A plan to preserve the picturesque seaside town of Teignmouth but to have a sustainable future is out for consultation.

Daniel Clark (extract) www.devonlive.com

The Teignmouth Neighbourhood Plan, which aims to provide a vision for the town for the next 20 years, outlines how the residents wish to ensure it remains a thriving town with a healthy and unpolluted environment, set in a protected coastal and estuarine setting.

There are 30 aims listed in the plan concerning topics ranging from housing, the future of the town centre, sport and leisure provision, traffic and parking, and flood prevention, with a ‘golden thread’ of climate change running throughout all the policies listed.

Cllr Joan Atkins, chairman of the Neighbourhood Plan Steering Group, in the foreword to the plan, said: “On the surface Teignmouth is a picturesque seaside town in South Devon, but underneath that first impression, it is far more than that. It is a complex town with a long history and many facets and styles which have been moulded by the hands of time, fashions in design and the topography and limitations of its location

“We very much hope and intend that this will facilitate appropriate future development in the town, taking into account a response to climate change, requirements of heritage conservation and, most recently, the impact and response required by the Pandemic.

“We will never be able to please all the people all the time, particularly as the goalposts keep moving, but we hope we have produced a balanced, even aspirational view after our many discussions, within the many limitations of what we can legally achieve through a Neighbourhood Plan.”

The vision statement says: “In 2040 Teignmouth will be a sustainable, thriving town with a healthy and unpolluted environment, set in a protected coastal and estuarine setting. It will have a high-quality public realm with all new developments meeting high standards of design and sustainability, good community, sports and recreational facilities for all ages and abilities, a diverse economy with opportunities to work from home or in business including the port, retail, tourism, leisure, art, and culture, and, good transport facilities for pedestrians, cyclists, buses, road vehicles, railways and parking.”

THE 30 AIMS OF THE TEIGNMOUTH NEIGHBOURHOOD PLAN

• The historic environment should be recognised and appropriately protected and enhanced.
• New development should have a beneficial impact on the character and sustainability of the area and respond positively to the challenges of climate change.
• Improve and maintain the public realm.
• Provide more green space, play areas, trees and community horticulture opportunities in residential areas for reasons of health, amenity, quality of public realm and a response to climate change.
• New development proposals should prove their sustainability credentials.
• The rate of housing growth should be moderate and must not put a strain on local infrastructure.
• New housing provision should address Teignmouth’s evidenced needs.
• The impact of new housing development on its location should be physically, aesthetically and socially beneficial and respond positively to the challenges of climate change.
• Local green spaces that contribute to the amenity of their local area should be protected
• Sports, leisure and recreation facilities should be sufficient in quantity and quality to meet evidenced community needs.
• Encourage recreational activity appropriate to the outstanding geographical location.
• Local community facilities should be sufficient in quantity and quality to continue to meet community needs.
• Opportunities for young people should be adequately addressed.
• Ensure the local provision of quality education opportunities for all.
• The town centre must remain the commercial and social heart of the area.
• Continue to improve the appearance and amenity of the town centre and seafront.
• Arts and cultural projects should be welcomed and promoted.
• Appropriate improvements and enhancements to tourism facilities should be welcomed and encouraged.
• Sustainable tourism development should be encouraged and actively pursued.
• Sustainable transport modes should be encouraged and better facilitated.
• The traffic & parking implications of new development should be fully recognised & addressed.
• More parking should be provided.
• Measures to address traffic problems and their implications should be introduced.
• The countryside and natural coastal and estuarine areas should be safeguarded from the impact of development or over-use
• Strategic gaps between settlement areas should be recognised and protected.
• Public access to the countryside and coastline should be accommodated where it does not cause harm.
• The sea wall, groynes and other coastal and estuarine flood defences will be protected.
• Business development that is in keeping with and enhances the town’s distinctiveness should be accommodated.
• Encourage development that offers good quality employment opportunities.
• Appropriate community-based renewable and low carbon energy initiatives are welcomed.

Rather than try to design a single planning policy about climate change and how mitigation and adaptation measures can be supported, the authors of the plan have sought to “climate change proof” policies and community actions and projects, which means the response to the changing climate, is a “golden thread” running through the plan.

With Teignmouth being a coastal town partially reliant on tourism, issues relating to climate change that will need to be addressed and mitigated, the plan says, include rising sea levels and flood risk from high tides, including the impact on the seafront and resilience of the railway infrastructure, the potential impact of flood risk and a changing climate on the local economy, the impact on the retention of beaches, and, the impact of current levels of traffic on carbon dioxide emissions.

Despite its familiarity, many of us still don’t know who’s land we are walking across when we visit the site.

Lili Stebbings www.devonlive.com

Dartmoor is one of the most famous national parks in the UK with its vast moor land making it perfect for long country walks.

Many of us have visited, some have even camped and of course the well-known annual Ten Tors takes place on its famous hills.

But despite its familiarity, many of us still don’t know who’s land we are walking across when we visit the site.

In actual fact 47 per cent of Dartmoor has 14 owners divided into a collection of families, businesses, royals and farmers. That’s 110,619 acres of its total 235,986.

So here’s who owns it:

Duchy of Cornwall

Starting with the largest owner of land is Duchy of Cornwall covering 67.274 acres spanning from part of Brent Moor in the south to Princetown leading west past Peter Tavy and up to Okehampton.

It first came about in 1337 after being founded by Edward III who honoured it as a private estate for his son, later becoming the first Duke of Cornwall.

Despite owning other areas of land around the country, this plot is the Duchy’s largest land possession.

The name of the estate is derived from the Earldom of Cornwall. Edward elevated the Estate to a Duchy and endowed it with lands, many of which remain in the estate’s possession today.

Lord Roborough’s Maristow Estate

The second biggest landowner of Dartmoor is the Maristow Estate to the west, owned by the Barons Roborough, the Lopes family who own 6,118 acres within the NP boundary and at least 11,500 acres in total.

The Maristow Estate was first constructed in the early 19th century by Sir Manasseh Masseh Lopes, 1st baronet.

Included in the ownership of this land are the commons of Roborough Down, Walkhampton and Ditsworthy Warren, as well as woodlands near Bickleigh and parkland surrounding Maristow House.

National Trust

Canonteign Falls in the Teign Valley

The National Trust own the third biggest lot of 5,891 acres including various properties, with the largest being Hentor Warren, south Dartmoor, also woods at Holne and Teign Valley.

It also owns Dartmoor’s most beautiful river valleys and intriguing buildings, including Castle Drogo, which was the last castle to be built in England – a granite fortress come family home on a granite spur above Teign Valley.

South West Water

Land was acquired from Lord Roborough in the late 19th century by Plymouth Corporation – later becoming South West Water.

This came about after the growth of Plymouth during the 19th century which meant there was an increasing need for larger supplies of water.

During the search for a new water supply, negotiations between Plymouth Corporation, which was the municipal utility, and Lord Roborough, who owned the land were in full swing.

An agreement was eventually made and the reservoir and its surrounding catchment from Lord Roborough’s land now belongs to privatised water company South West Water.

