Motorists are being denied millions of pounds in compensation for damage and injuries caused by potholes.

(Cyclists are at the greatest risk of serious injury from potholes, with 425 killed or injured because of poor or defective road surfaces since 2016, according to government figures.)

Ben Clatworthy www.thetimes.co.uk

Local authorities are rejecting on average 75 per cent of claims, although one in five councils reject at least 90 per cent.

It was found that Dundee city council rejected 96 per cent of claims over a three-year period. Each year at least 45 of 50 highway authorities rejected more claims than they paid out on.

Councils have been accused of trying to “wriggle out of responsibility” for defective road surfaces which shred tyres, damage car suspension and injure cyclists.

Rod Dennis, of the RAC, told the Daily Mail: “Drivers may not be aware that their chances of claiming any pothole damage costs back from a local authority is virtually zero if the council can say it wasn’t aware of a problem with the road in the first place.”

The newspaper analysed claims data from a sample of 50 highway authorities obtained via freedom of information requests, looking at the three financial years from April 2019 to March last year.

Overall about £3 million was paid out in compensation by the same group each year.

However, with about 75 per cent of claims being rejected each year, it could mean up to £9 million was denied by these 50 councils alone.

Gloucestershire county council settled only 93 of the 1,667 claims it received. Transport for London closed 93 per cent of claims without compensation and has so far paid out on only 24 of the total 776.

Lincolnshire had one of the best payout rates of the group, approving 48 per cent of claims.

Cyclists are at the greatest risk of serious injury from potholes, with 425 killed or injured because of poor or defective road surfaces since 2016, according to government figures.

Keir Gallagher, Cycling UK’s campaigns manager, said: “One pothole can cause an experienced cyclist to suffer a life-changing collision.”

A Local Government Association spokesman said councils “prefer to use their budgets to keep our roads in good condition” rather than paying out for compensation claims, while a spokesman for Gloucestershire county council said “almost 5,000” potholes were filled in April alone.

A Dundee city council spokesman said: “Each claim is dealt with on its individual merits.”

It’s “just industrial-strength bullshit”, like all the ” economic growth plans” announced locally , which seem to have had no impact.

These have included: Heart of the South West LEP; the “Golden Triangle” LEP (Exeter, Plymouth, Torquay) and the latest unelected, unaccountable and non-transparent quango – The Great South West (GSW), the LEP for LEPs

Who is the power behind the GSW economic strategy? None other than Pennon, the South West’s biggest employer and parent company of South West Water! – Owl

UK Needs an industrial strategy to compete in manufacturing

Larry Elliott www.theguardian.com

Who is the power behind the GSW economic strategy? None other than Pennon, the South West’s biggest employer and parent company of South West Water! – Owl

Countries that are serious about manufacturing have industrial strategies. The US and China have one. So do Germany and France.

Britain does not have an industrial strategy. Rishi Sunak talks about turning the UK into a “science and technology superpower” but that’s all it is: talk. It is a PR strategy masquerading as an industrial strategy.

Faced with the challenge presented by Joe Biden’s inflation reduction act (IRA), the government says it has no need to respond to the package of green subsidies being provided by Washington because Britain has already established a thriving renewables sector and the Americans are playing catch-up. The complacency is staggering.

Andy Haldane, once chief economist of the Bank of England and now chief executive of the Royal Society of Arts, had this to say last week. “The world is facing right now an arms race in re-industrialisation. And I think we’re at risk of falling behind in that arms race unless we give it the giddy-up.”

China, Haldane added, has been focusing on green technology for many, many years and had forged ahead in tech such as solar and batteries. “The west has belatedly woken up. The IRA is throwing cash to the wall on that. The cost of that [is] almost certainly north of half a trillion dollars. Possibly north of a trillion. The EU is now playing catch-up, [and] the UK currently is not really in the race at any kind of scale.”

A quick glance at the latest trade figures shows that Britain has some way to go before it can be considered a manufacturing “superpower”. That was true once, but no longer. Manufacturing’s share of the economy shrunk from more than 30% to less than 10% of national output during Queen Elizabeth II’s reign. The goods deficit, which has not been in surplus since the early 1980s, stood at £55bn in the first three months of 2023, with imports more than 50% higher than exports. A £40bn quarterly surplus in services was not enough to close the trade gap.

Those who supported Brexit say the UK now has the freedom to export more to those parts of the world economy that are growing faster. Those who opposed Brexit say exporting to the EU has become more burdensome. Both are right, but both are missing the point. Before Britain can take advantage of export opportunities, it has to have stuff to export. The fact is the UK is no longer a first-rank manufacturing economy and hasn’t been for decades.

The recent announcement by Dyson that it will build a new battery factory in Singapore is a perfect illustration of the challenge facing the UK. There was never the remotest possibility that the plant would be in the UK, owing to what its founder James Dyson, a prominent supporter of Brexit, called in a letter to the Times the “scandalous neglect” of science and technology businesses.

