A few (selected) comments from Swire’s Twitter account
Monthly Archives: September 2019
Claire Wright on Swire, politics and East Devon
Looking forward to Swire’s better explanation of his reasons for standing down, given that he adores Boris and supports a hard Brexit.
Was there the suggestion he might be deselected?
Was he frit?
Does Boris have the (formerly safe, but not now) seat for one of his mates?
Is a local Tory polutico ready to make his or her mark?
Come on, Hugo – spill the beans!
Government Brexit consultants – expensive and secret
“Government departments have ploughed nearly £100m into “overly secretive” Brexit consultant contracts since the 2016 referendum, MPs have said.
Publicly available information on consultancy work to prepare for Brexit is lacking and in some cases has taken too long – up to 237 days – to materialise, according to a Public Accounts Committee report out today.
Government guidelines say details of contracts should be published within 90 days of being awarded.
“Departments have been overly secretive about what the consultants are doing,” the PAC said.
“When departments have published information on consultancy work, usually later than they should have, they have failed to meet the government’s own transparency standards.”
Even when documents are published they are often “over-zealously redacted, the committee added.
The MPs also accused the government of being “overly relaxed” that 96% of the £97m spent on consultancy contracts has gone on just six large companies, despite the governments supposed “aspirations for more government work to go to small and medium-sized enterprise”.
The committee report suggested the true cost of Brexit consultancy work was not known, due to differing definitions of ‘consultancy’.
It said: “There is a widening gap between the Cabinet Office’s analysis of data on overall spending on consultancy services, not just to support Brexit, and expenditure reported by the departments.
“It appears that different departments are choosing to categorise their spending on consultancy services in different ways.”
For 2017-18 the Cabinet Office said total spend on all consultancy – not just for Brexit – was £1.5bn whereas analysis of invoices from individual departments suggested only £0.3bn was spent.
The Cabinet Office has been approached for a response. …”
Source: CIPFA (pay wall)
DCC FINALLY sacks broadband (non) provider Gigaclear
And it took 18 months of failure before they did so!
“Sharp increase in families on brink of becoming homeless”
“The number of families at risk of becoming homeless has risen by more than 10 per cent as councils struggle to support people living in overcrowded accommodation or facing eviction.
In the first three months of this year 70,430 households were judged to be on the brink of being made homeless, up from 63,620 in the previous quarter, the latest figures showed.
Local authorities have placed 84,740 families and couples in temporary housing, including 126,020 children, the highest figure in a decade.
A report last month by Anne Longfield, the children’s commissioner for England, showed that thousands of children were living in converted shipping containers and office blocks after being classed as homeless.
Yesterday’s figures were published by the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government a year after rules came into effect requiring councils to do more to prevent people from becoming homeless. It doubled to 56 days the period over which they must assess a person’s risk.
The most common reason for people becoming homeless, affecting 18,150 households, was family or friends no longer being willing to provide temporary shelter. The second most frequent cause was the termination of a shorthold tenancy by the landlord, which applied in 14,700 cases.
Kate Henderson, chief executive of the National Housing Federation, which represents housing associations, said more homes should be built for rent by people on low incomes rather than for better-off private buyers.
“It is unacceptable that the number of families living in temporary accommodation has been allowed to reach an eight-year high with no real action to tackle the root of the problem,” she said.
David Renard, the Local Government Association’s housing spokesman and Conservative leader of Swindon borough council, welcomed extra funds announced in the budget to support homeless people but said that long-term funding was needed.
“A lack of affordable housing has left many councils struggling to cope with a rising number of people coming to them for help and are having to place more families and households into temporary and emergency accommodation as a result,” he said.
Luke Hall, a housing minister, said the Homelessness Reduction Act, which came in last year, was “helping people earlier so they are not having to experience homelessness in the first place”. He said the latest figures showed that progress was being made. “There is still more to do, though, which is why we have committed a record investment to ending homelessness and rough sleeping for good.”
