Government “Landscapes Review” call for evidence on AONBs and National Parks

“Overview

The Government has asked for an independent review of England’s National Parks and Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONBs). You can find more about the work of the review and our Terms of Reference. Already the review team, led by Julian Glover and a panel with a range of experiences and interests, has carried out visits and meetings in many parts of England.

We will do more in the months ahead – but we want everyone to have a chance to contribute, whether you live in a National Park or AONB, run a business in them, enjoy visiting, care about landscapes and biodiversity, or represent an organisation with views that might shape and improve our findings. The questions (available as a list in the related documents section below) are a guide: please do not feel you must answer them all – or have to write at great length. We have not set a word length on answers, as we know some people and organisations will want to reply in detail on specific points. However, we ask that where possible you keep each individual answer to no more than 500 words. It is not necessary to reply to every question so please ignore those which you do not think relevant to you. You may find it easier to write your answers elsewhere before pasting them into the text boxes in the link below: …”

https://consult.defra.gov.uk/land-use/landscapes-review-call-for-evidence/

“Budget 2018: Big housing plan will supply only 9,000 extra homes”

“Theresa May’s plan to solve the housing crisis will result in only 1,500 additional homes being built each year, the government’s budget watchdog has said.

The Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR) predicts that the decision to allow councils to borrow extra money to build more social housing, which was the centrepiece of the prime minister’s party conference speech, will result in no more than 9,000 extra homes by 2024. It said that the plan would “crowd out” private sector construction as local authorities were forced to poach skilled tradesmen from house builders.

The analysis is likely to anger the prime minister because it contradicts previous predictions that the policy will help the government to meet its target of 300,000 new homes a year. “

Source: The Times (pay wall)

“The High Streets that missed out on millions: The Chancellor’s got £1.6bn to help shops but councils failed to make full use of his last helping hand”

“Struggling High Street shops have missed out on millions of pounds of vital emergency funding following a series of shambolic blunders.

On Monday, Chancellor Philip Hammond announced a £1.6 billion lifeline for Britain’s High Streets, which included a £900 million relief package to help shops battling sky-high business rates.

It means that around 500,000 shops, pubs, restaurants and cafes are expected to see their rates bills cut by up to a third over the next two years.

The Treasury will also set aside £675 million to help councils rejuvenate their town centres.

But it is the Government’s second attempt at helping the High Street, after a £435 million business rates relief package was announced in 2017.

This was supposed to help businesses struggling to pay their business rates.

However, Money Mail can today reveal that millions of pounds from the first fund failed to reach the businesses it was intended to help, and was instead returned to Treasury coffers.

As many as three-quarters of councils failed to hand out their allocated cash to ailing local firms. In some cases, councils spent only an eighth of their budgets, while others helped as few as five shops.

One local authority failed to spend almost £800,000 of its extra funding.

Eighteen months ago, more than 500,000 shops, pubs and restaurants were hit by business rates hikes — a tax on bricks and mortar businesses.

Following a Money Mail campaign, ministers pledged to introduce a £300 million fund for councils to distribute to those worst affected over four years, as part of a wider £435 million business rates relief package.

Some £175 million of this had to be spent in the first 12 months — by the end of September — or be returned to the Government. But many councils misunderstood the rules, while others failed to promote the scheme or made it too complicated for small businesses to apply.

Some councils claim the Government did not give them enough time to distribute the money before it was lost.

Embarrassingly, the council in former Communities Secretary Sajid Javid’s own constituency, Bromsgrove, Worcestershire, handed out only a third of the cash it had been given to help its High Street.

Mr Javid, now Home Secretary, was previously in charge of ensuring the fund was distributed by councils and had promised ‘absolutely no delay’ in doing so.

Yet figures collated by Retail Express and chartered surveyors Bankier Sloan reveal just £46,300 of the council’s £134,500 pot was given out in time — helping only 37 businesses.

Nearby Redditch Borough Council helped only 21 shops and spent just £15,800 out of £124,000, an eighth of its budget.

Stevenage Borough Council, Hertfordshire, gave cash to just five businesses in the town and awarded £18,800 out of a possible £100,000.