Only part of the company’s reluctance to manufacture in the UK is due to the recent jump in corporation tax, although the increase in the budget wipes out any benefit from tax breaks for research and development. It is also the planning system, the lack of enough trained engineers, the disdain shown for science and technology, and government interference in the way businesses are run.

Dyson is unhappy about plans to make it possible for new recruits to request to work from home from day one of their employment, something which is incompatible with the hands-on, learning-on-the-job approach required by a high-end manufacturing business.

The company says the UK will remain a key centre for R&D, and will invest £100m in a new tech centre in Bristol for software and AI research. But the idea that Britain can do all the clever, high-value-added, brainpower stuff while other countries do the production is an illusion. Increasingly, Dyson’s R&D is happening in Singapore – where it has its global HQ – and in the Philippines.

Dyson is by no means alone. A report by the lobby group Make UK found that six in 10 manufacturers thought government had never had a long-term vision for manufacturing, while eight in 10 considered the absence of a strategy put their company at a competitive disadvantage compared with other manufacturing countries.

Stephen Phipson, Make UK’s CEO, said last week the US was spending 1.5% of national output on the IRA. The equivalent sum in the UK would be £33bn. It is not just the money, though.

“A lack of a proper, planned, industrial strategy is the UK’s achilles heel,” Phipson added. “Every other major economy, from Germany, to China, to the US, has a long-term national manufacturing plan, underlying the importance of an industrial base to the success of its wider economy. The UK is the only country to not have one. If we are to not only tackle our regional inequality, but also compete on a global stage, we need a national industrial strategy as a matter of urgency.”

One option is to treat manufacturing as a niche sector and concentrate instead on sectors where it does have global clout: financial and business services, for example. In that case, the pretence has to stop that levelling up will be delivered by spanking new factories turning out world-beating products. The government can either make Britain an attractive place for manufacturing companies to invest or it can decide not to compete. Judged by its actions rather than by its rhetoric, it seems to have chosen the latter option.

Haldane, Dyson and Phipson are right. There is no plan and there is no strategy. There is just industrial-strength bullshit.

And now they’re nine-strong

Exeter’s Green Party and Liberal Democrats are to continue their opposition partnership on the city council.

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

The parties, together with an independent who is no longer a councillor, formed the ‘Progressive Group’ in 2019 in solidarity against the ruling Labour group.

Last year it overtook the Conservatives as the council’s main opposition and added a further two councillors – one each for the Greens and Lib Dems – at this month’s local elections.

The group is now nine strong, with six members from the Greens and three Liberal Democrats – after Andy Ketchin won the Green Party’s first ever seat in Newtown and St Leonard’s and Adrian Fullam took a seat for the Lib Dems in St Thomas.

Cllr Fullam returns as a councillor having previously served as city council leader between 2008-10, before Labour became Exeter’s dominant party.

The group has pledged to work “cooperatively together” and bring “balance and scrutiny” to Labour, which won and lost a seat earlier this month to remain on 25 councillors.

Co-leader, Green councillor Diana Moore, who was re-elected in St David’s, said: “The Progressive Group has demonstrated that a different type of politics is possible and that working cooperatively together is in the interests of local people and the environment.

“People repeatedly tell us they really like this cooperative approach.”

Fellow co-leader, Lib Dem councillor Michael Mitchell, who was re-elected in Duryard & St James, added: “We intend to ensure that the Labour-dominated council’s proposals and actions are subject to full public scrutiny.”

“Exeter is set to see some major changes and developments in the coming years. A strong opposition is going to be vital to challenge and suggest improvements to these plans. The Progressive Group will provide that challenge and, if needed, strong opposition.”

Mr Mitchell was previously co-leader of the group but is set to become the 2023-24 lord mayor of Exeter; a politically neutral, ceremonial role which is shared between the parties.

He said: “Four years ago I helped set up the Progressive Group on the city council. It was the first time individuals from different political parties and none had come together in Exeter in such a way. We developed a close bond, which is based on mutual respect.

“I am delighted to see that this group, which started as four councillors, is now nine-strong. I am hugely proud of every member in the group and of what we have achieved together. I know the group will go from strength to strength.”

Where are the local media heading?

East Devon Watch continues! – Owl

seatonmatters.org /

My fortnightly column in the Midweek Herald, Sidmouth Herald and Exmouth Journal has been discontinued. The editors have told me that they have too many political columns – but regular contributions by three Conservative politicians, Simon Jupp MP, Cllr John Hart and police commissioner Alison Hernandez, will continue, while on the other side only Cllr Paul Arnott and occasionally Richard Foord MP remain.

I’m not complaining, but it seems to me that with a General Election approaching where the East Devon seats will be more closely fought than they have been for a generation, the press should be scrupulously maintaining political balance.

I’d like to thank all the readers who’ve given me such positive feedback over the last three years – it’s made it all worthwhile. My apologies to those who thought I wasn’t outspoken enough, and to the gentleman who told me last year that I was too anti-Tory – perhaps now you understand why!