Owl says: unlikely!
“Plans for 12,000 new houses in Exeter will be unveiled today as the city expands over the next two decades.
The biggest house-building project will be in Marsh Barton, where more than 5,000 new homes are planned.
Thousands of others will be built in Sandy Gate, East Gate and Red Cow village.
Other schemes are also in the pipeline, including a new bridge over the Exe, cultural spaces and new schools.”
“We have today received the news that most people living locally didn’t want to hear. Namely, that the applicants who submitted a planning application to build a business park on agricultural land in an AONB, have now submitted an appeal against the decision taken last October by the District Council to oppose their application.
This clearly is very disappointing and speaks volumes about the attitude of the applicants to the wishes of those who live locally. After all, the Town Council, the District Council and 1,400 local residents who signed our petition all oppose the proposed business park.
We are determined to immediately take steps to raise funds to allow the Campaign to represent the views of local residents at the planning appeal hearing that will now have to be held. Our next email will set out how we intend to raise the funds to do this.
However, in the meantime we would again remind you of our timely ceilidh fundraising event which is being held on Saturday 23 February in Sidford Social Hall, Byes Lane, Sidford, starting at 7.30 pm. Tickets cost £5.00 and can be obtained by emailing us or from the Rising Sun in Sidford, the Red Lion in Sidbury or Paragon Books in Sidmouth.
It’s more imperative than ever to support us!
This is what we have today issued as a press release –
The Campaign is disappointed but determined to fight on!
The news that the applicants have lodged an appeal, whilst not unexpected, is nonetheless a massive disappointment, particularly for local residents who have overwhelmingly made their views known about this unwanted and unnecessary business park.
The fact that the applicants are going to an appeal when the District and Town Councils and so many local residents have all said that they are against the proposed business park shows how little the applicants care about the local area and its people.
The Say NO Campaign is absolutely determined to support the District Council and its rejection of the planning application at the appeal. But to do this we need to engage professional representatives to forcefully make our case against the business park development. This will take a significant sum of money that we must raise from our supporters. We will now be publicising how people can donate directly into our recently opened bank account, as well as continuing to accept cash donations.
Sadly, our fundraising ceilidh on the evening of 23 February at Sidford Social Hall cannot be timelier. If anyone wants to support the Campaign financially, or in any other way, we would invite them to contact us at
nosidfordbusinesspark@yahoo.com.
“The UK government is “in denial” over the sustainability of local government finances, a group of MPs has warned.
Councils are overspending on social care, reducing key services, relying on reserves and resorting to generating income from alternative sources, the Public Accounts Committee has claimed – adding that the government’s insistence that the sector is in fact sustainable is “extremely troubling”.
A PAC report, published today, noted that local authorities in England have seen their core funding from central government slashed by nearly 50% since 2010/11.
It added that such cuts have coincided with increasing demand for services such as housing – the number of homeless people in the UK has risen by one-third in the past eight years – adding that increased demand for social care means councils have had to cut spending in other areas. Spending on services outside of social care has fallen by 32.6% between 2010/11 and 2016/17, it stated.
The report added that, despite these figures, the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government insists the sector remains sustainable.
“The government is in denial about the perilous state of local finances. It insists the sector is sustainable yet is unwilling or unable to back up this claim,” said Meg Hillier, chair of the PAC.
“Flimsy assertions have no place in financial planning. The fact that government has bailed out councils with short-term fixes should be evidence enough that all is far from well.
“Government needs to get real, listen fully to concerns of local government and take a hard look at the real impact funding reductions have on local services. And then it needs to plan properly for the long-term,” she added.
The cross-party group of MPs added that it was “deeply dismayed” that MHCLG views the financial sustainability of local authorities solely in terms of a “small set of statutory services”, such as social care, rather than the full range of services local people need.
“It is extremely troubling that the government views the financial sustainability of councils solely in terms of statutory services, rather than the full range of services local people need and can reasonably expect councils to provide,” Hillier said.