The government published a separate report which showed that the number of vulnerable people sleeping rough had fallen by one third.”
Source: Times (pay wall)
Claire Wright responds to Hugo Swire standing down at next election
“Independent parliamentary contender Claire Wright has said tonight she ‘stands ready to take on the issues’ important to people in East Devon after a shock announcement from her long time political opponent East Devon MP Sir Hugo Swire.
In a tweet sent out tonight the MP said he remained a supporter of Boris Johnson but will be standing down at the next General Election.
Nub News contacted Claire Wright, who came a close second in East Devon in the 2017 General Election, for her views on Sir Hugo’s announcement, she said:
“Party Politics is in turmoil. I stand ready to take on the issues that matter to people here in Devon East of health services straining to cope, underfunded schools and the irreparable damage to our environment under the watch of the current Conservative government which lurches from one crisis to another and has put narrow party political interest above the needs of local people.”
https://exmouth.nub.news/n/claire-wright-says-she-stands-ready-as-east-devon-mp-announces-departure?
“Devon MP Hugo Swire will not stand in the next General Election”
Owl says: FRIT! FRIT! FRIT!
“The Member of Parliament for East Devon says he will not stand in the next general election.
Conservative MP Hugo Swire, who was first elected in 2000, insists that he will continue to support Prime Minister Boris Johnson but says he will not be standing for re-election.
Announcing his decision via social media this evening, he said: “At a meeting earlier this evening of the Executive if the East Devon Conservative Association I announced that I would not be standing for re-election as the Member of Parliament.
“It was my original intention to stand down in 2022, when the next general election was scheduled to be held.”
He continued: “I served in a number of different roles in opposition, including in the shadow cabinet as Shadow Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport. In Government I was first appointed as Minister of State in the Northern Ireland Office and then Minister of State in the Foreign Commonwealth Office.
“Whilst I was honoured to have been appointed to these roles, my greatest privilege has been to serve my constituents, regardless of their political allegiance, I am truly grateful for consistently returning me at elections and will continue to serve them to the best of my ability until an election is called.”
Reaffirming his support to Mr Johnson, he added: “We live in challenging political times, but I remain convinced that to bring the country back together we need to deliver on Brexit and I shall continue to support the Prime Minster and the Government in their endeavours.”
The announcement prompted quick reaction from the prospective parliamentary candidates (PPC) for East Devon.
Eleanor Rylance, for the Liberal Democrats, said: “Conservative chaos continues.”
And independent PPC Clair Wright simply posted a ghost emoji after Mr Swire shared his announcement on Twitter.”
https://www.devonlive.com/news/devon-news/devon-mp-hugo-swire-not-3314246
EDDC: political power … could be radically rejigged …
Currently:
Conservatives: 19
Green Party: 2
Independent Group: 19
Independent 1
Independent East Devon Alliance: 11
Liberal Democrats: 8
IF East Devon Alliance, Independent, Green and Lib Dems
formed a coalition they would number 22.
It would then be:
Conservatives 19
The Independent Group 19
Coalition Group 22
The coalition would be the biggest group ……….. and could, if they so wished, bring in a committee system …….
EDDC: the resigned/sacked councillor saga continues…
Owl says: Of course, none of this would be happening if Leader Ingram had been prepared to work with the other independent group – East Devon Alliance (of which he had previously been leader – after being an independent independent – after being a Tory!).
AND it re-ignites the argument: who actually runs the council: councillors or officers? In theory, officers advise, councillors decide …..
“Cllr Paul Millar, who represents the Exmouth Halsdon ward, quit the Independent Group who are in control of East Devon District Council
A blistering attack on East Devon District Council’s management has been launched by a councillor who resigned from group running the council.
Cllr Paul Millar, who represents the Exmouth Halsdon ward, quit the Independent Group on Monday night.
