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