South-west hospices under threat

“More hospice beds will close in the South West unless the way they are funded changes, according to both the Royal College of Nursing and hospices themselves.

The organisations are calling for an urgent review following news two weeks ago that a 12-bed unit at St Margaret’s hospice in Yeovil was to close due to pressure on staffing and finances.

Hospice UK said two in three hospices across England were operating at a deficit and many planned to cut services.

It said government funding had only increased by 3% over the last 10 years, and hospices were having to rely more and more on their charity shops and money left in wills. …”

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-england-devon-49297960

Drug crimes move from cities to rural towns and villages

“Drug crime is increasing in many small towns and villages even as it falls significantly in city centres, the BBC has found.

Police data shows drug crimes in England and Wales have fallen by more than 50,000 in the past five years. But national averages hide a major shift in where drug crimes are being committed.

It comes as the government pledged an extra £85m to prosecutors to help deal with a rise in violent crime.

In the village of Westhumble in Surrey, which has a population of 649, drug crime has more than quadrupled in the past five years, from nine cases to 42.

But just 20 miles away in Westminster, central London, drug crime more than halved over the same period, from 4,041 to 1,832. The pattern is repeated in many other areas around the capital, a BBC analysis of police-recorded crime showed. …”

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-48343369

Is spending £2.5 billion on extra prison spaces the answer to violent crime?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-49309112

Or would the money be better spent bringing young people out of poverty and diverting them into positive activities and meaningful jobs?

Swire’s pal Foreign Secretary Raab – Tory voters (particularly women workers!) might want to re-think …

One wonders what attracted Swire to direct the push for him as PM … actually, on second thoughts, one doesn’t!

“What do we know about Dominic Raab, and what does it tell us about how he might approach his new job as Brexit secretary?

Prediction is a fool’s game in Brexit Britain, but as this hardcore leaver settles behind his desk, Raab’s controversial ideology may offer some clues.
Dominic Raab: bullish Brexiter with outspoken reputation.

Brexit poses a serious challenge to many of the rights we take for granted, including workers’ rights and our right to equality, which is not protected by a written constitution. Many of those rights that we enjoy today are in very substantial measure the product of our membership of the European Union, underpinned and developed over 40 years through laws passed and case law developed with British input. Once we leave the EU, any of those rights that originate with our EU membership, for example working time protections and the right to equal pay for work of equal value, are subject to potential removal or restriction by a future government so inclined.

And Dominic Raab arrives into his new job with the credentials of someone who may well be so inclined. Our new Brexit secretary is a man who believes the time has come for men to burn their briefs. He has called for an end to obnoxious “feminist bigotry”, and thinks we’ve already sorted equality – for women anyway – so the real cause of advancement should be men’s rights.

According to him, we shouldn’t be worried about the gender pay gap because “men work longer hours, die earlier but retire later than women.” In fact, it’s discrimination against men we should be getting exercised about: “from the cradle to the grave, men are getting a raw deal”.

Raab’s regressive views aren’t limited to gender. He has a long history of decrying the “excessive protections” of workers’ rights in favour of the rights of business. He has consistently made clear his contempt for regulation. Raab expressly compared Britain to the “rising” power of Singapore in a 2011 report called “Escaping the Straitjacket”. and argued that the “burden of employment regulation” was a “dragging anchor” on the British economy. He called for scrapping the requirement for small businesses to pay those aged under 21 the minimum wage, renegotiating the UK’s treaty obligations with the EU on workers’ rights, and securing a total opt out from European working time regulations. …. “

https://amp.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/jul/11/dominic-raab-ideologue-rights-eu-brexit

Boris’s Rasputin: don’t do as I do …

Brings backsome old memories:

https://eastdevonwatch.org/2014/09/22/ex-councillor-browns-facts-disputed-2/

Anyone see parallels?

“Boris Johnson’s controversial enforcer, Dominic Cummings, an architect of Brexit and a fierce critic of Brussels, is co-owner of a farm that has received €250,000 (£235,000) in EU farming subsidies, the Observer can reveal.

The revelation is a potential embarrassment for the mastermind behind Johnson’s push to leave the EU by 31 October. Since being appointed as Johnson’s chief adviser, Cummings has presented the battle to leave the EU as one between the people and the politicians. He positions himself as an outsider who wants to demolish elites, end the “absurd subsidies” paid out by the EU and liberate the UK from its arcane rules and regulations.