Spitchwick Estate

Spitchwick Common (Image: Plymouth Herald)

This historic estate situated within the parish of Widecombe-in-the-Moor is owned by the Simpson family who purchased the land in 1934.

The family own 3,891 acres including the Spitchwick Commons and various woods and fields surrounding Spitchwick Manor House.

Later the family also acquired the 1,200-odd acres of Holne Chase and Holne House.

Dartmoor National Park Authority

After Dartmoor was developed into uses for those such as utilities, foresters and the military during the 20th century, two preservation charities the National Trust and, previous to it being named National Park in 1951, Dartmoor National Park Authority took over large parts of the land.

Dartmoor National Park Authority currently own 3,512 acres.

Ministry of Defence

A Royal Marines Commando during an exercise to rescue a stranded pilot during HMS Queen Elizabeth’s deployment in which F-35B Lightning jets landed on the aircraft carrier for the first time. This images was part of a winning selection for the Commandant General Royal Marines Prize won by HMS Queen Elizabeth. Picture by Leading Photographer Dan Shepherd

The Ministry of Defence own 3,343 acres of Dartmoor on freehold with their main possession being Willsworthy Range in which there is one of their two training camps.

The rest of the training area for the Royal Navy, Royal Marines, British Army, and Royal Air Force belongs to other landowners, including the Duchy of Cornwall, Maristow Estates and Southwest Water.

Forestry Commission

Bellever/Riddon Ridge on Dartmoor

The forests are managed as part of the public forest estate which covers 3,278 acres. This stretches from Fernworthy in the north, three miles west of Chagford, through Soussons and Bellever, close to the village of Bellever, to Brimpts in the south and the Canonteign plantations.

The public forest is predominantly conifer having been planted after the First World War to address the national timber shortage by the Duchy of Cornwall.

Alexander Darwall

Stall Moor is owned by fund manager Alexander Darwall. He owns 2,784 acres of the land.

Stall Moor lies between the Yealm and Erme rivers of south Dartmoor.

Stonewood Ltd

Brent Moor is currently up for sale with Knight Frank – going at a price of £750,000. However despite being put up for sale, the 2,750 acre land is currently listed as being owned by Stonewood Ltd.

There has been said to be rumours that the moor is owned by Saudi businessman Sheikh Khalid bin Ibrahim Al Ibrahim, since the late 1980s.

But despite that, this part of the moor has been listed for sale twice before – once in 2002 for £300,000 and a second time 2011 for £600,000.

Hurrell family

Dartmoor

Ugborough Moor spanning 2,294 acres is owned by the Hurrell family. HG Hurrell was a noted Devon naturalist and acquired the moor. Henry George Hurrell was a well known naturalist and a most public spirited citizen of Plymouth and passed away on 23 May 1981.

When the Dartmoor National Park was designated in 1951 he was nominated by the Minister as one of the independent members of the Park Committee on which he served until 1972, twenty years of valuable public service.

Today, this part of the moor is still owned by his descendants.

Howell family

Harford Moor contains Piles Copse – one of the three fragments of upland oakwood on Dartmoor of which the Howell family have owned since the 1930s.

In 1867 the Duchy of Cornwall sold Harford and Higher and Lower Piles, to the Rivers family, who owned Stowford estate, which is the old manor of Harford.

Howard Howell bought both Harford Moor and Higher Piles from the MacAndrew executors in 1931, along with the Lukesland portion of the Harford estates.

The Stowford estate and the moor were bought by James MacAndrew in 1878 and Lower Piles was later sold on sometime between 1867 and 1929, and has remained in separate ownership.

After that time, the Piles farms had long been abandoned and the Higher Piles boundaries were no longer stock proof.

Both Harford Moor and Higher Piles have stayed in the family since. Brian Howell was the legal owner of the 1,978 acre land from 1966 until his death in 2003, when it passed to John Howell.

Treneer family

The Treneer family own 1,138 acres across Dean moor which was excavated between 1954 and 1956.

Russell Ashford

Russell Ashford is Chairman of the Hill Farm Project Steering Group and as well as being a land owner of 848 acres of the Buckfastleigh Moor, he is also a grazier and advocate for the industry and the vital role upland farming plays on Dartmoor.

When we consider the likely effects of Boris Johnson’s administration over the next three years, and possibly beyond, it is easy to believe his achievements will be near or less than zero.

Phillip Inman www.theguardian.com 

Looking back to his time as mayor of London, he wasted most of his first term dealing with arguments among his close lieutenants before procrastinating about which of his limited set of manifesto pledges he would implement. Only in his second term did he press ahead with the capital’s cycle superhighways – for many people his only visible achievement.

Yet taking a narrow view of his time as mayor would be a mistake. The skyline across London changed hugely during his tenure and much of Britain could follow suit with him at the helm in No 10.

It doesn’t matter that he spends his time dozing while he holds the tiller, or distracting himself with designer wallpaper. The winners in the battle to be his lieutenants can be trusted to get on with the job – which includes a particular form of wealth creation based on property.

It is not surprising that the scandals affecting the Johnson administration – setting aside his own personal troubles over flat refurbishments and a subsidised holiday in the Caribbean, and the vast scale of corruption affecting the purchase of PPE and other essentials at the beginning of the pandemic – involve property deals.

The housing secretary, Robert Jenrick, approved a £1bn development in east London that shadow communities minister Steve Reed said had saved the former pornographer and property tycoon Richard Desmond £150m in tax and contributions to local amenities.

Reed connected the alleged agreement between Jenrick and Desmond, as many others did, with a modest £12,500 donation by Desmond to the Tory party a few days later.

It’s true that Jenrick was always going to bump into property developers at dinners and party gatherings; what is disturbing is how he fits in a pattern of behaviour that runs through the Johnson administration.

Edward Udny-Lister is another closely tied to Johnson’s coat tails. The former leader of Wandsworth council became chief of staff towards the end of Johnson’s first term as mayor and rejoined him as chief strategic adviser in Downing Street. Late last year he took over as chief of staff at No 10 following the departure of Dominic Cummings.

Property developers were never far away from City Hall and, to Londoners, it would seem construction projects were approved almost daily. The city is a sea of towers, most of them foreign owned and built without any requirement for affordable homes to be included.

An investigation by the Guardian found that several firms that succeeded in getting planning permission in London donated almost £1m to the Conservative party after Johnson became PM.

Lord Udny-Lister recently stepped down from his latest role as an envoy to the Gulf states after apologising for his failure to declare a conflict of interest that occurred when he approved a £187m loan underwritten by the taxpayer for a property developer he was being paid to advise.

An earlier investigation by the Times found that he was paid almost £500,000 by the Malaysian property company EcoWorld between 2016 and 2019 while he was also chair of Homes England, the housing authority charged with funding affordable homes.

To say that Britain is a giant property whirligig spun for the benefit of a closed group of Conservative party supporters is possibly overstating the makeup of the economy and its dependence on real-estate values.

But when so many agencies of the state have found their main job is to keep the housing market spinning, surely it is not such an exaggeration.

The Bank of England says it keeps interest rates at near zero to support small- and medium-sized businesses and the broader economy. But in truth it worries more about a fall in property prices, such is the power of a collapsing housing market to destroy consumer confidence and the balance sheets of high street mortgage lenders.

