Owl fact checks the PM’s reply

Source: www.theguardian.com 

Daisy Cooper (Lib Dem) asks if the PM will apologise to the families of people who died in care homes, and to care worker staff, in the light of today’s court ruling.

Johnson says he wants to renew his apologies, and sympathy, to people who lost relatives in care homes in the pandemic.

He says the government did not know much about the disease at that point. It did not know how easy it was for the disease to spread asymptomatically.

On the court judgment, he says the government will study it carefully.

Fact check from report of judgement:

The judges said the risk of asymptomatic transmission had been highlighted by people including Sir Patrick Vallance, the government’s chief scientific adviser, in a radio interview as early as 13 March.

“Non-symptomatic transmission would mean that one elderly patient moved from hospital to a care home could infect other residents before manifesting symptoms, or even without ever manifesting symptoms,” they said.

A woman [Cathy Gardner] whose father died from COVID in a care home has said government claims a “protective ring” had been thrown around residents at the beginning of the pandemic were “a lie”.

news.sky.com 

Dr Cathy Gardner said her father Michael Gibson died at the age of 88 at a care home in Bicester in April 2020 and took legal action against Health Secretary Sajid Javid, NHS England and Public Health England.

High Court judges ruled government policies on discharging patients from hospital to care homes at the outset of the pandemic were “unlawful” because they failed to take into account the risk to elderly and vulnerable residents from non-symptomatic transmission of COVID.

Dr Gardner told Sky News she “realised something was badly wrong” and wanted to “hold the government to account” because they had “not protected my father” – and strongly criticised claims made by the then health secretary, Matt Hancock.

She said: “They haven’t protected my father and other residents in care homes and I wanted to hold the government to account.

“When secretary of state Matt Hancock said that he’d thrown a protective ring around care homes right from the start – I heard him say that on television and my chin nearly hit the floor because all of us who were involved in any way with care homes at the start of the pandemic knew that was absolutely not true.

“It was a lie. It was a lie then and it is a lie now.

“They didn’t do anything to protect my father, there was no help given to care homes and the death toll in those first few weeks of the pandemic was catastrophic.

“I think they never imagined they were going to be found out. You only have to look at the parties (in Downing Street) to realise they never think they’re going to be found out.”

‘We don’t believe they did anything’

She added: “I think at the time Matt Hancock made that statement about the protective ring, the death toll in care homes was already horrendous.

“I think he was under attack and he felt that he needed to say that they’d done this even though blatantly they hadn’t to those of us who were there at the time and knew.

“They should have taken steps to protect the most vulnerable people. Measures should have been put in place. We don’t believe they did anything.

“There’s no evidence ever been provided that they did anything. Matt Hancock unfortunately made a statement which is untrue.”

Dr Gardner said she holds “many parts of the government responsible” and believes the “focus” at the time was “very much on the NHS”.

She added: “I was really shocked when it was suggested to me that my father had COVID.

‘I never blamed the care home’

“He got ill in March 2020, it was so early. The idea that he caught COVID in his care home just seemed almost impossible to me at the time.

“I never blamed the care home, never – and I don’t blame myself – I trusted that he would be safe in the care home and they did their absolute best.

“But the government had the responsibility and they had the legal duty.”

Dr Gardner’s High Court action was taken with Fay Harris, whose father Donald died – and they had asked two judges to make declarations that unlawful decisions were made.

Lawyers for Mr Javid, Public Health England and NHS England wanted the women’s claim dismissed.

A government spokeswoman had said in a statement outside court during the hearing that “we worked tirelessly to protect the public from the threat to life and health posed by the pandemic and specifically sought to safeguard care homes and their residents”.

Heart felt congratulations from Owl!

Covid: discharging untested patients into care homes was unlawful, says court

Robert Booth www.theguardian.com 

The government policy towards care homes in England at the start of the Covid pandemic has been ruled illegal, in a significant blow to ministers’ claim to have thrown a “protective ring” around the vulnerable residents.

The high court judgment was sought by two grieving daughters, Dr Cathy Gardner and Fay Harris, who lost their fathers to the virus in care homes in spring 2020. Michael Gibson died aged 88 in Oxfordshire on 3 April 2020 while Don Harris died aged 89 in Hampshire on 1 May 2020, both after outbreaks in their care homes.

More than a quarter of all deaths among care home residents in March and April 2020 involved Covid-19 – more than 12,500 people. Lawyers for Gardner, 60, and Harris, 58, had argued in a judicial review the government did the “very opposite” of the claim by then health secretary, Matt Hancock, that “right from the start we have tried to throw a protective ring around our care homes”.

After an almost 22-month crowdfunded legal challenge to the legality of policies advanced by the health secretary, Public Health England and NHS England, the verdict was handed down on Wednesday.

Lord Justice Bean and Mr Justice Garnham said: “The decisions of the secretary of state for health and social care to make and maintain a series of policies contained in documents issued on 17 and 19 March and 2 April 2020 were unlawful because the drafters of those documents failed to take into account the risk to elderly and vulnerable residents from non-symptomatic transmission.”

As ministers and officials pushed to free up space in hospitals by discharging 25,000 hospital patients into care homes, government guidance issued on 2 April 2020 said negative tests were not required prior to transfers.

The daughters had argued the failure to protect care home residents was among the most “egregious and devastating policy failures in the modern era”.

During proceedings government lawyers denied any policy failure and told the court that scientists did not advise of “firm evidence” of asymptomatic transmission until mid-April 2020. They said fears of hospitals becoming overwhelmed were “far from being theoretical” and that ministers had to balance competing harms amid enormous challenges.

The judges said the risk of asymptomatic transmission had been highlighted by people including Sir Patrick Vallance, the government’s chief scientific adviser, in a radio interview as early as 13 March.

“Non-symptomatic transmission would mean that one elderly patient moved from hospital to a care home could infect other residents before manifesting symptoms, or even without ever manifesting symptoms,” they said.

“The judges found that it was irrational for the DHSC not to have advised until mid-April 2020 that where an asymptomatic patient (other than one who had tested negative for Covid-19) was admitted to a care home, he or she should, so far as practicable, be kept apart from other residents for 14 days.”

The court dismissed the other aspects of the case brought by the claimants, including claims under articles 2 and 8 of the European convention on human rights, and a claim against NHS England.

We already know that our “cold fish”: East Devon Tories, and two MPs Neil Parish and Simon Jupp; are opposed to any more subsidies for LED, the “standalone” company that runs EDDC leisure facilities. Indeed, they are currently attacking the Democratic Coalition in their latest Tory “In Touch” leaflet for doing so during the pandemic, despite having subsidised LED themselves ever since they set LED up in 2006.

If you haven’t read this odious little gem, it will be popping through your door soon.  See local Tories sink into nauseating hypocrisy 

Matthew Weaver www.theguardian.com 

Heating bill increases of up to 150% will lead to the widespread closures of UK swimming pools without an emergency government bailout, ministers have been told.

Campaigners say that even if financial help is provided, swimmers will have to accept colder pools and higher prices.

The sport governing body Swim England and ukactive, which represents gym and pool operators, met the sports minister Nigel Huddleston on Tuesday to make an urgent plea for emergency funds to keep pools open.

