An agreement has been reached by non-Labour councillors to run Durham County Council for the first time in a century.

BBC News www.bbc.co.uk 

The alliance, made up of Conservatives, Liberal Democrats, independents and a Green, plans to take over at the council’s annual meeting on Wednesday.

Labour was the largest party following the local elections, with 53 of 126 councillors, but lost overall control.

It said it was disappointed to have been excluded from alliance talks.

However, it added that it remained committed to working with other parties.

Leadership of the council will rotate between the partnership, with cabinet positions shared out.

‘Painful lesson’

Liberal Democrat Amanda Hopgood is due to take charge initially.

A partnership spokesperson said: “We recognise that, subject to a successful annual meeting, this will be a historic moment for Durham County Council.

“Not only will the council be run by a non-Labour administration for the first time, it will also have its first ever female leader.

“In building to this moment, the partners have demonstrated what can be achieved by focusing on the big picture and the best outcome for communities across the county.”

Councillor Carl Marshall, leader of Durham Labour Group, said: “Labour’s first and only priority at this moment in time is to play our part in creating a council that delivers for the people and businesses.

“To be excluded from talks between other political groups is not only disappointing, but it threatens to destabilise the significant progress we have made in laying the groundwork for 30,000 new jobs across Durham.

“Labour heard what people had to say in the May elections. It was a painful lesson, but one we accept and learn from.”

East Devon District Council has re-elected the man ‘who has steered them through choppy waters’ back to his role as leader.

Daniel Clark www.devonlive.com

Cllr Paul Arnott, from the East Devon Alliance, who first took on the role in May 2020, was once again voted in to the position at Tuesday’s annual council meeting by 29 votes to 21 over Conservative candidate, Cllr Colin Brown.

The meeting was held in-person at Westpoint due to social distancing guidance meaning it could not be held at Blackdown House, and lasted just 46 minutes as councillors sped through the ceremonial business of the meeting.

Cllr Arnott, who leads the council, which is run by a coalition of the East Devon Alliance, Liberal Democrats, Greens and some Independents, beat the Conservative candidate in a vote for the leadership, although the margin was tighter than in May 2020 when a similar election occurred.

Nominating him to continue in the role, Cllr Eileen Wragg said: “It is with pleasure and pride that I nominate Cllr Paul Arnott for the next year. The past year has been uniquely challenging to adapt to new systems and ways of working and continue with projects started by previous administrations like Queen’s Drive and Cranbrook. Bold decisions have been made like withdrawal from the GESP and granting consent for the Lower Otter Restoration Project.

“Under Cllr Arnott, huge strides forward have been made, with a willingness to listen and engage, and relationships have improved. He has steered the council through choppy waters with his hand at the helm.

“I hope you support the nomination and we will work together for the people of East Devon and our outstanding environment and put it ahead of political differences. We are being led by a caring councillor who does that and leads by example.”

Seconding the nomination, Cllr Olly Davey added: “As a Green, I welcome the commitment to climate change and sustainability and make it a guiding principle of the council. He has steered us through a difficult year and he has assembled a great team around him and he will take us forward in the way we need to go.”

But putting forward an alternative candidate, Cllr Bruce de Saram proposed on behalf of the Conservative Group that Colin Brown should be the leader. He said: “He is the chair of the scrutiny so we know he plays a positive and ganging role in the life of the council, and he would make an outstanding leader off the council.”

Seconding the nomination, Cllr Philip Skinner added: “Colin Brown would bring a marked difference to the authority and I would like to think other members would get behind him as well.”

But councillors voted by 29 votes to 21 in favour of Cllr Arnott continuing to lead the council, with eight members abstaining and not voting for either candidate.

Following the meeting, Cllr Arnott said: “I have spent a quarter of a century now living in East Devon and am very fortunate to have been everything from a student in Topsham to the parent of a now grown-up family in Colyton. I love this area, and it is a great honour to have been elected by the council to serve for a second term as Leader, not something I will ever take for granted.

“I believe that the majority of people in East Devon, of all ages, are progressive, forward-thinking people, wishing for their local governance to be a national exemplar of transparency and accountability. We have put much in place to achieve this and I wish to thank the very many officers at the council who have joined us on this mission. The work goes on.”

Cllr Arnott said his entire first term of office as leader was conducted on Zoom, and the extra burden of the pandemic on councillors and officers alike, was considerable, and added: “Now, we are hoping for more capacity to make progress with our key aims. The town of Cranbrook needs much attention to help it emerge from some tangled knots remaining from its first ten years. Axminster, so full of potential, will be another focus of the coming year, as Exmouth has been in the past year, and will continue to be. I stand ready to help in whatever way I can for Honiton, where the green shoots of a revitalised town council are now emerging.

“Across the district, from Seaton to Sidmouth, Ottery St Mary to the Blackdown Hills, we want to engage with and help in the culture, leisure, sport and tourism economies. East Devon has so much talent and potential in this, and we want to help this sector thrive.

“There will be financial challenges too. The government said it would cover losses from the pandemic, and unfortunately it has not, in particular leaving us with more than a million pounds in losses with LED. We also have to take on challenges ducked by previous administrations. What to do with our ageing public lavatory provision, or with our car parks?

“In Climate Change issues, we now have a new dedicated officer to help us guide this process, and all emerging policy will need to pass through this filter. We have a new Poverty Action policy, and we will be working with County to help us realise this. And finally, as an absolute priority, we need to put into action challenging ideas for more social and attainable homes for local people. I can’t wait to get on with all this over the next year with colleagues of every political colour.”

Cllr Arnott reappointed Cllr Paul Hayward as the deputy leader of the council, and named an unchanged cabinet from that which is currently running the council.

The meeting also saw Cllr Ian Thomas, a former leader of the council, elected as the new council chairman, winning the vote 36-20 over the Conservatives Cllr Andrew Moulding.

Proposing him to be the new chairman, Cllr Geoff Pook said that as East Devon is a polarised council of near equal number of opposing views, the chair has to be independent of party and of political bias and give every councillor the voice that they represent.

As Cllr Thomas was the leader of the Independents, Cllr Pook said: “He will bring intellect and skill and total independence and integrity and ensure the reputation of the council is both enriched and enhanced.”

Seconding the nomination, Cllr Susie Bond added: “He has a decade long experience and during his leadership gained the trust of all sides, and this offers an ideal opportunity and era of collaborative working.”

On accepting the office of chairman of the council, Cllr Thomas said: “I thank you for the endorsement and it is a great honour to serve the council.”

And on the fact the meeting had to legally be held in person, he added: “Several of us feel some risk and vulnerability here and I am sure someone will come up with a reason why we all have to be here other than a 50 year old law which we hope to change as soon as possible. Let’s do the business professionally and then go home safely.”

Cllr Val Ranger was also re-elected to her role as vice-chair of the council, by 31 votes to 23 over the Conservative Cllr Mike Howe.

Footnote: Worth adding that Owl believes that Cllr Ben Ingham displayed his new/old allegiances by proposing Cllr Andrew Moulding for the role of chair. See “EDDC Tories in denial, they have finally lost what they thought was theirs by right” for interesting references to Cllr Andrew Moulding’s view on “change” (when it suits his argument).

 Help me hold the government to account for Covid-19 care home deaths

At the end of March Cathy Gardner wrote this update on her legal challenge:

“It seems like a lifetime ago that we were granted permission for the Judicial Review. That was on November 19th 2020. At the time, the government’s legal team were arguing against an early court date, which could have been this spring. Since then my legal team have been following up with the court to get a date for the hearing, with no success. We’re now pushing harder because it seems that the delay is now due to the court backlog.

Hopefully I’ll be able to update this page with a date very soon. It still seems likely that the hearing will be later this year, which is frustrating for me and all those affected by the issues in this case. Meanwhile the call for an independent public inquiry is growing louder too. We need to hold our government to account. With your help I have been able to bring this case and with your continued support I know we will get there.”

Thank you

Cathy

Owl has long held the view that “kicking the case into the long grass” may not be to the Government’s advantage. Cathy Gardner obviously thinks the same. Here is another update:

Will Cummings help our case today? – Dr Cathy Gardner

“We will be watching todays hearing with great interest. Dominic Cummings has already hinted at some explosive revelations, including the failure to protect the most vulnerable in care homes. 

We will issue a full update once we have had a chance to digest what he says and its implications for my judicial review. 

Coincidentally we have also just received the defendants ‘defence’ documents, which seem to be attempting to bury my legal team in irrelevant waffle and rewrite history with the benefit of hindsight. 

We remain focussed on the key questions in our claim – who made the critical decisions and why? In the first weeks of the pandemic over 50% of the deaths were residents in care homes. People like my father were not protected: where was Matt Hancock’s infamous “protective ring”?

Thank you for your support, I cannot do this without all of you.”

Cathy

26.5.21

Never mind the small print, let’s get away from it all down the M5. The forecast for the holiday weekend is good. So the least we should expect are traffic jams. – Owl 

Jennifer Williams .www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk 

At some point earlier this month, the government’s website quietly changed.

It appears to have happened on Friday, although ministers claim it dates back to May 14.

Either way, that blink-and-you’d-miss-it update has major consequences for thousands of people.

In Bolton, Blackburn, Bedford, Leicester, Kirklees, Hounslow, Burnley and North Tyneside, all places where cases of the Indian Covid variant have been rising fast, people should ‘avoid travelling in and out of affected areas unless it is essential, for example for work, if you cannot work from home, or education’, it states.

It also specifies stricter socialising advice, warning people to only meet other households outside and to keep to the 2m rule, effectively rolling back to some of the national rules prior to May 17.

But in a technicolour re-run of the rows that played out between local and national government last year, there was no active communication of the change to the local populations affected, no press release, no announcement and zero notification to any of their local systems.

When Manchester Evening News reporter Ethan Davies spotted the change yesterday, we all had to take a step back. Was this something we already knew about, but that all of us had collectively forgotten?

But no. A few messages to local sources quickly showed this was news to them too.

“Nope…that hasn’t been communicated to Greater Manchester,” replied one. “I think it will be news to Bolton too.”

It was news to Bolton. Within minutes a source there had replied to say: “We have only just found out. No public health comms and no public health directors in all the area were aware of the change. We weren’t notified.”

As another official then said: “Which begs the question: do any of the local authorities referenced on the website know and what evidence was used to support this local restrictions guidance?”

The answer seems to have been no.

