the ‘housing delivery test’ will penalise councils when house builders fail to deliver homes in their areas by removing local control over planning decisions. This in turn will leave them and the countryside open to speculative development.

CPRE have a number of other concerns, including:

a failure to provide an effective brownfield first policy

the continuing failure to support provision of affordable housing in rural areas

the discouragement of neighbourhood planning because of uncertainty over the validity of plans older than two years

continued implicit support for hydraulic fracturing for shale oil and gas, despite massive public opposition and little evidence of need
Matt Thomson, Head of Planning at the Campaign to Protect Rural England, said:

‘Rather than delivering “what communities want” as it claims to promise, the new planning rulebook and its new “housing delivery test” will result in almost all local plans becoming out of date within two years. It is a speculative developers’ charter and will lead to the death of the plan-led system.

‘Without a local plan, councils and communities have little control over the location and type of developments that take place. This results in the wrong developments in the wrong places – local communities’ needs are ignored and valued countryside destroyed for no good reason.’

Despite heavy criticism of the revised NPPF, CPRE are pleased to see that government has taken some positive actions.

They include:

National Parks and AONBs reinstated as having the ‘highest status of protection’

maintaining Green Belt protections and an improved definition ‘exceptional circumstances’ for releasing land from Green Belts

improved clarity and focus for policies on making better use of land

clearer guidance for viability assessment and that price paid for land should never be a justification for viability revisions

excluding National Parks, AONBs and Green Belts from the Entry Level Exceptions Sites policy

‘Social housing’ being reinstated in the definition of affordable housing.
CPRE will be providing further analysis of the revised NPPF shortly.”

http://www.cpre.org.uk/media-centre/sound-bites/item/4923-new-planning-rulebook-heavily-criticised-by-cpre

“Thousands in East Devon live in fuel poverty, new figures show”

“One in 10 East Devon households are in fuel poverty, according to a government report. Figures from the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy (BEIS) show nearly 6,000 households would be pushed into poverty by the cost of heating and lighting their homes properly.

Across the South West, around 240,000 households are in fuel poverty. Each household is on average £391 short of their required energy bills each year – a measure called the ‘fuel poverty gap’.

A household is considered to be ‘fuel poor’ if they have fuel costs which are above the national median average and if meeting those costs would push them below the poverty line. …”

http://www.exmouthjournal.co.uk/news/one-in-10-east-devon-households-in-fuel-poverty-1-5613713

More planners criticise new National Planning Policy Framework

“Communities face “punishment” if developers fail to build enough homes in their areas, the Local Government Association (LGA) has warned after the Government published a revised version of the National Planning Policy Framework.

Housing and Communities Secretary James Brokenshire said the new NPPF would make it easier for councils to challenge poor quality and unattractive development, and “give communities a greater voice about how developments should look and feel”.

But the LGA’s Conservative chair Lord Porter said: “It is hugely disappointing that the Government has not listened to our concerns about nationally set housing targets, and will introduce a delivery test that punishes communities for homes not built by private developers.

“Councils work hard with communities to get support for good quality housing development locally, and there is a risk these reforms will lead to locally agreed plans being bypassed by national targets.”

Mr Brokenshire said the revised NPPF would promote high quality design of new homes and places, give better environmental protection, secure “the right number of homes in the right places” and put greater responsibility and accountability for housing delivery on councils and developers.

It also gives a new method for councils to calculate housing need and from November 2018 imposes the housing delivery test to which the LGA objects.
This will penalise councils in areas where insufficient homes are built.
Lord Porter said: “Planning is not a barrier to housebuilding, and councils are approving nine out of 10 applications.

“To boost the supply of homes and affordability, it is vital to give councils powers to ensure homes with permission are built, enable all councils to borrow to build, keep 100 per cent of Right to Buy receipts and set discounts locally.”

Other major changes from the original NPPF include making it easier for councils to refuse permission for developments on grounds of poor design, and a more explicit protection for green belts.

Royal Town Planning Institute president John Acres welcomed clearer definitions of concepts like ‘sustainable development’ but warned about, “the significant pressure the new NPPF requirements will put on local authority planning teams”.

Acres added: “It is imperative that chief executives, council leaders and politicians resource planning departments sufficiently, particularly as they will now be held more accountable for delivery under the housing delivery test and are expected to carry out more regular reviews of their plans.”

http://localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=36155%3Acouncils-criticise-delivery-test-as-revised-national-planning-policy-framework-issued&catid=63&Itemid=31

Neighbouhood plans, conservation areas – who cares? Not EDDC

A correspondent writes:

Many of us in East Devon have spent, or are spending many volunteer hours in setting up a Neighbourhood Plan for our area.

Is it worth the effort?

Perhaps those in East Budleigh would say no. An application -18/0954-to build 2 bunkers in the conservation area, in the setting of many thatched, cob, listed buildings and within a stone’s throw of the Grade 1 listed church has been approved by planning officers. The application totally contrary to the Neighbourhood Plan and objected to by the Parish Council. Not a whisper from the Budleigh Boys, hence the application was not debated by the Development Management Committee.