Speaking before the meeting, the Swim England chief executive, Jane Nickerson, said: “We need some acute support now. At the moment swimming is not viable unless it’s supported. Our real worry is that doors will just shut because operators will find they can’t afford to run their pools. We need a bailout now because you can’t suddenly make a pool energy efficient.”

The chief executive of ukactive, Huw Edwards, agreed. He said: “Fitness and leisure operators are reaching tipping point as rising energy costs bite, forcing them to consider price rises, service restrictions or permanent closure. Pool operators, in particular, are facing huge bills, with hundreds of facilities across the country just months away from closures and service restrictions.”

The fear of widespread closures comes after the chancellor, Rishi Sunak, who is building a private pool in his North Yorkshire mansion, ignored calls for a long-term strategy to keep pools open as part of his spring statement.

Nickerson said public pools were struggling to cope with a total energy bill of £1.25bn this year compared with £500m in 2019, at a time when the sector was still reeling from forced pool closures during lockdown. “Providers have run their reserves down to cope with the pandemic,” she said.

One of the biggest public pool operators, GLL, which trades under the name Better, says its energy bills have increased by at least 150% since April 2019. Its chief executive, Mark Sesnan, who attended Tuesday’s meeting, said: “We are heading for a crisis and it needs urgent action. The minister went away with a clear message that we need something to be done. Although he was clear that he would struggle to make a special case to the Treasury.”

Sesnan added: “People need to realise that this is a real and present danger to swimming in the UK. And it will be very difficult to maintain the current stock of pools. The business model has been completely disrupted. Just to meet the energy price increase we need an extra £1 for every person who uses a pool.”

He said the public would also need to accept “more realistic” prices of about £7 or £8 a swim, as well as reduced opening hours and more stringent temperature controls to save on heating bills.

Nickerson said: “Letting people swim in wetsuits is fine for someone like me doing lengths, because I can swim fast to keep warm. But you can’t teach children to swim in cold water – parents won’t take their kids if they see their teeth chattering.”

She added: “If you shut the doors on these pools now you are losing out on kids learning to swim. You won’t die if you don’t learn to kick a football, but you can certainly drown if you don’t learn to swim.”

She is also worried that price rises could make swimming unaffordable for many families. Nickerson said: “We don’t want public pools to become like private health clubs. It should be an activity for everyone, not just for those who can afford it.”

Edwards pointed out the wider health benefits of swimming. He said: “More than 1 million children missed out on swimming lessons during the pandemic and many people’s physical and mental health deteriorated without access to pools and gyms. We need the government to act with urgency to support pools and gyms so that our nation’s health inequalities do not widen any further.”

Pool closures, or threatened closures, have already been reported, including in Halifax, Newport, Shropshire, Falmouth, Croydon and Keswick.

Even before the increase in fuel prices, a report by Swim England last September estimated that 40%, or 1,868, of the 4,336 public pools in England could be forced to close by 2030. Nickerson said: “There was a massive building programme in the 1960s and 70s but those pools have come to the end of their lifespan.”

She said the energy crisis had increased the urgency of replacing those inefficient buildings. “The sector is looking at what it can do to save energy and retrofit buildings. But that won’t happen overnight. And they will also need grants to do it because the payback period is so long,” she said.

A government spokesperson said: “We are in regular contact with Ofgem, business groups and energy suppliers to understand the challenges they face and see how they can best be supported.”

Boris, remember you usually get “Owt for nowt”. Do you understand the urgency? – Owl

Boris Johnson is a big-picture guy. He doesn’t do details. But our prime minister appears to be running short of big ideas on Britain’s cost of living crisis. So he has asked his cabinet colleagues to come up with “innovative” suggestions.

Adam Forrest www.independent.co.uk 

The problem is, their innovative suggestions cannot involve Treasury spending. Mr Johnson told his cabinet he is only interested in cost-free ways to ease the burden of soaring bills and rising prices on hard-pressed families.

Hence the ridicule from opposition parties, who claim that the PM is “completely out of ideas” and that the chancellor, Rishi Sunak, is unwilling to provide badly needed help. Is it possible to solve such a lack-of-money crisis without spending more money?

No 10 has hinted at the kind of cost-free things it wants ministers to consider. Whitehall departments are being encouraged to do more to promote existing support schemes that have not been widely taken up.

For instance, the government has estimated that around 1.3 million families could be taking up more support through the tax-free childcare scheme, which offers up to £2,000 a year towards costs.

No 10 has hinted that childcare rules could be changed in a bid to bring down costs – but there is no indication that the amount offered through the tax-free scheme will be increased.

Downing Street is flagging an estimate that 850,000 eligible households are not claiming pension credit, which can be worth over £3,300 a year.

Mr Johnson’s team also pointed at a move to freeze energy bill deductions from universal credit, designed to give claimants a bit more time to sort things out with their gas and electricity providers.

No 10 has not denied reports that the government is considering plans to cut tariffs on food the UK does not produce – such as rice – in a bid to bring down costs for British consumers.

Tinkering at the margins? Perhaps. Will it be enough to ease even the political pressure on the government? Probably not.

Increasingly restless Tory MPs fear that Mr Sunak’s failure to offer more help with bills and benefits at his recent spring mini-Budget will cost the party dearly at the local elections next week.

Backbencher Andrew Bridgen is among those who have said the chancellor may have to consider an “emergency Budget” before the summer recess – something Labour is now demanding.

But Mr Sunak made clear to cabinet ministers on Tuesday that there would be no new money available to spend on measures to tackle living costs.

No 10 says Mr Johnson will hold another meeting to decide on the “non-fiscal” measures “in the next couple of weeks”, with the PM apparently on the same page as the chancellor on holding down debt.

The local elections on 5 May could sharpen minds. If the results are terrible for the Tory party, then speculation about a backbench leadership putsch will hit feverish new heights.

Mr Johnson may find himself knocking on Mr Sunak’s door to ask if he can rustle up a few billion from somewhere to help him – and everyone else – through the summer.

The government plans to axe section 106 agreements in favour of an infrastructure levy, but Richard Harbord warns that consultation paralysis, levelling-up concerns and developer opposition could block any progress.

[Readers may remember the scandal unearthed through FOIs that the then Conservative controlled EDDC were so focused on “Build, build, build”, around 2016, that they had lost track of S106 payments, including uncollected payments. – Owl]

www.room151.co.uk 

There are rumours that central government is planning a reform to the current planning legislation involving the removal of section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990. The understanding is that it would be replaced by a levy on developers.

Originally section 106 agreements required developers to build infrastructure whenever they constructed housing estates. They would be required to provide schools, doctors’ surgeries and any other relevant item that the increased number of residents would need. This became, in many instances, the payment of a cash sum to cover the estimated cost of such infrastructure or contribute towards it.

In many local authorities there are considerable Section 106 reserves where these deposits are held but not immediately used. It has also been used to secure a specified percentage of affordable homes (as defined).

This is not actually a new idea because the proposals in the subsequently scrapped planning white paper were for the replacement of section 106 agreements and the Community Infrastructure Levy with a fixed tax on development value paid at the date of occupation.

The government says that it is developing models for a new levy. This, it says, will enable local authorities to capture value from new developments more efficiently. It would be used to finance affordable housing and community infrastructure.

The devil will, of course, be in the detail and consultation will follow. However, an interesting side issue is the government’s tardiness in responding to consultations affecting local authorities. Glacial response times could be another effect of the pandemic, but some are suspicious that there is an unwillingness to deal with politically sensitive issues.

