Can’t have a level playing field so let’s kick the proposal into the long grass.

Time to Change the Guard at Devon County Council – Owl

Daniel Clark www.devonlive.com 

Debate over whether the Government should facilitate free postal delivery of leaflets for each council election candidate in the May local elections has been ‘stifled’.

Cllr Martin Shaw, East Devon Alliance councillor for Seaton and Colyton, had put forward a motion to Thursday’s Devon County Council full council meeting calling for discussions to be held as to how the elections can be made safer following the decision that they will go ahead as planned.

The regularly scheduled 2021 Devon County Council elections will take place May 6 as per usual, despite the ongoing coronavirus pandemic.

Cllr Shaw had asked the council to discuss and debate his call for the Government to facilitate online registration for postal voting, and a free postal delivery of leaflets for each council election candidate on the day, rather than the usual process of referring it to cabinet before returning back to full council, as by the next council meeting, it would be out of date.

He said: “This is an urgent matter, and the Government only recently decided to hold the election and the rules for it. The next meeting is after the elections so if it is referred to the cabinet so will be out of date.

“We are in a pandemic and voting in person cannot be guaranteed as safe, but the Government is doing nothing to make postal voting easier, and banning leafleting by candidates won’t help the less well-off candidates.

“I would hope you would welcome the opportunity to discuss how to make the elections safer but if you don’t like the wording of the motion, you can amend it or you can vote it down, but don’t stifle debate.”

However, councillors voted 32 votes to 11, with four abstentions, against debating the motion on the day and instead referring it to Cabinet, a decision Cllr Shaw said was ‘disappointing’.

A second motion around elections from Cllr Shaw, calling for councils to be able choose to change their voting system from the first-past-the-post system to the proportional Single Transferable Vote system, which is already used for local elections in Scotland and Northern Ireland, was also referred to the cabinet, but in accordance with the wishes of Cllr Shaw.

One down, a few more to go. 

Worth also following link in penultimate paragraph [in bold] to see the follow up proposals the Good Law Project has made to restore public confidence in health procurement. – Owl

goodlawproject.org 

The High Court has ruled “The Secretary of State acted unlawfully by failing to comply with the Transparency Policy” and that “there is now no dispute that, in a substantial number of cases, the Secretary of State breached his legal obligation to publish Contract Award Notices within 30 days of the award of contracts.” We have won the judicial review we brought alongside Debbie Abrahams MP, Caroline Lucas MP, and Layla Moran MP.

In handing down the judgment, Judge Chamberlain brought into sharp focus why this case was so important. “The Secretary of State spent vast quantities of public money on pandemic-related procurements during 2020. The public were entitled to see who this money was going to, what it was being spent on and how the relevant contracts were awarded.”

The Judge went on to say that if Government had complied with its legal obligations we “would have been able to scrutinise CANs and contract provisions, ask questions about them and raise any issues with oversight bodies such as the NAO or via MPs in Parliament.”  When Government eschews transparency, it evades accountability. 

Government’s behaviour came under criticism in the judgment. If it had admitted to being in breach of the law when we first raised our concerns, it would have never been necessary to take this judicial review to its conclusion. Instead, they chose a path of obfuscation, racking up over £200,000 of legal costs as a result.  

We shouldn’t be forced to rely on litigation to keep those in power honest, but in this case it’s clear that our challenge pushed Government to comply with its legal obligations. Judge Chamberlain stated that the admission of breach by Government was “secured as a result of this litigation and at a late stage of it” and “I have no doubt that this claim has speeded up compliance”. It begs the question, if we hadn’t brought this legal challenge, what other contract details would have remained hidden from view? 

And whilst Government always sought to dismiss our challenge by claiming we needed to be an ‘economic operator’ to have standing, the judgment states that it is unrealistic that economic operators would have challenged Government’s breach of the law in these circumstances. In other words, if we hadn’t taken this case, there are not many others who could have done so. 

This judgment, which can be found here, is a victory for all of us concerned with proper governance and proof of the power of litigation to hold Government to account. But there is still a long way to go before the Government’s house is in order. We have now written to the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care detailing what needs to be done to improve procurement processes and ensure value for British taxpayers.

But for now, we can take a moment to celebrate this win. Thank you, as ever, for all your support.   

The increased infectiousness of the UK coronavirus variant could be because people stay sicker for longer, a small study has suggested.

Tom Whipple, Science Editor www.thetimes.co.uk

The research, conducted using data from 65 US basketball players and staff who had contracted Covid-19, found that the seven infected with the new variant were ill for about 13 days, compared with eight days for the 58 who contracted the old variant.

If confirmed, the study may also mean that countries need to extend the length of time that people self-isolate.

“We thought [the UK variant’s] increased infectiousness was due to higher viral load,” Eric Topol, director of the Scripps Research Translational Institute, said. The new data, he said, “suggests it’s related to . . . longer duration of infections”.

However, scientists caution that the findings come from a small sample.

The study, by researchers from Harvard University, was only possible because of regular testing in the US National Basketball Association. People typically only get a test when they are symptomatic, and after testing positive take no further tests, meaning it is possible to chart neither the beginning nor end of the infection. The NBA, however, tests daily, and — unusually — continues to do so when players test positive, meaning the full course of the infection can be monitored.

Those infected with the old variant took two days from the detection of the virus to reach peak viral load. It then took six days until the virus was undetectable. Among those with the new variant, the duration was five and eight days respectively.

Dr Jenny Rohn of University College London said that a larger study was needed, but that the findings would explain the strain’s infectiousness. “The study also has serious implications for the current quarantine period of ten days, given that the Kent variant was shown to be at large in the infected person for an average of 13 days,” she said.

Dr Simon Clarke of Reading University said that it hinted at why the variant was more deadly, speculating that the increased time “gives greater opportunity for the immune system to overreact and kill the patient”.

If tourism is so important to the local economy, why doesn’t the “sector” support Tourist Information Centres (TICs) ?

Owl understands that the rise in airbnb has resulted in a catastrophic fall in commissions that used to be earned by TICs in taking b&b bookings.

Daniel Wilkins​ www.exmouthjournal.co.uk

A plea has been made to help fund a new-look website for the town’s tourist information centre which would help attract visitors and tour operators to Budleigh Salterton. 

The TIC’s current website http://www.visitbudleigh.com is not ‘fit for purpose’ according to trustee Helen Warren and a drop in revenue from advertisers is partly due to the current state of the site. 

Estimates for a new web page are in the region of between £2,500 and £3,500 with East Devon AONB (Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty) pledging £1,000 towards the TIC. 

The centre is currently in the process of applying to become a not-for-profit organisation and is appealing for organisations or individuals who might be prepared to help meet the funding shortfall. 

