Why could this be important for Owl’s readership? Of all the parliamentary committees, the Treasury Committee (chaired by the majority party) and the Public Accounts Committee (chaired by the opposition) are arguably two of the most important, holding the government to account by inquiries and scrutiny. When an election is called all committee business ceases. The newly elected parliament and its committees may or may not continue with inquiries in progress. 

The previous treasury committee had just started taking oral evidence in an inquiry into regional imbalances in the UK economy. So it is to be hoped that the new committee will continue with this inquiry. Mel Stride is the MP for Central Devon and is, therefore, particularly well placed to make sure that Devon and the South West generally are not left behind in the race to re-balance the economy to the regions, primarily the “red wall” in the North.

Mel Stride MP will formally take up position as Chair of the Committee when the remaining members of the Committee have been named by the House. This is expected to be announced in February.

Owl has posted a number of links in the past couple of weeks to studies that highlight the deprivation and isolation found in rural areas, especially in Devon. 

Owl has also posted the Great South West’s latest attempt to make the case for more investment.

Last September the East Devon Alliance submitted evidence to this inquiry of the imbalance felt here in Devon.Theirs was the only evidence submitted by any solely Devon organisation among 76 submissions. The summary reproduced below seems to Owl to make a compelling case. 

https://www.parliament.uk/business/committees/committees-a-z/commons-select/treasury-committee/inquiries1/parliament-2017/inquiry7/publications/

Written evidence submitted by the East Devon Alliance (RDE0002)

Executive Summary

• There is a widespread belief that the “far” South West has suffered long-term lack of strategic investment hampering economic growth, particularly in Devon and Cornwall.

• We present evidence of poor economic growth, productivity and earnings in the sub-region.
• East Devon has 30% of its population already aged 65+ with high social and health care needs. It has one of the highest internal immigration rates in a region which, overall, has the highest rate of this type of immigration in the country.
• We present evidence of the unaffordability of housing and show that it is a matter of low earnings. The private sector has been unable to build the affordable houses needed.
• We highlight poor access to public transport as one of the discriminants between metropolitan and rural life.
• The creation of Local Enterprise partnerships (LEP) has added complexity to local government with little benefit. They are unrepresentative, unaccountable and have minimal public recognition. Our LEP growth deal was agreed with Government in 2014. Nothing was revealed to the public until 2015.
• We explain why increased productivity in our economy will take a long time to achieve.
• Our LEP’s strategy to double the economy in 20 years, 3.5% pa growth, lacks realism and is undeliverable. The latest LEP review shows our economy continuing to fall behind UK average; objectives already look “very aspirational”; only 23% of matched funding comes from private sector; there has been no significant influence on private investment plans.
• Regional and sub-regional economic data is essential to good planning, feedback and scrutiny. Our LEP has no feed-back loop to understand what works well and what does not.
• We give examples where our LEP and District Council have missed the opportunity to analyse readily available data. As a result they are continuing to follow growth strategies and plans demonstrably failing at an early stage.
• Hinkley C is regarded by our LEP as a “Golden Opportunity”. However, construction of Hinkley A & B (57/65 & 67/76) means that we have already experienced two decades building similar magnitude nuclear projects. We ask whether any forensic historical analysis of the benefit from such major infrastructure projects to local economies has ever been conducted and suggest that Hinkley C is substituting for a genuine regional growth strategy.

In a recent post Owl touched on the complexity surrounding the way that devolution is evolving and explained that the Great South West wasn’t another rail franchise but yet another added layer.

We have the formal devolution body, the Local Enterprise Partnership (LEP), Heart of the South West (HotSW). This has been pitching to government for funds since 2014. Then we have the Joint Committee with a single representative councillor from each of the 17 local authorities from Devon and Somerset. This started out in 2018 as a way for elected councillors to oversee and agree policy e.g. the HotSW Productivity Strategy, but has apparently rapidly evolved into developing relationships with key local partnerships and in overseeing delivery of the Strategy alongside the LEP. Owl is not sure how effective a large committee is at doing this.

The briefing papers for last week’s cabinet justified EDDC putting more resources into the Joint Committee suggested something quite different:

“Changes in Government policy away from large devolution ‘deals’ to a more targeted dialogue on key themes of relevance to the local authorities and partners, e.g housing. The Joint Committee’s influencing role has become increasingly important as recognised by Ministers, local MPs and Government officials. The ambition remains to draw down additional functions, powers and funding from Government.” I.e. EDDC anticipate that most funding will by-pass HotSW.

Obviously EDDC has an insight into the way the wind is blowing which has not yet dawned on the Great South West (GSW). The GSW website explains that on Wednesday, January 22, a delegation comprising business leaders, Local Enterprise Partnerships (LEPs), MPs and local authorities (Including DCC Leader John Hart) presented Minister for Local Growth, Rt Hon Jake Berry MP, with the GSW growth prospectus and briefed him on ambitions to deliver £45 billion of economic benefit and 190,000 new jobs over the next 15 years.

Last week devonlive reported that the Great South West had made a similar pitch to yesterday’s man Sajid Javid:

https://www.devonlive.com/news/devon-news/chancellor-urged-back-great-south-3820532

Owl wants to see increased investment and prosperity in the South West but these approaches look fragmented and muddled. Owl isn’t convinced that the best way to influence Ministers is by handing them glossy brochures and demanding £45M. (And £2M on account – see below).

Steve Hindley, Chairman of Midas Group, a construction company, stepped down as Chair of HotSW in 2019 and has now popped up as Chair of GSW.

GSW is the latest business led growth alliance proposed to rebalance the UK economy, alongside the Northern Powerhouse, the Midlands Engine and the Western Gateway. GSW covers Cornwall & Scilly Isles, Devon, Somerset and Dorset. The GSW prospectus seeks £2million over three years from government, and a dedicated liaison Minister, to move forward “at pace” and enable full business cases to be developed across a range of topics. [£2M and 3 years before anything really happens – is this “at pace” – Owl]

It seeks support for an enhanced export and investment hub; recognition of a Great South West Tourism Zone and an agreement to create a rural productivity deal.

At HotSW, Hindley oversaw an unrealistic and undeliverable strategy for regional growth aimed at doubling the local economy in 20 years, way ahead of any national performance forecasts, with no clear strategy or feedback mechanism to measure success. At GSW the proposal is more modest. If the Great South West economy reaches the UK average, it would be worth £84.1 billion today and would be worth £121.7 billion by 2035. Even just closing the gap to 90% of the UK average would see the local economy worth between £103 billion and £110 billion by 2035. Where does this leave the HotSW “ambition”?

Initial governance arrangements for GSW are, apparently, already in place with a business led Partnership Group representing the leading strategic public and private sector organisations from across the region (just look at the logos on the devonlive page). This is supported by a small Executive Board to ensure clear leadership and focused delivery. The work to date has been supported both financially and ‘in-kind’ by the three Local Enterprise Partnerships that form the backbone of the Great South West. The private sector provided the catalyst for this initiative, with the #backthesouthwest campaign and the public sector and academic institutions have made significant contributions to its progression.

