More than 350 sites have been put forward for potential development across East Devon – including three potential ‘new towns or villages’.

When the value of agricultural land can increase by as much as 100%, with planning permission, are we surprised to see such a long list? Gaining planning permission must be like winning the lottery like. Me, me, me.

Owl notes from the latest Dorset National Park Team’s newsletter: National Parks are not subject to central housing targets. Neither would the whole of the Dorset Council and East Devon Council areas be subject to such targets since planning law enables the partner local planning authority and the National Park to develop a local approach to determining the housing need for their areas. So did the EDDC “Old Guard” regime, fearing they would lose control, never bother to read the small print?

Owl also notes: the immediate priorities Natural England has established to meet the Government’s aim that 30% of the country should be protected and improved for nature by 2030. Is EDDC working in step with this?

The sooner we learn whether the Glover proposal for a combined Dorset and East Devon National Park is going to get the approval of Natural England the better.

Daniel Clark www.devonlive.com

East Devon District Council received a total of 359 site submissions as part of the Housing and Economic Land Availability Assessment (HELAA) process ahead of the review of the Local Plan which is under way.

Of the 359, 194 of those are ‘new’ sites, while 165 were previously submitted to the council in 2017 when a call for sites as part of the now defunct Greater Exeter Strategic Plan process.

The call for sites provided the opportunity for individuals and organisations to submit sites that they think have the potential to be developed for housing, economic or other uses, and officers have started the process of reviewing these sites ready for assessment work to commence

Among the submissions were three different proposals for new settlements, in the west end of the district – with a Clyst Valley Garden village on land south of Clyst St Mary and Clyst St George, land around Denbow Farm between the A30 and the A3052, and a site between Crealy Adventure Park and Greendale Business Park known as ‘Greenbrook’.

No decisions have yet been made as to the amount and location of development, but East Devon District Council’s strategic planning committee on Tuesday heard that the amount of development attributed to existing settlements will aim to be broadly consistent with the settlement hierarchy – although a future committee meeting would be asked to discuss a revised settlement hierarchy.

And the committee meeting also heard that residents across East Devon have been left split over how development should take place, the number and location of new homes to be built in the district, and if another ‘Cranbrook-style new town’ should be built, leaving no consensus among what residents wanted.

Ed Freeman, service lead for planning strategy and development management, told the committee that a more ‘West End’ focused approach to new housing development was the most popular, with 31 per cent of responses, closely followed by 27 per cent supporting the existing strategy, which would still see most new homes being built at the West End, but 16 per cent supported less focus on the West End and more homes at towns and villages elsewhere in the district.

He added: “Those settlements with a higher population, a greater range and number of jobs, community facilities and shops, better connectivity, and serving a wide area, will be placed at the top of the settlement hierarchy. Other, smaller settlements have fewer jobs and facilities, and therefore perform a more local but still important role – these settlements will be grouped lower down the hierarchy.

“The amount of development to be attributed to existing settlements will aim to be broadly consistent with the settlement hierarchy, however, factors such as district-wide housing and employment requirement, environmental constraints, sustainability appraisals, land availability, infrastructure requirements and viability will also be considered in identifying the amounts of housing and employment development at each settlement.

“Once these factors are considered, decisions can be made as to whether to focus more development close to Exeter in the western quadrant of the district, have a more even distribution across the western quadrant and existing settlement, or disperse development more widely to existing towns and villages across East Devon with less in the western quadrant.

“If a close to Exeter/western quadrant focussed approach is preferred, given the constraints elsewhere, particularly the area of AONB, this will likely mean one or more new settlements in the western part of the district.”

Councillors had previously heard that the north-west quadrant of the district, between the north of Exmouth and west of Ottery St Mary, was the least constrained part of the district for accommodating growth and would be the ‘logical’ location for any growth to take place.

No decision as to whether a new town, a series of new villages, or expanding existing villages would be the preferred option for development has yet been taken, with the villages of Poltimore, Huxham, Clyst St Mary, Clyst St George, Ebford, West Hill, Woodbury, Woodbury Salterton, Exton and Farringdon would be most likely to be included as ones that could be expanded further, based on them being in the quadrant and close to existing infrastructure.

The first potential ‘new town’ would be for a new ‘garden village’ on land around Clyst St Mary and Clyst St George. The site has been submitted as part of the HELAA process, and maps show that the site would extend to the north of the existing Clyst St George settlement to around where Winslade Park currently lies, before expanding out to the east towards Crealy Adventure Park, as well as out from the east of Clyst St George towards Woodbury Salterton.

The second proposal for a new town is at Denbow Farm. That scheme, which was also suggested during GESP, covers a large area of 660 hectares largely of rolling farmland extending from the A30 to the A3052, before adjoining the Hill Barton industrial area to the south.

It covers the parishes of Clyst Honiton, Sowton, Farringdon, Aylesbeare and could see 10,000 homes built, as well as employment land provided, and could deliver a new route connecting the A30 to the A3052, a self-sufficient, mixed-use garden community and it could deliver a regional hub for sports.

The third is on land south of the A3052 between the Greendale Business Park and Crealy Adventure Park – the proposed ‘Greenbrook’ development. The map shows that the entirety of the land between the two sites is included, with it also stretching slightly further south towards the edge of Woodbury Salterton.

As part of the Local Plan consultation, suggestions had also been made that ‘one or more’ new towns should be developed, including land at Axehayes, west of Hill Barton Business Park, Clyst Valley Garden Village in vicinity of Clyst St George, at Denbow Farm, and along the M5 between Cullompton and Cranbrook all being mentioned, as well as a whole new town redevelopment on the Smeatharpe Airfield site.

But other responses said Cranbrook shows that the new town approach does not work as the promised amenities have not happened, that sites on the edge of towns with limited environmental constraints that do not require major new infrastructure should be prioritised, and that a joint plan with Exeter should be produced covering Cranbrook and the West End with numbers kept separate from the remainder of East Devon, to reflect that this area is meeting Exeter’s housing need.

And other concerns raised were that as the AONB largely prevents development outside the western part of the district, it may be necessary to expand to expand some towns and villages in AONB if there are no alternatives, while the plan needs to take into account new development just outside East Devon’s boundary, such as the large expansion in Chard and Bridport, in Somerset and Dorset respectively.

Mr Freeman also added that ‘unmet need’ from neighbouring authorities was something that East Devon would have to take into account when revising the Local Plan.

He said that in their response, Dorset Council had said that as there were limited opportunities in Lyme Regis, which is adjacent to the Devon border, to meet needs for affordable homes and employment, there needs to be a consideration of opportunities in the vicinity to help meet the needs and sites in East Devon well related to the town may be more suitable than sites in Dorset.

And Torbay Council had advised the GESP that Torbay is unlikely to accommodate its standard method of 586 homes per year beyond 2030, and therefore the East Devon Local Plan needs to take account of neighbouring needs as part of ongoing consideration of cross boundary needs, with East Devon already meeting a substantial part of Exeter’s need which will continue.

Mr Freeman said: “We are bound by duty to cooperate and that is an issue we will have to address. We don’t have to accept what they are saying or their needs, but these areas have raised it as an issue.”

He added: “The HELAA process is about what can be delivered or achieved on the sites, not whether they are suitable, and which sites are to be allocated is for you to discuss following advice from the HELAA panel and officers.

“While brownfields are desirable, they have their own constraints and these kinds of issues can add to the costs of developing them, but we do agree with the principle of bringing them forward first and they should come forward through the process.”

The committee were told by chairman Cllr Dan Ledger that Tuesday’s meeting was not one where discussion of any individual sites should be raised, but Cllr Eleanor Rylance said that the West End of East Devon is ‘not a desert’ and is a collection of villages that already have been swamped by development.

Cllr Philip Skinner added: “If we don’t allow some development in the villages in which we live, then they will wither on the vine. It can be difficult to understand the balance going forward, but the villages want to see a little bit of housing, but not 50 houses and neighbourhood plans with villages are vital for how we go forward with the plan process.”

Cllr Jess Bailey asked whether communities which have experienced vast levels of developments would have that taken into account when looking at future development.

But Mr Freeman said that it could be looked at, but was difficult as East Devon is trying to focus growth in sustainable locations.

He said: “The areas that didn’t last time have much development probably was because they weren’t considered sustainable so unless they have become sustainable, I don’t think we can distribute growth to them just because they didn’t last time, and it may mean it has to go in the areas that they went last time.

“But I understand that may be difficult for communities to accept, and if they keep delivering growth to the areas, then further growth may not be sustainable.”

A further report on the strategy for development will come to a future strategic planning committee meeting, with the Strategic Planning Committee agreeing to note the various issues and options relating to the strategy for the distribution of development in the emerging Local Plan, the feedback report and the consultation responses received to the Local Plan issues and options report, and for a HELAA panel meeting to be held, with them to operate in an advisory capacity, making use of their specialist knowledge to advise on ‘achievability’ of the proposed sites.

Not all sites will be deliverable or achievable, nor will progress to the stage where they are consulted on with the public as part of the issues and options consultation to be run at a later date

HELAA submission Site Address Site Postcode 1 Land lying to the south of Knights Lane, All Saints, Axminster (Gated access between the properties of Pendle and Spindlewood) EX13 7LS 2 Land At Smallridge, Axminster, Devon EX13 7JJ 3 Land at Church Hill, Awliscombe, Devon, EX14 3GB EX14 3GB 4 Land on the south and west side Hillcrest, Awliscombe, Honiton EX14 3NU 5 Land North of Shoals, Musbury Road, Axminster, Devon EX13 8TQ 6 Land adjacent to Fire Station at Lyme Close, Axminster EX13 5BA 7 Land at Kings Farm, Woodbury Lane, Axminster EX13 5TL 8 Land at Green Lane, Raymonds Hill, Axminster. EX13 5TD 9 Axminster Carpets Factory Site, Woodmead Road, Axminster EX13 5PG 10 Land off Wyke Lane, Axminster, Devon EX13 5TL 11 Great Jackleigh Farm, Axminster EX13 8TN 12 Scott Rowe Building, Axminster Hospital, Chard Street, Axminster EX13 5DU 13 Land on the south east side of Axminster

14 Land at Lea Combe, Field End, Axminster EX13 5BD 15 Axe Cliff Golf Club Squires Lane Seaton EX12 4AB 16 Land south of Chapel Street, Axmouth, Seaton, Devon EX12 4BT 17 Land south west of Stepps Lane, Axmouth, Seaton, Devon EX12 4AS 18 Land at Stedcombe Vale, Axmouth, Seaton, Devon EX12 4BJ 19 Land on the north side of Shute Road (Gapemouth Corner), Kilmington, Axminster

20 Land to the south of Stepps Lane, Dowlands, Rousdon DT7 3XP 21 Land adjacent bramble mead and north of Withen Lane Aylesbeare EX52BX 22 Land Part Halls Farm, Aylesbeare

23 New Nutwalls, Harp Lane, Aylesbeare EX5 2JL 24 Land on the outskirts of Aylesbeare near the chestnuts

25 Land adjoining New Nutwalls, Harp Lane, Aylesbeare

26 Land on the outskirts of Aylesbeare near the Old School EX5 2BY 27 Land adjoining New Nutwalls

28 Land at Houndbeare Farm, Rockbeare Hill – to the south west of ‘Ferndale’ EX5 2EZ 29 Land at Oaklands Field, north of Martins Gate, Sidmouth Road, Aylesbeare

30 Land to the west of Barton Farm, Aylesbeare

31 Land adjacent to Bramble Mead and Withen Lane Ex52bx 32 Barton Farm, Village Way Aylesbeare EX5 2FF 33 Land off village way Aylesbeare EX5 2BY 34 Land at Houndbeare Farm, Rockbeare Hill EX5 2EZ 35 Part South Down Farm, Common Hill, Beer EX12 3AH 36 Land to the west of Cott Mead, north side of the road EX12 3BH 37 Field forming part of Cotte Barton Farm EX12 3BH 38 Land at Deems, Branscombe, Seaton EX123BG 39 Land Adjacent to Langaton Lane EX1 3SL 40 Land Adjacent To Sandycote, Honiton Road, Blackhorse, Clyst Honiton EX5 2AN 41 Land at Heathfield (Southeast of Woodbury View), Broadclyst EX5 3HL 42 Brock Hill House, Station Road, Broadclyst EX5 3AR 43 Land at Brockhill, Station Road, Broadclyst, Exeter EX5 3AR EX5 3AR 44 Land on the west side of Station Road, Broadclyst EX5 3AZ 45 Land at Langaton Lane, Pinhoe, Exeter, East Devon EX1 3TX 46 Land at Mosshayne Lane, Pinhoe, Exeter, East Devon EX1 3TR 47 Land adjoining Killenaule, Clyst Honiton, Exeter EX5 2AN 48 Land at Church Lane, Broadclyst EX5 3EL 49 Land to the south east of Pitmans Farm, Dulford – (Easting 307064, Northing 105814) EX15 2ED 50 Orchard Cross Paddocks, Dulford EX152EG 51 Land at Causeway End EX14 3LW 52 Causeay End, Broadhembury EX14 3LR 53 The Old Orchard, Broadhembury, Devon NK 54 Land to the North of Lucerne Road from Colliton Cross to Haskins Cross, Luton, Payhembury EX14 3HZ 55 Land South of the Vicarage, Broadhembury, Devon, EX14 3FF. EX14 3FF 56 Land at Barn Lane, Knowle, Budleigh Salterton EX9 6QW 57 Land at Barn Lane, Budleigh Salterton