While Swindon Borough Council, Wiltshire, spent only £58,000 out of £314,300, helping 41 businesses — with more than a quarter of a million pounds leftover.

Fenland District Council, in Cambridgeshire, spent £21,277 out of almost £160,000, barely a seventh of its budget.

And Broxbourne Borough Council, in Hertfordshire, spent a fifth of its pot, distributing £38,000 out of £213,500 and helping only 31 shops.

Camden Council, North London, allocated 100 per cent of its fund, but said shop closures meant that, in the end, it was only able to hand out 86 per cent of it.

It meant that, despite distributing £4.84 million to businesses, it had £790,000 leftover.

By contrast, around 30 councils spent all of their funding. Barnsley Council, for example, spent every penny of its £276,000 and helped an incredible 2,135 businesses.

Jerry Schurder, head of business rates at consultancy Gerald Eve, branded the distribution of the grant ‘shambolic’.

He says: ‘It was a poorly designed fund by the Government and a knee-jerk response to the backlash against the rates revaluation.

‘It was then badly implemented by some councils which did not pay sufficient attention to the criteria.’

The fund was supposed to help the smallest businesses facing the greatest rises.

The Government decided how much money to allocate to each council by calculating the total increase in bills for firms facing a minimum 12.5 per cent rate rise and with a rateable value of less than £200,000 — the rental value on which business rates are based.

But many councils used this same rigid criteria when deciding which firms should receive cash —awarding it only to those hit by rate rises of more than 12.5 per cent.

In fact, councils had total freedom to spend the cash however they wished, as long as it went towards reducing business rates bills.

Some councils excluded businesses they felt did not need the cash as desperately, such as schools, banks and estate agents.

Meanwhile, multinational firms and Government bodies were typically excluded because they had exceeded state aid limits via other grants.

The Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government refused to say how much cash had not been spent.

But research by Retail Express suggests it was as much as £17.5 million — 10 per cent of the budget.

A series of Freedom of Information requests showed that 159 out of the 195 councils that replied had failed to spend all of their grant by the end of April.

The deadline to hand out the cash was actually September 30, but many councils stopped distributing the 2017/18 grant at the end of the financial year.

News editor of Retail Express, Jack Courtez, who led the research, says: ‘I think it is incredible that councils claim they are being squeezed by a lack of central Government funding, but when they do receive money they fail to distribute it.

‘Many councils have let down local businesses which depended on this funding.’

Chartered surveyor Ian Sloan, of Bankier Sloan, who contacted councils to warn them they faced a massive under-spend, says: ‘The distribution of this fund has been a mess. Local businesses have lost out on money they really needed and now the money is gone.’

Councillor Matt Dormer, leader of Redditch Borough Council, says that as the funding is drawn from general taxation, the council has ‘a duty to spend it in an appropriate manner, and not to simply seek to spend as much of it as possible.’

Bromsgrove Council says it had to bear in mind that ‘any relief given to people facing an increase in their rates gives them a competitive advantage.’

Broxbourne Borough Council said that ‘100 per cent of businesses who completed and returned application forms were granted the relief.’ Swindon Council says it had to award cash automatically when few firms applied.

Stevenage Borough Council said it has already granted £32,392 of the £36,000 it has been allocated for the coming year. And Fenland Council says it would give higher amounts to successful firms this year as a result of the low take-up of the relief in 2017/18.

Camden’s Councillor Richard Olszewski says the council awarded all of its funds but ‘due to businesses moving in and out of the borough and a substantial number of successful rating appeals’ it was then unable to distribute it all before the deadline. This year it has over-allocated funds to allow for business turnover.

A total of £175 million was supposed to have been handed out in 2017/18, followed by £85 million this year, then £35 million in 2019/20 and £5 million in 2020/2021.

A Government spokesman says: ‘To help local businesses thrive, we have introduced over £10 billion worth of business rates support so nearly a third of all business pay no rates at all.’ “

https://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/news/article-6335101/The-Chancellors-got-1-6bn-help-shops-councils-failed-make-use-helping-hand.html

Will hospitals be sold off to US interests after Brexit?