Huge numbers of baby boomers now own their homes outright and see the value of their property as a barometer of their lifetime achievement as much as a vehicle for inheritance.

Many of them like the view from their homes and refuse to sanction planning applications near where they live. Once called Nimbys – “not in my back yard” – for their disapproval of development in general, they are now the main target of this Tory obsession with property.

A new planning law will strip them of their right to question planning applications once areas are targeted for expansion.

Older Nimbys are already casting themselves as environmentalists in this new conflict. And good luck to them. The green agenda is a legitimate way to fight back.

“This judgment has far-reaching implications for the protection of AONBs in Cornwall and beyond. It means that private ‘need’ alone would not in itself justify developments inside an AONB. It re-asserts the critical importance of the protective umbrella that the AONB offers when it comes to developments.”

Ben Webster, Environment Editor www.thetimes.co.uk

A farmer’s plan to build a dream home on Cornwall’s coast has been thwarted by a High Court ruling that could help to protect other scenic areas.

Mrs Justice Tipples quashed Cornwall council’s decision to grant Chris Wilton planning permission for the home with 27 windows, up to six bedrooms, three bathrooms, a wraparound balcony and detached double garage.

The Rame Protection Group, which challenged the approval of the home overlooking Whitsand Bay on Rame Head in the Cornwall area of outstanding natural beauty (AONB), said the ruling would help to protect other AONBs across the country from similar development.

Wilton, who was chairman of the parish council when permission was granted but lost his seat this month, had argued that he needed to build an “agricultural worker’s dwelling”. The parish council expressed support for his application. Wilton denied being involved in gaining the support of the parish council, which said its decision had been “unbiased”. [Owl emphasis]

County councillors voted seven to six to approve the home despite the AONB officer and the council’s principal planning officer recommending refusal because of the negative impact on the protected landscape.

The group said Rame Head was “valued for its breathtaking scenery and tranquillity” and argued at the High Court that Cornwall council had breached its duty to provide adequate reasons for its decision not to follow officer recommendations. It also argued that the council had failed to consider the extent to which the development accorded with the AONB management plan. Mrs Justice Tipples said in her ruling: “This is a case where the defects in reasons go to the heart of the justification for permission and undermine its validity.”

She said that a planning policy that allowed development when there was “essential need” was insufficient to justify granting permission for building in an AONB. She added: “One is completely in the dark as to why the [planning] committee thought the social and economic benefits of the proposed development outweighed the landscape harm. No reasons at all are provided.”

The Rame Protection Group said: “This judgment has far-reaching implications for the protection of AONBs in Cornwall and beyond. It means that private ‘need’ alone would not in itself justify developments inside an AONB. It re-asserts the critical importance of the protective umbrella that the AONB offers when it comes to developments.

“It is the group’s hope that this will help prevent similar attempts to undermine protective legislation throughout the county and beyond.”

Cornwall council said it would review the judgment and consider its options.

Kingsbridge development row: Council seeks court hearing

(Would this happen in EDDC? – Owl)

www.bbc.co.uk

A council is taking a developer to court over claims it has breached a notice ordering site work to stop.

South Hams District Council in Devon claims work started “before it was allowed to” in Kingsbridge.

Police have been called to the site at Lock’s Hill as tensions between local residents and the developer have risen.

Housing developers Blakesley Estates said the stop notice was “redundant” because the work being done did “not represent” a start to construction.

Planning permission for 32 homes at Lock’s Hill was granted by South Hams District Council (SHDC) in December 2020.

The notice issued by SHDC on 14 May said “pre-commencement conditions include the requirement of a scheme for the protection of retained trees”.

Judy Pearce, leader of SHDC, said: “The temporary stop notice was issued because the developer had started work before it was allowed to do so under the planning permission.

“It was also the case that the works that it had carried out were causing significant environmental damage.”

Ms Pearce said the council was gathering evidence to “prosecute the developer and all those not complying with the notice”.

Blakesley Estates says it had advised the council trial pits and fencing work would be happening

Blakesley Estates said it had previously made SHDC aware of preliminary works that would be carried out that required temporary fencing.

In a statement the developer said the fencing had been vandalised and it was working to make the area safe “before this cessation can commence”.

The statement said: “Where building operations are stopped, allowance should be made for any work necessary to make the site safe.”

The developers also claimed some of their staff had been threatened.

The statement said: “Terms such as ‘ecocide’ and our lack of regard for the environment is a narrative being perpetuated in order to generate angst in the local community by those who wish work would not commence on the site.”

The council issued a temporary stop notice for 28 days

Dan Sathers who founded the Save Lock’s Hill group said he was feeling “emotional” seeing the hill being dug up.

“During lockdown people rediscovered it again…it became so important during a very difficult time.”

He told the BBC the site was full of birdsong, bats and slow worms and is calling for ecological surveys to be done again.

Lesley Hurrell who lives nearby said: “We never thought this would happen.”

She said she hoped action against the developers “will make them understand they cannot ride roughshod over us all”.

In a statement Kingsbridge Police said they were “very aware of the community feeling” but it was a civil matter and would not be dealt with by police.

A spokesman said officers attended the scene to gather evidence and “prevent any breach of the peace”.

Five £1m luxury mansions to be demolished after long-running planning dispute

Ellen Manning uk.news.yahoo.com 

Five million pound mansions will have to be demolished after a lengthy planning wrangle. (SWNS)

Five luxury mansions worth over £1m each have been ordered to be demolished following a long-running planning row about their size and location.

The six-bedroomed properties built in the West Pennine moors, Great Manchester were found to have been built up to a third bigger and in different locations than they were given permission for, a planning inquiry heard.

Owners had appealed against an order to demolish the houses but their claims were rejected and a planning inspector has now given them 12 months to demolish the structures and return the site to its previous state.

Four of the properties have been built up to a third bigger than planning permission allowed. (SWNS)

Building work on the development started in 2014 when planning permission was granted for the conversion of a former farmhouse and four new homes around a central courtyard near Bolton, Greater Manchester.

Work was put on hold after a complaint was filed in October 2016 and Bolton Council found the houses were not being built in line with planning permission.

The inquiry heard that found of the plots were up to a third bigger than were allowed and some were also in different places than the permission allowed.

The local authority first issued an enforcement notice to developers Sparkle Developments to tear down the houses in 2018.

Developers had appealed against the order to demolish the properties. (SWNS)

They appealed, saying the order to demolish the homes was excessive and too harsh to remedy any breach in planning regulations.

But their appeals were dismissed this week, with planning bosses ordering that the houses be demolished.

The owners now have 12 months to demolish the properties – extended from six months due to the “hardship” that the decision will bring to them.

At the inquiry, Bolton Council argued that the location of the houses represented a “significant departure away from the clear design intentions of the 2014 scheme” and that harm had been caused to green belt land.

The council’s barrister Ian Ponter said: “The appeal schemes generate a very substantial loss of openness.

“The character of the area is scattered farms, individual rural houses and groups of houses clustered into small villages located below the uplands.

“The original plans were expressly designed to be compatible with that settlement pattern.