Last year these kinds of tensions were painfully common when covering the pandemic here – decisions landed from on-high at virtually no notice.

But even at the height of the madness, there was always some warning: local leaders knew shortly prior to the July 31 restrictions being introduced across Greater Manchester, for example; when the various hokey-cokey changes to borough-level measures were playing out, local authorities and MPs were generally consulted, even if they often didn’t like the outcome. Even during the tier three row, there were conversations.

This time, nobody had been told.

As in Greater Manchester, Blackburn’s public health director Dominic Harrison had no idea.

“Local government areas involved were not consulted with, warned of, notified about or alerted to this guidance,” he tweeted this morning.

“I have asked to see the national risk assessment which support this action – it has not been provided to us yet.”

In North Tyneside, director of public health Wendy Burke said the updated guidance had ‘not been accompanied by any communication to the local authority, local residents or businesses’.

Sources suggest the Local Government Association was not aware, MPs were not aware, the Association of Directors of Public Health were not aware…and it hadn’t come up on national discussions between central government and local officials.

“What’s the point of updating the government website when no Boltonian will bother to read it?” asks one senior figure here.

“If no one knows this, then there’s absolutely no chance of compliance.

“Boltonians can’t be blamed for not complying if they don’t know about any local restrictions. What’s puzzling is I didn’t know anything about these local restrictions, but did know that Boltonians have been barred from visiting Scotland, which says it all about the difference in national messaging.

“This is yet another clusterf***, to put it mildly.”

Today, meetings between local and national are escalating. There was already a meeting of Greater Manchester’s emergency Covid committee in the diary – which may end up being best summed up with a popcorn emoji – and sources say chief executives and directors of public health are meeting with Deputy Chief Medical Officer Jenny Harries at lunchtime.

As yet, it remains unclear how the updated guidance ended up on gov.uk, who drafted it and who signed it off.

Nevertheless the government seems, so far, to be doubling down on its latest advice.

Last night Number 10 tried to claim that the guidance had been contained in a speech by the Prime Minister on May 14, although in reality all he said was ‘those living in Bolton and other affected areas, there is now a greater risk from this new variant, so I urge you to be extra cautious’.

The government website was indeed updated on May 14 with ‘additional guidance on new variant’, according to its updates summary, although it was only on May 21 that it was updated with ‘updated guidance for areas where the new Covid-19 variant is spreading’.

This morning cabinet minister Therese Coffey appeared on Good Morning Britain to claim the web page update was ‘just an element of a formality’ around the need for extra caution in Bolton, adding that ‘the partnership has been there’.

Local level would disagree on both counts. Telling people not to travel in or out of their area feels like something a little more draconian than a formality.

As one official here points out, such a move will have an economic impact, including on hospitality.

And on ‘partnership’: “At least northern and southern councils are being treated equally sh*t.”

Or, as another puts it: “This doesn’t bode well for the future if government can’t be clear they need to have agreed a plan with local leaders. Secret pretend lockdowns ain’t going to help anyone.”

Martin Shaw westcountrybylines.co.uk 

The UK elections of 6 May 2021 revealed a fragmented political landscape. Although the results showed, as do most national polls, that the combined support for the opposition parties continues to exceed the Conservatives’, they showed no sign that Labour alone would be likely to oust Boris Johnson’s increasingly authoritarian and nationalist regime in the next General Election. Despite deep corruption and the worst pandemic record of any major Western country, the opposition remains relatively weak, and so divided that the Johnson-style Conservatives look likely to stay in power under the first past the post (FPTP) electoral system . This situation was also reflected in reflected in many councils, such as Devon, the largest in the South West. 

A big Conservative majority based on a minority of votes

Devon is often seen as overwhelmingly Conservative – and the party once more gained a huge majority (65 per cent) of seats. However this was on the basis of a minority (42 per cent) of the vote. The combined votes of Liberal Democrats, Labour and Greens exceeded the Tories’ even without including Independents, many of whom are left-leaning. Yet under FPTP, all four groups lost seats to the Conservatives compared with what a proportional distribution would have given them, as the table shows.

Overall results of the 2021 Devon County Council elections

This outcome was not an outlier. In 2017, the Conservatives won 70 per cent of the seats for a slightly larger minority share. In 2013 and 2009, too, they won comfortable overall majorities for minority votes. Not since 2005, when the Lib Dems tied with them on 42 per cent and actually won a majority of seats, has there been a different outcome.

Support for PR

So the Devon opposition has faced this situation for a decade and a half. Have they made any efforts to counter it – or do they march, election after election, into inevitable defeats born of lack of unity? Theoretically, opposition councillors see the problem. On 29 April 2021, at the pre-election meeting of Devon County Council, I proposed a motion welcoming the Welsh parliament’s initiative to allow councils to choose a reformed electoral system such as the Single Transferable Vote, and asking the UK government to introduce the same option for Devon. All the Liberal Democrat, Labour, Green and Independent councillors – except the leader of the Labour group – supported this.

Seats which the opposition could have won

Yet a week later, these opposition parties stood against each other in the elections, with the sadly predictable results reported above. Since Labour dominates Exeter but is hardly a serious contender outside it (Plymouth being a unitary authority), and the Greens are slowly rising but still significantly weaker than Labour and the slowly declining Lib Dems, there was no way that any sector of the opposition could have broken out and won alone under FPTP.

The plurality of oppositions countywide was reflected in the individual seats, with many 3- or 4-way splits of anti-Conservative votes. Looking at the results seat-by-seat, there were 11 seats which opposition forces could have gained if one or more of the weaker opposition candidates had stood down:

• Lib Dems could have won Chudleigh and Teign Valley, Braunton Rural,  and Tiverton East
• Labour could have won Duryard and Pennsylvania.
• Independent East Devon Alliance (EDA) could have won Axminster, Seaton and Colyton, and Sidmouth.
• Other Independents could have won Northam, Okehampton Rural, Yelverton Rural and Tavistock.

On the figures, some of these ‘gains’ seem near-certainties, while others are more speculative. If the Conservatives had lost all these seats, they would have lost their majority. It is more probable that at least half of these seats could have been gained and the Conservative majority drastically reduced resulting in a big improvement in representation for Devon’s voters as a whole.

Seeds of a Progressive Alliance

Three of the opposition forces, the Lib Dems, Greens and EDA did develop some local understandings which materially assisted their performance:

• Lib Dems gained South Brent and Teignmouth after the Greens did not stand.
• Greens held Totnes after Lib Dems did not stand, and won a seat in the two-member Broadclyst division after they and the Lib Dems stood only one candidate each.
• EDA came close to winning Axminster and Seaton & Colyton after the Greens did not stand, and Sidmouth after both the Greens and Lib Dems did not stand, while EDA not stand in seats where the two parties were contenders.

Local understandings also existed in other places: e.g. in Tiverton, the Lib Dems and Greens contested one seat each, both gaining second place, while in Exmouth, Independents and Lib Dems each contested only one seat in the two-member division, gaining the 3rd and 4th places out of a field of 7, behind two winning Tories.

The need for a comprehensive cross-party agreements in future elections

These understandings are a model for future cooperation, but they were too limited to affect the overall outcome. The Greens were the party most open to them, but the Lib Dems had inconsistent approaches, while Labour insisted on standing in every seat, sometimes with ‘paper’ candidates who won derisory percentages of the vote – but sufficient to cost other opposition candidates seats in close races. In post-election discussions, some Labour members have disowned this approach, imposed by their national party.

However, Labour and some Lib Dem members have also defended standing candidates as widely as possible, on the basis that withdrawing candidates denies the electorate the choice of their particular brands. Yet a wide choice doesn’t necessarily engage voters. In Exmouth, where five opposition candidates challenged the Tories for two seats but none had a credible claim to be the main challengers, turnout was a miserable 30 per cent. In nearby Sidmouth, clearly a close 2-horse race, 43 per cent came out.

Winning is a collaborative affair

In Devon, as nationwide, anti-Conservative voters are ever more outraged by Johnson’s regime, while some Conservative-inclined voters, including those alienated by the current government, will definitely vote for effective opposition or Independent candidates in local elections. It’s plausible to argue that both will be more enthused by potential winners. Many will happily vote for whichever of the opposition forces has a good local candidate who is likely to win.

Winning would surely be made more likely with county-wide collaboration between the parties, mirroring the cooperation in some of the district councils. After 12 years in which Devon has been dominated by a Conservative government which takes the South West for granted and a complacent Conservative County Council, the opposition could gain from a joined-up challenge to the Conservatives in the council chamber and the local media – while preparing the way for a synchronised electoral challenge, negotiated between the groupings, in future local elections.

If you are concerned about the democratic deficit in the UK, please join our free Q&A session “How do we fix our broken democracy”, 26 May, 20:00. Our panel: Klina Jordan, co-founder and chief executive of Make Votes Matter; Mary Southcott, from Labour Campaign for Electoral Reform.; Tom Brake, director of Unlock Democracy and Molly Scott Cato, former MEP (Green Party), economist and activist. See link at bottom of this page.

Owl understands that Cllr Cathy Gardner wanted to step down as Chair of EDDC and did not seek re-election.

Two nominations were proposed to take her place: Cllr Ian Thomas, Independent (formally Conserative ) and Cllr Andrew Moulding, Conservative. Cllr Thomas won. Votes were by a show of hands and Owl doesn’t have precise figures.

Two nominations were proposed for Vice Chair. Present incumbent Cllr Val Ranger, East Devon Democratic Alliance and Cllr Mike Howe, Conservative. Cllr Val Ranger was re-elected (by something like 31 votes to 23).

Two nominations were proposed for Leader. Present incumbent Cllr Paul Arnott, East Devon Democratic Alliance, and Cllr Colin Brown, Conservative. Cllr Paul Arnott was re-elected, but Owl doesn’t have precise figures.

The re-elected Leader confirmed Cllr Paul Hayward would continue as Deputy Leader.

From the meeting Agenda, there appears, unusually, to have been no contests for the other posts such as to outside bodies which are elected at this meeting. 

[Tomorrow we have Dominic Cummings giving potentially explosive and damning testimony on the government’s handling of coronavirus to two select committees. Alternatively, he may simply “crash and burn”. Either way it’s something else to look forward to. – Owl]

us15.campaign-archive.com /

Today in the High Court, Government’s lawyers set out their defence to our legal challenge over PPE contracts handed to “VIP” companies. Government claims that companies in the VIP Lane did not materially benefit from their special treatment, and that it was simply a different route by which they could win contracts.

