Boris Johnson’s adherence to Thatcherite “public sector bad, private sector good” dogma lies behind much of what has gone wrong in his handling of the pandemic. – Owl
“A senior director of public health, speaking anonymously, said: “The government says data is now flowing, but that’s just spin. It’s not granular enough, it’s not quick enough and it’s not frequent enough. What we’ve been told is that the commercial company operating pillar two didn’t set the data up so it can shared easily, and that the quality was poor as well.”
Local health officials are being “kept in the dark” about Covid-19 infections in their area by Whitehall’s refusal to share all of its data, Andy Burnham, the mayor of Greater Manchester, has warned.
Public health officials and council leaders also told the Observer that they were receiving only partial postcode data, which prevents them from precisely monitoring local areas, and could allow the virus to spread.
Burnham has urged ministers to change their approach after a week that saw Boris Johnson impose a local lockdown on Leicester when health secretary Matt Hancock, revealed that the city had seen a surge of 944 Covid-19 cases over two weeks.
Amid a public row between ministers and Leicester’s mayor, Sir Peter Soulsby, health officials finally began sharing more data with the city authorities last Wednesday. Previously, all councils had to wait for official Public Health England data to be published, which meant a two-week lag.
Yet significant problems remain, Burnham told the Observer. “We need a new principle going forward: everything the government knows, we should know – and at the same time that they know it. Because we cannot contain this virus if people at a local level are being kept in the dark.”
Public Health England (PHE) wrote to councils’ directors of public health last Monday with details of how to access “pillar two” data – that taken from home testing kits and mobile testing sites set up by Deloitte. Until that point, local authorities had only “pillar one” data – how many people in hospitals had tested positive. In Manchester, there had been 78 pillar one cases, but that jumped to 465 when pillar two figures were revealed.
“We get pillar two data once a week, on a Monday morning,” Burnham said. “But a lot can happen in seven days. So if we’re going to manage and chase this virus down on the ground, we need the same daily data that the government gets.
“They also won’t provide patient-identifiable data. Our teams tell me that is crucial, but the government cites patient confidentiality. Our teams are experienced public health staff – they know how to deal with data confidentially. It’s as if the government doesn’t trust the professionals working at local level.”
Government health sources insist that “data protection” issues limit who can access postcode-level data, since if the information were to leak beyond councils and the NHS, it could be used to identify individuals.
This week, the government is expected to publish an “outbreak framework” as guidance on what might trigger further local lockdowns. Ministers are understood not to be following the approach used in Germany, where local lockdowns are considered whenever the number of cases reaches a threshold of 50 per 100,000 people.
A further problem for local health teams is that there is a huge quantity of testing data to decipher, including hospital admissions, contact-tracing data from the NHS system and their own local intelligence.
Louise Jackson, portfolio holder for public health and wellbeing at Bedford Council, said her teams were still not getting good-quality information.
“They tell me there are duplicates – for example, if there are four results in one postcode area, does that mean you’ve got four cases, or one person who has been tested four times? They just don’t know. The local data dashboards only give the number of tests, not how many were positive or where they are. It’s very, very messy.”
A senior director of public health, speaking anonymously, said: “The government says data is now flowing, but that’s just spin. It’s not granular enough, it’s not quick enough and it’s not frequent enough. What we’ve been told is that the commercial company operating pillar two didn’t set the data up so it can shared easily, and that the quality was poor as well.”
MPs have raised questions about the role of Deloitte, which was appointed to run testing centres in March. In a written answer last week, health minister Nadine Dorries admitted that the government contract “does not require the company to report positive cases” to PHE.Stella Creasy, the MP for Walthamstow who tabled the question, said: “This is a mess. Local authorities need clear data about positive tests: where they’ve happened, who’s involved and who is isolating. And that should be what the government has commissioned. It’s becoming very clear that’s not the case.”
Deenan Pillay, a professor of virology at University College London and a member of the Independent Sage group of scientists, said he was consulted by Deloitte about setting up the testing sites in March.
“I told them one of the key things would be data flow, since that is critical to optimal use of the data for individual clinical care and pandemic control,” he said.
“Health data is a very complex area, and the problems we are seeing are some of the consequences of this being set up as a structure separate from the NHS, rather than being linked to the NHS’s laboratory and data systems.”He said that testing did not just happen in a lab but was a whole process that began with collecting the right patient information. NHS tests use patients’ NHS numbers, allowing results to go to their GP, Pillay said.
“We are now seeing the consequences of this lack of data integration with primary and secondary care, PHE and local directors of public health, which needs a lot of behind-the-scenes retrofitting.”
Whitehall did not respond to questions from the Observer about the sharing of data.
Deloitte said that the consultancy had designed the online form used to book and register tests and had commissioned testing sites, but did not run either them or the testing labs. Test results are sent from labs to the National Pathology Exchange, which connects NHS labs with other parts of the NHS, including NHS Digital.
Under fire housing secretary Robert Jenrick has been plunged into a potential new controversy over a planning approval called up by the government just after he was appointed to cabinet.
Quinn Estates had an application for a 675-home housing development in Kent taken over by the government last August from Swale Borough Council, after the plans were heavily criticised by local councillors and residents.
The Mail on Sunday has revealed that the planning application was taken out of the council’s hands just a month after Jenrick was appointed housing secretary.
The Mail also revealed that Quinn Estates donated £11,000 to the Conservative party the same month the application was called up by Jenrick.
The company went on to donate a further £40,000 to the Tories over the next few months.
A Jenrick spokesperson said that no decision has been made on the Quinn Estates application.
It comes after Jenrick recently became embroiled in another ongoing planning row.
In February, the housing secretary approved an application for a 1,500-home East London development shortly after sitting with the developer, and major Tory donor, Richard Desmond at a Conservative party fundraising dinner.
The application had previously been denied by Tower Hamlets council, before Jenrick overturned the decision.
Desmond then went on to donate thousands of pounds to the Tories a month after his application was approved.
Jenrick later said the decision was “unlawful” due to “apparent bias” and cancelled the project.
However, he denies any wrongdoing or that there was any exchange of favours for donations.
Labour shadow communities secretary Steve Reed has called the affair an example of “cash for favours” and has asked for a disclosure of all documents relating to Jenrick’s contact with Desmond.
“Bolsonaro, Trump and Johnson: these are men you wouldn’t put in charge of containing an outbreak of acne,” writes Ferdinand Mount, former head of Margaret Thatcher’s Downing Street policy unit, in the London Review of Books.
It is a shocking story. The US, UK and Brazil weren’t among the first countries hit by Covid‑19, so they had time to prepare. Admittedly, the health of ordinary Americans isn’t a Republican priority, but the US still spends as much on public healthcare as other developed countries. Add in private healthcare, and it spends more than any society in history. Yet American and Brazilian cases of Covid-19 are soaring as Europe’s and China’s fall, while the UK has one of Europe’s highest excess mortality rates. Within the US, states with ample time to prepare – Florida, Texas, Arizona – are now in full pandemic. Their governors, like Donald Trump, initially claimed to be prioritising the economy over the virus. Instead, they mismanaged both. Few people will risk dangerous illness to get a haircut.
All these places are ruled by mediagenic rightwing nationalists sceptical of credentialled experts. So are badly hit India, Russia and Belarus. A conventional social democracy can also mismanage Covid-19, as Sweden did, but it’s rarer. Why has this new category of leader got the virus wrong?
It starts with the attention economy. In an era of social media and nonstop news from endless outlets, the politicians who get most attention are those who create memorable, unusual, supposedly “authentic” characters for themselves. This system rewards narcissists and what the philosopher Harry Frankfurt calls “bullshitters”: people distinct from liars in that they have no interest in what’s true or not. They just say what sounds good. Their high verbal intelligence reduces their need for analytic intelligence.
Once elected, the leader immediately experiences hubris and boredom. For past leaders, this moment arrived only after about five years in office – the time it took for Tony Blair to decide to invade Iraq and David Cameron to call a referendum on Brexit. But those politicians thought their job was governing. The new men are communicators. For them, the game was the election; governing is the tedious epilogue.
Success breeds overconfidence. You silenced the doomsayers by winning the country’s biggest prize. How hard can governing be? You know the previous incumbents were idiots. So you avoid expert briefings, disband pandemic units or celebrate your triumph with continual holidays.
