The crisis in social care in the UK does not have just one cause, nor one simple solution. Chronic underfunding, an ageing population, the Brexit-induced labour shortage and the devastation wreaked by Covid-19 have all played a part. But the problems forcing the care system to the brink of collapse don’t just come from a series of exogenous shocks – they are internal too. The very structure of the sector is unstable.

Christine Corlet Walker (a researcher at the Centre for the Understanding of Sustainable Prosperity) www.theguardian.com 

The growing involvement of private equity, hedge funds and real estate investment trusts in the care sector in recent decades has brought about a rise in the use of predatory financial techniques, justified in the name of enticing capital into a sector that the government has persistently failed to adequately fund. According to data from the Care Quality Commission, these firms now own one in eight care home beds in England.

A screen of financial jargon helps investors avoid public scrutiny, but a slew of recent reports has begun to detail the many tactics used to ensure “healthy” returns on investment – and the profound and troubling consequences that these strategies have for the care sector.

In 2012, the UK-based private equity firm Terra Firma Capital bought Four Seasons Health Care in an £825m debt-leveraged buyout, backed by US-based hedge fund H/2 Capital Partners.

Leveraged buyouts are a common technique used to increase return on investment. They allow investors to pay only a fraction of the purchase price using their own capital; the rest is covered with a loan. In theory, the target social care company then pays off the debt using their cashflow, increasing the equity portion owned by the investment firm, meaning a larger windfall for investors if the care company is sold on.

However, recent research has found that these kinds of buyouts are associated with an 18% increase in risk of bankruptcy for the target company. In the case of Four Seasons Health Care, onerous debt payments contributed to the company’s collapse into administration in 2019. Two of the other largest care home providers in the UK – HC-One and Care UK – have also undergone leveraged buyouts and, as a result, their corporate group structures remain saddled with significant debts.

The implications of this debt-heavy model are significant. Among the five largest care home chains backed by private equity in the UK, interest payments on leveraged buyouts and other debt obligations absorb about 16% of the average weekly bed fee.

But interest payments on debt aren’t the only additional cost some care providers face. Other strategies for increasing return on investment see investors selling off care home properties for a one-off lump sum, then leasing them back – sometimes from a new landlord, sometimes from other entities within the corporate structure.

Care UK’s accounts, for example, state that it paid £4.1m in rent in 2019 to Silver Sea Holdings – a company registered in Luxembourg, a low-tax jurisdiction, which is also owned by Care UK’s parent company, Bridgepoint.

These financialised structures demand an ever-growing revenue stream, not to fund more and better quality care or higher wages, but to keep up with growing interest repayments on the debts they carry and rising rents, and to line the pockets of investors, some of whom are astutely located in low-tax jurisdictions.

Current reform proposals do not even begin to touch these problems. The touted 1p increase on national insurance contributions to fund social care, while welcome, would be like pouring money into a bucket that someone has wilfully punched holes into. We have to stem the outflow too.

Tighter financial regulation of the sector could rein in extractivist financial practices, and in the short term should be used to do so. However, this misses an even more fundamental challenge: that the core characteristics of adult social care make it almost impossible to privatise successfully. The supposed benefits of the free market – quality innovations and cost efficiencies – simply don’t apply. The bucket itself is not, and never has been, structurally sound.

For starters, well-functioning markets rely on consumer choice: if a product or service is inadequate, you simply choose another. But unlike a phone contract, where poor service may inspire you to switch provider, the physical and emotional costs associated with moving between care homes – known as “transfer trauma” – can leave vulnerable residents with limited power to voice their concerns.

In addition, the time-insensitive nature of care work means that there are few opportunities for cost-efficiency savings without compromising working conditions and quality of care. After all, asking a care worker to spend less time with each client can only be detrimental for a service in which, as the economist Tim Jackson puts it, the “quality rests entirely on the attention paid by one person to another”.

These two features of the care sector mean that service quality and worker pay come into conflict with returns to investors. Independent studies appear to corroborate this, finding that both quality of care and wages are generally lower in for-profit care homes.

Signing-on bonuses to recruit new carers, piecemeal funding reforms and even improved financial regulation cannot scratch the surface of these structural challenges.

The competitive, for-profit model of social care provision has had 30 years to deliver on its promises of efficient, high-quality services. In that time, the crisis in adult social care has only deepened. Instead of driving innovation, increased competition between providers has undermined care quality. It is time to stop pursuing the same strategy and expecting a different outcome.

The care sector needs an overhaul. Not only do we need adequate long-term funding from central government, we also need to address some searching questions about the role of profit in the sector, and ask: who is benefiting from this dysfunctional model? And who, ultimately, is paying the price?

The end of lockdown has come too late to prevent fresh store closures on Britain’s high streets as businesses count the cost of 18 months of pandemic disruption, the latest update on consumer spending has shown.

Larry Elliott www.theguardian.com 

Despite a boost to activity after the lifting of restrictions, the trade body for the sector, the British Retail Consortium, said the pace of recovery was slowing and more town centre sites were falling vacant.

The BRC said reform of business rates was vital to ensure investment in bricks-and-mortar retailing amid signs of a permanent shift towards online shopping during the Covid-19 crisis.

Its monthly retail sales monitor showed annual sales growth of 6.4% in July, well down on the three-month average of 14.7%.

Helen Dickinson, the BRC’s chief executive, said: “July continued to see strong sales, although growth has started to slow. The lifting of restrictions did not bring the anticipated in-store boost, with the wet weather leaving consumers reluctant to visit shopping destinations.”

Dickinson added that online sales remained strong, with the BRC figures showing a digital penetration rate of just under 50% for non-food items, up from 30% two years ago.

“Many shops and local communities have been battered by the pandemic, with many high streets in need of further investment,” the BRC chief executive said.

“Unfortunately, the current broken business rates system continues to hold back retailers, hindering vital investment into retail innovation and the blended physical-digital retail offering. The government must ensure the upcoming business rates review permanently reduces the cost burden to sustainable levels.

“Retailers want to play their part in building back a better future for local communities, and government must give them the tools to do so.”

Separate figures from the credit card company Barclaycard showed shops may have suffered from consumers spending more of their money on going to the cinema, theatre and sporting events.

Barclaycard said spending on its cards was 11.6% higher in July than in the same month two years ago as people took advantage of their “newfound freedom”. Entertainment experienced its first growth since the pandemic arrived in the UK in early 2020.

Raheel Ahmed, Barclaycard’s head of consumer products, said: “July’s major sports fixtures and the heatwave kept the nation in good spirits, providing more reasons to celebrate together, and giving the entertainment industry its long-awaited boost back into growth.

“While some sectors took a small step back as the post-lockdown ‘honeymoon’ period cooled, July was a positive month overall. However, with inflation expected to rise, it will be interesting to see how this impacts consumer spending behaviour over the coming months.”

The retail specialists Springboard said high street footfall continued to grow in the first week of August, rising by 1.4%.

A concerned resident writes in the Sidmouth Herald:

Closure of The Ham Path/Cycleway to the Public, for the proposed Jazz and Blues Festival, 2022:

The Sidmouth Town Clerk, the Chairman and Sidmouth Town Councillors have allowed The Ham path/cycleway to be closed to the public.

During the proposed Jazz and Blues Festival for 2022 the plan is for the path/cycleway to the Esplanade to be closed for the 7 day duration of the Festival.

The Festival proposes to fence off the path/cycleway and the whole of the grassed area of The Ham preventing public use.

(They also propose to have the Alma Bridge ‘boarded off’ to prevent viewing from the bridge).

Concerns are raised about access and mobility issues which will be caused for those who cannot easily be diverted and go around and over the small bridge, along the riverside path: those who are frail, disabled, in wheelchairs or with motorised wheelchairs, as well as those cycling or walking to and from the seafront.