In an email announcing his departure from the group, Cllr Millar said he found working with the Senior Management Team and trying to have any influence over his transformation portfolio to be impossible, that he had no confidence in the senior management, and that the Independent Group has little desire to change anything really at all.
His resignation from the group means that they are no longer the largest party on the council, with both them and the Conservatives having 19 seats each.
In a response, Cllr Ben Ingham, leader of the council, said that he thanked Cllr Millar for his contribution but that the ‘personal and unfounded comments’ do not help advance understanding of the work carried out by East Devon District Council’s officers and councillors.
It is understood that Cllr Millar had been removed from his transformation portfolio role by Cllr Ingham prior to his resignation from the group.
Speaking to the Local Democracy Reporting Service, Cllr Millar confirmed that he would remain a member of the council and would sit as an Independent not aligned to any group.
He said that he has found local casework immensely fulfilling and this will enable him to concentrate on that and he joked that his contributions to the cabinet wouldn’t be missed as his ideas seemed to be ignored and they didn’t give him anything to do.
In his resignation statement, Cllr Millar said: “Since being elected I have sadly found working with the Senior Management Team and trying to have any influence over my portfolio to be impossible. I was not once asked my view on any matter of policy or given information with which to make any real decision.
“I raised this on a number of occasions, and was sent an email by the Monitoring Officer telling me it is ‘impractical’ for councillors to make even a ‘small fraction’ of decisions.
“Although I’m very new, as a democrat I found this despairing and disappointing as I believe elected representatives are best placed to make decisions in the public interest. We take the blame when things go wrong, so we should have more control, as we’re the ones on the ground.”
Cllr Millar was absent from last Thursday’s overview and scrutiny committee meeting where the service plan objectives for 2019/20 where being evaluated due to illness, but had he attended, he said: “I would’ve struggled to explain what I’d done at the as I’ve not been given any opportunity to make a single major decision. I can only conclude this has been a deliberate action taken by the officer lead for my former portfolio.”
He added that he has no confidence in the current Senior Management and he would like to work with colleagues to at some point submit a motion of no confidence against the Senior Management Team.
He said: “I have become convinced by my short experience and conversations with others across parties that cultural change at the top is required if East Devon District Council is ever to provide a better service, win greater trust among our residents and to have fewer decisions made behind closed doors by officers who are unelected, unaccountable and often I believe show an arrogant contempt towards councillors.”
And he questioned whether the current administration in charge of the council was sustainable for much longer, and his departure means that the Independent Group, which was made up of 20 individual Independent councillors, is no longer the largest group, with the Conservatives also have 19.
He said: “My departure means the ‘Independent Group’ no longer has any majority and as a result to my mind no longer has any mandate to continue as the current administration.
“I will be voting against the Council Plan as I believe it is mostly a load of wishy-washy nonsense written entirely by senior officers, some of whom view our residents merely as “customers” to have money sucked out of, and underestimate the intelligence and ability of elected representatives. In its current form the plan gives the council and the current administration no clear direction of travel.
“Worst of all, I’ve been disappointed that the Independent Group has little desire to change anything really at all. I’ve never been part of a more autocratically-minded institution in my life, and my old Students’ Union was pretty bad.
“The leader and deputy leader have consistently bowed to the SMT (senior management team) in the name of ‘continuity’. It’s been so frustrating and there’s no active feeling that SMT want to work with councillors.”
Cllr Ingham, in response, said he was grateful for the work Cllr Millar had carried out and wished him well for the future.
He added: “It is very unfortunate when individuals resort to personal and unfounded comments. Such attacks do not help us advance understanding of the work carried out by East Devon District Council’s officers and councillors and their respective roles and responsibilities as detailed in the council’s constitution. Rather, they confuse, contribute to rumours and create more harm.”
“However, I am confident that the council offered Cllr Millar a high level of support and assistance to help him try to adjust to the demands of being a Portfolio holder, and I thank him for his contribution.