58 The Old Orchard, Halse Hill, EX9 6AD 59 Little Knowle, Budleigh Salterton

60 Budleigh Salterton Community Hospital, East Budleigh Road, Budleigh Salterton, Devon EX9 6HF 61 Land opposite Clay Steps, Chardstock EX13 7DA 62 Chubbs Yard, Chardstock, Axminster EX13 7BT 63 Land off Green Land, Chardstock, Nr. Axminster, Devon EX13 7BH EX13 7BH 64 Approximately 10.5 acres – Clyst Road, Topsham

65 Land at Clyst Road, Clyst St Mary, East Devon EX2 7JP EX2 7JP 66 Land to the west side of Blue Ball, Sandygate, Exeter EX2 7JL EX2 7JL 67 Land to the rear of Barley Way, Ebford (Land adjacent to the A376} (A) EX3 0OX 68 Land to rear of Barley Way, Ebford (land adjacent to the A376) (B) EX3 0QX 69 Land at Branscombe Farm, lower side of Ebford Lane, Ebford EX3 0QX 70 6.3 acres off Old Ebford Lane and Lower Lane in Ebford, East Devon

71 Approximately 20.3 acres fronting Clyst Road, Topsham

72 Old Winslade Farm, Clyst St Mary, Exeter EX5 1AS 73 Court Farm, Clyst St George, Exeter EX3 0NP 74 Approximatly 7.5 acres east of Clyst Road, Topsham

75 Land at Odhams Wharf, Ebford (A) EX3 0PD 76 Land at Odhams Wharf, Ebford (B) EX3 0PD 77 Darts Farm EX30QH 78 Approximatly 19 acres west and east of Clyst Road, Topsham, Devon

79 Land adjoining Darts Farm EX30QH 80 Land to the north of Ebford Lane, Ebford EX3 0QU 81 Land opposite Clyst St George Church, Clyst St George EX3 0RF 82 Land at Addlepool Farm, north and south of the Woodbury Road, Clyst St George unknown 83 Land east of Kingston House, Ebford Lane, Ebford EX3 0QX 84 Clyst Valley Garden Village, Land to the south and east of Clyst St Mary and Clyst St George

85 Bypass Site, Clyst Honiton, Devon EX5 2NH 86 Land at Clyst Honiton, Clystside Road EX5 2LX 87 Land south of P&R Autos, Clyst Honiton EX5 2HR 88 P&R Autos, Road from Little Hill Cottage to Marlborough Farm, Clyst Honiton EX5 2HR 89 Axehayes Farm, Clyst St Mary, Nr. Exeter EX5 1DP 90 Land to north (Phase 1) of Exeter International Airport, Exeter, Devon, (37.51 acres) EX5 2BD 91 Land adjacent Park Close, Clyst Hydon EX15 2NE 92 Hardy’s Paddock, Colaton Raleigh

93 Land to north of Treetops, Hawkerland, Aylesbeare. EX5 2JS 94 Alpine Park Cottages, Exmouth Road, Aylesbeare EX5 2LF 95 Land adjacent the Old Sawmill, Colaton Raleigh

96 Land to the West of Fair View Lane, Colyford

97 Land at Hillhead, Colyton

98 Land adjacent Fair View Lane, Colyton

99 Whitwell Lane, Colyford EX24 6HN 100 Land to the north of Colyford

101 Land to the south of Colyford

102 Land to the East of Fair View Lane, Colyford

103 Land adjoining Clay Lane, Colyton

104 Land on the east side of Apple Orchard, Hillhead, Colyton

105 Land adjoining Misbourne , Seaton Road colyford (Franklin acre) Ex24 6qw 106 Land west of Coly Road, Colyford EX24 6RJ 107 Clarkham Cottages Swan Hill Road Colyford Devon EX24 6QF 108 Land and Buildings at Three Mariners Farm, Cotleigh EX14 9HP 109 Land west of Cranbrook New Town – allocated in the Local Plan already EX5 2 110 Land at Lower Cobden Farm, Whimple EX5 2PZ 111 Land North of Louis Way, Dunkeswell EX14 4XT 112 Broomfields Dunkeswell EX144QH 113 Land off Frogmore Road, East Budleigh

114 Land at bottom of Bapton Lane, Exmouth between 14 Bapton Lane EX8 3JT and Cats Motel Bapton Farm EX8 3JT None 115 Douglas Gardens, Exmouth

116 Littleham Fields, Exmouth

117 Land to the South of Courtlands lane, Exmouth EX8 3NZ 118 Land off Marley Road, Exmouth EX8 5QB 119 Green Farm Buildings, Exmouth

120 Land at South Lodge, St Johns Road, Exmouth EX8 5EG 121 Land off Capel Lane, Exmouth

122 Land to the rear of Elm Lane, Exmouth

123 Land to the South of Littleham, Exmouth

124 Land directly to the east of Liverton Business Park, Exmouth

125 Land adjacent to Upper Deck, Gore Lane, Sandy Bay, Exmouth EX8 5BZ 126 Land at St.John’s, Exmouth

127 Wares farm, Clyst Honiton Exeter EX5 2BL 128 Land at Waldrons Farm, Sidmouth Road, Farringdon, Exeter, EX5 2JX EX5 2JX 129 Land south of the Sidmouth Rd EX5 2JU 130 Land lying west of Ottery Road, Feniton

131 Land and buildings at Burland Mead, Feniton, Honiton EX14 3BS 132 Land Adjoining To The West Of Beechwood, Station Road, Feniton, Honiton EX14 3ED; and Land Lying To The Southeast Of Beechwood, Feniton, Honiton (Part) EX14 3ED 133 Land adjacent to Louvigny Close, South of Station Road, Feniton, Devon N/A 134 Land at Sherwood Cross, Feniton

135 Westlades, Feniton, EX14 3ED 136 Land to north (Phase 2) of Exeter International Airport, Exeter, Devon (18.34 acres) EX5 2BD 137 Land at Treasbeare Farm (Cranbrook south western extension area)

138 Land at Till House Farm, Broadclyst (Cranbrook)

139 Land to the south of London Road, Rockbeare. EX5 2EF 140 Land to the north of Hazel Grove

141 Land to the East of Rockbeare village, Exeter EX5 2EL 142 Land at Lowbook, Rockbeare, Exeter EX5 2EL 143 Land to the south of London Road, Cranbrook (A)

144 Land to the south of London Road, Cranbrook (B)

145 Land at Higher Cobden Farm, Whimple EX5 2PZ 146 Land adjacent to Sidmouth Road, Ottery St Mary NA 147 Slade Farm, Ottery St Mary, Devon. EX11 1QN 148 Church Path Field, Land East of Bylands, Slade Road , Ottery St Mary EX11 1QN 149 Approximatly 68 acres at Ridgeway and Littlewell, Ottery St Mary

150 Land East of Honiton, Northcote Hill, Honiton EX14 4PR 151 Land to the north of Long Lane, Exeter, East Devon (29 acres of green field land) EX5 2BD 152 Land to the East & North of the Hampton by Hilton Hotel, Long Lane, Exeter Airport, Exeter, Devon EX5 2LJ 153 Land to the east of Exeter International Airport, Long Lane, Clyst Honiton, Exeter EX5 2BD 154 Land to the south of Long Lane, Exeter, East Devon (20.75 acres of greenfield land) EX5 2BD 155 Land at Exeter Airport, South of the A30

156 Land at Denbow Farm N/A 157 Land to the north of the A3052 and to the west of Yeo Business Park and Hill Barton Industrial Estate (known as land at Axehayes). EX5 1DP. 158 Land to the North of A3052 between Cat and Fiddle and Devon County Showground, Sidmouth Road, Clyst St Mary

159 Land at Coxes Farm, Sidmouth Rd, Clyst St Mary, Exeter EX5 1DN 160 Land at Hill Pond, Clyst St Mary EX5 1DP 161 Hill Pond Caravan and Camping, Clyst St Mary, Nr. Exeter EX5 1DP 162 Land at Venns Farm, Sowton, Nr. Exeter EX5 2AE EX5 2AE 163 1 Sowton Village EX5 2AD 164 Land off Meeting Lane, Lympstone

165 Land to The West of Strawberry Hill / Glebelands, Lympstone

166 22 acres – land to the east of Lympstone off Strawberry Hill

167 Land east of Axminster (central parcels)

168 Land West of Chard Road, North of Axminster Town FC

169 Land on the western side of Hayne Lane, Gittisham, Honiton EX14 3PD 170 Land to the West of Combe Garden Centre, Gittisham, Honiton

171 Land to west of Hayne Lane, Honiton

172 Hayne Farm, Hayne Lane, Honiton EX14 3PD 173 Norton Store, Hawkchurch, Axminster, Devon EX13 5XW 174 Field south-east of Hawkchuch School, behind and adjacent to School Close EX13 5GL 175 Land at Heathfield, East Of Hayne Lane, Honiton EX14 3TX 176 Land to the rear of Oaklea

177 Land to the north and south of King Street, including former Foundry Yard, Honiton EX14 1JZ 178 Former Millwater School, Honiton Bottom Road, Littletown, Honiton EX14 2ER 179 Land at the South Side of The Glenn Honiton EX14 2NT 180 Land at Ottery Moor Lane EX14 1AR 181 Honiton Cattle Market, Silver Street, Honiton EX14 1QN 182 Land on the south-east side of Cuckoo Down Lane, Honiton and land at Lower Marlpits Farm, Honiton EX14 9TB 183 Middle Hill, Church Hill, Honiton EX14 9TE 184 Hurlakes, Northcote Hill, Honiton, Devon EX14 9UP 185 Land At Pit Orchard, Bim Bom Lane, Kilmington

186 Land at Gore Lane, Kilmington, Axminster

187 Land adjoining Breach, Kilmington, Axminster EX13 7ST 188 Fernwood, Kilmington EX13 7NU 189 Field to the east of George Lane, between Dares Field and A35 Highway, Kilmington EX13 7DL 190 Land east of George Lane, Kilmington, Axminster

191 Land to the west and south west of the Old Inn, Kilmington EX13 7RB 192 Land to the east of and off Whitford Road, between Ashes Farm and The Beacon Chapel, Kilmington EX13 7RF 193 Land off Whitford Road (north of The Beacon), Kilmington EX13 7RF 194 Little Paddocks, 22 Underhill Crescent, Lympstone, Devon. EX8 5JF 195 Land lying to the north of Clay Lane, Lympstone

196 Land to the south of Meadowgate Cottage, Church Road, Lympstone, EX8 5JU EX8 5JU 197 Land to the southwest of Dawlish Park Terrace, Lympstone EX8 5AA 198 Land at Courtland Cross, Exeter Road, Lympstone, Exmouth EX8 3NS 199 9.2 acres fronting Hulham Road, Exmouth

200 Land off Harefield Road, Lympstone

201 approximately 30.5 acres fronting A376 and Summer Lane, Exmouth

202 Kings Garden & Leisure, Higher Hulham Road, Exmouth EX8 5DZ 203 Coles Field, Hulham Road, Exmouth EX8 204 12.1 acres fronting Hulham Road, Exmouth

