“Police admit loophole stops speeding drivers from being prosecuted on roads in Cranbrook”

Cranbrook a NEW development? Some of the houses there are 4 or more years old!

“Drivers on some of new roads in Devon cannot be prosecuted for speeding, police have admitted.

Numerous roads running off London Road in Cranbrook are yet to be officially adopted by Devon County Council therefore leaving housing developers responsible for managing them.

This means that Devon and Cornwall Police is unable to enforce speeding restrictions around the town on roads that are unadopted and do not have street lights.

“For speed enforcement to occur, a valid Traffic Regulation Order needs to be in place,” said Ch Insp Leisk.

“This is prepared by the local authority post adoption. When conducting speed detection activity, we would always confirm the validity of the TRO.

“The other occasion where a road speed limit is always 30mph is when street lighting is present less than 200 metres apart. Unless posted otherwise, this is always a 30mph limit.

“A street layout would always be agreed with the local Highway Authority, in this case Devon County Council, prior to build as part of the planning process.”

Concerns were raised at a recent Cranbrook Town Council meeting with Cllr Ray Bloxham telling members that police would not enforce the 30mph limit on unadopted roads.

He added that the Devon County Council task group was looking at speeding on Devon’s roads.

Cllr Kevin Blakey, chairman of Cranbrook Town Council, told Devon Live that his understanding was that all aspects of the Road Traffic Act apply on all of the town’s roads.

He said: “It is true that the majority of the roads in Cranbrook have yet to be adopted, and this is usual for most new developments.

“However, the supposition that speed limits and other regulations do not apply is incorrect.

“The Road Traffic Act and associated regulations apply in full and without exception to all roads to which the public have access.”

However, Ch Insp Adrian Leisk clarified that while certain aspects of the act do apply – such as needing insurance and a valid licence – police are not in a position to be able to prosecute speeding.

He said: “Elements of the Road Traffic Act apply such as insurance, standards of driving, wearing seat belts and not using a mobile phone.

“These all are applicable as the offence is committed on a road – there is a legal definition of road.

“The setting of speed limits are always detailed in the TRO, the lack of which could be relied upon in an individual’s defence.”

A spokesperson for Devon County Council said: “Because the roads have not been adopted, and so are not managed by DCC, the responsibility rests with the Cranbrook Consortium for main roads that link with London Road, and the relevant housing development companies manage the roads in their sections of development that connect to the main Cranbrook roads.”

https://www.devonlive.com/news/devon-news/police-admit-loophole-stops-speeding-2018242

A personal view of scrutiny

From Peter Cleasby, a member of the Green Party, who lives in Exeter.

The Centre for Public Scrutiny has been tasked by the government with contributing to the new statutory guidance on overview and scrutiny in local government [1]. Below are my own suggestions, drawing on experience with monitoring Exeter City Council, which I have sent to the CfPS and the government.

1. There should be a requirement that scrutiny committees are constituted so as to be able to challenge ruling group proposals effectively. Exeter City Council changed its rules a few years ago to require that the chairs of scrutiny committees would be drawn from the majority party only (previously the chairs could be taken by members of opposition parties). This reduces the independence of the committees and, for obvious party political reasons, reduces criticism of leadership group proposals.

2. There should be more opportunities for members of the public to ask questions and challenge councillors at meetings. Other Devon councils allow questions to be asked at meetings of their executives/cabinets, but Exeter limits this practice to its scrutiny committees. Although the questioner is allowed to speak at the end of any discussion following the question and answer, no opportunity is provided to ask a supplementary question. This reduces the effectiveness of the challenge and the quality of discussion, and a requirement for one supplementary question would be valuable.

3. Scrutiny committees should be required to engage independent specialists to help them understand and challenge leadership proposals which have a high technical content, for example: on air quality, waste collection and disposal, estimation of housing need. This would enable officer-led proposals, often informed by consultancy studies predicated on terms of reference and assumptions issued by those officers, to be debated on a level playing field of knowledge.

4. Officers should be required to inform scrutiny committees of any representations received from organisations and individuals, whether solicited or not, relevant to an item being discussed by a scrutiny committee.

5. It should be mandatory for all proposals which would incur unbudgeted expenditure in excess of (say) £50k should be discussed at a scrutiny committee; and the proposal should state explicitly where the funding for the proposal will come from, including the impact on existing specific budgets.

6. In the interests of measuring the extent to which members of the public are having to resort to FOI Act/EIR channels to obtain information, the number, nature and outcome of all such requests such be reported publicly to each scrutiny committee cycle.

