“Royal Mail boss is humiliated in another pay row as concerns grow that he is involved in too many companies”

Man with fingers in several pies, most of which are going off, gets more money as a thank-you for making the bad pies!

“Royal Mail chairman Peter Long has been forced into an embarrassing U-turn in a fresh row over fat-cat pay at a second company he runs.

Just weeks after suffering one of the biggest shareholder revolts in corporate history at Royal Mail, the 66-year-old faced investor fury at estate agency Countrywide, where he is also chairman.

The company, whose brands include Hamptons International, Bairstow Eves and John D Wood, had planned to hand top bosses including Long up to £20m in shares.

But the controversial bonus scheme has been axed following a backlash from investors who threatened to vote against the plan at a meeting next week. The climbdown comes weeks after Long was humiliated by Royal Mail shareholders when 70pc of them voted against the postal service’s pay policies.

Concerns have been raised about whether he is over-stretched. He is paid £300,000 a year as chairman of Royal Mail and £360,000 as executive chairman of Countrywide.

He is also deputy chairman of the supervisory board at travel agent Tui, where he earns £167,000, but has relinquished his role as chairman of Spanish theme park operator Parques Reunidos.

In an interview two years ago Long said: ‘You have to ensure that when you take on chairmanships you can give sufficient time to them and you don’t spread yourself too thin.’

Peter Kyle MP, a member of the parliamentary business committee, said: ‘I have met people who can do the most prodigious amount of work and do it very well. But we have to judge the performance of executives by outcomes and not on their words, and it’s very clear there have been some outcomes for Royal Mail that have affected staff and affected customers, and this for me should trigger a period of reflection.’

Countrywide is Britain’s biggest estate agent and has about 10,000 employees, but has been struggling in the face of slumping property sales and online competition. It has issued four profit warnings in less than a year. …”

http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/article-6080113/Royal-Mail-boss-humiliated-pay-row.html

“Persimmon profits rise 13% after help-to-buy boost”

Owl says; Summary – take care of your donors and they will take care of you.

“The housebuilder Persimmon has reported that its profits rose by 13% in the first half of the year, boosted by the government’s help-to-buy scheme and competitive mortgage deals.

Pretax profits jumped to £516m from £457m in the six months to 30 June, and Persimmon said it expected further growth in the second half of the year, bucking the wider trend of a slowing UK housing market.

“We have continued to experience good levels of customer interest in our housing development sites as we trade through the quieter summer season,” said the Persimmon chief executive, Jeff Fairburn.

“Customers are continuing to benefit from a competitive mortgage market and confidence remains resilient based on healthy employment trends and low interest rates.”

Britiain’s second biggest housebuilder angered shareholders earlier this year after handing Fairburn a £75m bonus. A report published last week by the High Pay Centre revealed Fairburn was the highest paid FTSE 100 boss in 2017, with a £47.1m package.

Persimmon sold 8,072 new homes in the first half of the year, up 4%. The average selling price increased by 1%, to £215,813.

The housebuilder has been one of the biggest beneficiaries of the government’s help-to-buy programme, which has lifted sales and supported house prices across the UK. …”

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2018/aug/21/persimmon-profits-rise-housing-market-help-to-buy

New homes: extra small and privacy only in the toilet

“New homes are 20% smaller than they were in the 70s, a study has found.

Families today squash into houses just 65sqm big, quarter of the size of a tennis court.

But while homes may be shrinking, their prices are expanding. In 1971, the average cost was £5,632, with wages being around £2,000 a year.

Now, buying a house sets us back on average £228,400 and pay is £27,000.

The study by the Royal Institute of British Architects of new pads on sale in 20 cities found kitchens are around 25% smaller than in the 70s, while bedrooms and ­bathrooms have 20% less space.

Riba president Ben Derbyshire said: “This becomes a critical problem for families. In a two bed, four person home there is no space to be on your own except in the ­lavatory.”

Homes in London are the most cramped, with Glasgow second on the list.

But the Home Builders ­Federation insisted smaller houses are making it easier for first time buyers to get a property.”

https://www.mirror.co.uk/money/british-houses-shrinking-property-prices-13111497

Cranbrook: plans to vastly extend town to be published soon

Just a coincidence that this is announced just after Exeter City Council refuses the first of four large retail development applications close by …..

“Expansion plans for Cranbrook are set to be revealed by the end of the year, revealing proposals to increase the number of households to nearly 8,000 over the next 15 years.

The first houses in the new town were built in 2012 and there are currently 1,700 households living there.

Alongside the residential part of the development, further details are expected for the town centre, to be built on land next to the Cranberry Farm pub.

The proposals include 13 retail units, a town hall with a library and auditorium, a health and well-being centre and a leisure centre.