205 Land to the Rear of Old Post Office, Membury, Axminster EX13 206 Kinders, Membury, Axminster, Devon EX13 7AF 207 Oaklands Farm, Monkton (A) EX14 9QH 208 Oaklands Farm, Monkton (B) EX14 9QH 209 Baxter’s Farm, The Street, Musbury EX13 8AU 210 Churchpath field, Axminster Road, Musbury EX13 8AQ 211 Doatshayne Lane, Musbury, Axminster EX13 8TR 212 Littledown Farm, Littledown Lane, Newton Poppleford, Sidmouth, Devon EX10 0BG 213 Land to the West of Badger Close, Exmouth Road, Newton Poppleford EX10 0EA 214 Land to the east Of Exmouth Road, Newton Poppleford EX10 0EA 215 Bowhayes Farm, Venn Ottery, Ottery St Mary EX11 1RY 216 Land off Back Lane, Newton Poppleford

217 Field adjacent to Hawthorn House, Back Lane, Newton Poppleford EX10 0BX 218 Land off Down Close, Newton Poppleford EX10 0JD 219 Seniors Farm yard Ex10 0BH 220 Land to the North of Exeter Road, Newton Poppleford Ex10 0BH 221 Land to the rear of Langford Mews, Newton Poppleford EX10 0DU 222 Land on the north side of Back Lane, Newton Poppleford, Sidmouth

223 Pearces Yard, Bridge End, Newton Poppleford, Devon

224 Land on the west side of Backwells Mead, Northleigh, Colyton. EX24 6BH 225 Land Adjacent to Flintstones, 3 Offwell Barton, Offwell, Nr Honiton, Devon EX14 9SA 226 Land off Ramsden Lane, Offwell, Nr. Honiton, Devon EX14 9SZ EX14 9SZ 227 Barrack Farm, Ottery St. Mary EX11 1RB 228 Land south of the Old Post Office, Fairmile, Nr Coombelake, Devon EX11 229 Land adjacent Thorn Farm Way/Barrack Road, Ottery St Mary EX11 1RA 230 Land South of Otter Close, Tipton St John EX10 0JU 231 Land at Sandgate, Sandgate Lane, Wiggaton, Ottery St Mary EX11 1PX 232 Oakfield Farm, Fenny Bridges, Honiton

233 Land at Thorne Farm, Exeter Road, Ottery St Mary EX11 1QZ 234 Land to North and South of Salston Barton, Ottery St Mary EX11 1RG 235 Gerway Farm, Ottery St. Mary EX!! 1PN 236 Approximately 38 acres west of North Street and Butts Hill Ottery St Mary, East Devon

237 Gerway Farm, Ottery St. Mary, Ex11 1PN EX11 1PN 238 Approximatly 8 acres off Butts Road Ottery St Mary

239 Land at Bylands, Slade Road, Ottery St Mary EX11 1QN 240 Land of Bell Street, Otterton

241 Land adjacent to the North Star, Otterton

242 Land at Hayes Lane, Otterton, Devon, EX9 7JS EX9 7JS 243 Land at Plymtree, Cullompton (A)

244 Land at Plymtree, Cullompton (B)

245 Land North Hatchland Road, Poltimore

246 Land at Poltimore/Broadclyst EX40BQ 247 Land at Quarter Mile Lane, Marsh Green EX5 2EU 248 Land at Houndbeare Farm, Rockbeare Hill – to the west of Robin’s Nest EX5 2EZ 249 Land at Houndbeare Farm, Rockbeare Hill – to the west of Melton Court EX5 2EZ 250 Land at Houndbeare Farm, Rockbeare Hill – to the east of Marl Cottage EX5 2EZ 251 Land at Harrier Court, Clyst Honiton, Exeter EX5 2DR

252 1 and 2 Tillhouse Cottages, London Road EX5 2EE 253 L/A The Grange, London Road, Rockbeare EX25 2FP 254 Clay Common, Seaton

255 Land at Barnards Hill Lane, Seaton

256 Harepath Road, Seaton

257 Land Between Churston Rise and Couchill Copse, Seaton. O/S Ref: SY2390NW EX12 2HD 258 Land at Clay Common (Little Paddock), Seaton

259 Land south of Beer Road, Seaton

260 Land at Barnards Hill Lane, Seaton, East Devon EX12 2TE 261 Land at Whitecross Farm, Colyford Road, Seaton EX12 2SN 262 Land south west of Woolbrook Road, Sidmouth EX10 0LZ 263 Land to the east of The Lookout Coreway Sidford EX109sd 264 Land east of Burscombe Lane, Sidmouth N/A 265 Land west of Two Bridges Road, Sidford

266 Land South of Furzehill, Sidbury N/A 267 The Hams, Fortescue Road, Sidford

268 Land adjoining Fortescue Road, Sidmouth EX10 269 Land adj Stevens Cross Close, Sidford (east side) EX10 9QJ 270 Peak Coach House, Cotmaton Road, Sidmouth, Devon (excluding The Belvedere and No. 3 Peak Coach Cottages) EX10 8SY 271 Plot 1 Sidmouth Garden Centre, Stowford, Sidmouth EX10 0NA 272 Peak Coach House, (Numbers 1-3 Belfry Cottages), Cotmaton Road, Sidmouth, Devon, EX10 8SY and

The Belvedere, Peak Hill Road, Sidmouth, EX10 0NW EX10 8SY 273 Plot 2- North Sidmouth Garden Centre, Stowford, Sidmouth EX10 0NA 274 Land at Dark Lane, Sidmouth EX10 9DR 275 Station Yard, Station Road, Sidmouth, Devon EX10 8NN 276 Units 2, 5A and 5B Alexandria Industrial Estate, Sidmouth EX10 9HL 277 Alexandria Industrial Estate, Alexandria Road, Sidmouth EX10 9HG 278 Sidmouth Health Centre, Sidmouth, Devon EX10 8ET 279 Land east of Two Bridges Road, Sidford N/A 280 Field bordering junction of Cotford Road and Roncombe Lane [OS: 805]. EX10 0QN 281 Land part of Lees Farm, Colyton Road, Southleigh, Colyton EX24 6SA 282 Land north of Sidmouth Road, Clyst St Mary

283 Langdon’s business park and the occupied units EX5 1AF 284 Denbowe EX5 1AF 285 8.81 acres fronting the A3052 at The Cat and Fiddle, Clyst St Mary

286 3.69 acres Bishops Court Lane, Clyst St Mary

287 Timbervale and part of Pine Ridge, Sowton Village, near ExeterER EX5 2AG 288 Land at Bishops Court Lane, Clyst St Mary EX5 1BX 289 Clyst Valley Garden Village, Land to the south and east of Clyst St Mary and Clyst St George

290 Axehayes Farm Clyst St Mary Nr. Exeter EX5 1DP 291 Land adjacent to Mannings, Stockland, Honiton EX14 9DS 292 Hornshayes Farm, Stockland EX14 9BX 293 Field 7414, Stoke Road, Stoke Canon EX5 4EG 294 Fields 7425 & 8333, Stoke Road, Stoke Canon EX5 4EG 295 Field 6700 & 6907, Stoke Road, Stoke Canon EX5 4EG 296 Land adjoininf Greenaces, Newtown, Talaton EX5 2RA 297 Land at Moorhayes Farm, Talaton EX5 2RE 298 Land adjoining Weeks Farm, Talaton EX5 2RG 299 Land to the east of Woodmans Orchard and Woodmans Hill Farm, Talaton EX5 2RW 300 Land at Sidmouth Road, Lyme Regis DT7 3ET 301 Goodlands Farm, Charmouth Road EX13 5ST 302 Land at Cowley, Exeter (A) EX5 5EN 303 Land at Cowley, Cowley, Exeter, Devon (B) EX5 5EN 304 Land at Cowley, Cowley, Exeter, Devon © EX5 5EN 305 Land at Westhayes/Hayes End, Eastfield, West Hill EX11 1UZ 306 Field at junction of adjacent to Prickly Pear House at junction of B3180 Exmouth Road and Bendarroch Road, West Hill, Devon EX11 1JY 307 Rear of Hasta-La-Vista, Windmill Lane, West Hill EX11 1JP 308 Land off Oak Road, West Hill, Nr. Ottery St Mary, Devon EX11 1SJ 309 Land north and east of Eastfield, West Hill EX11 1UQ 310 Land east of The Pygthle, Lower Broad Oak Road, West Hill EX11 1XQ 311 Hollybrook Nursery, Exmouth Road, Ottery St Mary EX11 1JZ 312 Weggis Farm, Higher Metcombe, Ottery St Mary EX11 1SQ 313 Pikes Farm, West Hill, Ottery St Mary EX11 1XJ 314 Flower Cottage, Elsdon Lane, West Hill, Ottery St Mary EX11 1TZ 315 Elsdon House, Elsdon Lane, West Hill EX11 1UA 316 WI Building and adjoining land, West Hill Road, West Hill EX11 1TP 317 Land at Cobden Whimple Devon EX5 2PZ 318 Land lying to the west of The Paddock Whimple EX5 2NP 319 Approximately 2.3 acres fronting Broadclyst Road, Whimple

320 Approximately 25 acres west of Church Road and Bramley Gardens, Whimple

321 Approximately 4.6 acres at the Junction of Church Road and Woodhayes Lane, Whimple

322 Land adjoining Woodhayes Country House, Woodhayes Lane, Whimple, Exeter EX5 2TQ 323 Approximately 4 acres Station Road, Whimple

324 Land off Lilypond Lane, Whimple, Nr. Exeter, Devon EX5 2QP 325 Land North side of Grove Road, Whimple, Exeter

326 Land at Perriton Barton, Whimple EX5 2QD 327 5.8 Acres off London Road, Whimple

328 Land Adjacent to 5 Woodlands EX5 2QW 329 Wilmington Quarry

330 Gibbons farm, Wilmington ex14 9jr 331 Field 4583, Exmouth Road, Exton EX3 0PZ 332 Land off Globe Hill, Woodbury

333 Land to the rear of Orchard House, Globe Hill, Woodbury EX5 1JP 334 Land Off Globe Hill, Woodbury EX5 1LL 335 Land at Gilbrook, Woodbury

336 Land to the East of Higher Venmore Farm, Woodbury EX5 1LD 337 Land of Broadway (Phase 2), Woodbury

338 Land on the east side of Parsonage Way, Woodbury EX5 1EQ 339 Ford Farm, Woodbury EX5 1NJ 340 Land North East of Webbers’ Meadow, Castle Lane, Woodbury EX5 1EE 341 Marandor, Exmouth Road, Exton EX30PZ 342 Land to the north and east of Exton Farm, Exton

343 Clyst Valley Garden Village, Land to the south and east of Clyst St Mary and Clyst St George N/A 344 Land at Rydon Farm, Woodbury EX5 1LB 345 Land Adjoining Woodbury Business Park, Woodbury EX5 1AY 346 Lower Pilehayes Farm, Woodbury Salterton, Exeter EX5 1QE 347 The Top Yard, Land at Venmore Farm, Woodbury EX5 1LD 348 Land to the South of Lower Road, Woodbury Salterton EX5 1AL 349 Former Sewage Treatment Works, Woodbury Salterton EX5 1QZ 350 Land at Honey Lane, Woodley Salterton, Devon, EX5 1PP EX5 1PP 351 Cricket Field off Town Lane, Woodbury

352 Greendale Business Park, Sidmouth Road, Woodbury Salterton, Exeter EX51EX 353 Land north of the A30 and south of Drakes Meadow, Yarcombe, Honiton, Devon EX14 9AA 354 Land north of the A303, Marsh, Yarcombe, Devon (A) EX14 9AJ 355 Land north of the A303, Marsh, Yarcombe, Devon (B) EX14 9AJ 356 Land adjacent to road through Marsh Village (Parish of Yarcombe) EX14 9AH 357 Land and buildings part at Yonder Marsh Farm, Marsh , Honiton EX14 9AH 358 Land to the north of Keets Mill Lane/south of Bishopswood Road, Bishopswood, Otterford, Somerset TA20 3RU 359 Land to the south of Higher Lane, Axmouth Nonwe

Does Boris Johnson take us all for fools? – Owl

Blow to Johnson’s authority as his health minister loses all support

http://www.theguardian.com 

When Matt Hancock drove to see Boris Johnson at Chequers to tell him he was resigning on Saturday, it wasn’t just an admission that he had run out of supporters after admitting his infamous clinch with an aide breached Covid guidelines. It was also a rare moment when the prime minister’s legendary ability to defy political gravity appeared to falter.