Stuck in the consultation queue

My point is that once the new levy proposals go out to consultation, they may well be stuck in a queue and not reach legislation for some time.

Developers, it has to be said, are not over-excited with the new proposals, arguing that a fixed-rate levy lacks the local flexibility of a section 106 agreement. There is also a feeling that fixed-rate levies may disadvantage certain parts of the country over others and be against the spirit of levelling up.

A figure of £7bn apparently could be raised through the levy, although that sum is not quantified over time a time period. Local authorities will be eager to see how the money is to be distributed and what limits there will be on its use. The spirit of such levies is that they are raised and spent locally. We will not know until we see the detailed consultation.

One police station has shut every two weeks under the “Law and Order” Party.

No wonder the Tories have made so much of reopening a station in the largest town in Devon, Exmouth, after seven years without.

What about smaller towns?

Remember for every £1 you spend in local taxes on services provided by EDDC you spend £1.6 on the Police. Value for money? – Owl

Amy Gibbons www.independent.co.uk 

The Government is being warned that people feel “unsafe on their own streets” as new analysis suggests more than 200 police stations and counters have closed in the past seven years.

The Liberal Democrats said the figures, which the party obtained under freedom of information laws, equate to the loss of more than one site every two weeks.

It said a total of 217 stations and counters in England and Wales were shut from 2015 to 2021, with an average of 31 closures a year.

London and the South East in particular have seen a “staggering fall” in numbers, the party said, with Thames Valley Police closing the most sites – 23 stations and 44 counters.

Ahead of the local elections in May, the Lib Dems are promoting a three-point plan to crack down on crime and anti-social behaviour.

This would involve restoring “proper community policing”, where officers are more visible, trusted and known personally to local people; and reversing cuts to youth services by investing an extra £500 million a year through a ring-fenced fund to local authorities, it said.

The party also wants to scrap police and crime commissioners and invest what it says will equate to £50 million in savings in frontline policing and solving crimes.

Lib Dem leader Sir Ed Davey said: “Shuttered police stations have become a symbol of the Conservatives’ failure on crime. Too many people feel unsafe on their own streets, and too many criminals are getting away with it.

“The Liberal Democrats are calling for a return to proper community policing, where officers are visible, trusted and focused on cutting crime.

“This May people will have a chance to send Boris Johnson’s Conservatives a message. A vote for the Liberal Democrats is a vote for more investment in our police and youth services to help make our communities safer.”

A Home Office spokesperson said: “The Government is already over halfway to recruiting an additional 20,000 additional police officers and the police are being given the powers, tools and funding they need to cut crime.

“It is the responsibility of locally elected police and crime commissioners and chief constables to take decisions around their resourcing and estates.

“However, police stations – which remain one of many methods where incidents can be reported – should be kept open where possible to ensure people feel safe in their communities.”

The site forms part of a major housing expansion in the area, as part of the Monkerton and Hill Barton masterplan which is included in the city’s housing land supply.

This document, published in 2010, provides a framework to “guide the future development of a sustainable urban extension to the north east of the city.”

Ollie Heptinstall, local democracy reporter www.radioexe.co.uk

They could affect Met Office satellite info

New homes on the outskirts of Exeter could affect the Met Office’s ability to receive satellite information, unless planning conditions are put in place.

The weather forecaster has submitted a response to outline plans for up to 285 new homes at Hill Barton that city councillors will consider next week.

Devon developer Salter Property wants to built the properties just north of the Met Office, on land between it and Hollow Lane.

The site forms part of a major housing expansion in the area, as part of the Monkerton and Hill Barton masterplan which is included in the city’s housing land supply.

This document, published in 2010, provides a framework to “guide the future development of a sustainable urban extension to the north east of the city.”

In the last couple of years, approval has been given for housing on land adjoining the site , with construction well underway and many homes already built.

The wider development area received outline permission for 750 homes in 2013.

There is likely to be a mix of properties including houses and flats, however this does not need to be confirmed at the outline stage and will be subject to the final stage ‘reserved matters’ application.

The proposal will also provide open space with a multi-use games area (MUGA) and other equipped play areas.

Planning officers recommend approval, subject to a number of conditions and contributions towards local amenities. This includes £1 million towards new secondary school provision at South West Exeter, over £500,000 in transport contributions and £166,349 for GPs to be able to take on more patients.

The council wants 35 per cent of the homes set aside as affordable, in line with its policy for new developments, with 70 per cent of these for social rent.

Four objections have been received from members of the public, with worries about overdevelopment, a loss of open green space, and nearby schools and GP surgeries being “over capacity to cope.”

The Met Office’s concern is about the potential for the construction work to “obstruct the receipt of satellite data transmissions” but it has has no objection subject to the “inclusion of suitable worded planning conditions” to prevent such issues.

In conclusion, the planning officer’s report states: “The site is allocated with the core strategy for residential development and therefore the principle of development is considered to be acceptable.”

“Furthermore, the site has previously benefitted from an outline consent for residential development as part of a wider site, large parts of which have already been constructed.

“The development would provide a significant level of housing towards the council five-year housing supply which is to be welcomed.

“The application is for outline planning permission and therefore, while some concerns have been identified with the illustrative layout submitted, these have been drawn to the attention of the applicant. It is considered that there is no reason why these cannot be addressed as part of any ‘reserved matters’ application…”

Sidmouth’s promised Rockfish restaurant is facing a delay.

Joe Ives, local democracy reporter www.radioexe.co.uk

No date is yet set for the conversion of the derelict Drill Hall in Sidmouth into the seafood eatery as “legal matters” continue to halt progress. 

East Devon District Council (EDDC) agreed to sell the historic building to the  restaurant chain in February 2020, but the pandemic intervened. Legal disagreements with the previous owners, reported in December last year, continue to hold the deal back.

According to the council, the former owners say they could be owed money if the land becomes significantly more valuable in future; for example if a block of flats were to be built there.

EDDC, which currently owns the property, says that’s not the case because Drill Hall is being refurbished and that these payments, known as overages, only have to be paid when a building is knocked down and the land redeveloped. 

EDDC says no agreement has been reached with the former owners: “despite the efforts of the council and its solicitors”, a situation it describes as “very unfortunate.”

The news came in a statement in response to a question submitted by Sidmouth councillor Cathy Gardner (Independent East Devon Alliance and Democratic Alliance Group) ahead of a full council meeting. In its reply, EDDC also reported it was looking at ways to give Rockfish “the comfort” to enter an agrrement to buy the building before the legal dispute is resolved.  

Rockfish, owned by award-winning chef and restaurateur Mitch Tonks, has an ‘option agreement’ to take over the Drill Hall which expires at the end of October. If the legal dispute is not settled before this date the council might have to re-market the building.

EDDC says it expects Rockfish to stick with its plans, which is said may bring £1million of investment and 30 to 40 jobs into the area. 

In her written question, Cllr Gardener said: “After many years of campaigning to save the Drill Hall at Port Royal, Sidmouth from demolition, I was delighted that Rockfish were willing to take on the lease and convert the building…[but] residents are now concerned about the future of this historic building.” 

Speaking in 2020 another Sidmouth representative, Councillor Denise Bickley (Independent East Devon Alliance and Democratic Alliance Group), said she hoped the regeneration of the derelict building would “transform the Port Royal area.”