The evidence tells a different story.

Emails between officials reveal that companies with a political connection were given priority. A key member of the VIP Lane team wrote, ‘Speaking personally, I don’t want a middling VIP lead prioritised over a credible high priority lead any more than you do…However, if two leads are otherwise equal priority and one is VIP, some weighting to the VIP is helpful.’

In another exchange, an official set out how companies placed in the “VIP” Lane should be treated, explaining “Follow standard procedure, but take a little more time over correspondence, ‘hand-holding’ the supplier where necessary”. They followed up to say, ”Personally, I’ve found VIP cases require about three times the time of a standard case.”

What is perhaps most striking about Government’s defence of the “VIP” Lane is its apparent determination to keep quiet the details of the politically-connected beneficiaries – and which Ministers or senior officials referred them. When the National Audit Office, the official spending watchdog, investigated the award of PPE contracts, Government intervened to prevent it from revealing the names of companies in the “VIP” Lane.

If the Government really has nothing to hide, why doesn’t it just come clean? Thanks to information uncovered through this litigation, we will be publishing details of a slew of other “VIPs” very shortly. Watch this space.

Thank you, 

Jo Maugham

Director of Good Law Project

As the Good Law Project’s latest legal challenge to the government draws to a close this week, its founder, Jolyon Maugham, has revealed the extent to which the case has got under ministers’ skin.

Haroon Siddique www.theguardian.com 

The judicial review over contracts for personal protective equipment awarded without competition concludes on Tuesday, almost two months to the day since the barrister received a letter from the government’s lawyers. “I was asked by the government legal department to refer myself to my professional regulator, the Bar Standards Board,” the QC tells the Guardian. Maugham says he refused and invited the government to refer him itself, as he says many others he has irked have done.

“I don’t think they have, which from my perspective is rather a pity because I think they would have got short shrift from my regulator. It would be a little awkward for the government legal department to refer me to my regulator and then for my regulator to clear me. It would look very obviously like what it felt like at the time, namely an attempt to bring the power of the state to bear on the silencing of a very vocal critic.”

The lawyers’ letter was a response to documents leaked to Maugham, which were shared with the press. Having held himself out as someone delivering transparency and accountability, Maugham says: “Behaving consistently with what I set out to do actually is upholding the standards of a courageous, independent bar.”

The Good Law Project was involved in the high-profile Brexit cases concerning prorogation of parliament and the triggering of article 50. Last year it brought judicial reviews relating to the environment and to the exam results fiasco. But it was cases such as the current one brought with the campaign group EveryDoctor, relating to the opaque award of Covid contracts, sometimes to suppliers with questionable relevant experience and/or who were political associates, that thrust it into the spotlight. “That sleaze narrative around this government, I think we can properly claim a significant part of the credit for,” says Maugham.

In Good Law’s annual report, the former Brexit secretary David Davis praises its work in holding the government to account, while Maugham claims government lawyers have told him the organisation is “changing the conversation”, making ministers much more mindful of whether proposed actions are lawful. “It’s a bit like knowing that the bizzies are around if you fancy breaking into someone’s house,” he says, smilingly acknowledging the provocative analogy. “They are mindful of the possibility of consequence in ways that they were not previously.”

Maugham adds: “Privately, government lawyers tell us at the same time they’re sending us letters they are cheering for us to win. These aren’t people who are politically motivated, they just see the decline in the quality of governance in government and they see us pushing back hard.”

The Covid contracts controversy has clearly resonated with the public. This time last year, Maugham says, he was asking Good Law’s director of campaigns if the number of direct debit donors might reach 5,000 by the end of 2020, from fewer than 2,000 at the start of the year and against a target of 3,500. In fact it soared to 11,000, and now there are almost 20,000, he says.

With its headcount also growing – from one employee in January last year to an estimated 25 by the end of this year – Maugham is looking to the future and expanding beyond litigation.

He unexpectedly namechecks David Cameron – “the most unfashionable man in the country at the moment,” he says – as he outlines plans, not to follow the former prime minister into lobbying, but for a “big society”.

Stressing that he wants to work from the bottom up, rather than the top-down approach he says Cameron favoured, Maugham describes his ambition to foster legal structures, such as cooperatives and trade unions, to “help people improve the world around them, help them improve their communities”.

An example he gives is an alternative takeaway delivery service, which could be launched next year. “What we will probably do is trial in a particular community a structure that enables restaurants and drivers to set up a company that operates an app that serves that community and that doesn’t have these vampires in America sucking wealth out of that community,” he says.

If the government’s experience is anything to go by, the likes of Uber Eats and Deliveroo should probably be looking over their shoulders. Reflecting on this desire to empower others and his personal motivation, Maugham recalls his time in psychotherapy in his late 20s.

“I had a wonderful psychotherapist and I remember her saying to me: ‘But Jolyon, it’s such a waste for you to be unhappy, to live an unhappy life.’ That really resonated with me then and it really resonates with me now. That idea that we can find ways to respond to the world around us that will make us happy, we’re not passive participants in fate imposed on us by others, is really important … Without it our lives in a sense can feel wasted. I don’t want that for anyone.

“Although I am deeply cynical about what governments do, and what big money does … I’m profoundly optimistic about human nature. It perhaps feels ridiculously ambitious to think that the law might be able to do something about that, but it’s a hill I’m very happy to die on trying.”

Nearly 400,000 homes will be built on greenfield sites in the south of England over the next five years, according to a new analysis of planning policy.

Andrew Ellson, George Grylls Ryan Watts www.thetimes.co.uk

Huge parts of the countryside could be paved over by councils to meet revised housebuilding targets, the data suggests.

Cornwall alone would have to build more than 11,000 homes on rural land and areas such as Buckinghamshire and Central Bedfordshire will each have to create at least 10,000 plots.

Less development will be needed in the north of England, with half as many new homes per head of population in “red wall” constituencies as in the rest of the country, The Times has found. This is because the government’s formula assumes that more homes are needed where prices are higher. The south also has fewer brownfield sites.

The figures have reignited concerns on the Tory back benches that planning reforms will alienate Conservative voters in the shires while undermining commitments made to the north.

“You can’t level up the north of the country by concreting over the southeast,” said Damian Green, Theresa May’s de facto deputy when she was prime minister.

Theresa Villiers, the former environment secretary, said: “Despite significant changes to the government’s housing algorithm, there is still far too much pressure to build in London and the south. Cramming more and more homes into the south will do nothing to deliver the government’s promises on levelling up the north.”

Tory backbenchers rebelled last year over a “mutant algorithm”, which they believed placed too much emphasis on development in southern areas.

An updated “Standard Method” for calculating housing need was published in December. The new analysis cross-referenced the revised targets against each area’s capacity to build homes on brownfield sites, which local authorities are required to publish. This gave a figure for the number of homes in each local authority that must be built on greenfield sites to meet the targets.

Greenfield land is defined as undeveloped land in a city or rural area that is used either for agriculture or landscape design or left to evolve naturally. Brownfield land is previously developed land that is not in use, such as an abandoned industrial area.

The analysis shows that greenfield sites will be needed to accommodate 193,724 homes in London, 107,000 homes in the southeast and 69,000 in the southwest over the next five years. It also suggests that there will be no need to build on greenfield areas in the northwest, northeast or Yorkshire because these areas will have to build fewer homes and have more brownfield sites.

Jonathan Jones, of the Campaign to Protect Rural England (CPRE), which commissioned the research, said: “The planning bill flies in the face of levelling-up ambitions and will lead to a huge loss of greenfield, including green belt in the southeast and London, while leaving brownfield to rot in the north.

“Access to green space and nature near by has become more and more important for our health and wellbeing but the analysis shows the planning bill would force local authorities to release these spaces in the southeast and London.” Government sources insist that the targets are not binding and they believe that London will under-deliver homes and the north will over-deliver.

“The number spat out by formula is not a target but a starting point,” one source said. “Green belts are protected and will remain protected. It is for councils to decide. It is between them and their voters if they choose to take out a greenfield.”

The revised planning formula requires that more homes are built in areas where house prices are higher, because property costs are seen as a proxy for where people want to live.

A stark illustration of the effect of the new plans can be seen by comparing the demands put on Boris Johnson’s London constituency and Rishi Sunak’s North Yorkshire seat. The analysis suggests that the prime minister’s seat of Uxbridge & South Ruislip would need to accommodate 1,220 homes a year, ten times as many as the chancellor’s constituency of Richmond.

In seats won in 2019 by the Tories across the north and the Midlands, 260 homes will be built per 100,000 people compared with 550 per 100,000 across the rest of the country.

Paul Miner, the head of land use and planning at the CPRE, said: “If you have a pattern of significantly higher levels of housing development in the south than the north, you will see significantly more government investment in infrastructure in these areas to make that happen, such as building new railway lines. A big question is how this will impact the levelling-up agenda if this approach is allowed to continue.”

A spokesman for the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government said: “To compare housing delivery in different parts of the country based on Local Housing Need formula is to misunderstand the nature and purpose of these numbers. That’s not how they work and this analysis is misleading.”

Britain’s energy regulator has approved a £300m investment spree to help triple the number of ultra-rapid electric car charge points across the country, as part of efforts to accelerate the UK’s shift to clean energy.

Kalyeena Makortoff www.theguardian.com 

Ofgem has given the green light for energy network companies to invest in more than 200 low-carbon projects across the country over the next two years, including the installation of 1,800 new ultra-rapid car charge points for motorway service stations and a further 1,750 charge points in towns and cities.

The investment will be undertaken by regional network companies to benefit urban areas including Glasgow, Kirkwall, Warrington, Llandudno, York and Truro. It will also cover rural areas, with some charging points aimed at commuters at train stations in north and mid-Wales.

The regulator hopes the extra investment to make car charging points more convenient will help to address motorist “range anxiety”, which is frequently mentioned as a key reason why drivers are wary about choosing an electric vehicle over a fossil fuel model.

The UK plans to ban the sale of new petrol and diesel cars from 2030 and phase out hybrid vehicles from 2035 as part of its plan to reduce road transport emissions. However, only 11% of new car registrations last year were for ultra-low emission cars.

The regulator’s chief executive, Jonathan Brearley, said drivers “need to be confident that they can charge their car quickly when they need to” if the UK hoped for a “rapid take up” of electric cars, which “will be vital if Britain is to hit its climate change targets”.