Government support is now required to help realise these “shared” ambitions.

So, once again, we have an unelected, unaccountable, group putting forward a growth strategy on our behalves. Adding a further layer of overarching bureaucracy to the already complex hierarchical relationship explained above. Along the line it is worth recalling that in autumn 2015 another group, independent from our local LEP, was formed under the surprising leadership of the Pennon Group, owners of the utility company South West Water. This group drafted a “South West Group Charter” within in days, following an invitation from Sajid Javid when visiting Exeter as Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government (he is an alumnus of Exeter Uni). This was sent to the Government ahead of the Chancellor’s Autumn Statement. However, it sunk without trace. Pennon is now a backer of GSW.

Owl agrees that the current division of the sub-region into three LEPs is a hotchpot arrangement and something like the GSW would be more a more sensible geographic area on which to base a regional strategy. Owl also thinks that the prospectus, whilst lacking any depth (it’s just a glossy brochure), is more sensible than anything produced by HotSW. For example it recognises, as problems: poor wages; poor productivity; the above average age distribution and the need for major changes to agriculture post-Brexit. As mentioned above it also has a more realistic approach to growth. There remain some dubious ideas: eg that the ageing population presents an opportunity to trial new approaches to wellbeing, care and employment with older people which will offer learning for the rest of the UK (so oldies become a marketing opportunity). Also, examples of exploitable opportunities taken from each county seem to be of very questionable value: Hinkley Point in Somerset, Europe’s first horizontal launch spaceport in Cornwall; the largest naval base in Western Europe at Devonport; and Dorset is one the country’s leading centres for financial services (Owl didn’t know that Dorset was the place to leave your nest egg).

None of this seems to relate to solving the problems of rural isolation and deprivation featured in recent East Devon Watch posts. Nor does it address the need for something like a national regional investment bank to support firms such as Flybe or Axminster Carpets.

With Sajid Javid’s departure Steve Hindley and his marketing team will have now to swivel rapidly to make their pitch to Dominic Cummings. The people who seem to impress him are: super-talented weirdos with genuine cognitive diversity, true wild cards. So no problem then.

GSW Prospectus

Click to access GSW%20Prospectus%20published%20final%20version%20100120.pdf

Owl recommends this analysis of what Sajid David’s resignation might mean for the economy – Larry Elliot, economic editor of the Guardian:

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/commentisfree/2020/feb/13/treasury-will-bide-its-time-over-johnsons-radical-changes

It was billed as just a limited shuffling of the pack, but Boris Johnson’s reshuffle proved to be the moment when the simmering conflict between 10 Downing Street and the Treasury burst out into the open.

The departure of Sajid Javid and his replacement as chancellor by the inexperienced Rishi Sunak means that first blood has gone to the prime minister or, more accurately, his chief adviser Dominic Cummings.

Javid is out and Sunak is in – but not because of a Whitehall disagreement over the activities of the former chancellor’s special advisers. Nor is it simply about the shape of next month’s budget, important though the disagreements were between a prime minister bent on an expansionary package and a distinctly more cautious Javid.

Ultimately, this is about power and whether the Treasury should continue to exert its stranglehold over the totality of economic policy – or be relegated to the role of a finance ministry, as it is in so many other countries.

Britain has been here before. Maynard Keynes argued in the 1920s and 1930s that the Treasury’s obsession with balancing the budget was the wrong response to a demand-deficient and high unemployment economy.

In the 1960s, Harold Wilson hived off a large chunk of the Treasury’s responsibilities to a new Department of Economic Affairs. John Major’s answer to the Treasury’s dominance was to beef up the industry department and put Michael Heseltine in charge. Tony Blair regularly chafed at being kept in the dark about key economic decisions when Gordon Brown was running the Treasury.

The power grab attempt by Johnson and Cummings is somewhat different. Instead of setting up a brand new ministry, they have decided to make 10 Downing Street the hub of economic policy.
This approach has both strengths and weaknesses. Its strength is that there are many economists who think that a successful industrial strategy for Britain has to involve limiting the power of the Treasury to keep vetoing things on budgetary grounds.

As an institution, the Treasury is hard-wired to be conservative and has often been wrong as a result. It was, for example, fully behind George Osborne’s austerity programme in 2010 on the grounds that running big budget deficits risked losing the confidence of the financial markets and would result in much higher interest rates.

A better solution – and the one Johnson and Cummings are trying after 10 years that have seen the weakest wage and productivity growth since the 19th century – would have been to take advantage of low interest rates to borrow for public infrastructure projects that would have produced faster growth, higher tax receipts and a lower deficit.

The weakness of the Johnson-Cummings approach is that Downing Street really doesn’t have the resources to run economic policy itself and will have to import resources from elsewhere.
Unless, of course, Cummings thinks he is so smart he can run the show on his own. Even Keynes, a man famed for his arrogance, did not think that.

History suggests that the Treasury will play a long game. It will sit tight for a while, and work on the more expansionary package that the new chancellor is having prepared for him in Downing Street.
It will assume that after a while Sunak will go native as most chancellors do eventually. And it will wait – as it did when Wilson tried to clip its wings – for something to go wrong, knowing that in a financial crisis it will be fully back in business.

The boost provided by the budget will mean stronger short-term growth, but this war is not over by a long chalk.

Sidmouth Town Council said flood advice is to be prepared and not wait until it is too late.

The empty sandbags, for people to fill themselves, are available from the town council offices from 9am until 1pm Monday to Friday.

During the weekend they can be collected from the yard of the council building in Woolcombe Lane.

Weather information, weather warnings, river levels and flood warnings for the Sidmouth area can be viewed here.

http://visitsidmouth.co.uk/weather/index.htm

https://www.sidmouthherald.co.uk/news/town-council-advice-be-prepared-for-flooding-1-6513966

The National Audit Office has just published its latest report into local authority investment in commercial property and recommends a toughening up.