When your scientific advisers mention a boring illness in Wuhan, you ignore them. When it spreads to Italy and New York, your nationalism or red-state exceptionalism tells you that it won’t happen here. Arizona’s governor Doug Ducey wouldn’t let mayors make masks compulsory.
You are confident because you know nothing about the complexity of governing. Psychologists call this the Dunning-Kruger effect: incompetent people don’t realise their incompetence. You are confident the virus won’t hit your citizens and it certainly won’t hit you, the chosen one. Bolsonaro, Trump and Johnson (until he got ill) acted out their sense of immunity by shaking hands in public, setting an example for their followers.
Johnson’s adviser Dominic Cummings displays his own version of personal exceptionalism: his unexpected victory in the Brexit referendum proved that he is smarter than anybody else. That entitles him to ignore both the advice of expert scientists and the rules against driving across the country during lockdown.
When the illness reaches your country, your communicational instincts kick in. Your scientific advisers want to give dull, repetitive, depressing briefings about locking down for the long haul. You need a better script. So you delay lockdown for fatal weeks, constantly proclaim victory over the virus, seek attention (in Trump’s case) by recommending bleach injections and reopen early.
No matter that reality – an overrated entity – will soon contradict your proclamations of victory. Your timeframe is now. In the attention economy, as you learnt getting elected, even a news cycle is a long time in politics. What counts is scoring this minute – let this evening worry about itself.
Your election victory showed you that many voters will believe anything. In fact, a large subgroup will identify with the ignoramus over the egghead. Trump and Johnson have weaponised the insight of behavioural economists that humans aren’t rational beings pursuing their self-interest. In a divided polity, most of your supporters will accept incompetence (even if it kills grandpa) rather than switch teams.
Most of your cabinet members will back whatever you do. You chose them for loyalty, not for their competence at sourcing PPE. You have also gotten rid of trendy diversity: Trump and Bolsonaro surround themselves with rich white men (ideally relatives), while Johnson’s inner set is overwhelmingly male, private school and Oxford. Groupthink is the aim. If that makes it harder to correct the leader’s mistakes, well, you’ll take it. Just in case Britain’s civil servants have their own ideas, Cummings is now taking back control.
It could be that coronavirus ends the ride for ignorant nationalist bullshitters. However, they have shown before that they can defeat reality.
According to a recent BBC report South Somerset District Council (SSDC) is hoping to make a return of up to 14% on its investment in a “battery farm” (see below).
Dr Maik Schneider, from the University of Bath’s Department of Economics, said energy storage technologies were part of the transition to a greener economy.
He said without seeing the figures it was difficult to comment specifically but an estimated return of 7-14% seemed “high but achievable”.
He added with even a return of 4-5% it could bring in a reasonable income but warned the model may not be as profitable in the long term. [And SSDC increased their “investment” in this by c 25% last August]
South Somerset District Council has now spent more than £68 million on speculative property investments across the UK.
The local authority has been forking out millions of pounds at a time for properties as far as away as Wales and Milton Keynes – and it’s total announced expenditure has now increased to £68,725,000.
Most recently, the council announced on Monday (January 6) that it has purchased a £9,730,000 office block in Welwyn Garden City, Hertfordshire.
These investments have no direct impact on the district it serves, but the council claims the profits it hopes to make from the purchases will go back into local services.
The purchases are part of South Somerset District Council’s “commercial strategy”, which it says is needed due to “a complex financial climate”.
A council spokesman said the purchases are “prudent financial decisions which will create significant income”, and added each decision has been “rigorously tested and checked”.
The council’s biggest spend so far is £12.34 million, which it spent on a battery storage facility near Taunton.
In August, the local authority loaned an extra £2.5 million to private company, SSDC Opium Power Limited, in a bid to further increase the facility’s capacity, after an initial investment of £9.84 million in 2018.
The 13 properties purchased so far
Total spend = £ 68,725,000
Marks & Spencer, Yeovil (£7.65M): The council has said this investment is linked to the company having a long-term lease. Nationally, Marks & Spencer has moved more towards food and home delivery, and has closed stores, but it has not announced any plans to close its Yeovil store.
Wilko, Yeovil (£4.23M): This store is covered by a covenant, with Wilko holding the tenancy until 2025. Robert Orrett, the council’s commercial property, land and development manager, told the council in June there were “no indications from Wilko that there is any intention to leave Yeovil”, partially in light of the sale of Glovers Walk and the Yeovil Refresh regeneration proposals, he said.
Residential development of former care home, Marlborough (£4.29M): The council has not divulged the precise location of this former care home, which is being redeveloped into 15 apartments and three new houses. But the council has claimed it “should generate a healthy receipt” once construction is finally completed by the end of 2019.
Battery storage facility, near Taunton (£9.84M + £2.5M): This facility stores power and sells it back to the National Grid at peak times. But it is not yet operational. The council claims the site is worth more now than the costs of setting up the project, with Mr Orrett claiming its value will “significantly increase” once it is actually up and running. A further loan of £2.5 million was given to a private company – SSDC Opium Power Limited – in August in a bid to further increase the facility’s capacity.
Units 1 & 2, Dunball Industrial Estate, Bridgwater (£2.82M): This is the council’s first investment in the industrial property sector, which it claims is “the best performing sector” in the commercial property market.
Linden House, Bristol (£2.75M): The council purchased this property in February to take advantage of what claims is a “historically low availability” of offices in the central Bristol area. The offices have been occupied by Galliford Try PLC, a major housing developer, since 2007.
GoCompare offices, Newport (£4.66M): Also known as Imperial House, this was purchased due to its close proximity to Junction 28 of the M4 and was refurbished back in 2013. The council claims the abolition of Severn Bridge tolls will lead to greater trade between south Wales and Bristol, which will lead to more demand for office space and thereby “an upturn in rents locally”.
Bell House, Milton Keynes (£2.925M): This comprises 10,695 sq ft of “grade A office accommodation” over four floors, according to the local authority. The council claims rent levels will rise in the coming years as a result of the improving transport links in the area, including the new railway line linking Oxford and Cambridge.
Hasbro warehouse, Newport (£2.78M): This is the distribution hub for board game giant Hasbro, famous for the likes of Monopoly and My Little Pony. Located on the Reevesland Industrial Estate, the council claims it will provide a healthy initial yield – and with Hasbro owning the remainder of the estate, the council is hoping the company is likely to remain in this location in the long run.
B&Q shop, Glastonbury (£4.4M): This is a 27,000 square foot retail warehouse, with an 8,000square foot external garden centre and 4,000 square foot secure delivery yard. It has been tenanted by B&Q since its construction with an unexpired lease term of seven years. The council claims this property will be “shielded from the general malaise that has hit retail warehousing”.
The Ralph, Buckinghamshire (£5.95M): The Ralph is a veterinary referral hospital in Marlow, Buckinghamshire. The council claims the 25,550 square foot property will provide a “guaranteed income stream for at least 14 years”.
Centurion Mill, Exeter (£4.2M): The council’s latest acquisition is a site home to one of the UK’s leading manufacturers of fireplaces, a distributor of electricity, and a Greggs bakery. The council says it is confident in “the intention of the tenants to continue occupation for the foreseeable future”.
Alchemy, Hertfordshire (£9.7M): The huge, 38,880 sq ft office block in Welwyn Garden City is occupied by “well-known tenants” the council claims. The council’s portfolio holder for commercial strategy, John Clark, has claimed there will be rental growth in the area over the coming years and that the council will see “substantial income” from this property.
Council explains its “commercial strategy”
You can read the council’s reasoning for these investment decisions below.
How does the council decide on where it invests?
A spokesman said: “Every decision that is made is being rigorously tested and checked. The Commercial Property Team is working to ensure that SSDC does not overpay for property due to the lack of supply, and is not exposed to undue risk, for example within the retail sector, where significant changes are currently occurring nationally.
“SSDC is investing in a diverse range of locations and asset types to ensure that it spreads any risks attached to investments which reflects sound investment practice. This includes assessing whether an investment outside the district will deliver a better rate of return for our communities than a similar opportunity in South Somerset.
“The new asset forms part of South Somerset’s growing portfolio, which includes High Street retail, in town and out of town offices, industrial, energy storage and a residential development site.”
How does the council pay for these deals?
A spokesman said: “The council uses a range of funding sources including investments utilising its reserves (sums of money that are held so that there is a financial cushion to meet sudden unexpected costs) and internal borrowing, a process through which SSDC can borrow from itself and charging itself interest.