The transport minister Rachel Maclean said the investment would add to the 500,000 electric cars already on the UK’s roads “as drivers continue to make the switch to cleaner, greener vehicles”.

The spending initiative, which will add 65p to customer bills for the next two years, will also include new projects to upgrade Britain’s electricity grids so they can power more low-carbon heating and connect to new low carbon energy projects such as windfarms and solar arrays.

Brearley said the investments were a “down payment” on the £40bn of green investment that is expected over the next seven years to power the UK towards its ambition to cut carbon emissions to net zero in the next 30 years.

The CBI, the business lobby group, said on Monday the UK could unlock nearly £700bn in growth opportunities by 2030 by decarbonising the global economy and growing trade as it emerged from the Covid-19 pandemic.

Alongside the regulator’s £300m spending programme, the government has revealed a £166m fund to support new green technologies. The cash injection will include £60m to help develop low-carbon hydrogen, £20m to help roll out projects to capture the carbon emissions from heavy industry, and a further £20m for fund research into “industrial decarbonisation” run by Heriot-Watt University.

The funding for the government’s green industrial revolution will also include £37.5m to help the UK become a leader in technology which can remove carbon emissions from the air. One so-called “direct air capture” project to win government support was put forward by the Sizewell C nuclear plant, which plans to use the reactor’s extra electricity to run the carbon capture equipment.

The energy minister Anne-Marie Trevelyan said the “major cash boost” would target the UK’s most polluting industries to encourage “the technologies we need to rein in our emissions and transition to a green economy” while reducing costs for businesses and boosting investment and jobs.

“Just six months ago, the prime minister set out a clear 10-point plan for creating and supporting up to 250,000 British jobs as we level up and build back greener from the pandemic. Today we’re boosting our armoury for the fight against climate change and backing innovators and businesses to create green jobs right across the United Kingdom,” she said.

Councils across England are likely to start legal battles to claw back ‘millions’ in unpaid taxes, thanks to a ‘landmark’ ruling by the Supreme Court.

Alice Richardson www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk

Local authorities may have been bolstered to launch proceedings against businesses which have failed to pay the ‘fair amount’ of tax, after Wigan council and others took a handful of businesses to court.

The authorities wanted to challenge a ‘widespread’ tactic some companies use to avoid paying business rates – renting out their properties to companies they themselves have set up which are very quickly wound down, liquidated or dissolved.

By law, firms in liquidation or dissolution don’t have to pay business rates and companies are then seen to ‘deliberately drag out the liquidation process for as long as possible’ so they don’t have to pay taxes to the council.

In some cases, the money saved from unpaid business rates is even handed out by the company in pre-agreed shares.

It is this legal loophole the local authorities wanted to close and, in a ‘formidable victory’ for councils across the country, they won.

Supreme Court Judge Lord Briggs said: “The local authorities should be allowed to take it forward to trial. The whole purpose of the schemes was to avoid payment of the rate rather than to transfer the responsibility for its payment. Apart from rates avoidance, the schemes have no separate business purpose of any kind.

“[The] schemes necessarily involve the deliberate abuse of a statutory legal process. There is a triable issue that the original owners remain liable for the rates.

“The local authorities’ claim against the original owners must be allowed to go to trial.”

This paves the way for the councils concerned to argue their case fully in a High Court trial and for other local authorities to do the same.

Matthew Whyatt, of ASW Solicitors, instructed for the case on behalf of the councils.

He said: “The Supreme Court have given a bold and very clear judgement, and the manner in which these business rates schemes were carried out has caused the Supreme Court some concern that many are unlawful, abusive and might merit an investigation for criminality.

“The granting of a lease to a company which is a mere skeleton of incorporation does not succeed in avoiding the liability for business rates. The lessee is not to be treated as the ‘owner’ for business rates purposes.

“These schemes are extremely wide-spread, and the decision of the Supreme Court is a formidable victory for the local authorities.

“The councils are going to continue the fight and will be considering all options available to them. The councils believe that their position is strong and so will be continuing the claims robustly.”

Danny Seasman, also from ASW Solicitors, added: “I would not be surprised if the global cost to local authorities is in the hundreds of millions of pounds, and significant numbers of local authorities now pursue their claims following the success in the Supreme Court.

“During what have been difficult times for local authorities, it is clear that the schemes have deprived numerous local authorities of significant sums for front line services.”

For the other Greater Manchester councils, this result could prove incredibly influential and financially beneficial.

A number of local authorities in the city-region have now confirmed their teams are looking into the impact this could have on them, and whether they will look to pursue any cases through the courts themselves.

A spokesperson for Salford City council said: “Business rates help fund vital public service and we welcome this significant judgement. We are now examining its implications.”

A spokesperson for Stockport council said: “We welcome the judgement and will seek the appropriate advice on what action to take to recover the amounts of business rates which remain unpaid’.

A Tameside council spokesperson said: “We welcome any cases that make business rates fairer for all – requiring business to pay their fair share for services and infrastructure, which everyone benefits from and which cost significant money to provide and maintain. Otherwise the burden for paying for these services must be met by an ever decreasing few, which is neither fair nor sustainable.”

A spokesperson for Trafford council said: “Trafford council welcomes the Supreme Court judgement and will now be reviewing any cases that might be linked to the ruling outcome.”

The ideas to reboot Britain’s pandemic-stricken high streets are coming in. After a record number of shop closures last year during the worst recession in history, stores are being replaced with student flats, gyms and crazy golf courses. But in one corner of south London, there is a different approach: retirement homes.

Julia Kollewe www.theguardian.com 

A retirement village has been built between Balham and Clapham high streets in south London, one of a number of purpose-built apartment blocks for older people that are springing up in town and city centres across the UK after a year of devastation for shopping districts.

Local planners hope that by bringing more people into town centres, these residences will help to regenerate Britain’s high streets.

Dominic Curran, a property policy adviser at the British Retail Consortium, said: “It is a very good idea to get more people living in town centres. We also need more housing for older people over 65, and it absolutely makes sense for them to be living in urban locations. Many will move with a lot of housing equity in their pockets, which will generate spend and footfall for local shops.”

The retirement home idea is running alongside plans to convert empty shopping sites. All over the UK, there are proposals to change derelict high street locations into something else. In Reading, a House of Fraser outlet is being converted into a food hall, bowling alley and crazy golf course, while on London’s Oxford Street a former BHS store has become a Swingers golf centre and food hall. In Edinburgh, the House of Fraser on Princes Street is being developed by the drinks firm Diageo into a tourist attraction promoting Johnnie Walker whisky.

However, Curran said high streets need more housing to survive alongside retail and leisure.

To help struggling high streets, the BRC is calling for reforms to business rates – the tax businesses pay on the properties they operate from – as part of a landmark government review under way. It also said support is needed to address £2.8bn of rent arrears built up by retailers unable to trade from physical premises during the coronavirus pandemic. Retailers make up 5% of the economy yet account for 25% of business rates. Firms have benefited from rates relief during the pandemic but this is set to end on 30 June.

Retirement villages have traditionally been gated communities in the countryside and on the edge of towns but developers have been snapping up retail and office sites that lie vacant in urban areas to build apartment blocks for the over-65s, many of whom want to be closer to bustling city centres for eating out, shopping and cultural pursuits. Several village builders reported that inquiries for retirement housing jumped during the Covid crisis, with more people feeling isolated and lonely.

“Too often retirement villages are built away from local amenities with poor public transport links,” says Liz Emerson, a co-founder of the Intergenerational Foundation, a charity. “We welcome any developments that bring older generations back into the heart of communities.”

Dorothy Fowler, 79, was one of the first to buy an apartment in the Audley retirement village in Clapham that opened at the start of the pandemic in 2020. As soon as Covid restrictions were eased in April, she went out for a restaurant meal with a group of other residents.

“We’ve all become good friends, probably because of Covid,” she says. “We are right next to Clapham South tube and will be able to go to the West End.” Audley also offers to take residents in a van for regular shopping and cultural trips.

As cities are being reshaped, the Social Market Foundation, a thinktank, said retirement housing could play a key role in the town and city centres of the future, especially if there is reduced need for retail and office space.

A record 11,120 chain store outlets closed between January and June last year, while 5,119 opened. The 6,001 net store closures were double the level in the same period a year earlier, as many shops fail to reopen, and the switch to working from home risks permanently lower levels of city centre footfall.

Developers are spoiled for choice. Audley’s chief executive, Nick Sanderson, said the company was offered three shopping centre sites in only one week, as well as “every Debenhams department store” after the retailer’s liquidation.

“Bringing [older communities] back into the centre of things is good for town centres because they are bringing economic vitality when everyone else is working,” he said.

Retirement Villages Group, which is backed by Axa Investment Managers, the French asset management firm, plans to build 5,000 homes for older people across 40 urban sites over the next 10 years. It recently received planning consent for West Byfleet and Chester, which will include some rental homes. “Our strategy going forward is urban,” says Will Bax, the firm’s chief executive.

The pensions and insurance group Legal & General has the ambition to build 3,000 retirement homes in UK city centres in a £2bn project in coming years. Its Guild Living arm has plans for retirement residences on the sites of former Homebase stores in Walton-on-Thames and Bath, and on the site of a former hospital in Epsom, as well as its first London project in Uxbridge on the site of a retail warehouse.

However, not everyone is a fan of retirement residences in urban areas.

Legal & General’s projects for Walton-on-Thames, Bath and Epsom have been rejected by council planners; the company has lodged appeals. Eugene Marchese, a co-founder of Guild Living, has accused Elmbridge borough council of ageism but the council rejected this and insisted that family homes were also “much-needed” in Walton-on-Thames. In Bath, one critic described the company’s plans a “ghetto for the elderly”.

Nonetheless, retirement accommodation will remain part of the conversation over the future of the high street.

Residents are being asked for their views on a bid to crack down on booze-fuelled bad behaviour on Exmouth beach.

eastdevonnews.co.uk 

District council chiefs have launched a consultation over plans to extend a Public Space Protection Order (PSPO) which already covers part of the town centre.

Begging and use of public places as a toilet will also be targeted if the initiative is given the go-ahead.

The authority says it is considering the move due to an increase in alcohol-related antisocial antics.

