Another case of government unpreparedness.

All MPs and peers have been asked to come up with solutions to the social care crisis, after Boris Johnson admitted his claim to have a plan was untrue.

edition.independent.co.uk

In an extraordinary letter, Matt Hancock, the health secretary, has asked them all to “share their views” – with the aim of kickstarting talks in May. The move comes after the prime minister acknowledged he had no proposals, despite claiming – as he entered No 10 last summer – to have a “clear plan to give every older person the dignity and security they deserve”.

Mr Johnson then promised “a plan this year”, but the letter sent to MPs and peers suggests the government is starting with a blank piece of paper, despite the gathering crisis.

Around 1.4 million people in need are already believed to be going without care, and the sector is plagued by 122,000 vacancies – even before a harsh post-Brexit immigration crackdown next year.

“We want to hear your views, your proposed solutions and your concerns about reforming the way that people pay for their care,” Mr Hancock has written.

The move comes after council bosses warned that, without an overhaul of social care, local services in England face a funding gap of almost £6.5bn by 2025.

Labour immediately agreed to join any talks, but warned they were unlikely to succeed without the government putting forward effective proposals. The party is likely to propose its manifesto policy – free personal care for older people and a lifetime cap on care costs – but there would need to be agreement on the tax rises to pay for it.

Barbara Keeley, Labour’s social care spokesperson, said: “The prime minister promised voters that he had a plan to fix the social care crisis but now all we see is an open-ended invitation for comments. As we have repeatedly said, cross-party talks can only be effective when the government comes forward with its proposals for reform. It is clear that it does not have a plan to fix the crisis in social care.”

Caroline Abrahams, charity director at Age UK, echoed the criticism, saying: “Unfortunately, this announcement, issued on a Friday afternoon, will not fill anyone who cares about the future of social care with much confidence. It is always good for ministers to seek alternative views, but it is very disappointing that they appear not to be offering any of their own at this stage.”

In the letter, Mr Hancock writes: “We need action now, finally, to seek a solution that can support future generations. We will seek to build cross-party consensus so that the reforms we progress will last long into the future, nobody is forced to sell their home to pay for care and everybody accessing care has safety and security.”

But he added: “Of course any solution needs to consider the financial impact on taxpayers.”

The purchase of the Knapp nature reserve has been finalised.

Beth Sharp  www.sidmouthherald.co.uk

East Devon District Council chairman Stuart Hughes handed over the keys of the Knapp to the Sid Vale Association (SVA) vice chair Ed Harrison and Land Trustee Richard Huntington, who is responsible for all SVA land.

The Knapp, an area measuring about 8.4 acres, is located between Peaslands Road and Station Road and joins Peaslands Knapp, which the SVA already own.

The site will continue to be managed as a nature reserve and will remain open to the public.

It comprises an orchard, a pond, a wild flower meadow and two areas of mature trees and saplings.

Most of the mature trees are covered by tree preservation orders.

The SVA is very pleased to have secured this plot from the EDDC for the future enjoyment of Sidmouth residents.

The organisation is run entirely by volunteers and anybody who would like to and help maintain the area would be welcomed.

http://www.sidvaleassociation.org.uk/

The country’s most unproductive areas receive the least investment to boost output, according to new analysis published before next week’s budget.

London and the South East get more per head in taxpayer cash for transport, housing, innovation and culture, says Onward, a Conservative-leaning think tank, in a report that paves the way for changes to Treasury rules.

London and South East enjoy most taxpayer cash

Francis Elliott Political Editor, The Times, March 6

Rishi Sunak, the chancellor, is expected to change rules on public spending that critics say reinforce regional inequality in next Wednesday’s budget.

Boris Johnson has made “levelling-up” opportunity around the country the overarching theme of his government. Today’s analysis shows the scale of the task ahead.

London has received nearly twice the UK average in research and development spending since 2001 and nearly three times as much capital spending on transport as the rest of England since 2007, according to Onward’s analysis. This equates to about £6,600 per head in the capital compared with £1,800 in the East Midlands and £1,980 in the South West.

The analysis also found that between 2016 and 2021, London will get five times as much financial support for affordable housing as the rest of England. It also enjoyed nearly five times as much spending on culture over a seven-year period from 2010.

The think tank is urging the prime minister and chancellor to “take a bazooka” to the Treasury “green book” that lays out the rules and devolve transport policy. It is also urging the chancellor to “use every tool at his disposal” to level up regional growth.

The author of the report, Neil O’Brien, a former Treasury and No10 adviser and now an MP, said: “It is no wonder some parts of the country feel shortchanged. For decades we have piled fertiliser on the parts of our economy that are already flourishing while refusing to water the seeds of growth elsewhere. The PM’s mission to level up poorer parts of the country is vital.

“To change trends that have gone in the wrong direction for decades will need not a few tweaks, but taking a bazooka to the problem. We have to use every tool, starting by rebalancing the types of spending that do most for growth towards poorer areas.”

There is a strong case for new transport infrastructure investment in some cities and large towns. But this only applies to a handful of places where the current transport system is struggling to support the growth of their city-centre economies.

Transport infrastructure investment in cities – Centre for Cities

www.centreforcities.org

There is a strong case for new transport infrastructure investment in some cities and large towns. But this only applies to a handful of places where the current transport system is struggling to support the growth of their city-centre economies.

Poor public transport is not the cause of weak city centres; instead low numbers of commuters, and the ease of driving, make public transport infrastructure improvements commercially unviable. Because of this, funding for new transport infrastructure in these cities will do little to spur economic growth.

Where will transport infrastructure investment unlock city-centre growth?

Only cities with strong and growing centres with high public transport usage but slow journey times need new investment in major transport infrastructure.

London, Manchester, Birmingham, and Leeds stand out as cities that need infrastructure improvements. Bristol, Cardiff, Edinburgh and Glasgow also face similar, though less severe transport barriers, for residents and businesses.

Where should cities with weaker economies focus investment?

Before considering public transport infrastructure investment, cities with weaker economies first need to create the demand for it. To do this they should focus on growing their city-centre economies and making them attractive places for high-skilled employers to locate. Primarily, this means investing in skills and further education provision.

Without doing this, the existing transport network is likely to be sufficient. However, these cities should still have access to funding to support improvements to the existing local transport infrastructure and services.

How should the Government invest in transport infrastructure to boost city-centre growth?

The Government should invest the £31 billion identified by the National Infrastructure Commission for new major transport infrastructure in priority cities outside London. The money should primarily be focused on cities with strong economies and growing city centres where public transport usage is high and journey times are relatively slow. This money should be available to cities providing they meed two conditions:

1. Cities contribute a share of the costs locally so that risks are shared between local and national government; and
2. This local contribution includes revenues from a city-centre congestion charge. If these cities are serious about improving their transport networks, they need to also take politically-tough decisions locally to do so.

Cities and large towns that need new infrastructure should use extra capital to enlarge the public transport network. The exact nature of this should respond to the specific requirements of each city centre: whereas some may benefit from a new tram line, others such as Manchester will require tunnelling to provide the space for extra trams or trains to enter and exit the city centre.

If new infrastructure investment were coupled with initiatives to better manage existing transport, particularly buses, this would further boost the efficiency and equity outcomes of investments. All cities and large towns should look at how to improve the management and efficiency of their existing networks.