“This means that money that was previously in bank accounts is generating a higher rate of return with the proceeds used to protect services and deliver important projects in South Somerset. It does not involve investing money that would have been spent on services. In the highly unlikely event that we do need to access funding quickly in an unplanned way, our careful approach to investment means we can still do this.”
Why is South Somerset District Council becoming more commercial?
A spokesman said: “The council is currently operating in a complex financial climate where it needs to deliver savings rising to £6 million per year until 2022. This is in addition to having to cut its costs substantially since 2010.
“SSDC has sustained a 70 per cent reduction in its Government grant funding since 2010 and further reductions are likely in the future whilst demand for and costs of many services continues to rise. It became clear that SSDC needed to make the most out of its assets and look for new opportunities which could generate income to protect the wide range of services our communities receive and create opportunities to fund new projects.
“This is about making prudent financial decisions which will create significant income to get the best results for South Somerset but still, where possible, supporting the local economy.
“In the future, we will have countered the loss of grant funding from Central Government though sensible investment and we will continue to deliver vital services, parks and open spaces as well as exploring new opportunities to make South Somerset an outstanding place to live, play and work.”
The English countryside and its wildlife are at serious risk because of Boris Johnson’s pledge to revolutionise the planning system, leading green groups warn today.
In a joint letter to the Observer, the organisations, which include the National Trust, the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds (RSPB) and the Wildlife Trusts, say wide-scale deregulation leading to lower environmental standards and less protection would be a betrayal of promises by Johnson and Michael Gove to deliver a “green Brexit”.
Such backtracking, which they fear is imminent, would also damage the UK’s reputation in the battle against climate change. The prime minister last week pledged to stimulate economic recovery after the Covid-19 crisis with a “build, build, build” strategy, adding that he wanted to drive through the most radical changes to the planning system since the second world war to ensure fast progress.
But green organisations say weakening planning and protections, including the role of local people in shaping developments, risks setting voters in the shires against the Conservative government – alarming many Tory MPs in the process. In 2011, David Cameron’s government faced the wrath of the shires as the Daily Telegraph mounted its “Hands off our Land” campaign in protest at attempts to change planning laws.
In terms that reminded environmentalists of Cameron’s pledge to ditch what he called “green cap” – having campaigned on a green Tory manifesto in 2010 – Johnson blamed red tape and over-regulation for hold-ups in development, saying: “Newt-counting delays are a massive drag on the prosperity of this country.”
Downing St, under the direction of the prime minister’s chief adviser, Dominic Cummings, has issued orders in recent weeks to several government departments to come up with ideas on how to slash “red tape” and make sure big building projects can be pushed through in what is known in Whitehall as “project speed”.
Despite having promised to maintain high environmental standards post-Brexit, there are now fears of a government U-turn that will see ministers drop laws on the protection of habitats while promoting plans that would see more carbon-generating projects, many for new roads.
In their letter, the green groups say: “There are rumours of forthcoming deregulatory measures, including those that weaken laws to protect habitats and wildlife. Furthermore, the government’s flagship environment bill has been delayed and its new body to enforce environmental laws after Brexit will not be ready in time. This will considerably weaken our environmental protections.
“Countless reviews, including those commissioned by the government itself, have shown that environmental laws guide good development when implemented well. There is no public appetite for deregulation, with 93% of Conservative voters wanting to maintain or strengthen protections for habitats and wildlife.
“Rebooting our economy needs to be done in a way that doesn’t exacerbate the current environmental and climate emergencies. Ripping up important laws and lowering our standards would be a betrayal of previous commitments and reduce our international standing.”
As well as simplifying planning, Downing St is understood to be looking at how to get rid of Strategic Environmental Assessments, which under EU law have been used in this country to assess the green impact of big new developments.
In July 2017 Michael Gove, then environment secretary, promised to deliver a green Brexit, saying: “Leaving the EU gives us a once in a lifetime opportunity to reform how we manage agriculture and fisheries, how we care for our land, our rivers and our seas, how we recast our ambition for our country’s environment, and the planet. In short, it means delivering a green Brexit.”
Government sources said the environment bill would return to parliament as soon as possible, but declined to comment on whether environmental protections and planning regulations would be weakened.
A LITTLE MP TO CALL HOME : Democracy in Global Britain has never looked more secure with the news today that a grassroots campaign called ‘PR Would Be A Good Start’ has taken a leaf out of the Tory donor handbook.
“It’s actually a kickstarter,” Mr Legit told LCD Views, “but the press is reporting it as a crowdfunder. That’s inaccurate. If we’re successful in purchasing a complete Tory MP we expect to make a significant profit on the initial investment, and to reinvest accordingly. My projections are for £108m, minus costs such as brown paper bags and expensive dinners, but that’s just for starters. Even partial ownership of an MP should see us making hay. Our ultimate aim is to change electoral laws and the voting system in England. Maybe even move Westminster to Manchester for six months each year, just for the fun of it.”
And the kickstarter move hasn’t yet caused the sort of kickback one would expect from Tory MPs, in spite of the loose accusation of alleged corruption that naturally goes with it, and them.
“I don’t care who feathers my nest,” Sir Fillme Boots-Swine, told LCD Views, “I’ll lobby for the devil or the angels. The accumulation of money and the sense of power that goes with it is all that matters. And the free bubbles! Ha! You want me to lobby to have environmental regulations strengthened to protect puffins? Fine. I’ll do that just as happily as I’ll lobby say to overturn Green Belt planning laws so you can build a mega-abattoir with US food industry cash. Just give me £20,000 and I’m all yours. Well, on a hourly rate, so about half a day’s work. I’ve got some free time in the diary in September. Let’s get you booked in.”
How the initiative to buy an MP will play out isn’t yet clear, given that the malign interests that already appear to allegedly heavily sponsor MPs have much deeper pockets, but as Mr Legit says, “If you can’t beat ’em, join ’em. Cash or cheque?”
Devon has plans to provide a fast response to any future outbreaks of the virus across the county and help prevent it spreading – although cases are among the lowest in the country.
“Devon’s Director of Public Health, Virginia Pearson, will lead a small committee made up of key personnel who can marshal all the resources needed to provide a swift response to managing an outbreak of the virus.”
So at last we have a Devon controlled and manged infection response team who start managing from a low infection base. Heartening to see that death rates per head of population in Devon corresponds to those experienced in Germany. Lets hope that the test and trace system is up to the task – Owl
‘If we end up like Leicester, then that will be an absolute failure’.
The East Midlands city this week became the first place to be put into a ‘local lockdown’ as a result of increasing numbers of coronavirus cases.
In total, there have been 3,673 positives cases in the city – with nearly 1,000 of them being in the last two weeks.
The number of infections in Leicester has seen the Government reserve some of the lockdown easing measures with non-essential retail having to close, schools going back to only taking children of key workers, and the ‘Super Saturday’ reopening of pubs on hold.
In complete contrast, Devon feels like a different world. Despite having nearly three times the population on Leicester, the county has seen less than a third of Leicester’s cases – just 1,185 as of Thursday.
Devon has so far escaped the worst of the crisis, with deaths among the lowest in the country, care home deaths significantly lower than would be expected given infections, and the number of cases having plummeted to levels where they the virus is barely there. Only North East Lincolnshire of upper tier authority has seen fewer cases per population than Devon.
And new measures to contain and reduce cases of coronavirus in Devon and safeguard the health of local people have now been revealed, which detail plans to provide a fast response to any future outbreaks of the virus across the county and help prevent it spreading.
The Local Outbreak Management Plan involves close partnership working between local organisations like health, councils, police, schools and care homes alongside businesses and key industries such as tourism, as well as working the Government and with the new NHS Test and Trace Service to ensure Devon has the necessary capacity and capability to provide a fully co-ordinated approach to contain and manage local outbreaks of COVID-19.
“If it can work anywhere, it is here,” said Dr Phil Norrey, Devon County Council’s chief executive. “At the current rate, it (covid-19) is almost not there in the local population. It is there, but at a very low level. The numbers cases may be three times the actual level but they are people who are asymptomatic and have no symptoms. We monitor it daily and get the information through, and if we get more than two in a day, we’re thinking ‘oh that’s a lot.
“Leicester last week had roughly 500 cases and they have same as in two and a half weeks as we have in the whole pandemic, and we have two times the population as them.”