But his critics say the revelation that Cummings has benefited from the system he intends to smash underscores how many British farmers are reliant on EU money that would evaporate if the UK leaves.

An Observer analysis of Land Registry documents and EU subsidy databases reveals that a farm in Durham, which Cummings jointly owns with his parents and another person, has received roughly €20,000 a year for most of the last two decades.

The revelation opens Cummings up to charges of hypocrisy, as writing on his blog, he has attacked the use of agricultural subsidies “dreamed up in the 1950s and 1960s” because they “raise prices for the poor to subsidise rich farmers while damaging agriculture in Africa”. …”

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/aug/10/dominic-cummings-owns-farm-got-eu-subsidy?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

Swire in Sri Lanka shows his true colours on racism and immigration

Watch the full (one minute video) in the link from which this quotation is taken:

“… Sir Hugo said that he believes that immigration has not been controlled, and it is a government’s number one priority to protect its original citizens [first and foremost]. He added that hundreds and thousands of people are in the UK and no one has any idea how they ended up in the UK. According to him, it’s negligent on behalf of the government or successive governments….”

British MP Sir Hugo on Newsline

Sadly, his views will be shared by many East Devon Tories.

Section 106 fund: £353,156.16 unspent in 2018

Page 17:

https://democracy.eastdevon.gov.uk/documents/g265/Public%20reports%20pack%2020th-Aug-2019%2010.00%20Strategic%20Planning%20Committee.pdf?T=10

This is not broken down in the report into amounts remaining to be spent in specific towns or villages.

Dramatic rise in delayed local government audit opinions

“Urgent improvement” is needed after a sharp rise in delayed audit opinions in local government, said the organisation that appoints auditors to 98% of council, police and fire authorities.

More than 40% of audit opinions (210 out of 486) on 2018-19 statements of accounts missed the target date of 31 July, figures released today from Public Sector Audit Appointments showed. Last year, just 13% were not available by the target date.

Tony Crawley, Public Sector Audit Appointments’ chief executive, suggested the rise was because of a lack of skills and poorly filled out paperwork.

“The challenge for all of the parties engaged in the accounts and audit process is to address the need for improvement urgently,” he said.

Accounts and working papers needed to be “prepared to the right standard”, Crawley explained, and auditors should have “sufficient appropriately trained and skilled staff”.

He added PSAA “looks forward” to working with the government on its review of the local audit system, which is expected to include the timeliness of audit opinions within its scope.

Crawley added: “There is also a need to address the more strategic challenges which arise from the current debates about auditing following various widely reported financial failures in the private sector.”

Although the deadline date for audit opinions is not statutory, auditors and audited organisations strive to meet it when possible, and bodies that do not do so must issue a statement explaining why they were unable to. …”

https://www.publicfinance.co.uk/news/2019/08/psaa-records-dramatic-rise-delayed-audit-opinions

General election rumours increase – register to vote NOW (update if you have moved)

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/aug/09/no-10-cancels-staff-leave-raising-possibility-of-snap-election?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

Register here:

https://www.gov.uk/register-to-vote

Now even The Times is questioning (rail) privatisation …

… but blaming underinvestment – not the privatisation process which was supposed to lead to MORE investment:

“When Grant Shapps was appointed secretary of state for transport last month, he used social media to express his view of the railway network that had become his responsibility. “As a very frustrated 6 trains per day commuter for the past few years, I’m delighted to be appointed transport secretary,” he wrote. He used a screaming-face emoji to convey his horror of travelling by train from his constituency of Welwyn, which was hit by the Thameslink timetable chaos last year.

Mr Shapps’ dread of British trains will be shared by many who rely on the network. Trains in Britain are often extortionately priced, delayed and overcrowded. Compensation forms are too complex. By proportion of salary, British commuters pay five times as much for tickets as the rest of Europe. Little wonder then that passengers (including those who are old enough to remember a pitiful state-run railway industry) are coming out in favour of renationalisation. A poll last year showed that 64 per cent of the public favoured taking the network back into public hands.

Yesterday, the future of Britain’s rail system was cast into further doubt when the government scrapped a competition to run Southeastern, one of the country’s busiest commuter lines. Mr Shapps cancelled the process amid concerns over escalating costs and uncertainty that the operator would achieve benefits for passengers. His decision calls into question other contracts, including the forthcoming competition to run trains on HS2 and the west coast mainline.

Passengers frustrated with Britain’s second-rate railways crave a dramatic solution. In contrast to its constructive ambiguity over Brexit, Labour’s position on the railway network appears clear. If elected the party would bring rail franchises back into public ownership when they expired, if not before.