Even by Saturday afternoon, when Tory MPs had begun to make their feelings known, Hancock’s own local paper had condemned him and senior figures in the NHS had concluded Hancock had lost all credibility, Downing Street stuck to its initial conclusion that the matter of the health secretary’s conduct was closed. The tactic, after all, had a good record of success. Be it the home secretary Priti Patel over bullying claims, education secretary Gavin Williamson over botched exams, or communities secretary Robert Jenrick over a Tory donor’s property deal, Johnson resolutely ignored demands for sackings. The regular use of the tactic had led Whitehall insiders and some Tory MPs to wonder what levers were still in place to hold faltering ministers accountable.

Yet it was the health secretary who concluded that the tactic could not save him. The previous 48 hours, and the collateral damage caused by the exposure of his alleged affair with his aide Gina Coladangelo, had left him with little doubt.

It was a vaguely absurd vignette on Friday night that demonstrated how little support Hancock had remaining. With his career hanging by a thread, facing a series of unanswered questions over hypocrisy and propriety following the exposure of his office clinch with Coladangelo, he faced an online meeting with 70-odd members of his local Tory party – and they weren’t happy. “He broke the rules when many of us weren’t allowed to see people we love dearly,” said one member. “Everyone is shocked. There is a lot of grievance. We were not seeing family. He’s told us to do that and we’ve followed him, and then you find out rules don’t matter to him.”

The embattled Hancock was spared an uncomfortable questioning by a friend. Members said that the chair, Rachel Hood, a Hancock supporter who donated £10,000 to him in 2018, did not allow any questions after he had given them all an update, largely on local issues. But the fallout continued.

By Saturday morning, the pressure on Hancock was intensifying, again in his own backyard. One local paper, the Eastern Daily Press carried the headline, “A complete and utter hypocrite”. Duncan Baker, a Norfolk MP, became the first Tory to call for his resignation. Meanwhile, there was also growing anger in the NHS, with influential figures amazed that Hancock had, at first, opted to stay and fight it out. “It is really difficult to see how somebody who has done what he has done can lead with credibility and authority,” said a senior NHS source. Tories reported to their whips that, much like Dominic Cummings’s trip to Barnard Castle, Hancock’s rule-breaking office clinch risked a major breach in public trust.

His resignation letter, sent to the prime minister on Saturday evening, was an admission that even if he had weathered the initial storm, he had lost crucial credibility. “We owe it to the people who have sacrificed so much in this pandemic to be honest when we have let them down,” he wrote. He could not hold the No 10 line. The support he subsequently received from Tory MPs was, to some extent, a sign of relief in the party that accountability still had some hold over the cabinet.

Downing Street’s hopes of simply closing down the issue were stymied by obvious questions. Coladangelo, a PR expert who had been a director of a lobbying company, was hired last year first as an unpaid adviser, and then as a paid non-executive director at Hancock’s department. Those appointments came with no public fanfare, while there was seemingly no independent process for her appointment as a director.

Meanwhile, more revelations emerged. On Saturday night, government sources confirmed that Coladangelo accompanied Hancock to the G7 meeting of health ministers in Oxford this month, with the department paying costs. The source said she was there in her capacity as a non-executive director with board oversight for international policy, and that the department paid for the whole delegation. Insiders suggest that she was acting more as a special adviser. There are already a series of demands for inquiries over how Coladangelo was appointed, including how she came to have a parliamentary pass sponsored first by Hancock in 2019 and then by health minister Lord Bethell.

In reality, many in the health service and political world concluded on Saturday morning that the growing charges against Hancock would simply weigh him down in the job. He had faced accusations of lying from Cummings, the prime minister’s former aide, who suggested Hancock’s handling of the pandemic, especially over PPE, testing and care homes, meant he should have been sacked several times over. Further revelations from Cummings last week showed the prime minister despairing of Britain’s pandemic response last year. Hypocrisy is the other glaring charge, most obviously in relation to Hancock’s conclusion last year that the scientist Neil Ferguson had no choice but to resign from the government’s science advisory committee over breaking lockdown rules. It left him few friends in the scientific and health fields.

Then there are the imminent health service reforms that Hancock was due to present to some cabinet colleagues on Monday, before introducing them in the Commons. Like all changes to the NHS, they are proving controversial, but the main bone of contention is the extra powers that will flow to the incumbent health secretary. Insiders were already asking if the new bill, an immediate challenge for new health secretary Sajid Javid, should proceed as planned. “It feels a bit rich that on the one hand, he should be asking for extra power, and then on the other, basically showing behaviours that are completely incompatible with the increased power that he’s asking for,” said a senior NHS figure.

Some Tories thought Hancock could survive had he made it to the Batley and Spen by-election, when the focus will switch to Labour. However, the obvious lack of support, with the threat of more fallout in the days ahead, made Thursday seem a long way off.

And what of accountability in the age of Johnson? Opposition parties are already hoping that Hancock’s demise is a sign that, even with an administration as unusual as Johnson’s, gravity will always find a way to bring matters back to earth.

Matt Hancock used private email account for government business

Gabriel Pogrund www.thetimes.co.uk 

Matt Hancock faces an investigation after using a personal email account instead of an official address during the pandemic in a breach of government guidelines.

Since March last year the former health secretary has routinely used a private account to conduct government business, concealing information from his own officials and potentially the public, according to documents obtained by The Sunday Times.

It means that the government does not hold records of much of Hancock’s decision-making, including negotiating multimillion-pound PPE contracts, setting up the £37 billion test and trace programme and overseeing the government’s care homes strategy.

The disclosure of Hancock’s secret account appears in minutes of a meeting between senior officials at the Department of Health and Social Care (DHSC) in December. Cabinet Office guidance states that ministers should use official email accounts in order to ensure that there is evidence of important decisions and of proper internal scrutiny.

Hancock was left fighting for his career after he broke his own coronavirus guidance — and potentially the law — during an affair with a senior aide.

Hancock, 42, is also accused of conflicts of interest after appointing Gina Coladangelo, 43, as his media adviser and a director of his department, earning £15,000 a year. However, according to leaked documents, he may have hidden details of their official dealings and his wider conduct in office.

The minutes record that David Williams, the department’s second permanent secretary, had warned about Hancock’s conduct, saying that he “only” deals with his private office “via Gmail account”. He stated that “the SOS [secretary of state] does not have a DHSC inbox”.

Williams disclosed that officials could not freely access key evidence or documents, saying the “threshold for requesting this personal account would need to be substantial”.

He added that Lord Bethell, Hancock’s ally and a junior health minister, engaged in the same practice, saying he “routinely uses his personal inbox and the majority of [approvals for contracts] would have been initiated from this inbox”.

The minutes concern a meeting about a Good Law Project legal challenge over Hancock’s decision to award a contract worth up to £75 million for “malfunctioning” tests to a firm linked to Sir John Bell, a government adviser.

In the minutes, Williams admits that he “doesn’t believe there was inappropriate acts on behalf of ministers but can clearly see the optics suggest otherwise”.

Since the meeting, Hancock has been given an official email account, although two Whitehall sources said that he still preferred to use Gmail. This is considered to be a less traceable form of communication.

Under the Freedom of Information Act, officials can request access to private email accounts. Yet the Information Commissioners Office (ICO) says such searches are rare. The individual must be asked to go through their own personal address and decide what to disclose, rather than handing it over to officials in full

The disclosures pose new questions about Hancock’s conduct. They suggest it will be difficult for officials to obtain evidence of his conduct in office before an independent inquiry into the government’s handling of the coronavirus pandemic.

His emails may also be important for any investigation into whether he breached MPs’ rules by sponsoring a parliamentary pass for Colandangelo. Cabinet Office guidance states explicitly that “it is expected that government business should be recorded on a government record system”.

Labour has demanded an investigation by the Information Commissioners Office. Angela Rayner said: “He needs to explain to the British people why he thought it was acceptable to have a secret and private email inbox for contracts for people that he had a direct relationship with.”

It is not the first time that ministers have been embroiled in controversy about the use of private email accounts. Ten years ago, Michael Gove faced an inquiry over similar allegations after Dominic Cummings, his chief adviser, refused to communicate via his formal inbox. He even wrote that would “not answer any further emails to my official … account”. Eventually Gove was forced to hand over his email to his department.

Hancock already faces potential investigations into whether he broke laws and guidance he helped create, and the ministerial code.

A DHSC spokesman said: “All DHSC ministers understand the rules around personal email usage and only conduct government business through their departmental email addresses.”

Whitehall sources rule out mole hunt to avoid whistleblowing claims from source of damaging images.

Denis Campbell www.theguardian.com 

The government will not launch any inquiry into who leaked a photograph of Matt Hancock kissing an aide, even though they believe they know who did it, the Guardian understands.

Downing Street and Hancock’s Department of Health and Social Care (DHSC) have decided not to instigate any hunt to try to identify who passed the image taken from a security camera in his ministerial office to the Sun.

The decision was taken at a meeting early on Friday morning involving Hancock, the DHSC’s permanent secretary, Sir Chris Wormald, and the department’s head of security, hours after the tabloid reported and provided evidence of Hancock’s encounter in his office on the ninth floor of the department with an aide, Gina Coladangelo.

Sources say that they have ruled out a mole hunt because if the person were tracked down they could then claim that they were a whistleblower who was exposing wrongdoing.

“Imagine if that person was dismissed for leaking what any employment tribunal that followed would be like for Matt Hancock,” said a source. “It’s hard to justify a leak inquiry when you’ve been caught brazenly doing something like this.”

Another source familiar with the DHSC’s handling of the fallout from Hancock’s behaviour said: “They aren’t going to do a leak inquiry. The thinking is that you could argue that whoever did it was a whistleblower. If someone was whistleblowing, putting sensitive information into the public domain, they deserve to be protected – that’s good practice with whistleblowers.”

The DHSC initially thought the photograph had been taken by someone using a long lens camera in a building opposite the DHSC’s headquarters on Victoria Street, a short walk from the Houses of Parliament. But it quickly discarded that theory and now believes that it came from a member of DHSC staff.

The DHSC believes the picture is a photograph of an image captured by the closed-circuit television camera in Hancock’s office rather than a screengrab that has been taken from CCTV footage. However, it is bracing itself for the prospect of the Sun publishing further material, possibly including moving CCTV footage of Hancock with Coladangelo, who one source described as “Matt’s style guru, someone to spruce up his image, as much as someone who advises him on what to say and how to say it in media interviews”.

Downing Street and the DHSC were asked if any leak inquiry would be held. A No 10 spokesperson said: “The prime minister’s spokesperson was asked about this at lobby [Friday’s briefing with journalists] and he said we don’t comment on security matters for obvious reasons, but he pointed journalists to DHSC for anything further on this matter.” Boris Johnson’s spokesperson declined at that briefing to say anything about an inquiry.

The DHSC had not responded by the time of publication.

It appears that Matt Hancock’s “chumocracy” runs even deeper than we thought! – Owl

Mark Kleinman news.sky.com 

A relative of the Whitehall director alleged to have had an extramarital affair with Matt Hancock, the health secretary, is an executive at a private healthcare company which has won a string of NHS contracts.

Sky News can reveal that Roberto Coladangelo – who is Gina Coladangelo’s brother – works at Partnering Health Limited (PHL Group), a specialist in the provision of urgent and primary care services to NHS patients.

The disclosure risks deepening the crisis engulfing Mr Hancock, who has already been left weakened by allegations about his competence at tackling the COVID-19 pandemic in recent weeks made by Dominic Cummings, Boris Johnson’s former adviser.

Mr Hancock has also become embroiled in several conflicts of interest scandals relating to coronavirus contracts, including one involving the former landlord of the health secretary’s local pub landing a deal to produce COVID test vials.

Mr Coladangelo is PHL Group’s executive director of strategy and innovation

In February, a judge ruled that Mr Hancock’s department had acted unlawfully by failing to reveal details of pandemic-related contracts in a timely fashion.

People who know Mr Coladangelo said that he and Mr Hancock’s aide were siblings, and social media profiles and electoral roll data appear to confirm a relationship between them.

None of those contacted by Sky News on Friday afternoon would confirm or deny the relationship between the Coladangelos.

More on Gina Coladangelo

• Who is Gina Coladangelo? The PR chief at centre of Matt Hancock ‘affair’ scandal
• Matt Hancock ‘affair’: Controversy over aide Gina Coladangelo will not go away easily despite No 10 trying to shut it down
• Matt Hancock faces further calls to quit after breaking social distancing rules over kiss with aide Gina Coladangelo
• Labour and Lib Dems call on Boris Johnson to sack Matt Hancock after CCTV leak shows office embrace with aide Gina Coladangelo

Mr Coladangelo is PHL Group’s executive director of strategy and innovation, and has worked there since October 2019, according to his profile on the networking app LinkedIn.

