Weakening or scrapping the nature-friendly farming payment schemes could increase river pollution by up to 20%, an analysis has found.

Helena Horton www.theguardian.com 

The payments are due to replace the EU’s area-based payments scheme, in which farmers are paid for the amount of land they manage. The new system would instead pay land managers to provide “public goods” such as enhanced nature and clean rivers.

Liz Truss’s administration made reviewing the upcoming schemes a priority in the few weeks of her premiership, and government sources said the intention was to remove nature restoration from the programme.

However, Sunak’s government appears less hardline on this issue, and sources at the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) said a review of the schemes, originally planned for this week, was likely to be delayed, with few if any substantive changes from the original plan.

Removing incentives to create wetlands around waterways and increase biodiversity could mean rivers become more polluted. Every single river in England is polluted beyond legal limits, and 86% are deemed not to be in “good ecological condition”. According to the Environment Agency, agriculture is the reason for 40% of water bodies in England failing to meet good status, due to pollution from animal manures and slurries, the use of chemicals such as pesticides and fertilisers, and soil running off fields, especially in wet weather.

Government analysis, compiled by the water pollution campaign group River Action, has also found that a current localised nature-friendly payment scheme, Countryside Stewardship, reduced river pollution by 2%. However, its impacts are very localised; measures such as the planting of winter crop cover and the creation of ponds to retain runoff can reduce nitrate pollution by 10%, phosphates by 16% and sediment by 20%. This scheme was expected to be brought into the new payments system but strengthened, with further financial benefits for farmers who work across river catchment areas, meaning these local benefits could become more widespread.

Charles Watson, founder and chairman of River Action, said: “Removing the payments that reward these vital environmental measures would leave England’s rivers in an even more polluted and degraded state than they already are.

“The public is looking to the government to sort out this appalling issue and it is abundantly clear that more measures, not fewer, are needed to clean up England’s rivers, protect our wildlife and ensure communities can safely enjoy their local watercourses.”

Farmers and environmentalists have warned that the retained EU law bill, which had its second reading in parliament this week, could also threaten the country’s rivers.

The same government analysis found that regulation and good practice leads to a 7-8% reduction in phosphorus, nitrate and sediment pollution across Britain. The regulations referred to are ones which are enshrined in retained EU law, which the new bill could scrap.

What a time to be a fracker. No sooner had they ordered fresh geological surveys, drill bits, hard hats and barbed wire, than their hopes have been dashed. 

[But the ban on building new on-shore wind farms remains, despite them being the cheapest and quickest way to increase sustainable power generation. No logic to Tory thinking. – Owl]

Rishi Sunak has reinstated the fracking ban – but the damage of the Truss era is done

Editorial www.independent.co.uk 

In his first policy U-turn, announced as a response to a question from Green Party MP Caroline Lucas, Rishi Sunak has restored the moratorium on extracting shale gas that formed part of the 2019 election manifesto. Mr Sunak has made many errors of judgement in his brief but meteoric rise to power, but on this he deserves lavish praise.

Of course, there is a political aspect to the change of tone and policy. The fracking policy affected areas such as Lancashire, Yorkshire and Somerset which had plentiful supplies of marginal parliamentary constituencies as well as shale gas. Whether justified or not, residents feared that fracking would produce earthquakes and devastate house prices, as well as cause noise, traffic and noxious fumes during and after development.

The voters in these areas are disinclined to believe in assurances from fossil fuel companies that fracking is “safe”. Jacob Rees-Mogg declared that he’d be happy for it to take place in his back garden, but of course no such licence has been applied for that affects the Rees-Mogg estate.

In itself, the new ban will leave fossil fuels in the ground, help contain greenhouse gas emissions and will make it marginally easier to meet the Cop26 targets on climate change.

Symbolically, the revived ban is a clear signal that the Sunak government is at least somewhat more serious about climate change than Liz Truss was, and that is welcome. How far it will be followed by other measures designed to deal with the transcendent issue of our items is less clear.

Investing in green technology, insulating Britain’s stock of older, draughty homes and generating more power from renewables will cost public money, one way or another. There is little sign, for example, that the ban on new onshore wind turbines will be lifted or new solar farms encouraged. That investment will soon repay itself in cheaper energy supplies and stronger energy security, but the pressures on public spending are well-known and the Tories seem to have a visceral aversion to any change to rural land use (whether farmers and landowners agree or not).

They are certainly not acting like there is a climate emergency, or indeed a man in the Kremlin determined to “weaponise” energy. Britain is better off and safer with green energy, underpinned by a steady base load of nuclear power and a rapid run-down on fossil fuel usage. The UK is in a strong position to be something like what Boris Johnson called, albeit with typical hyperbole, “the Saudi Arabia” of wind.

Such confusions about policy are damaging to investment, whether in fossil fuels or renewables. Before the fall of Mr Johnson, they had no hope of being able to extract shale gas from Britain’s (or more accurately England’s) apparently plentiful reserves. Indeed, one of the few pieces of advice offered in public by Mr Johnson to his successor was that fracking wasn’t really worth it.

Then came the arrival of the impetuous Liz Truss, enthusiastically abetted by Mr Rees-Mogg, and her bold move to reverse the ban imposed by her predecessor. She often added that fracking would not be permitted without local support, but the method by which that would be measured and obtained was opaque. However, her intent was plain.

In one of her last legislative acts as prime minister, with a substantial injection of incompetence and confusion, she forced through her policy; it contributed significantly to her demise.

The damage is done, however, and the Sunak administration has been gifted the worst of all worlds. The voters in areas targeted for seismic action cannot trust the Tories to keep their promises on fracking, no matter how sincere Mr Sunak sounds. The energy industry, both fossil and renewable, is left with a development and pricing regime that they cannot rely on for the long term – the Conservatives are liable to change their minds, and Labour would reverse much of the policy framework they have created, such as it is.

The vast investments the energy companies have to make – especially in the nuclear sector – demand long-term security. A cross-party consensus on the future of energy would help, but it remains as distant a prospect as nuclear fusion or, for that matter, unrestricted fracking.

Three senior Plymouth councillors including the former Tory leader have joined forces to form a new independent group. Nick Kelly, Terri Beer and Chaz Singh are the founding members of the Independent Alliance Group on the city council, which is currently in a state of no overall control following Cllr Kelly’s recent departure from the Conservatives.

Philip Churm www.plymouthherald.co.uk

They say the new group will allow them to represent residents on the various city council committees, with Cllr Kelly explaining: “We share common beliefs and values, and simply want the very best for Plymouth’s residents and businesses.” Ousted as leader of the council earlier in the year following a vote of no confidence, Cllr Kelly left the Conservative group in acrimonious circumstances this month.

He claims he resigned after being deselected by the Tories, accusing senior members of the party of pursuing an “ongoing vendetta” against him. The Plymouth Conservatives, in a statement reported by PlymouthLive, responded by saying Cllr Kelly had been suspended pending an investigation following “several serious and different complaints and allegations made formally to our group executive team.”