Mrs Warren, who is also chairman of the chamber of commerce, said the TIC, which is currently closed due to the coronavirus restrictions, is completely self-funded and relies on advertising revenue to keep going. 

She added: “It (the current site) is very difficult to navigate and the graphics are poor. 

“Our neighbouring towns of Sidmouth and Exmouth both have modern websites that have been fully funded by their town councils. 

“Sadly, this is not the case for Budleigh and so the centre needs to raise money in order to create a website of equal merit. 

“A modern, dynamic website with good visuals and links will help to promote Budleigh as a destination town worth visiting.  

“It would promote its independent shops and cafes, beach and water sports, walking and cycling routes, wildlife, community events , drama and Internationally acclaimed festivals, which will in turn benefit the local economy and provide community engagement. 

“By promoting sustainable tourism the information centre hopes to be able to persuade sufficient local businesses to think that this is a useful website that will promote their interests and encour-age visitors into the area.” 

The website also needs to be populated with good quality photographs of the area and events that take place throughout the year.  

If anyone can supply some suitable images, they can be credited with their name. 

For more information on supporting the Tourist Information Centre, ring Helen on 01395 442600/07902 128104 or email helenlouisewarren@gmail.com  

 Letter www.theguardian.com 

The recent Handforth parish council meeting (Editorial, 8 February) highlights the ongoing issue of dealing with bullying by councillors. The scrutiny of councils set out in the Localism Act 2011 sadly does not apply to parish councils. The government’s preferred approach is to leave complaints to be remedied through the ballot box but, with elections every four years, this is not a solution. Beleaguered councillors and residents have nowhere to go. Complaints may be made to the monitoring officer of the district or unitary authority, but they have no teeth to deal with bad conduct.

The government is aware of this problem. In 2015, a consultation on extending the remit of the local government ombudsman to larger parish and town councils was held, but the results were never published. In 2016, the draft public service ombudsman bill, in which all parish councils were to be included in the scheme, was drafted but not presented to parliament. Apparently, now it is not fit for purpose. In February 2019, a government briefing paper (No 04827) again highlighted the need for reform, but still nothing has been done.

In the meantime, good councillors are resigning following unacceptable behaviour from fellow councillors, and trying to recruit new ones is next to impossible in such a toxic environment. Parish councils are at the coalface of local government and communities. Only reform can solve this serious failing in local democracy.

Jane Brook

Former parish councillor, Northaw, Hertfordshire

This article in West Country Bylines explains the background to the “goings on” in Honiton Town Council chronicled in the Watch. 

This has led to the foundation of “Honiton Forward” and Owl wonders what impact that might have on the Conservative grip on the Honiton and surrounding Divisions in the May County Council elections.

John Burgess westcountrybylines.co.uk 

If you thought Handforth Council was bad, let me introduce you to Honiton. In the last three years, two successive town clerks and 17 councillors have resigned. Two council employees were more or less driven out of their jobs. £75,000 was wasted on staffing issues, and employment tribunals are pending. A barrage of complaints was sent to the Monitoring Officer, with a hearing due in March. £88,000 was spent on legal fees with no result, so a total of £163,000 of taxpayers’ money has gone down the drain.

Voters were so disgusted by this catalogue of failure that a non-political organisation, Honiton Forward, was formed to bring pressure to bear on the council. It gathered 600 signatures on a petition calling for all councillors to resign, so that an election could be held to form a new council.

The petition was presented in a volatile council meeting last March, attended by 60 members of the public. The vote on the motion was split 50:50 between the reformers on the council and those who had been largely responsible for its disastrous policies. The Mayor, chief instigator of the policies, cast his vote against the petition. All the reformers subsequently resigned, leaving a rump of just seven active members.

Honiton Forward launched a second petition calling on East Devon District Council (EDDC) to undertake a Governance Review of the council. This device is used for forming new councils or where ward boundaries have been changed, making it necessary to hold fresh elections. It has never (yet) been used to remove an existing council. Over 1400 signatures were obtained from the electorate – well over the 10 per cent required. The petition was presented to EDDC in December. We await its outcome.

However, change could come as soon as May, when by-elections will be held to fill the ten vacancies on the council caused by a spate of resignations last year. If Honiton Forward can field ten candidates and win all the seats, they will have a majority to bring about vital reform.

The history of the mess in Honiton goes back to 2012, when the council voted by 12 votes to 3 to build The Beehive, a new community and arts centre. This facility was something the town had desperately needed. The building opened in 2014, providing Honiton with a cinema, theatre, live music venue and a centre for many local organisations. With an annual footfall of 60,000, it has been a great success and was voted Devon Community Centre of The Year for 2017.

You would think the council would be pleased that this major project was going so well, and would do all it could to ensure continuing success, but you would be wrong.

There was a split on two big issues: first, an overspend on the build of almost £100,000 meant the council had to increase its mortgage on the building to plug the gap; and secondly, the council decided to operate The Beehive by leasing most of the building to a charity set up by the council for that purpose.

A faction on the council, led by the current mayor, strongly opposed leasing to a charity as the council would have no control, and this same faction also argued the overspend should be reclaimed from the architects of The Beehive who had overseen the build. Following resignations of six Beehive-supporting councillors, the ‘anti-Beehive’ faction became the dominant force and began disputes against the architects and against the charity, which led to legal action. Conflicts arose with council members and council staff, with accusations of bullying, resignations of councillors and the resignation of a Town Clerk.

So incensed were users of The Beehive that a council meeting attracted over 150 townspeople demanding that the council come to an agreement with the charity out of court.

Several issues with the way councils operate have become painfully apparent over the years of this sorry saga.

Because councils are sovereign bodies, there is no way to hold a council to account save through the election cycle. But if there is no election, what then? In the council elections in East Devon in May 2019, 67 wards out of 84 were uncontested, including the two Honiton Wards. No election meant no change.

Shockingly, there is zero redress for the ratepayers if the council wastes their money. Honiton council has blown £88,000 on two failed legal disputes, and wasted another £75,000 on issues caused by staff suffering work-related stress and having to take sick leave. No councillor has resigned, no councillor has apologised, and no one is held to account for this huge waste of money.

There is a growing recognition that councils do not reflect the diversity of the populations they serve. Six of the seven remaining active councillors in Honiton are retired, three first joined the council 12 years ago and one has been a member for over 30 years. Yet, nine of the ten members who resigned last year were in their 30s, 40s or 50s with full-time jobs, and took their relative youth, energy and ideas with them.

So what is to be done? There needs to be some means of holding a council to account, perhaps through a Council Ombudsman to whom the public can appeal if the council loses the confidence of the electorate. There should also be some external oversight of potential legal disputes to assess the risk to public money.