The Local Plan anticipates Cranbrook will have 7,850 new homes by 2031, equating to a population of about 20,000 people.”

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-england-devon-45186923

EDDC’s former auditors in hot water again

“Under-fire accounting giant KPMG was on Monday slapped with a £3 million fine by the industry watchdog for a “breach of ethical standards” over its audit of fashion brand Ted Baker.

The Financial Reporting Council said the firm, which admitted it was in the wrong, should not have provided expert witness services to Ted Baker in a court case while it was also handling its books in 2013 and 2014.

“This was in breach of the ethical standards and led to the loss of KPMG’s independence in respect of the audits,” the FRC said. “In addition, there was a self-interest threat arising from the fact that the fees for the expert engagement significantly exceeded the audit fees.”

The firm’s fine was reduced to £2.1 million for settling the case early, although the auditor was also landed with a £112,000 bill for costs.

Its senior auditor, Michael Barradell was fined £80,000, cut to £46,800 after he settled.

KPMG said: “Where there are lessons to be learned, we will learn them.” It added that since last year it no longer offers any expert witness work for any company it audits and stressed that the actual scrutiny of Ted Baker’s books has not been called into question. …”

Source: Evening Standard Business

Exeter Science Park gets new tenants: travellers

“A group of travellers has arrived on land owned by Devon County Council [and East Devon Growth Point] at the Exeter Science Park.

Five caravans have been at the site, on the outskirts of the city, since Friday afternoon.

Eyewitnesses said that they also saw a small pony and dogs.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-england-devon-45186923

Bankrupt Northamptonshire Country Council: more sleazy payments uncovered

“Councillors spent public money on a hospitality box and hiring a plane as the authority headed towards financial crisis, an investigation has found.
Payments were made by a company owned by Northamptonshire County Council whose directors were councillors.

NEA Properties, which bought the box at Premiership rugby side Northampton Saints, was dissolved a month before the council banned spending.

The BBC has contacted the councillors concerned for a response.

An independent audit report found that NEA Properties’ “expenditure incurred was consistent with the authority and purpose of the company and its directors”.

The company was incorporated in 1983 under the name Northamptonshire Enterprise Agency to promote the county and managed a number of units at the University of Northampton campus.

Conservative councillors Bill Parker and Andre Gonzales De Savage had served as directors in the company since 2010 and 2007 respectively.

It sold its properties in September 2014 and £700,000 was transferred back to the council, but £180,000 was spent on other items.

More than £4,000 was used on a B17 vintage aircraft and first aiders for a memorial event at Grafton Underwood in May 2015.

NEA Properties also spent £2,700 on a heritage dinner with string quartet.
The report also revealed the company spent more than £250 on “cheese, biscuits, etc” for a stately home event.

Concerns about finances at the council – which has been issued with two Section 114 notices, banning new spending – were made as early as 2013, according to former leader Heather Smith.

Worries over NEA Properties were first raised by a whistleblower, former UKIP councillor Michael Brown, in January 2017.

An audit was then commissioned and found the payments were made with “minimal” governance and documentation.

It found no evidence of improper spending or management by the company “but in the absence of various records only limited assurance can be provided”.

The audit was also told £80,000 spent on Northampton Saints went on the redevelopment of a new stand at the Franklin’s Gardens ground, but the club denied this was what was purchased.

A club spokesman said it could “confirm the county council had a box as part of a marketing package which they purchased”.

Financial adviser Mr Brown said the lack of a detailed audit trail was a “unbelievable in this day and age”.

He added: “As a public organisation they were keeping secret the accounts of a limited company it owns under the small companies exception. “This should not happen as it leaves itself open to abuse of public funds.”

A spokesman for the council said the report found that although limited assurances were provided about the company, “the organisational impact was minor”.

He added: “The report also found that expenditure and financial transactions were transparent.

“However, the committee did draw up a number of recommendations and work on addressing these will be done as soon as possible.”

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-northamptonshire-45211357

“MPs demand MORE expenses to pay staff complaining that Brexit has added to their workload”

“MPs are demanding more expenses as they complain that Brexit has added to their workload, it emerged today.

Politicians have been urging the parliamentary watchdog to increase allowances for staffing their offices, which can already be more than £160,000 a year.

The calls surfaced in a survey carried out by the Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority (Ipsa).

Under current rules, MPs can claim £150,900 a year for staffing costs, rising to £161,550 in London, although they can apply for an increase.

The figure has risen from £109,000 eight years ago.

Contingency funding is available on a ‘case by case’ basis where members have specific need for more support.

However, in its report on its annual feedback survey published this summer, Ipsa said some had said they still did not have enough money.