One pundit thinks so:

“Leading Brexiter Tories have revealed their plans to allow private US firms to take over NHS hospitals. They are also planning for the UK to adopt lower US environmental and food safety regulations and allow imports of things that are presently banned for health reasons such as chlorinated chicken into the country.

The radical plans were revealed in recommendations by a think tank called ‘The Initiative for Free Trade’.

The IFT was launched in September 2017 by a small but influential group of right-wing Conservative figures.

Who might those figures be?

None other than Tory party leadership contender Boris Johnson, Tory International Trade Secretary Liam Fox who both launched the think tank along with IFT president, Tory MEP Daniel Hannan.

https://tompride.wordpress.com/2018/10/31/tories-reveal-plans-to-sell-off-nhs-hospitals-to-us-firms-after-brexit/

with back information here from 2017:
https://tompride.wordpress.com/2017/04/23/theresa-mays-secret-plans-to-replace-nhs-england-with-private-us-healthcare-system-kaiser-permanente/

Twiss gets his words into a twist – ANOTHER reason we need independent councillors!

This time from the blog of DCC EDA councillor Martin Shaw.

“Conservative County Councillor for Honiton, Phil Twiss told Devon County Council on 4th October that ‘Sonja Manton [Director of Strategy for the Devon Clinical Commissioning Groups] said at the Health and Adult Care Scrutiny Committee the other week that there no plans to close any community hospitals in our area. We were talking about Seaton, Honiton and Axminster at the time.’

I was surprised that he should give us this good news in passing, and that the CCG had made no announcement of something so obviously important. So eventually I watched the webcast of the Health Scrutiny meeting on September 20th. Although Sonja Manton spoke several times, I couldn’t find her saying anything like what Phil said – indeed anything about community hospitals at all.

So I emailed Sonja and she confirms she didn’t speak about the hospitals. As for the issue, all she would say was, ‘I can assure you that our continued focus remains on planning and commissioning services and support to meet the needs of the Devon population in the best possible way. We recognise how strongly communities feel about community hospital buildings and will continue to work with communities and stakeholders to modernise and evolve the way our services are delivered and where they are based to make sure we make best use of all our resources and public estate.‘

So was Sonja more forthcoming at another, presumably private, meeting, Phil? Or was what you said wishful thinking?”

@philtwiss’claim that @SonjaManton said ‘there are no plans to close any community hospitals in our area’, not backed up by @NEWDevonCCG. What’s the explanation, Phil?

Why we need independent councillors

From the blog of Claire Wright. The review would NOT be happening without Claire’s dogged persistence (and similar action by EDA Independent Councillor Martin Shaw. Without them these issues would be kicked into the very, very long grass!

“A Devon wide review of how carers are coping will take place, following my successful proposal at last month’s Devon County Council Health and Adult Care Scrutiny Committee meeting.

I had been carrying out research into this area since January, when I asked for more information on a scrutiny report, which suggested that carers may be struggling.

I had a meeting with officers and asked for a report of a focus group that was carried out last autumn (2017). …

The results (which I was asked not to publish) were worrying. In almost all areas carers who took part indicated that they were worse off, or saw services being poorer.

What came out strongly to me that the three key areas of health, financial support and respite care, were all deemed as being poorer, according to the carers who took part.

I proposed a review at the June scrutiny committee meeting but chair, Sara Randall Johnson suggested a meeting with Devon Carers staff first, at the Westbank League of Friends. Devon Carers is commissioned to provide support for carers in the Devon County Council area.

This was a useful meeting. What emerged for me, among other issues, was that under the Care Act 2014, the bar has been raised by the government for both financial support and for respite care so it is now harder to access. I am quite certain that this is partly the reason that carers are finding things tougher.

I asked for a further agenda item for the September Health and Adult Care Scrutiny Committee meeting. I invited two carers who had asked for my help – Maureen Phillips and Mary Hyland, who gave powerful and moving presentations of their experiences of caring. Maureen, for her father and Mary for her partner.