His departure leaves the 57-seat council with 28 Conservatives, 24 Labour members, three Independents and two Green Party councillors. Cllr Terri Beer, last year’s lord mayor, resigned from Plymouth’s Tory group days after Kelly was replaced as leader by Cllr Richard Bingley in March.

She said of the new group: “Despite coming from very different backgrounds, we have a strong sense of fairness and equality.” The new alliance’s third member, Cllr Chaz Singh, a former deputy lord mayor, has been an independent member for three years since resigning from the Labour group in 2019.

He said: “We feel liberated that we can do the very best for Plymouth and our residents, and not be concerned about going against any national party policies or having disciplinary action taken against us. We are truly independent.” Cllr Kelly has opened the door for other councillors to join the group and claims that since leaving the Conservatives he has been “inundated with people urging me to stand as an independent and form an alliance.

“Previous councillors and councillor candidates have contacted me in the past few days wanting to stand and be part of this alliance in May 2023 [when the next elections will be held]. We already have enough candidates to stand in each of the 19 wards.”

He added: “This is something new and exciting, although a lot more work and planning will now start to truly offer the residents of Plymouth a real and credible alternative to the mainstream parties.”

Kerching! One rule for them another one for us. – Owl

The Liberal Democrats have called on sacked and newly reappointed Conservative ministers to forego their redundancy payments, following the reshuffle announced by Rishi Sunak.

By Joseph Kennedy thehighlandtimes.com 

Conservative turmoil has led to huge numbers of former ministers being able to claim payouts, with the two reshuffles carried out since July potentially costing taxpayers hundreds of thousands of pounds.

Ministers who were sacked just months ago but have now been reappointed are still able to claim thousands of pounds each in redundancy pay, as long as they have been out of a ministerial post for at least three weeks.

For example Dominic Raab, who was sacked by Liz Truss in September but reappointed as Justice Secretary today, would be eligible to receive £16,876 despite only being out of a ministerial job for seven weeks.

Steve Barclay, who was reappointed as Health Secretary after being sacked in September, would also be entitled to the same full redundancy payout.

The Liberal Democrats have called the arrangement a “farce” and said this “revolving door bonus” should be returned to the Treasury to help struggling families with the cost of living.  

Liberal Democrat Cabinet Office Spokesperson, Christine Jardine said:

“It beggars belief that while families are struggling to pay their bills, many retiring Conservative ministers are set to receive thousands of pounds, some of them after just a few weeks in the job. 

“The Conservatives have trashed the economy, and now expect the British people to endure even more hardship to clean up their mess.

“What staggering unfairness, for the Ministers who got us into this financial mess to be rewarded with  taxpayers’ cash.

“Perhaps most egregious of all is the revolving door bonus for ministers who got a payout just months ago and have now already been reappointed.

“It is a complete farce.

“These payouts should be stopped, and the money should be spent on helping the many people who are struggling under Conservative misrule.”

Suella Braverman accused of ‘multiple’ breaches of ministerial code by former Tory chair

Andrew Woodcock www.independent.co.uk

Fresh questions were tonight being asked about Rishi Sunak’s decision to bring Suella Braverman back into government as home secretary, after a former Conservative party chair claimed she had been involved in “multiple” breaches of the ministerial code.

Jake Berry, who was chair when Liz Truss sacked Ms Braverman last week, said that she was responsible for a “really serious breach” relating to confidential government discussions of cybersecurity.

And he challenged Mr Sunak’s claim that the home secretary had confessed to breaking the code, telling Talk TV that “the evidence was put to her and she accepted the evidence, rather than the other way around”.

Mr Berry’s shock intervention adds to pressure on the new PM, who is already facing accusations of failing to deliver on his promise of “integrity” in government by granting Ms Braverman “impunity” for her misdemeanour.

And it suggests that Mr Sunak may face efforts to destabilise his new regime by members of the Truss administration, like Mr Berry, who he sacked after coming to power this week.

Ms Braverman was reappointed home secretary on Tuesday just six days after Liz Truss sacked her for sending cabinet papers to unauthorised people via her private email – and just hours after Mr Sunak promised that his administration would have “integrity, professionalism and accountability” at every level.

Labour leader Sir Keir Starmer accused the prime minister of doing a “grubby deal” with the leading right-winger in return for her support in the Conservative leadership contest, which effectively scuppered Boris Johnson’s hopes of a sensational comeback.

Concern over Ms Braverman’s return is understood to have been raised by the head of the civil service, Simon Case, who initially advised Ms Truss that her actions amounted to a breach of the code.

Neither Mr Sunak nor Downing Street denied that Mr Case had advised against the appointment, though the PM’s official spokesperson said he “did not recognise” reports that the cabinet secretary was “livid” at being overruled.

Announcing her resignation last week, Ms Braverman admitted she made a “mistake”, which she described as a “technical infringement” of the ministerial rules.

But questions remain about why she sent the document to fellow right-wing MP Sir John Hayes and how she accidentally copied in an aide to another MP, who sounded the alarm.

Mr Berry told Talk TV: “From my own knowledge, there were multiple breaches of the ministerial code.

“It was sent from a private email address to another member of parliament. She then sought to copy in that individual’s wife and accidentally sent it to a staffer in parliament.

“To me that seems a really serious breach, especially when it was documents relating to cybersecurity, as I believe. The cabinet secretary had his say at the time. I doubt he’s changed his mind in the last six days, but that’s that’s a matter for the new prime minister.”

Asked if Ms Braverman had “put her hands up” to the breach, Mr Berry replied: “I wasn’t in that meeting, but as I understand it, the evidence was put to her and she accepted the evidence, rather than the other way around.” The FDA union, representing top Whitehall mandarins, said any civil servant would expect to face “the harshest of penalties” for such a breach of security, including losing their security clearance.

“Standards matter, and the clear signal from her appointment is that ministers can act with impunity if it suits the prime minister,” said the union’s general secretary Dave Penman.

“This sends the country and the civil service a worrying message about how the new government will approach standards and national security.”

Meanwhile, Downing Street signalled that Mr Sunak had ditched a Truss plan to allow overall immigration to rise in the hope of stimulating economic growth by filling vacancies in shortage occupations.

A spokesperson said the new PM will stick to the pledge in the 2019 Conservative election manifesto that overall numbers will come down over the course of the parliament.

The change – which will make it more difficult for chancellor Jeremy Hunt to convince the Office for Budget Responsibility he can fill a £40bn hole in the national finances – sparked speculation that it was part of a deal with Ms Braverman in return for her support in the leadership contest.

Ms Braverman had clashed with Ms Truss over migration, after declaring a personal ambition to get net numbers down below 100,000 a year, in contradiction to the then PM’s plans.

But Mr Sunak’s press secretary denied the pair discussed the home secretary’s job when they spoke ahead of Ms Braverman’s dramatic declaration in his favour on Sunday, insisting the issue had only come up when he was allocating cabinet roles on Tuesday.