‘There were also requests to further increase MPs’ staffing budgets due to their increasing workloads, some of which is the result of Brexit,’ the report stated.

What expenses can MPs claim?
Renting accommodation in London: £22,760
Office costs for London MPs: £26,850
Office costs for non-London MPs: £24,150
Staff for London MPs: £161,550
Staff for non-London MPs: £150,900

Ipsa said that it had received 93 response to the survey – nine from MPs, 33 from MP proxies who manage their business costs, and 51 from other staff members working for MPs.

It did not say how many had raised the issue of staffing costs.

The watchdog has not ruled out granting the requests.

The body has made clear it will ‘take into account any relevant consequences of the UK’s decision to leave the European Union’ when considering updating the rules on MPs’ expenses.

Sir Alistair Graham, a former chairman of the Committee on Standards in Public Life, said Ipsa should be wary of acceding to demands for a rise.

He told The Daily Telegraph: ‘Brexit sounds like a rather convenient argument for increasing funding, Ipsa should be very cautious about raising budgets.’

MPs were barred from employing family members after the election last year – although those who were already on the payroll have been allowed to stay on.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6077883/MPs-demand-expenses-claiming-Brexit-added-workload.html

” ‘No-frills’ lifestyle out of reach of parents on minimum wage – study”

“Couples raising two children while working full-time on the minimum wage are falling £49 a week short of being able to provide their family with a basic, no-frills lifestyle, research has found.

The Child Poverty Action Group (CPAG) called for an increase in the government’s “national living wage” to allow families to have an acceptable standard of living.

Its Cost of a Child report, published on Monday, showed an 11% weekly shortfall for a couple raising two children at the point they are aged three and seven.

Worse, however, was the deficit for lone parents, who every week fall 20% short of being able to provide a level of living for their children defined as acceptable by public opinion.

Universal credit flaws leaving families in debt, campaign group says
The charity blamed rising prices, freezes on benefits and tax credit, the bedroom tax and the rollout of universal credit for hitting “family budgets hard”.

The chief executive, Alison Garnham, said: “There is strong public support for the government topping up the wages of low-paid parents, and investing in children is the best long-term investment we can make.

“By using the forthcoming budget to unfreeze benefits and restore work allowances, the government can take steps towards making work really pay.”

Gains from increased minimum wages were offset by a freeze in tax credit support, the research showed.

The findings did, however, show an improvement on last year when the family with an 11% shortfall would have found themselves with a 13% deficit. …”

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2018/aug/20/no-frills-lifestyle-out-of-reach-of-parents-on-minimum-wage-study

” One in every 11 houses is a second home in South Hams”

With a knock-on effect across Devon on those locals desperate for local housing.

“One in every 11 residential properties in part of Devon is an unoccupied second home, new analysis has revealed.

Official government figures show that 3,896 dwellings in the South Hams area were classed as “second homes” for council tax purposes as of October 2017.

This means that while they are unoccupied for most of the time, they are fully furnished and so aren’t officially considered “empty homes”, even though no one permanently lives there. …”

https://www.devonlive.com/news/devon-news/one-every-11-houses-second-1908104

Labour councillor cautioned for voting twice in election

“Faisal Rana, a Labour councillor in Rochdale, has been cautioned by the police after admitting voting twice in May’s elections for the location council.

Cllr Rana has properties in two different wards and joined the electoral register at both addresses. The wards are in different Parliamentary constituencies but both within Rochdale council. Faisal Rana cast votes in both wards at the Rochdale council elections earlier this year.

It is legal to be registered in more than one place, such as students who can register both at home and at university if they have gone away for university. But it is illegal to vote more than once for the same body. One of those example students could, for example, vote in both places at council elections if they are for different local councils. They could only vote once in a general election.

Faisal Rana said:

I have accepted a police caution for an electoral offence, which relates to me casting separate votes for two different wards in two different Constituencies (Spotland and Falinge, and Norden Ward) in the local elections earlier this year.

I legally registered my votes by providing my genuine national insurance number, date of birth and addresses and when I received these through the post I thought it would have been OK and that is why they issued me two ballots for two constituencies.

I did not realise this was an offence and misinterpreted the rule that says it is possible to vote in two different electoral areas.

Cllr Rana had held the assistant finance portfolio in the ruling Labour group. He is now reported to have “stepped away” from the role.”

https://www.markpack.org.uk/155712/faisal-rana-rochdale-voting-twice/?goal=0_8f22492d8e-8327d54ac1-312639877

Britain’s richest (pro-Brexit) person moves himself and ALL his assets to tax-free Monaco

“Reclusive titan of industry Jim Ratcliffe has found himself under unusual scrutiny after being declared Britain’s richest man, with his political leanings and tax affairs coming under the microscope.