He previously founded Youla, an elderly care business, but prior to that was a marketing executive in the sports and gaming industries.

PHL Group describes itself on its website as “an independent healthcare company providing services and quality solutions to the NHS and private healthcare partners”.

Its website also discloses the provision of “COVID-19 services”, although it is unclear whether the Department of Health and Social Care (DHSC) was the awarder of contracts relating to these.

The Sun’s revelation of Mr Hancock’s personal relationship with Ms Coladangelo, who is a non-executive director at the health department, prompted calls on Friday for him to be sacked because of his apparent breaches of lockdown restrictions.

Mr Hancock said he had “let people down” and was “very sorry”, with Boris Johnson saying he considered the matter closed.

However, any suggestion of further conflicts of interest relating to the awarding of public health contracts would risk damaging not only Mr Hancock.

The prime minister has also been trying to move on from the recent row over the refurbishment of his Downing Street apartment.

Ms Coladangelo is reported to have known Mr Hancock since their university days, and joined the DHSC board less than a year ago.

Whitehall departments’ boards are chaired by their secretary of state, with many of the non-executives now handpicked by ministers based on previous connections.

There was no suggestion on Friday that PHL Group or Mr Coladangelo had acted improperly in the procurement of government contracts.

Neither the value of PHL Group’s NHS contracts or the timing of their award could be verified on Friday.

A person close to the situation said that PHL had been providing services to the NHS since it was established 11 years ago, and that contracts awarded by the NHS followed the relevant procurement rules.

Mr Coladangelo did not respond to an emailed request for comment.

He is understood to be participating in a cross-country bike ride to raise funds for charity.

A page on the fundraising site JustGiving confirms that Mr Coladangelo received a donation from “Gina [and] Olly” – Oliver Tress is Ms Coladangelo’s husband – with a further donation made by a couple who are understood to be the Coladangelos’ parents, Heather and Rino.

Ms Coladangelo could not be reached for comment, while a DHSC source insisted that the Secretary of State had no involvement in awarding NHS contracts.

“Non-executive directors hold advisory roles and also have no role in awarding NHS contracts,” the insider said.

A spokesperson for PHL said: “PHL has been operating for over 11 years and at all times has secured contracts through the robust tender and procurement processes put in place by local Clinical Commissioning Groups (CCGs).

“At no time have any contracts been awarded outside of these rigorous processes and no contracts have ever been awarded by the Department of Health and Social Care.”

Test And Trace Has Lost Track Of Nearly 600 Million Covid Tests

Paul Waugh www.huffingtonpost.co.uk

Boris Johnson’s £37bn Test and Trace service is facing fresh criticism after a damning new report found that it had lost track of nearly 600 million Covid tests.

The National Audit Office spending watchdog concluded that the system was still failing to “deliver value for taxpayers”, with a lack of any targets for self-isolation by the public and a continued reliance on private consultants.

Test and Trace, which was run by Tory peer Dido Harding, has already come under fire for its use of private firms Serco and Deloitte and its repeated failures in 2020 to track down contacts of people who had Covid.

The latest report sets out a raft of problems, including paying for tracing staff it does not use, the use of emergency procurement powers that dole out contracts without competition and a lack of data sharing with local public health chiefs that hinders efforts to tackle outbreaks.

In the six months from November last year to April this year, it failed to reach nearly 100,000 people who had tested positive for Covid and as result failed to identify their contacts who could potentially infect others.

The NAO also criticised Matt Hancock’s decision to absorb its functions into a new UK Health Security Agency, saying there was “a risk that the restructuring will divert NHS TandT’s attention away from efforts to contain the spread of the virus”.

It has given the government until October to sort out the problems, including how it will “best support citizens to come forward for tests and comply with self-isolation requirements” – a clear signal that the watchdog believes the public need higher payments to home quarantine.

Labour pounced on the report and suggested that it ought to kill off the chances of former Test and Trace chief Harding’s bid to become the next chief executive of the NHS.

Shadow health minister Justin Madders said: “I would suggest this is essential reading for the interview panel in case there is even the slightest possibility that they are considering her appointment.

“This report is damning. The government has been told time and again that if we are going to bring down cases, it needs to ensure people can afford to self-isolate, but it has refused to listen.

“If lateral flow tests are going to play their part in helping society reopen, ministers need to make sure results are registered – it’s astounding that 550,000,000 tests have gone missing.”

The report found that only a small proportion of the Covid tests distributed have been registered as used.

Test and Trace had forecast that between March and May 2021, 655 million lateral flow tests would be used in the UK.

But up to 26 May, just 96 million (14%) of the 691 million tests distributed in England had been registered. “NHS TandT does not know whether the tests that have not been registered have been used or not,” it said.

NAO head Gareth Davies said Test and Trace had introduced a lot of changes since its last withering report, including mass testing, closer working with local authorities and initiatives to identify and contain variant forms of Covid.

“However, some pressing challenges need to be tackled if it is to achieve its objectives and deliver value for taxpayers, including understanding how many lateral flow devices are actually being used and increasing public compliance with testing and self-isolation,” he said.

Public Accounts Committee chair Meg Hillier pointed out that the report had found that 45% of Test and Trace staff at its head office were still private consultants, despite Harding’s promises to reduce their number and to replace them with civil servants.

“Test and Trace employed more consultants in April 2021 than it did in November 2020. Despite being nearly a year old, nearly half the central staff are consultants,” Hillier said.

“Testing and tracing are likely to be around for some time yet and it’s hard to understand why these roles are not now permanent or fixed term contracts. The danger is that institutional memory will disappear as consultants walk off with their fat pay cheques.”

The latest report shows that although Test and Trace has introduced more flexibility into its contact centre contracts, across its testing and tracing activities it is “still paying for capacity it does not use”.

It’s “utilisation rate” – the proportion of time someone actively worked during their paid horse – had a target of 50% but in reality rates have been well below this since November 2020, peaking at 49% in January and falling to just 11% in February.

The unit cost per contact traced went up from around £5 in October to £47 in February.

The NAO found that Test and Trace had used £13.5 billion of its £22.2 billion budget in 2020-21, an underspend of £8.7 billion. Of this, £10.4 billion went on testing, £1.8 billion on identifying and containing local outbreaks and £900 million on tracing.

Test and Trace told the NAO that the underspend is because a predicted high level of demand for testing in January and February 2021 did not materialise due to the national lockdown.

A spokesperson for the Department of Health and Social Care said it had started a programme of research to understand the low rate of test registration and was working to increase public awareness of the need to register results and improve the ability to track tests.

“NHS Test and Trace has played an essential role in combating this pandemic and the NAO has recognised many of the rapid improvements we have made in the short lifespan of this organisation.

“The testing and tracing being delivered across the country is saving lives every single day and helping us send this virus into retreat by breaking chains of transmission and spotting outbreaks wherever they exist.

“While NHS Test and Trace continues to be one of the centrepieces of our roadmap to return life to normal, our new UK Health Security Agency is going to consolidate the enormous expertise that now exists across our health system so we can face down potential future threats and viruses.”

The government insists that the system has successfully identified over 3.4 million positive cases and notified a further 7.1 million contacts, to tell them to self-isolate, since 28 May 2020. Rapid tests have picked up over 213,082 Covid cases without symptoms.

It claims that the high number of consultants was critical for accessing specific skills and abilities in order to deliver operationally. DHSC is also evaluating several pilot approaches to improve compliance with self-isolation.

Pascale Robinson, campaigns officer at We Own It said: “It’s abundantly clear now that despite millions upon millions of pounds being handed to private companies, they have demonstrably failed to deliver a functioning system, leaving us without a crucial defence against Covid transmissions and needlessly putting lives at risk.

“With new variants spreading through our communities, it’s clear that even with the vaccination programme we desperately need a properly functioning contact tracing system.”

The Idea being floated is that devolution would be facilitated if there was a Metro Mayor for the combined area of Exeter, East Devon, Mid Devon and Teignbridge.

The “moles” tell Owl that Devon County Councillor Phil Twiss, as newly appointed cabinet member for finance, is plotting to dismember Devon into several unitary authorities.

Would this proposal pass his “scrutiny”? Probably not because none of these districts is currently Conservative controlled! – Owl 

Daniel Clark, Local Democracy Reporter sidmouth.nub.news

It’s been suggested that a Metro Mayor for the area of Exeter, East Devon, Mid Devon and Teignbridge could drive forward infrastructure improvements across the area, boost the economy and support job creation.

Metro mayors hold powers over spatial planning, regional transport, the provision of skills training, business support services, and economic development, and are directly elected by residents.

Cllr Paul Millar floated the idea at East Devon District Council Strategic Planning Committee on Tuesday, June 22, as the best way to get the ‘first class infrastructure’ that the region needs in order to flourish and prosper.

His suggestion would see the authorities of Exeter, East Devon, Mid Devon and Teignbridge – who were working together on a combined Greater Exeter Strategic Plan until it collapsed last summer – prepare a shared vision for devolution as they begin work on their joint, non-statutory strategic plan.

Why do we need a Strategic Plan?

The Greater Exeter Strategic Plan (GESP) was to be the formal, statutory planning framework for development across Exeter, East Devon, Mid Devon and Teignbridge, but collapsed after East Devon and then Mid Devon pulled out last summer.

However, the four councils did all agree that in its place there should be a non-statutory Joint Strategy covering infrastructure matters that affect the four areas, and on Tuesday East Devon joined Mid Devon in agreeing to support the scope, resourcing, timetable and governance arrangements.

The Joint Strategy is an opportunity for the authorities to jointly identify a clear, ambitious future for the area, demonstrate a commitment to joint working on strategic matters and distil the key strategic issues facing the area. It would enable each of the authorities’ Local Plans to respond in a way that reflects local conditions, support joint evidence preparation where appropriate, and act as a prospectus to lever in external funding to overcome strategic issues and unlock development.

The case for having a Metro Mayor

Cllr Millar, speaking at the meeting, suggested that given the scope and the ‘recognisable brand’ of the Greater Exeter region, a Metro Mayor for the area may be a sensible route to achieve some of the aims.

He said: “It is important we retain the Greater Exeter brand as the region has a bright future and when you look at the rest of the country, to get first class infrastructure, the answer tends to be Metro Mayors, so I can see the Greater Exeter brand leading us down that route, so have there been discussion among authorities on what the branding may be at this stage?”

After the meeting, Cllr Millar added: “Take Greater Manchester and their Metro Mayor Andy Burnham, who is bringing public transport back under public control, making bus travel more affordable. Metro mayors have independence from their political parties, thus being able to get things done without the usual point scoring.

“We’re still working together on a joint plan as four authorities, but leaders are seemingly ashamed to refer to the idea of a ‘Greater Exeter’ since the GESP died.

“As a fairly recent graduate, I want to see the South West deliver more jobs and a greater range of them. Andy Burnham didn’t just get a massive transport budget and powers to go with them for his beloved Greater Manchester, but generous grants to kickstart apprenticeship schemes. This area desperately needs that to keep more of our young people and with Exeter University, we have the platform to do so.

“I am by all means aware that there are many precarious hoops to jump through before any devolution deal is granted by the government. But the idea of a Greater Exeter City Region – East Devon, Exeter, Mid Devon and Teignbridge – makes a lot of economic sense.”

“For the future prosperity of our area, devolution matters, and a Metro Mayor and four combined unitary authorities would be the best way to achieve that.”

The argument against the Metro Mayor idea

However, Cllr Paul Arnott, leader of East Devon District Council, said that he didn’t expect the Metro Mayor suggestion to be taken up, and that given the backlash against the Greater Exeter Strategic Plan, the four leaders were unanimous in agreeing that the non-statutory strategy had to have a different name.

He said: “I think I don’t see Exeter going in the Metro Mayor direction any time soon. One of the difficulties GESP had was the areas on the extremities – like where I live in Colyton -we do business and look to Taunton and Bridport as much as Exeter and that was the same with far parts of Teignbridge as well.”

Cllr Paul Hayward, deputy leader of the council, added: “We need to seek assurance we are cooperating with the other authorities of South Somerset and Dorset as well.

“Axminster has a lot of interest in sites for development, as does Colyton and Seaton, Lyme Regis is looking to Uplyme to solve some of its problems, Chard is encroaching south into East Devon, so there is a great deal of interest along the boundary, so we need an assurance not just looking to the authorities that were in the GESP, but talking to the authorities in the east so what they do doesn’t impact on us and vice versa.”