At Prime Minister’s Questions in the Commons, Sir Keir told MPs: “We can all see what’s happened here – he’s so weak, he’s done a grubby deal trading national security because he was scared to lose another leadership election.

James Cleverly defends Rishi Sunak’s appointment of Suella Braverman

“There’s a new Tory at the top, but as always with them, party first, country second.”

And the SNP’s Westminster leader Ian Blackford accused Mr Sunak of doing a “sleazy backroom deal” with Ms Braverman to help “shore up” right-wing support in his battle with Boris Johnson.

Mr Sunak retorted that he was “delighted” to have Ms Braverman in his cabinet.

“The home secretary made an error of judgement but she recognised that,” the new prime minister told the Commons. “She raised the matter and she accepted her mistake.”

Ms Braverman was later accused of “running away” from scrutiny after she left the Commons chamber rather than respond to an urgent question from Labour about the leak.

Shadow home secretary Yvette Cooper has written to Mr Case demanding an investigation “into the extent of this and other possible security breaches”.

And she told MPs that Ms Braverman had “breached core professional standards and has now run away from accountability in this house”.

But Home Office minister Jeremy Quin, who stood in to answer the question on the home secretary’s behalf, insisted it would not be “proper” for Mr Sunak to order an investigation into actions which took place under Ms Truss.

Mr Quin told MPs that it was the PM’s intention to appoint a new independent ethics adviser, after two resigned under Mr Johnson.

But asked whether they would then investigate Ms Braverman, he replied: “Events in the last administration would not properly be part of the remit of a new independent adviser.

“That was a matter that was dealt with by the previous administration. We have a new administration and the home secretary has been appointed to her post.”

Even in the absence of an ethics adviser, it is within Mr Sunak’s power to instruct the government’s ethics and propriety team to look into alleged misbehaviour by a minister. However, the Cabinet Office confirmed that no such request has been made.

The general secretary of the PCS union, which represents many Home Office staff, said: “It beggars belief that a minister who lost her job just days ago for breaching ministerial rules can be welcomed back into government as if nothing happened.”

And Liberal Democrat leader Sir Ed Davey branded Ms Braverman “leaky Sue” and said her return to a highly sensitive post after such a breach was “inexcusable”.

“She’s responsible for MI5, she sits on the National Security Council, she sees some of the most highly confidential issues, both relating to crime and to our defence,” Sir Ed told the News Agents podcast.

“For her to apparently be so light and easy with copying to people who don’t have that level of clearance, I think is genuinely shocking.”

A new £8.7 million project seeks to understand the health risks posed by coastal waters due to climate change. The impact of climate change on health risks due to pathogens in the environment, specifically in our coastal waters, will be investigated by a new £8.7 million (€10 million) Horizon Europe project developed by the University of Exeter’s European Centre for Environment and Human Health and led by the Basque Centre for Climate Change (BC3).

Lewis Clarke www.devonlive.com 

The BlueAdapt project involves 12 institutes from across 10 countries in Europe, bringing together an interdisciplinary team of researchers including microbiologists, epidemiologists, economists, climate scientists and policy specialists. The project will focus on a wide range of pathogens including antimicrobial resistant bacterial pathogens which are becoming increasingly hard to treat with antimicrobial drugs commonly known as antibiotics.

The Covid-19 pandemic illustrated that there is need for a much better understanding of environmental pathogens. The project will help future pandemic preparedness by identifying when and where pathogens may evolve and what the risk factors for environmental transmission to humans are.

Dr Tim Taylor, senior lecturer in environmental and public health economics at the University of Exeter’s European Centre for Environment and Human Health who coordinated the bid said: “Our coastal waters are important to our society in terms of providing space for recreation, food to our tables and supporting a range of industries. It is important we understand how bacteria and viruses will respond to changes in our climate and society – so we can better plan for the future. Through a series of case studies, BlueAdapt will focus in on change in different areas of Europe and look at different options for responding to these emerging threats.”

Professor Will Gaze who leads the environmental demission of antimicrobial resistance research unit at the University of Exeter’s European Centre for Environment and Human health said: “Antimicrobial drug resistant infections are predicted to be the leading cause of death by 2050 and the role of the natural environment in the evolution and transmission of antimicrobial resistant pathogens is increasingly being recognised. With partners including those at Bangor University in Wales and the University of Galway in Ireland we will use a combination of experimental evolution and sophisticated modelling approaches to better understand the effects of climate change on risks posed by pathogens and antimicrobial resistance in the environment”.

Prof Marc Neumann, research professor at BC3 and BlueAdapt’s principal investigator explains: “BlueAdapt presents a unique opportunity for us to investigate emerging disease risks in our coastal waters. We hope to be able to improve the understanding on how bacteria and viruses in coastal zones will respond to changes in our climate and how this in turn may impact the health of the European population. We will investigate policy responses, including early warning systems, and estimate expected benefits of adaptation actions.”

BlueAdapt is a partnership between the Basque Centre for Climate Change, University of Exeter, Charles University, University of Warsaw, University of Galway, Deltares, CMCC, EuroHealthNet, Bangor University, Istituto Superiore di Sanita, University of the Basque Country and ThenTryThis.

BlueAdapt is funded under European Union’s Horizon Europe research and innovation programme under Grant Agreement No 101057764 and by UKRI/HM Government.

A charity founded by the chancellor, Jeremy Hunt, paid more than £110,000 – two-thirds of its income – to his former political adviser Adam Smith, who lost his job over a lobbying scandal.

Nice work if you can get it! – Owl

Rowena Mason www.theguardian.com 

Patient Safety Watch, which was set up to research preventable harm in healthcare, paid Smith as its sole employee and chief executive about 66% of its income in the year ending January 2022.

Hunt part funds the charity but it also solicits donations from the public on its website.

It was established in 2019 to conduct research, but appears to have produced no papers since then. A message on its website says: “We have an ambitious research programme looking into a wide variety of patient safety issues. We will publish details of our forthcoming research on these pages.”

However, the page for reports says: “Our reports will be published here – please check back soon for our first piece of research.”

Its main output appears to be a blog and publishing newsletters from Hunt in his capacity as founder and trustee of the charity. The annual accounts explain that the charity chose not to publish its research – some of which has been completed – while the NHS remained under significant Covid-related pressure and it would do so “when the climate is right”.

Smith resigned as an adviser to Hunt in 2012, when Hunt was culture secretary, after the Leveson inquiry, over a scandal in which he had exchanged messages with a lobbyist for Rupert Murdoch’s News Corp. The company was seeking permission for a takeover of BSkyB (now Sky) at the time, with Hunt in a quasi-judicial role.

When Smith stepped down, he said he acted without the authority of his boss and that he had allowed an impression to form of an over-close relationship between News Corp and the Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport.

Smith is now employed by Hunt as a parliamentary aide, having returned to work for him in 2020.

Smith’s £110,000-£120,000 salary, first reported by the Civil Society publication, represents more than two-thirds of the charity’s annual income of £164,400 for the financial year ending January 2022. Its annual accounts report that £106,000 of its income came from donations and legacies, and a further £58,400 from other trading activities.