The small bridge to the riverside can be a dangerous hazard.

An excessive 2,000 people are expected to attend the proposed Jazz and Blues Festival on The Ham (1,000 more than the Folk Week Marquee accomodates) adding increased access and safety issues to, and from, the Esplanade and Town.

Festival traffic, pedestrian and motorised traffic of all sorts will be channelled, dangerously, through York Street and around The Ham area itself.

The Ham path/cycleway has never been cut off from Public use in living memory.

Sidmouth Town Council have provided no information about this Festival plan, or it’s consequences, or that it is going to EDDC Licensing Committee.

The Application Notice asking for Objections is not easily seen by the Public-one was placed (out of the way?) in the corner of The Ham where few people go-; the Site Plan which shows the details of what is proposed, has to be requested and has been difficult to obtain from EDDC Licensing (the Organiser said they weren’t able to provide it to local residents- it is on one sheet of paper). The view from the EDDC Licensing Manager is that it is up to the Organiser to decide where they put the Application Notice to inform the Public of their proposals.

A second letter on this matter was sent to local residents. This had been the opportunity for Sidmouth Town Council and the Festival Organiser to be open and transparent with local residents and Sidmouth Townfolk about it’s plans: it has failed again to do this.

Many Sidmouth residents are unaware that this is proposed and the difficulties it will cause to many.

Stephen Pemberton,

Military personnel will be brought in to support the ambulance service in the South West, which has been struggling to meet demand during the summer.

Lee Trewhela www.devonlive.com 

With increased demand due to the higher number of visitors in Cornwall and Devon combined with the pressures of Covid-19 and shortages in staff there have been reports of all health services coming under sustained pressure.

The South Western Ambulance Service issued a desperate plea to the public earlier this month, urging them to only call 999 for life-threatening emergencies.

The warning came after the service said it was experiencing “extremely high demand.” The service had its busiest week on record in July, responding to a total of 22,041 incidents across seven days.

The pressure on the ambulance service has seen queues of ambulances outside the Royal Cornwall Hospital in Truro and other hospitals in the region.

Now, in a bid to support paramedics and other ambulance staff, military personnel will be assisting in the region.

Wayne Darch, South Western Ambulance Service’s assistant director of operations, said: “With the NHS in the South West facing increasing demand we are using tried and tested methods to alleviate pressures on services so everyone will continue to get the care they need.

“This includes a small number of military personnel to help us get more of our vehicles back on the road, getting people the urgent care and treatment they need sooner. If you are worried about your health but it is not an emergency, please use 111 online to be directed to the best service for your needs.”

The trial has begun of a former mayor of Exmouth who stands accused of historic sex offences against two underage boys.

About Author Becca Gliddon eastdevonnews.co.uk 

John Humphreys, aged 59, of Hartley Road, Exmouth, on trial at Exeter Crown Court, denies ten charges, alleged to have taken place between 1990 and 2002.

The court heard Humphreys denies ever having any sexual activity with either of the boys.

Humphreys stands accused of two charges of indecent assault and three counts of a sex assault on a boy aged 12 to 13 between 1990 and 1991.

He is also charged with five further counts of indecent assault of a second boy aged 14 to 15 between 1999 and 2002.

Prosecutor Mr Piers Norsworthy told the jury the younger boy said he met Humphreys in a public toilet and allegedly went on to have sex with him on three occasions; in a flat in Exmouth, and once in a stone building ‘that stank of pee’ in a Woodbury Common car park.

In a video interview played to the court, the male told police: “He took me into the apartment and made me do stuff that I didn’t want to do, and he shouldn’t be doing with a young boy.”

He said Humphreys was ‘aggressive’ when pushing him up against the wall of a stone building on Woodbury Common to have sex.

The male added: “He wiped himself all over my school shirt. I was thinking ‘my mum will kill me’.

“I took my school shirt off. I remember thinking ‘I don’t know how the washing machine works, so how am I going to explain this?’.

“I don’t know how I did any of it. The pain was unbearable. I thought I was going to die. I just couldn’t stop it.”

The court heard the second boy alleged Humphreys made him feel ‘dirty’, touching him sexually, and making him reciprocate, while in a flat while he was on work experience in Exmouth, telling the teenager: “This does not mean you are gay.”

Mr Norsworthy said the two complainants, both now adults, went to the police independently of each other.

The older boy went to Exmouth police in August 2004 and Humphreys was interviewed in October 2005, the court heard.

It was more than a decade later that the other boy went to police and the earlier complaint was reviewed, the jury was told.

Mr Norsworthy said the investigation had been ‘lengthy’, adding gardening contractor Humphreys had ‘denied ever having sexual activity’ with either of the males when he was interviewed about the allegations in 2016 and 2017.

The trial continues.

The New Statesman Podcast – Westminster Reimagined with Armando Iannucci

Part three: Centrism

This link should take you to the bonus 30 min podcast (with a few adverts) podcasts.google.com 

The legendary writer, satirist and broadcaster Armando Iannucci joins the New Statesman Podcast to co-host four special episodes. In these shows, Iannucci explores areas of British politics that he believes are broken, and is joined by guests from inside and outside the Westminster machine to discuss how politics could be better.

In episode three, Iannucci and Anoosh Chakelian examine political campaigning and centrism vs localism: whether better government comes from a powerful centre or from a strong local connection.

Iannucci and Chakelian are joined by special guests Chris Addison, Actor and Director who played special advisor Ollie Reeder in The Thick of It, and Claire Wright – the independent candidate who fought the East Devon constituency in three general elections – coming second each time. They discuss the conveyor belt from special advisor to politician and what you need to be a good MP.

Boris Johnson has found himself in the public’s firing line after it was revealed close to £100,000 was spent on two paintings for No.10.

Kate Nicholson www.huffingtonpost.co.uk

The accounts from the Government’s Art Collection fund – which is reinforced with taxpayers’ money – show that Downing Street spent £70,200 on just one 24in by 28in painting by Irish artist Cathy Wilkes.

Another £18,775 was spent on a set of four black and white photographs by installation Irish artist Willie Doherty, according to a report from the Daily Mirror.

The two works were apparently purchased to honour the century that has passed since the establishment of Northern Ireland.

The news has arrived weeks after the government cut £20-a-week from universal credit and introduced a real-terms pay cut for teachers and police officers.

Downing Street claimed the “majority” of the cash for the artworks came from donors and refused to say how much money came from the public purse.

Unsurprisingly, opposition MPs and the public are less than happy about the news.

Labour MP Neil Coyle tweeted: “As his government cuts universal credit and freezes frontline nurse/police pay, Johnson has found more money to treat himself. Again.

“He could not be more out of touch.”

Labour MP Emma Lewell-Buck also told the Mirror: “The selfishness of the prime minister is galling.

“When shelves were bare in my local food banks, businesses have gone to the wall, public sector and key workers have suffered pay freezes and cuts, his priority is once again himself.” 

One member of the public took to Twitter and asked: “How will these paintings benefit the taxpayer?”

Another said: “This is simply awful.”

A government spokesperson has defended the move, and said the Government Art Collection “acquires new works after consulting and securing the approval of an independent expert panel” and that the majority of the funding came from “philanthropic sources” not the taxpayer. 

Conservative Lord Ed Vaizey of Didcot, former culture secretary, also jumped in to support the Prime Minister:

But, even this provoked some backlash online with one Twitter account writing: “That however, doesn’t make it right in these times and any committee should have stopped this in its tracks.”