Overall local authority spending on services fell by 19.2% in real terms between 2010/11 and 2016/17, which the PAC says has pushed the MHCLG into using short-term cash injections, such as the £1.4bn allocated in the 2018 Budget.
Permanent secretary at MHCLG, Melanie Dawes, told the PAC in November: “We believe the sector as a whole is sustainable if the amount of resources available to it can deliver the statutory services that it is required to deliver.”
The report recommended that MHCLG should work with local authorities to collect evidence on the impact on service users of providing funding through one-off funding boosts as opposed to long-term funding arrangements.
In the 2019/20 local government finance settlement communities secretary James Brokenshire said that core spending power would increase from £45.1bn in 2018-19 to £46.4bn in 2019-20 – a cash increase of 2.8%.
“This year’s settlement paves the way for a fairer, more self-sufficient and resilient future for local government. That is why local authorities will have more control over the money they raise and a real terms increase in their core spending power,” he said.
The Local Government Association recently warned that discretionary services are under threat due to cuts to central government funding.
Further reaction to the report:
Rob Whiteman, CIPFA chief executvie, said: “It is widely accepted that the current funding model for local authorities is no longer viable, and without bold policy solutions vital public services will continue to be eroded in order to balance the budget.
“We should all share the concern that if current trends are allowed to continue, it will be some of the most vulnerable in society who will be missing out on services and experiencing worsening outcomes as a result.”
Richard Watts, chair of the Local Government Association’s resources board, said: “We agree with the Committee that the financial sustainability of local government cannot be defined by the ability of councils to just provide statutory duties.
“Pressures continue to grow in children’s services, adult social care, and efforts to tackle homelessness, and this is leaving increasingly less money for councils to fund other discretionary services, such as the maintenance of parks, certain bus services, cultural activities and council tax support for those in financial difficulty.”
Andrew Gwynne, shadow communities and local government secretary, said: “Nine of the ten most deprived councils in the country have seen cuts of almost three times the national average.
“And when you cut vital support services in such areas, social problems grow – and demand for those services only becomes greater.”
https://www.publicfinance.co.uk/news/2019/02/local-government-finances-unsustainable-mps-warn
From the East Budleigh Parish Conservation and Wildlife Protection Group.
What they do not mention is that the barn is owned by Clinton Devon Estates – the company that puffs itself up as “gold standard” when it comes to conservation …..
“Planning application, 18/1464/ful. The Pound, East Budleigh.
Since April 2018, the East Budleigh Parish conservation and wildlife protection group, have sought to do its utmost to protect the rare, and the not so rare species of Bat, as well as the other wildlife that inhabit the barn and adjacent green space known as ‘the Pound’ in East Budleigh.
All through this application we have researched extensively, bat law, wildlife protection, mitigation studies, European and domestic legislation and directives from the Bat conservation trust, the Back from the brink project, and Natural England to name but three.
Each body has standing advice on how to protect and conserve EPS (European Protected Species). We have shared that information with all the concerned councillors from parish to district level.
The advice from Natural England and Conservation bodies state that for rare species, the avoidance method should be taken, yet here we are fighting for those methods and laws designed to protect to be implemented.
Through our many conversations with various conservation trusts, the overwhelming response has been, “the laws are there to protect these species, if the LPA follow the directives and adhere to legislation, permission will be denied.”
Having studied the plans for mitigation, We have found shortcomings in all of the mitigation offered by the agent on this application, and areas of complete misunderstanding, or disregard for the laws that are supposed to protect all wildlife. So much so, that this contentious application has reached the next stage of the planning….. the development management committee.
Getting the application to this point is a small victory for the wildlife, as we feel sure, that had we sat by and done nothing, by now, the site would have been levelled, the new house been built and the wildlife displaced, gone, or even worse, dead.(as suggested possible in Richard Greens ecology report) So we have done incredibly well to get this far.
Now…according to EDDC planning agenda, the application is recommended for approval with conditions. It is due to be discussed at the next DMC, on
Tuesday February 12th at
11AM, in the
Council chamber at Exmouth town hall.