The accounts show that its only employee received remuneration of £47,232 in 2020, and that this more than doubled to £113,600 in 2021. Its 2022 accounts refer to a salary band of £110,000-£120,000.

The three trustees of Patient Safety Watch do not receive remuneration. The trustees are Hunt, a charity worker James Titcombe, and a chartered accountant David Grunberg.

Hunt and Patient Safety Watch did not respond to a request for comment.

In his weekly column Simon Jupp apologises for the turmoil in Westminster but not for the economic damage his government has inflicted on us by sheer incompetence.  A few weeks ago Liz Truss announced unfunded tax cuts, especially for the wealthy with disastrous consequences.

Now the new Chancellor is planning an austerity budget of tax rises and spending cuts, austerity 2.0.

We have consumer price inflation over 10%, food cost inflation at 17%, increases in mortgages, fuel bills that many cannot afford (fuel inflation 30%, gas temporarily capped at 100%, electricity capped at 54%) and we are facing a recession.

Pensioners and benefit claimants once more face cruel uncertainty over whether or not they will be paid in debased currency.

He also returns to his theme of trying to distract attention by criticising the non-Tory Council. This time for “not listening”.

But Simon, who were you listening to when you voted in the fracking lobby?

New Prime Minister will unite and deliver

Simon Jupp MP’s Weekly column for the local press:

Politicians don’t often apologise.

In political circles, it can be seen as weakness. Frankly, I really could not care less what politicos in Westminster think about me. I’m here to serve you.

I’ll be honest, I am annoyed by recent events. As your MP, I want to apologise for the turmoil in Westminster.

Although I campaigned for Rishi Sunak in the summer, I accepted a position in Liz Truss’ government because I wanted it to work. Unfortunately, it didn’t. At the time of writing, the markets and pound have responded positively to Rishi Sunak’s decisive victory in the leadership contest.

We have a mandate from a landslide election win for the Conservative Party in 2019. My party must quickly unite under Rishi Sunak as Prime Minister, get a grip, and govern.

It’s the message I heard loud and clear on Saturday as I knocked on doors with Paul Carter, the Conservative candidate in the upcoming Newton Poppleford and Harpford by-election next month. I’m typically out most weekends taking part in coffee mornings, community events, or speaking to people on the doorstep.

Westminster can be quite an isolating place, which is why it is important to come back to my home in Sidmouth. I’m often stopped in the street or in the shops. I hope you’ll always feel that I’m accessible as your MP.

On a final note this week, you may have noticed that I have been “bleating” about the reluctance of Liberal Democrat party member Cllr Paul Arnott to get his councillors to come out from behind their keyboards, return to physical meetings, and reopen East Devon District Council’s offices in Exmouth and Honiton. Thankfully, the Conservative Group, working cross-party with Labour and councillors in Cranbrook, defeated the current administration. Councillors will return to physical meetings soon.

Cllr Arnott should listen to local public concern and reopen Exmouth Town Hall and Blackdown House to the general public. I’m hoping that much like the totally unnecessary debacle with traders on Exmouth’s Strand, the council’s current administration will see sense.

Owl’s view on virtual council meetings can be found here.

[Fact check: Cllr Arnott leader, abstained in the vote, as did Cllr Ian Thomas, the Chair – can’t get fairer than that!] 

EDDC has taken, what in Owl’s opinion is a retrograde step, by agreeing to a motion inspired by the Tory group to return to physical meetings immediately.

The issue is not entirely straightforward as was reflected in the subsequent vote.

By not amending fifty-year-old legislation the virtual meetings held during lockdown are not considered “legal”. They are deemed to be only “consultative”, resulting in councillors not making “decisions” but only “recommendations” for officers to act upon. These temporary arrangements have had to be extended, then extended again, though in practice they worked very well especially in increasing public engagement.

So, our Tory friends (seeking a distraction maybe), argued virtual council meetings couldn’t be properly “democratic”. Council Officers are working to introduce a hybrid system, and will make proposals in December, but the Tories can’t wait.

Yes, physical meetings for certain purposes and occasions are important and will be occasionally necessary but virtual meetings have overwhelming advantages in terms of transparency and public engagement. They also make being a councillor accessible to a much wider section of the community eg those with family commitments or those with mobility problems.

How are you meant to get to Blackdown House by public transport these days?

To stop all virtual meetings before hearing about what hybrid meetings might offer is to throw out the baby with the bath water.

At heart, this decision is discriminatory. Hopefully, more sensible decisions will be made when the subject is revisited.

Making more use of virtual meetings in all walks of life is essential if we are to increase productivity and economic growth, whilst cutting our carbon footprint. Why are Tories so set against the idea?

Here is what Green Cllr Olly Davey, Exmouth, has written in the Exmouth Journal:

WHILE I would have thought that our MP. Simon Jupp, might have had other things on his mind than attacking EDDC over its decision to continue with virtual meetings, I suppose we must expect such attacks to continue as we approach Council elections next May.

A week after his column was printed, a virtual meeting of Full Council rejected advice from the Monitoring Officer to continue with virtual meetings for a few more months until a reliable hybrid system could be adopted, and voted instead to resume in-person meetings for all committees with statutory powers, so that delegation of decisions to relevant officers would no longer be required. This was done on the basis that delegation was “undemocratic”, and it was even suggested that councillors were not doing the job they were elected to do, which even a casual glance at any of the recorded meetings will show is not the case. The Council has continued to function in almost exactly the same way

Had the Government amended the 1972 Local Government Act, as it had the opportunity to do when the emergency legislation enabling virtual meetings came to an end in May 2021, delegation to officers would not have been necessary. A law drafted 50 years ago, not surprisingly, did not anticipate the advances in technology that we now benefit from. This was despite lobbying by the Local Government Association and many councils who could see the savings in carbon emissions, officer and councillor time, increased public access, and greater transparency of decision making. We might not all have wanted to continue with virtual meetings, but it would have been good to have had the choice.

So now that “democracy” has been restored, what does this mean? Well, firstly, if you enjoyed watching Council and committee meetings being live streamed on YouTube, you now will only be able to see certain committees, while the heavy hitters like Planning and Cabinet will no longer be available, except in audio (possibly). If you want to attend meetings to protest about or support certain proposals or just to observe, you will have to come to Blackdown House. That doesn’t sound much like “democracy” to me.

For a number of the committees of which I am a member, I shall have a 35 mile round trip each time I attend. As I did before. I shall attempt to carshare with other Exmouth members, but as a Green Councillor who tries to minimise his car usage, it’s not a good outcome. If I want to drop into a Cabinet meeting because there’s an item of interest to me, I shall have to travel to Blackdown House.

I am coming round to a view that democracy is about choice – who to be governed by, what sort of society I want to live in, how I wish to live. The inability to hold legally valid virtual Council meetings may not seem very important, but it’s yet another way in which my freedom, that of the Council on which I serve, and of the general public to be able to scrutinise how we operate, has been eroded. Perhaps I can count on the support of our MP to amend the 1972 Act to enable virtual meetings but I’m not holding my breath.