Most voters have little idea of who their councillors are or what they do. This makes an election where a voter has to choose, say, nine from a list of 16 candidates, simply a lottery; good candidates are not elected whilst poor ones are.

Candidates for council elections should be required to publish their manifestos on the council website, so the public have at least some idea who they are voting for. Once elected, councillors should also be required to report back to the public on a regular basis, say bi-monthly, on their council work, and to justify their decisions. Councillors should also be limited to two or three terms, and steps taken to help councils reflect the diversity of their communities. Honiton will have the added challenge of overcoming the damage done by this unhappy and very public spat.

Local councils have an important role in the local community, but their work is largely unknown and unappreciated. They can provide a stepping-stone into public decision-making for aspiring politicians, and an opportunity for retired people to bring their experience to bear. But they are also open to an abuse of power, and it is time to look at how they operate and find ways to improve transparency, scrutiny and accountability.

The fall of a leader with authoritarian instincts is usually symbolised by toppled statues and looted palaces. For Donald Trump, perhaps inevitably, it was the demolition of a failed casino.

David Smith www.theguardian.com

On Wednesday the former Trump Plaza Hotel and Casino in Atlantic City, New Jersey, was reduced to rubble in 20 seconds by 3,000 sticks of dynamite. It had fallen into such disrepair that chunks of the building had been tumbling to ground……

(see online article for video)

As Simon Jupp MP takes to the media to say that after a year with our freedoms curtailed, there’s light at the end of the tunnel, let us reflect what an expensive shambles this year has been.

Had the Government continued with its policy of turning to consultants, rather than use existing public sector expertise, Owl doubts that there would be anything to celebrate except more failed moonshots and dud silver bullet “game changers”. 

Boris Johnson show his true mettle

Selected extracts from:  https://timeline-of-failure.com/ covering just the first six weeks of the emerging pandemic

 Jan 23 

 Johnson skips first Cobra meeting on the crisis

“The committee – which includes ministers, intelligence chiefs and military generals – gathers at moments of great peril such as terrorist attacks, natural disasters and other threats to the nation and is normally chaired by the prime minister.” (Sunday Times)

January to March: Government fails to check or quarantine airport arrivals.

Fewer than 300 people out of the 18.1 million who entered the UK in the three months prior to the coronavirus lockdown were formally quarantined. The number of potentially infected individuals entering the UK from coronavirus-affected countries in that period is thought to be in the tens of thousands. (Guardian)

Jan 29 

Johnson misses second Cobra meeting on the virus

(Spectator)

Feb 5

Johnson misses third Cobra virus meeting
(Spectator)

Feb 11 

Government ignores recommendation to close pubs and restaurants to stop the spread of the virus

“Stopping all leisure activities, including public gatherings such as at bars and restaurants, would be expected to have a much larger effect on the population-level spread of the epidemic,” a report from government scientists states. The findings will be presented the next day at a Cobra meeting which Boris Johnson will fail to attend. (Government website)

As the danger grows, Johnson urges Britons to remain “confident and calm”
(ITV News)

Feb 12 

Johnson skips fourth Cobra meeting

A report from government scientists is presented, suggesting closing bars and restaurants could have a significant impact in stopping the spread of the virus. The Prime Minister is yet to attend a single meeting of the coronavirus emergency response committee. (Spectator)

MI5 implements pandemic plan

Sir Andrew Parker, then MI5 chief, enacts the Security Service’s pandemic plan. Parker is believed to have taken the decision immediately after hearing the grim Covid-19 prognosis from government scientists at a February Cobra meeting. (The Times)

Feb 14  

PM retreats for a ‘working holiday’

The PM decamps for a fortnight to Chevening, Kent. Despite the UK raising the official threat level to ‘moderate’ and NHS England declaring a Level 4 Critical Incident at the end of January, aides are told to keep Johnson’s briefing notes short. It will later emerge that much of Johnson’s time was spent reaching a divorce settlement, to pave the way for the announcement that he and his new partner are now engaged and expecting a baby. (Sunday Times)

 Feb 18 

Johnson skips fifth coronavirus Cobra meeting (Spectator)

Mid February: “There was a real sense that he didn’t do urgent crisis planning”

Looking back at this time, a Senior Downing St adviser will later say: “There’s no way you’re at war if your PM isn’t there. And what you learn about Boris was he didn’t chair any meetings. He liked his country breaks. He didn’t work weekends. There was a real sense that he didn’t do urgent crisis planning. It was… like people feared he would be.” (Sunday Times)

Feb 24 

Johnson emerges from his ‘working holiday’ and returns to Downing Street (Mirror)

Feb 26 

Closing schools could help stop spread of virus, government scientists advise

A paper from government scientists advises that a combination of measures including school closures, home isolation and voluntary household quarantine could substantially reduce the peak of the virus. (Government website)

“Herd immunity, protect the economy, and if that means some pensioners die, too bad”

A summary of how Dominic Cummings described the Government’s strategy, according to a witness who later spoke to the Sunday Times. He denies it. (Sunday Times)

Feb 29 

First recorded transmission of the disease on UK soil (Times)

NHS bosses warn of PPE shortage and “nightmare”

In 2019, the Government’s own National Security Risk Assessment warned of the severe risk from a coronavirus pandemic. The Government failed to heed even basic recommended preparations. Instead, Brexit preparations took priority over training key workers for a pandemic, and emergency PPE stockpiles severely dwindled or went out of date following years of austerity cuts. (Sunday Times)

Johnson retreats to Chequers to announce engagement and fiancé’s pregnancy
(Telegraph)

Johnson says the virus is likely to “spread a bit more” in the UK
(Reuters)

March 2

Government’s own scientists say more than half a million Britons could die if virus is left unrestrained (Reuters)

PM finally attends a coronavirus Cobra meeting

Chairing his first Cobra meeting about the disease, the PM is confronted with estimates of half a million deaths in the UK. Despite these chilling warnings from its own pandemic modelling panel, the Government declines another opportunity to join EU countries jointly buying essential PPE, including overalls, gloves and face masks. (Sky News)

Johnson tells the country we are “very, very well-prepared”

As chronic PPE shortages and other failures will soon reveal, Britain is not in fact prepared. (Sky News)

March 3

The total number of coronavirus cases now recorded in mainland China reaches 80,026, with 2,943 deaths (Guardian)

March 4 

Government stops providing daily updates on Covid-19 cases

Following a 70% spike in coronavirus cases in the UK, the Government stops providing daily updates on cases – instead moving to weekly updates. Ministers will later U-turn amid accusations it is withholding vital information. (Guardian)