Greensill Capital: David Cameron made $10m from bank he lobbied Rishi Sunak for

Labour blasts former prime minister’s earnings as ‘utterly ludicrous’ and says rules need to change

www.independent.co.uk 

David Cameron made $10m (£7.2m) from Greensill Capital before the financial firm collapsed, it has been revealed.

Documents seen by the BBC’s Panorama programme show the former Conservative prime minister cashed in $4.5 shares in 2019, was paid a $1m annual salary as a part-time “adviser”, and also got a $700,000 bonus.

The company left investors and UK taxpayers facing huge losses after collapsing.

Mr Cameron hit the headlines in relation to the bank after it emerged he was using his closeness to current cabinet ministers to try to persuade them to underwrite its loans with taxpayer cash.

He was unsuccessful in his approaches, though the bank was ultimately given access to another Covid-19 loan facility.

Mr Cameron has been cleared of breaking any lobbying rules over the affair, but MPs said he showed a “significant lack of judgement”.

Labour’s deputy leader Angela Rayner said: “It is utterly ludicrous that David Cameron walked away with $10m for two-and-a-half years’ part-time work for a company that collapsed, risking thousands of pounds of taxpayers’ money.

“The fact that David Cameron was cleared of any wrongdoing, proves that the rules that are supposed to regulate lobbying are completely unfit for purpose. It’s created a wild west where the Conservatives think it’s one rule for them and another for everyone else.”

She added: “The system causes more harm than good by giving a veil of legitimacy to the rampant cronyism, sleaze and dodgy lobbying that is polluting our democracy under Boris Johnson and the Conservatives.

“Labour will ban former prime ministers from ever taking on lobbying jobs after they leave office. We will overhaul the current broken system and replace it with an Integrity and Ethics Commission that will stamp out sleaze.

“This is money most of us cannot even imagine, but for David Cameron it was just a part time gig using his Tory contacts for huge personal gain.”

Mr Cameron’s spokesman said: “He acted in good faith at all times and there was no wrongdoing in any of the actions he took.”

He added that the former prime minister “did not receive anything like the figures quoted by Panorama”.

From a Budleigh correspondent:

I am sure that there are worst examples than this in villages and towns near you but this example in Budleigh Salterton demonstrates what is happening to the housing stock in beautiful Devon.

 We all have cottages built to house the manual workers in our neighbourhoods. Some are older than others. In the older villages in the Otter Valley, like East Budleigh, they were thatched, cob cottages. In later settlements, like Budleigh Salterton, they were Victorian terraces. They were mostly 2 up and 2 down with outside amenities. 

These, in the middle of the last century, were the first homes for many local youngsters. This was followed by the urban middle classes starting to buy up these properties for their holiday homes. Where now do the local youngsters go to live? Margaret Thatcher had allowed council housing stock to be sold off at a discount without replacement by the local authority. So we have fewer council houses, a disastrous scenario. The price of properties rocket. The contemporary “manual worker” earns a very basic wage and can’t afford to rent and definitely can’t afford to buy. We are told that new developments will supply affordable homes. And then what happens? In Budleigh 30 affordable homes on an estate is reduced to 5. How many affordable homes are there in Cranbrook? How many in the new estates of Exmouth?

But now in 2021 this has been made so much worse by the proliferation of Airbnb. Holiday rentals are at a premium, so kick out the long term tenants and make a tremendous killing with the holiday trade. Result that even the essential keyworker has nowhere to rent long term.

Budleigh Salterton has an interesting case. In Victorian times 2 blocks of red brick terraced cottages were built in Granary Lane, opposite the gas works. From the 1891  census we find one of the terraces, Jersey Cottages, had two dwellings with 9 people living in a 2-bedroomed cottage. Occupations of the males in the 12 cottages were predominantly labouring and the females were servants. 

We now see that an end of terrace cottage (with garage and extension) which sold in 2013 for £330,000 has just sold for £725,000. This is way beyond the affordability of a local youngster.

And to exacerbate the situation, local rumour has it that it was heard that “this will make a wonderful Airbnb”. Another loss to the local community and the community spirit of Granary Lane. And more importantly, another house less for permanent home ownership.

Bizarrely, holiday lets are required to have planning permission to convert into a permanent dwelling, but not the other way around. We need, as a matter of urgency, to have planning permission for permanent dwellings to convert to second homes and holiday lets.

From today’s politico newsletter:

Labour wants Tory MP James Gray to be investigated after the Mail on Sunday’s Anna Mikhailova’s great scoop that the seasoned select committee member has been taking money from a crisis comms company in return for coaching corporate clients on how to answer select committee questions. Anna has some great quotes from an outraged senior MP who describes Gray’s coaching gig as akin to “insider dealing,” adding: “It stinks.”

(The 66-year-old MP is a member of the Commons Procedure Committee and Environmental Audit Committee as well as the ‘Panel of Chairs’, which advises the Commons Speaker, for which he is paid £16,422 on top of his £81,932 MP salary.

Gray has sat on 12 committees, including defence, transport and environment, since he was elected MP for North Wiltshire in 1997.) 

An example of “them” and “us” and what “they” think we think of “them”. August is definitely the time to tug your forelock.

Owl assumes that pheasant shooting is regarded by “them” in a similar light, though it doesn’t feature as one of our Local Enterprise Partnership “Golden Opportunities”.

Also a good example of how vague “economic benefits” can be used to promote the wishes of landowners.

Luckily, Owls don’t have forelocks to tug nor are considered to be part of the Raptor family, the arch enemy of gamekeepers.

Ben Webster www.thetimes.co.uk

Grouse shooting brings social benefits because it allows mixing between shooters and the people who cater for them, a report has suggested.

The paper defends the sport against calls for it to be banned, saying that it also has economic and environmental benefits. The report, funded by the shooting industry, has been released before the grouse season opens on Thursday, the Glorious Twelfth of August, although a cold, wet spring means many moors have few birds to shoot.

The researchers say that driven grouse shooting, in which beaters drive birds towards shooters, involves “a wide range of individuals from a variety of backgrounds, not just guns but also beaters, pickers up, drivers, flankers, caterers, supporters and others, facilitating contact between individuals from different class backgrounds and maximising the potential for social impacts”.

The report by Northampton University was commissioned by the Uplands Partnership, which includes the Moorland Association representing landowners, the British Association for Shooting and Conservation, the Countryside Alliance and the National Gamekeepers Association.

The three authors include Simon Denny, a retired professor and former army captain who is a keen shooter. They say that one of the main reasons people oppose grouse shooting may be because “it is associated with the rich enjoying themselves”, and insist that this is “a gross over-simplification”.

The report suggests that many people involved in grouse shooting are disadvantaged in the debate over the sport because unlike high-profile opponents such as Chris Packham, the author and broadcaster, they are often “not confident in using social media and communication media”.

The economic benefits of grouse shooting include supporting jobs in remote areas, with a survey of 15 estates in North Yorkshire, Northumberland, and Scotland showing that they had 80 gamekeepers and 175 other full-time staff.

One moor in the North York Moors National Park employs 50 beaters earning £50 a day, 20 times a year, while another ten people earn £100 picking up the dead birds. Grouse shooting also supports hotels and other businesses, with clients flying in on private jets, bringing wives and partners and spending “a vast amount of money”.

Management of grouse moors helps to control ticks, which pose a disease risk to humans and wildlife. Bracken, which can harbour ticks and smother sensitive habitats, is also reduced.

The report says that a detailed study has not been carried out into the economic impact of managing moors without shooting but its authors conclude: “It is unlikely that the alternative uses that are proposed by some groups for the moorlands would deliver the same positive economic impacts, at least for a number of generations.” They said that shooting was “an important part of a mosaic of income-generating activities that sustain upland communities”.