Click to access Local-authority-investment-in-commercial-property-Summary.pdf

Recommnedations:

a. The Ministry of Housing, Communities & Local Government (the Department) should improve the relevance and quality of data and analysis it has on authorities’ acquisition of commercial property to understand more fully any associated risks and to provide greater assurance on framework compliance.

b. The Department, with HMT as appropriate, should broaden its analytical work on local authority commercial property acquisition to:

• assess potential market-distortion effects;
• understand any value-for-money risks associated with access to PWLB borrowing; and
• assess the investment risks that the sector as a whole is exposed to through the national ‘portfolio’ of investment properties.

c. The Department needs to articulate clearly both the nature and scale of behaviour causing it concern in relation to both borrowing in advance of need and disproportionate borrowing. It should:

• monitor trends more actively at sector level to understand compliance; and

• assure itself that it has sufficiently flexible forms of intervention supported by robust evidence to enable it to target particular behaviour.

d. The Department, working with CIPFA as appropriate, should review the prudential framework, its oversight and intervention arrangements, and underpinning data to ensure they remain fit for purpose in the context of an increase in local authority commercial activity. In doing this the Department should:

• examine whether varying interpretations of the authorities’ borrowing and investment powers in the sector are having an impact on the resilience of the prudential arrangements; and
• review recent changes in local authorities’ investment and borrowing activities and their underlying motivations to understand fully:
• the drivers behind recent changes in behaviour in different types of authority, and the relative importance of each driver

•  the extent to which authorities have undertaken activities that test the limits of the framework such as borrowing to invest solely for yield;
  • the extent to which changes to the codes and guidance have genuinely changed behaviour or whether other factors such as the recent rise in the PWLB rate might have been more significant; and
  • whether recent changes to the codes or guidance have had any unintended consequences that may have increased risk.

Chancellor dramatically walks out after a bust-up with Dominic Cummings over a demand for him to sack his advisers

Owl intends to be sparing with National News, you get it anyway, but this has a bearing on a post Owl has in preparation concerning various bides being made for more investment in the South west.

read:https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/sajid-javid-resigns-boris-johnson-chancellor-cabinet-reshuffle-latest-a9333256.html

Sajid Javid has dramatically quit the Cabinet, throwing Boris Johnson’s first reshuffle into chaos and controversy.

The chancellor walked out after a bust-up over Dominic Cummings’ demand for him to sack his advisers to end a briefing war, it appeared.

Mr Javid’s departure comes just one month before a crucial budget, intended to chart the course for the new government – and makes him the shortest-serving chancellor for more than 50 years.

Tensions have been rising between Mr Johnson and Mr Javid over spending plans and the power of the two offices. The chancellor also jumped the gun with his backing for the HS2 go-ahead.

The rivalry with Mr Cummings, the prime minister’s controversial chief of staff, dates back to the sacking of the chancellor’s adviser last year – when she was frogmarched out of Downing Street.

A source close to Mr Javid pointed the finger at No 10, saying “no self-respecting minister” could accept the condition being asked of him.

“The prime minister said he had to fire all his special advisers and replace them with Number 10 special advisers to make it one team,” the source said.

“The chancellor said no self-respecting minister would accept those terms.”

Rishi Sunak, the high-flying but little known chief secretary to the Treasury, was quickly appointed the new chancellor, having been called into No 10.

Sajid Javid is an Alumnus of  Exeter Uni

The decision to launch a formal marketing exercise over the future of Exmouth seafront has been called-in for further scrutiny.

https://www.exmouthjournal.co.uk/news/queen-s-drive-plans-called-in-1-6512774

East Devon District Council’s cabinet last Wednesday night voted to launch a formal marketing exercise to identify a developer/operator for a waterfront restaurant, an 80-bedroom hotel, and an area for play and leisure uses.

But that decision will now be reconsidered after Councillor Paul Arnott, leader of the East Devon Alliance, said the purpose of agreeing the selection criteria for the commercial development was not properly balanced.

The cabinet had agreed the leader of the council, the portfolio holders for asset management, finance and economy and relevant officers should be on the selection panel, as well as one Exmouth councillor.

But Cllr Arnott said: “The number of elected members taking part in the selection panel is too few and has insufficient Exmouth democratic representatives.

“There remains well-documented and live concern in Exmouth.

“Under this resolution their involvement comes belatedly in the Queen’s Drive Delivery Group, which has hitherto been meeting in secret.

“The ongoing damage to the council’s reputation – given its decision to fund the construction of Queen’s Drive from public funds without a certain means of recouping that – is further exacerbated by this and the continuing insufficient inclusion of localised democratic representatives risk our reputation even further.

“The constitutional justifications to seek scrutiny of this are that this decision is likely to cause distress, harm or significant concern to a local community, or to prejudice individuals within it and that this matter has not been subject to proper consultation or debate with relevant interested parties.”

Cllr Kim Bloxham, vice-chairman of the scrutiny committee, has accepted the call-in and the decision will now be discussed again when the Scrutiny Committee meet on Thursday, March 5.

If the scrutiny committee decide to take no further action, then the cabinet’s decision will come into force.

If they decide that the selection panel has been wrongly constituted, then their suggestion will go back to the cabinet for reconsideration.

At a meeting of the Broadclyst Parish Council’s staffing committee councillors (Pepper Chamberlain, Jackson, Rylance and Staddon) agreed to raise the pay grade of the clerk to SCP49 which is equivalent to £52,869 per year. (Minutes and nation pay scales)

Village clerk’s salary to rise to £52,869

This £1,440 raise brings the total increase in the clerk’s salary to £16,298 since 2015 and does not include pension contributions or training budgets.

By comparison the average wage in East Devon is just over £26,000 per year and most workers in Devon have seen their real term wages reduced.

A Freedom of Information request, asking who undertook the clerks salary grading and what qualification they have has gone unanswered by the Parish Council. Why won’t the council tell us and who recommended such a high grade and what qualification they have?

Using the information published by the parish council on its website [here] and through Freedom of Information requests [here] we have been able to establish the facts about pay.

Other staff will receive just the National Minimum Wage increase of 30p per hour meaning the gap between the highest and lowest paid staff continues to increase, with the maintenance and cleaning staff earning just above the minimum wage.

How can a Parish clerk be paid so much when other members of staff are paid so poorly? Looking at all the budgets for rural parishes across the South West I cannot find a single example of a parish clerk being paid more than £35,000 and the average is much less at around £25,000.

The question that remains unanswered is why is this such an expensive parish? We have the 4th highest rural parish precept in Britain which is funded by ordinary working families.
Let’s have fair play in Broadclyst with a parish precept that is substantially reduced.

The airline and government officials will meet this week to discuss the potential terms of a state loan, Sky News understands.

https://news.sky.com/story/flybe-set-for-crunch-whitehall-talks-over-bailout-terms-11932524

Flybe, the struggling regional airline, will be handed proposals for financial support from the government this week as it seeks to avoid a collapse that could undermine ministers’ pledge to bolster regional connectivity.

Sky News has learnt that Whitehall officials are expected to meet with Flybe and its shareholders as soon as Thursday to discuss the prospective outline of a £100m government loan.

The terms of a proposed deal may pose a dilemma for Flybe’s shareholders, led by Sir Richard Branson’s Virgin Atlantic.

Among the options being drawn up by officials would be for the government’s loan to rank above that of existing investors’ capital – an idea that at least one of Flybe’s shareholders has previously signalled they would reject.

Another scenario would give the taxpayer security over many of the airline’s remaining unencumbered assets.