“On behalf of the council I am very grateful for the work that Cllr Millar has carried out since his election and appointment to the cabinet and wish him well for the future. Looking forwards, though, it is business as usual for East Devon.”
It is understood that Cllr Ingham had sacked Cllr Millar from his role as he failed to take the ‘many chances’ given to ‘show respect to officers and each other at all times’.
Cllr Millar’s resignation leaves the Independent Group and the Conservatives both holding 19 seats on the council. The East Devon Alliance hold 11, the Liberal Democrats eight, the Green Party two, and one Independent.
A meeting of Conservatives members will take place next week to discuss what, if any, moves they plan to make to try and regain control of the council.”
https://www.devonlive.com/news/devon-news/councillor-quits-independent-group-launches-3313607
“£28m budget black hole forecast for Devon County Council”
“A report to Devon County Council’s (DCC) cabinet meeting tells councillors that the total projected budget overspend, four months into the 2019/20 financial year, is £4.3m.
However, Mary Davis the county’s treasurer, says this figure assumes a funding shortfall of £15.8m for special educational needs and disability (SEND) will not be dealt with this financial year.
It also assumes planned contributions to reserves of £8m are not made.
The report said that, without these adjustments, the projected overspend would be £28.1m.
Mrs Davis’ report added: “The Government has announced additional funding for SEND in 2020/21 but nothing as yet for the current year.
“It is suggested that the deficit is not dealt with at the end of this financial year but held on the balance sheet as a negative reserve.
“It is not a solution, but it is a mechanism that gives more time for a solution to be found.”
The cabinet are recommended to note the budget monitoring forecast position.
Councillor Alan Connett, leader of the Liberal Democrat group, said the projected £28 million shortfall highlights that Devon is being ‘short-changed’ by this Government.
He added: “More children and adults need the council’s support.
“Our schools are being cheated.
“They get around £300 per child less than the national average, and our children with special educational needs are being let down.
“Those that need our help the most are being denied by a Government that could act, but won’t.”
The cabinet agenda report says DCC could receive an extra £11.7 million next year and £9.5 million in 2021/22 for education, following the Government’s spending review, and an extra £8.6 million to help support children with special needs next year.
County council leader, Cllr John Hart, said: “We have been campaigning with headteachers, governors and parents for fairer funding for Devon’s schools and the promise to ‘level up’ under-funded areas is one I very much welcome.
“It’s also encouraging to see Mr Javid (Chancellor for the Exchequer) announcing a three-year funding cycle for education as compared to the single year for other services.”
https://www.exmouthjournal.co.uk/news/devon-county-council-budget-forecast-deficit-1-6264239
The dangers of anagrams and acronyms in these dangerous times!
Acronyms:
Story is civil servants – but nobody appears to have admitted to this being deliberate – named a process the “Community Rolling Action Plan”, knowing regulators’ love of acronyms. It is now called the CoRAP.
Anagrams:
YELLOWHAMMER
is an anagram of
ORWELL MAYHEM
Persimmon home buyers in Plymouth see £50,000 knocked off value of their homes in 3 years
“Devon and Somerset fire service ‘scraps’ £630k IT project”
burning money cartoon
“A cash-strapped fire service has scrapped an IT project that cost £631,000 but was branded “ill-conceived and overly complicated” by a union.
Devon and Somerset Fire and Rescue Service said it had to save £8.4m in the next three years and has planned to close eight fire stations.
The system was used to manage staff training needs and bosses said it was good value but no system was perfect.
But the Fire Brigades Union said it was a “waste of time and money”.
James Leslie, from the union, said the contract should never have been signed off and the money should have been used more wisely.
He said the programme was difficult to use, “never really took off and had been officially scrapped” and replaced with one that was “user-friendly”.
Mr Leslie said part of the programme was never released and as a result training went unrecorded and staff were struggling to find availability on courses.
However, the fire service disputed these claims.
The service said the programme was operational from 2016 until earlier this year but “due to a number of factors” it ended and a new system was developed.