Some of these requirements will have – modest – costs at a time when local authorities are under severe financial constraints. In the interests of restoring the health of our democratic arrangements, the government should be prepared to make available additional funding to support them.

NOTES:

[1] See https://www.cfps.org.uk/3323-2/

Another investigation of local authority scrutiny and accountability

Owl says: The time is coming for fewer reports and more action. As an example, council CEOs should be forced to attend such committees in public to answer for their more controversial and questionable behaviour.

“The National Audit Office is to conduct a study of local government governance and accountability that will “examine key elements of local arrangements in the light of current pressures”.

The watchdog will also examine how the Ministry for Housing, Communities and Local Government, which is responsible for maintaining the overall accountability system for local government, is exercising its responsibilities as the steward of the system.

The NAO said: “Council governance and accountability arrangements are key in securing value for money locally. However, these arrangements are being tested by the current financial circumstances in the sector. Increasingly difficult decisions need to be made to protect key services and ensure financial sustainability. This includes the design and delivery of large service transformation programmes and the pursuit of new sources of revenue income through commercial investments.

“Local governance and accountability arrangements provide assurance about decision making processes and support the mitigation of risk in this increasingly challenging and complex environment.”

The NAO report is expected to be published in early 2019.

A report from the Committee for Standards in Public Life on local government ethical standards is due to come out later this year.”

http://localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=36710%3Anational-audit-office-to-investigate-local-government-governance-and-accountability&catid=59&Itemid=27

Buying votes with new social housing – but only after 2022!

Throughout this government’s term those in social housing have been demonised as scroungers and workshy. The government instead chose to line the pockets of already-rich developers and people being helped to buy houses that cost up to £600,000.

Today, as Brexit continues to be a shambles, education is at breaking point, inequality is at its widest, the environment is being trashed and the NHS is on its knees, May announces that, in fact, people in council houses are mostly hard-working people trying desperately to make ends meet. And that occupying such housing should not be a “stigma”!

So what changed?

Nothing, except that more and more people are deserting her party and their votes are, of course, going with them – to people like Claire Wright, for example. And to other feisty independent councillors such as East Devon Alliance’s Gardner, Rixon, Jung and Shaw.

Read the fine print on this housing. It is not promised until 2022 – when Tories may well not be in power and when our economic climate could be very different.

And if you want to know who thinks social housing is a stigma, read here:

“… Housing Secretary James Brokenshire, asked who Mrs May saw as the politicians who “look down” on social housing, told BBC Radio 4’s Today programme: “I think it’s more a sort of a greater public perception, sadly.”

Pressed further if there are Conservative politicians who take this view, Mr Brokenshire again referred to a “general stigma” which he said was a feeling among tenants who were consulted for a Government policy paper. … “

http://www.itv.com/news/2018-09-19/pm-to-push-for-social-housing-reform-amid-second-rate-citizen-stigma-concern/

“Let American firms run hospitals, urges free trade group”

“Ministers should allow American healthcare companies to compete with the NHS to run hospitals as part of a free-trade pact after Brexit, a think tank recommends.

The Initiative for Free Trade (IFT) said that Britain should also end its ban on imports of products such as chlorinated chicken and accept American environmental and food safety regulations as equivalent to those in the UK.

The moves, it claimed, would help clear the way for a UK-US trade deal that would “rewrite the rules” of global commerce and allow Britain to take advantage of trade freedoms offered by Brexit. The IFT has received backing from Liam Fox, the international trade secretary, and Boris Johnson.

The report, edited by Daniel Hannan, a Tory MEP, was partly written by the trade lawyer Shanker Singham who has been consulted on free trade by Dr Fox, David Davis, Steve Baker and other ministers since the referendum.

Its conclusions will fuel suspicions that the think tank is being used as an “outrider” to align Britain with America on standards to secure a trade deal that would not be possible if the government signs a Chequers-style agreement with the EU.

The report, which was published simultaneously in London and Washington, was a collaboration between the IFT and the libertarian US think tank the Cato Institute.

It calls for Britain and the US to negotiate the most ambitious agreement ever that would allow British and American companies to compete on a level playing field in each other’s markets across both goods and services. Both countries should accept each other’s regulations on safety and environmental standards and open up all government procurement contracts to both sides.

It also suggests that any British or American citizen should be able to work in both jurisdictions if they have secured a job. It is the group’s proposals to open up the NHS to competition that is likely to prove the most contentious.