Her views were widely shared. At the time councillors voted unanimously in favour of the plans. 

Torbay playing catch-up – Owl

Joe Ives, local democracy reporter www.radioexe.co.uk 

Netflix beware!

Torbay residents will soon be able to watch council meetings online as the local authority finally takes more permanent steps to make use of streaming.

Torbay Council’s cabinet agreed to a ‘trial’ period for live streaming meetings that will start in May and last until the end of July next year. 

Councils were allowed to hold and make decisions in virtual meetings at the start of the pandemic. But since a High Court ruling in May last year, most local councils have had to meet in person.

However, this does not stop them from streaming meetings for the benefit of the public or councillors who may be unable to attend. 

Many councils, including most in Devon, have made use of this right and have kept live streaming their in-person meetings, allowing the public to watch online. 

Over the past year, the leadership of Torbay Council has insisted that this isn’t a good option for Torbay because of the cost and difficulty of setting up the technology in the council’s old buildings. 

Since late June 2021 the council hasn’t streamed any of its decision-making meetings, not even with a rudimentary webcam as has been used successfully by some councils.

Council leader Steve Darling (Lib Dems, Barton with Watcombe) said it was “a pity” that the government didn’t allow local authorities to decide if they wished to hold decision-making meetings over the internet or in person.

Commenting on the new streaming trial, Councillor Mike Morey (Independent, Furzeham with Summercombe), cabinet member for infrastructure, environment and culture, said: “Why should we expect people to come here [Torbay Council] to a central point to take part in and listen to meetings? 

“When we had Zooming, 12 months, two years ago, we had many more people taking part, whether that’s listening or participating. 

“They could dip in and out of meetings as and when they had something of interest, whereas if they travel here they’ve got to sit through a lot of interesting conversation until they get to their actual item.

“I do think live streaming and hybrid meetings do go some way to bring decision-making back to the people.”

Deputy leader of the council Darren Cowell (Independent Group, Shiphay) said the move was “long overdue” as many people are unable or unwilling to attend meetings. It’s also thought that more councillors attended meetings when they were streamed. 

There are no plans as yet to broadcast meetings of the council’s overview and scrutiny committee. Cllr Darling said: “This is a starter for ten and it is very costly as far as making this provision on a temporary basis and we need to get a longer-term solution for this.

If the pot will extend to overview and scrutiny then clearly we’ll do that. It’s about being realistic with what we have as far as the finances.” 

The council has not publicly revealed how much the trial will cost but it is known to be spending more than £50,000.

From a Correspondent:

We hope that the images below do not ‘stick in the craw’ of Owl, local ornithologists, naturalists and other East Devon environmentalists?

[Owl’s don’t have craws/crops for anything to get stuck in. They either swallow their prey whole or, Owl’s preference, tear them into small pieces and swallow them bit by bit!]

They are published in reply to today’s EDW posting entitled:-

‘VETO PLANS FOR UGLY HOMES, COUNCIL URGED – Could this apply to Clyst St Mary and the Winslade proposals? – Owl’

. . . . and indeed many residents living beside the proposed 15-metre 40 x 4.5 storey flats on a Winslade Park car park, encroaching into a TPO protected woodland and towering above tree-lines and existing 7-metre tall two-storey homes, have submitted their objections to these incongruous proposals (Application No. 21/2217/MRES) sited opposite a Grade II* Listed Historic Manor House in the East Devon rural village of Clyst St Mary.

The phrase ‘ugly homes’ can always be defended and dismissed by Developers as being subjective and based on personal feelings, tastes and opinions – but many will agree on what isand was is not ‘ugly behaviour’ i.e. inappropriate, harmful and disgraceful practices.

The following images show not only the ugly buildings that are proposed for Winslade Park in Clyst St Mary but also the ugly behaviour that has resulted in the recent decimation of large areas of mature trees and hedgerow within this car park area . . . . . and all this has happened before the Reserved Matters Planning Application has even been listed for an East Devon Planning Committee decision by elected planners!

The moment the chainsaws and mechanical chippers began annihilating this valued, natural environment, the residents informed various departments within EDDC – but to date there has been no official verification as to whether such extensive tree felling and hedge removal have authorisation or permission, either under the previous outline planning application or at all? Irrespective of this – these works have been undertaken and are still continuing during the prime bird nesting season, which, is surely, an offence under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981, (which appears to recommend a pre-work schedule being agreed by the local authority to ensure no bird nests, bats, wildlife are present within the trees and hedges being removed)? Obviously the Developers have submitted evidence that there are no nesting birds in these areas – although local people did report seeing bird boxes and nests thrown down by their boundaries during the chainsaw massacres – but all evidence has now been chipped into piles of sawdust – along with all the mature trees and hedges! Furthermore, the area that has been destroyed to date totals more than 5m3 of trees – so isn’t a felling licence required from the Forestry Commission, even if the trees do not have the benefit of TPOs (again does such evidence exist)?

Sadly, the birdsong from innumerable, diverse, indigenous bird species – some rare – some more common – have been replaced by the continuing, intrusive drone of the chainsaws!

The images below tell their own story:-

True Blue Tory Heath Council by-election falls to Lib Dem 2:1 landslide (thanks to “George Dixon” for spotting this one) – Owl

Ninian Wilson  www.thenational.scot 

THE Tories have been hit with a big loss in a local council by-election where Michael Gove is the MP.

As the Tories suffer a relentless barrage of scandals following Boris Johnson’s partygate fine, voters in the traditionally Tory area of Bisley and West End (Surrey Heath) have turned away from the Conservative party.

The Liberal Democrats managed to win almost twice as many votes as the Tories in what Gove will be hoping is not a forecast of things to come for his party in the upcoming May elections.

One Twitter user wrote: “Having lived in this area for a number of years and knowing how true blue it was, take it from me, this is a colossal result”

While the turnout for the election was relatively low, Tories may fear that an election result like this -and those coming up in May – could be seen by voters as an opportunity to voice their anger over the partygate scandal and the controversial Rwanda asylum scheme.

Rishi Sunak will this week attempt to put his recent political troubles behind him when he courts City figures at a Conservative donors’ dinner designed to bolster party finances.

Mark Kleinman news.sky.com 

Sky News has learnt that the chancellor will speak at the event in central London on Tuesday evening, with guests being charged £10,000 for a 10-person table.

Sources said the dinner had been organised by Malik Karim, the investment banker who was appointed as a Tory treasurer last September.

He is said to be keen to broaden the party’s donor base in an industry that has historically provided a reliable source of funding, and wants this week’s inaugural City dinner to become an annual event.

Ironically, major Tory donors who are members of the House of Lords will be unable to attend Tuesday’s dinner because they have been told to be available to vote in the chamber.

Mr Sunak is understood to have been promoted as the event’s guest of honour, with tickets costing £1,000-a-head.

Buyers of individual tickets would not be required to disclose their purchase, although anyone buying an entire table would, because of the £7,500 threshold for declaring political donations to national parties.

The chancellor has endured the toughest month of his political career amid scrutiny of his family’s tax affairs and the fixed penalty notice he received, alongside the prime minister, for attending a Downing Street gathering during one of the pandemic lockdowns.

Mr Sunak has asked the government’s independent ministerial standards adviser to investigate whether he has adequately disclosed his financial interests since joining the front benches.

