Owl hopes that the Honiton town council can now get off to a new start.

Philippa Davies www.midweekherald.co.uk 

A by-election for four Honiton Town Council seats, representing the St Paul’s ward, will no longer be held. 

 Only three candidates have put themselves forward for the seats – Joseph Furneaux-Gotch, Debra Hulin and Caroline Kolek – and they have been elected unopposed. 

There will still be an election on March 10 for four vacancies on St Michael’s ward. Six candidates are standing: Lisa Beigan, Jenny Brown, Robert Fowles, Cathy Maunder, Andrew Pearsall and John Taylor. 

A spokesperson for Honiton Town Council said: “The role of Town Councillor is as important as ever. The Town Council makes decisions that affect everyone in Honiton and the town’s economy, environment and community.  

“Voters have the opportunity to be represented on the Town Council by councillors for whom you have voted. By voting you are expressing your hard-won democratic right to Vote. Democracy is best served by a good turnout of people voting. Councillors are an essential link to and work closely with the community, representing people at the Council.” 

For more information visit the Elections page of East Devon District Council’s website.

 

Liz Truss is facing mounting questions over why the Foreign Office will take “weeks and months” to sanction Russian oligarchs, with the UK lagging behind the US and EU after targeting just eight individuals with links to Vladmir Putin.

Rowena Mason www.theguardian.com 

The Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office (FCDO) has for days been promising to target a “hit list” of oligarchs but refuses to say when the names will be ready, despite warnings from MPs that billionaires will already be taking their assets out of the country.

Senior Tory MPs have been growing increasingly frustrated by what they see as a lack of preparation on the part of the Foreign Office, with some having warned Truss months ago that the UK should be ready with a response against London-based oligarchs with links to Putin if Russia were to invade.

Labour also raised concern about “asset flight” by oligarchs who fear they may be hit by sanctions soon and worries that the UK is “off the pace” compared with the US and EU.

Priti Patel, the home secretary, claimed on Tuesday there were “legal reasons” for the time being taken, with officials trying to make sure sanctions are watertight against legal challenge.

Cabinet sources insisted the UK had been going further on hitting banks and financial operations with sanctions than other countries, with more than 120 entities targeted to date.

Asked whether more oligarchs would be blacklisted this week, a Foreign Office source said on Tuesday: “We will be sanctioning more oligarchs over the coming weeks and months.”

But David Davis, the Tory former Brexit secretary, said the financial industry sanctions “were not going to hit Putin where it hurts most”.

“We need to target many more of his allies and facilitators that have frankly bought their way into British society and that’s what’s really missing,” Davis said.

“We need to target those owning businesses on our stock exchange. We need to target those owning London homes that we can no longer afford because of Russian operations in London. We need to target oligarchs who own football clubs that many of our citizens can no longer afford to attend.”

He added: “I do worry about the government moving so slowly that its prey escapes it.”

In the House of Commons, Davis named Roman Abramovich, the Russian billionaire with property in London, saying “according to the Spanish national intelligence committee, he is one of the men who manages Putin’s business affairs. That is a really important issue about whether he should be on our target list.”

Abramovich, the Russian billionaire who recently passed stewardship of Chelsea FC to a charitable foundation, has vehemently disputed reportsalleging he is close to Putin or that he has done anything to merit sanctions.

Bob Seely, a Tory MP and member of the foreign affairs committee, said oligarchs needed to be under the spotlight as they were “not just obscenely rich people who are mates with someone” but part of the Kremlin’s “structure of control and power whether it is in east Ukraine or in the UK”.

The EU announced a list of sanctions against Russian businessmen on Monday night, including billionaires Mikhail Fridman and Petr Aven. They have vowed to contest the restrictions.

Fridman is a Ukrainian-born energy tycoon who owns AlfaBank with his partners, including Aven. He bought and still owns Athlone House in Highgate, north London, for £65m in cash in 2016, according to the Land Registry.

The billionaire, who is one of Russia’s richest men, controls private equity firm LetterOne, which owns Holland & Barrett. In a letter to his employees this week, he called for an end to the “bloodshed” in Ukraine and stated that “war can never be the answer”, without directly criticising Putin.