Following a proposal made by Cllr Mike Allen, the committee voted by nine votes to one, with one abstention, that while they would be engaging a consultant to prepare the Joint Strategy on behalf of the authorities, and any brief would include the statement that each authority will consume its own housing need.

---

Holidaymakers must remain vigilant when enjoying staycations this summer amid the risk of a rise in coronavirus cases at popular tourist spots, a leading scientist has warned.

From today’s Western Morning News

A “sudden influx” of people holidaying in Cornwall over half-term is likely to be a factor in an increase in cases in the county, Professor Tim Spector said.

One local councillor described a recent rise in cases as a “tsunami” in the wake of the G7 summit held earlier this month, but the Government denied a link between the two.

Prof Spector, professor of genetic epidemiology at King’s College London and lead scientist on the Zoe Covid study app, said data this week shows “rates in former hot-spots, such as Scotland and the north west of England, continuing to plateau”. He added: “At the same time, top UK holiday destinations like Cornwall are emerging as new areas with rapidly increasing cases. I think this is down to a number of factors, including the sudden influx of holidaymakers over half-term, as well as the recent G7 summit and a previously unexposed local population.

“We need to remain vigilant of these UK holiday destinations as summer holidays approach, and ensure that we minimise outbreaks by following Government guidelines.”

The latest local authority area figures show that Cornwall and Isles of Scilly had 857 new cases recorded in the seven days to June 19, up from 411 the previous week.

The long-running Zoe study estimates that among unvaccinated people in the UK there are currently 15,099 new daily symptomatic cases of Covid-19, up 18% on last week.

“Only a small minority of the tests it has bought have been registered as used……

“Research suggests that only a minority of people who have COVID-19 symptoms come forward for testing. It has no target for increasing this, the uptake of LFD testing or compliance with self-isolation…..

“Local authorities still struggle to get timely access to the data they need to deal with localised outbreaks of COVID-19…..

www.nao.org.uk

Test and trace in England – progress update

This is the second NAO report on government’s approach to test and trace services in England.

Report conclusions

The primary goal of NHST&T is to help break chains of COVID-19 transmission and enable people to return towards a more normal way of life. Since it was established in May 2020 there have been two national lockdowns and more than four million confirmed cases. In order to break chains of transmission, SAGE advises that it is desirable that no more than 48 hours should elapse between identification of an index case and their contacts self-isolating, and that 80% of these contacts would need to be reached. NHST&T now reaches around 85% of all contacts, and has reduced the elapsed time to trace contacts for in-person PCR tests. However, in‑person PCR tests make up a declining minority of tests, and it is less clear whether the wider system is operating as quickly as it needs to. Since November, it has rolled out a national asymptomatic testing programme to seek to identify those people who do not know they have COVID-19. Only a small minority of the tests it has bought have been registered as used, and NHST&T is now undertaking research to understand the reasons for this with a work programme underway to bring about improvements. The success of the test and trace programme relies on the public coming forward for tests when they have symptoms, carrying out asymptomatic tests when they do not, and complying with instructions to self‑isolate where necessary. NHST&T is responsible for driving up public compliance, but research suggests that only a minority of people who have COVID-19 symptoms come forward for testing. It has no target for increasing this, the uptake of LFD testing or compliance with self-isolation.

NHST&T was set up at speed with a workforce heavily reliant on consultants. It had planned to reduce its dependency on consultants but has not yet done so. NHST&T operates in an environment of high uncertainty, where demand for testing and tracing can be affected at short notice by new variants, case numbers and policy decisions (for example, national lockdowns). It is therefore challenging to forecast costs with precision. However, there is a very wide margin between the underspend of around 10% that NHST&T discussed with the Committee of Public Accounts in January 2021, and the 39% underspend of its 2020-21 budget that it reported two months later. It has taken steps to increase the flexibility of its contracts for contact tracing and future laboratory use and has generally improved its provision of data to and engagement with local authorities. However, local authorities still struggle to get timely access to the data they need to deal with localised outbreaks of COVID-19, and they are unclear on the planned operating model after July 2021. To achieve value for money NHST&T must be able to demonstrate both that the interventions it delivers are effective in achieving its objective, and that the mix of interventions is the most cost-effective use of public resources.

The Good Law Project has dropped its legal challenge to the government’s recruitment of Kate Bingham as chair of the vaccines taskforce, which had alleged it failed to follow a valid process and gave key roles in the pandemic to people well-connected to the Conservative party.

David Conn www.theguardian.com 

In the same legal action, the GLP is maintaining its challenge to the appointments of Dido Harding as head of NHS test and trace, and of Mike Coupe, who formerly worked with Harding at Sainsbury’s, as director of testing.

The government has defended the legal action, maintaining the appointments were all fair and lawful, and recently issued a detailed defence setting out the circumstances of the recruitment process, which led to the GLP dropping its action in relation to Bingham.

The government’s detailed defence document will not be made public until the case is heard – no date has yet been scheduled – but Jolyon Maugham, director of the GLP, said the process for appointing Bingham, while it did not follow an open advertising process, had been better than expected.

“We are not dropping the challenge or the point of principle that fair, open and transparent recruitment processes deliver better outcomes for the public,” Maugham said. “None of these recruitment processes during the pandemic were optimal; we are still unhappy with the government’s explanations relating to Dido Harding and Mike Coupe, but they have provided a better explanation regarding Kate Bingham, and it is responsible for us not to pursue that further.”

Bingham is managing partner of the venture capital firm SV Health Investments. Her appointment to the unpaid role of heading the UK’s efforts to secure Covid-19 vaccines was formally made by Johnson last May, and she reported directly to the prime minister.

Along with Harding, who was made a Conservative peer by David Cameron in 2014, her appointment led to claims they were part of a “chumocracy”.

The government has emphatically defended all its appointments, and praised Bingham for her achievements in investing in the manufacture of Covid-19 vaccines and securing 350m doses, saying in a public statement in November:

“Kate Bingham is uniquely qualified for the role of chair, having worked in the biotech and life sciences sectors for 30 years. While not specifically a vaccines expert, she is a proven drugs discovery expert with superb deal-making skills and an excellent global reputation, recently appearing alongside Bill Gates at the Gates Grand Challenge Conference.”

Earlier this month Bingham was given a damehood for her work on the vaccines operation in the Queen’s birthday honours list.

Last year more deaths than births were registered in the UK for the first time since 1976.

By Robert Cuffe Head of statistics www.bbc.co.uk

In total, just over 683,000 births were registered compared with nearly 690,000 deaths.

This was only the second time deaths have outnumbered births since the late 1890s.

The coronavirus epidemic led to a sharp rise in deaths last year but birth rates have also been falling for the last decade.

The coronavirus effect

The number of deaths in the UK has been rising in recent years, but part of that increase is due to the UK population increasing and getting older.

Last year’s 13% rise in that figure is attributed by statisticians to the coronavirus pandemic.

It was the largest jump in a single year seen since World War Two, bringing death rates, the chances of any single person dying, back to levels seen in 2008.

Figures published this morning by the Office for National Statistics suggest the first lockdown had not led to a baby boom.

Birth rates in December and January, nine months after lockdown started, were sharply down on the same months one year before.

But the pandemic has affected register offices, leading to problems with birth registrations, so the ONS “urges caution” when reading meaning into these figures.

It is perhaps unsurprising – and it should be a one off – but the provisional finding that the UK natural population shrank is stark all the same.

The spike in deaths above the number of births puts pandemic mortality into some sort of context.

But it also shines a light on the significant falls in the fertility rate in the past few years.

In 2012, the total fertility rate was 1.92 – close to the level where a population replaces itself.

In just eight years that has fallen below 1.6, much closer now to societies considered to be “ageing” such as Germany and Japan.

There are many questions to ask about whether this is linked to a significant squeeze on younger families.

These figures need not necessarily be a problem. However, if confirmed in the final figures, they do point to significant changes for British society and its economy too.

Falling birth rates

Part of the reason that deaths have outstripped births is that births have been falling steadily in every nation of the UK since at least 2015.

The Office for National Statistics says this is because we are having children later in life and fewer of them.

This trend has been happening for decades but it wasn’t apparent in the noughties as another trend was masking it.

Back then, younger migrants tended to have more children than UK-born mothers and so they propped up British birth rates.

But this is no longer the case and birth rates have been falling since 2011, feeding through into a lower total number of births by the middle of the decade.

When did this last happen?

The last time deaths outnumbered births was in 1976.

In that year, there were just under 681,000 deaths and about 5,000 fewer births.

The main driver was falling birth rates: the late 1960s and 1970s saw sharp falls in the number of live births in the UK.

There has been some relationship between the state of the economy and the number of births and the low levels in the 70s coincided with a faltering economy.

But the biggest reason for the sharp change was the widespread availability of contraception and the legalisation of abortion in the UK in the late 60s.

It is likely that more Britons died than were born during some years of the World Wars, with the smallest gap between the two in 1940, the year of the Blitz.

But deaths of military personnel who died abroad are not included in the UK death registration figures charted above.

Infections are increasing everywhere but Cornwall and Exeter have infection levels above average for England

BBC Local news Published 23 June

Here are the latest rates of cases of Covid-19 in Devon and Cornwall.

The figures show the number of coronavirus cases per 100,000 people in the seven days up to and including 19 June, with the week before shown in brackets for comparison.

The breakdown of the figures by local authority area is:

• Cornwall and the Isles of Scilly – 150 (up from 72)
• Plymouth – 68 (up from 32)
• Exeter – 110 (up from 53)
• Mid Devon – 78 (up from 26)
• East Devon – 33 (up from 13)
• Torbay – 29 (up from 15)
• Teignbridge – 34 (up from 22)
• South Hams – 30 (up from 15)
• West Devon – 20 (down from 23)
• North Devon – 39 (up from 17)
• Torridge – 86 (up from 9)

For comparison, the figure for England is 101.

“About twice as many local areas are classed as “education deserts” in the South West (6.4 per cent of local areas) and Yorkshire and the Humber (5.7 per cent) as in London (2.9 per cent).”

Nicola Woolcock, Education Editor www.thetimes.co.uk

More than 200,000 children live in an area with no good or outstanding primary schools, a report will reveal tomorrow.

One in every 25 primary age children — equivalent to 218,000 — lives in a local area containing only underperforming primary schools, according to research from the think tank Onward and New Schools Network, which supports new free schools.

It shows 306 areas across England where the only primary schools available are rated either inadequate or requiring improvement by Ofsted. The authors say this means that parents in these areas have far less choice, which limits their children’s educational opportunities.

The report will call on the government to “level up” opportunity by turning around school quality in these “education deserts”. It says that many have been underperforming for decades.

Using the nine statistical regions of England, it says that about twice as many local areas are classed as “education deserts” in the South West (6.4 per cent of local areas) and Yorkshire and the Humber (5.7 per cent) as in London (2.9 per cent). Among local authorities, the council areas with most deserts include Wellingborough, Arun, Ipswich, Cambridge and Scarborough.

In London and the South East, 86 per cent and 77 per cent of local areas contain only good or outstanding schools. This compares with 59 per cent in the East Midlands and 61 per cent in Yorkshire and the Humber, showing that good school access depends much on where families live.

There is one local authority with only underperforming secondary schools: South Derbyshire.

Rated 40th in the country for the proportion of pupils achieving five or more A*-C grades including English and maths in 1998, it has dropped 74 places in the past two decades.

Among local authorities, only Dorset has seen a greater fall in attainment ratings over the same period.

In a foreword to the report, Jonathan Gullis, the Conservative MP for Stoke-on-Trent North and a member of the education select committee, said getting schools back to where they were before the pandemic would be “nowhere near enough” and that a long-term, radical plan for school reform was needed.

“Levelling up has come to mean a wealth of different things, but ultimately it comes down to improving opportunity,” he said. “We all have talent but tragically opportunity is not distributed evenly. There is no part of society where this is more true, and more important, than in education.

“Progress scores in my constituency in Stoke-on-Trent, for example, are the seventh lowest in the country. This tells us that compared to their peers around England, young people in Stoke-on-Trent are falling behind.

“This isn’t their fault: out of the 15 mainstream secondary schools, only one is rated outstanding and a third are requiring improvement. Nor can ambitious parents or talented kids easily travel to attend a better secondary school near by.”

The Times Education Commission is consulting experts about whether substantial change is needed in the education system after the pandemic. It will release its full findings next summer.