Greece closes its schools, following in the paths of Iran and Italy

March 5

Larger public gatherings at Greek theatres, cinemas, museums and sports events have been cancelled in three western regions of the country. The Greeks will later be lauded for successfully suppressing the virus through early action. (Guardian)

March 7 

The Prime Minister joins 82,000 at Six Nations rugby match

In the absence of clear government direction many major organisations, businesses and sporting bodies have cancelled events or implemented urgent action plans. Meanwhile Boris Johnson takes his pregnant fiancé to Twickenham. (Express)

March 9 

France bans large events and begins stricter distancing measures (New York Times)

Ireland cancels St Patrick’s Day parades (BBC News)

Government ignores advice to abandon ‘mitigation’ approach and lockdown

A paper prepared for a scientific committee advising the government’s coronavirus strategy calls in stark terms for a lockdown: a full two weeks before lockdown is implemented. (Channel 4 News)

“No rationale” for cancelling sporting events, says UK Government (BBC News)

10 – 13 March: Cheltenham Festival goes ahead with more than a quarter of a million people attending

The festival organisers cite Johnson’s attendance at the rugby three days earlier as part of their rationale for going ahead. Data will later reveal a spike in cases in the region after the event. (Guardian)

March 11 

WHO declares global pandemic
Italy reaches 827 deaths, with over 12,000 confirmed cases. (BBC News)

Madrid becomes the centre of Spain’s coronavirus crisis, closing schools
With over 1,600 cases confirmed, Madrid’s regional government announces the closure of all nurseries, schools, universities and cultural institutions. (Guardian)

Johnson allows 3,000 Atletico Madrid fans to fly to Liverpool

UK government allows the Champions League match between Liverpool and Atletico Madrid to go ahead, seeing 3,000 football fans travel from Madrid to Merseyside. 52,000 people attend the match. An investigation will later be launched into a regional spike in cases. (Guardian)

March 12

Government briefs ITV’s Robert Peston that herd immunity is the strategy

Following a briefing from a Government source Peston writes: “The strategy of the British government… is to allow the virus to pass through the entire population so that we acquire herd immunity.” (ITV News)

Mass testing and contact tracing stopped

UK Government sharply departs from the course of action adopted by Germany and South Korea. At this point the UK has seen 10 deaths and 590 confirmed cases. “If we hadn’t stopped it on 12 March, our epidemic would have been much less,” professor of global health Anthony Costello will later say. According to the Royal Society of Medicine’s Gabriel Scally: “Abandoning testing gave the virus the green light to spread uncontrollably.” (Bloomberg)

UK Government’s plan is projected to kill 250k people

The Government is presented with “shattering” findings from Imperial College modelling. Untrammelled, the virus could kill half a million people. The Government’s herd immunity plan is projected to kill a quarter of a million. It is critical that action is taken urgently to suppress the virus. Instead it will be a further 11 days before Johnson introduces a lockdown. (Sunday Times)

Imposing a national lockdown one week earlier would have saved 21,000 lives during the first wave of Covid-19, new analysis has found, confirming that the Government’s dithering had deadly consequences. 

Sadly this dithering was to be repeated – Owl

Letters www.theguardian.com

I am worried that the Guardian has not understood the significant danger that the government’s white paper for NHS reform poses to the health service (Matt Hancock lays out plan for reorganisation of NHS in England; NHS and social care blueprint; Editorial, 11 February). The proposals will facilitate – by the removal of “irksome bureaucracy” – the direct awards of contracts without tender. Since the market model with purchaser-provider split is to remain, what is effectively going to happen is an unregulated market, with a reduction in the transparency and accountability of the contracting process.

In addition, there are plans for providers, potentially private for-profit, to be on the boards of the new integrated care systems (ICS) and to play a significant role in needs assessments, despite their obvious conflicts of interest. The role of councils is diminished, and there is still no duty on the government to provide key services throughout England and to everybody. Each of the 42 ICS areas can decide their own priorities, heavily guided by providers and distanced from local community input.

It is vital that opposition to this white paper builds rapidly, as negative impacts are concealed by the easily approved concept of “integrated care”. The Guardian needs to help, and the opposition needs to do more than complain about the timing.

Dr Pamela Martin

London

• Jeremy Hunt is right that “NHS restructuring rarely works out as intended” (An NHS shakeup could be revolutionary – but only if staffing levels are boosted too, 16 February), but wrong if he sees integration with the NHS as a solution to the social care crisis – a crisis created by his party.

The English local authority in which I worked in the 1990s had more than 30 care homes for elderly people, a thousand home carers and a wide network of day centres. Staff had good terms and conditions, were well-trained and morale was high. There was fair means-testing for clients, and nearly all assessed need was met. We were ready to meet the challenge of an increasing elderly population. Integration with the health service was neither wanted nor needed. We talked to colleagues from housing authorities and the voluntary sector – informally on an almost daily basis, as well as in monthly joint planning meetings. It was a system that worked well, until the Conservative party dogma of market forces, privatisation and financial cuts destroyed it.

For social care to be incorporated into the NHS would create an overcentralised, bureaucratic service, subject to constant reorganisation and the vagaries of changing ministers. Social care should once again become a service, rather than a business, managed by local councils and assured of the necessary funds.

Mel Wood

Dublin

• Your editorial suggests that the largest example of the fragmentation of the health and care system is “the relative neglect of care homes in relation to hospitals”. It isn’t. It is the fact that we have an almost wholly socialised state healthcare system operating alongside almost wholly privatised social care provision. Until social care is removed from the market, any notion of integrating it with the NHS is utterly meaningless.

David Hinchliffe

Former Labour MP and chair of the Commons health committee

• Jeremy Hunt tells us that our NHS is facing a big challenge from workforce shortages. Could this have anything to do with frozen NHS wages, the removal of nurse training bursaries and the imposition of inferior contracts on junior doctors – all under his ministerial watch?

Steve Smart

Malvern, Worcestershire

Ministers should cut VAT on repairs for electrical goods and green home improvements, to help people reduce greenhouse gas emissions in their everyday lives, an influential committee of MPs has urged.

Fiona Harvey www.theguardian.com

Funding for green home grants to install insulation and low-carbon heating, should also be restored to kickstart a “green recovery” in the UK, said the environmental audit committee in a report on how to “grow back better” from the coronavirus crisis.

Philip Dunne, chairman of the committee, said ministers must do more to generate a green recovery. “The jury is still out [on whether the government will manage a green recovery],” he said. “Last spring was about keeping the UK economy in aspic, with emergency measures and funding. Now, there is more time to put together measures for the next phase. We need to see that aligned with the objectives of net zero emissions, and that remains to be seen.”