Alex Hanson, Assistant Chief Fire Officer, said the project was “fundamental” in supporting firefighter training.
“No system is completely perfect,” he said. …
… In June, the fire service said it wanted to bring an outdated service into the 21st Century and announced the planned closure of eight stations – seven in Devon and one in Somerset.
The service said it had saved £12.2m over the past five years but still had to “make significant financial savings” because of reduced funding and rising costs.
However, the Home Office said the authority would have £75.6m to spend in 2019-2020 – an increase of £1.9m compared with 2018-2019.
Mr Hanson added the £631,000 was “one-off capital funding to develop a vital system for staff” and could not have been used for wages or savings.”
“Councils ignoring public right to audit accounts”
“Local authorities are refusing to let the public access key information on how their money is being spent, research by the Bureau of Investigative Journalism has found.
Authorities are:
redacting documents to “protect commercial interests”;
setting up council-owned companies that are removed from scrutiny;
failing to respond to members of the public who try to exercise their right to inspect council finances
The Local Audit and Accountability Act 2014 (LAAA) gives citizens and journalists the right to inspect the accounts and related documents of councils, police, fire and other local authorities, and to object to them if they believe something is amiss. It is an especially important right at a time when public bodies are under unprecedented financial pressure.
However, when Bureau journalists and volunteers attempted to exercise that right, some authorities withheld or heavily redacted the information. There was often little evidence that the public interest had been considered and no way of challenging the decision short of a costly court battle.
In one case, the Bureau was prevented from reading a contract because a council officer believed the company involved would sue. Another council refused access to the accounts of a company it had set up to manage a large property portfolio, raising concerns about transparency and accountability.
Duncan Hames, director of policy at Transparency International UK, said: “It’s critical that the public and press are allowed access to key documents about the finances of local authorities to ensure there is no place to hide for the misuse of public money.
“The law is clear that this financial information should be out in the open, so it is imperative that those failing to comply do not continue to withhold it from public scrutiny.”
Commercial interest over public interest
To test the law, Bureau Local volunteers submitted requests to nearly 50 local authorities asking to inspect documents — such as contracts and invoices — relating to the use of private consultants during multimillion-pound property deals, a subject the Bureau is investigating.
Some authorities gave only restricted access to the information, or refused altogether, often on grounds that releasing the information could cause financial damage to the councils and their business partners. …”
“Government turns blind eye as council sells “family silver” to pay bills”
“Publicly owned buildings and land could be at greater risk of being sold off by cash-strapped councils after a government ruling, a leading expert has warned.
Peterborough council appeared to breach one of the government’s “golden rules” between 2015 and 2019 when it balanced its books by using £24 million raised from selling assets.
However, after an inquiry into this practice — prompted by the Bureau — the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government (MHCLG) has decided to take no action against the council, potentially leaving the door open for other councils to do the same. The decision seems to be a U-turn, as government officials had previously told the council they disagreed with its position in correspondence seen by the Bureau.
Professor Tony Travers, of the London School of Economics, told the Bureau more local authorities may now take the opportunity to sell the “family silver” to make ends meet.
The ministry declined to comment when asked whether Peterborough’s spending was legal and if other councils are allowed to make use of the policy.
Local authorities are supposedly barred from selling their assets to plug gaps in their finances unless the money is used to fund cost-cutting measures. The regulations are designed to prevent councils becoming reliant on selling off land and buildings to pay running costs.
This is exactly the situation Peterborough finds itself in, leaving it with little of value left. It used money from selling off assets, called capital receipts, to pay what is known as the Minimum Revenue Provision charge, which is a proportion of its annual budget that has to be set aside to repay loans borrowed to fund things such as building schools.
An investigation by the Bureau found that, since 2015, Peterborough had used capital receipts totalling £23 million to meet the cost of MRP, despite guidelines which say the charge must be met from councils’ day-to-day budgets. The council’s latest accounts, released since our story was published, bring that figure up to £24 million.
