In October 2022 Simon Jupp “united” behind Liz Truss. As a result he was also “newly promoted” as a PPS to right-winger Simon Clarke when he became Secretary of State for Levelling-up, Housing and Communities.

So where does “our” Simon, the self confessed “libertarian”, stand on the leadership question?

Simon Clarke advised to lie down by Tory MP after calling for Sunak to quit

Aletha Adu www.theguardian.com (Extract)

Simon Clarke has been told it would be “good advice” to head to a dark room, lie down and sort himself out, after he called on Rishi Sunak to quit as Conservative leader or risk a Tory “massacre” at the general election.

The postal affairs minister, Kevin Hollinrake, said Clarke’s intervention on Tuesday night was a sign of the “panic” that is brewing in some factions, but said it was not a view held by the wider parliamentary party.

In 2017 EDW  posed the question: Hinkley C escalating costs, do we have too many LEP eggs in the Hinkley basket?

We now learn that Hinkley C could be delayed to 2031 and cost up to £35bn, (at 2015 prices).

So is it time to ask the question again and has anyone heard from our Local Enterprise Partnership (LEP) lately? Especially as the government has new plans for “mini nukes”. – Owl

Hinkley Point C could be delayed to 2031 and cost up to £35bn, says EDF.

Alex Lawson www.theguardian.com 

The owner of Hinkley Point C has blamed inflation, Covid and Brexit as it announced the nuclear power plant project could be delayed by a further four years, and cost £2.3bn more.

The plant in Somerset, which has been under construction since 2016, is now expected to be finished by 2031 and cost up to £35bn, France’s EDF said. However, the cost will be far higher once inflation is taken into account, because EDF is using 2015 prices.

The latest in a series of setbacks represents a huge delay to the project’s initial timescale. In 2007, the then EDF chief executive Vincent de Rivaz said that by Christmas in 2017, turkeys would be cooked using electricity generated from atomic power at Hinkley. When the project was finally given the green light in 2016, its cost was estimated at £18bn.

“Like other major infrastructure projects, we have found civil construction slower than we hoped and faced inflation, labour and material shortages, on top of Covid and Brexit disruption,” said Stuart Crooks, the project’s managing director, in a message to staff.

Crooks said: “Running the project longer will cost more money and our budget has also been affected by rising civil construction costs. It is important to say that British consumers or taxpayers won’t pay a penny, with the increased costs met entirely by shareholders.”

EDF had previously said that the first reactor unit at the nuclear site would be due to be complete by June 2027, with a 15-month buffer period which was likely to be used – putting its completion at September 2028, and a further year for the second unit. It costs were estimated between £25bn and £26bn, and this was later revised up to £32.7bn in February 2023.

EDF gave three scenarios, ranging from becoming operational is 2029, to delays pushing this back to 2031.

It said that the cost of completing Hinkley will be between £31bn and £34bn, although if completion is delayed to 2031 costs would rise to £35bn.

In December it emerged EDF’s partner in the project, China General Nuclear, had halted funding for Hinkley. The move came after the government took over CGN’s stake in Hinkley’s proposed sister site, Sizewell C in Suffolk, stripping the Chinese state-owned company of its role in the project.

The latest financial estimates are based on accounting in 2015 figures, meaning the total cost of the project could be far higher when inflation over the last decade is factored in. Hinkley’s ballooning costs have proved controversial with French taxpayers, which are picking up the tab.

Hinkley Point C and Sizewell C are expected to herald a new era of nuclear plants touted by the government.

Last year the government launched a delivery body, Great British Nuclear, with the aim of accelerating the development of new nuclear projects. Earlier this month ministers set out plans for out for the “biggest nuclear power expansion in 70 years”.

However, the Hinkley Point C delay will add to concerns over project delays and costs, as well as skills in an industry earmarked to deliver a quarter of the national electricity demand by 2050.

Crooks wrote: “Dome lift happened 24 months later than we had planned when we began in 2016. Of that delay, 15 months was due to the global pandemic. So, beyond Covid, we’ve lost nine months since we started. That’s not perfect, but for the first nuclear plant to be built in Britain since 1995, it’s not bad.”

Crooks said that project was “well past the halfway mark” and “many risks are now behind us”.

EDF said in January it would delay the shutdown of four of its UK nuclear reactors for at least two years and increase investment in its British nuclear fleet.

Transparency needed in the planning process, says councillor

Developers are short-changing Devon by turning their backs on commitments to build affordable homes and play areas, it is being claimed.