The 65-year-old head of the Ineos chemicals group has assets worth an estimated £21 billion ($26.7 billion, 23.5 billion euros), putting him top of the 2018 Sunday Times rich list.

He was only 18th on last year’s list but the value of his company, of which he owns 60 percent, soared last year, propelling him up the ranks and earning him a knighthood from Queen Elizabeth II.

It is a long way from his humble beginnings, growing up in social housing in Manchester, northern England. …..

Despite his success, Ratcliffe has long-remained a “secret” and “lonely” character, earning nicknames such as “JR” — in reference to manipulative oil baron in the US TV saga “Dallas” — and James Bond villain “Dr. No”, according to a 2014 Financial Times profile.

Privacy is also a hallmark of his Ineos group, which is not listed on the stock exchange and therefore has no obligation to disclose its accounts.

However, the businessman has made his views known on the thorny issue of Brexit, coming out as one of the few bosses to support the move to leave the European Union, like fellow entrepreneur James Dyson.

“The Brits are perfectly capable of managing the Brits and don’t need Brussels telling them how to manage things,” he told the Sunday Times a year before the June 2016 referendum.

Despite his professed patriotism, Ratcliffe has shifted his fortune to Monaco, according to British media, taking advantage of the principality’s generous tax regime.

The move put him in the sights of pro-EU politicians, who accused him of hypocrisy.

“It’s strange for someone who presents themselves as highly patriotic and has been given honours to move to a notorious tax haven,” Liberal Democrat leader Vince Cable told The Times.

“It’s unfortunate that when we make a song and dance about a national hero who’s investing in the UK, they disappear to Monaco.”

Tax concerns had already led him to relocate the headquarters of his company to Switzerland in 2010, before returning to London in 2016, saying he wanted to demonstrate his confidence in Britain’s post-Brexit economy.

New York Times: “As Austerity Helps Bankrupt an English County, Even Conservatives Mutiny”

This us from the New york Times and published in the United States: it is the best assessment of the effect of austerity on the UK that Owl has ever read and contains deep-level information not seen anywhere else. It was written by NTT journalist Kimiko de Freytas-Tamura – “a correspondent based in London, where she covers an eclectic beat ranging from politics to social issues spanning Europe, the Middle East and Africa”.

“NORTHAMPTON, England — It was a seething, stomping protest in this ordinarily genteel medieval town: Throngs of residents, whistling and booing, swarmed the county hall. “Criminals!” they shouted. They held up banners that read: “Tory councilors wanted for crimes against people in Northamptonshire.”

The crime?

The bankruptcy of their Conservative-led local government, which has a budget deficit so big that councilors are stripping away all but the minimum services required by law. Inside the county hall, the besieged council debated the latest round of cuts — it had already voted to close libraries and stop repairing roads — as disgusted residents jeered.

“Your guilt should keep you awake at night,” Patrick Markey said at the meeting earlier this month, his voice trembling with rage. “It’s criminal incompetence and criminal politics.”

Usually, local government finance is a dull affair. But Northamptonshire has become a warning sign of the perilous state of Britain’s local governments. A Conservative Party bastion, Northamptonshire is leafy and affluent, littered with aristocratic estates — yet in February its local authority became the first in two decades to effectively run out of money.

Britain is already in upheaval over Brexit, its looming withdrawal from the European Union, with many experts warning of economic hardship ahead. But Northamptonshire is foreshadowing another potential fiscal crisis: Local governments drained of resources, cutting services to the bone.

Councils are Britain’s fundamental unit of local government, dealing with an array of basic needs: trash collection, public transport, libraries, town planning, and care for children and other vulnerable people, among other things. They levy a tax on homes and charge fees for some services. They also collect a nationally set tax on commercial real estate, and keep an increasing share of it. But for years they received most of their funding from the central government.

The crisis in Northamptonshire is complicated and partly self-inflicted. But it has roots in the austerity policies and cost cutting that the Conservative-led national government imposed a decade ago in response to the global financial crisis. The Tories in London argued that austerity was the responsible solution to balance public accounts and encourage future growth.

Now some Conservatives, especially at the local level, are openly defying what has been a pillar of the party’s ideology.

Funding from London for local governments has fallen 60 percent since 2010, with reductions expected to total $21 billion by 2020, the Local Government Association has calculated. In response, nearly every council in Britain has cut or outsourced services, sold off assets and tried a host of budget gimmicks, experts in local finance say.

One in 10 of the larger councils that have obligations to care for children and elderly people — about 35 councils in all — are in danger of exhausting their reserves within the next three years, according to the National Audit Office.