“They were sensitively sited in a hamlet form of development.”

Profit before planet – developers duck opportunity to reduce carbon footprint

Councils serving the South West Exeter area have been forced to shelve an innovative district heating system designed to cut carbon emissions and reduce heating costs for future residents because most developers are unwilling to absorb any of the additional costs.

wearesouthdevon.com

Although house prices have risen by £25,000 per plot in Teignbridge over the past year, the majority of housebuilders involved in the proposed development to the South West of Exeter were not prepared to contemplate an additional £2,000 a plot in potential development costs, despite the scheme benefits of a 70% cut in carbon emissions compared with natural gas fired boilers.

Announced earlier this year, the carbon cutting heating system which would have used heat already being generated from waste, was supported by a consortium including Teignbridge District Council, Exeter City Council and Devon County Council. Due to the benefits of tackling climate change, the £23 million project would have been backed by the three councils with up to £7.3 million capital investment funding – the equivalent to £3,000 a plot.

In addition, the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy (BEIS) offered an additional £9 million through a mixture of loans and grants to support the scheme.

The scheme for 2,500 new homes, shops, community facilities and a new school campus near Exminster would have taken heat from the nearby Viridor Exeter Energy Recovery Facility at Marsh Barton and was supported by BEIS.

Annual carbon savings of 2,500 tonnes would have been secured by the scheme as well as lower energy costs for those who bought the new homes. The scheme was in line with the Government’s commitment to ending the use of fossil fuel heating systems.

In addition to the £7.3m contribution, Teignbridge was prepared to make a £50,000 advance payment for preliminary infrastructure.

Although smaller developers such as locally based Cavanna Homes demonstrated its green credentials by being prepared to support the scheme, the lack of sufficient housebuilder support means that the development, which has historic planning permission, is likely to go ahead with less energy efficient heating systems.

Teignbridge will continue to apply its approved carbon reduction policies and will need to approve plans prepared by the developers but the resulting emissions savings will not come close to the benefits of the district heating network.

Teignbridge Council leader and local County Councillor, Cllr Alan Connett said he was deeply disappointed that an impasse had been reached. “It seems to me that the developers are out of step with the public mood which understands the importance of doing everything we can to tackle climate change. Their actions do not seem to reflect the commitments in their annual reports to deliver low carbon developments.

“Sadly it seems that despite huge increases in returns over the past year due to the housing boom, many developers have taken a short sighted view, preferring to maximise profit before cutting carbon emissions and protecting the planet for future generations.

“We would have invested £3,000 a plot to achieve this fantastic carbon cutting scheme but the developers will not meet us even part way. Their decision makes it worse for the climate and future residents will also likely face higher heating bills as a result of this decision.”

Cllr Connett praised the organisations who had been involved in the project for their support of a common cause of providing high quality housing with low carbon, efficient heating.

Cllr John Hart, Leader Elect of Devon County Council, which is responsible for the Energy Recovery Facility site, said: “It is very disappointing that this scheme, to include the district heating system, is not going ahead because it would so clearly help address the Devon climate emergency. I am extremely keen to make use of the surplus heat from the waste to energy plant, and hope to see it being used in future housing projects.”

Johnny Mercer has vowed to march on campaigning for new state of the art facilities at Derriford Hospital after an official warning was placed over its under strain Emergency Department.

Eve Watson. www.devonlive.com

The Moor View parliamentarian believes the CQC’s report exposing a number of issues concerning crowding and delays as ‘not helpful’ during the coronavirus pandemic and says he will do all he can to ensure Derriford gets a new Emergency Department by 2024 as well as a brand new hospital in later years.

His comments come as the UK’s health watchdog orders Plymouth University Hospitals NHS Trust to make urgent improvements after an inspection in March.

The former Veterans Minister said: “I’d just like to thank all the staff who’ve done an amazing job during this pandemic.

“I’m not sure why the CQC think a report like this is helpful at this time during a once-in-a-generation pandemic when we all know there are structural challenges at Derriford Hospital and the A&E (Emergency) department so I don’t see why that’s helpful.

“Personally I don’t think it’s helpful, and I’d just like to say a huge thank you to the staff because they’ve been struggling away in a department that’s not fit for purpose in a long time.”

When asked whether the NHS was suffering from lack of investment under the Conservative Government, he responded: “I think if you look at the figures, yes historically as a Conservative Government we haven’t invested enough in our NHS, that’s a fair criticism.

“I don’t think that can be levelled at the current administration, I think that we need to have grown up conversations around how we can sustain a health care system that is free to the point of need for those who need it.

“One of the answers is a big investment in infrastructure which I’ve committed to, Matt Hancock has committed to, the Prime Minister has committed to. I think everybody knows my views of those who don’t deliver their promises in politics.”

Meanwhile, Plymouth Sutton and Devonport Labour MP Luke Pollard said some ‘serious problems need to be addressed’.

He said: “I want to thank our NHS staff for working under incredibly tough circumstances throughout the pandemic. The CQC report identifies some problems, but it should also thank staff enough for going the extra mile and working their socks off. I have confidence in the team at Derriford to address the problems that have been identified.

“A decade of underfunding and fragmenting our NHS means there are some serious problems that need to be addressed. One of the most urgent issues is sorting out the crisis in primary care so everyone can see a GP locally. Derriford’s Emergency Department should be for emergencies but sadly too many Plymouth families are having to use it because they can’t access a doctor.

“I want to see NHS staff paid a decent pay rise not given the planned real terms pay cut by Ministers. It also means proper investment in our NHS and that is what I will continue to argue for.”

A report from the CQC, published yesterday, states Plymouth University Hospitals Trust has been informed of two breaches of legal requirements which “must be put right”.

Inspectors received information which led to concerns about “the safety and quality of the service”, and as a result gave the trust “around 30 minutes” notice before an inspection was carried out of the ED and diagnostic imaging services.

The trust said it has provided the CQC with “evidence of the immediate actions” it has already taken to address the concerns raised during the inspection.

It praised staff for their efforts during the global pandemic “to meet the needs of patients attending as emergencies, both with and without Covid-19”.

A Derriford spokesperson said the hospital appreciated the recognition.

The inspection, which focused purely on how safe, responsive and well-led the service was, found that there had been a deterioration in the quality of services being provided, which resulted in some rating changes.

The safety of this service at Derriford Hospital was previously rated as requires improvement, but it is now inadequate; and where the service used to be good for being well-led, it is now rated as requires improvement.

The ‘Responsive’ category was not rated on this occasion so the previous rating of requires improvement remains. The overall rating for the urgent and emergency care service at Derriford Hospital remains as requires improvement.

CQC also looked at the diagnostic and imaging services in response to concerns about the safety and quality of the service, and to check on the progress of improvements made following a previous inspection. During this focused inspection, CQC looked at how safe, effective and well-led the diagnostic imaging service at Derriford Hospital was.

Due to the narrow focus of the inspection, the overall rating for diagnostic imaging did not change and remains requires improvement.

During this part of the inspection, the CQC found staff “identified, responded to and removed or minimised risks to patients” and the service managed patient safety incidents “well”. It also found that staff felt “respected, supported and valued” and were focused on the needs of patients receiving care.