Guy Henderson www.radioexe.co.uk 

Now a leading councillor is calling for what she calls the ‘deception’ to be stopped.

There are calls for closer scrutiny of large house-building projects to make sure builders keep their promises.

Teignbridge councillor Jane Taylor (SD Alliance, Kerswell-with-Coombe) will ask fellow councillors to support her when she speaks at a procedures committee next week.

She wants more transparency in the planning process, particularly around Section 106, the mechanism through which developers pay for community projects in return for permission to build.

She says that while councillors make decisions based on what is in front of them, the end product often ‘looks nothing like’ the approved application.

“It may change beyond recognition by a process of amendments,” she says in a motion to the procedures committee. Planning officers may be able to agree amendments without the planning committee ever seeing the proposal again.

Cllr Taylor adds: “This is a well-established practice by developers which enables the plans to be passed and then amended so that the maximum profit can be achieved.

“It is called value engineering. I call it deception and it’s time it stopped.”

She claims the council is aware of the process, but goes along with it for fear of the consequences if they don’t comply.

She goes on: “It is no secret that this council, along with many others, has an unhealthy dependency on the money provided by major housebuilders.

“It is time to draw the line and take the first steps to breaking the cycle and distancing ourselves from this unhealthy relationship by sending a clear signal to developers.

“We will not be bartering to build houses. Submit, approve, build.  We will no longer be engaging in planning ping pong.”

The motion says that any variation to planning conditions on all developments of 20 homes or more must be brought to the planning committee and not dealt with by officers.

eastdevon.gov.uk

Newly-released fly-tipping figures have been challenged by East Devon District Council (EDDC) as giving a distorted view of the actual situation.

The authority has reassured residents that it investigates every single report of fly-tipping. StreetScene officers visit all tips on council controlled sites to check for evidence of those responsible and arrange rubbish removal.

Where evidence is found or if the tip is on private land, EDDC’s Environmental Health team will carry out an investigation and take enforcement action where possible.

In 2022/23 even though there were 399 reported fly-tips, there was enough evidence for it to be referred to EDDC’s Environmental Health team on 23 of these occasions – 10 of which were investigated further.

The year 2022/23 was the first year since 2018 that no enforcement action was taken for fly-tipping. EDDC has seen a significant reduction in the numbers of fly-tips which have justified further investigation. So far, in 2023/24, it has served two fixed penalty notices for fly-tipping offences.

The Government requirement for all councils to provide information for the ‘fly tipping league tables’ only provides a very small amount of information of how a local authority is managing public spaces for their areas.

In an article last year, The Country Land and Business Association said:

“Yet despite the overall decrease in incidences, these figures fail to reflect the full scale of the crime, as increasing reports of fly-tipping on private rural land are not included. Two-thirds of all farmers and landowners have at some stage been a victim. But hundreds of thousands of offences on private land are going unrecorded, as farmers often have so little faith in the ability of the police or council to deal with fly-tipping that they simply bear the cost of removing rubbish themselves.”

The figures recently published shows that the fly-tipping in East Devon is declining but the council is aware that landowners and farmers are finding increasing amounts on their land.

Councillor Geoff Jung, EDDC’s portfolio holder for Coast, Country and Environment said:

“We have seen a big drop off in the number of fly-tips where evidence of responsibility is found, so we are looking at other ways to obtain this.

“These figures provided by Government gives a very distorted view of a council’s performance.

“I can reassure our communities that all fly-tips reported to the council are investigated and dealt with.  If they are on council-controlled land they will be removed and where sufficient evidence exists, enforcement action will be taken.

“I would urge any resident who witnesses fly-tipping to contact the council on the East Devon App so our officers can follow it up.”

“What is needed by Government is an overall strategy on dealing with illegal dumping of waste on both public and more importantly private land.”

Speaker’s Statement – Hansard – UK Parliament

hansard.parliament.uk 

Before we proceed to the next business, I would like to make a brief statement. The link between Members of Parliament and our constituents is special and fundamental to the democratic life of the country. As we enter the general election year, many hon. Members are expecting boundary changes. Some will contemplate standing for constituencies that they do not currently represent. I have received a number of representations from hon. Members from all parts of the House about colleagues involving themselves in their constituencies. I thought it would be helpful to remind the House of some important rules and conventions regarding constituency representation.