But, of course, as is usual in a ‘democracy’, free speech and independent opinion is subject to what the ‘powers that be’, decide on as to what can be discussed and what should be taken in to consideration, so that an informed decision and vote can be made!
During this long process, it has been, and still is, the groups aim to get the best possible outcome for our precious, rare wildlife and our local green space.
We are putting forward the argument that:
1) the Pound is a significant site, regardless of numbers, with no less than four rare species of Bat,( with up to fourteen species recorded by ourselves), evidence of Hazel Dormice and an active Badger sett.
2) the mitigation measures are not adequate, with little to no evidence that these measures are successful for the rarer, disturbance intolerant, more light adverse species such as the Grey long-eared, Greater and lesser horseshoe Bats. An opinion upheld by DWT’s conservation manager in his ‘neutral’ letter to EDDC.
3) the lighting plan is not in line with current research provided by the bat conservation trust, nor the ILP,(institute of lighting professionals) suggesting the maximum light spill should not exceed 0.45 lux lumen on a moonless night. whereas the current proposed lighting plan stands at 0.95. so still more than double.
4) These species ARE protected by law, but human interest is, once again, being favoured above the interest and protection of rare species and local wildlife.
We are, teetering on approval being granted, everything hinging on a committee of councillors who may not be able to see the bigger picture. Which is, if we all stand by and do nothing to protect our local patch and its inhabitants, we will lose more and more green space, more and more species and biodiversity.
Now we may not be able to make a difference globally, but if we all made a stand for our own little corner, couldn’t we, wouldn’t we, make East Devon a better place to be, not only for our wildlife, but ourselves too?
PLEASE STAND WITH US ON THE 12th.
We are meeting at around
10.15am outside the town hall in Exmouth,
to hold a peaceful protest prior to the DMC. So if you have time, We would greatly appreciate your support to stand beside us and be a voice for East Budleighs wonderful wildlife.
EBPCWP Group
ebpcwpgroup@yahoo.com
British synth-pop duo Pet Shop Boys have returned with a new song that makes fun of Michael Gove and Donald Trump.
Entitled Give Stupidity a Chance, the upbeat track is deeply ironic, calling for a world devoted to self-centredness and unencumbered by political correctness.
One lyric sung by Neil Tennant runs: “Intelligent people have had their say / It’s time for the foolish to show the way … We’ve had quite enough of experts and their dealings / Why face the facts when you can just feel the feelings?” This is a riff on Gove’s infamous statement ahead of the Brexit vote that “people in this country have had enough of experts”.
“The Crown Estate is holding a public consultation event from
2pm to 8pm
on
Friday (February 8)
at Millwey Community Centre,
to seek residents’ input on its proposals for land east of Axminster.
The Crown Estate’s site forms part of East Devon District Council’s (EDDC) Masterplan for the area, approved last week by councillors, for up to 850 homes, employment space and community uses as well as green space and a relief road.
The Crown Estate’s application would look to provide 441 homes – 25 per cent of which would be affordable – the central section of the proposed relief road, as well as space for new offices, shops and community facilities.
The event is an opportunity for local people to hear more about the plans and share their thoughts, ahead of a planning application being submitted to EDDC later this year.
Steve Melligan, strategic land portfolio manager for The Crown Estate, said: “Our proposals will help deliver a significant part of the new relief road for Axminster, as well as new homes and employment space for the area. We’re excited to present our plans to the community and look forward to hearing their views.”
https://www.midweekherald.co.uk/news/plans-unveiled-at-millwey-community-centre-1-5879374
“The Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government has set up a network of nine local authority chief executives across England as part of preparations for the UK leaving the EU.
The Ministry said the chief executives would engage with councils in their region “to share information on preparations to support an orderly exit”.
It added that the chief executives would simultaneously be kept informed on national policy on EU exit that could have implications for local services, businesses and residents.