This reduced the pressure on the Conservative-led council’s finances but also made it dependent on selling assets to break even – an unsustainable position in the long term, as Peterborough itself admits.
In total, Peterborough sold about 50 assets — including pubs, petrol stations, a former community college and farmland — between 2014 and July 2018. In February a further 27 sites were earmarked for sale over the next two years, including a bowling green, allotments, a library and a car park. A Labour councillor called it a “fire sale”.
After the Bureau asked the government about the situation in Peterborough, an investigation was launched. In response, the council insisted it had not broken the law, adding that its spending had been approved by auditors and other external advisers.
Speaking at a council meeting a day later, David Seaton, Peterborough’s cabinet member for resources, dismissed the story as “fake news” and said the council had sought the advice of a leading financial QC who had “given us the opinion that he cannot see Peterborough council acted illegally in any way”.
Councillors then passed this year’s budget, which includes a further £10.6 million in capital receipts to pay the MRP charge.
In the months that followed the council was asked by the government to explain its position. The Bureau obtained copies of correspondence between the council and MHCLG under freedom of information laws. In the most recent letter obtained by the Bureau, dated May 16, a government official made clear to the local authority that the way it spent capital receipts did not fall within the legislation. …”
Finally, Parish on Brexit …
Owl isn’t convinced!
“With the current unrest in Parliament – linked to indecision around Brexit – Honiton Nub News contacted local MP Neil Parish to find out his thoughts on what is going on.
He said: “I supported the PM in his call for a general election, so the country can decide who deals with Brexit.
“Parliament is not functioning properly.
“There is no majority for the executive, MPs are not respecting the referendum result – and are now refusing to face public opinion.
“It can’t go on. After Party conference, the impasse must be broken at the earliest opportunity.
“I want to get on with leaving the EU, recruiting 20,000 extra police officers, providing a £14 billion cash boost for schools, 20 new hospital upgrades and transformative infrastructure investment on transport and superfast fibre broadband.
“These are all things which are crucial for our area.”
£350,000 Persimmon home “infected” by radon and with “245 faults” – woman offered “£250 voucher” compensation!
Swire on prorogation – and a constituent’s response
LETTER SENT BY SWIRE TO CONSTITUENT:
“Dear Mr
Thank you for your email about the votes in the House of Commons on stopping a No Deal Brexit and extending the deadline.
I voted with the Government against the bill as I believe it completely undermines the Prime Minister’s attempt to get a deal on Brexit. It is little more than a cynical attempt to delay or revoke the whole process by those who have never accepted the result of the referendum.
The bill will allow the EU to unilaterally impose & dictate the length of a further Brexit extension therefore putting our future in the hands of the EU. It would go against the result of the 2016 referendum which wanted to have the power back into the hands of the UK.
I believe that not leaving by 31 October could lead to a catastrophic loss of confidence in our political system. The indecision of the last three years and the repeated failure to deliver on the referendum result cannot be allowed to continue.
Thank you again for taking the time to contact me.
Yours sincerely
Hugo Swire”
REPLY BY CONSTITUENT:
“Thank you for your biased reply.
The current Prime Minister is not attempting to get a deal with the EU. This has been confirmed recently by Amber Rudd, EU officials and Leo Varadkar.
I would remind you the 2016 referendum was “ advisory” only. The result has been hijacked by leavers as the “ will of the people “ to leave the EU without a deal.
To state that our future will be in the hands of the EU is incorrect. The UK has always had control over it`s own affairs and always will have. There have been occasions in the past when the UK has chosen not to use those powers. We have never been controlled by the EU without our own consent. The EU does not work like that and you know it. Member states have control over their own affairs and laws.
MPs are at Westminster to have the best interests of their constituents first and foremost in mind. MPs have the resources at hand via advisors and experts to “ save us from ourselves “ and put into action our best interests.This is something you have constantly failed to do.