Mark Avery, a co-founder with Packham of Wild Justice, which wants driven grouse shooting to be banned, said that the report was “from an industry in denial”. He ridiculed the claim that the sport brought classes together, adding: “We’ll have a game of dominoes down the pub with the Duke of Westminster [a grouse moor owner] any time he likes.”

Report can be found here

Footnote: On Monday 21st June the Westminster Petitions Committee debated the petition: “Ban Driven Grouse Shooting: Wilful blindness is no longer an option”. The petition was started by Wild Justice, the anti-shooting campaign group headed by Mark Avery, Ruth Tingay and Chris Packham. The debate followed a similar – unsuccessful – petition that was debated back in 2016.  Back then 30 MPs, including the now-Chancellor Rishi Sunak, made speeches in favour of grouse shooting, while none spoke in favour of the ban, and the petition was rejected. The 2021 debate followed a fairly similar pattern to the one from five years ago, with MPs lining up to support grouse shooting and to refute the claims of the petition.

Devon public health chiefs are urging people who have yet to take up the coronavirus vaccine to go and get jabbed as case rates in the county are above the national average.

Daniel Clark www.devonlive.com

Infection rates over the last few weeks in Devon are the highest they have been since the start of the pandemic, with case rates in Exeter in particular among the highest in the country.

Only Lincoln of the 315 lower tier authority has a higher infection rate than Exeter at present, with Plymouth and Torbay just outside the top ten, with Teignbridge and East Devon district areas also having case rates above the national average.

But while rates in Exeter, Mid Devon, South Hams and Torbay are rising, in East Devon, North Devon, Teignbridge, Torridge and West Devon, they are falling again.

Most Devon cases are among people in their late teens and of young working age population, and the latest data shows that Devon’s weekly case rate average is now above the national average for the first time since the beginning of the pandemic.

Cases are predominantly in children and younger adults, with the highest case rates in those aged 16 to 24 year olds.

“A lot of it is to be expected, with the gradual lifting of restrictions that we’ve seen over several months, and people having more opportunities to mix socially,” says Devon’s deputy director of public health, Tina Henry.

“A similar pattern is currently seen in many other cities like Exeter with a younger population profile.

“But we’re not seeing that follow through to hospitalisations, although hospitals are very busy right now. That’s largely thanks to the vaccine, which is why it’s so important to take both vaccinations when they’re offered to you.

“We’re now appealing especially to younger adults to make sure that they get double vaccinated.”

While in Devon, 87 per cent of adults have had one Covid vaccine and 74 per cent a second dose, in Exeter, where infection rates are currently at 568.5/100,000, only 78 per cent of adults have had their first dose, and 59 per cent a second dose.

The latest Government figures, which give the position as of Tuesday, August 3, show that across hospital trusts in Devon there were 86 patients in hospital after a positive Covid-19 test.

Derriford Hospital has 42 patients – up from 35 as of the previous Tuesday, with Exeter having 30, up from 27, Torbay up to 12, from 8, but in North Devon, numbers have fallen from 6 to 2. In Cornwall, the number only rose by two, to 23 from 21.

The figures show how many patients are in hospital following a positive test for Covid-19, but not whether they were admitted for Covid-related reasons, whether they were infected inside the hospital, or whether their admission was entirely unrelated but they happened to have Covid at the same time – figures for the South West show on July 27, around 15 per cent of beds were occupied by ‘non-Covid’ patients.

But apparently the “event” has yet to happen.

www.independent.co.uk

The major Conservative Party donor at the centre of an alleged “cash for access” row paid £100,000 for a breakfast date with Boris Johnson, it has emerged.

Business tycoon Mohamed Amersi is said to have paid for the early morning meeting with the prime minister after winning a fundraising dinner auction in November 2019.

The £99,500 donation to Tory HQ was reported to the Electoral Commission last January – but Mr Amersi is yet to get his breakfast with Mr Johnson, according to the Sunday Times.

Mr Amersi revealed last week that a group of wealthy Tory donors known as the “advisory board” had been developed to connect the party’s biggest financial backers with ministers.

A client of Tory co-chair Ben Elliot’s concierge company Quintessentially, Mr Amersi said the donors’ group worked in a similar way to the private firm. “One needs to cough up £250,000 per annum or be a friend of Ben.”

Frustrated by his failure to get his breakfast meeting with Mr Johnson, Mr Amersi reportedly emailed Mr Elliot in June 2020 to complain.

“I know this is unlikely to happen until full lockdown is over but can you ensure this is co-ordinated,” Mr Elliot then wrote to colleagues at Tory HQ. “Who is our internal liaison?”

It has also emerged that the Conservative Party made several payments to Mr Elliot’s company Hod Hill last year.

The party said the payments funded “administrative support” so Hod Hill co-director Jakob Widecki could work with Mr Elliot at Tory HQ, according to the Sunday Times.

It comes as new analysis by The Independent shows just ten wealthy people account for a quarter of all the donations made by individuals to the Tory Party since Mr Johnson became prime minister.

The ten super-rich donors have given a combined sum of just over £10m to the Tories since he entered No 10 – more than 25 per cent of the £38.6m received from individuals in the past two years.

Mr Amersi sits just outside the list of top ten donors, having given £189,000 since Mr Johnson entered No 10. He previously gave almost £300,000 to the party during Theresa May’s three years in Downing Street.

Labour MP Anneliese Dodds, the party’s chair, said the Conservatives had “serious questions to answer” about their dependence on big donors.

The frontbencher told The Independent: “We need to know why the Tories have become so reliant on huge donations from a select group of super wealthy individuals – and what it is that these elite donors are being given in return.

“Boris Johnson has created a cash for access culture in the Conservative Party … He needs to break his silence and explain what he plans to do to ensure there isn’t one rule for senior Conservatives and their cronies, and another rule for everyone else.”

Sir Keir Starmer has demanded that the Tories reveal who was in the party’s club for big donors. “We can’t have this sleaze, this murky cash-for-access,” he said.

Conservative Party co-chair Amanda Milling has insisted that government policy “is in no way influenced by the donations the party receives – they are entirely separate”.

She said: “All political parties raise money and accept donations in order to pay their staff and campaign in elections.”

Meanwhile, Labour has accused former chancellor Phillip Hammond of breaking the ministerial code, after he reportedly wrote to the Treasury to advocate for a bank he now works for as a paid adviser.

Mr Hammond emailed Charles Roxburgh, the Treasury’s second most senior civil servant, in July 2020 to explain the benefits of a “toolkit” developed by OakNorth to assess borrowers, according to the Sunday Telegraph.

Labour’s deputy leader, Angela Rayner, claimed the Tory MP had violated the code of conduct for former ministers and called for the cabinet secretary to investigate. “If the rules are treated with such derision by the former chancellor then the whole system is rotten.”

Lord Hammond’s spokesman insisted OakNorth were offering their toolkit to the Treasury “free of charge” and no rules had been broken.

Tory politics today is solely about holding onto power and financially rewarding those who help them do so. 

And that’s it. 

Actually governing the country is very low down on the agenda.

From today’s Western Morning News:

The leader of Devon County Council says social care is the “albatross around the neck of local government” as he urged Westminster to announce long-awaited reforms to the service.

Conservative John Hart also said successive governments, including the Tory-led coalition and majority Conservatives since 2010, had kicked the issue “as hard as it possibly can” down the road.

“I’m sure they have, because it’s one of these where it’s not an easy answer,” he said.

Under the current system in England, anyone who owns a home or has more than  £23,250 in savings needs to pay for their own care. For many people this means having to sell their property. Only when they have less than  £23,500 do local authorities step in to foot the bill.