It would restrict certain activities such as:

• Possessing an intoxicating substance including alcohol;
• Urination and defecation within a street or public place;
• Aggressive requests for money;
• Intimidation, harassment, alarm or distress.

East Devon District Council (EDDC) says the PSPO does not ‘ban’ alcohol at proposed locations.

But it added the measure is ‘a tool for police and authorised council staff to be able to deal with people who may be deemed as behaving in an antisocial way’.

Rules are have been in place in The Strand, Magnolia Centre, Station car park, Manor Gardens, and The Plantation areas since May 2020.

It is proposed the order is extended to the mean low tide mark on Exmouth beach, as well as some surrounding spaces.

Councillor Nick Hookway, EDDC portfolio holder for culture, tourism, leisure and sport, said: “The Public Space Protection Orders in Exmouth have proven to be successful for several years, but to reduce antisocial behaviour further, the recommendation is to include the beach itself.

“By extending these orders to include the beach, it will provide that extra reassurance for Exmouth residents and visitors that any antisocial behaviour can be dealt with speedily and effectively.

“I encourage you to take this opportunity to give your views in the consultation.”

The deadline for comments on the mooted PSPO extension is 5pm in June 20.

They can be emailed to pspoconsultation@eastdevon.gov.uk or sent by post to: Environmental Health, East Devon District Council, Blackdown House, Border Road, Heathpark Industrial Estate, Honiton, EX14 1EJ.

A former Devon council leader with a ‘dark side’ has been jailed for sexually assaulting three women.

Paul Greaves www.devonlive.com

Brian Greenslade, 72, a long-time leader of Devon County Council, assaulted two of his victims while on council business.

He lunged at one of the women, trying to kiss her, and put his hands down her trousers while she tried to push him away. He groped and fondled the other women’s breasts.

Greenslade, who led the council for 16 years and was also chairman of the Devon and Cornwall Police Authority, denied any of the incidents ever happened and suggested one of the women had been ‘put up to it’ for political reasons.

But the jury agreed with the prosecution that he was ‘completely driven by ego and self importance’.

A judge sentencing him said he had abused his position of power and status when committing the offences.

Judge Timothy Rose said: “You’ve lived a long life in the service of your local community, particularly in the county of Devon.

“It seems to me throughout a large part of that period you had a dark side to you that you couldn’t control yourself in the presence of women.”

Greenslade, of Marwood, Barnstaple, was found guilty of two charges of indecent assault and one sexual assault dating back to the 1990s and mid 2000s.

He was jailed for 16 months.

The first incident happened when Greenslade was alone with the woman on council business. He suddenly lunged at her, grabbing both her arms and tried to kiss her. He then put his hand down the front of her trousers. She tried to resist and pull away but he was too strong for her.

The woman drove off in shock and disbelief at what had happened.

In a victim statement read to the court she said: “He was in a privileged position which he abused. I was completely embarrassed, ashamed and angry.

“I asked myself why he thought he could do that.

“This was a period when men had mistresses and men thought they could do as they liked.”

The second victim said she was assaulted by Greenslade during a function at the County Hall.

The leader of the council approached her and spoke to her before putting his arm around her and fondling her breast. She told him to move his hand or she would break his fingers.

She said she did not report the assault at the time because she thought she would get into trouble.

“It was a shocking experience and still shocks me now,” she said. It was only recently she had come to the conclusion that she had done nothing wrong and that Greenslade had acted in an outrageous way

The third incident happened in the 1990s when Greenslade was working as an accountant.

He stood behind a woman in an office and reached over to grab her breast. She could recall feeling sick and shaking while he just grinned. She said she had been terrified by the incident.

The process of coming back to court to relive the event in the witness box had given her a panic attack. She too had felt guilty for not reporting the incident sooner.

Miss Carolina Guiloff, in mitigation, said each of the incidents had been short lived and opportunistic. During his 36 years working for the council he had supported many women in their work and ‘clearly wasn’t a misogynist’.

He now suffered ill-health and shortly before his arrest in 2018 had suffered a minor heart attack. She said nothing could be gained by sending the pensioner to prison.

Judge Timothy Rose said one of the themes of the case was a powerful man who thought he could get away with sexual actions against women.

He added: “You were a powerful man, and you were the leader of the council and you were the one able to carry on with your life as if nothing had happened.”

He added: “You took advantage of situations you were in. One possible explanation is you came to believe nobody would complain about you and you would be able to get away with it.”

He said appeared Greenslade could not ‘control himself’ in the presence of women.

“You thought you could get away with it because nobody would go against you. You simply couldn’t control yourself. You took advantage of your character, your status and position and benefited from it over years until such time as your victims were able to come forward and I commend them for doing so. It took a great deal of bravery.”

The three women came forward with their allegations in 2018. It followed a public censure of Greenslade by the county council on the grounds of his harassment of members of staff.

After the sentencing a spokesman for Devon County Council said: “Our thoughts are with the survivors who suffered at the hands of Brian Greenslade.

“We are pleased that our actions in 2017 in response to complaints from members of council staff have helped to shine a light on the issue of sexual harassment and inappropriate conduct in the workplace and particularly when involving those in positions of authority.

“This council has very firm and clear expectations with regards to the conduct of all its staff and elected members including how councillors interact with the council’s employees.

“We will always take allegations of inappropriate sexual behaviour and harassment very seriously and act swiftly.

“When allegations of this nature came to light in 2017, we acted quickly to thoroughly investigate them as part of our procedures, and the strongest possible sanctions on the former councillor were imposed. Most importantly all those staff impacted have been supported and continue to be so.”

Ann Hampshire of the CPS said: “Brian Greenslade was a respected and well-known public figure for many years but there was another side to his character.

“His position of authority made him confident that his victims would not complain or, even if they had, that they would not have been believed.

“All three women have said that his position was a factor in their decision not to report him at the time of the offences. I would like to thank them for coming forward when they did and for supporting this prosecution”.

The Police and Crime Commissioner for Devon, Cornwall and the Isles of Scilly Alison Hernandez has praised the victims for their tenacity.

Ms Hernandez said: “I would like to pay tribute to Brian Greenslade’s victims, who not only came forward to give evidence in the first place but who were then put through the ordeal of a trial that could have been avoided had he admitted his vile crimes in the first place.

“It is the victims’ tenacity and faith in the police and the criminal justice system that has persuaded a jury of his guilt and perhaps prevented yet more offences. I would urge all those affected by sexual offences to seek specialist help and advice from the wide range of services available, many of which are commissioned by my office.

“I hope this conviction sends a message to both victims and offenders that complaints will be taken seriously, investigations will be carried out and convictions can be secured.”

Free practical and emotional help and advice for crime victims, whether or not it has been reported to police, is available from the Devon and Cornwall Victim Care Unit on 01392 475900 or via Victim Support 24/7, on 0808 1689 111 or online at www.victimsupport.org.uk.

• Proposed first floor side extension above existing garage/car port. Proposed single storey rear extension. Proposed installation of roof windows to side elevation. 12 Ashley Brake West Hill Ottery St Mary EX11 1TWRef. No: 21/1364/FUL | Validated: Thu 13 May 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Single storey side/rear extension including demolition of existing store/wc and alterations to fenestration 106 Moorfield Road Exmouth EX8 3QPRef. No: 21/1368/FUL | Validated: Thu 13 May 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Construction of a single storey detached garage Chapel Croft Millhayes Stockland Honiton EX14 9DDRef. No: 21/1363/FUL | Validated: Thu 13 May 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Certificate of proposed lawfulness for a single storey side extension and single storey rear extension2 Church Lane Feniton Honiton EX14 3BYRef. No: 21/1353/CPL | Validated: Wed 12 May 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Replacement link extension to existing double garage, single storey rear extension and open porch to front 7 Louvigny Close Feniton Honiton EX14 3UWRef. No: 21/1355/FUL | Validated: Wed 12 May 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Variation of condition number 4 on application 17/2739/FUL (Change of use and works to convert traditional barn to four units of self-contained holiday accommodation together with demolition of modern agricultural building) Hares Farm Yarcombe Honiton EX14 9AZRef. No: 21/1337/VAR | Validated: Tue 11 May 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Dormers to front and rear and a single storey front extension Elm View 57 Burrow Lane Newton Poppleford Sidmouth EX10 0BWRef. No: 21/1335/FUL | Validated: Tue 11 May 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision
• T1, Cupressus macrocarpa : remove dead wood over 75mm and shorten back branch over roof to a suitable side branch to give clearance of 2m. Reason : to lessen the likelihood of damage to roof. 2 Boucher Road Budleigh Salterton EX9 6HGRef. No: 21/1340/TRE | Validated: Tue 11 May 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Reduce the height of leylandii by approximately 1.5-2m; reduce the height of 2 Thuja by 25% Long Acre Sid Road Sidmouth EX10 9AHRef. No: 21/1329/TCA | Validated: Tue 11 May 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision
• T1, Horse Chestnut: Dismantle to 1m stump and replant with a Silver Birch 23 Claremont Field Ottery St Mary EX11 1RPRef. No: 21/1328/TRE | Validated: Mon 10 May 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision

• Single storey rear extension 6 Littlemead Lane Exmouth EX8 4RERef. No: 21/1327/FUL | Validated: Mon 10 May 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision
• 2 no. single storey rear extension to assisted living facility Abbeyfield Society Marjorie Baker House Vicarage Street Colyton EX24 6LJRef. No: 21/1318/LBC | Validated: Mon 10 May 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision
• 2 no. single storey rear extension to assisted living facility Abbeyfield Society Marjorie Baker House Vicarage Street Colyton EX24 6LJRef. No: 21/1317/FUL | Validated: Mon 10 May 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision
• T1, Mature Oak : carry out a reduction via thinning of up to 1.5 metres max of 75 milimetre pruning cuts. The removal of epicormic growth of trunk/general crown clean 10 Ridgeway Honiton EX14 2GFRef. No: 21/1314/TRE | Validated: Mon 10 May 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Demolish existing summer house and erection of new garden room Bridge Cottage Dolphin Street Colyton EX24 6LURef. No: 21/1302/FUL | Validated: Mon 10 May 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Conversion of garage to habitable use with alterations to fenestration and erection of a store to side (Certificate of Lawful Development for a Proposed)7 Brent Close Woodbury Exeter EX5 1JHRef. No: 21/1266/CPL | Validated: Wed 12 May 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Conversion of roofspace to habitable use to include a rear dormer (Certificate of Lawful Development for a Proposed)6 Hill View Winters Lane Ottery St Mary EX11 1ATRef. No: 21/1263/CPL | Validated: Wed 12 May 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Installation of entrance gates at front Swallows Eaves Hotel Swan Hill Road Colyford Colyton EX24 6QJRef. No: 21/1249/FUL | Validated: Wed 12 May 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Installation of a single storey summerhouse to side of dwelling 8 Eden Way Church Road Colaton Raleigh Sidmouth EX10 0LNRef. No: 21/1254/FUL | Validated: Fri 14 May 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Replacement of windows and doors. Enlargement of external patio area with level change, steps and creation of outdoor pool. Addition of part timber cladding. Orchard Dene Underhill Lympstone Exmouth EX8 5HLRef. No: 21/1234/FUL | Validated: Fri 14 May 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision

• Replacement of rear/side flat roof with pitched roof, including alterations to fenestration; relocation of front porch including alterations to fenestration Holcombe Elm Farm Lane Colyford Colyton EX24 6QSRef. No: 21/1240/FUL | Validated: Fri 14 May 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Single storey side infill and rear extension. 4 Bluebell Road Dunkeswell Honiton EX14 4QFRef. No: 21/1242/FUL | Validated: Wed 12 May 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Single storey rear extension including demolition of existing conservatory and first floor side extension. 25 Ivydale Exmouth EX8 4TARef. No: 21/1239/FUL | Validated: Wed 12 May 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Single storey outbuilding for use as a covered swimming pool Field View Slade Farm Slade Road Ottery St Mary EX11 1QNRef. No: 21/1255/FUL | Validated: Tue 11 May 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Retroactive planning application to 20/0787/FUL for the total rebuild of the house (except for front wall and party walls) to include loft conversion with rear dormer window, first floor terrace with glass balustrade, internal alterations, new fenestration and reduced size rear extension. 10 Batts Lane Ottery St Mary EX11 1EYRef. No: 21/1226/FUL | Validated: Wed 12 May 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Part two storey part single storey rear extension including demolition of existing rear extension 4 Jubilee Grove Lympstone Exmouth EX8 5LURef. No: 21/1212/FUL | Validated: Tue 11 May 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Conversion of garage to habitable use with single storey front extension and alterations to front elevation, replacement of existing flat roof to pitch roof with porch to front. 47 Clyst Valley Road Clyst St Mary Exeter EX5 1DDRef. No: 21/1217/FUL | Validated: Thu 13 May 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Renewal of application 18/0749/FUL. Continued use of land behind Exmouth rowing club as a temporary public pay and display car park. Land At Rear Of Inshore Lifeboat Station Queens Drive ExmouthRef. No: 21/1209/FUL | Validated: Tue 11 May 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Side single storey extension to provide enlarged study 17 Ryalls Court Seaton EX12 2HJRef. No: 21/1214/FUL | Validated: Tue 11 May 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Single storey side extension with 6 x rooflights All Saints Church All Saints Road Sidmouth EX10 8ESRef. No: 21/1203/FUL | Validated: Mon 10 May 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision

• Single storey side extension with 6 x rooflights All Saints Church All Saints Road Sidmouth EX10 8ESRef. No: 21/1204/LBC | Validated: Mon 10 May 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Erection of gazebo and car port. Wynards House 1 High Street East Budleigh Budleigh Salterton EX9 7DURef. No: 21/1194/FUL | Validated: Thu 13 May 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Single storey side extension, single storey rear extension including demoliton of existing garage 39 Holland Road Exmouth EX8 4AYRef. No: 21/1180/FUL | Validated: Wed 12 May 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Installation of non-illuminated fascia sign Apollonia House Dental Practice Elysian Fields Sidmouth EX10 8UHRef. No: 21/1190/ADV | Validated: Thu 13 May 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Construction of single storey extension, porch, and new boundary treatment 7 Louisa Place Exmouth EX8 2ALRef. No: 21/1170/FUL | Validated: Wed 12 May 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Construction of polytunnel (retrospective application) Foxbeare Payhembury Honiton EX14 3JBRef. No: 21/1162/FUL | Validated: Mon 10 May 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Internal alterations to the existing KS1 and KS2 Boys’ and Girls’ WCs to include; replacement of ceilings to KS1 WCs, replacement of all fittings and minor remodelling of the KS2 Girls’ WC to provide a more accessible WC. Woodbury C Of E Primary School Castle Lane Woodbury Exeter Devon EX5 1EARef. No: 21/1164/LBC | Validated: Thu 13 May 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision
• New roof tiles to house and garage, single storey front extension, two storey side extension Minson Hill Cottage Upottery Honiton EX14 9QYRef. No: 21/1176/FUL | Validated: Thu 13 May 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Removing existing cement based covering on the building and replacing with traditional Lime based covering on front roadside elevation. Old Vealhayes Kilmington Axminster EX13 7RDRef. No: 21/1158/LBC | Validated: Wed 12 May 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Construction of first floor dormer window to replace existing velux rooflights in existing first floor office. The Surgery Fulford Way Woodbury Exeter EX5 1NZRef. No: 21/1147/FUL | Validated: Mon 10 May 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision

• Replacement of existing extension with two storey front/side/rear extension and porch, reroofing cottage, balcony, replacement doors and windows and addition of rooflights. Horners Shorebottom Stockland Honiton Devon EX14 9DQRef. No: 21/1155/FUL | Validated: Wed 12 May 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Replace 8no. windows: 2no. side elevation at first floor (W1 & W5); 2no. front elevation at first floor (W2 & W3); 1no. front elevation at ground floor (W4); 1no. side elevation at ground floor (W6) and 2no. rear elevation at first floor (W7 & W8) Pyms Orchard Lyme Road Uplyme Lyme Regis DT7 3THRef. No: 21/1146/LBC | Validated: Tue 11 May 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Erection of a log cabin Old Orchard Exmouth Road Lympstone Exmouth EX8 5LTRef. No: 21/1145/FUL | Validated: Tue 11 May 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Removal of existing shed and greenhouse and replacement with summerhouse in rear garden Abbots Cottage Combe Raleigh Honiton EX14 4TQRef. No: 21/1135/FUL | Validated: Thu 13 May 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Replacement of existing paddock with farm shed. Woodhayes Luppitt Honiton EX14 4TPRef. No: 21/1133/FUL | Validated: Mon 10 May 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Proposed certificate of lawfulness for change of use from use class B2 to B8Axminster Carpets Unit 3, Area L Gamberlake Axminster EX13 5JZRef. No: 21/1121/CPL | Validated: Thu 13 May 2021 | Status: Approved
• Conversion of existing garage into living space and the addition of roof lights3 Chambers Lane Tithebarn Exeter Devon EX1 3YDRef. No: 21/1087/CPL | Validated: Mon 10 May 2021 | Status: Approved
• Demolition of existing garage and erection of new dwelling. Land To The Rear Of 3 Trefusis Terrace ExmouthRef. No: 21/1092/FUL | Validated: Tue 11 May 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Construction of single storey rear extension with raised terrace and provision of cladding. 27 Mill Street Sidmouth EX10 8DWRef. No: 21/0992/FUL | Validated: Tue 11 May 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Agricultural livestock building for the loose housing of youngstock dairy followers. Marsh Farm Kilmington Axminster EX13 7DRRef. No: 21/0971/FUL | Validated: Mon 10 May 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision

• Re-slate front and rear elevations and replace fascias, guttering and downpipes on front and rear elevations Tudor Cottage Chapel Street Sidmouth EX10 8NDRef. No: 21/0633/LBC | Validated: Thu 13 May 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision

Landowners of Britain, rejoice! Your government has not forgotten you. Magnanimous and generous as it is, it has dedicated the vast public resources at its disposal to a noble cause, that of increasing the value of the property you own. Planning is relaxed, taxation reduced and subsidies introduced, all with the effect of increasing the already high prices of land and buildings in this country.

Rowan Moore  www.theguardian.com 

The government doesn’t put it like this. Its departments and ministers say that “we can help the high street to adapt and thrive for the future” or that its policies “will help support the creation of much-needed homes” or that first-time buyers will have a better chance to get on the property ladder. But the most certain effect is that often substantial windfalls arrive in the balance sheets of those who already own.

Take, for example, the policy that shops can be made into homes without planning permission, which came into effect in April. As has been widely pointed out, this is likely to have the effect of accelerating rather than reversing the decline in high streets, as owners push out viable businesses for no other reason than that they can make more money by turning their premises into homes.

What was once an active shopfront, with people going in and out all day long, becomes a domestic front door, which contributes less to the liveliness of the neighbourhood. Past downturns have enabled new businesses to flourish, taking advantage of low rents to revive high streets – market cycles, to put it another way, periodically reduce owners’ wealth to the benefit of tenants and the liveliness of the high street. Conversion from retail excludes that possibility for ever.

There are, of course, redundant retail buildings that can beneficially be turned into homes, but it requires some planning to work out where this is best done and planning is what the new policy excludes. It also removes the possibility of what is called planning gain, realised through instruments such as section 106 agreements or the community infrastructure levy (CIL), which is the ability of local authorities to require contributions to such things as affordable housing as a condition of planning permission.

We have been here before, with the eight-year-old policy of enabling offices to be made into homes without planning consent. The effects, in terms of the quality of the homes created, have been largely disastrous. As with the new policy on retail, the opportunity for planning gain was removed, so that the owners of office blocks that benefited from the policy sometimes saw their values double. “Retail,” say the property consultants Lambert Smith Hampton in relation to the new policy, “may offer far greater potential for change of use to residential over the years ahead than offices.” They also say that “the scale of opportunity is, potentially, huge”, that the absence of section 106 requirements is “a specific pull factor” and that “seeking change of use via this route can support developer profit margins and boost scheme viability”.

This is, in effect, a vast giveaway of public assets. Ever since the Town and Country Planning Act of 1947, development rights to land – as opposed to the land itself – are, in effect, public property. When planning permission is granted, a defined part of those rights and whatever value goes with it are transferred to the landowner. This principle gives local authorities leverage to require public benefits and to plan development. If those rights are simply given away, as is happening with retail-to-residential conversions, value and leverage go with them.