He called for the chancellor to lay out clear plans in next month’s budget to spur low-carbon growth in the runup to the vital UN climate talks, called Cop26, in Glasgow this November. “The eyes of the world will be on us for Cop26,” he said. “Rather than just preaching to other countries, we need to be seen to be taking action.”

In its report “Growing back better: putting nature and net zero at the heart of the economic recovery”, published on Wednesday, the committee said: “We recommend that the chancellor of the exchequer bring forward proposals to reduce the rate of VAT on repair services and products containing reused or recycled materials to increase the circularity and resilience of the UK economy. The government should also reduce VAT on green home upgrades to incentivise more people to install low-carbon technologies and improve the energy efficiency of new homes.”

Cuts to VAT on green goods have long been advocated by green campaigners, but VAT exemptions were limited under EU rules. Since Brexit, the UK can set all of its own VAT rates, but the government has made little indication it intends to use this to meet its net zero emissions target.

In October 2019, the government increased the VAT rate from 5% to 20% on installations of a range of low-carbon goods including many solar panel installations, especially those with batteries, as well as domestic wind turbine systems, heat pumps and insulation materials. The higher rate is charged where the cost of materials exceeds 60% of the installation cost, with exemptions for some cases of social need, such as care homes.

The committee’s recommendation is meant to correct the disparity between the zero-VAT rate on new construction and the full rate charged on retrofitting a property. However, the committee stopped short of recommending an end to VAT on all green goods, from solar panels to bicycles, called for by some campaigners.

Chris Hewett, chief executive of Solar Energy UK, a trade association, said: “Scrapping VAT for low-carbon technologies such as solar and batteries is a simple and effective way to make green home improvements more affordable for everyone. It would boost uptake, create new jobs and drive growth in Britain’s retrofitting market, which is a vital pillar in the UK’s efforts to decarbonise housing stock.”

Jenny Holland of the UK Green Building Council, said: “For too long, our VAT system has incentivised new-build over retrofit and refurbishment. Rewarding the use of recycled and reused materials will also tackle the problem that producing virgin materials is currently often cheaper than recycling or reusing products.”

Dunne said an overhaul of the green homes grant – a subsidy for retrofitting houses with insulation and low-carbon heating – was also a matter of urgency. The green homes grant was announced last summer, but the scheme has been dogged by problems, as the Guardian has revealed, and only about 5% of the £1.5bn allocated for the period to March 2021 has yet been spent. Last week, the government indicated that the unspent money would not be rolled over into the extension of the scheme for this year, prompting outrage.

Dunne called for the unspent cash to be made available in this parliament, so that at least 600,000 homes could be retrofitted to a low-carbon standard under the scheme.

Nina Skorupska, chief executive of the Association for Renewable Energy and Clean Technology, said: “The sudden removal of funding for the green homes grant would not only severely impact consumers and businesses in the short term, but would also damage confidence in future announcements. The problem with the scheme hasn’t been a lack of demand, but a combination of Covid and an administrative system which has been beset with problems.”

The committee also called for the government to begin work on a carbon tax, which would create incentives for people to choose low-carbon alternatives, and carbon border adjustments – tariffs or other barriers or penalties to the import of goods that have been manufactured with high carbon emissions overseas. The MPs also said that the Bank of England should require companies seeking bailouts to disclose their climate-related risk, and called for the Bank to align its corporate investments with the Paris agreement, but stopped short of calling for stringent green conditions to be attached to loans.

Caroline Lucas, the Green party MP, said: “The key message in this report is that investment in a green economy must be front-loaded. The government can’t keep putting off the critical policies and actions in the Micawber-like hope that something will just turn up. We need to see the investment now, and it must be in line with the temperature goals of the Paris agreement, and protect and restore nature. The forthcoming budget will be a key test of whether ministers intend to close the delivery gap between their fine words and real action.”

A government spokesperson said: “We’re committed to building back better and greener from the pandemic. We continue to bring forward bold measures to cut emissions, with plans to invest £9bn in improving the energy efficiency of buildings forming part of our wider commitment to end our contribution to climate change by 2050.”

“Even after a backbench rebellion and a rethink of the algorithm used to calculate housing targets, the housing secretary still wants to impose a controversial American system of zoning along with a presumption in favour of development.” 

This needs to be read in conjunction with the answers you make to the EDDC Local Plan consultation closing date 15 March. – Owl

Ros Coward

It would be easy to imagine the English countryside is a lovely place. Everyone has been talking about discovering the wonder of nature during lockdown and there are constant reports of droves moving out of towns and cities for more pastoral locations.

In many ways, however, the opposite is true. Look around and you’ll find local actions groups protesting, petitioning and even praying to save precious stretches of countryside from destruction. If you are one of the escapees from town, I’d check your new view isn’t earmarked for development.

We have already seen an orgy of eco-vandalism as a result of the HS2 rail project: heartbreaking images of wrecked nature reserves, magnificent old trees felled and ancient hedges bulldozed. But HS2 is only one in a vast catalogue of destructive developments. In Greater Manchester, for example, Friends of Carrington Moss are fighting a massive housing project planned on green belt that is also precious peatland. Meanwhile there are countrywide protests against the government’s road building spree. The Wensum link in Norfolk; the Stonehenge tunnel; the Lower Thames Crossing; and major roads in sensitive open countryside in Lancashire, to name but a few.

Kent is particularly badly hit – not just by Brexit lorry parks. Housing developments are everywhere, Graveney marshes have been designated for industrialisation, and now another ecologically important marsh at Swanscombe is targeted for a vast theme park billed as “the UK’s answer to Disney World”.

Protest groups fighting these developments are usually made up of inexperienced, previously apolitical, locals. Out of necessity they fight separate local campaigns. But the current level of destructive development is a nationwide problem requiring a nationwide response. Taken together, these developments are changing the character of the countryside towards urban sprawl. They are inflicting irreversible damage on wildlife.

What’s enabling this destruction is the national planning system, which ought to protect local communities, but now disempowers them. Planning has been hijacked by two doctrines. One is that pouring concrete will get us out of recession, the other that there’s a general housing crisis rather than an affordability crisis. Local challenges to these views are steamrollered as merely nimbyism.

Since the coalition government introduced the national planning policy framework in 2012 the planning system has increasingly favoured developers. That legislation insisted councils set housing targets but they lacked land to meet those numbers. Local authorities were forced to redefine green-belt areas as “available for development”. It was the beginning of a land grab. The Campaign to Protect Rural England states (in 2018’s The State of the Green Belt report) that since 2013 “huge amounts of greenfield land designated as green belt has been released or included in councils’ local plans”.