Councillor Hart, who has been in charge at county hall since 2009, said it was crucial the government finally announced the shake-up promised by Boris Johnson on his first day as prime minister.

“It’s crucial because social care is becoming almost the albatross around the neck of local government. We don’t know at times just what the heck we’re walking into.

“It’s almost an open cheque book. You can’t be sure what’s going to come through your door tomorrow and you have to be prepared for it.”

The budget for adult care and health in the Devon County Council area, which excludes Torbay and Plymouth, is  £233 million this financial year – an increase of nearly  £22 million on last year.

The council says it will support almost two-thousand older people in residential care, 2,483 receiving personal care and 3,150 who get ‘reablement’ – such as when people get help to live independently after a stroke or are discharged from hospital with limited mobility.

Speaking in 2019 after replacing Theresa May as prime minister, Mr Johnson said: “I am announcing now – on the steps of Downing Street – that we will fix the crisis in social care once and for all with a clear plan we have prepared to give every older person the dignity and security they deserve.”

But that plan has yet to be published, with any announcement yet to materialise. Reports in recent days suggest this has now been pushed back to the autumn.

One idea thought to be under consideration is a penny increase in national insurance contributions. However this would go against a Conservative manifesto commitment not to raise taxes.

When asked what the reforms should look like, Cllr Hart said: “I would like to see consistency from government first off. If we have to supply services for people, and we do have to supply services for people, we want to know from the government that they will support us for the services that we have to give.”

He added: “It’s getting to a stage shortly where some decisions are going to need to be taken because, as far as local government’s concerned, everybody says ‘you’re putting the council tax up every year’. We’re getting to a stage where people can’t pay. 

“The other side of that is unless we put council tax up, we haven’t got the money to look after vulnerable people across all ages.” 

In 2010, the Dilnot Commission was set up by the government to address reforms to social care. It proposed a lifetime cap on care costs individuals must pay of between  £25,000 and  £50,000.

However, whilst Cllr Hart said he hoped people could keep more of their own money, he questioned whether the Dilnot proposals would be “feasible,” adding that in some cases the authority is spending more than  £20,000 a year on care per person.

“In nursing homes, the fees are over a thousand pounds a week. Normal care homes are six to eight hundred pounds a week. I don’t know how one is going to handle this, but it is the albatross around local government. It’s almost the albatross around national governments as well.”

The Conservative Party made numerous payments last year to a company owned by its chairman, it can be revealed.

Gabriel Pogrund, Henry Zeffman www.thetimes.co.uk 

Ben Elliot, who was appointed by Boris Johnson to be co-chairman of the Conservatives in 2019 after spending years introducing wealthy donors to the party, oversaw the payment of party funds to his own firm, Hod Hill, between April and August last year.

The Conservatives are refusing to say how much was paid to Hod Hill, a small and unaudited company owned by Elliot, which has no public profile but assets of £2.4 million. It said the payments funded “administrative support” to Elliot, 45, in his role as chairman.

It is understood that the money paid for Elliot’s long-term business partner and co-director at Hod Hill, Jakob Widecki, and one of its employees, to work with him at party headquarters.

Widecki, 33, an Austrian citizen, owns shares in the company, and has also worked for Elliot’s other business, a concierge service for the ultra-rich, for most of the past decade.

The party could not explain why it had not paid Widecki and the other staff members directly, as opposed to giving the money to Hod Hill. It is unclear why the arrangement started or ended.

A party spokesman said: “Neither Ben Elliot nor Hod Hill have benefited financially from their relationship with the Conservative Party directly or indirectly.” It is understood that the two have moved to a separate financial arrangement.

The revelations will add to growing pressure on Elliot over the apparent overlap between his business activities and his role in public life and the party.

He is already facing claims he sold access to his uncle, the Prince of Wales, via Quintessentially, his concierge service. The Tory donor Mohamed Amersi was flown to meet Charles at Dumfries House after paying £15,000 a year to be a member of Quintessentially’s “elite” tier.

It has also emerged that Elliot oversees an elite “advisory council” of donor to the Tories, who for giving £250,000 receive access to the prime minister.

It can also be revealed that the Tories accepted £100,000 from Amersi, a paying client of Quintessentially, in exchange for a breakfast with Boris Johnson.

Elliot has repeatedly declined to say how Hod Hill has made its money. There is no suggestion of illegality or that Elliot has broken any rules.

Amersi bought his breakfast with Johnson for £99,500 in an auction at the Carlton dinner fundraising event in November 2019. The donation was reported to the Electoral Commission in January last year, but the breakfast has not taken place.

Last night Lord Leigh, the senior treasurer of the Conservatives, said: “Anyone who supports any party of any colour and is not a paid MP or full-time official has other interests, that’s true of any other party, it always has been, it always will be, there’s nothing wrong with that.

“The fact is you have a chairman with other interests which are also declared. It is all transparent and open. We need to thank people who help political parties voluntarily because without them we would have a state system, which nobody would enjoy.”

A party spokesman said: “Donations are properly and transparently declared to the Electoral Commission.”

Just 10 wealthy people account for a quarter of all the donations made by individuals to the Conservative Party since Boris Johnson became prime minister, according to new analysis by The Independent.

www.independent.co.uk 

The 10 super-rich donors – nine of whom are men – have given a combined sum of just over £10m to the Tories since Mr Johnson entered Downing Street, more than 25 per cent of the £38.6m received from all individuals in the past two years.

Fears have been raised about the power held by the very wealthiest Tory donors, after it emerged last week that a group known as the “advisory board” had been developed to connect the party’s biggest financial backers with ministers.

Campaign groups said The Independent’s analysis – based on the latest data from the Electoral Commission – showed the “concentrated power” of a small number of big donors.

Darren Hughes, chief executive of Electoral Reform Society said: “These figures show just how concentrated donor power is in UK politics. Political debate shouldn’t be something bought by a few very wealthy individuals.

“The fact that a small group have provided such a large amount of political funding and gained the potential influence that comes with it is of great concern.”

Calling for strict new limits on the amount donors can give, Mr Hughes added: “It’s time to fix the rot and restore faith in politics. We need to explore a cap on donations [and] greater public funding to bring us into line with most advanced democracies.”

Alex Runswick, senior advocacy manager at the Transparency International UK campaign group, added: “These revelations underline concerns that great wealth can secure a privileged audience in UK politics.

“This dependence on a small number of wealthy donors risks shaping policy and decisions in their favour rather than national interest, so the government should legislate to take big money out of politics.”

The donation data shows most of the 10 biggest individual Tory backers since Mr Johnson became prime minister in July 2019 made their fortune in either finance or property.

One of the 10 most generous donors is Jamie Reuben, co-owner of the Reuben Brothers property empire, who has given almost £700,000 to the Tory party thus far during the Johnson era.

His ties with the Tories came under scrutiny earlier this year, when it emerged his company was a co-investor with the Saudi Arabian Public Investment Fund (PIF) in last year’s failed bid to buy Newcastle United.

Leaked messages from September 2020 revealed that the prime minister had asked his adviser Sir Edward Lister to look into the chances of the deal being revived. When Sir Edward said that he was hopeful the deal could be done, Mr Johnson reportedly replied: “Brilliant.”

Other wealthy Tory donors on the top 10 list include online trading tycoon Peter Cruddas, who has given the party just over £870,000 in the past two years. Mr Cruddas was handed a peerage last year – sparking accusations of “cronyism” from Labour.

In June the anti-corruption campaign the Good Law Project launched legal action over the peerage, claiming that Mr Johnson ignored the advice of the House of Lords Appointments Committee against making the businessman a Lord.

The single biggest individual donor since Mr Johnson came to power is Malcom Healey – the retail tycoon whose company owns Wren Kitchens. He has handed the Tory Party £2m in the past two years.