A third idea, comprising warrants that would convert the government loan into equity in a rejuvenated Flybe, is said to be “significantly less likely”.

City sources say Flybe has sufficient financial resources to support the company’s operations until the end of March, but that the company’s existence would be imperilled at that stage if no deal has been secured.

Contingency plans that would allow the government to continue operating Flybe routes seen as critical to preserving vital regional connections are understood to be being drawn up, rival airline executives say.

While Flybe insists that it is not in talks about “a bailout”, and Sajid Javid, the chancellor, has denied any plan to support the company with state aid, its rivals have responded furiously to the idea of it being propped up by ministers.

British Airways’ parent – International Airlines Group – and Ryanair have threatened to take legal action against the government for breaching state aid law.

This week’s talks between the government and Flybe’s owners are said to represent an important step towards determining the scope of any loan, although the impending Cabinet and ministerial reshuffle will mean a delay to any formal decisions.

Officials from the Department for Transport, Treasury, and Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy are involved in the talks.

UK Government Investments, a unit of the Treasury, is helping to coordinate the negotiations.

On Wednesday, BA said it would step in to operate a Heathrow-Newquay route recently – and controversially – vacated by Flybe.

Last month, Heathrow Airport’s chief executive intervened in the row over Flybe’s future, demanding urgent government action to preserve “lifeline routes” from Britain’s busiest airport.

John Holland-Kaye wrote to Paul Maynard, a transport minister, to call for the ring-fencing of so-called Public Service Obligation (PSO) routes for flights to and from Heathrow.

A number of additional routes, including some operated by Flybe, are expected to be given PSO status following a forthcoming consultation on regional connectivity.

Ministers have also pledged to review Air Passenger Duty (APD) in next month’s Budget, with Flybe already benefiting from a short-term deferral of part of its tax bill.
Flybe, which is one of the UK’s biggest domestic carriers, transports more than eight million passengers annually.

It employs more than 2,000 people.

Michael O’Leary, Ryanair’s chief executive, has accused Mr Javid of being “blindsided by billionaires”, asking him last month: “If these billionaire shareholders are not willing to put their hand in their own deep pockets to bail out the loss-making Flybe, then why is your government and HMRC [the tax authorities] giving them a bailout?”

The restructuring experts Alvarez & Marsal have been drafted in to advise the government on the terms of any loan, which would have to be made on commercial terms to avoid breaching state aid rules.

Flybe’s inability to access a loan from commercial lenders has, however, provoked criticism that a loan from the government could be on such terms.

The airline could not be reached for comment, but said at the weekend: “Flybe and its shareholders continue to have productive and positive discussions with the government regarding support to enable us to deliver our long-term strategic plan.”

A bid to take money from a fund allocated to a Climate Change Action Plan and to be diverted towards Economic Development has been rejected.

read:https://www.devonlive.com/news/devon-news/council-rejects-bid-take-money-3819142

According to this press report a request for two additional posts in the Economic Development area had been put forward by Cllr Mike Allen (Con) to Cabinet last week. This was supported by both Overview and Scrutiny Committees, who as part of draft budget proposals, requested East Devon District Council’s cabinet consider funding these posts from part of the sum allocated to Climate Change.

As you might expect Owl has red lines when it comes to the environment and climate change. In this case the cabinet, in Owl’s opinion, made the right call in rejecting bids to take money from the Climate Change action fund. The article above went on to suggest that the joint meeting of the Scrutiny Committee, chaired by Cllr Alan Dent (Con) and Overview Committee, chaired by Cllr Nick Hookway (Ingham Indy group), tasked with reviewing the budget, had unanimously agreed that a proposal to take money from climate change to fund two new economic development posts should be put to cabinet. It has taken a week for Owl to calm down and try to understand, by listening to recordings of the joint committee debate and reviewing the draft cabinet minutes, why this could be so.

What Owl has found is that the debate at the combined Scrutiny and Overview was somewhat confused. There were eight budget proposals that members thought were unfunded or insuffiently funded and which they thought deserved to be reviewed at cabinet. They were also unhappy that the sizeable Climate Change budget of £323,000 was a ring-fenced allocation with, as yet, no definite spending proposals. Officers pointed out that as and when costed proposal were made these would have to be approved at cabinet and council. Just how these two concerns ended up as a single proposal to cut the Climate Change budget by £100K to fund two economic development posts rather than any of the other underfunded proposals is unclear. In the past EDDC, has equated economic development by sacrificing greenfield sites to build, build, build, the very antithesis of reversing climate change, so this trade-off looks particularly inappropriate.

Where this is spelled out in the audio recording of the joint committee and draft cabinet minutes is a mystery.

Owl shares, however, the concern that the Climate Change budget for the year doesn’t appear to have definite proposals yet. Owl’s message to officers and the portfolio holder for the environment is this: setting a climate change budget is necessary but not sufficient to deliver progress. You have the strategy for 2020 to 2025:

Click to access EDDC%20Climate%20Change%20Strategy.pdf

This says: we will draw up 5 year Action Plans to address these key priorities, and progress towards them will be measured annually. We are already into the second month of 2020. Where is the plan?

Full devonlive article reads:

A bid to take money from a fund allocated to a Climate Change Action Plan and to be diverted towards Economic Development has been rejected.

A request for two additional posts in the Economic Development area had been put forward by Cllr Mike Allen, and was supported by both Overview and Scrutiny Committees, who as part of draft budget proposals, requested East Devon District Council’s cabinet consider funding these posts from part of the sum allocated to Climate Change.

But Wednesday night’s cabinet meeting saw that recommendation rejected, with Cllr Geoff Jung, portfolio holder for the environment, saying: “I can hear Extinction Rebellion banging on our doors now.”

Making his proposal, Cllr Allen said there was a need for a senior commercial officer in East Devon to focus on working with businesses to broker the growth of small business units in the area and to make sure there is someone with commercial property experience who can go out and make sure there is inward investment which encourages ways in which business can grow.

He said; “We have lots of small businesses and have people who have been landlocked in terms of available space. They want to expand but simply can’t. The reason is they don’t know the best way to do it and there is no mechanism for us to help them as our resources are overstretched.”

But Cllr Ian Thomas, portfolio holder for finance, said he was concerned about the proposal that linked two different aspects of the budget.

He said: “We declared a climate emergency and wanted to put it at the core of everything that we do. I’m not comfortable that this proposal comes from the climate change budget, and am concerned that this is not supported by the officer teams or the SMT. In the absence of a coordinated proposal,

“I feel we have a mismatch, and I think we should refer it back to the service department for a review. If the service lead supports these additional staff, then we do have funds in the budget that could be used for this purpose, but it should not be linked to the reduction in the climate change budget.”

Cllr Jung added: “I cannot approve reducing in the climate change budget. It should be the wrong direction for the council. We should be serious about the climate change action plan or not, and do you want to expand a department to promote economic growth and take it from the budget for climate change? I can hear Extinction Rebellion banging on our doors now.”