The chief executives participating in the network are:
Phil Norrey, Devon County Council (South West)
Becky Shaw, East Sussex County Council (South East)
John O’Brien, London Councils (London)
Nick Page, Solihull MBC (West Midlands)
Anthony May, Nottingham City Council (East Midlands)
Tony Reeves, Liverpool City Council (North West)
Martin Swales, South Tyneside Council (North East)
Tom Riordan, Leeds City Council (Yorkshire and Humber)
Richard Carr, Central Bedfordshire Council (East of England)”
Source: Local Government Lawyer
When the new owner asked who would decide which 27 stores he would close, he said:
Landlords
In Exeter the House of Fraser store was saved by doing a deal with landlord Exeter City Council.
Princesshay is owned by The Crown Estate/TH Real Estate which had already pulled out of extending the shopping centre last year.
An anonymous civil servant gives his or her view on how Brexit preparations are going under “Operation Yellowhammer”*
Clue:
* Yellowhammer call is usually described as sounding like “a little bit of bread and no cheese”
“… We should by now be in Yellowhammer’s final, perhaps terminal, stage. In my own department, virtually all of the several hundred likely to be Brextracted are still waiting to hear. We know that directors are working behind the scenes to identify these poor buggers. But the worrying fact is that most people don’t yet know when they’re going to be deployed, how long for, or what they’ll be working on when they are. Then there’s the question of whether they’ll actually be qualified to do whatever their new job is, given a) anyone who’s spent even five minutes in a trade negotiating room has already been rounded up like a prized Angus by DExEU and DIT’s HR departments, and b) even now, nobody knows what is going to happen.
As reported by Civil Service World, around ten thousand civil servants are working on Brexit, with tens of millions of additional pounds being spent on consultancy fees. But 5,000 more civil servants will be needed, with the Institute for Government suggesting that even this won’t be nearly enough. You can’t help but wonder what could be achieved if this concentration of treasure and talent was lavished on other pressing national issues – education, housing, health, energy, climate change, the next series of The Bodyguard. We’ll never know, will we? …”
Corbyn notes that profits come before people:
“Jeremy Corbyn has taken aim at bus companies for raking in £3.3bn in profits since 2010 while slashing key routes. …”
and Friends of the Earth call for all bus travel to be free:
“Friends of the Earth said there needed to be a “radical reimagining of transport” to bring about a 20% reduction in car journeys, even with a faster switch to electric cars, to meet climate change targets.
The group said free bus travel, costing £3bn a year, would also help address public health concerns around air quality and obesity.
Mike Childs, the head of research at Friends of the Earth, said the outlay was a fraction of road spending. He said: “Dozens of cities across the world offer some form of free public transport. …”
Huffington Post has done a long article on the effect of austerity on six councils all over the country – Labour and Conservative.
It ends with this summary:
“The Facts And Figures
Cuts to local authority budgets began in 2010 under the coalition Conservative and Liberal Democrat government, as part of the wider reform agenda to reduce the deficit following the financial crisis of 2008.
But almost a decade on the Local Government Association (LGA) says more and more councils are struggling to balance their books, facing overspends and having to make in-year budget cuts.
Some of the basic facts and figures highlighted by the LGA are;
– Between 2010 and 2020 councils will have lost almost 60p out of every £1 the government provides for services.
– Main government grant funding for local services will be cut by a further £1.3billion (or 36%) in 2019/20.
– It is estimated councils would need an additional £8billion more than they are expected to have in 2024/2025 to deliver the same services as today.
Against this financial backdrop, the LGA says there is an ongoing surge in demand for council services.
Town halls are being asked to take on larger caseloads providing statutory services in adult and children’s services, and housing homeless families.
All of this leaves less money for day-to-day services such as running libraries or filling potholes.
The size of local government staffing has also shrunk significantly over the last 20 years by 629,000 (or 23% of the directly employed council workforce), while central government staffing has increased by 31%.
The LGA has called on the chancellor to tackle this “funding crisis” and says it is working hard to try and bring money back into local government.