If you go onto the Government website, the statistics show that Devon has had 1,185 confirmed cases across both Pillar 1 and Pillar 2. Of them, 831 are Pillar 1 details of tests carried out by NHS, with a further 354 in Pillar 2, carried out by commercial testing
On Tuesday, when speaking to the media, Dr Norrey said that in the previous five days, there had been no confirmed cases in either pillars in the county, although since then, three cases have been confirmed in East Devon.
“From the start, people in Devon took the message they received very seriously and took responsibility for them and their families. We know examples when people didn’t do that, but generally, there has been a responsible approach, and if that continues, we have every chance to keep levels as low as we can.
“It is a very nasty disease and we have 200,000 people over the age of 65 and the risk of getting ill doubles with every seven years of age, so we have the vulnerability if it is out and about. But where you see no cases in areas week after week, while it may still be there and very infectious and can spread quickly, from those levels, it will still take a while to build up in the local community even if the R Rate was very high, but we would aim to catch any outbreak early.
“Prevention is a key theme for us and all the public sector partners are working to prevent so as far as we can to stop an outbreak. If there is an outbreak then we aim to catch it early, and communicate and engage with the public. The key is to understand where the virus is being transmitted and then we are in a better position to understand that and we have the best possible data.
“People will be able take decisions for their own lives based on the best information that we have locally. If it is on the increase in an area then they can perhaps reduce the social contact or contexts where it is slightly riskier, but we are in a good position with a very low incidence of the disease. We are the lowest in the south west and have had zero cases in five days.”
Out of all of the 316 English district areas, Torridge remains the place with the lowest infections per 100,000 – with the South Hams now 3rd, North Devon 4th, West Devon 5th, East Devon 8th, Teignbridge 10th, Exeter 15th, Torbay 21st, Plymouth 40th, and Mid Devon 43 rd .
Across Devon, in the latest weekly Public Health Surveillance report, only Lambeth had reported a lower proportion of cases to its population than Devon, with five other areas, including Torbay, reporting no cases.
And despite fears that an invasion of tourists, or people flocking to the beach would cause a ‘second wave’, so far, there has been no impact at all in Devon, with the number of cases in single figures through the month of June in all parts of the county – with Torridge’s last case being report all the way back on May 19.
Dr Norrey added: “If you look back to where lockdown began to ease in May, more schools going back, non-essential retail opening, and some of the issues with large numbers coming to resorts or gathering on beaches, as yet, we have seen absolutely no impact on the incidence of the disease and it has steadily decreased. This is not to say we won’t see an increase, but that the incidence remains at a low and a manageable level to enable the economy to open up as far as it can safely.”
Asked what he thinks may happen once more lockdown measures are released on Saturday, Dr Norrey said it was very difficult to tell and there were a range of scenarios, but he thought the most likely was a small but manageable increase in the number of cases.
He added: “There will be more people having contact with more people in situations where the virus is more likely to transmit, but there has been a lot of work been done by businesses to minimise transmissions in those setting and people are being advised to think about the general level of social contact. The last thing businesses want is to reopen and be at the centre of an outbreak and then have to close again, so businesses want to get back in a secure way, and they are taking it really seriously.
“Much of our tourism industry is outdoors and the evidence from recent weeks of people coming together in outdoor groups is that it hasn’t led to any kind of perceptible increase in transmission. There could be small but manageable increase and if there is setting causing us a concern we can stop them quickly and manage the risk, but if people in their normal lives are not having lots of contact then the spread out from a setting would be minimised, and gives us time a catch and stop an outbreak.”
Devon County Council is one of 11 Beacon councils selected to help and advise other public authorities, and Devon’s Director of Public Health, Virginia Pearson, will lead a small committee made up of key personnel who can marshal all the resources needed to provide a swift response to managing an outbreak of the virus.
Dr Pearson said: “This comprehensive plan details how we will work with the new NHS Test and Trace Service and ensures we have the necessary capacity and capability to provide a fully co-ordinated approach to contain and manage local outbreaks of COVID-19.
“It provides a blueprint for action, but it will need regular updating as new national guidance is produced or legislation changes. Containing local outbreaks successfully will need to be a co-ordinated effort with specialists from Public Health England, the NHS, social care, district councils, education, the police, the private sector, employers and the community and voluntary sectors.
“But we have a long history of working with PHE on all sorts of outbreaks of communicable diseases as they happen all the time. Covid-19 is a special sort but we use the same principles of partnership working and early action if we see anything going wrong.
“As lockdown releases and as people want to get back to normal, we need to be vigilant and keep an eye on what is happening, but if people follow social distancing advice, wash their hands, keep going hygiene, wear face coverings where appropriate, it will protect people. We are the people in control of this and can stop covid spreading so have to take responsibility as individuals. It becomes less easy when people are travelling across the country as they increase the geographic footprint and return to normal life, but if we follow public health advice, it will minimise the risk of picking up the virus and spreading it to others.”
Speaking about Devon, Dr Pearson said that the county does have the local data which gives them the ability to keep an eye on what is happening locally, and she added: “There will be a risk until we get immunisation and until then have to be vigilant, but we are following up any cases that we do find and making sure people are protected. We need to keep an eye on local data, which we can do, and we can see what is happening locally and we want to share that with the population so we can tell you what is happening and increase the confidence of the public.”
She admitted that she was surprised by the response of the Government to the situation in Leicester and that if the powers were localised, they wouldn’t have applied the same response, but that Devon would be doing all it can to ensure they never got to a position where a wide ranging lockdown would be needed.
“It is difficult to know what happened in Leicester but we would see any community lockdown in Devon as an absolute failure given our numbers are so low and there is a whole range of things we can do before you end up on a situation where out of control and would have to do that,” she said.
Part of the issue in Leicester appeared to have arisen from local officials not having had the Pillar 2 data, but Dr Pearson confirmed that Devon are getting that information at a postcode level and have been for a while, although the data from the NHS track and trace system is not yet at postcode level.
Weekly rate of COVID-19 cases per 100,000 population
But she said that track and trace is able get hold of about 80 per cent of contacts from the few recent positives in Devon, making the county one of the best performing nationally, and she added: “The intelligence we are getting is that it is working.”
Cllr John Hart, Devon County Council leader, added that because of the way the vast majority of Devon people have behaved with ‘great sense and responsibility throughout the pandemic’, it has meant the county has had the lowest number of outbreaks by some way throughout the crisis.
He added: “We obviously want to keep it that way and reduce it still further. We can now build on this effort and extend the work we have done together as Team Devon to protect our residents and support the most vulnerable.
“We will now be at the forefront of responding and managing the outbreak at a local level. And if there’s a hotspot in a town or village we’ll be able to get onto it swiftly before it spreads too far.
“We’ve ensured that our plan includes a strong focus on prevention and early intervention to ensure key settings such as care homes and schools and high- risk locations and communities identify and prioritise preventative measures.”
Cllr Hart said that while there are no grounds for complacency, he will let people know if there is an issue, but ‘at the moment, we have no cases’. In the previous five days, there had been no new cases, while the previous week saw just five cases.
He added: “We prepared for all eventualities, but the eventualities have ironically not raised their heads.”
Based on the initial models, Devon was forecast to see up to 6,000 deaths from coronavirus, and the county spent £2m on two temporary morgues in case they were needed, but as of this week, there have been 169 deaths in all settings within Devon. The latest ONS weekly figures for the week b between June 13 and June 19, but were registered up to June 27.saw zero deaths in the county.
Cllr Hart added: “And we didn’t put all the problems in care homes either. We have 8,500 people in them, and the death rate in care homes is less than would be expected. Devon – along with Kent, Lancashire, Lincolnshire and Norfolk – is one of only five local authorities where the number of deaths in care homes is significantly less than would have been expected related to the general population.
“We have people lined up to firefight if there was a case, but at the moment we have just one care home with an issue out of 333. We have sorted a doctor for each home who will be responsible, and PPE has ceased to be an issue. Every death is a tragedy but the numbers are very small.”
On what will happen this weekend once lockdown measures are released, Cllr Hart added: “We don’t know, but the spikes in activity so far have not caused a problem. In the South West, we have been having second home owners coming since Easter – not in droves – but they have been coming, and it has not had any impact on the fact and figures.
“There have been spikes of activities on beaches since before the Spring bank holiday and there has been no increase in cases of covid-19, and since then, all of the figures have been reducing, not increasing.”
On a local lockdown, Cllr Hart said that they hope that Devon would never get anywhere close to that stage given they have all the information to know what is going on.