South West Water challenged on ‘missing’ data

Environment campaigner Feargal Sharkey has challenged South West Water over what he claimed was missing data about sewage discharges around the Devon coast. Mr Sharkey tweeted a copy of a map showing where storm overflows had been used at the weekend, and also where no information was available.

Edward Oldfield www.devonlive.com

The former lead singer with the 70s and 80s punk band The Undertones asked South West Water why it had “stopped supplying the data”. The keen fly fisherman has in recent years been an outspoken campaigner against the pollution of the UK’s waterways.

The map he used is published by Surfers Against Sewage and gives real-time updates on water quality around the coast. It relies on data provided by the water companies on the activation of combined sewer overflows, and water quality analysis from the Environment Agency, but that only operates from May to September.

Companies are legally allowed to release a mixture of raw sewage and rainwater into the sea following exceptionally heavy rain. That is to prevent the networking backing up to cause flooding at roads, homes and businesses. Downpours can also wash animal waste and fertiliser into rivers and seas, causing a pollution risk.

One Tuesday morning, the Surfers Against Sewage map showed an ‘out-of-season’ message for the places where information provided by the Environment Agency only during the summer season was not available. Other locations showed a message that sewer systems are under maintenance and real-time alerts have been temporarily disabled. In Devon, they were Sidmouth Town, Budleigh Salterton, Dawlish Coryton Cove, Paignton Preston Sands, and Shoalstone Beach.

Meanwhile there were pollution alerts listed at Exmouth, Meadfoot at Torquay and Goodrington at Paignton, saying that storm sewage had been discharged within the last 48 hours. South West Water said it issued precautionary alerts of a possible temporary impact on bathing water quality at those locations on Sunday. That was due to heavy localised rainfall which could trigger a storm overflow, and the alerts were lifted on Monday.

Enlarged view of South West peninsular below, showing many red dots and “grayed out, info unavailable” ones particularly on the South Coast. Link to tweet here

The Environment Agency publishes its ‘Swimfo’ map updated with water quality information from designated bathing waters around the coast between May and September. It provides weekly water quality assessments and daily pollution forecasts for some locations during that period.

South West Water said its BeachLive service issues precautionary alerts when a storm overflow might temporarily impact bathing water quality, and it operates all year round with alerts issued in near real-time. It supplies information to the Safer Seas & Rivers Service, which provides the map on the Surfers Against Sewage website and a mobile phone app.

South West Water said in a statement: “Our BeachLive alerts are being sent out as normal. The third party app receives information from two sources, BeachLive and the Environment Agency’s Pollution Risk Forecast (PRF) system, which looks at rainfall over the beach catchment, along with wind and tidal data. The EA’s PRF system only operates between 1 May and 30 September and hence the app will show out of season advice for those beaches that only receive warnings from the EA PRF system.”

The statement added: “Monitors at Sidmouth Town, Dawlish Coryton Cove, Paignton Preston Sands and Shoalstone are currently under maintenance due to suspected signalling issues. We are investigating these assets and will ensure they are back online as soon as possible. This does not mean that BeachLive warnings for those beaches will not be issued. Where a beach has more than one asset that might affect its water quality then, if any asset not in maintenance mode has a spill, a warning would still be issued.”

A South West Water spokesperson said: “Precautionary alerts were raised at Exmouth, Meadfoot and Goodrington on Sunday to notify that there could have been a temporary impact to bathing water quality, due to heavy, localised rainfall which can cause our storm overflows to trigger. These alerts were lifted on Monday.

“South West Water’s largest environmental investment programme in 15 years, WaterFit, is now well underway, focused on delivering benefits for customers, communities and the environment. Through WaterFit we will dramatically reduce our use of storm overflows, reduce and then remove our impact on river water quality by 2030 and maintain our excellent bathing water standards all year round.”

The discharge of raw sewage into rivers and seas hit the headlines last year after the government rejected a plan from the House of Lords to end storm overflows. The government voted down an amendment to the Environment Bill, then did a U-turn after an outcry and announced it will tighten the law to put a legal duty on water firms to reduce the harm from storm overflows.

[The policy to build 40 new hospitals by 2030 was one of the key domestic pledges Boris Johnson announced before the 2019 election. This manifesto and subsequent electoral mandate is being used to legitimise the Sunak regime. – Owl]

Plymouth’s super health hub at Colin Campbell Court is in danger of not being built after the Government confirmed £41m of funding for the project is not available. Despite demolition work having started in Western Approach the health minister said there is no national NHS cash, which would have underpinned the scheme.

William Telford www.plymouthherald.co.uk

It means the project is now in severe jeopardy. The West End Health and Wellbeing Hub was heralded as being highly important for regenerating the lower end of the city centre and relieving pressure on Derriford Hospital.

Three city GPs’ practices would have relocated into the building too. Construction work was due to start in early 2023, but the Government has confirmed that NHS England funding will not be available and had never actually been committed.

Luke Pollard, Labour MP for Sutton and Devonport, said: “If the project gets binned because ministers have withdrawn the £41m of funding, the detrimental knock-on-effect this will have on our city’s health cannot be understated. Our city’s health GP service is facing collapse.

“People in Plymouth deserve better than a creaking health service. The Government cannot be allowed to deny us a project which could provide a lifeline for Plymouth’s health.”

At a Westminster Hall debate today he asked health minister Robert Jenrick to restore the funding or find it from elsewhere. He said: “What are the options to ensure we can build the super health hub?”

Mr Jenrick confirmed there was no national NHS funding available but said £250m had been given to the Devon Integrated Care Board, for the next three years, and that board could fund the Plymouth building if it deemed it a priority, The minister said he would visit Plymouth and broker a meeting involving Devon Integrated Care Board, stakeholders such as the city council and NHS England to look for an “innovative or creative” solution.

The West End Health and Wellbeing Centre, which at 5,700sq m is bigger than Colin Campbell House, was planned to front onto Western Approach and fill a huge part of the car park in down-at-heel Colin Campbell Court. Plans show an eye-catching three-storey block with living, plant-covered “green walls” and a glass-roofed inner “green courtyard”, with the entire building surrounded by landscaped gardens. Demolition of stores fronting Western Approach is underway.

How the planned West End Health and Wellbeing Centre, with its glazed roof creating a ‘tunnel of light’ though the building, in Plymouth could look (Image: KTA)

It was planned for the building, envisaged as one of a number of Cavell Centre in-community health and wellbeing hubs, housing the North Road West Medical Centre, Adelaide Surgery and Armada Surgery GPs’ centres, which would close and move into the building. It would also house outpatient services provided by University Hospitals Plymouth NHS Trust, mental health, community health and diagnostic services, including X-ray, alongside a pharmacy, community kitchen and dining area, cafe, mental health area, and bookable interview and voluntary sector rooms, and small meeting “pods”, on the ground floor.