Robert Jenrick’s so-called planning “reforms” now go a lot further. Even after a backbench rebellion and a rethink of the algorithm used to calculate housing targets, the housing secretary still wants to impose a controversial American system of zoning along with a presumption in favour of development. The proposals are scarily anti-democratic. Housing targets will be imposed by central government and local input sidelined. Yet the housing developments championed by Jenrick do nothing to increase the number of affordable homes. Developers don’t want to build cheap starter homes. They prefer five-bedroom, low-density housing – hence the hunger for greenfield sites, especially those near beauty spots, which are massively more profitable. Meanwhile developers shun available brownfield sites that CPRE estimates could support building 1m new homes.

The National Infrastructure Commission’s assault on local democracy is even more blatant. The NIC is truly a wrecking ball to the countryside. Alongside HS2, think Minsmere, the RSPB’s jewel in the crown, threatened by Sizewell C, or the proposal for a million houses on “the Oxford-Cambridge arc”, most of which would be on green belt. And let’s not forget Guston lorry park, dumped on the unsuspecting residents of Dover. Local opposition is virtually irrelevant in NIC hearings. I know this first-hand having attended one such inquiry where local experts were openly mocked by some of the developers present. It felt like a sham of democracy.

Boris Johnson sometimes claims to care about biodiversity and speaks of supporting nature’s recovery and protecting green belts, digressing once about families picnicking in “wild belts” amid flourishing flora and fauna. But he also loves putting on hard hats for photo ops, promoting “build, build, build” and saying he won’t let “newt counters” get in his way. If “green” Johnson was the real thing, he would insist Robert Jenrick consider planning alongside environmental ambitions. And he would push through the much delayed environment bill, which could provide a framework for joined-up thinking on the environment. Instead he presides over a tsunami of destruction.

There are glimmers of a national fightback. The nationally coordinated Transport Action Network has just challenged the transport secretary, Grant Shapps, for rejecting environmental impact assessment in his road building policy. And CPRE is coordinating other green groups to put forward a democratic, ecologically aware vision of what planning could do in a post-pandemic world. The local groups waging their lonely battles need this national cooperation if the fight against the Tories’ eco-vandalism is to succeed – we need it before it is too late.

• Ros Coward is professor emerita of journalism at Roehampton University

Simon Jupp Conservative, East Devon

To ask the Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government, what plans he has to amend the Planning Act 2008 to allow Town and Parish Councils to support emergency covid-19 community groups with funding that has been received through the Community Infrastructure Levy.

• Tweet Share
• Hansard source
• (Citation: HC Deb, 16 February 2021, cW)

Eddie Hughes Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Housing, Communities and Local Government)

The Neighbourhood Share of the Community Infrastructure Levy ensures that up to 25 per cent of levy revenue is passed to a parish council in the area that development occurred, and provides considerable flexibility over the use of the funding. Parish councils can use the levy to fund anything concerned with addressing the potential demands that development places on their area. This includes provision which may respond to the COVID-19 pandemic, such as medical infrastructure.

More generally, the Secretary of State has written to principal authorities asking them to work closely with parish councils in order to ensure that the funding support provided to principal authorities has the maximum effect where it is most needed. We continue to encourage parish and town councils to work with their principal authority where they are delivering vital services that have been affected by COVID-19.

Does this answer the above question?

www.markpack.org.uk 

The BBC reports:

A woman has been given a suspended sentence for forging a council candidate’s election nomination papers.

Amanda Wycherley added eight people’s names without their knowledge and forged their signatures so Conservative Jonathan Liam Jones could stand in a Neath Port Talbot council by-election…

Mr Jones finished fourth in the May 2019 Resolven by-election, securing 34 votes in a ballot won by independent candidate Dean Lewis.

Wycherley later pleaded guilty to offences under Section 65 of the Representation of the People Act 1983 and was sentenced to six months’ imprisonment, suspended for 12 months.

She was also ordered to undertake rehabilitation, 180 hours of unpaid community work as well as paying £2,366.40 in costs.

Nearly two years from the election the court case, note. Another example of how slowly electoral justice often moves.

The first-of-its-kind study has been approved by the UK’s clinical trials ethics body.

ITV News www.itv.com 

The world’s first study which will deliberately expose volunteers to coronavirus to establish the smallest amount of virus needed to cause infection will take place in the UK.

Starting in the next few weeks, the human challenge trial will involve up to 90 carefully selected, healthy adult volunteers being deliberately exposed to Covid-19 in a safe and controlled environment.

The first-of-its-kind study has been approved by the UK’s clinical trials ethics body.

It will give doctors a greater understanding of Covid-19 and help support the pandemic response by aiding vaccine and treatment development.

Because the safety of volunteers is paramount, this virus characterisation study will initially use the version of the virus that has been circulating in the UK since March 2020.

This variant has been shown to be of low risk in young healthy adults.

Medics and scientists will closely monitor the effect of the virus on volunteers and will be on hand to look after them 24 hours a day.

The researchers are working closely with the Royal Free Hospital and the North Central London (NCL) Adult Critical Care Network to ensure the study will not affect the NHS’s ability to care for patients during the pandemic.

The study will not begin without their go-ahead, the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy (Beis) has announced.

Interim chairman of the Vaccines Taskforce, Clive Dix, said: “We have secured a number of safe and effective vaccines for the UK, but it is essential that we continue to develop new vaccines and treatments for Covid-19.

“We expect these studies to offer unique insights into how the virus works and help us understand which promising vaccines offer the best chance of preventing the infection.”

After the initial study has taken place, vaccine candidates proven to be safe in clinical trials could be given to small numbers of volunteers who are then exposed to coronavirus.

This will help identify the most effective vaccines and accelerate their development.

People aged between 18 and 30 years old, who are at the lowest risk of complications resulting from coronavirus, are being encouraged to volunteer for this vital study.

Volunteers will be compensated for the time they spend in the study.

They will receive around £4,500 to participate in the study which will involve some 17 days of quarantine and follow-ups over 12 months.

Professor Sir Terence Stephenson, chairman of the Health Research Authority (HRA), said: “People are rewarded for being in those studies, or compensated.

“The sum is about £4,500 but that covers the initial stay and follow-up.”

He added: “The initial stay involves quite an imposition on a young person – 17 days in quarantine and you cannot be visited by any member of your family or friend or relative.

“For the first £1,500 for 17 days we’ve got something like £88 a day, which I don’t think anyone would sense was a ridiculous coercion or inducement.”

In the past, human challenge studies have played important roles in accelerating the development of treatments for diseases including malaria, typhoid, cholera, norovirus and flu.