Cllr Richard Watts, chair of the LGA’s resources board, said: “Losing a further £1.3billion of central government funding at this time is going to tip many councils over the edge.
“Many local authorities will reach the point where they only have the funds to provide statutory responsibilities and it will be our local communities and economies who will suffer the consequences.
“In his Spring Statement last March, the Chancellor said he would invest in public services if public finances improve as recent forecasts have suggested. It is therefore vital that the government addresses the growing funding gaps facing councils in 2019/20 in the Autumn Budget.”
“Foreign agents running a lobbying and influence operation to ease U.S. sanctions on companies tied to Russian oligarch Oleg Deripaska were paid $543,958 over the past six months, according to newly released Foreign Agent Registration Act (FARA) disclosures made available through the Center for Responsive Politics’ Foreign Lobby Watch tool.
In May 2018, Lord Gregory Barker of Battle, a member of the British House of Lords and chairman of En+ Group — a Russian energy company formerly controlled by Deripaska — inked a six-figure-per-month contract with Mercury Public Affairs to lobby for the removal of U.S. sanctions imposed for Deripaska’s role in Russian interference in the 2016 election. Barker has paid the firm more than $650,000 since May.
At the crux of the operation is former Sen. David Vitter (R-La.), who left the Senate in 2017 and quickly entered the revolving door. Despite a two-year “cooling off” period that restricts Senators from immediately lobbying their colleagues under the Lobbying Disclosure Act, Vitter is still able to lobby other key figures in the Trump administration.
Earlier in 2018, President Donald Trump nominated Vitter’s wife, Wendy Vitter, to a federal judgeship with the U.S. District Court in New Orleans.
Vitter received 12 reported disbursements from Barker in June and July 2018, eight of which were for client meetings. In April, Vitter had several meetings with State Department and Treasury Department officials briefing them on Barker’s situation.
Among his activities, Vitter sent form letters to ambassadors from Australia, Germany, Jamaica and Sweden, urging them to press federal offices on behalf of the sanctioned company.
Vitter wasn’t the only big name Mercury enlisted to beef up their lobbying efforts for the sanctioned companies. Mercury also brought on former Trump campaign aide Bryan Lanza, assembling a contingent of the firm’s top lobbyists and foreign influence operatives.
Days before Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin announced his agency was considering lifting sanctions, Mercury filed FARA disclosures with the Justice Department announcing a new plan for sanctions relief from the Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) department.
Titled the Barker Plan, the document stated Deripaska had resigned as director of En+, that he agreed not to seek reelection as director of RUSAL and that the CEO and seven directors of RUSAL along with the president and director of En+, all of whom were appointed by or affiliated with Deripaska, had resigned.
Mercury advocated for the removal of the companies from the sanctions list by warning that “a failure by OFAC to provide a path forward would have severe negative repercussions for both the administration and the global economy.”
The firm also argued that if the Barker Plan was not fully put into effect, En+ could seek “a potential acquisition by Chinese interests or the potential nationalization of the company by Russia.”
Mnuchin also mentioned the threat of Russian nationalization when justifying the department’s December 2018 decision to lift sanctions on the companies, and noted they had been restructured to reduce Deripaska’s stake in the companies to below 50 percent.
In a letter to Congress, Treasury OFAC Director Andrea Gacki defended the decision to remove sanctions writing that “this action – a removal based on a change in factual circumstances that is in line with longstanding U.S. sanctions precedent and practice designed to change behavior – is not intended to significantly alter U.S. foreign policy.”
Senate Democrats and 11 of their Republican colleagues weren’t sold, voting Wednesday to block the Treasury’s decision but falling just short of the required 60 vote threshold. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) voted against the Senate’s resolution. In September 2018, Vitter’s Louisiana Reform PAC gave $3,750 to McConnell’s Bluegrass Committee PAC. The House voted overwhelmingly on Thursday to formally disapprove of the rollback of sanctions.