The project was also aimed at being the first segment in a regeneration of the Colin Campbell Court area, which could eventually see the refurbishment of the art deco Colin Campbell House, and the demolition and replacement of some buildings fronting Western Approach and Market Avenue with blocks of flats. And, being open seven days a week with up to 250 staff and around 3,000 appointments a day, it was predicted it would bring a huge economic boost to the area.

Mr Pollard said Plymouth’s health service is already at “breaking point” and “facing collapse”, despite the heroic effort of staff. He said some patients have been reportedly waiting more than 24 hours in an ambulance, and for an average of more than nine hours before being either admitted, treated or discharged from Derriford Hospital.

The health hub would also be based in Stonehouse, an area with the greatest health needs and lowest life expectancy in the city. Stonehouse accounts for about 20% of Derriford Hospital’s admissions and the new NHS facility was designed to improve access to health services and reduce the need for emergency admissions with early intervention and prevention.

Mr Pollard also stressed the project would be expected to generate significant financial benefits to the area, along with hopes that the investments generated would revitalise a part of the city centre that has “not received much love in recent years”.

He said: ““The super health hub is Plymouth’s flagship health project to address the GP crisis. By bringing health to the high street the aim is to treat more people earlier, prevent illness and cut emergency admissions at Derriford.

“This project matters a great deal to me. I have been campaigning for a super health hub in the city centre for years because I strongly believe the facility could be truly transformative for health in Plymouth. “

The project is a cross-party initiative and Richard Bingley, Tory leader of Plymouth City Council, said: “The West End Health and Wellbeing Centre would bring a massive range of benefits to people in Stonehouse – parts of which are in the top 1% of deprived areas in the country. The building and, most importantly, the new model of care it will deliver with integrated health and care services in one place, is a key development in addressing some of the vast health inequalities in the area.”

Mary Aspinall, Plymouth Labour’s spokesperson on health, said: “I am absolutely shocked that the rug is being pulled from under this huge investment in our city which would provide about 3,000 appointments a day and employ 250 staff. We will fight it tooth and nail. People in Plymouth do not deserve to be treated this way.”

From a correspondent: 

Yesterday four residents spoke to the EDDC Planning Committee about the issues regarding the construction of the three four story tower blocks backing on to the gardens at the bottom of Clyst Valley Road.

The application was debated at quite some length. Eventually Mike Howe suggested to the Planning Committee that they visit the proposed site and see for themselves exactly where the apartment blocks are proposed to go and just how large they will be. Residents remain hopeful that the good reasons that Charlie Hopkins ( the barrister) gave for refusal will see something that is far more in keeping for a rural village put forward.

[The Parish Council meets today at Clyst St Mary Village Hall at 2pmto discuss the vexed question of the Enfield Anaerobic Digester agenda here]

Dirty dairy farmers killing our rivers – Owl

An inspector was met with threats of violence at the start of a project in North Devon to check if farms were complying with rules to protect water quality, a report from the Environment Agency says. The study found nine out 10 of livestock businesses visited around the Taw Estuary were either causing pollution or breaking regulations.

Edward Oldfield www.devonlive.com

The project discovered a ‘surprising’ level of ‘complacency’ towards environmental rules and planning law on the farms that were visited, probably due to years of cutbacks in inspection visits. Details emerged in the report on the four-year project funded by the Environment Agency to improve the quality of waterways feeding the River Taw, which have been judged as poor or moderate due to pollution from cattle waste and fertiliser from the mostly dairy farms in the area.

An inspector visited 101 of the larger farms in the project area from 2016 to 2020. They found 66 were causing pollution, and in total 87% were either causing pollution or failed to comply with rules to protect the environment. The unannounced inspection visits resulted in advice in most cases, although there is one ongoing case of enforcement action.

The report, obtained by The Guardian under a Freedom of Information request, said the number of frontline inspection staff had been cut back in the last 15 years, which meant most farmers could expect to never have a visit during their lifetime. It said: “This may have led to complacency about regulations and a general reluctance to engage with the Environment Agency. The officer was subjected to hostility, aggression, and threats of physical violence at the start of the project, but there has been a marked change in attitude and some farmers will now contact the officer for advice.”

The officer was able to refer farmers to sources of advice and funding to improve the infrastructure on their farms, to meet regulations and reduce the risk of pollution affecting the waterways.

The 200 square kilometre area of North Devon was identified for the project, along with the River Axe in East Devon, due to concerns over the influence of farming on water quality. The inspections found problems with low quality infrastructure leading to poor management of slurry, run-off from fields rich in nutrients, and the use of fertiliser.

The area focused on was made up the catchments for the River Caen, Bradiford Water and River Yeo (Barnstaple), all of which discharge into the Taw Torridge Estuary. The Bradiford Water, Lower River Caen and Lower River Yeo were assessed as in Poor condition and the rest as Moderate.

The report said there was evidence that agriculture has a major influence on the quality of rivers. It said the low water quality in the surrounding area affected the Taw Torridge Estuary and “poses a significant risk” to bathing waters in the area, which has also seen salmon stocks continue to decline.

The estuary has protected status for shellfish, is a bass nursery, and a migration route for salmon, eels, elvers and shad in an Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty and a Unesco Biosphere Reserve. The report said the estuary waters are “failing” due to high levels of dissolved inorganic nitrogen, algae, and faecal indicators, mostly from livestock, in the shellfish waters and the beach at Instow, which has had its bathing water status removed.

The estuary discharges into Bideford Bay and can affect bathing waters from Westward Ho! to the south, through to Saunton Sands, Croyde, Putsborough and Woolacombe beaches to the north, all popular tourist destinations for water sports and vital to the area’s multi-million pound visitor economy.

The report said South West Water had invested to reduce nitrates from the major works discharging to the estuary serving Barnstaple and the surrounding area. It added: “However, the catchment continues to fail its water quality targets and it is postulated that this is mainly due to nutrient enrichment from dairy farming.”

The report said farmers in recent years had come under “intense commercial pressure” from low milk prices to expand dairy herds, often without increasing the size of storage for cattle waste, a mixture of manure and water known as slurry which is used as fertiliser. In some cases, DIY projects built without planning permission and ignoring guidelines can overflow or fail and cause pollution. The report adds: “When slurry stores have catastrophic failures, as well as risks to the environment, there is a real risk of injury or death from the physical failure of the structure or drowning.”

It said the dairy sector has “high potential” to release sediment, nitrate and phosphorus to rivers. The Taw Estuary is classed as a Nitrate Vulnerable Zone, which means it has a closed season for fertiliser and manure spreading, but winter spreading often took place, often on saturated soils.

The report said there was “particular concern” at the widespread lack of compliance with slurry storage rules, which required five months of storage. The report said non-compliance with regulations and planning rules “appeared widespread”. It added: “Considering the cost of these stores, this is surprising and indicates a complacency towards environmental regulations and planning law, something that would not be so prevalent in other regulated industries.”

The corporation was live outside Downing Street on Monday as the former Chancellor was confirmed as the next UK Prime Minister.