The subjective decision by the officers can be summed up as “The benefits outweigh the harm” (see below). The residents may struggle to see the public benefits of 2 more potential second homes to add to those already in the historic centre of one of Devon’s historic villages. The private benefit is all too clear.

They may also struggle with the weight put on the Neighbourhood Plan Policy D2 to contribute to the need for 1, 2 and 3 bedroom houses and the absence of any weight put on Policy B3 which supports development only on previously developed land and dwellings that reflect the character of the surrounding area.

Here is the planning officers reasoning:

“CONCLUSION

The location of the site within the built-up area and the characteristics of its past use suggest that appropriate forms of development would be acceptable in principle. The submitted scheme does have some shortcomings, particularly in terms of layout and changes to ground levels. These would result in some loss of significance to the conservation area because the historic layout and levels would be permanently lost. The only evidence that would remain would be documentary evidence in the form of maps and photographs. These impacts, however, would occur at a site level and would not affect the significance of the wider conservation area. For this reason the harm is regarded as less than substantial.

According to the NPPF, where a development proposal would lead to less than substantial harm to the significance of a designated heritage asset, this harm should be weighed against the public benefits of the proposal, including securing its optimum viable use.

In this case the proposal would contribute to the supply of housing in a sustainable location, bring additional people into the village to support local services and contribute to the need for 1, 2 and 3 bedroom houses identified in the NP (Policy D2).

While it would not support the provision of a community orchard as desired in the NP, the land was not allocated for such purposes and there is no evidence that it could be delivered. The benefits identified would be in the wider public interest whereas the harm would have limited public impact and would not harm the more public parts of the conservation which make the most contribution to its significance.

With regard to securing the optimum viable use of all land in the conservation area, it is considered that the site is effectively redundant for garden use and does not have any value as a public open space (it being in private ownership). Its development can therefore help to secure a viable use for the land while conserving the areas of main significance elsewhere in the conservation area.

Having regard to all other matter raised, it is considered that the public benefits outweigh the limited harm in this case and therefore the proposal is recommended for approval.”

RIP EDDC Development Management Committee and goodbye Local Plans

“Council chiefs today warned the Government was creating a developers’ charter that could see local objections to house building ignored to hit targets.

Under new rules unveiled today, housebuilders would be able to ignore local plans for mapping areas for homes if fewer than 75 per cent of those required by Whitehall targets for 2020 are constructed.

It means in some cases developers could be able to override a rejection of planning permission by appealing over local councillors.

The Local Government Association (LGA) claimed the new ‘housing delivery test’ would ‘punish communities’ opposed to bad developments.

The test is part of the new national policy planning framework (NPPF) announced by Communities Secretary James Brokenshire on Tuesday.

Mr Brokenshire said the rules would create a planning system ‘fit for the future’ which married requirements for building numbers, build quality and environmental requirements.

But Lord Porter, chairman of the LGA, said the plan failed to give councils the powers they needed ‘to ensure homes with planning permission are built out quickly, with the necessary infrastructure, in their local communities’.

He said: ‘It is hugely disappointing that the Government has not listened to our concerns about nationally set housing targets, and will introduce a delivery test that punishes communities for homes not built by private developers.

‘Councils work hard with communities to get support for good-quality housing development locally, and there is a risk these reforms will lead to locally agreed plans being bypassed by national targets.

‘Planning is not a barrier to housebuilding, and councils are approving nine out of 10 applications.

‘To boost the supply of homes and affordability, it is vital to give councils powers to ensure homes with permission are built, enable all councils to borrow to build, keep 100 per cent of Right to Buy receipts and set discounts locally.’

In a written ministerial statement Mr Brokenshire told the Commons that the NPPF ‘provides greater certainty for local authorities in the decision-making and planning appeals processes’, adding: ‘A new Housing Delivery Test will also measure delivery of homes, with consequences for under-delivery.’

The British Property Federation said it welcomed the test.

Ian Fletcher, its director of real estate policy, said: ‘This will provide a consistent measure against which different local authorities’ performances can be compared.

This is the way that the Government will deliver on its housing promises, and as importantly, cater for a generation that wants to have a home to call their own.’

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5987591/Council-chiefs-claim-planning-overhaul-developers-charter.html

New National Planning Policy Framework – effective from TODAY

Very rushed so there must be a great number of controversial changes!

Report to follow.

https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/revised-national-planning-policy-framework

The (political) times are a-changing in East Devon!

Once upon a time, the saying was that a donkey could get elected to East Devon District Council if it wore a Tory blue rosette. But times are changing … And what do we have here – a plea from the local Conservative Party for candidates for next year’s local elections – anyone, anywhere – please, please, with a whiff of desperation!

as discussed on EDA DCC Councillor Martin Shaw’s blog post here:
Desperate Conservatives advertise for candidates on Facebook, as they try to cling to control of East Devon in 2019

It seems to Owl that some of the old (very, very old) guard Tories are throwing in the towel – but no-one wants to pick it up!