OFAC has reportedly vetted trustees to oversee Deripaska’s shares that he will relinquish to Russia’s state-owned VTB Bank as well as those held by his family. …”
“A Conservative peer who chairs a firm being sanctioned in the US for its Russian links has declined to give public evidence about it to a parliamentary committee, leaked documents disclose.
Lord Barker of Battle, the chair of the aluminium giant EN+ which is majority-owned by Russian oligarch Oleg Deripaska, did not wish to appear in open session before MPs because he hopes to persuade Washington to lift the sanctions, letters show. [He was successful – Trump, against the advice of Congress and Senate – allowed Deripaska to operate again in the USA]
Sanctions were imposed on Deripaska and EN+ in April because of the oligarch’s close relationship with the Russian president, Vladimir Putin. The letters from Barker are due to be discussed by the foreign affairs select committee, which is looking into the flow of Russian money into the UK, on Wednesday.
The disclosure will raise concerns that the peer is being allowed to avoid parliamentary scrutiny. A Whitehall source said it was “highly unusual” for a parliamentarian not to give public evidence to a committee.
The letters also detail Barker’s attempts to persuade the US authorities to lift sanctions against EN+.
In April, the US treasury imposed sanctions on the company – whose assets include a stake in Rusal, the world’s second-largest aluminium producer – over what it called the Kremlin’s “malign activities”. Overall, it acted against seven oligarchs, 12 companies they own or control, as well as 17 senior Russian government officials amid allegations of Russian meddling in the 2016 presidential election and other issues. Deripaska resigned from EN+’s board in May but remains its biggest shareholder.
MPs are examining the issue of Russian money flowing into the UK following the nerve agent attack in Salisbury in March, which has been blamed upon the Kremlin, a charge it denies.
In a letter sent this week to the committee’s Tory chairman, Tom Tugendhat, Barker wrote that in light of sanctions against Deripaska, he is leading “a major effort” to take control of the company and would only give private evidence until negotiations with the US authorities have concluded.
“OFAC, the sanctions unit in the US treasury, has made it crystal clear that if certain changes are made to Deripaska’s controlling interest in the company, they are prepared to consider lifting the sanctions on the EN+ and Rusal group,” Barker wrote.
He said he would address MPs but only if the meeting was conducted in private. “Until this process is concluded, these measures remain financially and commercially sensitive. Nonetheless, given your interest in this area, I have offered your committee a confidential briefing in respect of this plan and my ongoing high-level discussions with the US treasury.
“You have declined that offer but I will be happy to return instead, as I have already informed you, once my discussions have concluded for an open public session,” he wrote.
In the letter, Barker also discloses that he offered to brief the security minister, Ben Wallace, about the US sanctions regime imposed on the firm and Deripaska. [Wallace refused].
However, he has denied allegations in the Times that he attempted to lobby Wallace.
Barker wrote: “I was very surprised to read this week in the Times, a leaked and partial extract of your correspondence with the minister that suggested that I had written to Mr Wallace ‘to request assistance for Russian associates’.
“As you know and as the attached letter makes absolutely clear, this is factually incorrect.
“I have written to Mr Wallace to kindly ask him to clarify the record and would be most grateful if you could also correct any false impression,” he wrote.
As supporting evidence to the committee, Barker included a letter he sent to Wallace in June in which he offered to meet the minister to explain how the firm planned to reduce Deripaska’s holding.
Barker, a former energy minister who has also been employed by Roman Abramovich, addressed the letter to “Dear Ben” and wrote: “I am now actively pursuing a number of radical changes in response to the imposition of US sanctions, details of which I would like to share with you.
“Together, these measures will result in the removal of Oleg Deripaska from the company and I am working closely with both the US administration, UK regulators and our minority shareholders to achieve this goal.
“Although I have no ask of you or any parliamentary colleague, I would be most grateful for an opportunity to come and update you on my progress and answer any questions you may have,” Barker wrote.
A source close to Barker said: “He wants to give a full account of himself but he cannot do that while negotiations are ongoing with Washington. Greg would be very happy to appear before the committee once negotiations have been concluded.”