Labour MP Anneliese Dodds, the party’s chair, said the Conservatives had “serious questions to answer” about their dependence on big donors.

The frontbencher told The Independent: “We need to know why the Tories have become so reliant on huge donations from a select group of super wealthy individuals – and what it is that these elite donors are being given in return.

“Boris Johnson has created a cash for access culture in the Conservative Party … He needs to break his silence and explain what he plans to do to ensure there isn’t one rule for senior Conservatives and their cronies, and another rule for everyone else.”

Last week the Financial Times reported that an “advisory board” donor club, featuring members who donated at least £250,000, was developed to connect Tory supporters with senior figures, claiming meetings have been held with Mr Johnson and chancellor Rishi Sunak.

The Conservative Party has since refused to reveal which donors have paid to be members of the group, or which ministers have attended meetings after Labour called for transparency.

Leading donor Mohamed Amersi told the FT the group is “like the very elite Quintessentially clients membership: one needs to cough up £250,000 per annum or be a friend of Ben”.

The name was a reference to the Conservatives’ co-chairman Ben Elliot, founder of the luxury concierge service Quintessentially who also reportedly help set up the donor network.

Mr Amersi sits just outside the list of top 10 donors in the past two years, having given £189,000 in the Johnson era. Most of the money – £99,500 – was paid for a breakfast date with Mr Johnson after he won an “auction” at a party dinner event.

Conservative Party co-chair Amanda Milling claimed that government policy “is in no way influenced by the donations the party receives – they are entirely separate”.

She said: “All political parties raise money and accept donations in order to pay their staff and campaign in elections.”

Earlier this week, cabinet minister Grant Shapps said large donations to the Tory Party from wealthy people should not be “painted as some sort of immoral act”.

The transport secretary also said the British public would not welcome any new limits on the amount donors could give – since he claimed it could mean more money coming from the public purse to fund political parties.

In 2011 the Committee on Standards on Public Life recommended that political donations were capped at £10,000 per donor, per party, per year – but the Tory-Lib Dem coalition government passed up the chance to reform the system.

Campaign groups said it was time for clear limits on the size on donations, urging MPs from all parties to consider new rules to limit the potential for corruption.

“Without limits on the size of political donations, political parties will continue to fail to build broader, more democratic bases of financial support,” said Ms Runswick of Transparency International UK.

“Clearly money does buy access, and the perception that this secures undue influence corrodes trust in our political system.”

Top 10 individual Tory donors since Boris Johnson entered No 10:

• 1. Malcolm Healey – £2m

Owner of Wren Kitchens’ parent company West Retail Group.

• 2. John Gore – £1.4m

Theatre production tycoon.

• 3. Peter Hargreaves – £1m

Co-founder of financial services giant Hargreaves Lansdown.

• 4. Jonathan Wood – £1m

Founder of hedge fund SRM Global.

• 5. Peter Wood – £1m

Founder of Direct Line and Esure insurance companies.

• 6. Peter Cruddas – £872,000

Founder of trading company CMC Markets.

• 7. Sir Ehud Sheleg – £832,000

Tory party treasury who was given knighthood under Theresa May.

• 8. Lubov Chernukhin – £681,000

Ex-banker whose husband was minister for Vladimir Putin.

• 9. Jamie Reuben – £639,000

Property tycoon whose company was part of failed bid for Newcastle United.

• 10. Howard Shore – £609,000

Founder of finance firm Shore Capital and Brexit supporter.

• T1 and T2 Ash : Fell; crown lift roadside trees to a maximum of 5.2 meters above highway level. Max diameter cut 75 mm. Reasons: one sided crowns dominating small garden, remove to improve light in garden and create space for remaining trees. Create standard highway clearance as high sided vehicles are hitting low branches 19 Simcoe Way Dunkeswell Honiton EX14 4URRef. No: 21/2070/TRE | Validated: Fri 30 Jul 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Reserved matters application for new internal estate road located to the south of Grow Out Building 3 including access, appearance, landscaping, layout and scale of the road and containing additional information and details to satisfy conditions 2,12,15,16,23,25,26,27,30,31,32 and 41 on outline planning permission ref: 09/1107/MOUT in so far as they relate to the new roadway. Land Adj Babbage Way Exeter Science Park Clyst HonitonRef. No: 21/2053/MRES | Validated: Thu 29 Jul 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Hedge 3, Bay hedge : Reduce by 4-5m to previous trim height to keep the hedge in a good cycle of management. Hedge 5, mixed species hedge L fell to near ground level to resolve the problem of the branches disturbing neighbouring properties. The Bays Coburg Road Sidmouth EX10 8NFRef. No: 21/2065/TCA | Validated: Thu 29 Jul 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Birch tree (T1) – crown reduction. Reduce height by approximately 3m to leave a final tree height of approximately 10 metres and reduce side crown to leave approximately 4m radial spread Cross Trees Bell Street Otterton Budleigh Salterton EX9 7HSRef. No: 21/2050/TCA | Validated: Fri 30 Jul 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Crown reduction to the northwest quadrant of the crown to achieve 3 metre clearance from chimney. Maximum diameter cuts of 100mm. Reason: to reduce needle fall on roof and gutters and maintain clearance from chimney Fair View 1 Brackendown West Hill Ottery St Mary EX11 1NTRef. No: 21/2041/TRE | Validated: Tue 27 Jul 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Change of use from agricultural land to outdoor leisure pursuits and associated operational development Land North Of The Shrubbery Escot Park Ottery St MaryRef. No: 21/2045/FUL | Validated: Fri 30 Jul 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision
• New Build replacement of Barn approved for conversion under 20/2041/PDQ, to accommodate one house and annexe (Class C3). Wishes Broadhembury Honiton EX14 3LNRef. No: 21/2037/FUL | Validated: Mon 26 Jul 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision
• T1 Ash. Fell. The tree has a very poor canopy (perhaps due to ash dieback) and is of low amenity value. Additionally the root plate is losing structural integrity thereby compromising its stability. 7 Old Home Farm Rousdon Lyme Regis DT7 3YLRef. No: 21/2029/TCA | Validated: Mon 26 Jul 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Raising roof height for conversion of roof space to habitable use to include a side dormer and roof lights and erection of porch 33 Parkside Road Exeter EX1 3TNRef. No: 21/2027/FUL | Validated: Mon 26 Jul 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision
• The retention and modification of vehicular access comprising removal of gravelled track, bollard lights and gate, and replacement by wooden gate, stone track together with landscaping proposals including new Devon bank and wildflower meadow. Titford Hold Awliscombe Honiton EX14 3PSRef. No: 21/2036/FUL | Validated: Thu 29 Jul 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision

• Single storey rear and side extension1 Woolbrook Rise Sidmouth EX10 9UBRef. No: 21/2038/CPL | Validated: Thu 29 Jul 2021 | Status: Refused
• Erection of two illuminated signs Whitty Court Weycroft Avenue Millwey Rise Industrial Estate AxminsterRef. No: 21/2035/ADV | Validated: Wed 28 Jul 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Installation of 24 ground mounted solar panels on three frames (2 frames of 9 panels and 1 frame with 6 panels) Foxgloves Woodhouse Lane Uplyme Lyme Regis DT7 3SXRef. No: 21/2030/FUL | Validated: Wed 28 Jul 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Certificate of lawfulness for a proposed replacement single storey side extension19 Feniton Gardens Feniton Honiton EX14 3DGRef. No: 21/2028/CPL | Validated: Wed 28 Jul 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision
• T1, Ash : Dismantle to ground level T2, Ash : Dismantle to ground level Reason for works: Ash Dieback Disease (ADD) T1 is severely leaning to the north and may be showing early signs of ADD, removal of tree now whilst still safe for tree surgeons to work on. T2 is showing approximately 50% dieback in crown due to ADD, removal to prevent limb or whole tree failure damaging surrounding area. The Lodge House 7 West Hill Lane Budleigh Salterton EX9 6AARef. No: 21/2039/TRE | Validated: Tue 27 Jul 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Approval of the reserved matters of access, appearance, landscaping, layout and scale children’s day nursery with associated engineering works, infrastructure, car parking and landscaping. Discharge of conditions 6, 11, 14, 17, 22, 23, 24, 28, 30, 33, and 37 and partial discharge of condition 33 all of planning permission 03/P1900. (This is a subsequent application in respect of permission 03/P1900 which was accompanied by an environmental statement) Parcel TC4A Land South Of Tillhouse Road Cranbrook Town Centre CranbrookRef. No: 21/2021/RES | Validated: Wed 28 Jul 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Erection of a single storey rear extension, which would extend beyond the rear wall of the original house by 3.8 metres, for which the maximum height would be 3.9 metres, and for which the height of the eaves would be 2.7 metres 19 Feniton Gardens Feniton Honiton EX14 3DGRef. No: 21/2032/GPD | Validated: Tue 27 Jul 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Ash trees, 152, 153,154,155 : Fell. Reason: Trees suffering from significant decline likely caused by ash dieback. A La Ronde Summer Lane Exmouth EX8 5BDRef. No: 21/2026/TRE | Validated: Mon 26 Jul 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Approval of the reserved matters of access, appearance, landscaping, layout and scale for retail uses comprising a supermarket and Cranbrook town square, with associated engineering works, infrastructure, car parking and landscaping. Discharge of conditions 6,11,14,17, 22, 24, 28, 30, 34 and 37 and partial discharge of condition 33 all of planning permission 03/P1900. (This is a subsequent application in respect of permission 03/P1900 which was accompanied by an Environmental Statement). Parcel TC4A Land South Of Tillhouse Road Cranbrook Town Centre CranbrookRef. No: 21/2033/MRES | Validated: Wed 28 Jul 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Approval of the reserved matters of access, appearance, landscaping, layout and scale for the southern side of the High Street comprising 11 retail units (to comprise A1, A2, A3, A4, A5 uses, in accordance with the outline consent (now recognised as falling within Class E)) and 26 residential dwellings, with associated engineering works, infrastructure, car parking and landscaping. Discharge of conditions 6, 11, 14, 17, 22, 24, 28, 29, and 37 and partial discharge of condition 33 all of planning permission 03/P1900. (This is a subsequent application in respect of permission 03/P1900 which was accompanied by an environmental statement) Parcel TC4A Land South Of Tillhouse Road Cranbrook Town Centre CranbrookRef. No: 21/2020/MRES | Validated: Wed 28 Jul 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision

• Single storey rear extension and lantern over kitchen Summerlee Sid Road Sidmouth EX10 9AHRef. No: 21/2015/FUL | Validated: Thu 29 Jul 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Replace 4no. windows on front south elevation Hembercombe Cottage Broadhembury Honiton EX14 3NJRef. No: 21/2010/LBC | Validated: Fri 30 Jul 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Demolition of existing conservatory and replacement with a rear extension Prospect House Parsonage Way Woodbury Exeter EX5 1HYRef. No: 21/1994/FUL | Validated: Tue 27 Jul 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision
• T1 to T4, Ash trees – Fell G1, 4 Ash – Fell Reason – Trees showing symptoms of Ash die back and removal appropriate safety management. Meadows End Harcombe Road Axminster EX13 5TBRef. No: 21/2000/TRE | Validated: Wed 28 Jul 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Erection of roof over existing silage pit Spence Cross Farm House Payhembury Honiton EX14 3JHRef. No: 21/1996/FUL | Validated: Wed 28 Jul 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision
• A steel lean-to to a silage pit cover Spence Cross Farm House Payhembury Honiton EX14 3JHRef. No: 21/2002/FUL | Validated: Wed 28 Jul 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Relocate bin store already approved 4 Chapel Street Budleigh Salterton EX9 6LXRef. No: 21/2004/FUL | Validated: Tue 27 Jul 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Demolition of building and construction of new dwelling house Mcbains Antiques Exeter Airport Clyst Honiton Exeter EX5 2BARef. No: 21/1963/FUL | Validated: Tue 27 Jul 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Single storey rear extension, and conversion of roof space to habitable use to include a rear dormer. 17 Higher Woolbrook Park Sidmouth EX10 9EDRef. No: 21/1967/FUL | Validated: Wed 28 Jul 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Alterations to fenestration, addition of first floor side window, and replacement of balcony balustrade Flat 4 Carlton Court 12 Carlton Hill Exmouth EX8 2AJRef. No: 21/1979/FUL | Validated: Wed 28 Jul 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision

• T1 and T2 ash trees – fell ash tees as showing signs of ash die back, reason for works is due to safety. 3 Walden Road Dunkeswell Honiton EX14 4XBRef. No: 21/1965/TRE | Validated: Fri 30 Jul 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Variation of condition No. 8 (Landscaping) of planning permission ref: 16/1190/FUL to allow for an integration of other proposals by softening the development as a whole and removing roadside planting to improve visability (Retrospective) Straitgate Farm Exeter Road Ottery St Mary EX11 1LGRef. No: 21/1951/VAR | Validated: Thu 29 Jul 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Proposed internal alterations and construction of a new two storey extension and single storey extension to form a new lounge. Creation of a new vehicular access off Lower Road and construction of a detached garage. Heathfield House Woodbury Salterton Exeter EX5 1ALRef. No: 21/1956/FUL | Validated: Mon 26 Jul 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Replace 2no. windows on ground floor rear elevation (W01 & W02) Budleigh Cottage Kerswell Cullompton EX15 2EJRef. No: 21/1957/LBC | Validated: Fri 30 Jul 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision
• A two storey rear & side projecting Green oak extension, largely glazed Cawleys Farm Wiggaton Ottery St Mary EX11 1PYRef. No: 21/1946/FUL | Validated: Mon 26 Jul 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Erection of glider trailer store Devon And Somerset Gliding Club Sheldon Honiton EX14 4QWRef. No: 21/1926/FUL | Validated: Wed 28 Jul 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Single storey front extension and erection of an open front porch to side with alterations to fenestration Little Holt Ebford Lane Ebford Exeter EX3 0QXRef. No: 21/1917/FUL | Validated: Tue 27 Jul 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Remove existing cementious render and replace with a lime based render on side (south east) elevation Tolcis Farm Tolcis Axminster EX13 7JFRef. No: 21/1823/LBC | Validated: Mon 26 Jul 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Replace 2no. windows on rear elevation and replace French doors on rear elevation with 1no. single door 5B Fortfield Terrace Sidmouth EX10 8NTRef. No: 21/1818/LBC | Validated: Thu 29 Jul 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Variation of conditions No. 2 (Approved Plans) and No. 6 (Landscaping Scheme) of planning permission ref: 15/2753/VAR to allow for reverting to the original green living wall and alterations to landscaping (retrospective) Barton Grange Barton Rise Tipton St John EX10 0ANRef. No: 21/1788/VAR | Validated: Mon 26 Jul 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision

• Beech tree : Prune lowest two branches touching the roof of the adjacent garage to achieve two metre clearance. Reason : In the interests of visual amenity and to ensure the garage roof is not damaged The Old House Chardstock Axminster EX13 7BTRef. No: 21/1742/TRE | Validated: Wed 28 Jul 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Application for 2x stone benches around new tree in memory of Sir John Cave. Millennium Green Bridge Street SidburyRef. No: 21/1502/FUL | Validated: Fri 30 Jul 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision

The waiting list for NHS care in England could rise to 15 million people in the next four years without a significant increase in its current capacity, ministers are warned, amid a cabinet clash over the service’s future funding.