You can read the full report here.

A national nature reserve has been announced today (13 May) for the East Devon Pebbled Heaths near Exeter.

Announced by Natural England, the East Devon Pebblebed Heaths, stretching between the village of Woodbury towards Budleigh Salterton on the Jurassic Coast, is the latest site in the county to join the UK’s list of nationally and internationally important landscapes. 

Radio Exe News www.radioexe.co.uk

East Devon Pebblebed Heaths (courtesy: Jake Newman, Rekord Media)

Protects and establishes habitats, species, and geology

The Pebbled Heaths Conservation Trust is managed by the Devon Wildlife Trust and the RSPB – a new board under the chairmanship of Chris Woodruff, the manager of the East Devon Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty Partnership, will guide and advise the partners in the management of the new NNR.    

Recognition of the 1,160 hectare site as a national nature reserve (NNR) both protects and establishes East Devon Pebblebed Heaths’ important habitats, species, and geology and provides an ‘outdoor laboratory’ for research.

The new NNR will make up a part of the wider Nature Recovery Network to significantly expand and connect wildlife-rich places to benefit people and nature. At the heart of the heaths is a Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI), and the site is also a Special Area of Conservation (SAC) and a Special Protection Area (SPA).  

A biodiversity audit in 2016 documented more than 3,000 species across the range of habitats on the heaths – and more than 10% of these have been shown to have high conservation value. Among the key species which benefit from the habitats the heaths provide are Dartford warblers, nightjars, and the southern damselfly. 

Announcing the NNR, Natural England Chair Tony Juniper, said: 

“National Nature Reserves are the very jewels in nature’s crown. In addition to being among our most wonderful natural areas, they are also at the very heart of our ambition to create a Nature Recovery Network, to restore the beauty, diversity, and health of nature across the country. 

“The East Devon Pebblebed Heaths reserve offers wonderful opportunities for people to connect with nature, and to experience some wonderful wildlife, including 70 species of breeding birds and many unusual plants, insects, and reptiles. It is also an important archaeological site, set in a unique and evocative landscape. 

“Natural England is very proud to confirm the designation of East Devon Pebblebed Heaths and hope many more people will enjoy its wonderful natural riches.” 

Dr Sam Bridgewater, Head of Wildlife and Conservation for Clinton Devon Estates, said: 

“The heaths have been loved by generations of people and attract around 400,000 visits a year. As well as providing space for some of our rarest species, they play an important role in supporting mental and physical health and wellbeing, providing contact with nature and a place to exercise, socialise and enjoy.  

“Being granted National Nature Reserve status by Natural England is a recognition of the hard work not just of the staff of the three partner management organisations but the many volunteers who give so much of their time through groups such as the Friends of the Commons, all of which are invaluable.  

“This declaration also helps ensure the future of the heaths and their wildlife because National Nature Reserves benefit from the highest level of conservation protection available under UK legislation.” 

NNRs are designated by Natural England and are acknowledged as rare and precious areas which protect some of our country’s most important places for wildlife and geology.  

There are more than 200 NNRs in England with the first NNRs declared in the 1950s. Today NNRs showcase the best of conservation practice aimed at protecting habitat, wildlife, and geology alongside supporting research, education, and recreation where people can enjoy and engage with our shared heritage. 

Owl will wait and see if it really happens. Can you rebuild lost teams of expertise overnight?

Patrick Barkham  www.theguardian.com 

Natural England, the government’s conservation watchdog, is to receive a 47% increase in government funding this year as its role expands to support a “green recovery” and provide environmental scrutiny of the government’s controversial “Project Speed”.

The dramatic funding increase is a boost for wildlife protection and monitoring after a decade of deep cuts which left the agency at “crisis point” and its chairman, Tony Juniper, admitting that it would struggle to reverse declines in biodiversity.

Natural England monitors and manages some of the country’s most wildlife-rich places, including sites of special scientific interest (SSSIs) and many nature reserves, also providing expert advice on the environmental impact of new homes, roads and other developments.

Juniper, the influential former Friends of the Earth campaigner who was appointed chair in 2019, said: “I am delighted to see the government backing nature recovery and giving us more of the tools we need to make a real difference and build back greener from the coronavirus pandemic. Natural England has big ambitions to establish a ‘nature recovery network’ and I believe our renewed focus and remit will help us to achieve this.”

The “nature recovery network,” a vision of landscape-scale restoration that joins up nature-rich places to better enable wild species to move through the countryside, was first mapped out in the government’s 25-year plan for the environment in 2018.

After a modest injection of an extra £15m last year, Natural England’s total budget for 2021-22 will rise to £198m, of which 90% is from Defra, plus £2.5m from other government departments and the remainder from fees, charges and external funding. Although a big increase from a low of £85.6m in 2019-20, its budget is still less than the £265m it received in 2008-09.

In its expanded role, Natural England will be a statutory consultee on the government’s “Project Speed” to accelerate infrastructure projects, an aspiration recently branded “an utter disaster” by conservationists.

Juniper told the Guardian that there was “a lot to do” to “join up the ambition to streamline the development process at the same time as achieving ‘nature recovery’” but that there was not necessarily a contradiction between these aspirations.

The forthcoming environment bill includes the requirement for all developments to provide a “net gain” in biodiversity, which Natural England will assess.

“Housing and infrastructure can be done in ways that are quite damaging [to nature] or in quite a good way. Our task at Natural England is to get these things as complementary as they can be,” he said. “If we can step back and have ecological thinking built into the planning process, that’s going to solve a lot of the problems before they emerge.”

The agency will also administer the new “nature for climate” peatland grant scheme and increase its work with farmers, helping Defra design the new environmental land management scheme (Elms). This post-Brexit support for farmers aims to provide “public money for public goods”, with farmers paid for environmental services such as flood alleviation and carbon sequestration in soils and trees.

Juniper, who has consistently argued for more government resources, said the increase was a “a very welcome outcome for this year” that would “put more capacity into the organisation”.

In 2019, he warned that the “massively depleted” agency could not adequately manage the “jewels in the crown” of English nature. The government missed its 2010 target to restore half of SSSIs to “favourable” condition by 2020, with more than 60% of the nature-rich sites in unfavourable condition, and more than half not monitored in six years or more due to the funding cuts.

Joan Edwards, director of policy and public affairs for the Wildlife Trusts, said: “This is a positive step in the right direction, but Natural England has suffered underfunding for years, which has had a significant effect on the work it needs to do for nature’s recovery.

“We hope that this is the first of a series of increases to Natural England’s budget, we are still one of the most nature depleted countries in the world. In the run-up to Cop26 we must show the world we mean business, tackling the twin nature and climate emergencies, and Natural England has a vital role to play.

“We still need to see significant increases in funding, for example, for work improving natural habitats at sea so that marine wildlife can flourish again, and sea habitats can store carbon once more.”

[All these events have been widely reported]

A week ago Boris Johnson felt sufficiently confident in the success of the Government’ Covid strategy to concede a public inquiry.

The May elections boosted his confidence that he could win a general election in 2023 without having to worry about an inquiry that would not start work before 2022 and would not report until at least 2024.