From Wikipedia entry:
“…In 2001, Barker became the MP for Bexhill and Battle after the retirement of the sitting Conservative MP, Charles Wardle.
Barker’s nomination by the Conservative Party was hotly debated when sitting MP and former Home Office Minister Charles Wardle accused Barker of being disingenuous about his business career and formally requesting Conservative Party Leader Iain Duncan Smith to investigate possible links between Barker and the infamous Russian billionaire Boris Berezovsky.[4]
Wardle supported Nigel Farage (who later became the Leader of the United Kingdom Independence Party), but Barker won the safe seat securing over 10,500 votes ahead of LibDem Stephen Hardy. Close to Conservative leader David Cameron, Barker, in his capacity as Shadow Environment Secretary, accompanied Cameron on his trip to the Arctic Circle in April 2006 for a fact-finding mission about global warming.
In April 2011, Barker was filmed addressing an audience at the Moore School of Business at the University of South Carolina, during which he said of the Conservative-led British government: “We are making cuts that Margaret Thatcher, back in the 1980s, could only have dreamed of.” [5]
Barker was implicated in the 2009 MPs’ expenses scandal for his purchase and sale of London flats; this led to widespread outrage from tax payers.[6][7] On 5 February 2013 MP Gregory Barker voted in favour in the House of Commons Second Reading vote on marriage equality in Britain.[8] On 14 July 2014, he announced he would not be standing at the 2015 general election.[9]
House of Lords
In August 2015, Barker was nominated for a life peerage in the Dissolution Peerages List.[10] On 12 October 2015, he was created Baron Barker of Battle, of Battle in the County of East Sussex.[11] He now sits in the House of Lords as a Life Peer. On 10 November, he was introduced to the Lords. He was supported during the ceremony by John Browne, Baron Browne of Madingley, and Guy Black, Baron Black of Brentwood.[12]
Personal life
Barker married Celeste Harrison, an heiress to the Charles Wells brewery fortune, in 1992. Following a diary report in The Observer,[13] Barker confirmed he and his wife had separated, and on 26 October 2006 the British tabloid newspaper the Daily Mirror revealed that he had left his wife and children for vintage fashion expert William Banks-Blaney. The paper backed the story by quoting his mother-in-law.[14] The Sun reported that Banks-Blaney had been employed to oversee renovations on the Barkers’ Peasmarsh family home.[15] It was later revealed that Barker was divorcing his wife. The Independent on Sunday later reported that Barker has confirmed that he is homosexual.[16]
Barker’s wealth is estimated at £3.9m.[17]
In May 2012 Barker attracted media attention after it was reported he used a staff microwave at the Department of Energy and Climate Change to warm a cushion for his pet dachshund, Otto.[18] In January 2012 Otto was a participant in the 20th Westminster Dog of the Year Show, but was beaten to the winning prize by Star, a Norfolk terrier owned by Barker’s fellow Conservative MP, Charlie Elphicke.[19]”
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greg_Barker,_Baron_Barker_of_Battle
“Tory peer declines to give public evidence to MPs over Russian firm:
A comment on EDW’s recent articles on Swire and his business pal Lord Barker:
https://eastdevonwatch.org/2019/01/28/swire-eagle-and-sham-an-unfortunate-choice-of-company-name/
throws more light on Barker’s past and recent dealings:
“Of course, as you report above, Oleg Deripaska has not only courted Conservative parliamentarians: he famously wined and dined Peter Mandelson on his yacht (together with George Osbourne):
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/3210969/Peter-Mandelson-had-three-meetings-with-Russian-oligarch-Oleg-Deripaska.html
and
That was over a decade ago – but the lobbying continues:
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/exclusive-tories-under-fire-for-links-to-pro-russia-lobbyists-9583023.html
Last October, the UK’s security minister turned down a request to meet up with Lord Barker, “requesting government assistance for Russian associates”:
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/tory-peers-told-to-come-clean-about-russia-links-gskcs3tw9
And in July last year, Transparency.org looked at ‘In Whose Interest’ this lobbying is conducted – as “corrupt and repressive regimes seek influence and legitimacy through engagement with UK Parliamentarians.”
https://www.transparency.org.uk/wp-content/plugins/download-attachments/includes/download.php?id=7724
Now, I’m not of course suggesting that Hugo Swire is involved in any such lobbying – but what is disturbing is how the ‘networking’ by Russian oligarchs and others with very close connections to the Kremlin is not being questioned more readily here in the UK.