Access to good schools across England

• The desert analysis uses “middle layer super output areas”, which are small units of geography. There are 6,791 of these areas in England, each with an average population of about 8,000 people. They have a median size of 3.04 sq km.

• The report shows what proportion of these areas in each region contain only good and outstanding schools and what proportion contain only schools that are inadequate or require improvement (RI). It revealed wide variations across the country:

East Midlands Good or outstanding 59%, RI or inadequate 4.7%

London 86%, 2.9%

East of England 66%, 4.6%

North East 76%, 3.7%

North West 75%, 3.3%

South East 77%, 4.4%

South West 63%, 6.4%

West Midlands 67%, 4.4%

Yorkshire and the Humber 61%, 5.7%

DOC WON’T SEE YOU NOW

THE number of NHS doctors retiring early has more than trebled since 2008, figures show.

It has gone from 401 to 1,358 in 2020/21 — with many citing pressure due to Covid as the cause.

Nick McDermott www.thesun.co.uk

Average retirement age fell from 61 to 59 in the period — but the overall number of doctors employed by the NHS jumped 35,000 to 176,000.

Almost half NHS trusts have seen staff leave early, a separate poll by NHS Providers revealed.

Saffron Cordery, its deputy chief executive, said “burnout” and the impact of the pandemic were among the reasons.

She said NHS staff were “incredibly tired”.

Dr Vishal Sharma, of the British Medical Association, said more than half GPs plan to retire before age 60 due to a “punitive” pension taxation system — and Covid had “made things worse”.

NHS chief Simon Stevens squirms and refuses to answer if he thinks Matt Hancock is ‘hopeless’ after Cummings claimed the Health Secretary ‘tried to throw Stevens under the bus’

And this – Owl

Thousands of leaseholders will be refunded unfair ground rents and allowed to buy the freehold of their property at a discounted price after a crackdown on property developers by the competition watchdog.

Jillian Ambrose www.theguardian.com

Persimmon Homes and Aviva have agreed to offer the refunds after the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) uncovered “troubling evidence” that leasehold homeowners and prospective buyers were overcharged and misled by the UK’s biggest housebuilders.

Campaigners described the new commitments as “life-changing” and a “massive milestone” in the battle to secure a fair deal for property buyers, and called for other developers and freeholders to follow suit.

Aviva, an insurance group that bought freeholds from developers, has agreed to remove ground rent terms that are considered unfair and repay homeowners whose rents doubled.

Persimmon has agreed to offer leasehold homeowners the opportunity to buy the freehold of their property at a discounted price, and will make repayments to some homeowners who have bought their freeholds.

Dean Finch, Persimmon’s chief executive, said the company would extend its right-to-buy scheme to cap the purchase price of a freehold at £2,000 for any house leases sold from 1 January 2000 until the end of 2026.

He added that buyers who had already acquired their freeholds from Persimmon under the existing scheme, and who still owned the freehold, could apply to be reimbursed for the difference between the price paid and £2,000.

The housebuilder has also agreed to extend the timeframe that prospective buyers are given to exchange contracts after reserving a property, owing to concerns that a short time limit could pressure buyers into making a purchase they would not have if given more time to consider.

Aviva said it would contact about 1,000 leaseholders to confirm the next steps.

The watchdog’s investigation into unfair leaseholds found in October that leasehold homeowners and prospective buyers were being “trapped” by developers that offered misleading terms and charged excessive fees.

The CMA identified a range of abuses including homeowners having to pay escalating ground rents, which in some cases were planned to double every 10 years, leaving people struggling to sell their homes. Some prospective leasehold homebuyers had been misleadingly told it would be cheap to convert a leasehold to freehold, only to find that the cost had increased by thousands of pounds, with little or no warning.

“Another massive milestone,” the National Leasehold Campaign said in a comment posted on Twitter. “Persimmon & Aviva have eventually done the right thing at last, now other developers and freeholders must follow.”

The inquiry has focused on the UK’s largest housebuilders, and investigations into Barratt, Taylor Wimpey and Countryside are ongoing. They could face legal action if they do not settle with the regulator.

Andrea Coscelli, the chief executive of the CMA, said the voluntary measures agreed by Persimmon and Aviva were “a real win for thousands of leaseholders”.

“For too long people have found themselves trapped in homes they can struggle to sell or been faced with unexpectedly high prices to buy their freehold. Now they can breathe a sigh of relief knowing things are set to change for the better,” he said.

“It is good that Aviva and Persimmon have responded positively to this investigation, enabling these issues to be fixed for leaseholders. But our work isn’t done. We now expect other housing developers and investors to follow the lead of Aviva and Persimmon. If not, they can expect to face legal action.”

Robert Jenrick, the housing secretary, said the government had introduced new legislation “that will protect future homeowners by restricting ground rents in new leases to zero”. He said he would “strongly urge other developers to follow suit in amending their historic practices”.

Owl was expecting Dominic Cummings to launch another broadside just before yesterday’s Prime Minister’s Questions. If it did happen it was another “damp squib”.

Why did Boris Johnson give him so much power?

Felicity Lawrence www.theguardian.com 

Dominic Cummings demanded senior civil servants pay half a million pounds to an external data team, according to leaked emails that show the prime minister’s then chief adviser urging officials to bypass government procedures.

On 22 March 2020, the day before Boris Johnson ordered the UK into full lockdown, Cummings instructed civil servants at NHSX, the government unit responsible for digital transformation in health, to grant the money to Our World in Data, a research project run by a not-for-profit organisation with Oxford academics.

“Someone please ensure that they have the 530k within 24 hours from now and report back to me it’s been sent,” Cummings wrote to the chief executive of NHSX. “No procurement, no lawyers, no meetings, no delay please – just send immediately,” he continued.

The funding request had the backing of the health secretary, Matt Hancock, who was copied in on the email chain at this point.

The emails, obtained as part of a joint investigation by the Guardian, BBC’s File on 4 and SourceMaterial, suggest it was Hancock who passed details of the proposed project to Cummings and other senior officials. “This is an NHSX lead. I support,” Hancock wrote.

The instructions from Cummings and Hancock caused disquiet among the civil servants tasked with carrying them out. Senior officials nevertheless felt compelled to act because the instruction had come from Cummings and Hancock, the emails show.

“My team can do this via DHSC and have the money in place by tomorrow, but it will mean your team waiving the normal grant-giving process. I don’t want to do anything untoward,” the NHSX chief, Matthew Gould, wrote to the second permanent secretary at the Department of Health and Social Care, David Williams, asking for help and a “green light” to justify acting on the irregular request.

Cummings did not respond to a request for comment. He told a government committee last month that the national emergency justified circumventing normal procurement rules, arguing that “the procurement system is completely unfit for its purposes in Whitehall”.

After a flurry of communication between top civil servants, money for Our World in Data was approved within days and put on NHSX’s budget, the Guardian understands.

However, the emails suggest the proposed grant was neither urgent nor immediately necessary to save lives. And despite absorbing the attention of senior mandarins, the grant was not even wanted by the not-for-profit in the form being offered.

Following Cummings’ email, one civil servant wrote to Gould: “They are not keen for us to give them money urgently and have made clear they want to understand the implications of taking government money and agree it with their board of trustees.”

Another wrote to Gould: “I need your help please to progress this to a point where there is enough air cover to justify a decision to proceed,” adding that further checks were necessary before disbursing the grant.

“Ordinarily this organisation would not meet due diligence as they do not have a full year’s audited accounts ,” the civil servant wrote. “I’m sorry I couldn’t just ‘make this happen’, but I share your concern about doing anything untoward.”

The grant proposal was brought to Hancock’s attention by William Warr, a special adviser in No 10 who was previously based at Oxford University.

Our World in Data’s director Max Roser said he was contacted by Warr after the adviser saw a tweet about lack of funding posted by Roser on the evening of 19 March. Warr contacted him that day and by 22 March the proposal for the government to award a £530,000 grant was being pushed through by Hancock and Cummings on to NHSX budget.

Roser said he had never heard of Warr before and neither he nor his fellow researchers at Our World in Data had any previous connection with him. The group chose to follow its own due process and later applied formally to DHSC and was awarded a grant.

Jolyon Maugham, whose Good Law Project has successfully sued the government for acting unlawfully with other contracts, accused Cummings of “regarding the public purse as his private piggy bank”. Peter Smith, a former senior civil servant who specialised in government procurement, said: “There are good reasons for having rules and processes, whether it’s procurement or grants.”

He criticised Hancock and Cummings for putting senior civil servants in a position where they were required to break the rules and their code of conduct. “What a waste of time when we were at that position in the pandemic. I think it was unethical, immoral, and an abuse of power,” he said.

DHSC said Our World in Data had helped inform 100 million visitors to its website about Covid-19, and that officials carried out due diligence and followed appropriate processes before the grant was awarded.

Owl is catching up.

This is the latest follow up to Simon Jupp’s “promise” in the run up to the 2019 general election: “Exmouth will receive new funding from the Government’s new Future High Streets Fund. The Secretary of State for Housing, Communities & Local Government, Robert Jenrick, has confirmed that Exmouth will receive funding to help secure up to £20 million pounds from the Government’s new Future High Streets Fund“. See this post.

Remember that Exmouth was placed in the lowest tier for the last round of funding and the earlier bid for Axminster failed completely.

Owl understands that all bids have to be “shovel ready” and it looks like a desperate County Council is “spread betting” its support for bids across the County in order to get something – anything.

Tim Dixon www.exmouthjournal.co.uk 

Town centre improvements will go forward for funding bid

Plans for town centre improvements for Exmouth will feature in a package of countywide projects to be put forward in a bid to get nearly £100m of Government cash.

Devon County Council’s cabinet, when they met at County Hall in person on Wednesday morning, June 9, unanimously agreed with the recommendation to give approval for the council to work with the relevant district councils to submit bids to the Government’s Levelling Up Fund.

Announced at the 2020 Spending Review, the Fund aims to support communities in order to regenerate town centres, enable investment in cultural facilities or upgrade local transport infrastructure.

A programme of schemes in Devon have been identified which cover a range of transport modes and spread the bids over a wide geography, with each scheme demonstrating a net gain in biodiversity, a reduction in carbon and air quality improvements.

The five schemes identified are:

Exmouth – Completion of Dinan Way and town centre improvements

Teign Estuary Trail and associated cycle links

Lee Mill – Slip road and associated local improvements

Okehampton – new rail station & transport hub

Cullompton – Town Centre Relief Road

The schemes for Okehampton, Cullompton and Exmouth will be submitted in the first round of bids, with the Teign Estuary Trail and Lee Mill to follow in later rounds.

Dave Black, head of planning, transportation and environment, in his report to the cabinet, said: “All the schemes will have a valid permission which will demonstrate a net gain in biodiversity, a reduction in carbon and air quality improvements. There is a wide range of schemes including a rail station, two strategic multi-use trails and highway schemes aimed at reducing the impact of traffic on sensitive residential areas and town centres.”

Backing the plans, Cllr Andrea Davis, cabinet member for transport, said: “All the schemes have widespread support,” with her adding that the Dinan Way extension would now be a bid submitted by Devon County Council in order to free up capacity for East Devon District Council’s plan for Exmouth town centre.

She said that the new Okehampton stations would be known as the ‘West Devon Transport Hub’ and that while Torridge and North Devon are not mentioned in the report, it is because those councils will be submitting non-transport related schemes for improvements to Bideford and Ilfracombe respectively.

Cllr Rob Hannaford, leader of the Labour group, said: “These are very good solid bids and many of them long standing and historic and clearly they are much needed,” while Cllr Alan Connett, leader of the opposition Liberal Democrat group, added: “These are a wonderful set of proposals and many ready for submission and to go. Collectively they will have an enormous benefit for residents and visitors across Devon as we emerge from the pandemic.”

Cllr Stuart Hughes, cabinet member for cycling, added that the Teign Estuary Trail would be submitted in a later round for the fund in order for a stronger bid to be put forward if it has planning permission.

Devon County Council has been supported by Teignbridge District Council in preparing the proposals to develop a 5km section of multi-use trail between Passage House Inn in Newton Abbot and the A381 at La Roche Maurice Walk, east of Bishopsteignton.

The Trail will also include a shared-use path connecting from the A381 to the junction near Morrisons supermarket, at the western edge of Teignmouth. However further design work is being undertaken on this link which does not require planning permission.

A planning application has been submitted for the next phase of the Teign Estuary Trail, although it is yet to be validated on the relevant planning portal for public comment.