The trials have also helped researchers establish which possible vaccine is most likely to succeed in phase three clinical trials that would follow, usually involving thousands of volunteers.

This study, backed by a £33.6 million UK Government investment, will also help doctors understand how the immune system reacts to coronavirus and identify factors that influence how the virus is transmitted.

This includes how a person who is infected with Covid-19 virus transmits infectious virus particles into the environment.

The human challenge study is being delivered by a partnership between the Government’s Vaccines Taskforce, Imperial College London, the Royal Free London NHS Foundation Trust and the industry-leading clinical company hVIVO, which has pioneered viral human challenge models.

The Royal Free Hospital’s specialist and secure clinical research facilities in London are specifically designed to contain the virus.

Highly trained medics and scientists will be on hand to carefully examine how the virus behaves in the body and to ensure the safety of volunteers.

The virus being used in the characterisation study has been produced by a team at Great Ormond Street Hospital for Children NHS Foundation Trust in London, in collaboration with hVIVO with support from virologists at Imperial College London.

The Health Research Authority (HRA) and the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) are the UK’s regulators responsible for providing ethics and regulatory approval, respectively for all human clinical trials.

Research Ethics Committees (RECs) are formed by the HRA as part of the approval process.

A specially-appointed independent REC has approved the study, and after reviewing the protocol, the MHRA concluded the virus characterisation study did not require its approval because the study does not involve an investigational medicinal product.

---

“Three Homes” Jenrick welcomes a report proposing suburban home-owners vote to demolish their street and rebuild in the Georgian style.

Could Exmouth become the new Sidmouth? – Owl

By Tony Diver, Political Correspondent www.telegraph.co.uk 

Homeowners in streets of bungalows or detached houses should be allowed to vote to turn their roads into Georgian-style terraces, a new report has argued.

The paper, from the Policy Exchange think tank, calls for local planning decisions to be devolved to individual streets, allowing residents to redesign their homes alongside their neighbours.

It argues that to solve the housing crisis the Government should increase housing density by allowing local people to choose to replace sparsely-built homes with terraced properties, which could be built in popular Victorian or Georgian styles.

The report’s authors say the democratic “street plan” proposal would also increase the value of residents’ homes.

Street plans would also allow local residents to agree on parking, contributions to local authorities and building heights, while the think tank said increased building work would provide a boost to the economy as the coronavirus pandemic comes to an end.

New planning rules for the street could be imposed if more than 60 per cent of residents voted for them, the think tank suggested.

The report’s findings were cautiously welcomed by Robert Jenrick, the Housing Secretary, who said the Government “supports enabling communities to set their own rules for what developments in their area should look like” and “ensuring that they reflect and enhance their surroundings and preserve our cherished local heritage”.

The Government’s own White Paper for planning reform raised the prospect of “very small areas” like individual streets having their own planning rules.

Calculations suggest that the average homeowner who took up the scheme and remodelled their street could make hundreds of thousands of pounds, because the new properties would be more valuable.

Today’s report says the areas most likely to increase the value of homes with such a scheme are London suburbs, including Barnet, Harrow, Croydon and Bromley.

St Albans and Brighton and Hove could also benefit from the plans, Policy Exchange said.

Christopher Boyle, Chairman of the Georgian Group, a charity promoting Georgian architecture, said: “This is an excellent proposal, which could make an immense contribution to resolving the housing shortage. 

“When land values rose during the Georgian era, they built up, bequeathing us many of our most prized streets. 

“This powerful and sophisticated proposal offers a way of doing this again, letting us create beautiful streets that we treasure for centuries.”

Five valued East Devon community buildings will benefit from more than £17,500 of funding from East Devon District Council.

Tim Dixon www.midweekherald.co.uk

They are the latest projects to win cash from the authority’s Community Buildings Fund.

Beer Albion Football Club will receive £3,500 to help pay for a viewing area for sports activities, community events and for private hire events.

Colyford Memorial Hall was granted £4,611 to help replace its floor, which is beyond further repair.

Exton Village Hall will receive £2,567 to help provide its sound system with a hearing loop, which users of the hall have asked for.

Newton Poppleford Pavilion was granted £2,000 to pay towards replacing windows, doors and other woodwork, some of which is rotten. This project will help make the hall more energy efficient and secure.

West Hill Royal British Legion Hall will receive £5,000 to help create a new kitchen. This will enable the Legion, groups that meet there regularly and other hirers to prepare and cook food on the premises, which isn’t currently possible.

The Community Building Fund has been running for more than 14 years. It supports village halls, community buildings and community shops by offering grants of anything up to £5,000.

The scheme’s purpose is to help rural community buildings and community shops all around East Devon with funding for projects such as new or improved toilet facilities, kitchen facilities, roof repairs, heating and new door fixtures.

The closing date for the next raft of applications is 9am on Monday, March 15.

The council explained that it had a maximum of £2,187 left to give out. Councillor Jack Rowland, East Devon District Council chair of the community grants panel, said: “On behalf of the East Devon District Council Community Grants Panel, we were pleased to support these applications as they all demonstrated exactly the reasons why these grants were made available.

“In these particularly difficult times it is vitally important that facilities such as these are maintained and improved in readiness for the time when the communities can make full use of them again.”

Plans for up to 71 homes on the edge of Exeter – half of which will be affordable – have been approved.

Daniel Clark, local democracy reporter www.radioexe.co.uk 

And a toucan crossing too!

East Devon District Council’s planning committee has unanimously backed the Johnstone Land (South West) Ltd scheme for land north of Moonhill Copse in West Clyst.

Their outline application was recommended for approval, despite being a departure from the Local Plan, as officers said the housing development was in a highly sustainable area and the 50 per cent affordable housing outweighed any harm caused.

The plans were due to be discussed last Wednesday but were deferred following a Devon County Council request for a contribution of £3,250 from the developer to alleviate some of the traffic issues the development could cause.

Councillors on Monday morning heard the developer had agreed. The money will first go towards putting a toucan crossing on the B3181.

Cllr Philip Skinner proposed that the scheme be approved, but asked if there was any way in which the crossing could come forward as quickly as possible.

Cllr Steve Gazzard added: “This seems a well thought out application,” while Cllr Olly Davey added: “It makes a lot of sense to bring the land into use and this seems a well-designed plan in a sustainable location with good provision for cycling and walking.”

Cllr Geoff Pook added: “So often we see applications on a larger scale skinning down the affordable housing to single digits, so this developer has shown a responsible way to deliver it and address all the concerns. This is a good and responsible development.”

Recommending approval, Chris Rose, East Devon District Council’s development manager, said: “The site has very good public transport links to the city of Exeter and further afield settlements including train and bus connection to the rest of the country. A recently constructed primary school lies within easy walking distance of the site and a convenience shop has recently opened on the opposite side of the B3181.