“There’s a slow-moving domino effect,” said Rob Whiteman, chief executive of the Chartered Institute of Public Finance and Accountancy.

Northamptonshire was the first flashing red light. East Sussex County Council, run by Conservatives, recently announced it would reduce services to the “legal minimum.” The Conservative-led county council in Somerset warned it might be facing bankruptcy. This month, two families won a case against Bristol City Council to block plans to reduce funding of special education needs and disability services.

The Northamptonshire council, having run through its rainy-day funds, now has enough money to pay only for mandatory services for the elderly and children. Unable by law to run a deficit, the council voted in February to shut down 21 of the county’s 36 libraries, remove bus subsidies and suspend road repairs. (A court recently blocked the decision to close the libraries.) At the meeting earlier this month, some councilors seemed resigned to the angry public response.

“I am happy to apologize,” said Richard Auger, a Tory councilor. “I think mistakes were made,” he added. “It’s a situation we’re responsible for.”

The crisis is a political embarrassment for Conservatives, who are already divided into warring camps over Brexit. The former leader of the Northamptonshire council, Heather Smith, has resigned from her position, and from the Conservative Party. Investigators sent from London blamed her and other councilors for mishandling local finances, even as she blamed London for impossible mandates and a refusal to consider higher taxes.

Sounding increasingly like their Labour opponents, some Conservative councilors in Northamptonshire are now talking about stopping the outsourcing of public services and demanding tax increases.

“I was a believer that we had to save money, but there had to be other ways than to slash and burn,” said John Ekins, a recently elected Conservative councilor in Northamptonshire. “How did we get to where we are? What the hell has been going on?”

The Graph of Doom

They called it the Graph of Doom.

It was 2013, and the Northamptonshire council was presented a Power Point chart that depicted an unavoidable contradiction: a sharp, rising public demand for local services contrasting with a sharp cutback in money from the national government, as part of the austerity program led by Conservatives in London.

“It was showing how we were all heading towards this cliff edge,” recalled Ms. Smith, who was then a senior councilor. The cliff edge was a shortfall of $175 million that needed to be addressed by 2020.

A committed Tory, Ms. Smith initially embraced the calls for austerity, as did many in reliably Conservative Northamptonshire. “Being a Conservative-run council, everybody accepted that the country had been overspending and that it was time to scale all of that back,” Ms. Smith said.

The problem was how to do it. The council needed to find huge savings, but it also had limited revenue sources.

Raising taxes was ruled out, deemed ideologically unpalatable while the Conservatives were making austerity-related cutbacks. Eric Pickles, the government minister who oversaw local government financing between 2010 and 2015, said it was a “moral duty” for the Tories to keep local taxes low.

“Some Conservative councils had a big fight over it, and said, ‘No, we’re not doing it,’ ” Ms. Smith said. “They had a huge amount of pressure on them.”

Northamptonshire also had a more unusual problem. Many Conservative councils were partly shielded from central-government cuts because they had large earnings from the commercial real-estate tax, called business rates.

But the concentration of blue blood in Northamptonshire actually hurt its tax base. Much of the region is owned by gentry like the Duke of Buccleuch, thought to be the largest private landowner in Scotland and England, and Earl Spencer, uncle to Princes William and Harry, heirs to the British throne.

Those holdings are generally agricultural land, said Guy Shrubsole, who runs the investigative blog “Who Owns England?” And agricultural land is exempt from business rates, leaving Northamptonshire even more dependent on funding from London.

Faced with the cold reality of the Graph of Doom, council leaders decided that the old ways of doing business no longer applied. The council’s then chief executive, Paul Blantern, designed the “Next Generation Model,” an initiative that pivoted the council, like many others across the country, toward outsourcing.

Under “Next Gen,” the council would become a commissioning body, spinning off many of the services it had been performing and, in the process, saving millions of pounds a year.

One initiative, Olympus Care Services, was founded in 2014, as a wholly owned subsidiary of the council. It was created to oversee adult social care services, with the intention of generating extra revenue by selling off surplus bed spaces to privately funded care customers.

During its first years, Olympus managed to post modest profits, as well as reducing the overall cost to the council.

But it never achieved the projected cost savings, and as budget pressure from the council mounted, it started recording losses — around $4 million in 2016 and $1.25 million in 2017.

“It’s all such a perfect storm,” said Simon Edwards, director of the County Councils Network, a cross-party group that represents England’s local authorities. “Northamptonshire was trying to be too innovative too quickly, outsourcing this and spinning off that, that they thought would save them money and protect some of the services.”

“They did some things wrong,” he added. “But inexorably austerity is leading many counties into very difficult financial positions.”