The Treasury declined to comment.

• Single storey side extension, 2 x replacement windows, provision of parking area, removal of front porch and demolition of garage, chalet and summer house. Gotherwell Road To Cornshay Farm Hawkchurch Devon EX13 5UARef. No: 22/0840/LBC | Validated: Thu 14 Apr 2022 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Single storey side extension, 2 x replacement windows, provision of parking area, removal of front porch and demolition of garage, chalet and summer house. Gotherwell Road To Cornshay Farm Hawkchurch Devon EX13 5UARef. No: 22/0839/FUL | Validated: Thu 14 Apr 2022 | Status: Awaiting decision
• T1 – dismantle Torbay palm tree due to outgrowing the space 2 Regency Gate Sidmouth EX10 9NQRef. No: 22/0833/TRE | Validated: Thu 14 Apr 2022 | Status: Awaiting decision
• T46a Self seeded Ash – The main stem leans and there is a significant number of dead branches. The tree has low amenity value and will leave space for better formed adjacent trees. Application to fell. T16 Holm Oak – The tree was pollarded at 10m some 15 years ago. Significant growth from both stems should now be reduced. Application to re-pollard. T21 Lawson Cypress – Trimming of low hanging branches would open up the area, adding amenity value by exposing the trunk, and freeing up the adjacent Maple. Proposed crown lift as indicated on attached photograph. 27 The Laurels Sidmouth EX10 8UXRef. No: 22/0827/TCA | Validated: Thu 14 Apr 2022 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Cypess tree growing less than 1 metre from high wall (3m). The tree is causing heave/lean to the wall for approx 3.5m either side of the tree. With advise from our building surveyor we propose removing the tree to ground level to stop any further impact or collapse of the wall structure. Clyston Mill East Broadclyst Exeter EX5 3EWRef. No: 22/0831/TCA | Validated: Wed 13 Apr 2022 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Conversion of detached garage to habitable use. 32 Stoneborough Lane Budleigh Salterton Devon EX9 6HLRef. No: 22/0828/FUL | Validated: Wed 13 Apr 2022 | Status: Awaiting decision
• T1 – Robinia – Removal due to extensive decay in lower main stem. Extensive decay in main leaders. Hollow sounding stems at approximately 5m. Crown dieback. T2 – Westerly Ash – Removal. Tree in poor condition. Numerous spots of decay from old pruning. Tip dieback. Epicormic growth. T3 – Central Ash – Removal. Tree in poor condition. Numerous spots of decay from old pruning. Upper crown dieback. Epicormic growth. Significant rot picket at base of central leader at three way union over car park. Tip dieback. T4 – Easterly Ash – Removal. Spots of decay from old pruning. Large area of basal decay. Tip dieback. All trees give an unacceptable risk due to the proximity of car park and public areas. Robinia over beer garden seating area. The Thirsty Farmer Talaton Road Whimple Exeter EX5 2QQRef. No: 22/0825/TCA | Validated: Wed 13 Apr 2022 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Erection of a replacement detached double garage. Devon Vale 9 Burrow Lane Newton Poppleford Devon EX10 0BWRef. No: 22/0824/FUL | Validated: Tue 12 Apr 2022 | Status: Awaiting decision
• First floor extension F W S Carter And Sons Road To Greendale Business Park Greendale Business Park Woodbury Salterton Devon EX5 1EWRef. No: 22/0819/FUL | Validated: Thu 14 Apr 2022 | Status: Awaiting decision
• T13 Beech – Form prune, reduce ascending limb to NE by 4m by making 1 x 100mm cut T11 Turkey Oak – Raise to 2m above garage to NE by making 3 x 50mm target pruning cuts, raise to 2m above garage to S by making 3 x 50mm and 4-5 x 25mm cuts, raise to 4m over neighbours drive by making 5 x 25mm cuts and prune to give 1.5m clearance of BT line by making 10 x 25mm cuts T10 Maple – Form prune, reduce higher stem to S by making 1 x 150mm cut and reduce smaller stem to S by making 1 x 150mm cut T2 Copper Beech – reduce limb to E by removing first ascending branch making 1 x 200mm target pruning cut and reduce second ascending branch by 5m by making 1 x 150mm target pruning cut – after inspecting possible weak union at 4m Please note TPO trees T12 and T8 do not exist. Cotmaton House Cotmaton Road Sidmouth EX10 8QTRef. No: 22/0814/TRE | Validated: Wed 13 Apr 2022 | Status: Awaiting decision

• Variation of Condition No.2 (Approved Plans) and No. 3 (Approved Building Materials) on application 20/2821/FUL. Devon Cliffs Holiday Centre Sandy Bay Exmouth EX8 5BTRef. No: 22/0818/VAR | Validated: Tue 12 Apr 2022 | Status: Awaiting decision
• General purpose agricultural building for the storage of livestock feed, straw and farm machinery. Granary Farm Farway Colyton EX24 6DHRef. No: 22/0815/AGR | Validated: Tue 12 Apr 2022 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Internal alterations, external alterations, conversion of existing access/drive and existing drive to a garden. Change of use of meadow area to a drive and garden. Talaton Farm Cottage Talaton Exeter EX5 2SARef. No: 22/0798/FUL | Validated: Tue 12 Apr 2022 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Single storey extension to front porch and external cladding. 26 Holland Road Exmouth Devon EX8 4BARef. No: 22/0807/FUL | Validated: Mon 11 Apr 2022 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Conversion of roof space to habitable use to include two rear and two front facing dormers, gable end windows and rear roof windows, general external remodelling and recladding and new porch canopy. Danetree Coreway Sidford Sidmouth Devon EX10 9SDRef. No: 22/0808/FUL | Validated: Mon 11 Apr 2022 | Status: Awaiting decision
• T1, Oak : crown lift and deadwood crown to be raised to 5.2m over road for adequate clearance for vehicles and pedestrians Hamecot Lodge 43 Manstone Lane Sidmouth EX10 9RZRef. No: 22/0802/TRE | Validated: Wed 13 Apr 2022 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Removal of Condition No.2 (Approved Plans) on application 99/P1851/00132. Appledore Farm Farway Colyton EX24 6EHRef. No: 22/0809/VAR | Validated: Mon 11 Apr 2022 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Single storey extension to front porch. 36 Ridgeway Gardens Ottery St Mary Devon EX11 1DURef. No: 22/0805/FUL | Validated: Wed 13 Apr 2022 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Removal of low spreading conifer Silverdale Bickwell Valley Sidmouth EX10 8SGRef. No: 22/0801/TCA | Validated: Mon 11 Apr 2022 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Erection of a two storey 3-bed detached dwelling, detached double garage to side and demolition of existing two storey dwelling. Scotts Cottage Sanctuary Lane Woodbury Devon EX5 1EURef. No: 22/0796/FUL | Validated: Wed 13 Apr 2022 | Status: Awaiting decision