Meanwhile, the government has used public finances on a number of schemes intended to help first-time buyers and others desperate for a home that suits their needs. The help-to-buy programme, which started in 2013, enables buyers to borrow money from the government on favourable terms. Last summer, as part of its response to the pandemic, the Treasury reduced the stamp duty that you have to pay when you buy a house. This reduction is temporary and is due to be phased out later this year.

Both measures might have their uses in reviving stagnant property markets, but where demand is high they have the effect of pushing up the prices of homes, thus cancelling out the benefit they might have brought to buyers. One of the side effects of help to buy was to enlarge the profits of housebuilding giants such as Persimmon, which contributed to the £75m bonus that its chief executive, Jeff Fairburn, took in 2017, having first been offered more than £100m. Purchasers report developers using help to buy to push up the value of their flat. Meanwhile, the price of an average home rose by £24,000 in the 12 months from March 2020, despite the economic contraction of lockdown, substantially boosted by the stamp duty holiday.

Further winning owners are likely to be created by the government’s makeover of the planning system, set out in a white paper last year, which figured prominently in the recent Queen’s speech. Areas of the country will be zoned for “growth”, benefiting from automatic outline planning permission, which, again, is likely to increase values. Here, at least, there are plans to capture some of this value for public benefits, replacing section 106 and CIL with a new levy. There’s too little detail yet to know how this will work. We can only hope that the government will buck its own trends and make sure that it benefits the property have-nots over the already-have-plenties.

Published last June but still relevant – Owl

Peter Geoghegan www.opendemocracy.net 

The Conservatives have received more than £11 million from some of the UK’s richest property developers and construction businesses since Boris Johnson became prime minister last July, an openDemocracy investigation has found.

Donations to the Tories from the property business increased significantly over the past year, with more than 120 individuals and companies connected to the sector giving money.

Just six leading Tory donors linked to the property sector gave more than £4.5 million since July – a four-fold increase in their donations from the final year of Theresa May’s premiership.

Other recent Conservative donors include controversial luxury property developer Nick Candy and West Ham United owner David Sullivan, who donated £75,000 ahead of December’s general election through a small property company he controls, according to figures from the Electoral Commission.

Commenting on openDemocracy’s findings, Transparency International’s Steve Goodrich said: “The corrupting influence of big money from UK politics must be removed before it irreparably damages trust in our democracy.”

“Once again, we see the Conservatives in hock to their wealthy donors”

Details of the Conservatives’ reliance on property tycoons comes as housing secretary Robert Jenrick is under fire after admitting unlawful “apparent bias” in over-ruling local officials who rejected Tory donor Richard Desmond’s £1billion Tower Hamlets housing development and fast-tracking the planning process saving the property developer £45 million.

Desmond – who had sat beside Jenrick at a £900-a-head Conservative fundraiser at the Savoy Hotel in London late last year – subsequently donated £12,000 to the Conservatives.

In a BBC interview defending Jenrick earlier this week, business minister Nadhim Zahawi said that voters who wanted to raise planning issues with their MPs could likewise go to a Conservative fundraiser.

“They will be sitting next to MPs and other people in their local authorities and can interact with different parts of the authority,” Zahawi told the Today programme.

Jenrick is not the only senior Tory facing questions about his links to property developers. Former planning minister Bob Neill is under investigation by the parliamentary watchdog for failing to mention that he was a paid consultant for a luxury hotel development that he lobbied for in his Kent constituency. Neill denies any wrong-doing.

Sue Hawley of Spotlight on Corruption said: “It’s time for a serious review of conflicts of interest in UK planning.

“It is entirely wrong that those with money can gain access to politicians that puts their interests above the rest of us,” she told openDemocracy.

Many of the property tycoons who have donated to the Conservatives in the past year would qualify to become part of the Leader’s Group of top donors where, for a minimum of £50,000 a year, they can attend quarterly meetings with the prime minister and senior cabinet ministers. Conversations are off the record.

A previous openDemocracy investigation found that Leader’s Group donors had given more than £130 million to the Conservatives since 2010. Previous commitments to publish lists of attendees have not been kept. Earlier this year, the Tories scrubbed details of previous Leader’s Group meetings off the party website.

Big money

Property has long been a major issue in British politics, and many of the biggest players in property and construction have been significant Conservative funders, especially since Boris Johnson became prime minister.

Malcolm and Eddie Healey – dubbed “East Yorkshire’s richest men” in the local press -have donated £1.1 million to the Conservatives between them since July.

Billionaire property developer Tony Gallagher gave the Conservatives almost three-quarters of a million pounds through his company Countywide Developments Ltd. A long-time Tory donor, Gallagher hosted David Cameron’s fiftieth birthday party at his Oxfordshire mansion in 2016.

Bridgemere UK, a property company chaired by one Steve Morgan, donated £1 million less than two weeks before Johnson won what he called a “stonking” majority in December’s general election. Morgan, who sold Wolverhampton Wanderers in 2016, retains a £245.6 million holding in house builder Redrow, according to The Sunday Times Rich List 2020.

Construction tycoon John Bloor – whose Bloor Homes did well from the Conservatives’ Help to Buy scheme – gave the Tory party £962,000 since July, through his company J.S. Bloor (Services) Ltd. The Solihull-based IM Group, founded by retired Tory peer Lord Edmiston, donated £388,000, much of it going to Tory candidates who took seats in Labour’s so-called ‘red wall’.

“It is entirely wrong that those with money can gain access to politicians that puts their interests above the rest of us”

Elsewhere, 33-year-old Mayfair property tycoon Jamie Reuben has donated £586,250.00 to the Tories since Boris Johnson became party leader. The Queen’s Park Rangers director, who is also heir to a huge family fortune, made donations only to Johnson himself in the previous year, amounting to £50,000.

The Conservatives’ top ten property donors gave more than £5.7million to the party since last July – compared to just £1.5million in the final twelve months of Theresa May’s premiership.

Other major Tory donors with major interests in property include John Beckwith, who gave a quarter of a million pounds to the Conservatives last year, Richard Caring, who gave over £217,000, and developer Jeremy Knight-Adams, who donated £100,000, as did hotelier Lord Rocco Forte.

New money

openDemocracy’s analysis found a number of figures linked to the property sector have emerged as Conservative donors for the first time over the past year.

Adeyheath Limited has given £260,000 since August. The property firm is controlled by Berish Berger, who is the director of more than 130 companies including the London-based Greaterheaven and Makepeace Investments.

In November, a company called Conegate Limited donated £75,000 to the Conservatives. It is ultimately controlled by West Ham United owner David Sullivan. As mayor of London, Boris Johnson was heavily criticised for his role in the deal that saw West Ham take over the Olympic stadium. The deal is estimated to have cost taxpayers in excess of £300 million.

In March, the Conservatives received £100,000 from luxury property developer Nick Candy. In 2016 a former business partner accused Nick Candy and his brother Christian of tax evasion. The brothers won the case in the high court but the judge remarked that “none of the protagonists emerge from this trial with great credit”.

The Conservatives have also received almost £25,000 from Bruce Ritchie. The founder of Residential Land was the co-chair of the controversial President’s Club, which was heavily criticised in 2018 after it emerged that young women at the men-only event were allegedly propositioned for sex and asked to wear skimpy clothes and sign non-disclosure agreements.

Property tycoon Christopher Moran gave the Conservatives £8,500 in January, his first donation since 2017. Moran – who flew Boris Johnson back from a DUP fundraiser on his private jet in 2018 – has been accused of turning a blind eye to sex workers in a Chelsea building he owns. (Moran denied any knowledge of the situation.)

Among other donors linked to the property sector are a number involved in care homes. Hampshire’s Churchill Retirement Living – a leading provider of homes to the over-sixties – gave £150,000.

The median value – the mid-point in the ranking – of a donation from the property sector to the Conservatives was £95,744.

But the party also received dozens of often smaller donations from companies with little obvious footprint that are registered at Companies House as being involved in property or real estate. The cumulative value of these donations runs into hundreds of thousands of pounds.

‘Beholden’

Steve Goodrich, senior research manager at Transparency International, said: “When political parties become heavily reliant on a small number of big donors it creates the perception, and quite possibly the reality, they are beholden to narrow sectional interests.

“Our research has found there’s a deep public suspicion that those with the deepest pockets wield outsized and undue influence over decision-making in Westminster.”

Reacting to openDemocracy’s findings, the Scottish National Party MP Martin Docherty-Hughes accused the Conservatives of being “in hock” to wealthy donors.

“This is yet more evidence of the dependence of the Conservatives on rich backers that will only increase concerns about ‘cash-for-access’ in British politics. What do these donors get for their money? Surely the public has a right to know?”

Docherty-Hughes criticised Boris Johnson for refusing to release a report into Russian interference in British politics that is widely expected to name a number of Tory party donors with links to the Kremlin who have stepped up their donations in recent years.

“I thought when the Tories delayed publication of the Russia report it was because they wanted to avoid the embarrassment of showing the extent to which Russian oligarchs had infiltrated the Conservative Party.

“Now I’m beginning to wonder if it is because they don’t want comparisons drawn with their own increasingly oligarchic way of governing, where normal planning laws are for the little people and the rich get to the front of the queue,” Docherty-Hughes said.

When asked by openDemocracy about previous donations, a Conservative Party spokesperson said: “All reportable donations are properly and transparently declared to the Electoral Commission, published by them, and comply fully with the law.”

This piece was edited on June 29 to include updated figures from the Electoral Commission.

A plan that aims to preserve one of East Devon’s most rural parishes as a special place to live, work and visit has been unveiled.

Daniel Clark www.devonlive.com.

The parish of Dalwood, which lies entirely within the southern boundary of the Blackdown Hills Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty, is approximately midway between the market towns of Axminster and Honiton.

Home to around 380 residents in 196 households, the parish is very rural, with predominant activities being arable and livestock farming, while the character of the village is a mixture of old and new with several modern residences either side of the road that runs through the village, with a historic core formed by a church, adjacent cottages and a public house on the opposite side of the road.

The Corry Brook runs to the east of these buildings providing an attractive green corridor through the heart of the village and greatly enhancing the settlement’s rural character.

Residents of the parish have come together to put forward a Neighbourhood Plan which aims to protect, preserve and enhance the qualities of the community and this part of the Blackdown Hills Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty.

The plan sets out 17 aims as to how it aims to achieve the vision statement which is that Dalwood is a vibrant, active and friendly community that is a special place to live, work and visit.