Not only is this very creepy, but it undermines (the vestiges of) our democratic system.
Well done the EDW for continuing to poke at this.”
“Britain’s nuclear power stations recorded a 12% decline in their contributions to the country’s energy system over the past month, as outages raised concerns over how long the ageing plants will be able to keep operating.
A temporary closure of two of the country’s eight nuclear plants resulted in a double-digit drop in nuclear generation in January, compared to the same period last year.
Prospects for new nuclear projects have commanded headlines and government attention in recent weeks, with Hitachi and Toshiba scrapping their plans for major new plants.
But the fate of the existing plants, which usually provide about a fifth of the UK’s electricity supplies, has been pulled into focus by outages due to safety checks and engineering works running over schedule. Nuclear outages also push up carbon emissions because any capacity shortfall will typically be replaced by fossil fuel power stations.
Seven of the power stations use an advanced gas reactor (AGR) design, the oldest of which is 43 years old and the youngest 30 years.
Most were built with a lifetime of about 35 years in mind. All are due to be closed in the 2020s after owner EDF Energy extended their lives, but there are now fears that ageing infrastructure may reduce their output or even lead them to shut early.
Iain Staffell, lecturer in sustainable energy at Imperial College, which compiled the nuclear output data, said: “Just as Toshiba and Hitachi have pulled out of building new reactors, we have one third of the existing nuclear capacity unavailable either for maintenance or because their maximum power has been reduced as they get older.
“Many of our reactors were built in the late 70s, and like your typical 40-year-old they aren’t in peak physical condition anymore.” …
Martin Freer, head of nuclear physics at the University of Birmingham and director of the Birmingham Energy Institute, said: “It is clear they are showing their age. When they were originally built they weren’t built to operate as long as they will.”
The issue is not one of safety because of tight regulation of the plants, he said, but it showed the UK’s need to get on and build new nuclear power stations.
By the time Dungeness is hoped to return, another old plant, Hinkley B in Somerset, will have been taken offline for graphite inspections. Any unexpected rate of cracking found there could lead to a longer outage.
Francis Livens, director at the University of Manchester’s Dalton Institute, said the struggle to green-light new nuclear projects had made the need to keep the old ones on more acute.
Freer said he hoped the plants would make it to their planned closure dates rather than retiring early – Hunterston is officially meant to last until 2023 – but feared some would not. “It may just be a run of unfortunate incidents, or it might be a trend of reducing reliability,” he said. “My suspicion is not all of them will make it through to the end.”
EDF said its investments meant the old plants were performing well and it had spent more than £100m over the past six years on the issue of graphite cracking. The company’s figures show generation from the company’s eight plants, including the newer one at Sizewell, growing after it bought them in 2008 before peaking in 2016 and declining since.
Brian Cowell, managing director of generation, said: “EDF Energy’s seven advanced gas-cooled and one pressurised water nuclear power stations [Sizewell C] are delivering at ever better levels thanks to sustained investment and the expertise accumulated over more than 40 years of operation.”
Several of the old plants are also undergoing safety reviews by the Office for Nuclear Regulation. Heysham 1 and Hartlepool both had a periodic safety review in January, with Heysham 2 and Torness to follow next January.”
” …Improving the bus system would bring about significant productivity gains. If, for example, journey times became as reliable at peak hours as they are off-peak, the effective size of Birmingham would increase from 900,000 to 1.3 million people. Assuming UK cities would enjoy the same agglomeration benefits as those in France, Forth calculates that would mean an increase in output per head of 7%. …”
East Devon Watch 