Others to be sanctioned by the EU, but not the UK, include Alexei Mordashov, a major shareholder in TUI, the London-listed travel company. Alisher Usmanov, who has sponsorship links to Everton, also had his assets frozen as part of sanctions imposed by the European Union in response to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. The Uzbekistan-born billionaire’s USM Holdings sponsors Everton’s training ground, with an initial five-year deal announced in 2017.

Another Russian oligarch not sanctioned by the UK is Oleg Deripaska, who has been on the US sanctions list since 2018 over his alleged links to the Russian government, which he has taken legal action to challenge.

This week, Deripaska called for peace talks to begin “as fast as possible” in a post on the messaging app Telegram. “Peace is very important,” wrote Deripaska, who founded the Russian aluminium giant Rusal, in which he still owns a stake through shares in its London-listed parent company EN+ Group.

The British government strongly defended the sanctions it has already put in place. The Foreign Office source added: “Liz has been clear we have a hit list and we’ll be working our way through that as part of a rolling package. Nothing – and no one – is off the table.”

Robert Jenrick, another former Tory cabinet minister, also argued that the most important sanctions were those that have a “systemic impact on the Russian economy”.

He said parliament “should not be going down the rabbit hole of interest in individuals and oligarchs – important though that is – as that is not going to make a material difference in the short term”.

He added that many of those business people left Russia many years ago and are not currently close to Putin.

Britain has long been a haven for people of negotiable integrity to stash their cash, often via property deals made with the help of an army of lawyers, PR advisers and bankers.

By Lawrence Booth vervetimes.com 

Not only are super-mansions in London and the home counties a safe bet from an investment point of view, but the ability to disguise ownership via a labyrinthine network of shell companies offers a degree of anonymity to those who prefer their financial dealings to remain secret.

On top of that, the Companies House database – the repository for details of UK-registered businesses – has become almost a punchline to a pretty bad joke.

Information is often missing, incomplete or obviously fake. Directors have been registered in the name of Adolf Tooth Fairy Hitler and Judas Superadio Iskariot, without anyone batting an eyelid. Information can be hard to search for and the website crashes or times out on a regular basis.

On Monday, amid pressure to crack down on the billions of pounds in Russian “dirty money” flowing through London, the business secretary, Kwasi Kwarteng, brought forward measures designed to clean up the mess. They include a register of properties owned by overseas investors, in theory preventing them from disguising their identities.

“By legislating now, we’ll send a clear warning to those who have or are thinking about using the UK property market to launder ill-gotten gains,” Kwarteng said.

Companies House will also be “upgraded” to improve the quality of information available from its database and there will be measures to strengthen “unexplained wealth orders”, which give law enforcement bodies the power to seize assets where they suspect criminality may have occurred.

Long-time anti-corruption campaigners are relieved, if frustrated at how long it has taken Britain to relinquish its role as obsequious financial butler to what the business department now calls “corrupt elites”.

“It’s about bloody time,” said Susan Hawley, executive director of Spotlight on Corruption.

She said campaigners had “been waiting six years” for measures like these, ever since an anti-corruption summit in 2016, adding: “These measures are a good start but on their own will not be enough to plug the loopholes in our defences against dirty money.

“We need a massive investment in law enforcement capability so they can get on with investigating unexplained wealth, and with investigating and prosecuting money laundering breaches and sanctions evasion.”

Already, there is scepticism about whether the super-rich and super-nefarious will be able to flout the rules. For instance, while the “ultimate beneficial owner” of a property will have to be disclosed, that could still be a legal entity or a company. If that entity is itself in a jurisdiction that permits corporate secrecy, there will be no way to unravel the final links in the chain to the person at the very top.

Graham Barrow, of the Dark Money Files podcast, has consistently exposed some of the more ludicrous failings of Companies House to provide legitimate data. He pointed out that these rules are similar to those for “persons of significant control” disclosures that, in theory, tell you who owns a company.

“We know from experience that they can be circumvented by declaring that there is no one who meets the definition of a ‘beneficial owner’,” he said. “Whilst there are penalties for making a false declaration, knowing who is behind an entity in a location like the Marshall Islands, the Seychelles or BVI is not a straightforward task.