The aims are:

• Protect and enhance the natural environment, including the distinctive landscape and ecology.
• Protect the tranquillity of the environment and maintain the dark skies.
• Ensure that all new development is sympathetic to the traditional character, materials and style to retain the distinctive character of the village.
• Protect the area’s heritage sites and locations. Housing and Population Aim
• Support new local housing development which respects the characteristics and constraints of Dalwood’s built and natural environment, yet allows continual evolution of the Parish.
• Preserve the overall character of the Parish’s settlements within the AONB.
• Encourage retail and/or hospitality development that meets local and visitors’ needs.
• Resist the loss of local facilities and amenities (including St Peter’s Church, Methodist Chapel, Community Shop and Post Office, Village Hall, Pavilion, Jubilee Field, Pub and protect Assets of Community Value (ACV’s).
• Seek ways to minimise parking problems in the village when development is proposed. Improve parking provision.
• Maintain and enhance a network of public rights of way and bridleways.
• Help create, support and sustain local businesses
• Improve broadband connectivity. Any future developments aim to improve connectivity.
• Ensure new builds provide sustainable broadband connectivity.
• Help to sustain arable and livestock farming life-styles
• Support small scale, unobtrusive renewable or low carbon energy schemes providing they are sensitively sited and screened, i.e. appropriately landscaped.
• Support a provider or village initiative to come forward with card access electric vehicle charging points.
• Increase recycling levels via a generic supporting policy.

Dalwood community shop and post office (Image: Roger Cornfoot/Geograph)

The plan says: “Dalwood is a rural parish nestled in the Blackdown Hills AONB. The parish itself has little through traffic. It is an example of a tranquil, beautiful and special rural Devon landscape rich with wildlife. The distinctive quality of the parish is a characteristic highly valued by the residents and it is one of the reasons people chose to live here.

“This applies to those who have moved into the village and those who have grown up here and stayed or moved away and returned, and the aims and objectives reflect the desire to protect the valuable and high-quality natural environment of the parish.

“Dalwood village is characterised by an historic core. Roads to the village are narrow, often single track and flanked by traditional Devon banks or hedges. While there is no public transport available, anyone without a car is reliant on community transport such as ‘Ring and Ride’, Trips Community Transport Association, or lifts from others to access facilities not available in the village.

“The village benefits from a Village Hall, children’s nursery, two churches, a community shop and the Jubilee Pavilion and Field with children’s playing area. Much of the local employment in the parish is naturally based on farming activity, and it is important to understand the characteristics of the village as they inform the suitability or not of locating new development there, and to what scale and type. The Local Plan does not consider Dalwood as suitable to sustain further development due to its limited range of services and facilities.”

The community questionnaire identified a preference for housing developments to take place only if local need is established and for them to come forward within a ‘settlement boundary’, but it also highlighted a need for smaller homes for existing residents to downsize and remain in the village.

The plan looks favourably upon new housing developments which meet parish needs and/or support the ageing population as well as young families, as well as supporting the provision of housing through the demonstration of small-scale local needs on exception sites in Dalwood

It says: “There is a preference for appropriate development to fit within the landscape, without having adverse impacts on its surrounding landscape and the natural and built character of the area within which the proposal is located.

“However, in some cases, it may be acceptable for appropriate landscaping to play a role as part of the solution to ensure that there is no adverse impact on the setting of the proposal. Where the use of planting is an appropriate part of that solution, native local species of plants should be used, such as hawthorn, blackthorn, ash, oak or beech

“Development proposals will only be supported where the development does not result in adverse impacts on the natural environment (landscape and biodiversity), and they enhance the natural environment, where there is the opportunity to do so.

“To ensure that new housing development is of high-quality design and sympathetic to the traditional built character of the parish, proposals will be supported where they take fully into account the Blackdown Hills AONB Design Guide for Houses, and ensure that the size, scale and location of the development is appropriate to the form, scale and setting of the existing built environment.

“Housing development will be supported within the settlement boundary where development is of a scale and appearance in keeping with surrounding properties and the character of the village, local amenity is not impacted and there is provision for sufficient off-street parking, meeting current adopted parking standards and exceeding them where feasible.”

The plan also adds that the aim for the village is to maintain and increase, not decrease, the range of facilities that serve the local community, and that the community will oppose any proposal that results in a loss of such facilities.

The plan aims to support applications for retail or hospitality businesses that are in keeping with the character of the area, although any development would need to demonstrate that it would not have any significant adverse impact on the existing state of the natural environment and support the sensitive and necessary maintenance and improvement of local facilities and amenities.

Fields at Dalwood lane – View south across the steep pasture fields towards the village of Dalwood whose houses are just visible in the early morning sun (Image: Nigel Mykura/Geograph)

And as Dalwood Parish is served by a network of narrow lanes typical of rural East Devon and the Blackdown Hills, and that residents are very car-dependent with there being no bus service – the nearest public bus service a 35-minute walk from the village – the improvement and enhancement of public rights of way will be supported.

Schemes will be supported where they promote, protect, maintain and enhance the existing local footpath and bridleway network for use on foot, bicycle or horseback, they improve and enhance the existing network through the provision of new or extended routes, and they prevent motorised vehicles illegally using designated footpaths, bridleways and cycleways.

The parish council also aims to work with the local community in the development of a recycling collection area, which is properly screened and managed providing there is no significant adverse impact on the area.

Dalwood Parish Council has now submitted their Neighbourhood Plan to East Devon District Council, and residents can now have their say in a consultation on the plan, which runs until Wednesday, June 30, 2021.

The plan sets out policies for the future of Dalwood parish, which will be used to help inform future decisions about development and planning applications in the area for the next ten years and beyond.

The Dalwood Neighbourhood Plan has been in production since 2016 and covers a variety of topics including the natural, built and historic environment, housing, economy and employment, transport and access, community facilities and services, and energy/low carbon, waste and plastic.

After the consultation, the plan will go before an independent examiner, who will inspect the plan against a series of ‘basic conditions’ that the plan must meet

If the examiner is happy the plan meets the requirements then it can proceed to a local community referendum. If more than half of the electors vote in favour of the plan it will be adopted and will become part of the statutory development plan for East Devon.

Once adopted, the plan will be used to help inform future decisions about development and planning applications in the Dalwood area.

The plan and all supporting documents are now on the EDDC website at https://eastdevon.gov.uk/media/3722605/dalwood-np-submission-version-05-03-21.pdf, along with a comments form for residents and interested parties to share their views.

Anyone wishing to comment should send their comments by email to planningpolicy@eastdevon.gov.uk, or by post to Angela King, Planning Policy Team, East Devon District Council, Blackdown House, Border Road, Honiton, EX14 1EJ.

Seasonal flower displays in East Devon parks and green spaces are being scrapped in favour of wildlife-attracting blooms and plants that will return year-on-year.

eastdevonnews.co.uk 

The district council is sowing seeds of change in the way it manages beauty spots in a bid to be more environmentally-friendly.

Plans involve a reduction in seasonal bedding displays to include more permanent planting designs.

East Devon District Council (EDDC) says it is on a mission to take ‘positive steps’ to reduce its carbon footprint, utilise resources more sustainably and increase biodiversity.

The authority added that a cold and dry spring has meant newly-planted beds are looking ‘less full’ – but will flourish as the weather warms.

An EDDC spokesperson added: “Our mission is to provide more sustainable planting that gives year-round interest and colour but lessens the impact on our planet.

“This action is a small but important part of our work to help meet our climate change action plan as part of signing up to the Devon Climate Emergency.

“We really hope everybody gets on board and supports a greener East Devon.

“We understand this won’t be to everyone’s taste, however, we have had a real buzz around this; on-site whilst we have been planting out the interest from the public has been really high.

“Many people now seem to understand the need to think about sustainability, the way we look after our planet and the importance of providing habitat as well as year round interest in our beds, many of which were often bare in the autumn/winter months.

“This is a new venture for us, and we would urge the public to hold their judgement until the beds are fully established. We will continuously review the success, adding colour and interest.”

EDDC says there are a number of reasons why it has changed its approach:

• Permanent planting will help to create mini eco systems and habitat for bugs, bees and birds to flourish;
• Plants will be selected to provide nectar, essential to our pollinators to thrive and survive;
• Plants will be selected on their drought tolerance and suitability to the endemic environment but also their wonderful flowers, form, texture or scent;
• Planting can be divided and recycled in future seasons – less plastic pots and trays;
• Reduced cultivation of the beds allows earth worms and mycorrhizal fungi to flourish – big buddies of plant life.

The council says it is reducing its traditional bedding displays because:

• Bedding plants are intensively produced and provide a monoculture environment which doesn’t allow wildlife to flourish;
• They don’t attract enough pollinators essential to biodiversity;
• They are single-use and are thrown away at the end of their short life. There is a seismic shift to move way from single use products for good reason;
• They require intensive watering which is an unnecessary waste of natural resource;
• The constant digging over of the beds disturbs the natural soil culture.

Councillor Denise Bickley, EDDC’s assistant portfolio holder climate action and emergencies, said:

“I am delighted to totally support this change in policy.

“We must do all we can to help the planet recover, by doing the most we can in our own area.

“This is a win on so many levels – helping biodiversity, reducing plastic waste and transport pollution, allowing soil quality to improve, reducing inadvertent damage to peatbogs just for starters – and we can all benefit from learning from the gardening skills it takes to enable a healthy native, perennial display, as oppose to easy wins earns from planting more ‘showy’ annuals.

“I look forward to seeing these displays mature and thrive.”

Exmouth Community College is proposing at the request of Devon County Council to have its current capacity increased from 2,418 pupils to 2,650.

Will Goddard exmouth.nub.news 

Exmouth Community College. Credit: Simon Cobb

The college is a secondary academy trust for ages 11-18.

The proposal is a 9% increase on the current number of students, and was prompted by East Devon District Council’s plan for more housing development in Exmouth – and Devon County Council’s responsibility to provide school places for all children in the county.

To accommodate the extra students, an eight-classroom extension has been proposed for the Maths Block at the site at Gipsy Lane. Detailed plans are available on the college’s website.

Devon County Council and East Devon District Council will fund the extension.

For more information, members of the public can access the full consultation document here.

If you would like to respond to this consultation, you can email consultation@exmouthcollege.devon.sch.uk or write to the following address:

Consultation on changes to provision

Exmouth Community College

Gipsy Lane

Exmouth

EX8 3AF

The closing date for responses is 5pm on Wednesday 23 June 2021.