• Variation of condition 2 of planning consent 20/2089/MFUL (Proposed breach of the River Otter embankment, Little Bank and Big Bank to restore the historic floodplain creating intertidal saltmarsh, mudflats and freshwater habitat at Big Marsh, and new freshwater habitat at Little Marsh; associated works including development of a new footbridge, realignment of South Farm Road, and creation of a new car park (The Lower Otter Restoration Project); accompanied by an Environmental Statement) to facilitate alterations and raising of ground levels of public footpath (12) Lower River Otter Valley East Of Budleigh Salterton And South West Of OttertonRef. No: 22/0804/VAR | Validated: Tue 12 Apr 2022 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Single storey side/rear extension. 58 Wells Avenue Feniton Devon EX14 3DRRef. No: 22/0810/FUL | Validated: Mon 11 Apr 2022 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Single storey rear extension. Russett Flower Street Woodbury Devon EX5 1LXRef. No: 22/0806/FUL | Validated: Mon 11 Apr 2022 | Status: Awaiting decision
• SVT Watt Colyford T1 Eucalyptus dbh 30inches, located in rear garden. Dismantle to the ground. Diseased with Ganoderma, fruiting bodies at the base, unwanted fast growing species that is not suitable in its place close to the main house, should you require further expert arboricultural evidence please kindly advise, the ganoderma is self evident. Woodmans Stoup Swan Hill Road Colyford Colyton EX24 6QJRef. No: 22/0795/TCA | Validated: Mon 11 Apr 2022 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Internal alterations, external alterations, conversion of existing access/drive and existing drive to a garden. Change of use of meadow area to a drive and garden. Talaton Farm Cottage Talaton Exeter EX5 2SARef. No: 22/0799/LBC | Validated: Tue 12 Apr 2022 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Garage conversion and extension and loft conversion with internal alterations. 16A Stevens Lane Sidmouth EX10 9ULRef. No: 22/0794/FUL | Validated: Wed 13 Apr 2022 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Construction of 3no. car ports and erection of 3no. storage/garden sheds. Removal of existing lean-to structure and replacement with borehole pump store. Land And Buildings At Upexe Farm UpexeRef. No: 22/0785/FUL | Validated: Tue 12 Apr 2022 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Conversion of top two floors from commercial to residential to include a 2-bed flat. Refurbishment of ground floor to include access to flat and repositioning of WC. 12A Parade Exmouth EX8 1RWRef. No: 22/0779/PDM | Validated: Wed 13 Apr 2022 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Certificate of existing lawfulness to establish use of land as a garden in connection to The Firs. The Firs Woodbury Salterton Exeter EX5 1ERRef. No: 22/0778/CPE | Validated: Mon 11 Apr 2022 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Prior approval for the change of use of agricultural building into a residential dwelling under class use C3(a) and (b). Buildings Adjacent To Hilltop Hutgate Road Honiton EX14 9UXRef. No: 22/0776/PDQ | Validated: Tue 12 Apr 2022 | Status: Awaiting decision

• Erection of a two storey 4-bed detached dwelling with associated parking and amenity space and vehicular access. Site Of Woodside Metcombe Ottery St Mary Devon EX11 1SSRef. No: 22/0765/FUL | Validated: Wed 13 Apr 2022 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Demolition of existing buildings and erection of 2 no. new industrial buildings auxiliary to existing operations. 113-115 Harbour Road Seaton EX12 2NHRef. No: 22/0747/FUL | Validated: Tue 12 Apr 2022 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Installation of 2 x internally illuminated individual lettered sign to shopfront. Installation of 2 x PPV faux neon signs. Installation of internally illuminated individual lettered sign bonded to new fascia panel. Installation of 2 x internally illuminated individual lettered sign to shallow trays. 38-39 The Strand Exmouth EX8 1AHRef. No: 22/0746/ADV | Validated: Tue 12 Apr 2022 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Annexe over garage to be changed from residential use to a holiday let Ford Cottage Perkins Village Exeter EX5 2JGRef. No: 22/0728/FUL | Validated: Mon 11 Apr 2022 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Rear single storey extension 34 Whiteway Close Whimple EX5 2TLRef. No: 22/0718/FUL | Validated: Wed 13 Apr 2022 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Car park improvements, including landscaping and associated infrastructure (see parent application 22/0709/FUL) The Warren Car Park WoodburyRef. No: 22/0710/FUL | Validated: Tue 12 Apr 2022 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Car park improvements, including landscaping and associated infrastructure Woodbury Castle Car Park WoodburyRef. No: 22/0709/FUL | Validated: Tue 12 Apr 2022 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Car park improvements, including landscaping and associated infrastructure (see parent application 22/0709/FUL) Estuary View Car Park WoodburyRef. No: 22/0711/FUL | Validated: Tue 12 Apr 2022 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Wooden 6 foot close boarded fence to roadside/south of property. The Barn Yettington Budleigh Salterton EX9 7BPRef. No: 22/0649/FUL | Validated: Mon 11 Apr 2022 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Construction of dwelling (outline application with all matters reserved) Littlecombe Shoot Beach Huts Branscombe Footpath 9A Branscombe Devon EX12 3BDRef. No: 22/0645/OUT | Validated: Mon 11 Apr 2022 | Status: Awaiting decision

• Retention of the following: door installed (D3) on north elevation and variation of condition 3 (13/1174/LBC) window profile. Proposed: install glazed panel in door (D1) on east elevation and door (D2) south elevation and replace rainwater goods on south elevation Higher Thorn Cottage Salcombe Regis Sidmouth EX10 0PARef. No: 22/0338/LBC | Validated: Tue 12 Apr 2022 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Re-submission of application 17/2336/MFUL full planning permission for the reconfiguration of the existing public house and construction of a two storey, 33No. bed hotel with associated infrastructure in line with the subsequent Variation of Conditions approval (Ref 18/0223/VAR) Cat And Fiddle Inn Sidmouth Road Clyst St Mary Exeter EX5 1DPRef. No: 21/3243/MFUL | Validated: Tue 12 Apr 2022 | Status: Awaiting decision

“South West Water needs Potty Training” read one placard held by a two year old. More “cut the crap” images on Cornwall Live

People have had enough of sewage pollution

Greg Martin www.cornwalllive.com

Campaigners were joined on Fistral Beach by everyone from local swimmers to national TV presenters, from toddlers to silver surfers

Around 150 people gathered in Newquay today, Saturday April 23, to demand an end to sewage pollution by South West Water. The protest was one of 12 taking place simultaneously around the country, targeting UK water companies on a ‘National Day of Action on Water Quality’.

Representatives from ocean conservation charity Surfers Against Sewage (SAS) who teamed up with clean water campaign groups to organise the protests were joined on Fistral Beach at 1pm by everyone from local swimmers to national TV presenters, from toddlers to silver surfers.

The protests come after data was released by the Environment Agency (EA) on 31 March, revealing that in 2021 water companies discharged raw sewage into UK rivers 372,533 times, for a combined total of more than 2.7m hours – prompting outcry from the public and campaigners.

The former health secretary Matt Hancock was given an overnight stay at a country estate owned by the head of Randox, the healthcare firm that had hired the MP Owen Paterson as a consultant.

Rob Evans www.theguardian.com 

During a two-day visit to Northern Ireland as health secretary in 2019, Hancock had a private dinner and stayed overnight at the Dundarave country estate in County Antrim, which is owned by Peter Fitzgerald, Randox’s founder.

The overnight stay was disclosed in documents released under the Freedom of Information Act. It was not included in the official register of hospitality received by ministers.

Through a spokesperson, Hancock said he did not need to declare the hospitality as he had not accepted it in a ministerial capacity. However, transparency campaigners disagreed and said there was a “clear expectation” that ministers should declare such hospitality and follow the spirit of the rules.