The naive and gullible who voted to leave the EU in 2016 were encouraged to do so by inveterate liars. Staggeringly, those liars are currently at the very top of Government.
I look forward to the upcoming General Election when we can vote for someone who will at the very least attempt to represent constituents and not just be driven by self interest.”
Who decided to sack “Independent Group” councillor?
LATE CORRECTION: Greens are independent of the Independent Group but Ollie David accepted the role as Lead Member for Environmental Health and the other Green councillor accepted the role of Lead Member for Health and Wellbeing.
How does a group of Independent Councillors sack an independent councillor?
We know how parties and alliances do or might sack a member councillor – they would have a committee meeting of elected members, make a decision and communicate it to other members and the councillor concerned.
But the “Independent Group” appears to have simply decided it was a group and elected itself a leader in the first week of the new council. As it then had the most seats, its Leader got to be Leader of the new council. Green Party councillors also joined the Independent Group (can you be even be Independent and Green Party?). It did not follow up with a committee or internal executive as far as we know, the Leader simply chose Cabinet and other roles for councillors – some of whom were Tories (eg Head of Development Management Committee) and one of whom was an East Devon Alliance member (Dan Ledger – Procurement).
So, did the Leader unilaterally decide to sack Councillor Paul Millar from the Independent Group, or were all of its members involved in the decision or just a small number of them? If so, were Tory councillors and Green councillors also involved in the decision (it seems unlikely the EDA councillor would have been consulted)?
Who initiated the call for the sacking? Were officers involved and, if so, how and why? Will the Monitoring be involved? Was the Monitoring Officer involved? Was the inexperienced, young councillor offered advice or extra training in his new role?
So many questions!
“EDF feels heat from nuclear weld problems”
Hinkley C nuclear plant is where the vast majority og our regional funds have been placed by our Local Enterprise Partnership – many of whose board members have a direct or indirect financial interest in the project.
“The French state electricity group building Britain’s new nuclear plant suffered another setback yesterday when it admitted to possible faults with components used in reactors in France.
The disclosure alarmed investors, raised a new question mark over the French nuclear industry and will fuel speculation that slipshod practices have gained hold in a sector that supplies about three quarters of the country’s electricity.
EDF said that a factory that made steam generators used in nuclear reactors had failed to follow standard procedures. The problem was with the welds on the generators, it said.
The factory is in Saint-Marcel, central France, and is owned by Framatome, a French nuclear group in which EDF has a majority stake. The plant supplies heavy equipment for the French nuclear industry and has provided components for 106 reactors worldwide.
EDF said that Framatome had informed it of “a deviation from technical standards governing the manufacture of nuclear reactor components”. It said that the problem concerned components already installed in reactors, as well as those being prepared for future use. A spokesman for the French Nuclear Safety Authority said that about 20 functioning reactors built after 2008 were believed to be affected.
“EDF, along with Framatome, has been conducting in-depth investigations to identify all affected components and reactors, as well as to ascertain their fitness for service,” EDF said.
The setback comes after a factory in nearby Le Creusot, which belonged to Areva and is now part of Framatome, admitted to having failed to follow safety test procedures during the manufacture of nuclear components. The Nuclear Safety Authority said that test results appeared to have been falsified and added that it had alerted prosecutors to possible fraud.
The latest scandal could hardly have come at a worse time for EDF, which said this summer that the launch of its new-generation nuclear reactor had suffered a further delay. The reactor in Flamanville, Normandy, will now come on stream in 2022, a decade after it was meant to be operating.
EDF is leading the project to build two similar reactors at Hinkley Point in Somerset at a cost of £19.6 billion. They are due to come on stream in 2025.
With difficulties mounting for EDF, its share price fell sharply on the Paris stock market, and closed down 74 cents, or 6.8 per cent, at €10.12.”
Source: Times (paywall)
East Devon Watch 