Michael Savage www.theguardian.com 

With senior figures inside the health service warning there is currently “a chasm” between the NHS and the Treasury over the financial settlement now needed, exclusive analysis seen by the Observer shows that NHS trusts in England are on course to spend almost £5bn more next financial year than was anticipated when Theresa May set the service’s funding levels in 2018.

The analysis by the Nuffield Trust finds that NHS trusts also face ending this financial year with an overspend of £5bn, excluding the extra costs of dealing with Covid. Insiders warn that billions more will have to be added to the NHS’s new financial settlement this autumn in the wake of continuing Covid-related costs, reduced capacity and staff shortages.

Several sources said that a “conservative estimate” would see an extra £7bn a year needed on top of existing NHS funding. However, the battle over future funding, set to kick off between health secretary Sajid Javid, NHS England, and chancellor Rishi Sunak this summer will begin with the sides far apart. Ultimately, the prime minister is also expected to engage in the talks.

Writing in today’s Observer, Chris Hopson, the chief executive of NHS Providers, warns the government that the package handed to NHS England at this autumn’s spending review will have a “significant impact on the next general election”. He said the last time the NHS had to deal with comparable waiting lists in the early 2000s, it was handed annual increases of 7% or more.

“The chancellor has, up to now, largely met his pledge of giving the NHS what it needed to cope with Covid-19,” he writes. “But, recently, the Treasury mood music has sharply switched. To recovering the national finances, reducing the NHS share of public spending, and a worryingly misplaced assumption that Covid-19 costs will fall quickly, so the NHS can return to its ‘generous’ June 2018 settlement. Frontline leaders can’t provide the quality of care patients need, and deliver the government’s manifesto commitments, unless they are properly funded to do so.”

Two issues are combining to cause severe problems for the health service’s budget. Millions of patients will be added to existing waiting lists as the Covid pandemic eases and they return to GPs. Meanwhile, Covid restrictions mean that the service was only running at 82% of its 2019 capacity by May this year.

Javid warned last month that waiting lists could reach 13 million people before they begin to fall. However, new analysis by the Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS) has found that the outlook could be even worse unless action is taken. If only two-thirds of the “missing” patients return, with the NHS remaining at 95% of its pre-pandemic capacity over the next few years, waiting lists would still rise to an enormous 11 million within a year and then continue to climb to more than 15 million by the end of 2025.

The IFS found that even in its most optimistic scenario, the number of people waiting for treatment would rise to over nine million next year and would only return to pre-pandemic levels in 2025.

Max Warner, a research economist at the IFS and an author of the analysis, said: “More than four million people were on an NHS waiting list even before the pandemic. Covid-19 has only made matters worse, as millions of people have missed out on treatment and millions more haven’t even been referred on to the waiting list to begin with. There is a real risk that if the NHS cannot find effective ways to boost its capacity – a challenge at the best of times, let alone after a major pandemic – then much longer waiting lists will be with us for years to come.”

A Department of Health and Social Care spokesperson said huge amounts had already been given to the health service during the crisis, on top of its previous settlement. They said: “We are committed to making sure the NHS has everything it needs to continue providing excellent care to the public as we tackle the backlogs that have built up during the pandemic. This year alone we have already provided a further £29bn to support health and care services, including an extra £1bn to tackle the backlog. This is on top of our historic settlement for the NHS in 2018, which will see its budget rise by £33.9bn by 2023-24.”

Just take the batteries out of the smoke alarm – Owl

Aubrey Allegretti www.theguardian.com 

Boris Johnson is facing mounting anger after it emerged he continued with a tour of Scotland and decided not to isolate despite a member of his team testing positive for Covid-19 on the trip.

A senior government source told the Guardian the prime minister and official were “side-by-side” on several occasions and even travelled together on an RAF Voyager between Glasgow and Aberdeen, but a Downing Street spokesperson said they did not come into close contact.

The civil servant, who is now isolating at a hotel in Scotland, attended an event with Johnson at a police college on Wednesday.

Later that day, he and the staffer flew as part of a small No 10 contingency of about a dozen people to the next leg of Johnson’s two-day tour of Scotland – though they were said to be sat at opposite ends of a large cabin.

The group were tested upon landing, and the official’s result was positive so they went into isolation. Some whose result came back negative were told to make their own way home, while others, including Johnson, finished the tour. The prime minister was then pictured meeting the business secretary, Kwasi Kwarteng, the Scottish Tory leader, Douglas Ross, and the Conservative MP Andrew Bowie.

Johnson and several members of the No 10 contingent are not isolating – but a government source said “the whole lot should be”. The Downing Street spokesperson also refused to say if he had been tested since the positive case was discovered.

The prime minister is spending the weekend at Chequers, meaning if he is told to stay at home it will be the second time in a month he has had to spend 10 days in his countryside grace and favour mansion.

After coming into close contact with the health secretary, Sajid Javid, who tested positive for Covid in mid-July, Johnson and the chancellor, Rishi Sunak, initially resisted isolating – claiming they could avoid it by participating in a daily contact-testing pilot. However, within hours they bowed to public pressure and said they would self-isolate.

Anneliese Dodds, the Labour party chair, said it was clear the prime minister “hasn’t learned anything from what happened last time he tried to cook up a reason to be above the rules everyone else has to follow”.

She said: “Senior Conservatives are really taking the public for fools. This is yet another example of one rule for them and another for everyone else.”

Ed Davey, the Lib Dem leader, also called on Johnson to confirm he had not been asked to isolate again. Referring to the excuse Dominic Cummings used for breaking lockdown rules last spring, Davey said of the prime minister: “If it turns out he has scorned his own government’s policy on self-isolation again, the public reaction will be Barnard Castle on steroids.”

After being approached by the Guardian, a Downing Street spokesperson said: “The prime minister regularly visits communities across the UK and all aspects of visits are carried out in line with Covid guidance. The prime minister has not come into close contact with anyone who has tested positive.”

Questions still remain, including over when the prime minister last tested negative, if he has the Covid contact-tracing app on his phone, and whether he wore a mask on the flight with the staffer concerned. Government guidance makes clear that in England it is “recommended and expected that passengers wear face coverings onboard aircraft”.

Johnson may also have to cooperate with the test-and-trace scheme set up in England and the separate test-and-protect operation in Scotland.

The rules by Public Health England say “contacts of a person who has tested positive for Covid-19 need to self-isolate at home because they are at risk of developing Covid-19 themselves in the next 10 days”, adding: “They could spread the virus to others, even before any symptoms begin.”

A contact is defined as someone who has had face-to-face contact with a person who has the virus from two days before they tested positive; been within 1 metre for one minute or longer; or been within 2 metres for more than 15 minutes – either as a one-off or added up together over a day.

It also includes someone who has “travelled in the same vehicle or plane as a person who has tested positive for Covid-19”, raising the chances Johnson’s flight with the staffer could yet see him forced into isolation.

Though he is fully vaccinated, everyone contacted by test and trace must still quarantine. The rules will change on 16 August to allow those who are fully vaccinated to avoid isolation.

Johnson faced calls to bring the date forward but resisted doing so, saying it was important people continued to follow the existing isolation rules to avoid spreading the virus.

His trip to Scotland was also mired by a joke he made that Margaret Thatcher gave a “big early start” to green energy by closing coalmines, which was denounced as “unbelievably crass” by the Scottish first minister, Nicola Sturgeon.