Yet nationalisation would not release the railways from the morass they find themselves in. The network was beset with problems when it was privatised under John Major’s government after years of underinvestment. To nationalise now would cost a fortune. Taxpayers already bear a large burden of the costs, given that Network Rail, which runs the country’s tracks and biggest stations, is publicly owned. To expect taxpayers to foot the whole bill would be unfair.

Instead, improvements must be made urgently to the system we already have. A review of the railways led by Keith Williams, the former chief executive of British Airways, is expected to be published this year. Mr Williams has previously proposed that a “Fat Controller-type” figure should oversee the day-to-day running of services. That is worth exploring, but he must offer ways to tackle two significant problems facing the rail industry right now.

First, the unsatisfactory relationship between tracks and trains. At present trains run on tracks that operators have no responsibility for. It is the passenger, ultimately, who pays for the lack of joined-up thinking. Second, the problem of dwindling competition. When companies were first allowed to bid for rail franchises they did so in their droves. Now, as few as two companies typically bid to run a franchise, leading to slipping standards. The Department for Transport issues detailed demands for operators, setting out the number of trains they must run per hour. Operators are being micromanaged. Yet overcrowding, disruption and high prices mean that growth in passenger numbers has slowed. The time has come to give them more freedom to innovate.

Mr Shapps should focus now not on cancelling other contests to run rail services, but on making the current system fit for purpose. The public’s faith in the country’s privatised rail network is waning. It is up to the government to remind passengers of why nationalisation is not the solution.”

Source:Times (pay wall)

Yet another electoral roll mess up

From a correspondent:

As both my kids will be at university this autumn, they decided to apply for postal votes. I downloaded the application form but the return address on it is still The Knowle at Sidmouth. Whilst it may be an oversight on EDDC’s part, the cynic in me wonders if this is perhaps a cunning ploy to disenfranchise those in my daughters’ positions who are studying out of area, but still want a say in what happens.

As it is, I have saved the reply paid envelope from the application which has the Honition address on it and will use that instead. East Devon will pay for it, rather than me, and hopefully the form will arrive safely.

EDDC moved its HQ in February 2019. It seems our Electoral Officer (CEO Mark Williams, for an extra fee, of course) didn’t update the registration website – perhaps too busy having unminuted meetings with developers …

We must hope that mail is still being redirected and that ALL of it arrives at its new address …

“Have your say on the Jurassic Coast’s future” [suggestion: new National Park]

Now Mr Diviani is no longer leader of EDDC perhaps the idea of a Jurassic National Park can be resuscitated – he and his council were against this as they didn’t want to lose their control over planning (over-developing) the site:

https://eastdevonwatch.org/2018/10/09/new-national-park-for-east-devon-not-while-people-like-diviani-are-councillors/

And surely we are not in the situation of caring what our CEO then and now thinks?

“The public is being asked to help draw up a new blueprint for the future management of the Jurassic Coast.

https://jurassiccoast.org/what-is-the-jurassic-coast/world-heritage/looking-after-the-jurassic-coast/partnership-plan-consultation/

The survey is here:

https://www.surveymonkey.co.uk/r/QLGGNSD

The trust which manages the site, stretching from Exmouth, in East Devon, to Studland, in Dorset, is creating a new partnership plan document in collaboration with a wide variety of stakeholders.

It will be published towards the end of this year and will guide management of the World Heritage Site over the next five years.

The plan will take in conservation and preservation of the site, how the site impacts on the local economy and how it can play an active role in the lives of local communities.

As part of the creation of the new partnership plan, a consultation process is being untaken from now until the end of September.

A spokesman for the Jurassic Coast Trust said: “The new partnership plan is an important document, representing a tangible expression of the partnership that looks after the Jurassic Coast.

“It explains the reasons for the Jurassic Coast’s World Heritage designation, and how it is protected and managed.

“It also outlines the aims, policies, actions and aspirations for managing the site over the coming years.”

The partnership plan is a formal requirement and will replace the current site management plan, which, along with a copy of the new draft plan, can be seen by clicking on the Trust’s website here Alternatively a copy can be requested by telephoning the Trust’s office on 01308 807000.

People going online can contribute their views directly or they can download a printed version of the survey to fill in later.