“Without adequate human and financial resources, along with cooperation from overseas territories, the requirements look difficult to enforce effectively”.

Hawley raised misgivings about measures to target those trying to evade sanctions, a hot-button topic as ministers target Russian oligarchs and Kremlin officials. “It isn’t clear that this bill goes far enough in giving law enforcement the real tools to bring criminal cases for sanction evasion,” she said. “There hasn’t been a criminal sanctions evasion case for over 12 years.”

Barrow also declared it “deeply disappointing” that the government was not acting faster. “Companies House continues to be abused on a daily basis and further delay simply opens the door to more and more criminals.”

One campaigner, who asked not to be named until he had spent more time analysing the detail, was more sanguine about the prospect of the financial chicanery that may go on as the corrupt and secretive hide their assets elsewhere in the period between the proposals being announced and implemented.

“The gate will be open for a while,” he said. “But I’d rather get a decent piece of legislation than try to pass it in three hours. We can’t turn back the clock. We are where we are.”

Tory peer Lord Moylan demands police ‘butt out’ of ‘farcical’ Partygate investigation saying Boris Johnson is being unfairly targeted for Covid rules ‘punishment’ usually reserved for ‘egregious acid house parties’ – as PM awaits his fate

• Lord accused cops of treating the PM like the hosts of ‘acid house parties’
• Peer was an adviser on transport to Mr Johnson when he was mayor of London
• Senior politicians are awaiting the results of the Metropolitan Police probe 
• Mr Johnson could be fined for breaking laws preventing social gatherings  

Details from the Daily Mail here

These remarks follow his derogatory comments about Yorkshire made in a recent tweet:

Worzel has asked for this comment to be withdrawn because it dwells too much on personal angst with regards to the unfolding tragedy instead of concern for others.

Split opposition leads to Conservative gain from Independent – Owl

Philip Churm, Local Democracy Reporter www.radioexe.co.uk 

By-election was tense, but efforts paid off  

West Devon’s newest councillor says he is passionate about the local area and is determined to help tackle the housing crisis.  

Cllr David Turnbull (Conservative, Tavistock North) was elected in a by-election on 17 February with a majority of 42 in a win that bolsters the Tory group on the borough council which now has 17 councillors. 

The election was called after the resignation of independent councillor Steve Hipsey earlier this year. 

Cllr Turnbull, who has been elected for a 15-month term ahead of full council elections in May 2023, says the by-election was tense at times but that his efforts paid off.   

“I didn’t really know which way it was going to go,” he says.

“I know we’d worked really hard. I got out to meet and speak to as many people as I could but up to the day, it was quite close.” 

Cllr Turnbull describes how his decision to stand for election was made after speaking to other councillors and locals. 

“I’ve always been interested in local politics. I’ve had a few conversations with [Cllr] Debo Sellis (Conservative, Tavistock South East) when she’s been canvassing me at my home address in Tavistock and had some really good conversations. 

“I’ve told her my interests and she followed through with that. 

“So when Steve Hipsey stepped down, she approached me. 

“I went out for coffee had a conversation with a couple of guys. Everything led from there, really.” 

But Cllr Turnbull says his greatest strength on the council will come from living and working locally for many years. 

“I’m born and bred in Tavistock, albeit I moved to Tavistock, I think, when I was about 18 months old,” he explains. “I’ve spent the vast majority of my life in Tavistock. 

“I’m very passionate about the area and do whatever I can to help to deal with anyone’s area of concerns locally. 

“I live within the ward that I represent, so I’m on the doorstep if anyone needs me.  Ultimately I adore Tavistock and it’s very close to my heart.

“I’m beginning to take note of things that might need to be improved and I’m looking forward to finding out what I can do to deal with those issues.  

In mid-February West Devon Borough Council agreed a motion to declare a housing crisis.  

It follows concerns that house prices in the borough are the least affordable in Devon with average housing costs standing at over 12 times the average salary. 

There is also a severe lack of long-term rented accommodation.

Cllr Turnbull is an estate agent with a business based in the borough.  He says his knowledge of the housing market may help the council tackle the housing crisis but acknowledges there are several challenges. 