The outsourcing experiment collapsed last year, before it had fully started. By February, the council realized it had no way out, issuing a formal notification of de facto bankruptcy. In response, Conservative leaders in London dispatched government inspectors.

In March, the inspectors issued a damning report.

Max Caller, the chief inspector who wrote the report, said that the county council’s troubles were self-inflicted and that the Next Gen approach did not have any “documented underpinning” that set out how it was expected to deliver savings.

“The things that they did were unwise,” he said in an interview. “You could say that they didn’t want to face up to the challenges of austerity, but all the other councils have.”

According to his findings, he said, Northamptonshire overspent by $130 million over three years and took no steps to rein in expenditure. “Everything has been a waste of money.”

Still, he said of the financial problems afflicting other councils: “You can’t go year after year holding down taxation rates at local level and taking the money away and expecting the same level of service. That’s not possible.”

Ms. Smith and other local Conservatives said the inspectors’ report was unfair, and that the national government was wrongly scapegoating the council. She said other Conservatives, locally and in London, grew irritated with her insistence that insufficient funding was the core problem.

“They wanted me to shut up about us being underfunded,” she said.

This year, the government announced some new money for councils, including about $200 million for adult social services. Even so, some experts say that councils are still staring at a $4 billion funding hole.

In response, according to an annual government survey of council leaders, an overwhelming majority of county councils across England plan to raise council tax, their levy on homes, 5.99 percent this year — the maximum the central government will allow. Many have also said they would like to raise business rates, a move the central government is still rejecting.

Before declaring bankruptcy, Northamptonshire took the desperate step of selling and leasing back a $70 million headquarters building it opened in October. The move brought widespread public ridicule and helped prompt the arrival of the government inspectors.

Northamptonshire’s financial troubles were clear from the moment the government began to pull back on grants to local authorities, officials said. What they did not expect was that a Conservative government in London would let the county slide into bankruptcy.

‘The Whole Process Has Gone Mad’

On July 24, the Northamptonshire Council issued a Section 114 notice that banned any new expenditure of public money, after realizing it needed to save almost $90 million more this year. In laymen’s terms, this meant that the council was declaring de facto bankruptcy for a second time.

Politics is usually sharply divided in the county, with Labour on the left and the Tories on the right. But by the time the council voted to shut down most of the county’s libraries, the overall scope of the cutbacks startled many people in both parties. In recent years, the council had also closed local centers for children and sharply reduced educational funding.

But it was the vote to shut down the libraries that struck the sharpest nerve, even in affluent villages like Roade, where the local library is described as “a pub without pints.”

“I couldn’t face the libraries being cut,” said Sam Rumens, a Conservative councilor who voted against that measure, as he sat recently with some Labour officials at the town hall discussing “problems of capitalism.” (“This is one of the leftiest views you’ll get out of me today,” he told them.)

“There was a very sharp intake of breath,” he recalled when he said that he would oppose the cuts. Labour lawmakers cheered and members of the public who attended the debate on the budget this winter roared their approval.

“The whole process has gone mad,” said Jason Smithers, another Conservative politician and the incoming mayor of Higham Ferrers, as he strolled through the town, which has yellow-brick houses that look straight out of a Jane Austen novel and a grocer selling organic duck and goose eggs.

Like Mr. Rumens, he was a dissenter from his Conservative colleagues. “They were like cowboys running through the town,” he said of colleagues who voted for the library cuts. Mr. Smithers said he supported higher taxes even if it would jeopardize his political fortunes. “I’m a Conservative through and through,” he insisted. “But you’ve got to be realistic.”

Council leaders in Northamptonshire said they had done everything by the Conservative government rule book.

“We did everything that the government asked for,” said one senior council official, who would speak only on condition of anonymity. There was even a handbook prepared by Mr. Pickles, the minister in London, on “50 ways” councils could save money. It suggested banning mineral water in council meetings, scrapping subsidized canteens in favor of local sandwich delivery firms and opening coffee shops in libraries.

In Horton, a village where elegant mansions peek from behind wooded lanes, Wedgwood Swepston, 57, was out inspecting his Land Rover. An Aston Martin idled nearby.

“They’ve been austere in the wrong places,” he said of the government. “When austerity affects people who cannot look after themselves, then you need to question whether austerity has gone too far.”

When asked about his party affiliation, he became thoughtful. “I suppose I’m now what you call a ‘floater,’ ” he said.

“It makes me cross,” said Gloria Wagstaff, 77, expressing her discontent with typical British understatement as she waited for a bus in Higham Ferrers. “The whole government has lost its way.”

It is taking a petition to try to force government/developers to pay for their cladding mistakes

Dreadful that this has not been forced upon them by government.