The completed surveys should be sent directly to the

Jurassic Coast Trust,
email at:
info@jurassiccoast.org

or by post to:

Partnership Plan Consultation,
Jurassic Coast Trust,
Mountfield,
Bridport,
Dorset DT6 3JP

The Jurassic Coast Trust will also be running drop-in consultation sessions across the World Heritage Site area in September. Dates and venues will be announced towards the end of this month.

The deadline for responses to the survey is Friday, October 4. All comments received as part of the consultation will be collated. A report will be produced by the Jurassic Coast Partnership detailing the responses and indicating how the plan will be subsequently amended.

The report will be made available online and to anyone who has asked to be sent updates on the progress of the plan.

Once an amended version of the plan is agreed by the Jurassic Coast Partnership and approved by Historic England, it will be adopted by Dorset Council and Devon County Council before being formally submitted to DCMS and UNESCO.”

https://www.midweekherald.co.uk/news/consultation-on-management-of-the-jurassic-coast-1-6203990

Clinton Devon Estates: “‘Deceit and lies’ – Councillors speak out Newton Poppleford GP campaign looks to be over”

Wonder if EDDC’s CEO had any private advice for CDE?

This has gone into the most spectacular orbit of deceit and betrayal in the planning system.”

Those are the words of one councillor as the district authority agreed at a meeting on Tuesday (August 6) not to fight a developer’s appeal over a Newton Poppleford site.

Clinton Devon Estates (CDE) lodged an appeal after East Devon District Council (EDDC) delayed a decision on an application to build two homes on land originally earmarked for a GP surgery.

A wider plan for a 40-home development at King Alfred Way, including a doctors’ surgery, was approved in 2013. CDE was unable to find a tenant, so instead applied to build two more homes.

At that stage the parish council expressed an interest in running the surgery.

EDDC twice delayed a decision – the second to allow the parish council to meet with the developer to find a solution.

The developer lodged an appeal with the planning inspector, who will now also decide whether the council should pay costs.

Planning officers recommended the authority should not fight the appeal arguing the surgery was not ‘legally justifiable’. Councillors voted by seven votes to five not to fight it.

Councillor Mike Howe, chairman of the development management committee, told the meeting CDE had acted ‘atrociously’ and could not be considered an ‘ethical or nice developer’.

Cllr Olly Davey said, unless ‘legally enforceable’, ‘any promise that a developer makes is not worth the paper it is written on’.

Councillor Paul Arnott put forward a motion to reject the application, on the grounds the developer had failed in its ‘commitment’ to deliver the surgery – but it was thrown out by seven votes to four.

Councillor Paul Arnott said the application was the most ‘spectacular orbit of deceit and betrayal’ and the council should mount a challenge despite the costs. He said: “It’s so mired in lies and deceit going back years, betrayal, treachery, accusations of wording.

“We cannot afford, as a rule, to be spending council taxpayers’ money on appeals we may not win, but on this occasion we have to. It is a notorious case and we have to draw a line.”

Cllr Eileen Wragg said the committee needed a ‘damn good reason’ not to agree with the officers’ report.

Council officer Henry Gordon-Lennox, strategic lead, said nothing in planning law could stop the developer applying for a different use of them land, despite the original plan for a surgery.

He said: “I do absolutely understand the frustration and the annoyance and the disappointment, but from our point of view as officers there is nothing to defend precluding them from doing this, unpalatable as that may be.”

CDE was represented at the meeting Amy Roberts, who said there has never been a planning justification for the surgery, within the original plan. She said CDE did not want to appeal, but that the developer’s ‘hands were somewhat forced’ by the non-determination, despite planners’ recommendations.”

https://www.sidmouthherald.co.uk/news/clinton-devon-estates-slammed-for-newton-poppleford-homes-plan-1-6203178

Survey on local health services

Please do fill in this survey – it has a lot of open-ended questions about what you think – but remember this survey is about cuts so it needs to be emphasised that cuts are not the answer – increased funding IS.

From the blog of Claire Wright, Independent Parliamentary candidate for East Devon:

“The local NHS says there’s a funding shortfall so is asking people their views…

The local NHS – Northern, Eastern and Western Devon Clinical Commissioning Group (NEW Devon CCG) – is asking Devon residents their views on health services, after outlining in a presentation sent to councillors, information about a funding shortfall, workforce shortages, a population increase and lengthening waiting times.