Daniel Ikenson, one of the report’s editors, described the NHS as an “incumbent” healthcare provider that should have competition. “The purpose of liberalising trade is to expose incumbent businesses to competition, including healthcare providers,” he added.

A Department for International Trade spokesman said: “We are currently seeking a wide range of views about four potential free-trade agreements, including with the USA, and we encourage all interested organisations and members of the public to make their voices heard through our online consultations.”

Source: Times (pay wall)

“Living in a polluted area increases the risk of dementia by up to 40 per cent”

Traffic to and from business parks on main roads … heavy goods vehicles … multi-drop deliveries … taking cars for short journeys … built up towns … we have it all.

“Thousands of cases of the illness could be prevented every year by cutting traffic fumes, said researchers who have added to growing evidence that dirty urban air can damage the brain.

Polluted air is known to cause lung and heart problems as tiny soot particles and chemicals such as nitrogen dioxide (NO2) pass deep into the body.

Research is also increasingly linking traffic fumes to thinking problems. Last year a Canadian study of 2.2 million people concluded that those who lived continuously near a busy road were 12 per cent more likely to get dementia.

Scientists now say that Britain’s higher pollution levels may make the risk even greater in this country after looking at data on 131,000 Londoners aged above 50, of whom 2,200 developed dementia over seven years.

The research cannot prove a causal link but it found that people living in the fifth of areas with the highest levels of fine particulate matter (PM2.5) were 20 per cent more likely to get dementia during the study. Those exposed to the highest fifth of NO2 levels were 40 per cent more likely to get dementia even after adjusting for age, class and other health habits, according to results in the journal BMJ Open.

Frank Kelly, of King’s College London, senior author of the study, said that while the results were not conclusive “it is increasingly appreciated that the impacts of air pollution on health are seen far beyond the lungs”.

He said it was “very likely that high air pollution alone does not cause dementia but rather it increases the risk of an individual developing it”, adding: “Air pollution is linked with many more conditions than dementia and therefore there is now overwhelming evidence that we should be improving air quality in cities to improve public health.”

Traffic fumes, particularly from diesel, are the main sources of PM2.5 and NO2 and Professor Kelly said that ministers had a responsibility to cut pollution. He advised people wanting to minimise their exposure to “plan low-pollution routes and try to avoid rush hour”.

He added that indoors, people could decrease emissions by not burning candles or having open fires and by increasing ventilation when cooking.

Exactly how pollution harms the brain is not fully understood, nor how long people need to be living in polluted areas to be at risk, as the study looked only at pollution exposures at one point in time. Professor Kelly said that damage was likely to build up over years or decades as the result of inflammation and other reactions to pollution.

“We thus hypothesise that it is these reactions by our body to elevated pollution occurring over and over again that leads to the eventual tissue damage such as to the lungs, blood vessels or brain,” he said. The study suggested that each extra microgram per cubic metre of PM2.5 increased dementia risk by 7 per cent, compared with 1 per cent in the Canadian research. Professor Kelly said: “The pollution concentrations in London are higher and this would be the most likely explanation.”

He estimated that bringing pollution down to the lowest levels seen in London could prevent 7 per cent of all dementia cases in the study. With 210,000 people developing dementia each year in Britain, cleaner air could result in a “significant public health gain” he said.

Martie van Tongeren, of the University of Manchester, said: “There is a growing body of evidence of the link between air pollution and brain health, including dementia and Alzheimer’s. This study adds to this . . . As most people in the UK live in urban areas, exposure to traffic-related and other air pollutants is ubiquitous. Hence, even a relatively small increase in risk will result in a large public health impact.”

With no treatment for Alzheimer’s, experts increasingly believe that preventing the condition is the best hope of mitigating its toll. However, James Pickett, of the Alzheimer’s Society, said that despite the evidence that pollution particles could reach the brain the link was still uncertain. “We need more robust research into how pollution affects brain health before we can decide whether we should get out of the city and move to Emmerdale,” he said.

David Reynolds, of Alzheimer’s Research UK, said it was possible that other diseases not measured by the study could skew the results, as could differences in diagnosis rates by GP surgeries. “The diseases that cause dementia can begin in the brain up to 20 years before symptoms start to show. We don’t know where people in this study lived in the two decades before their dementia diagnosis, so we have to be cautious about how we interpret these results,” he said.

“The link between air pollution and dementia risk is a growing area of research. This study highlights the importance of further studies that look into exposure to pollution over a longer period of time.”

Source: Times (pay wall)