Mary said there is no respite care available. And that overnight she became a carer, she was thrown into it, she knew nothing about it and had to give up her job. She has no support and finds it hard to even leave the house. Previously, she was a very outgoing person, even having her own programme on BBC Radio Devon. She said she was there on behalf of all local carers. Everyone is finding things hard.

The committee was silent.

Maureen said she had been the carer to her father for eight years. Life is exhausting, demanding, frustrating and isolating, she said. Maureen said specialist support workers are required. She said both she and her father need emotional support. She asked who she should turn to when things get tough. There is a shortage of care workers. In the last eight years she had one holiday. She had to take her father with her. Maureen said she had to fight for every bit of support. She has turned to the services of a solicitor in desperation.

When I made the proposal for a spotlight review at the September meeting, it was seconded by the chair and agreed by the committee. I hope to have a date for the first meeting soon.

We need your help! If you would like to take part by giving your story to the spotlight review, please get in touch at claire@claire-wright.org – many thanks

Here’s the webcast: You can see Mary’s and Maureen’s presentation under public participation – https://devoncc.public-i.tv/core/portal/webcast_interactive/359701

The agenda item itself is under number 12..”

http://www.claire-wright.org/index.php/post/scrutiny_review_to_take_place_into_how_devon_carers_are_coping

Some better news – reduced winter car parking charges start on 1 November

Winter parking tariff starts this week:

£2 all day in all East Devon car parks compared to £1 per hour summer parking charges. BUT this applies to CASH paying parking only – parking permits and Parkmobile tariffs are NOT included.

No excuses not to do your Christmas shopping in your local East Devon towns.

Richest households to gain 14 times more cash than poor households from budget

“… Despite the chancellor setting out £55bn in spending on Monday, the Resolution Foundation concluded that 84 per cent of the income tax cuts will go to the top half of the income distribution.

“The richest tenth of households are set to gain 14 times as much in cash terms next year from the income tax and benefit giveaways in the Budget as the poorest tenth of households,” its post-Budget report stated.

“Meanwhile, income tax cuts announced yesterday will overwhelmingly benefit richer households, with almost half of the long-term gains going to the top 10 per cent of households.” …

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/budget-2018-philip-hammond-income-tax-cuts-austerity-finance-economy-chancellor-statement-a8608231.html

Get your school toilet rolls here!

Yesterday’s budget promised “a one-off £400m “bonus” to help schools buy “the little extras they need” this year”.

Note that this CANNOT be used for staffing – only one-off purchases (such as toilet rolls which some schools have asked parents for help to buy).

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/education/education-news/school-funding-teachers-parents-national-education-union-neu-austerity-a8282236.html

“Budget 2018: Anger as Hammond’s £60m pledge to plant trees is dwarfed by £30bn road spending plan”

“Environmental campaigners have condemned the chancellor’s budget plan to spend £60m on tree planting while £30bn is being pledged for roads.

They highlighted the contrast between the money the government is vowing to spend on improving green spaces and how much it is putting towards infrastructure that they fear will encourage driving and damage the environment.

Philip Hammond will announce in the budget that £60m will be spent on planting millions more trees across England, including a project to plant new street and urban trees set to receive £10m.

Environmental groups attack government’s £30bn roads spending plan
The remaining £50m will be used to buy carbon credits from landowners who plant woodland, the Treasury said.

But hours earlier, the government revealed it would be putting £30bn – 500 times as much – towards roads.

That money – ringfenced vehicle excise duty – will be used to upgrade and repair major routes including motorways, as well as fixing potholes.

But it may also go towards building new roads. …”

Developers get another easy ride budget

“In a boost for U.K. homebuilders, Chancellor of the Exchequer Philip Hammond will introduce a new Help to Buy program that will run from 2021 until 2023.

The scheme extends the original program, which has drawn criticism for boosting prices. It will be limited to first-time buyers and regional price caps will be introduced, limiting the value of the home to 1.5 times the price for an average debut home purchaser.

The government gives home buyers an interest-free loan of 20 percent to 40 percent of the purchase price under the program. The announcement was made alongside the publication of an independent, government-commissioned review of the original program. Some had feared the review might result in the policy being scrapped, but it confirmed the policy has boosted house building.