He added: “When two or more cases and not in the same household, we will do checks to make sure the people of Devon are safe even though looking to open up the tourist industry. It is worth nearly £2b a year and employs over 85,000 people, so it is crucial that we get back working.
“We will be working for the benefit of the people of Devon and telling them what is happening rather than what rumour can create, if there is something. I hope we never get to lockdown and can stamp out coronavirus and any outbreaks quickly, but we are still looking for a faster response to testing so people know where they are, but we will stamp anything out before we get anywhere near there.
“A local lockdown is around a nine out of ten on a scale and there are lots of other activity before we get to that kind of position and I hope we never get to that kind of position.”
Among the actions that could be taken if there was a spike anywhere, Dr Norrey said, included at short notice deploying testing facilities if they feel the need to around asymptomatic testing of individuals.
He added: “With the numbers we have and they were not isolated cases, we would focus on a setting, be it a care home, a workplace, a school, a factory, and we would work first at that level before it got to the wider community, and we have already done that quietly behind the scenes in a couple of cases
“There has not been a lockdown but we have been working with the settings and ensuring appropriate measures. We identified some that have been an issue but have not had to exercise any powers. Before you get anywhere near closing a setting then lots of work you can do and the last thing we want to do is unnecessarily shut down any setting.”
He added: “Overall, our rate is something like 26 deaths per 100,000 when national average is 86 per 100,000, and the death rate is broadly comparable with the figure in Germany.”
And he added that at the levels of infection in Devon at the moment, the much heralded and misunderstood R Rate was meaningless, saying: “It doesn’t mean as much to me as the number of cases we are seeing locally. It seeped into the public consciousness but have become less and less relevant as cases drop off.”
And cases continue to drop off. The latest Public Health England surveillance report, bases on data between June 22 and June 28, showed another fall in the levels of coronavirus in Devon. The previous week had seen the weekly rate of COVID-19 cases per 100,000 population under Pillar 1 and 2 positive tests at 1 for Devon. That figure has dropped to 0.4 – effectively three cases in the last seven days.
Only Lambeth, and the City of London, Rutland, Portsmouth, Bath and North East Somerset, and Torbay – the latter five where no positive cases where recorded – have a lower positivity rate than Devon.
Cllr Hart added: “We have no grounds for complacency but we will let people know if there is an issue, but at the moment, there isn’t one. If there is something going on then we will tell you.”
The latest data modelling from the COVID Symptom Study app is now able to identify potential COVID hotspots in the UK, as well as showing daily cases in the population.
The COVID Symptom Study app can now detect potential COVID hotspots
The latest data modelling from the COVID Symptom Study app is now able to identify potential COVID hotspots in the UK, as well as showing daily cases in the population.
The modelling highlights three key local authorities as potential new hotspots. As well as Leicester which is already back in lockdown, the data has highlighted Dudley and Wolverhampton as other areas in the Midlands that could be heading in the same direction.
The COVID Symptom Study app defines three key criteria for identifying hotspots. The local authority area must:
1. Have significantly higher prevalence than its neighbouring authorities
2. Be in the top 10th percentile of prevalence for the UK; and
3. Have a prevalence that is higher today than 10 days ago
This method for estimating prevalence is based on the assessments of 3.7 million UK app users, using a validated model to predict COVID-19 based on symptoms and combine it with swab test results reported by app users.
The model used to estimate prevalence, which has been peer-reviewed and published in leading journal Nature Medicine, can find areas in the country that have a prevalence which is higher than its neighbours and is likely to lead to an increase in confirmed cases and hospitalisation in the following 5 and 12 days respectively. The same model predicted Barnsley and Rochdale to be hotspots back on June 17th but these areas no longer rank highly.
The recent lockdown of Leicester has expedited the need for earlier hotspot detection. This model can help find areas in the country that have a prevalence which is higher than its neighbours and are likely to lead to an increase in confirmed cases and hospitalization in the next 5 and 12 days respectively.
Daily new cases
According to the latest COVID Symptom Study app figures, there are currently an estimated 1,445 daily new cases of COVID in the UK on average over the two weeks, 14 to 27 June 2020 [*]. The number of cases has continued to fall nationally, and this week the number fell by 34 % since last week. The highest rates of new cases are still found in the Midlands.
The figures were based on 10,393 swab tests from 14 to 24 June based on 31 positive results. A full regional breakdown can be found on our data and maps page.
Tim Spector, Professor of Genetic Epidemiology at King’s College London, comments:
“This fresh look at the data was inspired by the local lockdown in Leicester, we challenged ourselves to see if our app data could highlight any other local hotspots and we are really pleased that it does. The new model picked up Leicester as a consistent hotspot back on the 17th June which suggests it is accurately picking up places of concern.
With our data now flagging up potential new hotspots, it will allow for greater surveillance and focussed testing that could detect problems like Leicester much earlier and hopefully reduce the number of major lockdowns. But to do this more successfully we still need more people to join us by logging how they are feeling each day so we can send out kits to those feeling unwell and catch these outbreaks and help us closely monitor what is going on in the UK population.”
Additional notes:
[*] This analysis requires swab testing, which was kindly provided by the Department of Health and Social Care for England. As Scotland and Wales are not yet offering tests to app users, we provided indirect estimates using countrywide averages and wide confidence limits. Testing is happening in Northern Ireland, but the number of participants is too few to generate an accurate estimate. These figures exclude care homes as there is not enough data from the app to estimate this population.
Restrictions have been relaxed from today with pubs, hotels, restaurants and hairdressers all permitted to reopen following months of lockdown.
Devon Live is reporting huge delays on roads through Devon and Cornwall, with delays around Bristol and North Somerset predicted.
There are currently long delays on the M5 past Exeter.
Inrix reports: “Reports of accident on A384 near A38 (Dartbridge Junction). Traffic is coping well.
“A388 in both directions partially blocked due to accident near Service Station. Traffic is coping well.
“Reports of accident, a truck leaving the carriageway involved on A3072 between A388 North Road and Brooks Avenue. Traffic is coping well.”
Dozens of caravans and motorhomes were seen parked up at Taunton Deane Services this morning as hundreds of tourists head to the region’s beauty spots.
The latest government data on the rate, which was published yesterday (July 3), shows that the rate in the region could be as high as 1, having just two weeks ago been recorded as the lowest in the UK.
On June 19, the rate in the South West was reported as 0.6-0.9, but now it has risen to between 0.7 and 1, with the national average for England coming in at between 0.8 and 0.9.
The ‘R’ rate is the name given to the measured rate at which the virus can spread from person to person, and it is measured by the number of people who are being infected by one person carrying the virus.
FURTHER details of the planning breaches at Dominic Cummings’ lockdown cottage have emerged after The Northern Echo exclusively obtained a copy of the investigation report.
The Durham County Council inquiry shows the house the Prime Minister’s chief aide helped to build on his family farm was in breach of planning laws.
Durham County Council found several infringements following three visits to North Lodge Farm on the A167, near Durham, but concluded enforcement action could not be taken because changes were made too long ago.
The cottage the political strategist used during his trip to the region was a former barn or storage area and was converted in 2002, after Mr Cummings quit his job as director of strategy for the Conservative Party.
It is understood Mr Cummings built the ‘bunker’ with his father during a two year hiatus from politics.
The unauthorised change of use for the building is now immune from enforcement action by the planning authority but may still be liable for council tax.
Dominic Cummings leaves Downing Street
Investigating officers found there was no planning history at all relating to the building, but believe it was already on the site when the Cummings family bought the land in 1999.
The report said: “The building has been partly converted to a self-contained unit of accommodation comprising two bed, bathroom, kitchen and lounge area in or around 2002.
“The conversion works comprised the removal of openings, installation of windows and doors and internal fit out.
“Invoices relating to the materials for the conversion work verify the approximate date of conversion.
“The remainder of the building (northern part) remains a garage/store and has not been subject to any conversion works. The building is understood to be occupied on an infrequent basis (approximately four weeks in any given year, by family).”
Planning inspectors also found the main property on the farm had been extended without planning permission with a porch built in breach of regulations and a ‘pod’ extension near the family’s swimming pool.
Studies of aerial photography as part of the investigation also revealed the curtilage of the property has also been increased to specifically include the area that now contains the cottage.
The author of the report, which was redacted in the copy seen by The Northern Echo, said there was no evidence to suggest either deliberate concealment or deception have taken place.