Cllr Kevin Blakey, portfolio holder for the economy, added: “As much as I want to see economic growth in the district and it may be that some additional staffing is needed in the future, I don’t think now is the time. Funding it should be part of a long term commercial plan and it should not be coming from the budget from climate change action plan.”

The cabinet recommended their draft budget to full council for approval, without the proposal for £100,000 for two additional posts in the Economic Development service and reducing the sum allocated to the Climate Change Action Plan from £323,000 to £223,000.

The draft budget also includes a Council Tax increase of £5 a year, giving a Band D council tax of £146.78 a year for 2020/21.

The cabinet also recommended that full council adopts the Climate Change Strategy 2020 – 2025, which incorporates the Climate Change Action Plan

John Golding, Strategic Lead – Housing, Health & Environment, said that an initial assessment has been made on the cost implications associated with the Climate Change Action Plan has been made to meet the council’s clear ambition of being carbon neutral by 2040 at the very latest.

He told the cabinet that he would be bringing papers with a number of specific actions to be taken ‘imminently’, around the electrification of their vehicle fleet, sourcing green energy, and investment in the council housing stock to heat them via air source heat pumps.

The council has budgeted for £10,000 to be spent on each of its 4,200 council homes, but Cllr Thomas said that figure might not be enough and that if a £25,000 investment was needed, it would costs more than £100m, ‘a sum larger that we borrowed to buy the whole housing stock in the first place’.

He added: “This shows that we are not even in the right millennium in terms of our funding and if are to meet the objectives and aspiration, we will need central government support as we cannot do it under our budgets.”

Cllr Jung added: “It will cost a lot of money, but we have to get started now and get on top of climate change.”

Should ‘all possible steps’ be taken to save the Budleigh Salterton care home set to close next month?

https://www.exmouthjournal.co.uk/news/budleigh-shandford-rescue-bid-drop-in-1-6507445

Families of residents at Abbeyfield Shandford and concerned members of the Budleigh community are set to ask whether there is support for creating a community interest company to run the home.

A public drop-in event has been organised to discuss the idea on Friday (February 14) at Budleigh Salterton Football Club between 4pm and 6.30pm.

The Abbeyfield Society last month confirmed its decision to close the home on March 1 due to the spiralling cost of maintaining the building and difficulty attracting new staff.

A panel of local people had been put together to investigate transferring the home to trustee management but they decided ‘reluctantly’ it was not viable.

Following a meeting at the home called by East Devon MP Simon Jupp, those campaigning for the home to stay open say there is a ‘clear consensus’ that Shandford should be saved.

Mr Jupp said: “At the end of last week I met with the relatives of residents at Abbeyfield Shandford to hear their concerns and discuss next steps.

“I will be meeting with management from Abbeyfield later this week to raise questions on behalf of the residents and their relatives.

“I am still concerned about the lack of clear communication from the charity and questions remain over the amount of money left by former residents.

“I will be updating family members next week and hope to get the answers they need.

“Relatives of residents have said to me that they would like more time to consider other options for its future before residents are forced to move elsewhere.”

Owl will be trying to follow future developments in this story closely. First out of concern for the vulnerable and elderly residents and their families facing a traumatic move to who knows where. Second because East Devon has no recent experience of a constituency MP taking any active interest in the problems of his constituents. New MP, Simon Jupp, has decided to become involved and this will be the first test of his resolve. Owl can only hope that this is more than just a PR exercise.

Owl says Ouch! This demonstrates the value to transparency of well drafted FOIs

Over the last five years Honiton Town Council has spent more than £120,000 on legal costs, a Freedom of Information request has revealed.

https://honiton.nub.news/n/town-council-spends-more-than-121000-on-legal-costs-over-five-years

Since 2015 Honiton Town Council has spent £121,817 on legal costs.

To put the figure into perspective, during the same period Exmouth and Sidmouth Town Councils spent a combined figure of £7,984, a difference of £113,833.

Honiton Nub News contacted all of Honiton’s town councillors for a response to the newly revealed figures.

Councillor Ray Hanratty says he was surprised by the amount of money spent on legal costs, he said: “I have been astonished and hugely dismayed by the level of expenditure on legal fees by HTC. This money could have been utilised to better effect within the community of Honiton.

“The entrenched position adopted by certain members of the council has prevented sensible negotiations from taking place in order to reach an agreed compromise”

The leader of Honiton Town Council, Mayor John Zarczynski, had this to say in response to the figures: “The Town Council as custodians of public money has a duty to take all steps necessary to recover tax payers’ money where there is evidence supported by legal advice that money is due to the council and Honiton tax payers.

“Unfortunately Honiton Town Council was subject to a Judicial Review when a new council was elected in 2015, this imposed a sanction on a serving councillor that were ruled unlawful by the courts.

“I must point out the councillor subject to unlawful sanctions paid all his own legal fees inclusive of court cost out of his own personal finances.

“The Town Council has also unfortunately been forced into legal disputes, not of council’s making, despite the council making all efforts possible to resolve matters without the need for all concerned incurring legal costs.

“I am not at liberty to comment on the council’s legal dispute with Bailey Partnership, as I am on the council’s appointed management team, to manage the build of the Beehive. This is currently an unresolved contractual legal matter as such it would be inappropriate for me to comment.

“Regarding HTC’s dispute with Honiton Community Complex, the private Company with Charitable Status who lease the Beehive. Following talks with directors of HCC full council has resolved the council’s willingness to support the continued success of the Beehive.

“The Council believes it has made a very generous offer in resolving outstanding financial commitment to HCC with council now currently awaiting written confirmation from HCC that council proposals, as agreed, during a meeting with directors have been accepted by HCC.”

Jason Hannay became a Honiton town councillor last year, he said: “Unfortunately I was only told about this once being co-opted onto the council. The figures have always been out there for people to see, just not as clear as how you are putting it.

“I am sure some members of the current council feel that this has been money well spent and that is the council’s duty to the community, something that needs to be fulfilled and sorted. There are many contributing factors to why the costs have escalated I am sure.

“Personally I feel that money could have been spent better and that there have been a lot of community projects that this money could have contributed towards, but like anything there are two sides to every story.

“There are always going to be misunderstandings, heated debate and opposite views with any committee/council on different things, that’s a part of being an individual. But the council members are some fantastic people with love for Honiton and I look forward to working towards brilliant ideas to give our community value for money.”

According to the figures released by the town council since 2018 £44,525 has been spent on the dispute with the Bailey Partnership regarding the management of the Beehive’s build.
The figures also show that the council has spent £3,860 on a dispute with the Honiton Community Complex regarding its financial relationship with the council. However, that figure is not the total amount spent by HTC on the Honiton Community Complex dispute.