Persimmon plc, the U.K.’s largest home builder, has gained about 107 percent since the introduction of Help to Buy in April 2013. About 60 percent of the company’s home sales are through the Help to Buy program, according to research by analysts at Liberum. The policy, which has already been extended once, was due to expire in 2021.”

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-10-29/u-k-to-start-new-help-to-buy-program-for-first-time-buyers

Homeless sent from London to cheaper far away areas

“The number of households being moved out of London by councils has increased dramatically, rising by almost 50% in the first half of this year as town hall leaders blame rising homelessness, tightening public finances and a chronic lack of new cheap homes in the capital.

Councils have sent homeless households as far away as Glasgow, Newcastle and Cardiff in the last year, according to figures collected by local authorities and seen by the Guardian. Seven hundred and 40 households have been relocated to Kent, 574 to Essex, 30 to the West Midlands and 69 to Surrey.

More than 1,200 households were sent out of the capital in the first six months of this year – a 46% rise in the number of out-of-London placements. Six hundred and eighty-eight households were sent away between April and June alone, the highest rate in at least six years, up from 113 households in the first quarter of 2012-13. …”

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2018/oct/29/number-of-homeless-households-moved-out-of-london-soars

Hospitals should not be used as “weapons”

Here are some images of a few of the responses in the Sidmouth Herald to Hugo Swire after his claims that campaigners for Ottery St Mary Hospital are “anti-Tory” and have “weaponised” their campaign (click on images for better view):

  

     

The secret life of an MPs assistant [including those like Swire and Parish who employ their wives]

“Former parliamentary assistant Margot was thrilled to get a job in politics a few years ago, when she was in her mid-20s, but soon found herself a personal lackey, often doing private work instead of the constituency casework she was hired for – something that is against parliamentary rules. She spent three days designing a website for her MP’s wife’s company, and was then sent to the couple’s home to show his wife how to use it. At other times, she was told to run an online auction to sell her MP’s livestock collection and find people to write references so he could apply to a private members’ club. “It would have been so hard to say no to whatever I was asked to do,” she tells me. “I assumed it was par for the course, although I recognised it was outside of my duties. Had I wanted to complain, I would have had no idea how.”

Her boss, who is still an MP, shouted and swore at staff and told racist and sexist jokes, she and other members of his team tell me. With four full-time assistants paid from his parliamentary staffing allowance (this is £153,620, or £164,460 for London MPs), who helped with his personal life and political work, the MP spent significant time consulting for private businesses and attending board meetings. More than once, staff opened his office door and found him playing computer games in the middle of the day. “All I could really do was roll my eyes,” Margot says. “Because these people are more powerful, you just have to put up with it.” …”

… It also helps to be related or married to your boss [as Hugo Swire an Neil Parish do]: more than 100 MPs currently employ their relatives with public money, according to parliament’s register of members’ financial interests. Among them is Labour’s Margaret Beckett, whose husband Leo, in his 90s, has worked for her for decades. In a rare instance of intrusion into staffing, last March parliament’s standards authority banned MPs from hiring family members, saying it hindered diversity and transparency, although relatives who were already employed can remain. Archy Kirkwood tells me he “made no secret” of employing his wife, that she worked hard and “would never let me down”, but acknowledges some MPs have been less conscientious. “The only person in the world I would trust to handle constituency business in London in my absence would be my wife,” he says. “But [the system] was abused. It was.” Emma, another former researcher for an MP, says her boss employed his wife on the highest pay band (currently almost £50,000 a year), but it was unclear how much work she did.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/oct/27/sworn-at-belittled-fired-at-will-the-truth-about-working-for-an-mp

(Another) self-serving own goal for our Local Enterprise Partnership?

Our LEP is padded with business people who have heavy direst, indirect and subtle links to the nuclear industries and housing development around Hinkley C, so the longer they can keep this white elephant limping along the better. Eggs … basket …. though if the eggs fall out of the basket WE will be clearing up the financial mess, of course.