A segment of the programme featured a Savanta ComRes poll which asked people to describe the Tory leader in one word.

Craig Meighan www.thenational.scot 

Among the popular phrases to describe the PM were “rich”, “okay”, “capable” and “liar”.

Other descriptions included “boring”, “posh” and “arrogant”.

But some viewers were surprised when they saw the words “twat” and “c***” spread across their TV screens.

The first expletive had no symbols to obscure the word while the latter had an asterisk only for the second letter.

One Twitter user shared a picture of their TV screen and said: “The BBC have accidentally broadcast the word c*** twice in a week, unbelievable scenes.”

Meanwhile Wayne David said: “I actually cannot believe the BBC News showed this Rishi Sunak word cloud earlier today.”

One user described the clip as “too funny” while another said “yeah I’d say that’s about right”.

“I would be grateful if you could convey my resignation as secretary for business, energy and industrial strategy to the King,”

Everyone, especially in the Scottish Press, is struggling with Jacob Rees-Mogg’s hand-written resignation letter dated “St Crispin’s Day”.

The last hurrah for the so-called honourable member for the 18th century is good news though. – Owl

Parliamentary Private Secretaries are appointed by ministers. So with Clarke gone our Simon will be looking for another job. Owl can’t see him being cerebral enough for Michael Gove the new levelling up minister.

With his old boss Dominic Raab back as deputy PM and Justice Secretary he could be in with a chance.

Simon will be glued to his phone for days waiting for a call.

Shock return of Suella Braverman taints Rishi Sunak’s vow to lead government with ‘integrity’.

The shock return of Suella Braverman as home secretary has undermined Rishi Sunak’s promise to lead a government with “integrity” on his first day in No 10….

Rob Merrick www.independent.co.uk (extract)

…Mr Sunak’s most significant move was to bring back the home secretary sacked – just six days ago – for a security breach that broke the ministerial code, in apparent payback for Ms Braverman backing his campaign.

The arch right-winger admitted breaching the rules by sending a policy document on an immigration shake-up from her private email to a colleague, allegedly misleading Ms Truss about it.

Just hours earlier, Mr Sunak, speaking outside No 10, had promised the country: “This government will have integrity, professionalism and accountability at every level. Trust is earned. And I will earn yours.”

Yvette Cooper, Labour’s shadow home secretary, said: “Just a few hours into the job and Rishi Sunak is already putting party before country.”

Ms Braverman had left office “for breaches of the ministerial code, security lapses, sending sensitive government information through unauthorised personal channels, and following weeks of non-stop public disagreements with other cabinet ministers”, she said….

…“His decision to bring Braverman back as home secretary, less than a week after she resigned for breaching the ministerial code, suggests he intends to repeat them.”

Rishi Sunak has also appointed vehemently anti-trans Tory MP Kemi Badenoch to his cabinet as minister for women and equalities. www.pinknews.co.uk

Under the headline:

‘Fuming’ Tory members threaten to leave after being denied leader vote

The telegraph reports:

“Tens of thousands of Tory members will leave the party in anger at being denied a vote on the next leader, Rishi Sunak has been warned.

Ben Harris-Quinney, chairman of the Bow Group, the Conservative think tank, said the decision to bar members was a “terrible advert” for the Conservative Party.

And he warned that those members who remain will be less inclined to campaign for their local candidate at the next election – making a Labour victory more likely.”

Does Simon Jupp’s “door knocking” in Newton Poppleford signal the exodus has already started locally? – Owl