“These are significant considerations when considering the location of development to seek to minimise the use of the private motor vehicle and weigh significantly in favour on the proposed development. On the basis that houses have been consented surrounding the site having been found to be sustainably located, the same conclusion should be reached in relation to this site.

“The benefits of the proposal through providing housing development in a highly sustainable area with good linkages and nearby infrastructure to support daily living without reliance on the private motor vehicle, and provision of a high proportion of affordable housing to address the needs of the district, are considered to outweigh any harm caused by the proposal and outweighs the fact that the proposal represents a departure from local plan policy.”

Contact tracing alone has a marginal impact on Covid transmission, curbing the spread of the disease by just 2% to 5%, official estimates show.

Natalie Grover www.theguardian.com 

The figures come after Dido Harding, who heads the government’s £22bn test-and-trace programme in England, suggested it was set to substantially reduce the spread of coronavirus this spring.

Newly published data behind that assertion shows the vast majority of the impact of test and trace is down to people self-isolating. An army of contact tracers has been hired to track down close contacts of those who test positive for Covid, and ask them to self-isolate. The contact tracers also remind people of the need to quarantine after a positive test.

Earlier this month, Harding told MPs that thanks to test and trace, the R (reproduction) number for the virus was expected to fall by between 0.6 and 0.8 at the end of March, an improvement on a drop of between 0.3 and 0.6 achieved in October. Greg Clark, the chair of the science and technology committee, pressed Harding for the source of the claim.

Published last week, the official report behind the claim said a combination of testing, tracing and self-isolation in an environment similar to last October’s resulted in an R reduction of 18% to 33% when compared with a scenario involving only social distancing restrictions and no self-isolation. This corresponded to a reduction in the R number of 0.3 to 0.6.

Contact tracing alone reduced the R number by just 2% to 5%, the modellers estimated in the report, with testing and self-isolation accounting for the remaining 16% to 28%. “Hence, the majority of transmission reduction is due to isolation on symptoms,” it said.

If all test and trace targets were met – and circumstances otherwise were similar to those in October – the model estimates that transmission would reduce by 33% to 42%, including a contact-tracing impact of 7% to 10%. That translates to an R reduction of 0.5 to 0.8, Harding wrote in a letter to Clark.

Prof Sir David Spiegelhalter, chair of the Winton Centre for Risk and Evidence Communication at the University of Cambridge, noted on Tuesday that the report stresses the R reduction estimate is in comparison to a scenario with only social distancing restrictions and no self-isolation.

However, advice to self-isolate upon developing symptoms was already in place before NHS Test and Trace was set up in May, together with some testing capacity.

Spiegelhalter told the Guardian: “It’s unfortunate but understandable that they felt unable to estimate the influence of TTI [test, trace and isolate] over and above other strategies to encourage self-isolation.”

The R number reflects how many people an infected person can spread the disease to – and it must be below 1 for the epidemic to wane. As of Friday, scientists estimate the UK-wide R number is between 0.7 to 0.9.

Harding’s projection of a 0.6 to 0.8 reduction by the end of March is optimistic, suggested Prof Rowland Kao, who studies infectious disease dynamics at the University of Edinburgh.

“The potential for test and trace to work effectively is there – a large proportion of transmission is believed to occur before people are symptomatic, so if you can get people to isolate, thereby reducing contact, then it can eliminate this element of the spread – and 0.6 to 0.8 impact on R is not necessarily out of line,” Kao said. “So, the potential is there but unless people self-isolate … then all the test and trace isn’t going to help.”

Dr Kit Yates, a senior lecturer in the department of mathematical sciences at the University of Bath, indicated the considerable resources set aside for NHS Test and Trace could be put to better use by focusing on isolation.

“One can’t help thinking that some of the £22bn – the figure widely quoted as having been earmarked for the operation thus far – might be better spent on providing support for isolation, which is likely to have a significant impact reducing transmission,” said Yates.

About 20,000 people a day who are contacted by test and trace are not fully isolating, Harding has said. The estimate suggests 20% to 40% of people cannot or do not comply with the rules. Research suggests a majority of people who apply for a one-off £500 payment for isolation are rejected.

Morten Morland Times cartoon: February 16

‘Unsustainable’ proposals for eight new homes in Poltimore have been turned down by East Devon planning chiefs. 

Daniel Clark eastdevonnews.co.uk

Councillors made the decision ‘with sadness’ after the scheme for land west of Kilmore House  – which featured six ‘affordable’ dwellings – was considered by the authority on Monday (February 15).

Applicant Martin Reeves told the committee that the project was about keeping communities together in small village areas.

He added: “This is a must and, if you take the youth away, the village will die, as the properties are way too expensive for 99 per cent of people.

“People have a right to live in the village they have grown up in.

“There are schools in walking distance, a village shop, hall, pub, and the church, and we will have a play park in the development.

“We are trying to build a community and not dissect one. It is vital more than ever to keep the community together so the community can thrive.”

But recommending refusal, East Devon District Council (EDDC) development manager Chris Rose cited five reasons why the application should be turned down.

The mooted development site on land west of Kilmore House in Poltimore. Image shown to East Devon District Council’s Planning Committee

He said: “While the proposal would address the housing need numbers for affordable housing in this immediate locality… it remains the case that insufficient justification has been provided to satisfy the policy requirements in terms of unit types and location.

“The site lies in an unsustainable location with insufficient services and facilities to meet the needs of potential occupiers resulting in an unsustainable form of development reliant on private modes of transport, and the proposed development, by virtue of the number and scale of dwellings, would introduce a form of development which would present a harsh urban form within the open countryside.

“The heritage impact of the proposed development on the adjacent Grade II listed building Poltimore House is not considered to be acceptable and it is not considered that any benefits of the proposed development would be sufficient to outweigh this harm.

“In addition, it has not been demonstrated how the development would achieve the valley park specific objectives for people and wildlife for the Clyst Valley Regional Park, or that there would be no adverse effect on the County Wildlife Site within which the site is located.”

Councillor Philip Skinner said: “I don’t want to be coming here and not supporting applications for affordable housing, but there is no support from officers, the parish council, and no support from the ward member.

“So on that basis, and the many reasons why we shouldn’t support, I have to move for refusal and the recommendation of officers.“

Cllr Olly Davey added: “There is just not enough support from officers for this one.

“It is in the Clyst Valley Regional Park, it’s too close to Poltimore House, and there are just too many objections, as sad as I am to refuse this.”

EDDC’s Planning Committee voted by nine to none, with three abstentions, to refuse the application.