“France has postponed a decision on whether to order more nuclear reactors in an indication that it may be losing faith in the technology it has sold to Britain.

François de Rugy, the ecology minister, rejected calls for the swift launch of the construction of new French-designed European pressurised reactors (EPRs).

He said no decision would be taken before 2021 and hinted that the authorities might rule out more EPRs altogether. “That is a question which remains open,” he said.

His comments were a blow for EDF, the mostly state-owned French electric group that is building two EPRs at Hinkley Point in Somerset at a cost of £19.5 billion.

Hinkley has faced continued criticism and calls have been made for the project to be halted because of its spiralling costs as well as fears over the technology.

EDF, which is struggling to build France’s first EPR at Flamanville, Normandy, hoped to have a second one up and running by 2030. That is now highly unlikely, given the reluctance of President Macron’s government to place an order. An internal French government document leaked to Agence France-Presse said ministers had told EDF to show that it could limit construction costs before a new order would be considered.

Doubts about the EPR programme have grown amid a series of setbacks at the five sites where they are under construction.

EDF says the one at Flamanville will not be operational before the end of next year.”

Source: The Times

Clinical Commissioning Group merger for Devon – good or bad?

Owl says: a bigger group fo DCC NOT to scrutinise – right….

“There are claims a planned merger between two NHS bodies in Devon will result in a less accountable system with no guarantee of improved healthcare for patients.

At present, there are two clinical commissioning groups – or CCGs – which plan and buy healthcare for local people. There’s one covering the North, West and the East of the county – NHS NEW Devon CCG – and the other covering Torbay and the South – NHS South Devon & Torbay CCG. Health bosses want them to merge into one big organisation, claiming this will save money and result in a stronger service. They say there’s already been benefits from the two organisations working more closely together.

But GPs in Torbay have voted against the move and local councillor in the Bay, Swithin Long, is also worried…”

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-england-devon-45865015

Coastal communities at high risk within a generation

“Rising sea levels will claim homes, roads and fields around the coast of England, the government’s official advisers have warned, and many people are unaware of the risks they face.

The new report from the Committee on Climate Change (CCC) said existing government plans to “hold the line” in many places – building defences to keep shores in their current position – were unaffordable for a third of the country’s coast. Instead, the CCC said, discussions about the “hard choices” needed must be started with communities that will have to move inland.

“There genuinely will be homes that it will not be possible to save,” said Baroness Brown, chair of the CCC’s adaptation committee. “The current approach is not fit for purpose. This report is really a wake-up call to the fact that we can’t protect the whole English coast to today’s standard.”

She added: “We could see as much as a metre of sea level rise before the end of the century, so within the lifetime of today’s children, and that has a major impact on coastal flooding and erosion.” Prof Jim Hall, another member of the committee, said: “We are not prepared.”

The regions affected include areas with soft, eroding shores in the south and east, as well as low-lying areas in East Anglia, Lincolnshire, parts of the south-west such as the Somerset Levels, and the coast between Liverpool and Blackpool in the north-west.

The entire coast of England is already covered by shoreline management plans, developed by the Environment Agency and local councils. These would cost £18-30bn to implement, but have no funding and no legal force. The CCC analysis found that, for more than 150km of coast, the plans to hold the line would cost more than the property and land that would be protected.

For another 1,460km of coast, the benefit of holding the line was twice the cost, but the government only currently funds defences with at least a sixfold cost-benefit ratio. “Funding for these locations is unlikely and realistic plans to adapt to the inevitability of change are needed now,” said the report.

The report also found that 520,000 properties are already in areas with significant coastal flood risk. However, this may treble to 1.5m by the 2080s without action.

Currently, 8,900 properties are at risk from coastal erosion and in 2014 the Environment Agency calculated that 7,000 homes, worth more than £1bn, would fall into the sea this century. But the CCC report found that in the 2080s another 100,000 properties would be at risk of sliding into the sea.

As well as properties, key infrastructure is also at risk from the sea level rise and bigger storms being driven by climate change. In the 2080s, 1,600km of major roads, 650km of railway line and 92 stations will be at risk, the CCC found. Ports, power stations and gas terminals are also in danger. A further risk is toxic waste from old landfill sites falling into the sea as the coast is eroded; a 2016 study found 1,000 such sites at risk.