First, Members usually deal with individual cases relating only to their own constituencies. When a Member is contacted by someone seeking assistance who is not her or his own constituent, the normal expectation is that the person should be referred to the relevant constituency Member. Secondly, when a Member intends to visit another constituency other than in a private capacity, they should make every reasonable effort to inform the Member representing that constituency before they do so. That applies equally to ministerial visits. The ministerial code states that the Ministers intending to make an official visit in the United Kingdom must inform, in advance and in good time, the MPs whose constituencies are to be included in the visit. I should add that, although the ministerial code does not apply to shadow Ministers, they should adhere to the same protocol if visiting constituencies.

Thirdly, when issues relating to another constituency are raised in the House, the Member concerned should, where possible and when time permits, inform the other Member involved in advance. That applies equally to the tabling of written questions.

Hon. Members have a duty to look after the constituents who elected them to this place. Boundary changes do not take effect until the next election. We must observe the convention of not involving ourselves with another Member’s constituency until that time. More generally, I understand that the political temperature will rise as we get closer to an election. I urge all hon. Members to continue to treat each other with courtesy and respect in the remaining months of this Parliament. The election seems to have started a little too early.

Leader of East Devon District Council Paul Arnott writes.

On Monday this week the government’s offshore petroleum licensing bill passed its second reading. In essence, this puts wind back in the sails of the oil and gas companies who wish to suck every last drop of fossil fuel from the North Sea.

The government was determined to push this through, which resulted in protests from Chris Skidmore MP resigning his ministerial position rather than have to vote for it, and other abstentions. We can’t be sure of Simon Jupp’s position as he was not present at the vote, but real guts was shown by Alok Sharma MP. He turned up and abstained, a touch choice which will have cost his political career a great deal.

I have often written that despite not being from a Conservative background myself, I have many friends who are, and I am always ready to offer praise from to politicians from all backgrounds. Alok Sharma is a highly significant, centrist Conservative (one of the few left) who served as President for the International Panel on Climate Change having previously served as Secretary of State for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy from 2020 to 2021 and Secretary of State for International Development from 2019 to 2020. He knows his stuff.

At last year’s Dubai conference, the government promised to phase out oil and gas, the conference agreeing that no new oil and gas licences should be granted if the world is to limit global heating to 1.5C above pre-industrial levels. All agreed that going beyond this would cause climate catastrophe, ruining the lives of millions.

Yet the Conservatives are so in thrall to the right-wing climate-change-sceptic chunk of the party that almost immediately they nominated Lord David Frost, fresh from his leaving the country in a tough spot as a result of his bullish Brexit negotiation, to sit on the House of Lords select committee on environment and climate change. In this the party shows that it is ripping itself apart, wasting valuable time in the process.

You may remember Donald Trump wondering if inhaling disinfectant into lungs might cure Covid-19. Sir David Frost’s displayed Trumpian intelligence in the House of Lords last year, when he said that rising global temperatures due to the climate crisis were “likely to be beneficial” in the UK, because it would mean fewer people would die from cold temperatures.

He seemed not to have a clue that warming changes weather systems, increasing storms and flash floods as well as sea level rises, as all of us have seen happening before our eyes in the last year. He seems not to be aware of places in East Devon like Exmouth where every flood now causes a sewage crisis to. Not theoretical, but here and now.

I need hardly add that Lord Frost is also a trustee of the Global Warming Policy Foundation, which opposes a number of net zero environmental policies funded by wealthy Conservative donors. And of course, it is well known how close oil and gas companies have been to the party for many years.

Never mind the “culture wars”, all the distracting nonsense about “wokeness” being injected into the nation’s bloodstream ahead of a general election. This climate battleground within the Conservatives between Alok Sharma thinking of the future and Lord Frost thinking of his chums in well-funded and convenient denial is the real frontline for the soul of a once great party. And the nation.

In East Devon, this foolishness from the government regarding climate change is a daily challenge. Change please, and soon.

Especially in an election year!

Surprise, surprise, yesterday, 23 January 2024, Simon Jupp wrote to the education Secretary about the state of St. Peter’s primary in Budleigh Salterton. This was prompted by the Panorama exposé rather than the letter an exasperated Head Teacher, Steve Hitchcock,  wrote to him nine months ago in March 2023.

It raises questions about whether Simon Jupp has only been putting effort into those communities with deserving cases such as Tipton, that will lie within the new constituency boundaries of Honiton and Sidmouth, leaving the rest of his constituents to fend for themselves.

As Owl has pointed out, Simon is abandoning 78% of his current constituents. If he was such a good constituency MP why would he do this?