They say:

One in 10 nurse jobs and 1 in 12 social worker posts in Devon remain vacant as demand for services increase.
There have been increases in NHS funding, but peoples’ needs for services are growing faster
Devon is struggling to provide timely access to services. In addition, a rise of conditions like cancer, heart disease and dementia will put the health and social care system under more pressure unless more flexible, joined up approaches are taken
The county’s population will rise by about 33,000 people equivalent to the population of Exmouth over the next five years
The number of people aged over 85 in Devon will double in the next 20 years. W e need to be able to offer all the services they need as an even greater priority
The CCG says it does not have all the funding it needs to deliver the ‘current models of service provision.’

Here’s the link to the questionnaire. It closes on 5 September.

I urge you to complete the survey.

https://www.surveymonkey.co.uk/r/BetterDevon

For a full copy of the briefing contact Ross.Jago@nhs.net”

The local NHS says there’s a funding shortfall so is asking people their views…

Register to vote NOW

With rumours of a general election getting stronger, now is the time to register to vote if you have not already done so.

It takes less than five minutes of your time to do it online at:

https://www.gov.uk/register-to-vote

“Johnson’s NHS cash ‘money trusts already have’ “

“Much of the £1.8bn for NHS infrastructure announced by Boris Johnson is money providers already have, health experts have said.

On Sunday the government announced the cash injection, which consists of £1bn in capital spending for infrastructure projects and around £850m to upgrade existing outdated facilities and equipment.

The £850m will be available for 20 hospitals in England over a five-year period while the £1bn will be used to tackle a backlog of maintenance issues this year.

Although the government has repeatedly claimed this was ‘new’ money, health experts have said it was mainly giving trusts permission to spend cash they already have.

Dr Eleanor Roy, health and social care policy manager at CIPFA, said: “It should be noted that more than half of this ‘boost’ to the NHS represents cash that many NHS providers already have.”

The prime minister’s announcement “merely raises the capital Departmental Expenditure Limit (DEL) threshold for the health services overall”, she said. …”

https://www.publicfinance.co.uk/news/2019/08/johnsons-nhs-cash-money-trusts-already-have

No “new” hospital money for Devon

The “new” money for hospitals, announced by Boris Johnson, is actually money for projects already agreed but where funding had not been released. Suddenly the “magic money tree” has sprouted new leaves and plans for 20 projects are being given the go-ahead.

None are in Devon.

Most are in leave constituencies.

“Boris Johnson will upgrade hospitals in Leave-voting seats as he attempts to see off the electoral threat from the Brexit Party.

The Prime Minister has announced a £850million funding boost to add hundreds of new hospital beds and improve facilities in 20 hospitals across the country.

The money, which will be spent predominantly in Leave-voting constituencies, is part of a £1.8billion funding boost for the NHS, in addition to the £20bn a year Theresa May pledged for the NHS.

The new money will be funded by dipping into Philip Hammond’s £26.6billion “fiscal headroom”, a Downing Street spokesman said. …”

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2019/08/04/boris-johnson-pledges-hospital-upgrades-leave-voting-seats-attempts/

The East Devon electoral roll – is it up-to-date and fit for purpose this time round?

Householders are currently receiving a form from EDDC about checking that the household occupants are registered to vote.

It comes with a prepaid envelope and an alternative option to complete online. If you choose the latter, one can end up being told the information has already been supplied. The wording implies the visit to the website may have been unnecessary.

If it WAS unnecessary then itis a waste of time and money – or perhaps the wording could be more appropriate if it WAS necessary?

One wonders about the scale of this and whether it really is necessary to ensure inclusion on the electoral roll? Perhaps CEO Mark Williams’ (Election Officer, for an extra fee and staff budget) ought perhaps to be better targeting – making extra sure he doesn’t “lose” another 6,000 or more voters like he did in the next-to-last general election.

Home visits to addresses in ever-spreading Cranbrook might be a good idea along with some of the other large new estates that have sprung up all over East Devon since the last election (there must be hundreds of new households). How many of those, in the current political climate, might prefer a candidate other than incumbent Tory Swire and where a few hundred votes mught be crucial?

And he doesn’t have the excuse of it being too dark at night for his canvassers to go out … like he said when he tried to explain to Parliament why telephone contact (sometimes to people newly arrived in the area where their telephone numbers would not usually be known, or these days where they are likely to have only mobile phones) was more preferablethan canvassing

Which you can read about here:

https://eastdevonwatch.org/2014/10/13/highlights-of-mr-williams-audio-transcript-of-evidence-to-the-parliamentary-select-committee-on-voter-engagement/

Scrutiny definitely needed this time around … where the stakes are so very high.