The author concludes: “Whilst there have been historic breaches of planning control relating to two extensions to the principal dwelling, building works to the cottage as well as a change of use of agricultural land to garden, these breaches are all now beyond the period in which enforcement action can be taken and are therefore immune.
“I therefore recommend that the case file be closed as there are no breaches of planning control against which enforcement action can now be taken.”
Durham County Council has said the issue of whether the cottage is liable for council tax has been referred to the Valuation Agency Officer, part of HMRC, which will not comment on individual cases.
Durham County Councillor John Shuttleworth, who sits on three of the council’s planning committees, said: “If he (Dominic Cummings) has tried avoid council tax he should be made to pay it.
“Anybody else would so what is the difference.
“This guy is running the country. You have got to be above it and be squeaky clean.”
It is understood Mr Cummings is a co-owner of the property helped build the cottage between quitting the Tory Party led by Iain Duncan Smith in 2002, and leading campaign against regional devolution in 2004, a precursor for his success with Vote Leave 12 years later.
The investigation was launched into the planning issues at the family property after Durham County Council received 18 complaints in the wake of the furore surrounding his trip to the region.
Durham City MP Mary Foy said: “I would like to thank Durham County Council officers for the speedy and professional way they have looked into this matter, but even though this report indicates that some breaches of planning regulations had taken place, the current time limits on enforcement mean that no action can be taken.
“This may be the case, but it’s very troubling that the Prime Minister indicated in his speech on Tuesday June 30 that the Government is planning to relax planning regulations even further, ostensibly to get the economy moving again.
“Rather than give carte blanche for developers to convert even more existing commercial buildings to residential without planning permission, and make it easier for people to carry out the sort of inappropriate development highlighted in this report, the Government should be increasing funding to planning departments to make sure that plans are properly scrutinised, and new buildings are fit for purpose.”
Mr Cummings was heavily criticised for leaving London to bring his wife, to Durham while they were both suffering from coronavirus symptoms in case they needed childcare for their four-year-old son.
Mr Cummings was also ridiculed for claiming a trip to Barnard Castle on Easter Sunday, which coincided with his wife’s birthday, was to see if he could drive having experienced problems with his eyesight.
A subsequent inquiry by Durham Constabulary found the initial trip did not breach Government restrictions but the trip ‘might’ have warranted a minor breach’.
A judicial review is now being sought over the failure of the director of public prosecutions, Max Hill, to investigate Mr Cummings for alleged breaches of lockdown rules.
Mr Hill has said it is a police matter, but the man behind the challenge, Martin Redston, has said the DPP has shown insufficient independence from the Government regarding the actions of Boris Johnson’s adviser.
A legal team, headed by the barrister Michael Mansfield, has now begun legal proceedings in the High Court.
The Cummings family have declined the opportunity to comment.
New building projects to kick-start South Devon’s economy and create thousands of new jobs are on a ‘wish-list’ being sent to the Government this week.
As the Prime Minister heralded an ambitious nationwide ‘New Deal’ worth billions of pounds to kick-start the economy after the coronavirus lockdown, the South West’s biggest business organisation submitted a £121 million bid to fund a package of ‘shovel ready’ projects which include developments on the outskirts of Torquay, a new road at Newton Abbot and investments in South Devon College.
The Heart of the South West Local Enterprise Project (LEP) says the projects could be started quickly and would provide an immediate stimulus to the economy, unlocking at least another £171m of investment and creating more than 3,000 jobs. They say the schemes would deliver the most benefit, give value for money and could be completed in a short time. Many already have planning permission, and are just waiting for investment.
Karl Tucker, who chairs the LEP, said: “Our bid will help the national campaign to build back better. We’ve selected our list based on how much these projects can deliver in economic, social and environmental benefits in the short and long term.
“We’ve put forward a strong case, and we await what we hope to be a positive decision. The LEP has a track record of delivering its projects on budget and on time.
“This is just the start, and we call on the Government to back this and back the Great South West.”
[Karl Tucker, executive chairman of Yeo Valley Production Ltd takes over from Steve Hindley, the chair of the Midas Group construction company, who announced in July 2017 he would be stepping down after six years. (The transfer was announced in December 2019.) Steve Hindley then popped up as the Chairman of the, unaccountable, unelected pressure group which seem to be an LEP for LEPs “The Great south West”.
Mr Tucker has been with Yeo Valley since 1996, having joined from the quarrying industry and before that having served in the British Army.
As well as his role at Yeo Valley, Mt Tucker sits on the SW CBI Council, is chair of the SW CBI’s Food and Drink Council and a member of the Somerset Growth Board.] – Owl
Projects on the wish-list include 2,000 sq m of office and industrial space at the ‘Torquay Gateway’ site at Edginswell, a development which it says will act as a ‘catalyst’ for the building of around 400 homes and will link in with the proposed new Edginswell railway station and a multi-million-pound Torbay Hospital improvement programme.
The Jetty Marsh Two link road between Newton Abbot town centre and the A382 is also on the list.
The LEP says it ‘represents an essential missing link that overcomes a significant bottleneck and supports around 4,000 allocated and future homes. It introduces a walking/cycling corridor where there is no existing or alternative provision, and is an important component of a new strategic bus route. It already has planning permission.
The list bids for new equipment at the EPIC and South Devon College Hi Tech Centre in Paignton to support the development of new talent for the growing hi-tech sector in Torbay.
A second phase of the Torbay Business Centre in Torquay’s Lymington Road is also on the list. The LEP says it will provide modern fit-for-purpose employment space in Torquay town centre and regenerate an area of deprivation.
At Cockington Court there is a plan to create a permanent Sculpture Park, building on the success of the sculpture trail project of the past two years. New commercial units and a harbour depot at Batson Creek in Salcombe complete South Devon’s section of the wish-list.
Skate parks in Budleigh Salterton, Exmouth, Honiton and Seaton can be used from Monday, July 6, after they were closed at the end of March because of the coronavirus lockdown.
Some 12 games areas across Exmouth, Axminster, Honiton, Ottery St Mary and Budleigh Salterton will also welcome back the public from July 6.
East Devon District Council (EDDC) announced the move today (Friday, July 3) adding it ‘anticipated’ reopening play parks on Monday, July 13, in Exmouth, Honiton, Axminster, Budleigh Salterton, Sidmouth, Beer and Ottery St Mary.
It said new signs will remind the public to take along sanitiser, wash their hands thoroughly before and after visits and warn them not to eat and drink while on the play equipment.
They will also be told to take litter home, be considerate of other park users and be prepared to come back another time if the area is busy.
The council warned it could not guarantee the public areas would be free from the virus, and urged parents to supervise their children and take ‘all reasonable precautions’.
Skate parks reopening on Monday, July 6, are:
Budleigh Salterton (Lime Kiln);
Exmouth (Phear Park);
Honiton (Allhallows);
Seaton (Underfleet).
Multi-use games areas open to the public from July 6 are:
Exmouth: Phear Park (x2), Liverton Copse, Cumberland Close, King George’s Field, Carter Avenue, The Crescent;
Axminster: Foxhill;
Honiton: St Mark’s, Davey Playing Field, All Hallows;
Ottery St Mary: Thorne Farm Way, Winter’s Lane;
Budleigh Salterton: Greenway Lane.
The district council anticipates the following play area sites will re-open on Monday, July 13.
Queen’s Drive play area, Exmouth;
Phear Park, Exmouth;
Redgates, Exmouth;
Allhallows, Honiton;
St Mark’s Road, Honiton;
North Street, Axminster;
Foxhill, Axminster;
Lime Kiln, Budleigh Salterton;
Stowford Rise, Sidmouth;
Manstone Recreation Ground, Sidmouth;
Jubilee, Beer;
Land of Canaan, Ottery St Mary.
Councillor Geoff Jung, EDDC portfolio holder for coast, countryside and environment, said: “I am really pleased that following the Government’s decision to reduce COVID-19 Emergency measures we are able to reopen many of our play areas.
“We are only able to do this following a thorough review and risk assessment of all our sites, and providing extra cleaning, materials and signage to protect the health and wellbeing for all the users.
“There are other play parks and facilities throughout the district run by a community, group, or parish council who are also considering opening their facilities and therefore residents need to check locally when their play park is open.”
Re-opening of play sites is a ‘more complex issue’ because of detailed guidance set out by the Government on increased cleaning, due to the risk of spreading the virus from where people’s hands meet the equipment, the council said.