Agenda Item 71 in the Beehive Dispute Report presented to HTC on Monday, October 14, states: “HTC has been forced into the position of having to spend over £15,000 in legal fees so far and one can only presume that HCC have spent a similar amount.”

Nub News contacted the Tax Payers Alliance, a campaign group lobbying for lower taxes, government transparency and an end to wasteful spending in local government, for its take on the figures.
Harry Fone, grassroots campaign manager at the TaxPayers’ Alliance said: “These findings will be of great concern to many taxpayers.

“With the tax burden at a 50-year high, many households are struggling to pay their bills and don’t want to see their hard-earned taxes spent inefficiently. The council must ensure it is using every penny to provide the best services for its residents.”

Cllr Paul Millar, who represents the Exmouth Halsdon ward on East Devon District Council, confirmed he had joined the East Devon Alliance (EDA) on Tuesday.

https://www.exmouthjournal.co.uk/news/paul-millar-joins-east-devon-alliance-1-6509015

His decision to join the EDA means the group now has 12 seats on the district council. The ruling Independent Group has 18, the Conservatives 19, the Liberal Democrats eight, Green Party two, and there is one independent.

Cllr Millar had initially joined the Independent group that run the council after he was elected in May, but quit the group in September and had been sitting as an Independent since.

He said: “The Independent East Devon Alliance Group share a set of values and a vision which more closely represent the mantra I stood on last May, especially with regard to how the council ought to be run, and doing things differently from the former administration which too many people seem to forget were voted out.

“I have been assured that by being part of this political grouping my ability to think for myself and speak freely, which is part and parcel of being independent, will not be stamped on by any Leader.

“I will continue to campaign for our taxpayers’ money to be invested in projects that manifestly improve town and village life across the district, rather than shallow vanity projects such as the current plan for Exmouth seafront.”

Cllr Paul Arnott, leader of the EDA, added: “Paul has shown courage and integrity as a ward member for Exmouth Halsdon since May 2019, making a leading contribution at District in the fight for democracy, accountability and transparency in the context of a still opaque administration.

“I hope our experience as Independents and willingness to battle will help both Paul and his constituents.

“His presence will certainly help us too.”

As a result of the change in the political balance, the next full council meeting on Wednesday, February 26, will be asked to approve changes to the committee memberships that have to be politically balanced.

Many find it difficult to understand why, if the East Devon Alliance represents independent councillors, it is a registered “political party”. The reason is that it is a government requirement for any group which campaigns under a shared ethos, and with a defining logo, to be formally registered, even if they are free to act independently. There was an electoral reform recommendation that this should only apply to national politics which was rejected by the government of the day.

From the East Devon Alliance website https://www.eastdevonalliance.com/ :

We are purely an alliance of free-thinking, free-speaking, concerned individuals who came together as independents to challenge the insidious culture of secrecy prevalent within the district council, and still sadly evident in 2019.

Our Alliance is simply that; we work together to campaign, to challenge, to question the decisions that are taken at EDDC which we believe favour the select few, and not the many.

Formed in 2013, by the coming together of a number of groups campaigning across East Devon, we represent the silent voice of those residents who are horrified by the lack of transparency and openness in their Councils. We represent those who believe that unfettered development in favour of rapacious landowners and commercial organisations has been given an unfair advantage over those who live and work in rural East Devon and who believe that not everyone shares the opinion that you can promote growth, and prosperity by simply concreting over every square inch of green field.

We represent those who question the financial integrity of the District and County Councils; decisions made by a small “cabal” of Councillors from one dominant group, who use the party system to bulldoze through policy, and legislation – to the detriment of the vast majority of the residents in this County – ably and willingly assisted by a silent and compliant cohort of party members who rarely speak and who rarely object but continue – with a quiet word in their ears and a gentle arm at their elbows – to vote how they are told and when they are told. That is not democracy in our opinion. That is a virtual autocracy.

Owl wonders who will be next to follow Paul Millar?

Reducing the volume and speed of traffic through the village and reducing heavy goods vehicles is also listed as a priority in the plan, as well as resisting any future expansion of the Ladram Bay Holiday Park.

https://www.devonlive.com/news/devon-news/ladram-bay-holiday-park-expansion-3831841

A plan to support the future development of Otterton as a thriving community has been published.

The Otterton Neighbourhood Plan aims to ensure that the village continues to be an outstanding place to live, work and visit, to Preserve and enhance Otterton’s historical significance and built environment, and to insist that any new development should meet the needs of the local inhabitants first.

Reducing the volume and speed of traffic through the village and reducing heavy goods vehicles is also listed as a priority in the plan, as well as resisting any future expansion of the Ladram Bay Holiday Park.

The plan says that the Holiday Park has grown to its maximum size within its permitted boundary, has a detrimental impact on the Jurassic Coast World Heritage Site and the East Devon AONB, and has an impact on the village in terms of excess traffic, congestion and the accompanying pollution that cars, delivery vans, lorries and caravans bring.

It adds that the access road is totally inadequate to serve such a large site, and vehicles coming to and from the site must be properly controlled to prevent congestion, and therefore recommends that development would only be permitted within its existing site boundary.

Support will be given for any proposal though which improves the wider road infrastructure giving access to the site, reduces the number of holiday units on the site, reduces the need to travel by car, the need for delivery lorries and improves the infrastructure for walking and cycling.

The plan outlined that there was a 146 % Increase in vehicles travelling through Otterton in August on a Saturday, compared to November, and a 341% increase on a Tuesday for August to November.

It says: “All traffic to Ladram Bay (including movement of the lodges) has to pass through the village, as it is located at the end of a narrow road, which turns into a farm track and footpath. This is seen as a very major problem for the village, causing a significant increase in traffic and congestion at times, with many questionnaire respondents highlighting this issue.

“By far the biggest issue raised in the traffic part of the questionnaire concerned Ladram Bay and it is the traffic that is generated from this popular site, including the visitors, the trades and the movement of the lodges and mobile homes, that causes huge concern to Otterton residents.”

The plan adds: “In many places there are no footways for pedestrians to walk safely along the main street. On-street parking in the village is a problem, giving rise to traffic jams at busy periods and heavy volumes of traffic, which are a major concern for many parishioners, is exacerbated by the lack of off-street parking along the main street.”

It calls for the village to be provided with a car park for visitors as shortage of parking in the village centre is also affecting businesses, the Community Shop, and the Village Hall.

In terms of new housing, the majority of respondents to a survey about the Neighbourhood Plan either did not want further development, or suggested the North Star site, which already has planning permission for 15 homes.

Policies in the plan say that no development should be allowed to have a detrimental impact on the landscape and character of Otterton village and the Parish as a whole by virtue of its location, scale, density and design and any necessary future development should support proven local needs first, for those with a local connection to the Parish.

These should be small scale housing developments to include affordable housing and properties for downsizing, accompanied by all the necessary improvements to village infrastructure, it adds.