• Single storey rear extension, loft extension incorporating a rear hip to gable and side porch extension. 32 Willow Avenue Exmouth EX8 4QSRef. No: 22/2298/FUL | Validated: Fri 14 Oct 2022 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Retention of roofing over silage clamp. Sandys Farm Upottery Honiton EX14 9PQRef. No: 22/2290/FUL | Validated: Thu 13 Oct 2022 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Roofing over existing open livestock yard Gittisham Farm Gittisham Honiton EX14 3AXRef. No: 22/2291/FUL | Validated: Thu 13 Oct 2022 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Roofing over open livestock yard. Sandys Farm Upottery Honiton EX14 9PQRef. No: 22/2292/FUL | Validated: Thu 13 Oct 2022 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Proposed building for hay, fertiliser and agricultural machinery storage Chineway Farm Putts Corner Sidbury EX10 0QQRef. No: 22/2285/AGR | Validated: Thu 13 Oct 2022 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Certificate of lawful development for the conversion of a roof space to habitable use to include a rear dormer129 Victoria Road Exmouth EX8 1DRRef. No: 22/2273/CPL | Validated: Wed 12 Oct 2022 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Deed of variation to amend the mortgagee exclusion clause (MEC) to the Section 106 agreement pursuant to application Land North Of Eastfield West HillRef. No: 22/2267/V106 | Validated: Wed 12 Oct 2022 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Proposed single storey rear extension 35 Regents Gate Exmouth Devon EX8 1TRRef. No: 22/2274/FUL | Validated: Wed 12 Oct 2022 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Rear single storey extension and replacement outbuilding Hillhead St Mary Broadway Sidmouth EX10 8RQRef. No: 22/2275/FUL | Validated: Wed 12 Oct 2022 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Variation of conditions 2 (approved plans) and 9 (tree protection) of planning permission 21/0970/FUL (Erection of a single storey house in garden plot) to allow for removal of tree T1 Sunbeams Rhode Lane Uplyme Devon DT7 3TXRef. No: 22/2279/VAR | Validated: Wed 12 Oct 2022 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Deed of variation to amend the mortgagee exclusion clause (MEC) to the Section 106 agreement pursuant to application 14/0167/MFUL and deed of variation pursuant to application 16/1049/VAR Land West Of Woodbury Road Clyst St GeorgeRef. No: 22/2266/V106 | Validated: Wed 12 Oct 2022 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Construction of single storey rear extension to create family kitchen and living room measuring 8.00m beyond original rear wall, 2.40m to the eaves and 3.60m in total height. Applands Plymtree Cullompton EX15 2JYRef. No: 22/2269/GPD | Validated: Fri 14 Oct 2022 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Variation of conditions 2 (approved plans), 5 (garden subdivision) and 6 (bin and bicycle storage) of planning permission 18/1228/FUL (Conversion of existing house into 4 no. flats and re-building of existing barn in the back garden to create 3 no. flats) to correct the labelling of the west elevation and revise a window design in the west elevation, omit the car parking and communal garden, provide details of fencing and revise the bicycle parking Barn Mews King Street Honiton EX14 1ABRef. No: 22/2280/VAR | Validated: Wed 12 Oct 2022 | Status: Awaiting decision
• First floor side extension to provide accommodation, single storey front extension, replacement porch to front and associated internal alterations. 1 Moorfield Close Exmouth EX8 3QSRef. No: 22/2261/FUL | Validated: Fri 14 Oct 2022 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Two storey rear extension, alterations to fenestration and demolition of existing single storey rear extension 55 Albion Street Exmouth EX8 1JHRef. No: 22/2258/FUL | Validated: Thu 13 Oct 2022 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Western Red Cedar – reduce height by 2 – 2.5m (close to previous pruning height). Variety of pruning cuts between 25-75mm, with a maximum of 150mm where balanced form of tree to be retained. The Dairy Old Bystock Drive Exmouth EX8 5EQRef. No: 22/2255/TRE | Validated: Wed 12 Oct 2022 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Prior approval for change of use of an existing agricultural building to a hotel/guest house (Use Class C1) under Class R of Schedule 2, Part 3 of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development Order 2015) (as amended) Building Adjacent Northleigh Village Hall NorthleighRef. No: 22/2249/PDR | Validated: Wed 12 Oct 2022 | Status: Awaiting decision
• T2 – Hawthorn. Fell to ground level G5 – Beech & Eucalyptus. Reduce height to previous pruning points and cut back road side to in line with edge of grass verge. Long Summers Town Lane Woodbury EX5 1NERef. No: 22/2246/TCA | Validated: Tue 11 Oct 2022 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Alteration to design of agricultural building approved under ref 17/1130/COU (retrospective), change of use of part of the landholding for amenity use including retention of timber amenity hut. Woodentops Land At Littledown Lane Newton PopplefordRef. No: 22/2243/FUL | Validated: Mon 10 Oct 2022 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Side extension to existing care home to provide an additional 11 ensuite bedrooms. Works include demolition of existing side extension, and associated external works Malden House 69 Sidford Road Sidmouth EX10 9LRRef. No: 22/2265/MFUL | Validated: Fri 14 Oct 2022 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Conversion of roof space to habitable use to include a 2no. front dormers, 3 x rooflights and 3 x front roof windows. 36 Post Coach Way Cranbrook Devon EX5 7BSRef. No: 22/2248/FUL | Validated: Mon 10 Oct 2022 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Prior approval application for the addition of a 2nd storey and the addition of 3 x front dormers 36 Post Coach Way Cranbrook Exeter Devon EX5 7BSRef. No: 22/2252/GPAA | Validated: Fri 14 Oct 2022 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Prior notification for the change of use from commercial (health and beauty suite (Use Class E(e)) to residential flat (Use Class C3). Seabrease Prospect Place Sidmouth EX10 8ASRef. No: 22/2251/PDMA | Validated: Mon 10 Oct 2022 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Construction of extension over garage with installation of external staircase. 2 Convent Fields Sidmouth Devon EX10 8QRRef. No: 22/2247/FUL | Validated: Wed 12 Oct 2022 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Construction of a new slurry store. Barnfield Farm Monkton Honiton EX14 9NLRef. No: 22/2245/FUL | Validated: Wed 12 Oct 2022 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Proposed New Spray Booth Compound 58 Greendale Business Park Woodbury Salterton EX5 1EWRef. No: 22/2227/FUL | Validated: Tue 11 Oct 2022 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Change of use from domestic Granny Annexe to Holiday let Accommodation adjacent existing dwelling house.Annexe Mathayes Farm Luppitt EX14 4SARef. No: 22/2235/LBC | Validated: Tue 11 Oct 2022 | Status: Withdrawn
• Change of use from domestic granny annexe to holiday let accommodation adjacent existing dwelling house Annexe Mathayes Farm Luppitt EX14 4SARef. No: 22/2234/FUL | Validated: Tue 11 Oct 2022 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Conversion of existing hay shed to commercial/light industrial workshop/storage Colliton Barton Broadhembury Devon EX14 3LJRef. No: 22/2225/PDR | Validated: Tue 11 Oct 2022 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Single storey side extension and conversion of garage for use as a restaurant. New Fountain Inn Church Road Whimple Devon EX5 2TARef. No: 22/2232/FUL | Validated: Thu 13 Oct 2022 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Erection of a replacement double timber garage with carport and demolition of existing asbestos garage. Jubilee House Chardstock EX13 7BHRef. No: 22/2233/FUL | Validated: Tue 11 Oct 2022 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Proposed construction of cider barn and tool shed Courshay Springs Hawkchurch Axminster EX13 5XFRef. No: 22/2221/FUL | Validated: Mon 10 Oct 2022 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Construction of hip to gable roof enlargements, veranda to front elevation, 2 x porches, alterations to fenestration and first floor side facing windows – and insertion of roof light within side facing roof slope. Springfield Hawkchurch EX13 5XBRef. No: 22/2205/FUL | Validated: Mon 10 Oct 2022 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Replace the four front windows of the property with matching style UPVC windows, retaining the existing stone cills. Myrtle Cottage The Strand Lympstone Devon EX8 5EZRef. No: 22/2206/FUL | Validated: Tue 11 Oct 2022 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Variation of condition no. 9 (materials and finishes) of planning permission 16/1578/MFUL for samples of materials and finishes to be used for external walls and roofs of the proposed development Mcbains Antiques Exeter Airport Clyst Honiton Exeter EX5 2BARef. No: 22/2199/VAR | Validated: Wed 12 Oct 2022 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Installation of 34 x ground mounted photo voltaic panels. Ivygreen Farm Chardstock EX13 7BYRef. No: 22/2191/FUL | Validated: Tue 11 Oct 2022 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Single storey rear extension, single storey side extension with alteration to fenestration, first floor rear balcony. 30 Camperdown Terrace Exmouth EX8 1EHRef. No: 22/2157/FUL | Validated: Wed 12 Oct 2022 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Partial removal of wall between lounge and kitchen and install new steel box section beam and post; glazed opening between the lower part of the stair Myrtle Cottage Tipton St John Sidmouth EX10 0AWRef. No: 22/2101/LBC | Validated: Fri 14 Oct 2022 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Replacement of existing conservatory with widening of existing doors. Robin Cottage Sandys Lane Upottery EX14 9PLRef. No: 22/2044/FUL | Validated: Wed 12 Oct 2022 | Status: Awaiting decision
• The retention of the removal of internal plaster. Proposed works: re-plaster ground floor internal walls; removal of partition wall at ground floor and install steel beam; replace 5no. windows on rear elevation; replace 1no. door on rear elevation; windows on front elevation to have fitted internally with self-adhesive magnetic polycarbonate; replace staircase; create bathroom downstairs with extraction vent; insulate walls to lean-to at rear; lean-to floor to be insulated with limecrete (to become new bathroom and utility); install flue in lean-to for new boiler; new extraction/vent unit in lean-to; slate vent on main roof North elevation; dig out ground floor and install limecrete floor and new underfloor heating; re-pointing of front elevation; replace rainwater goods on front and rear elevation and drainage work 1 Virginia Cottages Causeway Beer Devon EX12 3JYRef. No: 22/1928/LBC | Validated: Mon 10 Oct 2022 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Remove existing render on South elevation and re-render The Lodge Elysian Fields Sidmouth EX10 8UHRef. No: 22/0913/LBC | Validated: Wed 12 Oct 2022 | Status: Awaiting decision