Then:

 “I’m sick of it.” 

 Jenny McGee, St. Thomas’ nurse who treated Boris Johnson, resigned over low pay. 

“We’re not getting the respect and now pay that we deserve.”

“We’re All Going on a Summer Holiday”. Or are we?

Days of mixed messages about travel – Can you/can’t you? Should you/shouldn’t you? Does amber mean stop, go or don’t even think about it?

A couple of days ago:

Dominic Cummings tweeted in combative mood that the key to the pandemic was “fast hard effective action” to lock down. He dismissed any notion of there being a trade-off between lockdown and economic recovery. “This nonsense is STILL influencing policy, eg our joke borders policy.”

 Which naturally leads Owl to note:

The “Indian” variant of Covid-19 is becoming increasingly “significant” and, if it proves to be very much more infectious than the “British” variant, could derail Boris’ June 21 “Freedom Day” plans.

As Cummings says, Johnson has become complacent about the trade-off strategy. 

Yesterday:

The government has admitted that failings with the test and trace system led to a delay in hundreds being told they should have isolated after coming into contact with coronavirus,

The glitch meant local councils, including Blackburn with Darwen, were not given the full data on the number of positive tests in their area – which may have led to the current surge in numbers.

On Track and Trace :

Dido Harding’s test and trace system has swallowed up “unimaginable” amounts of taxpayers’ money with no evidence of any measurable difference on the progress of the coronavirus pandemic, a scathing report by a Westminster spending watchdog [the Public Accounts Committee] has found.

The report said NHS test and trace must “wean itself off” its reliance on private-sector consultants, after figures showed it was still employing around 2,500 in early February on an estimated daily rate of £1,100 a head – with the highest-paid individual costing taxpayers £6,624 a day. 

The March budget included an additional £15bn for test and trace, taking the total bill to more than £37bn over two years.

Next week:

Cummings is to give “explosive evidence” to the joint health and science select committee investigation on the handling of the pandemic next Wednesday. (He claims to have a “Smoking Gun”).

 Finally:

To cap it all, the £840/roll “gold” print wall paper is reported to have started to peel off the walls of the Downing Street flat.

The company states on its website that it does not offer refunds and advises customers to inspect deliveries before pasting its heavy-duty products to walls. “No claims for faulty fabrics or wallpapers can be made after the fabrics or wallpapers have been cut or hung,” the firm says. 

 So who foots the bill on this one?

A care home at the centre of a police inquiry over a Covid-19 outbreak has been banned from taking on any new residents.

www.bbc.co.uk

The Care Quality Commission (CQC) also downgraded the Holmesley Care Home in Sidmouth, Devon from good to inadequate on safety and leadership.

The CQC visited the home in February and March, days before an outbreak of Covid-19 which led to nine deaths.

Two people have been arrested on suspicion of wilful neglect.

The CQC said it had imposed conditions on the operation of the care home, preventing it from admitting new residents, or re-admitting former residents “without prior written agreement from the CQC”.

The care home “must also ensure that systems are in place to prevent and control the spread of COVID-19 to protect patients and staff”, said the CQC.

Amanda Stride, CQC’s head of adult social care, said: “When we inspected Holmesley Care Home, we found that people were not protected from the spread of infection.

“During the first day of our inspection we observed seven members of staff wearing face masks under their chin, or not at all.

“Soon afterwards, the care home experienced a widespread outbreak of Covid-19.

“As the circumstances which led to this are now subject to a police investigation, we are unable to comment further on this.”

She said inspectors found “widespread and significant shortfalls in the way in which the service was led”.

“Residents were at risk of neglect and abuse because systems to monitor the quality of care were either not in place, or not operating efficiently,” she said.

The CQC would “continue to monitor the service closely, in conjunction with the local authority, to ensure that improvements are made and fully embedded”.

It was also meeting managers “to discuss how they plan to make the required changes to improve their rating and we will re-inspect to check the improvements have been made”.

Good Law Project  us15.campaign-archive.com /

Today the High Court heard our lawyers detail waste, mismanagement – and yet more special treatment for politically connected companies placed in the “VIP” Lane. 

Government paid tens of millions of pounds to PestFix and Ayanda Capital for face masks which did not meet NHS standards. An email from a senior official stated that they needed to “get out of a contract” due to “a failure of the commercial process…”

PestFix was in the “VIP” lane because an ex-director was an old-school friend of a senior official’s father-in-law; Ayanda, because one of its senior advisers was a member of Government’s Board of Trade.

Government failed to carry out any proper checks before ordering gowns from PestFix. After examining the evidence, our lawyers told the Court: “over £100m spent on gowns with no technical assurance, no financial due diligence and based on a misunderstanding of the gowns which were actually being purchased.”

Government didn’t put its cards on the table. One witness went to some lengths to “gloss over” – as our lawyer put it – the lack of technical assurance. It was left to a detailed forensic review by our legal team to uncover this extraordinary failure. 

Government awarded huge contracts to Ayanda Capital despite it having failed financial due diligence. The hedge fund was given a red rating, which meant there were “Major issues or concerns [which] would need to be resolved before we use them”

Not only did this not dissuade Government from accepting Ayanda’s offer to supply millions of FFP2 masks, but its VIP status actually meant that it was invited to supply a different type of mask, leading to an even larger contract award.

This was taxpayers’ money, dished out to companies because of who they knew, not what they could supply. The result – unsurprisingly – was a waste of hundreds of millions of pounds. In these contracts alone.

Our challenge seeks to get to the truth of the PPE procurement process in which – again to quote our lawyer – “a truly colossal amount of public money” was spent “in circumstances of almost total secrecy”.

Please help us shine a light on this scandal by sharing with your friends and family and asking them to sign up for updates. 

Thank you,

Jo Maugham 

Director of Good Law Project

[Tuesday 25 May, socially distanced at 6.00 pm Westpoint – Owl]

Paul Arnott www.midweekherald.co.uk

Many readers may know that councils have been meeting entirely by Zoom since March 2020, with two great benefits. 

The first of course has been to prevent the spread of infection. The second has been the ability to attend meetings and really get stuck in while not having to drive 15 miles to do so. The final attendance figures for the last civic year are still being looked at – but I suspect that meetings have probably seen a rise of the numbers of councillors attending of about 25%

The reasons for this are clear. Without wishing to play the violin, backbench East Devon councillors are allowed a (taxable) amount of a little over £4,000 per year to cover all their expenses and all their time. Many give two to three whole days a week to their work, and the reward is pitiful. If however they can attend a meeting for a couple of hours without it turning into a whole half day, this enables those with jobs or young families to play a much fuller part.

However, the Conservatives, despite universal pleas from across the political spectrum, have now failed to put in place the legislation needed after emergency Covid-19 powers lapsed on May 7. Therefore, as if in Dr Who’s Tardis, we have all been propelled back to the sideburned days of 1972, when the most recent legislation was passed, insisting that councillors had to be “present” to vote in any meeting.

In 1972, the idea of the internet might pop up in Star Trek or an Isaac Asimov SF novel. And back then, council meetings were mostly old men with brylcreemed hair smoking their way through long afternoons in civic halls. Today that has entirely changed.