Save homeowners from financial ruin. Ensure the right parties pay in the Cladding Scandal:

https://www.change.org/p/kit-malthouse-save-homeowners-from-financial-ruin-by-ensuring-developers-pay-for-their-cladding-mistakes

“Thousands of UK bridges are ‘sub-standard’, at risk of collapse and will cost almost £1billion to repair, experts warn after the tragedy in Genoa”

“The number of ‘sub-standard’ bridges in the UK has soared in recent years and would cost almost £1 billion to repair, according to alarming new findings.

A survey by the RAC Foundation revealed that almost 3,500 British bridges maintained by councils are not considered strong enough to bear 44-ton lorries – the heaviest vehicles permitted on our roads – placing them at risk of collapse if warning signs are ignored.

The figure – an increase of almost 45 per cent from the 2,375 recorded in 2015 – was correlated after the motoring research charity sent out Freedom of Information requests to all local authorities.”

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6074663/Thousands-UK-bridges-sub-standard-risk-collapse.html

“Government £200m brownfields building fund falls flat, as number of new homes declines”

A £200million Government fund to pay for more homes on industrial land has resulted in the opposite effect, with fewer homes built on brownfield areas than before it was set up.

Official Government’s land use change statistics show that the proportion of new homes registered on previously developed land has fallen by 4 percentage points since 2014, when the fund was set up.

Yet over the same period the number of new residential addresses on supposedly heavily protected Green Belt land has increased by the same proportion – 4 per cent.

Separately, over the same period – 2013/14 to 2016/17 – the proportion of new residential addresses on the protected Green Belt land increased from 3 per cent to 4 per cent of all new homes built.

The Government’s record on building on brownfield sites was attacked by Labour which said minister’s commitment to building on brownfield sites was “hot air”.

The £200million fund was announced by Brandon Lewis, the current Tory party chairman and then then-Housing minister, in August 2014 so “councils across the country can now team up with developers and bid for government assistance to build thousands of new homes on previously-developed land”.

Mr Lewis published bidding criteria to create 10 housing zones on brownfield land, each able to deliver up to 2,000 new homes each.

The new zones, which will be outside London, should be large enough to deliver 750 to 2,000 properties and would help councils boost housebuilding on previously-developed land while safeguading the countryside, he said.

However John Healey MP, Labour’s Shadow Housing Secretary, said the figures showed that the Government had gone backwards on its pledge to encourage more building on brownfield sites.

He said: “If hot air built homes then Ministers would have fixed our housing crisis. Despite big promises to get building on brownfield land, official Government figures show we’ve gone backwards.

“It’s clear that Ministers are failing to get good value-for-money for taxpayers.

“By giving developers a free rein to do what they want, the Government is failing [to] get homes for local people built where they are needed.”

Matt Thomson, Head of Planning at the Campaign to Protect Rural England, backed the findings, saying that “promises to build the homes the nation needs while protecting the countryside are not being carried through.

“Our analysis of the government’s new ‘planning rulebook’ suggests that despite a lot of warm words current trends will continue, to the detriment of both town and country.

The government must stick to its guns and end this constant cycle of broken promises.

“They need to rein back greenfield development where suitable brownfield land is available, and discourage growth where it cannot happen without compromising their own policies intended to manage sprawl and protect open land.

Last week the CPRE warned that green belt was disappearing at an “alarming rate” with the equivalent of 5,000 football pitches lost because of a relaxation of planning laws.”

Source: Sunday Times (pay wall)

Free “Devon Scrutiny Symposium” 7 September, 10-4 pm, County Hall

Not heavily publicised, picked up off Twitter. One rule of scrutiny: make it accessible to all …!

Vulnerable children failed by cash-strapped councils

Owl says: children – not adults, children. How low we have sunk. But no doubt still even further to sink.

“A “silent crisis” in the care system has left more than 13,000 children with unacceptable levels of support from local authorities, an analysis warns.

Tens of thousands more are being looked after by English councils that are deemed to be in need of improvement, with warnings that a £3bn shortfall in the budget for children’s services will emerge by 2025. Anne Longfield, the children’s commissioner for England, said the findings cast “a stark spotlight on the inadequacies of systems that are meant to be in place to support our most vulnerable children”.

Vulnerable children are on the new frontline of a crisis in social care
The analysis by the Social Market Foundation thinktank examined the treatment of “looked-after children”, who have been taken into care. It found that over the past three years, about 47,000 of the children were with local authorities deemed by Ofsted inspectors to have inadequate children’s services or services that require improvement. The figure represents almost two-thirds of all children in care. There were 13,790 in inadequate authorities.

Local councils insisted that those deemed to need improvement in some way should not be seen as failing. However, only 36% of local authorities were classed as “good” and only 2% were rated as “outstanding”.