Cllr Hughes added: “This is another important step in the development of the Teign Estuary Trail, which will have a positive impact on the economy and environment of the local area as well as benefiting local people’s health and wellbeing. We’ve seen that the majority of the public who responded to last year’s consultation supported the route and we’re keen to progress this next 5km of the route.”

The total cost of the programme for the five schemes is approximately £92m, the report says, which would include £74.3m in capital grant from Government, £12m from other contributions and a contribution of £5.7m from Devon County Council.

EXMOUTH

A bid which includes the Dinan Way extension will be submitted by Devon County Council.

Dinan Way currently forms a partial ring road around Exmouth, but it lacks the final connection to the A376, and as a result, traffic from Dinan Way has to use unsuitable residential road, and furthermore, goods vehicles accessing the Liverton Business Park, surrounding employment & retail area and the road to Budleigh Salterton are signed to travel through residential areas and past the school on the periphery of the town centre.

The Dinan Way extension proposals, which secured planning permission in 2017, will provide an improved pedestrian/cycle connection to the Exe Estuary multi-use trail and has potential for better bus services to Exeter.

This will form part of a wider bid covering Exmouth, with East Devon District Council leading on other proposals focusing on the regeneration of the town centre, including interventions utilising district owned land to enhance the existing town centre assets which could include new mobility opportunities, better accessibility and wayfinding and leisure and cultural attractions.

Eileen Wragg writes in the Exmouth Journal  and recalls being told many years ago: “It’s going to take a long time to turn this ship around”         

Although the administration of EDDC changed last May, to the Democratic Alliance of East Devon Alliance, Liberal Democrat’s, Greens and some Independents, the only time that the council has had a physical meeting was on May 25 this year when the AGM was held at Westpoint, due to the social distancing, as required under the Covid rules.

It was with pleasure and pride that I nominated Cllr Paul Arnott to be the leader for the coming year, which was seconded by a Green, Cllr Oily Davey. I am delighted that the nomination succeeded by 29 votes to 21, with eight abstentions.

This past year has been a uniquely challenging one due to the pandemic, and all members and officers have had to adapt to new systems and ways of working.

The council has also had to continue with projects which had been started by previous administrations, notably Queen’s Drive Exmouth, Cranbrook and those associated with climate change, such as introducing electric vehicles to our fleet, and charging points in our car parks.

Bold decisions have also been made, such as the withdrawal from the Greater Exeter Strategic Plan (GESP), and consent to the Lower Otter Restoration Project, which has received national accolades. Under Cllr Arnott’s leadership, huge strides forward have been made. With his readiness to listen and engage, relationships with officers and members have improved. His natural abilities and good humour have helped steer our council through some choppy waters, with his hands firmly at the helm.

Many years ago, someone said to me ‘It’s going to take a long time to turn this ship around’. Well that is finally happening, we are now a forward thinking council, and have already agreed to engage a climate change officer, and a mental health officer. Both are important appointments, the latter having been brought into sharp focus, due to significant mental health issues caused by Covid.

I trust that members of the council will be able to put aside any political differences and work together for our constituents and in the best interests of all and our outstanding environment. We can now look forward to the next 12 months knowing that we are being led by a caring council leader who does just that, and who leads by example.

How big would our housing crisis be if it were not for second homes? It’s a question almost no one in public life wants to ask, let alone answer. But it becomes more urgent every day.

George Monbiot www.theguardian.com 

By a second home, I don’t mean one continuously rented to another household. I mean a property used either as a personal holiday home or as a place to stay while working away from your main home: in other words, a luxury that deprives other people of a necessity.

Before the pandemic, government figures show, 772,000 households in England had second homes. Of these, 495,000 were in the UK. The actual number of second homes is higher, as some households have more than one; my rough estimate is a little over 550,000. Since then Covid, Brexit and the growing realisation that you can monetise your extravagance by putting your second home on Airbnb when you’re not using it have triggered a gold rush.

Far from seeking to restrain this frenzy, the government has lavished subsidies and tax breaks on second-home owners. If you rent yours out as a “furnished holiday let” for part of the year (it should be “available” for 140 days but needs to be let for only 70), you no longer have to pay council tax, but can register instead as a business ratepayer. Then you apply for 100% small business rates relief, cancelling the entire bill. So while every other kind of housing is taxed, second homes, if you play it right, are tax-free.

Under the restart grant scheme, hospitality and leisure businesses registered for business rates are entitled to a gift of up to £18,000. This comes on top of the closed business lockdown payment, of up to £9,000, the small business grant fund, of £10,000, and the retail, hospitality and leisure grant: a further £10,000. The stamp duty holiday also applies to buying a second home, saving up to £15,000. Every sinew of the state is strained to reward and cosset those who deprive other people of a home.

All this has further fuelled a massive spending spree. On the coast, and in scenic areas inland, local people report that buying a home has become impossible. Rural prices over the past year have risen by an astonishing 14%: twice the rate of homes in cities.

The result is community death. A survey in Devon this month found villages in which between two-thirds and 95% of properties are second homes. In one village in Pembrokeshire, there are three remaining residents. In Cornwall last month, there were more than 10,000 properties listed on Airbnb for holidaymakers, but just 62 offered on Rightmove for rent to permanent residents. In the Newquay area alone, more than 500 people are reckoned to be homeless. While tourists surf, residents sofa-surf.

Homelessness and housing demand caused in one place can manifest in another. If people can’t find a home where they want to live, they have no choice but to move, and they might end up on the housing list in a less attractive borough. Displaced demand can ripple through the entire housing sector, as people bump each other along the chain.

The environmental implications are also massive. If you own two homes, another home has to be built to accommodate the household you’ve displaced. In other words, you’ve doubled your housing footprint. Prosperous people in the shires, rightly objecting to Boris Johnson’s proposal to rip down the planning laws, might ask themselves whether they have helped cause the problem he falsely claims to be solving.

So how much of the housing crisis is caused by second homes? Well, it depends which crisis you mean. Let’s start with its most extreme manifestation: homelessness. On one estimate, there are 288,000 households in England that are homeless or in imminent danger of becoming so. So on this measure, we discover something truly obscene: there are roughly twice as many second homes as homeless households.

Of course, this is by no means the whole story. There are 1.6 million households on the social housing waiting list. The level of unmet need could rise even further, now that the Covid eviction ban has been lifted.

But just as homelessness is the extreme and visible symptom of a much bigger problem, so are second homes. Though we need to build far more social homes, the underlying reason for high house prices is not the lack of supply. The number of dwellings in the UK has been growing faster than the number of households, and there are now more bedrooms per person than ever before. The problem is the grossly unequal distribution of space. Houses are unaffordable because of the purchasing power of landlords and speculators, and their use as investments. Government figures show that even if 300,000 new homes are built every year for 20 years, house prices will be only 6% lower in real terms than they would otherwise have been.

What we need, in all cases, is effective politics. We might decide, as a nation, that holiday lets are important enough to make other people homeless, or to trigger demand for new housing elsewhere. We do, after all, need holidays, and coastal and scenic communities want income from tourists. But good policy doesn’t happen by itself. As we proposed in the Land for the Many report, local authorities should be able to decide how many of the homes in a village or town should be permanent residences, and how many should be holiday lets. Any second home, existing or envisaged, would need planning permission for change of use.

In Wales, local authorities are able to charge double the rate of council tax for second homes. But, though this power is contained in Westminster legislation, it doesn’t apply to the rest of the UK. Even so, it’s of limited use, now that second homeowners have discovered that they can register as businesses, pay nothing at all, and be rewarded for it. We need a progressive property tax, based on value and payable by owners, not tenants. And second homes should be taxed at a much higher rate.

So why isn’t this urgent issue on the political agenda? Well, partly because almost everyone prominent in public life – including many MPs, editors and senior journalists – seems to own a second home. This is how we end up with a cruel, divided nation, in which wealth causes poverty and greed displaces need. It’s not enough to revolt against Johnson’s attack on the planning laws. We also need to fight a gross injustice.

Matt Hancock has promoted a healthcare startup whose shareholders have made donations to the health secretary and the Conservative party, the Guardian can reveal.

Felicity Lawrence www.theguardian.com 

The revelations about investors in Babylon Healthcare, a startup that offers smartphone-based NHS GP consultations and symptom-checker services, raise questions about possible conflicts of interest for Hancock.

Babylon, a company founded in 2013 by the British-Iranian former banker Ali Parsa, is in the process of a listing in the US, which is expected to value the company at $4.2bn (£3bn).

Hancock has repeatedly endorsed Babylon’s products publicly, and said he wants everyone in England to have access to them.

An investigation by the Guardian, the BBC’s File on 4 and SourceMaterial has established that shareholders in the company have included companies owned by two donors to the Conservatives, as well as an adviser on artificial intelligence appointed by Hancock.

While it has operations in several countries, much of Babylon’s success has been rooted in the UK, where it runs the GP at Hand app, offering rapid consultations for NHS patients who register with it as their GP. Its NHS service was launched in London in 2017 and has since been expanded to Birmingham, with around 100,000 patients now enrolled.

However, GP at Hand has attracted controversy. Some GPs have complained that it attracts younger, healthier patients who are cheapest to treat, leaving other GP practices with more complex cases.

Dominic Cummings acted as a consultant to Babylon on communications and personnel in 2018. Since departing Downing Street, Cummings – who did not respond to a request for comment – is understood to have been back working with Parsa.

The numerous links between Babylon and Tory figures and donors raise questions about possible conflicts of interest for Hancock, who has been an enthusiastic supporter of the company’s technology.

Shortly after becoming health secretary in July 2018, he told the House of Commons that he was a user of GP at Hand and that it was his personal GP. A few weeks later Hancock told the Daily Telegraph that “GP at Hand is revolutionary … I want to see it available to all, not based on their postcode.”

That same month, September 2018, Hancock went to an event to mark an investment round of $100m at Babylon’s London offices. A couple of months later Hancock gave an interview to the Evening Standard for a supplement sponsored by Babylon, in which he endorsed GP at Hand again.

One of Babylon’s significant financial backers is the Egyptian billionaire Nassef Sawiris, who also has stakes in Adidas and Aston Villa football club. A company he controls, OCI UK, donated £200,000 to the Tory party between 2017 and 2018. His shareholding in Babylon is held by another company he controls called NNS Holding. Sawiris did not respond to requests for comment.

Another Tory-linked backer of Babylon is the financier Ian Osborne, an informal adviser to David Cameron at the time of the 2010 election. Osborne was a shareholder in Babylon via his firm Longsutton until 2019, but has since exited his investment in the startup.

Osborne made a donation of £10,000 to Hancock’s Tory leadership campaign in 2019 via a subsidiary company, Connaught International. The Connaught donation is acknowledged in the health secretary’s declaration of financial interests.

Osborne said he had not donated to the Tory party, had no active dealings with Babylon and had never encouraged Hancock to endorse Babylon, adding that to suggest the political donation to him was linked to Babylon would be misconceived.

A third Babylon shareholder until 2019 with connections to Hancock is Demis Hassabis, a co-founder of the London-based artificial intelligence firm DeepMind, which was acquired by Google in 2014. Hassabis was made a government adviser on AI by Hancock while he was secretary of state at the Department for Culture, Media and Sport in 2018.

Hassabis has also exited his investment in Babylon. A spokesperson said he was an early angel investor in the company but had no active role in it and had never had any discussions with the NHS, Hancock or any part of UK government about Babylon. There was no link between his passive investment in Babylon and his role as adviser on AI, she added.

Sir Alistair Graham, the chair of the Committee on Standards in Public Life from 2004 to 2007, said an investigation should be launched by the relevant authorities to establish if, following donations, Hancock’s public endorsements of Babylon and its services constituted a conflict of interest and a breach of the ministerial code.

Graham said Hancock should have explained the Tory links to Babylon Healthcare when promoting the firm.

A source close to Hancock said the health secretary supported digital innovation, so it was not surprising that he talked about telemedicine services for the NHS. He rejected any suggestion he had acted improperly. Hancock does not know Sawiris, the source added.

Lawyers for Babylon said the company had never made political donations and that any political donations made by a few of its many shareholders were not linked to the firm’s success. They added that Babylon had no control or knowledge of donations to political parties or MPs made by shareholders.

They said Babylon had not benefited from special treatment, saying its innovative and highly valued service was the reason for its success. This service had understandably led to praise and interest from politicians across the political spectrum, the lawyers added, insisting there was no basis to attribute Babylon’s achievements to political donations by third parties.