One of the problems that my group on the council has is that far from being stale old men with yellow fingers, there is a welcome mixture of younger councillors elected in 2019. It’s not that they have not had two jabs; many have not even had one. The first fruit of the government’s failure was seen at our Cabinet last week where a portfolio holder in their thirties simply did not feel it was safe to attend, and I don’t blame them.

But Cabinet is just 10 councillors. Next week we are being forced to hold our annual meeting – where the Chair and Leader of the council for 2021-22 will be elected by all 59 councillors – in conditions we are still working on at Westpoint. Our own quite sizeable chamber at Blackdown House is not remotely big enough for 59, plus officers, to meet safely.

This will involve a huge amount of wasted public money, councillor and officer anxiety, and the unanswerable question: what do those with one or no jabs do? Sorry to be so blunt, but this government doesn’t give a damn, even though we have been warning about this for a whole year.

It is so obvious that we should meet, as we did last May, to hold this annual meeting by Zoom. But to do so is to break a 50 year old law, and the government has simply washed their hands of the consequences. Closer to home, your parish and town councils are being forced to do this too. Last week, Seaton Town Council held their annual meeting in a car park, praying that the rain would hold off. They will not be alone in this.

However, we will crack on of course, and must continue to make the case to government to legislate as they had promised. I will not hold my breath. Many believe there is a cussed inclination emanating from the Leader of the House, Jacob Rees-Mogg, who sets the tone in these matters, that it’s all stuff and nonsense. Tell that to my eldest son in Glasgow, where the Indian strain this week is as virulent as it is in Bolton.

Residents of Newton Poppleford and Harpford have voted overwhelmingly in favour of a set of locally drawn up policies to help decide planning applications.

Philippa Davies sidmouth.nub.news

The referendum on the Neighbourhood Plan – held at the same time as this month’s local elections – resulted in 652 ‘yes’ votes and just 83 who said ‘no’.

The Plan will now be considered by East Devon District Council’s Cabinet on June 9, and if they agree to formally ‘adopt’ it, the council will be guided by the Plan when making decisions on applications for new developments in the parish.

The Neighbourhood Plan has the general aim of ensuring that ‘Newton Poppleford and Harpford will continue to be a thriving and vibrant village community which protects and enhances its distinctive character, rich heritage and its East Devon AONB setting, and should become an even better place for residents of all ages to live.’

Development applications will be looked at to see if they support that aim, for example by providing adequate parking, not generating extra traffic, retaining public rights of way, conserving the natural environment and incorporating road safety measures.

A consultation on the architectural style of potential new homes was carried out, and the preference was for traditional designs using similar materials to the existing properties.

A summary of the Neighbourhood Plan can be found here.

Good Law Project 18 May us15.campaign-archive.com /

Dear Friend,

Today was the first day of our High Court legal challenge over Government’s award of PPE contracts. Here are three of the most shocking revelations from Court.

1) Government prioritised companies because of who they knew and not what they could deliver. Take Pestfix and Multibrands. Both suppliers emailed the senior official in charge of NHS procurement explaining their ability to supply PPE. Multibrands did so on 20th March 2020, a week before Pestfix. Multibrands received no response. 

By contrast, Pestfix’s email resulted in their allocation to the “VIP lane”, where companies were fast-tracked to lucrative contracts. Why? An ex-director of PestFix was an “old school friend” of the official’s father-in-law. 

2) Ministers did not want their political contacts to have to wait in line with everyone else. Evidence read out in Court revealed “…ministers and senior officials sometimes introduce offers of PPE and want them personally handled rather than going through surveys and bulk routes. Some of these contacts simply flatly refuse to proceed via a webform…..”  

3) The banks were so concerned about Government’s lack of due diligence on  companies who had been handed huge contracts that they halted payments. An email from a civil servant stated “It is… imperative that we rectify the with supplier due diligence to ensure we do not leave ourselves at unacceptable risk of fraud/loss”

Thank you as ever for your support. There will be more from Court tomorrow. If you’re interested, our skeleton can be read here.

Jo Maugham

Director of Good Law Project

Coronavirus has exposed decades-long weaknesses in government and divisions in wider society, an official parliamentary watchdog has said, including neglect of social care and chronic underfunding in local government.

Peter Walker www.theguardian.com

Amid renewed questions over the reopening timetable, the National Audit Office (NAO) warned that from the very start of the pandemic a lack of planning had left ministers without a “playbook” on how to respond.

In the report released on Wednesday that pulls together lessons from more than a dozen more sector-specific reports into the handling of Covid, the NAO said the virus “laid bare existing fault lines within society, such as the risk of widening inequalities, and within public service delivery and government itself”.

Coronavirus had “stress-tested the government’s ability to deal with unforeseen events”, said Gareth Davies, the head of the NAO, noting that it had shown the need for government to be “systematic” in planning for emergencies, and to learn lessons at speed.

Boris Johnson has told his cabinet that he intends to proceed with the roadmap for lifting England’s lockdown despite concerns over a new coronavirus variant, but said the government would monitor the data over the coming days.

The prime minister told reporters on Tuesday he saw no conclusive evidence to delay the full reopening of the economy on 21 June, though sources have suggested it may not be as comprehensive a lifting of restrictions as previously billed.

“I don’t see anything conclusive at the moment to say that we need to deviate from the roadmap,” Johnson said, adding that more would be known “in a few days’ time.”

A number of cabinet ministers are understood to be reluctant to allow the roadmap to slip unless there is compelling evidence that the spread of the variant could pose a threat to NHS capacity. A Whitehall source said ministers were keeping their counsel while a few more days of data is analysed.

One cabinet source said they expected government to throw “the kitchen sink” at hotspot areas to try to stem the spread of the new variant, expected to become the dominant variant within days. Another cabinet minister said the next few days would be “a race against the virus.”

The chancellor, Rishi Sunak, is understood to be keen to proceed with the roadmap as planned but is prepared to be convinced otherwise if the data is overwhelming.

Other ministers with a particular vested interest in keeping to the 21 June plan if possible include Oliver Dowden, with his culture department in daily talks with sports organisations, theatre owners and others about whether a long-anticipated return of crowds can still happen.

Theatres have given the message that it is “bums on seats or bust” for their profession, a source said, adding: “We completely understand that plans might have to change, but it’s also important to know that we can’t keep the sort of emergency support we’ve offered to the sector going into the long term. Part of our job is to set out the case that more delay could mean the end for some venues.”

Johnson is charged with making the call on whether to proceed with the roadmap, with intense scrutiny over the early weeks of the pandemic, and the charge he allowed the B.1.617.2 variant to establish itself in the UK by delaying curbing arrivals from India, jeopardising a planned summer timetable for reopening the economy.

The NAO report highlighted the need for long-term solutions across areas including the disconnect between adult social care and the NHS, failings in data and IT systems, workforce shortages and ongoing monetary shortfalls, with a warning that already-struggling local government finances had been “scarred by the pandemic”.

The report also collated the total government extra spend on Covid-related measures, putting it at an estimated £372bn by the end of this March, taking in the full lifetime of all policies.