The study warns that children in care have educational outcomes that are way below average and are significantly over-represented in the criminal justice system. Only 14% achieved five A*-C GCSEs, including maths and English, in 2015. The national average is 55%. Looked-after children are five times more likely to be excluded from school, while 39% of children in secure training centres had been in care. …”

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2018/aug/18/crisis-inadequate-council-caring-for-thousands-of-children-local-authority-care

Planning consultation – new NPPF weakens public input

“In May, the Government (Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government) held a consultation on revisions to the National Planning Policy Framework – the headline planning policy document from which all other planning policy stems.

The Institute responded to the consultation, specifically commenting on the very opaque legislation / guidance surrounding the requirements for consultation in planning and development.

Despite growing concern about public disaffection in the planning system, the guidance contained within the original NPPF was very vague: while developers were encouraged to engage and the benefits are described, there was nothing in law to require developers to consult local people before submitting a planning application.

The revised NPPF has now been published and we were disappointed to see that very little has changed in the requirement to consult.

Engagement is still only ‘encouraged’; one of the few changes being that it has been extended from solely statutory, to both statutory and non-statutory consultees.

However, the list of information requirements that local authorities must make of developers has been reduced from ‘proportionate to the nature and scale of development proposals’ to ‘kept to the minimum needed to make decisions’. To view the exact changes between the two documents, click here:

Click to access The-NPPF-on-Pre-application-engagement-and-front-loading-a-comparison-between-the-original-and-revised-versions-1.pdf

While the legal requirement for developers to consult remains opaque, the notion that community involvement can benefit planning decisions is unequivocal.

Planning is ultimately about people: whether a local authority-run strategic plan or a private sector-led development proposal, change to the built environment impacts on communities. While it is generally believed that those proposing changes should involve local residents as a courtesy, additionally planners and developers have much to benefit from involving local people.

Consultation provides the opportunity to glean information and ideas from a local community. This might include knowledge of local history and which has the potential to enrich a scheme, otherwise unknown social issues which might have delayed the process, and the needs and aspirations of the community which may be met through the new development. With local input, proposals can be enriched and finely tuned to a specific neighbourhood, creating a unique scheme well suited to its location.

The local community, too, can benefit: community involvement can promote social cohesion, strengthen individual groups within it and create a shared legacy.

Following local dialogue at an early stage and having had proposals either challenged or welcomed, a developer has a greater chance of building local support for a proposed scheme. And a well-run consultation can build a trusting and mutually cooperative relationship between the developer and the community, which can minimise the potential for conflict and thereby remove risk in the process.

While tCI is disappointed by the lack of commitment to consultation in the revised NPPF, we are encouraged that policy might ultimately change following the Raynsford Review, a review of the planning system which has been commissioned by the Town and Country Planning Association and makes community participation a high priority. To view tCI ‘s contribution to the Review’s Interim Report, click here:

https://www.consultationinstitute.org/tcis-response-to-the-interim-report-of-the-raynsford-review-on-greater-community-involvement-in-planning/

https://www.consultationinstitute.org/the-nppf-and-consultation-or-revised-planning-policy-and-consultation/

Those MP dodgy links – this time vaping

“MPs who backed calls for looser laws around vaping are attacked over their links to the industry.

MPs who called for restrictions on e-cigarettes to be relaxed have been criticised over their links to the vaping industry.

In a controversial report, they said bans on vaping in public places – such as in hospitals and restaurants or on buses – should be considered.

The report, by the Commons science and technology committee, also said that ministers should carry out a review to make it easier to get the devices on the prescription.

MPs who called for restrictions on e-cigarettes to be relaxed have been criticised over their links to the vaping industry.

It emerged yesterday that the committee’s chairman, Norman Lamb, spoke at an industry forum held by the UK Vaping Industry Association. The forum focused on how to boost the market for e-cigarettes.

He was also photographed next to John Dunne, the association’s director, at the launch of another report and told the audience: ‘I was horrified when the EU went down the route of health regulation [of vaping products]… I thought it was a complete own goal.’

Professor Simon Capewell, of Liverpool University, said: ‘The committee has concentrated solely on ‘experts’ who are e-cig champions.’

Mr Lamb said yesterday that it was unfair to say the committee has a pro-vaping bias.

‘I reject this assertion,’ he said. ‘The committee carefully considered evidence from more than 90 organisations including a range of academics, NHS professionals, NICE [the clinical guidelines watchdog], and government departments to inform the report.

‘It is my responsibility as chair of this committee to speak to a range of organisations and individuals about our work.’ “

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6072919/MPs-backed-calls-looser-laws-vaping-attacked-links-industry.html