Questions have been raised about the relationship between Randox and the Conservative party after the firm was awarded almost £500m of public funds during the Covid pandemic for testing.

Randox also hired Paterson as a consultant, paying him £100,000 a year. Paterson resigned from parliament last year after he exploited his position as an MP to lobby for his clients, including Randox.

Randox donated £160,000 to the Conservative party between 2010 and 2018. Paterson directly lobbied Hancock on behalf of Randox during the pandemic. After Paterson’s lobbying, Hancock chased his officials, saying he was “very worried” about how his department was treating Randox and other firms.

During the Northern Ireland visit in 2019, Hancock met three firms, including Randox, that at that time were paying Paterson to be their consultant. Official documents obtained by Transparency International UK under the Freedom of Information Act suggest Paterson was partially involved in organising Hancock’s visit.

They also show how Hancock was invited by Randox to have dinner and stay overnight at Fitzgerald’s Dundarave estate during his visit.

The County Antrim estate is described as “magnificent … in a glorious setting” with “a fine Italianate mansion at its heart.”

On 21 March 2019, Hancock toured Randox’s laboratories in Belfast. An email sent to the health department, which appears to have been written by a Randox employee, said: “Understand SoS [secretary of state] will be with us, Randox Science Park … Then SoS goes to other visits before joining us for a private dinner and overnight that evening.”

On the same day, Hancock carried out a number of other official visits, including at Ulster hospital. He also attended a forum to discuss health and food. Two of the speakers were from Devenish, a firm that makes animal feed, and Lynn’s Country Foods, a firm that makes meat products.

The two firms were at that time paying Paterson a total of £61,000 a year to be their consultant.

The rules governing the conduct of ministers, known as the ministerial code, state that when politicians accept hospitality in a ministerial capacity, details should be made public through a register that is published regularly. Official guidance identifies dinners given by companies as the type of hospitality that should be declared if received in a ministerial capacity.

Hancock’s spokesperson, James Davies, said there had been no need to declare the private dinner and overnight stay at the Randox founder’s estate because it was political rather than departmental.

“Everything was declared properly and appropriately,” Davies said, adding that the relevant paragraphs of the ministerial code were “a departmental responsibility. If they judge an event political, then this doesn’t apply. Perhaps you should be speaking to [the Department of Health and Social Care], rather than Mr Hancock.”

He continued: “Staying overnight is absolutely fine. It was a political dinner, and Mr Hancock met many [Northern Ireland] politicians including Robin Swann, another relationship that became critical in responding to the pandemic. It’s absurd to say there was anything wrong with this.”

That interpretation of the rules was disputed by Rose Whiffen, a research officer at Transparency International UK, which obtained the documents. She said: “When ministers accept hospitality, especially from political donors, there is a clear expectation this should be declared and a matter of public record.

“When a secretary of state is uncertain over whether they have to report being wined and dined under the ministerial code, it is always better for them to err on the side of caution and follow the overriding spirit of the rules by doing so.”

Bank Holidays are traditional times for Developers to submit controversial plans. No exception this year as Burrington’s submitted further amendments to the 40 four-storey flats proposed on Winslade Park. These amendments are in the Documents file dated 11th April 2022 – see link below

21/2217/MRES | Reserved matters application pursuant to outline application 20/1001/MOUT seeking details of layout, appearance, scale and landscaping for a residential development of 40 apartments (Zone D) | Winslade Park Winslade Park Clyst St Mary (eastdevon.gov.uk)

Comment from Clyst St Mary Residents Association:

Burringtons have only slightly reduced the height of two blocks (by lowering their increased ground level plans) by 90cm for Block A and 45cm for Block B and moved Block B (1.8 metres)  and Block C (1.6 metres) further south away from some  tree roots, with a few other minimal differences that are also inconsequential for us all and so insignificant that they will make no difference to our previous objections. 

These amendments are so insignificant that they fail to address the concerns and objections on the detrimental issues of overlooking, privacy and intrusion on Clyst Valley Road residents’ existing 7-metre-high 2-storey homes by these proposed approx. 15-metre-high 4.5-storey apartment blocks.

The Parish Council considered the new application last Wednesday but there is still time for individuals to make their comments direct to EDDC.

Could this apply to Clyst St Mary and the Winslade proposals? – Owl

Tom Wall www.theguardian.com 

Housebuilders are churning out substandard housing schemes with poor living conditions despite councils having the power to block them, according to new research.

The National Planning Policy Framework was amended in July to allow councils to refuse “development that is not well designed”. A study by University College London found that the Planning Inspectorate, which hears housebuilders’ appeals, is now three times as likely to back councils who reject developments on design grounds. But it also found that the vast majority of those blocked were in the south-east, suggesting that elsewhere councils were not using the new powers.

Professor Matthew Carmona, who carried out the research, said councils depleted by austerity often lacked the in-house design expertise to take on large, well-resourced developers.

“Local authorities in the south-east generally deal with more development and are more likely to have their own local design policies and employ urban designers. They are simply more geared up to challenge developers,” he said. “Councils in the south-west, Midlands and north tend to see fewer developments and are more reluctant, and perhaps a little nervous, to call out bad design.”

A survey revealed last year that 41% of councils do not employ any urban designers, and 76% lack access to any advice on architecture.

The change to the country’s planning rules was part of a package of measures that ministers claimed would ensure new housing was “beautiful and well-designed”. The government is setting up an “Office for Place” to help “communities encourage development they find beautiful, and refuse what they find ugly”.

The report, published by the UCL-based Place Alliance, highlights 12 schemes rejected on design grounds since last July. The inspectorate found proposals for an unattractive block of 15 flats on the site of a demolished car park in Crawley in West Sussex would offer “unsatisfactory living conditions”. Some flats had limited natural light and the outside spaces were close to roads and railway lines. Others lacked privacy as windows were next to people passing on a walkway and close to cars queueing on a traffic gyratory system.

The inspectorate also backed Braintree district council’s efforts to block two estates on the edges of villages in Essex, where developers were trying to squeeze in large numbers of houses, jarring with houses nearby. Officials also turned down an appeal relating to five tower blocks on the former Westferry newspaper printworks site in east London. It was ruled the scheme – which led to a row about media mogul Richard Desmond’s contact with ministers tasked with planning decisions – would harm appreciation of the Greenwich world heritage site.

Carmona said big developers had been getting their way for decades but the tables were starting to turn. “Volume housebuilders have been able to get a lot of poor-quality development past local authorities. But this research shows councils can now be far more confident in their exercise of quality control,” he said.

Profits for Britain’s biggest housebuilders have continued to rise despite routinely producing low-quality homes and failing to meet the UK’s estimated housing needs. The UCL researchers rated three-quarters of large developments in England as “mediocre” or “poor” in 2020.

They found bland architecture, with estates dominated by access roads and parking spaces at the expense of green areas and playgrounds. Other failings included few public transport links and a lack of amenities such as shops, pubs and cafes.

Carmona said it was possible to increase the number of houses built without compromising on the design factors that allow a new community to flourish.

“We are in desperate need of housing but it doesn’t mean we should build poorly designed, unsustainable places,” he said.

“Wildlife groups fear that influential landowners who have interests in removing police focus from wildlife crime could take inspiration from the situation in Dorset, and that this pattern could be repeated throughout the country.”