A Children’s Questionnaire was also distributed to the village, and nearly 65 per cent of children wanted a skate park/ramps with other ideas to further improve facilities, while nearly 90 per cent greatly appreciate their natural environment and said that it is either ‘very important’ or ‘important’ to them to be able to walk along the footpaths by the river, hills and cliffs around Otterton.

“Keeping the children involved and satisfied with their community adds to its vibrancy, so, any planning requirements relating to play areas should be viewed favourably,” the plan states.
East Devon District Council’s cabinet, when they met last Wednesday, unanimously noted the formal submission of the Otterton Neighbourhood Plan and congratulated the producers of the plan on the dedicated hard work and commitment in producing the document.

The Neighbourhood Plan will now go forward to the formal examination stage to make sure it is ‘sound’, and if an inspector agrees that it is, it will then be subject to a referendum where everyone on the electoral roll for the defined area will have a right to vote for or against it. If at least half of votes cast support the Plan then it can be brought into legal force.

Owl has lost track on the state of play with regard to determinations on outstanding planning appeals and retrospective planning applications for Ladram Bay. But Owl thinks at least one, the retrospective planning application to build a viewing platform directly onto the World Heritage Site, is still to be determined.

In passing Owl also notes that FWSC (LADRAM) Ltd and FWS Carter & Sons Ltd (of Greendale) are both listed as donating £2,500 each to Simon Jupp MP in January.

See: the support linked to an MP but received by a local party organisation or indirectly via a central party organisation section in Simon Jupp’s Register of Members’ Financial Interests.
https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm/cmregmem/200111/jupp_simon.htm

Town clerk walks out of explosive town council meeting after fiery row – in which he is accused of ‘sneaking’ an item on to agenda.

https://www.midweekherald.co.uk/news/clerk-walks-out-honiton-town-council-meeting-10-02-20-1-6507991

The latest meeting Honiton Town Council exploded into chaotic scenes tonight – resulting in the town clerk walking out after being accused of secretly placing an item on to the agenda.

Mark Tredwin withdrew from the meeting, at The Beehive, citing doctor’s orders after town mayor Councillor John Zarczynski said a report was ‘sneaked on to the agenda’.

Councillors were discussing the following agenda item when the row broke out: ‘for members to look at adding and deleting members from committees and working groups.’

Cllr Caroline Kolek questioned whether a meeting of Honiton Town Council’s Human Resources committee earlier today (Monday) had been held illegally, after legal advice was released on Friday evening.

Mr Tredwin said legal advice was circulated that stated the meeting of the HR committee was ‘ultra vires’ – meaning ‘beyond the powers’.

He said the point was the agenda stated it can be to resolve any changes to committees and outside bodies ‘as agreed at this meeting’.

Mr Tredwin said: “If a councillor wishes to discuss the composition of a committee, they can do so because the agenda item does allow for it.”

Cllr Zarczynski said he disagreed, and said the item was placed on the agenda without his knowledge as he and the clerk sat down to agree the agenda.

He said the issue should be made into an agenda item if councillors felt the issues involving the HR committee were strong enough.

Cllr Zarczynski said: “This is purely a composition of committees, this is not a complaint against a committee. There is nothing on this agenda that says that.

“What has been raised… is a separate thing all together.”

Cllr Ray Hanratty said when a committee has operated outside its remit and created a ‘huge faux pas’ in operational procedure, its membership needs to be called into question.

He said: “I would propose a motion that we disband the current HR committee with a view to reassembling it with new members.”

The motion was seconded by Cllr Michelle Pollington, but before a vote was taken, Cllr Zarczynski said he could ‘see now why this was sneaked on to the agenda’.

Mr Tredwin said he did not take kindly to Cllr Zarczynski’s accusations and revealed he was signed off earlier that morning.

He withdrew from the meeting, apologising to deputy town clerk Heloise Marlow.

As the meeting descended into chaos, Cllr Kolek said illegal meetings had been held and walked out.

The meeting was ended before the town council could discuss becoming a Fair Trade authority, and decisions had been made in relation to grant funding for the town’s air cadets and Scouting group.

Owl obviously missed a real treat.

On the theme of rural deprivation, CPRE also released yesterday a study on “Transport Deserts – the absence of choice in England’s small towns”. Owl notes that, “coincidentally” today the government, or rather Boris Johnson, will pledge a £5Bn “overhaul” of rural? bus services to fend off any revolt in parliament and the excluded parts of the country over his decision to press ahead with HS2. Owl will wait to see the “colour of this money” before commenting further.

Click to access transport-deserts-2020.pdf

CPRE press release:

– Thriving rural communities need to be well-connected with good public transport, yet 56% of small towns in the South West and North East of England are found to be ‘transport deserts’ or at risk of becoming one.

– Calls for the government to invest in rural communities by establishing a dedicated rural transport fund.

More than half of small towns in the south west and north east of England have such bad transport connectivity that they are considered to be living in ‘transport deserts’ or are at imminent risk of becoming one, according to new research conducted by Campaign for Better Transport for CPRE, the countryside charity. Nearly one million people (975,227) who live in these towns have no option for convenient and affordable public transport and risk being cut off from basic services if they don’t have access to a car.

A ‘transport desert’ occurs when a community lacks the public transport options for residents to be able to conveniently travel on a day to day basis without driving. The research is the first attempt to develop a scoring system to rank the public transport options available to rural communities.

Public transport services, including bus, train and community transport options, were scored in over 160 locations in the South West and North East against their accessibility and frequency. The analysis has shown that in 56% of the cases, residents who can’t drive or are unable to afford a car are at risk of being cut off from basic services.
Darren Shirley, Chief Executive of Campaign for Better Transport, said:

“Nearly a quarter of the country’s population lives in small towns, too many of which have become transport deserts. In some cases, towns which lost their railway stations in the Beeching cuts of the 1960s are now losing the bus services that were brought in to replace them.

“Weak transport provision is a major barrier to participation in these towns, affecting low income households, older people and those in education and training the most. A lack of sustainable transport options also undermines efforts to reach net zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2050.

“Small towns have been sidelined for too long: the Government must act to reconnect these transport deserts.”

Beneath the headlines, the research shows that the lack of public transport in some counties is even more severe:

Dorset: ten out of the 14 small towns in Dorset have become ‘transport deserts’ or are at risk of being absorbed into one. This is after 80 per cent cuts to spending on bus services in the county.

Devon: 17 of the 25 towns investigated are in the same position.

County Durham: Only six of the 22 small towns covered by the research have a remaining train station.

Northumberland: six of the 12 towns investigated are at risk of becoming ‘transport deserts’, including Alnwick, Newbiggin and Seaton Delaval.