Pollution risk from over 1,000 old UK landfill sites due to coastal erosion.

Brown said people living in coastal areas do not have access to good information about the risks they face. “A retired couple could buy, with cash, a house with a fabulous sea view without being given any information about whether it was at risk of erosion,” she said.

Making better information easily available would alarm people but was vital, said Hall. It would also affect property values, he said: “If it was better communicated, as we think it should be, then that would have a [negative] impact on house prices.”

The government must work with local councils on long-term, funded programmes that engage people and help them move if necessary, the CCC said. “Those are very difficult decisions,” said Brown. “Local councils are in a very tough situation having to raise those kind of issues with their communities. There may be a bit of denial going on in local authorities.” …”

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2018/oct/26/rising-sea-levels-will-claim-homes-around-english-coast-report-warns

Cranbrook town councillors attempt to block mobile catering vans is defeated

Owl says: This is what happens when you fail to build a proper centre in a new town.

“Members differed in their opinions when deciding whether to support a request for annual street trading consent from Richard Filby, who runs popular chip van Flippy Chippy.

Councillor Ray Bloxham said granting consent would go against Cranbrook’s ‘healthy’ image, as it is just one of ten sites selected to join NHS England’s national Healthy New Towns programme. He said: “We are trying to do something about the health of our town.

“We need to, at some stage, make a stand against this type of thing because it is not good.”

Cllr Bloxham said there is a ‘proliferation’ of mobile businesses coming into Cranbrook, which do not pay business rates and sell ‘unhealthy food’ to the community.

Cllr Sarah Gunn said a fish and chip shop is set to open in Cranbrook soon and the council needed to support it. She added: “It is not cheap rent or business rates – there are no concessions.

“A chip van up the road is going to make that very hard.”

Cllr Matt Osborne said Flippy Chippy is ‘well known and liked’ in Cranbrook, and had been involved with a lot of community events held in the town.

He said: “If we take that away when there is a chip shop opening, the backlash will be quite severe – because we are the reason people can not have fish and chips in town anymore.

“I think we will get some kind of movement against that.”

Cllr Bloxham proposed the council objects on the grounds that Cranbrook is a Healthy New Town and the council is ‘trying to promote healthy living’.

He added: “It is unfair competition for businesses trying to set up shop in the town. [Flippy Chippy] has no overheads apart from a bit of petrol.”

Cllr Bloxham’s proposal was defeated by four votes to three.

Cllr Les Bayliss said two other mobile companies sell food in Cranbrook and it would be unfair to object to Mr Filby’s request.

He proposed the council supports the trading consent request, but his motion was also defeated by three votes to two.”

Councillors finally agreed they would send their comments to East Devon District Council, which will decide whether to grant consent at a future date.

Mr Filby’s application is to trade from a catering van every Monday, from 4.30pm to 7.30pm, on Younghayes Road (by the country park).

http://www.midweekherald.co.uk/news/council-split-in-deciding-whether-to-support-street-trading-request-from-popular-flippy-chippy-food-van-1-5749353

Newham latest wobbly council

“Newham financial health check identifies control weaknesses

A financial health check carried out by the Chartered Institute of Public Finance and Accountancy (CIPFA) has recommended that London Borough of Newham addresses weaknesses in its financial control.

CIPFA was appointed by the borough’s mayor Rokhsana Fiaz to examine the council’s finances after she was elected earlier this year.

According to a council report this week, the initial findings of the review recommend that the council carries out a fundamental budget review with external challenge and new corporate standards.

It also says the council needs, as a matter of urgency, to assess the extent to which reserves might be needed to support this year’s revenue budget.

In addition, it recommends the adoption of outcomes-based budgeting, the consideration of council tax increases, and that the council “review the use of its assets, dispose of assets no longer required and how it finances investment in those assets”.

The final report is set to be presented to the council in the next three months.”

http://www.room151.co.uk/brief/#newham-financial-healthcheck-identifies-control-weaknesses