Government guidance says parents, guardians and carers should sanitise children’s hands before and after using the play equipment, said EDDC.
An EDDC spokeswoman said: “There are clearly many of these touch points where children play and, whereas before these touch points were not cleaned, the council is carrying out further risk assessments to determine the levels of cleaning now required in light of COVID-19.
“These assessments are required for each of the seventy-one play area sites. With the current resources the council has, it is focussing on how it can safely re-open twelve play parks and will review the re-opening of all the other sites shortly.”
She added: “As with all outdoor equipment that can be accessed by multiple people, play areas cannot be guaranteed to be free of COVID-19.
“Parents should supervise their children at all times and should take all reasonable precautions to ensure the safety of themselves and their children while using the equipment.”
The lockdown in Leicester constitutes a foreseeable crisis of the Government’s own making. It has come too late and, by being imposed on the locality, rather than being developed and implemented with the locality, it risks creating uncertainty, dissent, and even disorder. In the case of Leicester, and for future such cases, we advocate a response that is led by local government, supported by agencies such as PHE Health Protection Teams, the NHS and the Police and with additional funding from central government. The imposition of local restrictions should only be considered in the context of such an overall package of support, they should only be a last resort and used as a temporary measure. Such an approach will maximise both the efficacy of infection control measures and public support for these measures.
1. The situation in Leicester was both predictable and avoidable. It derives from the premature lifting of lockdown restrictions at a time when the virus is still circulating widely in some areas, when there is still no functional system of find, test, trace isolate and support and when the Prime Minister was sending an implied message that things are ‘back to normal’.
2. The current situation arose out of a failure to respond to the increase of infections in Leicester (and other localities) at an early stage and before they reached crisis levels. This was a result of several factors: (a) an excessive centralisation and unavailability of data; (b) the fragmentation of the testing system; (c) a lack of coordination with both the local authorities and with the NHS, PHE and other agencies locallyin understanding the cause, nature and response to the outbreak. This has eroded trust in government and the information it provides about COVID-19 risk.
3. Leicester is a city rich in multiple cultures and traditions, yet also has high levels of disadvantage and poverty. The imposition of a lockdown, without the prior involvement of local authorities, has already created massive confusion about who can do what, where and when. It risks creating a deep sense of resentment and of inequity in the local populations. It also creates a situation in which racist groups may politicise that resentment by blaming ethnic minorities for the lockdown.
4. These resentments and divisions feed into resistance to restrictions. If this is met by repressive measures on behalf of the police and other authorities then there will be a serious risk of local outbreaks of disorder and for that disorder to spread to other areas with similar resentments. Widespread disorder would be disastrous for the entire national response to the pandemic.
5. Rather than responding to local increases in infection with centrally imposed restrictions and repression we call for a local response rooted in additional support to the affected population. This has five elements:
First, rapid availability of all local data deemed necessary by the local authority, with sufficient detail (down to postcode level at a minimum) to underpin and help inform the local response
Second, a substantial increase in active case finding, supported by enhanced local testing facilities, located so as to be accessible to the affected populations and with outreach to those unable to access them. While a telephone-based system of contact tracing can play a role, long experience with epidemics elsewhere shows that it is essential to “walk the streets” to gather intelligence on the nature of the outbreak, for example whether transmission is in homes, at a workplace, or somewhere else. These activities should be undertaken in close consultation with the local communities most affected, explaining both the need to be tested, provide contacts, and why it is important for cases and their contacts to self-isolate, and also the practical steps involved in doing so (such as where to get tested) using tailored public information campaigns in appropriate languages. These need to be done in a culturally appropriate manner with rapid but meaningful co-production of measures working with local community networks.
Third, the coordination of the actions of all organisations involved in testing and tracing, delivering a single data pipeline to local authorities and other agencies that need it, with ownership vested in local authorities that are known to and trusted by local populations
Fourth, the provision by central government of substantial support to those cases and contacts who are required to self-isolate which addresses the specific needs of affected populations (e.g. those living in multi-generational households) and which, at a minimum, fully covers loss of income and organises free accommodation for isolation where needed.
Fifth, the use of additional restrictions on local activity. However, these should only be applied as an emergency last resort while the enhanced testing process identifies hotspots and achieves the isolation of those infected. Moreover, they should be accompanied by full financial compensation to those affected and their contacts, particularly local small, medium, and large businesses, many of which have been making substantial investments to re-open safely.
6. This approach demands clear lines of accountability. At a local level, it is local authorities that have the appropriate democratic mandate to take action and who can be held to account. They bring together a range of functions necessary for a comprehensive response and, where they do not, they have extensive experience in convening multi-agency responses. However, they operate within a national legal framework, albeit one that lacks clarity in various respects, and they vary in their capacity to develop an effective response. Consequently, there should be a statutory obligation on local authorities to set out in detail how they will respond once a threshold of cases has been exceeded. The German threshold of 50 cases per 100,000 population over a seven day period seems appropriate.
7. We expect further instances of local “spikes” of infection in other towns and cities. We call on the government to coordinate with local authorities in order to achieve early identification of problems, to define their criteria for intervention and also their criteria for terminating these interventions.
The data shows the spread of the virus in workplaces is trending up while transmission in most other settings is in decline. Workplaces are now the only location where the spread of the virus is clearly on the increase.
Suspected outbreaks of Covid-19 in workplaces in England almost doubled in the past week, prompting concern as more people return to their jobs.
Public Health England (PHE) said 43 acute respiratory outbreaks were reported in workplaces in the week ending 28 June, up from 22 in the previous week.
The data shows the spread of the virus in workplaces is trending up while transmission in most other settings is in decline. Workplaces are now the only location where the spread of the virus is clearly on the increase.
Low-paid, manual workers, face a much greater risk of dying from coronavirus than higher-paid, white-collar workers. Security guards, care workers, construction workers, plant operatives, cleaners, taxi drivers, bus drivers, chefs and retail workers are all at a greater risk of dying, according to analysis of Covid-19 fatalities from the Office for National Statistics.
People began to return to work in England from 13 May, although those who could work from home were encouraged to continue to do so. Since then, construction sites, warehouses and some restaurants and cafes have started to reopen. Employers have been issued with guidelines on how to keep workplaces safe, including advice to stagger shifts and cleaning.
However, the return to work has clearly caused an increase in outbreaks in workplaces. Figures show clusters started to increase two to three weeks after people began to return to work. In the week ending 7 June there were 24 reported outbreaks, up from five in the previous week. At the time of the outbreaks, the data published by PHE did not make clear that these clusters were occurring in workplaces, as the cases were recorded under “other settings”.
An outbreak is determined by PHE when two or more lab-confirmed cases of Covid-19 have been linked to a particular setting. Suspected clusters are also counted and investigated by local PHE teams, although not all of the cases will prove to be related to the virus. Of the 43 incidents reported in workplaces, 36 had two or more cases of Covid-19 linked to that setting.
Outbreaks of the virus in England have slowed in almost every other setting and are down by almost a quarter overall, to 171, from 223 in the previous week. There were 58 outbreaks in care homes last week, down from 112 in the week before.
Prisons are the only other setting where outbreaks of the virus increased, from two to four cases in the past week.
More outbreaks of the virus have been detected since pillar 2 testing became open to everyone during week 21 of the pandemic. This has lead to greater detection of the virus in “settings with healthy younger populations”, according to PHE.
Official data shows that the seven-day rolling average of deaths has stayed broadly stable at about 117 over the past week, with only a 1.2 per cent fall from the week before. In the seven days to Wednesday deaths totalled 825, compared with 823 the week before.
Deaths from coronavirus appear to have stopped falling as infections also continue to plateau.
Official data shows that the seven-day rolling average of deaths has stayed broadly stable at about 117 over the past week, with only a 1.2 per cent fall from the week before. In the seven days to Wednesday deaths totalled 825, compared with 823 the week before.
This compares with weekly falls of more than 20 per cent in both of the three previous weeks and experts said the consequences of flat-lining infection rates were feeding through to mortality figures.
The Office for National Statistics (ONS) said infection rates were flat, with 3,500 people catching the virus every day, not significantly different to the week before.
The ONS also estimates that one in 2,200 people in England — the equivalent of 25,000 people — has the virus. Although this is half of last week’s figure, it is not considered a clear sign that infections are falling. The figure could be anywhere between 12,000 and 44,000 given uncertainties in a survey in which only 12 out of the sample of 23,203 tested proved to have the virus.