He says it is “very difficult for first time buyers to get on the ladder. 

“They’ve obviously got to save up large deposits which is very difficult for a lot of them to do.”

But Cllr Turnbull says many existing schemes should help ease the problem. 

“Help-to-Buy and shared-ownership affordable housing is another important part that needs to be more available, I think, so that people who have got smaller deposits, that’s their leg up to get onto the housing ladder, albeit they’ll be buying up a share of the property rather than 100 per cent of it.”

The result in the by-election were:

Susan Bamford (Green Party) – 163 votes

Doug Smith (Labour) – 85 votes

Peter Squire (Liberal Democrats) – 337 votes

David Turnbull (Conservative) – 379 votes

The Conservatives now hold 17 of the borough’s 31 seats, giving them a majority on the council.

The remaining seats are held by the West Devon Alliance group, which has 12 representatives.

West Devon Alliance is made up of one Liberal Democrat, two Green Party councillors and nine independents. 

A further two councillors sit as non-aligned independents.

He said he broke the social distancing guidelines but “by then, they weren’t actually rules, they weren’t the law.” – So that’s quite clear isn’t it? – Owl

It came after host Steven Bartlett, the entrepreneur and Dragon’s Den investor, asked the former minister about Covid rules during the height of the pandemic which prevented couples in different households from kissing, holding hands or any other type of touching.

www.independent.co.uk

Matt Hancock has said he broke social distancing guidelines at the height of the Covid pandemic because he “fell in love” with his married aide.

The former health secretary resigned from his ministerial role in disgrace and left his wife of 15 years after CCTV images emerged of him kissing close friend Gina Coladangelo inside the Department of Health last summer.

In a tell-all interview with The Diary of a CEO podcast, Mr Hancock has now revealed he “fell in love with somebody” and it “all happened very quickly” – but insisted he did not break the law.

He said: “I resigned because I broke the social distancing guidelines.

“By then, they weren’t actually rules, they weren’t the law. But that’s not the point.

“The point is they were the guidelines that I’d been proposing. That happened because I fell in love with somebody.”

Mr Hancock quit in June last year after The Sun published images taken on 6 May 2021 showing him in an embrace with Ms Coladangelo.

Two-metre social distancing guidance was in place at the time, while a ban on hugging between people in different households wasn’t lifted until two weeks later.

Ms Coladangelo, whom Mr Hancock met when they both worked in student radio at Oxford University, was a non-executive director at the Department of Health at the time, earning at least £15,000 a year.

Mr Hancock told the podcast Ms Coladangelo, whom he has known “for more than half [his] life”, was brought in to help with public communications.

Former health secretary Matt Hancock has said he broke social distancing guidelines at the height of the Covid pandemic because he ‘fell in love’ with his married aide

“We spent a lot of time together – ironically trying to get me to be able to communicate in a more emotionally intelligent way – and we fell in love,” he said.

“That’s something that was completely outside of my control and I of course regret the pain that that’s caused and the very, very, very public nature … but I fell in love with someone.

“It actually happened after the rules were lifted, but the guidance was still in place.

“I hold no bitterness about this because I broke the rules, I ’fess up. I broke the guidance.”

Mr Hancock was also keen to stress that his and Ms Coladangelo’s relationship was not “casual sex”.

It came after host Steven Bartlett, the entrepreneur and Dragon’s Den investor, asked the former minister about Covid rules during the height of the pandemic which prevented couples in different households from kissing, holding hands or any other type of touching.

The then-health secretary had warned people to “be careful” about the risk of coronavirus when those rules were relaxed in September 2020 for couples in “established relationships”.

A visibly uncomfortable Mr Hancock asked Mr Bartlett to start the section of questioning again without the reference to casual sex.

“I haven’t had casual sex with anybody,” he said. “I fell in love with somebody.”

The podcast comes after the High Court ruled Mr Hancock broke equality law when appointing Conservative peer Dido Harding to an emergency health job during the Covid crisis.

Judges ruled the then-health secretary failed to comply with public sector equality duty in the process of appointing Baroness Harding and her ex-Sainsbury colleague Mike Coupe to senior posts in 2020.