Johnson’s former senior adviser Dominic Cummings is also expected to lay out his view of the early weeks of the pandemic next Wednesday when he appears before a parliamentary committee which is also examining the lessons of the pandemic.

In a Twitter thread, Cummings argued that the early process had been over-secretive, and promised to release what he described as “a crucial historical document from Covid decision-making”.

The NAO report laid out wider failures in planning for a pandemic, noting that Exercise Cygnus, a 2016 modelling of a flu-based outbreak, did not properly consider the issue of shielding clinically vulnerable people. “Government lacked a playbook for many aspects of its response,” the report concluded.

This led to gaps in data, it found, saying that when it was decided last spring that clinically vulnerable people should shield, it took three weeks to identify more than 400,000 of them because of the “challenge of extracting usable data from different NHS and GP IT systems”.

On social care, a lack of integration between care services and the NHS “has been challenging for decades”, the report said, citing 12 government consultations and five independent reviews in the past 20 years.

An impact of this was a better response to the pandemic for health services than for care. From March to July last year, NHS trusts received 80% of their estimated requirements for protective equipment, with the equivalent figure for care providers being just 10%, the NAO said.

It also set out the effects of underfunding, often due to a decade of austerity policies, in areas including councils, the NHS and social care.

The NAO also highlighted findings from its earlier reports about staffing shortages, with 11% vacancy rates in nursing just before the pandemic, and one-third of social care providers saying they needed extra staff.

Jonathan Ashworth, the shadow heath secretary, said Covid had “exposed the NHS and social care to extreme pressure like never before”.

He said: “We entered the pandemic with a weakened NHS with growing waiting list, fewer beds and desperately short of staff. We cannot afford to repeat the same mistakes. We need both an NHS rescue plan to bring waiting lists down and a plan for social care reform. Our NHS and care system cannot be left exposed in the same way again.”

A government spokesperson said: “Throughout the pandemic, our approach has been guided by data and the advice of scientific and medical experts. As new evidence emerged, we acted quickly and decisively to protect lives and livelihoods.

“We have committed to a full public independent inquiry to look at what lessons we can learn from our response to this unprecedented global challenge.”

But Boris han’t seen “anything conclusive at the moment to say that we need to deviate from the road map”.

Max Channon www.devonlive.com

A Government source has reportedly claimed the likelihood of full Covid lockdown restrictions being lifted on June 21 in England is ‘close to nil’.

However, Prime Minister Boris Johnson has today said he has not seen “anything conclusive at the moment to say that we need to deviate from the road map”.

Nonetheless, ITV’s Robert Peston reports “the prospect of the final easing of lockdown restrictions in England going ahead precisely as planned on June 21 are close to nil… according to ministers and officials.”

ITV quotes a government adviser as saying: “It is clear some social distancing will have to be retained, not everything we’ve set out for June 21 is likely to happen.

“But it is also possible some of the easing we’ve done will have to be reversed.”

Meanwhile, the Daily Mail reports that “one Cabinet minister” has said that missing the June 21 milestone could become Mr Johnson’s ‘Theresa May moment’ – a reference to her failed Brexit deadline.

The Mail quotes its source as saying: “This freedom date is burned on people’s brains in the same way as her date for leaving the EU,’ the source said. ‘When she missed it, she was finished.'”

However, Boris Johnson has told senior ministers that he still wants to work through the road map for lifting coronavirus lockdown restrictions in England.

And, on a visit to a vaccine centre in London, he said: “I don’t see anything conclusive at the moment to say that we need to deviate from the road map.

“We’ve got to be cautious and we are keeping everything under very close observation. We’ll know a lot more in a few days’ time.”

The PM’s official spokesman said that he told the weekly meeting of the Cabinet that they would need to monitor the data closely.

“The Prime Minister set out the Government’s desire to continue to work through the road map following the move to step three yesterday,” the spokesman said.

“He concluded Cabinet by re-stating the important need to closely watch the data in the coming days ahead of making decisions on step four.”

The spokesman said that Health Secretary Matt Hancock told the meeting that “comprehensive work” to provide more vaccines and “surge” testing in outbreak areas was continuing.

Stephen Pemberton has sent Owl the text of his letter, as recently published, in the Sidmouth Herald.

[Owl thinks it shows “counter-intuitive” attitudes to late night noise between Exmouth and Sidmouth.]

“Sidmouth Town Clerk, The Leader and Sidmouth Town Councillors have excelled themselves.

They have allowed the proposed Sidmouth Jazz and Blues Festival in June 2022 to apply for a drink and entertainment license from midnight until 2.30am each morning of the week.

This is a residential area.

Recent years has seen events on The Ham close by 9.30pm, and be placed at the sea end of The Ham, except the Folk Festival which ends and is cleared by 11.00pm, and the Fun Fair.

All this continues decades long lack of consideration of the needs of local residents. It compounds a recent imposition of groundworks which falsely claims it has the Agreement of Glenisla Terrace residents, and the sudden (despite assurance by the Town Clerk as to otherwise) removal of the shielding of trees and bushes for some of the houses from The Ham playground.

Events on The Ham are why many residents moved here: complete disregard for residents’ needs and of reasonable behaviour perpetuates the long held poor reputation of Sidmouth Town Council and how it is run, apparently again with complete disregard for local residents.”

Stephen Pemberton

A teaser of what to expect next week from Boris Johnson’s “Disrupter-in-Chief”.

Henry Zeffman Tuesday May 18 2021 www.thetimes.co.uk 

The UK’s border policy is a “joke”, Boris Johnson’s former chief adviser has said as the row intensifies over whether the Indian coronavirus variant could have been stopped before it entered Britain.

Dominic Cummings accused the government of being “totally hostile to learning from east Asia” over the course of the pandemic, resulting in a reluctance to close the UK’s borders.

Writing on Twitter, Cummings, who left Downing Street during a power struggle late last year, said that “one of the biggest misunderstandings” was that there is a trade-off between locking down to stop Covid and protecting the economy. “Fact: evidence clear that fast hard effective action best policy for economy AND for reducing deaths/suffering,” he wrote. “Best example: Taiwan. Also shows that if you really get your act together not only is econ largely unscathed but life is ~ normal.”

He continued: “There’s a general western problem based on nonsense memes like ‘asians all do as they’re told it won’t work here’. This is what many behavioural science ‘experts’/charlatans argued, disastrously, in Feb2020. This nonsense is STILL influencing policy, eg our joke borders policy.”

Cummings will give evidence to MPs next week about his role in the government’s response to the pandemic.

There has been increasing criticism of the UK’s decision not to close down travel from India earlier. At least 20,000 passengers who may have been infected with the variant were allowed to enter Britain before India was added to the red list on April 23, according to a Sunday Times analysis.

Johnson had been hoping to fly to Delhi on April 25 to discuss a post-Brexit trade deal with Narendra Modi, the prime minister; something opposition figures blame for the government’s delay in blocking travel from India.

In the Commons yesterday Yvette Cooper, Labour head of the home affairs select committee, said that people would be “angry” that “the government’s border measures have failed to prevent the spread of a new variant”.