“At this point, we do not have evidence that the current trend is anything other than flat,” the ONS concluded.
Kevin McConway, a professor of statistics at the Open University, said: “The levelling off did not happen as a sudden change, so it’s difficult to say exactly when it started — perhaps since early or middle June.
“In principle, it would be the incidence figures of new infections that might tell us something about the immediate effects of changes in policy, such as various loosenings of lockdown, but the changes in incidence rate are not really estimated accurately enough to make that link clear.”
Jose Vazquez-Boland, a professor at Edinburgh University, said that the flat trend of infection was likely to explain why the steep decline in deaths had stopped. “The short answer is yes,” he said, when asked if one led to the other.
The seven-day average of deaths peaked at 945 in mid-April and has been falling since. It fell below 200 on June 11 but has not fallen noticeably for the past week. However, deaths are not reported on the day they happen and Jason Oke, of the University of Oxford, said: “It is unclear, when and where these deaths come from and why they fluctuate so much.”
On Tuesday 176 deaths were reported but most were outside hospitals, even though most people with coronavirus do die in hospital, Dr Oke said.
Looking at figures on the day people actually die, he said: “ONS recorded 66 deaths occurred on June 19 in all settings in England and Wales continuing a downward trend in deaths since mid-April. We need to know how many of the deaths outside of hospital are current to be able to judge whether the trend is plateauing.”
His team’s data does not cover people who died last week because of the delay of several days in reported deaths.
The other way of looking at the toll is to count “excess deaths”, which have totalled more than 65,000 since the start of the crisis. Weekly death numbers have returned to normal, however, with official figures this week finding that the total number in the week to June 19 from all causes is slightly below the five-year average.
Most coronavirus tests are too slow for effective contact tracing, figures suggest. The scheme is also struggling to trace people as they move around more.
looks like another Boris pledge is going to be missed – Owl
Just 8 per cent of home testing kits and 14 per cent of the batch kits sent out by post have results within 24 hours, making it much harder to hit the goal of tracing and isolating contacts within 48 hours of someone becoming ill.
Six in ten home tests take more than 48 hours and officials are now encouraging people to go to testing sites in person if they can.
Postal kits made up 58 per cent of the “pillar 2” or community tests carried out over the past week, with the remainder processed by drive-through and mobile testing units.
These were significantly faster, with 72 per cent and 60 per cent of tests getting results within 24 hours respectively in the week to June 24.
However, Boris Johnson’s pledge to have all of these tests done within 24 hours by the end of June appears to be in significant doubt. Officials argue that more than 97 per cent of non-postal tests are now coming back the next day. With these they believe they are getting closer to the goal of isolating 80 per cent of contacts within 48 hours of a person becoming ill.
This is the benchmark set by the Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies for an effective system that can avoid a second wave and allow secondary schools to reopen in September.
The figures also do not include “pillar 1” tests carried out in NHS hospitals and Public Health England laboratories, which measure speed differently. The NHS says its average turnaround time is 14 hours but in 10 per cent of labs the average is more than 24 hours.
Baroness Harding of Winscombe, executive chairwoman of NHS Test and Trace, said: “We have seen significant improvements in the time it takes to process test results, an important step to rapidly reach the contacts of those testing positive and ask them to self-isolate to prevent them spreading the virus further.”
She argued that the real issue was ensuring people did not soldier on when they were ill but ordered a test quickly, saying: “If you have coronavirus symptoms, get a test immediately.”
The latest figures also show that a quarter of people with confirmed coronavirus referred to the scheme still cannot be contacted.
Justin Madders, a shadow health minister, said that the number of people being contacted was “well below the levels we need to effectively contain the virus”. He added: “The performance so far simply isn’t good enough and far from the world-leading system we were promised. We know for there to be an effective testing and tracing system . . . results need to be back quickly.”
The scheme is finding it harder to reach trace contacts, with the proportion reached and asked to self-isolate falling from 90 per cent in the first week of the scheme to 73 per cent last week. This is because at the start of the scheme the vast majority of contacts were part of outbreaks in places such as care homes and schools, but now rising numbers involve contacts in ordinary daily life.
Staff and residents in care homes in England will be regularly tested for coronavirus from next week, the government has said.
Meanwhile, Mr Hancock is facing legal action from the daughter of an 88-year-old man who died of suspected COVID-19 in a care home. [Dr Cathy Gardner Owl]
Care home workers will be tested weekly, while residents will receive a test every 28 days, according to the Department of Health and Social Care (DHSC).
It has also promised intensive testing in any care home facing a coronavirus outbreak or an increased risk of a flare-up.
Coronavirus and its impact on care homes (see original article for video)
The programme will be rolled out from Monday to all care homes for people aged over 65, and those with dementia, which have registered to receive re-testing over the next four weeks.
It will then be expanded to the entire care home sector from August.
Health Secretary Matt Hancock said the government’s response to the pandemic “has always been led by the latest scientific advice from world-class experts”.
“We will now offer repeat testing to staff and residents in care homes, starting with homes for elderly residents before expanding to the entire care home sector,” he added.
The government has faced criticism for failing to protect care homes from coronavirus.
There have been more than 14,600 deaths linked to COVID-19 in care homes across England and Wales registered up to 19 June, according to the latest Office for National Statistics data.
A National Audit Office report in June claimed that around 25,000 hospital patients were discharged into care homes in England at the height of the pandemic without all being tested for COVID-19.
Research published last month revealed a third of care home residents had not been tested for COVID-19, despite government promises that all residents and staff would be tested by “early June”.
The research from The Data Analysis Bureau suggested that while testing had risen over that month, many residents were still missing out.
Meanwhile, Mr Hancock is facing legal action from the daughter of an 88-year-old man who died of suspected COVID-19 in a care home.
Daughter’s legal action over care home claim (see original article for video)
Dr Cathy Gardner is demanding the health secretary retract his claim that he placed a “protective ring” around care homes following the death of her father Michael Gibson.
The new testing strategy follows the latest advice from the government’s Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies (SAGE) and new evidence indicating a higher prevalence in care homes, the DHSC said.
The Vivaldi 1 study, which surveyed almost 9,000 care home managers and analysed data from care home tests, identified higher levels of the virus among care workers – particularly among temporary staff working in multiple care settings.
The study suggested that care home staff may be at increased risk of contracting the virus which they could then pass on to others if they have no symptoms, the DHSC said.
The new repeat testing programme was welcomed by care sector leaders who said it was “essential” to support care homes managing the spread of infection.
Vic Rayner, executive director of National Care forum, added: “Access to repeat and regular testing is absolutely central to support care homes in managing the spread of infection within care homes.
“Testing has proved to be a vital tool in the box for providers and the continued expansion of the testing regime is essential.”
Shops and businesses in Ottery Town Centre are to get a facelift as they reopen after lockdown, following successful applications for grants to repair and improve their premises.
The town council made a fund of £10,000 available, and has been offering up to £500 towards maintenance and upgrading work, on condition that the business pays the same amount or more towards the total cost.
Several businesses applied for the funding by the initial deadline of June 14, and have been granted money towards work such as repairs, repainting, cleaning and new signage. Some also plan to add hanging baskets and other decorations.
More than £5,000 in total was allocated at the town council meeting on Monday, June 15. But the councillors were aware that not all traders had been aware of the scheme, because of the difficulties of publicising it during lockdown, and have extended the deadline until Saturday, July 4 to enable more businesses to benefit.
The next set of applications will go before the council’s meeting on Monday, July 6.
Cllr Dean Stewart, who is also chair of the Ottery Business Forum, said this would be the first of several schemes by the town council to help local traders recover from lockdown and make the most of the summer trade.
He said so far the town’s businesses have adapted well to the Covid-19 secure social distancing measures that were needed for them to reopen safely.
He said: “I think the shopkeepers were nervous to start with, but they’ve all got their processes in place now.
“There are one-way systems and lots of red and white tape saying ‘walk this way’, ‘wait here’ and ‘keep two metres apart’.
“Shopkeepers have been very responsible and are taking it very seriously, and people know they can confidently shop in Ottery.”
Meanwhile, eight jobs are being created by the opening of a new branch of Argos inside the Ottery St Mary branch of Sainsbury’s.
Argos already has a collection point in the supermarket in Hind Street.
Work is now underway to turn it into a digital store, scheduled to open in August this year, where customers buy items instore via a tablet, or collect items they have ordered online.
East Devon Watch 