Crispin Truman, chief executive at CPRE, the countryside charity, said:

“A thriving countryside depends on well-connected small towns and villages serviced by low carbon public transport that fit into people’s everyday lives. But it is clear that, outside of England’s major cities, communities are being left high and dry in ever widening ‘transport deserts’ with completely inadequate bus and train connections. And this is having dramatic effect on rural communities – young people are compelled to move away, older people are left isolated and lonely, while less affluent families can be sucked into a cycle of debt and poverty.

“CPRE is calling on the government to act now to reconnect everyone with proper public transport options. That means establishing a dedicated rural transport fund. But recent government funding to re-open some railway lines across the country does not go nearly far enough – especially in the shadow of the £28.8 billion planned spend on roads. If the prime minister and this Government are serious about ‘spreading opportunity to every corner of the UK’ we need decisive action to stop the march of ‘transport deserts’.”

Owl’s post box yesterday was full of reports from the local press around the country listing the most isolated communities in their neck of the woods. Turns out that they were all using a new fine structure data base constructed by the Office of National Statistics (ONS), recently released.

This ONS data breaks down England into neighbourhoods, or ‘lower super output areas’, which contain roughly the same number of people (around 1,500 in all).

That means neighbourhoods in densely-populated cities and towns tend to be much smaller, and average travel times to key services tend to be shorter.

Lightly-populated neighbourhoods are bigger and tend to fare much worse in the rankings.

The study ranks every one of 32,844 neighbourhoods in England based on how long the ONS says it takes an average person to reach primary and secondary schools, GP surgeries and food shops, plus major railway stations and major airports.

Owl and Owl’s helpers have been unable to find a link to this data base – probably because it will be very large and difficult to interpret.

What we have located is this related summary:

Click to access 01_Statistical_Digest_of_Rural_England_2020_January_edition.pdf

The Statistical Digest of Rural Statistics is a collection of statistics on a range of social and economic subject areas. The statistics are split by rural and urban areas, allowing for comparisons between the different rural and urban area classifications. The Digest includes high level statistics which present an overall picture for England. However, there is likely to be considerable variation in individual towns, villages and hamlets. The Digest starts with a section on the rural and urban populations in England. This is followed by a rural economy section containing indicators on economic activity, earnings, productivity as well as a selection of indicators relating to economic growth. The Rural accessibility section includes data on transport, measuring accessibility to services and broadband. The final section of the Digest includes a selection of rural living statistics on housing, household expenditure, poverty, education, health and crime.

Sections of the Digest are updated throughout the year. In this edition the following section(s) have been updated:

• Population at local authority level
• Productivity by industry
• Accessibility to services
• Residential housing transactions

The report runs to 213 pages. Enjoy!

EAST Devon District Council’s cabinet, last Wednesday night, approved the introduction of an additional fixed penalty fine against householders or businesses who have breached their duty of care in respect of how their waste has been disposed of.

Existing powers enabled the council to issue fixed penalty offences against the actual fly-tipper, but the new provision, under S34(2A) of the Environmental Protection Act 1990, enables action to be taken against householders who do not undertake due diligence over who takes their waste away.

Andrew Ennis, service lead, Environmental Health, told the cabinet the intention of this new provision is to encourage householders to think carefully and to choose a waste carrier who is able to confirm that they hold a waste carriers’ licence and that they do in fact use approved disposal facilities.

He added: “In our experience, unlicensed carriers tend to be typically a ‘man and a van’ operation often found through advertising on social media or even plying their trade from door to door in an area.”

His report said officers will usually interview the originator of the waste, if that person can be identified, in order to ascertain how their waste came to be found as a fly tip, and that in most cases they are finding that the originator, usually a householder, cannot demonstrate that they have acted responsibly, and for example, will not be able to give any information about the person who they say removed their waste.

Mr Ennis said: “It therefore seems reasonable that responsibility for the final disposal remains with the householder and now regulations require that waste originators are actually responsible for ensuring that their waste is ultimately disposed of properly.”

He outlined that during the last two years the Environmental Protection team has investigated 49 littering and fly-tipping cases and issued 25 fixed-penalty notices. They have collected £3,460 in fines, and £1,263 in clean-up reimbursement costs, and there has been one successful prosecution.

He asked the cabinet to approve allowing his team to use the new power, adding: “There is a clear duty for the householder to undertake due diligence, and as an alternative to prosecution, we can use this Fixed Penalty Notice route. I hope that you see the value in the power.”

Cllr Geoff Jung, portfolio holder for the environment, said that he supported the use of it. He added: “Most people deal with their waste in the right way, but there are some cowboys still out there. We will endeavour to catch and fine them.”

A fixed-penalty of £400 (reduced to £200 if paid within ten days) for medium and large fly-tips, can now be issued, as can a lower fixed-penalty amount of £200 (reduced to £120 if paid within ten days) for small fly tips (defined as less than 180litres in volume – roughly the amount which would fill a standard wheeled bin).

Mr Ennis added: “A fixed penalty notice will generally be used only in response to a first (or in exceptional circumstances a second) offence committed by an individual or company.”
The cabinet unanimously supported the proposals.

https://www.southwestfarmer.co.uk/news/18223803.new-powers-tackle-fly-tipping-east-devon-agreed/?ref=rss

Devon Live has just published an article by Paul Greaves who visits three communities which have been named the most isolated in England.

However, the web site also has a ready reckoner where you can find out how your area ranks for isolation and connectivity by entering your postcode. [and give your e-mail!]

The result is an isolation score out of a hundred and an estimate of the average journey times to key services by public transport, cycling and car.

Owl was surprised – well not really, Owl knows the problems people who rely on public transport face- at how badly many East Devon villages scored, even places such as Ottery St Mary are considered isolated.

https://www.devonlive.com/news/devon-news/most-isolated-communities-england-right-3824237

Article by Paul Greaves reads:

Sue Lewis and Frank Bowden both live in deep Dartmoor

You could say there are two kinds of isolation, one bleak and lonely the other bleak and beautiful.

A new study says that parts of Dartmoor are the most remote not only in Devon but in England as a whole. It takes longer on the moor to see a doctor or get to school than anywhere else.
Those of us who live in Devon recognise Dartmoor for what it is: a brooding, natural treasure. Then again, most of us don’t live there, we just visit. It can’t be much fun when it takes two hours to get to the classroom by foot or public transport. A GP is an hour and a half away by walking or public transport, 34 minutes on a bike or 18 minutes in a car, while it takes two hours to get to hospital on public transport.

I visit three places where isolation is keenest felt: Dartmeet, Lettaford and Manaton to ask what the people who live there think about being disconnected from the living. I want to know if we should be worried about their lonesomes lives among the ponies and if they miss the bright lights of say, Newton Abbot, or the comforting bosom of an Exmouth, statistically the best connected place in Devon.

What kind of isolation is it to be? Desperate or splendid.

Yesterday Owl posted a catch-up story about the rewilding of Beavers.

Today The Times publishes a leader and article on the same subject.

Are the editorial staff following EDW?