But when you think of councillors who are REALLY changing things, who do you think of?

Well, of course, Independent Claire Wright – but also EDA Councillor Martin Shaw (fighting long and hard for the NHS), EDA Councillor Cathy Gardner, constantly holding EDDC to account and fighting her Sidmouth corner, EDA Councillor Marianne Rixson and Dawn Manley – never-ceasing their crusade about the awful plan for a massive business park in Sidford, EDA councillor Val Ranger taking in developers, including Clinton Devon Estates in Newton Poppleford, EDA Councillor Geoff Jung – with some spectacular successes taming the Greendale tiger – which has now lost quite a few teeth! All EDA councillors, all making a big difference.

Voters – if you want to effect REAL change in East Devon, the Tories are a lost cause. Their MP in East Devon is an absentee, more interested in exotic foreign travel than his constituency. And even when down here he prefers to live in mid-Devon! Their Tiverton and Honiton MP puts all his energy into fighting for farmers after Brexit (well, not surprising as he is one in Somerset). Ah, and probably best not to go into the health service cuts and privatisations, Brexit fiasco, the austerity cuts, the drop in education standards, rising crime, inappropriate developments …

No, if you want to make a difference it has to be East Devon Alliance (note: this blog DOES support EDA but is not a part of EDA as everyone must surely realise).

Why become an EDA councillor? Because all EDA councillors ARE independent but do agree on the major issues facing the district and, while being free to vote as they wish – without the whipping by a Whip-who-says-he-doesn’t-whip that has seen some disgraceful behaviour of this majority party. And EDA councillors help and support each other in elections.

There MUST be a new approach to East Devon’ mounting problems and it must come from an effective and united independent opposition – that could hopefully become the ruling group.

So, if you are thinking of being an East Devon councillor, think carefully whether you want to continue to drag East Devon along the bottom and answer the plaintive Tory howl of anguish, or raise it up and contact East Devon Alliance!!!

They can be contacted at:
http://www.eastdevonalliance.org.uk/admin/contact-us/

or via their Facebook page

https://www.facebook.com/eastdevonalliance/

Devon primary classes – more than 8,000 pupils being taught in 30+ classes

“The number of primary school children in Devon being taught in class sizes of more than 30 pupils has now exceeded more than 8,000.

According to latest figures from the Department for Education, 1,308 more primary pupils were being taught in large classes in January 2018 than at the same time the previous year.

It means 8,072 children are now being taught in classes of more than 30, which is the equivalent of one in seven pupils in Devon. … “

https://www.devonlive.com/news/devon-news/school-class-sizes-just-keep-1821453

“Tory-led Northamptonshire county council imposes emergency spending controls for second time in six months”

“A Conservative-led council has taken the unprecedented action of imposing emergency spending controls for the second time in six months after projecting a budget shortfall of up to £70m.

Despite being the first council in nearly two decades to issue a section 114 notice – immediately banning new expenditure – in February, Northamptonshire county council issued its second notice on Tuesday.

As a result of the extraordinary action earlier this year, two government-appointed commissioners were sent to oversee the finances of the council and produce a balanced budget.

But in a letter to councillors, the leader of Northamptonshire county council Mark McLaughlin said the situation was of an “extremely serious nature” and projected a significant budget shortfall in the current financial year of £60m-70m.

After meeting the government commissioners, the council chief decided to issue a second section 114 notice which means no new expenditure is permitted.

The only exception is for the safeguarding of vulnerable people and statutory services. …”

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/northamptonshire-council-run-out-funds-conservative-led-second-time-cuts-a8461461.html

Public service pay increases? Yes, but ….. no but …..

Owl says: Yes, you get a little more money … but there will be fewer of you to do the same amount of work (or more work).

Owl suggests those affected think of becoming MPs. It doesn’t have to be a full-time job (see our own MP Swire’s impressive list of other jobs), your pay rises are frequent and well above inflation, brilliant pension, no questions (or few questions) expenses … what’s stopping you?

“More than a million public sector workers, including teachers, doctors and police officers, can expect wage increases of up to 3.5% a year as Theresa May moved to drop the government’s pay cap. …..”

“The planned new wage increases have come from departmental savings, rather than the Treasury releasing new funds, according to the Sun newspaper. This could result in frontline services coming under threat in order to fund the rises. …..”

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2018/jul/24/theresa-may-to-end-pay-cap-by-forcing-departments-to-make-savings

Broadband: third world UK

“… Only 4% of homes in the UK have a full-fibre broadband connection, compared with 89% in Portugal and 71% in Spain. …”

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2018/jul/24/superfast-broadband-bt-charges-openreach-sky-talktalk-vodafone