Helena Horton www.theguardian.com 

Birds of prey are being put at risk by the disbanding of one of the country’s leading wildlife crime teams, campaigners have warned, raising fears it could be part of a nationwide pattern.

Wildlife crime officers work to stop offences such as raptor persecution, where birds of prey are poisoned or shot by gamekeepers and landowners.

Earlier this year, a rare white-tailed sea eagle was found poisoned on an estate in Dorset. The local wildlife policing team opened an investigation led by PC Claire Dinsdale, a recipient of the Queen’s police medal for her work on wildlife crime. But weeks later, the case was abruptly closed, and a search on the estate where the eagle was found dead was cancelled. The RSPB described this decision as “baffling”.

Around the same time, the local wildlife crime team was rebranded – removing “wildlife” from its name. Dorset police rural wildlife and heritage crime was renamed as Dorset police rural crime team on its Twitter account, and police sources confirmed this rebrand took place to “reflect the broader work we are undertaking to ensure we provide exceptional local policing to our rural communities”. The wildlife crime section of the local policing website has also been removed.

Dinsdale then went on leave, and the Guardian understands that she has been told that on her return she will no longer be a wildlife crime lead.

Sources who were part of the white-tailed eagle death investigation told the Guardian that they were concerned about the hostility to wildlife crime investigations in the area, pointing out that the local MP, Chris Loder, said that police funding should be focused on other crimes.

Wildlife groups fear that influential landowners who have interests in removing police focus from wildlife crime could take inspiration from the situation in Dorset, and that this pattern could be repeated throughout the country.

Dr Ruth Tingay, a co-founder of wildlife campaign group Wild Justice and author of the Raptor Persecution blog, said: “If police wildlife crime teams are disbanding or rebranding to exclude wildlife crime, this flies in the face of government and police commitments to tackle wildlife crime, and particularly raptor persecution which is supposed to be a national wildlife crime priority but is on the rise according to the latest annual reports.

“There is absolutely no justification whatsoever for ignoring these crimes when there is a statutory duty for raptors to be protected.”

The RSPB, which is still conducting its own investigations into bird poisoning in Dorset, said it was concerned by the changes in Dorset police.

RSPB’s head of investigations, Mark Thomas, said: “RSPB Investigations enjoy a good working relationship with police wildlife and rural crime teams across the UK, especially in relation to fighting raptor persecution, the illegal killing of birds of prey, most often relating to land used for gamebird shooting.

“Dorset police … has been an exemplary force to work with. We obviously have concerns if the level of response from any force to wildlife crime incidents was diminished in any way, as there is clearly lots of work to be done, especially at a time when raptor persecution is at a modern day high and we have suspicious deaths of amazing birds like white-tailed eagles.”

A spokesperson for Dorset police said: “Dorset police is committed to keeping everyone in our county safe, including our wildlife, which brings so much to our beautiful countryside and our communities.

“As part of the police uplift programme and working together with the office of the police and crime commissioner we have reviewed our rural crime strategy for the county and allocated increased numbers of officers to the rural crime team to tackle the issues that matter. This includes all aspects of rural, wildlife and heritage-related crime.

“We will continue to work closely with many different partner agencies in relation to these issues. We want to make it clear that we take any and all potential wildlife offences seriously and will act to prevent and detect offences wherever possible.”

A Home Office spokesperson said: “We recognise the importance of tackling wildlife crime and those who hurt animals should be subject to the full force of the law. However, it is for operationally independent chief constables and elected police and crime commissioners to align their resources to tackle local priorities.”

Ninety-seven per cent of rivers are off limits to the public, and tens of thousands of acres of woodland have benefited from public subsidy yet remain publicly inaccessible.

Locally, the Exe Estuary and the East Devon Pebblebed Heaths provide an important recreational resource for the local community. However, they are sensitive environments which are important to international nature conservation.

The increased housing development and consequential footfall in East Devon has required mitigation strategies to be put in place. (I.e. trying to keep people out!). One of these is the  creation of the Clyst Valley Regional Park.

Another reason we need the protection of absorbing the East Devon and Dorset AONBs into a new national Park. – Owl

Minister defends shelving right to roam report: ‘the countryside is a place of business’

Helena Horton www.theguardian.com 

The English countryside is a “place of business” and already has “hundreds of thousands of miles of public footpaths”, a minister has said in response to questions about why the “right to roam” report has been shelved.

The comments by Mark Spencer, the leader of the house, came as campaign groups expressed their fury over the Treasury’s decision to shelve the review, which was commissioned to search out a “quantum shift in how our society supports people to access and engage with the outdoors”.

The review, headed by Lord Agnew, had included a potential expansion of the much-fought-over “right to roam”, which campaigners fear will not now go ahead. In response, activists are planning mass trespasses to raise awareness of how much of England’s land is out of bounds. The right to roam exists over only 8% of the country.

Spencer made the remarks after the Green MP Caroline Lucas asked why the responses to the Agnew report into making more of the countryside publicly accessible would not be published.

He said: “I think we are blessed in this country with hundreds of thousands of miles of public footpath to allow people to access the countryside. We have to recognise the countryside is not just a place of leisure, but it is also a place of business and food production.”

Lucas responded: “Utterly feeble ‘defence’ from leader of house on government quashing review into the right to roam. Working and leisure are not incompatible – is this really the government’s excuse?”

Ninety-two per cent of England’s land is privately owned and not available to access. The Countryside and Rights of Way (CRoW) Act 2000 gives a legal right of public access to mountains, moorland, heaths, some downland and commons, and the English coastal path. Campaigners have asked for this to be extended to cover rivers, woods and green belt land. Ninety-seven per cent of rivers are off limits to the public, and tens of thousands of acres of woodland have benefited from public subsidy yet remain publicly inaccessible.

This weekend, the Right to Roam campaign is celebrating the 90th anniversary of the 1932 Kinder Trespass, when hundreds of activists trespassed on Kinder Scout in the Peak District. They were there to highlight the fact that walkers in England and Wales were denied access to areas of open country.

A group of ramblers will be walking to Kinder Scout on Sunday for a Kinder in Colour event, which will be led by people of colour.

The organisers said: “Even with a small amount of rights of way available to ramblers, the countryside is still rife with barriers to access, especially for black people and people of colour. With this in mind, we want to celebrate the Kinder Scout legacy by creating a new culture for the countryside, one which is fully inclusive and embraces differences.”

The Right to Roam campaign is planning a series of mass trespasses planned between May and September, including in Totnes on 8 May and West Berkshire on 14 May, with more to follow.

James MacColl, the head of policy, advocacy and campaigns for the Ramblers, said the UK government was not doing anywhere near enough to improve access to the countryside.

He explained: “The government … isn’t making use of its own Environment Act powers to set public access targets. Its new farm payments scheme shows no sign of rewarding farmers for improving access on their land, despite repeated promises. Proposed changes to the planning system don’t prioritise access to nature.

“As the Ramblers continue to campaign for access rights, this weekend we’ll be celebrating the 90th anniversary the Kinder Scout trespass, a landmark protest on the route to improving access to the countryside for all.

“Access to these green open spaces is still currently very limited and unequal and the Ramblers wants to see government extend the freedom to roam across England and Wales so that it is more easily accessible, and better connected to our path network and our towns and cities.”